4 ms·

> People do unpaid work all the time. Ask your mom. Humans have compassion. They want to cooperate and collaborate. Free work is for people close to me or for

> People do unpaid work all the time. Ask your mom. Humans have compassion. They want to cooperate and collaborate. Free work is for people close to me or for special cases like FOSS projects I want to win. It's not for strangers. When the Soviets collectivized farms, output crashed. Let's not so quickly forget the lessons of the 20th century. > have a system that takes from the productive (workers) and gives it to the unproductive (shareholders) Profit is not a sin. Tech treats its workers better than practically any other industry, and there's never been an industry with fewer barriers to industry. If you want to renew 20th century worker class consciousness rhetoric, also renew its disastrous consequences.

andrekandre 7y ago
> Profit is not a sin not necessarily.... it really depends on your (many times religious) world view [1] [1] http://www.lulu.com/shop/skip-worden/gods-gold/paperback/product-23013853.html http://www.lulu.com/shop/skip-worden/gods-gold/paperback/pro...
turbinerneiter 7y ago
The problem with your argument is that you only know capitalism and communism and act like it's the end all of all economic ideas anyone could ever have. What societal benefit does profit have? Is there a difference between profit put into research and profit put into dividends? What do you think benefits humanity more? High stock prices? High wages? You talk about the lessons of the 20th century. You mean the golden times, when a single earner in a car factory could feed a family? When minimum wage had more buying power than today? When more people were unionized? Or do you mean the lessons we learned in the 21st century? When an unleashed financial industry crashed the economy? In today's economy the shareholder of a successful company can earn more in dividends than the workers who produce the wealth in wages. This is the issue. ROI on capital is higher than on work. Model the system, feed in this number and you will see it's unstable. Disastrous consequences? Take a look at the US healthcare system - congrats for not having any socialism - you pay double than anyone else and have lower life expectancy. Awesome system.
CiPHPerCoder 7y ago
> Profit is not a sin. What work do shareholders actually do within the confines of the company? If you gave a poor unemployed person the investment capital that shareholders have, then from the company's perspective, how do you distinguish them from other shareholders? That was the parent poster's point. > Tech treats its workers better than practically any other industry, and there's never been an industry with fewer barriers to industry. Instead of economic or physical barriers, we have hordes toxic personalities that try to gatekeep people. It's not all sunshine and roses.
- AdrianB1 7y ago
  They put their hard earned and taxed money into a company to produce something. To build a nail factory you need workers, but you also need the plant; who pays for the plant? Not the workers. Without one of the components, there is no nail plant, you have either unemployed people or an empty building.
  - turbinerneiter 7y ago
    This is btw the smartest comment here. The key to economic stability and social progress is the balance of the return on capital to the return on work.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- weberc2 7y ago
  > Instead of economic or physical barriers, we have hordes toxic personalities that try to gatekeep people. It's not all sunshine and roses. I’m skeptical that these are uniquely tech problems; I suspect they occur in relatively even proportion in other industries, but other industries have bigger problems that tech largely doesn’t have, and so they aren’t preoccupied with “toxic personalities”. In particular, the “tech is terrible” proponents need to explain why tech selects for toxic people more than other industries, and so far all such explanations depend on (toxic) stereotypes of whites, Asians, men, and people interested in technology (“nerds”).
sosborn 7y ago
> Profit is not a sin. Agree 100%, but it can certainly be argued that letting members of your community die on the streets is.

andrekandre 7y ago

> Profit is not a sin not necessarily.... it really depends on your (many times religious) world view [1] [1] http://www.lulu.com/shop/skip-worden/gods-gold/paperback/product-23013853.html http://www.lulu.com/shop/skip-worden/gods-gold/paperback/pro...

turbinerneiter 7y ago

The problem with your argument is that you only know capitalism and communism and act like it's the end all of all economic ideas anyone could ever have. What societal benefit does profit have? Is there a difference between profit put into research and profit put into dividends? What do you think benefits humanity more? High stock prices? High wages? You talk about the lessons of the 20th century. You mean the golden times, when a single earner in a car factory could feed a family? When minimum wage had more buying power than today? When more people were unionized? Or do you mean the lessons we learned in the 21st century? When an unleashed financial industry crashed the economy? In today's economy the shareholder of a successful company can earn more in dividends than the workers who produce the wealth in wages. This is the issue. ROI on capital is higher than on work. Model the system, feed in this number and you will see it's unstable. Disastrous consequences? Take a look at the US healthcare system - congrats for not having any socialism - you pay double than anyone else and have lower life expectancy. Awesome system.

CiPHPerCoder 7y ago

> Profit is not a sin. What work do shareholders actually do within the confines of the company? If you gave a poor unemployed person the investment capital that shareholders have, then from the company's perspective, how do you distinguish them from other shareholders? That was the parent poster's point. > Tech treats its workers better than practically any other industry, and there's never been an industry with fewer barriers to industry. Instead of economic or physical barriers, we have hordes toxic personalities that try to gatekeep people. It's not all sunshine and roses.

AdrianB1 7y ago
They put their hard earned and taxed money into a company to produce something. To build a nail factory you need workers, but you also need the plant; who pays for the plant? Not the workers. Without one of the components, there is no nail plant, you have either unemployed people or an empty building.
- turbinerneiter 7y ago
  This is btw the smartest comment here. The key to economic stability and social progress is the balance of the return on capital to the return on work.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
weberc2 7y ago
> Instead of economic or physical barriers, we have hordes toxic personalities that try to gatekeep people. It's not all sunshine and roses. I’m skeptical that these are uniquely tech problems; I suspect they occur in relatively even proportion in other industries, but other industries have bigger problems that tech largely doesn’t have, and so they aren’t preoccupied with “toxic personalities”. In particular, the “tech is terrible” proponents need to explain why tech selects for toxic people more than other industries, and so far all such explanations depend on (toxic) stereotypes of whites, Asians, men, and people interested in technology (“nerds”).

sosborn 7y ago

> Profit is not a sin. Agree 100%, but it can certainly be argued that letting members of your community die on the streets is.