A couple of quotes on industry and business practices

And with a decent screenplay, it could serve as a cautionary tale.

Or you could go the James Cameron route and not bother with a screenplay at all.

And? So what? Might there still be wisdom in the quote? I'd take my business elsewhere for other reasons, but why shouldn't I myself follow the advice if it seems sound, aside from my hatred for the man who said it?

It is very easy to be giving and altruistic when you're making money hand over fist.

I'm waiting to hear such things from a businessman who is barely making ends meet and wondering how he can possibly avoid bankruptcy before the end of the year.

So only failed entrepreneurs give good advice?

Depends on how important you think the right to organize is.

Ford paid and treated his employees very well, but when they tried to organize a union he hired the Pinkertons to beat the shit out of them on some bridge.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely, money is power, money corrupts.

Thomas Watson's IBM wasn't all sunshine and rainbows.

who says money is evil?
I think the point is that the gulf between top and bottom shouldn't be so far that one can't even see the other shore.

fuck the auto workers, as I've already alluded to in that range of the overpaid middle class... I'm talking about the poor schlub working in the parts plant supplying their jobs at minimum wage for the last 8 years and his deserving a bigger piece of the pie. enough to pay the rent, enjoy basic nutrition, and maybe go see a movie once or twice a month, maybe even bank a few bucks to improve his life. that's food and free time as I'm referring to it. Not to own a new 72" tv every two years and last years model Camry along with drug/dental. I'm arguing for where a 40 hour week brings a person up to the poverty line.

Oh, and maybe some realistic chance of negotiating a higher wage over time based on merit.

There's a bunch of labour law around that perhaps, but them's the basics. I expect a job should be paying a person enough to be able to maintain his health to continue performing his job. Izzat so fucking hard to not try and twist?

2-I'm gonna go with short sighted greed and a robber baron mentality.

"Deserving" is pure bullshit bingo. It has no fixed, objective value, so it represents whatever your whims say it does, and therfore has no useful meaning in a discussion like this.

Of course you do. That academic "labor theory of value" bullshit is a symptom of your disease.

oh, do fuck off with that objectivist tripe. "deserving" is interchangable with "is owed for services rendered".

to be employed under the prospect of diminishing returns for your labour as you get better at it is completely illogical-and at it's heart, a form of fraud. I get less as my employer gets more? fuck that.

You don't have to be an "objectivist" to use the word "objective."

Then you're conceding that, if you can't afford it on your paycheck, you don't "deserve" it.

So go work somewhere else, or start your own business.

The "it" is equitable pay for quality work. You don't even know what the topic is.

September 25, 2013: Uncle Albert goes the full KIRK1ADM...

Then we're back to bullshit bingo. You do not get to hold the entire world to your personal definition of "equitable."

Unless you're CEO of a Fortune 400.

Explain how such an individual holds the entire world to their personal definition of equitable.

It's not "personal"; it's corporate. They control your world; that's sufficient.

Then your CEO example was not a response to anything I said.

And spare me your IDLE, anti-corporate posturing while you sit and type on the products of corporation, in a house financed by a one, with your belly full of shit you had to buy somewhere. The worst thing anyone could do to you is remove your lamented corporate rulers. I might not die, but you wouldn't last a fucking day.

Because you don't get how the system works, and you don't want to know.

None of them are Fortune 400s. Your facts are uncoordinated.

You mean I don't buy into your bullshit take on it.

Explain how you think a CEO is holding the entire world to their personal definition of equitable. You can't, because they're not. You were just hoping your bullshit would go unchallenged.

So you trace the corporate lineage of every product you buy? Bullshit. You rest on rationalizations for why your dealings with corporate whoremongers are devoid of any guilty implications.

Now, you will tap dance and say something about me reading your mind, because that's easier.

Oh, now it's one CEO?

You were the one who brought up "CEO". I don't care if it's one or a gaggle. Back up your bullshit claim that they hold the world to their sense of equitability. Or, you know, do the unthinkable and just admit your assertion was based on nothing but a whole pile of assumptions on what "everyone should agree" major corporations do to the world, what constitutes "holding us to their definition," and acceptance of the OPINION that it is
impossible to resist whatever influence they exert.

*edit* Mangled this in an attempt to quote it.

No, I don't. I think it's remarkably tedious of you to keep moving the goal posts. Please stop.

Couldn't deal with the rest of that post, huh? I accept your surrender.

The first sentence was so duplicitous I saw no point in going further.

Okay, Castle.

NM-you're already dodging this

Bullshit. This paragraph nailed your unspoken thoughts exactly. You just don't want to admit what you had no chance to bury in 10 pages of prevarication and tap-dancing. Maybe spacetard can answer for you.