• driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    1 day ago

    In the capitalist system, the investors deserve all the profits because they’re the ones risking everything, or something like this, I’m not an economists.

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Yes, and the workers risk nothing, or something like that, I’m told. 😂

      • rigatti@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        1 day ago

        I get the sentiment and I’m all for workers sharing in profits, but what do they really risk by working at a company? Sure, the company can fail and they might be stuck in a bad situation, but shareholders and owners probably have it worse in that scenario, right?

        • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          59 minutes ago

          Workers risk a few things, depending on the job:

          • Health
          • Time
          • Opportunity (could be working someplace else that’s better)

          These have a lot of dimension to them, including how one quantifies what “pay” actually is/for, what legal restrictions there are around taking the job (e.g. non-compete, non-arbitration), work/life balance, and so on.

          Risk comes into play where the employee takes a bet that the job won’t destroy their health, work only as much as is absolutely necessary, and have taken a position at the optimal balance of responsibility, personal growth, retirement prospects, and income. It’s a risk since there are substantial barriers to changing to a new job, so you can wind up “stuck” in a bad position, but can’t know until after you start.

          • rigatti@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            16 hours ago

            They don’t lose their life if a company goes under though? I don’t mean to diminish the contribution of workers. I think they need a much higher share of what companies take in, and they need more voices at their companies.

            • Alaik@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              22 minutes ago

              I bet there’s far more cases of homeless and suicide due to a lost job than due to a shareholder losing value in one company’s stock.

        • pebbles@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          23 hours ago

          Depends, are you considering the fact that 90% of stocks are owned by the top 10% of Americans? Also are you considering that being in the top 10% means you likely have rich friends and family that could bail you out? I think black rock is going to be fine.

          Most businesses aren’t like my friends parents little Chinese restraunt.

          To me using the, “think of the shareholders” line is silly for a reason. The biggest privilege is the privilege to make mistakes without becoming impoverished. Workers have it much harder in that respect.

          Edit: grammer

          • rigatti@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            16 hours ago

            You make a good point that the shareholder/business owner class is more likely to have better safety nets. So from that standpoint, if the absolute value of their loss is greater, it could have a much less significant impact on their lives.

            I think you may be underestimating the amount of small businesses though, at least in the US.