View from the Center and Left Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: TigerPaw who wrote (11016)	2/6/2006 7:22:43 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 541791

The worker does not really have the option to be compensated in an "immortal" series of payments the way the owner does. Yes he does. He can get a job that includes stock grants or options as part of the compensation. Some workers have become very wealthy through this method. He can also turn around and buy company stock or any other stock with cash from his paycheck. The solution is not to find ways for the worker to have some little slice of the ownership, but instead to recognize that the investment too was just a one time contribution and does not deserve an infinity of returns. Ah, now we hit the heart of the matter that we have been dancing around. I'm sorry but I just disagree. Any form of wealth or income can be turned in to a capital investment that has the same properties. I might see a problem if the worker was not allowed to make capital investments. To me, to the extent there was any issue at all the solution was "to find ways for the worker to have some little slice of the ownership", or perhaps a not so little slice. I don't see any injustice or unfairness to the idea that a capital investment can in theory continue to provide returns forever. You apparently at least consider it to be very unfair, and perhaps even fundamentally unjust. I don't and probably never will. I actually think this might bring us to the end of the conversation. Debate and argument of this type can produce understanding, can produce agreement, or can lead to compromise. Whether or not they do any of those things at least they can be interesting. We have established our core point of disagreement. So presumably we have achieved a measure of understanding. Neither one of is likely to convince the other, so we won't come to agreement. We aren't actually implementing policy on this issue so there is no real need for compromise. And while this conversation has at times been interesting I think that won't continue for much longer. If we aren't done we are probably at least close. Tim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next