It's like the best way to prevent police brutality and murder: simply make them individually liable for damages and require them to carry insurance for it. Bad actions make you uninsurable, and the rest of your department more risky (expensive).
Most government employees are not elected. Needing the entire state to vote on a ballot initiative to get a raise would make it even harder than it already is for teachers...
This comment was made after the half dozen edits you made clarifying to no one.
Every few generations everyone seems to forget the existing social contracts exist for reason, and that reason is never the benevolence of the plutocrats.
I’ve said that on Reddit and people got mad at me.
A single warehouse burning because of low wages is like a single healthcare CEO getting shot: Funny to read about, but ultimately not going to change much.
Turn it into a monthly thing, and it becomes a revolutionary act that will change things!
I'm not a lawyer, but this sounds perfectly feasible to me. So insurance companies simply choose to not treat low wages as a risk factor. I wonder why 🤔
Right. A more likely one is that having staff in a building at all are a liability and so all these warehouses are moving to robots. There will be an oversaturation of warehouse workers vs sites still using them, and so these fires are just going to bring wages lower.
If the cost of keeping humans is higher than the cost of automating, they'll just automate the process. Or have the place ran by wire, where humans pilot lifts remotely.
There were only 8 people in that whole warehouse when it burned. It clear they already cut staff to an insanely low level. If they could have automated those 8 jobs away, they already would have.
Stop preemptively giving up your power by assuming you have none.
Honestly probably easier as there are less eyes. Just walk in with a clip board and say your from XYZ company and you have a contract to service the robots. If they seem hesitant at first, immediately get irate and say the contract is hourly and your technically already on the clock. In 98% of circumstances this will be your ticket in, if not try again on a different day of the week two weeks later.
Then just leave behind some incendiary devices as your "servicing the robots" and now not only did you burn the warehouse down, they also have no clue who you even are.
What? No. Arson usually covered on standard policies. Most likely what would happen in the scenario portrayed here is that insurance would go up and future insurance contracts would specifically exclude arson / vandalism.
If you set a fire or otherwise intentionally cause your home to be burned down, then no insurance would not cover that. However in this case it is arson committed against the owner of the property, which is absolutely covered by insurance.
It's like the best way to prevent police brutality and murder: simply make them individually liable for damages and require them to carry insurance for it. Bad actions make you uninsurable, and the rest of your department more risky (expensive).
Ironically the reason we have this problem is because the armed guards of capital are one of the only jobs that still have strong unions.
Union is underselling their mafia racket.
Its a big gang, and youre not in it.
No one has replied to this comment, yet you’ve edited it as though you’re having multiple conversations.
Are you ok?
Most government employees are not elected. Needing the entire state to vote on a ballot initiative to get a raise would make it even harder than it already is for teachers...
This comment was made after the half dozen edits you made clarifying to no one.
We can only wish teachers unions were as powerful as police unions. The world would be very different
Unions were the compromise between violence against the capital from the working class.
Every few generations everyone seems to forget the existing social contracts exist for reason, and that reason is never the benevolence of the plutocrats.
Too bad companies spent decades demoting and crushing them. Paid money for it, even.
The same Pinkertons that were hired over a century ago to bust unions, are still around today for a reason.
More like "Old school problems require old school solutions"
✊
Wooden shoes are so uncomfortable though
Toss em in something with gears to make them more comfortable.
Not a modern problem. Not a modern solution. Fuck Dave Chappelle.
I’ve said that on Reddit and people got mad at me.
A single warehouse burning because of low wages is like a single healthcare CEO getting shot: Funny to read about, but ultimately not going to change much.
Turn it into a monthly thing, and it becomes a revolutionary act that will change things!
FTFY.
Actually it's only a warehouse if it comes from the warehouse region of France. Anything else is just a "storage shed"
sparkling storage shed
That's right, kids: try it at work!
Hypothetically, I really hope this happens. Hypothetically, like once a week for the next year.
Yeah! Try it at a factory
If they used to be houses, then they are were-houses.
If it used to be a house, then it's a was-house.
Usually what the owner class does is push for tougher laws instead
I'm not a lawyer, but this sounds perfectly feasible to me. So insurance companies simply choose to not treat low wages as a risk factor. I wonder why 🤔
So they run without insurance, lobby to mitigate their liability and the conditions of workplaces plummets.
Oh no how unfortunate.
Finally, a sensible market solution /s
Right. A more likely one is that having staff in a building at all are a liability and so all these warehouses are moving to robots. There will be an oversaturation of warehouse workers vs sites still using them, and so these fires are just going to bring wages lower.
Warehouses can burn whether they have robots in them or not lmao
The ESG that the right deserves
you'd be replaced with robots even sooner
I it seriously got to that point those robots would have to be fireproof.
Burn baby burn. Disco inferno! Burn baby burn!
If the cost of keeping humans is higher than the cost of automating, they'll just automate the process. Or have the place ran by wire, where humans pilot lifts remotely.
There were only 8 people in that whole warehouse when it burned. It clear they already cut staff to an insanely low level. If they could have automated those 8 jobs away, they already would have.
Stop preemptively giving up your power by assuming you have none.
You can burn down an automated warehouse too.
"Hence the word...'sabotage.'"
(Note: this probably isn't true)
History is replete with turning points....
Honestly probably easier as there are less eyes. Just walk in with a clip board and say your from XYZ company and you have a contract to service the robots. If they seem hesitant at first, immediately get irate and say the contract is hourly and your technically already on the clock. In 98% of circumstances this will be your ticket in, if not try again on a different day of the week two weeks later.
Then just leave behind some incendiary devices as your "servicing the robots" and now not only did you burn the warehouse down, they also have no clue who you even are.
For 200 years, workers have been told that automation will make their lives better...
If they could, they'd already have.
Depending on which oligarch you believe, we’re just about there. General purpose humanoid robots are almost ready to take over warehouse work
I am sure they are as almost ready as the swasticar autopilot
There's plenty of technology that could be, but isn't yet because the incentives aren't there.
If we turned all this wasted ingenuity towards the betterment of humankind, then everything could get much better very quickly.
So better be a slave than unemployed?
Ironically, arson is a felony and it's unlikely that insurers cover such events that are due to criminal acts.
Insurers are likely not paying out anything.
What are you smoking? Insurance pays for damage caused by criminal activities
This is only the case when one intentionally burns down their own property.
What? No. Arson usually covered on standard policies. Most likely what would happen in the scenario portrayed here is that insurance would go up and future insurance contracts would specifically exclude arson / vandalism.
New armchair expert topic just dropped
Yeah have someone burn down your house and then file an insurance claim.
See how that goes for you.
If you set a fire or otherwise intentionally cause your home to be burned down, then no insurance would not cover that. However in this case it is arson committed against the owner of the property, which is absolutely covered by insurance.
Am now millionaire, thanks for the advice