Fixing the economy through collective bargaining

Much of this past year workers in the fast food industry have been taking action to get better wages. While there is certainly a debate as to whether an increase in the minimum wage is the proper vehicle to facilitate this change there is little denying the fact that income inequality is on the rise and hurting the entire economy.

Data shows that corporations are bringing in record profits while wages are at an all time low. Additionally, while wages for the middle class are essentially stagnate the top 10% set a new record as they now bring in more than half of the countries income yet spend a much lower portion of their income. Studies show that the rich save a greater percentage of their income while simultaneously putting less back into the economy.

Trickledown economics only works if the rich spend their money or if corporations use profits to hire more people. Unfortunately both of these things are decreasing instead of increasing as a greater portion of company profits heads towards top executives and away from other employees.

A giant stumbling block in lowering income equality is the American dream. In the past it was believed anyone could rise from the bottom and become successful in the US. Unfortunately the US is no longer the world leader when it comes to social mobility. As a matter of fact children of wealthy parents who don't attend college are 2.5 times more likely to be wealthy than children of poor parents who follow the "work hard" tenant of the American dream and get a college degree. Essentially regardless of the amount of hard work you put in it is extremely difficult to move from the bottom to the top.

But this reality doesn't stop many at the top from perpetuating this fallacy for their own benefit. Instead, this sleight of hand is used to justify the outrageous gains those at the top have made suggesting that if you work hard you too can become a millionaire. Thanks to this meme the average American believes that the US is filled with nearly four times as many millionaires as there really are.

The reality is that there are fewer rich people in the US then many would have you believe and regardless of effort the majority of those that make it big already had a seat reserved by their parents before they got there.

The solution to these problems is to get the average working class citizen a greater piece of the pie. This can be done with government mandates like minimum wage and redistribution via taxes however those are not necessarily the most effective methods and can potentially negatively affect businesses. The best course of action for these fast food workers is to unionize. Data shows that the higher the percentage of workers that are in unions the lower the income equality is.



By coordinating a strike these workers have already taken a first step to organizing. Once organized these workers would be able to hire profession negotiators to sit down at the table and find a common ground that benefits the employees and the companies they work for.

A common belief among those who oppose unions is that each employee should negotiate for themselves however while many union employees are highly skilled at the jobs they perform they are not trained negotiators. Suggesting that individual employees handle the negotiations of their benefits and pay with fortune 500 companies is not much different than expecting people to act as their own attorney. Sure you can do it but most people would be better off hiring a professional.

Contrary to popular talking points unions are not out to fleece the companies they work with. Ask any high ranking union official and they will tell you they want the company to be successful because in the end, any agreement should benefit both parties. As Ford CEO Alan Mulally said in a recent interview "both the management and the unions signed these agreements over the years and we ended up not being competitive. In Fords case we worked together, we redid all the agreements and that's why we are now bringing products back to the United States".

Greater union membership would also alleviate a number of Republican's concerns as well. They complain that the rich pay too much tax. Luckily unions are adept at helping employees get a greater share of company profits. This means that the people at the top would have less taxable income. Republicans also feel that too few individuals contribute to the US tax system and want to broaden the base. Again, since unions make sure workers bring home more of the profits they help their companies achieve they also make sure that less people "pay no taxes".

In the end the best way for American workers to get their fair share is to avoid government intervention and instead rely on free market principles. No individual can match the power of a corporation, but an organized collection of individuals can work with these corporations to create an environment where everyone wins.

The hypocrisy of the "War on Christmas"

It's that time of year again - time for all Fox News contributors to feign outrage at every person, place or thing that doesn't overtly include Christ in their holiday experience.

While the finger is often pointed at atheists a large number of complaints from the right involve corporations. Yet the motivation for these corporations to shun Christianity and say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" is capitalism and the free market. If using the term "Merry Christmas" moved more product every company would do so. Given that many do not, research must show that these businesses are better off using the term "Happy Holidays". The only god these corporate "people" worship is the all mighty dollar. Fox News can shame them as much as they want but unless the economics of "Merry Christmas" change, companies will continue to use data, not faith to define their message.

Having said that, the question of religious freedom is certainly not one that Christians have shied away from recently.

For example a number of "Christians" have argued that due to their religious freedom they should be able to deny their employees birth control as part of the health insurance. Some have suggested that businesses should be allowed to refuse service to certain individuals because doing so would be against their religious beliefs. Others have fought to keep same sex couples from getting married because their interpretation of the bible says this is wrong. There have also been those that claim a doctor should be able to turn away certain patients if the procedure they require conflicts with the doctor's religious convictions.

One would think that a group of people who are so cognizant of every possible situation where their religious rights might be infringed upon would be more aware of the religious rights of those who they foist their religious symbols and prose upon each holiday season.

Ironically this is an eye for eye situation. The more Christian groups use "religious freedom" as the impetus to perpetrate perceived discrimination the more push back they are going to get from non-Christians about having Christian symbols or gatherings at government buildings.

By and large the majority of non-Christians really don't care how much Christ Christians put in Christmas. If a life size manger display gets you in the Christmas spirit, by all means set one up in your yard. If acknowledging the birth of Jesus Christ in your celebration gives you that yuletide feeling then "Merry Christmas" to everyone you see. But recognize that not everyone has the same beliefs and regardless of how many of these people there are, their right to religious freedom is no less important than that of Christians.

If only there was a trusted voice that these well meaning Christians could turn to as an example of how to proceed in such a situation. The only thing that comes to mind is a quote from a good book that says "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you". Because apparently even two thousand years ago, hubris made it difficult for many to perceive the hypocrisy of their own actions.

Problems with Obamacare don't prove private sector superiority

The main stream media has been very focused recently on every problem with the Affordable Care Act (affectionately known as Obamacare). There are plenty of things not to like about the ACA and in particular the website launch but many in the media have taken this as an opportunity to push as common conservative platitude - anything the public sector can do the private sector can do better.

While prevalent, there is example after example after example where this meme has been proven wrong.

Of course we need look no further than our most recent financial crisis to see an illustration of the kind of wide spread disaster the public sector can create.

One of the biggest complaints about the ACA is the failure of the website to function properly. Due to this failure few have been able to actually obtain the insurance they were promised. On the other hand the mortgage banks set up such a complicated system that they lost promissory notes that gives them ownership of a mortgage. If you believe Republican talking points losing the document necessary to uphold the terms of an agreement is something only the government would do.

Another issue with the ACA is that some people are losing the insurance they had even after the President said they could keep it. On the other hand the mortgage banks errantly foreclosed on some 4 million Americans. By comparison the inconvenience of being falsely forcibly removed from your home seems a tad bit worse than having your inadequate insurance policy canceled.

Also a concern about the ACA is the additional burden it puts on young Americans with higher premium rates. On the other hand mortgage rates jumped without any corresponding increase in the loan rate from the Federal Government. Over a 12 month period the profit margin for new mortgages nearly doubled. This rise in profits for the mortgage banks has resulted in higher costs for new home buyers while negatively affecting the home sales market. At least the extra cost of health care gets you better coverage and saves you money on the back end.

Partially based on these problems and the distain for the ACA, House Republicans met to discuss possible impeachment hearings for the President. On the other hand a company called Blackstone Group recently used the same credit default swaps some consider the reason for the mortgage crisis to bilk another company out of over $15 million. Lesser acts of cheating would get you arrested in Vegas. The response to this possibly illegal and definitely immoral activity? Nothing. No hearings. No new regulations. No arrests. No one held accountable.

For all the good the free market can do the bottom line in the private sector is profits and this goal is typically at odds with doing what is best for the public good. The public sector is far from a perfect entity but however flawed it may be it pales in to the comparison to those who believe that simply converting public sector programs on to private sector payrolls will suddenly solve the problems.

Conservatives unpatriotically rooting for Obamacare failure

The main stream media has been obsessed with comparing the Affordable Care Act (affectionately known as Obamacare) with various failures by the previous administration. The comparisons have included "the ACA is Obama's" - 9/11, Iraq, Abu Ghraib, or Medicare part D. But the most popular of these analogies seems to be Hurricane Katrina.

And while there is a litany of problems with this talking point the most disturbing point is how many conservatives are rooting for the failure of the ACA and humbly declaring victory with every set back.

Just imagine if people in the 1990's who thought the government wasn't paying enough attention to terrorist organizations came out after the 9/11 attacks and celebrated the successful attacks because it proved they were right.

Before we invaded Iraq there were certainly those that argued against such an action. Conservatives would have howled that using the deaths of American soldiers as an opportunity to say "I told you so" was at the very least unpatriotic if not treasonous.

What if those who had been urging the government to consider additional reinforcement for the levies in New Orleans before Katrina went on television after the levies broke and declared this a victory because it showed they were right?

For a group that was furious that the president supposedly "spiked the ball" on certain occasions this gloating is embarrassingly hypocritical. Perhaps their hubris would be more palatable if they had a better plan - or a plan at all for that matter.

Of course not only do they not have a plan they are also willfully standing in the way of progress. Much has been made about those whose insurance policies are being canceled due to the ACA however it should be noted that thanks to provisions in the bill all of these people can get a more robust policy which may or may not cost more money. The same cannot be said for the nearly 5 million Americans that will not be covered under the ACA's Medicaid expansion thanks to a number of Republican governors who refuse to accept this change for their state.

The main reason for their rejection - money. Of course denying this change will not stop these individuals from going to the hospital for treatment nor will it reduce the ever increasing costs of medical care. All it really does is prohibit poor men, women, and children from having a regular doctor and seeing them on a routine basis to prevent more costly ER visits later. It may make their state budgets look better but in the end it doesn't lower the cost of care, it just shifts the burden from the state to the insured that will pick up the tab for these ER visits.

The reality is that as a country 18 percent of our spending goes towards healthcare – which is three and a half times as much as we spend on Social Security, and over four times as much as we spend on defense. We have a crisis in healthcare. Taking a victory lap at preventing less fortunate Americans from having the security of health insurance or celebrating any problems with the ACA as a triumph for America is an astoundingly callous missing the forest for the trees situation.