Buh.

[rowyn]

There are many ways to respond to the high cost of health care. But I can't say that I care for this one. O_o

I'm glad I don't work there. And bully for the four people who refused to take the test; I hope they find a better company to work for soon.

I won't say "there oughta be a law" or "Weyco shouldn't be able to do this", because I don't believe in laws to control who a company hires and fires, or why. But I will say: I sure hope market forces clobber them hard.

Comments

Good point

[rowyn]

A problem for libertarian theory: what if every company in your town got together and refused to hire, buy from, sell to, or even admit on their premises, black people? Or Jews? Or Republicans?

In theory, the market fixes problems eventually ... but to be perfectly fair, "eventually" is measured in centuries or millenia, and that's way too long to wait. I am not opposed to checks and balances via government, when necessary.

But because the government is so heavy-handed and powerful, I would much prefer that market forces be given the opportunity to redress wrongs, first.

And then there's the matter of "At what point does this become so wrong that it needs government redress?" The actual example of Weyco's policy is clearly wrong. What they are doing is invasive, cruel, and inappropriate. But that doesn't mean it needs to be illegal. The people who left should be able to find work elsewhere, and given the environment Weyco is promoting, they'll probably be happier overall working somewhere else than they would if Weyco were forced to find a sneakier way to promote their agenda.

On the other hand, your more extreme counter-example does require the force of law to correct, especially if the group of people so stigmatized cannot compete. (Eg, they are so disadvantaged they cannot set up their own business.)

At what point does the problem of Weyco become severe enough that it requires government intervention? I'm not sure. But I look on the government as a cure often worse than the disease. If the market's own immune system can shake off the virus of Weyco, that would be easier all around.

Re: Good point

[prester-scott.livejournal.com]

Well, don't forget something else I said: when the environment is bad enough that the whole market is unfair to the stigmatized group, you are not likely to get any help from the government either, because the same people are going to be running both business and government in a given community. When such extreme cases have cropped up in American history -- such as Jim Crow laws -- it required what was essentially intervention by an OUTSIDE government (e.g., the Feds) to solve it. If the prejudicial environment gets wide enough then there simply is no redress at all except rebellion.

But I look on the government as a cure often worse than the disease.

I will agree with that. And I also agree that Weyco will probably be a self-correcting problem.

Re: Good point

[rowyn]

I sort of conflated "government" and "rebellion" into the same thing, since -- in some sense -- forcing a new policy to be instilled through rebellion is and act of government. A new government, maybe, but a government nonetheless. :/

But it's rather more accurate to distinguish between the two. I'm pretty sure we're only clarifying points, here, and not really disagreeing about anything. :)