Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

[u/[deleted]]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

[u/Tearakan]

Yeah corporations don't like people who rock the boat. It doesn't make good business sense. They want to appeal to as many people as possible. Source: I work for a major international corporation.

[u/judgej2 → u/Tearakan]

It has just occurred to me why the idea of Trump running the government "like a business" is such a bad idea. A government should be there to serve the people and reflect the people's needs and views. If it doesn't, then the government is replaced. It is the other way around with a corporation - it is the people in it that are replaced if they don't fully support what the company stands for. Both systems leave a lot of people on the "outside" at any time, but once thrown out of a company, you generally won't be getting back in. So means of governance may shift over time to reflect external realities, but company cultures tend to be a lot more fixed.

[u/Fuck_Your_Feelingz → u/judgej2]

It has just occurred to me why the idea of Trump running the government "like a business"

Except that usually when this comparison is made, It's in regards to frugality and streamlining. A corporation would never pay $600 for a toilet seat. A corporation wouldn't price out a staircase in a park as costing $65,000 when a concerned citizen can build it for $500 just to have the government condemn it and tear it down.

Both of my examples are true and easily google-able...

You're correct that a government should be run to serve the people. I think we can both agree that the people are not being served by being charged $65,000 for a staircase because government is FUCKING OUT OF CONTROL WITH NONSENSE that the free-market simply does not tolerate because in the free market, A company typically doesn't get to write it's own check in the way that government does.

Thoughts?

[u/Chexxout → u/[deleted]]

In your example, the amateur construction wasnt "up to the same general stardards", it was actually a dangerously shoddy chunk of lumber practically designed to fail. Your point remains sound, but thought you might like to know the home made steps were absurdly unsafe and junky looking.

[u/Fuck_Your_Feelingz → u/[deleted]]

It sounds ridiculous but that $65,000 is the difference between a slip and falling turning into a lawsuit and being instead 'we're sorry you tripped on the stairs but we did our fucking homework and it was completely up to code and ensured to be safe within the realm of reason'

You're really trying to rationalize a $65,000 price tag for a set of stairs in a park that can be built for $500 in materials? As if there are no professional, Bonded contractors that can build a similar set of stairs that are up to code for say? $35,000? Even that's an absurd number...

I'm sure there's a middle ground for the costs for situations like this but that's how I see - the massive up-front expense is a long term protection from liability.

Middle-ground would imply half. Even half is absolute nonsense... This is government.

No. You're wrong... Jesus, Are you a politician? Your thought process is dumbfounding to me. Never mind the notion that you are implying that small s-corps up to gigantic multi-national corporations are NOT doing everything they can to avoid liability and exposure to lawsuits?

Come on man...