3 ms·

> Business is not your friend, it's not your family. The only goal of business is to make profit. If they can make something good along the way - great, but don

> Business is not your friend, it's not your family. The only goal of business is to make profit. If they can make something good along the way - great, but don't expect them to do it. Yep, this is what the robber baron capitalists of the USA also used to believe - profit at the expense of human life. You are simply proving the point here that the only way to win is civil dis-obedience. Boycott, blockade, unionize and make these modern robber barons pay. Unless they feel the pinch they will not change. Believing in profit at the expense of all other considerations only kick-starts a revolution.

Kiro 4y ago
Comments like yours is why I'm afraid to hire anyone to begin with. The moment I do I'm automatically an enemy.
- lenkite 4y ago
  Once an employer has explicitly approved an employee's maternity leave, then the notice period of termination should begin from when the leave has expired. This is basic, common sense and is also law in many European nations.
  - Kiro 4y ago
    It's regulated by law in my country so yes, but that's not what I'm talking about. Once your revolution kicks off the mob won't care a single bit that I'm a "good" employer. No, I rather keep working on my own even though I could and should employ someone.
    - lenkite 4y ago
      And that is your free choice. I am sure they were many employers in the days after the union movement who decided not to hire because they believed in making employees work 20 hours a day and they were afraid of retribution if they pushed the line. And that is fine - these folks would have lost out business to other employers who appeased the "mob" as you call it. There is only so much a single person can scale out to, after all. Other employers will fill the vacuum. It is interesting you haven't responded to the guy who believes in profit at all costs. If you truly believe that, then yes, its best not to hire people.
      - Kiro 4y ago
        Responded to who? I don't believe that and I also don't plan to treat any employee badly. My point is that it doesn't matter. Once your proposed civil war happens I will automatically be the bourgeoisie class that needs to be crushed, tortured and killed.
        lenkite 4y ago
        > Responded to who? The guy with a throwaway account who supports Google's policy. You have responded to his objectors several times but not to him which indirectly states where you actually stand. A civil disobedience movement becomes utterly necessary when employers cross the line of human dignity again and again. It is in everyone's interest to make sure that doesn't degrade to a civil war of-course. It will not just be the bourgeoisie class that is effected here. I will correct my post.
        throwaway45501 4y ago
        I do not support Google's policy. I view USA's labor laws as barbaric. In EU paid leave and paid maternity leave is standard, nobody even view them as extra benefits. I just don't understand why very intelligent people are surprised by all of this, and why they expect to never be laid-off.
        earthling8118 4y ago
        Perhaps both you and the strawman you are lugging around in this comment chain deserve to go then? If you're really at fear for this I think it indicates that 1. You're in the wrong line of work 2. Maybe you aren't treating employees right and realize it
throwaway45501 4y ago
I view this behavior as an emerging property, and I don't think you can get rid of it. What we as a society can do is educate people that companies are not your friends, that they are amoral, and they exist to maximize their profits. I think we shouldn't allow them to make political donations or support any charity or social movement because this makes them seem "friendly," - which is a net negative for society. Can you elaborate on why civil disobedience is the only choice? I don't think it is. We haven't tried other solutions. I would love to see a global agreement to cap the wealth of any individual at $1 billion dollars and the total market value of any company at $100bn (those numbers are arbitrary).
- andrekandre 4y ago
  > I would love to see a global agreement to cap the wealth of any individual at $1 billion dollars and the total market value of any company at $100bn (those numbers are arbitrary). how would you get any country to agree to such a thing?
  - throwaway45501 4y ago
    I'm terribly sorry, I can't describe my idea and expect to stay anonymous. If I would ever describe it again I could be linked to the account, which defeats purpose of creating the throwaway account. One day I hope to be a billionaire and at least try to change the system. I would gladly spend nost of my wealth to see this happen.

Kiro 4y ago

Comments like yours is why I'm afraid to hire anyone to begin with. The moment I do I'm automatically an enemy.

lenkite 4y ago
Once an employer has explicitly approved an employee's maternity leave, then the notice period of termination should begin from when the leave has expired. This is basic, common sense and is also law in many European nations.
- Kiro 4y ago
  It's regulated by law in my country so yes, but that's not what I'm talking about. Once your revolution kicks off the mob won't care a single bit that I'm a "good" employer. No, I rather keep working on my own even though I could and should employ someone.
  - lenkite 4y ago
    And that is your free choice. I am sure they were many employers in the days after the union movement who decided not to hire because they believed in making employees work 20 hours a day and they were afraid of retribution if they pushed the line. And that is fine - these folks would have lost out business to other employers who appeased the "mob" as you call it. There is only so much a single person can scale out to, after all. Other employers will fill the vacuum. It is interesting you haven't responded to the guy who believes in profit at all costs. If you truly believe that, then yes, its best not to hire people.
    - Kiro 4y ago
      Responded to who? I don't believe that and I also don't plan to treat any employee badly. My point is that it doesn't matter. Once your proposed civil war happens I will automatically be the bourgeoisie class that needs to be crushed, tortured and killed.
      - lenkite 4y ago
        > Responded to who? The guy with a throwaway account who supports Google's policy. You have responded to his objectors several times but not to him which indirectly states where you actually stand. A civil disobedience movement becomes utterly necessary when employers cross the line of human dignity again and again. It is in everyone's interest to make sure that doesn't degrade to a civil war of-course. It will not just be the bourgeoisie class that is effected here. I will correct my post.
        throwaway45501 4y ago
        I do not support Google's policy. I view USA's labor laws as barbaric. In EU paid leave and paid maternity leave is standard, nobody even view them as extra benefits. I just don't understand why very intelligent people are surprised by all of this, and why they expect to never be laid-off.
      - earthling8118 4y ago
        Perhaps both you and the strawman you are lugging around in this comment chain deserve to go then? If you're really at fear for this I think it indicates that 1. You're in the wrong line of work 2. Maybe you aren't treating employees right and realize it

throwaway45501 4y ago

I view this behavior as an emerging property, and I don't think you can get rid of it. What we as a society can do is educate people that companies are not your friends, that they are amoral, and they exist to maximize their profits. I think we shouldn't allow them to make political donations or support any charity or social movement because this makes them seem "friendly," - which is a net negative for society. Can you elaborate on why civil disobedience is the only choice? I don't think it is. We haven't tried other solutions. I would love to see a global agreement to cap the wealth of any individual at $1 billion dollars and the total market value of any company at $100bn (those numbers are arbitrary).

andrekandre 4y ago
> I would love to see a global agreement to cap the wealth of any individual at $1 billion dollars and the total market value of any company at $100bn (those numbers are arbitrary). how would you get any country to agree to such a thing?
- throwaway45501 4y ago
  I'm terribly sorry, I can't describe my idea and expect to stay anonymous. If I would ever describe it again I could be linked to the account, which defeats purpose of creating the throwaway account. One day I hope to be a billionaire and at least try to change the system. I would gladly spend nost of my wealth to see this happen.