| ▲ | owaiswiz 7 hours ago |
| > She was getting richer at a stupendously rapid rate. And yet she hadn't been doing anything bad. The reason her startup was growing so fast was simply that users loved what she'd built. So she could feel from her own experience how wrong that politician was. She wasn't exploiting anyone. I presume it's a company that just has co-founders then?
Or everyone is getting an equal % of the share? In which case SHE's not getting 93% richer just cause her start up is. |
|
| ▲ | FromTheFirstIn 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| No it’s a magical startup where it’s just going to be her in a basement doing 100% of the work required for 10 months straight while demand doubles every month. |
|
| ▲ | Telemakhos 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Let's say she has ten employees. They all voluntarily agree to work for her: slavery is illegal, so people work for others on a consensual basis. Both the employer and employee negotiated and consented to a salary or wage schedule for that employee. The employer pays the agreed-upon compensation, and the employee receives it. If the company makes an unexpectedly large profit, the employer is not obligated to redistribute that to her employees in addition to the already agreed-upon and paid compensation. If the employees think that what they agreed to work for is no longer sufficient, they are welcome to renegotiate their compensation or, if they feel they have been wronged and are being paid less than they are worth, to take their talent to a different employer. After all, everything so far has been consensual. The only thing that would be non-consensual would be obligating the employer to redistribute her profit over and above what had already been negotiated. |
| |
| ▲ | JimmyBuckets 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This completely negates the fact that due to how the labor market is structured, most people who sell their labour to survive are in a disadvantageous position for the negotiation you are talking about. What you are talking about works well in a basic economics text book but does not translate to the real world. | | |
| ▲ | stephbook 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | The cleaning lady at SpaceX doesn't do a better job than that at Walmart. So why should she be paid more? You think she's doing the heavy lifting there? Creating the billions? While the underperformer at VideoBuster / Radio Shack is responsible for tanking the business? That's just not true. | | |
| ▲ | FromTheFirstIn 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Finally, the case for exploitation! So brave to say people who do physical labor deserve less. | | |
| ▲ | hparadiz an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | There's lots of physical labor jobs that pay more. It's all about doing something others can't. | |
| ▲ | stephbook 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I didn't say that. You misunderstood me. Read again. | | |
| ▲ | FromTheFirstIn an hour ago | parent [-] | | You are saying that, you just value physical labor so little you no longer recognize it. Read again. | | |
| ▲ | therealdrag0 44 minutes ago | parent [-] | | If you think they were commenting on physical labor your reading comprehension is poor. The example job could have been a “non physical” job, say the hallway CCTV monitor, and made the same point. | | |
| ▲ | FromTheFirstIn 4 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Their point is that labor they consider low impact or menial doesn’t drive returns, and therefore shouldn’t share in the returns. You’re right that the labor being physical is incidental, really they’re just classist/elitist and any job they consider beneath them would fit this model, while others wouldn’t. There’s a reason they chose a cleaner (and a woman!) instead of a product manager or CPA, though the quality is also unlikely to differ between spaceX and Walmart there. Speaking of reading comprehension, they didn’t address the core argument of the person they were responding to, which is that labor that falls “beneath the fold” of this class line is not able to negotiate aggressively due to the inelastic costs of food, shelter, and basic necessities. It doesn’t matter how “high impact” you are, if you’re negotiating and need to eat you’ll accept any amount that lets you eat. In fact, having impact or driving revenue is never the most important factor to reaping the rewards. Anyone who’s worked for a few years with their eyes open should reach this conclusion unless they have some strong motivation not to. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | babelfish 7 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
| |
| ▲ | AndrewKemendo 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > slavery is illegal, so people work for others on a consensual basis Well there you have it folks case closed. Slavery is illegal therefore there is no slavery. Geniuses at work indeed | | |
|
|
| ▲ | migueloller 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Let’s not be silly. If there are 10 people each with 10% and the company grows by 93%, then everybody’s shares, including the founder’s, grows by 93%. |
|
| ▲ | 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | ozgung 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yeah math is wrong. She has to wait one more month to be a billionaire since she has a co-founder. So 10 months. The good news is she can be a trillionaire in another 10 months. |
|
| ▲ | zarathustreal 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Not giving everyone equal % is exploitation? Interesting, by that logic every participant in the economy should also be required to bail out any startup that fails otherwise we’re exploiting the founders! They’re taking all the risk and we’re getting all the benefit of the services and goods they create! |
| |
| ▲ | inigyou 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Well yeah? We should have really wide safety nets actually, so people can try startups and feel comfortable that they might fail. What kind of losses are you envisioning - is it just salaries? | | |
| ▲ | therealdrag0 40 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Some have argued American bankruptcy laws is a contributing factor to how many companies get founded, more than most/all other counties in the world. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [deleted] |
