Silicon Valley's Anti-unionism and Class Warfare
nymag.com
nymag.com
But comments like Lacy's and White's in response to the BART strike revealed something new. Namely, portions of the tech community are not only observing the destruction of unions as a long-term sociopolitical trend, but actively cheering it on as an example of an intellectual "maker" class beating out working-class "takers."
What I don't understand in the venom these people receive. Makers vs. Takers? Ridiculous. Perhaps people should stop buying into Ayn Rand's objectivism nonsense and take a more humanist stance? Society is made up of people from various strata, some skilled, some unskilled. That doesn't mean it we should devolve into class warfare. These people are working and providing a service. Shouldn't they try to maximize their earning potential while doing it? Why begrudge them for wanting to make a decent wage in an area that is already hyper-inflated? Certainly there were some ridiculous parameters for the negotiations, coming from BOTH sides. If there should be anger it should be at the lawmakers for allowing critical infrastructure in a city the size of SF controllable by any one entity, be it union or not.
To me, this issue is about more than a wage number. It's about leveling everyone in society.
As far as I'm concerned, the bus drivers are clearly in the maker class. They provide a service that the city requires. They make things that need to happen (people getting from one point to another) happen.
The takers are the assholes who provide no service to society but get rich on their connections-- the VCs lining their pockets with the yield of multiple liquidation preferences.
If you want to deal with wealth inequality how about starting with people that are actually poor, instead of the near-rich? You know, like the people that have to take the bus to get to work, because they can't afford a car.
Barely middle class, what planet do you live on?
Here is the closest thing to talking about the details, which is a straw man:
> "The notion that 'These workers are expendable' is a fundamentally different attitude toward workers than 'Let’s make sure they have these benefits so they don’t want to unionize,'" Berlin said.
Here is the only article I've been able to find that lists any specifics:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/health-coverage-costs...
- Federal taxes
- State taxes
- Social Security
- Medicare
If you make 100k and pay 30% to California, your take-home would have to be like 40k, because the Fed will be taking some ~20% (effective; marginal rate would be 28%) and SS+Medicare is another chunk.
I'm a programmer in the tech industry, and I feel that life is an aristocracy - we the workers, whether being at our desks 10 PM on a Saturday, or doing a night shift on BART are the ones building and creating something. The money goes to the heirs - the VC limited partners, the rentiers who get dividend checks from Apple, Microsoft, Qualcomm etc. They do not work, they create nothing, they're parasites off of us who do work.
It's the emperor has no clothes. VC limited partner heirs who've never worked a day in their life hand her a big, fat check. Then she claims the BART workers out on the job at 11 PM, being hassled by crazies are not hard workers. Shuttling people back and forth to where they need to go, they're not part of the wealth creation process apparently.
Up is down, black is white. It's amazing what these parasites and their myrmidons like Lacy spew out. People who do work are accused of not working hard enough, by those who never do any work and their paid lackeys. Saying workers don't work is hegemonically acceptable and normal, saying it's nuts like I am is radical. Too non-normative. What a load of bullshit.