4 ms·
Some may be opposed for that reason, but I suspect there are many more reasons than that one. Other possibilities include the belief that a union would be inef
by compiler-guy 4y ago
Some may be opposed for that reason, but I suspect there are many more reasons than that one.
Other possibilities include the belief that a union would be ineffective. Or corrupt. Or at least unproven. Or would kill the goose that laid the golden egg. Or would immediately be captured by special interests not directly related to employment at big tech.
Which isn’t to say that these concerns are valid, or couldn’t be addressed, or whatever. But they exist
- braingenious 4y agoNone of those reasons are incompatible with what I said! In fact, >Or would kill the goose that laid the golden egg. is a re-statement of my observation! :)
- compiler-guy 4y agoNot really. You describe it as it as the veneration of some mythical 10x developer or founder who single handedly props up the sky. One can believe none of that, but still believe that a union would sufficiently change the firm’s economics that it would no longer offer the kind of jobs it does today. One could believe that the collective work of all the employees produces all that value—no need for embarrassed billionaires—and still think that a union would work against that value. And I’m not sure how believing that a union is unproven fits into your theory that HN readers believe the value is produced by the Übermensch.