4 ms·

Comments like this make me wonder what the economic philosophies of the average HN commenter is. I see a lot of things that seem pretty pro-capitalist, neo-libe

Comments like this make me wonder what the economic philosophies of the average HN commenter is. I see a lot of things that seem pretty pro-capitalist, neo-liberal, etcetera. But I've always viewed the bulk of who's visiting and viewing to be mostly working, middle, or upper middle class. There's remarkably few people who benefit from the no-union position (even if Delta's messaging was legal). Of course your company is going to protect its own interests, but I'm surprised how frequently I see pro-employer comments at the top, rather than pro-worker. Personally, I dis-like Delta's messaging because it equates one of the last vestiges we have of worker's rights -- the union -- to a video game console. It's absolutely insulting to the worker, to suggest the people that work for you are dumb enough to believe that argument. It's fine for the employer to have an opinion on unions, but this is tasteless.

seibelj 7y ago
A lot of people on HN are entrepreneurial, and have started their own businesses or have worked at a small one and understand the perspective of management. I do not want employees, no matter how low level, to view their employers antagonistically. Unions foster a sense of antagonism and inflexibility, which makes hard but necessary decisions more difficult. Ultimately it will kill the business, which helps no one.
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
  Do unions practically matter to entrepreneurs? You'd might be better served worrying about whether your business will crash and burn (as most do in the first N years). Once you have a thousand people, then really think of the implications of unions. To have a dozen people and worrying about your totally-gonna-happen-exponential-growth and the consequential unionization seems like a short-sighted use of limited hours you have in ensuring your startup's success.
  - seibelj 7y ago
    I’m saying you get an appreciation for management. You can steal the golden goose’s eggs for only so long, which is part of the reason why Delta acquired the unionized company in the first place - it was weak.
- droptablemain 7y ago
  --> "I do not want employees, no matter how low level, to view their employers antagonistically" The problem is, at its core, the employer-employee relationship is a type of exploitation. Exploitation of any kind generally does not come without antagonism.
  - leereeves 7y ago
    If you find it exploitative, try living without an employer, hustling for every customer. You'll learn how much of a service employers provide by providing a steady paycheck just for showing up.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Analemma_ 7y ago
Politically, spaces full of techies have traditionally been an uneasy truce between progressivism (as you'd expect from high-income, high-education white-collar professionals) and libertarianism (from the entrepreneurial and anti-authoritarian segment of the population), with both sides represented in roughly equal numbers. About 80% of the time, these two sides see eye-to-eye, so places like HN can seem more monolithic in opinion than they actually are.
mindslight 7y ago
IMHO the "average HN commenter" is more likely to not just straightforwardly share in the popular consensus. One doesn't have to be anti-union to write the comment you're responding to - aggressively pro-union with an attitude of "let them try, we'll do it in spite of them" gets to the same place, even if it's a bit naive. It is definitely Orwellian to be continually subjected to messages directly contrary to your self-interest/well-being. But unfortunately this is the same setup we see across all of wider society - whenever someone stands to make a buck through some psychological failing of yours, they buy advertising to induce that. Philosophically, why would union membership be any different?

seibelj 7y ago

A lot of people on HN are entrepreneurial, and have started their own businesses or have worked at a small one and understand the perspective of management. I do not want employees, no matter how low level, to view their employers antagonistically. Unions foster a sense of antagonism and inflexibility, which makes hard but necessary decisions more difficult. Ultimately it will kill the business, which helps no one.

JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
Do unions practically matter to entrepreneurs? You'd might be better served worrying about whether your business will crash and burn (as most do in the first N years). Once you have a thousand people, then really think of the implications of unions. To have a dozen people and worrying about your totally-gonna-happen-exponential-growth and the consequential unionization seems like a short-sighted use of limited hours you have in ensuring your startup's success.
- seibelj 7y ago
  I’m saying you get an appreciation for management. You can steal the golden goose’s eggs for only so long, which is part of the reason why Delta acquired the unionized company in the first place - it was weak.
droptablemain 7y ago
--> "I do not want employees, no matter how low level, to view their employers antagonistically" The problem is, at its core, the employer-employee relationship is a type of exploitation. Exploitation of any kind generally does not come without antagonism.
- leereeves 7y ago
  If you find it exploitative, try living without an employer, hustling for every customer. You'll learn how much of a service employers provide by providing a steady paycheck just for showing up.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

Analemma_ 7y ago

Politically, spaces full of techies have traditionally been an uneasy truce between progressivism (as you'd expect from high-income, high-education white-collar professionals) and libertarianism (from the entrepreneurial and anti-authoritarian segment of the population), with both sides represented in roughly equal numbers. About 80% of the time, these two sides see eye-to-eye, so places like HN can seem more monolithic in opinion than they actually are.

mindslight 7y ago

IMHO the "average HN commenter" is more likely to not just straightforwardly share in the popular consensus. One doesn't have to be anti-union to write the comment you're responding to - aggressively pro-union with an attitude of "let them try, we'll do it in spite of them" gets to the same place, even if it's a bit naive. It is definitely Orwellian to be continually subjected to messages directly contrary to your self-interest/well-being. But unfortunately this is the same setup we see across all of wider society - whenever someone stands to make a buck through some psychological failing of yours, they buy advertising to induce that. Philosophically, why would union membership be any different?