3 ms·

I'm not sure why that matters. For a very long time I was impressed with the low number of employees and the income per employee at Google. I think their raise

by yakak 4y ago

I'm not sure why that matters. For a very long time I was impressed with the low number of employees and the income per employee at Google. I think their raise in employees should ideally be because they finally have a new product with similar income per employee potential, less ideally they could be releasing a new product branching into Microsoft or IBMs territory and need many somewhat lower paid employees.

adam_arthur 4y ago
It matters because inefficient business are bad for society. The reason economic prosperity has raised so many out of poverty is because systems and businesses get more efficient over time. Because when markets are competitive, cost to consumer declines to cost of production (with perfect competition) That’s the philosophical answer. If Google had more direct competition market forces would push wages down on their own. Make no mistake though, it’s not altruistic whatsoever to defend a system that functions inefficiently. It’s a value transfer from broader society to the above market wages of whichever company. Maybe that adheres to your priorities, maybe not, but broader society does best in aggregate when competition drives efficiencies
- nemothekid 4y ago
  >It matters because inefficient business are bad for society. The implication that Google's employee wages are inefficient is hearsay; and it's the kind of MBA-babble that an hedgefund manager that is trying to increase short term profits would say. >If Google had more direct competition market forces would push wages down on their own. This makes no sense. If Google had more competition, wages would go up. The only incentive Google management has to keep wages high is to prevent employees from working for a competitor. I think people forget that in the early days of Google, Microsoft lost a lot of good engineers to Google because Google paid better.
  - nightski 4y ago
    And yet they are almost double the market cap now. Hmmm.

by yakak 4y ago

adam_arthur 4y ago

It matters because inefficient business are bad for society. The reason economic prosperity has raised so many out of poverty is because systems and businesses get more efficient over time. Because when markets are competitive, cost to consumer declines to cost of production (with perfect competition) That’s the philosophical answer. If Google had more direct competition market forces would push wages down on their own. Make no mistake though, it’s not altruistic whatsoever to defend a system that functions inefficiently. It’s a value transfer from broader society to the above market wages of whichever company. Maybe that adheres to your priorities, maybe not, but broader society does best in aggregate when competition drives efficiencies

nemothekid 4y ago
>It matters because inefficient business are bad for society. The implication that Google's employee wages are inefficient is hearsay; and it's the kind of MBA-babble that an hedgefund manager that is trying to increase short term profits would say. >If Google had more direct competition market forces would push wages down on their own. This makes no sense. If Google had more competition, wages would go up. The only incentive Google management has to keep wages high is to prevent employees from working for a competitor. I think people forget that in the early days of Google, Microsoft lost a lot of good engineers to Google because Google paid better.
- nightski 4y ago
  And yet they are almost double the market cap now. Hmmm.