5,800 Workers Voting to Unionize Their Amazon Facility

[Felya]

1. It has no relevance in this thread
2. Race is also a forbidden subject

So stop trying to shove it in there when nobody is even remotely mentioning race.

Dude... Welfare queen is a racist term, but you chastise me for pointing it out? How about copy exactly what you are saying to me and use it in relation to people using racist terms, instead of fraud?

Your policing is noted and promptly discarded...

[Felya]

It has nothing to do with race.

It explicitly does... I am explaining to you what the term does... I linked a book that explains how the stereotype originated... I am showing how the term was used to attack all poor people, because race separated the kind of poor. Your unwillingness to learn, just means you want to keep your racist stereotypes. Which is why I need to point this shit out, so others don’t use it by accident... you don’t care what the term means... others do... others will start calling it fraud, because explaining that it’s racist, means not only is there no reason to use the term... using it, makes it worse...

It’s your choice what to do... stop using the term and just say “fraud”, since it’s been explained to you the term is racist and an attack on the poor... or you can continue to ignore it and create excuses, because that term means that much to you.

Edit: From this point on, if you use the term to describe welfare fraud, you are intentionally being racist.

Edit 2: Just to explain something to fellow Americans... “Only fools and horses work for living” is a very common term in GB. We don’t have similar in US... instead, we have racist stereo types separating the disenfranchised future billionaires and those “others” on welfare keeping them down. The idea that the term would be used outside US, beyond far right campaigns mimicking Reagan, is absolutely absurd. Ya’ll have universal coverage... lol

[downnola]

It has nothing to do with race.

It's astonishing how unaware you are of how biased this forum's moderation is towards you and people of your political affiliation. Anyone else who wouldn't be waving the 'Democratic Party' flag would've gotten infracted the first time they brought it up, but here you are, bringing it up for the umpteenth time without consequence. smh

Yes, it does. Just because you choose to not see the racism in the term, it doesn't mean that it doesn't have that meaning in the United States, where the term originated. One of the reasons people come at you as hard as they do is because you display your ignorance in the most arrogant way possible. The way you cast yourself as a victim every time you're wrong about something would embarrass most people if they self-reflected for a moment. It's quite pathetic.

[unfilteredJW]

Yes, it does. Just because you choose to not see the racism in the term, it doesn't mean that it doesn't have that meaning in the United States, where the term originated. One of the reasons people come at you as hard as they do is because you display your ignorance in the most arrogant way possible. The way you cast yourself as a victim every time you're wrong about something would embarrass most people if they self-reflected for a moment. It's quite pathetic.

Don’t need self reflection when you can just change your forum name and delete posts.

[Felya]

Yes, it does. Just because you choose to not see the racism in the term, it doesn't mean that it doesn't have that meaning in the United States, where the term originated. One of the reasons people come at you as hard as they do is because you display your ignorance in the most arrogant way possible. The way you cast yourself as a victim every time you're wrong about something would embarrass most people if they self-reflected for a moment. It's quite pathetic.

It can’t exist outside US... because, they don’t consider welfare to be an affront. When the guy who pushed through universal coverage in UK died, they mourned as a nation. We have a political party calling anyone with even the completley water down version of universal coverage, fucking Hitler.

Look at the title of the thread? Do they think we have strong workers rights, with pensions and leave pay? We don’t have unions like they do in EU... welfare or the dole, cannot be as pronounced as a result. Our political environment is uniquely designed for shit like this... theirs isn’t...

Edit: “welfare queen” doesn’t exist outside US, for the same reason “Only fools and horses” doesn’t mean anything in US.

[Felya]

This is absurdly incorrect.

What ever you say... this isn’t an entry point for you to talk about immigration and fear mongering refugees. Just a side note... that’s not the same as welfare or the dole...

[Elegiac]

"Welfare queens" do exist.

"Just trust me" isn't evidence.

Are they a majority ? Absolutetly not. But they do exist, mostly in lower class of society.

Again, "trust me" isn't evidence; and you're still going to have to demonstrate that they exist in sufficient numbers to justify the harm caused by public assistance crackdowns.

Do people want to work for poverty wage ? Yes, they do. Do they "really" want to work for poverty wage ? Nope, but they still do because sometimes, that's all they can have.

This isn't "grey area" thinking, it's just blatant contradiction attempting to sound deep because you don't want to admit that labor under capitalism is inherently exploitative. Lol.

[Felya]

"Just trust me" isn't evidence.

Again, "trust me" isn't evidence; and you're still going to have to demonstrate that they exist in sufficient numbers to justify the harm caused by public assistance crackdowns.

This isn't "grey area" thinking, it's just blatant contradiction attempting to sound deep because you don't want to admit that labor under capitalism is inherently exploitative. Lol.

@Specialka now imagine you said “welfare fraud” instead...

[Felya]

No, he does not have to provide or demonstrate any "facts" or "evidence" for his statement. Because we're talking about an activity that happens in pure illegality, and of which it is impossible to find any concrete evidence - which anyone with a bit of common sense would know. In my opinion, and this is purely my opinion so don't take it as an affront, we're all trying to be good people here, those who don't believe that welfare fraud exists must lack experience or social contacts or perhaps even a lack of entrepreneurship - because you'd be bound to run into those kinds of people if you're a small business or starting business owner.

No one is saying the bold... the basic point, is that stronger unions would prevent welfare. Which includes fraud...

Edit: Can I schedule an appointment with you directly or call the numbers?

[Felya]

Okay, we're all in agreement then if no one is saying that welfare fraud does not exist. Just appears that some people keep repeating or insisting that it does not exist it all.

I'm in favor of unions by the way. Very much in favor of them.

Guess why I tried to clear up the language? lol

[Glorious Leader]

Well, anyone -can- leave their work whenever they want.
It's literally written so in the laws of pretty much every modern nation. Including the right to begin your own business.

As compared say, the days where you didn't even have the right and would get whipped or beaten if you dared try.

Everything that happens outside of when you -do- leave your job, is a consequence of liberty and freedoms that were given to people.

Theirs a concept thats missing here called quality of choice. If you get held up at gun point and are offered the choice your gun or your wallet you still had a choice technically

[Elegiac]

No, he does not have to provide or demonstrate any "facts" or "evidence" for his statement. Because we're talking about an activity that happens in pure illegality, and of which it is impossible to find any concrete evidence or officially reported numbers - which anyone with a bit of common sense would know. In my opinion, and this is purely my opinion so don't take it as an affront, we're all trying to be good people here, those who don't believe that welfare fraud exists must lack experience or social contacts or perhaps even a lack of entrepreneurship - because you'd be bound to run into those kinds of people aplenty if you're a small business or starting business owner.

I'm not saying welfare fraud doesn't exist.

I'm talking about the idea of the welfare queen - i.e. someone who lives a luxury life entirely on public assistance, or the idea that owning an iPhone means someone doesn't "really deserve" aid.

And, I'll reiterate, the point is that y'all do have to provide evidence that welfare fraud is an egregious and common phenomenon because the measures proposed to crack down on it always result in a lot of entirely innocent people getting cut out of aid or having it delayed needlessly - so there better be good reason for doing that. Have you checked to see if your baby is in the bathwater?

[Elegiac]

1. What would happen if -everyone- in the labor force said: "Fuck you, I'm not doing the shitty job"? Which is basically something unions can help organize and what gives unions their power. But this also brings up the heated point of what happens when unions go on strike and they start blocking entrance to the factory for non-union employees or others who don't agree with the strike...

Not very progressive of you supporting strike scabs.

2. Quality of Choice is relative - and it even smells a little bit of consumerism.

"Choices made under duress are non-choices is consumerist" is pseudo-intellectual bullshit, Pro-Violence. As is the argument that poor people in Western countries are under less duress because they aren't living in whatever fictional version of Africa you've constructed in your head.

[Elegiac]

My objection to this is the fact that it's incredibly difficult to deliver concise numbers about illegal activities like these

Cool. Given you can't provide sufficient justification for the harm done to people who are using the system as intended by gatekeeping assistance, the argument should be disregarded.

50% of me feels like: "My income tax is 50% because my country has extremely strong and generous welfare systems, and I know at least a few dozen people who have been intentionally exploiting the welfare system for decades..."

No you don't. Conservatives frequently say this but the stories typically don't hold water when put under scrutiny, if they even bother sharing them.

Nor are you thinking of the several times more people that would get assistance delayed or denied trying to punish your "friends". You aren't the arbiter of justice, sweaty.

[Elegiac]

We'll have to agree to disagree, and that is fine.

So yeah, you can't actually provide any examples of what you're worried about that personally affect you, so you have to construct hypothetical scenarios in which you're aggrieved because your tax dollars "might" go to someone "undeserving".

This is why we're skeptical whenever people claim welfare fraud is a significant problem. Because there's never any evidence presented besides "trust me" and "well there's no way to measure it" and other intellectually dishonest arguments of that sort.

[Elegiac]

Pfff, nah you are probably right. Knowing how governments and politicians operate, the money probably would go into their own pockets if it wasn't being spent on others undeserving or undesirable.

Which is an entirely different problem from welfare fraud or unionization. Once again you're taking curiously anti-worker stances for a "Pro-Violence" progressive.

[Glorious Leader]

Well several points on that:

1. What would happen if -everyone- in the labor force said: "Fuck you, I'm not doing the shitty job"? Which is basically something unions can help organize and what gives unions their power. But this also brings up the heated point of what happens when unions go on strike and they start blocking entrance to the factory for non-union employees or others who don't agree with the strike...

2. Quality of Choice is relative - and it even smells a little bit of consumerism. The choice to live in accordance with the atomic family model is entirely up to each individual. Less so when we're literally talking about dying from starvation... but how realistic is that in a western nation anywhere, where there are a thousand and one alternatives to get free food if you're really in need.

1. Brilliant you understand the concept of solidarity and why its so important.
2. https://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america

Of course one not need die of starvation but still suffer from malnutrition. Additionally leaving ones job carries a number of consequences far beyond hunger. Since health insurance is tied to employment in the US you lose that as well. Misery, destitution, poverty all the consequences of not having employment. The choice is really a non choice. Again when the quality of choice is so poor you may as well get shot.

[Acidbaron]

Your opinion is trash because unionization isn't a real option for everyone.

Should all workers unionize? Yes.
Can they without massive pushback from capital? Obviously not.

If you want to enter the realm of pointless exercises and do something like rate an opinion you can and i can simply throw that back at you.

Now however what you don't understand is our different understanding of worker rights and unions as you are American and i am European there's a vast difference between the both in how they are organized and structured. That's the reason why i also highlighted them being nation wide organized.

Surely they can push back but yet the unions on European soil have a lot more teeth, true some companies did move out in part of that but long term is that a negative ? i beg to differ.

[downnola]

If you want to enter the realm of pointless exercises and do something like rate an opinion you can and i can simply throw that back at you.

Now however what you don't understand is our different understanding of worker rights and unions as you are American and i am European there's a vast difference between the both in how they are organized and structured. That's the reason why i also highlighted them being nation wide organized.

Surely they can push back but yet the unions on European soil have a lot more teeth, true some companies did move out in part of that but long term is that a negative ? i beg to differ.

This isn't a thread about unionization in Europe, it's a thread on workers in an Amazon warehouse in the United States trying to unionize. My knowledge of union structure in Europe has nothing to do with you making a sweeping statement about workers being fools for not being in a union. I don't really give a shit if it's easier for Europeans to join a union. Good for you, I'm glad for EU workers. However, we're not there yet.

[Cthulhu 2020]

so you are gonna purposedly ignore huge amount of "forever unemployed living of social support programs " people in many western countries so it fits your narrative got it. and huge amount of immigration with sole purpose of living of such programs that those countries experience (it was one of main reasons Brexit happened - by hey lets ignore it sure why not)

im sure people paying taxes who sponsor such living are ok with it too - that their taxes are wasted instead put into healthcare of education systems.

yes i get it - it has nothing to do with this particular case. but its not some imaginary problem of Austrian school economics

The legend of the welfare queen is just that. One woman gamed the system and suddenly Reagan propped her up as every single unemployed adult in the world. The reality is that living off of welfare is not possible, especially in the US.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, I wouldn't say it's the majority either, it's probably a minority, but still quite a bit more than what official numbers might indicate.

What bothers me usually in these discussions is that some people have the tendency to pretend there aren't any people at all ever committing welfare fraud or... what for me was the most comical, the idea that the concept of a 'welfare queen' is some sort of 'racist myth' - while I wasn't even remotely considering race in the equation, but speaking entirely from a west-european perspective...

I'm all for strong social welfare systems, but I also think there should be strong checks and balances to combat fraud. The only thing that sours my mouth whenever I say that is that I'm well aware that corporations get much more welfare hand-outs than any common person could ever spend in a multitude of lifetimes - and that there might indeed be systemic forms of exploitation and abuse that put common people at a heavy disadvantage in the labor market as opposed to the employers. But I'm also not entirely on board with pretending that all employers are evil or malicious. I mean... can you really blame them when there's hordes of employees throwing themselves at their feet willing to do anything for a poverty wage? Are they supposed to be saints and say to themselves: "Damn, making money out of this is wrong. I should pay them an honest wage instead and perhaps not turn a profit at all..."

1) There already are strong checks and balances in place to prevent welfare fraud. You could spend billions of dollars more and a couple of hundred people might get away with a couple of thousand dollars each. Boohoo, you just wasted money anyway.

2) The welfare queen myth was started in the US. It was a racist dogwhistle against a very specific black woman, but was used as a bludgeon to rally whites against welfare by being told that blacks were sucking up the federal budget by buying lobster and wine with welfare money.