4 ms·
100k in appreciating stocks and 50k cars qualify as private property, or it can be converted into one fairly easily. For example, many Googlers from other count
by sn_master 6y ago
100k in appreciating stocks and 50k cars qualify as private property, or it can be converted into one fairly easily. For example, many Googlers from other countries like India buy land and houses there.
There are very long threads on eng-misc about those and other "environmental" topics, there aren't ones I randomly came by. Arguments using logic and majority of population preferences all get thrown off the window whenever someone mentions the E word (ethics). We're not living in a Utopia. If you think something is so wrong, pass a law to ban it or make it illegal, but don't enforce on me something that the vast majority of the US and world population is okay with.
I don't want to pay money to them in order to have a vote. If they want to enforce a police on the entire company, they should allow the entire company to vote on it, rather than only the ones who give them $$$. Otherwise, they'll keep coming up with all sorts of very controversial policies just to get everyone to give them money to have a chance vote against it!
Monopoly abuse goes both ways. They're okay with it when it allows them to silence the person who two months ago was chosen by seventy five million people in a democratic election, but it becomes an evil monopoly when it goes into helping same said democratically elected government. There is so much double standard in tech.
I agree with you on one point, sex-based discrimination needs to end in Google (and Microsoft too): https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/04/technology/google-gender-pay-gap.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/04/technology/google-gender-...
- lucian1900 6y agoIt’s true that many well-meaning people are idealists, when they would be well served by dialectical materialism. Thankfully, a union is a materialist endeavour of people that understand no amount of asking nicely will bring about as much change as the threat of a strike. Members tend to be quite realistic and class consciousness in my experience. Why would union members assume the risk of being fired just to give everyone in the company control over the fruits of that risk? If you want democratic control over your workplace, you can collectively act together with your coworkers. That’s all a union is. The funds are collected to further that goal, often to protect workers from retaliation.