Lemmy might, MIGHT have a small bias towards the left

您正在查看单个线程.

1706 留言

That's an extremely narrow view point I'd say. In my country the government promotes the growth of existing big corporations so that there can be more jobs and infrastructure development - but this has in the end lead to a widening of gap and has essentially only made the rich even richer.
I genuinely believe promoting start ups is better for the middle class than big corporations, as usually startups pay a crazy amount of money if you ask for it compared to what a big rich corpo would give you (ironically).
- Monopolies have been allowed to take over large portions of the markets (amazon, google, windows etc). Startups need more backing and protection from government sources. Without competition we get screwed in the long term.
  
  It's better to prevent the formation of these kinds of monopolies by proper regulations and approval for acquisitions and break-ups of bigger corporations into multiple smaller ones. Like what happened with Standard Oil and Microsoft at one time
  
  Oil companies are gouging the planet and Microsoft has no real competition. That doesn't hold much water imo.
- Start up are a fraud to society. It's funded either by private funds or society. Then either it fails or it succeed, and if it succeed, it's bought by a megacorp or investment fund for cheap until it grows to give even more money to these already rich people.
  Results are rich people are richer, society funds the risk of the concept and research, and private corps get the tech to profit from it.
  It's capitalism these days anyway : society covers for risks, private investors take the profits.
  
  Most startups are funded by large / rich investors though. It's only when they get public do they get funding from society in general. But by that stage they are no longer a startup.
  
  Not in Europe
- The con is that your startup could die tomorrow
  
  I went into a startup job. It's not a con because everyone knows that your job is less secure, and employers have to figure out how to incentivize their employees to be willing to stick around. Absolutely zero people were under the impression a startup job would be secure in the long run.
  If you're in a good startup, it can be a great way to take some of that venture capital funding as your wages. If you're in a bad one, at least job hopping isn't that rare so you can just move on to your next job and it's a normal thing.
  Our world is shaped by those capitalists, but that doesn't mean these jobs are a con.
  
  Yep. It's high risk high reward.
  
  If the markets are well regulated and competition is fair, you always have four options when you’re employed somewhere:
  -be happy where you are
  -be unhappy and whine about it on lemmy
  -be unhappy where you are and join another unhappy people to fight for your rights
  -be unhappy where you are, think you can do better than whoever is the company’s manager and make your own business
  
  think you can do better than whoever is the company’s manager and make your own business
  Your ability to do so is heavily dependent on the amount of Capital you have, which in most cases is a factor of generational wealth.
  be unhappy where you are and join another unhappy people to fight for your rights
  Yeah that's socialism!
  
  Correct and usually what's recommended is that people should switch jobs every couple of years for a 15-30% hike. Your existing company won't give it, but if you shift, there's a high chance you will get it every 2 years - until it plateaus.
  
  That means now there is enough money to start two more

1706 留言