So what you’re saying is that if I, as a semi-independent contractor, should generate millions of dollars of profit for a company that I shouldn’t get a reasonable percentage of that, but that I should just be glad that I was given the opportunity to work?
Or are you saying that when my initiatives, come up with by me, presented to the customer, approved, signed off on, and then followed through with and delivered, that generates new opportunities for millions of dollars a year of revenue growth for both the company I contract with and the company I’ve contracted for, that I should not be paid commensurately to the value that I provided, but rather, I should count myself lucky that I have a job at all?
I don’t know, man, that’s pretty anti-worker of you. I don’t think we could be friends if that’s how you think.
I think the profits of the company should be disconnected from the profits of the employee unless it’s explicitly a cooperative. However, and this is important I think, I think that companies shouldn’t generate millions of dollars of untethered profit in the first place.
Well, I understand that you may think that, but the fact is that it’s happening.
So would you rather the corporations generate millions of dollars worth of untethered profit and not pay the workers that made that money for them, or would you rather them generate millions of dollars of untethered profits and pay the workers that generated the money for them?
Not trying to be facetious, but that’s a bit like saying, “people are dying in car accidents so would you rather the cars come with heated seats or cigarette lighters?” It doesn’t matter what is or isn’t happening, it’s not connected to anything else in this thread.
I think you’re wrong if you’re not being facetious then, because people are going to drive cars as long as cars are available, and there’s nothing quibbling about it can do about that.
So would you rather that employers pay a significant and fair portion of the profits to the people that generated them or would you rather that employees be grateful that they have a job at all because they’re going to make that money and the question is do the workers that generate the money deserve a fair share of it?
If I make my boss $10 million, am I not entitled to $500,000 of that?
Can you explain how that is fair in your opinion? Why do you think I should not be paid $500k for my work when you don’t even know what I do?
I mean, these kinds of recruitment offers are like offering Warren Buffett a job as the assistant general manager of a rural dollar general.
I’m sure he would be very good at the task, but you can’t afford him.
Because I don’t think anyone should be paid $500k for work. It’s too far from the median. There’s nothing more to it than that, really.
So what you’re saying is that if I, as a semi-independent contractor, should generate millions of dollars of profit for a company that I shouldn’t get a reasonable percentage of that, but that I should just be glad that I was given the opportunity to work?
Or are you saying that when my initiatives, come up with by me, presented to the customer, approved, signed off on, and then followed through with and delivered, that generates new opportunities for millions of dollars a year of revenue growth for both the company I contract with and the company I’ve contracted for, that I should not be paid commensurately to the value that I provided, but rather, I should count myself lucky that I have a job at all?
I don’t know, man, that’s pretty anti-worker of you. I don’t think we could be friends if that’s how you think.
I think the profits of the company should be disconnected from the profits of the employee unless it’s explicitly a cooperative. However, and this is important I think, I think that companies shouldn’t generate millions of dollars of untethered profit in the first place.
Well, I understand that you may think that, but the fact is that it’s happening.
So would you rather the corporations generate millions of dollars worth of untethered profit and not pay the workers that made that money for them, or would you rather them generate millions of dollars of untethered profits and pay the workers that generated the money for them?
Not trying to be facetious, but that’s a bit like saying, “people are dying in car accidents so would you rather the cars come with heated seats or cigarette lighters?” It doesn’t matter what is or isn’t happening, it’s not connected to anything else in this thread.
I think you’re wrong if you’re not being facetious then, because people are going to drive cars as long as cars are available, and there’s nothing quibbling about it can do about that.
So would you rather that employers pay a significant and fair portion of the profits to the people that generated them or would you rather that employees be grateful that they have a job at all because they’re going to make that money and the question is do the workers that generate the money deserve a fair share of it?
If I make my boss $10 million, am I not entitled to $500,000 of that?