The start of that did include the perverse incentives from people switching to caring about share price rises rather than dividends. But since they're the one who picked that part to highlight, you still win the point ;)
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
that said, there are equal-and-opposite evidence inflexibly rising labor costs feed innovation by incentivizing process efficiency and productivity-per-hour or just increasing capital intensity (btw not taking the definite contrary position, just saying it's an open question)
-
"pressure to innovate" is a very mixed bag in the first place -- competition clearly is good for innovation in *some* specific domains, in others the big innovators are industrial monopolies or military-industrial-complex actors shielded from pressure to see near-term profit
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Even on Sandy's terms, the proper outcome is eventual bankruptcy and zeroing out the shareholders' wealth. But of course, when the time came for that to happen, it wasn't permitted. Again, because it was too important to protect the workers' wages and benefits.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
