Readit NewsHe pointed out that not all unions are the doom and gloom version where you can't carry lightbulbs (seriously people, don't ever use that example, it's right out of the anti-union video, obvious tell) and good people can't get promotions because of blah blah blah.
You then responded by saying it doesn't count because it's different.
Yeah, that's the point. A "union" isn't a thing like gravity. It doesn't only work one way. It a collection of workers who want to collectively bargain with an employer to bring some balance to the power dynamic between huge companies and individual workers. Whatever rules the union wants to set out are up to them.
For example, just in the replies to your comment people are saying they dislike unions because they protect the incompetent, stifle progression, give preferential treatment purely on seniority, etc.
But then go look at Hollywood, with the Screen Actors Guild, the Writers Guild, the PGA, etc. These are unions that have some of the most highly paid and richest people in the world as members. The same is true in the sports world.
And sure, these unions are not perfect by a long shot, but they are doing a huge amount to hold what is ultimately a very exploitative industry to account.
Of course, companies like Google, Amazon, and the like would much prefer software engineers continued to think that all unions were like the Teamsters. They don't want you to know that there's a whole class of professional unions serving some of the most highly paid people and engaging in collective bargaining.
It's also a challenge to get into a guild, SAG has minimum requirements for having already performed. A union is generally just something you have to join when you take a job at a unionized company.
This is not a value judgment, just wanted to point out the differences.
I don't miss commercial society, I don't miss their tropes and their rituals. Fake friendship and banter from people hanging around to get some of my money in exchange of half a glass of ice and a dribble of liquor.
Bonus annoyance this year: the eternal covid lamentations of bar and restaurant owners, as if governments purposely wanted to destroy their businesses, as if one's bar is more important than other people lives, as if they didn't paint themselves and their stupid restaurant for years as an example of entrepreneurship (apparently the free market is a good idea only when your business goes well).
To hell with paid service, picnics and aperitivi in the main square with cheap liquor and (honestly) friendly smiles.
"I command this dump to wither, board its doors and windows forever" as Dan Feeder says.
This statement is so confusing. Forcing millions of businesses which were previously legal to shutter under questionable authority is literally the opposite of a free market.
And unsafe, too. I'm not not going to restaurants because I'm not allowed to (they're actually opening back up a little bit here now), but because under the present circumstances it's not safe to do so.
Of course they're going to be around for almost any given corporate failure.
I don't have an opinion on how useful McKinsey is, but I'll note that no one is pointing out that they also did a lot of work for Microsoft before their big turnaround.
"Effect" is an Entity, a noun. They both start with "E."
"Affect" is an Action, a verb. They both start with "A."
Effect is sometimes used as a verb, especially in bureaucratese, but not in the way you're using it.
With apologies.
"Affect" can also be a noun, referring to behavioral characteristics :)
So even though you're being sarcastic, you might be on to something there :) (I'm not suggesting this is possible, just idle musings)