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

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#911

Post by Rinzler89 »

chasd00 wrote: post #652
apantel wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who want to make money above all else are pursuing that because they think that will make them happy. It’s just their idea of the path that will get them to happiness. They see Mark Zuckerberg wakeboarding at his Lake Tahoe retreat and think, ‘That’s happiness — having billions of dollars, not having to worry about meeting basic needs, being able to do what you want.’

i heard a quote a long time ago "money won't buy you happiness but it's more comfortable to cry in a Mercedes".

Forget the Mercedes. Money won't bring you happiness and neither will a Mercedes, but in case of illness or living discomfort (not from overwork but from other stuff out of your control, like needing physiotherapy, braces, prosthetics, dental implants, or living in a rough, loud, polluted neighborhood etc) you'll have a much easier time taking care of yourself and escaping discomfort if you have money vs not having money.

Having money helps a lot in making yourself comfortable when life makes you uncomfortable.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#912

Post by Rinzler89 »

stavros wrote: post #694
pavlov wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was recently in Lisbon and was surprised that an espresso still costs 70 cents despite the influx of tourists and expats. If it's the same in Greece, I can easily see how an unemployed person can afford to hang out.

It used to be 2.5 EUR or so, but now it's risen due to inflation. Keep in mind that in Greece, your family will also support you if you're unemployed, so it's not uncommon for parents to share their pension or children to share their salary with the family.

>Keep in mind that in Greece, your family will also support you if you're unemployed

That's cool, if you have a family nearby or you're a in a good relationship with yours. Sucks for those who do not, which is why social safety nets are more important. You pay taxes but in case you fall down, the safety net should catch you make sure you don't end up on the streets if you don't have a family nearby.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#913

Post by stavros »

Rinzler89 wrote: post #912
stavros wrote: post #694

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It used to be 2.5 EUR or so, but now it's risen due to inflation. Keep in mind that in Greece, your family will also support you if you're unemployed, so it's not uncommon for parents to share their pension or children to share their salary with the family.

>Keep in mind that in Greece, your family will also support you if you're unemployed That's cool, if you have a family nearby or you're a in a good relationship with yours. Sucks for those who do not, which is why social safety nets are more important. You pay taxes but in case you fall down, the safety net should catch you make sure you don't end up on the streets if you don't have a family nearby.

Again, that's Us-centric thinking. If you're unemployed and don't have family nearby, you either move there to save on costs, or they send you money. There are very few people here who have a relationship with their families so bad that the family won't support them, because it's a social expectation. That's the definition of a social safety net, as it's a safety net that society institutes.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#914

Post by Rinzler89 »

stavros wrote: post #913
Rinzler89 wrote: post #912

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Keep in mind that in Greece, your family will also support you if you're unemployed That's cool, if you have a family nearby or you're a in a good relationship with yours. Sucks for those who do not, which is why social safety nets are more important. You pay taxes but in case you fall down, the safety net should catch you make sure you don't end up on the streets if you don't have a family nearby.

Again, that's Us-centric thinking. If you're unemployed and don't have family nearby, you either move there to save on costs, or they send you money. There are very few people here who have a relationship with their families so bad that the family won't support them, because it's a social expectation. That's the definition of a social safety net, as it's a safety net that society institutes.

>Again, that's Us-centric thinking.

Not it isn't, I'm European from a European centric thinking. What you're talking about applies if young people choose to continue living in the same village where they were born and their family still lives, but that hasn't been the case in a long time. Young people (in Europe) move to big metro areas for university or jobs, and often, especially in Greece, they move to other EU countries.

Your family from some Greek village, won't be able to come take care of you in Amsterdam, and most likely they won't have the money to support your NL living expenses from their Greek pensions to help you out, nor will you moving from Amsterdam back to some Greek village help you out too much since there's no jobs in your niche there, or maybe even no jobs at all so now you're broke in Greece instead of broke in Amsterdam but with less job options.

Your PoV scenario is just unrealistic in the world of today and only applies in the traditionalistic tribal village lifestyle that's more or less dead nowadays and few live it. Sure, some lucked out and were born in afluent big metro areas with universities and jobs meaning they always have their family close by, but that's more the exception rather than the rule. If you look at international cities like Munich or Berlin, most people living there weren't actually born there or have family there, they just moved there for study/work. How can family help them then?

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#915

Post by stavros »

Rinzler89 wrote: post #914
stavros wrote: post #913

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, that's Us-centric thinking. If you're unemployed and don't have family nearby, you either move there to save on costs, or they send you money. There are very few people here who have a relationship with their families so bad that the family won't support them, because it's a social expectation. That's the definition of a social safety net, as it's a safety net that society institutes.

>Again, that's Us-centric thinking. Not it isn't, I'm European from a European centric thinking. What you're talking about applies if young people choose to continue living in the same village where they were born and their family still lives, but that hasn't been the case in a long time. Young people (in Europe) move to big metro areas for university or jobs, and often, especially in Greece, they move to other EU co…

I kind of feel like you can't lecture someone from a small Greek village on what life for people from small greek villages is like unless you've lived there.

I know plenty of people who emigrated to the Netherlands, I don't know anyone who was poor and emigrated there (they don't speak enough foreign languages to have a hope) or that lived there for more than a few months while unable to get a job

Who are these people who go be unemployed in a high CoL country?

Anyway, that's my opinion, and trying to correct people from other cultures that tell me my opinions on my culture cannot be right is tiring, so I'll leave it here.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#916

Post by aleph_minus_one »

rangerelf wrote: post #752
aleph_minus_one wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's much more at play than just "cooperatives are not any better". Cooperatives don't get as much funding from investors because investors won't be owning a larger share of them, and taking their returns, they instead invest in a traditional company because then they can extract as much as possible from their investments. Unions should put their money where their mouth is and invest in cooperatives.

Unions aren't there for "Ownership" of companies or cooperatives, they're for improvement of member's work lives, it can be training, worker contract negotiations, as go-between when dealing with management or owners, etc.

If an investment into a work cooperative improves the life of the members, it does serve these stated goals.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#917

Post by tticvs »

> That’s right, this manufacturing company will become a unicorn this year—one of only 6,000 companies in the world earning more than $1 billion in revenue.

This is not what "unicorn" means. I do not think this author knows much about what they are writing about.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#918

Post by bookaway »

sotix wrote: post #431
stavros wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then maybe "taking over the market" is a bad metric, and we should be optimizing for making a company that makes the workers' lives better. The US cultural bias is showing here, as it's assumed that profit is above all else, and a company that forgoes profit to make workers happier must thus be less good. The vast majority of people in companies are workers. Let's stop optimizing for owner wealth and start optimizing…

> The US cultural bias is showing here, as it's assumed that profit is above all else I asked my Greek teacher what they biggest change she experienced moving to the US was, and she said that in Greece, her community prioritized happiness above all else, but everyone she met in the US prioritized making money. I also asked her what the financial crisis was like in Greece, and she said that you couldn’t find an empty…

I wouldn't start paying attention until you got answers to the same questions for Spain and France.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#919

Post by cultofmetatron »

geodel wrote: post #497
sotix wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The US cultural bias is showing here, as it's assumed that profit is above all else I asked my Greek teacher what they biggest change she experienced moving to the US was, and she said that in Greece, her community prioritized happiness above all else, but everyone she met in the US prioritized making money. I also asked her what the financial crisis was like in Greece, and she said that you couldn’t find an empty…

So "Greek are lazy" is condescending but everyone in US prioritized making money is just fact? BTW there must be some interesting story that your Greek teacher had to move to US and deprioritize happiness.

I'm an American currently living in greece for the past month.

Both are more or less factual statements.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#920

Post by pie_flavor »

consteval wrote: post #794
pie_flavor wrote: post #720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how are new ones minted?

By luck and status. Right place right time. They have some experience, and they just so happen to know X, Y, Z (probably because their dad knew X-1, Y-1, Z-1 and so on) so they get in. Maybe they went to harvard or something.

What opportunity manifests at the right place and right time? What's an example of this? And if it's based on knowledge and experience and an acquirable credential, then we're right back to square 1.
Post reply on HN