How to go down with style • Hacker News Board

Re: How to go down with style

#11

Post by nihilocrat » Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 12:20 PM UTC

mixmax wrote: post #9

netcan wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought that shareholders were supposed to be the last to get paid.

Yes, but the managements sole responsibility is to make money for the shareholders. Not for the employees.

Welcome to Capitalism! Bend over!

To clarify: I think it's really a sad state of affairs when the people who commit most of their waking hours to a company and depend on their salary for day-to-day living aren't the ones who are paid first.

Everyone knows: Bros (employees) before 'hos (shareholders).

Re: How to go down with style

#12

Post by netcan » Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 12:25 PM UTC

mixmax wrote: post #9

netcan wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought that shareholders were supposed to be the last to get paid.

Yes, but the managements sole responsibility is to make money for the shareholders. Not for the employees.

Yes, but that wouldn't mean they're expected to murder & steal on behalf of shareholders if opportunity presented itself.

That money is owed to employees by shareholders.

Re: How to go down with style

#13

Post by abijlani » Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 12:55 PM UTC

Great story, thanks for sharing.

Re: How to go down with style

#14

Post by saint » Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 1:16 PM UTC

You have very good mentor. And I liked the part about "younger girlfriend" ;-)

Re: How to go down with style

#15

Post by fallentimes » Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 3:19 PM UTC

mixmax wrote: post #9

netcan wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought that shareholders were supposed to be the last to get paid.

Yes, but the managements sole responsibility is to make money for the shareholders. Not for the employees.

When the employees benefit, the shareholders often do as well.

http://www.businesspundit.com/good-work-environment-higher-r...

I don't know if the data is significant, but it's certainly worth nothing.

Re: How to go down with style

#16

Post by dnene » Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 3:37 PM UTC

nihilocrat wrote: post #11

mixmax wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but the managements sole responsibility is to make money for the shareholders. Not for the employees.

Welcome to Capitalism! Bend over! To clarify: I think it's really a sad state of affairs when the people who commit most of their waking hours to a company and depend on their salary for day-to-day living aren't the ones who are paid first. Everyone knows: Bros (employees) before 'hos (shareholders).

Ok. Here's a hypothetical (actually no longer such a hypothetical scenario). The shareholders are the tax payers in a financial institution where the employees have been quite handsomely paid till now. Who gets paid first - employees or shareholders ?

Re: How to go down with style

#17

Post by blurry » Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 3:39 PM UTC

I might get downvoted for this but what the hell. Did you effing have to mention the younger girlfriend prize while talking about honor of all things?

You just made me and every other female/over 30 reader feel like shit. If you think we all get worthless as we grow older, have the decency of keeping it to yourself. Especially if you are going to expound the moral virtues of treating people right.

"Think twice before passing forward your pain, be it by inaction or by delusion" indeed.

Re: How to go down with style

#18

Post by alecco » Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 3:57 PM UTC

blurry wrote: post #17

I might get downvoted for this but what the hell. Did you effing have to mention the younger girlfriend prize while talking about honor of all things? You just made me and every other female/over 30 reader feel like shit. If you think we all get worthless as we grow older, have the decency of keeping it to yourself. Especially if you are going to expound the moral virtues of treating people right. "Think twice before…

Sorry about that. My point was the greedy wife left him when he most needed her.

The girlfriend was a successful entrepreneur all by herself. And she was 40. Far from a young trophy girlfriend.

And I think it's wrong to measure how much you are worth by looks in the first place. My mistake was mentioning age, but note I didn't say she was prettier (she wasn't.)

(And you got my up vote, you are right.)

Re: How to go down with style

#19

Post by j2d2 » Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 5:05 PM UTC

alecco wrote: post #18

blurry wrote: post #17

I might get downvoted for this but what the hell. Did you effing have to mention the younger girlfriend prize while talking about honor of all things? You just made me and every other female/over 30 reader feel like shit. If you think we all get worthless as we grow older, have the decency of keeping it to yourself. Especially if you are going to expound the moral virtues of treating people right. "Think twice before…

Sorry about that. My point was the greedy wife left him when he most needed her. The girlfriend was a successful entrepreneur all by herself. And she was 40. Far from a young trophy girlfriend. And I think it's wrong to measure how much you are worth by looks in the first place. My mistake was mentioning age, but note I didn't say she was prettier (she wasn't.) (And you got my up vote, you are right.)

but note I didn't say she was prettier (she wasn't.)

now you did.

just sayin'

Re: How to go down with style

#20

Post by mixmax » Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 5:21 PM UTC

netcan wrote: post #12

mixmax wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but the managements sole responsibility is to make money for the shareholders. Not for the employees.

Yes, but that wouldn't mean they're expected to murder & steal on behalf of shareholders if opportunity presented itself. That money is owed to employees by shareholders.

Within the law obviously ;-)