Unions pay better

Published

Yep right up to the closing of the plant, the bankruptcy, or the closing of the hospital.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

.......... more proof that a union nurse is payed more,:biggringi http://www.iwpr.org/pdf/PressRelease2_8_06.pdf

Up Vote Up Vote ×

..................

Up Vote Up Vote ×
.......... more proof that a union nurse is payed more,:biggringi http://www.iwpr.org/pdf/PressRelease2_8_06.pdf

What that study failed to mention is that the states with the highest wages also have the highest cost of living. If a gallon of gas, cost 3.25 here, what do you think that is costing in Hawaii?

Then of course, there is the wage increases, minus the union dues, which gives you exactly what you made before, sometimes even less. Then if the union strikes, and you do not want to, the union can fine you for thousands and thousands of dollars.

It amuses me that unions claim credit for so much social reform and fighting social injustice, yet they advocate higher wages for workers. Higher wages mean higher costs. Higher costs are passed along to consumers. Who now with their higher wages, can afford exactly the same as they could before, without their money going to leftist political campaigns.

The CNA, for example, supports the Conyers medicare for all bill. Who is going to pay for that? Why we are with our tax dollars of course. How does the government make deals and pay for things? With contracts to lowest bidders. How are the hospitals and healthcare facilities going to cover expenses when the government is only going to pay a flat rate for services rendered? Are they going to still be able to pay the high wages that unions are demanding? Are they going to stop offering other expensive procedures and diagnostic tests?

I am curious about this. Sincerely.

Or is the government going to simply take over the hospitals etc, and nationalize them. (VA nightmare, anyone?)

seems to me, that the unions are shooting themselves in the foot, in their endeavors to move us more towards the socialist utopia.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
SEC. 103. QUALIFICATION OF PARTICIPATING PROVIDERS.

    (a) Requirement to Be Public or Non-profit-

      (1) IN GENERAL- No institution may be a participating provider unless it is a public or not-for-profit institution.

      (2) CONVERSION OF INVESTOR-OWNED PROVIDERS- Investor-owned providers of care opting to participate shall be required to convert to not-for-profit status.

      (3) COMPENSATION FOR CONVERSION- The owners of such investor-owned providers shall be compensated for the actual appraised value of converted facilities used in the delivery of care.

    Then they state that no private insurance can sell insurance that covers the same thing, so essiently, you will have to go to the public facilities, or pay all by yourself, for care at some other facility.

      Hmm, doesnt seem to appealling to me.

        SEC. 104. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATING COVERAGE.


          (a) In General- It is unlawful for a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act.

          (b) Construction- Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act, such as for cosmetic surgery or other services and items that are not medically necessary.

          How will this be paid for?

          SEC. 211. OVERVIEW: FUNDING THE USNHI PROGRAM.


            (a) In General- The USNHI Program is to be funded as provided in subsections (b) and ©.

            (b) Annual Appropriation for Funding of USNHI Program- There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act such sums as may be necessary.

            © Intent- Sums appropriated pursuant to subsection (b) shall be paid for--

              (1) by vastly reducing paperwork;

              (2) by requiring a rational bulk procurement of medications;

              (3) from existing sources of Federal government revenues for health care;

              (4) by increasing personal income taxes on the top 5 percent income earners;

              (5) by instituting a modest payroll tax; and

              (6) by instituting a small tax on stock and bond transactions.

          Yes Yes Tax us even more...It also states that everyone in the US is elgible, be they a citizen, or pay taxes or not...(even bigger influx of illegals now)?

          You can go here and read the entire thing yourself:

          http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.00676:

          Up Vote Up Vote ×

          http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06094/679126-28.stm

          The OP linked a letter that was merely a response to the editorial.

          Up Vote Up Vote ×
          Yep.............. whatever it takes.

          NO UNION IS A GOOD UNION

          Nephro I have to admire your consistency.

          The real source of economic problems for corporations is short term management. The average CEO is NOT worth 1200 dollars per hour. Unions through their pension fund investments are fighting these corporate thieves and crooks every step of the way. You may not believe or agree with this but unions fight to save the goose NOT kill it through their demands for financial transparency AND good management. see http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060501/blanding

          Some examples of corporate CEO malefactors who killed the economic goose. Ken Lay, Jeff Skillings.

          I am better off with the union than without.

          HM2

          Up Vote Up Vote ×
          + Join the Discussion