Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Slate's Newly Unionized Writers and Editors Give OK to Strike

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 74 posts

Re: Slate's Newly Unionized Writers and Editors Give OK to Strike

#51

Post by mruts »

sascha_sl wrote: post #48
lucozade wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the great thing about anarchism. As long as you include enough syllables, we can each have our own one. Obviously, it all falls apart when you try to implement it but that's not realistically going to happen again. So there's no actual downside.

[flagged]

I live in Tanzania and I think you lack perspective. Many people here would appreciate any home at all that isn’t made of mud and shit. There are price controls on grain and export bans in order to make things “cheap”.

The result? People are hungry, some are starving. Businesses can’t function due to the high taxes. Farms are closing down because they can’t turn a profit. The country is falling apart.

I came the from the US, and it has completely reframed by perspective. People desperately want capitalism: they want cheap phones, they want cheap food, they want the government to stop exploiting them in the name of “social good.”

The only people in the world who want socialism are those who are already in rich capitalist countries. They can’t appreciate what capitalism has delivered for them because they have nothing to compare it to.

Capitalism delivers and is by far the most optimal system (and also the only stable system).

We talk about “the poor” in the developed world. But the poor in the US would be in the top 1% over here.

If you don’t think that capitalism has helped everyone, I think you might be misinformed.

Re: Slate's Newly Unionized Writers and Editors Give OK to Strike

#52

Post by sascha_sl »

mruts wrote: post #51
sascha_sl wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I live in Tanzania and I think you lack perspective. Many people here would appreciate any home at all that isn’t made of mud and shit. There are price controls on grain and export bans in order to make things “cheap”. The result? People are hungry, some are starving. Businesses can’t function due to the high taxes. Farms are closing down because they can’t turn a profit. The country is falling apart. I came the from…

You omitted the part where first world countries exploit everyone else for resources and cheap labor. Especially Africa. There's a reason China is investing into basic infrastructure there. Capitalism does not work in isolation.

I don't know anything about policy decisions and local resources in Tanzania, so I can't comment on specifics, but socialism doesn't really work in less developed countries. Look at pre-soviet Russia. The only reason the soviet union was ever a world power was their authoritarian but rapid by-all-means industrialization (aka "Stalinism").

It also doesn't work well in total isolation; the DPRK is doing much worse than East Germany ever did because they lack natural resources and soviet support is gone.

Re: Slate's Newly Unionized Writers and Editors Give OK to Strike

#53

Post by throwaway427 »

lucozade wrote: post #50

Seems reasonable. Unionism hasn't historically been very successful outside of monopolistic industries but digital media seems a good place to experiment. Worst case it'll bankrupt a company that won't really be missed. Best case we find a sustainable model for digital media. If I were a betting hominid, I'd say the former is more likely than the latter but you never know.

Oh the former is definitely more likely in the long run and I don't think anyone really minds.

In the short term I suspect they won't strike at all. NYC and DC rents are expensive.

Re: Slate's Newly Unionized Writers and Editors Give OK to Strike

#54

Post by throwaway427 »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #16

Interested to see how this plays out. I'm a Slate Plus member, mainly for the extra segment on the Slate Political Gabfest. Ironically, none of the three hosts of that show have worked at Slate in years, which is probably a large part of what makes it enjoyable. For reasons I'd be hard-pressed to explain, I listen to a number of other Slate podcasts, even though I often find them irritating. Most (but not all) Slate…

I finally gave up on the Political Gabfest. Mostly because I am fine with the cadence of the primary three hosts righteousness or overt partisan moments, but I have a hard time listening to the rotating fill-in hosts, which happens more frequently now and causes the show to take the shape of the rest of the Slate podcasts, which are past my irritation threshold.

Your comment doesn't deserve downvotes.

Re: Slate's Newly Unionized Writers and Editors Give OK to Strike

#55

Post by ryanwaggoner »

throwaway427 wrote: post #54
ryanwaggoner wrote: post #16

Interested to see how this plays out. I'm a Slate Plus member, mainly for the extra segment on the Slate Political Gabfest. Ironically, none of the three hosts of that show have worked at Slate in years, which is probably a large part of what makes it enjoyable. For reasons I'd be hard-pressed to explain, I listen to a number of other Slate podcasts, even though I often find them irritating. Most (but not all) Slate…

I finally gave up on the Political Gabfest. Mostly because I am fine with the cadence of the primary three hosts righteousness or overt partisan moments, but I have a hard time listening to the rotating fill-in hosts, which happens more frequently now and causes the show to take the shape of the rest of the Slate podcasts, which are past my irritation threshold. Your comment doesn't deserve downvotes.

Agreed on all points except I guess my thresholds are higher :)

I can’t believe they still find the time to do the Gabfest, John especially.

Re: Slate's Newly Unionized Writers and Editors Give OK to Strike

#56

Post by ryanwaggoner »

djrobstep wrote: post #35
tengbretson wrote: post #23

Good grief. Do these people think the ability to write the kind of garbage published by Slate is in any way rare?

Which abilities should or shouldn't qualify a person for dignity and basic workplace rights?

To be fair, their demands seem a little beyond dignity or basic workplace rights. These aren’t factory workers in the 1800s.

Re: Slate's Newly Unionized Writers and Editors Give OK to Strike

#57

Post by SlowRobotAhead »

Latteland wrote: post #30
SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So rhetoric aside, what has Trump’s admin done to them?

Hurt their economic interests by taxing them via tariffs and hurt their manufacturing companies by making raw materials and steel etc more expensive. That why Harley moved production OUT of the us to where it wouldn't be affected by retaliatory tariffs against Trump's tariffs.

Ok, so all rhetoric then. Got it.

Re: Slate's Newly Unionized Writers and Editors Give OK to Strike

#58

Post by ryanwaggoner »

sascha_sl wrote: post #41

I'm very much irritated by how opposed HN seems to be to unions existing. Not that I'm surprised at all. The "Hacker" in "Hacker News" never included the anticapitalist and anarchist tendencies that are normally associated with "Hacker" in Europe/Germany. But what should one expect from a site run by a VC fund.

I’m not anti-unions. If employees want to band together and negotiate as a group, that seems fair. Public sector unions are a little different to me, but let’s avoid that landmine, shall we?

The biggest thing I object to here is their demand that Slate force every employee to fund the union, regardless of whether they want to. That’s ridiculous. Why are your ideas so weak that you have to force people to support them? And yes, I’m aware of the free rider problem. Still unconvinced that compulsory dues are justified.

Re: Slate's Newly Unionized Writers and Editors Give OK to Strike

#59

Post by [deleted] »

Angostura wrote: post #32
tengbretson wrote: post #23

Good grief. Do these people think the ability to write the kind of garbage published by Slate is in any way rare?

Good grief do these people think the ability to work in a warehouse/dig coal out of the ground/collect garbage/teach is in anyway rare?

[deleted]

Re: Slate's Newly Unionized Writers and Editors Give OK to Strike

#60

Post by jblow »

tengbretson wrote: post #23

Good grief. Do these people think the ability to write the kind of garbage published by Slate is in any way rare?

It’s exactly the opposite. If you have skills that are rare (and exist at a level below demand), you have a lot of bargaining power. Unions are for people who didn’t have much bargaining power in absence of the union.
Post reply on HN