8 ms·

Ah what a world we have constructed. Those with money do nothing to keep getting more money, while those that do the actual work hardly get any consideration.

Ah what a world we have constructed. Those with money do nothing to keep getting more money, while those that do the actual work hardly get any consideration. Got it.

commandlinefan 3y ago
Do you have a (workable) alternative?
- stefantalpalaru 3y ago
  [dead]
- greenie_beans 3y ago
  this is such an antagonist way to start a discussion. i'm gonna assume that you'll shoot down any alternative anybody proposes
- ClumsyPilot 3y ago
  Do you think the financial system has not changed in the past 150 years? Just withing Capitalist countries. we have tried like 4 or 5 different forms of capitalism. When eneconomic growth was highest in US history, college was free and share buybacks were illegal. 40% oftax reciepts were corporation tax. (now <10%)
- eatsyourtacos 3y ago
  I could write you a book on this. But let's just say the "alternative" is all in attitude and what we care about in society. The person I responded to literally just says "well the corporation only exists to give profit to the shareholders!! that is their legal obligation!" As if that is some kind of fact of nature? That is a debatable topic. As in- SHOULD that be the case? The older I've gotten the more I realize we are taught all of these constructs and never to question their actual intentions. What is the intention behind the construct of a corporation that the primary responsibility is to give back to the shareholders? Green & rewarding people that already have money. Why can't the main intention be a company to given stable employment to workers and adequate rights? To pay reasonable taxes on your profits to give back to the welfare of society? But no.. we have a system in place here where a company is basically not required to give paid sick leave, no maternity leave, limited healthcare, zero paid time off, no sort of retirement/safety nets, no guarantee that you won't be fired the next day and have zero severance.. etc etc etc Everything that's wrong with not helping people in our society is all intermingled right now. We need to increase taxes significantly on corporations and the wealthy. We need to guarantee healthcare, early childcare, significant maternity leave, paid sick days, vacation, way more higher education assistance. Then even if corporations get to continue to be more greedy, at least they are paying their share and have to provide way more benefits to people. Now since we are on HN- someone is going to say "Intel and X tech corporation do that!" And hey, fair enough they do a lot of that. But you know what? They are giving benefits to the people WHO HAVE MONEY! We are literally in a society where the people with the best benefits are the ones who make enough money where they could manage without them. Yet most of the workforce that does more random jobs are the ones who get screwed with basically no benefits while making shit money. Long story short? It's all connected and so much needs to change. But I have little hope any of this will in the US.
martindbp 3y ago
And a glorious world it is. We had to go through millenia of chaos and violence before we found a system which can channel greed and status and power seeking into something mostly productive.
- amrocha 3y ago
  Unless you're poor, in which case you just die I guess
  - dartharva 3y ago
    Well that has never not been true.
    - amrocha 3y ago
      I'd like to aim for something better than "just as bad as always"
      - dartharva 3y ago
        You can't escape it, however emotional it might make you. Society cannot exist without social hierarchy.
        amrocha 3y ago
        You know what they say about the divine power of kings and everything
  - martindbp 3y ago
    https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/dataviz-remake-fall-extreme-poverty-best-news-world https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/dataviz-remake-fall-ext...
    - amrocha 3y ago
      The world bank! That classic charitable organization that definitely does not make predatory loans to poor countries and force them to privatize their industries
RivieraKid 3y ago
Most owners of Intel do work. Many people in this thread co-own Intel and also have a job.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > Most owners of Intel do work. Most (by ownership) direct owners of Intel aren't even natural persons.
  - RivieraKid 3y ago
    Ok, but that's just an implementation detail, it doesn't matter whether I own a share directly or through some fund.
- eatsyourtacos 3y ago
  Buying shares in Intel and holding them means you are doing literally zero work for Intel.
  - RivieraKid 3y ago
    Yes (unless you're employed at Intel). Not sure what's your point though.

Ah what a world we have constructed. Those with money do nothing to keep getting more money, while those that do the actual work hardly get any consideration. Got it.

commandlinefan 3y ago

Do you have a (workable) alternative?

stefantalpalaru 3y ago
[dead]
greenie_beans 3y ago
this is such an antagonist way to start a discussion. i'm gonna assume that you'll shoot down any alternative anybody proposes
ClumsyPilot 3y ago
Do you think the financial system has not changed in the past 150 years? Just withing Capitalist countries. we have tried like 4 or 5 different forms of capitalism. When eneconomic growth was highest in US history, college was free and share buybacks were illegal. 40% oftax reciepts were corporation tax. (now <10%)
eatsyourtacos 3y ago
I could write you a book on this. But let's just say the "alternative" is all in attitude and what we care about in society. The person I responded to literally just says "well the corporation only exists to give profit to the shareholders!! that is their legal obligation!" As if that is some kind of fact of nature? That is a debatable topic. As in- SHOULD that be the case? The older I've gotten the more I realize we are taught all of these constructs and never to question their actual intentions. What is the intention behind the construct of a corporation that the primary responsibility is to give back to the shareholders? Green & rewarding people that already have money. Why can't the main intention be a company to given stable employment to workers and adequate rights? To pay reasonable taxes on your profits to give back to the welfare of society? But no.. we have a system in place here where a company is basically not required to give paid sick leave, no maternity leave, limited healthcare, zero paid time off, no sort of retirement/safety nets, no guarantee that you won't be fired the next day and have zero severance.. etc etc etc Everything that's wrong with not helping people in our society is all intermingled right now. We need to increase taxes significantly on corporations and the wealthy. We need to guarantee healthcare, early childcare, significant maternity leave, paid sick days, vacation, way more higher education assistance. Then even if corporations get to continue to be more greedy, at least they are paying their share and have to provide way more benefits to people. Now since we are on HN- someone is going to say "Intel and X tech corporation do that!" And hey, fair enough they do a lot of that. But you know what? They are giving benefits to the people WHO HAVE MONEY! We are literally in a society where the people with the best benefits are the ones who make enough money where they could manage without them. Yet most of the workforce that does more random jobs are the ones who get screwed with basically no benefits while making shit money. Long story short? It's all connected and so much needs to change. But I have little hope any of this will in the US.

martindbp 3y ago

And a glorious world it is. We had to go through millenia of chaos and violence before we found a system which can channel greed and status and power seeking into something mostly productive.

amrocha 3y ago
Unless you're poor, in which case you just die I guess
- dartharva 3y ago
  Well that has never not been true.
  - amrocha 3y ago
    I'd like to aim for something better than "just as bad as always"
    - dartharva 3y ago
      You can't escape it, however emotional it might make you. Society cannot exist without social hierarchy.
      - amrocha 3y ago
        You know what they say about the divine power of kings and everything
- martindbp 3y ago
  https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/dataviz-remake-fall-extreme-poverty-best-news-world https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/dataviz-remake-fall-ext...
  - amrocha 3y ago
    The world bank! That classic charitable organization that definitely does not make predatory loans to poor countries and force them to privatize their industries

RivieraKid 3y ago

Most owners of Intel do work. Many people in this thread co-own Intel and also have a job.

dragonwriter 3y ago
> Most owners of Intel do work. Most (by ownership) direct owners of Intel aren't even natural persons.
- RivieraKid 3y ago
  Ok, but that's just an implementation detail, it doesn't matter whether I own a share directly or through some fund.
eatsyourtacos 3y ago
Buying shares in Intel and holding them means you are doing literally zero work for Intel.
- RivieraKid 3y ago
  Yes (unless you're employed at Intel). Not sure what's your point though.