Oh that’s interesti…no…no it’s dumb. Have a great time with that “logic”. I hear parts of Yemen don’t have any such tyrannical gov’t, maybe you should take a look?
You expanded my vocabulary.
I think that there is something else in that report. That lawmaker said that women should quit and find an employer with better workplace protection. Therefore, he believes that the employee is in a position to negotiate a working contract to her advantage.
In my experience, that is what the rich actually think. And it makes sense for them, because they are usually in that position themselves. They are in power and they can negotiate contracts to their advantage.
So it’s more a blindness to what the average worker actually feels than anything else. It is not an excuse, of course.
Interestingly, some workers are in that position. Silicon valley firms apparently make lots of efforts to attract and keep graduates and will provide benefits for pregnant women. The reason is market forces: there is a shortage of bright minds. It is possible that this south Dakota lawmaker may be thinking albout that particular scarce workforce. In any case, he is still completely insensitive to the needs of 90% of his voting base, who are not in that position.
He’s not engaging, which is interesting because I was reading about a recent study that showed that people of far-right views tended to make posts promoting their views but not reply to other people. I guess it’s stereotypical behaviour.
In a just world, it would be where you kept .bat files.
That is one of my favourite visual puns ever.
Shawn, I was wondering what your perspective on contracts might be?
The way you were describing the relationship between the employer and employee almost made it sound as if you believed that whilst negotiating a contract coercive force could be used by only the employer and not the employee.
I was wondering if you saw this as a disparity or if you thought perhaps there were extenuating circumstances that make it desirable to have such an unbalanced use of force predominate what should be good faith negotiations?
IMO this doesn’t really mean the employer is actually using violence, although you do seem to equate that kind of unfair application of forced coercion with violence, so I’ll use your terminology for the purpose of this question.
Laws are rarely enforced at the “point of a gun”. Laws are followed out of cooperation and mutual respect.
This is what pisses me off so much, it’s that the people advocating for changes that increase their personal wealth at the expense of more than half the population are so stupid. That’s the way to the guillotine. Making things better for everyone means that bigshot CEOs still get to live great lives and have nice homes and great vacations. It also means no murderous revolt in sight, no angry masses voting in Trump to take (misdirected) revenge, and far less everyday theft and violence.
Of course I’m not sure they are actually stupid. I think at least some of them are psychopaths who want exactly the world they are trying to create.
Rep Steinhauer expanded on this view, saying that pregnant people shouldn’t want to work for employers who wouldn’t accommodate their pregnancies, and thus the state was doing them a favor by failing to require employers to treat workers with fairness and dignity.
Do me a favor and don’t do me any favors.
Posting stupid rants online is a choice. I suggest you choose silence.
Did you know that starting and running a business is also a choice? You aren’t in prison, you don’t have to pay for other people to have kids. Just walk away.
They need to study the classics to learn about real anarchism:
Correct! Big fish think that.
and because this is a giant cargo-cult: Thinking that makes you a big fish.
Ah, AnCaps. Anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Has he been banned, or just run away?
You all scared him off by using so much force.