FBXL Social

Some people who are for unions and against being able to pay people based on their competence instead of seniority say "I really don’t care to play 'who deserves a minimum quality of life'."

Reality doesn’t care whether you care to play or not.

There’s a limited amount of resources, you can’t hire everyone on Earth, you can’t give everyone an unlimited salary. Everything past that you’re making decisions as to who gets what.

And by the way, if you make enough poor decisions eventually everyone loses their jobs.

I'm not opposed to alternative structures than the traditional employer/employee relationship, but not the specific stuff I've seen.

Hey let’s hire Ashok for this position! He’s really good!

Oops, sorry. Bob Whiteman has been here for 30 years. He’s just good enough not to fire but he has seniority so he gets first dibs on the job.

Hey, let’s give Ashok a raise! He’s really good!

Oops, sorry. Bob Whiteman has been here for 30 years. He’s just good enough not to fire. It he’s been here the longest so he gets paid the most.
replies
1
announces
0
likes
0

I think unfortunately just a lot of the jobs disappeared, sent elsewhere. Much of North America has been in deep decline for 50 years and the unions didn't prevent that.

The thing that's required is for the working class to have more bargaining power, but the union isn't that -- its just the manifestation of power they already had.

I think the things that need to happen are for the upcoming population collapse to occur. Historically, its those eras where working class people get power back. If we're lucky it'll be peaceful, but in previous eras it got really bloody, such as the French civil war.

Power corrupts, so I expect something cyclical, where it'll get better for a time then it gets gummed up, then something new takes its place.