[hayst4ck]

Just like in physics where you can choose a point of origin to make calculations easier. Choosing the frame from which to analyze the situation can often determine the conclusion with presuppositions encoded into the language of the frame.

Here is the truth: Wage measures power, not usefulness, not productivity. Productivity puts a cap on wages because you can't pay a person more than they produce, but it does not determine the wage.

So when someone says:

> The company needs to lower costs, and do some layoffs, in order to make it more profitable.

This denies the idea that labor could be powerful enough to hurt the bottom line of the company enough that layoffs are not profitable.

The frame (more profit good) hid that for labor more wage and less layoffs are good. What is best for the company is being confused for what is best for everyone or what is best for labor, and labor cannot get what is best for themselves because they have no power.

You presupposed that what is best for the company is what is best with your choice of frame.

[chii]

> What is best for the company is being confused for what is best for everyone

and there we have it - the difference in point of view. No company (nor anyone really) is making decisions that is "best for everyone", because that would imply altruism. And i am a stern believer that altruism does not exist.