261–270 of 277 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what's wrong with "If you don't like Amazon or what they are doing to their workers, write an article about it" ?
I don't know if the person who wrote the article has ever shopped on Amazon. But in case they have/do they should stop shopping on amazon first and stop being a hypocrite.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the Poland/Hungary point relates to the recent issues with abortions and gay rights respectively. The rules in these cases may be more progressive at least in parts of the US. But if you take labor rights, these are a lot more humane in the EU
Poland is also sabotaging independence of the courts in attacks on democratic principles.
I've read similar articles so many times but they all lack one thing - solutions. Seriously, what should we do about it? Yeah, I agree that workers shouldn't be working so hard that they can't even go to the bathroom. Would we have a better world if Amazon didn't exist? I personally doubt it. So, it's not Amazon per se, it is the system, isn't? So, what are the solutions? How do we make it better? How do we minimize…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your third option is likely to only reinforce the sociopolitical conditions that lead to corporatism and starvation in the first place.
I have thought about this: We know that pressure produces counterpressure, the more you knock down a populous the more likely they are to rise up and burn everything down regardless the consequeces (see the various slave revolts in history)... it might not IMPROVE the situation directly, but with every burning down of a society there is a new chance that what rises out of the ruins may be better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It helps that a minimum wage and absurd regulation conspire to eliminate a good size of firms that would otherwise be competing in a fair labour market. And let's not get started on the taxes that small and medium sized businesses have to pay, and that Amazon is exempt from. Raising social safety nets would only lead to inflation, and so now you need to put a price ceiling on essential goods&services, which leads to…
Do you actually think small and medium sized businesses can really compete with Amazon at this point? Their advantage at this point, technologically and operationally, is far more than simply lower tax burden.
I've read similar articles so many times but they all lack one thing - solutions. Seriously, what should we do about it? Yeah, I agree that workers shouldn't be working so hard that they can't even go to the bathroom. Would we have a better world if Amazon didn't exist? I personally doubt it. So, it's not Amazon per se, it is the system, isn't? So, what are the solutions? How do we make it better? How do we minimize…
One of the interesting solutions I have heard: Board-level representation of workers. Currently all board members represent shareholders, and unsurprisingly the company is willing to sacrifice workers to satisfy shareholders. Make it so a third, or half the board has to be elected by workers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find that most propaganda comes from unions as they increasingly seek a political relationship with workers rather than the economic relationship that workers want. On any union site - there are terms like "solidarity" with images of fists raised rather than actual data about improvement of wages or working conditions. This is why unions get trounced in votes by real workers, things like Prop 22 pass with easy marg…
> I find that most propaganda comes from unions as they increasingly seek a political relationship with workers rather than the economic relationship that workers want. This is probably the purest, and most direct example of the insane propaganda trying to separate economics and politics as if they weren’t inherently and inseparably tied together. “Oh, I’m so sorry that we can’t spend money on health care, or pay a l…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So 2 things: 1) I do not believe they are in equal footing generally and never stated that - I was pointing out the nuances with respect to Prop 22. Gig cos. didn't win just because they had more money - they won because AB5 is a despised policy. 2) Unions != Labor. Workers == Labor. This is the key point I'm trying to make.
> What they lack in economic resources, they make up for in political power via bureaucratic control. This would seem to imply equal footing, wouldn't it? > Unions != Labor. Workers == Labor. This is the key point I'm trying to make. So I'm not sure how this is relevant to the prop 22 discussion - did the legislation have anything to do with unionization? As far as I know it was only about extending existing labor pr…
Prop 22 is strongly linked with AB5 - the entire push was by union leaders and the leaders of both AB5 and No on 22 (e.g. Lorena Gonzalez) regularly tweet things like "#AB5IntoAUnion."
I actually think there is no currently effective system. I believe in collective bargaining, but I just think that unions as a tool have become increasingly concerned with political representation and political power rather than worker representation. Using AB5 as a case study, there are virtually n=0 freelancers in California (incl. myself) that are happy with the law. It's a universally despised policy by workers and businesses alike, loved by unions...
Reading this, I'm so glad that in all of the EU it is illegal to fire someone purely based on a software decision. There's a minimum level of humanity that we should extend to everyone. Letting a known faulty AI decide if someone will have money for food tomorrow is way across the line. I'm not surprised that treating humans like cattle on their way to slaughter is hugely profitable. But I'm not sure we want to opera…
>Letting a known faulty AI decide if someone will have money for food tomorrow is way across the line. So is the implication here that humans are less faulty, or that there's something intrinsically wrong about an AI making this decision rather than a human? If the former, then this is an issue that the technology will probably eventually solve. If the latter, well... that doesn't seem very justifiable, to say the le…
What utter nonsense. What will happen in reality: business "thought leaders" of all types will say "Amazon does it, Amazon is successful, therefore we should do it" regardless of whether it's actually a good idea. And they'll be praised by their peers for doing so.
Just like Jack Welch's leadership philosophy (and stack ranking) in the 2000s and Google style interviews for every low-level tech job in the 2010s.
Reading this, I'm so glad that in all of the EU it is illegal to fire someone purely based on a software decision. There's a minimum level of humanity that we should extend to everyone. Letting a known faulty AI decide if someone will have money for food tomorrow is way across the line. I'm not surprised that treating humans like cattle on their way to slaughter is hugely profitable. But I'm not sure we want to opera…
>Letting a known faulty AI decide if someone will have money for food tomorrow is way across the line. So is the implication here that humans are less faulty, or that there's something intrinsically wrong about an AI making this decision rather than a human? If the former, then this is an issue that the technology will probably eventually solve. If the latter, well... that doesn't seem very justifiable, to say the le…