American Politics 3.0 - Back to Brunch

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Would you be OK if your employer's solution to the shortage was to make it so you could essentially never take a day off in the event of a medical appointment or a family emergency without repercussions (while simultaneously raking in record profits)?

Companies have increasingly gone leaner and leaner, having fewer people around to do the same amount of work in order to boost earnings. And as long as they can continue exploit their existing employees to do that, they'll keep doing it.

It absolutely happened to us during COVID. We were asked to sacrifice a little to make it through a potential down period. What happened was that we had record enrollment and came out the other side with enough funds to build a new residence hall.

I have no love for companies that ask too much or take from their employees without a need, and I've often thought about unionizing our faculty. But I just don't see this as that type of situation.

The profits have come due to unexpected increase in demand, or pure luck and happenstance due to weird global events, and the workers want a share of that. Fine. However, if they're going to throw the entire economy off the rails just to get an extra sick day or two? I'm definitely NOT in ####ing favor of something like that. It's ludicrous.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

LOL, yeah, because that's what I said and that was my overall point. Cool. Have fun arguing with the wall.

Is the wall offer still on the table?

Originally Posted by nfotiu

I stand by that point and don't see how this argument is inconsistent with my thinking that we should prioritize the bigger picture and greater good. In my hypothetical, I was preferring a democrat senator who was heading to prison (with a likely party line replacement) ahead of giving a pivotal senate seat to a republican.

I'm a tepid supporter of unions, but I'm pretty ok with forcing a mediated compromise to workers making 110k plus a posh pension when a strike will impact a whole lot of people rich and poor in the country.

My values align with supporting the overall greater good of the country that my kids and I live in, ahead of winning cheap political battles that cause the rest of us more harm than good.

Why do you get to paint yourself as someone doing something for the greater good of the country and your children but paint Rubecube as someone destroying the world just so the “far left” can win? What if you have different versions of what the “greater good” looks like? Because to me, protecting workers rights is part of the greater good.

For someone who said they’d vote in a murderer and consider a pedophile, it’s just a pathetic way to approach it. I wouldn’t, for example, care about putting myself on the line to protect worker’s rights for a union entirely made of pedophiles, but that’s where we have different standards. You very clearly will do anything for your version of “the greater good,” and that’s fine, but not everyone would stoop so low, and not everyone shares the same values you do (if you value anything).

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Would you be OK if your employer's solution to the shortage was to make it so you could essentially never take a day off in the event of a medical appointment or a family emergency without repercussions (while simultaneously raking in record profits)?

Companies have increasingly gone leaner and leaner, having fewer people around to do the same amount of work in order to boost earnings. And as long as they can continue exploit their existing employees to do that, they'll keep doing it.

These medical appts/sick days/family emergencies all seem like union red herrings when you dig into them.

The workers in this union tend to hover around or less than 100 hours per month of actually being on the job. Yeah, if you have a 6 figure job where you average 25 hours a week, it seems reasonably to be able to fit appts into your off hours. That's the same for most professional type jobs that have an expectation of cancelling dr appts if something comes up.

It seems there is some disagreement on whether they can utilize their PTO for unexpected sick days, but the agreement provides for 10 pto days to be used as single days for unexpected circumstances. There were accusations the companies were being shady about honoring that, but it didn't seem like it was widespread and there are mechanisms to deal with it when it happens.

PeteMoss's comments are spot on. Why is the hard left dying on their sword to support six-figure railway workers who work 25 hours/week with 5 weeks PTO and a cushy pension?

[GGG]

The reason you support the workers right to strike is significant profit is being made by these companies and the workers have a right to demand a share of it. Perhaps we should regulate the price of shipping to prevent excess profit if you don’t want workers to be able to fight for it

If you have pissed people off enough they are willing to go without pay for weeks or months you probably are a ####ty employer.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Is the wall offer still on the table?



Why do you get to paint yourself as someone doing something for the greater good of the country and your children but paint Rubecube as someone destroying the world just so the “far left” can win? What if you have different versions of what the “greater good” looks like? Because to me, protecting workers rights is part of the greater good.

For someone who said they’d vote in a murderer and consider a pedophile, it’s just a pathetic way to approach it. I wouldn’t, for example, care about putting myself on the line to protect worker’s rights for a union entirely made of pedophiles, but that’s where we have different standards. You very clearly will do anything for your version of “the greater good,” and that’s fine, but not everyone would stoop so low, and not everyone shares the same values you do (if you value anything).

A long, full railroad strike would hurt many times more people of all classes than the 100k or so in the rr unions in question. The government stepping in, in this situation with a forced mediation isn't setting a precedent for non essential infrastructure unions. Supporting a railroad strike is a cut off your nose to spite your face move, and I don't find that rational.

Republicans should absolutely be shamed for voting for Walker as their candidate. But if you believe in the crap Republicans believe in, then it's not irrational to vote for him unless they think he's some kind of wolf in sheep's clothing that will go against their interests. I distinguished a job like Senator that is just a vote, vs a Governor or President that judgement, character and intellect matter and where maybe they'd have powers to do further evil or enable it.

A lot of the "progressive" type platforms tend to be too black and white and are cut off your nose to spite your face policies. They sacrifice incremental improvement for digging their heels in on policies that aren't necessarily feasible or that will cause more harm than good, and in turn kill the incremental improvements that would actually help people.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by GGG

The reason you support the workers right to strike is significant profit is being made by these companies and the workers have a right to demand a share of it. Perhaps we should regulate the price of shipping to prevent excess profit if you don’t want workers to be able to fight for it

If you have pissed people off enough they are willing to go without pay for weeks or months you probably are a ####ty employer.

This was my point but much better said.

We should demand more of big companies as a collective society.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

A long, full railroad strike would hurt many times more people of all classes than the 100k or so in the rr unions in question. The government stepping in, in this situation with a forced mediation isn't setting a precedent for non essential infrastructure unions. Supporting a railroad strike is a cut off your nose to spite your face move, and I don't find that rational.

Republicans should absolutely be shamed for voting for Walker as their candidate. But if you believe in the crap Republicans believe in, then it's not irrational to vote for him unless they think he's some kind of wolf in sheep's clothing that will go against their interests. I distinguished a job like Senator that is just a vote, vs a Governor or President that judgement, character and intellect matter and where maybe they'd have powers to do further evil or enable it.

A lot of the "progressive" type platforms tend to be too black and white and are cut off your nose to spite your face policies. They sacrifice incremental improvement for digging their heels in on policies that aren't necessarily feasible or that will cause more harm than good, and in turn kill the incremental improvements that would actually help people.

How are worker’s rights being incrementally improved by the government forcing mediation?

Your opinion about progressive platforms is fine for you to have, but it’s my opinion that “hold the line at all cost” centrist types are naive and toothless. You’re losing the line because you don’t actually have any values you care about and don’t do anything but naysay everyone that isn’t holding up the status quo. This is true of a lot of the lazy centrists I know and it’s true from the posts of yours I have seen. I could name a single thing you actually support aside from “Democrats.”. Don’t like Republicans, don’t like progressives, would vote for a murderer so long as they kept things exactly as they are. You believe your version of centrism to be the balance between things, and that version exists, but it’s not yours. Yours is the version devoid of anything. It’s the empty space in between. You say you care about poor people and those people making less than $100k but I’ve also seen you argue about against multiple policies designed specifically to help those people, so you don’t really care, right? It’s ok to be honest.

Try to worry less about “rational” and more about figuring out what you actually value, like I said. It makes it easier to fight for the greater good when you have some idea of what that good actually is.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

How are worker’s rights being incrementally improved by the government forcing mediation?

Many workers will lose their jobs if there is a long, vast railroad strike. 6% of private workers in the US are unionized, and forcing a settlement will erode their leverage somewhat, especially if they support critical infrastructure. The vast majority non-unionized workers lives will be better off if the trains keep running.

Your opinion about progressive platforms is fine for you to have, but it’s my opinion that “hold the line at all cost” centrist types are naive and toothless. You’re losing the line because you don’t actually have any values you care about and don’t do anything but naysay everyone that isn’t holding up the status quo. This is true of a lot of the lazy centrists I know and it’s true from the posts of yours I have seen. I could name a single thing you actually support aside from “Democrats.”. Don’t like Republicans, don’t like progressives, would vote for a murderer so long as they kept things exactly as they are. You believe your version of centrism to be the balance between things, and that version exists, but it’s not yours. Yours is the version devoid of anything. It’s the empty space in between. You say you care about poor people and those people making less than $100k but I’ve also seen you argue about against multiple policies designed specifically to help those people, so you don’t really care, right? It’s ok to be honest.

Try to worry less about “rational” and more about figuring out what you actually value, like I said. It makes it easier to fight for the greater good when you have some idea of what that good actually is.

Off the top of my head, things that are important to me that are current political topics:
Abortion rights, environment issues, lbgqt+ rights, racial issues, improved medical coverage and access, education, increased min wage and other programs for working poor, a thriving and sustainable economy.

Where a progressive says a $15 min wage across the board for everyone, or nothing, I'd lobby for a geographically adjusted min wage that helped as many or more people but didn't have as many pitfalls. The latter may have been viable to pass, but the insistence on the former got nothing done.

There are Bernie or else Progressives that enabled a Trump victory due to either going to Trump or not voting, thinking that there was no difference to their lives between having Trump or Hillary as president. That directly led to objectively worse conditions for at least the first 5 things I listed.

M4A or nothing has impeded the ability of the current government to incrementally improve healthcare by further subsidizing Obamacare and offering a public option. So that is another area that sticking to an all or nothing has hurt incremental improvement.

There was a big stink from the progressive side and others when Pelosi resisted supporting another round of $1000 checks with the trade off being eliminating the EIC. Most anyone who isn't a working, poor single mom had no idea with the eic was. But the deal she resisted was taking away a program that gives low earning workers with dependents thousands a year. The vast majority of those are single working moms. She was called all sorts of names from the hard left for standing that ground, but that group didn't even stop to realize they were willing to sacrifice thousands of dollars per year to poor, working mothers in the name of a one time check to everyone. So where are the progressives values there?

I get that there should be limitations on private corporations and executive compensation and am in favor of a lot of those things. But, I think that progressives are way to quick to write off anything that helps them thrive as some Corporate bogeyman paying them off. A healthy environment for corporations to thrive (with appropriate guard rails) is good for the majority of the people. I take issue with anyone thinking I'm some kind of bootlicker or shill or whatever for thinking that way. If a progressive is of mind to completely dismantle capitalism, then fair enough. I'm not going along with that, but if we are going to have capitalism, then there is value for the corporations in your country thriving.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

There are Bernie or else Progressives that enabled a Trump victory due to either going to Trump or not voting, thinking that there was no difference to their lives between having Trump or Hillary as president. That directly led to objectively worse conditions for at least the first 5 things I listed.

Blaming the Bernie left for 2016 is like laying the blame for 5-1 loss on a bad penalty call. Sure, it didn't help, but there were far bigger problems than that, most of which were direct the result of Democrat policy failures and own goals.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Why do you get to paint yourself as someone doing something for the greater good of the country and your children but paint Rubecube as someone destroying the world just so the “far left” can win? What if you have different versions of what the “greater good” looks like? Because to me, protecting workers rights is part of the greater good.

For someone who said they’d vote in a murderer and consider a pedophile, it’s just a pathetic way to approach it.

I mean...if I were to guess CaliPantherFan and nfotiu's income bracket relative to their opinions on this?

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

It's literally why he teaches

[SutterBrother]

Automation is going to make most of this moot in 10 years. The smart corporate move would be to give the union much of what they want right now and pivot as fast as possible to autonomous trains as a clear cost saving measure w/o concern to 24/7 “on call” or medical needs.

It sucks for those in that industry. Just like it did for movie projectionists in the late 90’s and elevator operators in the 1920’s.

But at the end of the day, robots don’t unionize.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by SutterBrother

Automation is going to make most of this moot in 10 years. The smart corporate move would be to give the union much of what they want right now and pivot as fast as possible to autonomous trains as a clear cost saving measure w/o concern to 24/7 “on call” or medical needs.

It sucks for those in that industry. Just like it did for movie projectionists in the late 90’s and elevator operators in the 1920’s.

But at the end of the day, robots don’t unionize.

…yet.

[Fuzz]

You may be able to automate the actual driving of a train, but you aren't going to have robots running around fixing issues with brakes 50 cars back(for the foreseeable future). So I'm not sure you save any labour.

[activeStick]

Yeah there's definitely some things that can't be automated yet but the consulting firm I work for is already supporting both Canadian rail companies to automate whatever can be done (which is a lot, including rail yards and freight yards where they need to manage the movement and storage of rail cars, etc.).

[PsYcNeT]

Hey! Theo's on Tucker today peddling absolute garbage

https://twitter.com/user/status/1598342583289368577

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Hey! Theo's on Tucker today peddling absolute garbage

https://twitter.com/user/status/1598342583289368577

Mmm, except if you watch it, Theo refuted what Tucker was peddling.

Theo, quite surprisingly, had a win here.

No one expected it, but let's be happy even an idiot can say the right thing once in a while.

[Scroopy Noopers]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1598345761783267329

[photon]

Kari Lake wants YOU to go to jail for her so she can be Governor. That's the kind of courage our politicians need!

She can't go to jail because they won't let her bring in her video call filters.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1598018906115170304

[Fuzz]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1598363768157016064

Sweating yet, Matt?