9 ms·

US to target more businesses after Hyundai raid

58 points by DocFeind 1y ago

techpineapple 1y ago
I would say this is good to see on principle, but I assume which businesses they target will be decided through corruption and not data.
- tootie 1y ago
  That presumes that this kind of enforcement is a net positive and I'm pretty convinced it isn't. The distinction between legal and illegal immigration is essentially arbitrary. Illegal immigration is not a crime of morality, it's basically one of economics. The legal framework theoretically is designed to produce an optimal outcome for the health and wealth of the nation and presently it is not doing that at all. We can and should welcome far more people than we do. Deporting people who are not violent and contributing to the economy because they have incorrect paperwork isn't a win for anyone but politicians and racists.
  - pessimizer 1y ago
    > Illegal immigration is not a crime of morality, it's basically one of economics. Then why do you immediately shift into questions of moral judgement, and your moral judgement of how "welcoming" people should be? This politics is garbled. New immigrants lower the leverage of domestic workers, and the leverage of previous immigrants, by intention. The myth that they move on to become mandarins that are too good for those jobs comes from people who never had to work those jobs. Black people didn't move anywhere except to even worse, less secure work. I watched a South filled with black servants serving everyone's food and doing all the hard work, turned into a South filled with black people who have $0 worth outside of the equity in their cars, and all of that (horrible shit-)work being completely closed to them because they didn't speak a foreign language. At the same time, especially in the north, I watched tons of terrible jobs filled by the barely English speaking Indian "relatives" of the people who opened franchises, and who kick back half of their checks to these "uncles", another quarter of that check goes back in remittances, and they get to live like kefala Emerati slaves. It is dystopic to consider this the compassionate choice. It's purely a matter of trend following when the people who profit from this stuff also do the media work to set the trends. The "left" were against all of this in the 90s as a central principle. Cesar Chavez gave speeches about the "wetbacks" being brought in to undercut striking workers. As a Black person born in Chicago, I was part of the Great Migration that was brought in to undercut European immigrants who were fighting for their labor rights. It doesn't make me "bad," or my family "bad." The accusation that people who object to it are demonizing immigrants is an intentional distortion and a marketing strategy for consistent hypercapitalist laissez-faire politics. I miss when "liberals" didn't have Reagan's policies. But they're a natural consequence of their having become extraordinarily wealthy from them.
    - tootie 1y ago
      You're reading way too much into the word "welcome". I don't mean we should be more polite, just more intentional. Data says immigration is generally good for the economy but certainly within some parameters. I don't think any data says immigrants hurt black Americans but please cite something besides your personal observation. It does seem pretty specious to blame the least powerful people in society for the downfall of the next least powerful and not the massive wealth concentration at the top. The fact that immigration is being demonized by the same crew who want to ban discussion of racism or diversity is not a coincidence.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
    << The distinction between legal and illegal immigration is essentially arbitrary. Most lines are. It is a line we agreed on as a society. Just for a quick comparison, 21 is a legal drinking age in US ( going after less incendiary example just to prove a point ). But, and here is my subtle point, either those are real lines or there are not. If they are real, they should be enforced and if they are not, they should be nulled. << We can and should welcome far more people than we do. Before I offer a reflexive response, I think it is worth to task a simple question: why? << Deporting people who are not violent and contributing to the economy because they have incorrect paperwork isn't a win for anyone but politicians and racists. That is amusingly neat way oh framing it, but if it only it was that simple. I want to argue against this framework, but not before you give me an idea about how you justify the why in previous section. I struggle to understand this particular perspective.
    - crooked-v 1y ago
      > why? Because without immigration, the population of the US will objectively shrink over time, and that's bad for both the country in the abstract and the personal welfare of the average middle class person as they reach old age.
      - A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
        Interesting, you do think the local populace is not capable of breeding? If so, can you point to the why? I might be leading you a little, but I promise only a little.
        crooked-v 1y ago
        The US has a fertility rate of 1.6 (https://apnews.com/article/fertility-rate-us-low-cdc-replacement-532c4f43f420f29b32212db9cfa0e0af https://apnews.com/article/fertility-rate-us-low-cdc-replace...), i.e., 1.6 kids per 2 parents. Better social services and social safety nets would likely increase this some, but it would still probably be under 2, since that's the general trend for wealthy countries.
  - yesiamracist 1y ago
    [flagged]
- crooked-v 1y ago
  The South Korean nationals that ICE arrested were already allowed to enter the country without a visa (for trips under 90 days) and perform business activities (such as overseeing construction and factory layout planning). That's not even targeting based on corruption, it's just trying to fill quotas without giving a shit about the rest of the country.
jleyank 1y ago
If they really want to address illegals they should penalize the companies that use them rather than individual workers. Hell, they might be working with companies to stage deport theatre and then looking away when they restock. Like they argue with drugs, remove the demand and the problem will decrease.
- jibe 1y ago
  "US to target more businesses" - they are!
  - A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
    I think what parent is referring to is the simple fact that the management making the decisions to hire illegal immigrants are rarely ( as in effectively never ) brought on any kind of charges despite it being ostensibly against the law. What we end up with a system, where companies get highly malleable ( and replaceable ) workforce afraid to raise a complaint and zero consequences for people making the actual decisions. edit: A cynic would argue that the system is in place is working exactly as designed.
  - jandrese 1y ago
    To be clear those business won’t be punished except for having to find more workers.
  - Guvante 1y ago
    What specific action did the US government take against Hyundai here? Or did they just gut their workforce and claim that was "enough of a penalty". Historically the US has implicitly condoned these illegal actions by employers by refusing to ever take action against them. There has only ever been action taken against employees, who sometimes aren't even meaningfully informed that they are breaking the law. (Certainly they often know but the employer always knows)
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
jaco6 1y ago
[dead]
onetokeoverthe 1y ago
[dead]
zaktoo2 1y ago
Literally Idiocracy
iammjm 1y ago
targeting integrated, working and tax-paying citizens, truly a big brain MAGA move
- hilsdev 1y ago
  If an American citizen had gotten the same job, they would be paying the same taxes
  - jaco6 1y ago
    [dead]
  - whatshisface 1y ago
    No, they would be paying lower net taxes. US citizens are eligible for government services.
    - hilsdev 1y ago
      Where I live, even the undeniably "illegal" are eligible for government services
    - knowitnone2 1y ago
      where I live, illegals get government services whether they pay taxes or not. Welcome to socialism
- UncleMeat 1y ago
  They hate nonwhites. Remember BigBalls' "normalize indian hate" tweet? The goal is not human flourishing. The goal isn't even flourishing for the groups that they care about. The goal is suffering for the people they hate.
JKCalhoun 1y ago
Curious to see what comes home to roost. I mean when, for example, you clear out the agriculture workers of the U.S. without any thought as to how or what you are going to do to replace them, well, expect higher grocery prices I guess?
- hilsdev 1y ago
  The labor cost of food is near the bottom of the price factors.
  - bostik 1y ago
    If UK's experience is anything to go by: the fraction of produce left in the fields to rot, unpicked, will go WAY up. Labour cost is one thing, total useful production volume is another.
  - margalabargala 1y ago
    Directly yes but there are knock on effects. What you say is true only when labor is not scarce. The consequences of having insufficient labor is a large price factor. If you can only harvest 30% of your crop and the rest rots in the field because there's no one to pick it, that is outsized.
    - hilsdev 1y ago
      If you paid a lot more there would be more people to pick it
      - margalabargala 1y ago
        True! And then the labor cost of food would no longer be near the bottom of the price factors.
  - AngryData 1y ago
    Yeah but you still need people to do it and paying a bit better is not going to get an immediate response of many tens of thousands of workers to quit their jobs to do seasonal and migratory work across multiple states living out of vans and campers with no insurance and increased workload and injury rate. Many crops are just going to rot, output will be lower, and prices will still rise. At some point years down the line sure things might improve and settle out and more US people can fill a larger number of those roles, but it will not happen quickly, especially not for token wage increases, and will likely never gain the workforce numbers that migratory farm workers offer who travel not just across the US but also throughout Central and South America. A US citizen is never going to work in Mexico or Brazil during off seasons for US crops because it basically represents a net-zero or negative wage converting it back into US currency to come live back here. Ive done farm and trade work my whole life, physical work is not a problem, but even if you doubled the pay for picking tomatoes and other fruits and lettuces, I would not consider for a second joining that workforce even if I was otherwise homeless. Im not even sure being a row crop farmer that doesn't even need extra labor is worth the effort. Farms are getting the least and smallest margins by far for food production out of anybody in the food logistics supply line and there is no potential windfall for workers and no career path to work up from picking fruits. Would I like people picking fruit to earn more money and have stables lives and not have to migrate across the country living in vans? Of course, 100%. But without a huge overhaul of our economic priorities and policies towards worker rights and wages, which is the exact opposite direction from where we have been heading the last 60+ years, none of that is going to change regardless of what prices people are willing to pay for food. The base of the agricultural market of farms and the workers directly harvesting food is and has been running on thinner margins than pretty much any other industry in existence. A 2% return on a farmer's seed and fuel and fertilizer inputs is considered a great success.
exabrial 1y ago
Whats [additionally] infuriating for me is all of this is funded by my tax bill. Both Hyundai taking massive federal incentives, and the subsequent arrests. I just think of the money wasn't collected/handed out to them in the first place we wouldn't be in this situation.
- jondwillis 1y ago
  Yeah if only we didn’t have taxes, surely we would all be driving our Cybertruck 2s on beautiful, well-maintained privately owned roads by now.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
    There are real benefits to power staying with the people and not faceless ( or in this case, as it were, facefull ) government. I get that people discuss this in extremes, but surely there is some middle ground between NJ level craziness and, say, taxless utopia.
- knowitnone2 1y ago
  you fail to understand basic economics. states AND countries provide tax breaks to lure in businesses with certain agreements. In the long term, this provides jobs, training, benefits local economy, income taxes, raises property values, increases property taxes, etc. And your tax contribution to would be %.0001. There are MANY things about the government to be infuriated at but this isn't one of them.
  - exabrial 1y ago
    I fully understand basic economics. Thank you.
neither_color 1y ago
One thing missing from the public debate and I havent seen any writers I follow bring up: When US companies first started outsourcing their factories to Korea, China, and other countries, they were doing the exact same thing. They were just flying engineers over on business and tourist visas to jump start factories and train the workers. Typically only long term workers bothered getting bona fide employee visas abroad. Open any Steve Jobs biography. "Jobs told me to fly to China tonight and deal with the problem" You think he got a Chinese work visa in one day? This is hubris-driven rule by law. As Americans we can't fathom a foreign company knowing something we don't. The shoe is on the other foot now. Foreign conglomerates have knowledge and processes and expertise that we dont have. There's literally no pragmatic way for Hyundai to get 300 employees here on short notice. They moved fast and broke things. They did what they thought they had to do to survive in a kafkaesque system.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - neither_color 1y ago
    Who said anything about excusing crime? At least dozens of valid visa holders were caught in the dragnet, some appear to have been in a gray area as to what they were allowed to do(the "strawman" in question), and some were truly sub-sub contracted illegals. The latter could have been apprehended without all the spectacle, and the grey area could've been dealt with tactfully without offending our ally, like, "hey you're only allowed to attend stakeholder meetings and not actually touch anything. Consider this your warning". I'm less sympathetic to "the law is the law" because of the historical context of what's happening.
    - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
      >Who said anything about excusing crime? The person I was replying to. Did we read the same comment? His argument was that the US is wrong to deport Hyundai workers here without legal visas since in his mind, an Apple worker from the story in the book he read, also didn't have legal visa to travel to China on a whim, even though his argument is 100% bogus since the Apple worker most definitely have a visa for that, and even so, two wrongs don't make a right. >I'm less sympathetic to "the law is the law" because of the historical context of what's happening. Careful with such arguments that apply selective enforcement based on the political climate you sympathize with(or not), as others will apply the same judgment to you when you'll get caught and they'll be in power.
1oooqooq 1y ago
can't wait for them to hit some oil drilling sites. /s
knivets 1y ago
Somehow this article is no longer on the first page[0] (or even second) of hn even though it has more upvotes (and is newer) than other articles with less upvotes (or older ones). Is HN hiding politically controversial articles? [0] https://imgur.com/a/e7EplV6 https://imgur.com/a/e7EplV6
- Bender 1y ago
  They fall off the main page when people start flagging. If enough people flag it will instead be [flagged]. For a period of time it can get vouched if [flagged] and then [flagged][dead].
insane_dreamer 1y ago
So many people in this thread clearly have no idea how international business actually works irl :(

58 points by DocFeind 1y ago

I would say this is good to see on principle, but I assume which businesses they target will be decided through corruption and not data.

tootie 1y ago
That presumes that this kind of enforcement is a net positive and I'm pretty convinced it isn't. The distinction between legal and illegal immigration is essentially arbitrary. Illegal immigration is not a crime of morality, it's basically one of economics. The legal framework theoretically is designed to produce an optimal outcome for the health and wealth of the nation and presently it is not doing that at all. We can and should welcome far more people than we do. Deporting people who are not violent and contributing to the economy because they have incorrect paperwork isn't a win for anyone but politicians and racists.
- pessimizer 1y ago
  > Illegal immigration is not a crime of morality, it's basically one of economics. Then why do you immediately shift into questions of moral judgement, and your moral judgement of how "welcoming" people should be? This politics is garbled. New immigrants lower the leverage of domestic workers, and the leverage of previous immigrants, by intention. The myth that they move on to become mandarins that are too good for those jobs comes from people who never had to work those jobs. Black people didn't move anywhere except to even worse, less secure work. I watched a South filled with black servants serving everyone's food and doing all the hard work, turned into a South filled with black people who have $0 worth outside of the equity in their cars, and all of that (horrible shit-)work being completely closed to them because they didn't speak a foreign language. At the same time, especially in the north, I watched tons of terrible jobs filled by the barely English speaking Indian "relatives" of the people who opened franchises, and who kick back half of their checks to these "uncles", another quarter of that check goes back in remittances, and they get to live like kefala Emerati slaves. It is dystopic to consider this the compassionate choice. It's purely a matter of trend following when the people who profit from this stuff also do the media work to set the trends. The "left" were against all of this in the 90s as a central principle. Cesar Chavez gave speeches about the "wetbacks" being brought in to undercut striking workers. As a Black person born in Chicago, I was part of the Great Migration that was brought in to undercut European immigrants who were fighting for their labor rights. It doesn't make me "bad," or my family "bad." The accusation that people who object to it are demonizing immigrants is an intentional distortion and a marketing strategy for consistent hypercapitalist laissez-faire politics. I miss when "liberals" didn't have Reagan's policies. But they're a natural consequence of their having become extraordinarily wealthy from them.
  - tootie 1y ago
    You're reading way too much into the word "welcome". I don't mean we should be more polite, just more intentional. Data says immigration is generally good for the economy but certainly within some parameters. I don't think any data says immigrants hurt black Americans but please cite something besides your personal observation. It does seem pretty specious to blame the least powerful people in society for the downfall of the next least powerful and not the massive wealth concentration at the top. The fact that immigration is being demonized by the same crew who want to ban discussion of racism or diversity is not a coincidence.
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
  << The distinction between legal and illegal immigration is essentially arbitrary. Most lines are. It is a line we agreed on as a society. Just for a quick comparison, 21 is a legal drinking age in US ( going after less incendiary example just to prove a point ). But, and here is my subtle point, either those are real lines or there are not. If they are real, they should be enforced and if they are not, they should be nulled. << We can and should welcome far more people than we do. Before I offer a reflexive response, I think it is worth to task a simple question: why? << Deporting people who are not violent and contributing to the economy because they have incorrect paperwork isn't a win for anyone but politicians and racists. That is amusingly neat way oh framing it, but if it only it was that simple. I want to argue against this framework, but not before you give me an idea about how you justify the why in previous section. I struggle to understand this particular perspective.
  - crooked-v 1y ago
    > why? Because without immigration, the population of the US will objectively shrink over time, and that's bad for both the country in the abstract and the personal welfare of the average middle class person as they reach old age.
    - A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
      Interesting, you do think the local populace is not capable of breeding? If so, can you point to the why? I might be leading you a little, but I promise only a little.
      - crooked-v 1y ago
        The US has a fertility rate of 1.6 (https://apnews.com/article/fertility-rate-us-low-cdc-replacement-532c4f43f420f29b32212db9cfa0e0af https://apnews.com/article/fertility-rate-us-low-cdc-replace...), i.e., 1.6 kids per 2 parents. Better social services and social safety nets would likely increase this some, but it would still probably be under 2, since that's the general trend for wealthy countries.
- yesiamracist 1y ago
  [flagged]
crooked-v 1y ago
The South Korean nationals that ICE arrested were already allowed to enter the country without a visa (for trips under 90 days) and perform business activities (such as overseeing construction and factory layout planning). That's not even targeting based on corruption, it's just trying to fill quotas without giving a shit about the rest of the country.

jleyank 1y ago

If they really want to address illegals they should penalize the companies that use them rather than individual workers. Hell, they might be working with companies to stage deport theatre and then looking away when they restock. Like they argue with drugs, remove the demand and the problem will decrease.

jibe 1y ago
"US to target more businesses" - they are!
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
  I think what parent is referring to is the simple fact that the management making the decisions to hire illegal immigrants are rarely ( as in effectively never ) brought on any kind of charges despite it being ostensibly against the law. What we end up with a system, where companies get highly malleable ( and replaceable ) workforce afraid to raise a complaint and zero consequences for people making the actual decisions. edit: A cynic would argue that the system is in place is working exactly as designed.
- jandrese 1y ago
  To be clear those business won’t be punished except for having to find more workers.
- Guvante 1y ago
  What specific action did the US government take against Hyundai here? Or did they just gut their workforce and claim that was "enough of a penalty". Historically the US has implicitly condoned these illegal actions by employers by refusing to ever take action against them. There has only ever been action taken against employees, who sometimes aren't even meaningfully informed that they are breaking the law. (Certainly they often know but the employer always knows)
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]

jaco6 1y ago

[dead]

onetokeoverthe 1y ago

[dead]

zaktoo2 1y ago

Literally Idiocracy

iammjm 1y ago

targeting integrated, working and tax-paying citizens, truly a big brain MAGA move

hilsdev 1y ago
If an American citizen had gotten the same job, they would be paying the same taxes
- jaco6 1y ago
  [dead]
- whatshisface 1y ago
  No, they would be paying lower net taxes. US citizens are eligible for government services.
  - hilsdev 1y ago
    Where I live, even the undeniably "illegal" are eligible for government services
  - knowitnone2 1y ago
    where I live, illegals get government services whether they pay taxes or not. Welcome to socialism
UncleMeat 1y ago
They hate nonwhites. Remember BigBalls' "normalize indian hate" tweet? The goal is not human flourishing. The goal isn't even flourishing for the groups that they care about. The goal is suffering for the people they hate.

JKCalhoun 1y ago

Curious to see what comes home to roost. I mean when, for example, you clear out the agriculture workers of the U.S. without any thought as to how or what you are going to do to replace them, well, expect higher grocery prices I guess?

hilsdev 1y ago
The labor cost of food is near the bottom of the price factors.
- bostik 1y ago
  If UK's experience is anything to go by: the fraction of produce left in the fields to rot, unpicked, will go WAY up. Labour cost is one thing, total useful production volume is another.
- margalabargala 1y ago
  Directly yes but there are knock on effects. What you say is true only when labor is not scarce. The consequences of having insufficient labor is a large price factor. If you can only harvest 30% of your crop and the rest rots in the field because there's no one to pick it, that is outsized.
  - hilsdev 1y ago
    If you paid a lot more there would be more people to pick it
    - margalabargala 1y ago
      True! And then the labor cost of food would no longer be near the bottom of the price factors.
- AngryData 1y ago
  Yeah but you still need people to do it and paying a bit better is not going to get an immediate response of many tens of thousands of workers to quit their jobs to do seasonal and migratory work across multiple states living out of vans and campers with no insurance and increased workload and injury rate. Many crops are just going to rot, output will be lower, and prices will still rise. At some point years down the line sure things might improve and settle out and more US people can fill a larger number of those roles, but it will not happen quickly, especially not for token wage increases, and will likely never gain the workforce numbers that migratory farm workers offer who travel not just across the US but also throughout Central and South America. A US citizen is never going to work in Mexico or Brazil during off seasons for US crops because it basically represents a net-zero or negative wage converting it back into US currency to come live back here. Ive done farm and trade work my whole life, physical work is not a problem, but even if you doubled the pay for picking tomatoes and other fruits and lettuces, I would not consider for a second joining that workforce even if I was otherwise homeless. Im not even sure being a row crop farmer that doesn't even need extra labor is worth the effort. Farms are getting the least and smallest margins by far for food production out of anybody in the food logistics supply line and there is no potential windfall for workers and no career path to work up from picking fruits. Would I like people picking fruit to earn more money and have stables lives and not have to migrate across the country living in vans? Of course, 100%. But without a huge overhaul of our economic priorities and policies towards worker rights and wages, which is the exact opposite direction from where we have been heading the last 60+ years, none of that is going to change regardless of what prices people are willing to pay for food. The base of the agricultural market of farms and the workers directly harvesting food is and has been running on thinner margins than pretty much any other industry in existence. A 2% return on a farmer's seed and fuel and fertilizer inputs is considered a great success.

exabrial 1y ago

Whats [additionally] infuriating for me is all of this is funded by my tax bill. Both Hyundai taking massive federal incentives, and the subsequent arrests. I just think of the money wasn't collected/handed out to them in the first place we wouldn't be in this situation.

jondwillis 1y ago
Yeah if only we didn’t have taxes, surely we would all be driving our Cybertruck 2s on beautiful, well-maintained privately owned roads by now.
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
  There are real benefits to power staying with the people and not faceless ( or in this case, as it were, facefull ) government. I get that people discuss this in extremes, but surely there is some middle ground between NJ level craziness and, say, taxless utopia.
knowitnone2 1y ago
you fail to understand basic economics. states AND countries provide tax breaks to lure in businesses with certain agreements. In the long term, this provides jobs, training, benefits local economy, income taxes, raises property values, increases property taxes, etc. And your tax contribution to would be %.0001. There are MANY things about the government to be infuriated at but this isn't one of them.
- exabrial 1y ago
  I fully understand basic economics. Thank you.

neither_color 1y ago

One thing missing from the public debate and I havent seen any writers I follow bring up: When US companies first started outsourcing their factories to Korea, China, and other countries, they were doing the exact same thing. They were just flying engineers over on business and tourist visas to jump start factories and train the workers. Typically only long term workers bothered getting bona fide employee visas abroad. Open any Steve Jobs biography. "Jobs told me to fly to China tonight and deal with the problem" You think he got a Chinese work visa in one day? This is hubris-driven rule by law. As Americans we can't fathom a foreign company knowing something we don't. The shoe is on the other foot now. Foreign conglomerates have knowledge and processes and expertise that we dont have. There's literally no pragmatic way for Hyundai to get 300 employees here on short notice. They moved fast and broke things. They did what they thought they had to do to survive in a kafkaesque system.

FirmwareBurner 1y ago
[flagged]
- neither_color 1y ago
  Who said anything about excusing crime? At least dozens of valid visa holders were caught in the dragnet, some appear to have been in a gray area as to what they were allowed to do(the "strawman" in question), and some were truly sub-sub contracted illegals. The latter could have been apprehended without all the spectacle, and the grey area could've been dealt with tactfully without offending our ally, like, "hey you're only allowed to attend stakeholder meetings and not actually touch anything. Consider this your warning". I'm less sympathetic to "the law is the law" because of the historical context of what's happening.
  - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
    >Who said anything about excusing crime? The person I was replying to. Did we read the same comment? His argument was that the US is wrong to deport Hyundai workers here without legal visas since in his mind, an Apple worker from the story in the book he read, also didn't have legal visa to travel to China on a whim, even though his argument is 100% bogus since the Apple worker most definitely have a visa for that, and even so, two wrongs don't make a right. >I'm less sympathetic to "the law is the law" because of the historical context of what's happening. Careful with such arguments that apply selective enforcement based on the political climate you sympathize with(or not), as others will apply the same judgment to you when you'll get caught and they'll be in power.

1oooqooq 1y ago

can't wait for them to hit some oil drilling sites. /s

knivets 1y ago

Somehow this article is no longer on the first page[0] (or even second) of hn even though it has more upvotes (and is newer) than other articles with less upvotes (or older ones). Is HN hiding politically controversial articles? [0] https://imgur.com/a/e7EplV6 https://imgur.com/a/e7EplV6

Bender 1y ago
They fall off the main page when people start flagging. If enough people flag it will instead be [flagged]. For a period of time it can get vouched if [flagged] and then [flagged][dead].

insane_dreamer 1y ago

So many people in this thread clearly have no idea how international business actually works irl :(