Listen, every time you work with say 10 or 20 people, people start to disorganize. You can have a Fishing Club or organize a LAN party and it’ll probably happen. And it becomes kind of obvious that it’d be good to have a person that would have general overview of the thing and they’ll focus to keep the thing on the track, resolve conflicts etc. You want to call that person a leader, boss, cheff, CEO, captain, whatever, but at certain group size it becomes kind of necessary.
This person needs certain skills to be good at it. Is it more complicated than janitor? Probably yes. Should you respect them more than a janitor? No. Should this person have astronomical sallary? No. Should you guilotine this person? No.
A CEO’s competency is measured by how they raise value for the shareholders. This means increasing the rate of exploitation; getting more out of the workers while giving them less.
Shareholders elect a CEO based on expected effect on dividends and share prices (for spherical capitalists in a vacuum, in reality class consciousness, nepotism, etc play into it)
Profit is a function of revenue minus expenses (such as wages); to increase this, you can either get more out of the labor you’re buying or buy that labor at a lower price.
I’m sure you might be able to find a “better” CEO who fails to prioritize profit at the expense of the owners, but capitalists who only pick losers get out competed by more efficient ones.
A manager is a role precisely like that of a janitor and should get the same respect.
They both keep the workplace clean and operational. They don’t actually make the business any money, but are both necessary for ideal operations.
However, only one of them has delusions of grandeur that they’re irreplaceable and ilis generally willing to maim or kill people indirectly to better their personal station. And it isn’t the Janitor.
I know, I know and I know Lemmy’s history with far-left and I know this is memes community. But everytime I see such oversimplified thing it becomes kind of scarry to me. I mean the worst human attrocities in the history started with oversimplified “this group of people = BAD! Even worse, they’re daemons! Kill them!”. So I’m just trynig to calm things down and bring some ballance to the force
Lemmy makes me feel like a centrist despite being much more of a democratic socialist on the issues.
But it’s a battle I try not to fight here since people are extremely intolerant to opinions they disagree with, much more so than Reddit was. I haven’t seen a single nuanced conversation about anything deeper than “how is your day going” since joining up with this place.
The fact that even my most heavily downvoted comments usually have some upvotes too tells me that I’m not shouting into a void. If me trying to make sense of things out in the public makes even one person reconsider their position then I see that as a success. The mobbing and ad-hominem attacks haven’t ever made me change my mind about anything so it’s just wasted time on their part. It’s also a good way to lure out the meanest commentors so that I can block them.
Are you actually a democratic socialist, like Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales? Or are you a social democrat, whose political project consists of begging the capitalist class for more crumbs instead of taking power from them.
Because I never see the former complain about tankies or people going too far left, since we have the same goal, whereas the former become reactionaries the moment anything threatens the structure of capitalism and imperialism.
Yes, but what happens when you have fifteen of these groups? You need a person with the general overview of those groups.
And how about fifteen of those level 2 groups… does the person over those groups have any clue what is done on the actual work level? Should they be guillotined for claiming that without them nothing would be done and therefore they need as much as the cumulative pay under them? (Hint:Yes)
Listen, every time you work with say 10 or 20 people, people start to disorganize. You can have a Fishing Club or organize a LAN party and it’ll probably happen. And it becomes kind of obvious that it’d be good to have a person that would have general overview of the thing and they’ll focus to keep the thing on the track, resolve conflicts etc. You want to call that person a leader, boss, cheff, CEO, captain, whatever, but at certain group size it becomes kind of necessary.
This person needs certain skills to be good at it. Is it more complicated than janitor? Probably yes. Should you respect them more than a janitor? No. Should this person have astronomical sallary? No. Should you guilotine this person? No.
Nobody is complaining about the concept of leadership, it’s that the CEO is responsible to the shareholders, not the workers.
Nor to the customers
Without a competent CEO there’s no workers to be responsible of
You’re missing the point.
A CEO’s competency is measured by how they raise value for the shareholders. This means increasing the rate of exploitation; getting more out of the workers while giving them less.
That is extremely naive and narrow view of the job of a CEO.
Which part are you having trouble with?
Shareholders elect a CEO based on expected effect on dividends and share prices (for spherical capitalists in a vacuum, in reality class consciousness, nepotism, etc play into it)
Profit is a function of revenue minus expenses (such as wages); to increase this, you can either get more out of the labor you’re buying or buy that labor at a lower price.
I’m sure you might be able to find a “better” CEO who fails to prioritize profit at the expense of the owners, but capitalists who only pick losers get out competed by more efficient ones.
A manager is a role precisely like that of a janitor and should get the same respect.
They both keep the workplace clean and operational. They don’t actually make the business any money, but are both necessary for ideal operations.
However, only one of them has delusions of grandeur that they’re irreplaceable and ilis generally willing to maim or kill people indirectly to better their personal station. And it isn’t the Janitor.
Sir, this is Lemmy.
I know, I know and I know Lemmy’s history with far-left and I know this is memes community. But everytime I see such oversimplified thing it becomes kind of scarry to me. I mean the worst human attrocities in the history started with oversimplified “this group of people = BAD! Even worse, they’re daemons! Kill them!”. So I’m just trynig to calm things down and bring some ballance to the force
I don’t disagree.
Lemmy makes me feel like a centrist despite being much more of a democratic socialist on the issues.
But it’s a battle I try not to fight here since people are extremely intolerant to opinions they disagree with, much more so than Reddit was. I haven’t seen a single nuanced conversation about anything deeper than “how is your day going” since joining up with this place.
The fact that even my most heavily downvoted comments usually have some upvotes too tells me that I’m not shouting into a void. If me trying to make sense of things out in the public makes even one person reconsider their position then I see that as a success. The mobbing and ad-hominem attacks haven’t ever made me change my mind about anything so it’s just wasted time on their part. It’s also a good way to lure out the meanest commentors so that I can block them.
My days in Reddit (and by extension, Lemmy) pulls me over from the left side. I remember when r/LSC still seems profound to me.
I’m only here now for funny memes with hierarchical comments.
Are you actually a democratic socialist, like Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales? Or are you a social democrat, whose political project consists of begging the capitalist class for more crumbs instead of taking power from them.
Because I never see the former complain about tankies or people going too far left, since we have the same goal, whereas the former become reactionaries the moment anything threatens the structure of capitalism and imperialism.
I am a guy who said he isn’t fighting these battles on lemmy. Smh.
Lefty lemmy, righty reddit
Nobody is questioning leadership, but CEOs ain’t there to lead, they are there for the bottom line.
The CEO is there to do what the board wants, and the board points the company in the direction the shareholders want.
The catch is that all three of these groups have a ton of overlap and all they care about is money.
Yes, but what happens when you have fifteen of these groups? You need a person with the general overview of those groups.
And how about fifteen of those level 2 groups… does the person over those groups have any clue what is done on the actual work level? Should they be guillotined for claiming that without them nothing would be done and therefore they need as much as the cumulative pay under them? (Hint:Yes)
Whom then do I guillotine?
I didnt sharpen this bad boy for nothing.
Fascists