211–220 of 448 posts
When TX first passed its law that allowed anyone to sue individuals that had or aided an abortion, Apple offered to pay for transport and the procedure for anyone at its new Austin campus. https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/17/apple-is-monitori...
Honestly, Apple should be dialing down investment in Texas.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, Apple should be dialing down investment in Texas.
Will they dial down investment in nations with far worse human rights or is this just virtue signaling?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, it's important for people to realize the split is closer to 50/50 nation wide, some people forget that, but in tech, it's definitely not 50/50 and that's relevant as well.
"As of March 2022, a broad majority of Americans oppose overturning Roe v. Wade (61%) and just over one-third (36%) support it. Opposition is highest among Democrats (74%), including a majority (56%) who strongly oppose overturning Roe. Most independents (61%) also oppose a Roe overturn." https://www.prri.org/spotlight/most-oppose-overturning-roe-v...
Those numbers are far closer to 50/50 than one would imagine in the bubble, but that's also reference to specifically overturning Roe v. Wade, not whether or not abortion should be legal, which is closer to 50/50.
Have a look at the second chart[1]
It's been 'mostly, roughly, steadily ~50/50 'ish' for about 20 years.
I think most self described progressives would be surprised by those numbers, and even the 64/36, as you brought up.
This is a 'big win' for 35% of the country, and another 15% are maybe ok with it, and a few others ambivalent.
That sentiment I think is at odds with the moral outrage felt by ~55% of the country, and it's hard to ingest.
Which makes this a big more difficult to navigate than I think we might normally assume.
I think Google's response is rational, but it's not as 'Black and White' an issue as our 'tech culture instincts' might have us believe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, Apple should be dialing down investment in Texas.
Will they dial down investment in nations with far worse human rights or is this just virtue signaling?
Do you see companies moving their offices to places where people have better rights, which usually translates into better salaries, better benefits, better working conditions? No. But they spent lots of money moving their operations to places where people have less or no rights at all.
So it's clearly virtue signaling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> suspect that states will be of less interest to a significant portion of the tech workforce. This is part of the stated plan: “Josh Hawley says abortion ruling will push people to move states, strengthening the GOP” https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article2... The sad thing is this comes right as remote work has the potential to do the opposite: bring Americans closer together by allowing more op…
I don't think remote work would result in bringing us together at all, quite the opposite actually. Frankly, the existing populations in the states people have been leaving for decades are very culturally different than your average remote worker. The local population will see this as cultural colonialism by coastal elites, and the remote workers will wonder why they aren't welcomed, all while driving up local house…
I was born in a “conservative state”. For me, it wouldn’t be cultural colonialism but, rather, moving home. For my cousins and friends who are just starting their careers, it’s an opportunity (I didn’t have) to continue to live and work locally.
My assumption is that there are more people in my situation than people motivated to migrate away from their home town with the intent of colonizing other places. Certainly possible my assumption is wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How did that work out for Disney?
I'm confused at how that follows what you were saying. I thought you were saying businesses try to act in their rational self-interest and I was trying to highlight how political issues could be in their rational self-interest. I don't think the effects of one's actions, such as those of Disney's, would negate whether the company intended to do something to help their own company.
What I meant was taking sides on divisive hot button issues is fraught with peril. The probability of blowback is high.
Even if a large proportion of employees held a particular political position, I'd imagine only a small number of activist employees would be disgruntled by the company choosing to stay out of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1) probably since people started carryind them inside themselves, they've had that right towards themselves 2) does it matter? 3) does it matter? 4) does that matter?
Yes it does, it’s a terrible thing to do. We close our eyes, we don’t see it’s there, we pretend it doesn’t matter, we call it clump of cells, we call advocates ’pro choice’. Let’s face it, it’s the killing of a human, that have no voice, no choice in the matter.