Subject:
|
Re: Preaching to the Choir
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 11 Aug 2004 19:39:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1778 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz wrote:
> True, that's a lot of it, but not all. He wants to hire the most efficient
> excavator, because he knows his job is going to take a long time, and he
> wants to manage the cost. Perhaps the other guy just wants it to look like
> he's having a grand project done, so he's willing to take anyone willing to
> stand around his yard waving a shovel around, but he'd like to pay that guy
> less than if he actually wanted that guy to do something useful.
But, standing around flailing with a shovel _is_ useful, otherwise he wouldn't
want it done. And in any case, it takes just as much time out of that person's
life to perform those diggerly theatrics as it takes for a real excavator to dig
for the same time. And to cover this issue and some of what you're talking
about farther down, you can always manage for efficiency by hiring the most
efficient person who's willing to do the work. That's another perfectly natural
(and acceptable, I think) way of rewarding the good worker.
> But the current system allows your employer to subjectively rate your
> performance, and pay you more if he thinks your a more valuable employee.
And this socialist system allows your employer to subjectively rate your
performance, and use you more if he thinks you're a more valuable employee.
> The only way the socialist alternative gives me of rewarding people
> differently is to keep track of exactly how many minutes they are
> productive because I can't say "Gee, you and Bob appear to be equally
> industrious, but somehow you produce twice as many widgets as Bob."
I'm not sure what I've said that makes you think that.
If you have a need for fifty widgets and you can get them from Bob in four days
or from me in two, you'd normally try to hire me. Of course if I were busy with
more desirable puruits you might have to hire us both for a day and a third or
resort to Bob.
> In fact, I may not even be able to find a
> time when Bob isn't working. So I guess I decide to fire him. Of course the
> ideal is to talk to him first (which theoretically happens in today's
> situation).
It sounds an awful lot like the socialist system has the same plethora of
options except for differential pay rates.
Further, I speculate that in a society in which the bottom line has been edged
away from as the primary motivating force and business exists to satisfy needs
rather than play in an investment market, you might not be _so_ concerned about
whether Bob or I will get the work done faster. There might be other factors
that matter more (like getting Bob up to speed under your patronage, working
with friends, not worrying so much about how long it takes, or getting it done
on a particular schedule (at night?) instead of as fast).
Chris
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Preaching to the Choir
|
| "Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:I2ALon.22wt@lugnet.com... (...) needs a (...) some (...) hour." (...) wants (...) True, that's a lot of it, but not all. He wants to hire the most efficient excavator, because he knows (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
113 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
