4 ms·

> but it's undeniable that many companies choose to underpay workers while raking in massive profits for themselves. Are you replying to my original statement

• lossolo 3y ago
  > Are you replying to my original statement or not? This has nothing to do with the original discussion. Yes, I am addressing your original statement, which implies that some companies underpay workers despite making massive profits. My point was that this is an issue we should consider in our discussion about fair wages and workers' treatment. > To underpay a worker ultimately means that you have an outstanding debt to that worker. Are you suggesting that Louis Vuitton has outstanding debt to its workers and that the workers continue to stick around only because they think "If I keep working hard enough I am sure that good guy Louis will eventually settle up!" No, I am not implying that Louis Vuitton or any other company has outstanding debt to its workers. The point is that if a company is making substantial profits but not adequately compensating its workers, it raises concerns about fair treatment and the distribution of wealth within the company. > Louis Vuitton has been in business since 1854, so unless this is something that has only started happening in the past few months, I expect that isn't really the case. I expect the workers are actually paid up in full. Workers don't like to be banks. You won't last long if you treat them as such. I agree that businesses must pay their workers adequately to retain a skilled workforce. However, the issue is not whether workers are currently owed back payments, it's about ensuring that workers are paid fairly for their contributions and that companies prioritize fair wages alongside their profits. > Let's not. Advocacy requires presenting opinion, and presenting opinion is bad faith participation. Good faith participation limits itself to exploring the way things are. One can always use that information to form an opinion, if they so choose. And, frankly, if you are not familiar enough with the way things are in order to be able to contribute in good faith, you most certainly are not in a position to have a well-considered opinion. I disagree. Good faith participation involves discussing issues with the goal of seeking positive change and improvement. While we explore the way things are, we can also advocate for fair treatment and better conditions for workers based on ethical and moral considerations. The real issue here is about recognizing that some companies may not prioritize fair wages for their workers, even if they have the means to do so. By discussing this, we can raise awareness and foster a better understanding of the challenges faced by workers in various industries. It's evident that your approach to the discussion has been selective and avoiding certain aspects that do not fit your viewpoint. It's disappointing to see you ignore crucial points about the challenges faced by workers in various regions, especially those with low wages and inadequate labor protections. Addressing only parts of the conversation that align with one's narrative while disregarding significant aspects of the discussion limits the potential for a constructive and well-rounded exchange of ideas. This behavior not only hampers progress in finding solutions but also fails to acknowledge the complexity and diversity of issues related to fair wages.
  • randomdata 3y ago
    > which implies that some companies underpay workers despite making massive profits. Again, had you taken the time to read the full context, you would know the statement was made with respect to not being able to find workers to hire. How can you underpay, let alone pay at all, workers which do not exist? You can't. This has nothing to do with the original topic. > The point is that if a company is making substantial profits but not adequately compensating its workers If the workers are not adequately compensated then there must be debt. You fundamentally cannot withhold something in an exchange without accumulating debt. Perhaps you mean the workers have voluntarily forgiven any debt that was outstanding? Indeed, that is an option available to them, but not something workers usually take kindly. > it's about ensuring that workers are paid fairly for their contributions and that companies prioritize fair wages alongside their profits. What is fair is established when to exchanging parties reach an agreement on what they both consider to be an equal exchange of value. Until such an agreement can be made, a transaction does not begin. If, later, one party does not fulfill their end of the agreement then that would be unfair, but debt is also created. When there is unfairness, there is debt. They are intrinsically linked. Debt is literally a measure of how far one party has been unfair to another. > Good faith participation involves discussing issues with the goal of seeking positive change and improvement. You can't meaningfully seek positive change and improvement without understanding the current state of the world. Once you do understand it, that change is a natural consequence. It doesn't require drawn out discussion. Jumping straight to pushing your agenda of what you think is the positive change and improvement is bad faith participation as it robs other parties from the understanding of why it is the change they too want to see, and is typically done so because the message wouldn't be compelling if the other parties had that underlying understanding. Even where intentions are pure, it is a self-centred position, and self-centredness is not faithful to the other participants.
    • lossolo 3y ago
      Seems like I'm rate limited, couldn't add reply for 45 minutes. I understand your perspective, but it's important to clarify some points: > You can't meaningfully seek positive change and improvement without understanding the current state of the world. Once you do understand it, that change is a natural consequence. It doesn't require drawn-out discussion. While understanding the current state is crucial, meaningful change often requires open and constructive discussions to explore various perspectives and potential solutions. Engaging in dialogue allows us to gain insights from different viewpoints and fosters a deeper understanding of the issues at hand. > Jumping straight to pushing your agenda of what you think is the positive change and improvement is bad faith participation as it robs other parties from the understanding of why it is the change they too want to see, and is typically done so because the message wouldn't be compelling if the other parties had that underlying understanding. Advocating for positive change can also involve presenting well-considered ideas and supporting them with evidence and reasoning. Engaging in open discussions allows us to better comprehend the underlying issues and work towards consensus on positive improvements for all parties involved. > What is fair is established when two exchanging parties have reached an agreement on what they both consider an equal exchange of value. Until such an agreement can be made, a transaction does not begin. If, later, one party does not fulfill their end of the agreement, then that would be unfair, but debt is also created. When there is unfairness, there is debt. They are intrinsically linked. Fairness in the context of business goes beyond just an initial transaction. It involves ongoing relationships between employers and employees. While formal agreements are crucial, there is also a moral and ethical dimension to consider in how workers are treated over time, especially in light of the company's profits and growth. There is important additional context that needs to be considered when discussing fair exchanges in the labor market. In many cases, especially in poor countries or among economically vulnerable individuals, the concept of "equal exchange of value" might not be applicable in the traditional sense. For many people in these situations, they may not have the luxury of multiple options or the bargaining power to negotiate for fair wages. When individuals are in desperate need of employment to survive, they might accept any job opportunity presented to them, even if the compensation is not sufficient. In such cases, the power dynamics between employers and employees are significantly skewed, making it challenging for workers to demand fair wages. This imbalance can lead to underpayment and exploitation, and it may not be a result of an equal and voluntary agreement between the parties. Recognizing this context is essential to understanding the complexity of labor issues and the intrinsic link between unfairness and debt that you mentioned earlier. It highlights the need for greater attention to workers rights, social safety nets, and the role of governments and businesses in ensuring fair treatment and better opportunities for economically vulnerable individuals. In discussions about fair wages, we must consider the broader socioeconomic context and work towards addressing the root causes of inequality and exploitation in the labor market. By doing so, we can foster an environment where all workers are treated fairly and have the opportunity to thrive, regardless of their socioeconomic background.