upvote
No, that is not a “complex” position at all. On the contrary, it’s a fairly simple position where you take no strong stance but still want to claim the positive aspects from each side.

Are unions universally good? No, because humans are in the loop, and humans can do bad things.

Does that change the fact that the concept of a union is one of the greatest innovations in all of human history? No.

Can unions today help disparate human workers collectively improve their working conditions? Yes, because this is what unions were designed for, and I think is the key outcome the Rockstar folks are betting on.

For a recent example, read up on the Samsung union bargaining for company wide bonuses in the wake of the huge profits made off the surge in demand for memory.

reply
Then that is an argument to reform and innovate on unions, not do away with them altogether.
reply
"Are unions net benefit for the general public" and "whether reforming or abolishing the unions is the best course of action for the general public" are two separate questions. The unions could be beneficial (and still a reform could improve this benefit) or they could be harmful (but a reform could make them beneficial without abolishing them). The original claim was they are beneficial right now, in heir current form, but no actual proof had been provided.
reply
reply
Do you think Vox has ever written about how transit unions increase costs by mandating redundant workers and work against technology that could automate trains?

Do you think Box has ever written about how Detroit unions fought EVs and AVs and automation that could result in cheaper cars?

Why do you think that is?

reply
Is Rockstar try to ban unions? Or just deciding they don't want to work with one. Those are very, very different things.
reply
I’m not talking about Rockstar, I’m talking about your implied position.
reply