Norway Joins Denmark in Swedish Tesla Strike/Blockade
svt.se
svt.se
Highly recommend watching the full interview that Andrew Ross Sorkin did with Elon Musk (it is the one where he told advertisers to go fuck themselves) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BfMuHDfGJI
It is wide ranging and fascinating. In it, he explicitly says that he doesn't do things in order for other people to like him. Instead, he focuses on making the best products (e.g. best cars, best rockets, best satellite).
He really, really, wants to be internet liked, that’s he claims he doesn’t care about.
If that were true, then why consciously piss so many people off?
Which is different than "liked by 100% of the global population"
Despite really disliking Elon as a whole, one thing I like about him is that he expresses himself like a human being, contrary to most of the HR/PR/D&I drones who claim he's an antisemite now.
We saw the tweets (it wasn't just the one) he boosted and agreed with.
You can absolutely be a 'real' and authentic person without promoting that kind of garbage.
I don't think I'm alone in having previously thought he was perhaps a bit eccentric, but involved in some cool stuff. I lost a lot of respect for him though.
We all screw up, and IDK, maybe once could be like "uh, sorry, I was really high and not at all myself and I did this thing", but a repeated pattern is enough to convince me that where there's smoke, there's fire.
I don't take any pleasure in it. I preferred thinking he was a bit weird (but who isn't) and doing some cool things.
You think he repeatedly demonstrates antisemitism? The evidence is quite the opposite if you listened to the interviews he does on the topic of the war between Israel and Hamas (this interview being one of them, where he talks in nuanced terms about the difficulty of peace in the Middle East in general and the difficulty of the current war in particular).
This is like pointing out that a murderer went their whole life up until the alleged murder doing stuff that wasn't murdering (as far as we know), and has done so since, too (as far as we know), so how can they be a murderer?
It's worth noting, too, like the killer, the examples we know of are just the examples we know of.
If there's part of the interview where he admits he endorsed an anti-semetic conspiracy theory, and was wrong to do so (not just that it was a mistake) and explains how he came to endorse an anti-semetic conspiracy theory, and how he now rejects the anti-semetic conspiracy theory and the anti-semites who subscribe to it, perhaps he should put that info into the format and platform that he used to endorse an anti-semetic conspiracy theory.
However, putting Tesla directly into the political line of fire with the union fight seems more like a case of personal beliefs run amok. Many companies making cars in the United States run non-union shops, including most of the Japanese ones. Their behavior abroad doesn't usually create a problem. But the more that Tesla itself is positioned as a political entity, rather than a car company that happens to have a conservative CEO (which didn't kill Taco Bell), the more he invites the kind of backlash that could really hurt. European regulators watching him scorn their beliefs may take that into account, fairly or not, if they are called on to mediate this union dispute. It seems like a very risky overextension.
Or, he's a 50yo man with multiple divorces, few personal friends to vent to, and numerous children he's not on speaking terms with.
He just joined the millions of men his age that have the same baggage and the free time to spend bloviating online about wokeness.
It is implied with the phrase “burns company hours”
elmu's tasking of his staff to figure out why his trolling wasn't making him popular enough was a real thing, and a good example of his time wasting abilities in furtherance of his desperate, desperate, desperate need to feel popular.
Is that what he told the banks when he was taking out the loan to buy Twitter?
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/narcissistic-...
Then why piss off advertisers?
If you want proof that Elon isn't too concerned about making good products, try using Twitter/X without being logged in. The experience is significantly worse than before the takeover.
If you cared to watch the the interview I linked to above with Andrew Ross Sorkin at the NYT Dealbook summmit, you will hear three things:
a) remorse for the dumb thing he said (he says it is probably the worst mistake he has made)
b) when you say a lot, you're abound to say foolish things and that he has
c) he actually re-explained his clarification of the logic that was widely labeled as antisemitic but that people have chosen to ignore it. If you think this is a cop out, look at (a) again, where he expresses remorse for having said what he said in the way he said it.
> Then he got mad at advertisers for, as he thought, trying to rein him in.
Yes, when people try to limit what you say (beyond the law) then it is natural to be upset about it.
> If you want proof that Elon isn't too concerned about making good products, try using Twitter/X without being logged in. The experience is significantly worse than before the takeover.
Let's talk in 3 years.
Meanwhile, I'll point you to Tesla (Model Y is the best-selling car of any kind across the world), SpaceX, and Starlink. I don't know about you, but I would classify these as best in class.
X operates worldwide and even though Elon Musk is a staunch believer in free speech, X also has to follow laws of different jurisdictions, including limitations on speech.
That's just, like, your opinion, man. And I don't believe it.
It’s a very specific and weird personality type that’s constantly drawn to white knighting racists and billionaires.
"Foolish things" sure, but this is a little too forgiving. If I talk enough, I'm bound to call someone the N word at some point, for example?
This is the same interview where he told the advertisers he needs for revenue to go fuck themselves. I don't think the remorse is genuine.
> Yes, when people try to limit what you say (beyond the law) then it is natural to be upset about it.
I also feel that Disney is limiting what I say by not giving me millions in ad revenue. That's just the reality I have to live with though.
Most people have all kinds of practical limitations on what they can say. I can't tell my boss to go fuck himself and still put food on the table. Joe Biden can't tell the American public to go fuck themselves and still get elected. I'm not sure why Elon feels entitled to be uniquely free from consequences for his utterances.
He posts on Twitter because he’s addicted to it &can’t really stop himself. It’s not a grand strategy of PR.
In that sense, I'm giving him the benefit of a doubt there, but I don't understand why he has to do it with his real name.
You might have that view of YouTube in general but this is an interview during the New York Times Dealbook summit.
BTW, you will always reach the point where you need to "curtail[..] your own citizens from living as they please" or else you'll end up with kids blowing up your stuff just for the fun of it.
More in the classic libertarian sense that if what I enjoy is not directly harming you or taking away your rights, keep to your own business.
Here it is a Scandinavian choosing to buy a Tesla with no concern or argument concerning labor unions. BTW, the UAW sucks.
The workers are unionised because if they weren't, Tesla would be leading the charge on torching whatever rights workers had previously agreed to.
More countries could stand to do this, to show that it is the people who have power over corporations, not the other way around.
If the freight workers unloading shipping containers containing iPhones choose to strike, it will be due to changes in working conditions that affect them, not what conditions are like in a foreign factory.
Tesla is a big seller in Norway, then Sweden, followed third by Denmark in Scandinavia. The governments push them legislatively and via financial subsidies. I am not fully informed of the metal worker's gripes in Sweden, nor the labor structures in Scandinavia, but the mob of Norway dock workers and others in Denmark unions all joining in, because Elon doesn't agree with unions or forming them, seems more a first-world problem (like people not potentially getting their iPhones), but with the iPhone nobody boycotted Apple from 2006 to 2010, and then in 2012, writers, not unions, started to raise consumer consciousness on the issue with suggestions of boycotts on Apple.
I hope Elon tells Scandinavia to F-off like he just did to X advertisers. Sweden is one of the world's most unionized nations, but it is a fairly homongenous society. The percentages are going down as they accept more immigrants into their society. In addition, Scandinavia has bought the EV craze hook, line, and sinker, even though EVs are turning out not to be the cure for all the ills of the world as many thought they once were. They are heavily invested in many ways. I am curious to see how this plays out.
[Edit] I don't think the consumers are personally buying Teslas to financially support Elon personally, but by choosing to buy a Tesla they are voting with their wallets, and I think pro- and anti-union are two valid stances. Neither is the product of being brainwashed as some have commented here.
Okay, let's let the people decide whether they want to buy heroin and support violent cartels. Let's take the same approach to slavery. Or fire safety of buildings.
In fact, can you name 1 occasion in history when a consumer boycott stopped any kind of bad corporate behaviour - it does not even stop child slavery.
Do you agree with the legal sale of alcohol then? Over 80% of violent crimes involve it. Prohibition didn't work, did it? Personally, I don't drink, but hey, you can drink yourself to death as long as you don't drive and hurt me or others - DUIs, violence, etc...
The unions will fall in Scandinavia once the countries become less homogeneous as much as some fight it. They are already declining in number and you can't blame Elon.
While your at it, according to your logic, they should put curfews on citizens going out at the hours surrounding noon and midnight to prevent crime, since so much of it takes place at that time. You don't want to support violent crime do you? While your at it, ban alcohol and end government taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, because bad, and people are infants to be raised by Big Brother.
Without the 'mob of workers' you would enjoy the same working conditions as currently they have in factories in China, for children.
We literally used to send children to die in the coalmines untill the 'mob of workers' stopped it.
IMO soon he will admit all this anti union stuff was also dumb.
For what it’s worth, I don’t consider myself a fan, for the simple reason that I think no human is perfect or likable (Steve Jobs, Bach, Napoleon, Mother Theresa, to name a few). Instead it is better to evaluate someone’s ideas and impact.
What is disappointing to me is that we (I count myself here too) make up a rigid opinion of people based on memes, sound bites, unnuanced morsels of information, rather than demonstrating deep curiosity.
And so my responses on this thread should be viewed through the lens of surfacing more nuance and curiosity, rather than cheap and absolutist opinions that lack nuance.
More conversation please.
When he admits it was dumb and his fans argued for hours that it was smart how do they feel?
I do not mean you should stop loving Elon if he says say some dumb stuff, but why should Elon fans defend dumb stuff with even more dumb arguments.
IMHO the focus here on HN and elsewhere on the antics of this person leads the debate astray somewhat. (Actually on every single activity this man is involved with, not just cars.) I do not find it beneficial.
Tesla is a multinational multi-million corporation trying to compete in a market that is undergoing a technological revolution. And, a very American corporation at that (as in not exactly guided by an European value set). Tesla is not one single man. If you want understanding you should consider that.
As for the current situation in Scandinavia, this company will have to adapt or go home eventually. Option two is not really an option, so they will adapt. Pressure against them goes only one way from here, up. Same for loss in profits. It started in one country, now they already face trouble in three.
"When in Rome..."
Like respecting local laws and customs?
Same people who deride local laws in Europe get really worked up when someone tries it in US.
Us Scandinavians on the other hand find it pretty baffling that someone would just roll over to a megalomaniac who clearly states he would like to destroy what makes our countries great, our unions and working conditions.
But I wouldn't want a specific union to have a monopoly over my entire country and in case I don't want them to they shouldn't meddle with my work.
And to be honest I believe that the state postal workers should have absolutely no say on whether someone gets their mail delivered.
The whole point of the union system is to be a separate pillar of power to the state to keep it in check.
I'm not suggesting anything.
Actually they are no longer state postal workers. PostNord is owned by the Swedish and Danish states but it is not a part of the state as post offices used to be, it's no longer the Royal Mail.
When a company is 100% state-owned and state-run then it is a public institution. The special thing here is that Sweden and Denmark share it.
They are still profit driven, like most state-owned companies in Scandinavia.
What governments have done here is to deregulate the postal services to a fairly large degree so that there is genuine competition at least for parcels. I can send parcels using three different services here in Norway: Posten (the former royal mail, now a state owned company), Helthjem a company owned by a bi online trading site and media company (a bit like eBay), and the now infamous Swedish-Danish PostNord.
If one of them puts up the prices the others will just get more business.
The liberalisation of postal services is also required by an EU directive.
Appointing a new CEO of a state-owned company and telling him what to do is hardly a 'dictatorship'. Maybe if it was a public broadcaster and the government made editorial decisions.
My country also has a national Post Office which is a joint stock company and the state 'only' owns all of the shares. It is still definitely a public institution.
In Denmark the government just took away all subsidies to the PostNord company. Prices will double next year, and some areas will not be served at all. Mind you there is no alternative for common mail, only for parcel delivery.
But sure, go fight your fight with the megalomaniac...
Now don't try to tell me that bargaining power isn't a thing. With more bargaining power you can often get better deals!
Note that Unions work very differently across different parts of the world. So your local union might be very different from ones that I've experienced.
You are right on this one. My experience with unions is that they want people to have a job even if that job is more efficiently done by a machine or to get salary increases even if the company is doing poorly because of outside market factors (like not enough sales due to poor economy and so on).
And while the goal might be ideal, the reality is quite different.
I would say it is worse for people in Chicago that work in the big slaughterhouses and even though they can pursue other opportunities, they still choose to work there.
Using the "small town, no options" narrative doesn't really hold water.
Using all your extensive savings from a job that in many parts of the US, pays up to 20% less than the livable wage?
It's literally not "free" to move. If it were, many people would've done it a long time ago. Beside the financial cost, there are also very real social costs like losing friends and family - basically your whole support network, as well as putting all of that burden on a potential spouse and maybe kids too.
Almost everyone on HN can live to standards that would have been between comfortable and luxurious a hundred years ago, possibly even in a developed country. (The median world wage--assuming a 40-hour work week with 2 weeks off, which is not the median working schedule--is $5/day [1].)
This doesn't undermine the struggle. Just that there is, to varying degrees (but increasingly so among anyone in tech), a choice being made.
[1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/166211/worldwide-median-househo...
I'm lucky, I can go find other work and live without working for a while.
Someone on the poverty line working a warehouse job for health insurance to cover their diabetes in America is not able to "just move to a new place" like a sibling comment stated. The real goal should be to raise the bottom line up so even the poorest have a decent standard of living which is how the Nordic countries behave.
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-...
In Europe a lot of countries have a system of "Tarifvertrag" ("tarrif contract", but really "collective agreement"). In such contracts the workers union of a section (e.g. metal) do a contract with the business union of the employers. They settle then down to "give 28 days of holidays and x EUR per month to each" ... and then they won't strike. The special thing about this "Tarifvertrag" is now that EVERYBODY benefits from them, union member or not! In Sweden, for example, such general tariffs apply to 90% of the employees. So you can see how normal it's seen there. Anything that fights against this normality is thus seen not favorably (in Denmark it's 80%, in Germany it's much less, just 51%).
Now, Tesla Sweden says that they don't won't to follow such a model, since Eon Musky is, as many US brainwashed business people, is strictly anti-union. Whatever comes from unions is surely coming right from hell :-)
And so in October 130 Tesla employees in various service stations went to strike. Musky didn't bulge. In November 470 employees did strike. Musky still thinking he can work against unions (not with them, like it is custom in Europe, maybe with the exception of France, you can't work with their unions ...). Then workers from other swedish unions said "We don't load/unload for Tesla in Sweden". And now danish and and norwegian workers joined as well.
Currently 12 different unions joined the "make Tesla think a bit more european" strike.
Isn't Musk actually born South African? Then he became Canadian and lastly American? Not that it makes much of a difference, I just find it odd as labelling him as US brainwashed when canonically, his origin isn't the US.
If that's the case, then Tesla would have been subject to the CC as well, regardless of the unionised status of the employees.
The Swedish transport union stopped unloading Tesla cars at Swedish ports November 7, but Tesla Y was still one of the most sold car models in Sweden in November (second place between Volvo XC40 and XC60).
In the words of Jeremy Clarkson: Oh no! Anyway…
"At present, the ETUC represents almost 45 million workers across Europe, affiliated to 93 national trade union confederations from 41 European countries, and 10 European Trade Union Federations (ETUFs)."
At a very modest evaluation, that is 100 million workers (probably 150 million, but I dont have stamina to get the numbers), 1/5 of people in EU. People who elect governments.
He wont be able to sell a free sample of Tesla in EU. And someone stupid enough to buy it will have windows broken on daily basis as quisling. Not something unheard of, google for BMW - Break My Window.
No one in EU is stupid enough to challenge trade unions at this scale. With a good reason.
Best solution for him would be to back off when first union intervened, get into agreement with them, claim them for his best friends ever and keep it out of the press. Now this is cultural fight, where he will need to eat shi1 to calm everything down (for youngsters that don't understand: for him, 500 million market is in play and corporations from Microsoft to Facebook were eating shi1 to sell their products there).
(btw, for people downvoting me, I am just stating the facts, feel free to verify them and argue against, downvoting wont change them, at worse it will help Musk do another stupid mistake)
> He wont be able to sell a free sample of Tesla in EU. And someone stupid enough to buy it will have windows broken on daily basis as quisling. Not something unheard of, google for BMW - Break My Window.
Personally, I appreciate you "just stating the facts" so clearly. And because of your wording (eg "quisling"), it offers evidence that you personally support such window breakings. It is very useful for my model of the world to know how much the threat of violence there is. By analogy, in November 1938, I'd appreciate forewarning that the authorities would look on without intervening as a bunch of windows were broken.
(All the Google searches I did suggest that "Break My Window" was largely derived from thieves stealing radios. I assume that's not what you were referring to, but as far as I know, you may "just" support stealing from people.)
Also, I wonder if it would completely kill their margin to just have a horde of workers drive the cars individually to Sweden.
The other unions are targeting strikes in solidarity.
Yes, it's legal, and standard.
That's not exactly true. It's a partnership between the government, the unions, and the employers with the government usually taking the role of mediator.
"The Swedish model & collective agreements – a brief introduction
The Swedish labour market model in a nutshell
In the Swedish labour market model, the social partners (trade unions and employers’ organisations) are responsible for wage formation. The social partners also have a key role in establishing other employment conditions in the labour market.
The legislation constitutes a framework that supports this model, for instance, through provisions on association and negotiation rights and the right to take industrial action. The social partners have significant autonomy to regulate the precise conditions through collective agreements. Many statutory regulations can be replaced with collective agreements. There is no legislation on minimum wages or universal application of agreements.
Another key feature of the Swedish model is that disputes are resolved in the first instance through negotiation. A prerequisite for the model is that collective agreements cover most of the employees on the labour market"
https://www.mi.se/app/uploads/the-swedish-model-and-collecti...
Fwiw I live in Sweden and am a member of its largest Union
Legally that seems a bit crazy that shipping company workers can select what gets shipped based on their political beliefs.
Next the power utility company workers are going to refuse to give Tesla electricity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Icelandic_women%27s_strik...
Elmo need to start paying attention.
The strike is about working contracts not about Elon dumb stuff, and before someone defends Elon I will inform you that Elon himself admitted he said some very dumb stuff.
I actually know a postal worker in the US who got fired ("resign or else type") for refusing to deliver political mail that he didn't agree with, so yeah in the US try this and get fired.
But there are plenty of examples of companies threatening to leave, or leaving a state due to unfavorable politics. Companies choose all the time where and with whom they do business.
"It is crazy that they have an effective mechanism for ensuring good working conditions in their societies"
This isn't just some random dockworkers, this is Fellesforbundet, Norway's largest private union. Unions are usually democratic, with elected leaders.
The Israel example is absurdly weak, that has nothing to do with working conditions.
Solidarity strikes/actions aren't a new thing, they are well established things that have forced many other multinational companies to treat their Scandinavian workers better. Most of those companies, like McDonald's, eventually concede and start operating profitable ventures with good working conditions here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nae_Pasaran
> Nae Pasaran is a 2018 documentary directed by Felipe Bustos Sierra about a group of workers at a Rolls-Royce factory in East Kilbride, Scotland, who refused to work on Chilean Air Force parts from 1974-78 due to the atrocities carried out in Chile by the Pinochet dictatorship
It's only permissible in response to an active dispute and refusing to unload all shipments from Israel definitely wouldn't qualify.
Can the police union also refuse to protect Tesla property/workers? Or like the public transit union? Where do they draw the line in Sweden?
I've never heard of a system where workers can so selectively decide who to target. I've only heard of the "not go into work" type of strikes
No they cannot be fired under this circumstance so long as the right procedures have been followed by the union and its members.
Employers on their part have access to a similar tool in the form of lockout, where they bar employees from coming into work and stop paying their wages. An employer targeted by (legal) solidarity action can't fire their striking employees, but could respond with a lockout.
There's a provision that disallows strike action where it would harm public order, which would apply to the police union refusing to protect Tesla property.
Unless I am heavily misreading, “we organized a strike, and if you don’t join us, you are expelled from the union” sounds exactly like a union forcing its members to strike.
What other kind of “forced to strike” scenario were you imagining? Union leaders holding those refusing to strike at a gunpoint? Because other than extreme examples like this one, it sounds like a textbook version of forcing members to strike.
Most if not all organisations have standards of conduct that they expect their members to follow, and its not surprising that unions view strikebreaking ("scabbing") as being contrary to those standards.
But seeing as the whole point of unions is organised action, why would you want to be a member if you weren't interested in participating in that action?
Sweden seems to have low regulation, no minimum wages so is a perfect place for an american company to take advantage, unless the peasants use their rights to strike then the billionaires are demanding regulations. As software developers we should do the same when we are asked to take part on building harfull shit, as an individual we have no power, if I refuse someone else will be paid to do it but as a union we could do some good and reduce the harm int he world.
Tesla is free to use other companies or methods to deliver, create their own delivery companies from scratch , deliver the cars with their rockets. I do not think they can cut off the power but there could be problems finding people fixing their electrical issues if they appear.
In theory, but it's not unprecedented for payment providers to refuse to process payments so they'd not be able to pay people to even get started (if they went that way)
Who gets to decide what is harmful and what is not?
Me? You?
Your proposal won't go anywhere because you won't agree with others on what is harmful and what is not.
Maybe in some groups we can achieve a consensus. Say 80% of developers at a company think that the new feature of addicting kids on some game mechanic is harmful?
I am not referring to the stupid culture war in USA, so when I suggest this I am not attacking your political opinions.
Who cares? The company will just get someone from the other 20% to develop it. Or contract it out.
What is your proposal for stopping a company from developing something you think is harmful? You can't very well complain that other developers have to agree with your opinions[1], after all.
[1] Whether something is harmful or not is simply your opinion. If that something is a fact, then there's probably a law against it, so there's no need to prevent other developers from developing it.
Cigarettes are harmful and are legal.
It is not an easy as you think, I worked at a small company in a emote team, there was proposed that we all need to install spying software on our computers so we can be better monitored. Everyone in the team refused and the bad stuff did not happen, we were not replaced with a new team. But if it was only one guy he could be replace but good luck replacing 80% of your developers like they are are some pre-made lego bricks you can swap out.
You might be right, maybe developers should instead work on proposing legislation for banning harmful stuff and keep unions focused on work conditions.
> I worked at a small company in a emote team, there was proposed that we all need to install spying software on our computers so we can be better monitored. Everyone in the team refused and the bad stuff did not happen, we were not replaced with a new team.
Isn't that different to what you asked for? The harmful stuff in this story was harmful to the workers. Unions protect workers.
You're asking that employees must form a union to protect consumers. Have you ever seen that happen? Unions are not primarily consumer-protection groups.
Once again, I reiterate that you are going to have trouble getting a union (or a bunch of them) all agreeing that their workers would strike if any worker is ever employed producing cigarettes (the example you gave).
The reason this is not going to happen, is because you aren't going to get enough developers to agree with your opinion on what is harmful and what is not.
> You might be right, maybe developers should instead work on proposing legislation for banning harmful stuff and keep unions focused on work conditions.
Give me just one single example that you think should be enshrined in law and currently isn't, and I'll show you how unworkable your proposal is.
Just one.
Feminist issues is a good example it has almost always been up to the women to fight for that, unions have been in the back seat on most of these issues until support was well above 50% in their ranks.
That's not what the poster I replied to was arguing - they were arguing for developers to all agree not to develop harmful (to the consumer) products.
That is not what unions do. Unions are not known for acting in the customers best interest. They are a workers collective, not a consumer advocacy group.
Brother/Sister, a strike can in principle be done for any reason.
In a sense these unions do have a lot of power when all of their interests align. But because of the sheer number of people and diversity of their industries and the political capital they expend in performing these actions, they don't tend to act at this scale very often. You need to have fucked up pretty badly to have mobilised all of these people against you.
It sounds like what anti union people like to portray them as. A tax on employees and nepotism.
It's not a tax on employees, I consider it a quite cheap insurance.
You can shop around for insurance, you can't shop around for employers.
Seems to be a complete clusterfuck, as someone living in the Nordics it's pretty funny to think that a bit of snow can simply grind to a halt the richest area of Germany.
> Stockholm is not in southern sweden
Are you sure this the level of comments you are supposed to post here?
With the help of ChatGPT, I crossreferenced two lists of all municipalities (kommuner) in Sweden to place them in an increasing latitude order (south->north), and calculated where the 80% population threshold lies.
The answer is Västerås, which is a bit north of Stockholm. It is only 31.7% of the distance to the northernmost point in Sweden.
So 80% of Sweden's population lives in the southernmost 32% of the country. This might not be called "Sydsverige" in Swedish, but describing it to a foreigner I think 32% qualifies as "Southern Sweden".
Source data:
https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/regional-statistik-och-kartor/regionala-indelningar/digitala-granser/
https://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__BE__BE0101__BE0101A/BefolkningNy/ChatGPT: "Stockholm lies approximately 28.87% of the way north when considering the span from the southernmost to the northernmost points of Sweden's municipalities, based on latitude."
Swedes do not care about your conclusions as we still won't claim Stockholm is in the southern Sweden.
Again, reading your comments it looks like you're translating Swedish words directly to English ("Sydsverige" -> "Southern Sweden"). But they are not the same, right?
And I didn't just ask ChatGPT for a number.
I used ChatGPT Python data analysis to process official SCB datafiles with the population count and geographical locations for the 290 municipalities ("kommuner") in Sweden.
They were sorted in increasing latitude (south -> north). The population count for each municipality was accumulated until it reached 80% of the total Swedish population.
The municipality where the 80% threshold was crossed turned out to be Västerås.
That means that my claim "Southern Sweden with 80% of the Swedish population" is correct. You don't have to go that far north (32%) before you've covered 80% of the Swedish population.
Where do you think the 80% threshold lies?
Source data:
https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/regional-statistik-och-kartor/regionala-indelningar/digitala-granser/
https://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__BE__BE0101__BE0101A/BefolkningNy/https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%B6dra_Sverige
https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydsverige
Ingen av dessa geografiska områden inkluderar Stockholm. Sluta använda ChatGPT som källa, det får dig bara att framstå som korkad.
Jag har inte skrivit något på svenska eller ens riktat till en svensk. Jag skrev "Southern Sweden" till en tysk.
Det har inget att göra med vilka begrepp vi använder på svenska. Avsikten var att att ge honom en bild av vilken del av Sverige jag menade i mitt första inlägg. Vad får dig att tro att han tolkade "Southern Sweden" som det svenska "sydsverige" (dvs Skåne och Blekinge), och inte "Sverige upp till Stockholm ungefär" som jag menade?
Din engelska är långt ifrån perfekt. Jag antar att du inte har bott längre perioder i utlandet, och inte heller är extremt van att kommunicera på engelska med folk som inte känner till Sverige? Jag har bott utomlands i omgångar i uppemot två decennier nu, och tycker mig ha en bra bild av vilken bild personer i andra länder får när jag säger "Southern Sweden". Detta är alltså en helt annan sak än vad någon från Linköping uppfattar som det svenska "sydsverige".
Jag definierade sedan exakt vad jag använde ChatGPT till. Dvs att låta den analysera officiella datafiler från SCB för att räkna ut hur långt norrut man måste gå för att täcka 80% av befolkningen. Detta gjordes steg för steg, med kontroller av mig längs vägen att delresultaten verkade vettiga eller fick rättas till. Jag påstår inte att det garanterat är 100% korrekt, men det är långt ifrån snutet ur näsan som du antyder.
Du kanske tycker att "80%" är ointressant, men den biten kommer från mig, inte ChatGPT.
Om du tycker att det verkar helt osannolikt att 80%-gränsen går ungefär i höjd med Västerås, så skriv det isåfall?
Var menar du att 80%-gränsen går? Luleå? Halmstad?
But that wasn't the context in this case. I described the situation in Sweden to a person from Germany.
In that context, I think it is reasonable to call the southernmost one third of Sweden "Southern Sweden".
It will give him the correct mental image of what I meant when he looks at a map of Sweden.
Yeaaah about that, Denmark is currently covered in snow and the country isn't equipped to deal with it at all. As soon as the snow starts falling busses and trains are cancelled, people realize that maybe winter tires aren't such a bad idea, roads aren't cleared because the cities don't actually have the budgets to deal with it. So you can't rely on public transport, but driving can be dangerous because many roads aren't kept clear and other people are idiots, driving around on summer tires (that includes busses and trucks).
Hold the phone. Are you telling me winter tires are not mandatory by law in Denmark in winter?!
You could probably get a fine for driving without them if the weather makes it unsafe, but that would be because you're not driving according to conditions.
Anyway, loads of people are driving around on summer tires during the winter and it's amazingly dangerous and they cause problems for themselves and others.
That's absolutely insane. One would think the Nordics would be a bit morse sensible on this. Here in Austria they are mandatory between November and April even if you live in places that don't see much snow. Yeah, it's an added expense and PITA but when the snow does come it's overall way safer.
That does not seem to be correct:
"Die Winterreifenpflicht gilt für Pkw und Lkw bis 3,5 t nur bei winterlichen Fahrbahnverhältnissen und nur dann, wenn auch gefahren wird."
https://www.oesterreich.gv.at/themen/freizeit_und_strassenve...
That wording looks to be the same as for Denmark and Sweden?
That is exactly how the law is written in Sweden too:
"During the period from 1 December to 31 March there are special requirements in Sweden on which type of tyre a certain vehicle is to have when there are winter conditions on the road."
https://transportstyrelsen.se/en/road/Vehicles/winter-tyres/
So, according to the law in Sweden, winter tires are not legally required if there are not winter conditions on the road.
But most years, you won't make it much past December 1st before encountering winter conditions in most parts of Sweden.
Prost! :-)
Edit:
Seems like some need a history lesson about Hans Carl Nipperdey
Thanks to
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Carl_Nipperdey
who already stripped worker of their rights in the Nazi regime.
"There were no strikes against Agenda 2010 as the German constitution prohibits politically motivated strikes, but some demonstrations at least were organized and supported by the unions."
(for those who don't know, Schröder were a Putin stooge):
This serves as an important reminder for the distinction between national wealth and individual wealth, which are not always directly proportional. You can easily make your country wealthier and your people poorer at the same time, which is exactly what Agenda 2010 did.
You can't have strong unions and labor regulations when you don't have your own captive world leading domestic industry like IKEA, Siemens, SAAB, Novo Nordisk, Bosch, Airbus, etc. Nobody would invest in your country.
The alternative for eastern Europeans always was to go to UK or Germany and be a fungible labour there.
Current strategy increased quality of life in EE countries. So far that in main cities in Poland housing prices are 4000-5000 USD per square meter.
And while it's better to be with work than without, living paycheck to paycheck in fear is not that great either, and doesn't exactly provide ways out. So sometimes we're left with just what solidarity we can arrange without legal representation, like the time entirety of one of my former workplaces left the job one day for what american management did to one of them.
Poles are entrepreneurial and forward thinking nation that will sooner or later become economically as prosperous as WE.
We on the other hand will always be discount version of Austria/Germany.
EE was basically bankrupt in the early 90's. How could they have caught up to join the wealthy innovation driven countries like UK, Netherlands, Germany and Nordics, on mere fractions of their education and research budgets and considering the massive social damage 45 years of communism has done to eradicate free thinking, innovation and entrepreneurship. Basically, post 1989, nobody had any idea how to run a business, how to do market research, marketing, sales, any of that, let alone build businesses that could challenge wealthy established players from the west, since none of that was taught in schools and universities during communism and now you have to catch up with over 45 years of lost progress over night.
It was just not possible at the time, so being cheap outsourcing labor was the only choice to get out of poverty.
That left those countries without any local champions or easy options to elevate themselves. I've said it many many times that it will take dozens of unicorns like UIPath in Romania to offset the loss of industries now dominated by DACH companies.
Romania would need to become another Singapore which is almost impossible.
There was surprisingly a lot of free thinking, innovation, even entrepreneurship. Not everything was as bad as it was painted, not everything was as good as it was sometimes shown.
One of the rare positive elements in all that chaos that some had pointed out and I agree was that the chaos at least ensured consumer goods were better represented and prevented oligarchic centralisation to the level that happened in some other countries.
EE is full of entitled elderly pensioners that control the narrative and are only interested in returning to the "good old times of communism" in one way or another.
Prosperity requires stepping out of your comfort zone and implement ideas that bring competitive advantage over your neighbors. These kind of ideas are lumped in the same category like LGBT rights, climate etc etc.
Because also the political and education system in communism couldn't create any visionary technocrats focused on innovation and exports.
It simply encouraged cronyism, lying, backstabbing, empire building, fiefdoms and thievery from the same zero-sum pie aka the local national economy.
Well educated and innovative workers from Taiwan or South Korea weren't sent to the gulags or political prisons for "free thinking" or for coming from the wrong family backgrounds.
World leading companies were moving to eastern Europe because it was cheap. Both land and labour.
In some cases comparable to china. It is an outsourcing hub, way to cut costs.
You get same skill (or even more) in Poland as you can get in Germany, but for half price and slightly less bureaucracy.
Maybe compared to the US, but not compared to France, Germany or Nordics.
>World leading companies were moving to eastern Europe because it was cheap. Both land and labour.
The "cheap-ness" of labor is also related on the availability and strength of unions, lack of bureaucracy and red tape, taxes, worker's rights and social benefits, not just on their local supply/demand and purchasing power.
Having had strong unions in EE that could strike on a whim and demand better conditions, wouldn't have made it very attractive to foreign investors despite the lower wages.
In fact, the constant strikes in the early to mid '90's is what kept foreign investors away from Romania causing it to fall behind most of its post comunist neighbors at the time.
Foreign investors are also looking for stability, not just cheap labor.
Lots of rules about overtime, work schedule, total working hours, vacations, sick leaves, payment, notice period in case of mass layoff.
Labour law is strong. But people are cheap - that's what attractive for international employers.
Minimum wage, costs of living in Germany is higher than in Poland. What is a minimal wage in Germany is a decent wage for factory worker in Poland.
Yes, it's the same in Romania, on paper, there are loads of rules and regulations to protect the workers, but those rules are broken all the time by employers, especially in low paying jobs, because low paid employees don't have the time and money to take those employers to court, and there are next to no unions.
And the labor laws are still weaker than what workers in for example France or Netherlands would get for the same job at the same company.
Then there's environmental regulations which are laughable in Romania compared to what they are in Germany. To open a dirty tire factory or a mine in Germany you'd get protests up your ass meaning you'd never start building, while in Romania everything gets rubberstamped quickly if you grease the right wheels, meaning the cost of doing business is much lower regardless of wages, as the environmental costs also factor in the total cost of doing business somewhere, not just wages.
Also in Poland labour law is covering mainly people on regular employment agreement. There are ways to get around and screw employees, but western factories and outsorcing vendors(like TCS, Capgemini) are not doing business that way.
On paper. In practice workers figure out pretty fast that if that big employes moves shop they're screwed for life. I don't know much about Poland, but somehow I don't think unions in Poland will be "no, we don't want Mercedes to open a factory here and tell us what to do" :)
The problem in EE is not the laws it's the local psyche.
But thankfully workers aren't mere wheels, and they can design the said framework themselves! Pretty much like peasants got to imagine parliements so as to gain the natural right to rule over themselves, despite kings and lords trying to convince them it was a silly and dangerous idea.
Congratulations, you have just invented entrepreneurship
Yes, they're called committees. They're wildly inefficient for fundamental reasons [1]. We tolerate them in government, because when it comes to the state, we've learned that being consistently right is more important than being efficient. That's not the case in commerce.
I don't think worker-owned companies are communist. Until recently, investment banks and law firms were predominantly structured as partnerships.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/01/why-elon-musk-loves-norway.h...
Why did Elon pick this fight? Most American companies know how to operate here without getting into fights with unions.
In Elon's world, a world with Unions is a world with a feudal system where the Unions are the lords and poor owners like Elon are vassals and fiefs (his words, not mine).
Would that work or are Tesla’s too hard to service by third parties?
Outside of maintenance, what else does Tesla need people for in Sweden? Sales all done online?
Are all people represented by unions in Sweden? If so, this situation makes more sense to me. It could be seen more as preserving the culture of Sweden than just an act against one company. If not, why are the unions not ganging up on other companies?
So let me explain on this, as european union culture is VERY different from US union culture.
In Europe a lot of countries have a system of "Tarifvertrag" ("tarrif contract", but really "collective agreement"). In such contracts the workers union of a section (e.g. metal) do a contract with the business union of the employers. They settle then down to "give 28 days of holidays and x EUR per month to each" ... and then they won't strike for some time, e.g. 2 years. After this, they negotiate anew.
The special thing about this "Tarifvertrag" is now that EVERYBODY benefits from them, union member or not! In Sweden, for example, such general tariffs apply to 90% of the employees. So you can see how normal it's seen there. Anything that fights against this normality is thus seen not favorably (in Denmark it's 80% of all employees, in Germany it's much less, just 51% --- but still way more than in the US).
Now, Tesla Sweden says that they don't won't to follow such a model. The collective agreement is to them null and void. It seems that Elon Musky is, as many US brainwashed business people, strictly anti-union. Whatever comes from unions is surely coming right from hell :-) They have NEVER learned that with good unions you can have "peace at work", or more motivated people. The effect of this is visible, e.g. when you look at efficiency of e.g. german workers compared to their US counterparts. And this despite --- due to unions --- e.g. german cashiers can sit while checking people out. Horrors to US employee ... but effectively better for the people. So, in my view, US business people never learned how to use unions to their advantage --- which clearly is possible!
Now, with Musky's staunch "we ignore unions" stance, some reaction had to happen. Actually it was an escalation:
* in October 130 Tesla employees in various service stations went to strike
* in November 470 employees did strike
* now late December workers from other swedish unions said "We don't load/unload for Tesla in Sweden"
* and now, in early December, Danish and and Norwegian workers joined as well
Currently 12 different unions joined the "make Tesla think a bit more european" strike.
Can you please then explain to me how ~ 332mm people in the US are more productive than ~448mm people in the EU by almost 5 trillion dollars if the Americans are less efficient?
I'm measuring the success of the US economic model with the EU economic model and the US one is winning by a lot.
And you're measuring "success" of a economic model just based on how it increases GDP? What about lowly things like "life expectancy" or other things related to, you know, actual human lives?
I knew USAians were "corporate and financials"-horny but this takes it to a whole other level.
In EU we try very hard not to bet our economy well-being on slave workforce - and we are not very good at that (Spain / south Italy vegetables production) but we still didn't slave the whole continent for corporation goals.
In USA, most of workforce are slaves to their corroborative/stock masters.
Don't get a nudge to protest. It is OK with me, it was your choice, not mine. On the other hand, I will rather leave to China then go working for USA slave system, even if I would be able to have a few Mexican slaves for me. I know it is my problem, I just don't believe in slavery. Sorry its about having ethics, parents raised me wrong /s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectoral_collective_bargaining
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterprise_bargaining_agreemen...
Actually because of unions in Germany (where I currently work) it's really really hard to get a raise even if you're a top performer. Say I am 2x faster than anyone in my factory. I cannot go to my employer and ask for a raise. They will say: "Well, this is already discussed with unions. You're in the company for X years, this is your salary range. Work extra hours if you want more money". So all I can do is not work 2x as fast as everyone... waste time, and do extra hours so I can earn more. Waste of time. Without an union I could have negotiated my own salary based on my own merits and earn the same money I earn with the extra time in normal time cause I am efficient.
So unions are not some holy grail. They come with drawbacks. And I find it wrong that a union I am purposefully not part of decides my salary. That makes no sense to me.
Wikipedia says that 87% of swedish employees work at workplaces which have collective agreements. So it's not everyone, but pretty much.
On the other side, strike and unionizing is one of basic workers rights here and you just don't fight unions in EU. As you will be losing more money than if you get to an agreement with them.
When elmu started his crusade against unions, I was laughing: "another USA manager that doesn't understand that he is no longer in states". But I never thought that he will be stupid enough to continue.
--- edit ---
I think also that most of young in USA and EU are in misunderstanding what Musk did and what he is fighting against. But I think they should and they SHOULD understand what solidarity means and what it can do. And why employers are trying to discredit unions, prevent them etc. - here you can check the Last Week Tonight on union busting in states: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk8dUXRpoy8
(the numbers are just for illustration, google them, they are public)
Musk fights against one union. With 100.000 members. That union is in federation with 10 other unions with 100.000 members and federations are joining into confederations.
Even first federations presents a formidable force, from political perspective (number of votes on state elections), to pure money and people power.
You cant win, this is now, for unions and federations of unions, cultural fight. Initial union is no longer important and even if they would want to stop, they cant. If he will be poking long enough whole EU will fight him, from politicians that cant afford to lose votes from unions members and on top of that, do you think that German car industry is happy about him on EU soil? They would gladly cover wages for anyone striking.
If ETUC joins (largest EU trade union), he will be against 45 million workers and 41 EU states, and additional 10 union federations, probably bringing together numbers of 100 million workers, 1/5 of EU population without counting smaller unions. There is no politician that would want to lose their member votes and absolutely no EU capitalist that would be stupid enough to fight them even in worse nightmare. The backlash will be so huge all over EU that he wont sell even a free sample of Tesla car except to the greatest "individualists/fanboys" and they will have car windows broken on daily basis as quislings.
That's why never before something like this happened. As no one would be stupid enough to tease them.
If I would be him, I would pull back when second union was in play and reach silent agreement that wouldn't come to the news. Now, with 20 unions in protest? With two countries involved and potential for whole EU?
That's why I am saying, that he just didn't understand what is he fighting against. My honest advice. Stop. Now. Dont wait.
Yeah, I am kinda seeing that expectation to be pretty realistic.
If Tesla mechanics received stock in 2013, some of them probably got rich. It’s plausible Tesla mechanics actually think it’s awesome to receive tons of overtime, stock, and perf bonuses. I haven’t seen their perspective covered in the media, which I find suspicious.
Oh, yes you do - it happens all the time.
The current Swedish government just signed an agreement to be able to station US troops under US jurisdiction at Swedish military bases. You think they are going to side with the unions?
And since they are also voters on next elections, you can imagine what would happen if government would start working against unions in favor of US military bases.
What do you mean?
>The current Swedish government just signed an agreement to be able to station US troops under US jurisdiction at Swedish military bases. You think they are going to side with the unions?
They don't have a say in the matter.
Companies, Unions, Workplaces and Courts are separate from government.