[untitled]
5 comments
Do you really want to know? We have 150+ years or socialists studying this problem after all.
The answer is to force the government to impose sky high tariffs. This forces local production and thus the employment of people locally. And if that leads to a shortage of goods and price hikes ... then it leads to a shortage of goods and price hikes.
The answer is to force the government to impose sky high tariffs. This forces local production and thus the employment of people locally. And if that leads to a shortage of goods and price hikes ... then it leads to a shortage of goods and price hikes.
Coming *to* big tech?
Though I appreciate disclosing your bias in the title, I guess.
Though I appreciate disclosing your bias in the title, I guess.
It's too bad it doesn't actually work like that. If unions were like a plague of locusts you could unleash on some monopolist and have them pick the bones clean in an afternoon, they'd be an extremely useful tool in getting rid of those companies.
Meanwhile in practice they do what they did to the 20th century US automakers, i.e. decades-long stagnation while their customers suffer from the continued consolidated market until some foreign competition finally shows up to eat their lunch.
Meanwhile in practice they do what they did to the 20th century US automakers, i.e. decades-long stagnation while their customers suffer from the continued consolidated market until some foreign competition finally shows up to eat their lunch.
The main positive benefits are around overtime pay, work hours and well-defined work schedules and tasks. Now that also comes with drawbacks. Seniority decides who moves ahead, you can't easily hop into tasks that your contract has not been defined for (e.g. if you're a python dev that can do rust).
To think that a union will protect against layoffs is wishful thinking.