641–650 of 699 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you name a company in, say, the top 50 largest companies by market cap that isn't run by scumbags? The intent of the question is to divine whether you think Coinbase in particular is a problem, or whether you have a problem with big companies in general.
From what I know as an outsider: Tesla, TSMC, Netflix, Adobe, Toyota.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, I, a fairly good Engineer, would favor Coinbase over many other tech companies precisely because their CEO had the courage to say what every other CEO is thinking, that is that a company is a place where money is exchanged for labour not a venue for promoting one's political agenda, no matter how righteous that agenda might feel.
Because the CEO shares your politics and is only allowing your brand to express themselves at work you want to work there. I mean I understand the feeling but can we stop pretending that this isn’t entirely political?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This matches my recent experience. I researched plans on Washington state's health marketplace and found that while the available plans were generally much cheaper than COBRA, their coverage for out-of-network or out-of-state care was limited (e.g. "emergency" care only, where the definition of emergency is vague and up to the insurer). And even if you are careful to get taken to an "in-network" hospital, there are p…
> . And even if you are careful to get taken to an "in-network" hospital, there are plenty of horror stories about inadvertently getting treated by an "out-of-network" provider while inside and being on the hook for the entire bill. This is no longer legal in any state as of July 1st of this year. > Bans out-of-network charges for ancillary care (like an anesthesiologist or assistant surgeon) at an in-network facilit…
This change was enacted December, 2020 with a July 1 deadline to confirm it would be enacted.
It doesn't go into effect until January 1, 2022 and does not apply to charges incurred before then.
It also only applies to federal plans (including "Obamacare" plans, but not necessarily private plans.
The language of the subsection addressing this is poorly constructed, so be careful.
The HHS link provided above by secabeen has those details and links to further information
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The goal in Western capitalism is to create wealth for stakeholders. Those stakeholders can then get involved in politically impactful projects as wealthy individuals if they have a conscience. As competitive, innovative companies they will bring wealth and better lives to their communities long term. There are many good reasons for this system. Wanting companies to play politics means they will be choosing sides of…
You are assuming only the wealthy should drive politics. The employee driven politics is happening because they don't have money to shape politics and this is the only way they see of having an effect. Not saying it is good, but the idea the money buys politics kind of leads to this.
But perhaps it's not such a bad thing for you to push people away from your position with such shameless behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the CEO shares your politics and is only allowing your brand to express themselves at work you want to work there. I mean I understand the feeling but can we stop pretending that this isn’t entirely political?
What 'brand of politics' is it to suggest that politics shouldn't be a major factor at work. Also, to your OP's point ... I think it's reductionist to suggest that 'companies are an exchange for labour' - this is too much. Almost all educated workers derive some meaning and dignity from their work beyond salary or benefits. So 'what we work on matters'. That said, even if we work on 'some new currency that can help t…
What mission did they focus on and how did it go? All I see here is "I wrote a controversial screed and many people tolerated it and kept showing up to work." That's great and all, but what sort of new things did it unlock? How do you compare it to the world where you didn't write the screed? It all feels like a heap of bullshit to me -- if you're in the right industry, you can be the worst manager on the planet and…
> What is the scope of our mission?
> Coinbase’s mission is to create an open financial system for the world. This means we want to use cryptocurrency to bring economic freedom to people all over the world. This is difficult and important work, and every employee at Coinbase signed up because they are excited about this mission.
More details here: https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-is-a-mission-focused-comp...
The fact that you immediately jumped to calling it a "screed"—not once, but twice—despite allegedly not knowing this reveals your motives quite clearly. You are simply ideologically opposed to the message, not its form, and in favor of the imposition of a woke monoculture.
Your dishonest use of an obvious motte-and-bailey in your last sentence is just the cherry on top.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I work for a company run by evangelical Christians, and this extends to probably 80% of the company. Certainly the only people taking about religion are the evangelicals. Management attends explicitly Christian "leadership retreats". Among other things, I would not be comfortable attending these events. Officially discussion of religion and and politics is discouraged. In practice that means the conservative culture…
Your second paragraph is a word salad and non-sequitur. Treating a human who claims they're a deer as a human isn't denying their existence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No I'm not missing any point. You are making up a point that has absolutely nothing to do with the actual situation at Coinbase. The political debate at Coinbase was never about "safety net" at all. It's about petty identity politics. You are trying to make the discussion about "safety net" when that discussion has nothing to do about "safety net" at first place. What do employees demanding a company makes a statemen…
Black Lives Matters is important because companies discriminate against black people and there is police discrimination and brutality against black people and whoever the police deem undesirable in the US, not just in one or two regions, but in every sizeable city in the US. So it's hard to see your friends discriminated against and employers (the only entity with enough political power to effect change in the us) ma…
They actively discriminate for black people.
> there is police discrimination against black people in the US, not just in one or two regions, but in every sizeable city in the US
Source? Did you control for crime rates? Violent crime rates? Armed encounters?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your second paragraph is a word salad and non-sequitur. Treating a human who claims they're a deer as a human isn't denying their existence.
No one in this thread is asking anybody to do that. I was responding to a question that was asked of me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue is that it’s possible for that person to not “be political”, even typical in large parts of the world, so if the person thinks they always are, they’re not seeing correctly. Insane is way too strong a term but such a person does risk their misperception harming relationships and wasting good opportunities.
Sure. A person's existence may "be political" in certain spaces and not others, and it is helpful and necessary to be able to sort out where your existence challenges other people, whether it should, and whether you are projecting undue fears onto other people based on a biased history or an unexamined worldview. It is further useful to examine your worldview to understand what is fundamental to your self-understandi…
Companies are publicly committing to a priori support of one or the other of the conflicting views rather than do the more difficult work of helping someone get past this, in the US, but in other parts of the world it seems possible for culture to exert itself and heal the misperception over time.