3 ms·

SO: Why do you think they chose what they chose? If you want to start that conversation, let's start it. I don't think it's gonna look good for conservative, a

SO: Why do you think they chose what they chose? If you want to start that conversation, let's start it. I don't think it's gonna look good for conservative, anti-public-safety-net types...

bumby 5y ago
Not the OP, but here’s how I’ve seen it framed. Those employees against unionization arent stupid. They are often in dying industrial towns and they know they may scare away further industry by unionizing. Meaning, they (and their town) will ultimately be worse off. Its a pragmatic assessment between the lesser of two evils. There’s also a moral component. They generally take these jobs because it’s better than the alternative offers they have in the table and that it’s fair given the circumstances. They may feel it’s ungrateful to push back just because they can. It’s possible to vote against your own self interest on moral grounds (see: wealthy people who vote for more progressive taxation). While I may not agree with those perspectives, it would give me pause to think I am uniquely more qualified to assess their own situation. So why do you think you know more than they do about their own circumstances?
- majormajor 5y ago
  It's not that I think I know better than them about how to deal with their own circumstances, it's that I think the system is intolerable if those are their circumstances. Having to feel like putting up with terrible conditions is the best option available because otherwise business will up and leave for a different set of suckers is a bad thing, full stop. Desperate people will accept lots of things. Let's make them not desperate. I'm not arguing here with someone in that situation who voted against a union, saying they were wrong; I'm arguing with someone who's using "they voted against it, they aren't stupid" as a defense of US society at large. The moral responsibility is on US, not them, so that they aren't in a "take this abusive shit or have nothing at all" situation.
  - bumby 5y ago
    I can agree with this assessment. But i can also understand someone advocating for change the overarching system to avoid that lesser-of-two-evils scenario while simultaneously hedging within the current system by voting locally against something like unionization. Whether those two approaches can coexist long term, I don’t know.

SO: Why do you think they chose what they chose? If you want to start that conversation, let's start it. I don't think it's gonna look good for conservative, anti-public-safety-net types...

bumby 5y ago

Not the OP, but here’s how I’ve seen it framed. Those employees against unionization arent stupid. They are often in dying industrial towns and they know they may scare away further industry by unionizing. Meaning, they (and their town) will ultimately be worse off. Its a pragmatic assessment between the lesser of two evils. There’s also a moral component. They generally take these jobs because it’s better than the alternative offers they have in the table and that it’s fair given the circumstances. They may feel it’s ungrateful to push back just because they can. It’s possible to vote against your own self interest on moral grounds (see: wealthy people who vote for more progressive taxation). While I may not agree with those perspectives, it would give me pause to think I am uniquely more qualified to assess their own situation. So why do you think you know more than they do about their own circumstances?

majormajor 5y ago
It's not that I think I know better than them about how to deal with their own circumstances, it's that I think the system is intolerable if those are their circumstances. Having to feel like putting up with terrible conditions is the best option available because otherwise business will up and leave for a different set of suckers is a bad thing, full stop. Desperate people will accept lots of things. Let's make them not desperate. I'm not arguing here with someone in that situation who voted against a union, saying they were wrong; I'm arguing with someone who's using "they voted against it, they aren't stupid" as a defense of US society at large. The moral responsibility is on US, not them, so that they aren't in a "take this abusive shit or have nothing at all" situation.
- bumby 5y ago
  I can agree with this assessment. But i can also understand someone advocating for change the overarching system to avoid that lesser-of-two-evils scenario while simultaneously hedging within the current system by voting locally against something like unionization. Whether those two approaches can coexist long term, I don’t know.