• CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    87
    ·
    5 months ago

    sets a dangerous precedent where the government knows better than the markets

    Wtf. You could say this about literally any law. Outlawing murder-for-hire sets a dangerous precedent where the government knows better than the markets. Making people pay income tax sets a dangerous precedent where the government knows better than the markets. Speed limits set a dangerous precedent where the government knows better than the markets. What a terrible argument.

    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      5 months ago

      No kidding. Even regular staunch capitalists recognize that regulation is sometimes necessary. Regulation against anti-competitive practices exists because a market left to its own devices will devolve into monopolies that will be much less efficient than a competitive market. Non-competes are just employers establishing monopolies over their workforce.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      The thing is that the government absolutely knows better than the markets.

      Left unchecked, markets would bring back slavery.

    • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Ha ha, I came to see who you were replying to but I can’t because I already blocked them. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

      (Odds are good I didn’t find their style or content particularly edificatious)

  • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    5 months ago

    My first question coming into this thread was, “is this a Trump judge?” I’m glad OP answered that in the post!

    • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s always a Trump judge!™

      It’s the legal corollary to “Did Trump actually say this fucked up thing?” Ha ha! You know he did, Timmy.

    • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Also in the northern district of Texas. I smell some judicial venue shopping. Northern district of Texas is basically now the Mordor of the legal world.

  • duderium2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    What is the point of “democracy” in the USA if unelected judges who were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote but won the presidency due to the slaveowner-designed electoral college can just nullify anything that is even slightly good? It’s almost as though amerikkka has always been a fascist dictatorship toward anyone who is not a rich white male and that this country desperately needs a communist revolution right now.

      • TurtleJoe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        5 months ago

        This country was founded by white men, and built by enslaved black people. The white supremacy was baked right in from the beginning. Black Americans didn’t gain full civil rights until the 1960s (when my parents were in college.) The legacy of that white supremacy remains to this day, both from existing power structures and ways of thinking, and due generational wealth differences.

        It is not racist to point that out.

        • ManixT@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          There is no denying the legacy of non-white racism and genocide against native Americans and its horrible impact continues today. Racism is a real problem that hasn’t gone away and should not be ignored.

          Maybe I’m being an idealist, but when I see use of language from OP making it seem like theres some coordinated white people scheme to only benefit white people, it seems like a straw man argument made to demonize one specific race. I feel like we’re all getting pretty damn well shafted these days and we can work together to improve the lives of people in marginalized and underserved communities.

          • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            That comment seemed squarely about the legacy of a system designed to benefit white men, which it was.

        • ManixT@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          5 months ago

          Imagine being so racist that you think discrimination of a particular race is not possible.

          Go back to… Not being educated?

          I don’t watch Joe Rogan and I’m not conservative.

  • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    5 months ago

    In all of human history, conservatives have oppressed the normal people. That’s just who conservatives are at their core. They are natural, instinctive oppressors.

    Never in history have conservatives been defeated by pacifism. Never. Swift, direct, forceful action is always required to defeat them.

    The slower we are to act, the less likely we are to survive this. Every normal person you know is in mortal danger and no one is coming to save us. We need action.

    • duderium2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      It would be nice if liberals like biden and his supporters stopped either enabling or aping conservatives.

        • duderium2@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yes, Biden is a liberal, which is one of many reasons why he supports genocide. It’s nothing new for liberals. Just look at the history of the USA for instance. This hellhole couldn’t exist without genocide.

    • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah he could still go ahead with the student loan relief too for that matter. All the stuff they say no to he has the power to say yes again now

    • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      5 months ago

      Not everyone was a fan of the non-compete ban, this year or last. Republicans and other proponents of the clauses said they help prevent trained employees and their skills from being poached by competitors.

      Wah! Pay people better and treat them like real people and they won’t need to be poached.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        5 months ago

        What’s hilarious is that they don’t really do all that much training anymore.

        They just hire people who already have the skills. or tell people to “figure it out”. They might pay you to go to a conference or something to improve skills… if those skills are hard to come by. It’s a cost benefit analysis, and new-hires are generally cheaper.

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        they help prevent trained employees and their skills from being poached given optimal pay according to market forces by competitors.

        This is fundamentally an anti-free-market opinion. But Republicans don’t care about markets, they care about corporations.

  • TipRing@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    5 months ago

    Looks like a limited injunction so far, but she intends to rule before the ban goes into effect and we can probably guess whose side this Federalist Society judge will come down on.

  • lone_faerie
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    5 months ago

    So how big of a tip do we think this company gave when the judge swiveled her iPad around?

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    5 months ago

    In my field of work this is relatively important. For one thing there are company secrets that give the company an edge temporarily. Those things you generally don’t patent because you don’t want to disclose them yet.

    So if you could just find another job and tell others these things, then yeah that could hurt a company. Usually we keep those things a just need to know level. So the guy who orders parts or the lady who does budgets don’t get to know details.

    But then on the overall it hurts us workers because we would like to be paid more or get a promotion or a new higher income somewhere else. But we are trapped. But I think this sort of thing is very niche. I mean, I literally spent 3 years of my life trying to find another team member with the right engineering background.

    And it also hurts the country overall. People who know the technology are few and far apart so when we loose one to old age or disease so goes all that knowledge.

    I for one try to grow engineers. I find those who are open minded and hungry for new ideas and then I bring them to the water. If the donkey drinks, then my job is done. It’s really hard to see one of my guys just leave. It’s years of my life and effort gone. But for them, it’s spin-off open season. Or maybe they teach others the principles we developed together. And this in turn makes better and more engineers. Putting a limit on what we can say or do just sucks balls.

    • 555_2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      5 months ago

      Sounds like your field of work should pay their employees a lot and treat them well.

      • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        And they do. I got no complaints from that end of the bargain myself. But It depends on when you start. Like if you start at a point when the company is not doing well, you are probably not going to get a good bump. But then you don’t know what others make so it’s mostly going to be compared with rumors from the net as to how much you might ask for. Anyway if you join in a bad year you get stuck with that pay while new people probably get a lot higher when profitability comes back. The owners have no incentive to pay you more just because they are making more.

        There’s a new law here in Washington State where the new positions must state the pay range. But then you can have a rate range that is far too large to be of any comparison or gage use.

        The reason I would want freedom from these laws is so that I can get a good job doing what I like. Chasing a project from company to company just to learn more about it for example is not uncommon.

  • maxinstuff@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Aren’t non-competes basically unenforceable anyway? At least for individual contributors. You can’t contractually ban an individual from making money from their literal profession.

    Senior execs and company founders with privileged information are a different story.

    Not American, but in my country non-compete clauses are routinely put into employment contracts even though they have been demonstrated to be illegal in most cases.

    It’s simply used to intimidate the ignorant.

    • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Depends on how bad you want to go to court, and how big of an asshole your former company is.