|
Bel Shazar posted:Seems to me it's 'ensuring you get the deal you want at the expense of the one you are less willing to fight for'
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 07:07 |
|
|
It's literally not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, from the pov of the dem caucus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:31
|
|
|
cat botherer posted:e.g., they don't care about the RR workers or the long-term stability of our rail system. Or their own party’s political future, given how this kind of backstab will play with union workers. Papercut posted:It's literally not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, from the pov of the dem caucus. Or the party leadership (and many members) just doesn’t support the workers and cares more about the rail bosses.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:32
|
|
|
All the rail workers need to do is offer a bigger bribe, or 538 bigger bribes, than the bosses, and justice will win. Fair's fair. They might have to throw in some late fees for not bribing earlier though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:34
|
|
|
Papercut posted:It's literally not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, from the pov of the dem caucus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:34
|
|
|
Just to be clear here, the deal they're talking about fast tracking forcing the adoption of has the 4? days of sick time that would still result in a strike based on less than half the membership approving it, and the one that's being split off to be killed is a Bernie addition that would expand it to 7?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:34
|
|
|
Papercut posted:It's literally not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, from the pov of the dem caucus. in this metaphor the perfect is 'workers get sick days' and the good is 'making it legal for a democratically controlled government to murder you if you strike for sick days'
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:35
|
|
|
Papercut posted:It's literally not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, from the pov of the dem caucus. I would say this is more along the lines of “don’t let labor get too much power” but that’s not a pithy truism used to make excuses for working against the interests of your ostensible (but not actual) constituents
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:35
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Just to be clear here, the deal they're talking about fast tracking forcing the adoption of has the 4? days of sick time that would still result in a strike based on less than half the membership approving it, and the one that's being split off to be killed is a Bernie addition that would expand it to 7? That is basically it. Because, and based on repeated examples that demonstrate their actual values, they aren’t willing to fight for even three extra days.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:36
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:in this metaphor the perfect is 'workers get sick days' and the good is 'making it legal for a democratically controlled government to murder you if you strike for sick days' Seven sick days itself is a completely insulting amount. It's cartoonishly evil that they have to fight for that lovely bare minimum.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:37
|
|
|
Papercut posted:It's literally not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, from the pov of the dem caucus. I think the problem with this old chestnut is that the "good" in this scenario still involves a strike. If the starting position is "this strike cannot happen no matter what" then the railroad ownership has already won, which is to say rail service is likely about to get loads worse because "victory" for them means a likely exodus of rail workers and despite their insistence it is not in fact their plucky entrepreneurial spirit that keeps the trains running
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:39
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Just to be clear here, the deal they're talking about fast tracking forcing the adoption of has the 4? days of sick time that would still result in a strike based on less than half the membership approving it, and the one that's being split off to be killed is a Bernie addition that would expand it to 7? No. The deal they’re talking about forcing the adoption of has 0 days of unpunished sick time and Bernie is wanting 7 instead of 4 that the union is asking for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:39
|
|
|
The non-doom angle has a couple things going for it. 1) Cornyn flat-out said that Bernie's amendment was going to attract a lot of GOP votes. He didn't have to say that, and wouldn't if the plan was to kill it. If the GOP was going to strongly oppose the sick leave they would have had their propaganda machine spun up against it by now, but they aren't. 2) Splitting it off might have also been a request from the GOP to show that they are better than Biden and/or make a play for the blue-collar PA voters that they JUST badly lost ground on. Rubio also strongly hinted at this.
Rigel fucked around with this message at 16:44 on Nov 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:41
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:in this metaphor the perfect is 'workers get sick days' and the good is 'making it legal for a democratically controlled government to murder you if you strike for sick days' It's interesting that you didn't bother responding to the post explaining why you were wrong yesterday, but you're back on it today. Here you go: Main Paineframe posted:Only if you're somehow posting from 1899. Yeah, it sucks. It's a lovely thing Biden is doing, but please either support the "omg this is legalizing murder" routine or stop it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:46
|
|
|
Also, the perfect versus the good analogy just flat out doesn’t work because in this instance the good is the 4 days the union is asking for and the perfect is the 7 days that Sanders supports. The deal Biden is calling on Congress to pass has 0 days.
Nucleic Acids fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Nov 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:48
|
|
|
Rigel posted:The non-doom angle has a couple things going for it. 1) Cornyn flat-out said that Bernie's bill was going to attract a lot of GOP votes. He didn't have to say that, and wouldn't if the plan was to kill it. 2) Splitting it off might have also been a request from the GOP to show that they are better than Biden and/or make a play for the blue-collar PA voters that they JUST badly lost ground on. So they say they're forcing adoption of the compromise deal, which has 4 days, but now I'm told the force them back to work bill has 0 days and the sick days are separate entirely. If it's not to pass what the owners want and then punch out until the split bill expires at the start of the next Congress, what is the point? These are people that have sold their souls in many cases chasing the high of bipartisanship, hell they invited Kasich to speak at the DNC, why split it off at all if the intention is still to pass it, especially when splitting to kill stuff the progressives like is a tactic utilized by both Biden and both Dem majorities already?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:50
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:It's interesting that you didn't bother responding to the post explaining why you were wrong yesterday, but you're back on it today. Here you go: What’s the point of deploying law enforcement and military if not to make the “else” part of “or else” clear? Why deploy the armed wing of state power if the implicit threat of violence isn’t needed or desired?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:50
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:Also, the perfect versus the good analogy just flat out doesn’t work because in this instance the good is the 4 days the union is asking for and the perfect is the 7 days that Sanders supports. The deal Biden is calling on Congress to pass has 0 days. This is clearly not true from the perspective of the Democratic caucus. They wouldn't be passing this is they thought it did zero good obviously.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:53
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:It's interesting that you didn't bother responding to the post explaining why you were wrong yesterday, but you're back on it today. Here you go: YMB has never and will never post in good faith and it is absolutely infuriating that disingenuous rear end in a top hat is still allowed to post here. e: gently caress off forever you smug prick (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:54
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:So they say they're forcing adoption of the compromise deal, which has 4 days, but now I'm told the force them back to work bill has 0 days and the sick days are separate entirely. If it's not to pass what the owners want and then punch out until the split bill expires at the start of the next Congress, what is the point? These are people that have sold their souls in many cases chasing the high of bipartisanship, hell they invited Kasich to speak at the DNC, why split it off at all if the intention is still to pass it, especially when splitting to kill stuff the progressives like is a tactic utilized by both Biden and both Dem majorities already? Do we even know that its 0 vs 7? We only know the amendment adds 7, so it could be 4 vs 11
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:54
|
|
|
Papercut posted:This is clearly not true from the perspective of the Democratic caucus. They wouldn't be passing this is they thought it did zero good obviously. Good for who? Who do you think the constituencies they listen to vs those they placate are? that they are being shady is a clear sign that the bosses are the main constituency for them. Voters and workers are a managed asset, bosses are co-workers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
Papercut posted:This is clearly not true from the perspective of the Democratic caucus. They wouldn't be passing this is they thought it did zero good obviously. Everybody considers what they want in this to be the good outcome, who cares what they think is good or not, what are the actual details and how likely is it to be a ham-fisted needle threading that ends up making EVERYBODY mad is the real question.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
Papercut posted:This is clearly not true from the perspective of the Democratic caucus. They wouldn't be passing this is they thought it did zero good obviously. The "good" that they feel the bill is doing is ending the strike before Christmas so that corporations can get their products to sell to consumers. This bill really comes across as the ruling class telling the workers "Ok, you've had your fun, but now you need to get back to work because it's starting to cause an inconvenience."
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
Papercut posted:This is clearly not true from the perspective of the Democratic caucus. They wouldn't be passing this is they thought it did zero good obviously. Or they are passing it because they don’t support giving the union workers even the four days they’re asking for. Based on the Democratic Party’s history of splitting bills to kill things they don’t want, I think that’s more likely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:56
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Do we even know that its 0 vs 7? We only know the amendment adds 7, so it could be 4 vs 11 Well I asked an a couple people said the one congress is pushing is 0 despite the compromise having 4, I'm not really in a position to read the still changing text of a bill that probably isn't even written so I'm sort of going off what I'm told here
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:56
|
|
|
Papercut posted:This is clearly not true from the perspective of the Democratic caucus. They wouldn't be passing this is they thought it did zero good obviously. They would if it was a gop demand to make a statement
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:Or they are passing it because they don’t support giving the union workers even the four days they’re asking for. Based on the Democratic Party’s history of splitting bills to kill things they don’t want, I think that’s more likely. Except this time the gop is strongly hinting that a lot of them will support it to be better than biden
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:59
|
|
|
Papercut posted:This is clearly not true from the perspective of the Democratic caucus. They wouldn't be passing this is they thought it did zero good obviously.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 16:59
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:It's interesting that you didn't bother responding to the post explaining why you were wrong yesterday, but you're back on it today. Here you go: he opened with 'yes, it does, but we haven't done it in a long time.' because he knows about the Pullman strike, and chose to excise it from consideration on grounds of inconvenience. it would be preferable if declaring a rail strike illegal was not also declaring it legal to send in the army to murder strikers on grounds of national security. it is a profoundly uncomfortable thing to acknowledge. really useful when it comes to telling workers to eat poo poo or die, though, as the last century of rail strikes has shown.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:01
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Except this time the gop is strongly hinting that a lot of them will support it to be better than biden I do doubt that they’ll put their money where their mouths are, but at the end of the day, it’s the votes that count.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:02
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:he opened with 'yes, it does, but we haven't done it in a long time.' because he knows about the Pullman strike, and chose to excise it from consideration on grounds of inconvenience. Wasn't the Pullman strike like...literally over a century ago?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Everybody considers what they want in this to be the good outcome, who cares what they think is good or not, what are the actual details and how likely is it to be a ham-fisted needle threading that ends up making EVERYBODY mad is the real question. I'm responding to this quote:I cannot conceive of a single reason why these bills would be split other than to ram through the rail bosses’ deal and then kill the sick leave provision I think it's easy to conceive of other options, such as having 90+ senate votes for the general bill and closer to 50 votes for the sick days. If the OP had said they didn't think the Dems were willing to play hardball while putting the overall deal at risk, I'd agree.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
Papercut posted:To insure that at least the deal gets passed while still attempting to include the sick leave provisions No. It's to ensure that the deal gets passed while throwing up a half-hearted fig leaf where they pretend like they're trying to include the sick leave provisions, even though everyone knows they won't. Papercut posted:It's literally not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, from the pov of the dem caucus. A strike might be forcefully prevented through legislation, but that's not going to stop the attrition of workers. People are leaving those jobs at a faster rate than new people are being hired. Until the railroad corporations actually improve working conditions by spending money focused on retaining staff, they're going to continue to hemorrhage workers through retirements or quitting until the system breaks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:08
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Wasn't the Pullman strike like...literally over a century ago? The us government literally bombed strikers from their air on Blair Mountain. Deploying police and national guard units (or even the army) always represents a threat of violence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:08
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Wasn't the Pullman strike like...literally over a century ago? I have to obey laws written over a century ago all the time. History won’t ignore you no matter how hard you try to ignore it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:09
|
|
|
Papercut posted:I'm responding to this Maybe they just don’t have the votes because they don’t want to pass the sick leave period and aren’t will to even try whipping their caucus
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:10
|
|
|
I'd put my money on the Dems not really thinking in terms of warfare because they're fully technocratized and think this is just another series of pin heads to fly through, and the GOP doesn't actually intend to do anything more than sit on their hands much less think. If it falls apart I think it gets messy quick and then quicker as "they" realize just telling the police or army to deal with it doesn't help when people are just leaving the industry now that they've got their answer as to if it'll ever get better, all while nobody actually wants to be formally associated with it in any way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:10
|
|
|
As was pointed out yesterday, the Dems don't have the votes needed for an action going beyond the tentative agreement. This is another case where having more Senate votes would make it more viable. "Whip harder" is no more of a meaningful counterfactual here than it was any of the previous times it was raised to ignore the current balance of the Senate.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:11
|
|
|
How many years does "we machine gunned hundreds of your grandparents and are allowed to do it to you if you want a sick day" take to expire as a subtext to the conversation? 30? 50?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 07:07 |
|
|
Is there actually any sort of mechanism that stops the unions from voting down the deal and then ignoring any back-to-work legislation? We just had an episode here in Ontario where the government imposed a bad contract on education support workers and made it illegal for them to strike. They struck anyway, and the government backed down, because it's not like people are lining up for those jobs (especially at what they pay these days), and firing them all would have done nothing to reopen the schools. The rail workers seem to be in a similar position—there's no credible threat that they'll be fired and replaced.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2022 17:12
|
|
