Labor Party Beliefs

I will try to use the term "trade union" instead of labor union, but some of my quotes may mention it the latter way. Point 1: Corporations are made of employers and shareholders because without them, there would be no company. And there is no conflict between corporations' right to expand and people's reasonable standard of living and employment because when the company grows, they are able to add more workers, provide products at a lower price, and increase GDP, in turn decreases unemployment and increases over per capita GDP and individual household wealth. Without companies expanding, there would be little economic expansion. "In the United States today, virtually every small business, college and charity is incorporated. To suggest that corporations lack speech rights would affect a great many rights and protections that we have come to rely on. Be careful what you wish for.": http://www.npr.org.... This quote is just one of the many that says that corporations have the same rights as people, so they must be considered people. And without a strong employer/stockholder presence in the company, the company can not provide the rights to employees, making them shut down, which in turn increase unemployment. Point 2: I think you misread my quotes. I said that unionized workers were likely to have lower salaries, higher levels of unemployment, and lower levels of education than non-unionized workers. So to reduce all of those effects and to increase GDP growth, one must get rid of labor unions for moving the economy backwards. "Economic theory consequently suggests that unions raise the wages of their members at the cost of lower profits and fewer jobs, that lower profits cause businesses to invest less, and that unions have a smaller effect in competitive markets (where a union cannot obtain a monopoly).": http://omegahrsolutions.com....... See. This said that unionization is bad. There are two problems with the "unionization increases productivity" argument. One, unionization increases sloth because unions force the company to pay a certain wage for the employee. This wage is required no matter the productivity. So a unionized worker who does nothing would get the same salary was a unionized worker who does a lot, and most likely, gets more wages than the non-unionized worker who even does all that he can. And two, unionization adds to the growing "dumbness" of workers. Since the standards for getting a job are forceibly lowered, people can apply and do a bad job, and they are still protected from losing their jobs. This decreases productivity and GDP growth, the company gets less profit, overtime acquires a loss, then has to shut down, thus causing increases in unemployment. But you can not forceibly create more jobs. Why? Because after the company goes out of business due to the trade unions, do you think the company will return? And plus, even if they didn't, it would be impossible to create enough companies to create enough jobs to help even 10% of the unemployed. Point 3: "Studies have shown in each case that their wage policies killed jobs for teens. The Massachusetts teen employment rate sank by one-third when the minimum wage rose by 88% between 1995 and 2008".:http://online.wsj.com.... Employees have the right to search for jobs with higher pay. There is nothing stopping them. In fact, because of job competition, competition increases wages. Teens and adults have the right to shop around for jobs. In fact, "According to new numbers from the Labor Department, in 2008 only 1.1% of Americans who work 40 hours a week or more even earned the minimum wage. In other words, 98.9% of 40-hour-a-week workers earn more than the minimum.""Minimum wage jobs are nearly all first-time or part-time jobs, and an estimated two of every three minimum wage workers get a pay raise within a year on the job.": http://online.wsj.com.... Why? Because they can shop around for jobs. And they should be paid based on performance, not unionization. And plus, teenagers have their parents to pay for their room and board, so they don't even need the minimum wage. Not to mention, when the minimum wage is applied to teenagers, it reduces their urge to work at the beginning, thus being burdened to live a live of sloth. It is not as bad when applied to older people because they grew up with hard work (not that it is good for them either though). Point 4: I think you need to re-read the last point again because you misinterpreted it. A few worker protections are necessary, but there is an extreme overload of them. We don't need to have a lot of the workers' protections laws because we live in the 21st Century. People would not allow that to happen, and they would quit if they were not established. Shopping around for jobs again. I say the child labor laws should stop at age 12. By that time (if the child is thought right), the child has learned most of the basics, and is learning the characteristics of hard work and perseverance, and is learning how to work for a bigger job later on in his or her career. And plus, the laws are voluntary. The children get to decide. "On a side note, aren't these laws a form of ageism, i.e. targeting individuals because of age rather than intellect, ability, or capacity? In the case of the new labor laws, the young are prohibited to work in certain agricultural fields not because of there skill (or lack thereof), but because of their young age. Targeting safety is one thing, but targeting safety laws on the basis of age is another.":http://www.triplepundit.com.... "As Dick Grotton, head of the Maine Restaurant Association, told Bloomberg News: "How come it's OK, even exemplary, for teenagers to spend 40 hours a week in sports, glee club, chorus, debate society or any other select activity sanctioned by the social elite, but if you are a teenager who wants to work or needs to work, there are limits?":http://www.theolympian.com.... Which is another way of saying that kids working is not a bad thing. And plus, if you look at my profile, I am 14. I would know how to balance education and work. And people who are in their 20s who are getting college degrees are balancing their education and work.