this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2024
856 points (97.7% liked)

Work Reform

13302 readers
202 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 356 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (11 children)

Doesn't even question what employees are possibly doing. Just says there are too many and they must be put out on the street. Says the people who are left are making too much money.

I say this a lot but....seriously....when do we start burning things?

[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 76 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

My hatred of the owner class is matched only by my disappointment in my fellow humans for not only taking it, but often defending it.

The people we struggle for have abandoned their humanity. That's what it takes to be one of society's supposed winners or be in their good graces: practiced sociopathy.

And half of the peasants fantasize about being the sociopaths instead of ending their reign and this despicable con game of an economy.

[–] setInner234@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Summed up concisely. I've unfortunately given up hope that anything can be done or can improve. It feels the fight, whatever fight there ever was, has been lost.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Fuck that. I will not go gently into that good night. I will rage against the dying of the light.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] lickmygiggle@lemmy.world 43 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I’m genuinely not super revolutionary but I didn’t get halfway through this letter before coming to the realization that this person needed to not exist anymore and same for anybody else of the same ilk.

[–] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

If you don't have a list of people in society that need to burn you aren't paying attention hard enough.

[–] KingJalopy@lemm.ee 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I can't afford that much paper

[–] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Which is another reason we need to start burning things. can't even afford paper.

[–] capital@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

“Man, if I just had the Death Note.”

[–] CallumWells@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Holy hell, if some fairly rational person got such a book and did their research on who needs to be written down the world would probably look a lot different in a short amount of time.

[–] paysrenttobirds@sh.itjust.works 31 points 2 years ago

He says they aren't needed "operationally" but Alphabet is not supposed to be merely operating anything. They are supposed to be inventing and experimenting and pushing the envelope. This discontented billionaire just wants ever-increasing rent on existing IP and should be called out as a simple landlord and not called an investor at all.

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 21 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Yeah, I'm not sure I really get this whole "reduce employment" logic. Like if some product just isn't profitable and you lay off the employees you hired to work on it, that's not surprising, but if the employees are doing something profitable, and you actually needed to hire that many to get whatever it was you hired them for done, shouldn't it be more profitable to a company to keep them, even if one had a large number?

[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 33 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Moreover, if all the oligarchs are doing it, and they are, who will be left to buy their products/services?

They're breaking their own ponzi scheme economy for a few more quarterly profit boosts because there's nowhere else to grow/metastasize. Media companies are making less media. Food makers are making less product types. Their profit is coming out of gutting workers and their ability to produce what their economic sector even produced.

This is a terminal stage market capitalism fire sale. The snake is eating its own tail having conquered the board.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Because this is the End of the Line. The snake has found its tail and Oroborous awakens to transform the end into the beginning. An ideology of everlasting consumption will eventually consume itself.

[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Especially on a finite world with finite resources.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Bold of you to assume the stock market has anything to do with finite resources.

When the ultra wealthy and their companies run the system into the ground they will buy up the failed stocks and cheap land that nobody else can afford then come out ahead when the economy recovers like they have in the previous economic crashes. They can afford to buy low and cash out when it is high because they have zero pressure to act at any given point in time due to their ridiculous wealth and zero legal repercussions.

[–] HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

But even then there reaches a point where they run out of things to buy, and people to buy them from.

Eventually they poison the one thing they worship: the sanctity of private property rights. It has to serve at least some portion of the populace if it's going to remain tenable, but they're doomed to discover and undershoot that number.

The Western world spent a century demonising socialism with "they'll take your home and car" but it rings hollow when you have neither.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] instamat@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

They’re not thinking long term, they want immediate and maximum profits

[–] Sheeple@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago

It makes quarterlys look good immediately before the problems show up later

It's the mindset of someone who wants to cash out which is usually all ultracapitalists

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 15 points 2 years ago

The source matters, too. This is a dude exploiting people and hoarding so much needed wealth. To an obscene amount. Like, he has more than enough to do everything he could possibly dream of, for the rest of his life. And long after he's gone, all his descendants will be set and will never have to worry about money for their entire lives...

So what does this psychopath obsess about? "Please kick people out into the street and reduce the pay of anyone who remains. Number go up... Fuck em, got mine lol"

[–] cultsuperstar@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

Because he doesn't care. He's looking out for himself.

"Hey Googs, you have too many employees and that's cutting in my investments. Shitcan 150,000 so my investments go up and I make more billions kthxbye"

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

The funny thing is... what are the operational requirements of an R&D organization?

As far as I can see, it's nothing, by definition.

Anyway, does the rich person there not understand that? Also, what is the value of an R&D organization where people are demotivated?

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The rich person only cares about short term profits. They want to liquidate any good will and long term preparedness. Once the host corporation has been sufficiently bled of value, the parasite will move on to the next source of value it can find.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

But then, an R&D organization doesn't have short term profits.

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Correct. R&D only creates future value. Usually in the VC model, R&D is done by individuals or small groups and then funded (bought) by VC to get it to market. So even though the R&D do-er can cash out their future profits for immediate profits, the value of that R&D can't be realized immediately.

I personally think the VC and legacy models are currently competing, and VC is winning out. As we see here, even large, established companies aren't immune to impinging VCs.

load more comments (3 replies)