Comment Re:Obligatory Google is awesome thread of the week (Score 1) 322
"Now, after faithfully giving 15-20 years of their life to bettering your company you would just cut them off to go start over somewhere else?"
If the gov't allowed it, most businessmen would. Very few consumers (outside of a few industries) care about the ethics of the company they're (usually indirectly) buying from. Most of us buy from China (I sure do). Most of us don't have time to look up the history of every corporation we buy from. Shareholders... forget about it, most of them use mutual funds. Because of that, you have a choice: make more money, or be ethical. You or I might go for the latter, but our company would eventually fail or get eaten up (outside of a few industries).
"Now.. if they cannot or will not learn to perform a new task... then sure, go ahead and can them."
The problem here is the company gets to choose the task. So they'll gradually make the person work harder and more hours for the same money. If the guy leaves, good we wanted to fire him anyway, and if he stays, also good because he's overworked. It creates a sort of "race to the bottom" among poorer people that is basically the biggest pitfall of uncontrolled capitalism (or overpopulation possibly).
The rest here is just rant.
There's lot of gov't regulations that could be put into place to help; incentives for hiring, penalties for "needless" layoffs, etc. In my opinion the most important in terms of controlling unemployment would be incentives for shorter hours, but that's just one of many, and I'm not an expert.
But wait! The companies with the most money to lobby (bribe) congress, bribe media, buy ad slots, etc. are the unethical ones. And the only regulation they're big on is corporate welfare. Damn.
I guess this is what happens when we have a really stable society. It's awesome that we have one, but it makes it harder to put any real pressure on top officials in government (who are supposed to, in theory, put pressure on corporation management). They'd be all like "what are you gonna do, rebel?" and we'd be all like "nah guess not" and they'd be all like "yeah that's right" and we'd be all like "Well we'll just do subtle things that will hopefully piss you off and write music about it" and they'd be all like "yeah whatever" etc.[/bum review]
Luckily, there are elections to balance the power.
And a good laugh was had by all.
If the gov't allowed it, most businessmen would. Very few consumers (outside of a few industries) care about the ethics of the company they're (usually indirectly) buying from. Most of us buy from China (I sure do). Most of us don't have time to look up the history of every corporation we buy from. Shareholders... forget about it, most of them use mutual funds. Because of that, you have a choice: make more money, or be ethical. You or I might go for the latter, but our company would eventually fail or get eaten up (outside of a few industries).
"Now.. if they cannot or will not learn to perform a new task... then sure, go ahead and can them."
The problem here is the company gets to choose the task. So they'll gradually make the person work harder and more hours for the same money. If the guy leaves, good we wanted to fire him anyway, and if he stays, also good because he's overworked. It creates a sort of "race to the bottom" among poorer people that is basically the biggest pitfall of uncontrolled capitalism (or overpopulation possibly).
The rest here is just rant.
There's lot of gov't regulations that could be put into place to help; incentives for hiring, penalties for "needless" layoffs, etc. In my opinion the most important in terms of controlling unemployment would be incentives for shorter hours, but that's just one of many, and I'm not an expert.
But wait! The companies with the most money to lobby (bribe) congress, bribe media, buy ad slots, etc. are the unethical ones. And the only regulation they're big on is corporate welfare. Damn.
I guess this is what happens when we have a really stable society. It's awesome that we have one, but it makes it harder to put any real pressure on top officials in government (who are supposed to, in theory, put pressure on corporation management). They'd be all like "what are you gonna do, rebel?" and we'd be all like "nah guess not" and they'd be all like "yeah that's right" and we'd be all like "Well we'll just do subtle things that will hopefully piss you off and write music about it" and they'd be all like "yeah whatever" etc.[/bum review]
Luckily, there are elections to balance the power.
And a good laugh was had by all.