4 ms·
Isn't that a good thing? It promotes creating jobs and sharing some of the wealth
by EricMausler 3y ago
Isn't that a good thing? It promotes creating jobs and sharing some of the wealth
- dazzlefruit 3y agoImagine what could be done with that infinite money if Google had a real incentive to build more useful things.
- EricMausler 3y agoWould being tighter with their budgets and reducing headcount give them more incentive to build more useful things? They built the useful thing already. It prints money. Let them house and feed a bunch of people as employees. Idk maybe I'm missing something
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- gmadsen 3y agoNo? the purpose of a job is to create value.
- EricMausler 3y agoEh. The purpose of a job is to do the job. Creating value feels more like the purpose of the business. Google is creating value, and I dont see the problem with them creating a bunch of easy jobs for people as a means of distributing that value
- jokethrowaway 3y agoIt's worse for everyone else (plus it's mentally terrible for the soulless drones taking paychecks). If Google didn't waste money they could offer more value to society. It's like the government redistributing your money to bullshit initiatives
- EricMausler 3y agoAre you saying Google is currently trying to offer more value to society and they can't find the funds? My core stance probably comes down to: I don't see how putting money into payroll can be considered a waste to society. It's distributing money directly into the bank accounts of the working class. They are in a position to provide value to society. They have as large a team of vetted professionals as they can. A bit cliche, but the horse has been lead to water
- gmadsen 3y agothe opportunity cost of these people's entire working lives? How is that not a waste to society? Its not like Google is stashing its funds under a matress unless it doles out extra payroll