Prelude to the Apocalypse

[Domino]

Except for the Unions ruling (which I do believe was right), the others were meh this week. Twitter is having a meltdown right now.

[Mischief Maker]

Except for the Unions ruling (which I do believe was right),

So if a bunch of your coworkers gather their money together to hire laywers, use their free time off organizing, and the end result is that you, who did none of the work and paid none of the fees, get more money on your paycheck. Or better healthcare. Or a bigger pension. You're materially benefiting from their hard work and the money they spent, and you contributed nothing. And this is fine with you?

Don't you ever say a word about "welfare queens."

[Domino]

So if a bunch of your coworkers gather their money together to hire laywers, use their free time off organizing, and the end result is that you, who did none of the work and paid none of the fees, get more money on your paycheck. Or better healthcare. Or a bigger pension. You're materially benefiting from their hard work and the money they spent, and you contributed nothing. And this is fine with you?

Actually no. The catch here is if you elect not to be part of an union, then you shouldn't get any any of their benefits or their "wins." The big part on why I was happy with the ruling is NO ONE should be force to pay dues if they don't want to. If they believe they are better off negotiating their pay/benefits without the help of an Union, then that's their right.

[Mischief Maker]

If they believe they are better off negotiating their pay/benefits without the help of an Union, then that's their right.

But they're not.

An individual worker is objectively worse off negotiating with management than a collective union. No amount of smooth talk or groveling will overcome the massive power imbalance between an individual worker and a huge corporation.

Individual Tesla worker goes up to Elon Musk and says, "you need to raise my pay and benefits or I refuse to work on your assembly line!" Musk responds, "Fuck off, you're fired. My HR department already has your replacement picked."

The majority of Tesla workers go up to Elon Musk and say, "you need to raise our pay and benefits or we refuse to work on your assembly line, then you get to tell the board of directors why you fell short of your manufacturing targets yet again!" Musk responds, "God damn it! I can't replace all of you fast enough to meet my target. I guess I can survive with one less Zeppelin this year, what do you want?"

There's a reason Musk's company is interrogating his workers to make sure they aren't unionizing.

You know that line from The Usual Suspects, "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist?" There's a decades-long class war going on and not only didn't you know you were a combatant, while you were contemplating the abstract ideal of individual decision-making that the Libertarians distracted you with, you missed that fact that your position's being overrun right now and you're about to find yourself on the business end of a bayonet.

[Ed Oscuro]

I feel it's right that forcing non-union members to pay wages was unjustifiable philosophically - unfortunately, with old-school system of allowing -simply allowing! - collective bargaining getting wrecked, we're set to have the pendulum continue to swing all the other way towards a modern Gilded Age, this time called the Gig Economy. Actually, we're clearly already there; we're just seeing the last vestiges of the old system being swept away.

I'm no expert on unions, but from what I have read (and heard) it seems that the system evolved to be too closed and too rigid. I've read a couple stories of union leadership colluding with corporate management, a situation that would not stand in the old days before leadership got coopted like everything else. Naturally the anti-union campaign from the right is not aimed at improving the chances of tradesmen, which is another example of the GOP's tactics being ultimately short-sighted and hypocritical. Really, when did you last hear about a GOP strategy to improve the standing of a regular employee?

It's funny that we have so many people on Capitol Hill think nothing of being in or praising gropus that effectively set their own pay and conditions - the Armed Forces are basically able to set their budgets, Congress members are largely members of the American Bar Association, Trump promotes unions for Border Patrol and police. At the same time, these folks work to deny teachers the right to set their professional standards and plans for teaching students. That should be alarming because teaching wasn't historically considered a 'low income' or 'low skilled' job; but certain people are trying to ensure that it becomes one. And this is to say nothing of all the jobs that actually have been historically considered low-skilled or manual labor. Amazon and trucking companies alike are abusing 'contract employee' deals to screw over employees. Real pay for truckers is just a fraction of what it was in 1980 - and here's a good read about what's coming down the pipe from Amazon: link.

And so this is not just a partisan screed, I've noticed that many so-called tech hub 'liberals' seem to act as if promoting gay and immigrant rights gives them the right to be robber barons every bit as much as the Subpar Koch Bros. Commenter guinnessfanatic writes:

I mean, the endgame is 10 people in McLaren P12,000's and 300 million people, walking to work and manually mowing those 10 200,000,000 acre lawns.

That was aimed at the Kochs but I can't convince myself that Jeff Bezos isn't exactly the same.

People have just got to be smarter than to turn to the likes of Trump to rescue us from this nonsense.

[Mischief Maker]

I feel it's right that forcing non-union members to pay wages was unjustifiable philosophically

What are you talking about? I just gave the philosophical justification. It's not possible for a lone worker to effectively negotiate with management, it has to be done collectively. Collective Bargaining is expensive both in money and time and the benefits are given to all workers. If a worker collects a higher paycheck because of the union, but doesn't contribute any time or money to the bargaining that made that pay raise possible, that worker is a freeloader.

If you think the whole necessity of a union is a massive inefficiency, you're starting to learn the limitations of capitalism and why interest in socialism is growing. And before you go, "Eek! Stalin," understand that modern socialism doesn't focus as much on the state as they did a century ago. Modern socialism looks to seize the means of production through things like worker-owned-and-operated Co-Ops.

[Ed Oscuro]

I generally agree with that - and your post kind of ninja'd mine; mine was aimed at the previous post by Domino Pizzaman.

I suppose I could clarify all the same: I think some inefficiencies crept into the union system over the years, but the basic idea of collective bargaining is not something I think can be thrown away without messing with fundamental liberty. To give up collective bargaining is to say "I believe in my freedom, except when it comes to being paid." I am drawing a distinction between saying "there is something better than collective bargaining, and / or democracy" with saying "there might be says to fix the union system / democracy."

Part of the problem might be how it is framed. Not many people would get a warm response for arguing they don't have to pay taxes for certain roads because they don't use them. Try as I might, I don't see a way such a person could just not use the roads and have the problem solved, just as I don't see how not paying for the military or police are options. I also don't see how somebody could seriously say "I don't want to be part of this collectively bargaining process, I'll just take a lower wage." Even putting aside the issue of them working against their interest, how would anybody adjust their pay to what it was without the collective bargaining, without totally destroying the right of others to bargain collectively?

I realize this is the issue facing pretty much every worker today, when it comes to how the spoils of work are divided.

But still the idea bugs me a bit, because there are limits to how far I would be comfortable taking taxation or private responsibilities. You can take an old Three Stooges story about the banker coming to take the farm, and replace the banker with "Uncle Sam." I don't know how often it happens, but this is a big bugaboo that goes bump in the night for lots of people. Maybe it's just the wrong worry, I dunno. The problem I see is that a lot of people want just one system for every eventuality, when we should be able to agree that something like the right to collective bargaining is straightforwardly anticipated by the American Republic's founding documents.

Chalk it down to the perfectionist / gentle soul somewhere in me. Philosophy has a history of being abused for getting around an obvious answer.

[ED-057]

An individual worker is objectively worse off negotiating with management than a collective union.

Not true. You are making too many assumptions.

Does the union negotiator know exactly what is good for the workers?
Is the union negotiator 100% loyal to their cause?
Is the union negotiator skilled enough to always get the best possible deal?

No, they are human. Collective bargaining is not a sure thing.

I'm not saying unions are a bad thing overall. But when the entity that is supposed to represent you fails miserably (hello congress), it's nice to have other options. I have heard that, in some other countries, multiple unions may represent workers at a single employer and the worker is able to choose which one to be affiliated with. Unfortunately this is impractical in the US because we have bad laws.

[Ed Oscuro]

I think a compromise is really overdue here - it's fair to say that a bit of competition amongst unions can improve union services.

On the other hand I don't think MM is being silly to suggest that the basic practice of collective bargaining is always going to improve a worker's lot. That basic right is what's been at stake. We aren't going to get any substantive discussion of union issues because for the GOP unions are a threat to their tenuous hold on the political landscape, and Democrats are just trying to keep the right to bargain alive.

In a perfect world we could talk about those other issues, but on the whole I think the issue is this: Whatever concerns I have about the occasional bad union leader, or the right of a worker to not pay dues, are pretty small compared to what looks like part of the continuing pattern of voter suppression and disenfranchisement of people who have not been pro-GOP (or who have been targets of the GOP's wealthy backers).

In a perfect world it would just be about outcomes, and improving systems, but we do live in a megapartisan system.

[quash]

The problem with unions in the US is that they have grown too big for their britches in the past, and until the laws surrounding them change significantly, there's reason to believe it will happen again. I recall mentioning it before, but the UAW along with the complicit management at GM and Chrysler killed those companies. In the aftermath of their bankruptcies, not only did the union make out like a bandit ($35B to be exact), GM and Chrysler got the second chance of a lifetime on the taxpayers' dime.

I don't expect much, if anything to change in this area any time soon, in large part because there's simply no political will to change how unions operate in the US. You can come to your own conclusions as to why that could be.

[Mischief Maker]

An individual worker is objectively worse off negotiating with management than a collective union.

Not true. You are making too many assumptions.

Does the union negotiator know exactly what is good for the workers?
Is the union negotiator 100% loyal to their cause?
Is the union negotiator skilled enough to always get the best possible deal?

No, they are human. Collective bargaining is not a sure thing.

I'm not saying unions are a bad thing overall. But when the entity that is supposed to represent you fails miserably (hello congress), it's nice to have other options. I have heard that, in some other countries, multiple unions may represent workers at a single employer and the worker is able to choose which one to be affiliated with. Unfortunately this is impractical in the US because we have bad laws.

I never said unions are infalliable.

The fact remains that a lone worker does not have the leverage in negotiations that a collective would. Therefore the lone worker is at a tremendous disadvantage.

ANY system can fuck up if the person in charge is a fuckup.

[BryanM]

Why wouldn't the Democrats be able to filibuster?

The depressing thing is if the democrats were an opposition party, all it'd take is one republican having the sniffles for a month to delay the confirmation of Younger Kennedy to past the election.

The 60% passive filibuster is of course not real and will be removed the moment it stops the corporatists from anything. But in theory, yeah, you'd only need 40 democrats to completely block a nominee. Senator Tester has already vowed to support republicans to the best of his ability however, so I'm sure they can scourge out ~9 other villains to rotate in to confirm Asshole Merrick Garland, instead of forcing the republicans to change the Senate rules. Decorum must be upheld - it's not enough to lose with both fists swinging, you have to lose by laying on the ground and taking a nap through the whole thing first.

Otherwise, you might win an election and god help us we can't have that happening.

[Ed Oscuro]

Mitch McConnell's Stolen Supreme Court Seat Is Already Fucking Up America
Nice op-ed here; going past the headline, Jay Willis points out the right-wing bloc's apparent double standard on bias - in the gay wedding cake case, "a few stray comments ... constituted bias" but Trump's comments against religious freedom get a pass.

In summary, now the Republicans don't just get to ignore the law - now they get to justify their bad work with outrageous SC decisions. It's going to take some heavy lifting to right the ship again.

[Mischief Maker]

1934 NY times article urging Jews to tone down the rhetoric against Nazis. They're only acting on economic anxiety!

[quash]

Didn't you just rail against big business? I'm going to have to ask that you cool it with the anti-semitic remarks.

[Mischief Maker]

Didn't you just rail against big business? I'm going to have to ask that you cool it with the anti-semitic remarks.

Wait, what? Who are you replying to here?

[quash]

Quit being so coy. "Huge corporations", "capitalism", quoting The Usual Suspects. The jig is up. We all know what you really mean. There's no way you're attacking these institutions without also attacking those who uphold them.

[Mischief Maker]

Quit being so coy. "Huge corporations", "capitalism", quoting The Usual Suspects. The jig is up. We all know what you really mean. There's no way you're attacking these institutions without also attacking those who uphold them.

I think this analysis says more about you than it does about me.

[BryanM]

It's amazing some of our media is doing the same thing they tried to do with Corbyn, by actually being semi-honest about Cortez's positions on things. Seeing Sean Hannity scream at a list of "crazy" things that includes a bullet point of "Support seniors"? He didn't even reframe Medicare as a "government takeover of healthcare". How can you parse that as anything more than an intentional ad for the Democratic party?

The whole point of the overton window is you don't expose people to ideas they might like. It only takes 1% to tip the balance in our carefully manufactured and manicured see-saw electoral system.

[Mischief Maker]

Why the hell did The Young Turks fire Nomiki Konst?

There are so many other hosts I would have put on the chopping block before her. Especially Cenk's fucking nephew.

[quash]

Quit being so coy. "Huge corporations", "capitalism", quoting The Usual Suspects. The jig is up. We all know what you really mean. There's no way you're attacking these institutions without also attacking those who uphold them.

I think this analysis says more about you than it does about me.

Well, I'm only half joking. I don't see how you can point the finger at big business without also pointing the finger at those who run them, as if you can separate the system from the people that comprise it.

[BryanM]

Kyle's inexplicable love affair with Ro Khanna always has me baffled. Maybe it's just identity politics that warped his brain 'cause he likes the guy's personality?

Ro has always been an opportunist. He's young, and he sees where he has to go if he wants power 20 years from now. There's nothing wrong with someone being a cynical careerist, there's all kinds of people. If he votes correctly then he's fine, but a position of absolute trust... that's too far.

Why the hell did The Young Turks fire Nomiki Konst?

There are so many other hosts I would have put on the chopping block before her. Especially Cenk's fucking nephew.

Tell me about it... they're not called the young turds for nothing man.

Only theories I've got is they either don't like a newcomer being more popular than them, or they wanna be more like the "real" cable news outlets. And you know the #1 feature of cable news outlets is, they don't have any field reporters who go outside and talk to people and take the time to learn about things.

Some of the other youtube talking heads, like that one guy who makes hour long videos of himself talking while sitting in the corner of his house, speculate it might be monetary troubles, or that maybe they're just kickblaster scamlords.

It's kind of analogous to when MSNBC fired their #1 host, Donahue. In the sense that this was like the #1 person not to fire, and any reason one could come up with is not good.

[Mischief Maker]

I don't see how you can point the finger at big business without also pointing the finger at those who run them, as if you can separate the system from the people that comprise it.

The main business owners I've been criticizing in this thread have been the Kochs and the Mercers, neither of whom are Jewish.

Again, this analysis of yours is more self-revealing than anything. I think you need to lay off the Breitbart for a while, it's getting into your brain.

Kyle's inexplicable love affair with Ro Khanna always has me baffled.

Kyle's taste in set design has me baffled. Of all the political youtubers who have a set, his is the ugliest! The one and only piece of credit I'll give to Dave Rubin is his excellent taste in set design. When I first saw his show, I thought it was a TV program uploaded to youtube. Of course the more likely explanation is it was built by a professional set design company using Koch brothers money.

At least The Young Turks finally called out his dumb ass. It doesn't make up for firing Nomiki, but it's something.

David Pakman's always been the most transparent about political youtuber financials and he says the membership boom that happened after Trump's election has started to dwindle, so it's not unthinkable something similar is happening to the Young Turks and Cenk had been assuming they were becoming the new CNN (especially after scooping up Dan Rather) and expanded too optimistically.

[quash]

The main business owners I've been criticizing in this thread have been the Kochs and the Mercers, neither of whom are Jewish.

Again, this analysis of yours is more self-revealing than anything. I think you need to lay off the Breitbart for a while, it's getting into your brain.

You're not getting it. If you think the richest people in the US should have less money, you're more of an anti-semite than I'll ever be. This of course, follows the modern leftist convention of a policy or circumstance having a larger impact on a given group as being an attack on said group.

Also, Breitbart is kosher, so again, I'll have to ask that you cool it.

[Mischief Maker]

Are you suggesting that Andrew Breitbart is still running that website from beyond the grave? Like they're reading the copy out loud to a Ouija board and getting style corrections?

[BryanM]

Kyle's taste in set design has me baffled.

I actually kind of like how much of a 13 year old dude bro he is. The aggressive green lights, the justice league logo - the whole thing is like a transformer's cartoon from the 80's.

It's stylistically identifiable, too. Bloomberg has his dystopian Robocop set, corner bro is the only guy on youtube using his corner as a set (you'd think there'd be thousands of youtubers who did this, but no! They somehow rightly recognize no one in their right mind would do something so distracting.).... unique memorable decor helps make people remember that you exist.

Dan Rather

Certainly probably a major factor, that is not a small paycheck right there.

Which is a damning indictment on their organization. Come on, Dan in one hand, Konst in the other - who do you think their audience wants to see more of?

In my opinion aspiring to be the next MSNBC is a reprehensible thing. The worst thing.

Wanting to be the next Frontline would be ten million times better.

[Mischief Maker]

Well I just got back from the "Families belong together" rally at the capitol. It was roasting hot outside but we still had a good showing.

For the record, I saw Democrats there, I saw voter registration tables, I saw several flavors of socialists, but you know who I didn't see there at this most important moment?

The Green Party.

[BryanM]

Hopefully Mexico can get a little bit better from today's election. They pulled the lever for it, but the powers that be will do everything possible to stop it from happening. More than 130 candidates were straight up assassinated there this cycle.

It really seems distant.

The Green Party.

It's not really fair to try to hold up the Loch Ness Monster to some kind of existence test.

Its base is a loose coalition of anti-war, anti-vaxxors, anti-nuclear, anti-carbon, animal rights activists, environmentalists, anti-democrat party... it's always struck me as a group of people who on the whole don't actually want power.

The DSA at least has a strategy. Hierarchies are enforced by divisions, so in order to reduce the stratification of society, you have to tear down those divisions.

Hierarchies are enforced by divisions

Which is why management gets paid so much more than labor - it's not because they're worth more or cost that much, but its a bribe to divide their interests from working class.

In the absolute sense of things, it's like paying one of your kids $0.01 a month to narc on the others. It's a good strategy.

[gameoverDude]

Mitch McConnell's Stolen Supreme Court Seat Is Already Fucking Up America
Nice op-ed here; going past the headline, Jay Willis points out the right-wing bloc's apparent double standard on bias - in the gay wedding cake case, "a few stray comments ... constituted bias" but Trump's comments against religious freedom get a pass.

In summary, now the Republicans don't just get to ignore the law - now they get to justify their bad work with outrageous SC decisions. It's going to take some heavy lifting to right the ship again.

Mitch just got motherfucking SERVED! Tammy Duckworth used his own 2016 tweet against him. In that tweet, Mitch said "The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court justice". What a hypocrite.
None of the SCOTUS candidates Trump has been looking at seem to be worth a damn. At least moderate GOP Senator Susan Collins, who is a key swing vote, won't side with anyone who's hostile to Roe v Wade. Also, she has fought in favor of affordable health care.

I laughed when Sarah Sanders got kicked out of a restaurant. That's karma at work. Honestly, I wouldn't have admitted her either.

Last night I was told by the owner of Red Hen in Lexington, VA to leave because I work for @POTUS and I politely left. Her actions say far more about her than about me. I always do my best to treat people, including those I disagree with, respectfully and will continue to do so
— Sarah Sanders (@PressSec) June 23, 2018

If that's your best, Ms. Sanders... you sure need to do better! Oh well, I don't expect any good from the likes of you. Just try to be less bad.

[BryanM]

The Rhode Island Democratic Party endorsed a lowercase nazi over an incumbent. On the surface of it you'd assume it's just because she's not sufficiently corrupt, but if you dig a little deeper another theory arises: they want to get rid of her because she's the buzzkill that narc'd them out for getting wasted on the state house floor.