That depends on why the workers unionized.
Companies could restructure and hire everybody as independend contractors, paying for work and not time.
If companies play along, work would move to the most productive areas. Workers would be fired and leave low productive areas and move to where the work is.
Ultimately this should lead to some highly populated areas in the world while the rest is empty.
Maybe eventually like this?
The world would get very wobbly.
Climate change, wealth inequality, fascism, war, the global epidemic of loneliness & depression aren’t distinct disconnected problems. They are a singular globally connected problem. And it requires a singular globally connected solution. We’d need a few things -
- We will need to take care of all human essential services like healthcare, education, food, banking, technology etc. Only things that add positive value to society. We can have a singular globally coordinated effort.
- We will need an economic engine, so as to provide a UBI for all, reasonably paid based on cost of living. To generate income we can sell our products & services at a markup to non-union members.
- We will need an army because the enemy has one and we need to defend ourselves.
- Decentralization is also a defence mechanism. Don’t build 1 giant bank, build a million connected credit unions all utilizing the same backend tools & processes. It’s such a nice defense mechanism that we might even be able to skip the army altogether, which bank are you gonna breakup when we can open a hundred more tomorrow.
Those unions would have elected union reps. They’d gain an immense amount of power, and anyone on the edge of society not in a union would lose their voice — stay at home parents, small business owners, etc.
Eventually the unions would gravitate to a party system, those parties would become bipolar, and world governments would become figureheads. Unions would begin to clash, eventually forming new political bodies along union lines. Union members would question why non-union members don’t have to pay dues, and a requirement would come about that when old enough to work, it would be mandatory for everyone to pick a union.
You can see where this is going.
The only reason unions work is that they pit the power of production against the power of military strength and control. Give the unions too much power, and their leadership becomes the thing they’ve fought to resist.
So, where we currently are, just a different set of naming conventions.
Yup.
You can see where this is going.
Yes but only if all the world would work like Usa.
In reality, all the world works differently than all the world.
Well, you could argue that China already has the structure being described here. How does it work out there?
I was assuming a union system similar to what is currently used in the US. If it’s not democratic, you’re going to have other issues.
Of course, ranked choice could mitigate some of the issues, but you can’t get away from the power imbalance problem.
You’d need a world wide government to tax and distribute for that, right? So that government would need to have control of every over country, like the EU on a larger scale. That seems unlikely to happen without violence, but I guess it would work if every worker in the world was suddenly in support of it.
If that wage is meant to be the same everywhere: economic chaos. A living wage for a worker in NYC, NY, USA is very different to the living wage in Da Nang, Viet Nam. You could work for eventual parity, but that comes with its own huge set of challenges. It’s interesting to think about.
A possible solution is to use percentages to keep it relative. Workers make 10% of what a CEO makes, a manager makes 15%, etc. Or a percentage of GDP or so other metric to make it comparable.
It’s still likely an impossible idea, but you could start nationally and then work out from there.
Or a more globalized world would do like the covid pandemic and decentralize people more.
It’s almost impossible to tell or coordinate.
What currency is the universal wage in? USD? EUR? CNY?
Is it the same everywhere? Do you adjust for purchasing power? How?
What you’re suggesting requires global cooperation on a scale that is inconceivable today. Nations would have to give up economic power in ways that no one would do today. You’d need a global government. We are nowhere near that and probably won’t ever be unless an extraterrestrial threat exists.
A global government would prevent this from ever happening.
A few elites have the power to inflict violence on everyone else and get away with it - aka the state’s monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. This allows them to enforce injustice like unlivable wages but also to starve, jail and kill anyone who is serious about taking aware their power.
Setting up a global union would drastically curtail the power of elites, and they would prevent it. You would have to defeat the world’s elite, and in that case a universal wage is small potatoes.
Wouldn’t you be installing a new set of elites with incredible power, though? After all, someone has to count and interpret the votes. Hopefully the minimum number of people required to check and to balance is not larger than the maximum number of people capable of fruitful collaboration.
bad things would happen once some people decided to mess with the system, not share their wealth, and raise a military. then all those globaly unionized workers would need a military. and btw the military wouldn’t be allowed to unionize separately, their suppose to follow orders. fun thought experiment but wouldn’t work too well
One thing that must happen for this is the elimination of all nation-state imposed trade and labor barriers. No more immigration checks, no passports or visas: Free, global labor distribution.
Is that all?
turns off switch
I know, I’m disappointed that humans are humans, too.
2-3 years ago, it would be great. Nowadays, I think it will just expedite the embrace of AI as an alternative, but I might be pessimistic.
Rojava or 1930s Spain
Impossible when events like Tienanman Square are the outcome in some countries. It only takes one to upset a global unionization apple cart.
Huh? You think Tiananmen was about unionizing…?
Also it’s Tiananmen
In a sort of abstract sense, there are some parallels.
In a system like the US, corporations and those with a lot of money hold a lot of power, and unionization is a way for everyone else to take some power for themselves to make sure that their voices are heard.
In a system like China however, most of that power is instead concentrated with the government and upper echelons of party, so attempts at democratizing fill a similar role of giving regular people a voice.
There’s a lot of nitty gritty details, cultural differences, etc. and I don’t really want to gloss over those, but the root in either case is common people organizing and trying to make sure their voices are heard.
I think it’s actually spelled “天安门广场”
Source: https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Tiananmen
Yes, I am fun at parties, and I will prove it as soon as I get invited to one.
I’m inviting you to the worst party ever tomorrow!
Won’t be the worst 'til I get there!
Interesting scale there (all workers unionized versus one country fucking over others), I don’t think they are exclusive.
It would be better, butnot perfect and with new issues.
I have started to think of the federal mining wage as “the union of man’s negotiated minimum rate”. All other unions and individuals negotiate from that.
