4 ms·

This btw is why Japanese cars are better than American cars. It's objectively better to work in a unionized environment. Let's you be "lazier" and get away wit

This btw is why Japanese cars are better than American cars. It's objectively better to work in a unionized environment. Let's you be "lazier" and get away with half-asserey - great from the worker perspective but from the perspective of a prospective buyer, ideally your product is produced by people who work as hard as possible. The Japanese have a work-hard without half-assing attitude. This is why Toyota/Lexus have consistency the best build quality, stitching, etc in their cars. Their employees are mostly not unionized and not even paid particularly better than the American ones - but the Japanese work ethic is preserved. This is also why "made in japan" toyota/lexus is prefereed to made in america/canada toyota/lexus.

hef19898 3y ago
The only thing correct in your statement is the spelling of Toyota and Lexus, and even that you only nailed one out of three times (brand names start with capitals, even in English).
- Der_Einzige 3y ago
  Maybe you could stop being lazy and explain specifically why what I claimed was wrong. But you can't, because you're wrong and you know it.
  - hef19898 3y ago
    Car build quality has nothing to do with unions for example, and that unions allow workers to be lazy is such wrong statememt, I din't even know where to start. US car makers were always bad when it came to quality, unions or not since Tesla is no difference. Build quality doesn't come from "working ad hard as possible", in general quality is indorectly proportional to the amount of hustling people do, voluntary or othetwise. Build quality in anything assembeld comes from proper engineering, proper assembly procedures, properly trained staff, solid quality culture (guess where the Japanese traditionally excel) and a quality focused organisation. None of those have anything to do with unions, half-assery or anything else you brought up.
zbyte64 3y ago
We always ignore Nordic unions when ever we trash talk unions. If things were as easy as black and white then there wouldn't even be a need to debate, the productive non-union businesses would just slay and everyone would be working for them.
- missedthecue 3y ago
  You mean... like tech companies?
  - zbyte64 3y ago
    A tech unicorn slays, but for how long? I do think the intention of most American tech companies is to financialize some aspect of the market, and that is lucrative and "slays" - but I think such arrangements are moats built with sand. Without that angle, a tech company is just another goods or service and looks less like Uber and more like the gaming industry.
- alephnerd 3y ago
  > ignore Nordic unions In Sweden (the largest industrial hub in Scandinavia), unions don't collectively negotiate wages with employers - they collectively set wages across an entire industry with the government and business management (think Syndicalism, which is the primary industrial philosophy in Europe compared to the US). Also, blue collar membership has declined after the 2008 Financial Crisis dealt a killing blow to Volvo and Saab. Blue Collar union membership in Sweden peaked at 85% in the 1990s but has fallen to 59% in 2019. Some American unions (primarily UAW and Teamsters) would have to fundamentally reform in order to act like European unions, and they would assuredly fight tooth and nail against such a change. Also, the kind of sector level salary negotiations common in Europe might fall foul of American collusion laws, and might anyhow be unpopular with local chapters (hypothetical example: if UAW and all major automotive manufacturers decided to set wages at South Carolina levels nationally, that would be a pay cut in the Midwest).
  - zbyte64 3y ago
    UAW already went through some reforms which is arguably why they're experiencing a surge in popularity. In particular Shawn Fien was part of UAWD's 1 member, 1 vote initiative: https://uawd.org/ https://uawd.org/ The characterization that they would eschew reform even when it would boost their popularity is not reflected in current events (certainly the managerial friendly unions of the past would avoid reforms)

hef19898 3y ago

The only thing correct in your statement is the spelling of Toyota and Lexus, and even that you only nailed one out of three times (brand names start with capitals, even in English).

Der_Einzige 3y ago
Maybe you could stop being lazy and explain specifically why what I claimed was wrong. But you can't, because you're wrong and you know it.
- hef19898 3y ago
  Car build quality has nothing to do with unions for example, and that unions allow workers to be lazy is such wrong statememt, I din't even know where to start. US car makers were always bad when it came to quality, unions or not since Tesla is no difference. Build quality doesn't come from "working ad hard as possible", in general quality is indorectly proportional to the amount of hustling people do, voluntary or othetwise. Build quality in anything assembeld comes from proper engineering, proper assembly procedures, properly trained staff, solid quality culture (guess where the Japanese traditionally excel) and a quality focused organisation. None of those have anything to do with unions, half-assery or anything else you brought up.

zbyte64 3y ago

We always ignore Nordic unions when ever we trash talk unions. If things were as easy as black and white then there wouldn't even be a need to debate, the productive non-union businesses would just slay and everyone would be working for them.

missedthecue 3y ago
You mean... like tech companies?
- zbyte64 3y ago
  A tech unicorn slays, but for how long? I do think the intention of most American tech companies is to financialize some aspect of the market, and that is lucrative and "slays" - but I think such arrangements are moats built with sand. Without that angle, a tech company is just another goods or service and looks less like Uber and more like the gaming industry.
alephnerd 3y ago
> ignore Nordic unions In Sweden (the largest industrial hub in Scandinavia), unions don't collectively negotiate wages with employers - they collectively set wages across an entire industry with the government and business management (think Syndicalism, which is the primary industrial philosophy in Europe compared to the US). Also, blue collar membership has declined after the 2008 Financial Crisis dealt a killing blow to Volvo and Saab. Blue Collar union membership in Sweden peaked at 85% in the 1990s but has fallen to 59% in 2019. Some American unions (primarily UAW and Teamsters) would have to fundamentally reform in order to act like European unions, and they would assuredly fight tooth and nail against such a change. Also, the kind of sector level salary negotiations common in Europe might fall foul of American collusion laws, and might anyhow be unpopular with local chapters (hypothetical example: if UAW and all major automotive manufacturers decided to set wages at South Carolina levels nationally, that would be a pay cut in the Midwest).
- zbyte64 3y ago
  UAW already went through some reforms which is arguably why they're experiencing a surge in popularity. In particular Shawn Fien was part of UAWD's 1 member, 1 vote initiative: https://uawd.org/ https://uawd.org/ The characterization that they would eschew reform even when it would boost their popularity is not reflected in current events (certainly the managerial friendly unions of the past would avoid reforms)