3 ms·

> We could always compare unemployment rates in the US to those in France for a straight forward comparison to a European country. Then we could compare full-ti

by jahaja 7y ago

> We could always compare unemployment rates in the US to those in France for a straight forward comparison to a European country. Then we could compare full-time employment rates for another straight forward comparison to a European country. Sure, go a head. Historically as well. Furthermore, what kinds of jobs are those actually? What is the quality of the jobs? Do they enable a dignified existence and so on? > The American experience is that labor can and occasionally has set itself up for massive failure in the past. The idea that there's literally nothing to lose fails a basic sanity check against not-so-distant American history. Do you have an example where it was obviously due to unions?

Kalium 7y ago
I wrote a more detailed response, but I have deleted it, as it was a distraction. Getting into the details of Detroit's economic history or a deep comparison between the US and French economies struck me as perhaps not as helpful as it could be while providing an endless profusion of points for differences of opinion to distract. I hope you'll forgive this editorial decision. Please accept my sincere apologies if I have been in any way less than clear. All I ask if that you consider if it may be worth considering the possibility that some people might might legitimately, earnestly, and honestly perceive there to be real risks. People may have what seem to them to be good reasons to fear that they may actually have something to lose. Some of these reasons might be rooted in history in living memory. Please, don't hesitate to ask if there's something you would like me to clarify about this core point.
- jahaja 7y ago
  No worries. I can of course understand that some might think so. I'm just cynical enough to assume that a corporation will move to a lower-cost country independent of the added 15% or whatever the amount in added labour costs that various benefits may add. If there's a profit increase waiting, they'll grab it.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- unapologetic 7y ago
  > I hope you'll forgive this editorial decision. Why would we, you threw out some sketchy claims and then bailed on explaining them.

by jahaja 7y ago

Kalium 7y ago

I wrote a more detailed response, but I have deleted it, as it was a distraction. Getting into the details of Detroit's economic history or a deep comparison between the US and French economies struck me as perhaps not as helpful as it could be while providing an endless profusion of points for differences of opinion to distract. I hope you'll forgive this editorial decision. Please accept my sincere apologies if I have been in any way less than clear. All I ask if that you consider if it may be worth considering the possibility that some people might might legitimately, earnestly, and honestly perceive there to be real risks. People may have what seem to them to be good reasons to fear that they may actually have something to lose. Some of these reasons might be rooted in history in living memory. Please, don't hesitate to ask if there's something you would like me to clarify about this core point.

jahaja 7y ago
No worries. I can of course understand that some might think so. I'm just cynical enough to assume that a corporation will move to a lower-cost country independent of the added 15% or whatever the amount in added labour costs that various benefits may add. If there's a profit increase waiting, they'll grab it.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
unapologetic 7y ago
> I hope you'll forgive this editorial decision. Why would we, you threw out some sketchy claims and then bailed on explaining them.