some debates go on and on

I find it interesting that years and years of debate and real-world experience still don’t settle some issues. Liberalism favors a considerable extent of governmental social spending and regulation in order to ameliorate the lapses, breaches, distortions, and transgressions inherent in the capitalist marketplace system. Conservatism asserts that governmental interventions themselves distort the optimal workings of the marketplace economy and advise against the fostering of governmental dependencies. The debate goes on and on.

https://mishtalk.com/politics/uaw-files-lawsuit-based-on-the-trump-elon-musk-discussion-on-x/

Unionization?

Progressives say that the union movement is a beacon of social progress.

Speaking at a conference last year, Elon Musk said unions “try to create negativity in a company” . . . They rile up antagonism where the owners and managers are trying to foster a team spirit of joint commitment to productive excellence and maximal profitability.

The debate goes on and on.

* * * *

There surely are some owners and managers who strive re: ESG

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental,_social,_and_governance

“If Tesla gets unionized, it will be because we deserved it and we failed in some way,” Musk said. “But we certainly try hard to ensure the prosperity of everyone.”

My father had a small business. He tried to foster a collective, even communitarian, sensibility among the staff (who numbered, like, two full-timers and one part-timer). He said: “It’s beneficial for us all if we can create a team-like, perhaps familial, working environment.” He rewarded conscientiousness and loyalty. It can be done when the scale is personal-scale.

Large companies, driven by marketplace competition toward maximal exploitation of resources, become impersonal. The unions are defensive organs against corporate exploitation. Governmental regulators work against the anti-social, anti-ecological, and overly-exploitative impetus of profit maximization.

ESG is touted as an enlightened sensibility. But some say it’s nothing but a “greenwashing” drag on financial performance. The unions can be perceived as a counterweight. Their defense of the interests of labor can be viewed as necessary and positive. Or the narrative of “labor vs. capital” can be viewed as regrettably antagonistic. Likewise, the criticism of “the Bolsheviks” is that “they’re trying to foment the negativity of class struggle” . . . “us against them” . . . instead of national unity and harmony.

Real-world experience has not settled these debates.