#idk how representative the worldwide vote actually was

[feytouched]

last esc post i prommy but here is how i would fix eurovision

a) jury vote value down to 25%, televote 75%

b) winners of past years can only feature as guests, not contestants. you had your shot, now move on

c) national juries need to have a fixed number of people from music related backgrounds reflecting diverse tastes and opinions, and jury lists should be public for transparency. keeping their names secret to avoid bribery has not prevented bribery from happening nonetheless

d) make votes cost the same for everyone. when some countries pay 0.20€ per vote and others well above 1€ that's gonna skew results

e) and lastly, get rid of israel

[quizzically]

wait while i'm making posts.

I think the statistical implications of how most tumblr polls work is totally fascinating and really should be acknowledged by people who compile data they get from tumblr polls to show facts

i am such a huge statisticshead it really interests me i love data analysis. it kills me when people let the sanctity of a good old fashioned poll get taken out back and shot. BUT IT DOESNT HAPPEN ANYWHERE MORE FREQUENTLY THAN ON THIS SITE

The bias on polls is INSANE. "Voter fraud" game is INSANE.,shithole bananas. Ok let's take a favourite obscure character poll for example. let's say it's relatively small scale that receives about 400 voters per poll at leaston each of its rounds. people who are into smaller fandoms seek a blog that runs a poll about their small fandom. they Nominate their own candidate. when this candidate appears in the polls, because of how tumblr polls function (they appear on your dash from people you follow already, voting takes literally no more than 10 seconds if youre not super divided and then youre on your way. no need to register a name, or any other details. polls can be botted, you can use alternative accounts, there is no showing up in person.) the success of the candidate may almost entirely depend on the dedication of the person who nominated that character to promote and spread "propoganda" as its always called, to their followers and friends who may have had no actual previous opinion of this character. IT IS THE PICTURE OF A NIGHTMARE BIAS. they could not be less from representing the opinion of a general public or an actual body of people. It's less like gathering statistics and more like a popularity contest? but you're not shown all your options! maybe the opposing candidate is great but just doesn't have anybody who is obsessed with them to write a 3000 word essay on how they're so great! music blogs are really widespread too, either for knowing music or liking it, so that reduces bias, but still; people on tumblr are often young, often queer often leftist id say, they will be inclined by these demographics to recognise/like certain artists or genres less, certain genres more. like what im imagining is old, classic (but obscure and not trendy) bands might get voted out in favour of a broad-appeal modern artist. Despite that band actually being recognised worldwide and having cultural-reset-level influence. i probably should recognise that tumblr polls are not trying to represent a world statistic..that's pretty impossible and an unrealistic standard. i dunno.it just gets me het when people pretend they have ANY credibility. lets talk about vriska winning pathetic meowmeow over harry dubois ok. ITS A POPULARITY CONTEST! SMEAR CAMPAIGNS! How many people can you get to show up for you but it doesnt actually represent whos better or who SHOULD factually win! i suppose popularity contests IS all they are or all they can be tbh it's just like. who likes apples who likes oranges. IDK take everything i say with a grain of salt These polls are cursed horrible sickly animals. just wanted to talk about it

[tenrose]

bonjour! I saw your post about elections in France and I got a question: is M. Le Pen really getting more popular, or it's just gossip?

Well, she's not "getting" more popular like suddenly now. She was second in the last elections in 2017 and that's how we ended up with Macron as President because a lot of people voted for him to block her. At the same most people were like "well it can't be worse with him than with a far right politician, right?" Now it turns out that Macron is maybe not worse (debatable since the whole xenophobia and islamophobia stuff he's pulled out in 5 years), but he's absolutely no better either.

And the fact is the we have now way more candidates of the right wing than we had five years ago, and with more chances of having a lot of votes. And she's not even the first of them currently according to opinion polls. But we all know that we shouldn't trust poll. So I take her and every other far right wings candidates (and like traditional right as well) as a threat. Idk how foreign countries talk about the french upcoming elections but right now, on french TV she's not with the most broadcast (it's another fascist dude who's actually "worse" than her). And the fascism is on the rise these last years, thanks to medias, and now she's even considered "weak" and "soft" by right wingers, can you believe?

And the thing is that, like I said people voted Macron to block her, but Macron's presidency has been fucking shit (and it's an euphemism and by the way he's totally a right wing politician even though he claims he's not left or right or whatever), but if a similar scenario (with Le Pen or any other right wing candidate) happen for second tour, more people won't vote Macron this time because they don't want to be fucked over again. Except for now he's the higher in the polls (but again don't trust polls), and we don't have a strong left anymore so we will end up with a right wing president for 5 more years anyway...

So no, i don't think she's getting more popular, but it doesn't mean anything, she's always been a threat. And so are any other of those fascist scums. And her, and all the other should be considered a threat to democracy instead of being given more screen time. Because it's not Marine Le Pen herself who's getting more popular but far right nationalism in general and that's absolutely dreadful. But the fact is that's it's not just a french problem, it's a european problem, hell it's even a worldwid problem.

Note: you see me talking about second tour (idk about english word for this sorry) so let me explain quickly french presidential elections if you don't know how it work. First, we vote directly for our candidates. One vote = one voice for the candidate. We have more than two parties and basically anyone can be candidate, and we vote for the candidate rather than party (i mean you do vote for a candidate from a party you like but that doesn't mean because a candidate is elected that his party is gonna be the majority but i'll explain later). We have this year 12 candidates. So what happens is, we vote first for one candidate in the first tour. The two first ones end up in second tour. They traditionally have a debate, and every politician who voted for another one while trashing them become a major hypocrite and tell who they are going to vote for in second tour (to influence their militants etc.) And one week later (you get 4 sundays ruined with this shit by the way) we vote again for one of the two remaining. Aaaand it's not over yet lmao. Because then we have to vote for the "Assemblée nationale", deputy, who represent the people by geographic areas and they vote the laws proposed by the government. That's how we get the Prime Minister by the way. He's chose by the president according the majority in the Assemblée nationale. And this is where the fun begin, because we can end up with say a right wing president, but like two months later, the people are like "fuck this shit" and they vote for a majority of left deputies and that's how you end up with a right president having a left prime minister (and they hate each other) with an assembly of left majority that's gonna reject all laws proposed by the government, and neverending debates. It was made so the President doesn't have all the power.

This is all to say, that even if in the worse case Le Pen or any other fascist end up being elected president, we still have a way to make their job as difficult as possible and so as long as democracy, even a faillible one, is standing.

[a-method-in-it]

Hey idk if you know this abt the Walmart unions but you sign a contract before they employ you saying you can’t unionize and can’t sue. Idk if that’s legal or not but that’s my experience

Well if that isn’t some fuckery. You know what? Screw it, let’s talk about Walmart. Buckle up everyone!

So Walmart is — and I cannot emphasize this enough — a bonkers huge company. It employs over 2.2 million people worldwide, 1.5 million of them in the U.S. More Americans work for Walmart or one of its subsidiaries than live in Phoenix, Arizona — the fifth largest city in the country. More Americans work for Walmart than live in Maine.

According to its own SEC filings, which are legally required to be accurate, Walmart brought in $514 BILLION dollars in revenue in 2018. And its profit margin is 24.5%, meaning its gross profit in 2018 was over $125 billion. 

And the real kicker is that even though Walmart is a publicly traded company, 51% of its stock is owned by the Walton family. 

So what does this have to do with unions? Everything. 

Let’s mosey away from Walmart for just one second to talk about unions. What are unions?

Well, at their most basic, unions are legally recognized groups made up of employees that allows these employees to band together and have more of a say in how they are treated in the workplace. 

Unions negotiate contracts on behalf of their members that govern what the company can and can’t do — stuff like how much paid time off you are given per year; how your healthcare works; how your shifts are determined; what your job duties are and aren’t. The contract usually prevents the company from firing you “at will” and instead says you can only be fired for “just cause” which — legally speaking — is a much more narrow set of circumstances. 

Unions also represent employees who are being disciplined, and can act as an intermediary (when asked) to handle conflicts between employees and managers. 

And most important of all for this conversation, unions make sure people are paid what they’re worth. If you look at a company like Walmart — did the Walton family generate all that profit? Did the Waltons stock the shelves and drive the delivery trucks and ring up rude customers with a smile on their faces? Did the Waltons mop up the aisles or pick items off a warehouse shelf? That $514 billion — was that because of the Waltons? Or was that because of YOU?

Unions believe that employees should share in the wealth of the company for the very simple reason that employees are the ones who generate that wealth. So employees should get a fair share. 

Or, to quote a Pete Seeger song:

It is we who plowed the prairies

Built the cities where they trade

Dug the mines and built the workshops

Endless miles of railroad laid

Now we stand outcast and starving

Mid the wonders we have made

But the union makes us strong

So let us return to Walmart. Specifically, let us return to that number I mentioned earlier: 24.5% gross profit margin. 

An average profit margin in the U.S. is about 10%. If you have a 20% profit margin, you’re doing really, really well. Walmart’s profit margin is 24.5%

So how do they do that? They do that in a lot of ways but one of the biggest is screwing over their workers. Walmart employees are underpaid and undervalued in terms of the benefits they receive. A disproportionate number of them are kept as “part time” so the company can avoid paying for benefits at all. The company has been subjected to racial and gender discrimination allegations for years along with claims people are forced to work off the clock. Some stores literally lock their employees in at night, creating a huge safety risk in case of fire or other disasters. 

I could keep going, but there’s literally a whole Wikipedia page just dedicated to criticisms of Walmart. 

Look at this. Look at how long just the table of contents is. Look at what’s on it.

Walmart isn’t stupid. The Waltons aren’t stupid. They know that if unions ever successfully make inroads into Walmart it will be a threat to their combined family fortune of $170 billion. Improving the lives of their workers takes money directly out of their overstuffed pockets.

So Walmart goes all out to try to stop unions. It has a protocol managers are required to follow when they discover union organizing going on. It has perfected its misinformation campaign. 

Side note: please enjoy this video of a leaked anti-union Walmart training video cut with some dude laughing at all the same places I wanted to laugh. 

In addition to that, Walmart straight up spies on its workers. It has been accused of firing people who try to organize their co-workers — which is very, very illegal, but Walmart would rather get sued and pay a settlement than let unions get in. 

Walmart once stopped selling fresh-cut meat in every single store nationwide because a group of 10 — ten! — meat cutters at one store once voted to unionize. Because it’s illegal, you see, to eliminate a store or location because it has unionized, so instead Walmart shut down its entire meat-cutting operation nationwide the very next day after the union vote and claimed it was totally unrelated. With a straight face they said this. 

So it doesn’t surprise me, OP, that they make you sign stuff saying you won’t unionize. The good news, though, is that that agreement is (almost certainly) totally bogus. Like, I’m not a lawyer, but as far as I know it is not possible to waive your rights under the National Labor Relations Act, and that includes your right to unionize. 

(For the non-suing bit, I’m guessing that means you agreed to settle any disputes via binding arbitration — which is also not a great for other reasons, but is legal for them to do). 

So in light of all this, why do I think Walmart stores really can unionize?

Because unionizing would truly, genuinely and majorly benefit the people who work at Walmart—and Walmart can only try to suppress that reality for so long. 

Like, just look back at that video. It’s a really sophisticated piece of work. If you play it without the dude laughing, it might even be convincing. And I could spend a lot of time going over it point by point and explaining the sophistry involved (and who knows, maybe I will someday). But all I really have to say to completely obliterate the overall argument is this:

Union dues are virtually never more than 2% of a member’s paycheck

Unions get paid more when you get paid more—so they want you to make as much money as they can get for you

Unions are there to protect your interests, and if they don’t do that, they can be sued

As opposed to the company, which directly benefits from screwing you over

And call me an optimist, but even Walmart can’t change the cold, hard reality here. To say nothing of the fact that, even though unions haven’t been able to crack the Walmart nut yet, they have learned from each defeat. Those meat packers I mentioned? That happened in 2000 — unions have learned A LOT since then. 

So how would you even go about unionizing?

Look, I am active with my union, but I’m not going to pretend to be an expert on stuff at this level — which is why you should actually talk to the experts. United Food and Commercial Workers has made inroads in the past, and they can give you information about what they can do for you, and how you might go about starting the process without risking your job. 

Companies will always fight you, and I really don’t think any company fights harder than Walmart. But at the end of the day, Walmart is still nothing without the people working there. And that’s power, whether the employees realize it or not. 

Solidarity!