Why doesn't somebody make an app that makes it easy to start (and run) a union?
It’s time to balance the power between workers and employers
121–130 of 224 posts
Re: It’s time to balance the power between workers and employers
#122Why doesn't somebody make an app that makes it easy to start (and run) a union?
Could you write down the requirements for this app?
Re: It’s time to balance the power between workers and employers
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>But there are at least a couple problems. First, many Americans are apparently convinced that some other issue is central in American politics. Maybe it's threats from foreigners. Or from Satan, or some proxy of his. Or perhaps, it's losing their guns. Or whatever. This is very much by design. The state and controlling money interests are happy if people are complaining about guns, weed, LGBT rights, neo-Nazi march…
The conversation in threads never goes beyond this point. Yes, this is by design - and crickets (usually). Even if it were by design, how can it be countered or worked around.
In order to supplant an ideology, you need a new ideology. A coherent set of ideas, rather than a disparate list of complaints. When people understand (or at least think they understand) where their beliefs are taking them they're more likely to work together, which is necessary to accomplish anything. That's why communists, fascists, Christianists, Islamists, and anarcho-capitalists have organizations and magazines whereas people who are concerned about how behavioral economics affects modern capitalism do not. There's no such thing as Tverskyism.
Re: It’s time to balance the power between workers and employers
#124One thing I'd been wondering about was how minimum wages interacted with the obvious power imbalance between low-skill, low-wage workers and their employers. If I'm right then employers would basically be compelled by competition to take advantage of their most powerless employees, in the absence of such legislation.
In the free market ideal, the wages would be getting forced higher than is ideal by government intervention, but apparently reality hasn't supported this theory, and one obvious reason to me is that the wages were being suppressed below their true level due to this asymmetry.
Tangential aside: is this the same Larry Summers that suggested we should ship toxic waste to 3rd world countries because their lives were worth less? Things must be getting pretty grim if he's speaking out in favor of unions.
Re: It’s time to balance the power between workers and employers
#125Richard Wolff has also been evangelizing co-ops and worker-owned businesses for some time. http://www.rdwolff.com/faq_worker_coops_wdes https://youtu.be/urCy3UOGgx8
In the current economy I feel co-ops are bit too radical to remedy the imbalances of power within large businesses (where it really matters). We might need something less aggressive like the widespread promotion of Employee Stock Ownership Programs (ESOPs) as a start [1]. Also co-ops might come across to business people as something along the lines of "loony-leftist Marxist idealism". Instead one can speak their lang…
Here Finland we have couple very large Co-ops eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_Group and there is not really any difference between large corporation and large Co-ops at daily life.
Re: It’s time to balance the power between workers and employers
#126> The central issue in American politics is the economic security of the middle class and their sense of opportunity for their children. Maybe for Mr. Summers, it is. And maybe as well, for liberals generally. But there are at least a couple problems. First, many Americans are apparently convinced that some other issue is central in American politics. Maybe it's threats from foreigners. Or from Satan, or some proxy o…
> So it goes.
Always makes my day :)
Re: It’s time to balance the power between workers and employers
#127> The central issue in American politics is the economic security of the middle class and their sense of opportunity for their children. Maybe for Mr. Summers, it is. And maybe as well, for liberals generally. But there are at least a couple problems. First, many Americans are apparently convinced that some other issue is central in American politics. Maybe it's threats from foreigners. Or from Satan, or some proxy o…
>>But there are at least a couple problems. First, many Americans are apparently convinced that some other issue is central in American politics. Maybe it's threats from foreigners. Or from Satan, or some proxy of his. Or perhaps, it's losing their guns. Or whatever. This is very much by design. The state and controlling money interests are happy if people are complaining about guns, weed, LGBT rights, neo-Nazi march…
I'm confused by your dichotomy.
Isn't the war on drugs an issue that affects economic insecurity and/or civil liberties?
Don't LGBT-rights affect economic insecurity and/or civil liberties?
Don't people waving Nazi banners have manifestos that directly affect economic insecurity and/or civil liberties of those they target?
Is it just because they don't affect you directly that you've mentally put them in the "distracting identity politics" bucket?
Re: It’s time to balance the power between workers and employers
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Credit would dry up overnight and interest rates would go through the roof on many loans. That's a silly thing to say. Will the Moon fall down too? > Also why would anyone ever offer a student loan under these conditions? Probably profit. Don't you think? Isn't that usually why loans are made? You understand that this is a recent change to the law (1998) and prior to that, student loans still existed and worked fin…
Why would you extend a massive loan to someone who is broke, has no credit, and can immediately discharge the debt. They could and many of them would immediately discharge the entire balance of the loan upon graduation by declaring bankruptcy. They don't offer standard 40k+ loans to people with no credit at any rate. Also even if they did offer that the interest rate would be insane because you are dealing with so ma…
Many is not the same as most. Most people would be perfectly happy to pay off their debt unless they were literally unable to.
Re: It’s time to balance the power between workers and employers
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's not forget that unions can also become detrimental to employees' working environment. In France unions are very powerful and unionists when going on strike, prevent non-unionists from working, and retaliate against folks who do not agree with their agenda - this goes against individual employee freedom and becomes another form of coercion. And unionists, no matter how piss poor a job they do, can never be fired…
> And unionists, no matter how piss poor a job they do, can never be fired (in theory they can, but in practice it never happens). Do you mean union leaders or regular members? Because if it's the latter, then you have a counterexample in every 100% unionized company that ever fired anyone.
More specifically union leaders, who have the whole weight of the union behind them.
Re: It’s time to balance the power between workers and employers
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't "enter the top 1% at least for a year". To be part of the 1%, you at least have enough capital to live off interest indefinitely. Indeed, enough for your children to live off interest indefinitely.
I think you mean "to be rich". To be in the top 1%, you, by definition, need only to have an income which is in the top 1% of the US income distribution. However, the lacuna between the income distribution and the power distribution is exactly what is misleading about the term "the 1%" when it is used to complain about the power of the wealthy in modern America.
Some people use top 1% to refer to income. Some use it to refer to wealth.
For range majority of people income relies on a job, and by doing it harder/longer/smarter you get a higher income. Our tax system peanalisies hard work.
The other option is to treat rich people as those with a lot of money, not those who are most productive.
When I think of someone who is rich, I think of someone who is wealthy. That means having a lot of wealth, more than 99% of the country. To do that you need assets of over $8m (2013) {1}
That amount of assets should be able, long term, to grow with inflation and still deliver over $100k a year to live on. Even if it didn't just withdrawing the cash at $100k a year will see you through for life.
1. https://dqydj.com/net-worth-in-the-united-states-zooming-in-...