Hollywood's Writers' Strike

[Sohrshah]

Originally Posted by Morrigoon

I wonder though... would being a scab writer get you blacklisted in the future? Probably.

I would imagine so, yes! Unless you used a psuedonym... then you could still try to write under your own name later.

[Alex]

Well, John Stewart was pretty obviously written last night. He may have ad libbed more but you can talk to a sequence of graphics (some static, some with timed changes) without having done some writing in advance.

Colbert seemed a little more spontaneous but I have to wonder what he is going to do in a couple days when he can't just fill the first 15 minutes with strike jokes and has to start talking about other things. Jokes about not knowing what you're going to say are going to get old pretty fast.

Also thought Stewart, when talking about the WGA making deals with some people but not with others, was a bit disingenuous in not mentioning that to give him and Colbert a deal would require the WGA letting one of the major producers (Viacom) begin a process of piecemeal bargaining. There is a big difference between making a deal with Worldwide Pants (total current productions: 2) and Viacom.

[Sohrshah]

Originally Posted by Alex

And yes, it sucks if other people are financially harmed by my decisions but I don't think it is selfish of me to refuse to work for compensation I consider insufficient. Yes, compared to what the average person makes I am pretty rich. And that would be true even if they refused to give me raises and bonuses for three years running. And the fate of the administrative assistant who might be fired if I were to leave the company would not play a role in my decision on whether to stay or not.

Administrative Assistants are not fired because their bosses leave. They often make more money than you think they do, and when you leave, guess who's keeping your things in order for the next guy?

[Morrigoon]

Visible mojo to NM since I'm supposed to spread it around first

[Alex]

Yes, sometimes administrative assistants get fired when someone leaves (because people aren't always replaced). And I know how much they make and what they do because I used to be one.

But that is beside the point I was making, which is: when making decisions about adequate compensation for your work, the secondary dependencies who may be affected by your decision not to work aren't really a factor.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by NirvanaMan

That is the beauty of capitalism. All things generally have a way of sorting themselves out in the free market, including employment.
[SNIP]
People are not commodities. They should not be treated as such.

Umm, huh? Those two statements are kinda contradictory, aren't they? By saying, "Let the market sort it out" you are precisely suggesting that people should be treated as commodities.

[Sohrshah]

Originally Posted by Alex

Yes, sometimes administrative assistants get fired when someone leaves (because people aren't always replaced). And I know how much they make and what they do because I used to be one.

But that is beside the point I was making, which is: when making decisions about adequate compensation for your work, the secondary dependencies who may be affected by your decision not to work aren't really a factor.

Point taken, though in my experience if someone is not being replaced, the company is reorganizing or downsizing, and the admins are usually among the first to be let go (excepting high level admins, who are sometimes the last)

I agree with you that when making decisions for yourself, the collateral damage cannot be a factor, though my tendencies towards compassion would make that a very difficult decision. I don't think I would sleep well at night knowing that my decision is negatively affecting someone else. Simultaneously, I have never been in a life situation where I could AFFORD to be out of work for weeks and weeks. I wonder how hard this strike is on writers who don't make 100K+ a year? I imagine the union subsidizes them to some extent, but it can't be nearly what they were making before...

[NirvanaMan]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

If the market were entirely free, there'd be no need for antitrust laws. The government may not care, but price fixing is alive and well.

Sure, which is why I used the term "generally" as opposed to language that would be more absolute in nature. But generally, I believe the government needs to butt out of such things as well. In time the market generally finds a way. There are of course exceptions, especially prevalent at the dawn of the prior century.

There are exceptions to every rule, but they are just that. I challenge anyone to find anything that is perfect in life outside of the following:

• 1967 Corvette Stingray convertible with a 427 and side pipes
• Boiled Maine lobster fresh off the boat eaten at a picnic table out of a paper basket with lemon and melted butter
• Boobies
• Tacos
• Fireflies
• That which is the "Glorious Maximus"

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by NirvanaMan

There are exceptions to every rule, but they are just that. I challenge anyone to find anything that is perfect in life outside of the following:

• 1967 Corvette Stingray convertible with a 427 and side pipes
  
• That which is the "Glorious Maximus"

Mentioned in the same breath as the Stingray??

[NirvanaMan]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Umm, huh? Those two statements are kinda contradictory, aren't they? By saying, "Let the market sort it out" you are precisely suggesting that people should be treated as commodities.

No, I'm not at all. I can't even see the correlation. My opinion is quite the opposite in fact.

Unless you are suggesting that the only items traded or dealt with in a free market are commodity goods.