3 ms·
But of course it implies exactly that. People should be rewarded for their skills and their contribution to the success of the company, which means that lion's
by mamon 9y ago
But of course it implies exactly that. People should be rewarded for their skills and their contribution to the success of the company, which means that lion's share of profits goes to those on top. And no, we as a society don't get to decide that, because companies are privately owned by individuals, not by society as whole. Why should society decide how should I spend my money?
- chrisbennet 9y agoYes, reward them for their skills and work - not what they can capture of someone else’s hard work. It is an article of faith in some quarters that someone who manages to put themselves in a position where they can skim the labor from employees or renters somehow means they are a wealth creator. Usually though, these “wealth creators” are just capturing wealth generated by someone else.
- dcre 9y agoWhether it’s really yours is what we’re arguing about. You’ve just made the interesting argument that because it’s yours, it’s yours. Not sure I’m convinced by that.