5 ms·
Executives don’t lose. They get paid when the company is doing poorly and they have to make “hard decisions” to do layoffs. They get paid when the company is do
by taurath 3y ago
Executives don’t lose. They get paid when the company is doing poorly and they have to make “hard decisions” to do layoffs. They get paid when the company is doing well. The most downright destructive executives I’ve ever worked under are still employed. They don’t take pay cuts.
The workers, nurses, doctors, orderlies, etc at hospitals are completely burned out and are reduced to skeleton crews. Hospitals get bought by private equity or big conglomorates and are gutted and their owners rewarded handsomely for churning through people like sociopaths.
Why have hope?
- chris-orgmenta 3y ago>Why have hope? I feel this sentence is a non sequitur unless you inject "and this will never be fixed because A, B, C" before it. I have hope that it will resolve, but I don't have hope that it will be done in what I consider an appropriate timeframe. I think 'we' are talking about these (relatively tiny, but still extremely terrible and important to fix) injustices more than 'we' did while the East India Company were operating.
- taurath 3y agoThere's no guarantee of resolution, we can just as easily go even deeper into a capitalist-feudal state. The truth is we have enough resources to solve all these problems, and mitigate all this suffering and yet we don't, and the problems are getting worse not better. Maybe it'll be better in a generation, but we've squandered and centralized so much wealth without actually building much of anything useful. Our towns and cities crumble. > I think 'we' are talking about these (relatively tiny, but still extremely terrible and important to fix) injustices more than 'we' did while the East India Company were operating. I'm sure Indians would beg to differ!
- superchroma 3y ago[flagged]
- Nasrudith 3y agoTerror is a fucking stupid method for bloody-minded idiot barbarians. It worked so well that the French went to dynastic emperors!
- vmladenov 3y ago“You’re so close”-type replies are easily the most annoying kinds of comments on message boards. Can you just say what you actually mean so people can refute it directly?
- superchroma 3y agoI'm saying we take a more medieval approach to wealth redistribution. When polite society fails and these animals take advantage of the system to such a degree that it strains until it begins to fall apart, it will probably be necessary to make an example of a lot of them, so that any others with such aspirations never forget that it could be their neck metaphorically (or, um, literally) on the chopping block next.
- sobkas 3y ago> He's so close to making the final leap. Now, the $1,000,000.00 question, how do we make these awful people to be terrified of the populace so they behave even remotely respectably...? > The audience is waiting with baited breath to see if he'll say the right answer! No one is villain in their own story. They must believe that their actions actually are good, because they rise shareholders value. And because most shareholders don't invest long-term it doesn't matter what happens in such time scale. Alternatively they are so raging sociopaths I don't believe they are able to function in any civilised society. In the end it's the system that choose people who have traits from both of my points. Because if only KPI is maximisation of profits, then only thing you will get is profit maximisation.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- throwaway038519 3y ago[flagged]