I think the idealogy of neoliberalism has succeeded quite admirably in duping the population into believing that it shares with corporations the same interests, erasing almost all collective consciousness of class struggle.

Each community has both a stated purpose and an evolved character, and each occurs within a broader context of politics and society. We discuss and contribute openly, beneath such context.

Your objection is not particularly accurate. I was explaining, against your earlier concern, that the intention is quite different from attacking individuals for how they approach their own circumstances, and from imposing over discussion any assumptions about such circumstances.

Even if certain contributions may appear superficially as personal, the deeper motive is most likely political or structural.

We are trying to educate each other about the general issues in our society, and to broaden insight. We are not preaching solutions for individuals, or making demands on anyone.

The post is not intending to criticize an irregular work schedule on its merits. Indeed, some occupations require an irregular schedule.

The criticism directs at platforms manipulating workers by obfuscating the structure of exploitation through participation in the gig economy.

Note the text, “Working excessive hours isn’t… [just] flex…”

Overtime is best when organized with a union. Otherwise, it is being taken through scabbing.

Enthusiastically providing your own labor increases the total supply of labor, leading to wage depression for you and every other worker.

Make business owners pay more for your labor, by making your time valuable to you, for your own life and for improving the lives of others, in family and community, about whom you genuinely care.

I agree that doctors are unlikely to seek union formation at the current time. I have suggested supporting the working class overall, to help us develop power against the systems that are harmful to us as a class.

Build class solidarity. Erode the power of insurance companies. Demand reimbursements that cover both your operating expense and personal income. Support other workers. Support every worker. Take down the system.

Millennials is just the name for the group despised by Boomers, and Boomers is just the name for the group despised by Millennials. Otherwise, either term is completely meaningless.

I suspect the folks upstairs have some change to spare.

But are you so naïve to think that will ever happen in the near future?

No one is committing to a firm prediction.

The objectives for workers to pursue are, on the broadest level, quite apparent.

If workers fail to recognize the objectives, and of the necessity for direct and coordinated action toward achieving them, then they will fail to stop elites from consuming and eventually depleting the resources and populations of the planet, for their own hubris and greed.

In such a case, there is no doubt elites will not stop themselves.

Workers form unions because they want to fight capital, not because they somehow have an option to take control of the workplace, but refuse to do so because they love their bosses.

I was asking for information that could be sourced. Math cannot tell you which decisions someone else has made or which practices have been adopted.

I feel you may be cherry picking arguments in order to support a conclusion you have reached for reasons that are emotional. Otherwise, I have little more to offer.

Are you providing information from actual sources, or just speculating from your own calculations?

In comparison as soon as UAW closes down a shop the big 3 start losing money.

The observation seems to challenge your own premise.

Why is Fain pumping the breaks when he could be building more momentum (for both his members and the labor movement at large) with a full strike?

The current strategy seems to be winning, unless I am unaware of deeper problems. I am not understanding why you are displeased, or what you realistically expect that would be much better.

Do you know how long it would take to accumulate the same amount of funds?

I question the comparison, implying that an entire union must strike in one particular case, simply because such a strategy was successful in another case. Many strong differences in circumstances are relevant.

Class struggle entails shifting balances of power.

Many groups are interacting within each side.

Workers currently have little power, but the UAW action has so far seemed as one of the most momentous opportunities in recent memory.

Building power depends on seeking gains that may be expected to be both reached and to be held. Once a stronger position is reached, then the even stronger position becomes closer at hand.

You are suggesting throwing everything at a single opportunity within a hostile and untested climate.

It is wise to seek modest gains one at a time, trying to encourage everyone that better days are coming soon.

At the moment, even a substantial symbolic victory in one area would be quite significant in terms of building momentum to expand movements across the working class. When one group of workers rises, even by only a modest increment, we all gain power in the shared struggle, power we can use to climb higher.

deleted by creator