5 ms·

If it's really that unfair, why don't you just become an entrepreneur?

by ajhurliman 4y ago

karpierz 4y ago
If winning the lottery is so great, why don't you just become a lotto winner?
- daenz 4y ago
  Great analogy actually. The founders own the lottery ticket, but they pay employees cold hard cash despite the fact that the lottery ticket will likely be worthless. When the founder lose the lottery, and lose all of the unpaid hours and resources they personally put into buying the ticket, they don't demand employees reimburse them and share in the losses. But on the rare chance that they win the lottery, we have to have conversations like this about how "unfair" it is that they owned the ticket, despite paying everyone what they agreed to be paid. So the point that the parent was making was "go buy your own ticket," not "go win the lottery."
  - anon2020dot00 4y ago
    The parent was making no point but was making an unreasonable argument in line of "No one can criticize, but if you believe that then why don't you make a profit?". Similar to people who say "if crypto is a scam, why don't you short it?" There are various reasons why people choose to or not choose to become an entrepreneur or why people choose to or not to short something. It doesn't mean just because a person doesn't want to be an entrepreneur, then capitalism is perfect. The argument is a strawman where-in the original discussion was about billionaire entrepreneurs and how much is a fair reward to them. We understand the entrepreneur deserve to be rewarded but the original question is up to what extent. Like how in some EU countries, CEO pay is capped.
    - ajhurliman 4y ago
      They deserve to be rewarded by what the market will bear. By introducing ceilings on their income you'd be stifling people's will to "buy the lottery ticket". I can't wrap my head around why people think they know better than the market.
anon2020dot00 4y ago
This logic is nonsense; no one is allowed to criticize capitalism's flaws? It's like a movie critic cannot criticize a movie, since the film-maker can just state "why don't you just make a better movie?"; A diner cannot criticize the chef because chef can say "why don't just prepare a better meal?", etc.. Bringing the personal into it is unrealistic since not everyone is equipped to be a movie maker, chef or entrepreneur but that doesn't mean those jobs are immune from criticism. Even Warren Buffet has spoken about the excesses of capitalism and pointed-out that the rich are taxed too little as just one example of capitalism's flaws. Capitalism is still the best system but that doesn't mean it's perfect or can no longer be improved.
- daenz 4y ago
  Why stop at criticizing? Go prove people wrong and make a company that does things drastically differently. That's why people are tired with the "I'm just criticizing!" attitude. Instead of talking and telling everyone else they need to change, go show everyone that you know better.
  - anon2020dot00 4y ago
    So I guess no one can criticize anymore? If my car is broken, then I have to make my own car? It's a strawman and a diversion to just be talking about the general concept of fair compensation to CEOs and founders and then to just reply with "why don't you make your own company if you think the pay is too high"?
    - daenz 4y ago
      It's not a strawman, you just aren't understanding the fundamental lesson in the idea of starting your own company. "Fair" is what the participating parties agree is fair when they form the agreement. You appear to be speaking from one side of the agreement (the employee side). Starting your own company will give you drastically different view about risks and costs that were previously hidden to you as an employee, and you'll come out with a better understanding of how "fair" is negotiated between the participating parties.

If it's really that unfair, why don't you just become an entrepreneur?

karpierz 4y ago

If winning the lottery is so great, why don't you just become a lotto winner?

daenz 4y ago
Great analogy actually. The founders own the lottery ticket, but they pay employees cold hard cash despite the fact that the lottery ticket will likely be worthless. When the founder lose the lottery, and lose all of the unpaid hours and resources they personally put into buying the ticket, they don't demand employees reimburse them and share in the losses. But on the rare chance that they win the lottery, we have to have conversations like this about how "unfair" it is that they owned the ticket, despite paying everyone what they agreed to be paid. So the point that the parent was making was "go buy your own ticket," not "go win the lottery."
- anon2020dot00 4y ago
  The parent was making no point but was making an unreasonable argument in line of "No one can criticize, but if you believe that then why don't you make a profit?". Similar to people who say "if crypto is a scam, why don't you short it?" There are various reasons why people choose to or not choose to become an entrepreneur or why people choose to or not to short something. It doesn't mean just because a person doesn't want to be an entrepreneur, then capitalism is perfect. The argument is a strawman where-in the original discussion was about billionaire entrepreneurs and how much is a fair reward to them. We understand the entrepreneur deserve to be rewarded but the original question is up to what extent. Like how in some EU countries, CEO pay is capped.
  - ajhurliman 4y ago
    They deserve to be rewarded by what the market will bear. By introducing ceilings on their income you'd be stifling people's will to "buy the lottery ticket". I can't wrap my head around why people think they know better than the market.

anon2020dot00 4y ago

This logic is nonsense; no one is allowed to criticize capitalism's flaws? It's like a movie critic cannot criticize a movie, since the film-maker can just state "why don't you just make a better movie?"; A diner cannot criticize the chef because chef can say "why don't just prepare a better meal?", etc.. Bringing the personal into it is unrealistic since not everyone is equipped to be a movie maker, chef or entrepreneur but that doesn't mean those jobs are immune from criticism. Even Warren Buffet has spoken about the excesses of capitalism and pointed-out that the rich are taxed too little as just one example of capitalism's flaws. Capitalism is still the best system but that doesn't mean it's perfect or can no longer be improved.

daenz 4y ago
Why stop at criticizing? Go prove people wrong and make a company that does things drastically differently. That's why people are tired with the "I'm just criticizing!" attitude. Instead of talking and telling everyone else they need to change, go show everyone that you know better.
- anon2020dot00 4y ago
  So I guess no one can criticize anymore? If my car is broken, then I have to make my own car? It's a strawman and a diversion to just be talking about the general concept of fair compensation to CEOs and founders and then to just reply with "why don't you make your own company if you think the pay is too high"?
  - daenz 4y ago
    It's not a strawman, you just aren't understanding the fundamental lesson in the idea of starting your own company. "Fair" is what the participating parties agree is fair when they form the agreement. You appear to be speaking from one side of the agreement (the employee side). Starting your own company will give you drastically different view about risks and costs that were previously hidden to you as an employee, and you'll come out with a better understanding of how "fair" is negotiated between the participating parties.