860
submitted 11 months ago by lledrtx@lemmy.world to c/workreform@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 159 points 11 months ago

Hedge fund. He doesn’t care about the employees or the company. Just the money he can make trading the stock.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 108 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

So an inhuman greed monster sociopath, then.

[-] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 26 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I don’t have a problem with people who create value and become wealthy. They earned it and created good jobs, more power to them.

Hedge funds, most Private equity, etc can go fuck themselves. They strip wealth and destroy things.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 58 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I'm not for people only interested in benefiting themselves being the ones rewarded most by society, let alone being the ones effectively in charge of society as they are.

It isn't heroic, benevolent, or even minimally pro-social to spend your life trying to accrue private profit for the sake of private profit. It just makes you greedy and selfish. Or as they call it with their orwellian language manipulation, "rational self-interest." being greedy, selfish, and unconcerned with the effects your actions have on others makes you a vile, broken, contemptible person, and humanity seems to have forgotten that entirely, or at least we've been propagandized to forget it by the owner class.

We punish people that dare to pursue vocations that benefit society, like teachers and paramedics, and reward selfishness.

I can't root for my own species in this state. Slitting eachother's throats when there's another dollar to be had by it. If this is truly what our species has chosen as it's most practiced purpose and meaning, I want no part of it, and I will be grateful when it's time to leave it.

[-] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

Comment on semantics:

I’ve heard humanity described as being composed of “self-interested, rational economic actors” to help us understand economics.

Like, we all want the eggs from the farmers’ market that were laid by the happiest hens. A farmer can assume we’re rational & self-interested when pricing her eggs so she can try to sell enough of them to make a living. $2/egg won’t fly because stores sell them so much cheaper.

Think I’m saying morally bankrupt, anti-social hoarders have rational self-interest but so do normal people like you & me. I’m fizzling out here but either way hoarding’s bad :)

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Right, but there's no term for being greedy, sociopathic, or engaging in hoarding in economics.

They fall under Orwellian double speak terms that make them complimentary, "rational self-interest, creating externalities, curtailing redundancies" etc. Language designed to turn their sins into their achievements.

Considering the central prominence of greed in our economy, it's a glaring ommission that the capitalists and economists themselves seem to have forgotten that word, or to create an economic term for greed that isn't complimentary.

They are driven almost entirely by insatiable greed, yet the term is never uttered in their earnings reports or economic news.

They seem to want the concept of greed as the pejorative it is to be forgotten entirely, despite it demonstrably being their core value.

[-] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Greed is the best descriptive word and incredibly negative as you've said. No reason to make a more negatively charged word. The tale of Midas, and others, demonstrate how destructive and harmful greed is.

Midas has always stuck with me since I first heard the tale and in a way informed who I am today, especially my political leanings.

[-] CallumWells@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago

With the amount of people who get manipulated with sales and other tactics I don't think we can argue that humanity is composed of rational economic actors. There are some rational economic actors, but the vast majority probably isn't acting rationally with regards to their economics. And that's okay, because humans aren't rational beings first and foremost. We're primarily emotional beings. We make most of our decisions based on emotions, then we may try to rationalize our choice.

It takes a lot of effort to be rational about things.

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 27 points 11 months ago

No one creates wealth alone. When one becomes that rich, they've stolen it.

[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

Don't get it wrong, he is completely human.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

In the sense that Jeffrey Dahmer and Jack the Ripper were also completely human, sure.

Although that's not fair to them, the damage they inflicted on humanity was of a ridiculously smaller scale.

[-] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Misery is capitalisms best friend.

[-] instamat@lemmy.world 26 points 11 months ago

Notice also how he starts each paragraph with “I” and not to be an armchair psychiatrist but that says a lot about his motivation.

[-] Kalkaline@lemmy.zip 18 points 11 months ago

I want to make money off of Google stock too, but I also want their shit to work so I can make more money in the future.

[-] AnonTwo@kbin.social 25 points 11 months ago

I mean if he catches wind their products stop working to the point consumers react, he can just sell his stock and move on to destroy another company.

[-] pkill@programming.dev 4 points 11 months ago

Hey remember when Google Drive lost thousands of customers data for the past 6 months? That was in November.

[-] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 9 points 11 months ago

I own a little Google stock. I don’t mind they pay their employees a shit ton. I want them make good products. I’m not a fan of most their products but that’s just me

[-] Pepsi@kbin.social 0 points 11 months ago

lol sorry to break it to you but a few bucks in fractional shares doesn’t count as “owning a little stock”

🤣

[-] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

I own about 250k of Google stock. So a little bit. I don’t own more because I don’t like that you are the product.

[-] mjhelto@lemm.ee 11 points 11 months ago

So what you're saying is we start the burning with him?

this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2024
860 points (97.8% liked)

Work Reform

10143 readers
68 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