• silent_water [she/her]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    261 year ago
    1. those shares don’t give you voting rights

    2. those shares amount to a tiny fraction of the total value of the company

    3. without the employees there would be no company

    you try to square those three facts

    • @Chriskmee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago
      1. So all those times I’ve gotten mail about using my shares to vote, what was that about exactly?

      2. Of course they do, I don’t expect a given employee who isn’t the owner or high level exec to have a larger fraction of ownership.

      3. So what? What’s your point?

        1. Mostly it was about fooling you into thinking that, as a worker, you have even an iota of power within that company.

        2. You: “The owners deserve all the value that results from owning the company and not the workers because the owners own the company, duh.” Reread what you said and note the ridiculous circular logic.

        3. The company would continue to function perfectly fine without the owner(s), yet would immediately cease to function or even exist without the workers. The only role the owner plays in the company (that the workers operate), is to siphon the value away from the workers who made it and unto themselves.

        • @Chriskmee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago
          1. The workers get paid, they get value out of it, they aren’t slaves.

          2. The company wouldn’t exist without owners, someone created it, someone started it, someone owns it. The owners are also the ones usually making the big decisions, they have a lot of skin in the game when it comes to the future of the company.

          Look at a company like Blockbuster. With a better owner they could have changed their position to stay around as a company, but the owner made bad choices. If there was no owner what would have happened? It probably would have failed even quicker because there is nobody making decisions and most employees probably didn’t see the wiring on the wall until it was too late.

          A good owner would have seen the direction the market was going and changed the company to prepare. Netflix has been fighting this fight for a while now, switching from streaming other’s content to making their own content. Without an owner they would have died a long time ago.

          • very_poggers_gay [they/them]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 year ago

            The company wouldn’t exist without owners, someone created it, someone started it, someone owns it. The owners are also the ones usually making the big decisions, they have a lot of skin in the game when it comes to the future of the company.

            The kingdom wouldn’t exist without monarchs, someone created it, someone started it, someone rules it. The monarchs are also the ones usually making the big decisions, they have a lot of skin in the game when it comes to the future of the kingdom.

            Americans are so pro-democracy, but they’ll bust out the most self-defeating, thoughtless, begging-the-question-ass logic to argue against having democracy in the workplace. Sad.

              • very_poggers_gay [they/them]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                31 year ago

                I hope you can realize this is a false equivalency, but maybe you can’t?

                If you believe so little in democracy in the workplace, why do you bother with democracy at all? Should other institutions that govern our lives also function as oligarchies, dictatorships, autocracies?

                • @Chriskmee@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  Maybe a workplace and a government are different and shouldn’t be run the same way? Just a thought.