This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I do generally support labor over capital I would say. But I would also say that I think more restrictions should be placed on Mergers & Acquisitions for large companies. I believe in harsher penalties for companies that break laws, and harsher penalties for labor violations and retaliation. I would support a mandatory minimum number of sick days and maximum consecutive work hours. I would support more scrutiny over independent contractor status and using salary to avoid unpaid overtime.
As for Trump's tariffs talks, I don't think much of them. Labor in other countries costs pennies on the dollar. I think the tariffs necessary to dissuade that would cripple the economy. Well, that and I don't trust anything Trump says, and that goes double for Trump campaigning.
If you understand that labor in other countries costs pennies on the dollar, and that the tariffs necessary to dissuade that will cripple the economy, you should be able to easily understand that a mandatory minimum number of sick days and maximum consecutive work hours makes purchasing labor locally more onerous.
How do you expect to stop the extremely entrenched practice of outsourcing to the cheapest bidder?
I don't pretend my policies are 100% free, but even something like a minimum 2 sick days a year, or mandating that someone cannot be made to work > 24 hours straight do not strike me as onerous enough to have a noticeable impact on price. It wouldn't result in any change 99% of the time in any case, it's there for the few times it would apply.
I don't think you can. Labor is like a tenth of the price in other countries, if that. Best thing to do is invest in more high-tech industry.
I don't- I'm confused. Or maybe you're confused. Leaving aside the costs of enforcement and that companies will pull every trick in the book to avoid it - can you answer the following, yes or no?
Simple thought experiment: do you think a company that has employees working for 10 hours a day is more or less competitive than one that has employees working for 11 hours a day, assuming all other factors (race, culture, net productivity, labor cost) are equal?
Obviously in the long run the market will usually point in the right direction. But not every actor in a system is a rational one. I'm not interested in micromanaging every possible behavior. I'm more interested in, when you can point to a situation that is clearly far out of bounds of reasonable, forbid it for the sake of if someone ends up in that situation they have recourse. To that end, the limits should be high enough that it doesn't come up often. It shouldn't need too much enforcement. Just allow it to be sued over and with penalties that would dissuade it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link