https://archive.ph/hMZPi

Remember when tech workers dreamed of working for a big company for a few years, before striking out on their own to start their own company that would knock that tech giant over?

Then that dream shrank to: work for a giant for a few years, quit, do a fake startup, get acqui-hired by your old employer, as a complicated way of getting a bonus and a promotion.

Then the dream shrank further: work for a tech giant for your whole life, get free kombucha and massages on Wednesdays.

And now, the dream is over. All that’s left is: work for a tech giant until they fire your ass, like those 12,000 Googlers who got fired six months after a stock buyback that would have paid their salaries for the next 27 years.

We deserve better than this. We can get it.

  • darq
    link
    fedilink
    852 years ago

    The line dividing working class from owning class is not their monthly salary. It’s their relationship to capital. Do they work for their living, or do they own for their living?

    • @_number8_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      222 years ago

      same reason why being an athlete sucks – even though you’re making insane sums, the guys at the top are making far more than that, without putting their body on the line in any way whatsoever, indefinitely [whereas most players retire in their 30s, if they’re lucky enough to have that long of a career]

      • @Shadywack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        92 years ago

        Difference in stock options as compensation for executives vs managers or the entire middle management layer is beyond insane. Like exponentially more.

      • @Not_mikey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        102 years ago

        They are petit bourgeoisie, they work for a living but their interests are aligned with capital as they’re hired by the owners to extract as much surplus labor as they can and will often get bonuses tied to how well they do that, they’re the overseer.

        Software developers work and contribute to the company, they are the ones whose surplus labor is being extracted. They may get a larger chunk of the value they create but they don’t get all of it. They are still in class conflict with the owners to get all the value they create. They’re house slaves, treated better but still fundamentally against the owner.

          • @Not_mikey@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            No, I’d say that “financially independent” really means your dependent on capitalism, and that dependency will lead you to defend capitalism from any challenges. That is the bourgeois position and puts you against the proletariat. Their are other classes though besides proletariat and bourgeoisie with different relations to capital. Petite bourgeoisie are neither bourgeoisie nor proletariat but there interests align with the bourgeoisie/capital and against the proletariat, but they are not completely dependent on capitalism so they won’t defend it as zealously. There is also the independent worker class who work for themselves outside a corporate structure, eg. An independent farmer, whose interests don’t align with either the bourgeoisie or proletariat.

      • @Bye@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 years ago

        Some. But at firms of even modest size, though, a CEO receives ownership of capital, not just salary, as compensation.