7 ms·
Increasingly, American political parties are most interested in seizing and wielding power, and I feel like most citizens are occupied with surrendering and ass
by hollasch 5y ago
Increasingly, American political parties are most interested in seizing and wielding power, and I feel like most citizens are occupied with surrendering and assigning that power to their preferred political party. How in the world did we get here? Is there any way we can turn back?
Most of the discussion here is about whether mandating business practice would be a good or a bad business move, but hardly anyone is questioning whether this is a good or legitimate role for those in government to decree and mandate. More and more, I see governments mandating changes that already appear to be underway, but in a way that accrues the praise and rewards to themselves. Most Americans seem to be complicit in this transformation, continually voting greater and greater control and authority away from the people and toward government powers.
- monocasa 5y agoThe definition of the length of the work week and who it applies to is already a concept defined by government.
- artificialLimbs 5y agoUnfortunately. People should be able to negotiate between themselves without interference from the government.
- camdat 5y agoAs should children! Why should the pesky government step in the way of my child working in a factory.
- JaimeThompson 5y ago>without interference from the government. I don't see the corps giving up all the advantages they have such as mandatory arbitration and the like. It wouldn't be an equal negotiating table for the vast majority of people.
- lores 5y agoWith all respect, that is an astoundingly naive viewpoint in light of the fact that there is nowhere near power equality between employer and worker.
- drdaeman 5y agoI suppose many folks here are in those blessed industries and positions where employers and employees are in much more balanced relationships than mostwhere. Which is how it should be; I don't think anyone would doubt that GP is correct in this regard. But - very sadly - not how it works in most of the reality.
- alan-hn 5y agoI agree. I constantly see arguments in HN comments that come from the perspective of a highly paid tech worker and they either ignore anyone making minimum wage or pretend they don't exist in this dynamic or they are written off as unimportant because they should have "worked harder to change their position in life" Its pretty sad that this ideology exists, we need people to do jobs and we shouldn't shit on them for it. We should support people in what every job they're doing because we're all part of the same societal machine
- robotresearcher 5y agoThe government is one of the mechanisms we created to negotiate things.
- akira2501 5y agoStated this way it makes it sound as if the government, unbidden by anything external, just decided to make this a requirement one day. Of course, this was not the case. In reality workers, unions and even industry leaders themselves were already pushing for this decades before the government codified it in the Fair Labor Standards Act.
- plankers 5y agoPeople literally died fighting for the 40-hour workweek: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haymarket_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haymarket_affair
- notahacker 5y agoThe reason various entities wanted it codified in law was because regardless of what labour with actual negotiating power and businesses with the ethics and margins to not demand absurdly high workweeks wanted, millions of workers didn't have much choice. When child labour was legal, lots of children worked.
- nostromo95 5y agoEh whether government should have the right to do this takes a backseat to the fact that the government is the only way we can do this. The government is the only coordinating mechanism we have to enforce something like this, otherwise everyone is playing the prisoner’s dilemma.
- pc86 5y agoRespectfully, this seems like a completely backward take. If you don't care about whether or not government should be able to do things, and are only concerned with whether or not it does things you like, you end up with a government that can do whatever it wants. Eventually, that power will be wielded by someone you find detestable, or even worse, someone who finds you detestable.
- nostromo95 5y agoSeems like we're mixing up couple things here--(a) the level to which a government represents the people and (b) the powers that a government should have. It's easy to lose sight of the fact that the government is--in its ideal essence--just a way for a population to collectively enforce compliance with / contribution to a social good. I don't think it's controversial to say that if 100% of people wanted a 32 hour work week, the government should probably pass a law mandating that. Separately we can argue about the tendency for the aims of government to diverge from the aims of the citizenry or there being a slippery slope, but the "legitimate role" of government is representing the people.
- forbiddenvoid 5y agoIt's probably more nuanced than that. If 100% of people wanted a 32-hour work week, a law wouldn't be necessary - we would just have a 32-hour work week. The fact that the number is less than 100% is the reason we need a law, because the incentives aren't aligned between those who want it and those who don't.
- ZeroGravitas 5y ago
- pandemicsoul 5y agoBecause there's really no reason to question whether government should reasonably limit standard business practices – we've seen, in spades, how business practices are driven entirely and only by concerns of profit while the labor market has very little flexibility that would allow workers to "vote with their feet" and move to "better" employers without outside influence. Put another way: Of course it's a good thing to force businesses to make work more humane and sustainable for the humans who have to do it.
- superfunny 5y ago>> while the labor market has very little flexibility that would allow workers to "vote with their feet" and move to "better" employers without outside influence Have you heard of the Great Resignation?
- bb88 5y agoMost companies treat employees as necessary liabilities to make profit and not assets. Flexibility only went one way, and people felt that life is too short to be treated like shit, so they left. Usually the bosses/managers/execs had tons of flexibility, but the employees didn't. I'm not saying your wrong, it's just that it took a pandemic for people to realize that working in a shitty job for 20 years may not be the best use of their lives.
- tanaros 5y ago>> Have you heard of the Great Resignation? Isn’t the Great Resignation driven at least in part by the government’s influence? COVID lockdowns and regulations heavily incentivized employers to offer more flexibility around remote work, and COVID economic relief policies helped provide folks with the financial stability needed to look for better employment. I’m not sure this would have occurred organically without any government intervention.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- 5y ago
- vmception 5y ago> and I feel like most citizens are occupied with surrendering and assigning that power to their preferred political party No, most of us are independent and lie to our friends for employment and sex
- luckydata 5y ago{insert strawman here} The US government doesn't do nearly enough to ensure the welfare of workers. If not being treated like shit by your employer bothers you have plenty of options.
- koof 5y agoI need more free time from my work responsibilities so I can think about this very scary question with the gravitas it deserves. Can you give me a day off?
- dennis_jeeves1 5y ago>but hardly anyone is questioning whether this is a good or legitimate role for those in government to decree and mandate. That's because you are in the wrong forum. I would think that there are forums out there where unpopular or less common opinions are the norm. Your original point is still true, far less people care less about their freedom, welcome to life.
- TazeTSchnitzel 5y agoGovernment power isn't the only power. Workers cheer government regulation as one of their only leverages against employer power (or the power of capital).
- ghufran_syed 5y agoI agree - a related issue is that if indeed government should be using it's power, then it should be exercised at theost local level possible ie at the city or county level. That way you could see what happens when people have more of a choice about whether to live under those rules or not, before applying it in a way that is harder to avoid. Meaning it is easy to move cities or counties (in the US), harder to move state, almost impossible to change countries for most people's. If it really is good for companies, then more will move there. If not, they will move out - better to do the experiment on a small scale first! But the aim of a lot of federal or state level proposed legislation is so that people can't escape nirvana...
- Vladimof 5y ago> Most of the discussion here is about whether mandating business practice would be a good or a bad business move, but hardly anyone is questioning whether this is a good or legitimate role for those in government to decree and mandate. Isn't the Government already limiting the workweek to 40h?
- qeternity 5y agoI agree with your comment, but it has nothing to do with Americans. Your comments sounds very much like an American with limited experience outside of the US. The scary part is that especially post pandemic, this is a very global phenomenon. Source: American expat
- proc0 5y agoAre you saying these laws are common elsewhere? I don't recall any other country passing a 4 day work week law. Either way, these type of laws being uncommon in America is not a bad thing.
- carapace 5y ago> hardly anyone is questioning whether this is a good or legitimate role for those in government to decree and mandate. That's because it's been discussed and the current status quo is the result. Check out the history of the labor movement. > The nature and power of organized labor is the outcome of historical tensions among counter-acting forces involving workplace rights, wages, working hours, political expression, labor laws, and other working conditions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_history_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_history_of_the_United_St... > More and more, I see governments mandating changes that already appear to be underway, but in a way that accrues the praise and rewards to themselves. That's pretty much the definition of "politician", eh? > Most Americans seem to be complicit in this transformation, What transformation? > continually voting greater and greater control and authority away from the people and toward government powers. Without concrete examples it's difficult to say anything useful.
- malermeister 5y agoThe authority isn't with people right now, it is with capital and being wielded against the people. The only mechanism I'm aware of to change that is government and it needs more power to do so. Government is elected and democratic. Capital is neither.
- skd23423 5y agoIf the govt does not have the power to dictate working hours, people would did from overwork like in the other countries. May be not software for now, but definitely it is possible with low skilled jobs. This is actually a good thing for the govt to have power over. PS: This applies to every company, so the playground is fair to compete against.
- badRNG 5y agoIt is interesting to see the tensions play out between managers/"entrepreneurs" and workers in threads like this. The idea that the establishment of a working week is government tyranny is obvious to one side and bizarre to the other.
- skd23423 5y agoKeeping managers and entrepreneurs on the same plane is the most bizarre thing and frankly insulting to entrepreneurs