Controlled Capitalism - A maximum wage

originally posted by: avgguy
Literally what is happening to America. People want $15 an hour for jobs that a 15 year old can do and now people want a maximum wage because it's "unfair." You people realize that this is still America right? Home of the American Dream? Ring any bells? No. Ok. I must not be tuned in to MSNBC as much as the rest of the forum.

Because people, by and large, are becoming increasingly stupid.

They also conveniently forget that all those little things they take for granted, their life necessities (because cars, TVs, and iPads are a human right, darn it!) have all come about because someone wanted to get as rich as possible off the back of some brilliant idea they had.

Ford changed the world of manufacturing and blazed the trail for getting mass-produced products down to a price where average families could realistically consider them. I bet he didn't do it just for the rosy glow of spreading cosmic peace and love...

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Wouldn't quit opening your wallet, and quit giving them money, be a more viable solution than getting the state involved?

Not really no. Since I'm one person and we live in a country with a very large, very disorganized populace which is for the majority addicted to the products offered by said companies.

Tell you what though, you come up with a way to get through to these other people as well, and for us to all organize something like that which will create a significant enough dent for them to notice and I'm right there.

But me, or him, or any other one person doing this without hundreds, thousands, millions all in a pact to do the same is just one person creating suffering for themselves by depriving themselves quite often of basic necessities owned by these corporations for literally no effect that's noticeable or noteworthy in the least.

The population is too large and too disorganized for the "Don't like something vote with your wallet" to be a viable strategy in the least.

a reply to: Puppylove

Sounds like an excuse to keep consuming their product if you ask me. Keep it up, it's making them obscenely rich. Or you can buy basic necessities from locals.

If you keep sitting around waiting for someone to cap wages, or organize a populace, you're waiting for a bus that never comes, while at the same time contributing to the problem.

The only problem with capitalism is the hoarding of cash in what's supposed to be a finite money supply.

When the rich hoard billions and billions of dollars, then they have to crank up the printing presses again, which in turn deflates the overall value of cash.

South Korean citizens were hoarding trillions of dollar in personal savings and it was ruining their economy, so their government crafted a little "use it or lose it" law which promptly got the wheels of the economy turning again.

So I don't think a maximum wage would help too much until you dealt with how much one could save. You could set it
at like $500 million dollars and the majority of us plus a lot of millionaires would never even notice. I think only corporations should handle anything over a billion dollars because they're going to have to spend it anyway for everyday operations.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Pre Ronald Reagan was zero different than post Ronald Reagan as far as economics is concerned.

Somebody needs to brush up on their history.

There was however, double digit inflation, double digit unemployment with those stuck on a fixed income, pensioners, etc. suffering the worst.. Thank you, Nixon, Carter and the rest of the incompetents prior to Reagan.

Total bunk. Regan went on a spending spree and let the Federal Reserve do whatever it wanted.

Trickle down economics is nothing more than a political catch phrase invented by the left-as was "Reagan will start WWIII'- just garbage.

Regan did start trickle down economics if you actually knew history you would know this.

He did lower the base income tax rate, citing JFK's reduction and resulting surge in economic growth, however, which gave us the largest period of prosperity in recent memory.

The only economic growth was for the wealthy, middle class bankruptcies went by 600% under Regan. Not to mention his war on the Unions further decimated the middle class.

If one wants to buy into the overpaid, extravagant CEOs that Obama pushed in the early days of his first term, just look at how many vacations, trips and indugences he's allotted himself ever since.

His vacations are nothing compared to the one before him who kissed the butts of CEO's and spent two years out of eight in office on vacation.

originally posted by: CAPT PROTON

The only problem with capitalism is the hoarding of cash in what's supposed to be a finite money supply.

Where does anything say it's a finite money supply?

Debt based and debt dependent systems can't possibly be finite.

"debt" puts everything into a collective posture.

originally posted by: CAPT PROTON
The only problem with capitalism is the hoarding of cash in what's supposed to be a finite money supply.

Hoarding cash is a response to concerns over the economy. People who like to have lots of money also tend to realise that the worst thing to do with money is to hoard it. Money loses value every year through inflation, you need to use it to earn enough to cover inflation just to be worth the same amount in real terms. Every day it just sits there you will be getting poorer.

When they have confidence in the economy, that money is put to work by reinvesting it - in other words, re-injecting it back into the economy.

Sensible people (or people rich enough to have decent financial advisers) don't hoard cash unless there is too much risk to use it. The risk, more often than not, comes from increasing government intervention.

"Rich" people, more often than not, will be worth a lot on paper but will not have a great deal of cash on hand. Most of their money will be tied up in investments.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Isurrender73

I've never seen such pure bunk in a thread in all my life.

Pre Ronald Reagan was zero different than post Ronald Reagan as far as economics is concerned.

There was however, double digit inflation, double digit unemployment with those stuck on a fixed income, pensioners, etc. suffering the worst.. Thank you, Nixon, Carter and the rest of the incompetents prior to Reagan.

Trickle down economics is nothing more than a political catch phrase invented by the left-as was "Reagan will start WWIII'- just garbage.

There has been zero change in our economic system- capitalism- since the start of this nation.

He did lower the base income tax rate, citing JFK's reduction and resulting surge in economic growth, however, which gave us the largest period of prosperity in recent memory.

If one wants to buy into the overpaid, extravagant CEOs that Obama pushed in the early days of his first term, just look at how many vacations, trips and indugences he's allotted himself ever since...

My contempt.....

Your contempt is understood and appreciated. However, capitalism has undergone several evolutions.

originally posted by: beezzer
Once you have government dictate what a person can make, you might as well take capitalism out of the equation and just leave the word, "Control".

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, "Capitalism is the worst form of economics, until you compare it to everything else."

Controlled Capitalism has already proven to be better than Uncontrolled Capitalism.

The Sherman Act, which is now simply ignored, and high corporate taxes were in place during the greatest upturn in history. This despite the leaches at the FED and their private banks.

It is ok to limit capitalism. Limiting capitalism will not lead to negative production. It will only control man's insatiable appetite for power.

a reply to: CAPT PROTON

If you read what I posted in the OP you will see I addressed your concern near the bottom of the post.

If we had a maximum wage and "maximum amount of monetary wealth" this could never happen.

a reply to: Isurrender73

I disagree.

Controlled capitalism is just another word for socialism.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Isurrender73

I disagree.

Controlled capitalism is just another word for socialism.

Then enjoy your world because thier is no way to fix it without controlling it.

a reply to: Isurrender73

You don't need any minimum or maximum wage what you need is free competition and a congress that is not run by the established Oligopolies.

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: notmyrealname

Again, I wouldn't ever call spending money working. My guys make 25k a year, same as me. Do you pay your employees the same, or remotely close to what you make? I'll answer for you, you own an asian business so nope, not a chance in hell you do. Keep telling yourself you are part of the solution though, it's good for the ego.

This makes you a failure in business. How can you not see that? When the best you can possibly do is beat the poverty line you're not doing it right.

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: notmyrealname

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: notmyrealname
a reply to: Vector99


Maybe I should just close all my companies so that I can ensure others make the money I leave available in my void and my employees can try and fend for themselves.

This is the rich man attitude by the way. DO IT, CLOSE THEM. you think someone won't be there in a second to pick up what you stopped? Man...you are really a sad case. You think YOU are the reason people have jobs.

Man, you are something. You advocate shutting companies that I happened to build and hand to other's to run as a responsible thing because I have done it well?! You are sad. Good luck and make sure you close your business before you die and make sure you don't do too well because then you will have rich man attitude…….

Also to directly address this, your perception is so flawed you should run for political office. I DO run a business. It profits on average (depending on contracts) about 100k per year. I employ THREE PEOPLE. I PAY THEM 25 THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR EACH.

Yes I took a different approach towards business. I could EASILY drop my guys to 10k a year, putting an extra 45k a year in my pocket. I didn't do that. I figured out costs and legalities to hire them and keep them as independent contractors. They don't contract anything but the job I send them to. They also make no less than I would (after taxes of course).

So yea, i have an idea. I work a full time 38k a year management job because I want to pay my employees fair. Granted, I kick ass at my restaurant job, so most of that work can overlap with my business. Do your employees make 25k a year for 30-35 hours a week of work?

I'm happy to make less and say I pay 3 people very well rather than your road thinking you are important and what you do or own couldn't be replaced in a heartbeat. Your jobs could be replaced that fast, mine couldn't.

Okay either you're terrible at business or full of....
If your business PROFITS 100K/annually and you pay yourself and 3 people 25K each what happens to the other 100k? You do know that PROFIT is counted AFTER payroll right? So you make 125k and they make 25k? Or your business actually has a net profit of zero. Which is it?

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: Isurrender73

You don't need any minimum or maximum wage what you need is free competition and a congress that is not run by the established Oligopolies.

No

Free competition has lead to 1% owning 50% of all global wealh.

Deregulation has proven to be a failure that only benefits a few. The 99% were far more successful when the corporations were regulated.

This is a historical fact.

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: notmyrealname

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: notmyrealname
a reply to: Vector99


Maybe I should just close all my companies so that I can ensure others make the money I leave available in my void and my employees can try and fend for themselves.

This is the rich man attitude by the way. DO IT, CLOSE THEM. you think someone won't be there in a second to pick up what you stopped? Man...you are really a sad case. You think YOU are the reason people have jobs.

Man, you are something. You advocate shutting companies that I happened to build and hand to other's to run as a responsible thing because I have done it well?! You are sad. Good luck and make sure you close your business before you die and make sure you don't do too well because then you will have rich man attitude…….

Also to directly address this, your perception is so flawed you should run for political office. I DO run a business. It profits on average (depending on contracts) about 100k per year. I employ THREE PEOPLE. I PAY THEM 25 THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR EACH.

Yes I took a different approach towards business. I could EASILY drop my guys to 10k a year, putting an extra 45k a year in my pocket. I didn't do that. I figured out costs and legalities to hire them and keep them as independent contractors. They don't contract anything but the job I send them to. They also make no less than I would (after taxes of course).

So yea, i have an idea. I work a full time 38k a year management job because I want to pay my employees fair. Granted, I kick ass at my restaurant job, so most of that work can overlap with my business. Do your employees make 25k a year for 30-35 hours a week of work?

I'm happy to make less and say I pay 3 people very well rather than your road thinking you are important and what you do or own couldn't be replaced in a heartbeat. Your jobs could be replaced that fast, mine couldn't.

I apologize for multiple replies but I can't help it...
How do you figure paying 25k/year for 30-35 hours per week is "paid well"? That's terrible pay. McDonalds pays that. And 38k a year as a manager? That's not success. I hate to break it to you but you're not paying anyone well and you're being ripped off yourself. It's actually offensive and degrading that you would think paying someone 25k/year for 75-80% full time work is "very well paid".

Solution : raise the minimum wage to a sufficient high level that the welfare top up is no longer needed. This levels the playing field for companies who are try to be ethical but cannot currently compete with unethical low payers.

How is this a solution? We all know that business will jack prices accordingly if this happens on a large scale - no one is going to shrink their profit margin, at least not for long. So when prices go up and Mr. $15/minimum wage goes to buy a jar of peanut butter that now costs double is he really ahead? Even if businesses don't immediately jack up prices it will happen gradually and quietly over time. You can't outlaw profit margins. Even if you did, companies will pack up and go overseas where other countries will happily welcome them and their jobs.

Maybe the solution is people should shut up, put their head down, work harder, and climb themselves out of the hole instead of looking for a handout. Anyone working at McDonalds for their entire life demanding to make $40k a year is lazy. If you choose to stay at McDonalds stay there but don't expect to make the same as someone who worked harder than you.

The laziness now - especially in my generation and younger (call it 15-35) - is disgusting. The fact that ANYONE thinks they're entitled to something from anyone else is terrible. The fact that you're sitting here whining that a company gets X, Y, and Z from the government and its evil for doing so but then turning around and asking for the exact same for yourself is hypocrisy. It's not the job of corporations to provide welfare. It's your job in life to not need it. Aside from a small minority of people, if you're on welfare and not working you're failing life. You shouldn't even be on this forum. You should be out looking for a job or creating your own. People whine and moan that this isn't possible - look around you. People do it every single day.

originally posted by: Isurrender73

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: Isurrender73

You don't need any minimum or maximum wage what you need is free competition and a congress that is not run by the established Oligopolies.

No

Free competition has lead to 1% owning 50% of all global wealh.

Deregulation has proven to be a failure that only benefits a few. The 99% were far more successful when the corporations were regulated.

This is a historical fact.

A fact eh? Where? When? How?

I'll save you the time. It's not a fact. Don't go claiming anything is a fact unless you can support it.

originally posted by: beezzer
Once you have government dictate what a person can make, you might as well take capitalism out of the equation and just leave the word, "Control".

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, "Capitalism is the worst form of economics, until you compare it to everything else."

No CEO is worth even a Million Dollars. They simply don't do that much, don't make that many decisions that matter and don't really have the impact on the companies success that warrant a Million Salary. No one does really. Why they get paid so much is because they will line the pockets of the rest of the board members and politicians with large sums of cash. They also hire peoples families or network with other rich people to make sure their kids and family get an edge on high paying jobs. It is all a big scam and if your not a part of it your working for nothing.