Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Companies don't have violence and only have rules in a limited sense. E.g. a company can't lock you in a box for failing to give it some of your money

Companies certainly do "have violence" and certainly have locked people up in the past. The only thing keeping large corporations from doing this now is the state.

In the article, the author puts forth the problem with the Great Leap Forward: large central authority being disconnected from those starving workers. That's a problem large, centrally planned, corporations face.



> the author puts forth the problem with the Great Leap Forward: large central authority being disconnected from those starving workers. That's a problem large, centrally planned, corporations face.

This is not the whole truth. The problem with the Great Leap Forward was that the state enforced farming techniques, and even what farmers should work on instead of farming, and took food to bring to the centre. It's not just disconnection. Disconnection is far too vague a word to choose. To compare a company not listening to its workers with what the GLF did - it's hard to avoid thinking you picked the one vague word that could technically describe both of those scenarios, despite the vast gulf between them.

As I sort of said elsewhere - some companies are bad. That's fine, unless there's no competitor to move to. Then workers' situations are really bad, because they have to choose between retraining, moving, and staying, none of which is a great choice. But if you think that's bad, think how much worse it is that a state bureaucrat can lock you in jail, and your only option is to flee the country. Companies aren't perfect, but they limit the blast radius of the damage an incompetent or malicious employee can achieve.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: