Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights • Hacker News Board

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#271

Post by PebblesRox » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 4:19 AM UTC

rglullis wrote: post #82

abernard1 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I, having seen Austin, TX grow from a laughingstock to an industry powerhouse, find your points humorous. There is a very big elephant in the room for where people are moving. And those people are young. And those people do not have the belief monoculture that has existed prior. Smaller elephant in the room #2 is that cost pressures and globalism don't care about the opinions of the traditional PMC that has reign…

PMC?

I think it stands for Professional Managerial Class.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional%E2%80%93manager...

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#272

Post by jimkleiber » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 4:19 AM UTC

KMag wrote: post #200

jimkleiber wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue mostly emotional, us projecting our different emotional experiences on each other and wanting them to feel how we feel regarding the same things. I also believe it has scientific and legal and axiomatic components, just feel quite confident it has to do more with the fear, anger, guilt, shame, and other emotions we feel and attach to things.

I'd agree with that, but unfortunately, that makes it even harder for maximalists on either side to communicate.

Lol I agree. I think people who take maximalist positions often speak the most distantly about how they feel, using a lot of second or third person pronouns and focusing on how people certainly are and not how they might feel.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#273

Post by UkrainianJew » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 4:19 AM UTC

ch4s3 wrote: post #166

hedora wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at national opinion polls. The US is incredibly united right now. 70% want medicare for all (53% want single payer health care). Strong majorities object to overturning Roe v Wade and rolling back gun control laws. The issue is that the senate can be filibustered with 5% of the US population's backing. A majority vote requires 8%. A fillibuster-proof majority requires 12%. This implies that it would not take man…

Not to overly pick a nit, but if you dig into that Medicare for all poll, only a single digit percentage of Americans support it when you get into the actual details of the plan as presented at the time of the poll.

Well, yeah. The root of the problem isn't single-payer vs. out-of-pocket. The real problem is too many people competing for too little doctors and hospital beds.

Making it centrally-funded won't magically warp new doctors from hyperspace. It will simply shift the pressure from prices to waiting times.

The working solution would be to reduce the bureaucracy and make it easier to open new practices, ban anticompetitive behavior by hospitals and address the residency spot bottleneck. But nope, nobody is suggesting that. We keep fighting about the most fair way to split 3 beds between 10 people.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#274

Post by silisili » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 4:19 AM UTC

anon9001 wrote: post #130

This is the n'th tech company today that's made an announcement similar to this. Even Disney is going to transport workers to abortion-legal states as needed as "health benefit". It's certainly a perk and good on Google for this one, but we're headed to a dark place if your best shot at human rights is to retain employment by a big tech company.

One side of me applauds companies who truly do things they believe are right.

The jaded side of me wonders if some amount of companies figured it'd be cheaper to pay for an abortion than maternity leave and health insurance.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#275

Post by hedora » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 4:20 AM UTC

andrekandre wrote: post #244

hedora wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are a tiny minority at this point. I don't care what they want. This is a democracy, not a dictatorship. The polls agree with me. Edit: Republican leadership is seriously considering banning birth control and sodomy at this point, and jailing rape victims for having questionable miscarriages. I do not believe these policies align with the opinions of average Republican voters. However, this is what Republican po…

> However, this is what Republican politicians need to support to avoid being primaried. this is a key issue, as long as someone can make it through with less than 40% favorability, these things will keep happening i think...

It only takes about 25% favorability if everyone votes party lines. I suspect there's something to be said there about game theory and political incentives.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#276

Post by alfor » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 4:20 AM UTC

mikeyouse wrote: post #253

woodruffw wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “consequences” you’re glossing over here include rape (both forcible and statutory), fetuses who would die at childbirth anyways, who endanger the lives of their mothers, and so forth. There’s no single group of people who seek out abortions, and virtually nobody wants one in the abstract: they’re a means for preserving bodily autonomy and a necessary consequence of our legal respect for said autonomy.

I literally have a friend-of-a-friend right now being denied an abortion for a fetus with severe Anencephaly. There’s a group thread trying to figure out where she can travel to in order to terminate. These fucking monsters want her to carry this non viable fetus for 5 more months to deliver a guaranteed stillborn baby with 0 chance of survival. Can you even imagine the trauma that would inflict on the mother? The nu…

She is in the the 1% of case that make sense.

The laws are based on a moral code that protect the most vulnerable.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#277

Post by woodruffw » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 4:21 AM UTC

alfor wrote: post #267

woodruffw wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “consequences” you’re glossing over here include rape (both forcible and statutory), fetuses who would die at childbirth anyways, who endanger the lives of their mothers, and so forth. There’s no single group of people who seek out abortions, and virtually nobody wants one in the abstract: they’re a means for preserving bodily autonomy and a necessary consequence of our legal respect for said autonomy.

Frow what I saw rape and serious medical condition account for close to 1% together. You are left with the 99%: mostly a lazy and horrible way to do contraception. Ok: abortion legal for that 1%, I would go with that no problem.

Do you deem yourself, or anyone else for that matter, qualified and entitled to the private circumstances that separate those two groups? Does that sound like a reasonable thing for the government to task itself with ascertaining?

And no, it’s not 1%. It’s closer to 10% in self-reporting figures[1], which don’t include the obvious problem of shame associated with rape and one’s own inability to healthily deliver a baby.

[1]: https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/tables/3...

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#278

Post by alfor » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 4:22 AM UTC

na85 wrote: post #268

alfor wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

>Do you care if a random woman kill her newborn? I honestly don't care. 20 murders happened on the other side of the planet while I typed this comment. I think it's sad, but it doesn't affect my life in any material way.

But you care about laws against abortions?

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#279

Post by betwixthewires » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 4:22 AM UTC

hedora wrote: post #105

immigrantheart wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't avoid polarization by just meshing people together. If anything, it can backfire. Simply a fact of life, that we are different. Our values, philosophies, ethics, religions, perceptions, etc. We are different, and sometimes our differences are irreconcilable. Forced multiculturalism and diversity will backfire. That's just a fact of life. People who are for abortion won't want to be forced to buddy buddy tog…

The point isn't to change neo-nazis minds. The point is to tip state demographics so that the Republican party never holds 40 senate seats or the presidency again.

Everyone that doesn't think like you is a neo Nazi. Got it.

Re: Google says US employees can relocate to states with abortion rights

#280

Post by KMag » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 4:22 AM UTC

joshl32532 wrote: post #131

kepler1 wrote: post #46

Quoted post unavailable.

Because Google is an AMERICAN company, and losing the abortion right is a HUGE deal? Especially for Google employees who relocated to conservative states for the job? Next question?

Abortion rights are a huge deal. But, as to your other argument, Google is a global company, headquartered in the US. I'm not sure if a majority of its employees are in the US these days.

I think you may be misinterpreting the GP as raising a whataboutism-like argument. I think they're saying "Yes, and also" instead of "No, instead". I realize many times bringing up unrelated problems is used to make "No, instead" arguments, but I don't think that's where the GP is going. I think they're applauding Google, and trying to use embarrassment to push for more broad actions on Google's part.