5 ms·

> Companies are not charities created to employ people. And employees are not charities for their employers! If you can't afford the staff needed for a given t

by isodev 4y ago

> Companies are not charities created to employ people. And employees are not charities for their employers! If you can't afford the staff needed for a given task, perhaps you should pivot to something else.

phpisthebest 4y ago
Right you are paid X currency for X labor. How is paying employees to sit at home not working anything other than charity/
- Qem 4y ago
  Where do new employees came from? Do they materialize adult and fully educated out of thin air? Society-wise new workers are born and raised from preexisting workers. If corporations don't bear some of this burden in minting new employees, they are free-riding.
- isodev 4y ago
  It’s because when you hire employees they come with the aspect of being “people”. People work to live, they don’t live to work.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    This has the very very close connotation to "from each according to ability to each according to need" I live a very frugle life, my expenses are low, I have no kids, I dont take expensive vacations, drive a fancy car, etc... So should that mean I do not get time off, or high raises, etc simply because my "needs" are not the same as a co-worker? Why should a co-workers personal life choices (i.e the choice to have 1 or more children) be a factor in the terms of their employment? I think employment policies should be agnostic to the personal life choices and situations of employee's infact the employer should not even know if you have kids or not, let alone provide you with "extra" because you do Sounds like you would support a policy of income based on your personal expenses. Should the programmer with 5 kids make more than the programmer with no kids simply because the programmer with kids has more expenses?
    - therouwboat 4y ago
      Maybe you should talk to your boss and ask for more, instead complaining about others.
      - phpisthebest 4y ago
        I am in the US and I do pick my employers based on these kinds of policies because their is no government mandate.
    - niels8472 4y ago
      Considering having children is beneficial to society and the economy (e.g. it's advantageous for employers since they still want to be able to hire people in n years and surely they'd like there to still be customers) one could argue that the programmer with five kids should get some "compensation" for this service, and as we know some countries do either directly or via employers.
    - lagadu 4y ago
      > Should the programmer with 5 kids make more than the programmer with no kids simply because the programmer with kids has more expenses? The programmer with 5 kids does make more than the one with no kids because he pays fewer income taxes. So the answer to your question is yes: it's how it already works.
      - phpisthebest 4y ago
        No my question was should they. I also disagree with the Child tax credit.
    - HowTheStoryEnds 4y ago
      > Sounds like you would support a policy of income based on your personal expenses. Should the programmer with 5 kids make more than the programmer with no kids simply because the programmer with kids has more expenses? First time in Europe? That's pretty much a given here, more kids = bigger tax break = more netto pay.
- mopsi 4y ago
  > How is paying employees to sit at home not working anything other than charity They are not sitting at home doing nothing, they are raising children. Helping them to do that is companies' share of investment into the workforce of tomorrow. Your utilitarian "fair" worldview doesn't account for the fact that having kids is insanely profitable to the economy. In modern economies, every kid is worth at least a million bucks over lifetime. If you choose not to have kids and not contribute in this way, then who's going to foot the $1M or $2M bill for you?
- lagadu 4y ago
  Those are operational costs. They are part of the costs the company has to support in order to have access to that country's labour market. If the company is unable to compete in that market they are, of course, most welcome to leave this market and go operate in some other lawless country.
- smcl 4y ago
  Well you're actually paid a fraction of every X dollars of value you produce

by isodev 4y ago

phpisthebest 4y ago

Right you are paid X currency for X labor. How is paying employees to sit at home not working anything other than charity/

Qem 4y ago
Where do new employees came from? Do they materialize adult and fully educated out of thin air? Society-wise new workers are born and raised from preexisting workers. If corporations don't bear some of this burden in minting new employees, they are free-riding.
isodev 4y ago
It’s because when you hire employees they come with the aspect of being “people”. People work to live, they don’t live to work.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  This has the very very close connotation to "from each according to ability to each according to need" I live a very frugle life, my expenses are low, I have no kids, I dont take expensive vacations, drive a fancy car, etc... So should that mean I do not get time off, or high raises, etc simply because my "needs" are not the same as a co-worker? Why should a co-workers personal life choices (i.e the choice to have 1 or more children) be a factor in the terms of their employment? I think employment policies should be agnostic to the personal life choices and situations of employee's infact the employer should not even know if you have kids or not, let alone provide you with "extra" because you do Sounds like you would support a policy of income based on your personal expenses. Should the programmer with 5 kids make more than the programmer with no kids simply because the programmer with kids has more expenses?
  - therouwboat 4y ago
    Maybe you should talk to your boss and ask for more, instead complaining about others.
    - phpisthebest 4y ago
      I am in the US and I do pick my employers based on these kinds of policies because their is no government mandate.
  - niels8472 4y ago
    Considering having children is beneficial to society and the economy (e.g. it's advantageous for employers since they still want to be able to hire people in n years and surely they'd like there to still be customers) one could argue that the programmer with five kids should get some "compensation" for this service, and as we know some countries do either directly or via employers.
  - lagadu 4y ago
    > Should the programmer with 5 kids make more than the programmer with no kids simply because the programmer with kids has more expenses? The programmer with 5 kids does make more than the one with no kids because he pays fewer income taxes. So the answer to your question is yes: it's how it already works.
    - phpisthebest 4y ago
      No my question was should they. I also disagree with the Child tax credit.
  - HowTheStoryEnds 4y ago
    > Sounds like you would support a policy of income based on your personal expenses. Should the programmer with 5 kids make more than the programmer with no kids simply because the programmer with kids has more expenses? First time in Europe? That's pretty much a given here, more kids = bigger tax break = more netto pay.
mopsi 4y ago
> How is paying employees to sit at home not working anything other than charity They are not sitting at home doing nothing, they are raising children. Helping them to do that is companies' share of investment into the workforce of tomorrow. Your utilitarian "fair" worldview doesn't account for the fact that having kids is insanely profitable to the economy. In modern economies, every kid is worth at least a million bucks over lifetime. If you choose not to have kids and not contribute in this way, then who's going to foot the $1M or $2M bill for you?
lagadu 4y ago
Those are operational costs. They are part of the costs the company has to support in order to have access to that country's labour market. If the company is unable to compete in that market they are, of course, most welcome to leave this market and go operate in some other lawless country.
smcl 4y ago
Well you're actually paid a fraction of every X dollars of value you produce