Comment

Comment on Intel introduces its newest employee, Chip the robotic inspector, just after announcing mass human layoffs

partial_accumen@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

I don’t understand what you’re trying to prove here to be honest. Of course there’s been shitty behavior all along.

This is the first post you haven’t been praising the 1950s as a better time for workers. Thats what I was trying to prove. All your prior posts were speaking nostalgically about the “better time” for workers in the 1950s. Besides a small set, it wasn’t better, and many times worse. Thats all.

My point is simple: corporations are a made-up concept and one of the main things people are supposed to get in the deal to allow them to exist in the first place is efficient allocation and utilization of human resources.

Efficient for the corporations. Not efficient for an individual.

It seems to me they are admitting that they cannot do that. In which case, the deal should be renegotiated.

Their goal isn’t your goal. There can be an argument made whether capitalism should exist, but under the current system they are behaving as capitalists. Workers welfare isn’t their primary goal, and in fact, only a goal at all as required by law (OSHA, DoL rules).

source

Sort:hotnew top

aesthelete@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

This is the first post you haven’t been praising the 1950s as a better time for workers.

Isn’t at all, but you’re reading whatever you want into my posts. So keep on keeping on. 👍

I get that you recently read some Marx or some shit, but corporations aren’t just capitalism. They have charters. They were put into existence via law. It is possible to still be “under capitalism” and restructure the laws. Full on gay space communism isn’t required to make any progress on any issue.

source
- partial_accumen@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
  
  This is the first post you haven’t been praising the 1950s as a better time for workers.
  
  Isn’t at all, but you’re reading whatever you want into my posts. So keep on keeping on. 👍
  
  Do I need to quote you back to yourself? Okay, these are your words:
  
  “If you look at what many consider to be the golden age of American corporations after the second world war, the notion of a ‘company man’ was a celebrated one”
  
  “but it’s worse now than it was in the – what I’m now calling the first – gilded age.”
  
  I think we’ve hit the end of productive conversation between the two of us on this subject. I appreciate your conversation up to now. You’re welcome to keep going, but I won’t be responding on this thread anymore. I hope you have a great day!
  
  source
  - aesthelete@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
    
    If you look at what many consider to be the golden age
    
    Emphasis mine
    
    I didn’t even say I consider it a golden age, because I don’t.
    
    but it’s worse now than it was in the – what I’m now calling the first – gilded age.
    
    The gilded age was not in the 1950s. Also, gilded age doesn’t mean golden age.
    
    I think we’ve hit the end of productive conversation between the two of us on this subject
    
    Agree. Maybe next time read and comprehend some of the responses?
    
    source