22 ms·

I agree with that as a possible source - I think a similar sort of justification of value is why extroverts tend to earn more overall and is also partially resp

by munk-a 7y ago

I agree with that as a possible source - I think a similar sort of justification of value is why extroverts tend to earn more overall and is also partially responsible for the gender pay gap (due to upbringing factors). I just wonder if there is some way to counter that effectively and also probably couple that with taxation and service provision to make it so that someone working hard at a dying company has a chance at a decent life compared to someone doing nothing at a successful company that gets a wealthy life due to happenstance. It's interesting to me that the income security of a non-commissioned job is sort of a trade off against profit sharing - where one extreme can leave a hard worker destitute and the other extreme can leave a lazy worker wealthy.

auggierose 7y ago
You could argue that the market would want that nobody works hard at a dying company.
- munk-a 7y ago
  I think that's a fair statement, and I think it's well reflected in reality, most employees will judge the company health of various employers - whether it's inclusion in the DOW index, some promotional information about various clients or the condition of the site and investment in long term company health (like a restaurant not having "That one freezer that's always on the fritz so we always just use the other one - oh sure it'll be fixed one of these days, just need to get approval from corporate")