Live data from Hacker News

Chinese embassy lobbies U.S. business to oppose China bills

reuters.com

141–144 of 144 posts

Re: Chinese embassy lobbies U.S. business to oppose China bills

#141
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here it is from the horse's mouth, the newspaper of the ILA - International Longshoreman's Union: https://ilaunion.org/2021/05/latest-long-beach-terminal-auto... "TTI would become the fourth automated container terminal in Southern California. Total Terminals International’s (TTI’s) decision this week to automate its 385-acre Pier T terminal in Long Beach sets up a classic struggle between terminal operator employers…

Solid evidence that many US and at least one Danish union behave that way. It leaves me wondering whether German unions might behave different. (I know their legal environment is different, but I don't know how that changes their incentives.)

> It leaves me wondering whether German unions might behave different

A lot of moderns don't understand the unique role of Germany in the historical pantheon of left wing movements.

Germany has historically been the hotbed of socialist movements, and has a long history of a very strong, well-organized, violent, militant hard left insurgencies. If you were to talk to most communists or socialists in 1900 and ask them what the first communist nation would be, they would answer "Germany". That was always the prize and it was their power base.

So Germany developed a number of techniques to fight against these movements, including codetermination, or the idea that unions be represented in corporate decision making which would give them a stake in the overall health of the firm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codetermination_in_Germany

It's no accident that the first iteration of codetermination laws were adopted in 1848, and their modern incarnation goes to 1951, at the beginning of the cold war.

Note that codetermination is the exact opposite of US labor law, which bans management from being union members and thus is virtually designed to create or intensify animosity between non-supervisory and supervisory workers, which frankly seems like a dumb and arbitrary distinction, basically designed to create conflict within the firm. This also explains why US firms are much more resistant to unionization efforts while at the same time they lead the world in things like stock grants to workers, and the U.S. has a large number of worker owned firms as well.

Re: Chinese embassy lobbies U.S. business to oppose China bills

#142
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're describing the future that doesn't yet exist, as though it already does. Tesla _tried_ to automate their manufacturing as much as it could and had to give it up. And it's run by some of the same folks who launch people into space and land the rockets afterwards - there was no shortage of technical capability, I'm sure. Now, I'm not arguing that automation isn't the "future", it is pretty clear that it is, but…

I think the issue with Tesla was the lack of time and capital to automate. Innovating that industry will take a lot of both. I doubt they have given up entirely, just paused because they had to be realistic with the production demands and available time in the timeframe in which they had to produce.

I think the issue with Tesla was the lack of technologies that would let it automate to the desired extent. They have plenty of money now, and they still employ tens of thousands of people. Tech simply doesn't exist yet to do what humans do even for car assembly, let alone anything more complicated or bespoke than that.

Re: Chinese embassy lobbies U.S. business to oppose China bills

#143
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a hilarious comment. Granted this forum has an over-abundance of the so-called academic elite and so phrases like "low intelligence" and "work ethic" can be passed around with impunity. But what I cant look past is the audacity to suggest and eveb imply that historical migrants from Europe(mostly) worked hard and had some magically higher IQ. What? If even the academic elite, who pride themselves in their rat…

Europeans do have a higher average IQ than places like Sudan which has an average IQ in the 70 range. To put this in perspective, the US Army generally doesn't accept people below 85 IQ because they are ineffective in any position (yes, they are considered inadequate to be a janitor). You also didn't address my point about values or crime, both of which are proven. Particularly, some immigrant groups have huge portio…

Does the IQ test cater to Sudanese or Europeans?

See, heres the thing: some countries really have no implicit interest in [copying] or attempting to define themselves by European standards. Does that make sense?

So things like western education (countries like S.Korea, Japan, India and China being the exceptional European standard [chasers?]) Will always score not western countries lower because the west is the defacto standard due to colonization and globalization.

To put it in simpler terms, we can't judge a fish by its ability to climb trees as the adage goes.

Which is interesting because sone countries overall growth and development strategy is based on copying verbatim the trajectory of 20th century Europe/US and offering no alternative. This is a false suggestion that European standards are the end all, the pinnacle of human progress.

Just a though dear fellow. Just a thought.

Re: Chinese embassy lobbies U.S. business to oppose China bills

#144
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the US didn't have a giant welfare system when the 'floodgates' were open. Immigrants moved to New York or other places, and worked exceptionally hard to provide for themselves or were forced to return home. Now, they can move to San Francisco and have the city spend thousands of dollars on them for free. It's nearly impossible to starve on US streets today, because there's free food on nearly every street. T…

Migrants everywhere are, as a group, net contributors to welfare programs. You're living in propaganda land if you actually believe the myth of immigrants coming to get welfare: immigrants come to work.

In 2012, 51 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) reported that they used at least one welfare program during the year, compared to 30 percent of native households. Welfare in this study includes Medicaid and cash, food, and housing programs.

https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Hous...

The average household headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) costs taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare benefits, which is 41 percent higher than the $4,431 received by the average native household.

https://cis.org/Report/Cost-Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native...

Post reply on HN