4 ms·

I'm constantly baffled by how anti-union many Americans are, how willing to give up their rights.

by gvx 7y ago

chance_state 7y ago
My impression of these tech unionization efforts are that they're mostly about pushing a social/political agenda, with workers rights being an afterthought. Every single time I see these posts the involved employees are activist LGBT folks. Am I wrong here? Why do all these issues seem to stem from the same group of people?
- bluntfang 7y ago
  That's a great question. Are you familiar with the historic treatment of LGBTQ+ folks?
  - antpol 7y ago
    Historically big tech companies are treating their LGBTQ+ folks the best in comparison with any other industry though I guess it’s not enough
    - bluntfang 7y ago
      Have any info to back that up? And just because an entity is the best at something doesn't mean they are good at it.
- booboolayla 7y ago
  You should read about Marxism, and especially the Frankfurt School, so you could understand the modus operandi of Marxist activism better. LGBTQ are just the latest in line of "classes" of people that have been taken under the Marxist wing for supposed protection, with the real goal being having them used as political tool to gain political power. Marx started with "workers" as the protected class, but as majority of workers never really bought the ideology Marxists started looking for other victims that will help them ultimately defeat the Western Civilization. After workers it was women in general, but that wasn't too successful either. Today it's LGBT people, homeless people, non-white people - they are currently the top three "recipients" of Marxist "compassion" that are being used to further political goals.
TechBro8615 7y ago
I’m constantly baffled how Europeans, who get paid 50-60% as much as Americans, and have almost no innovative companies of their own, think their system is somehow better.
- jdauriemma 7y ago
  Can you define "their system" in plain language? Are you referring to unionization in particular, or are you framing a broader narrative?
  - TechBro8615 7y ago
    I’m referring to unionization, since this is the topic of the post, but also the broader idea of top-down market regulation that includes provisions for workers rights and taxation of externalities, driven by generally left-leaning, anti-capitalist sentiment. In general, it seems Europeans expect more of their government than Americans do. Historically, Americans have tended to be more distrustful of their government, believing that the less it gets involved in their affairs, the better. This distrust of government pushed the US toward a generally laissez-faire approach to regulation, while most European countries have gone the opposite direction. The approaches differ in terms of workers rights, labor laws, and taxation. Specifically, as a simple example, in the US, you can fire somebody whenever you want. Generally speaking, taxes are lower, it’s easier to start a company, and the regulatory environment is friendlier to business models driven by venture capital. I’m arguing that it shouldn’t be a surprise, then, that the US has produced more innovation and economic capital than European countries, partially because the regulatory environment is friendlier and more encouraging of risk.
    - jdauriemma 7y ago
      Unionization is the topic of the post, but workers' rights are not ontologically related to statism. There are plenty of libertarian socialists and plenty of authoritarian capitalists. Some of your points are non sequitur as a result. To this point, though: "I’m arguing that it shouldn’t be a surprise, then, that the US has produced more innovation and economic capital than European countries, partially because the regulatory environment is friendlier and more encouraging of risk." I tend to agree, but that's not really what's at stake for businesses facing organized labor. After WWII, the (capitalist) USA controlled about half of the world's wealth and was home to a robust labor movement. In many ways the American labor movement between ca. 1850 and 1960 was hugely influential in the Western world, including and especially Western Europe. During that time, American businesses produced an astonishing amount of inventions. For these historical reasons, I think the narrative about America's relationship to organized labor is far more complex than you've asserted, unless we're supposed to pretend that American history only dates back to the Reagan administration.

I'm constantly baffled by how anti-union many Americans are, how willing to give up their rights.

by gvx 7y ago

I'm constantly baffled by how anti-union many Americans are, how willing to give up their rights.

My impression of these tech unionization efforts are that they're mostly about pushing a social/political agenda, with workers rights being an afterthought. Every single time I see these posts the involved employees are activist LGBT folks. Am I wrong here? Why do all these issues seem to stem from the same group of people?

bluntfang 7y ago
That's a great question. Are you familiar with the historic treatment of LGBTQ+ folks?
- antpol 7y ago
  Historically big tech companies are treating their LGBTQ+ folks the best in comparison with any other industry though I guess it’s not enough
  - bluntfang 7y ago
    Have any info to back that up? And just because an entity is the best at something doesn't mean they are good at it.
booboolayla 7y ago
You should read about Marxism, and especially the Frankfurt School, so you could understand the modus operandi of Marxist activism better. LGBTQ are just the latest in line of "classes" of people that have been taken under the Marxist wing for supposed protection, with the real goal being having them used as political tool to gain political power. Marx started with "workers" as the protected class, but as majority of workers never really bought the ideology Marxists started looking for other victims that will help them ultimately defeat the Western Civilization. After workers it was women in general, but that wasn't too successful either. Today it's LGBT people, homeless people, non-white people - they are currently the top three "recipients" of Marxist "compassion" that are being used to further political goals.

TechBro8615 7y ago

I’m constantly baffled how Europeans, who get paid 50-60% as much as Americans, and have almost no innovative companies of their own, think their system is somehow better.

jdauriemma 7y ago
Can you define "their system" in plain language? Are you referring to unionization in particular, or are you framing a broader narrative?
- TechBro8615 7y ago
  I’m referring to unionization, since this is the topic of the post, but also the broader idea of top-down market regulation that includes provisions for workers rights and taxation of externalities, driven by generally left-leaning, anti-capitalist sentiment. In general, it seems Europeans expect more of their government than Americans do. Historically, Americans have tended to be more distrustful of their government, believing that the less it gets involved in their affairs, the better. This distrust of government pushed the US toward a generally laissez-faire approach to regulation, while most European countries have gone the opposite direction. The approaches differ in terms of workers rights, labor laws, and taxation. Specifically, as a simple example, in the US, you can fire somebody whenever you want. Generally speaking, taxes are lower, it’s easier to start a company, and the regulatory environment is friendlier to business models driven by venture capital. I’m arguing that it shouldn’t be a surprise, then, that the US has produced more innovation and economic capital than European countries, partially because the regulatory environment is friendlier and more encouraging of risk.
  - jdauriemma 7y ago
    Unionization is the topic of the post, but workers' rights are not ontologically related to statism. There are plenty of libertarian socialists and plenty of authoritarian capitalists. Some of your points are non sequitur as a result. To this point, though: "I’m arguing that it shouldn’t be a surprise, then, that the US has produced more innovation and economic capital than European countries, partially because the regulatory environment is friendlier and more encouraging of risk." I tend to agree, but that's not really what's at stake for businesses facing organized labor. After WWII, the (capitalist) USA controlled about half of the world's wealth and was home to a robust labor movement. In many ways the American labor movement between ca. 1850 and 1960 was hugely influential in the Western world, including and especially Western Europe. During that time, American businesses produced an astonishing amount of inventions. For these historical reasons, I think the narrative about America's relationship to organized labor is far more complex than you've asserted, unless we're supposed to pretend that American history only dates back to the Reagan administration.