You clearly have little to no idea of the job market. Even in a manual labor job company's constantly hound for those who rise above the others, and put them in positions of responsibility.
In jobs that are more intellectual, things are even better, those with innovation are constantly hunted for.
it's not fair and it probably will never happen in no economic system, cause the purpose of any business is profit and of course you have to give more responsibilities to the best employees or the business will not do well.
If you are in a dead end job, find another one.
usually is not that simple.
Except in socialism they end up having the idiot who's been working there for 20 years command the hyper intelligent guy who's been working for 5.
It will never happen and it does not happen, if you have personality and skills you have good chances of commanding somebody.
it's not fair and it probably will never happen in no economic system, cause the purpose of any business is profit and of course you have to give more responsibilities to the best employees or the business will not do well.
Wrong. In the relatively simple socialized system of unions that happens everyday. It isn't run on how well you do, how hard you work, or anything of that nature, it is run on how much seniority you have. Nothing more, nothing less.
It will never happen and it does not happen, if you have personality and skills you have good chances of commanding somebody.
Wrong. In the relatively simple socialized system of unions that happens everyday. It isn't run on how well you do, how hard you work, or anything of that nature, it is run on how much seniority you have. Nothing more, nothing less.
In the way you think Lenin or Stalin would have never became leaders and the USSR's leader would have been Ivan the 80 year old worker.
No he did not. The persons with charisma and leadership skills have and had always the power. When you have power you can be corrupted, if you don't have power you cannot be corrupted. In every system the leaders if are not controlled by the people can become corrupted.
Every single capitalist nation has undergone socialist reforms because pure capitalism is bad; there is no safety net for the poor incase all jobs have been taken. Socialism is not only able to provide a safety net for the poor, but it improves competition for the workers to earn more money based on how long they work. Infact, the wages for workers would go no where but up because all that money CEOS don't get any more goes directly to the workers in an ideal situation.
All capitalist nations implement socialist reforms, and all socialist nations implement capitalist reforms - because each economic system benefits with application from certain principles of the other.
All capitalist nations implement socialist reforms, and all socialist nations implement capitalist reforms - because each economic system benefits with application from certain principles of the other.
What happened to the Soviet Union when the leaders decided to privatize factories at the wake of the 90s? North Korea and Cuba allow little to no capitalist reforms in their nations! It's an oversimplification to say that all capitalist or socialist economies end up mixing 100% of the time. Although it does happen a lot...
What happened to the Soviet Union when the leaders decided to privatize factories at the wake of the 90s? North Korea and Cuba allow little to no capitalist reforms in their nations! It's an oversimplification to say that all capitalist or socialist economies end up mixing 100% of the time. Although it does happen a lot...
It was an exaggeration, but I think I did get my point across.
And look at how well North Korea turned out . . . .
AS for Cuba, its economy is pretty much entirely tourism.
They're not failing at all, comrade, they just have really bad embargoes from other nations and poor civil rights. They've been here for decades. Infact, they've out lived the Soviet Union by almost twenty years.
