Blake [he/him]

  • 2 Posts
  • 574 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle

    • 7zip (archive tool) People still use Winrar for whatever reason.
    • Firefox (web browser) - It’s well known but still under-used. Stop using chrome. Chrome will be the end of the free internet.
    • windirstat (visualise used disk space) - I use this to clear free space
    • musicbee (music player) - replaced VLC with this because VLC has had a bug that makes it not playback FLAC files properly for like… A year?
    • Screen2Gif (gif recorder & editor)
    • ShareX (screenshot/video tool)
    • Open Video Downloader (GUI tool to rip YouTube etc.)
    • uBlock Origin (ad-blocker) addon
    • Sponsorblock (sponsorship skipper) addon





  • See, what you’re having trouble with here is that you don’t want to support censorship, even though you do. You don’t like the connotations, so you find some excuse that makes it more comfortable for you. It’s cowardly and dishonest. The word means what it means. Call me a pedant, tell me I’m not adding to the conversation, I don’t care. You’re still supporting censorship whether you want to wear that label or not.





  • Until this moment you haven’t asked me for any sources for my claim, whereas I have asked you multiple times for yours. Your basis is “just my vibes” and now you’re acting like I’m an asshole for pointing out that your position (arguing against science based on vibes) isn’t rational. Now by claiming I haven’t backed up my claims, despite pretty much accepting that they were valid until this moment, you cast me as irrational, and instead of asking for proof of my claims so you can amend your perspective, you just loftily declare that the conversation is over, because you know fine well that if it continues, your world view will be completely compromised.

    Anyone who wants to see the proof can simply Google “average wage difference for unionised workers” or anything like that. You can do the same thing. I’m guessing you already have, but decided “that doesn’t apply to me” because you’re oh so special.

    Lower risk often means lower reward

    For investment and such, yeah sure, but not everything follows the same pattern. Unionising and collective bargaining is a perfect example, because it consistently has been shown to lower risks and increase rewards, again and again.

    Act all indignant if you want to. You’re giving me a perfect platform to demonstrate the superiority of my ideology against your very weak, irrational reasoning. If you think that I’m somehow hurting my cause by revealing the inherent incoherence of your position, then yeah, sure, I’m really destroying my cause right now.


  • I’m in the same field as you are with years more experience. Not only that, I have experience in management in the same field.

    I am not denying that you have individual bargaining power that I’m sure you’re leveraging successfully.

    I am just pointing out to you that if you were unionised, you’d have even more bargaining power which would almost definitely have resulted in a better outcome for you.

    Collective bargaining may not be risk free, but it’s lower risk than individual bargaining, by definition.

    There’s plenty of proof, and I don’t see why I need any more. You’re just refusing to acknowledge it, like a flat earther faced with the results of their experiment refusing to accept it. Just because you say “no, I don’t like this scientific proof” it doesn’t mean that I’m somehow failing to back up my argument when I refuse to give you more proof. You have THE proof of the matter. Accept it and be right, or reject it and be wrong. It’s up to you.

    As for your analogy, being in a union does not mean you lose your individual bargaining rights, you can continue to negotiate your salary individually if you wish to do so. You do not lose any power or rights from being in a union. You only gain power.




  • I read your whole comment, but at no point does it explain why you think you wouldn’t be able to negotiate improvements with a union. What you have written essentially amounts to:

    “I was able to build a really beautiful cabinet with hand tools. I reject the notion that power tools make it easier to build cabinets. I know people who have power tools but they haven’t made cabinets as nice as mine.”

    If you have multiple people as a group who have the power to completely sink a business negotiating together, they stand a much better chance of improving conditions than any of them do alone.

    How are you reasoning against such a self-evidently true claim?



  • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uktoAsklemmy@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Whether I agree with you or not, technically, it is still censorship. Censorship is the limitations and restrictions on the freedom of expression, for example, prohibiting the publication of threats of violence is still a restriction on freedom of expression. It just happens to be censorship you agree with - that does not counteract the fact that it is censorship.