Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Every company should be owned by its employees

elysian.press

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 1001 posts

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#31

Post by oleg_antonyan »

heckerhut wrote: post #4
oleg_antonyan wrote: post #3

It's insane how socialism is growing in the west after defeat of soviet union

more nuance wouldn’t hurt

The headline itself literally repeats Marxists theory: the means of production belong to workers aka proletartiat. Inside the article they oppose this working class to "evil rich CEOs" aka bourgeoisie. I won't even go deeper to unrelated to the article topics like "evil imperialism" and other nowadays popular in the west ideas used by Lenin&co hundred years ago. This crap cannibalizes the very foundation of the success of the western civilization and many people fall into this - that's insane to me

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#33

Post by glandium »

dan-robertson wrote: post #22
sofixa wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not every public company pays its employees in stocks/stock options/RSU/etc.

If the company is public, one can simulate the scheme by buying their stock, I guess. Taxes may be different and phrased like that, it seems weirdly risky to buy more of the thing you’re most exposed to (if the company lays you off, the stock may be down too).

> if the company lays you off, the stock may be down too

Don't most layoffs make the stock go up?

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#35

Post by defrost »

oleg_antonyan wrote: post #3

It's insane how socialism is growing in the west after defeat of soviet union

Did the Soviet Union ever actually practice effective social policy and embrace control from the lowest working level or did they just run with epilet backed dull grey committees with a promise they'd eventually get to actual socialism and communism post Stalin and all that not socialism stuff?

I'm no fan of the USSR but they're arguably no more socialist than the National Socialism of the Nazis.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#36

Post by dheera »

xmprt wrote: post #18

I think the most surprising thing about trends in modern executive class pay is just how steep it is compared to the median employee. It makes me wonder why shareholders outside the company are happy with it. For example, the Boeing CEO made 22M in 2022 and 32M in 2023. I'd argue that he did a much worse job in 2023 than in 2022 but somehow got paid almost 50% more. Even Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, is "only" being p…

> Even Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, is "only" being paid $34M in 2024.

26.6M of that was stock. In percentage terms it's just equity that he effectively handed out before as a founder and is getting back in return for growing the company even more. I don't see a problem with it, considering that the median employee takes almost zero risks and can leave whenever they want.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#37

Post by ffgjgf1 »

sofixa wrote: post #14
talldatethrow wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People can absolutely afford houses. They can so easily afford houses that they buy them quickly, often for over asking. If people couldn't afford houses, they would sit unsold until sellers lowered the price to a price someone could afford. Luckily so many people can afford houses in most areas they don't have to do that.

You're confusing some entities, often private equity or similar corporations buying assets, often to rent, sometimes just to park, being able to buy, and the general public being able to afford to buy. In many desirable metro areas, you need two high incomes (two people in tech or lawyers or finance) to be able to afford to buy anything. What about everyone else?

> often private equity or similar corporations buying assets

What proportion of housing do they own? I would assume it’s pretty small if still significant.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#38

Post by TechDebtDevin »

dheera wrote: post #36
xmprt wrote: post #18

I think the most surprising thing about trends in modern executive class pay is just how steep it is compared to the median employee. It makes me wonder why shareholders outside the company are happy with it. For example, the Boeing CEO made 22M in 2022 and 32M in 2023. I'd argue that he did a much worse job in 2023 than in 2022 but somehow got paid almost 50% more. Even Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, is "only" being p…

> Even Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, is "only" being paid $34M in 2024. 26.6M of that was stock. In percentage terms it's just equity that he effectively handed out before as a founder and is getting back in return for growing the company even more. I don't see a problem with it, considering that the median employee takes almost zero risks and can leave whenever they want.

Investing your talent and time in a company is a potential risk.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#39

Post by yamumsahoe »

it's a no for me.

it's like the idea of taxing the rich. it sounds great until you become one of those rich people.

this idea sounds great until you become a founder or an investor yourself.

these are laws, systems, and regulations that sets the first movers and real builders apart from the average laymen. all comes down to risk/reward incentives.

it's poor people telling the rich how to spend and allocate their money. the rich people will just say "the fuck do you know about it?"

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#40

Post by daedrdev »

If you have every company owned by its employees, it can cause big problems for society. There are many arguments to make, such as how investment and hiring would decrease but an interesting one is that it prevents people from de risking their savings.

Normally, if your company goes under your savings which are invested in a wide range of companies will be fjne. But since we cant invest in other companies your savings are the ownership of your company. When when it goes under your life is ruined enron style.

Its fine to do this if you want, but if this compnay in the article goes under, those people will have lost millions. And dont force me to be an owner, I really dont want to be one and resent people who want to force me to own part of the company I work for.

Post reply on HN