Just out of curiosity, how do you view the relationships between employer, employee, and consumer/customer?
Employee - commodity to the employer. Rates for this commodity are established by âthe workforce,â and arenât set in stone.
Employer / consumer - a symbiotic relationship in which the employer produces a good/service with hopes of capturing market share. Consumer spends their slice of GDP with the hopes that the value of that product (to them) will exceed the value they had to provide to obtain it.
That is NOT to say that the employer works for the employee the way you describe. The employer is fully able (and almost always does) to refuse/change any and all demands of the consumer. The consumer is then reliant on someone else in the market caving to said demands. The employer can term the employee for any reason, even no reason. The consumer cannot.
Man, I canât believe Iâm saying this but I agree. However if itâs for medicinal purposes and mainly CBD(which doesnât create the high) then I would see no problem with it.
Maybe recreationally but medicinally it is critical.
Well maybe they can switch to an American style election that is essentially auctioned off.
Read up in your spare time.
Here ya go for starters. Publicly funded elections - Wikipedia
No getting private money out of politics is not the same.
OhhhâŠyou meant âpublicly.â Gotcha.
Iâm not really sure where we disagree. Unless Iâm missing something, thatâs what I said.
Edit:
Assuming you meant âterminateâ here, this view is vastly different from the one you presented earlier when you said the employer must be able to show X adversely impacts work performance.
No itâs not. For general depression/anxiety (vast majority of the medical MJ population), a dealer will easily be able to give you a correct strain. When you narrow down the weights of indica/sativa, itâs not that hard to know whatâs going on.
The number of issues that medical MJ can help AND require specific strains are exceedingly rare. Iâd challenge you to name a condition that requires specific strains apart from just knowing the indica/sativa blend.
Iâm not saying they should be allowed to. Merely that they can. Such a feat is literally impossible re: consumer vs employer. The consumer is a broad entity that very very rarely does anything of substance without a decent weighting of people (obv relative to the area).
Theyâre also just not equal grounds for comparison. Comparing the employee, the employer, and the consumer are equivalents. Youâd have to use âthe workforce,â âthe employer force,â and âthe consumerâ to get true comparisons of power.
That may be. I donât know why âcomparisons of powerâ are necessary, relevant, or desirable here, though.
Funny,I donât remember getting a check in the mail or being forced to vote for the main two candidates. Hmmm 
Because you can then see the movements of each in itâs relation to the others. The consumer has the most power in this equation. Their spending dollar trumps all. The employer comes in 2nd, as they have power over their employees, yet the employee doesnât have comparable power over the employer (because the workforce does). The employee exerts its power by using their numbers and voting for laws they see fit in a way that can circumvent the employerâs power.
Libertarians are going to naturally see this using of laws against the employer as a bad thing, as itâs infringing on the employers rights when he runs his business. I do not share that opinion. I think using laws and the govt is the only real way the workforce makes itâs will known in a real life scenario with real life unemployment rates.
This is only true where âthe consumerâ has used government force.
This is not true. The employee has the option of leaving, and leaving his employer short of what he believes is needed to best accomplish his goal.
Itâs difficult to imagine why you view economic relationships as beneficial only to one party. Both parties are improved(at least, subjectively) by such relations, when the relationship is freely agreed upon.
Agreed. In the real world with real world unemployment rates, this rarely has large company impact. Shit rarely even medium level impact.
I donât view them as beneficial to only one party. I just understand the power dynamic and how each piece exerts force.
As we approach âfull employmentâ is the force/power dynamic exerted by the employer on the employee lessened? Meaning, the employee in a thriving economy has a lot of options.
âYeah, Iâm gonna need you to come in on Saturday. Thatâd be great.â
âNope.â
1 Like
Maybe as we approach like sub 2% unemployment. But even then at an employee level youâre still able to play on their fears and responsibilities as theyâre typically monumentally higher than the employer.
Then you have no idea what youâre talking about.
So the dealer is to be trusted and not a dispensary?
Plenty of information available.
Not to mention the importance of the delivery system.