« Fairness, decentralization & capitalism | Main | The C-word »

August 16, 2015

Comments

Roy Lonergan

Chris
Thanks for the link to that Jonathan Jones article. It is unusual to find something by him that makes some sense - normally he comes over a complete fuckwit.
Roy

Bob

You should read some Dilbert cartoons Chris :)

Bob

"It is centrists who are utopians, in that they grossly over-estimate the ability of the state to improve well-being in a capitalist society."
I'm sorry but I very strongly disagree with this.
The government could end poverty tommorow by offering a guarantee job offer at the living wage.
Tell that to anyone who has used the NHs, education system, or who is only alive now due to state benefits.
I guess it depends on the meaning of "centrist."
I would say the biggest problem is libertarianist defeatism and hatred of the State.

Luis Enrique

Regarding over estimating ability to improve things , if you think that the Tories are really bad, then you think there is a large magnitude improvement on offer by not being Tories. Or are you saying the Tories aren't so bad?

Roy Lonergan

@Bob
Just because the state could do a good thing doesn't mean that a state is a good thing itself.
Roy

Tophattingson

"It is bosses who still believe in the out-dated and discredited dogma of central planning"

You should take a look at transfer pricing and internal markets. It aims to remove some of the central planning within a business. There's an article from 2004 that describes these techniques.

https://hbr.org/2004/04/bringing-the-market-inside

Bob

Roy, yes it does. Ought implies can implies should. I know you have an irrational ideological axe to grind.
How else can you compare neutrally?

Roy Lonergan

@Bob
Which irrational ideological axe do you mean? (I have so many).
Roy

Sam

"In fact the biggest risk-bearers are often not bosses at all, but workers. It is they who invest all or most of their biggest asset (their human capital) into a single venture."

I don't think this can be true at all. Workers do not "invest" their human capital in their employer's business, they lease it to him, and are paid their rental fee on a weekly or monthly basis. For sure, a worker who contributes to the success of his employer stands to gain human capital as well as his rental fee, and a worker who causes his employer's downfall will see his stock plummet, but in general, the only skin the worker has in the game is a pay period or so's income, plus the lack of income for the time it takes him to find alternative employment.

A worker whose employer goes under doesn't lose his human capital (at least, not quickly. If he spends a prolonged period out of work, he will see it dwindle.)

An Alien Visitor

A very good article.


Sam - have you actually read the link above that explains why the bosses were taking less risks than the workers? This answers a few of your questions. It seems to me you have a rather midsomer murders view of what an employer is. Wake up, this is the 21st century.

Sam

I may have a "midsomer murders" view of what an employer is, but I'm pretty sure that I know that a self-employed owner-driver isn't an employee.

Churm Rincewind

I'm not at all sure how Tom Jones' departure from The Voice provides any evidence for anything.

Whatever reasons the BBC had for not renewing his contract, it would seem odd to suggest that this decision should have been discussed with him, or that it's not "innovative" .

Let's suppose that audience research provided evidence that he was unpopular with viewers (which is more than likely, given broadcasters' slavish commitment to ratings).

What is, then, the "conversation"?

BBC producer: "Hi Tom, just ringing to say that the viewers think you're a boring old fart, so we're not renewing your contract."

Tom Jones: "Fair enough. I just hope you're going to announce that publicly."

BBC producer: "Well actually we weren't going to defend our decision in the press because our reasons might damage your future career."

An Alien Visitor

"I know that a self-employed owner-driver isn't an employee."

And if you would read the article about risk you would understand that it talks about larger sized businesses and not the self employed model. And therefore states that the biggest risk is *often* not borne by the owners but the workers and small investors.

***Note the word often in the above sentence and the above article***

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Why S&M?

Blog powered by Typepad