What would you recommend to capitalists, for defending themselves from the broader population, that might be a superior alternative to using human shields?
Overall, employers hold almost all the power in their relationships over employees.
Depending on individual and conditions, some may find themselves with the privilege of slightly improved bargaining power, but no assumption is stable or reliable, and ultimately employers have the final word. A company always may find other workers more easily than, in the greater balance, individuals may find other job positions.
Workers have no inherent or intrinsic value in the relationship. Companies value workers only for their labor, and do so under systems of labor commodification captured beneath the whims of the market.
There are many variations of the theme throughout history that may be called hospitals, but any large facility for housing the ill would have tended to have no private owner. Doctors visiting the homes of patients has been more common historically than patients visiting homes or offices of doctors.
One problem is that as technology has been advanced to treat health conditions, care for individuals has been forgotten in its basic essence of being humane and social.
The profit motive definitely deforms the structure of medicine and medical services.
A guarantee for coverage, with most providers being private, is the essence of the systems in many countries, and is far better than the system in the US.
Yet, even considered globally, our world has been made bleaker by the domination of healthcare, for development, manufacturing, and distribution of technology and processes through private corporations, the features of such systems including monopolies, patents, and private investment.
We might try to imagine medicinal systems being structured and practiced as a public good, emphasizing human life as having the highest value.
I get it. You want dialogue, discussion, and deliberation. Nothing hasty.
There are lots of angles to consider, and one thing for sure is no one ever gave them much thought.
Perhaps it would take at least two more decades of development and planning to achieve any kind of tax code that is more sensible and equitable than the one currently in place.
Not having a union guarantees having no power when the bosses stomp their boots over the faces of workers.
A union is just workers agreeing and organizing among themselves that they prefer to fight back. United we can build the power we need to make meaningful advances.
There is no reason simply to let the bosses take whatever they want just because no one tried to stop them.
Hustle culture has infected America. But the truth is, the only real way to get ahead isn’t by working harder or out-competing your co-workers – it’s by teaming up and collectively REFUSING to work.
Workers form unions because they want to fight capital, not because they somehow have an option to take control of the workplace, but refuse to do so because they love their bosses.
Class struggle entails shifting balances of power.
Many groups are interacting within each side.
Workers currently have little power, but the UAW action has so far seemed as one of the most momentous opportunities in recent memory.
Building power depends on seeking gains that may be expected to be both reached and to be held. Once a stronger position is reached, then the even stronger position becomes closer at hand.
You are suggesting throwing everything at a single opportunity within a hostile and untested climate.
It is wise to seek modest gains one at a time, trying to encourage everyone that better days are coming soon.
At the moment, even a substantial symbolic victory in one area would be quite significant in terms of building momentum to expand movements across the working class. When one group of workers rises, even by only a modest increment, we all gain power in the shared struggle, power we can use to climb higher.
I question the comparison, implying that an entire union must strike in one particular case, simply because such a strategy was successful in another case. Many strong differences in circumstances are relevant.
In comparison as soon as UAW closes down a shop the big 3 start losing money.
The observation seems to challenge your own premise.
Why is Fain pumping the breaks when he could be building more momentum (for both his members and the labor movement at large) with a full strike?
The current strategy seems to be winning, unless I am unaware of deeper problems. I am not understanding why you are displeased, or what you realistically expect that would be much better.
I feel you may be cherry picking arguments in order to support a conclusion you have reached for reasons that are emotional. Otherwise, I have little more to offer.
Because they can print as much money as they want, devaluing yours in the process
The observation that is politically relevant is that availability of money is not a constraint for the capacity of the state to ensure adequate provisions for everyone, as long as such provisions continue to be available through production.
Cryptocurrency is based on a fantasy of apolitical money. Bitcoin is not currency because designation of an asset as currency is political. The moment everyone realizes that Bitcoin has neither intrinsic value, like gold, nor state backing, like the dollar, the value crashes.
JT, the creator of ST, certainly has expressed various views that many find problematic, respecting Marxism-Leninism and related historic events.
Nevertheless, the ST channel itself is curated to explain values and objectives that are largely noncontroversial in leftist circles, anti-capitalist and socialist. I feel JT deserves some acknowledgment for successfully explaining such ideas while separating some of his own more controversial leanings.
The broad observation is that the political world is not divided between those who criticize NATO and also laud Putin, versus those with sympathies exactly the inverse. It is possible to criticize the practices and alignments of one’s own nation, without having distorted views about another.
Views about the Russian invasion of Ukraine are too nuanced and complex that anyone’s may be reduced meaningfully to a few lines of text. It is helpful to avoid attempting clean demarcations between right versus wrong.
It is being claimed that JT, the creator of ST, supports Putin, due to JT’s view that the US and other NATO-aligned states militarily supporting Ukraine broadly serves to exacerbate the same trajectory of geopolitical tension that has helped enable Putin’s aggression.
JT has called for NATO weakening ties with Ukraine, and reversing its course of expansion, as part of a process for seeking stronger diplomacy between the West and Russia.
I believe he regards such a strategy as best supporting the long term interests of mitigating the incidence of armed conflict and gaining power for the working class internationally.
He has also criticized Ukrainian elites as prioritizing their own class interests aligned with foreign oligarchs, above the broader interests of the working class in Ukraine and elsewhere.
Much of JT’s rhetoric and many of his connections are ML, which has not helped him reach common ground with many outside such circles.
Value is generated by work, but valorization is based on processes of use or exchange. Generally assets have intrinsic value. Fiat currency has no intrinsic value. Its value derives from the state assuring a demand for goods and labor, which will be purchased in the currency, from assuring the availability of investment assets, which will promise a return above an original value, and from regulating the supply, to assure that the values of ordinary goods will remain generally stable.
The term limit is used in mathematics differently from how you are understanding it from vernacular usage. A mathematical limit expresses directionality toward an unreachable value.
The meaning of the statement is that every marginal augmentation of the money supply carries some marginal diminution of the currency value, without any possibility that the supply may be exhausted absolutely or the value annihilated.
The reason CEOs want workers to Return To Office is because they want you to quit ( www.fastcompany.com )
Employees threatened with loss of healthcare if they strike. Their employer is a hospital and they're nurses. ( www.oregonlive.com )
One of the main reasons employers want to keep healthcare private; enormous leverage against labor, organized or not…
We're already understaffed... ( lemmy.world )
Amid financial stress, workers are asking for emergency savings accounts as a job benefit, survey finds ( www.nbcchicago.com )
Saw this on Facebook 😍 ( lemmy.world )
How Unions CRUSH Capitalists - Adam Conover ( www.youtube.com )
Hustle culture has infected America. But the truth is, the only real way to get ahead isn’t by working harder or out-competing your co-workers – it’s by teaming up and collectively REFUSING to work.
Historic change for tipped workers: Subminimum wage to end in Chicago restaurants, bars ( www.usatoday.com )
Tipped restaurant and bar workers in Chicago will make $15.80 per hour through raises over the next few years as subminimum wages are banned.
UAW will not expand strikes at Detroit automakers after last-minute GM proposal ( www.cnbc.com )
They quit their jobs. Their ex-employers sued them for training costs ( www.straitstimes.com )
Nonunion autoworkers are watching the UAW — and deciding whether they want in ( www.nbcnews.com )
Flashback - Mark Zuckerberg on billionaires: 'No one deserves to have that much money' ( www.cnn.com )
Why The Government Has Infinite Money ( www.youtube.com )
A video explaining modern monetary theory and how with a little Marxism it can benefit everyone.