11–20 of 138 posts
Organized labor was extremely problematic for capital since WW2. The new dealers ( FDR, Truman ) gave organized labor tremendous power because without it the USA would probably have had a big communist party. They also knew the deflationary period of the 1930s lead to the rise of fascism and nationalism in Europe. So the petty greed of capital was scarified at the altar to maintain peace. They were also willing to sa…
It's funny how they couldn't get an amazon warehouse employee to stand in front of a camera and read this script.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The principle is sound but sometimes the implementation is weak"? A question to ask is perhaps, if a Mondragon workers cooperative should have a union?
Devil's Advocate: If there are so many examples of weak implementations, then is the principle therefore unsound?
What really struck me is how much they remind me of the cringey anti-drug videos we used to watch in like middle school, “If you see a suspicious person smoking something that looks like a cigarette but smells funny, cross the street to get away. They may offer you a joint for free to get you hooked. If you smoke that joint, before you know it they’ll be giving you free crack. Cool kids just say no.”
I mean, obviously, just like everything, unions have pros and cons, but does this kind of cheesy fear mongering actually work? If we could see through it and make fun of it as children, surely a grown adult would find it as off putting as kids do?
- Valuing innovation while saying that nothing should ever change in their relationships with employees
- Using the words "vulnerability to organizing" and "dangers of organizing" as if it's a terrible disease
- Saying that unionizing employees aren't displaying "normal behavior"
- Calling the phrase "living wage" a warning sign
- Refusing to explain why it is that employees might want to unionize
Organized labor was extremely problematic for capital since WW2. The new dealers ( FDR, Truman ) gave organized labor tremendous power because without it the USA would probably have had a big communist party. They also knew the deflationary period of the 1930s lead to the rise of fascism and nationalism in Europe. So the petty greed of capital was scarified at the altar to maintain peace. They were also willing to sa…
> They were also willing to sacrifice growth to maintain peace.
Who would do such a thing! We should get back to my grandfather times, he was happy because he was a child, and children did not only get a few potatoes to eat per day, but also a little bit of oil with it. Also I suppose it's kind of romantic to have sex with a stranger on the barricades before being shot to death and having your body join the decomposing pile of bodies in the streets.
The US will see yet another major driver of innovation and production growth, this time the tech industry, succumb to social activists and their rent-seeking-motivated ideological narratives.
A century of pro-union-monopoly advocacy will not change the fact that unions as generally conceived are anti-market interventions and thus economically unsound.
The best/worst parts: - Valuing innovation while saying that nothing should ever change in their relationships with employees - Using the words "vulnerability to organizing" and "dangers of organizing" as if it's a terrible disease - Saying that unionizing employees aren't displaying "normal behavior" - Calling the phrase "living wage" a warning sign - Refusing to explain why it is that employees might want to unioni…
It's obvious, isn't it? Workers organize because they are greedy and lazy, while capital organizes because they are innovative and industrious.