[pdntspa]

Are you sure about that? So much of "good business practice" is really exploiting your suppliers. If you are trying to underpay for a resource, or forcing cost cuts, or simply taking more of the pie that you previously gave your resource, for the same or better quality service, you are exploiting that resource.

[brigadier132]

Economic transactions only happen if there is a mutual benefit. Typically one side of the transaction has more market power than the other and captures more of the surplus but the transaction doesn't happen if one side is worse off from it.

The entire idea of economic transactions being exploitative is literal Marxist propaganda. If you read the word "exploit" in some news article and it's referring to economic transactions, you are reading propaganda.

[Incipient]

"exploit" has two perfectly usable definitions in this context, essentially. One is negative, one is not.

    To employ to the greatest possible advantage.

    To make use of selfishly or unethically.

[brigadier132]

Yes, they are always using the second definition.

[BestHackerOnHN]

Loving this classic HackerNews-type discussion!!!

[pdntspa]

I don't usually ask for citations on comment threads, but assserting that 'exploitation' is Marxist propaganda is gonna need some citations for me to take even remotely seriously. Otherwise, talk about room temperature IQs...

> Economic transactions only happen if there is a mutual benefit.

There are all sorts of coercive circumstances that may appear mutually beneficial on a superficial level, but may actually not be the case, whether due to contract details, opportunity costs, strategic mistakes, or otherwise. Perhaps this is true given perfect information and execution, but the real world is much more messy.

As an example, consider Spotify or Adobe's transition to a subscription model. There are a lot of people for whom those models are a very bad deal compared to what was.

[BestHackerOnHN]

> I don't usually ask for citations on comment threads

No - please do!!! It'll ensure we have robust discussions on this great site!

[brigadier132]

It's a dog whistle. There are no studies on this, why would academia (which for the field that would study this is 100% composed of leftists) have a study on leftist dog whistles?

Also, putting any value on "studies" when they almost universally fail to replicate outside of hard sciences is dumb.

[pdntspa]

Hillsdale College somehow sends me a circular several times a year full of right-wing neoconservative religious cocksucking. That right there immediately disproves your "100% composed of leftists" assertion. I'm sure the students and faculty at BYU or USD or any number of other religious academic institutions would agree.

[brigadier132]

For someone so in touch with what studies say you seem to have a very inaccurate view of the political leanings of academics

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GYOm6ciXcAAZ0vl?format=jpg&name=...

You see, all the fake fields of studies are field with leftists. And sure, you might say democrats aren't leftists, which is what every dumbass marxist says.