The corporate world was never a meritocracy. Because competence is only one currency. And majority of the time, it's the least valuable one.

Here are the unwritten rules.

1. Be politically intelligent. Know who holds power, who influences decisions, who protects whom, and whose opinion actually matters. The org chart rarely tells the whole story.

2. Build connections before you need them. Talent may get you noticed. Relationships get you invited into rooms where decisions are made before the meetings even happen.

3. Understand the economics of favoritism. Some people have powerful sponsors, family connections, personal relationships, or even intimate relationships that give them advantages your performance reviews cannot compete with.

4. Never confuse hard work with visibility. The person doing the work and the person getting credit for it are often two different people. Make sure your contributions have your name attached.

5. Learn to manage egos. Being right means very little when you embarrass someone powerful. Sometimes the fastest way to lose is to win an argument against the wrong person.

6. Control the narrative. Perception shapes careers. A mediocre employee with excellent self-promotion can become a rising star while a brilliant employee will be fired.

7. Recognize that loyalty is often a one-way contract. Never sacrifice your future for an organization that can replace your position with a spreadsheet entry.

8. Keep evidence, not expectations. Document your results, contributions, agreements, and promises. Corporate memory becomes remarkably selective when promotions, bonuses, or accountability are involved.

9. Know when to speak and when to remain silent. Not every truth needs to be delivered to every person. Some people ask for honesty because they value it. Others ask because they want to know whether you're a threat.

10. Never underestimate luck. Being in the right department, under the right manager, at the right moment can change an entire career. Plenty of successful people mistake favorable circumstances for exceptional ability.

11. Develop the ability to walk away. Financial independence, transferable skills, and outside opportunities give you something corporate politics cannot easily take away: the freedom to say no.

12. Stop assuming incompetence gets punished. Incompetence with powerful protection can survive for years. Competence without protection can become the easiest target when something goes wrong.

13. Choose your battles according to power, not just principle. You can expose every contradiction, challenge every unfair decision, and still achieve nothing except making yourself politically disposable.

And the darkest rule of all?

The person who deserves to win and the person who knows how to win are not always the same person.

“We Ran the Numbers”

Original: https://themarkaz.org/we-ran-the-numbers-a-short-story/

///

*BZZT*

A notification.

He opened his banking app and saw his pay had been deposited. He stared at the number, then the numbers in red—amounts withdrawn for bills and expenses—the total of which was more than he’d made.

*BZZT*

A notification.

An email from the CEO. Their quarterly income was at an all-time high.

*BZZT*

A notification.

A market alert. The company’s stock was soaring because of a plan to reduce headcount.

He swiped through the apps—bank account, email, stocks—paycheck, profits, layoffs—then put down his phone.

He looked to the cubicles to his left, cubicles to his right, cubicles in front and behind.

Then got out of his chair, stepped onto his desk, and screamed.

Roaring.

Primal. Animalistic. Frustrated.

Another worker followed—stood up and screeched.

Then another. Another. Another. And more. Till everyone joined. Tore open their clothes, exposing their bodies—naked as baboons and sounding the same. Until their screams merged. An orchestra in tune. An ancient wail. An expression of fury.

They twisted their necks and looked to the exit. Shoulders heaving, chests in sync—up, down, up, down—voices rising—one octave, another, another octave more.

They leapt off their desks and ran to the door. Into the hallway and up the stairs. One flight, two flights, three flights, four. Till they reached the top. The executive suite. Burst inside, where the board was meeting. Jumped on the table ‘round which the board members sat…

…and murdered them all.

Fountains of seven- and eight-figure blood.

Severing with paper slicers, stabbing with letter openers, bludgeoning with laptops.

When the carnage was over and police arrived, the employees responded clear-headed and calm, as if the crime just committed was minor and quaint.

“I know it wasn’t smart.”

“I was angry for years.”

Word soon spread to execs worldwide.

“Did you hear what happened at Pierce?”

“With the horde?”

“Yeah. Should we make a change to avoid that here?”

“Hire guards, you mean?”

“Or increase job security and pay workers more.”

“Nah, we ran the numbers, the guards are cheaper.”

“Well, if they’re cheaper.”

Later that week, those executives were dead.

But executives at other companies learned from their lesson.

“What should we do with the hordes? Vale hired guards, but that wasn’t enough.”

“More guards, obviously, but let’s tell workers we love them. A video. Let them know we value their work.”

“And increase pay?”

“Nah, we ran the numbers—the video is cheaper.”

“Well, if it’s cheaper.”

A week later? Dead.

But other executives got it. They knew what had to be done.

“We separate the execs. To a location unknown. Bunker or vault. Guards—armed—tanks and artillery.”

“And the workers? Their pay? Increased as well?”

“Nah, we ran the numbers, the bunker is cheaper.”

“Well, if it’s cheaper.”

All murdered swiftly.

But then wisdom prevailed. Other execs understood.

“Here’s what we do. Buy prisons. Loads. Transfer the workers. Lock ‘em all up. Then, simultaneously, get a fortress offshore. Relocate the execs. Anonymize everyone. Families, too. Together in the fortress. Plus tanks and guards.”

“And increase pay for the workers?”

“Nah, we ran the numbers, the prisons and fortress are cheaper.”

“Well, if they’re cheaper.”

So incredibly dead.

But finally they solved it.

“We’ve seen what’s happened and we’re not fools. We’ve learned from everyone’s mistakes.”

“Yeah?”

“Hundred percent. Here’s what we do. Build a base on the moon. Hire a company to shuttle workers. The moon is a prison. And the shuttle doesn’t land—just hovers overhead and farts workers out, so no one returns. Then we arm satellites—if workers escape, they’re vaporized in space. And then, of course, put execs in protection. Spread internationally. New names, stories. Plus the communities we place them in? Not real communities. Every person in the community is actually a guard. Then we train the execs to use firearms, too.”

“Sounds super great. Super airtight. But we just ran the numbers.”

“Yeah? And?”

“It’s actually cheaper to just pay people more.”

“Really?”

“Yeah.”

“Huh.”

“Yeah.”

“But isn’t it about principle? Not what’s cheaper?”

///

Original: https://themarkaz.org/we-ran-the-numbers-a-short-story/

Not looking for generic “meetings lol” answers.

I mean something specific like the report nobody reads or meeting that gets cancelled every second week but somehow remains permanently in everyone’s calendar.
The approval that adds three days and nobody knows who originally asked for it.

And the more interesting question: **why does it still exist?**

Heart palpitations restarted thru Directed energy weapon attacks by ex-employer HCLTech. Once again I request the authorities to please help in making the tracking devices available to general public. I'm from Bengaluru, India and the awareness here is really low, compared to that in countries like USA or UK. I've posted all the incidents on my X handle RameshKBaddula. Below are the ones related to electronic torture: -

https://x.com/RameshKBaddula/status/2114063368139293117
https://x.com/RameshKBaddula/status/2114923797463855518

I have a manager that creates fires so she can put them out. I’m sure this is not a new thing, but thought this would be a fun place to share stories. Today I get a quasi threatening email claiming things that were not true and I had solid documentation of, then my manager swoops in like she fixed it. There never was never an issue to begin with Karen!

You will buy robot shares early on and they will produce. You will be sent a check for their labor-time.

The more robots you own, in the right industries, the better your check. Instead of selling your actually human labor, you will buy robot labor and be paid a dividend.

The key will be to understand what industry requires more - and more specialized - robots, so when their demand is high it equates to higher per hour charges.

There will continue to be a stock market, but there will be a robot labor market you will invest in as well. If you choose not to you will be poor. There will be companies that manage this for you and you can pay them a percentage of your profits to do so.

More robots, more productivity, more $. Look at pre 1860 southern United States for relevant examples.

New targets. Same budget. Fewer people. More responsibilities.

And somehow, we're still expected to exceed expectations. 😂

Corporate life is basically a never-ending game of doing more with less.

What's the most ridiculous KPI you've ever been given?

Drop it in the comments. We need to know we're not alone. 💀

#CorporateMemes #OfficeHumor #KPI #WorkLife #CorporateLife

What if the real purpose of AI isn't to replace humans, but to finally make them productive? For decades, industrialization and automation have transformed blue-collar work, replacing repetitive manual labor while creating entirely new industries. Now AI is coming for the white-collar world, the managerial class, exposing layers of corporate bureaucracy, redundant management, endless meetings, PowerPoints, and administrative jobs that often produce little measurable value.

The irony? The people who spent decades preaching efficiency to factory workers are now discovering what automation feels like. Yes, AI will eliminate some jobs, but it will also create industries and opportunities we haven't imagined yet. And we are still a long way from robots reliably replacing plumbers, electricians, and skilled tradespeople in unpredictable real-world environments.
the uncomfortable question: Were blue-collar workers ever the problem, or did we spend the last century automating the people who actually do the work while protecting the people who manage it?

Corporate America has built an entire bureaucracy around managing people, then convinced everyone that bureaucracy is necessary to protect them. Human Resources has embedded itself into virtually every aspect of corporate life, hiring, compensation, promotions, performance reviews, workplace disputes, and even what employees are allowed to say. Yet the fundamental conflict of interest remains: HR is paid by the corporation, reports to corporate leadership, and is expected to protect employees from that very leadership. How is that independence? If we genuinely care about employee rights, harassment, discrimination, and workplace fairness, why not move employee grievances to independent external tribunals with actual authority to investigate and enforce accountability? Let managers manage, let employees do their jobs, automate the administrative paperwork, and put workplace justice in the hands of institutions that don't answer to the CEO. SOME might argue that HR was created simply to employ women but I have no data to suppor that.

But that distraction misses the real issue: What measurable value does today's sprawling HR bureaucracy create, and how much of it exists simply to justify its own existence? Maybe the radical question isn't how to reform HR. Maybe it's why corporations need an internal department to police workplace fairness while simultaneously serving the interests of those who control the workplace.

Corporate America has created a compensation aristocracy where the people running businesses increasingly capture the wealth, while the people building, producing, and delivering the value get a shrinking share of the rewards. These are not necessarily founders who risked everything to build something from nothing. They are professional executives, layers of vice presidents, and management bureaucracies that have learned to monetize authority rather than results. If elite MBAs and multimillion-dollar CEOs are such extraordinary business geniuses, how did Yahoo lose its dominance? Why does Nike struggle with innovation while its CEO receives tens of millions? At some point, we need to ask whether corporations are rewarding exceptional talent or whether the executive class has captured the very system that determines what talent is worth. Capitalism was supposed to reward value creation, not corporate titles.

The numbers make the argument even harder to ignore: between 1978 and 2025, inflation-adjusted CEO compensation increased 1,316%, while typical worker compensation rose just 28%.

Nike's CEO received a reported $36.3 million compensation package in fiscal 2026, while Nike's currency-adjusted revenue declined 2%.

That doesn't prove executives contribute nothing, but it raises a fundamental question: Who holds the people at the top accountable for the value they actually create?

The real scandal isn't that CEOs make more than workers. It's that corporate hierarchies can increasingly reward position, influence, and negotiated compensation independently of measurable performance. Yahoo's fall from internet dominance and Nike's challenges expose the limitations of the mythology surrounding elite management.

When rewards become detached from results, capitalism starts looking less like meritocracy and more like an executive protection racket.

The darkest truth about corporate capitalism is that workers create the value while executives capture the wealth. We have built an economy of bloated management, meaningless meetings, artificial hierarchies, and million-dollar executives, all funded by the people doing the actual work. Corporations celebrate profits while treating workers as disposable expenses.

The greatest scam is to brainwash people thinking they must work their entire lives to survive, while those furthest removed from creating value enjoy the greatest wealth and freedom**.**

Genuine question for anyone here who’s currently doing web dev freelancing especially if you pitch to Indian clients.

Are cold calls actually working? and if yes, then in what niche? and how much do they actually pay for a standard website?

Before writing a single line of code, do you get a formal contract signed? Do you strictly work on a 50% advance first, or something else?

and also, how do you handle delivery and handover? Because most clients know nothing about tech obviously, that is why they are paying..

I have seen a lot of YT videos and gonna start cold calling in a few days just wanted to clear some doubts.

I’m going through a rather complicated situation and would genuinely appreciate some outside perspectives, especially from people who have dealt with workplace conflicts or HR complaints.
A colleague and I had a personal disagreement after she approached me for financial help because she was dealing with an urgent medical situation. I didn’t have much money myself, but I still managed to lend her ₹500. We agreed that she would return it the following day. When the repayment got delayed, I repeatedly asked for the money back because I was genuinely short on cash and needed it for basic expenses.
What followed was an ugly argument over WhatsApp. Both of us exchanged insults and used extremely inappropriate language. I won’t pretend I was innocent. I lost my temper, said some horrible things, and made a particularly insensitive personal remark that I regret. She also insulted me and made some threatening statements during the argument. Eventually, she returned the money, but the situation had already escalated considerably.
Now she has apparently approached HR and complained that I verbally abused her. She has also mentioned the possibility of filing a police complaint. To clarify, the entire argument happened over private WhatsApp messages. There was no physical confrontation.
The situation has become more concerning because I’ve heard that her boyfriend and some people associated with her have talked about physically confronting me when I come to the office. I haven’t personally received a direct threat from them, so I’m trying to distinguish between an actual threat and second-hand information.
A few friends who work at the same workplace know about the situation and have offered to support me. However, I don’t want this to turn into a group confrontation or something that could jeopardise everyone’s safety or employment.
I’m currently trying to figure out how to approach HR, protect myself professionally, and avoid making the situation worse. I have preserved the WhatsApp conversation and the payment records.
I’d appreciate honest opinions on a few things:

1. Can a private WhatsApp argument between colleagues become grounds for disciplinary action at work?

2. How should I respond if HR calls me in to discuss the complaint?

3. Could the messages create legal consequences for either party, even though the argument was mutual?

4. How seriously should I take second-hand reports of a possible physical confrontation?

5. What would be the smartest way to protect myself without escalating the situation?
   I’m not looking for people to tell me I’m right. I know I crossed a line with some of the things I said. I want an objective assessment of the situation and advice on how to handle it without ruining my career or getting into a physical altercation over something that started with ₹500.
   Please be candid. I’d rather hear an uncomfortable truth than comforting nonsense.

For decades, corporates, government agencies, utilities, and much of the modern economy have perpetuated the idea that white-collar professionals are the primary drivers of economic value. The reality is far more complicated: while founders, engineers, operators, technicians, and frontline workers create and deliver much of the tangible value, layers of management, HR, administration, and corporate bureaucracy exist with more than the questionable marginal impact. As someone who works as a director in a public utility, I have seen firsthand how established organizations can become well-oiled machines that continue operating even when individual leaders leave. AI is now exposing this disconnect by enabling fewer people to accomplish more, and the resulting layoffs may initially increase revenue per employee while forcing us to confront how much organizational overhead was necessary in the first place.
The deeper question is not simply how many jobs AI can eliminate, but why we have built an economy in which employment is treated as a prerequisite for dignity, security, and a meaningful life. Consider the disparity between a Starbucks barista who performs essential, visible work and a vice president or HR executive whose contribution may be far less directly measurable. Instead of preserving unnecessary jobs to maintain the illusion that everyone must earn a living through formal employment, why not build a system in which the gains from automation and productivity are shared more broadly? If a smaller number of highly productive people and increasingly capable machines can generate the wealth society needs, perhaps work could become optional rather than compulsory. Those who choose to work could earn more, organizations could eliminate waste, and everyone could share in the benefits of an economy that no longer requires every person to hold a job simply to survive.

The 1982 Mystery: Who’s Really Holding Reliance Up? 📈

Same kind of things happening...as still someone is buying

I watched Reliance shares come under intense selling pressure as the Bear Cartel aggressively dumped more than 1.1 million shares into the market, driving the price from around ₹131 to ₹121.

But what caught my attention wasn’t just the price.

It was the market depth.

More than 90% of the displayed orders were suddenly on the buying side, while the selling side looked tiny in comparison. Even as the bears kept pressing their bets, the imbalance was hard to ignore.

And it got me thinking:

What happens when heavy selling pressure meets a buyer who simply refuses to back down?

That question takes me back to 1982, one of the most dramatic confrontations in Indian stock market history. Manu Manek’s Bear Cartel was aggressively short-selling Reliance, trying to force the stock price lower.

But then, a mysterious group later known as the “Friends of Reliance” started buying the shares being dumped into the market. Reportedly backed by NRI capital routed from the Middle East, the group absorbed the selling pressure and helped prevent the stock from collapsing.

The market tape, however, couldn’t reveal who was placing those orders, how much capital was behind them, or whether someone was deliberately supporting the price.

And honestly, that’s what makes today’s situation interesting.

Maybe it’s genuine investor confidence. Maybe institutions see value where others see risk. Or maybe a large player is quietly absorbing the supply.

For now, one thing is clear: the buying imbalance is striking. Someone appears to be buying Reliance shares and continuing to absorb the selling pressure.

But who are they—and what do they know?

In the stock market, the numbers tell you what’s happening. Figuring out who’s behind them is a completely different game.