jdreyer wrote on Jan 12, 2020, 15:38:

CthulhuFan wrote on Jan 11, 2020, 20:10:

jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2020, 15:29:

CthulhuFan wrote on Jan 10, 2020, 14:31:

NKD wrote on Jan 9, 2020, 11:12:
Unions aren't viable as a one time thing that pops up and gets you a nice contract that lasts forever. You need an organization that can foot the bill for lawyers and handle all the shit that a gaggle of random employees who aren't experts in labor law can't do. Plus considering that companies love to do shady shit to keep people from forming a union in the first place, it's not something you want to give up once you have it.

A contract with an organization that no longer exists doesn't really have much teeth.

I would argue that is the point of a PAC.

1. A pro-employee PAC gets its funding from unions.

This should be funded by individuals

Individual contributions are even more anemic than union contributions.

2. Even a PAC funded by unions can't compete with the amount of money, access, and lobbying that a corporation can afford to spend, and thanks to cases like Citizens United, there is no upper limit corporations can spend promoting their views and getting their legislation passed.

I'm going to need a source on that shit. I do, however, agree that funding for local elections should be limited to locals/constituents. Outside influence in a local area should not be tolerated.

Here's one source on PAC spending, there are many. Here's a primer on Citizens United, where the Supreme Court decided that money equals free speech.

3. The amount of influence corporations have on legislation is documented here:

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.

Emphasis mine.

Yeah, I don't think we disagree here. You're talking about "Chrony Capitalism". I don't like it either.

Actually, crony capitalism is related, but a bit different. Certainly corporations manipulate the political process to engage in crony capitalism. However, they also manipulate politics more broadly to reduce regulation, reduce worker benefits and salaries and protections, etc. in order to improve their bottom line.

Until corporate money is completely prohibited from the political process, there's truly no way to have a real democracy that operates for the people. Until then, unions are a necessary evil to counter the power of corporations.

Until corporate money is completely prohibited from the political process, there's truly no way to have a real Republic

jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2020, 15:29:

CthulhuFan wrote on Jan 10, 2020, 14:31:

NKD wrote on Jan 9, 2020, 11:12:
Unions aren't viable as a one time thing that pops up and gets you a nice contract that lasts forever. You need an organization that can foot the bill for lawyers and handle all the shit that a gaggle of random employees who aren't experts in labor law can't do. Plus considering that companies love to do shady shit to keep people from forming a union in the first place, it's not something you want to give up once you have it.

A contract with an organization that no longer exists doesn't really have much teeth.

I would argue that is the point of a PAC.

1. A pro-employee PAC gets its funding from unions.

This should be funded by individuals

2. Even a PAC funded by unions can't compete with the amount of money, access, and lobbying that a corporation can afford to spend, and thanks to cases like Citizens United, there is no upper limit corporations can spend promoting their views and getting their legislation passed.

I'm going to need a source on that shit. I do, however, agree that funding for local elections should be limited to locals/constituents. Outside influence in a local area should not be tolerated.

3. The amount of influence corporations have on legislation is documented here:

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.

Emphasis mine.

NKD wrote on Jan 9, 2020, 11:12:
Unions aren't viable as a one time thing that pops up and gets you a nice contract that lasts forever. You need an organization that can foot the bill for lawyers and handle all the shit that a gaggle of random employees who aren't experts in labor law can't do. Plus considering that companies love to do shady shit to keep people from forming a union in the first place, it's not something you want to give up once you have it.

A contract with an organization that no longer exists doesn't really have much teeth.

RedEye9 wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 14:04:
mises
Any organization that opposes child labor laws and is anti-immigrant gets my support. /s

Prez wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 12:52:
As with most everything as complicated as organized labor and the capitalist model the reality is far from either extreme that both sides project. There is a lot of truth to the claims made in the links provided by Cthulufan... but there is a lot of glossing over of inconvenient truths and omissions of facts that would provide a more complete representation of the subject such as why unions were formed in the first place and how historically they greatly improved the working conditions of the American worker. On the flip-side, I have been dealing with unions for most of my adult life, and know first-hand that there is a lot of what unions do that is, at best, counterproductive and, at worst, detrimental to the business its workers are employed by. There is just no denying that unions can be uncooperative, unrealistic, and unwilling to accept basic reality when at contract negotiations. They demand things that harm productivity and fly in the face of reality all the time. I've seen it many times over the course of almost 30 years.

What it comes down to, as has been stated previously, is that unions are a necessary evil in the modern work force. They stand as the only check and balance against unfettered capitalism which, let's face it, has nothing to do with proper treatment of workers. To pose raw capitalism as being at all inherently altruistic is either painfully naive or grossly misinformed. Unregulated capitalism is as brutal as any economic system ever devised.

RedEye9 wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 11:14:
Do you have sources for all this harm?

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Jan 7, 2020, 12:57:

Here is the self destructive mentality common in non-millionaire people these days, mostly in the US, but other countries also. "Screw Unions, I want to be fired at any time, for any reason, and work 7 days a week, 60 hours a day for no extra pay!"

Darks wrote on Jun 18, 2019, 19:30:

Quinn wrote on Jun 18, 2019, 16:00:
Man this looks fucking ridiculous. To each their own though. Good that you guys have fun.

I know right! I cant understand how shit like this gets funded. its like kids from the 80's have invaded our timeline.

MeanJim wrote on Jun 5, 2019, 16:06:

I had a friend that was super into Diablo when it came out. It's one of those games I never understood the hype around it.

Wesp5 wrote on May 30, 2019, 02:40:

Cutter wrote on May 29, 2019, 23:37:
Sure hope they have the Nosferatu in this.

Missing clans have been promised as free DLC, so expect Nosferatu and Gangrel then!