[Take8435]

> Sometimes, I feel like the whole downwards trend having a single kid loses the family aspect of my previous generation

There are many reasons folks have no kids or only one kid. I don't think opining for a larger family 'for the chance' of having a family member with similar tastes is really... compelling.

> Nobody to pull them up and nobody to pull up in term. Not dynasties of tiger children, but simply support in minor ways.

Are you saying friends cannot provide support in minor ways?

In my view, it's more compelling to solution the many downsides of nepotism (esp. in governments not just private entities) rather than endorse or perpetuate it.

[geodel]

> In my view, it's more compelling to solution the many downsides of nepotism

The solution is endless growing bureaucracy to implement and enforce fairness at every level and it is happening everywhere I can see.

> Are you saying friends cannot provide support in minor ways?

From my experience family members have some sort of obligation towards other members( though maybe less true or just untrue in modern day US) whereas friends can say yes or no to any request purely based on convenience.

[Take8435]

Your experience is typical only for your region, I'll just say that.

> The solution is endless growing bureaucracy to implement and enforce fairness at every level and it is happening everywhere I can see.

You are advocating for fairness - but for it to be fair - you need to be allowed special treatment and that treatment (positive mostly, from your stance) to be applied only to family members. E.g., "It's only fair I hire my brother. So I can enrich my family. He may not be qualified, but I'm the founder."

But then in the same breath, you say it is unfair to bolster nepotism and cast aspersions on the vast majority of workers who feel opposite of you.

Your argument is flawed and flimsy, with all due respect.

You may have a business that works but no one outside your family would want to work with you and especially working with inept family members. At least no one I know.

I'll edit to add: I think it's a sad state of affairs you see friends as just a convenience. Nothing more. Sure seems like there's no investment in relationships outside families which seems very exclusionary.

[geodel]

I did not advocate fairness, neither I am berating nepotism. Maybe you don't read comment but feel urge to respond nonetheless.

[mulmen]

> The solution is endless growing bureaucracy to implement and enforce fairness at every level and it is happening everywhere I can see.

Really? Endless? Everywhere? “I can see” is doing a lot of work there.

> From my experience family members have some sort of obligation towards other members( though maybe less true or just untrue in modern day US) whereas friends can say yes or no to any request purely based on convenience.

Ostensibly the United States is a meritocracy.

Nepotism is a form of corruption. It’s fine to help your family and peers with their career development but it’s not ok to hire them based purely on your relationship.

[pcl]

I don’t think that’s really fair. Nepotism has a lot of negatives, but also positives. It’s a form of management and hiring, not a form of corruption. It can be bad for a business, but it also can be good, especially once you take the owners’ goals for the business into account.

[Take8435]

It's actually considered a form of political corruption. Not necessarily illegal corruption but corruption in the "normal" sense of decision making and dealings of the organization.

[singleshot_]

It’s somewhat intrusive to suggest that my business should run according to your principles. Are you familiar with the strongest form of business, the family firm?

[Take8435]

By whose measure is it the 'strongest'? That suggests it's somehow more effective.

Counterpoint: It's intrusive to a worker's life, career prospects and their family if you decide to hire a family member over someone who (and I'm adding this in purposely) - objectively more qualified - than the family member.

[mulmen]

It is intrusive. You are also not allowed to utilize slave labor or employ children. We accept some restrictions for the smooth running of society.

[singleshot_]

Prohibition of slavery is a shared principle, unlike preference for the stranger over my brother.

[mulmen]

There are no universally shared principles.

I love my siblings and they are intelligent successful people but I wouldn’t want them as coworkers because they don’t have the necessary skills and experience to do what I do.

Slavery is legal in the US in the case of prison labor.

I’m sure someone exists who would employ minors given the opportunity.

[no_wizard]

>Ostensibly the United States is a meritocracy.

I have yet to see any of this purported meritocracy. I see lots of nepotism (as well as adjacent behaviors similar to nepotism) and things typically associated with oligarchy, even in the world of business.

Who you know and your background have so much to do with success that outliers are rounding errors for a reason. It has nothing to do with ability or any accepted definition of merit as related to meritocracy.

[geodel]

Indeed. So many things look meritocratic once one is born in right country, right city, right zip code , right family and so on.

[Take8435]

I am not who you replied to, but this is why I find it odd that people want nepotism to continue.

[geodel]

> Really? Endless? Everywhere? “I can see” is doing a lot of work there.

You seem to think it is just rhetoric. But ensuring fairness is one of the core job of bureaucracy. After all they are not supposed to be related to people they are serving or rulers/politicians they work for to ensure fairness. It is growing because people want fairness in more and more aspects of life.

You've provided a definition of nepotism not solution.

[mulmen]

The solution is the bureaucracy. I just don’t agree it is endless or ever present or that nepotism is the only reason for bureaucracy.

[geodel]

Well I see it in schools, universities, hospitals, government offices, public companies and so on. Small businesses have full discretion on how to do things so they don't need it.

Also I don't see it is the only reason but one of the core reason.

[mulmen]

Your claims just don’t align with my experiences, anecdotes, or information.

My mayor hired his niece to run a department. My cousin hired my nephews at a school district. I worked at a hospital where the IT director and the network admin were married. My dad worked at a family owned car dealership that’s in the third generation of ownership. I don’t think any of those cases were corrupt.

Meanwhile “the bureaucracy” in the form of OIG has an excellent track record of eliminating waste. The mayor of my hometown has personally visited each department to ensure they are operating responsibly and uncovered and eliminated widespread waste.

I just don’t see what you’re seeing.

[ghaff]

I pretty much agree. All of my jobs since grad school have come through professional connections—none remotely through relatives.

[CommenterPerson]

The author used Nepotism tongue in cheek. It's clear he was pretty talented. He was just saying his family was also talented and knew people in Silicon Valley.