5 ms·

We're a bit overdue for a labor uprising. Fingers crossed the mass evictions heading our way leaves enough people hungry and desperate enough to fight for thei

We're a bit overdue for a labor uprising. Fingers crossed the mass evictions heading our way leaves enough people hungry and desperate enough to fight for their future.

commandlinefan 5y ago
Out of curiosity, what would you imagine that fight to look like? I can see it going two completely opposite ways: one, a return to our pre-lockdown lives when people could earn enough money to pay their rent, or two, a push for wealth redistribution.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- munk-a 5y ago
  I think the next widespread labour action will be focused on benefits - it'll pull in both of the factors you mentioned (increased earnings and wealth redistribution) since I don't think any labour gains will ever happen without those factors (and the first factor necessitates the second factor). But I think the focus will be lowering employee stress by advocating for stronger requirements around healthcare and reducing the workweek.
- pjmorris 5y ago
  I don't think those alternatives are as opposite as they first appear. One way to restore the pre-2000's relationship between income and housing expense would be to cancel the debts that were created by the stimulus created by the Fed and Congress since that time... which amounts to wealth redistribution.
- pope_meat 5y ago
  Return to pre-lockdown conditions is basically saying the system is working. It's not. I've watched the homeless encampments grow over the last 20 years(maybe longer, but I can only speak for my lived experience). The lockdown was perhaps the straw that broke the camel's back to the point where it's hard to ignore, but the problem has been brewing for a while. I blame Ronald Reagan, the ghouls have had it real good since.
  - ummonk 5y ago
    The homeless encampments are not caused by housing costs.
- majormajor 5y ago
  How prevalent are extensive "people can't pay their rent" lockdowns currently?
EarthIsHome 5y ago
One difference between then and now is that more people then thought of themselves as workers, which gave a sense of connection and common struggle to build solidarity. They also worked closer together, lived closer together, etc. We're more atomized now. Maybe a similar sense of connection will happen with the housing crisis, but I don't think labor is the same as it was. People don't think of themselves as workers in a class; we have been divided more and think of ourselves as subgroups like entrepreneurs, doctors, engineers, scientists, etc., which I think changes how you feel about solidarity. To build solid and sustained mass movements, you have to struggle together. [0] [0]: Theory of class struggle
- macintux 5y ago
  News is more atomized as well. YouTube, Twitter, FB, dozens of cable channels… hard to unite when we can’t find common ground on what’s actually true.
  - neartheplain 5y ago
    YouTube, FB, TikTok, Twitter etc. do make it easier to share and unite around feelings or emotional reactions. However, these platforms don't facilitate the sort of careful, thought-out organization and planning that historically has been necessary to make lasting social change. It's the difference between liking a tweet and maybe going to a protest vs. showing up to weekly meetings, having a long-term legal or political strategy, and executing on that strategy step-by-step.
- majormajor 5y ago
  The push for less ownership of one's primary residence, and less rent control (rent control is a policy that is much less popular now than it less was) also serves to heighten this separation. If one's residence is determined by market rents it's going to be very segregated by income level. Less stable neighborhoods and buildings where your neighbor who was there for two decades might be much lower income but "grandfathered" in by a lower sales price or lower rent back then. Being reminded that people in "lower class" jobs used to be able to afford what takes a high professional salary now would be a good reminder of the fragility of ANY labor, regardless of today's salary and comfort.
eplanit 5y ago
Or maybe hungry and desperate enough to find one of the abundantly available job opportunities, or start a business, etc. to pay for their future. Why wish for conflict?
- pope_meat 5y ago
  ...if you suggest to someone who just got evicted to start a business, you'd get punched in your face, and you'd deserve it.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - eplanit 5y ago
    With a good attitude, anything is possible: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/232341 https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/232341
    - pope_meat 5y ago
      The exception is the norm, huh?
  - nichos 5y ago
    No one deserves to be physically attacked because they have a different opinion than you. Dont be scared of different ideas.
    - pope_meat 5y ago
      Ah yes, we are famously anti-violence in this country, how did I ever forget. Pretty fucking rich opinion to hold on a thread about the labor movement in the united states.
n8cpdx 5y ago
I don't think that makes sense. While there is considerable overlap, the group of exploited workers is fundamentally a different group than the group of exploited tenants. The issue of housing affordability is also, primarily, an issue of housing policy, rather than labor policy. The evicted people aren't going to be able to tell a clear story about who they are, why they are fighting non-labor (which I guess is business and employers), and why a labor uprising is the answer to a housing policy and pandemic response failures. I don't expect a clear answer, because recently, popular uprisings have been very unimpressive in terms of intellectual rigor. I moved to Portland expecting to join up with more radical groups, but I quickly learned that no one is really serious (hence why despite having overwhelming resources compared to the police force, they haven't succeeded in making change). In my experience, an unserious labor movement is one of the more convincing arguments for a neoliberal approach. Add to that public sector unions tarnishing the brand of organized labor in general (see police unions, teacher's unions) and I just don't see it.
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  Rents and wages are inextricably bound. One cannot address one without addressing the other, least a gain in one side be appropriated from the other. The law of rent meets the iron law of wages. An excellent recent comment: "All goes back to the land, and the land owner is able to absorb to himself a share of almost every public and every private benefit" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28267591 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28267591 http://www.andywightman.com/docs/churchill.pdf http://www.andywightman.com/docs/churchill.pdf
zackmorris 5y ago
Not sure why you're being downvoted for this since what you wrote is honest. Although we can't condone violence, so maybe that should have read "to organize for their future". I live in a red state with right to work (for less) laws and a strong anti-union sentiment. The work ethic here is: if you have to cut down every last tree, desertify every last grassland, poison every last waterway, then you do it to feed your family. Now we're living under the consequences of that freedom, with rampant wildfires and the loss of most timber/grazing/mining jobs. $15 per hour is mocked like some kind of impossible dream because everyone works at the call center or does food service now. I'm concerned that many of the people reading this live in big cities with liberal politics so they haven't seen the consequences of unregulated wild west crony capitalism. I grew up with it, so I know how it leads to wealth inequality and inequality in general. It's basically the aristocratic/imperialist model like England had, where one rich guy hires everyone else and everybody is happy because the rich guy keeps them safe and the poor people have a meal ticket. But I would argue that's suboptimal. A much better system is one where everyone prospers. Reaganomics put us on the libertarian path since about 1980, but as the boomers retire, Gen X and younger doesn't have to stay trapped under that system they didn't vote for. My feeling is that change will come swiftly over the next 2 years and that only the very stodgiest boomers will still believe they have the power. There's talk of a general strike over the holidays this year where young people will not hire on to seasonal jobs, and abstaining from holiday buying will be encouraged. There's a chance that could break some of the smaller corporations that have borrowed against that holiday cashflow. But in order for that to stick and let young people transition to something more like solarpunk, automating drudgerous labor and UBI, they're going to need alternatives. There's some hope with some of the back to basics trends like tiny homes and working jobs like Uber that let employees set their own hours. That stuff will be attacked on every front though until young people internalize that they actually have the power because they do the actual work.

We're a bit overdue for a labor uprising. Fingers crossed the mass evictions heading our way leaves enough people hungry and desperate enough to fight for their future.

commandlinefan 5y ago

Out of curiosity, what would you imagine that fight to look like? I can see it going two completely opposite ways: one, a return to our pre-lockdown lives when people could earn enough money to pay their rent, or two, a push for wealth redistribution.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
munk-a 5y ago
I think the next widespread labour action will be focused on benefits - it'll pull in both of the factors you mentioned (increased earnings and wealth redistribution) since I don't think any labour gains will ever happen without those factors (and the first factor necessitates the second factor). But I think the focus will be lowering employee stress by advocating for stronger requirements around healthcare and reducing the workweek.
pjmorris 5y ago
I don't think those alternatives are as opposite as they first appear. One way to restore the pre-2000's relationship between income and housing expense would be to cancel the debts that were created by the stimulus created by the Fed and Congress since that time... which amounts to wealth redistribution.
pope_meat 5y ago
Return to pre-lockdown conditions is basically saying the system is working. It's not. I've watched the homeless encampments grow over the last 20 years(maybe longer, but I can only speak for my lived experience). The lockdown was perhaps the straw that broke the camel's back to the point where it's hard to ignore, but the problem has been brewing for a while. I blame Ronald Reagan, the ghouls have had it real good since.
- ummonk 5y ago
  The homeless encampments are not caused by housing costs.
majormajor 5y ago
How prevalent are extensive "people can't pay their rent" lockdowns currently?

EarthIsHome 5y ago

One difference between then and now is that more people then thought of themselves as workers, which gave a sense of connection and common struggle to build solidarity. They also worked closer together, lived closer together, etc. We're more atomized now. Maybe a similar sense of connection will happen with the housing crisis, but I don't think labor is the same as it was. People don't think of themselves as workers in a class; we have been divided more and think of ourselves as subgroups like entrepreneurs, doctors, engineers, scientists, etc., which I think changes how you feel about solidarity. To build solid and sustained mass movements, you have to struggle together. [0] [0]: Theory of class struggle

macintux 5y ago
News is more atomized as well. YouTube, Twitter, FB, dozens of cable channels… hard to unite when we can’t find common ground on what’s actually true.
- neartheplain 5y ago
  YouTube, FB, TikTok, Twitter etc. do make it easier to share and unite around feelings or emotional reactions. However, these platforms don't facilitate the sort of careful, thought-out organization and planning that historically has been necessary to make lasting social change. It's the difference between liking a tweet and maybe going to a protest vs. showing up to weekly meetings, having a long-term legal or political strategy, and executing on that strategy step-by-step.
majormajor 5y ago
The push for less ownership of one's primary residence, and less rent control (rent control is a policy that is much less popular now than it less was) also serves to heighten this separation. If one's residence is determined by market rents it's going to be very segregated by income level. Less stable neighborhoods and buildings where your neighbor who was there for two decades might be much lower income but "grandfathered" in by a lower sales price or lower rent back then. Being reminded that people in "lower class" jobs used to be able to afford what takes a high professional salary now would be a good reminder of the fragility of ANY labor, regardless of today's salary and comfort.

eplanit 5y ago

Or maybe hungry and desperate enough to find one of the abundantly available job opportunities, or start a business, etc. to pay for their future. Why wish for conflict?

pope_meat 5y ago
...if you suggest to someone who just got evicted to start a business, you'd get punched in your face, and you'd deserve it.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- eplanit 5y ago
  With a good attitude, anything is possible: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/232341 https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/232341
  - pope_meat 5y ago
    The exception is the norm, huh?
- nichos 5y ago
  No one deserves to be physically attacked because they have a different opinion than you. Dont be scared of different ideas.
  - pope_meat 5y ago
    Ah yes, we are famously anti-violence in this country, how did I ever forget. Pretty fucking rich opinion to hold on a thread about the labor movement in the united states.

n8cpdx 5y ago

I don't think that makes sense. While there is considerable overlap, the group of exploited workers is fundamentally a different group than the group of exploited tenants. The issue of housing affordability is also, primarily, an issue of housing policy, rather than labor policy. The evicted people aren't going to be able to tell a clear story about who they are, why they are fighting non-labor (which I guess is business and employers), and why a labor uprising is the answer to a housing policy and pandemic response failures. I don't expect a clear answer, because recently, popular uprisings have been very unimpressive in terms of intellectual rigor. I moved to Portland expecting to join up with more radical groups, but I quickly learned that no one is really serious (hence why despite having overwhelming resources compared to the police force, they haven't succeeded in making change). In my experience, an unserious labor movement is one of the more convincing arguments for a neoliberal approach. Add to that public sector unions tarnishing the brand of organized labor in general (see police unions, teacher's unions) and I just don't see it.

dredmorbius 5y ago
Rents and wages are inextricably bound. One cannot address one without addressing the other, least a gain in one side be appropriated from the other. The law of rent meets the iron law of wages. An excellent recent comment: "All goes back to the land, and the land owner is able to absorb to himself a share of almost every public and every private benefit" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28267591 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28267591 http://www.andywightman.com/docs/churchill.pdf http://www.andywightman.com/docs/churchill.pdf

zackmorris 5y ago

Not sure why you're being downvoted for this since what you wrote is honest. Although we can't condone violence, so maybe that should have read "to organize for their future". I live in a red state with right to work (for less) laws and a strong anti-union sentiment. The work ethic here is: if you have to cut down every last tree, desertify every last grassland, poison every last waterway, then you do it to feed your family. Now we're living under the consequences of that freedom, with rampant wildfires and the loss of most timber/grazing/mining jobs. $15 per hour is mocked like some kind of impossible dream because everyone works at the call center or does food service now. I'm concerned that many of the people reading this live in big cities with liberal politics so they haven't seen the consequences of unregulated wild west crony capitalism. I grew up with it, so I know how it leads to wealth inequality and inequality in general. It's basically the aristocratic/imperialist model like England had, where one rich guy hires everyone else and everybody is happy because the rich guy keeps them safe and the poor people have a meal ticket. But I would argue that's suboptimal. A much better system is one where everyone prospers. Reaganomics put us on the libertarian path since about 1980, but as the boomers retire, Gen X and younger doesn't have to stay trapped under that system they didn't vote for. My feeling is that change will come swiftly over the next 2 years and that only the very stodgiest boomers will still believe they have the power. There's talk of a general strike over the holidays this year where young people will not hire on to seasonal jobs, and abstaining from holiday buying will be encouraged. There's a chance that could break some of the smaller corporations that have borrowed against that holiday cashflow. But in order for that to stick and let young people transition to something more like solarpunk, automating drudgerous labor and UBI, they're going to need alternatives. There's some hope with some of the back to basics trends like tiny homes and working jobs like Uber that let employees set their own hours. That stuff will be attacked on every front though until young people internalize that they actually have the power because they do the actual work.