return2ozmaWatch: Billionaire CEO says unemployment 'has to jump' to put 'arrogant' workers in their place
Joshua NozziEat the rich.
FuglyDuckDon’t eat junk food. Compost.
sydfloydboyCan we feed them to the wolves?
Pretty sure they shouldn’t be eating junk food either.
Compost, spread it on a farm. We can leave a row up for the deer and let the wolves have some easy-mode fun,
seathruI’m hungry.
🍽️
Time for us to all agree if we’re on the jury for a murderer of a billionaire; there is reasonable doubt.
CH3DD4R_G0B-L1NJury nullification is better. “Yeah, they did it, but we don’t see it as a crime”
Shadywack“Temporary insanity, acquitted”
FYI insanity plea is arguably the worse sentence if successful because you’re sent to a secure medical facility and can be held indefinitely until they decide you are “better”
Arghblarg“Obvious crime of passion”
Flying SquidThis is going to be a very novel use of the Twinkie defense.
RootiestHe may have eaten that billionaire, but it was for the good of the people so we’re gonna let this one slide
XillyDisgusting.
TransplantedSconieSomeone needs to punch Dumbo in his gob.
glowieSounds and looks like a douchebag
Sounds like the cries from a future bodybag
Tim Gurner, the founder and CEO of the Gurner Group
Landlord. He’s a landlord.
Explains so much.
driving_croonerThis is the same guy who said that millennials can’t afford houses because avocado toasts?
Is he really the origin of that whole thing?
Looks like yes, is the same mf again.
He went from millionaire to billionaire in 6 years.
Apparently we as a society love people like him and reward him as much as we possibly can
Certainly puts a bright smile on my face /s
Sometimes I get real sad that people would destroy their rentals and pour cement down the sink.
But then I wonder if these rentals are owned by this a-hole and well… good.
Sounds like someone’s previous policies led to a brain drain in their business and now he’s hoping other employers will blindly follow this rhetoric (and shoot themselves in the foot) so he can poach their employees for his company gain.
I’m fine with billionaires eating each other so we don’t have to.
This the people that work for his company need to learn the definition of Secessio plebis and execute it.
JeenaHe’s just saying what the Bourgeoisie has been thinking and doing since the beginning of capitalism, nothing new to see here.
HegarElites have been saying this well before capitalism. Capitalism sucks, but heirarchy is the problem.
We didn’t have elites before capitalism
The French would like to have a word with you?
Before Capitalism, there was Aristocracy. It sucked. It got corrupt. So we replaced it with something else that sucked and was corrupt.
Is it your belief that ancient Egypt was capitalist, or that the people interred in pyramids were not elites?
Just curious which of those you think is true.
Janet Yellen wrote a memo in 1996 about this.
theintercept.com/…/unemployment-inflation-janet-y…
The rich want workers to have weak bargaining power. It’s class warfare, plain and simple.
Correct. This is why I have a problem with people (ironically, mostly poor) who call non-working people lazy. It’s not laziness to insist on making somewhere near the value you produce. If a company makes $250,000/yr off an employee, it’s unethical to nickel and dime then of making $30,000 to $40,000 or judge them for not working for $30,000.
It’s not laziness to insist on making somewhere near the value you produce
This is not why most non-working people don’t work. Mostly it is childcare costs or disabilities.
If a company makes $250,000/yr off an employee, it’s unethical to nickel and dime then of making $30,000 to $40,000
People are paid based on the market value of their skills, not the value they provide the company. You sell your skills. If you don’t have skills that cannot be found elsewhere (e.g. you do manual labor), your bargaining power is diluted because literally anyone can do your job.
This is the reason unions were invented.
This is not why most non-working people don’t work. Mostly it is childcare costs or disabilities.
Fair point, but for most it still amounts to making less than you work.
People are paid based on the market value of their skills, not the value they provide the company.
Which is a breach of the EMH, and evidence the whole process fails. The more the Efficient Market Hypothesis is false, the more employees not having more leverage is a failure of capitalism. If goods are not traded somewhere near “real value”, then supply and demand go from being the effective tool capitalists claim to being downright wasteful at best, and Police-Theft at worst.
And for the record, many people ARE paid based on the market value of their skills. Just ask fishermen. It’s just still a minority payment structure because companies have no problem manipulating the labor pool, taking short-term losses to keep wages down. If you go back less than 100 years, they were doing it as blatantly as having towns where all goods in and out had to go through them and employees were paid in credit for those goods.
This is the reason unions were invented.
Unions are, and always will be, the small band-aid for big problems. I support them (though I’ve seen a few shifty ones who used non-voting workers as leverage for benefits for voting ones), but they will never solve the problem. A well-governed economy is one where the unions sit back and go “well shit, we got nothing to ask for because we already have it, and if we ask for more it’ll bankrupt the employer”. I’d like to point reference again to many classes of fishermen, paid in shares. You got 18 year old kids making $200,000/yr “unskilled”, NOT because there’s nobody else willing to do the job for less, but because they’re paid by tradition based upon the value they create.
Which is a breach of the EMH, and evidence the whole process fails
No it isn’t, because,
If goods are not traded somewhere near “real value”, then supply and demand go from being the effective tool capitalists claim to being downright wasteful at best, and Police-Theft at worst.
This just shows your misunderstanding of the concept of value.
A well-governed economy is one where the unions sit back and go “well shit, we got nothing to ask for because we already have it, and if we ask for more it’ll bankrupt the employer”
Here we largely agree. Unions are kind of like the LGBTQ or deaf communities, in that ideally they would have no reason to exist.
Just because you don’t agree (or didn’t understand) with what I was saying about the concept of value doesn’t mean I am misunderstanding it. You don’t have a monopoly on how value works.
Have a great day. I don’t intend to reply again.
I don’t intend to reply again.
Always cracks me up when people say this. Peace out bro, thanks for not sharing more misinformation. Have a great day yourself.
I would say that he’s an aristocrat complaining about the uppity bourgeois. Many of the tech worker he’s talking about are upper middle class.
The modern usage of the term Bourgeoisie typically does not reference “the middle class” but “the owning class”. The wealth distribution of capitalism has changed since the 1780s.
Remember, in France there was a time where being a successful business owner had a ceiling because you couldn’t easily buy power with money, so you were “middle-class”.
Billionaires need to touch grass
You mean buried under it?
Sure. If you also bury grass with them
Yeah, touch grass as their corpse falls into the grave.
stopthatgirl7I’d prefer if they tried to touch the bottom of the sea in an OceanGate submersible.
Be under grass more like
As global demographics begin their decline the value of labour can only come up. Plus the more specialised the workers the more power they possess. This guy is a delusional moron who’s fighting inevitable changes.
In order to get 40% unemployment they have to assume massive losses, and we know they do anything to prevent small losses, so threat is emptied than his brain.
Just read the article, and holy shit is this guy delusional. 50 percent would cause massive unrest, if not total collapse of many branches of the economy. The fact he wasn’t laughed out of the room speaks volumes about these billionare circlejerk events.
Not too mention he seems to be confused as to why business owners don’t already just layoff a ton of people to send some sort of message and put them in their place.
Hmmm… I wonder why that hasn’t happened… its almost as if there was some reason business owners would actually need good workers… That can’t be tho, must be something else… 🤔
Businesses don’t need the working class dolly, they take on the burden of employing them out of the goodness of their hearts.
jkjk 😂
It was like someone here on Lemmy who was talking about how it was the taxpayers who made ‘meaningful contributions’ to society. I was like, “what about the people who make your food and clean your hotel room when you go on that luxury vacation?”
There’s this weird balance with businesses. While narcissists and sociopaths make the best business owners, many successful business owners are merely “unpleasant”.
Look at Musk. If he were competent (and the Twitter thing wasn’t originally just an attempt to manipulate stock prices), the whole “buy and gut” attitude can be quite effective at making money. Dump compliance folks. Dump critical personnel and let them “figure it the fuck out”, etc. I’ve seen businesses run by sociopaths do things like that all the time.
And hell, let’s look at Musk a bit more. Everyone talks about how much money Twitter is losing. Nobody is talking about how much money Musk is losing (or not losing). First, a full 1/3 of the purchase price are loans in Twitter’s name (!!!). That puts Musk on the hook for $30b directly… which he paid in equity of other companies (making the purchase tax-sheltered).
Burned utterly to the ground (the product and the staff), 2023 might be their first profitable year since 2019 (albeit as a MUCH smaller company), and I’m guessing Musk is collecting a fair chunk of change in salary and bonuses. Ironically, I’m guessing he’s still going to amortize the “losses” as he builds his own ROI.
Yes, a better leader would have created a successful Twitter. And YES, Musk never really wanted to spend that much on it. But I firmly believe he’s taking it to the bank anyway.
And as horrific as most CEO’s are, a lot of them don’t have this type of behavior in them. Which is the other side of the “reason business owners need good workers”. Not every CEO is willing to embrace “profit-focused mass-layoffs”
It would cause a literal revolution.
If you read the article, he says a 40% increase in unemployment. That would like (for simple math) increasing the rate from 5% to 7%.
The current unemployment rate in the US is 3.8% and Aus it’s 3.5%. So he wants them at 5.3% and 4.9%, respectively.
Fuckface.
We need to see some pain in the economy. We need to remind people that they work for the employer, not the other way around... There's been a systemic change where the employees feel that the employer is extremely lucky to have them, as opposed to the other way around.
So said every vicious aristocrat throughout history.
Whether owner of slaves, serfs or workers - elites always believe it's their right to harm on others. Eat the rich, put us out of their misery.
Bet with his neck under a guillotine he’d change his tune.
I like when they don’t and just keep bitching right up until a few seconds after they’ve been decapitated.
Makes it more exciting for the onlookers
For extra fun, keep telling them that “at any point the Governor might call with a last minute reprieve.”
Killing people is not okay. You should treat others the way you would want to be treated yourself.