3 ms·

Employment is one-sided: You get paid to work for someone, not to do as you please. If you do not like what you are paid to do, no-one forces you... Socialism

Employment is one-sided: You get paid to work for someone, not to do as you please. If you do not like what you are paid to do, no-one forces you... Socialism does not work. It ends in chaos and failure.

kazagistar 7y ago
Plenty of far more socialist policies than the status quo work perfectly well. The whole anti socialism ideology is bullshit pedaled by the powerful to enforce the status quo.
- NotPaidToPost 7y ago
  Socialism has been tried and failed. It's no 'bullshit' to state a historical fact.
eropple 7y ago
It is not "socialist" to expect a specially-treated organization to not act shitty if it wants to keep that special legal treatment. It just...isn't. Not that you're right about your sweeping statement either, but it doesn't even begin to apply here except insofar as labor participation in direction can--not will, but can--discourage that shitty behavior.
- NotPaidToPost 7y ago
  You commented that employees should have a say on the direction of the company... That's a socialist concept.
  - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
    For clarity, are Ireland and Germany socialist countries? Both require employee representation on boards, as do many other not-socialist countries. Germany also has works councils.
    - NotPaidToPost 7y ago
      The concept is socialist. You are trying a rhetoric trick by equating that to a socialist economy... That's bad faith. The truth is that employees do not dictate the direction of the company in those countries. They have virtually no power and the system is used as a discussion platform on working conditions, pay, etc. This is not quite the same as having employees decide what the company should produce and to whom it should sell it.
      - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
        No I'm not, I was asking the question. They both require one third of the board to be employee representatives. It might even be half for larger German companies. How does getting to vote on decisions and appointments equate to having virtually no power? German work's councils, for all their imperfections and flaws, have often been looked at enviously by other Western countries - including US and UK. It is those which deal with conditions, pay and what have you.
  - eropple 7y ago
    Policies are not "socialist" or "capitalist"; they're...policies. You pick what works. Judging from the pretty consistent success of labor participation on boards in other companies, it certainly seems to help make a good chunk of money, too. That such organization tends to also have societal value--weird that thinking about societal value gets conflated with "socialism", I guess every man is an island--is a really nice side effect, though.
dang 7y ago
Would you please not take HN threads further into generic ideological flamewar? First you posted flamebait above ("red guards of the left") and now head straight into the most generic and therefore most boring possible direction ("socialism does not work"). Maybe it doesn't, but all these discussions are the same, and tedious repetition is not what HN is for, so please don't do this here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- NotPaidToPost 7y ago
  I felt important to repeat that socialism does not work since we keep reading people advocating it. That is not generic, that's quite the crux to the issue here. I maintain the term "red guard" because that's exactly how they behave. See the reactions to me daring to contradict. I am very surprised that a moderator would take side and use a rather rude and condescending tone in replying to a commenter that hasn't do anything beyond voicing a legitimate point. Is that what HN is for?
  - dang 7y ago
    I'm sorry that my comment sounded rude and condescending. I try to avoid that, but haven't yet mastered the art. Generic ideological arguments are simply off topic on HN. If you like, you can think of that as an arbitrary moderation decision. I think of it as following from the site principle of curiosity. Either way, please don't post any more of those.

kazagistar 7y ago

Plenty of far more socialist policies than the status quo work perfectly well. The whole anti socialism ideology is bullshit pedaled by the powerful to enforce the status quo.

NotPaidToPost 7y ago
Socialism has been tried and failed. It's no 'bullshit' to state a historical fact.

eropple 7y ago

It is not "socialist" to expect a specially-treated organization to not act shitty if it wants to keep that special legal treatment. It just...isn't. Not that you're right about your sweeping statement either, but it doesn't even begin to apply here except insofar as labor participation in direction can--not will, but can--discourage that shitty behavior.

NotPaidToPost 7y ago
You commented that employees should have a say on the direction of the company... That's a socialist concept.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  For clarity, are Ireland and Germany socialist countries? Both require employee representation on boards, as do many other not-socialist countries. Germany also has works councils.
  - NotPaidToPost 7y ago
    The concept is socialist. You are trying a rhetoric trick by equating that to a socialist economy... That's bad faith. The truth is that employees do not dictate the direction of the company in those countries. They have virtually no power and the system is used as a discussion platform on working conditions, pay, etc. This is not quite the same as having employees decide what the company should produce and to whom it should sell it.
    - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
      No I'm not, I was asking the question. They both require one third of the board to be employee representatives. It might even be half for larger German companies. How does getting to vote on decisions and appointments equate to having virtually no power? German work's councils, for all their imperfections and flaws, have often been looked at enviously by other Western countries - including US and UK. It is those which deal with conditions, pay and what have you.
- eropple 7y ago
  Policies are not "socialist" or "capitalist"; they're...policies. You pick what works. Judging from the pretty consistent success of labor participation on boards in other companies, it certainly seems to help make a good chunk of money, too. That such organization tends to also have societal value--weird that thinking about societal value gets conflated with "socialism", I guess every man is an island--is a really nice side effect, though.

dang 7y ago

Would you please not take HN threads further into generic ideological flamewar? First you posted flamebait above ("red guards of the left") and now head straight into the most generic and therefore most boring possible direction ("socialism does not work"). Maybe it doesn't, but all these discussions are the same, and tedious repetition is not what HN is for, so please don't do this here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

NotPaidToPost 7y ago
I felt important to repeat that socialism does not work since we keep reading people advocating it. That is not generic, that's quite the crux to the issue here. I maintain the term "red guard" because that's exactly how they behave. See the reactions to me daring to contradict. I am very surprised that a moderator would take side and use a rather rude and condescending tone in replying to a commenter that hasn't do anything beyond voicing a legitimate point. Is that what HN is for?
- dang 7y ago
  I'm sorry that my comment sounded rude and condescending. I try to avoid that, but haven't yet mastered the art. Generic ideological arguments are simply off topic on HN. If you like, you can think of that as an arbitrary moderation decision. I think of it as following from the site principle of curiosity. Either way, please don't post any more of those.