# Wisconsin orders arrest of missing Democrats.  Legal?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-orders-arrest-of-missing-democrats-legal/573396>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [March 3, 2011, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-orders-arrest-of-missing-democrats-legal/573396 "2011-03-03T19:15:51Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 9

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\
**Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-orders-arrest-of-missing-democrats-legal/573396/161 "2011-03-06T22:25:32Z")

</div>

> [@Whack-a-Mole](#):
>
> Is there ever a case where the law/rules call for a supermajority and they only mean a supermajority of the members present?

Seems like that would be rather pointless – easily subject to manipulation.

Just have enough of your supporters leave the chamber until you have a supermajority of those remaining present.

Or prevent opposing voters from being there – don’t tell them where/when the meeting is, or even have them arrested as they try to enter the meeting hall. That was a common one way back in King George III’s time; thus the rule in America that Legislators in Congress can’t be arrested on the way to a session.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\
**Post date:** [March 11, 2011, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-orders-arrest-of-missing-democrats-legal/573396/162 "2011-03-11T01:55:58Z")

</div>

> [@Whack-a-Mole](#):
>
> Let’s think about what you want to replace that with.
> 
> Let’s pretend that you, a non-union worker, makes $30,000/year in salary building widgets.
> 
> In the future, the most (not guaranteed) you can make is $30,000/year + inflation so, in essence, you are making the equivalent of $30,000/year today.
> 
> Now, if you want to make more than that $30,000/year + inflation the shareholders of the widget factory need to vote to allow it. They are not likely to willingly part with their money (since if they pay you more they lose money). But hey…might happen right? All you need to do is convince a majority of shareholders that you and all the other workers deserve more money and the shareholders should pay for it.
> 
> Make no mistake, it makes no difference if you become more efficient at your job and build more widgets per hour. It makes no difference if they fire 1/3 of the workers and expect you to maintain the same production such that you need to work more hours per day. You get your $30,000/year no matter what (unless the shareholders are feeling generous).
> 
> You’d be ok with that?

A couple of points:

1. If the market wage for a widget maker is $30k/yr, under what rationale should a union, for example, come in and negotiate a salary of $40k/yr? Would that mean that we all pay increased prices for widgets just so a handful of widget makers can make more than what they are worth?

2. If a widget maker was good enough at his job that he could produce 33% more widgets than the average worker, a business would be crazy not to give him a pay increase. A worker like that is worth more than the average, and if his company won’t pay, a competitor will.

3. The union system would guarantee that hard working widget makers and lazy ones all get the same pay, thereby taking away the incentive for the hard worker. He will start coasting, productivity suffers, morale suffers, less widgets get made, company makes less money, and the consumers pay more for widgets.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-orders-arrest-of-missing-democrats-legal/573396.md?page=8)