6 ms·

Consider it from their perspective. If they leave a job as a union-protected coal miner, their options are garbage, trained or not. They'll be going from a si

Consider it from their perspective. If they leave a job as a union-protected coal miner, their options are garbage, trained or not. They'll be going from a situation where they can expect and get reasonable compensation which grows faster than cost of living increases, pensions, etc to being treated like a cost center to be manipulated and reduced, forced to hop jobs every 4 or 5 years to even remain at market rate for their skill level, etc. You really can't expect them to not be defensive of their position, especially considering the history of open flagrant abuse and violence they've faced in the past.

thebooktocome 9y ago
I'd try to consider it from their perspective, but I get confused by the part where they vote overwhelmingly Republican to protect their union jobs and government subsidies.
- ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
  Perhaps you get confused about the long history of Appalachian Coal Miners voting solidly Democratic, 100 years of such, only to see their votes taken for granted and their livelihood disappear. West Virginia, despite being as far from Cosmopolitan as you can get has been a Democratic stronghold until the last election cycle
  - ceejayoz 9y ago
    The coal industry employs fewer people than Arby's. Their votes are "taken for granted" because they're a tiny constituency, and their livelihood was always going to disappear. Mines have become progressively more automated (like everything else) and between natural gas and renewable energy options, it's simply no longer the economic home run it used to be.
    - ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
      Yep at the moment they do, and they will continue to, but that has nothing to do with the fact that historically those in the industry voted Democratic not Republican. The lack of reality among some around here does amaze me
      - ceejayoz 9y ago
        Sure it does. People always look for someone to blame for something like this, and the Republicans capitalized on that fact with the "war on coal" narrative. Not shocking it worked.
        ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
        >I'd try to consider it from their perspective, but I get confused by the part where they vote overwhelmingly Republican to protect their union jobs and government subsidies. Ok, read the parent. Appalachian Miners do not vote overwhelmingly Republican to protect their union jobs and government subsidies. For the longest time they voted Democratic to Protect their Union Jobs and Government subsides until their jobs were no longer there. Their jobs aren't coming back, that's a given, and the reaction to that was to stop voting for the people they thought would protect their way of living, only to see a shift over the last decade where their voice was completely drowned out in the Democratic party
      - CalChris 9y ago
        And historically those miners had jobs. However the loss of their jobs had nothing to do with sanctuary cities, abortion, second amendment rights or any other wedge issue but their party switch did.
        ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
        However you do realize that sanctuary cities, abortion, second amendment rights or any other wedge issue those in Appalachia did not stand with the Democratic party on and voted for their own interests when it came to employment edit @CalChris Because your reading comprehension is not the best. They voted for their own economic interests by voting Democratic. You do realize in 2008 both of WVs Senators were Dems and so was their governor. Since the Depression the vast majority of West Virginia's Senate seats have been filled by Dems
  - thebooktocome 9y ago
    100 years ago, the Dems were still the party of southern pride. I think the shift is about more than "economic anxiety" Also, West Virginia isn't all of Appalachia. SE Ohio, rural Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Tennessee, and North Carolina are coal producing regions that are also very conservative.
    - ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
      Except that has nothing to do with why they voted as they did going back to before the 20th century as rural America has never been about today's Democratic ideals. The Miners and their Unions have been supportive of Democrats since before FDR. Edit could the downvoter parked here show their face, literally five seconds after posting and you're downvoting have to assume you've gone down the thread downvoting everything, so just say hi
  - Feniks 9y ago
    Its typical human hypocrisy and stupidity. Capitalism is great, government is evil blah blah. But everyone loves those subsidised government programs.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
ryanmarsh 9y ago
to being treated like a cost center to be manipulated and reduced, forced to hop jobs every 4 or 5 years to even remain at market rate for their skill level You’re right this is how most people work. Makes me think we should start to unionize office work.
- oddlyaromatic 9y ago
  I'm with you. The company who wants to exchange capital for labor benefits from being able to negotiate separately with each provider of that labor to get the lowest price possible from each person. SOME of the people providing the labor do well out of this too (the good negotiators) and would perceive a union as harmful to them. Employers can exploit this by, say, keeping salaries as close to secret as they can so that more people think they are doing better than average. But it's weird to me that this hoodwink works so well. I have been in both union and non-union roles. I'd go for union every time. All of the labor might as well negotiate with all of the capital, otherwise the power differential has an outsized effect.
  - cjalmeida 9y ago
    And that worked remarkably well for Detroit auto works. They thought once they could leverage they're position as car capital if the world for unionized benefits. Until it became much cheaper to just build better cars elsewhere. Unionizing SV will likely have the same result, except that with today's comm tech, importing services is much simple than building auto supply chain.
    - oddlyaromatic 9y ago
      It is already much cheaper to import services and hire people who don't live in SV. But somehow companies continue to locate themselves there. Presumably the opportunities for profit outweigh the costs imposed by the high cost of living etc. Unions might reduce profits a little (or not, depending on the impact on worker productivity) but these companies have shown they will pay big premiums to attract the most capable workers. But unions must of course think about these things and understand their ACTUAL bargaining power. Detroit sounds like that mark was missed.
mikeash 9y ago
Aren’t these programs aimed at people who don’t have jobs anymore?
krapp 9y ago
>They'll be going from a situation where they can expect and get reasonable compensation which grows faster than cost of living increases, pensions, etc to being treated like a cost center to be manipulated and reduced, forced to hop jobs every 4 or 5 years to even remain at market rate for their skill level, etc. They and most other people in the world. What's happening to the Appalachian coal miners today is going to happen to tech sooner or later. >You really can't expect them to not be defensive of their position, especially considering the history of open flagrant abuse and violence they've faced in the past. But coal isn't going to make a comeback. The world has moved on from that economy. Trump lied to them, and fed them a populist self-insert power fantasy where America just strongarms the world into treating them with the respect they feel they deserve. That isn't going to happen.
- azr79 9y ago
  > What's happening to the Appalachian coal miners today is going to happen to tech sooner or later. How so? Care to elaborate on this?
  - krapp 9y ago
    Basically, I believe the Industrial Revolution started with obsoleting physical labor, because that was simpler, and now efforts to automate will move on to mental and creative labor. Most technical, programming, design and even scientific work will likely become either fully AI driven or else be outsourced to fewer and fewer necessary humans, leading to the same problems of mass layoffs and skills suddenly having little value in an evolving marketplace.
    - davewritescode 9y ago
      AI hasn’t replaced anyone’s job yet, even low skill workers. Speculating the impact of AI on overall employment is slightly speculative. I mean there’s a whole generation of CS graduate students focusing their attention babysitting machine learning algorithms.
      - 9y ago

thebooktocome 9y ago

I'd try to consider it from their perspective, but I get confused by the part where they vote overwhelmingly Republican to protect their union jobs and government subsidies.

ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
Perhaps you get confused about the long history of Appalachian Coal Miners voting solidly Democratic, 100 years of such, only to see their votes taken for granted and their livelihood disappear. West Virginia, despite being as far from Cosmopolitan as you can get has been a Democratic stronghold until the last election cycle
- ceejayoz 9y ago
  The coal industry employs fewer people than Arby's. Their votes are "taken for granted" because they're a tiny constituency, and their livelihood was always going to disappear. Mines have become progressively more automated (like everything else) and between natural gas and renewable energy options, it's simply no longer the economic home run it used to be.
  - ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
    Yep at the moment they do, and they will continue to, but that has nothing to do with the fact that historically those in the industry voted Democratic not Republican. The lack of reality among some around here does amaze me
    - ceejayoz 9y ago
      Sure it does. People always look for someone to blame for something like this, and the Republicans capitalized on that fact with the "war on coal" narrative. Not shocking it worked.
      - ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
        >I'd try to consider it from their perspective, but I get confused by the part where they vote overwhelmingly Republican to protect their union jobs and government subsidies. Ok, read the parent. Appalachian Miners do not vote overwhelmingly Republican to protect their union jobs and government subsidies. For the longest time they voted Democratic to Protect their Union Jobs and Government subsides until their jobs were no longer there. Their jobs aren't coming back, that's a given, and the reaction to that was to stop voting for the people they thought would protect their way of living, only to see a shift over the last decade where their voice was completely drowned out in the Democratic party
    - CalChris 9y ago
      And historically those miners had jobs. However the loss of their jobs had nothing to do with sanctuary cities, abortion, second amendment rights or any other wedge issue but their party switch did.
      - ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
        However you do realize that sanctuary cities, abortion, second amendment rights or any other wedge issue those in Appalachia did not stand with the Democratic party on and voted for their own interests when it came to employment edit @CalChris Because your reading comprehension is not the best. They voted for their own economic interests by voting Democratic. You do realize in 2008 both of WVs Senators were Dems and so was their governor. Since the Depression the vast majority of West Virginia's Senate seats have been filled by Dems
- thebooktocome 9y ago
  100 years ago, the Dems were still the party of southern pride. I think the shift is about more than "economic anxiety" Also, West Virginia isn't all of Appalachia. SE Ohio, rural Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Tennessee, and North Carolina are coal producing regions that are also very conservative.
  - ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
    Except that has nothing to do with why they voted as they did going back to before the 20th century as rural America has never been about today's Democratic ideals. The Miners and their Unions have been supportive of Democrats since before FDR. Edit could the downvoter parked here show their face, literally five seconds after posting and you're downvoting have to assume you've gone down the thread downvoting everything, so just say hi
- Feniks 9y ago
  Its typical human hypocrisy and stupidity. Capitalism is great, government is evil blah blah. But everyone loves those subsidised government programs.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

ryanmarsh 9y ago

to being treated like a cost center to be manipulated and reduced, forced to hop jobs every 4 or 5 years to even remain at market rate for their skill level You’re right this is how most people work. Makes me think we should start to unionize office work.

oddlyaromatic 9y ago
I'm with you. The company who wants to exchange capital for labor benefits from being able to negotiate separately with each provider of that labor to get the lowest price possible from each person. SOME of the people providing the labor do well out of this too (the good negotiators) and would perceive a union as harmful to them. Employers can exploit this by, say, keeping salaries as close to secret as they can so that more people think they are doing better than average. But it's weird to me that this hoodwink works so well. I have been in both union and non-union roles. I'd go for union every time. All of the labor might as well negotiate with all of the capital, otherwise the power differential has an outsized effect.
- cjalmeida 9y ago
  And that worked remarkably well for Detroit auto works. They thought once they could leverage they're position as car capital if the world for unionized benefits. Until it became much cheaper to just build better cars elsewhere. Unionizing SV will likely have the same result, except that with today's comm tech, importing services is much simple than building auto supply chain.
  - oddlyaromatic 9y ago
    It is already much cheaper to import services and hire people who don't live in SV. But somehow companies continue to locate themselves there. Presumably the opportunities for profit outweigh the costs imposed by the high cost of living etc. Unions might reduce profits a little (or not, depending on the impact on worker productivity) but these companies have shown they will pay big premiums to attract the most capable workers. But unions must of course think about these things and understand their ACTUAL bargaining power. Detroit sounds like that mark was missed.

mikeash 9y ago

Aren’t these programs aimed at people who don’t have jobs anymore?

krapp 9y ago

>They'll be going from a situation where they can expect and get reasonable compensation which grows faster than cost of living increases, pensions, etc to being treated like a cost center to be manipulated and reduced, forced to hop jobs every 4 or 5 years to even remain at market rate for their skill level, etc. They and most other people in the world. What's happening to the Appalachian coal miners today is going to happen to tech sooner or later. >You really can't expect them to not be defensive of their position, especially considering the history of open flagrant abuse and violence they've faced in the past. But coal isn't going to make a comeback. The world has moved on from that economy. Trump lied to them, and fed them a populist self-insert power fantasy where America just strongarms the world into treating them with the respect they feel they deserve. That isn't going to happen.

azr79 9y ago
> What's happening to the Appalachian coal miners today is going to happen to tech sooner or later. How so? Care to elaborate on this?
- krapp 9y ago
  Basically, I believe the Industrial Revolution started with obsoleting physical labor, because that was simpler, and now efforts to automate will move on to mental and creative labor. Most technical, programming, design and even scientific work will likely become either fully AI driven or else be outsourced to fewer and fewer necessary humans, leading to the same problems of mass layoffs and skills suddenly having little value in an evolving marketplace.
  - davewritescode 9y ago
    AI hasn’t replaced anyone’s job yet, even low skill workers. Speculating the impact of AI on overall employment is slightly speculative. I mean there’s a whole generation of CS graduate students focusing their attention babysitting machine learning algorithms.
    - 9y ago