5 ms·

This is related to Taleb's observation that employment is a kind of "slavery". What he means by this is that you effectively have sold your option to own those

This is related to Taleb's observation that employment is a kind of "slavery". What he means by this is that you effectively have sold your option to own those to outsized returns in exchange for a regular paycheck.

hawkice 8y ago
That's... not what slavery is. That analogy is extremely poor compared to using securities derivatives, which is a field Taleb is familiar with. Edit: also, is this feature of salaried employment so misunderstood as to require an analogy? You get paid a fixed amount, or with specified bonus structure. It's literally the number one fact people know about their employment contracts.
- someguydave 8y ago
  > also, is this feature of salaried employment so misunderstood as to require an analogy? I would argue yes. Many professionals like engineers and programmers can point to contributions they made to the corporation that have been sold for many times their annual salary. How many of those professionals consider the fact that they could have sold their design for themselves and pocketed the revenue? This is related to Coase's question: why have a firm in the first place? In modern times it seems that ongoing disaggregation of businesses and reduced transaction costs in software would cause more professionals to consider working for themselves, rather than selling their (potential, uncertain, unlimited) profits for a (certain, fixed) income.
buzzdenver 8y ago
That sounds more like an option pair for an equity. Both your upside and downside are limited and you get a steady income stream. Slavery is very different.
- someguydave 8y ago
  Except, is your downside really limited? It's true the company must make payroll while you are still employed. However, the employer has the option of firing you. While this might not put in you in debt to the employer's creditors, it does reduce the value of your employment contract to zero AND reduces your attractiveness to future employers. If you only have had one employer for a long period, this is a large blow. Taleb makes the point that the taxi driver is in an enviable position compared to the salaryman for this reason.
  - buzzdenver 8y ago
    Your downside is limited to being laid off, so it is limited. They can't go after your personal assets if the company goes bankrupt, or claw back past wages. And a couple of tangential points: 1) Being laid off because your company went under is not a bad black mark on your resume. 2) You have the freedom to terminate your employment at any time just like the company can. That's very different from slavery.
dredmorbius 8y ago
Thorstein Veblen, in an earlier age.
- someguydave 8y ago
  There are similarities. They are certainly both critical of business. Taleb has a strong allergy toward anyone who appears to be abusing their position of public trust to swing economic rents towards themselves or allies.
gnode 8y ago
A better term for a classical comparison would be serfdom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serfdom#Becoming_a_serf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serfdom#Becoming_a_serf Although, slavery existed within the feudal system as the lowest class of serf.

hawkice 8y ago

That's... not what slavery is. That analogy is extremely poor compared to using securities derivatives, which is a field Taleb is familiar with. Edit: also, is this feature of salaried employment so misunderstood as to require an analogy? You get paid a fixed amount, or with specified bonus structure. It's literally the number one fact people know about their employment contracts.

someguydave 8y ago
> also, is this feature of salaried employment so misunderstood as to require an analogy? I would argue yes. Many professionals like engineers and programmers can point to contributions they made to the corporation that have been sold for many times their annual salary. How many of those professionals consider the fact that they could have sold their design for themselves and pocketed the revenue? This is related to Coase's question: why have a firm in the first place? In modern times it seems that ongoing disaggregation of businesses and reduced transaction costs in software would cause more professionals to consider working for themselves, rather than selling their (potential, uncertain, unlimited) profits for a (certain, fixed) income.

buzzdenver 8y ago

That sounds more like an option pair for an equity. Both your upside and downside are limited and you get a steady income stream. Slavery is very different.

someguydave 8y ago
Except, is your downside really limited? It's true the company must make payroll while you are still employed. However, the employer has the option of firing you. While this might not put in you in debt to the employer's creditors, it does reduce the value of your employment contract to zero AND reduces your attractiveness to future employers. If you only have had one employer for a long period, this is a large blow. Taleb makes the point that the taxi driver is in an enviable position compared to the salaryman for this reason.
- buzzdenver 8y ago
  Your downside is limited to being laid off, so it is limited. They can't go after your personal assets if the company goes bankrupt, or claw back past wages. And a couple of tangential points: 1) Being laid off because your company went under is not a bad black mark on your resume. 2) You have the freedom to terminate your employment at any time just like the company can. That's very different from slavery.

dredmorbius 8y ago

Thorstein Veblen, in an earlier age.

someguydave 8y ago
There are similarities. They are certainly both critical of business. Taleb has a strong allergy toward anyone who appears to be abusing their position of public trust to swing economic rents towards themselves or allies.

gnode 8y ago

A better term for a classical comparison would be serfdom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serfdom#Becoming_a_serf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serfdom#Becoming_a_serf Although, slavery existed within the feudal system as the lowest class of serf.