would be pretty easy to hire scabs, for sure. these companies could easily afford $20/hr to break a strike. they could also just close up shop, too. thats the problem; food and housing for the rich are removed from the immediate affects of labor from the working man. so what if cities worth of people starve; better than helping the poors
this is bullshit. of course the rich are more insulated from the economy; they always have been. you know what isn't insulated from labor? their fucking profits! that's the point of a strike, not to literally starve to boog or some shit.
deleted by creator
would be pretty easy to hire scabs, for sure. these companies could easily afford $20/hr to break a strike. they could also just close up shop, too. thats the problem; food and housing for the rich are removed from the immediate affects of labor from the working man. so what if cities worth of people starve; better than helping the poors
this is bullshit. of course the rich are more insulated from the economy; they always have been. you know what isn't insulated from labor? their fucking profits! that's the point of a strike, not to literally starve to boog or some shit.
deleted by creator
Capitalists can handle a temporary loss in profits to starve out a strike. They've always done that! It's a long-term strategy.
Yeah, it wouldn't be easy. They don't even live near anyone else anymore, theyre all snowboarding out west.
just said this somewhere else, but when shit hits the fan, head to the hills. the rich know whats up