• pjhenry1216@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    87
    ·
    1 year ago

    Workers wanted an increase in pay, so shareholders needed to offset that by even more. Workers can’t get a raise without shareholders getting a raise.

    Inflation is majority driven by profit, not wages. Dems barely attack that angle. Republicans actively work against it.

      • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sorry, didn’t mean to word it as support. Just wording it as the reality of what they think.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        38
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Shareholders provide economic value (it’s literally in the name) and are not rent-seeking by definition

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            16
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Shareholders are key investors and are the principal drivers of M&A and infrastructure investment.

            Disagreeing with the idea that companies exist to drive shareholder returns does not change the actual purpose of shareholders, nor suddenly cause them to be rent-seekers.

            • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              How did they get that capital to invest I wonder? The simple answer is that they obtained it through a chain of underpayment of workers for the true value they produce, thus creating a profit. Investors are simply people with wealth who put some of that wealth at risk in the hopes of increasing that wealth by exploiting workers.

              The only inherent value an investor has is taking risks, but the risks they take are rarely material risks. Most of these investors have diverse portfolios and are unlikely to see their quality of life affected in any meaningful way if they are in any way financially responsible.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                22
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah sorry man I have first hand experience in senior leadership, and your weird commie take isn’t gonna hold water with me.

                • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  This only reinforces my view that the vast majority of people are empathetic and consider themselves moral individuals who do the right thing. Of course senior leadership wouldn’t engage with or think much about a valid perspective that threatens their view of themselves as moral people. Even if they were forced to read Capital, it would most likely cause most of them to double down on their beliefs. They don’t hold those beliefs for ethical reasons. They aren’t willing to seriously question their beliefs.

                  When it comes to my opinion being some, “weird commie take,” you clearly show your hand. It doesn’t matter how sound my argument is or how many holes you have in your own worldview. You lived inside and experience what life is actually like for executives, therefore you clearly have a better understanding than some nobody like me. The problem is that it’s exactly my position as someone who has never been an executive that makes my view clearer. I don’t have my moral self view tied up in that world being justifiable. Your experience makes you more likely blind spots that miss the inherent horror of capitalism.

                  You don’t have to be a communist to read Marx. Many economists read Marx, even in schools that promote neoliberalism. Sociologists and political scientists study Mein Kampf, biologists are well acquainted with creationism, and physicists learn about outdated theories of gravity. Considering it to be a moral failing to think critically about Marx’s ideas is some Matt Gaetz level shit.

                  • SCB@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    6
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    I’ve read Marx. It’s a big part of why I’m not a commie.

                    Considering it to be a moral failing to think critically about Marx’s ideas is some Matt Gaetz level shit.

                    I think it’s a moral failing that you haven’t thought critically about Marx. I don’t disagree with you because you know more than me, I disagree with you because you believe what you want to believe instead of what is real, despite evidence to the contrary.

            • nednobbins@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              1 year ago

              You brought an economics argument to a rage thread. OP isn’t making a technical claim when they say “rent seeking behavior”, they’re angry and using it as a synonym for “greedy people”.

              • hark@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Some jackass buying a bunch of shares that were already issued and then flipping them for a profit isn’t doing shit other than enriching themselves. You might as well argue that scalpers are important. Oh wait, I have seen that brain-dead argument with “pRoViDeS LiQuIdItY!!1”

              • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Ah yes, the people are angry about things they have every reason to be angry about. Thank goodness someone used a shallow pseudointellectual argument that glosses over basic truths!

                • SCB@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  People are angry about things they don’t understand.

                  Case in point, the poster above you:

                  Some jackass buying a bunch of shares that were already issued and then flipping them for a profit

                  Thats… not a shareholder.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                I don’t tilt at these windmills for the people arguing nonsense, but for people scrolling by.

    • Wet Noodle@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah except the workers never get the increase in pay you tool. Both Dems and Republicans in office actively help this happening, progressive Dems are the ones that give a damn

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Restaurants have among the lowest profit margins of any industry.

        • deadsenator@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          I know by definition “restaurant” can be a fast-food place, but genuine restaurants are what you meant. Fast-food joints do not operate this way.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Even BKs margins of 18% do not account for a $28 markup, as was suggested above.

            You are correct that I was misattributing casual dining margins tho. That was a neat rabbit hole I went down.