u/Inevitable_Dot5610

This is to parody the opening of scary movie 2. he throws him like 20 feet btw. shoulda woulda coulda. just make a racist cuck holder skit. prolly have the white guy sitting in a chair doing a doing the evil finger-twiddle villant thing with his hands.

​

Decades of anti-worker laws, legal loopholes, and state-level restrictions were explicitly engineered to crush union power.

A piece of federal legislation called the **Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act** was designed to completely reverse this damage. It was engineered to ban state "Right-to-Work" laws, stop forced anti-union workplace meetings, and outlaw the permanent replacement of striking workers.

It passed the House comfortably. But it died in the Senate due to a completely broken, conventional political strategy.

Here is exactly how the strategy failed, shift in strategy that must be adopted if we ever want to win again.

The labor movement treated the PRO Act like a standard legislative debate. They poured millions of dollars into direct lobbying

But unions were playing a rigged game. Corporate interests, private equity giants, and mega-business coalitions easily outspent labor by an overwhelming margin. They successfully locked down a unified wall of 50 Republican Senators to block the bill using the **Senate filibuster**, which requires a 60-vote threshold to overcome.

But this was no problem because there was another option on the table, labor and Senate leadership shifted to a smarter procedural strategy The goal was to bypass the filibuster entirely by forcing a simple-majority vote (51 votes) to create a specific rule "carve-out" for worker and voting rights. Because the Senate was split exactly 50-50, Democrats needed absolute, flawless unanimity to change the rules and clear the path for the PRO Act.

but this entire strategy collapsed because of just two moderate Democratic senators who broke ranks and voted "no" on the rule change: Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. The entire workforces trillions of dollars stolen from the productivity gap was in the hands of two people

Labor tried to use standard like cut off future campaign funding, and threatened to back progressive primary challengers to take their seats. It successfully ruined their popular support, forcing both of them to decline to run for reelection and exit the Senate. But punishing them *after* the fact did absolutely nothing to pass the law in the *present*.

The unions’ electoral threat failed because the politicians they helped elect were structurally incentivized to betray them. Once in office, those lawmakers were immediately out‑lobbied by corporate interests who could apply pressure in real time and offer something unions couldn’t: lucrative, guaranteed careers waiting for them after public service.

That combination flipped their loyalty. They blocked the PRO Act knowing Wall Street, private equity, and major law firms were already preparing their parachutes.

Sinema is the clearest example — she was heavily courted by corporate lobbyists during the fight, then stepped straight into multi‑million‑dollar advisory roles at Hogan Lovells and Coinbase. When reporters asked about the backlash from furious workers, she dismissed them with a blunt “**Don’t give a shit**”. Manchin followed the same pattern, pivoting into private‑equity and energy consulting.

Worker anger didn’t matter because corporate America had already secured their next career. They were out‑lobbied in office and bought out afterward — the incentives made betrayal the rational choice.

The solution for unions is to lobby politicians you can control easily. That being asset heavy meaning to have some sort of business you can legally hit with labor strikes as punishment for not complying. politicians who do have real economic ties in their states/districts — real estate developers, local business owners, people with skin in local industries, family businesses, etc. Or more importantly, you create leverage by organizing in the districts of politicians who have vulnerable economic bases. if you have no way to punish them, you have no real power over them. Funding an asset-light career politician is a mathematically guaranteed recipe for betrayal.

Another idea is to simply support politicians that are blacklisted from the corporate world and basically have no parachute waiting for them

The main reason we have such a large wage to productivity gap is from the lack of unions correct? and the reason they're so weak nowadays is from the lack of money? correct? and I mean money to counter aggressive corporate opposition and to counter lobby all the laws meant to constrict them etc etc. so what if we just make a private equity or a hedge fund designed to invest in unions or create their own and simply take a cut from the increased wages as a profit/performance fee? I think it would logically make sense to introduce outside capital, what do you guys think. if we frame this as a big arbitrage gap and start looking at those stolen trillions ever year as potential revenue this might be the next ai investment craze

Decades of anti-worker laws, legal loopholes, and state-level restrictions were explicitly engineered to crush union power.

A piece of federal legislation called the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act was designed to completely reverse this damage. It was engineered to ban state "Right-to-Work" laws, stop forced anti-union workplace meetings, and outlaw the permanent replacement of striking workers.

It passed the House comfortably. But it died in the Senate due to a completely broken, conventional political strategy.

Here is exactly how the strategy failed, shift in strategy that must be adopted if we ever want to win again.

The labor movement treated the PRO Act like a standard legislative debate. They poured millions of dollars into direct lobbying

But unions were playing a rigged game. Corporate interests, private equity giants, and mega-business coalitions easily outspent labor by an overwhelming margin. They successfully locked down a unified wall of 50 Republican Senators to block the bill using the Senate filibuster, which requires a 60-vote threshold to overcome.

But this was no problem because there was another option on the table, labor and Senate leadership shifted to a smarter procedural strategy The goal was to bypass the filibuster entirely by forcing a simple-majority vote (51 votes) to create a specific rule "carve-out" for worker and voting rights. Because the Senate was split exactly 50-50, Democrats needed absolute, flawless unanimity to change the rules and clear the path for the PRO Act.

but this entire strategy collapsed because of just two moderate Democratic senators who broke ranks and voted "no" on the rule change: Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. The entire workforces trillions of dollars stolen from the productivity gap was in the hands of two people

Labor tried to use standard like cut off future campaign funding, and threatened to back progressive primary challengers to take their seats. It successfully ruined their popular support, forcing both of them to decline to run for reelection and exit the Senate. But punishing them after the fact did absolutely nothing to pass the law in the present.

The unions’ electoral threat failed because the politicians they helped elect were structurally incentivized to betray them. Once in office, those lawmakers were immediately out‑lobbied by corporate interests who could apply pressure in real time and offer something unions couldn’t: lucrative, guaranteed careers waiting for them after public service.

That combination flipped their loyalty. They blocked the PRO Act knowing Wall Street, private equity, and major law firms were already preparing their parachutes.

Sinema is the clearest example — she was heavily courted by corporate lobbyists during the fight, then stepped straight into multi‑million‑dollar advisory roles at Hogan Lovells and Coinbase. When reporters asked about the backlash from furious workers, she dismissed them with a blunt “Don’t give a shit”. Manchin followed the same pattern, pivoting into private‑equity and energy consulting.

Worker anger didn’t matter because corporate America had already secured their next career. They were out‑lobbied in office and bought out afterward — the incentives made betrayal the rational choice.

The solution for unions is to lobby politicians you can control easily. That being asset heavy meaning to have some sort of business you can legally hit with labor strikes as punishment for not complying. politicians who do have real economic ties in their states/districts — real estate developers, local business owners, people with skin in local industries, family businesses, etc. Or more importantly, you create leverage by organizing in the districts of politicians who have vulnerable economic bases. if you have no way to punish them, you have no real power over them. Funding an asset-light career politician is a mathematically guaranteed recipe for betrayal.

Another idea is to simply support politicians that are blacklisted from the corporate world and basically have no parachute waiting for them