4 ms·
I think you're missing what we're getting at. OP was talking about rank and file employees. 99% of people who work at Goldman Sachs don't really give a shit wha
by tootie 3y ago
I think you're missing what we're getting at. OP was talking about rank and file employees. 99% of people who work at Goldman Sachs don't really give a shit what's good for Goldman Sachs. A substantial percentage actively dislike their employer, but just want a nice paycheck. They are people working a job. Like 1/4 of GS employees are technologists. They don't know or care about how climate regulation affects their business. In fact, a lot of employees jobs are mitigating compliance risk so they literally depend on onerous regulation to stay employed. I'd wager a substantial percentage of GS employees don't even know how to trade stocks.
- thebooktocome 3y agoI find it really hard to believe that even a mere “technologist” wouldn’t understand how their bread gets buttered, but maybe they’re even less engaged than I’ve heard & seen. I think we’re starting to talk past each other, but for the sake of pointing out where we seemingly agree: GS employees are more-or-less self-interested, and they do depend on gaming (or mitigating risk, I suppose) regulations to stay employed. Neither of those make great bullet points on a green tech pivot resume, which was more or less my original point? I brought up their charitable org specifically because I recall an acquaintance who works there saying it was more employee-driven than the average corporate tax amelioration scheme. Maybe he was wrong? He’s only been there for five years or so.