Tech Workers Backing Candidates Looking to Break Up Their Employers • Hacker News Board

Re: Tech Workers Backing Candidates Looking to Break Up Their Employers

#271

Post by robomartin » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 11:03 PM UTC

dmode wrote: post #263

robomartin wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are not socialist nations, not even close. This is a common response that has no basis in reality. For example: Have any of those nations taken over and nationalized large businesses? Have any of those nations grown government so large that a massive percentage of the population depends on it to survive? Those countries are as capitalist as you can get in practice. They just happen to have one or more well deve…

Those are overwhelmingly described as socialist nations in conservative media and is the north star of 99% of democratic policies Edit: rest of your response. Where do I even start. Hundreds of millions of people are not looking to move to Europe ? Do you even read the news ? Have you heard about the refugee crisis in Europe ? Have you read about the divide between immigrant community in Europe ? Have you read about…

What media says, conservative or otherwise, has no relevance here. These are not socialist nations, period. This isn't even debatable. And, frankly, it is amazing anyone would believe this in a day and age when it is easy to google stuff and learn.

For example: Is Denmark socialist?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzEPKrHalaY

Get this, Denmark doesn't have a minimum wage! How socialist is that?

You are truly confused about a ton of stuff here. Of course I know about what's going on in Europe. I've only been going there for nearly thirty years with great regularity. I have watched as these uncontrolled migrations have devastated entire areas and the culture in some locations. Terrible stuff.

I digress. You are comparing things that have nothing to do with each other. For example, these migrants are escaping war and, in some cases, genocide. They could not care less where they go so long as it isn't where their feet happen to be during the war.

As a descendant of genocide survivors and one who had extensive conversations with my grandparents, I can tell you that they didn't get out their World Almanac and Political Science books along with world economic reports to figure out where to go; they got on the first ship, train, cart or horse that got them the hell out of there.

Please, stop and do a little reading. I'm sure you are an excellent person and one of great intelligence, you are simply operating with the wrong information and, as a result, have reached very flawed conclusions. The good news is this can be fixed if you are willing to consider things might not be as you have grown to believe.

Re: Tech Workers Backing Candidates Looking to Break Up Their Employers

#272

Post by robomartin » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 11:06 PM UTC

littlestymaar wrote: post #269

robomartin wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The good news for the US is that they don't have an imperialist neighbour I don't think you know the history of Latin America. If you speak Spanish you should watch the many excellent videos out there with Gloria Alvarez. If you don't, she has been doing more and more work in English, here's one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xP-epEQikI If you do understand Spanish, here's a short history of Latin American histo…

That's funny how libertarians get all their reading from libertarian sources. Gloria Alvarez is no historian, she is a politician with a libertarian agenda…

That's funny how people who don't understand history and facts always choose to attack the messenger rather than the arguments being presented.

I studied in Latin America and lived there for nearly 20 years in total. I KNOW THIS HISTORY because I both studied and lived some of it. She is telling the truth.

Re: Tech Workers Backing Candidates Looking to Break Up Their Employers

#273

Post by lonelappde » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 11:16 PM UTC

klipt wrote: post #213

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The market didn't always work that way. Until Google monopolized it, search engines and ad networks were independent pieces competing on an open market. For example, one of early Google's successes was getting Yahoo to license its search engine.

Google tried monetising search in other ways and apart from ads, none of them would have kept the company profitable. Even duckduckgo which considers itself the "anti Google" gets all its money from ads.

That's not a response to parent comment, which is about competitiveness in the ad placement market, not ads on Google Search.

Re: Tech Workers Backing Candidates Looking to Break Up Their Employers

#274

Post by lonelappde » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 11:17 PM UTC

zepto wrote: post #182

fmajid wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Structural separation: you can't run a search engine and at the same time services that are the subject of it. For Amazon, you can't run the marketplace and at the same time sell own-brand (AmazonBasics) products. For Apple you can't run the app store and also sell apps. It's in Warren's program, although of course the devil is in the details. Lina Khan is the thought leader on these issues (I am sure there are other…

This is a completely destructive plan that will enable international competitors who aren’t subject to it to simply take the tech industry away from the US.

There's no reason that foreign companies that don't follow US law must be allowed to operate in US.

Re: Tech Workers Backing Candidates Looking to Break Up Their Employers

#275

Post by littlestymaar » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 11:45 PM UTC

robomartin wrote: post #272

littlestymaar wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's funny how libertarians get all their reading from libertarian sources. Gloria Alvarez is no historian, she is a politician with a libertarian agenda…

That's funny how people who don't understand history and facts always choose to attack the messenger rather than the arguments being presented. I studied in Latin America and lived there for nearly 20 years in total. I KNOW THIS HISTORY because I both studied and lived some of it. She is telling the truth.

I'm not «attacking» anyone, but you wouldn't trust Lenin talking about the Russian history (and you'd be right) and you shouldn't trust a libertarian politician about history either.

Re: Tech Workers Backing Candidates Looking to Break Up Their Employers

#276

Post by littlestymaar » Mon, Nov 04, 2019, 11:51 PM UTC

robomartin wrote: post #259

littlestymaar wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've seen this playbook before in Latin America --many times-- it doesn't end well. The good news for the US is that they don't have an imperialist neighbour who's going to crush their economy and support a coup to shut down any socialist threat to their imperialism. Because that's what happened all the times in Latin America. > The proper context is external to the US: China. They are laughing their asses off righ…

> That's a really strange thing for a “classical liberal” to say. This is straight from the hardcore neoconservative narrative. Not really. If China were playing with equal rules there would be no problems. They are not. From currency manipulation to intellectual property theft, not a care about the environment and the imprisonment of massive amounts of people and more, they are not equal participants in the economic…

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU-8Uz_nMaQ

Oh, look! Yet another conservative think-tank with “liberty” in its name…

Re: Tech Workers Backing Candidates Looking to Break Up Their Employers

#277

Post by robomartin » Tue, Nov 05, 2019, 12:39 AM UTC

littlestymaar wrote: post #275

robomartin wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's funny how people who don't understand history and facts always choose to attack the messenger rather than the arguments being presented. I studied in Latin America and lived there for nearly 20 years in total. I KNOW THIS HISTORY because I both studied and lived some of it. She is telling the truth.

I'm not «attacking» anyone, but you wouldn't trust Lenin talking about the Russian history (and you'd be right) and you shouldn't trust a libertarian politician about history either.

> I'm not «attacking» anyone

Had you studied Philosophy and Logic in university you would have understood my comment.

This is what's colloquially known as "shooting the messenger" or attacking the source. You said:

> Gloria Alvarez is no historian, she is a politician with a libertarian agenda…

BTW, she is not a politician. She recently tried to run for President of Guatemala but didn't get very far. She was not a politician before that and is not a politician today.

The fallacy you are committing is "argumentum ad hominem". Here's a reference:

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

The simple explanation is to attack the person ("she is a politician with a libertarian agenda") rather than to address the argument she presents by offering-up evidence that proves your case and disproves hers. The implication, of course, being that nothing she says is valid because of who she is, regardless of the nature and content of her presentation.

> you wouldn't trust Lenin talking about the Russian history

Not true, you are attacking the messenger again. There is no reason to assume Lenin (or anyone else) is lying just because of who they are or what they did. You can be skeptical about it, sure, but the only LOGICAL approach --if what you seek is the truth-- is to listen (or read) and then confirm the validity and soundness (these are two different things) of the argument Lenin would be making. Only after confirming the validity and soundness of the argument can you conclude whether Lenin is telling the truth or not about a particular argument. He could be lying about one thing and telling the truth about another.

As Einstein said, paraphrasing, the solution to a problem requires a higher perspective than the one that created it in the first place.

Please be careful about what you believe and why you believe it.

It's much easier to accept a conclusions "don't listen to her, she is just a libertarian" than to actually take the time to listen to somebody, perhaps even engage with them in a respectful manner and consider the arguments being presented. This is the only way we move forward as a society. Politicians (notice I did not specify party affiliation) would prefer to herd us all like sheep with false promises and stuff that sounds great. Politicians hate it when we actually think and challenge what comes out of their mouths. That requires work and emotional separation from any affiliation, which isn't necessarily easy for a lot of people.

Re: Tech Workers Backing Candidates Looking to Break Up Their Employers

#278

Post by lonelappde » Tue, Nov 05, 2019, 12:57 AM UTC

bcrosby95 wrote: post #203

esotericn wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you can generalize that much. Personally none of that stuff mattered once I earned more than like, twice minimum wage. Nowhere near $200K. Maybe that's a US thing, since you guys have so much tied up in work (health insurance etc). I just think about having enough money to get by and help people around me, employment fits around that, not the other way around. Sure, people who are actually earning biscu…

It goes pretty fast if you have kids in the US. We have twins and preschool alone is 700/month. You're also supposed to save like 500/month/kid for college - we have 3 so that's another 1500/month. Minivan to lug everyone around is 600/month.

Student loans can pay public school tuition, and anyway $100K plus a decade of investment interest is quite generous for public school, or private school with a scholarship (aka not a diploma mill) or ivy league school with financial aid for non-1%ers. And counting both daycare and saving college tuition is double-counting on an annalized basis. A minivan costs $600/month only if you buy new and trade in for another new car after 5 years. It's under $400 if you keep if for 7-10 years. Your $2800/month is only $1000-$2000 in the real world.

Re: Tech Workers Backing Candidates Looking to Break Up Their Employers

#279

Post by perl4ever » Tue, Nov 05, 2019, 12:59 AM UTC

username90 wrote: post #254

perl4ever wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are taboos on the left, but there's no right wing alternative to the science. I mean, if there was some viable insight into biology that required eschewing leftish ideology, why couldn't it be monetized with startups?

> I mean, if there was some viable insight into biology that required eschewing leftish ideology, why couldn't it be monetized with startups? Startups do this all the time by hiring mostly asian and white men instead of trying to match population levels. We can't say for sure if that strategy helped or hurt them, but I haven't seen any investor trying to force startups to diversify their workforce.

I was talking about science/scientists, not HR policies. Like at a biotech startup. From the point of view of an investor, who is doing the science differently because of ideology, and why is it better?

Re: Tech Workers Backing Candidates Looking to Break Up Their Employers

#280

Post by lonelappde » Tue, Nov 05, 2019, 1:01 AM UTC

kmlx wrote: post #236

adrr wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a few large companies that have colluded to keep salaries down by having no poaching agreements doesn’t seem it’s good for tech workers. Having a bunch of companies and a competitive labor market is much better for tech workers.

"salaries down" if anything, all IT salaries need to come back to earth. i assume via massive taxation from the likes of warren and sanders.

Why should capitalist do-nothings and mangament capture all the wealth of a company? Lower pay for labor is an acceptable consequence of lowering consumer prices, not a goal in itself.