4 ms·

> just like we forbid work under alcohol Do we? In many companies there is free infinite beer

ClumsyPilot 2y ago
In British parliament the most important people in the country get alcohol subsidised by the taxpayer. And they regularly find drugs in the bathroom. You’d think that if anyone, these people would have to be sober.
- graemep 2y ago
  If you assume what MPs do is all that important. They mostly just do what their told by their party leadership anyway, and the rest of the time they are making decisions about things they know nothing about. Someone did a survey of how much MPs knew about economics and the results were dire, and they is something good many have been taught (all those PPE degrees!) and that is really important to them.
  - 4ndrewl 2y ago
    You're ignoring constituency work. Do you have a source for the "someone"?
    - graemep 2y ago
      Here is one about economics: https://positivemoney.org/archive/mp-poll/ https://positivemoney.org/archive/mp-poll/ Here is one about very simple stats: https://rss.org.uk/news-publication/news-publications/2022/general-news/new-rss-survey-tests-statistical-skills-of-mps/ https://rss.org.uk/news-publication/news-publications/2022/g...
  - switch007 2y ago
    They do important work for their constituents. Let's not insinuate MPs are irrelevant Would you rather they were dispensed with and instead we have a dictatorship?
    - LordN00b 2y ago
      Not having MPs doesn't lead to a dictorship, dial it back. Not having MPs means that we don't have MPs,(hooray) and the opportunity to replace them with something alittle more equitable to the society they exist in, free of the influences of lobbying, cronyism, greed, power and rampant, unchecked hypocrisy. Personally, I want a new class of people, styled after monks that spend 20 years being schooled in social structure, land husbandry, city welfare etc. These are then cloistered for the term that they serve and can only be approached by the permanent Civil Service when required. The local consituants are served by local councillers, (probably all of whom are lib dem as they are unconsionably successful at local issues). Anyway down with parlimentary democracy, and have a nice Sunday.
      - tsimionescu 2y ago
        What you're describing is a form of technocracy (rule by a class of dedicated scholars). It has been tried occasionally, but it is essentially the same thing as any non-Democratic rule: the technocrats do what is best for themselves, and using their knowledge and expertise, are able to invent convincing reasons on why that is supposedly best for the country as well. This is especially true when the "science" they are supposed to study is economics, a notorious pseudo-science whose real purpose is to act as justificationa for policies desired by whoever is paying the research. There is no way to ensure that rulers align with the people unless the people have a say in who rules. Scientific authorities have a long history of being negative even for their own fields ("physics advances one funeral at a time"), and that doesn't change when they are given power over an entire country.
        brabel 2y ago
        With the current MPs, why do you think they do not do what's best for themselves, or for whoever is sponsoring their political campaigns and lobbying them constantly? The question is not whether a technocracy would be perfect, it's whether it would be better than that, and your argument has zero explanatory power to answer that.
        2y ago
throwawayFinX 2y ago
This surprises me. Are you speaking from a US point of view? In many west european countries it is forbidden to consume alcohol in work hours, except at company-arranged events etc. and/or to be intoxicated. For a comparative overview of the practical differences: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9779578/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9779578/
- bowsamic 2y ago
  I live in Germany and a lot of companies still have free beer on tap and the managers will pressure you to drink during work hours From the article you posted: > Therefore, in most companies and public administration, it is solely at the discretion of employers as to what extent they tolerate alcohol consumption by their employees. The employer has the right to impose sanctions on the employee who refuses to take an alcohol test, which may result in loss of employment or suspension [53]. In Germany, regional and cultural particularities can be decisive; for example, in Lower and Upper Bavaria and in Franconia it is still common for many companies’ employees to have a glass of beer during the lunch break.
  - throwawayFinX 2y ago
    Haha interesting! Which sector are you in? I work for a German-owned industry corporation (in a nearby EU country) and would get fired for having a friday beer with colleagues if not at company-arranged “friday bar” or some other event :) No national law requires this strictness, but +95% of companies in my country have simular rules in place. My German colleagues are mostly serious when saying “Kein Bier vor vier” (i.e. no beers before 16:00/work ends).
    - bowsamic 2y ago
      My wife is in mechanical engineering. I am in academia. I think in my job there would be more pressure against it, but that's mainly because it's younger people. In my wife job, the CEO goes around encouraging people to drink while working, especially on Fridays. > My German colleagues are mostly serious when saying “Kein Bier vor vier” (i.e. no beers before 16:00/work ends). 4pm doesn't mean that work ends then though. Many people continue working after that beer.

In British parliament the most important people in the country get alcohol subsidised by the taxpayer. And they regularly find drugs in the bathroom. You’d think that if anyone, these people would have to be sober.

graemep 2y ago
If you assume what MPs do is all that important. They mostly just do what their told by their party leadership anyway, and the rest of the time they are making decisions about things they know nothing about. Someone did a survey of how much MPs knew about economics and the results were dire, and they is something good many have been taught (all those PPE degrees!) and that is really important to them.
- 4ndrewl 2y ago
  You're ignoring constituency work. Do you have a source for the "someone"?
  - graemep 2y ago
    Here is one about economics: https://positivemoney.org/archive/mp-poll/ https://positivemoney.org/archive/mp-poll/ Here is one about very simple stats: https://rss.org.uk/news-publication/news-publications/2022/general-news/new-rss-survey-tests-statistical-skills-of-mps/ https://rss.org.uk/news-publication/news-publications/2022/g...
- switch007 2y ago
  They do important work for their constituents. Let's not insinuate MPs are irrelevant Would you rather they were dispensed with and instead we have a dictatorship?
  - LordN00b 2y ago
    Not having MPs doesn't lead to a dictorship, dial it back. Not having MPs means that we don't have MPs,(hooray) and the opportunity to replace them with something alittle more equitable to the society they exist in, free of the influences of lobbying, cronyism, greed, power and rampant, unchecked hypocrisy. Personally, I want a new class of people, styled after monks that spend 20 years being schooled in social structure, land husbandry, city welfare etc. These are then cloistered for the term that they serve and can only be approached by the permanent Civil Service when required. The local consituants are served by local councillers, (probably all of whom are lib dem as they are unconsionably successful at local issues). Anyway down with parlimentary democracy, and have a nice Sunday.
    - tsimionescu 2y ago
      What you're describing is a form of technocracy (rule by a class of dedicated scholars). It has been tried occasionally, but it is essentially the same thing as any non-Democratic rule: the technocrats do what is best for themselves, and using their knowledge and expertise, are able to invent convincing reasons on why that is supposedly best for the country as well. This is especially true when the "science" they are supposed to study is economics, a notorious pseudo-science whose real purpose is to act as justificationa for policies desired by whoever is paying the research. There is no way to ensure that rulers align with the people unless the people have a say in who rules. Scientific authorities have a long history of being negative even for their own fields ("physics advances one funeral at a time"), and that doesn't change when they are given power over an entire country.
      - brabel 2y ago
        With the current MPs, why do you think they do not do what's best for themselves, or for whoever is sponsoring their political campaigns and lobbying them constantly? The question is not whether a technocracy would be perfect, it's whether it would be better than that, and your argument has zero explanatory power to answer that.
        2y ago

throwawayFinX 2y ago

This surprises me. Are you speaking from a US point of view? In many west european countries it is forbidden to consume alcohol in work hours, except at company-arranged events etc. and/or to be intoxicated. For a comparative overview of the practical differences: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9779578/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9779578/

bowsamic 2y ago
I live in Germany and a lot of companies still have free beer on tap and the managers will pressure you to drink during work hours From the article you posted: > Therefore, in most companies and public administration, it is solely at the discretion of employers as to what extent they tolerate alcohol consumption by their employees. The employer has the right to impose sanctions on the employee who refuses to take an alcohol test, which may result in loss of employment or suspension [53]. In Germany, regional and cultural particularities can be decisive; for example, in Lower and Upper Bavaria and in Franconia it is still common for many companies’ employees to have a glass of beer during the lunch break.
- throwawayFinX 2y ago
  Haha interesting! Which sector are you in? I work for a German-owned industry corporation (in a nearby EU country) and would get fired for having a friday beer with colleagues if not at company-arranged “friday bar” or some other event :) No national law requires this strictness, but +95% of companies in my country have simular rules in place. My German colleagues are mostly serious when saying “Kein Bier vor vier” (i.e. no beers before 16:00/work ends).
  - bowsamic 2y ago
    My wife is in mechanical engineering. I am in academia. I think in my job there would be more pressure against it, but that's mainly because it's younger people. In my wife job, the CEO goes around encouraging people to drink while working, especially on Fridays. > My German colleagues are mostly serious when saying “Kein Bier vor vier” (i.e. no beers before 16:00/work ends). 4pm doesn't mean that work ends then though. Many people continue working after that beer.