6 ms·

America needs better labor protection laws. Every other day, I see drama like this that ripples across the globe. Fed rate has improved, inflation is rising ag

America needs better labor protection laws. Every other day, I see drama like this that ripples across the globe. Fed rate has improved, inflation is rising again, and the surrounding conditions resemble those of the ZIRP era—aside from the actual rate. Meanwhile, corporations are making more profit than ever. There should be policies in place to prevent them from pulling crap like this whenever they feel like it.

starspangled 2y ago
> America needs better labor protection laws. Maybe so, although I don't know that Blue Origin is the best demonstration for the need. I doubt it's made a profit let alone returned investment. Bezos has supposedly been putting 1-2 billion into it every year, and CEO recently said it makes hundreds of millions per year. > Every other day, I see drama like this that ripples across the globe. What do you mean by ripples across the globe? > Fed rate has improved, inflation is rising again, and the surrounding conditions resemble those of the ZIRP era—aside from the actual rate. Meanwhile, corporations are making more profit than ever. There should be policies in place to prevent them from pulling crap like this whenever they feel like it. I don't think that's a good line to go down to basically say corporate profits in good times should be curtailed by forcing them to hold onto employees who are costing more than they make for the company. Because what do you do in bad times? Force the companies to go bankrupt, or weaken laws? I think labor protection should be significantly or entirely divorced from corporate performance, and profit-taking that is wildly disproportionate to value provided should be addressed by mostly by promoting competition.
- chillingeffect 2y ago
  Clearly with Musk running the country, BO's chance of getting contracts is zero. I heard a talk today(1) that pointed out that pre-Musk was given too much power and now we see from BO's demise why. Competition is now impossible. (1) https://youtu.be/z8Lrd8FM6mA https://youtu.be/z8Lrd8FM6mA
  - oskarkk 2y ago
    Blue Origin was founded before SpaceX (in 2000). SpaceX launched their first small orbital rocket successfully in 2008, and is launching Falcon 9 since 2010. At that time Musk had no significant power and he was less wealthy than Bezos (and that was true until 2022 or something, SpaceX also makes up like half of Musk's wealth). SpaceX is in the position it's in because it's been delivering for the last 15 years. There is no "Blue Origin's demise", because they never really started delivering anything other than short up-and-down rides to the edge of space in the 25 years of their existence, until they're finally launched New Glenn last month. I believe that in the end they'll ramp up New Glenn and they'll have both commercial customers AND government customers - I don't believe Musk/Trump can/will really exclude any company from competing for government contracts. But competing with SpaceX is extremely hard, because in 2024 they launched more rockets than every other company/country in the world combined.
glimshe 2y ago
As a lifetime employee, I don't want better labor protection laws. One of the reasons that America has better job prospects than most of the developed world is exactly because of its flexibility in hiring and firing people. Blue Origin hired thousands of people in the past few years because they knew they could reduce the labor force in case of a business contraction or poor decisions in hiring. I've left a country with amazing labor protection laws because it was really hard to find a good job and salary was relatively low because employers had to take into account the huge risks of hiring even a single person.
- rednafi 2y ago
  It’s a different tradeoff. I come from a country with a weak passport, which limits my opportunities a lot. It’s hard to explain that to someone who can travel wherever they want, so it’s a bit different for me. When visas are tied to jobs, getting laid off means something completely different—even in a good labor market. I had to move from the US to one of those countries with strong labor protections. But I agree that salaries take a massive hit because of this, and opportunities are reduced too. I’ve seen the opposite as well—people losing their residence permits and healthcare coverage, and then going bankrupt after a layoff. For me, lower pay for better labor protection is a sensible tradeoff. But of course, your mileage may vary.
  - Denvercoder9 2y ago
    A better solution is to not tie visas to jobs. While at it, also stop tying healthcare insurance to jobs. As someone from a country with strong labor protections, I'm in favor of making it easier to fire people. There's too much dead weight around in companies here. But being fired shouldn't be a life threatening event.
    - rednafi 2y ago
      This is something I can get behind. I don’t want to be a deadweight to a company and still expect to get paid handsomely. But the reality is that tying visas and healthcare to jobs, and treating expats who pay taxes in the 90th percentile like unwanted immigrants, is a bad deal for everyone involved. I do hope this gets fixed at some point—I’d love to go back. I made some great friends there. But until then, I still stand for better labor protection.
valyala 2y ago
No, thank you! Europe has these laws, which complicate reducing workforce when needed. These laws resulted in economic crisis across top industries (such as automotive) we see right now.
_heimdall 2y ago
"Better" is all in the eye if the beholder. I don't know any fellow Americans that want labor laws similar to Europe. In sure some people do, but in my experience its nowhere near a majority.
bilsbie 2y ago
The harder you make it to fire, the harder you make it to hire.
latentcall 2y ago
Protection laws? Maybe. I think we need to improve the lives of workers in other ways. Higher pay, better benefits, universal healthcare to break the employer tie, more time off, more sick time, mandated parental leave. I understand the hate for at will employment. If you pay attention to the industry and what your company is doing, you can avoid layoffs or at least be better prepared for them.

starspangled 2y ago

> America needs better labor protection laws. Maybe so, although I don't know that Blue Origin is the best demonstration for the need. I doubt it's made a profit let alone returned investment. Bezos has supposedly been putting 1-2 billion into it every year, and CEO recently said it makes hundreds of millions per year. > Every other day, I see drama like this that ripples across the globe. What do you mean by ripples across the globe? > Fed rate has improved, inflation is rising again, and the surrounding conditions resemble those of the ZIRP era—aside from the actual rate. Meanwhile, corporations are making more profit than ever. There should be policies in place to prevent them from pulling crap like this whenever they feel like it. I don't think that's a good line to go down to basically say corporate profits in good times should be curtailed by forcing them to hold onto employees who are costing more than they make for the company. Because what do you do in bad times? Force the companies to go bankrupt, or weaken laws? I think labor protection should be significantly or entirely divorced from corporate performance, and profit-taking that is wildly disproportionate to value provided should be addressed by mostly by promoting competition.

chillingeffect 2y ago
Clearly with Musk running the country, BO's chance of getting contracts is zero. I heard a talk today(1) that pointed out that pre-Musk was given too much power and now we see from BO's demise why. Competition is now impossible. (1) https://youtu.be/z8Lrd8FM6mA https://youtu.be/z8Lrd8FM6mA
- oskarkk 2y ago
  Blue Origin was founded before SpaceX (in 2000). SpaceX launched their first small orbital rocket successfully in 2008, and is launching Falcon 9 since 2010. At that time Musk had no significant power and he was less wealthy than Bezos (and that was true until 2022 or something, SpaceX also makes up like half of Musk's wealth). SpaceX is in the position it's in because it's been delivering for the last 15 years. There is no "Blue Origin's demise", because they never really started delivering anything other than short up-and-down rides to the edge of space in the 25 years of their existence, until they're finally launched New Glenn last month. I believe that in the end they'll ramp up New Glenn and they'll have both commercial customers AND government customers - I don't believe Musk/Trump can/will really exclude any company from competing for government contracts. But competing with SpaceX is extremely hard, because in 2024 they launched more rockets than every other company/country in the world combined.

glimshe 2y ago

As a lifetime employee, I don't want better labor protection laws. One of the reasons that America has better job prospects than most of the developed world is exactly because of its flexibility in hiring and firing people. Blue Origin hired thousands of people in the past few years because they knew they could reduce the labor force in case of a business contraction or poor decisions in hiring. I've left a country with amazing labor protection laws because it was really hard to find a good job and salary was relatively low because employers had to take into account the huge risks of hiring even a single person.

rednafi 2y ago
It’s a different tradeoff. I come from a country with a weak passport, which limits my opportunities a lot. It’s hard to explain that to someone who can travel wherever they want, so it’s a bit different for me. When visas are tied to jobs, getting laid off means something completely different—even in a good labor market. I had to move from the US to one of those countries with strong labor protections. But I agree that salaries take a massive hit because of this, and opportunities are reduced too. I’ve seen the opposite as well—people losing their residence permits and healthcare coverage, and then going bankrupt after a layoff. For me, lower pay for better labor protection is a sensible tradeoff. But of course, your mileage may vary.
- Denvercoder9 2y ago
  A better solution is to not tie visas to jobs. While at it, also stop tying healthcare insurance to jobs. As someone from a country with strong labor protections, I'm in favor of making it easier to fire people. There's too much dead weight around in companies here. But being fired shouldn't be a life threatening event.
  - rednafi 2y ago
    This is something I can get behind. I don’t want to be a deadweight to a company and still expect to get paid handsomely. But the reality is that tying visas and healthcare to jobs, and treating expats who pay taxes in the 90th percentile like unwanted immigrants, is a bad deal for everyone involved. I do hope this gets fixed at some point—I’d love to go back. I made some great friends there. But until then, I still stand for better labor protection.

valyala 2y ago

No, thank you! Europe has these laws, which complicate reducing workforce when needed. These laws resulted in economic crisis across top industries (such as automotive) we see right now.

_heimdall 2y ago

"Better" is all in the eye if the beholder. I don't know any fellow Americans that want labor laws similar to Europe. In sure some people do, but in my experience its nowhere near a majority.

bilsbie 2y ago

The harder you make it to fire, the harder you make it to hire.

latentcall 2y ago

Protection laws? Maybe. I think we need to improve the lives of workers in other ways. Higher pay, better benefits, universal healthcare to break the employer tie, more time off, more sick time, mandated parental leave. I understand the hate for at will employment. If you pay attention to the industry and what your company is doing, you can avoid layoffs or at least be better prepared for them.