Doesn't matter how strong worker protections are if they're not enforced. So, strong enforcement is a must. Let's go for maximum support. But actual laws on the books? Keep it at moderately pro-worker. The grants we're giving out are supposed to ensure a fairly level playing field and a chance for people to open their own businesses. If we didn't have this, then it would basically only be the mega wealthy with stored capital able to invest. In this case we're helping everyone, because, quite simply the richest don't always get there by being smarter, they can get there by being able to outspend the competition. And thus capital accrues further wealth. In this scenario, ideally we're making capital available to anyone with a good idea.

And So while we do need to support workers/the common people. Starting up new businesses should also support regular people become small business owners. I'm thinking moderately pro-worker to not strangle them with too much red tape. It's a gesture of trust. Abuse this good will and we can tighten restrictions later.

[X] Broad Support
[X] Moderately Pro Worker
[X] Intensive Enforcement
 
Last edited:
I don't really care either way, but you could have at least shown a source that doesn't have a name as shady as "truthout" Lol :p.

I knoooooowwwww, I feel kind of embarrassed about it! :p

Alas it's not an area that gets a lot of active reporting and I'm not eager to hunt down other sources while limited to phone posting.

Edit: I'm pretty strongly against moderating our stance on worker rights however. Things may work out /now/ but give it a few decades for the Tendency of the Rate of Profit to Fall to kick in and we'll be back to neoliberal hellscapes.
 
Last edited:
The idea that a business can't run if the workers have good pay and authority is a myth. A very threadbare one built on the back of anti-union rhetoric. Historically unionized workers, in cooperation with the board and CEO of various companies, have opted to take pay cuts to keep the business running in the black during slim times; its in the interests of the worker if the business succeeds and continues to employ them. In the aftermath, once the business/economy recovers, it's almost always the case that the business itself fails to uphold its side of the bargain and raise wages back to previous levels, rather than a failure to uphold their agreement on the worker side. Believe it or not, workers aren't morons, and it's not only the wealthy that have enlightened self-interest.

What doesn't happen when workers have good wages and authority is massive golden parachutes for the top 4 or 5 guys in a company. Most big American corporations have the CEO making 500-1000x the wages of their average worker. That's where all padding in the margin goes, because workers in the company have no idea what the books look like, what the margins are like, and no authority to stop that bullshit even if they did.
...yes we heard you the first time you posted this.
 
[X] Broad Support
[X] Strongly Pro Worker
[X] Moderate Enforcement

Death to Abusive Business! :V
Preferably under pressure of unions
 
So your saying we ARE the dictator? Like its constantly referenced that noone really talks to the MC and he doesn't really get involved in politics, his influence is practically nil because of that. Not to mention that even if we have not dipped to the popularity we had before, we likely don't have the public popularity to do whatever. Like our government is a democracy right?
No, we're not a dictator. If we do things that are too unpopular, we will be removed. And no, a bunch of people talk to Dr Granger - he's just not good at politics, and wasn't well-known to anyone outside his field before he took the job.

And you're right, we don't have the popularity, either public or political, to do "whatever". Forex: it's been said it would take over 100 Political Support to not be fired for raising the question of spreading Tiberium to any other celestial body. But we have a great deal of power within our sphere.
 
So what you two are saying is that by making our laws very pro-worker we are actually making capitalism stronger? :p
Depends on what you want. Autocratic owner-employee business is very fast to grow. Essentially that system creates thousands of businesses and 95% of them fail in 5 years, and the other 5% quickly enlarge and take over the others that failed. This model grows quickly, but is extremely volatile and leads to monopoly eventually. It also has the tendency of concentrating money toward whichever major metropolis is the headquarters for the business, creating large geographic wealth inequalities.

Worker-Union or Copperative Model business are slower to grow, but much more stable. They also tend to reinforce and strengthen the community local to the business, because the money made to the business is going back to members of that community. This decentralizes wealth and grows the economy more evenly.

So if wealth were a plant, a traditionally owner-employer models is like a tropical forest with huge trees (owners) and a bit of undergrowth at their base (the workers) whereas cooperatives are more of a prairie or grassland, with lots of growth everywhere and some big trees or bushes here or there.
 
Last edited:
I beg of you. Please. Not the forest analogy. :V

But yeah, the resiliency of worker owned businesses is attractive for a setting as volatile as Tiberium!Earth.
 
...yes we heard you the first time you posted this.
It got double posted by lag. Not sure why. I deleted the later one almost immediately as it posted. You're too fast for me mate.

Edit: or I thought I did? Theres a weird time gap between them. Not sure how that happened. Sorry for the inconvience though.
 
Last edited:
The idea that a business can't run if the workers have good pay and authority is a myth. A very threadbare one built on the back of anti-union rhetoric. Historically unionized workers, in cooperation with the board and CEO of various companies, have opted to take pay cuts to keep the business running in the black during slim times; its in the interests of the worker if the business succeeds and continues to employ them. In the aftermath, once the business/economy recovers, it's almost always the case that the business itself fails to uphold its side of the bargain and raise wages back to previous levels, rather than a failure to uphold their agreement on the worker side. Believe it or not, workers aren't morons, and it's not only the wealthy that have enlightened self-interest.

What doesn't happen when workers have good wages and authority is massive golden parachutes for the top 4 or 5 guys in a company. Most big American corporations have the CEO making 500-1000x the wages of their average worker. That's where all padding in the margin goes, because workers in the company have no idea what the books look like, what the margins are like, and no authority to stop that bullshit even if they did.

and something important is that cooperative based buisness do exist in a big and sucesful scale

not as some sort of abstract ''it wasnt real socialism/it wasnt done right'' idealist take of ''what if''
but as actual economic force

in spain you have mondragon wich is a conglomerate of small buisness and cooperatives with up to 80k employees and presence along several countries

cooperatives can and have compited on equal standing to more traditional buisness models
 
Closed Military Hearing (semi canon)
Closed military hearing

Undisclosed location. Blue zone 1

Mike sat eyes closed, listening to the rustle of paper in the court. Not the grand affair of Director Boyle that had been streamed publicly around the world and breathlessly reported on by reporters of all stripes and colours. No, this was a small, relatively private affair. Only, presided over by some very powerful men and women. Not quite worth the time of the heads of divisions time it was nonetheless harrowing to be judged by by some of the highest ranking and most famous Generals and field commanders in GDI, some were war heroes. There was of course also a colonel from the air force here to give testimony, someone from space force due to the satellites he'd borrowed.

And of course. Himself. Major Carpenter of InOps. Being held to account.

"State your name and rank for the record."

"Major Michael Carpenter, current acting director of Intelligence Operations for Red zone One. Most relevant to the charges I directly oversaw observation of temple prime. During which I was a captain when it was still classified as Yellow Zone one Sir."

"You're aware of course Major. That former director Boyle has been executed for his crimes?"

"Yes sir. Wouldn't be much good at my job if I didn't." Left unsaid of course was that Boyles fate had been decided long before the trial made its official ruling.

"Quite." The general replied dryly. "Then for the record, let me state that his orders directly led to the explosion at Temple Prime, for which he has been punished accordingly. And yet, it was on your orders that even prior to the Destruction of the Philadelphia you ordered Temple Prime be placed under satellite observation during its construction and after."

"A recommendation Sir, the orders were agreed upon and signed off on by my superiors. Sadly no longer with us."

"And who is your day to day commander now major?"

"Yet to be established sir. During the war I oversaw operatives attached to various units providing analysis of raw data and passing along what I found up the chain of command to the pentagon as needed or else to those better placed to make use of it. I followed their orders as best I could when not interfering with my own duties."

"You seem to have been entrusted with rather a number of duties for a mere Major. Would it be fair to say you've been acting outside the scope of the chain of command?"

Mike paused for a moment. Considered carefully, then answered. "Yes Sir, to both."

That caused a minor rustle as the generals up in the judges seats conversed quietly for a few moments.

"Do you feel you're qualified to carry out those duties?"

"No sir." He replied. If his previous answer caused a rustle this was more akin to a small tornado. One of the commanders standing and clearing their throat to bring the hearing back to order.

"Then why did you perform them?"

"Anyone who was qualified was killed Sir."

"But you agree both that you weren't qualified to perform such decisions and that you were acting outside of the chain of command, often without reporting to any higher ups for weeks at a time."

"Yes sir, though I would like to add, InOps agents such as myself are trained to be able to make decisions when cut off from command."

"In. The field. This is hardly the same thing."

"Do you feel you did a good job?" Another general asked calmly.

"No Ma'am. I wish I'd done better." Mike answered voice even.

"Back to temple prime itself. Your recommendation. Led to temple prime being observed. Observed as it was rebuilt and turned into a stronghold for the brotherhood of Nod."

"Yes Sir. That is accurate."

"So you agree, your actions contributed to the deaths of millions, that number rising, due to the construction of Temple prime, and the subsequent liquid tiberium explosion that was caused. Is there any reason you felt why temple prime shouldn't have been bombed, at any point before they developed their counter to the Ion Cannons?"

"I can't give an exact figure. But my eva informs me there's over twelve hundred reasons, gathered over the course of years of observation."

"Over a thousand reasons?!"

"Twelve hundred sir. That you're cleared to know of." Mike amended his statement slightly as a ghost of chuckle cut through the tension of the room.

"Perhaps you'd care to enlighten the members of the bench on some of these that we are cleared to know of."

"One Josep Tingiski, explosives expert, GDI observers photographed him and his likeness helped a security team detain him in copenhagen, delivering bomb making materials to a cell of would be militants. Decrypting their communications their plans to bomb schools and malls could have killed hundreds. It also led to further ID's of nod assets that InOps followed up on. Put simply, Nod having a central location they were based out of allowed us to track and document traffic to and from that known site and prevent what could have been thousands of attacks of varying intensity."

"That's supposition Major."

"Sorry Sir, won't happen again Sir." Mike responded schooling his temper.

"Would not have destroying the temple before the Liquid Tiberium device was ever built have saved millions. Not only from the explosion itself but the resulting Scrin invasion."

"For the Record. Director Boyle ignored all advice to not shoot the ion cannon."

"And yet it was not shooting it in the first place that led to this current situation."

"That would be Supposition Sir." Mike answered flippantly and lifting his chin to look the general in the eye. Beside him the Commander held a small smile on their face.

"The facts are clear major. This was a nod base. You gave the 'recommendation' to not wipe it off the map immediately and that base directly led to multiple major humanitarian disasters! Undoing decades of effort in tiberium abatement and even causing blue zones to be lost."

"Sir. If every Nod Base that InOps was aware of was targeted by ion cannon strikes there wouldn't be any yellow zones left. Sir."

"And that would be commands decision not yours Major. Hearing adjourned. We'll decide our ruling now." The general stated, standing and leading the way into the private judges chambers to review the evidence and decide Mike's fate. If he was lucky he mused they'd execute him and get it over with. More blood to slake the Hawks thirst. If he was really lucky they'd bust him back down to Lieutenant and he could find some easy job running security details for middle management types.
 
Last edited:
Why would we want that though? If anything one of the benefit of going strongly pro-worker is that they will have both the resources and organization to stand up to us later on.
The way I see it, the more pro-worker the policies become, the better benefits and pay the people get. But then the businesses that pays those workers also become less profitable, or not be able or even want to start up at all due to too much costs over profits. Combine that with how most startup businesses have little resources of their own to invest and must rely on grants, it means the economy is essentially mostly running because the government is paying for it, and must continue to pay for it to keep it running, for a longer time than if the market was more free and less constrained by pro-worker policies for more profit and growth rate.
 
We are fixing the start-up cost issue by throwing resources at the sector, and while there may still be some issues at the start, I think that in the long term the greater amount of money circulating in the economy will actually make most businesses more profitable. IIRC this is what happened in countries that followed this path historically. Yes, it will be more expensive for us but it's going to pay off.
Oh no, I wasn't arguing about whether or not this is the wrong method. I think the slow but steady and controlled growth is fine. The reason I replied to you was to explain why I thought Pro-worker policies would make the people more dependant on the government. It's because the longer they need to rely on the government to provide the initial funding and regulation enforcement to keep businesses honest for their treatment of the workers, the longer the government then would in turn have more control over the economy.

It's why I was tempted to vote for more Pro-worker, as to slow down the development of a free market even further to keep privatization under even more control.
 
Adhoc vote count started by Derpmind on Jun 9, 2021 at 11:00 PM, finished with 179 posts and 96 votes.


welp,this is how is it going
 
Oh, that government control isn't going to last forever. Sooner or later the economy will properly mature and all those private sector unions and coops and such are going to be looking out for their own interests ahead of our own desires and be much more capable of pushing back if we try to boss them around. That, and the higher consumption, is precisely the reason I supported the pro-worker option.
I can definitely understand the hesitancy people have of empowering a few corporations at the cost of the rest of the economy but I really don't quite get the desire for us to remain the only economic actor capable of doing anything of note.
Forever isn't needed. So long as more time is drawn out to get more time before the economy truly takes off, then it's good enough for the sake of retaining control in the short term. Because what GDI is short on currently is time, time to reclaim more of the planet, time build up infrastructure and the foundations needed to rebuild the physical parts of society, and to time to build up more defenses against the Nod and aliens. All the while not being further constrained and slowed down by uncontrolled private markets and consumerism than it absolutely needs to be.

So my reasons to want to retain economic control is due to threats that humanity is still facing, and I don't think GDI should spend more resources on restarting the private economy and slowing its efforts down while most of those problems aren't solved yet.

Edit:
96 voters. Almost 100. Quite the popular vote this time around.
Probably because it's not a plan and more of an ideal. Easier to vote for than the intimidating plans per turn. I myself hesitated to do any voting until more than a month after reading the quest to better understand how to vote responsibly.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top