zlacker

>>hhs+(OP)
Glad to see this from Amazon, although I see it heading off the inevitable. Wouldn't this be the most powerful moment for employees in 'essential' services to engage in worker strikes? Is there any legal precedent for what governments would do?

With all this war rhetoric thrown around, it seems a reasonable jump to declare essential workers troops on the frontline deserving of what we give other troops (free health care, pension, heavily subsidized secondary education)

>>bdefor+T7
>War rhetoric

Wait, like a real war? Who's talking about a war? Between what parties? I have heard nothing about a war, please explain.

>>jacobw+Za
Based on downvotes I'm gonna go ahead and guess that there is no war (aside from the wars that are already going) and this use of the word "war" was referring to something else. Still I would like someone to please confirm that there is not a real war coming.

>>jacobw+4c
> I'm gonna go ahead and guess that there is no war

That's not really right, because that implies that other people are using the word wrong. It's more that it's a word with a lot of uses, and you got stuck on one of them.

>>Dylan1+xw
They are using it wrong. I think when op said "war" op meant "public health policy" which is really far away from war. It's actually the complete opposite thing.

>>jacobw+1l1
They're not using it wrong.

Merriam-Webster, definition 2:

  2a: a state of hostility, conflict, or antagonism
  b: a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a 
  particular end
  a class war
  a war against disease

Note that last line. The use here is so extremely valid that it's an example in the dictionary!