Union Bosses, Wal-Mart and Consumers
Inside Liberty Watch Today - May 15, 2006

It is no secret that unions are hounding Wal-Mart. The largest private employer in the world is the world's biggest labor prize. Union honchos dream at night about the torrent of cash that they would swim in if Wal-Mart employees were handing over union dues each and every month.

But just what is the end game in the union vs. Wal-Mart struggle? Do union organizers believe that suddenly the folks in Bentonville, Arkansas will wake up one morning, slap their foreheads, and exclaim, "I think our company would be better off if our associates were represented by a union." Is CEO Lee Scott going to look at GM and Ford and think to himself, "hmm, the UAW sure has done a lot for the US auto industry; I think we need some of that here."

The union folks aren't betting on it. But, what Service Employees International Union president Andy Stern has in mind is, "to get Wal-Mart's leadership out there in traffic and holler, 'We can no longer compete in the global economy when health care is factored into the cost of our products.'"

It wasn't all that long ago that Hillary Clinton floated the national healthcare balloon. It was popped quickly back then, but if guys like Stern can get big business on board, we'll all be lining up at doctors offices to enjoy the same level of service provided by the DMV or TSA.

This may all seem far-fetched, the biggest company in the world advocating that taxpayers provide for everyone's healthcare, but in a speech made to the National Governors Association, Wal-Mart's Scott told the Governors: "We cannot do it alone. No business can. No business should have to. The fact is the soaring cost of health care in America cannot be sustained over the long term by any business that offers health benefits to its employees."

This kind of talk is music to union boss Stern's ears, as Joshua Green points out in the current addition of The Atlantic Monthly. "In Stern's thinking, if the world's largest company could be coaxed or bullied into publicly favoring a national health-care policy, here's how things might play out: a rush of other companies already beset by health-care costs and accustomed to mimicking Wal-Mart would fall in line, putting business on the same side with labor," Green writes. Plus, there is no question that the domestic carmakers that are going broke would sign on for national healthcare. GM's healthcare costs amount to $1,600 for each and every vehicle they produce.

Of course there's another group that would line up with labor and big business. State governments burdened by Medicaid costs would likely join in to put pressure on the federal government.

Green points out that Wal-Mart provides better health-care benefits than its competitors and the fact that more of the company's employees are on Medicaid roles "is a function of Wal-Mart's size more than mean-spirited company policy."

Senior Editor Green also fingers the culprit for soaring health care costs: wage controls during WWII. The labor shortage during the war caused labor costs to soar and the government stepped in and capped wages. To attract employees, health care benefits were provided when higher wages couldn't be offered. At the time, health care costs were not a major expense.

What Green misses is that health care costs have exploded because of this policy as well as the implementation of government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. When people do not spend their own money on something they demand more of it, pushing up the price.

So why do unions want taxpayers to cover health care costs; because providing health care coverage takes money away from unions. "As a union we are steadily trading wages for health care," Stern told Green.

Don't expect national health care proposals to come in the form of a "single-payer" system with taxpayers paying all the bills. Likely presidential candidates Clinton and Governor Mitt Romney know that dog won't hunt. Romney just approved a bill in his state of Massachusetts to require health insurance, like auto insurance. The taxpayer then subsidizes poor people. These plans, as Green describes, "would be organized by government but operated through private doctors and health plans." Oh, goodie, what a relief, Mussolini would be proud.

But, when health care is firmly controlled by government, black markets will inevitably develop. And as economist George Reisman makes clear, as sellers evade government controls, totalitarianism will then required to keep the black (or under ground) market from developing. Government spies, informants and thugs will serve to make people fearful and make it dangerous to conduct healthcare business because the black market will be seen as "stealing" from the state.

Thousands of people each day are turning 60 with the expectation of enjoying their golden years. Medical care fascism will burst their bubble.


Doug French, Liberty Watch Columnist


Liberty Watch On-Line
3111 S. Valley View
Suite B-109
Las Vegas, NV, 89102
Phone: 702-385-3320
Fax: 702-385-5488