> I agree, we and the union workers should vote in a government that helps people who lose their jobs to progress.
You have an incorrect, oversimple model of politics (e.g. business interests have shown much more capability in influencing government on economic policy to suit their own goals than pretty much every other group, and there are a lot of reasons for that).
You use "progress" in a really suspect way, like it's a line pointing one way. It's really about whose progress it is.
etc.
> After all, it's the job of a government, not a company, to serve the needs of the people.
I disagree, and I think that idea is actually at the root of a lot of problems.
> You have an incorrect, oversimple model of politics
I disagree, I believe I have a correct, appropriately complex model of politics. I guess our opinions cancel each other out, and we'll have to agree to disagree on this point, friend.
> business interests have shown much more capability in influencing government on economic policy to suit their own goals
I actually agree here: business is great at influencing policy in a way that suits their goals, but not necessarily in a way that suits the goals of society or individuals. The 2 goals are different, that's why we can't rely upon the former to achieve the goals of the latter.
It's the goal of business to make money, it's the goal of unions and people to make sure people are taken care of, so unions and people should vote for a government that takes care of people.
>> After all, it's the job of a government, not a company, to serve the needs of the people.
> I disagree, and I think that idea is actually at the root of a lot of problems.
That is a valid viewpoint. Another valid viewpoint is, thinking that idea is at the root of a lot of problems, is itself at the root of a lot of problems. Unfortunately, without any detail provided either way, all we have now is 2 conflicting, equally-valid viewpoints.
You have an incorrect, oversimple model of politics (e.g. business interests have shown much more capability in influencing government on economic policy to suit their own goals than pretty much every other group, and there are a lot of reasons for that).
You use "progress" in a really suspect way, like it's a line pointing one way. It's really about whose progress it is.
etc.
> After all, it's the job of a government, not a company, to serve the needs of the people.
I disagree, and I think that idea is actually at the root of a lot of problems.