4 ms·

I'm against non-competes, but likening them to slavery seems distasteful. I'm not sure they infringe on people's freedoms or rather a specific people's freedoms

I'm against non-competes, but likening them to slavery seems distasteful. I'm not sure they infringe on people's freedoms or rather a specific people's freedoms the way slavery did/does. No one is going to secede over non-competes.

jfengel 2y ago
It illustrates the way the "leave it up to the states" argument grates on some ears. It's a slippery slope argument, which is not automatically faulty. It is a call to know how you expect things to not slide down. If the suggestion is "anything shy of complete chattel slavery", people get worried.
- IncreasePosts 2y ago
  Why have states at all then? Why not just one giant national government?
  - Uvix 2y ago
    The US has been that since 1861.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - SpaceNugget 2y ago
    Why have a federal government at all if states are perfectly well suited to all forms of human rights oversight, lawmaking, etc?
    - int_19h 2y ago
      Collective defense?
gamblor956 2y ago
In living memory, at least 3 SCOTUS judges have stated that slavery is legal and should not have been ended. Two of those justices currently sit on the Supreme Court.
- gotoeleven 2y ago
  Please cite.
  - hedora 2y ago
    I’m not the person you are replying to, but California had a ballot initiative that would finally eliminated slavery in California in 2024. It failed. If you think the US completely banned slavery, or that slavery is unpopular, you’re misinformed.
    - gotoeleven 2y ago
      Well that was about forced labor in prisons which is a bit different.
      - itsanaccount 2y ago
        Restricting the slave owner to the state (+ leasing to businesses) does not make it not slavery. I can't believe I have to say this.
    - lazide 2y ago
      To quote a well known (fictional) sociopath - ‘what’s to prove? It’s free labor!’
- unclad5968 2y ago
  What does that have to do with non-competes?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
outside2344 2y ago
Really? If you are an employee of Microsoft, how is it possible not to run afoul of a non-compete in tech for example?

jfengel 2y ago

It illustrates the way the "leave it up to the states" argument grates on some ears. It's a slippery slope argument, which is not automatically faulty. It is a call to know how you expect things to not slide down. If the suggestion is "anything shy of complete chattel slavery", people get worried.

IncreasePosts 2y ago
Why have states at all then? Why not just one giant national government?
- Uvix 2y ago
  The US has been that since 1861.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- SpaceNugget 2y ago
  Why have a federal government at all if states are perfectly well suited to all forms of human rights oversight, lawmaking, etc?
  - int_19h 2y ago
    Collective defense?

gamblor956 2y ago

In living memory, at least 3 SCOTUS judges have stated that slavery is legal and should not have been ended. Two of those justices currently sit on the Supreme Court.

gotoeleven 2y ago
Please cite.
- hedora 2y ago
  I’m not the person you are replying to, but California had a ballot initiative that would finally eliminated slavery in California in 2024. It failed. If you think the US completely banned slavery, or that slavery is unpopular, you’re misinformed.
  - gotoeleven 2y ago
    Well that was about forced labor in prisons which is a bit different.
    - itsanaccount 2y ago
      Restricting the slave owner to the state (+ leasing to businesses) does not make it not slavery. I can't believe I have to say this.
  - lazide 2y ago
    To quote a well known (fictional) sociopath - ‘what’s to prove? It’s free labor!’
unclad5968 2y ago
What does that have to do with non-competes?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

outside2344 2y ago

Really? If you are an employee of Microsoft, how is it possible not to run afoul of a non-compete in tech for example?