pmiller2

19 ms·

211.
by pmiller2 6y ago
China is not socialist. Their economic system is state capitalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism
212.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Yes, they need to know what's being voted on. But that's not the purpose of company-sponsored, mandatory "information" sessions. The purpose is to coerce employees into sitting down and listening to anti-union propagan
213.
by pmiller2 6y ago
No, it wouldn't. They could still host sessions outside of work, and make them truly voluntary. There is no particular reason Amazon must speak their message in their house, under threat of dismissal, except to coerce employees into
214.
by pmiller2 6y ago
How are they supposed to even have the chance to tell the difference between the good and bad arguments if they don't get a chance to hear them both?
215.
by pmiller2 6y ago
> that stat is missing the context that Americans are terrible at saving and tend to live beyond their means. Which is entirely irrelevant to the fact that these people depend on their jobs. > also, you are trying to solve a 21st cent
216.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Don't believe this so called "leftist media," then. Here's the data: https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2020-economic-we... Read. Regardless of it being the employer's "fault&quo
217.
by pmiller2 6y ago
I'd go for that, too, provided the union gets access to the same mailing list.
218.
by pmiller2 6y ago
It's "mandatory" if they want to keep their jobs, but they can "freely" choose to quit. Or, so the party line goes. It's also "mandatory" that you drive on the correct side of the road, but you can
219.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Don't forget the Screen Actors Guild.
220.
by pmiller2 6y ago
If that's the way it falls, then ban all "information sessions" during work hours altogether. I'm fine either way.
221.
by pmiller2 6y ago
They're also not literally threatening the employees' jobs if they don't attend.
222.
by pmiller2 6y ago
"Kerfuffle," FYI, and only because you asked. :-)
223.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Or a handful that are bought and paid for in an even more key district.
224.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Well... they kinda don't pay taxes, but that's a whole different barrel of monkeys.
225.
by pmiller2 6y ago
I know they're not. I am literally arguing that if they're going to sit there and say "nice job you've got there... wouldn't it be too bad if you lost it," and then "invite" you to a "mandatory
226.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Amazon has the same access outside of work hours. They can host events and invite employees just as easily as the union can. The union has zero access during work hours. Amazon must "give" something because Amazon "has&quot
227.
by pmiller2 6y ago
How long has Amazon "had their time?"
228.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Because they shouldn't be able to abuse the power asymmetry in the employer / employee relationship to advocate for their position, while denying the union an equal opportunity. Alternatively, they don't have to pay for it.
229.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Why MUST they, if the union doesn't?
230.
by pmiller2 6y ago
That would be fair. When I said "this practice should be banned," I meant the way it is now, where the employer gets to abuse their position to shove their opinion down peoples' throats. Make them invite in a union rep and
231.
by pmiller2 6y ago
I'm sorry. I wish I didn't need to add that.
232.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Boxes don't spew propaganda at you while you stack them. At least not yet. Edit: Yep, predictable. Y'all want to upvote "fingers crossed for yes," but then downvote for suggesting employers shouldn't be able to pr
233.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Fingers crossed for "yes!" > ...lengthy mandatory "information sessions"... This practice really should be banned, IMO. The employer is taking advantage of the fact that the employee typically needs the job to surv
234.
by pmiller2 6y ago
No, I have never been religious. I did, however, read the entire Bible in high school for a literature class. Well, okay, except for all those pages of "this dude begat that dude, and so on...." I just mentally substituted "
235.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Oh, that wasn't intended as a personal jab. It was a response to what you said about these ideas being considered imperialist and such. If anyone else comes up with a better and more workable idea to save the planet and stave off glob
236.
by pmiller2 6y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by "your children" and "your current political ideology," but, no matter what you do, children are going to acquire a political ideology, there's nothing you or anyone else can do to
237.
by pmiller2 6y ago
There is no separating economics from politics, really. If God can't deliver, people have to, and that's inherently a political position.
238.
by pmiller2 6y ago
> Having the Church community while growing up was great. But the fact that admission to this community required total philosophical adherence is just bizarre. If you're not talking about the capital "C" church (which I in
239.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Take a look at the popularity of "prosperity gospel" with poor and middle class individuals. This is as a response to the inequality and social immobility brought about since the mid 70s. I'll leave out explicit mention of
240.
by pmiller2 6y ago
Well, that was a really short few weeks.

More ›