Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Try again. Your challenge wasn't re whether the people taking the position are assholes, but whether any position they take is non-assholish. Strike one at changing your own question. Care to fail again?

Crickets. What do I win? I admit when I am wrong, Sebby does too. You?

LessinYangon

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Crickets. What do I win? I admit when I am wrong, Sebby does too. You?

LessinYangon

dude, you're just the wrong guy to post about assholes

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

His point is, all of us are overvalued, the beneficiaries of a rigged system that helps us and keeps the proles down, and we are deluded in our bleeting about Trump because we don't want real change, we just want a different leader who will preserve our privileges.

man, and I thought he was just pimping rides.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

dude, you're just the wrong guy to post about assholes

That seems like a harsh way of admitting that he was right.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

dude, you're just the wrong guy to post about assholes

FWIW, I'm met about 12 GAs and I have to say Less IRL is the furthest from his persona- truly a sweet guy. And he had the sense not to fuck paigow, when that was an option. Less, please confirm?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

FWIW, I'm met about 12 GAs and I have to say Less IRL is the furthest from his persona- truly a sweet guy. And he had the sense not to fuck paigow, when that was an option. Less, please confirm?

is today sensitive day on the LT board or something? I meant asshole in a nice way, of course. I'm sure Less is a sweetie.

You, though, more of a plain old asshole.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Are limos even a thing any more? I mean, other than for Prom? Are you thinking liberals shouldn't go to prom? I just don't get it.

I hear you, but what am I supposed to substitute? Porsche Progressive?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I hear you, but what am I supposed to substitute? Porsche Progressive?

I prefer Single-Malt Progressive myself.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

His point is, all of us are overvalued, the beneficiaries of a rigged system that helps us and keeps the proles down, and we are deluded in our bleeting about Trump because we don't want real change, we just want a different leader who will preserve our privileges.

Which why we're all so excited about Biden...

[sebastian_dangerfield]

I thought you were proposing something more profound that raising the minimum wage, but I guess neither of us really know what you're proposing. My assumption is that spreading money around more equitably would be better for everyone, in the aggregate, and if you disagree with that then I'm not sure why you think it's a good idea.

I don't disagree with that. I just think it's better done within commerce, within businesses, rather than through tax policy, which introduces a costly, slow, and inefficient middle man for no reason.

That would make sense if professionals and managers were hired by laymen with no familiarity with their jobs, but it turns out that's not how the world works.

In really big corps, they are approved by clueless boards all day long. In small to mid sized corps you see them hired by people with limited familiarity with the jobs as well. All the time. This is why there are so many terrible hires. At the first stage of hiring, HR, which is clueless on almost everything, brings you a pile of acceptable resumes. What the fuck does HR know about vetting talent? HR is comprised almost entirely of people with not talent. It's where dumbest lackeys congeal like bacon grease in the corner of a griddle.

In my job, the information assymmetry is that I know stuff about the law and compliance, and my colleagues don't. So they pay me to help them understand what they need to do. This seems to create value. Not clear why you think it needs correction.

I don't want to correct that. I want to correct the asymmetry between what buyers of professional work, who don't know how easy much of it actually is, and sellers, who've no incentive to let them know how easy it is.

If you're focussed on the highest-paid jobs, then try a corporate governance fix.

Attacking the cronyism on boards is a great idea.

1. Introduce an intrinsic value into the debate
2. ??????
3. Social justice and peace on Earth

Think of like adding a few drips of food coloring to a glass of water. Or maybe cancer is a good analogy. All your need to do is introduce the idea of intrinsic value as a way for shareholders to pare professional services and higher management costs and they'll run with it. Hell, they'll run with any idea that allows them to find even a tiny bit of profit.

If the idea is articulated well, and that's nothing more than well done PR, it metastasizes. Look at how an idea like "fake news" caught fire and is now all over the place.

Five or six SEO pros and few PR people could have people holding "intrinsic value to workers now!" banners at Warren and Bernie rallies (and maybe even Trump ones) within a month.

I'm sure you could, and they would be equally unresponsive to what I said, which was, "One can think that CEO pay is out of whack (and identify specific reasons for that) without thinking that everyone's pay across the whole economy is out of whack and needs to be replaced with a number that you made up."

But that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying introduce the concept and it will lead to people pushing for lower prices for professional services and arguing that management should have lower wages. How does it work from there? I don't know, but I know in a world where everyone is looking to cut costs, it'll get traction.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I prefer Single-Malt Progressive myself.

He's now really beginning to annoy me. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-to-...-rift-deepens/

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

His point is, all of us are overvalued, the beneficiaries of a rigged system that helps us and keeps the proles down, and we are deluded in our bleeting about Trump because we don't want real change, we just want a different leader who will preserve our privileges.

Close. We'd all like to give more and have a more equitable society, but nobody wants to give up the structures that protect our revenue streams (that aren't really warranted).

I just made what most Americans might earn in a day in one hour. I try to provide the most value I can (I'll actually tell clients how to cut bills of other attys where I see fluff work being done, which I think they appreciate). And I'll tell people all the time, "You really don't want to pay me to do that" when a lot other guys would happily run the meter.

But even being fair, it's a joke to get paid hundreds of dollars per hour for this work. Am I worth more than a plumber? Worth more per hour than a dentist? Fuck outta here! There's a fucking massive informational asymmetry at work here.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Attacking the cronyism on boards is a great idea.

I definitely think that the makeup of corporate boards is a big part of what ails the American economy. From mutual back scratching leading to inflated executive pay to excessive-focus on deals and the short term to tax-strategy focused decision-making.

I haven't looked into the details, but doesn't Warren have a plan for worker representation? That seems like an obvious first step reform, to the extent that it can be imposed federally (ETA: I assume it's only for listed companies). I'd be interested in other ideas to diversify board membership but nothing obvious springs to mind.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Crickets. What do I win? I admit when I am wrong, Sebby does too. You?

LessinYangon

I've been wrong?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

I definitely think that the makeup of corporate boards is a big part of what ails the American economy. From mutual back scratching leading to inflated executive pay to excessive-focus on deals and the short term to tax-strategy focused decision-making.

I haven't looked into the details, but doesn't Warren have a plan for worker representation? That seems like an obvious first step reform, to the extent that it can be imposed federally (it's only for listed companies). I'd be interested in other ideas to diversify board membership but nothing obvious springs to mind.

40% of seats on boards would be workers, I think. Copies Germany.