Lemmy.World

Edit:

• fixed error on date, 26 not 28

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/14780037

Short Summary

1. The speaker discusses their frustration with the FTC and their support for the right to repair movement.
2. They share a personal story about hiring an employee with a non-compete agreement and their dislike for such agreements.
3. Emphasizing the importance of knowing what you're getting into in personal and business relationships, using the example of hiring based on recommendations rather than random hires.
4. Highlighting the benefits of offering better pay and working conditions to retain employees.
5. The speaker believes that non-compete agreements are detrimental to both employees and employers in a capitalist system.
6. They argue that non-competes limit competition and incentivize employers to mistreat employees.
7. The speaker supports the idea of not having non-compete agreements to encourage businesses to improve their practices and treat employees better.
8. They believe this leads to employees receiving better pay and working in environments where they are valued.
9. The speaker also shares personal experiences of hiring employees who were mistreated in previous jobs and significantly increasing their salaries.
10. Overall, they advocate for laws that enhance overall freedom and prevent the restriction of individuals' opportunities.

Edit:

• fixed error on date, 26 not 28, wording

Short Summary

1. The speaker discusses their frustration with the FTC and their support for the right to repair movement.
2. They share a personal story about hiring an employee with a non-compete agreement and their dislike for such agreements.
3. Emphasizing the importance of knowing what you're getting into in personal and business relationships, using the example of hiring based on recommendations rather than random hires.
4. Highlighting the benefits of offering better pay and working conditions to retain employees.
5. The speaker believes that non-compete agreements are detrimental to both employees and employers in a capitalist system.
6. They argue that non-competes limit competition and incentivize employers to mistreat employees.
7. The speaker supports the idea of not having non-compete agreements to encourage businesses to improve their practices and treat employees better.
8. They believe this leads to employees receiving better pay and working in environments where they are valued.
9. The speaker also shares personal experiences of hiring employees who were mistreated in previous jobs and significantly increasing their salaries.
10. Overall, they advocate for laws that enhance overall freedom and prevent the restriction of individuals' opportunities.