5 ms·

> but also improve the final product by not having underpaid stressed staff with high turn-over. We'll see. It's not like police unions are making life better

> but also improve the final product by not having underpaid stressed staff with high turn-over. We'll see. It's not like police unions are making life better for citizens. Unions are there for one reason, the union members. This will most likely be good for the employees and good on them for acting in their best interest but it seems just as likely that a unionized rockstar is negative for the consumer in either increased pricea, extended timelines or minimum effort to meet exact requirements from employees. The benefits that workers gain from unionizing come from somewhere.

zarzavat 5mo ago
I would happily pay extra money for GTA 6 if it goes to improving working conditions. It's only negative for the consumer if the consumer views life as a zero sum game.
- jjice 5mo ago
  I agree with you, but I think most people don't. People generally hate paying for software and the $60->$70 standard AAA game pricing got a lot of people (my well paid friends included) complaining. Even if it was very clearly said that it is the cost of a well paid and respected team behind the game, I think most people won't care.
  - zarzavat 5mo ago
    That's fine though. The value of unions is that they can force consumers to pay for better working conditions and prevent a race to the bottom. Consumers usually are workers themselves so they also benefit from raising the bar of working conditions. Even if they don't like paying more, they are still receiving the benefit of living in a better society.
    - jjice 5mo ago
      I completely agree with you, but I have found that the average person I've talked to about things like this refuses to look past the first thing they see, which is higher prices. If everything could go up and not just have people switch to the next lowest cost good with bad worker conditions, then that could work. I'd argue GTA 6 is an inelastic good and people will play it no matter what, so I do think what you're saying applies here.
AndrewKemendo 5mo ago
Police unions aren’t labor unions and are illegal in many countries including Japan. https://theconversation.com/why-police-unions-are-not-part-of-the-american-labor-movement-142538 https://theconversation.com/why-police-unions-are-not-part-o... Notably, American police (the country that invented police unions) are a modern invention that largely exist as a output of slave catching and bounty hunting services.
- parineum 5mo ago
  > Police unions aren’t labor unions I'd really like to know what kind of tangled logic it requires to believe that. Regardless, police unions aren't the only example of unions who have worked against the benefit of everyone else but themselves. I only used them as an example because I didn't think anyone here would argue disagree that it's had negative outcomes. What I didn't expect was to find someone arguing that a union wasn't a union. It doesn't matter if it's legal in other places, it's legal in the US. Just because Japan has made police _unions_ illegal doesn't make an US police _union_ not a union.
- strictnein 5mo ago
  The police union in my city, in a state that borders Canada and fought against slavery, was founded in 1915. I'm guessing they would be surprised to learn that they are a "modern invention" that was from "slave catching" (I guess they do time travel?) and "bounty hunting services". I'm not even sure how you can say something is both a "modern invention" and the "output of slave catching". There's nothing modern about them and being the "output of slave catching" makes them definitionally not "modern". Police unions act just like every other union does: in the interests of their members. Unions are illegal in lots of the world. Federal public sector unions weren't legal in the US until the 1960s. Did the fact that they were illegal in 1965 have any bearing on whether or not they should be allowed? Does the fact that something is illegal in the US have any bearing on whether or not Japan should allow it?
  - AndrewKemendo 5mo ago
    Modern being post Industrial Revolution
keybored 5mo ago
Anti-unionists are here to tell us that consumers might possibly suffer. Higher prices and delays on a video game. Which has not seen a release in this series in half this century so far. For all this consumer cares, great. Make it 20% more expensive. Make it 50% more expensive. A hundred. If that helps the greater union cause I can take more walks in the woods to pass the time instead.
- matchbok3 5mo ago
  What a luxury you have to spend so much money on things, then. Hint: most people don't live that way.
  - vouwfietsman 5mo ago
    Hint: maybe they would if they would unionize themselves.
  - fodkodrasz 5mo ago
    Well, given that computer games are not essential goods, most people could survive perfectly well without these so-called luxuries. Or is it only fairly produced luxury goods that are considered a luxury, while exploitatively produced luxury goods are simply treated as the standard way people live?
  - thrance 5mo ago
    It's extremely dishonest to frame it as "if workers get good working conditions then consumers suffer". The reality is that Rockstar is extremely profitable. The crunch they impose on their devs with every single release shouldn't be tolerated, and I stand in full support of the unionized workers. And if a product requires human suffering to be so cheap, then maybe it shouldn't be so cheap.
  - keybored 5mo ago
    Most people haven’t had the luxury of playing a new GTA game in 13 years either. Jesus Christ, I need to spell out that it’s a video game and not some life necessity? The usual anti-union scaremongering is about families being delayed for their vacations because airport workers want rights, but this is even more optional. I don’t buy the premise of workers ruining the lives of consumers; I think the real problem is them ruining the relative profits of shareholders.[1] But F me, I’m not gonna buy this privilege checking over a crime sandbox video game. [1] This user in another subthread[2] is complaining that people are antagonistic against management. Of course, whatever is most expedient for anti-unionism, everything from woe-is-poor-person to you-need-management-you-peons. [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48326490 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48326490
GuinansEyebrows 5mo ago
> It's not like police unions are making life better for citizens. which is precisely why many union advocates argue that police should not have unions. the police exist as the physical arm of the capital class in direct opposition to the labor class. they are class traitors. police unions are not the same.
M2Ys4U 5mo ago
>We'll see. It's not like police unions are making life better for citizens. The police aren't allowed to join a union
mrkpdl 5mo ago
Look at the big picture. Most consumers work somewhere. Better working conditions across the board can only be good for consumers. Edit: and a note to say that comparing all unions to police unions isn’t a good faith/useful comparison. It’s true that the quality of unions vary, but overall they do far more good than bad.

zarzavat 5mo ago

I would happily pay extra money for GTA 6 if it goes to improving working conditions. It's only negative for the consumer if the consumer views life as a zero sum game.

jjice 5mo ago
I agree with you, but I think most people don't. People generally hate paying for software and the $60->$70 standard AAA game pricing got a lot of people (my well paid friends included) complaining. Even if it was very clearly said that it is the cost of a well paid and respected team behind the game, I think most people won't care.
- zarzavat 5mo ago
  That's fine though. The value of unions is that they can force consumers to pay for better working conditions and prevent a race to the bottom. Consumers usually are workers themselves so they also benefit from raising the bar of working conditions. Even if they don't like paying more, they are still receiving the benefit of living in a better society.
  - jjice 5mo ago
    I completely agree with you, but I have found that the average person I've talked to about things like this refuses to look past the first thing they see, which is higher prices. If everything could go up and not just have people switch to the next lowest cost good with bad worker conditions, then that could work. I'd argue GTA 6 is an inelastic good and people will play it no matter what, so I do think what you're saying applies here.

AndrewKemendo 5mo ago

Police unions aren’t labor unions and are illegal in many countries including Japan. https://theconversation.com/why-police-unions-are-not-part-of-the-american-labor-movement-142538 https://theconversation.com/why-police-unions-are-not-part-o... Notably, American police (the country that invented police unions) are a modern invention that largely exist as a output of slave catching and bounty hunting services.

parineum 5mo ago
> Police unions aren’t labor unions I'd really like to know what kind of tangled logic it requires to believe that. Regardless, police unions aren't the only example of unions who have worked against the benefit of everyone else but themselves. I only used them as an example because I didn't think anyone here would argue disagree that it's had negative outcomes. What I didn't expect was to find someone arguing that a union wasn't a union. It doesn't matter if it's legal in other places, it's legal in the US. Just because Japan has made police _unions_ illegal doesn't make an US police _union_ not a union.
strictnein 5mo ago
The police union in my city, in a state that borders Canada and fought against slavery, was founded in 1915. I'm guessing they would be surprised to learn that they are a "modern invention" that was from "slave catching" (I guess they do time travel?) and "bounty hunting services". I'm not even sure how you can say something is both a "modern invention" and the "output of slave catching". There's nothing modern about them and being the "output of slave catching" makes them definitionally not "modern". Police unions act just like every other union does: in the interests of their members. Unions are illegal in lots of the world. Federal public sector unions weren't legal in the US until the 1960s. Did the fact that they were illegal in 1965 have any bearing on whether or not they should be allowed? Does the fact that something is illegal in the US have any bearing on whether or not Japan should allow it?
- AndrewKemendo 5mo ago
  Modern being post Industrial Revolution

keybored 5mo ago

Anti-unionists are here to tell us that consumers might possibly suffer. Higher prices and delays on a video game. Which has not seen a release in this series in half this century so far. For all this consumer cares, great. Make it 20% more expensive. Make it 50% more expensive. A hundred. If that helps the greater union cause I can take more walks in the woods to pass the time instead.

matchbok3 5mo ago
What a luxury you have to spend so much money on things, then. Hint: most people don't live that way.
- vouwfietsman 5mo ago
  Hint: maybe they would if they would unionize themselves.
- fodkodrasz 5mo ago
  Well, given that computer games are not essential goods, most people could survive perfectly well without these so-called luxuries. Or is it only fairly produced luxury goods that are considered a luxury, while exploitatively produced luxury goods are simply treated as the standard way people live?
- thrance 5mo ago
  It's extremely dishonest to frame it as "if workers get good working conditions then consumers suffer". The reality is that Rockstar is extremely profitable. The crunch they impose on their devs with every single release shouldn't be tolerated, and I stand in full support of the unionized workers. And if a product requires human suffering to be so cheap, then maybe it shouldn't be so cheap.
- keybored 5mo ago
  Most people haven’t had the luxury of playing a new GTA game in 13 years either. Jesus Christ, I need to spell out that it’s a video game and not some life necessity? The usual anti-union scaremongering is about families being delayed for their vacations because airport workers want rights, but this is even more optional. I don’t buy the premise of workers ruining the lives of consumers; I think the real problem is them ruining the relative profits of shareholders.[1] But F me, I’m not gonna buy this privilege checking over a crime sandbox video game. [1] This user in another subthread[2] is complaining that people are antagonistic against management. Of course, whatever is most expedient for anti-unionism, everything from woe-is-poor-person to you-need-management-you-peons. [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48326490 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48326490

GuinansEyebrows 5mo ago

> It's not like police unions are making life better for citizens. which is precisely why many union advocates argue that police should not have unions. the police exist as the physical arm of the capital class in direct opposition to the labor class. they are class traitors. police unions are not the same.

M2Ys4U 5mo ago

>We'll see. It's not like police unions are making life better for citizens. The police aren't allowed to join a union

mrkpdl 5mo ago

Look at the big picture. Most consumers work somewhere. Better working conditions across the board can only be good for consumers. Edit: and a note to say that comparing all unions to police unions isn’t a good faith/useful comparison. It’s true that the quality of unions vary, but overall they do far more good than bad.