Remember the company that instituted a $70,000 minimum wage? Profits have doubled.

[fast]

[...]Dan Price [...] raped the free market by paying his employees above their "market rate".

Raped the free market?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

[...]Dan Price [...] raped the free market by paying his employees above their "market rate".

Raped the free market?

Business owners do this every time they pay people more than minimum wage according to free market evangelists.

 

[barbos]

The concept of fairness in relation to pay rates for employees is an anathema in the cut throat world of ideological Capitalism.

Why do you keep discussing fairness when real motives of Dan Price have been discovered?
He is an ordinary piece of shit sociopath CEO who does not care about fairness at all.

 

[DBT]

The concept of fairness in relation to pay rates for employees is an anathema in the cut throat world of ideological Capitalism.

Why do you keep discussing fairness when real motives of Dan Price have been discovered?
He is an ordinary piece of shit sociopath CEO who does not care about fairness at all.

I am speaking generally. I don't know what has been discovered, or what the truth actually is in this case. I'm saying that fairness appears to be an alien concept to the disciples of ideological capitalism regardless of whatever happened in this instance.

 

[barbos]

Why do you keep discussing fairness when real motives of Dan Price have been discovered?
He is an ordinary piece of shit sociopath CEO who does not care about fairness at all.

I am speaking generally. I don't know what has been discovered, or what the truth actually is in this case. I'm saying that fairness appears to be an alien concept to the disciples of ideological capitalism regardless of whatever happened in this instance.

Well, It certainly alien to Dan Price.

 

[barbos]

Anyway, I am surprised (not really) that Dan Price cheerleaders suddenly disappeared.

 

[arkirk]

Anyway, I am surprised (not really) that Dan Price cheerleaders suddenly disappeared.

Maybe you should read the link in the OP before you opine too much. What have you guys got against people with long hair anyway?

 

[barbos]

Anyway, I am surprised (not really) that Dan Price cheerleaders suddenly disappeared.

Maybe you should read the link in the OP before you opine too much.

Why?

What have you guys got against people with long hair anyway?

Why?

 

[DBT]

I am speaking generally. I don't know what has been discovered, or what the truth actually is in this case. I'm saying that fairness appears to be an alien concept to the disciples of ideological capitalism regardless of whatever happened in this instance.

Well, It certainly alien to Dan Price.

An act that is fair and reasonable remains fair and reasonable regardless of motives.

Is it not fair and reasonable that all who participate in generating wealth should benefit according to their input?

Reasonable and fair does not include the lions share of the wealth being generated going to the CEO and board of directors, with the minimum, the scraps, left to the employees.

Namely those who are considered to be further down the 'food chain' yet do work that is essential for running the business.

 

[barbos]

Well, It certainly alien to Dan Price.

An act that is fair and reasonable remains fair and reasonable regardless of motives.

Could not disagree more. An act was neither fair nor reasonable and motives are important here and they were not noble at all.

Is it not fair and reasonable that all who participate in generating wealth should benefit according to their input?

Wealth have nothing to do with their input. And in the long run they are not going to benefit at all, certainly not after the whole story was discovered.

Reasonable and fair does not include the lions share of the wealth being generated going to the CEO and board of directors, with the minimum, the scraps, left to the employees.

I am fine with CEO sharing their profits, but this particular case was not that at all.

Namely those who are considered to be further down the 'food chain' yet do work that is essential for running the business.

They are not essential and they certainly don't deserve $70k, not when much more deserving people get less than that.

 

[ronburgundy]

You may be one of the few in American capitalism that can just quit any time you want and suffer nothing because of it.

But for most it would mean hardship and possibly serious hardship.

People are not as "free" as you pretend.

I said I can quit one group and join another. Capitalism allows for freedom of groups to form as they please with their own rules and membership requirements. You are free to join a communist commune or start one yourself, for example, or be the founder of a town on unincorporated land where the requirement is that all businesses must be co-ops as you envision them with whatever taxation rules you and the other founders deem best.

There are even some places in the US where you can obtain free land and begin creating your utopia with other like-minded people:

http://www.outsideonline.com/1924886/cheapest-land-country

The issue raised was about the morality of dictatorships, and what matters to that morality is whether people would suffer if they left the group being dictated to. You are free to leave a society and your homeland just as much (or as little) as many/most people are "free" to leave their job. Whether the suffering that results comes from governmental laws or other factors is largely irrelevant to the fact that their are always constraining factors that limit realistic choices. Thus it is a canard to assume total unconstrained "freedom" when trying to excuse or rationalize actions taken by a private company that would be extremely immoral and worthy of violence if taken by a government. The differences are not qualitative but merely a matter of degree, thus the difference in immorality are only one of degree rather than one being unacceptable and the other treated as though those ethics don't even apply.