This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I disagree, some industries have short term bottlenecks but medium term they can hire and train.
And yes I will stick with its stealing. It violates market principles.
This wont be true in many locations. Lost of autoworker jobs are located in mediocre areas and yet require decent intelligence to even perform the tasks. Getting average IQ people to relocate to work in a factory in the middle of nowhere at a workplace that just fired everyone for demanding a raise is a short and long term problem. The genius of the original locations of these places is they sopped up labor that was bleeding out of farms that were increasingly mechanized (fewer workers per acre) while also having high fertility. That's not nearly as true anymore, there aren't all sorts of white boys pouring out of farms that need semiskilled work.
Or you just build a new factory, hire people there, and then shut down the prior one…
That is a waste of capital, if you can avoid it you should. If an economy can avoid it, it should craft labor rules to.
More options
Context Copy link
Building factories anywhere near population centers is almost impossible in the US.
Depends on which population center, honestly. Dallas-Fort Worth has new factories opening semi-regularly.
True! Texas and Florida seem to be the exception it’s pretty cool what they’ve managed to do down there.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It is a government enforced quasi cartel. Cartels are the sine qua non of anti competitive behavior except for the labor carve out. It is really bad policy and we don’t need to resort to spherical cows.
More options
Context Copy link
That’s just like your opinion. If it costs the average consumer money it feels like stealing to me.
Ok so you don’t like my frame. It doesn’t change what unions do which is theft. They don’t abide by market forces. If you want to propose something similar I will agree it’s theft.
Ok, so I'm not a big fan of modern unions, but theft? Really?
You aren't entitled to a particular product. If you want something made by non-union labor, that's an option. Go buy from a different company.
More options
Context Copy link
So it’s theft by my definition. Sorry you don’t like my frame but using government mandated force to make others poorer well is theft.
You seem ignorant of the massive government thumb on the scale for unions. Companies are forced to negotiate with a union. Can you think of any other situation where an unwilling party is forced to negotiate in “good faith” and can be heavily fined if the government determines otherwise? Hell, for a long time companies were forced to allow union organizers onto their property to agitate for unionization.
More options
Context Copy link
Ok then remove there government protections.
I guarantee if that happens the UAW wouldn’t exists.
More options
Context Copy link
Almost all unions require government intervention to exists because they violate market forces. UAW wouldn’t exists without government protection.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link