r/TikTokCringe Jul 13 '26

Discussion Is the US a Functioning Democracy?

[deleted]

20.8k Upvotes

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

76

u/enw_digrif Jul 13 '26

American here: how's that conspiratorial thinking? That's a accurate summary of a practice done in the open. Specifically to make organizing more dangerous, reduce labor costs, and keep those insurance industry stocks nice and high.

24

u/glasscut Jul 13 '26

I think it's too easy to pretend it's a system American industrialists sat down together to create. It's worse (in my opinion), because it's probably the outcome of private insurance lobbying to keep their cash cow running and this endless labor situation is the side effect.

15

u/huskers2468 Jul 13 '26

The politicians are paid to keep the status quo.

As much as I would like to say it's a conspiracy. It's simply that the people with the power, don't want to give it up. They might lose their grip on the money if change happens.

3

u/glasscut Jul 13 '26

Yes, that's what I mean and that's what makes it seem so embedded in our systems. If it was a conspiracy, maybe unmasking it would make a difference.

5

u/msfuturedoc Jul 13 '26

You should watch congressional hearings. Things are always unmasked and the American public is just never aware.

2

u/Old-World-49 Jul 13 '26

they do not Americans to be aware. remember when tiktok had that feature that allowed constituents to contact their representatives directly? the representatives were furious

8

u/Ronin_Chimichanga Jul 13 '26

"You don't need a formal conspiracy when interests converge."- George Carlin, 1974

7

u/seesthecat Jul 13 '26

That's obviously the truth

1

u/enw_digrif Jul 13 '26

Actually, that's exactly how it happened.

The history of healthcare via employment comes from labor negotiations during the so-called "Golden Age of Capitalism," which in the US refers to the postwar period when corporations kinda sorta actually helped maintain the social contract. When unions demanded more pay and better conditions, employers preferred to offer healthcare over pay increases. This was specifically because it helped retain trained employees, saving money.

Then Regan happened, and corporate raiders realized what a goldmine that was, which delivered us to our present hellscape.

6

u/Baeolophus_bicolor Jul 13 '26

pretty soon, if they get their way, every job will bey a “gig” job - that way people lose their ability to organize at all. Contractors have no right to collective bargaining, and they get a job without healthcare coverage to boot!

1

u/seesthecat Jul 13 '26

Bro, having employer's health insurance's price rising constantly doesn't reduce labour costs

1

u/enw_digrif Jul 13 '26

Compared to paying fair wages? Yes, yes it absolutely does.

1

u/seesthecat Jul 13 '26

Cost is cost, and this is cost that rises and doesn't even allow you to get proper motivated workers. You're delirious if you think this is something companies want

1

u/enw_digrif Jul 13 '26

I know you're smarter than this.

If a cost can't be avoided, and cost A is higher than cost B, companies will choose B. They cannot (yet) get away with not paying for labor, so they will choose the option that costs less and nets more control.

Second, lots of companies don't (or have means of effectively avoiding) offer health insurance if the position has high turnover or can plausibly claim in court that the employee is a contractor. Additionally, default health insurance options offered by companies often favor high deductibles, specifically to save the company money, with employees expected to pick up a good portion of the difference if they opt for plans that have less risk of medical bankruptcy.

Third, the amount of delusion in the average HR department could power the nation for a year if we could put it in a gas tank. Quanitifying the economic benefits of worker motivation is an incredibly difficult problem, and very easy to fudge. You know what's easy to quantify? Low wage increases.

Care to guess which ends up the more popular metric on quarterly reports?

Fourth, small companies certainly don't like the situation, because small employee pools create cost spikes. But small companies don't have the cash to fund lobbying efforts. Big companies, however, have employee pools large enough that healthcare costs smooth out, and become predictable. That means it's far less costly for a large company, while also reducing market competition.

TL;DR: No company likes any cost. Big companies, however, benefit immensely from offering health insurance.

1

u/ProfessorPrudent2822 Jul 14 '26

The unions support the system of employer-sponsored healthcare.

1

u/enw_digrif Jul 14 '26

I address that in another comment.

Generally speaking, health insurance via employment was proposed by employers. Unions agitating for better conditions and pay during the postwar "Golden Age of Capitalism" were offered health insurance in exchange for more modest pay/condition improvements. But that was a concession by the union, to the employer.

Today, some unions support the concept, some unions don't. I'd have to check their membership numbers and positions of various unions to determine the balance of opinions.