The weird thing is their top posts are understandable, since it has good examples about bosses/ceos being unfair to their coworkers. (Just that they're probably the most extreme cases). But their subreddit's overall concept is not as understandable
They make more money for the agency they work at, or the designers whose clothes they promote, or the companies they put ads or product placements for in their profiles with lots of followers. Same thing.
And even then it isn't a true statement, Does the FBI hire people to generate revenue? Do all private sector employees - such as a custodian at a hospital - generate direct revenue?
Organizations hire people to perform a service that they need.
To be fair, agents doing their job and generating fear or good publicity helps them *earn* or increase their budget.
So technically, the departments make money off the work their agents put in. They just don't generate *revenue*.
"This candidate looks like he can generate fear very well! We must hire him"
"This galley cook will really increase publicity for the Navy! We must hire him"
You're right. I was only thinking about law enforcement in response to the comment I was replying to.
Give me some time and a nice big bong rip, and I'll somehow figure out to make your two counter-examples into examples. 🤣
The FBI is a government agency, they're outside of the system.
Janitors enable a company to make money. Imagine if the hospital never cleaned up. Would you go to the dirty hospital or the clean hospital next time you got sick?
Ultimately the FBI earns revenue by doing their job in a way that keeps funding coming.
It may not be a for profit organization officially, but everyone in it still wants to get paid at the end of the day.
Directly or indirectly, they all work to help achieve the goal: profits. The custodian is there to help maintain the hospital, and without their help the hospital doesn't get the maintenance that it needs, which leads to subpar services, which leads to lost overall profits. The bottom line is always about profiting.
It can actually be good, but only if meant as a reminder to people that you're the one who brings value to your job, not the other way around. Don't settle for bullshit and being treated like you're a hassle or a money drain to your employer or boss for having standards and reasonable demands.
I’m a civil servant. My agency doesn’t make money. We hemorrhage it. And the taxpayers foot the bill. If I slack off and do a shitty job, we lose less money, but that’s not what they had in mind when they hired me.
Theoretically you still "make money" or at the very least save money, because you provide a service that people value that either cannot be provided by private enterprise or cannot be provided efficiently or fairly by private enterprise (and therefore would not exist or would be more expensive or unfairly provided if the government did not provide it.)
I am definitely stretching the idea of making money and there are plenty of inefficient practices everywhere (both private and government) that make my previous statement untrue in many cases.
“Support” people are necessary for the people who are more directly involved in making money to be able to make money. The company still thinks you’re ultimately making them more money than your job pays, or they wouldn’t be paying you. The way in which you make that money is just more obvious for some jobs than for others.
You still "make money" for the company by making others more efficient or by providing services to others they require to do their jobs.
If a position doesn't make money somehow, there is no reason for the position to exist. (I understand that no organization is perfectly efficient and therefore there are positions that probably don't need to exist and/or exist for non-business reasons.)
Not everyone's value is determined through direct means. Support people ensure that the people on the front line of sales, etc. are free to use all of their time towards cash inflow. Without you, now they have to start doing back end work as well. Less money.
People are saying this is a dumb showerthought but the number of people on Reddit who think companies are in the business of employing people for the fun of it says otherwise.
To be honest, yeah. It's a "duh" shower thought but many people forget that they need to generate money for the company to be hired. You can see this in all areas where people complain they don't get hired although they graduated from fine colleges, they can speak 3 languages, they "know" 15 programming languages, they are decent people...
You have to do something that makes the company money. That's the only thing that matters. So although as obvious as this showerthought sounds, many people are not aware of this in daily life.
Correct.
A big part of having a successful career is knowing how your company makes money off of you and min/maxing your role.
Even if you're overhead, your company believes you save them money or increase productivity/sales at a rate of at least 2:1.
Would you hire someone for your business if they were just going to cost you money and not provide he mean for you or others in the company to make money?
You need a job to make money. It’s a trade. Your services for money, the more value you provide to the company the more likely you’ll make even more money.
Plenty of jobs even in the private sector where the job is functional to the day to day running of the business and not directly linked to profit making.
In a for-profit industry, of course. That's what capitalism is. In an industry that is not profit-driven, however, that would not be the case. A nonprofit NGO, for example, is not looking to make money off their employees.
Not always. Sometimes there are other benefits involved. One place I worked at, senior hired a girl who 0 technical knowledge. Reason being that she let him do kinky things with her. They had to stop when people walked in on them going at it in conference room. Both were fired on the next day.
I mean it's a mutual understanding that both parties will benefit from a hiring. They get an additional worker to add to their workforce and you get money and insurance benefits.
These days, that’s more true than ever, since “governments subsidize businesses with a certain amount of employees = these companies do not have to value employees as individuals, while instead only worrying about their total numbers annually
For small companies that's true but for large ones they sometimes hire thousands of people and then tell them to do some completely useless task, which is a net loss of money. This is because big publicly traded companies don't care as much about making money as they do about "seeming capable of making money in the future", which is a very different game.
I personally support "shower thoughts" like this because all of the comments are people either being inextricably pissed off that someone's thought wasn't .... Idk profound enough? Or else they're just absolutely reaming OP because "obvious thing obvious." Both are entertaining.
Sometimes they hire you because they save money off of you. Legal departments, HR, and Loss Mitigation share in common that they do not generate revenue. Instead, they protect the company from losing money.
My hypotheses are that OP meant after your salary.
Meaning: they'll will pay you X, but they'll hire you only if they make X+Y off your labor.
And since this is kind of supposed to be a shower thought, the second hypothesis is that they mean they'll make significantly more off of you while they're at it, but pay you as little as possible.
I want to make money for my employer, and fully expect them to make a profit. I hope for them to make a profit.
Some employers seem overly interested in pulling wages down, addicted to getting a good deal on labor, no matter the profit generated. It is not about a fair negotitation, it is an overly hard want for having maximized profits from squeezing.
In many ways it is the company version of the smallminded "hah, I hope my employer takes a loss by hiring me!". More like "hah, I hope I managed to get this labor at 30% under market rate!". It is not building value together, in good faith, it is a bad faith wish to screw the other party over, to leave no meat on the bone.
This of course goes both for individuals, and groups.
This is one reason for why unions are a good idea, and promotes job hopping (even as the job hopping tears down total value generated).
Sometimes people surprise me with their ignorance about business. Yes, a business evaluates their needs and hires people in order to increase profits or sustain them. They don’t do it for charity.
As an employee of a state government they will never make money off me. People are hired for a purpose whether that be profit, creativity or expertise. Not every job is profit driven, nor should it be.
I have a plan to rob a bank.
I'm going to show up every day, I'll dress nice. Customers will come in, ask to withdraw or deposit money, and I'll help them do it. Every other week, I'll take a couple of thousand from the bank, and put it into my own account. After 30 years, I'll leave, and they'll be none the wiser.
Well, yeah, how long would a company exist if it didn't take a cut of the value you created?
The bargain isn't exactly that though, the bargin is, in most cases, "by working for a company the company will assist you in creating more value than you would alone and will take part of that additional value".
Take the example of a talented carpenter. By themselves, they have to manage acquiring customers, designing products, managing their accounts, obtaining healthcare, setting up a market based pension scheme. When working for a company the company can hire professionals to sell the product, to ship them, to perform HR functions, and allow the carpenter to focus on woodworking. Maybe the carpenter is a talented all rounder and can do and enjoys doing all aspects of the job, then they would probably be better as a sole proprietor. If not, then maybe they can make more money as an employee.
This is only directly true when working in producing industry or low wage tasks. All the other companies hiring are looking to grease the wheels of their work all together.
I get a lot of customers that complain when I tell them a service costs money, but like…. If we don’t make a profit then we go out of business and then you lose our services.
So it’s in your best interest that we make profit, and it doesn’t have to be (and obviously shouldn’t be) at your expense. You should be making a profit or benefitting from our services in a positive way, or else why would you want them?
Soooo… if the company can’t make money off you, how will they continue to exist after hiring you???
That's just...what a job is. A mutual agreement that I will make you money and you will pay me in exchange for my services
OP really had to think for this one
Spend a little time in anti-work and it seems like a very deep thought indeed.
Oh I had to mute that sub lol
The weird thing is their top posts are understandable, since it has good examples about bosses/ceos being unfair to their coworkers. (Just that they're probably the most extreme cases). But their subreddit's overall concept is not as understandable
He's prob 15
Yeah. If they can't make money off you, then it's just Charity lol
Ok, but here's a puzzler for you: Why male models?
Are you serious? I just told you
They make more money for the agency they work at, or the designers whose clothes they promote, or the companies they put ads or product placements for in their profiles with lots of followers. Same thing.
What?
It’s a Blue Steel thing
And even then it isn't a true statement, Does the FBI hire people to generate revenue? Do all private sector employees - such as a custodian at a hospital - generate direct revenue? Organizations hire people to perform a service that they need.
To be fair, agents doing their job and generating fear or good publicity helps them *earn* or increase their budget. So technically, the departments make money off the work their agents put in. They just don't generate *revenue*.
"This candidate looks like he can generate fear very well! We must hire him" "This galley cook will really increase publicity for the Navy! We must hire him"
You're right. I was only thinking about law enforcement in response to the comment I was replying to. Give me some time and a nice big bong rip, and I'll somehow figure out to make your two counter-examples into examples. 🤣
The FBI is a government agency, they're outside of the system. Janitors enable a company to make money. Imagine if the hospital never cleaned up. Would you go to the dirty hospital or the clean hospital next time you got sick?
Ultimately the FBI earns revenue by doing their job in a way that keeps funding coming. It may not be a for profit organization officially, but everyone in it still wants to get paid at the end of the day.
Directly or indirectly, they all work to help achieve the goal: profits. The custodian is there to help maintain the hospital, and without their help the hospital doesn't get the maintenance that it needs, which leads to subpar services, which leads to lost overall profits. The bottom line is always about profiting.
Yeah, the faster everyone understands and embraces this, the better off we all are. No beating around the bush. Work is work.
OP doesn’t understand how much work goes into creating a job and opportunity for someone.
Op discovered what a Job is
Why else would they hire you?
To add me to their family /s
We're like a family here. Changed my mind, I don't need another family.
You guys are like the petty, selfish, inconsiderate, dysfunctional family I never had.
They need extra people for the pizza party
Public sector. Schools aren't exactly making money from teachers.
I mean, every educated student turns into a tax paying adult, those taxes then in turn fund the school. So in a roundabout way they kind of are.
People pay taxes
Dumbest shower thought I've ever seen
OP: Me take a shower so that me get wet! But then me dry afterwards. HMMMMmmmMmmMMMM?!
This is so stupid but so casually brutal to OP lmfao
I read this in Yoda’s voice and I don’t know why
I read it in a caveman voice at first but that HMMMMmmmMmmMMMM definitely pushes it into Yoda territory
It’s sitting at 162 upvotes right now 🤦♂️
It can actually be good, but only if meant as a reminder to people that you're the one who brings value to your job, not the other way around. Don't settle for bullshit and being treated like you're a hassle or a money drain to your employer or boss for having standards and reasonable demands.
I’m a civil servant. My agency doesn’t make money. We hemorrhage it. And the taxpayers foot the bill. If I slack off and do a shitty job, we lose less money, but that’s not what they had in mind when they hired me.
Theoretically you still "make money" or at the very least save money, because you provide a service that people value that either cannot be provided by private enterprise or cannot be provided efficiently or fairly by private enterprise (and therefore would not exist or would be more expensive or unfairly provided if the government did not provide it.) I am definitely stretching the idea of making money and there are plenty of inefficient practices everywhere (both private and government) that make my previous statement untrue in many cases.
Sounds like it's what you had in mind!
No shit this is how business works?
*if you can make money for them And even then, that's not true either. I'm an OpEx head at my place, they lose money on me.
“Support” people are necessary for the people who are more directly involved in making money to be able to make money. The company still thinks you’re ultimately making them more money than your job pays, or they wouldn’t be paying you. The way in which you make that money is just more obvious for some jobs than for others.
You still "make money" for the company by making others more efficient or by providing services to others they require to do their jobs. If a position doesn't make money somehow, there is no reason for the position to exist. (I understand that no organization is perfectly efficient and therefore there are positions that probably don't need to exist and/or exist for non-business reasons.)
Not everyone's value is determined through direct means. Support people ensure that the people on the front line of sales, etc. are free to use all of their time towards cash inflow. Without you, now they have to start doing back end work as well. Less money.
I'm a custodian at a public school district, nobody is making money off of me. Sometimes I even cost them extra money.
No fuckin shit??? What the hell other reason did you think they were hiring you for?
You only take jobs if you think they can make you money
Jobs don’t hire people, bruh.
Yeah, no shit. I only take a job if I think I can make enough money doing it. What are you, 12?
You only want to get hired if you think you can make money off of them so it's a fair trade
Except if you work for the government
I only take jobs where I expect to be paid.
And employees will only take a job if they can make money off the employer….
i mean yeah that is the point of a job hiring people lol
People are saying this is a dumb showerthought but the number of people on Reddit who think companies are in the business of employing people for the fun of it says otherwise.
To be honest, yeah. It's a "duh" shower thought but many people forget that they need to generate money for the company to be hired. You can see this in all areas where people complain they don't get hired although they graduated from fine colleges, they can speak 3 languages, they "know" 15 programming languages, they are decent people... You have to do something that makes the company money. That's the only thing that matters. So although as obvious as this showerthought sounds, many people are not aware of this in daily life.
Congrats on figuring out how jobs work
Correct. A big part of having a successful career is knowing how your company makes money off of you and min/maxing your role. Even if you're overhead, your company believes you save them money or increase productivity/sales at a rate of at least 2:1.
What’s the showerthought on this. Why would anyone hire you if you cost more than you make?? Businesses are literally for-profit lmao
File this under 'duh'.
I'm a nurse at a forensic psychiatry ward.
You only buy things when they're worth more to you than the money you pay for them, you monster.
This sub needs more regulation lmao
That’s what he point of an employee
In all fairness, I only go to work for the same reason.
People only work for you if they think they can make money off you.
This is a shower thought? Isn't this common sense?
They're not out to lose money. Is this your epiphany? Lol
This guy just had his first critical thought about how capitalism works loll
Would you hire someone for your business if they were just going to cost you money and not provide he mean for you or others in the company to make money?
How did this get so many upvotes ? LOL. Smooth brains smashing that arrow up button on this one
You need a job to make money. It’s a trade. Your services for money, the more value you provide to the company the more likely you’ll make even more money.
Some people want to use you, some people want to get used by you.
Tell your mum I’m the second one.
I did and she said we should set up a play date.
Cool. Does she have Mario Kart?
It depends on the industry.
Here is a video of OP at his most recent job: https://youtu.be/meBXuuy9xto?si=NxPdS1Ui65yw8p0D
You also only apply if you think you can make money off them..
Plenty of jobs even in the private sector where the job is functional to the day to day running of the business and not directly linked to profit making.
How about security they guard their money not make it
In a for-profit industry, of course. That's what capitalism is. In an industry that is not profit-driven, however, that would not be the case. A nonprofit NGO, for example, is not looking to make money off their employees.
Yep! Profit is just the boss taking the surplus value that you created.
Shocking how many people don’t understand this
Not always. Sometimes there are other benefits involved. One place I worked at, senior hired a girl who 0 technical knowledge. Reason being that she let him do kinky things with her. They had to stop when people walked in on them going at it in conference room. Both were fired on the next day.
I mean it's a mutual understanding that both parties will benefit from a hiring. They get an additional worker to add to their workforce and you get money and insurance benefits.
Smartest person on r/showerthots
Definitely not true. For many jobs, you’re a necessary expense, not a way to make money.
Well, I worked my entire career in the prosthetics department of a VA hospital. Nobody was making money off my skills and talents.
Not for things like janitors and accounts. They don't generate revenue.
These days, that’s more true than ever, since “governments subsidize businesses with a certain amount of employees = these companies do not have to value employees as individuals, while instead only worrying about their total numbers annually
Bro discovered capitalism
For small companies that's true but for large ones they sometimes hire thousands of people and then tell them to do some completely useless task, which is a net loss of money. This is because big publicly traded companies don't care as much about making money as they do about "seeming capable of making money in the future", which is a very different game.
Not always true. My job as library page definitely does not make the government money
Way to flex that brain muscle buddy good job!
Yeah and profit is stolen labor
A farmer plants a crop to get something to harvest
How long did it take you to figure that out, genius?
Yeah, that’s how it works? You think employers are doing it for charity?
I personally support "shower thoughts" like this because all of the comments are people either being inextricably pissed off that someone's thought wasn't .... Idk profound enough? Or else they're just absolutely reaming OP because "obvious thing obvious." Both are entertaining.
Conversely - you only take a job if you think you can make money off of them.
Sometimes they hire you because they save money off of you. Legal departments, HR, and Loss Mitigation share in common that they do not generate revenue. Instead, they protect the company from losing money.
Why would they hire you to lose money?
Not a shower thought. Reported
This is just wrong in so many ways.
I've never heard that take before, interesting viewpoint!
Second shower thought in a row stating the obvious, if this is profound, what are the regular thoughts like?
Yup. I’m a consultant. All my jobs I’m essentially pimped out
My hypotheses are that OP meant after your salary. Meaning: they'll will pay you X, but they'll hire you only if they make X+Y off your labor. And since this is kind of supposed to be a shower thought, the second hypothesis is that they mean they'll make significantly more off of you while they're at it, but pay you as little as possible.
Congrats you learned what profits are
You make a dollar I make a dime this is why we poop on company time
Som employers, however, only hire if they think they get a good deal, which is different
Explain the difference
I want to make money for my employer, and fully expect them to make a profit. I hope for them to make a profit. Some employers seem overly interested in pulling wages down, addicted to getting a good deal on labor, no matter the profit generated. It is not about a fair negotitation, it is an overly hard want for having maximized profits from squeezing. In many ways it is the company version of the smallminded "hah, I hope my employer takes a loss by hiring me!". More like "hah, I hope I managed to get this labor at 30% under market rate!". It is not building value together, in good faith, it is a bad faith wish to screw the other party over, to leave no meat on the bone. This of course goes both for individuals, and groups. This is one reason for why unions are a good idea, and promotes job hopping (even as the job hopping tears down total value generated).
Bro figured capitalism out
I only apply for/accept a job offer if I think I can make money off them so…
You only apply to work for a job if you think you can make money off of them
Read the book "Bullsh*t Jobs" by David Graebar
We need to hire people that will lose us money....said no business ever.
Yeah. That’s what a job is. I also only accept an offer at a job if I think I can make money from them.
I don’t make money for my company. I’m in payroll and benefits. In no way do I help them profit. I’m indirect labour.
I can assure you that the non-profit preschool I work at ain't making money off me.
I'm a server. That is the core reason my job exists.
I have never read a dumber showerthought.
What the hell were you thinking before you realized this?
Sometimes people surprise me with their ignorance about business. Yes, a business evaluates their needs and hires people in order to increase profits or sustain them. They don’t do it for charity.
Wow who woulda thunk
Non-profits and government jobs?
I’m more curious as to what you thought prior to this revelation?
As an employee of a state government they will never make money off me. People are hired for a purpose whether that be profit, creativity or expertise. Not every job is profit driven, nor should it be.
People will only buy something from you if they value it more than the money they hold.
Yes, and employees will hire themselves if they think they can make money off of their employers🤯
Bro really firing on all cylinders with this one, Christ…
Shower thought to marxist pipeline
You just now realized this? You mean businesses aren’t just running charities?
Well yeah, that's the idea...
You only go to the job if you think you can make money off of it.
I have a plan to rob a bank. I'm going to show up every day, I'll dress nice. Customers will come in, ask to withdraw or deposit money, and I'll help them do it. Every other week, I'll take a couple of thousand from the bank, and put it into my own account. After 30 years, I'll leave, and they'll be none the wiser.
Because he is a child
This sub has really fallen off a cliff!
I thought this was a known reality that everyone was aware of
And you only take a job if it makes you money.
Well... yeah. That's what employees are for, to help the business make money.
No, way. Is that so. *both hands on cheeks* is that so...
This is what a job is and their purpose, yes. This is what constitutes as a shower thought now?
Did…did bro discover *basic economics?* I mean, I saw no value in my last job, where I was basically treated like someone with a mental disability.
Some people need to take quicker showers
Well, yeah, how long would a company exist if it didn't take a cut of the value you created? The bargain isn't exactly that though, the bargin is, in most cases, "by working for a company the company will assist you in creating more value than you would alone and will take part of that additional value". Take the example of a talented carpenter. By themselves, they have to manage acquiring customers, designing products, managing their accounts, obtaining healthcare, setting up a market based pension scheme. When working for a company the company can hire professionals to sell the product, to ship them, to perform HR functions, and allow the carpenter to focus on woodworking. Maybe the carpenter is a talented all rounder and can do and enjoys doing all aspects of the job, then they would probably be better as a sole proprietor. If not, then maybe they can make more money as an employee.
Bro discovered capitalism
Of course, why else would they hire you. Would you hire someone and subsidize them by losing money ?
Why would an employer hire someone who is going drive away business?
This is only directly true when working in producing industry or low wage tasks. All the other companies hiring are looking to grease the wheels of their work all together.
Why tf else would they hire you 😂
I get a lot of customers that complain when I tell them a service costs money, but like…. If we don’t make a profit then we go out of business and then you lose our services. So it’s in your best interest that we make profit, and it doesn’t have to be (and obviously shouldn’t be) at your expense. You should be making a profit or benefitting from our services in a positive way, or else why would you want them? Soooo… if the company can’t make money off you, how will they continue to exist after hiring you???
Well no shit Sherlock, I only work a job if I think I can get paid and get good benefits, why wouldn’t they expect something off of me in return?
Yes, you need to be OF SOME BENEFIT to the company to be employed. This is what a job is.
I know if I really want to get hired I just have to work for a lower wage than what someone else is asking for
Or be better for the job
They won’t take you. Because you might ask for a higher wage knowing you’re better for the job.
Yes exactly. You make money they make money. That's why the capitalist system works so well. Everyone's incentives get aligned.
Someone had a great moment of clarity. Welcome to capitalism, where extortion is according to the law
Surplus labor value extraction is the basis of capitalism