When I read the above quote I was incredulous, then furious, then contemptuous, & then I was at peace. I found a frame in which the above statements make sense: the returns to capital versus the returns to labor. Under the bluster & confusion, Mr. Friedberg’s underlying point is clear—more of the profit of technology companies should go to investors & less to the workers. I disagree, despite my recent bourgeois status.
More capital or revenue can affect the output of a company’s personnel or services both positively or negatively. It can serve as a booster for personal productivity or even attract better personnel to that company or business. On the other hand it can numb developer productivity and proficiency when the business doesn’t have great impact to consumers, or faced with less competition from other businesses . The way to balance the phenomenon is to make sure when hiring the goals and aims of that business or company are clear to the personnel and there should be constant monitoring and evaluation to fish out bad eggs. That said, I see no reason why personnel and investors alike don’t enjoy the proceeds of the undertaking committed to the business or company by both parties.
More capital or revenue can affect the output of a company’s personnel or services both positively or negatively. It can serve as a booster for personal productivity or even attract better personnel to that company or business. On the other hand it can numb developer productivity and proficiency when the business doesn’t have great impact to consumers, or faced with less competition from other businesses . The way to balance the phenomenon is to make sure when hiring the goals and aims of that business or company are clear to the personnel and there should be constant monitoring and evaluation to fish out bad eggs. That said, I see no reason why personnel and investors alike don’t enjoy the proceeds of the undertaking committed to the business or company by both parties.