• DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      In this case, it kills unproductive jobs. Payroll people are necessary but at the end of the day, they don’t produce anything you would want to buy. This means that if you keep more administrative jobds than you need, there will be fewer actuall things to go around. Hence everyone will be poorer on average (or realistically speaking, the rich will be poorer in the current system, but that is a different issue).

      Anyway, keeping unproductive jobds to reduce unenployment is a dumb idea and is one of the main reason why communism sucked so much.

      • trolololol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I have a better idea. Fire the whole payroll division and hire just one accountant. Since clearly, clearly, any number of payroll employees can sustain any company size, this is the most cost efficient way to go.

        Oh you say one staff in payroll is not enough? Oh then I miss your point.

        • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          How about you take your strawman argument somewhere else? I never said you need just one. But the company clearly did not need as many, if they were able to let them go. Economy of scale I guess.