3 ms·

In your second example, the company literally would not exist without the founder. If you divide up the "value" the act of creating a company provides over the

by whatok 11y ago

In your second example, the company literally would not exist without the founder. If you divide up the "value" the act of creating a company provides over the lifespan of the company, it will likely eclipse the value a project manager or warehouse supervisor presently provides.

crimsonalucard 11y ago
The company is the sum of it's parts: The employees. Employees exist without the founder or the company. Thus, the value still exists within the economy, it is just the distribution is different as said employees are producing value in other sectors of the economy. When a founder forms a company he is not creating value. He is redeploying existing labor to do OTHER things. Whether that creates new value is a separate issue as said labor could create new value wherever it was before. Additionally, the founder is also creating a new corporate pyramid structure that funnels a lot of the redeployed wealth from this labor towards the people sitting on top: Whether that be himself or shareholders. Let's say there are two companies. Company A and Company B. Company A is a established company and Company B is a startup. Lets also say there is one worker, named Chris. When Chris works for company A his work output is 20$ a day. Let's say Chris changes his job and moves to company B. You're telling me that Company B by virtue of being a startup makes chris's work output suddenly equivalent to 100$? Tell me what magic makes this the case? What is it that makes it so new value is created out of thin air? It's not physically possible. In fact it's stupid to think that just by creating a startup you're creating value. You're just redeploying labor. So where does new value come from if not just from a company by virtue of being a startup? The answer: When new technology or new innovations are created that fundamentally change the infrastructure of the economy so that it can be more efficient. It can happen from ANY company and it can even happen from government, it does not have to come from a startup. Examples: Apple: iphone, military: internet. To tell you the truth, most startups amount to shit. If anything the majority of startups redeploy labor onto endeavors that amount to nothing. Usually big corporations more effectively redeploy labor. Could any random startup do what apple did to the phone industry? Probably, but waay less likely.
- whatok 11y ago
  Your second paragraph is utter nonsense. A productive business absolutely creates value. History is littered with examples of entire brand new industries birthed by the sole creation of a single company. The pie literally grows larger. This doesn't create value? By "existing labor" voluntarily "redeploying" themselves, they are in complete recognition of that fact and want to partake in the additional value created.
  - crimsonalucard 11y ago
    Additional value by virtue of being a startup? Joining a startup doesn't make someones labor output suddenly increase. What may appear as "utter nonsense" is actually deeper understanding. Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance.
    - serge2k 11y ago
      > Additional value by virtue of being a startup? Joining a startup doesn't make someones labor output suddenly increase. shhh, you will upset the Founders are gods and we should worship at their Startup temples viewpoint that is the foundation of HN.
      - whatok 11y ago
        The parent poster completely altered his post after I responded to it so I would take that into mind when reading things. Also, throughout this thread I have never once mentioned anything about startups but assume away.
        crimsonalucard 11y ago
        Nope. Parent Poster added to the explanation so you could be less ignorant. The second paragraph you referred to is still there, it is just expanded upon with more paragraphs for greater detail and clearer explanations. The reason this was done was because I reached my post limit. Not like anyone else is looking at this anymore anyway. I can move the additional explanations to the responding post if you want, as that's where I intended it to be at first. I could've waited for the rate limiter to expire but I responded hastily because I was highly, highly offended by you saying that my paragraph was "utter nonsense." You don't say these kinds of things to people in real life. I'm not sure if your post qualifies for a flag but I do know really negative comments like that are frowned upon by the moderators. You never once mentioned startups. That is true. But you do mention the creation of a company. You're telling me that the creation of a company isn't a startup? Ok I now assume that the creation of a company isn't a startup. You're talking exclusively about split-ups, as that's the only other time I know about where company creation occurs without the creation of a startup: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/split-up.asp http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/split-up.asp. If a company splits up. The old company is destroyed and the new companies are the sum of it's old parts. No new value is created. Understand? Or is my assumption incorrect? Clarify if i'm wrong about what you're referring to by "sole creation of a single company."

by whatok 11y ago

crimsonalucard 11y ago

The company is the sum of it's parts: The employees. Employees exist without the founder or the company. Thus, the value still exists within the economy, it is just the distribution is different as said employees are producing value in other sectors of the economy. When a founder forms a company he is not creating value. He is redeploying existing labor to do OTHER things. Whether that creates new value is a separate issue as said labor could create new value wherever it was before. Additionally, the founder is also creating a new corporate pyramid structure that funnels a lot of the redeployed wealth from this labor towards the people sitting on top: Whether that be himself or shareholders. Let's say there are two companies. Company A and Company B. Company A is a established company and Company B is a startup. Lets also say there is one worker, named Chris. When Chris works for company A his work output is 20$ a day. Let's say Chris changes his job and moves to company B. You're telling me that Company B by virtue of being a startup makes chris's work output suddenly equivalent to 100$? Tell me what magic makes this the case? What is it that makes it so new value is created out of thin air? It's not physically possible. In fact it's stupid to think that just by creating a startup you're creating value. You're just redeploying labor. So where does new value come from if not just from a company by virtue of being a startup? The answer: When new technology or new innovations are created that fundamentally change the infrastructure of the economy so that it can be more efficient. It can happen from ANY company and it can even happen from government, it does not have to come from a startup. Examples: Apple: iphone, military: internet. To tell you the truth, most startups amount to shit. If anything the majority of startups redeploy labor onto endeavors that amount to nothing. Usually big corporations more effectively redeploy labor. Could any random startup do what apple did to the phone industry? Probably, but waay less likely.

whatok 11y ago
Your second paragraph is utter nonsense. A productive business absolutely creates value. History is littered with examples of entire brand new industries birthed by the sole creation of a single company. The pie literally grows larger. This doesn't create value? By "existing labor" voluntarily "redeploying" themselves, they are in complete recognition of that fact and want to partake in the additional value created.
- crimsonalucard 11y ago
  Additional value by virtue of being a startup? Joining a startup doesn't make someones labor output suddenly increase. What may appear as "utter nonsense" is actually deeper understanding. Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance.
  - serge2k 11y ago
    > Additional value by virtue of being a startup? Joining a startup doesn't make someones labor output suddenly increase. shhh, you will upset the Founders are gods and we should worship at their Startup temples viewpoint that is the foundation of HN.
    - whatok 11y ago
      The parent poster completely altered his post after I responded to it so I would take that into mind when reading things. Also, throughout this thread I have never once mentioned anything about startups but assume away.
      - crimsonalucard 11y ago
        Nope. Parent Poster added to the explanation so you could be less ignorant. The second paragraph you referred to is still there, it is just expanded upon with more paragraphs for greater detail and clearer explanations. The reason this was done was because I reached my post limit. Not like anyone else is looking at this anymore anyway. I can move the additional explanations to the responding post if you want, as that's where I intended it to be at first. I could've waited for the rate limiter to expire but I responded hastily because I was highly, highly offended by you saying that my paragraph was "utter nonsense." You don't say these kinds of things to people in real life. I'm not sure if your post qualifies for a flag but I do know really negative comments like that are frowned upon by the moderators. You never once mentioned startups. That is true. But you do mention the creation of a company. You're telling me that the creation of a company isn't a startup? Ok I now assume that the creation of a company isn't a startup. You're talking exclusively about split-ups, as that's the only other time I know about where company creation occurs without the creation of a startup: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/split-up.asp http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/split-up.asp. If a company splits up. The old company is destroyed and the new companies are the sum of it's old parts. No new value is created. Understand? Or is my assumption incorrect? Clarify if i'm wrong about what you're referring to by "sole creation of a single company."