I wonder if you've ever had the pleasure of working for a small company full of the owner's incompetent friends and family. Loyalty is nice within reason, but it can be pathological.
I didn't think that, quite the contrary. Since you seem to have trouble with comprehension, let me break this comment thread down for you:
- GP says that loyalty isn't always always a good thing because it causes small companies to keep incompetent or lazy employees.
- You make an ideological remark about how GP is "sticking up for Corporate Man" by saying that.
- I respond that yes, in fact, small companies often do employ useless people out of misplaced loyalty, perhaps you just haven't personally experienced it.
- You somehow misinterpret my comment as accusing YOU of sticking up for companies. I did not. Don't worry, I fully understand that your entire philosophy boils down to "companies bad".
It seems that you, asshole, have misunderstood me then. Sticking up for companies was the part where they propagated the myth that companies sometimes have loyalty to their employees. They do not.
You then took that as a premise that I somehow would also belive in (of course I don’t).
Then you made your little ideological remark. And we were all better off for it.
You really came back after four days just to try to spin this in a way that makes it look like you were in the right?
> You then took that as a premise that I somehow would also belive in (of course I don’t).
Lol no, I didn't. You're either still misunderstanding, or being deliberately obtuse. My point is that some companies DO have loyalty, and a subset of those are loyal to all the wrong employees. I'm fully aware that you disagree with both of those things. If I thought you agreed with them, why would I have commented in the first place?
