>libertarian society >teachers Choose one, lol. My children will be home schooled and that's that. The way I see it, unions are simply a symptom of a broken society. They wouldn't exist if the workers had good working conditions, something that will never happen under the current neo-liberal economy and government we have right now. You wanna know how you fix it? With a free market.

>>4187 do you really consider the current economy neoliberal? i'd call it keynesian.

>>4188 This. Neoliberalism is nothing but a leftist strawman argument and should be mocked relentlessly whenever it's brought up.

>>4186 Workers are free to form unions, but they do not enjoy the special legal status that they have now (e.g. no exclusive representation, no ban on firing striking workers).

>>4188 >>4189 I call "neo liberalism" the current government controlled corporatists market we have right now in most of the "developed" world (America, Britain, France, etc.). Income tax, regulations, copyright laws, gun control, free healthcare, etc. that's what neo liberalism is. The entire point of the movement was to take the ideas of John Locke and "modernize them" (basically create a capitalist market that wasn't actually capitalist and was as far away from laissez-faire as possible). To oversimplify it, Trump is neo-con and Joe Biden is neo-lib. Corporations shill for Joe Biden because neoliberalism gives billion dollar globohomo corporations a leg up in the government.

>>4186 public school systems should be burned to the ground and not suck up anymore of our tax dollars. next question.

>>4199 It's not even about tax dollars when it comes to public schools. Just how they completely eliminate the soul, curiosity, and enthusiasm of every child is enough. Also, I wonder how it'd be like to wear triangle glasses like that.

>How would a libertarian society deal with unions Unions exist for two reasons: 1) Because workers are legitimately fed up with management and are resorting to collective bargaining due to these discrepancies since it would cost the business more to train an entire new staff than to meet the union's demands. These are considered "legitimate" unions because they typically form, set a few goals, and move on. The business owner is not required to follow up with them, he can tell them to get fucked, but he has an incentive to work with them. This typically happens in businesses where the owner is too old to actually teach new staff or in fields that are more expensive to train someone off the street to do. This is where the meme of "that employee could fuck my wife and I couldn't do anything about it" comes from. 2) Because the government said you as a business have to deal with one if your workers form a union. These ones suck, are never opt-in, and are as corrupt as any government organization. When you take power away from government to manage and regulate unions, the shitty teachers unions tend to disappear in short order while the unions actually accomplishing goals tend to stick around.

The modern education system has been stripped of anything even slightly insightful to cater to the lowest common denominator, which is now Africans in every western society. Your children would be far better off homeschooled under any system in the modern world.

>>4213 I work at a place that has a union where...and this is difficult for me to understand let alone explain...but essentially the union is covering for a lot of the bullshit that an HR would typically foist upon a company. E.g., any federal requirements for 'diversity representation'/'blabla practice in the workplace'/'safety regulation X' we've been able to get around by saying 'we have a union that does that'. We have to deal with a lot of headaches because of the union, but it's a helluva lot less than having to deal with a fully compliant HR staffed with women who majored in feminism in university.

>>4186 Unions are fine so long as they're formed independently and organically by the workers themselves. It's when the government tries to quasi nationalize your business by mandating you have one that it becomes a problem especially given the fact that union leaders can be bribed by the business to stfu basically. I hate this meme that claims LoLbertarians are "anti Union," no I"m anti government forcing dumb shitty tax funded inefficient and easily corruptible bureaucracy unto people that ultimately makes both the workers and business owner unhappy. Actually this anon >>4213 sums it up pretty well, better than me in many respects.

>>4664 To expand on this anon's point, there's literally no reason for unions to take dues from their members, it just becomes another layer of bureaucracy and grift from that point forward. The notion that Unions that take a-sometimes sizable-portion of an employee's paycheck every week in order to supposedly secure them a slightly larger paycheck and/or benefits get to play the "good guy" whereas the employer itself is the irredeemable bad guy despite facilitating the company's very existence and certainly spending more on keeping these employees paid than anything else is laughable. There is nothing inherently "anti-libertarian" about organized labor but it should never be compulsory either. It's also a fact that Unions have basically driven a lot of work overseas, so yeah the 10 guys left in the factory get to continue making $40 an hour to do jack shit while the company shifts 87% of its production workforce to Mexico or China but overall it's hurt more people than it helped in the macroeconomic sense.

Americans say welfare doesn't increase the debt or cause inflation at all.

>>5263 I don't say that

Libertarians think that they should give up defending freedom because Americans hate liberty, but Libertarians should keep resisting tyranny for selfish reasons. While the elites control the money, government, and media, the 99% have the numbers. One Libertarian may not be able to resist being sent to the concentration camps, but one million people might.

>>4187 >They wouldn't exist if the workers had good working conditions You DO realize that Disney and Ford were the center for unionization battles in their respective fields, DESPITE BOTH companies paying their employees well above their competitors and having the cleanest and healthiest facilities in their environments. And, being the only companies who didn't wilt at the sign of money. In fact, both companies had nothing against unions, and allowed their employees to join whatever union they so desired, but that didn't stop other moral busybodies from raking both companies through the coals until they either submitted entirely and created the first "union-only" shop (Ford) or destroyed the familial atmosphere of the company and caused many of their best people to leave altogether (Disney).

Americans say that the reason the elites want to kill off the 99% is to save the environment, but maybe the globalists are just evil, insane, and greedy.