Share good ideas and conversation.   Login, Join Us, or Take a Tour!
comment by kleinbl00
kleinbl00  ·  261 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: The Real Future of Work

I follow a lot of capitalists. I read their newsletters. They're all about figuring how best to get your capital to increase. In human terms, that means I listen to a lot of rich people who talk about how their richness can be leveraged to make them richer. They don't put it in these terms, of course. However, there's only a couple of them that talk about working. One of them talks about how hard his dad worked so he makes his daughters work hard. Another one talks about how his farm is a toy compared to his grandpa's farm. All of them are stock investors and advisors and if they do any work, it's symbolic. It's a hobby. Implicit is the notion that if you work for a living, you're a chump. Sure you're noble and sure you're the heartbeat of America or some shit but you're a chump.

The implicit argument of communism is that it's unfair for rich people to get richer simply because they're rich, particularly if it comes at the expense of the average working stiff. Therefore the implicit argument of capitalism became the idea that everyone is entitled to get rich any way they can. Anybody interfering with the rich people's rights and opportunities to get richer was - wait for it - a communist.

I'm union. My union has more teeth than most. I realized recently that my union is as strong as it is because the structure of Hollywood is one in which every show is a startup while the unions are forever. Unlike most of America, where the corporations hold all the cards, a new show in Hollywood is weeks old while the unions go back decades. Their structure is proven and in place while the producers are forming a new system; not only that but the guilds backing the producers have agreements with the unions going back to the very beginning. As such, the big stuff is going to be union, it's just a matter of time.

That advantage is rare everywhere else. Workplace protections, wage guarantees, all that stuff falls by the wayside when the way to succeed is to dissolve whatever agreements you have and re-form under a new name.

It isn't gloomy-and-doomy for you because you didn't understand what was happening and now you do. For me, it illustrates what's been happening for decades - worker protections are being eliminated, the middle class is dissolving, and capital is trouncing the shit out of labor.

Labor always outnumbers capital, though. It can't continue. We'll see what it looks like when the growling stomachs deafen out the platitudes.




OftenBen  ·  261 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    Labor always outnumbers capital, though. It can't continue. We'll see what it looks like when the growling stomachs deafen out the platitudes.

You've read more history than me. I'm still crunching through volume one of Durant.

Has this story ever ended other than with violence?

kleinbl00  ·  261 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Violence is not a binary condition. Russia became the USSR through civil war. Violence in the west was mostly contained to some riots, firebombings and assassinations. India could have been a lot more violent than it was; China a lot less so.

So no - it's never ended other than with violence but yes, it has happened with less than armed uprisings.

OftenBen  ·  260 days ago  ·  link  ·  

It reminds me of that alleged Churchill quote about prostitution.

    “Churchill: "Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?"

    Socialite: "My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms, of course... "

    Churchill: "Would you sleep with me for five pounds?"

    Socialite: "Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!"

    Churchill: "Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price”