[HM2Viking]

Georgia
% Families with Health Insurance 81
% Graduated HS 72
http://covertheuninsured.org/states/?StateID=GA
http://reportcard2006.gaosa.org/k12/Indicators.aspX?ID=ALL:ALL&TestKey=GradRate&TestTy pe=indicators

Florida
% Families with Health Insurance 79
% Graduated HS 72
http://covertheuninsured.org/states/?StateID=FL

http://data.fldoe.org/fsir/default.cfm

It is a pretty clear contrast as to the positive effects of having a strong labor movement on social indicators. MN and Iowa both states with a strong history of Labor activism have a positive correlation with rates of insured families and rates of graduation from high school that both fall above the national average.

Michael Moore Published the following on his website (excerpted for space reasons.):
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/la...dex.php?id=144

August 29th, 2004 9:38 pm
Day in the Life of Joe Middle-Class Republican

by John Gray
Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and work as advertised.
All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too.
...
He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe’s employer pays these standards because Joe’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call the union.
...
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his life-time.
...
He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn’t have to. After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home.
He turns on a radio talk show, the host’s keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. (He doesn’t tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day) Joe agrees, “We don’t need those big government liberals ruining our lives; after all, I’m a self made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have”.

[Shamira Aizza]

This is not evidence of union improvement on insurance and high school graduation rates. You could just as easily tie this to the population of illegal immigrants or weather.

It's not outrageous to point out that unions are unanimously corrupt; name a union, any union, and I will be able to show you documented corruption in that union...I've done a bit of review on this issue in the not-so-distant past; there was previously only two exceptions, and the defining characteristic was that they were both "young" unions...and given a few years, that list dropped to one.

A "positive relationship" does not mean that unions resulted in a improved patient outcome, and in this case, this could actually be interpreted as an inverse relationship...meaning, that if the conditions of a facility warranted the implementation of a union, the outcomes for a specific disease-type improved. Additionally, it proves nothing to use just one benchmark (AMI), to qualify an entire organization like a hospital or a union.

Finally, I can toss in here all kinds of statistics showing improved outcomes for a particular disease or social event in the absence of unions, but that is a pointless game to play. But I'll take a turn here; Cuba has zero health-care unions, but ranks above the US in all kinds of health care outcomes.

See how ridiculous it is?

[Gromit]

rosy little fantasy you have there. Of course, eventually most people DO grow up a bit, and take off their rose-colored glasses.
Most do, anyway.

[HM2Viking]

Originally Posted by Shamira Aizza

Wikipedia? Alrighty then.

We need corporations. Someone has to provide the services and products.

Some of what you share is simple philosophy...it doesn't make it accurate or functional. Let's just allow..for the moment..your definition of community. I have no problem with the definition of the word "community," but I have a big problem with the attempted force-feeding of what you believe to be the "common good."

You think that some people should pay for everyone else's acute and routine care. I think that if I'm footing part of the bill, I should be allowed to tell them how to behave so that they don't engage in behaviors that result in their inability to pay even a $10 copay for medical care...that would be for the common good of everyone...both them and me.

Another data point for your consideration....

Several U.S. states were reportedly prepared to offer more than double that amount of subsidy. But Fedchun said much of that extra money would have been eaten away by higher training costs than are necessary for the Woodstock project.
He said Nissan and Honda have encountered difficulties getting new plants up to full production in recent years in Mississippi and Alabama due to an untrained - and often illiterate - workforce. In Alabama, trainers had to use "pictorials" to teach some illiterate workers how to use high-tech plant equipment.
"The educational level and the skill level of the people down there is so much lower than it is in Ontario," Fedchun said. In addition to lower training costs, Canadian workers are also $4 to $5 cheaper to employ partly thanks to the taxpayer-funded health-care system in Canada, said federal Industry Minister David Emmerson.

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/business/050630/b0630102.html
Union workers are on balance far more likely to support strong school systems and health care systems for the benefit of everyone in society. The point is that state and local governments in MS and AL through failing to invest in the social structures that support skill development that workers in 2 states failed to have the opportunity to work in good paying jobs and that is the definition of a common good. Good education and health care systems give people the tools that they need to achieve their potential level of success which in the not so long run benefits society as a whole.

http://www.morganquitno.com/sr07mlrnk.htm

Alabama 42/50

20.86

[HM2Viking]

Originally Posted by Gromit

rosy little fantasy you have there. Of course, eventually most people DO grow up a bit, and take off their rose-colored glasses.
Most do, anyway.

Below average social investments yield below average results:

http://www.morganquitno.com/sr07mlrnk.htm

Florida 27/50

25.27
31

To Florida's credit they did show improvement in their morgan quitno ranking from last year.

[Gromit]

FDR began the war on poverty, and welfare has grown remarkably since then. Its more convoluted, filled with more red tape or beaurocracy than ever before. No signs of it ever stopping, but thats what you get when good "progressive" liberals push the ideal that the government should take care of you, instead of the people shouldering personal responsibility and working to take care of themselves.

One of the aspects of childhood is the priviledge of letting the adults take care of your basic needs (shelter, food, clothing). One of the aspects of adulthood is doing this for yourself. Growing up is not measured by chronology, but in attitude and willingness to be responsible for ones' self and ones' actions.

[HM2Viking]

I don't know of a single union member who does not believe in the value of work or making work pay. As I was pointing out in my earlier post investing in education and health care does yield a superior work force and business environment. People can and will take care of themselves in an environment that supports living wages.

A broad based prosperity strengthens the social fabric of society. The 10 year old of today is the home health aid of 2040 who will take care of you as a senior citizen.

[Gromit]

For one, I don't have any reasonable expectation of seeing 2040, certainly not of being stuck in some nursing home or saddled with home-health. But my only point -admittedly not very well made- was that we do not owe everything to the unions.
There is ample proof throughout history that unions had their place, and made valuable contributions to the well-being of workers in the workplace. No argument there. But too much of anything -even unions- is never a good thing. They can rightly take credit for many of the good, but they must also take credit for some of the bad -going too far and ruining companies or running them out of town is one aspect -just ask anyone who had generations of family members in the phosphate business. Right or wrong, when you make it too expensive to do business, your competition from overseas will gladly take your place. The world is not a fair playing field. Now, that being said, in no way do I want to see OUR workers suffer or have to contend with dangerous working environments, and it should go without saying that I want OUR people to have the best possible standard of living. But at the same time, we must be mindful that there are ALWAYS consequences to our actions -some of them aren't desireable results, but that too is part of life.
----
Back to the original topic and all, I have worked in places that certainly would have benefitted from a strong union -and would gladly have joined ranks to vote for one if it were trying to get 'in'. My current facility (as I've said time and again) is not one such place. I doubt seriously that a union would have much of a chance in getting 'in' at that place, because by and large the employees are pretty happy with the place. I count myself lucky to be among them -having worked in some seriously lousy places, I certainly am aware of when I have it 'good', and of how bad it CAN be.

To that end, I think I've made myself pretty clear that I don't think unions are 'the devil' (gotta love Waterboy! grin) but by that same token, I don't think they are the final answer to all our problems, either.

[HM2Viking]

The other part of this is that over the last 25 years our government has been run on an antilabor agenda. (eg PATCO). When labor is strong then workers in the nonunion places tend to be paid better and have better benefit packages in the desire of management to "keep the union out."

Scale: 0-56% Rank
33 Florida 42%
33 Georgia 42%
14 Iowa 35%
6 Minnesota 29%

Definition: The share of children under age 18 who live in families with incomes less than 200 percent of the federal poverty level, as defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.
http://www.kidscount.org/sld/compare...r=25&x=28&y=11

A strong labor movement leads to a broader base of prosperity and stronger social networks.

[talaxandra]

Originally Posted by nursemike

The topic of unionization has come up,lately, at work, and it got me wondering. So I'm hoping some of you nurses who are currently represented by unions could tell me what union you're with, and how your experience with it has been. I'm ambivalent about the whole idea, but that's a change from being pretty firmly opposed. Any feedback will be appreciated.

I've been a member (and job rep) of the Australian Nurses' Federation for my whole post-registration career, so I'm clearly biased toward unions.
Fom everything I've read on this board, the union movement in the US is very different from here - one union (with branches in each state) represents all nurses. All the office bearers are registered nurses, and are voted for by members. Wages and conditions are negotiated on a state-by-state level, with nurses employed in the public sector having statewide parity; in private hospitals conditions are negotiated on a hospital- or group-basis.
It is solely as a result of union activity that Victoria was the first place in the world to have nurse: patient ratios.
The ANF is seen not only as a union but also a professional body - it produces the Australian Nurses' Journal, a monthly magazine that includes clinical and professional information (eg best practice guidelines) as well as industrial information. In addition the ANF produces the Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, a peer-reviewed academic monthly publication.
As a result of my union membership (which is tax deductable) I have indemnity insurance, WorkCover top-up in the event of serious illness, and legal representation. When there are condition with which I am unhappy (only the following week's roster available; a grievance I am unable to resolve independently) I have an organiser available and advice available at any time of the day.
I also get to support the organisation which has done the most to enhance, maintain and improve my professional career. Without the ANF I would not get paid study leave, or a qualification allowance for my Masters degrees, get leave loading when on annual leave or have six weeks of leave a year, or be a CNS.
I appreciate that the situation in the US is different, and seems very confusing to the uninitiated outsider. But I'm very happy with my Aussie union
Hope this helps.