Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    What I meant is that automating all jobs that exist right now will free us up to work on an endless amount of new problems and we'll be creating new industries to meet future goals. There can't be a utopia so there will always be more things for people to work on.
    That's a very good point. In the past many automated jobs gave way to new jobs. ATM's, for example, haven't replaced bank tellers, those tellers just perform different functions.

    Your post is an excellent example of generalizing historical events to predict the future.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by xenogear3 View Post
    They are lured to make millions of dollars in the future.
    a tiny fraction of them, sure

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    That's illegal within the US. Its probably illegal within any developed nation. By all means continue to blame the workers for the sins of the employers. Hope you enjoy the race to the bottom. When do you start singing a different song? When wages dip below $5?
    Can you please link to the labor law in the US? I can't imagine a law that would force any business owner to operate his business at a loss. The only exception would be a utility of some kind, which we weren't.

    Edit: Just looked it up, and the SCOTUS decided in 1965 that closing a business to avoid a union is explicitly legal under most circumstances.

    Textile Workers v. Darlington Mfg. Co., 380 U.S. 263

    https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/380/263/

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    Unless you are at least a millionaire and a member of the capitalist class making neoliberal talking points like this is advocating against your own interests and makes you a propagandist or a fool. Don't be either, be better.
    How is sharing my own personal story a "talking point"? Are you saying that my personal experiences aren't valid because it doesn't agree with you? There was no opinion or agenda in my post, it was simply an anecdotal story from my life. How is that advocacy? Should I not tell a story because it upsets people?
    Last edited by lordsphinx; 2020-08-19 at 05:24 PM.
    CPU: Intel i7 3770K Mobo: Asus P8Z77-V PRO GPU: 2X Asus GTX 770 OC SLI Heatsink: Hyper 212 EVO RAM: Corsair Vengeance 2x8GB 1600mhz SSD: 120Gb Samsung 840 EVO HDD: WD 2tb Caviar Black PSU: Corsair HX850 Case: CM HAF 932 Advanced

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by lordsphinx View Post
    Can you please link to the labor law in the US? I can't imagine a law that would force any business owner to operate his business at a loss. The only exception would be a utility of some kind, which we weren't.

    Edit: Just looked it up, and the SCOTUS decided in 1965 that closing a business to avoid a union is explicitly legal under most circumstances.

    Textile Workers v. Darlington Mfg. Co., 380 U.S. 263

    https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/380/263/
    Your link:
    "2. Closing part of a business is an unfair labor practice under § 8(a)(3) of the Act if the purpose is to discourage unionism in any of the employer's remaining plants and if the employer may reasonably have foreseen such effect. Pp. 380 U. S. 274-275.

    Page 380 U. S. 264

    3. If those exercising control over a plant that is being closed for anti-union reasons have an interest in another business, whether or not affiliated with or in the same line of commerce as the closed plant, of sufficient substantiality to promise a benefit from nonunionization of that business, act to close their plant for that purpose, and have a relationship to the other business which makes it probable that its employees will fear closing down if organizational activities are continued, an unfair labor practice has been made out. Pp. 380 U. S. 275-276."

    https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/righ...of-their-union
    "It is unlawful to discourage (or encourage) union activities or sympathies "by discrimination in regard to hire or tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment." For example, employers may not discharge, lay off, or discipline employees, or refuse to hire job applicants, because they are pro-union."

    Any business that is unwilling to pay appropriate wages isn't worth saving. Your shitty personal anecdote is an example of a business refusing to make adjustments to its business. That's simply poor business practices. They're the bad guy here not the people who wanted to unionize.

    Uber is only able to function because it refuses to take proper care of its employees. And they are employees. If they were contractors, the contractors would set their own prices and Uber would take a cut. That's not what Uber does.

    Stop apologizing for wage theft. Its the number one form of fraud in America and its criminally under-enforced because its a crime the rich commit against the poor.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    Your link:
    "2. Closing part of a business is an unfair labor practice under § 8(a)(3) of the Act if the purpose is to discourage unionism in any of the employer's remaining plants and if the employer may reasonably have foreseen such effect. Pp. 380 U. S. 274-275.
    Correct, closing part of a business is illegal. Closing the entire business is not illegal. You cannot force someone to keep a business open against his or her best interests. This is the entire point of the Supreme Court case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    3. If those exercising control over a plant that is being closed for anti-union reasons have an interest in another business, whether or not affiliated with or in the same line of commerce as the closed plant, of sufficient substantiality to promise a benefit from nonunionization of that business, act to close their plant for that purpose, and have a relationship to the other business which makes it probable that its employees will fear closing down if organizational activities are continued, an unfair labor practice has been made out. Pp. 380 U. S. 275-276."
    Again, this refers to closing part of a business, or closing one business entity out of several owned. Neither of these apply to my scenario at all. The business owner owned one business, and he closed it. The SCOTUS has confirmed that this is not illegal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/righ...of-their-union
    "It is unlawful to discourage (or encourage) union activities or sympathies "by discrimination in regard to hire or tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment." For example, employers may not discharge, lay off, or discipline employees, or refuse to hire job applicants, because they are pro-union."
    Nobody was discharged, laid off, disciplined, or refused hire. The company went out of business and closed the doors. If your job disappears because the business closes, that is not considered being laid off. The quoted statement doesn’t apply to the situation I went through. Again, the SCOTUS has set precedence here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    Any business that is unwilling to pay appropriate wages isn't worth saving. Your shitty personal anecdote is an example of a business refusing to make adjustments to its business. That's simply poor business practices. They're the bad guy here not the people who wanted to unionize.

    Uber is only able to function because it refuses to take proper care of its employees. And they are employees. If they were contractors, the contractors would set their own prices and Uber would take a cut. That's not what Uber does.

    Stop apologizing for wage theft. Its the number one form of fraud in America and its criminally under-enforced because its a crime the rich commit against the poor.
    I worked in accounting at the time. We were in a very, very competitive market, and were actively fighting overseas pressure from Chinese, Vietnamese, and Phillipine competition. We priced our product at 2-3% profit margins, while the owner took about $120k / year in compensation. The Union would have forced the company (and owner) to lose money if it wanted to stay in business. They decided to close instead. This isn’t a hard concept, and a majority of the public doesn’t realize that a lot of business owners live modest lifestyles. They’re not all diving around in their Ferrari’s and sailing the Mediterranean on their private yachts. A lot of them make an honest living, support their families, and provide gainful employment to the community. Stop painting everyone with the same brush. Painting every xxxx person as a bad person is bad, no matter what xxxx is.
    CPU: Intel i7 3770K Mobo: Asus P8Z77-V PRO GPU: 2X Asus GTX 770 OC SLI Heatsink: Hyper 212 EVO RAM: Corsair Vengeance 2x8GB 1600mhz SSD: 120Gb Samsung 840 EVO HDD: WD 2tb Caviar Black PSU: Corsair HX850 Case: CM HAF 932 Advanced

  6. #46
    Lets note here that current polling shows that prop 22 is very likely going to pass. Prop 22 will protect the 1099 status of Uber / Lyft drivers.

    As of August 9th, polling was 41% yes, 26% no, and 34% unsure. But if just 10% of that 34% unsure vote say yes, then prop 22 passes. That's a pretty easy bar to cross. But let's see if the polling numbers change once Uber and Lyft stop service.

    https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies....tion-9-august/

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by lordsphinx View Post
    I worked in accounting at the time. We were in a very, very competitive market, and were actively fighting overseas pressure from Chinese, Vietnamese, and Phillipine competition. We priced our product at 2-3% profit margins, while the owner took about $120k / year in compensation. The Union would have forced the company (and owner) to lose money if it wanted to stay in business. They decided to close instead. This isn’t a hard concept, and a majority of the public doesn’t realize that a lot of business owners live modest lifestyles. They’re not all diving around in their Ferrari’s and sailing the Mediterranean on their private yachts. A lot of them make an honest living, support their families, and provide gainful employment to the community. Stop painting everyone with the same brush. Painting every xxxx person as a bad person is bad, no matter what xxxx is.
    So the market crushed the business? Because if you're going to operate in America you're going to need to pay American level wages because American employees are definitely going to be paying American shelter, food, transportation and clothing costs. Obviously that's not a concern for you because a $5/hr job is sufficient so business owners don't get their feelings hurt.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by lordsphinx View Post
    -snip-
    The point is, this ruling won't apply to Uber unless they close down their entire business.......around the world. Because the ruling also holds that shutting down a business partially to avoid union organizing is illegal.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    The point is, this ruling won't apply to Uber unless they close down their entire business.......around the world. Because the ruling also holds that shutting down a business partially to avoid union organizing is illegal.
    I understand that. This discussion happened because I was told that my previous owner going out of business was illegal. I know Uber can't, but I know one of my previous employers did, and I had to show that it wasn't, in fact, illegal.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    So the market crushed the business? Because if you're going to operate in America you're going to need to pay American level wages because American employees are definitely going to be paying American shelter, food, transportation and clothing costs. Obviously that's not a concern for you because a $5/hr job is sufficient so business owners don't get their feelings hurt.
    The whole point of my anecdote is that sometimes you need to be careful what you wish for. Demanding higher wages can result in losing your job entirely. That's all, nothing more, nothing less. If you feel like no job is better than a low paying job, then that's your prerogative
    CPU: Intel i7 3770K Mobo: Asus P8Z77-V PRO GPU: 2X Asus GTX 770 OC SLI Heatsink: Hyper 212 EVO RAM: Corsair Vengeance 2x8GB 1600mhz SSD: 120Gb Samsung 840 EVO HDD: WD 2tb Caviar Black PSU: Corsair HX850 Case: CM HAF 932 Advanced

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by lordsphinx View Post
    The whole point of my anecdote is that sometimes you need to be careful what you wish for. Demanding higher wages can result in losing your job entirely. That's all, nothing more, nothing less. If you feel like no job is better than a low paying job, then that's your prerogative
    And my entire point is that demanding higher wages is an absolute necessity. Life gets perpetually more expensive. Your boss is not your friend. They're under no obligation to pay you better even if you need it. Quite often your boss's only obligation is to make you work more for less money so you better be ready to fight for your money. Unions are a convenient way for workers to do that which is why employers are scared shitless of them.

    Your anecdote is trash. If a business isn't prepared to pay its employees properly then its not going to succeed. You worked for an insolvent business which was marginally successful only because it underpaid its employees.

    Uber is the same. It sells itself as something that pays well if you work hard but its nothing more than libertarian snake oil. Pulling yourself up by your bootstraps is actually a futile endeavour.


  11. #51
    The Unstoppable Force Ghostpanther's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    USA, Ohio
    Posts
    24,032
    The best way to handle bad policies from state officials is for businesses and workers to leave the state. Money ( tax revenue) talks louder than complaints.
    " If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher.." - Abraham Lincoln
    The Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to - prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms..” - Samuel Adams

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Drutt View Post
    Just goes to prove that Uber's "brilliant" innovations are nothing more than skirting labour laws in a race to the bottom at the worker's expense.
    This, enough said. Uber shutting down is a good thing.

  13. #53
    Titan I Push Buttons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    11,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    So the market crushed the business? Because if you're going to operate in America you're going to need to pay American level wages because American employees are definitely going to be paying American shelter, food, transportation and clothing costs. Obviously that's not a concern for you because a $5/hr job is sufficient so business owners don't get their feelings hurt.
    If you were one of the millions of people who depended on '$5/hour' gig economy job to get by, would you rather make $5/hour or make $0/hour because well-meaning people got rid of your gig economy job because 'you were being exploited' in their view.

    The well-wishes of those well-meaning people don't pay your bills, the $5/hour did. And now its gone.

  14. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by I Push Buttons View Post
    If you were one of the millions of people who depended on '$5/hour' gig economy job to get by, would you rather make $5/hour or make $0/hour because well-meaning people got rid of your gig economy job because 'you were being exploited' in their view.

    The well-wishes of those well-meaning people don't pay your bills, the $5/hour did. And now its gone.
    And here we have another participant in the Race to the Bottom.

    Neither the $5/hr or $0/hr will pay the bills. Stop relying on the well wishes of well meaning employers to take care of you. They don't give a fuck about you.

    Do you understand that Uber set billions of investment dollars on fire? That money could've been spent on worthwhile investments. All Uber has accomplished is destroy better paying jobs that obeyed labour laws while creating lower paying jobs that circumvent labour laws. And somehow you think this is a good thing.

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    The best way to handle bad policies from state officials is for businesses and workers to leave the state. Money ( tax revenue) talks louder than complaints.
    "Bad policies" also known as "trying to protect worker rights and not let them be exploited"?

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    The best way to handle bad policies from state officials is for businesses and workers to leave the state. Money ( tax revenue) talks louder than complaints.
    Uber and Lyft may close their car sharing operation in California. However, their HQs and research facilities will still be in CA. All the money they generate globally will still flow to the city by the bay. There are several reasons why companies like Microsoft, Amazon, and even Tencent and Alibaba maintain huge research facilities in CA.

  17. #57
    Titan I Push Buttons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    11,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    And here we have another participant in the Race to the Bottom.

    Neither the $5/hr or $0/hr will pay the bills. Stop relying on the well wishes of well meaning employers to take care of you. They don't give a fuck about you.

    Do you understand that Uber set billions of investment dollars on fire? That money could've been spent on worthwhile investments. All Uber has accomplished is destroy better paying jobs that obeyed labour laws while creating lower paying jobs that circumvent labour laws. And somehow you think this is a good thing.
    Except not really since that $5/hour figure is highly exaggerated.

    The reality is more like "I make $15/hour, but after paying for gas, the car payment, the car insurance, getting the car cleaned once a week, etc., its only $9/hour"...

    But such expenses are true for everyone, 'gig economy' workers aren't some special case... If someone has to spend $20/week on transportation to get to their minimum wage job, are you going to try and abolish their job too because by that same flawed logic they are getting paid less than minimum wage after spending that $20 to get there?

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    And here we have another participant in the Race to the Bottom.

    Neither the $5/hr or $0/hr will pay the bills. Stop relying on the well wishes of well meaning employers to take care of you. They don't give a fuck about you.

    Do you understand that Uber set billions of investment dollars on fire? That money could've been spent on worthwhile investments. All Uber has accomplished is destroy better paying jobs that obeyed labour laws while creating lower paying jobs that circumvent labour laws. And somehow you think this is a good thing.
    Almost 69% of Uber and Lyft drivers do it as a side hustle, to help pay the bills. When they fall behind a little, they work some extra nights. When they're flush, they may not work as much. If anyone plans of driving for Uber or Lyft as a full time, life supporting job, then they have made a series of terrible life decisions that landed them there in the first place.
    CPU: Intel i7 3770K Mobo: Asus P8Z77-V PRO GPU: 2X Asus GTX 770 OC SLI Heatsink: Hyper 212 EVO RAM: Corsair Vengeance 2x8GB 1600mhz SSD: 120Gb Samsung 840 EVO HDD: WD 2tb Caviar Black PSU: Corsair HX850 Case: CM HAF 932 Advanced

  19. #59
    The Unstoppable Force Theodarzna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    22,569
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    The best way to handle bad policies from state officials is for businesses and workers to leave the state. Money ( tax revenue) talks louder than complaints.
    Nah, All these companies are doing is conclusively proving that the only innovation was refusing to obey labor laws, and burning Saudi oligarch money in a big furnace.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crissi View Post
    i think I have my posse filled out now. Mars is Theo, Jupiter is Vanyali, Linadra is Venus, and Heather is Mercury. Dragon can be Pluto.
    Tankie Paleo-Conservatism with TERF characteristics / Socialism with My Chemical Romance characteristics. Caramelldansen Nationalism. Aimee Terese was right about Warren. Anti-HR Aktion. Bashar Al-Assad's runescape gf.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by I Push Buttons View Post
    But such expenses are true for everyone, 'gig economy' workers aren't some special case... If someone has to spend $20/week on transportation to get to their minimum wage job, are you going to try and abolish their job too because by that same flawed logic they are getting paid less than minimum wage after spending that $20 to get there?
    That sounds completely reasonable. Everyone needs shelter, food, healthcare, clothing and transportation. If existing jobs aren't going to provide sufficient income for those things than two things MUST happen:
    1 - Compensation must increase.
    2 - The cost of living must go down.

    And guess what actually happens? The former perpetually dwindles, the latter keeps on rising. The gig economy is nothing more than some marketing scheme telling you its ok to settle for less.

    Are you one of those people who doesn't understand the concept of a minimum wage?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by lordsphinx View Post
    Almost 69% of Uber and Lyft drivers do it as a side hustle, to help pay the bills. When they fall behind a little, they work some extra nights. When they're flush, they may not work as much. If anyone plans of driving for Uber or Lyft as a full time, life supporting job, then they have made a series of terrible life decisions that landed them there in the first place.
    This sounds a lot like the McDonalds argument ie its a low paying job meant for part time high school students. This ignores the fact that McDonalds needs people at all hours of the day which is why the majority of its employees* are working adults. People need transportation at all hours of the day. Why do you think cab drivers worked regularly assigned shifts? There's nothing wrong with driving for a living. Its a perfectly acceptable job and its one that should be paid appropriately. Even if its just a side gig, that is no reason to ignore labour laws.

    Seriously, why do you like crime so much?

    *McDonalds is also a corporation that regularly engages in wage theft and ignores labour laws.
    Last edited by Ivanstone; 2020-08-20 at 10:59 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •