Board full of rich people

>board full of rich people
>99% investors
>1% creating businesses and hiring people
This is why the global economy is broken you dumb shits

investors (X)
degenerate gamblers (O)

Fuck off faggot dog eat dog.

It's not "dog eat dog", it's more "rich get richer".
People with money are so concerned with earning more money, that a very slow exponential growth of their wealth is more appealing to them than not dying unknown and irrelevant.

Seriously, investment is an everybody-loses scenario.
>company that is invested in, due to having shareholders, is forced to maximise profits at any cost; this harms both workers and customers, often shareholders too in the long run
>many people can't get jobs when wealthy people who would normally create businesses instead invest in businesses that won't use the money for more workers
>investors get very wealthy, accumulating money their whole life as long as they remain forever paranoid; then after an uneventful life, they die, get a line in the newspaper obituary, and the money is squandered by whoever inherits it.

>technology is literally making human beings obsolete
>the problem is those who realize it

I do both. You'll stay poor though because I'd never hire you

Are you Jewish?

Companies have been trading publicly for ages. "In the long run", many of them are as profitable as ever.

Investing in a business means money goes to that business which increases their profits and therefore their ability to hire more employees.

Investors don't just "accumulate" money, they invest it. It doesn't end up under a mattress, it ends up in a complicated network of banks, businesses, etc that altogether fuel our market-based economy.

This is your mind on furryism and communism. Kill yourself, you have a contrarian high school understanding of how business works.

fuck the people, employees are nothing more than a liability. people starting companies now should be looking at how to minimize or completely eliminate the number of employees they need to operate. and its getting so much easier to do so. and any employees you have to have are better off "hired" on a zero hour contract you can shop around to different countries for the best deal.

Well, why don't rich (a few hundred k in bank is rich by today's standards) people do anything about it?
Even if I wasn't getting paid that much, I'd find it fun being on a team of programmers making software tools that screw with automated systems.

I've been thinking of how to train an AI to observe how an AI or algorithm responds to input, then give the user tools to exploit that AI/algorithm.
For example, a tool that makes very tiny adjustments to videos to allow them YouTube's copyright infringement detection and anti-offensiveness AI.

>any employees you have to have are better off "hired" on a zero hour contract

My god you are a 100% retard. The entire point is to have the least employees possible.

Thanks for funneling your clients to me after you piss your customers off with Indian tech support. I'll be here with my 2 highly experienced and constantly requested workers with massive rapport.

>Veeky Forums
>rich
Yeah,if you consider $50 net worth rich then maybe

I'm sure your workers will stay on forever,and since microsoft outsources their tech support,I'm sure you are a multi-billionaire,since you are more successful than them.

Nobody likes microsoft's free-included tech support retard. Who the fuck pays for their tech support specifically?

tech support is one of the easiest things to contract out to countries with no horrible accents. again, employees are nothing but a liability, especially no skill employees like tech support.

why do you think so many new businesses completely cut out any human to human interaction entirely? the minimal gains simply arent worth it unless you're at a scale where you simply cant operate without hundreds to thousands of employees.

but this is besides the point because i would never start a business that required anything but cheap outsourcing that i barely have to deal with.

Well it all depends on your customers and what drives their loyalty.

>increases their profits and therefore their ability to hire more employees
That's how it used to work.
A company starts up, and sells stocks so it can buy much-needed workers.
There's two problems though:
>old companies already sold their stocks, investors are just leeching
>new companies need loads of advertising but very few workers

The worst case scenario is:
>old industry employs tens of thousands of people
>new company with a handful of people sells all their stock, spends it all on growing market share but not company size, demolishes the entire industry
That's a big problem with new companies these days.
New companies with just a handful of people can sometimes render an entire industry obsolete.

which, of course, isn't a problem at all, its what people in the 21st century call progress. every employee is an inefficiency that needs to be cleaned up, and the world is going to keep accelerating in this direction whether you like it or not. its simply a lot easier for new companies to adopt modern thinking than it is to rearchitect entire legacy companies hierarchy.

>why dont rich people arbitrarily throw money trying to stop technology
This is why you're poor.
And retarded

What do you think "investing" means? It's essentially giving your money to other businesses to use.

>board full of rich people
What?
Look at the balances people post. Almost everyone of these "investors" is obviously making less than minimum wage

It's really a problem of competition vs philosophy.
Anyone who is anything more than subhuman filth recognises that a company should serve a higher purpose than making money.
Problem is, the subhuman filth who go for maximum profit at all costs are strong competition, not by virtue of being good businessmen, but bad men.

For the most part, shares are bought from other investors.

>work 20 hours a day and spend years to create a business with a high probability of failing

>press the mouse a couple of times with no effort or work

Hmmmm, i wonder what i will choose.

Yes employees should come first because they are more money long term.

Problem is our financial system encourages parasitism. You theoretically make WAY more money pumping and dumping different sources than you do holding any one.

Which of course then encourages a parasitic mindset in daily life outside of business.

communist please get the fuck off this board

Corps are communist for welfare parasites at the top.

Are you Jewish?