←back to thread

996

(lucumr.pocoo.org)
1002 points genericlemon24 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.201s | source
Show context
stego-tech ◴[] No.45149449[source]
These times really do feel like those once-in-a-century redefinitions of work and labor, similar to how we got Child Labor Laws and 40-hour work weeks from the labor movement early last century. Intrinsically, more people are realizing that the former social contract was long ago fed into a shredder, and that the lack of a formal contract will have consequences. Technology broke down the 40-hour work week by enabling more work to be done both outside the office and after traditional working hours, drastically increasing productivity and profit while wages stagnated for decades in the face of skyrocketing costs. Now we’re racing ahead towards a breaking point between Capital cheering shit like 996 and AI job-replacement, while more humans can’t afford rent, or food, let alone education or healthcare on their burrito taxi wages.

Something will eventually have to give, if we aren’t proactive in addressing the crises before us. Last time, it took two World Wars, the military bombing miners, law enforcement assassinating union organizers, and companies stockpiling chemical weapons and machine guns before the political class finally realized things must change or all hell would break loose; I only hope we come to our senses far, far sooner this time around.

replies(6): >>45149684 #>>45149819 #>>45149975 #>>45150057 #>>45150329 #>>45150542 #
lifeisstillgood ◴[] No.45150057[source]
We probably need to rethink how companies are structured - there are (many) companies with revenues greater than most countries but are (in theory) dictatorships with no official ability to change course if the one guy who owns the shares does not want to.

Who is the ‘demos’ in a company? Who gets a vote ? Will voting really slow things down?

replies(3): >>45150308 #>>45150772 #>>45150917 #
kriops ◴[] No.45150917[source]
As long as the companies in question aren't monopolies on violence, it's a complete non-issue. So with that in mind, why would any sane person want to impose such an inefficient mechanism to allocate resources and make decisions within a company or corporation?

The only good thing about democracy in the context of a state, after all, is that every other alternative is worse. But that is strictly because of the fundamentally violent nature of the concept of a state, which does not apply to companies or corporations.

replies(4): >>45150967 #>>45151091 #>>45151183 #>>45152039 #
1. roughly ◴[] No.45151183[source]
The guy who whispers in the king’s ear also has an effective monopoly on violence.

What we’ve learned over the last half century is that extreme wealth disparities lead to extreme power disparities. Coercion doesn’t just emanate from the state.