There is no or a very small impact of regulation on the number of exiled people coming in country. However, making more people illegal let bosses exploit them more. Those workers could not sue their boss because of those regulations, and most conservative unions rely unfortunately too much on legal solutions.

So if a country couldn't limit immigrations, it could exploit more people and bybass human right with regulations against exiled people.

Yes, this is only positive for far-right bosses, and awful for others. But guess who decide in a capitalist economy ?

What ? A corporation that earn money in selling personal data, that don't want to share its code that run on a device with a microphone, actually use it ? I'm shocked

So what is a confederation of different industries ? Why many of those confederation accept every industries but not cops association ? Finally, people organized tend to have share some analyses and goals, and some of them appends to be left-wing. It's not u surprise than people struggling for their rights meat the same issues, and share some common interests. Being smash by cops for no reasons when you just want to keep your job is an example why organized workers consider that cops have not the same interests

We used C++ based software. Who need sanity ? Clearly overrated

"Have your heard about our nor God nor Saviors, Anarcho-unionism" ?

There is many homeless women; unfortunately because of threat of rape and harassment (somehow underlined here), lots of them have to not look homeless. They have to buy fine clothes, and makeup. If you think that people "just have to prostitute lol", you have to ask why you don't. There is a fucking lot of violence against sex workers. Usually people that could prostitute have coworkers to rely on, or are forced to work for a boss (or a pimp, that the same thing). If the first case is the most common in most of countries, it's not available for people with few social connections; which is usually the main reason of homelessness

I think we should not confuse the authority based on oppression, and those based on expertise. However the last one could be justified in front of the community (like the Union), so I would use the word "hierarchical"; the trust we gave in those people is freely agreed between equals.

A lot of website use so much ressources, I couldn't visit its with my 5 years old laptop or my "smart" phone. The only way to access their services is with apps. Fortunately, I could choose FOSS apps on F-Droids

However, loading textual information shall not consume all my RAM and most of my CPU. There is an issue with today web

all managers are bastards

• Short term interest: Yearly benefits make the corporation value. Work to enhance stability, such as investment in other open source project, documentation, formation, or code quality enhancement are less likely to qet time
• Commercial focus: In a capitalist economy, we don't have pure and perfect knowledge of product. Even if it's supposed to work like this, commercials and adds are way more effective to sell products, than a top notch product
• Antagonist interests: even if workers tend to like making good stuff, they'd rather eat and get housed. Sending a warning because the products are bad or dangerous can threat someone that made a bad decision, which is likely to be someone in charge. Keeping a low profile is (unfortunately) a reasonable behavior

I think that an economy lead by financial interest, open market, and a hierarchy in the production is a good definition of capitalism.

And yes, definitely the way that people get food, housing, and not being exclude will define a lot of thing in society.

So in the end, they is an internal contradiction in capitalism. It just append to be collapse due to lack of ressources and dumb management

We couldn't have non capitalist state with imperialism However, if we consider countries without state, we shall consider EZLN and the Democnatic Confederation in Rojava. Both have very interesting approach of eco-socialism.