Hacker News Reader

Comment by bofadeez | Hacker News Reader

The reason companies exist in the first place is to respond to market conditions and make profit for shareholders, not for employees and not for the public good. It's not your boss' job to take care of you or be concerned with your welfare. That's what family and community are for.

An employee is an economic input, just like land or capital or machinery. Why do you think you're entitled to not being treated like a commodity exactly? It's their money and their risk:reward profile, not yours. You don't get a vote just because you have emotions. Labor IS a commodity. Labor takes no risks when they show up to work and collect a guaranteed paycheck.

All you can do is focus on gaining competitive skills that allow you to enjoy the luxuries you think you're entitled to automatically. You're entitled to nothing.

View on HN

The employee does take a risk. The risk is that it is wasting its time vs an alternative opportunity. Also in most jobs there is risk is to health to various degrees.

Working does consume one's time, energy and health.

If one is not getting the best bang for one's potential in wage terms then one is feeling the negative potential of this missed opportunity risk.

Conversely if one is getting paid more than they are worth and one is experiencing the upside of this risk. The downside is still present too...they could be laid off and find a less well paying job.

So employees absolutely take on risks by engaging in particular jobs vs. alternate opportunities.

The most valuable things any person possesses are time and health.

To the extent that the labor market is efficient and human capital is well utilized this risk is minimized.

"The reason companies exist in the first place is to respond to market conditions and make profit for shareholders"

It is not, and this attitude that profit is all that matters is exactly what's wrong with our current system, or why the current system is just wrong. Eg 'shareholder value' was only enshrined as the existential goal for companies in the early 20th c, and only really driven aggressively following the Lewis Powell collusio.. uh, memo.

Yes, companies should be profitable, to prove that they are doing something that society values, given the lack of any other realistic gauge (maybe we can invent something less clumsy and random, more elegant, in future).

But the reason for work, and therefore companies, is to provide goods and services to society, not just to 'make profit'. What does 'make profit' even mean, really? Markets, capital, profits, are all just current (flawed) methods to enable work, to decide what work should be done, to encourage invention of new valuable work, etc. The reason for the work is to feed, clothe, educate, heal, entertain ourselves.

Society should pool resources with family and community and stop blaming ego-driven people for their problems.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com