6 ms·

Duplicate? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21433710 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21433710 The aha comment that made me realise why this probably w

by pgt 7y ago

Duplicate? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21433710 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21433710 The aha comment that made me realise why this probably won't take off by @claudeganon [^1]: > "The whole arrangement is about control, preventing workers from having the time or energy to build competing enterprises, develop skills beyond a certain level, or organize against their employers. It’s the same reason why most big corps oppose a national healthcare system in the US: it keeps people locked in to their current positions and has the knock-on effect of putting downward pressure on wages and turnover expenses." [^1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21434297

_visgean 7y ago
I think this is better source - I was very skeptical from the original thread because the source did not seem trustworthy. I think BBC is slightly more reliable..
- ekianjo 7y ago
  > BBC is slightly more reliable You mean in general or only in the context of this article? because the BBC is certainly not a channel devoid of bias (just check this: https://www.quora.com/Why-is-BBC-called-British-Bullshit-Corporation-by-many-people https://www.quora.com/Why-is-BBC-called-British-Bullshit-Cor...)
  - tonyedgecombe 7y ago
    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bbc/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bbc/ Maybe a slight left bias although personally I think it's more a bias to the current sitting government. However there is plenty of UK media that sees the BBC as unfair competition and would love to see it disappear.
    - andy_ppp 7y ago
      To be fair the licence fee has served its purpose. The BBC should move to a £10 per month Netflix model and be available world wide. It'd be a very profitable business and would easily make more in revenue for its current output than it does now.
      - tonyedgecombe 7y ago
        That would mean a drop in revenue and leave questions about radio, in particular the world service. Programs are already available worldwide so revenue wouldn't increase.
MuffinFlavored 7y ago
> It’s the same reason why most big corps oppose a national healthcare system in the US: it keeps people locked in to their current positions and has the knock-on effect of putting downward pressure on wages and turnover expenses. Is this... true?
- me_me_me 7y ago
  One thing that has always came true throughout my life is a phrase: "If you don't know why, its money." Why there is no national healthcare - money, someone makes a ton of it by preventing nationalization of healthcare system. Everything that doesn't make sense, has better alternatives (somehow not adopted) always boils down to money :(
  - FrankyHollywood 7y ago
    Another reason is people don't like sharing. In democracies the majority of people don't vote for a program where they have to pay for others, even if the net result would be in their advantage. so it's money, and stupidity :)
    - chooseaname 7y ago
      Exactly this. I'm in the South (U.S.) and a lot of people here would benefit from national healthcare, but they continue to vote against it (rather, for politicians who are against it) because "if you don't work for it, you don't deserve it." They're so afraid of the few who would take advantage of it that they're willing to let the many who need it not get it.
      - saiya-jin 7y ago
        Yes it sounds like common mentality in US - "you need to deserve your spot under the sun". This mindset can push society to achieve great things rather effectively (as seen numerous times in the past with US), but it can also mean cruelty to fellow citizens because... usually money, power, status. Everybody for themselves ain't a good model for a healthy society in long run. Way too many predators out there.
jacquesm 7y ago
So tell me then, why didn't the shift from 6 to 5 days cause that?
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
aerovistae 7y ago
That's a conspiracy theory, predicated upon the idea that all these entities are working together with malicious intent. Or, more realistically...entrenched systems evolve slowly.
jes5199 7y ago
I sure hope my workers don’t develop skills
not_a_cop75 7y ago
"It’s the same reason why most big corps oppose a national healthcare system in the US" Why would any company oppose a healthcare system in the US? It effectively moves the blame for healthcare from company to government.
ninedays 7y ago
The problem with this reasoning is that it doesn't apply to countries outside the US. Take Europe for example where the healthcare system is miles ahead compared to the US yet Europe is clearly not the most innovative space because of this.

by pgt 7y ago

_visgean 7y ago

I think this is better source - I was very skeptical from the original thread because the source did not seem trustworthy. I think BBC is slightly more reliable..

ekianjo 7y ago
> BBC is slightly more reliable You mean in general or only in the context of this article? because the BBC is certainly not a channel devoid of bias (just check this: https://www.quora.com/Why-is-BBC-called-British-Bullshit-Corporation-by-many-people https://www.quora.com/Why-is-BBC-called-British-Bullshit-Cor...)
- tonyedgecombe 7y ago
  https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bbc/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bbc/ Maybe a slight left bias although personally I think it's more a bias to the current sitting government. However there is plenty of UK media that sees the BBC as unfair competition and would love to see it disappear.
  - andy_ppp 7y ago
    To be fair the licence fee has served its purpose. The BBC should move to a £10 per month Netflix model and be available world wide. It'd be a very profitable business and would easily make more in revenue for its current output than it does now.
    - tonyedgecombe 7y ago
      That would mean a drop in revenue and leave questions about radio, in particular the world service. Programs are already available worldwide so revenue wouldn't increase.

MuffinFlavored 7y ago

> It’s the same reason why most big corps oppose a national healthcare system in the US: it keeps people locked in to their current positions and has the knock-on effect of putting downward pressure on wages and turnover expenses. Is this... true?

me_me_me 7y ago
One thing that has always came true throughout my life is a phrase: "If you don't know why, its money." Why there is no national healthcare - money, someone makes a ton of it by preventing nationalization of healthcare system. Everything that doesn't make sense, has better alternatives (somehow not adopted) always boils down to money :(
- FrankyHollywood 7y ago
  Another reason is people don't like sharing. In democracies the majority of people don't vote for a program where they have to pay for others, even if the net result would be in their advantage. so it's money, and stupidity :)
  - chooseaname 7y ago
    Exactly this. I'm in the South (U.S.) and a lot of people here would benefit from national healthcare, but they continue to vote against it (rather, for politicians who are against it) because "if you don't work for it, you don't deserve it." They're so afraid of the few who would take advantage of it that they're willing to let the many who need it not get it.
    - saiya-jin 7y ago
      Yes it sounds like common mentality in US - "you need to deserve your spot under the sun". This mindset can push society to achieve great things rather effectively (as seen numerous times in the past with US), but it can also mean cruelty to fellow citizens because... usually money, power, status. Everybody for themselves ain't a good model for a healthy society in long run. Way too many predators out there.

jacquesm 7y ago

So tell me then, why didn't the shift from 6 to 5 days cause that?

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

aerovistae 7y ago

That's a conspiracy theory, predicated upon the idea that all these entities are working together with malicious intent. Or, more realistically...entrenched systems evolve slowly.

jes5199 7y ago

I sure hope my workers don’t develop skills

not_a_cop75 7y ago

"It’s the same reason why most big corps oppose a national healthcare system in the US" Why would any company oppose a healthcare system in the US? It effectively moves the blame for healthcare from company to government.

ninedays 7y ago

The problem with this reasoning is that it doesn't apply to countries outside the US. Take Europe for example where the healthcare system is miles ahead compared to the US yet Europe is clearly not the most innovative space because of this.