Hacker News Reader

Comment by bakugo | Hacker News Reader

Sounds like par for the course for big tech companies. Hire a ton of HR people with no real skills beyond "people skills" because you MUST grow at all costs, those people in turn hire more people like themselves with no real skills, next thing you know you have hundreds of people sitting around collecting a paycheck for doing nothing.

View on HN

Bullshit. No faang company has 10 managers per dev. Not even close. At best, you could point to oracle and call lawyers "managers" but only the dumbest would listen.

I don't think the numbers are meant to be literal.

> for doing nothing

nope. plenty of stress, long hours, tons of work.

just very little product output. often even negative output.

>next thing you know you have hundreds of people sitting around collecting a paycheck for doing nothing.

That is socialism and it's no wonder why some leftists love corporations. It's because many corporations are examples of applied socialism.

Now this is some fresh horseshoe theory.

I think I might have the lost it somehow over the years but I remember writing a short “fiction” thing about basically this “turned pro”… corporate driven socialism, natural humans are restricted to owning at most one personal share in the company, every share has the right to vote but the elected “board of directors” have term limits enforced by the articles of incorporation which require unanimous consent to modify, you don’t have social welfare, you have a “dividend” payed out from the collective “contractually obligated payments” required of shareholders who operate addition businesses with permits (business license, individual tax registration etc) which are basically just your Taxes … it was a pretty funny exercise in torturing the definitions of words around to take the most capitalist thing I could think of “the government is just the biggest company and basically owns you” and slowly twist it round till it was for all intents and purposes socialism, if not actually “communism”.

If every employee own a share of the company (voting share), this is communism. If only investors do, its capitalism.

If you have both, its a mixed?

It’s been quite a while since I re read it in full, but all up it was a couple pages and I definitely tried to make the effort to claim it wasn’t a “mix” which I would normally think of as something on the scale between capitalism and communism representing the ends of the scale, and that the hypothetical “government” structure was in fact “both” simultaneously and now I’ve had more time to try and remember it, I remember it was sort of a fake wiki entry or mockumentary style article, right now I want to call it “mocumentatation” but I’m not sure if that’s an establishment term of one I’m accidentally coining right now for mock non-fiction style documentation about topics.

Wish I still had it, since my summary here really doesn’t do as good a job facetiously arguing that something could be both fully communist and capitalist at the same time.

So true! As they say, workers of the world, unite, and submit your quarterly OKRs!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com