If there’s that much of an issue, then rail employers should actually acknowledge the power of the union, negotiate, and fucking deal. The state stepping in to kill collective action here, because it might affect people over there is done not to protect the people over there, but to ensure they don’t get any ideas of their own.
But with the US electing swinging to what we laughably refer to as the left, I wonder if it could cause the CPC trouble in the upcoming election.
No. We lag behind the US’s shifts here, which is why it’s important to PP to get the election rolling before the year is out. While he’d still probably win an election next year, in all likelihood it would be a much smaller victory should the Yankees actually send any kind of message rebuking the naked fascists running this year.
We could less-figuratively use O’Leary as the signal fires of Gondor.
Well, further end, at least. There’s been very little in the way of movement leftward in the last 40 years.
Giving a sliver of a shit about PoC and vulnerable minorities is not a shift leftward.
Federal government has the means and responsiblity to persuade and cajole provinces in certain directions when it comes impacts of policies they are implementing.
I’m not going to defend Trudeau. Not on any front.
But this is a bad take. Any federal government taking a take-it-or-leave-it approach to the provinces is attempting to operate as a dictatorship, and it’s something that should be actively resisted or rejected.
The problem right now is that there are a lot of Conservative Premieres, and they can taste blood in the water, so they’re circling and stonewalling.
The Liberals have been unambiguously pro-business since Cretien. It’s just which businesses have been the focus of their support that’s changed somewhat over time. Neoliberalism has been at the heart of the party since the Red Book.
The current administration has been throwing all of its support behind big city “businesses businessing businessly” businesses. Think of Bill Morneau and his family enterprises, or anything B2B where it seems like something the client company could just do on their own, but they gain a lot of connections by working with the other business.
You know. Rich people bullshit.
Sounds like some corporate offices and some parliamemt buildings need to be burnt down
Remember folks, you have the right to strike! Unless doing so actually meaningfully impacts anything.
But these workers are not. These workers are fighting for their rights, and that’s going to inconvenience everybody else. So, they’re going to highlight that inconvenience, rather than the underlying cause.
Albertan minister, a Chamber of Commerce guy and a CN rail official. No union representation. This is a bit shameful from the CBC.
This has been par for the course for a while now, unfortunately. The CBC’s most used lens is “How does this inconvenience the average Canadian?”, followed by “How much does this impact shareholders?”
Oh good! Does this mean the government’s also going to protect my stock portfolio and guarantee those investments always succeed, too? Because if so, I should start having a stock portfolio!
“We increased supply! That makes prices go up, right?”
I think a significant issue here is that Reddit is not built for fostering communities, and things that mimic Reddit will not foster them, either. The whole model is built around an endless number of very large, single subject discussion spaces with functionally no globally consistent moderation or oversight.
This is a model of content categorization and filtering for individual consumption, not community building. Lemmy “communities” are just content tags, they’re not real community spaces. They’re never going to encourage the kind of tight knit spaces with idiosyncratic customs, rituals, and rules that actual vommunities have. They’re never going to let you get to know others because “off topic” discussions are meant to be had in entirely different spaces.
Reddit and reddit-like services are about content creation and delivery, noy community. Thatms baked into the form.
Commumusm is when gubmint no give tax credits to rich and when hair
The policy rate is sitting right around where it was prior to 2008. In the years that followed, the economy went nuts, and a big part of that insanity was masked by the essentially free money capital was able to get from lenders. Venture Capitalists managed to gain immense influence over so much of our daily lives, and employers masked their ever growing share of the pie with ever cheaper and lower quality consumer goods that got cheaper relative to overall inflation.
Rather than fix the underlying problems, they’re signalling that they want to go back to sweeping them under the rug.
Fun.
It’s upper management that wanted people back mire than anyone. They had no one to show off their wealth and power to.
No, they’re happy to pay their friends from the public purse, too. They’re just not also above throwing those friends under the bus when they think it’s politically advantageous.
Especially if they were someone else’s friend.
Employers lost their minds when they saw their office employees comfortable and happy. They realized that WFH gave them just a little bit of control over their day, and that meant the employers haf just a little bit less.
Then they tried to strong-arm them back into the office, and a lot of people quit. Those who did not were less than enthused to be there, and many people were completely burnt out from the pandemic. Employers returned to offices having lost their most productive people, and having angered a significant number of those who stayed. Many disgruntled workers talked about cutting back their work activities, since they rexognized that their efforts didn’t eben earn them the trust to work without their boss standing over their shoulder, let alone more tangible bemefits.
Around the same time, reports of a completely separate phenomenon - one where employees gradually disengage from their jobs as they search for a new one - came out. These were based on corporate research that showed you could predict who would tender a resignation days or even weeks before they did so. This phenomenon was given a name by the report’s authors.
Once that name got misapplied to the former consequences-of-employer-actions, bosses got talking, and people who are Very Serious Business People Who Are Very Serious Abpit Business went into action to do what Business People do best: talk confidently about bullshit and things they know nothing about.
The result has been a “-gate” like meme of reproducing and evolving names for things that people with too much time and money believe are keeping them from owning peoples souls.
Because “you need to name a problem to solve a problem”.
Yes, that’s how leverage works. I think they know that when they themselves are negotiating from a place of power.
Unfortunatey, it’s very difficult to actually decide what an election will be based on. You usually try and figure that out by polling the electorate and framing your election campaign in its terms, in a form of political judo.
This is going to be a cost-of-living election. Milhouse is just trying to turn that into an anti-tax thing.