I generally agree with you on public service unions. I don't agree that unions are generally bad for capitalism. I think they are agnostic for capitalism, with some positives and some negatives.
Nope. All positive, including folks whose employer is our government, who are not indentured servants nor property of the state. They're workers, with every right we have, and the exact same obligations under our tax code.
The thing that Conservatives, and even many Liberals, fail to grasp, despite it's obvious truth in a Consumer Economy, which is what the USA is: our value is not in what we do;
it's in what we buy.
Robert Riech, easily the most-eminent political economist of our generation, wrote a book recently, in which he advocated all Americans get a minimum of $50,000. Those not working get it all; those working and making less would be supplimented. Those making more, are already there, and get nothing. But everyone can consume at a $50 grand a year level, at a minimum, exploding the market. Novel concept, which I'm not in complete agreement with, since I think it borders on a level that might disincentivize too great a percentage of our workforce. But the economics are incredibly sound.
Consider the problem with poverty: needs not being served, when we have a market based entirely on meeting needs. Consumer need, is the lifeblood of businesses. And the more doing so, increases the effects of supply and demand, making the market more free market-like. When markets contract, businesses seek policies that diminish the effects of supply and demand, to create more profit from what they have, rather than going after market opportunity. This effect, is sometimes called, metaphorically, looking for rembrandts in the attic. And it leads to rent-seeking, as we call it in economics, where larger pieces of what's there are taken, by government mandate / policies, driving prices up for consumers, without adding value or production. Not a good thing.
And we do things now, trying to help grow consumption: credit is loosened, or like now, we borrow from our future retirement (2% drop in payroll taxes) to get us spending more today. Also, tax credits and rebates move us to buy stuff, from those who have it to sell and can influence policy, i.e. GE with expensive lightbulbs that save energy, but really don't cost justify for typical consumers. So EPA pays rebates to retailers, who take it off the price, letting you buy up to four, for 20% of the cost.
So looking at the poor and unemployed, in that light: need not being served. You'll see that empowering them, so they can meet their need, is a huge boom to those who serve the need, and drive the economy and jobs forward. And rather that $50 K for everyone, I'd advocate immediate upping of the Minimum Wage to around $12 / hour, and get welfare, SSI and UI recipients to something near to that level, but so close as to be equal: circa $9 / hr / x40 / x 52 ... just under $19 K a year.
And indeed, supporting more unionization, will help drive up the prevailing wages for us all, far better than simply a few union workers, principally in public service sector jobs, boosting only slightly, and not by much, the prevailing wage ... which in aggregate, has been moving backward most of the last 1/3 century.
