I cannot attest to the construction field or any area specifically, however, I have known many people who do just as has been accused and discussed here. Lets face it, times are tough and jobs are not readily available to many people. One question is why? I know this is a rather simplistic question with multiple and diverse answers that are complicated and not wholly agreed upon. Looking at the current government and the state in which we find ourselves and the "ideas" it has implemented and one should be able to conclude that we are dealing with an ideologue that is not concerned with the state of affairs we are in; it does not fit their plan of "fundamentally changing America" in that if it requires suffering to obtain a desired state (socialism) so be it. Looking from a liberal/socialist point of view, the last thing you want to have happen is for the people to no longer need your services and your programs. Again a simplistic way of putting it, but one I believe to be accurate. Another area I believe goes into answering the afore question is unions. Lets face it, unions have not really helped. I know this is a controversial stance but I have my reasons which I will generally try and explain some of my main thoughts. First, unions do cost everyone, not just the union members their dues. The added cost to maintain a union in any field is one of the largest cost to any industry. What do I mean? The cost of higher wages, healthcare issues, pensions, job retention, job titles and classifications, etc. Obviously, people want the most they can get out of a situation and I believe paying people decently helps the economy as a whole (Henry Ford should ring a bell), but I am sorry, working on an assembly line does not warrant the money some union jobs receive. I am willing to bet that many of the skilled workers such as construction workers not only work harder (i.e. more physically and mentally demanding) and have a larger learning curve (i.e. on the job sight and schooling) than those mundane and repetitive jobs they are paid less for them and have less security. Secondly, looking at the people supported by unions as an organization have nothing really in common with the rank and file but instead benefit the leadership. The worst, and in my view the most egregious, are government unions. To me this is an oxymoron because those same unions that demand and receive more do so at the expense of the tax payer (including themselves) and does nothing to create new wealth which can only be done in the private sector. It only takes it away thus retarding the growth needed to create jobs; this also applies to taxes as well. Its simple, the more you move money from the private to the public sectors, the less money is available to create the capital needed to grow the economy. But I digress, looking at the state of manufacturing it is plain to see that these jobs have moved else where. I believe the unions are part to blame for this. The business of business is to make money and grow and to do so faster and more efficient than the composition, if cost such as labor make it so one is less competitive, than one looks to change the equation. I do agree with this philosophy but I also do believe that keeping jobs in America benefits America. What I have seen as a fault with this thinking in America is that the dollar, bottom line and especially the short term rule the boardrooms. At the same time because we have moved to a "world economy" it makes it hard to see beyond this thinking. Unions do adhere to this type of thinking in their own right. The old-fashion style of unionism is dead and needs to change its ways. I doubt unions will ever be gone and they do serve a purpose and I venture to guess even industry captains see them as being useful, however they need to move into the 21st century with the rest of the world. One does not have to look far to see what happens when they do not; the auto industry and Detroit.
