Always immediately to the you are a socialist comment when the ills of capitalism are mentioned. So boring. Hey guy, maybe capitalism just needs to be improved, not swapped for socialism. That ever cross your 1980s Reagan brain? Risk deserves reward commensurate with the level of risk actually taken. And let’s be honest, the VC firm is paying that founders salary even in the toughest of times.
Definition of underpay: founder/owner/ceo-type takes every last red cent they are legally allowed to compensate themselves with whether or not they created the corresponding value. The remaining is the underpay allocated to the workers. No one pays more to attract and retain talent because the “founder takes most system” has been established and the rich and powerful, well, they ain’t gonna change that.
“Many have earned their wealth on the backs of those they underpay, even though they do create jobs.” A point no Republican will ever acknowledge. It’s always oh look at the jobs! Never the exploitation.
Please don’t glorify the I built it all by myself in my garage so I deserve my billions mantra. Companies that are successful are that because of the people, the many people, who build them. The many people do not get compensated at the level they deserve based on the value they created. Its a founder take most system. That’s why people are envious / irritated with billionaires.
Do you have it backwards? You use Microsoft as an example… I’ll use WeWork. Adam Neumann is a billionaire. The many people who built the company? You know how that went.
Person starts a company. Takes the risk of using his money or someone else’s. Most give it a year maybe two. The max downside is probably personal bankruptcy. Woopie, thousands go bankrupt every month. Company is working so the person hires someone else and then many more. The company is built by the many. The many work the long hours and have the stress of building just like the founder, employee or not. Nothing is guaranteed at the early stages. This is where the issue lies. The founder gets incredibly rich and powerful if it is a success. The many workers? If they were lucky they have stock options and they get rich but not nearly the same level as the founder. Didn’t they take the same level of risk? Corporate structure is the issue. Keep it private and the founder can and should do whatever with the stock. If a company goes public, how can you bring fairness to the many workers?
Comments
Sounds like you were a sole proprietor, which would make your experience completely irrelevant to this conversation.
Post: Care to join me on my yacht cruising the Mediterranean? Do you envy the super wealthy? RDQ
Link to comment from March 26, 2025
Straw Man, also boring.
Post: Care to join me on my yacht cruising the Mediterranean? Do you envy the super wealthy? RDQ
Link to comment from March 25, 2025
Always immediately to the you are a socialist comment when the ills of capitalism are mentioned. So boring. Hey guy, maybe capitalism just needs to be improved, not swapped for socialism. That ever cross your 1980s Reagan brain? Risk deserves reward commensurate with the level of risk actually taken. And let’s be honest, the VC firm is paying that founders salary even in the toughest of times.
Post: Care to join me on my yacht cruising the Mediterranean? Do you envy the super wealthy? RDQ
Link to comment from March 25, 2025
Definition of underpay: founder/owner/ceo-type takes every last red cent they are legally allowed to compensate themselves with whether or not they created the corresponding value. The remaining is the underpay allocated to the workers. No one pays more to attract and retain talent because the “founder takes most system” has been established and the rich and powerful, well, they ain’t gonna change that.
Post: Care to join me on my yacht cruising the Mediterranean? Do you envy the super wealthy? RDQ
Link to comment from March 23, 2025
“Many have earned their wealth on the backs of those they underpay, even though they do create jobs.” A point no Republican will ever acknowledge. It’s always oh look at the jobs! Never the exploitation.
Post: Care to join me on my yacht cruising the Mediterranean? Do you envy the super wealthy? RDQ
Link to comment from March 23, 2025
Explain WeWork to me then.
Post: Care to join me on my yacht cruising the Mediterranean? Do you envy the super wealthy? RDQ
Link to comment from March 22, 2025
Then you see no problem in a founder take most system. Which is fine if you don’t mind very unequal pay for similar work / value creation.
Post: Care to join me on my yacht cruising the Mediterranean? Do you envy the super wealthy? RDQ
Link to comment from March 22, 2025
Please don’t glorify the I built it all by myself in my garage so I deserve my billions mantra. Companies that are successful are that because of the people, the many people, who build them. The many people do not get compensated at the level they deserve based on the value they created. Its a founder take most system. That’s why people are envious / irritated with billionaires.
Post: Care to join me on my yacht cruising the Mediterranean? Do you envy the super wealthy? RDQ
Link to comment from March 22, 2025
Do you have it backwards? You use Microsoft as an example… I’ll use WeWork. Adam Neumann is a billionaire. The many people who built the company? You know how that went.
Post: Care to join me on my yacht cruising the Mediterranean? Do you envy the super wealthy? RDQ
Link to comment from March 22, 2025
Person starts a company. Takes the risk of using his money or someone else’s. Most give it a year maybe two. The max downside is probably personal bankruptcy. Woopie, thousands go bankrupt every month. Company is working so the person hires someone else and then many more. The company is built by the many. The many work the long hours and have the stress of building just like the founder, employee or not. Nothing is guaranteed at the early stages. This is where the issue lies. The founder gets incredibly rich and powerful if it is a success. The many workers? If they were lucky they have stock options and they get rich but not nearly the same level as the founder. Didn’t they take the same level of risk? Corporate structure is the issue. Keep it private and the founder can and should do whatever with the stock. If a company goes public, how can you bring fairness to the many workers?
Post: Care to join me on my yacht cruising the Mediterranean? Do you envy the super wealthy? RDQ
Link to comment from March 22, 2025