4 ms·

> This way of thinking has been disseminated as being "The Truth" of business while... It actually isn't, returning money to investors used to come only after t

> This way of thinking has been disseminated as being "The Truth" of business while... It actually isn't, returning money to investors used to come only after taking care of your workers and after providing a benefit to society, training workers used to be a thing so your company could keep its edge in the long-term. Business always has and always will be investor focused. Because they own it. Because the whole thing is literally made up out of their money. Likewise, the tradeoff between short-term cashflow and long-term viability always has and always will be a choice investors have to make. The optimal choice depends on the business and where it is in the business cycle. A wise investor ends up with Berkshire Hathaway; a foolish one ends up with Boeing and loses his shirt.

mordae 2y ago
> Because the whole thing is literally made up out of their money. No. Waaaaaast majority of it is made of employee work and customer's money. Owners merely started it in the right time and place to match the demand.
- FredPret 2y ago
  No. Employee value and customer money can only contribute to a system once investor money and entrepreneurship construct that system. “Merely started in the right time and place to meet demand” is something of an understatement. Try it sometime before you gloat about how easy it must be versus the employment end of the business.
  - piva00 2y ago
    It's all interdependent, investors without workers and customers would never make money, workers without someone with capital injection to start the business would not have places to be employed at. Most of the value was generated by labour though, not by investments, do you agree? There's no value generated by a pile of cash somewhere, you need someone to do something so it can increase in value somehow.
    - FredPret 2y ago
      Of course it’s interdependent. > Most of the value was generated by labour though, not by investments, do you agree? Not sure how this seems logical to you. Both components are required, so you can’t really compare numerically. Given how many people start and fund successful businesses from the ground up, versus how many people have successful careers, it seems clear to me that the start is by far the hardest part. This lines up with my experiences as an employee, investor, and entrepreneur.
      - piva00 2y ago
        Both components are required but as much as you want to start a business if you don't have labour to actualise the idea/business, ramp it up, etc. you simply don't have a business. There's no value without labour, that's a given not much up for discussion. The start can be the hardest part but it's definitely not where most of the value comes from, that's what I'm saying.
- RestlessMind 2y ago
  > Owners merely started it in the right time and place LOL. If it is "merely" a matter of starting in the right time and place, why don't you go ahead and start a few companies who will treat their employees in the ideal way you prefer.
cactacea 2y ago
> Because the whole thing is literally made up out of their money. Yes because labor comes out of thin air.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

mordae 2y ago

> Because the whole thing is literally made up out of their money. No. Waaaaaast majority of it is made of employee work and customer's money. Owners merely started it in the right time and place to match the demand.

FredPret 2y ago
No. Employee value and customer money can only contribute to a system once investor money and entrepreneurship construct that system. “Merely started in the right time and place to meet demand” is something of an understatement. Try it sometime before you gloat about how easy it must be versus the employment end of the business.
- piva00 2y ago
  It's all interdependent, investors without workers and customers would never make money, workers without someone with capital injection to start the business would not have places to be employed at. Most of the value was generated by labour though, not by investments, do you agree? There's no value generated by a pile of cash somewhere, you need someone to do something so it can increase in value somehow.
  - FredPret 2y ago
    Of course it’s interdependent. > Most of the value was generated by labour though, not by investments, do you agree? Not sure how this seems logical to you. Both components are required, so you can’t really compare numerically. Given how many people start and fund successful businesses from the ground up, versus how many people have successful careers, it seems clear to me that the start is by far the hardest part. This lines up with my experiences as an employee, investor, and entrepreneur.
    - piva00 2y ago
      Both components are required but as much as you want to start a business if you don't have labour to actualise the idea/business, ramp it up, etc. you simply don't have a business. There's no value without labour, that's a given not much up for discussion. The start can be the hardest part but it's definitely not where most of the value comes from, that's what I'm saying.
RestlessMind 2y ago
> Owners merely started it in the right time and place LOL. If it is "merely" a matter of starting in the right time and place, why don't you go ahead and start a few companies who will treat their employees in the ideal way you prefer.

cactacea 2y ago

> Because the whole thing is literally made up out of their money. Yes because labor comes out of thin air.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]