 |
|  |
 |
|
Ogie Oglethorpe
|
 |
Marietta, GA
Dec 1999 time: 05:13
|
|
First off apologies for getting this thread off track. That being said....
Considering a today view point a labor sided industry vs. green enviro friendly industry battle certainly exists. I submit though that this is a side battle if you will and still not the primary focus of labor.
However, if we turn the clock back to the late 1800's to early 1900's when the industrial revolution was in full swing and mega-monopolies existed everywhere from coal, steel, railways, oil etc. The archtypal Monopolists J. P. Morgan, Carnegie, Getty, etc. ruled the world. In those days the labor interests struggled moreso against the monopolists then they did against governmental interferences in eco-policy. One outgrowth of this obviously was communism (wherein it was corrupted to the point of making a Yang police state faction to model the stereotype of ~1930-1970's style communism). The other was obviously the emergence of labor unions and labor parties. To make a long story short the monopolists were historically THE nemesis of labor.
In those days the cause of labor was to initially improve working conditions and expand its membership to presumably expand it power base. Improving working conditions included safe working environs which meant of course a number of safety as well as environmental regulations coming to pass. Coming from a strictly US view (apologies to those reading this from outside the US), adoption of initial OSHA and EPA regulations came during the heyday of Labor Power.
I submit that today, labor is finding it's power base diminished and as a result has had to adopt viewpoints that are somewhat of a compromise. Case and point, labor has today worked with industry management to fend off job elimination in the auto industry by improving productivity and efficiency. It's beef with enviromental policies stems from the belief that the world is not a fair workplace/market and that overly restrictive enviro regulations puts a domestic industry at a disadvantage and hence jobs and membership are at risk.
I beleive if one really wanted to represent the beliefs of a labor faction a penalty to overall trade should be a result. When you look at today, the labor interests have vehemently opposed free trade policies moreso than any other policy (example Seattle riots over Pacific rim free trade and other protests re: NAFTA) and as a result I think the case can be strongly made that free marketeers are the real perceived enemy of labor.
All in all, a labor friendly faction for my money would be most opposed to free market then any other SE choice considering the present and history of labor.
[This message has been edited by Ogie Oglethorpe (edited February 11, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Ogie Oglethorpe (edited February 11, 2000).]
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Byron
|
|
eisduotres: if its true that being governor gives you a bonus of +1 energy to each base then add that to your total because with plenty of small cities + Planetary Transit and maybe Empath Guild becoming Governor is a piece of cake for the Borg, especially if two of the 6 AI are aliens of course.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gothar
|
|
Canberra, ACT, Australia
Nov 2000 time: 05:13
|
|
After reading this i tried a game with the drones. I was running demo/fm/wealth. I was in a pact with the cyborgs so was still getting techs. It was all right but they weren'yt my absoloute favourite faction. Research was to slow for my liking.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:13. Apolyton Time is 00:13. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|