4 ms·

I don't understand why if a financier or businessman says they're gonna "pull their business" if higher taxes or minimum wage is enacted, this is seen as a very

I don't understand why if a financier or businessman says they're gonna "pull their business" if higher taxes or minimum wage is enacted, this is seen as a very important thing to take into account. Meanwhile, if a teacher or a nurse says the same thing, you get: > The union boss, Joe Del Grosso, demanded a ransom of $31 million to compensate for what he felt members should have received in previous years — before agreeing to discuss any labor reforms. Why isn't this "ransom" language used when businesspeople threaten to move their business elsewhere, fire people, etc.?

larrik 11y ago
I really don't see the similarity here. Threatening to leave a locale is completely different from asking for a specific amount of money up front.
- fweespeech 11y ago
  ....no, not really. "If you do not do X, I will do Y" is very much the ransom formula regardless.
  - manigandham 11y ago
    That's not ransom (which is all about extorting money). Saying if conditions change then you'll take a different action is just stating fact. Every change will have it's consequences, that doesn't make it ransom or somehow wrong.
    - fweespeech 11y ago
      Getting things that make you money and cost the other party money is extorting money.
      - manigandham 11y ago
        So if I win a client from a competing business, I'm extorting money? Reactionary changes are just that. Raise taxes or min. wage and businesses move to do what's best for them. That's not ransom.
        fweespeech 11y ago
        > I really don't see the similarity here. Threatening to leave a locale is completely different from asking for a specific amount of money up front. A) Keyword is "threatening" as in proactive, not reactive. B) This is the clearly in the context of private individuals demanding stuff from government.
        manigandham 11y ago
        It seems you're replying to the wrong post. That was just a subjective word used by another HN user. It's not the keyword in anything. It's just stating the reaction that will happen to proposed changes. And what's wrong with proactively warning the other side? It's the smart thing to do. The actually important point is that both sides are completely free to do as they like. The company isn't forcefully demanding money or causing harm so there's no ransom or extortion going on here.
        fweespeech 11y ago
        http://www.businessinsider.com/states-where-teachers-unions-are-illegal-2011-2 http://www.businessinsider.com/states-where-teachers-unions-... You can bust teachers unions. Remind me again how they are forcefully demanding money?
        manigandham 11y ago
        What does this link from 2011 have to do with anything? I'm not sure about the legalities of teachers unions or what bill was curtailing their bargaining rights (which understandably would cause protests) but there is no ransom involved in that either. Perhaps you should read these links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion
      - lfjmfkekdk88 11y ago
        So employees at Ycombinator startups are extorting money from their employers? I find your definition of ransom and extortion quite bewildering.
  - lfjmfkekdk88 11y ago
    That really is a misleading definition of a ransom. A ransom is more like, "If you do not pay X, I will do Y"
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
adventured 11y ago
Businesses get vilified all the time for that behavior. Tesla got attacked a lot for their attempts to leverage the best deal possible when pursuing a location for the gigafactory. Articles are still being written about it. I must have read two dozen negative articles against the company regarding that one thing alone. A few of which were on HN's front page. And in that case it wasn't even Tesla threatening to pull existing business from a location. Why is it seen as an important thing? Ask California how much they've enjoyed Texas pulling business from the state. Of course it's an important consideration, the states compete with each other in most things including where businesses choose to locate facilities.
- andreasklinger 11y ago
  I think the main question here is balance. We could have the same argument with pretty much everything - not only companies / unions. In the end each party is motivated to use its own power to optimize for their end. Systems like markets only seek equilibrium if there is a balance in power between parties. Balance needs to be a neutral position that's still beneficial (read fair) for all sides.
- dopamean 11y ago
  That's such nonsense though. The gigfactory didn't exist and they were looking for a place to build it. That is not quite the same as threatening to move an existing business that presumably employs a lot of people in the area.
trhway 11y ago
>Meanwhile, if a teacher or a nurse says the same thing, you get: >> The union boss, Joe Del Grosso, non-sequitur. Del Grosso isn't a teacher or a nurse. Unions in New Jersey is a pretty specific kind of entrepreneural activity and well covered in many famous literature and TV works. >The superintendent, Cami Anderson, demanded accountability from schools but set her own performance goals only after the academic year was largely over and relied on expensive consultants — whose total bill ultimately exceeded $20 million having grown in USSR/Russia, my first instinctive calculation produces $15M kickback such situation must involve ... of course here things are completely different and expensive consultants is just an expensive and necessary cost of teaching math and reading to schoolchildren :)
thebmax 11y ago
Business people who move jurisdictions due to tax hikes are not 'ransoming' anyone - its their own private property and they can move where ever they want. Politicians who are too stupid to realize that raising taxes causes capital flight deserve to lose businesses from their city/state. Your idea is against the whole notion of private property. "Work like sheep for the government all you business owners and if you move or close it down we're going to arrest you"
- kevin_thibedeau 11y ago
  It doesn't work that way in professional sports where team owners raking in guaranteed profits hold their host cities ransom every 20 years looking for a new public subsidized stadium. One that could be paid for out of pocket by investing a portion of the profit made over those 20 years.
rayiner 11y ago
Fananciers and businessmen don't base their calls to raise their salaries at the public expense on the premise that it'll be good for children.
threatofrain 11y ago
I do think the author of the NYT article used an unfairly mischaracterizing word. The better replacement would be "tough negotiation". From what I've read, the union leader was not threatening a strike, but merely refusing to engage in talks.
- mratzloff 11y ago
  "I'm not even willing to listen to your position until you pay me" may not be ransom, but it is an extremely unproductive relationship.

larrik 11y ago

I really don't see the similarity here. Threatening to leave a locale is completely different from asking for a specific amount of money up front.

fweespeech 11y ago
....no, not really. "If you do not do X, I will do Y" is very much the ransom formula regardless.
- manigandham 11y ago
  That's not ransom (which is all about extorting money). Saying if conditions change then you'll take a different action is just stating fact. Every change will have it's consequences, that doesn't make it ransom or somehow wrong.
  - fweespeech 11y ago
    Getting things that make you money and cost the other party money is extorting money.
    - manigandham 11y ago
      So if I win a client from a competing business, I'm extorting money? Reactionary changes are just that. Raise taxes or min. wage and businesses move to do what's best for them. That's not ransom.
      - fweespeech 11y ago
        > I really don't see the similarity here. Threatening to leave a locale is completely different from asking for a specific amount of money up front. A) Keyword is "threatening" as in proactive, not reactive. B) This is the clearly in the context of private individuals demanding stuff from government.
        manigandham 11y ago
        It seems you're replying to the wrong post. That was just a subjective word used by another HN user. It's not the keyword in anything. It's just stating the reaction that will happen to proposed changes. And what's wrong with proactively warning the other side? It's the smart thing to do. The actually important point is that both sides are completely free to do as they like. The company isn't forcefully demanding money or causing harm so there's no ransom or extortion going on here.
        fweespeech 11y ago
        http://www.businessinsider.com/states-where-teachers-unions-are-illegal-2011-2 http://www.businessinsider.com/states-where-teachers-unions-... You can bust teachers unions. Remind me again how they are forcefully demanding money?
        manigandham 11y ago
        What does this link from 2011 have to do with anything? I'm not sure about the legalities of teachers unions or what bill was curtailing their bargaining rights (which understandably would cause protests) but there is no ransom involved in that either. Perhaps you should read these links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion
    - lfjmfkekdk88 11y ago
      So employees at Ycombinator startups are extorting money from their employers? I find your definition of ransom and extortion quite bewildering.
- lfjmfkekdk88 11y ago
  That really is a misleading definition of a ransom. A ransom is more like, "If you do not pay X, I will do Y"

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

adventured 11y ago

Businesses get vilified all the time for that behavior. Tesla got attacked a lot for their attempts to leverage the best deal possible when pursuing a location for the gigafactory. Articles are still being written about it. I must have read two dozen negative articles against the company regarding that one thing alone. A few of which were on HN's front page. And in that case it wasn't even Tesla threatening to pull existing business from a location. Why is it seen as an important thing? Ask California how much they've enjoyed Texas pulling business from the state. Of course it's an important consideration, the states compete with each other in most things including where businesses choose to locate facilities.

andreasklinger 11y ago
I think the main question here is balance. We could have the same argument with pretty much everything - not only companies / unions. In the end each party is motivated to use its own power to optimize for their end. Systems like markets only seek equilibrium if there is a balance in power between parties. Balance needs to be a neutral position that's still beneficial (read fair) for all sides.
dopamean 11y ago
That's such nonsense though. The gigfactory didn't exist and they were looking for a place to build it. That is not quite the same as threatening to move an existing business that presumably employs a lot of people in the area.

trhway 11y ago

>Meanwhile, if a teacher or a nurse says the same thing, you get: >> The union boss, Joe Del Grosso, non-sequitur. Del Grosso isn't a teacher or a nurse. Unions in New Jersey is a pretty specific kind of entrepreneural activity and well covered in many famous literature and TV works. >The superintendent, Cami Anderson, demanded accountability from schools but set her own performance goals only after the academic year was largely over and relied on expensive consultants — whose total bill ultimately exceeded $20 million having grown in USSR/Russia, my first instinctive calculation produces $15M kickback such situation must involve ... of course here things are completely different and expensive consultants is just an expensive and necessary cost of teaching math and reading to schoolchildren :)

thebmax 11y ago

Business people who move jurisdictions due to tax hikes are not 'ransoming' anyone - its their own private property and they can move where ever they want. Politicians who are too stupid to realize that raising taxes causes capital flight deserve to lose businesses from their city/state. Your idea is against the whole notion of private property. "Work like sheep for the government all you business owners and if you move or close it down we're going to arrest you"

kevin_thibedeau 11y ago
It doesn't work that way in professional sports where team owners raking in guaranteed profits hold their host cities ransom every 20 years looking for a new public subsidized stadium. One that could be paid for out of pocket by investing a portion of the profit made over those 20 years.

rayiner 11y ago

Fananciers and businessmen don't base their calls to raise their salaries at the public expense on the premise that it'll be good for children.

threatofrain 11y ago

I do think the author of the NYT article used an unfairly mischaracterizing word. The better replacement would be "tough negotiation". From what I've read, the union leader was not threatening a strike, but merely refusing to engage in talks.

mratzloff 11y ago
"I'm not even willing to listen to your position until you pay me" may not be ransom, but it is an extremely unproductive relationship.