🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@JonKramer

No not always... other companies are unionized too, working for yourself wont help as they wont hire consultants and contractors either outside of the union... When unions are pervasive you dont have those options (much like when companies start to collude to price fix)

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec

@JonKramer

Quite the opposite, unions make markets less free... Thankfully in most cases they may remain free-enough depending on how pervasive it is.

Take Netherlands as an example (where unions are required and everyone is in one)... There when I was around 20 I would make 1/3 what I make in the USA. Now that I am 40 I make about 1/10th my salary there thatI would in the USA.

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec

@HeavenlyPossum

I am not claiming that exclusive contracts arent bad... they are... they just arent the only issue nor the issue on the table.

@JonKramer @trinsec

@HeavenlyPossum

No, you keep trying to sell this idea (and its nonsense) that working together is the same as price fixing.. it isnt. The owners dont control the prices within the company they own, its nonsense. Yes they are collaborating, no they arent price fixing.

@JonKramer @trinsec

@JonKramer

Because you might really like the company, you want the particular position because of your potential for your career, or perhaps because you just cant find any other jobs because they are all union jobs in your area.

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec

@JonKramer

Actually there are plenty of states where unions can force employees to join. Ultimately they forced a company into such an agreement which the company is now not able to get out of and is legally obligated to only hire union workers. In some states this is legal, others it is illegal. It is called "right to work" laws.

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec

@JonKramer

The fallacy you just demonstrated is:

cum hoc ergo propter hoc

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec

@JonKramer

Correct, and unions usually stubb out competition... In fact in quite a few states you are legally **required** to join a union and in some countries too. In that sense they are 100% effective in eliminating competition as they legally managed to do so.

Even when you arent legally obligated to join the union as a worker have you ever tried getting a job at a unionized workplace without being in the union, even if you are willing to work for half the rate? Chances are you wont even get an interview and if you did all your coworkers would be actively sabotaging you.

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec

@JonKramer

It has nothing to do with morality, it has to do with a healthy, functioning economy where everyone benefits.. price fixing destroys economies.

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec

@HeavenlyPossum

Again, cooperation of any kind isnt the issue. Companies and people can cooperate all they want.. What they cant do is price-fix.

Labour can sell their services through staffing firms, and they even set their prices as a group when they do. This is fine because it doesnt target the entierty of a niche (all employees of a single company, or of a particular class of workers, or even of a geographic region). Much as company owners have some ability to collaborate and work together so long as they dont price fix (cooperate with other companies to fix the price within a certain niche such as a geographic location).

@trinsec

@JonKramer

Even just two companies of one person each would be in violation of the law if they colluded to price fix together. We have seen examples of this where single-owner businesses on a signle block (in this case on a campus) colluded to price fixed and were found to be acting illegally.

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec

@HeavenlyPossum

And you are missing the point.. The legal structure is such that their collusion is severely limited by ensuring they dont have the information about the internal workings of the company to collude in any way that would result in price fixing.

People are allowed to work together, companies and employees... what they can do is collude to carry out price-fixing, and owners are prevented from doing just that.

@trinsec

@JonKramer

Of course there is a barrier to entry when it comes to work... Your success as a worker financially is largerly dependent on your education or skills. Aquiring those skills costs money.. there is a huge barrier of entry for those starting out in life with no skills or money and must compete with others int he labour force to grow their "brand" so they can make more money as they advance as a worker. Education for example (or other forms of training) is a huge barrier.

@ech @trinsec

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec

Because the system is specifically designed such that multiple owners cant collaborate in large numbers.

If you want to start a company that has more than a few owners then it would be a corperation since other types of companies have severly limited numbers of owners.

In a corporation the owners must be isolated fromt he board and the board somewhat isolated from day-to-day operations. One of the reasons to isolate the owners from what happens in their own company is specifically so they cant collaborate and manipulate prices within the company.

@JonKramer

Well no.. all you need is enough people collaborating to artificially tilt the market, it doesnt have to be an exclusive contract.

This is why anti-trust isnt limited to company coalitions that require companies to join (which dont exist anyway)... even just two companies collaborating to fix price is illegal... just as even two people collaborting in a union should be.

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec

If you want to argue that way then fine, id be forced to oppose antitrust laws if I were to be convinced to support unions. Since as you say they should be free to collaborate

@HeavenlyPossum @trinsec @JonKramer

No not at all this has nothibg to do with exclusive contracts

@AmpBenzScientist Its not the physical mechanisms that enable immutability that is the problem, there are tons of good approaches there. The issue is more around the elegance of the whole process (namely mutate-and-copy paradigms)

@postmodern Oh I agree, the handling of immutability has been less than elegant since the get go.. but its not really a ruby problem.. no OO language handles it all that well to be honest.