We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Excellent as far as it goes. Clear, emphatic, well-put. I will pass this around.
He touches slightly on the other reasons besides money that people will work for a place, shop at a place, or hire a person, but I don't think he says enough about that. One of the distortions government regulations create is that it's all about the $, because those are measurable. It is an irony, that critics of business claim it is all about the money to the employers, when that charge might be more accurately directed at themselves. Projection, I think.
People will take a job because of the hours, or the opportunity for advancement, or the location, interest in the work itself, security, or friendly environment, not only the most money. I could probably make more money selling drugs, for example, but there are, er, downsides to that. People shop at a store because it's close, because it's friendly, because it's familiar, because they sponsor Little League teams. The free market isn't all about the money. It's about every individual balancing those things in the way they like.
Assistant Village Idiot
I thought he misunderstood the concept of maximizing shareholder/owner value by viewing it too narrowing. I've never thought that it was in any way opposed to treating your employees as well as you can. I think that companies that profit on the backs of their employees will end up with unproductive, unhappy employees with a lot of turn over.
Unions say that management is always screwing them but unions only have to worry about their membership while the owner/manger has to keep suppliers, workers, and customers happy. Those things often pull in different directions so to my mind, the owner/manager that does that well deserves a lot of credit - much more than the union boss.
My thought is that if unions think they can run a business better than management (they don't pay enough, don't provide this or that, etc.), why don't they pool their money and form a business and show the rest of us how to do it. This goes for all the other kibitzers and critics as well.