More like this
After posting this essay about skeptical theism last week, Michael Egnor showed up in the comments to heckle me. Egnor, if you are unfamiliar with him, is a blogger for the Discovery Institute, which does not bode well for the merits of his comment. He opened his remarks sensibly enough by…
Via Lessig and as explained beautifully by Colbert, payday loans are evil.
The Colbert Report
Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Word - Have Your Cake And Eat It, Too
colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes
Political Humor
NASA Name Contest
Being a Democrat is no…
A lot of people who rail against popular music (hipsters, classical music snobs, etc.) will cite the mere presence of one or more saxophones in a song as evidence that it sucks, as if saxophones are inherently evil. I've never really understood this attitude, and wonder how widespread it is. Thus,…
Over at The New York Times, Gary Gutting has an interview with philosopher Michael Ruse. It is part of a series on philosophy and religion. There are several interesting nuggets in the interview, but I just want to discuss this one:
G.G.: Do you think that evolution lends support to the…
This is just an isolated incident.
Everyone should read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine". It ties together so many things that have happened in the last 20 years or so in a way that is makes perfect sense, yet is chillingly evil.
As an ageing lefty, I would only observe that even a bad union is better than no union.
Tom, I'm not going to disagree outright. I only wonder if a union that goes out of its way to create conflict and discord between management and labour doesn't have a negative impact. Can a union be so bad that it hinders the company's growth and prosperity.
>>if a union that goes out of its way to create conflict and discord between management and labour<<
Unions come into existence BECAUSE of conflict and discord in the workplace. People don't look to organize and join unions until things are very bad. The vast majority of workers do not want to stir up trouble -- they only want relief from trouble that already exists. And as for strikes...I have twice been in situations where strikes looked like they might be necessary. In both cases, the overwhelming majority did NOT want to strike. They wanted almost any solution except that. People go on strike only when they feel their backs are to the wall.
I've worked in places that needed a union but didn't have one. I've worked in a few places that didn't have a union but people were happy enough without one. I've never worked in a place where a union existed and it didn't appear to be needed. And yes, even a piss-poor union is better than none at all.
itzac, yes. So can a company.
currently reading it. very depressing. but I knew beforehand already that whenever a disruption happens, wealth concentrates and misery spreads instantly. it takes active effort to keep power/money/etc. from accumulating in one spot. unions are essential. they only become diffictult when THEY reach critical mass at which power/money starts concentrating around them*. this is what happens to IGMetal in Germany. Still, even a powerhungry union is better than no union; checks and balances, as it were.
*I'm starting to think this is some law of physics: money/power accumulate and concentrate freely around certain objects, and the larger the object, the faster the accumulation/concentration happens, until all power/money has accumulated in one spot, at which point all motion stops and the universe ends :-p