Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

In the context of a discussion about what method of delivering oil is more efficient, wasting resources on employing people for unnecessary tasks does not have enormous benefits. From a society point of view, if the goal is to deliver oil, then it is a societal loss to do it inefficiently just to pay more people.

If the goal is to pay people, then just pay people, no need to do it in a roundabout way of forcing an inefficiency into the system.



> wasting resources on employing people for unnecessary tasks does not have enormous benefits

Agreed, but that assumes perfect knowledge by business owners of what is most efficient.

I think business owners often lean much too far toward seeing labor as a commodity and an expense, to be minimized. Another approach is to see humans as the most powerful parts of the organization, and to invest in and empower them.

I'm speaking in the abstract; of course it's not always the case that more investment in labor is better. But there is a history of it: For example (and this is more a legend than something I have details on), back in the 1980s American auto companies had long treated workers as commodities. Toyota was far more successful by empowering them; famously, any worker could stop the assembly line.


Labor isn't ecologically inefficient. People are alive regardless of if they work.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: