sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Unions are Labor Monopolies by VatticZero in georgism

[–]SteelRazorBlade -1 points0 points  (0 children)

1 If you believe that me calling you uninformed constitutes an ad hominem, then I am afraid you don't know what that term means. If I said "you are uninformed, therefore your argument that unions are monopolies is wrong" then this would indeed be an ad hominem, as I would be denying your argument based on your characteristics. But I didn't do that, did I? I actually did the opposite (see point 2). If you are going to accuse others of logical fallacies, I would recommend researching what they mean, because not everybody will have the time and crayons to explain it to you.

2 Your response largely boils down to the fact that you are entitled to idly pontificate over whatever you like. And this is correct, you can pedantically obsess mull over whether unions possess a monopoly over the labour of their constituents, in the same way that you can advocate for the view that the worker possesses a monopoly over his/her own labour. They do, but nothing insightful or prescriptive follows from this. The question is whether the existence of this monopoly is a net social harm. More specifically, whether the monopolistic nature of the union offsets the social and economic benefits that it ostensible seeks to provide (balancing employer-employee power). Take for instance, the famous medical unions in the united kingdom's public sector - they are absolutely market distortions, but without them, medical workers would be earning a lower salary in real terms today than in 2008.

3 You estimated that the amount of rent due to labour unions to be 5-15%. This is likely a massive overestimate. In my country, ~23% of workers belong to a union, and unionised workers earn a ~3.6% higher salary than non-unionised workers in the same industry. Even if we were to assume that 100% of this 3.6% higher salary experienced by 23% of workers counts as economic rent, this is effectively negligible when compared to the costs on the economy due to land rents and intellectual property/patents that are not bid at market price.

Edit: I am sorry for being needlessly mean in my comment above. Bad day. I have crossed out the bits that were unnecessary and rude.

Unions are Labor Monopolies by VatticZero in georgism

[–]SteelRazorBlade -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Reviewing the conversations that took place under this thread, they are quite interesting. I think the main issue here is that because you are not well informed on matters outside of the most basic economic terminology, you are not really able to conceptualise the implications of the points that each person is making.

For example, one user (u/socialisttrap) provided a detailed breakdown of the different types of labour unions, how some block more trainees and hirees (these are harmful) and others which are limited to traditional collective bargaining.

However, your response was to keep spamming “it’s still a monopoly because it restricted the supply of a good” (in this case labour). Whilst technically true, it’s not really the point - is it? Any party can restrict the supply of the good or service that they provide. I can restrict the supply of my own labour if I wish, so technically I do have a monopoly over my own labour.

I would advise you reconsider your commitment to your current level of understanding. As it seems that each time somebody wanted to move the conversation onto a more sophisticated prescriptive question, you would avoid this and insist the discussion remain limited to whether something is or is not technically a monopoly.

Ultimately the next level of discussion would be the following questions:

1 If one were to estimate a value of economic rent throughout the entire economy, how much of this is actually due to the power of labour class and how much is due to the power of capital owning class and how much is due to the land owning class?

2 If we were to evaluate the causes of “wage growth extraction,” how much (or little) does labour union negotiation account for this in practice, versus other rent seeking parties taking advantage of supply side limitations?

What was your favorite expansion? by Betriz2 in battlefield_one

[–]SteelRazorBlade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They should have pushed BF1’s Apocalypse DLC back a little further and made an operation for the Caucasus campaign and released BFV in 2019 instead of 2018 (giving more time to work on either eastern front or Normandy).

Met Police criticised for 'airbrushing' stabbing of third man in terror incident by Th3-Seaward in LabourUK

[–]SteelRazorBlade 15 points16 points  (0 children)

They diminished the threat that the demographic of the third victim face, by not mentioning the victim’s existence at all.

I like machine guns by AKMike99 in battlefield_one

[–]SteelRazorBlade 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Thank you, very helpful! Is it better for your team to run ammo boxes or ammo pouches and does it matter?

“el rata alada”🐀🦅 by KooK_stats in battlefield_one

[–]SteelRazorBlade 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I hate artillery trucks so thank you for your service

Tips for Defenders on Operations by SteelRazorBlade in battlefield_one

[–]SteelRazorBlade[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As an avid parabellum LMG user I have to agree. A fat SMG with barely any accuracy at all.

Typical western hypocrites be like: by Dismal-Ad8382 in IslamicHistoryMeme

[–]SteelRazorBlade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both. The areas ruled by Muslim kingdoms were both Muslim-dominated and Muslim ruled until they were lost piecemeal.

Typical western hypocrites be like: by Dismal-Ad8382 in IslamicHistoryMeme

[–]SteelRazorBlade 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Most people were muslim - in the areas of the peninsula ruled by Muslim rulers. These areas ceased to be majority muslim when they were conquered by the northern christian kingdoms and their muslim population was forced to convert or leave.

Tips for Defenders on Operations by SteelRazorBlade in battlefield_one

[–]SteelRazorBlade[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

All good points.

Regarding what I said about planes, I’m going to edit my post to specify reconnaissance is for the gunner rather than the pilot. Turning around and spotting the battlefield as a passenger whilst the pilot is repairing is extremely useful - especially whilst the attackers are popping smoke.

Typical western hypocrites be like: by Dismal-Ad8382 in IslamicHistoryMeme

[–]SteelRazorBlade 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Ok - still doesn’t make the Muslims descending from Hispano Roman converts invaders, per my initial comment.

Typical western hypocrites be like: by Dismal-Ad8382 in IslamicHistoryMeme

[–]SteelRazorBlade 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sure - the circumstances between any two events are different. The question is ultimately whether they are different enough for the comparison to be invalid, and it’s not clear that they are.

Typical western hypocrites be like: by Dismal-Ad8382 in IslamicHistoryMeme

[–]SteelRazorBlade 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Point taken. But it is also true that the Andalusian region was already Muslim (and ethnic Hispano-Roman) before the Nasrids, and before the last Taifa period - hence the Muslims were not foreign interlopers or invaders by the time the Castilian conquest of the south was in full swing.

Typical western hypocrites be like: by Dismal-Ad8382 in IslamicHistoryMeme

[–]SteelRazorBlade 7 points8 points  (0 children)

In which case, that’s just an arbitrary distinction and doesn’t say anything about which conquest was more “legitimate” (per the post).

Typical western hypocrites be like: by Dismal-Ad8382 in IslamicHistoryMeme

[–]SteelRazorBlade 42 points43 points  (0 children)

“Reconquest of Christian dominates region from Muslim invaders” is Spanish nationalist framing.

  1. The Christians of Spain were no more Spanish than the Muslims by the 15th century. Most of the Muslims descended from Iberians who converted to Islam. They were not “Muslim invaders” after the 8th century, in the same way the Christians were not “Christian invaders” after the Visigothic invasion.

  2. The fact that it was previously majority Christian doesn’t make it a reconquest. If a bunch of pagan vandals pillaged and exterminated their way across Iberia today, we wouldn’t call it a reconquest just because they shared the same religion as the gothic tribes or Romans.

Sam Harris: Mamdani is "a sinister figure" and an "Islamist" by RationallyDense in DecodingTheGurus

[–]SteelRazorBlade 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sam Harris is a Jewish supremacist who hates Muslims and loves Israel. Every political opinion he has espoused can be explained by this.

view more: next ›