For me, it’s a matter of how little they know the world around them and how things affect other things. Case and point, when voters thought that voting Trump in, that he would magically make egg prices go down. They’re going down now, from what I saw shopping earlier today, but they weren’t because of him.
Another example is how when shop lifters, when they shoplift, always think that they’re harming who they call ‘The Man’ aka corporate operating the stores, directly. That’s not entirely true and I know this having worked retail several times and currently.
Who you’re hurting, really, is the store itself and those that work in it. The store pulls its own profits in by how many people shop there and part of that profit, is distributing to those who work there. When you’re stealing from that store, you are actively harming that store’s profits and in turn, harming those that work there.
The CEOs and executives are still raking in millions and they aren’t above having to shut down stores over dipshit thieves which in turn, costs a lot of jobs in that store to absorb the profits to make up whatever costs.
Distributing as in being paid as in paycheck as in you getting money into bank account for the hours you’ve worked. Fucking duh.
peak redditor
On a post about judging people’s intelligence, you said that employees are paid off of the pool of profit left over at the end of the day. That’s so fucking untrue that no one has the time to even START explaining it to you. That is not at all how that flow works.
If the ENTIRE store is ransacked and all products are stolen, everyone that works at that store still gets paid because they all work for contracts that have no stipulations about whether or not the store is robbed. We are talking about big box stores and not mom and pop shops.
I think you may have low intelligence, per your own standards.
As a wage laborer, I trade time for a fixed amount of money to be deposited to my bank account.
As an employer, I agree to pay employees a wage based on some existing contract.
As a wage laborer, I can work harder to sell more product making more profits for the company.
As an employer, a productive wage laborer increases my profits since ((gross profit) - (fixed labor cost)) = (net profit).
The kicker is the productive wage laborer could keep the net profits, or split them with other workers, if not for the employer. The employer has trapped land, capital (building, tools, ect) and a favorable agreement with labor in the form of wages to fix costs. The employer then lives off the work of others.
Employers are parasites. The struggle between wage laborers and employers is a class struggle. Class solidarity is an acknowledgement of the parasitic relationship. Class solidarity, friend!
So you are impliciting saying that this behavior will damage the profit share of shop and nothing else, because almost nothing will be reverted into the workers.
And only once the share profit is not enough, excuse me, decided to be insuficiente by the ceo to fulfill the gross margin of the full multinational company, those workers will suffer the consequences even if there were not any stealing.
It is ironic that this appears in a post about understanding difficult and not obvious relationships between complex concepts :)
And no, I am not justifying anything, this post in only for the sake of understanding a complex pattern
You got me there. For that’s how words work.