Obama: "Profits have to be shared by workers" ... Idiodic Statements for $500 please!

reply to post by gncnew

I understand the frustration but also view statements like this by him that expose things and make people open their eyes and ask questions as transparency in a way. Corporate greed is at the root of a lot of what ails us. Some can disagree...that's their prerogative...but that's the way many see it.

The profits they report are FALSE and I've been seeing that for years. They're not profits from innovation or a great product...they profits because they cut jobs and get their crap produced cheaper elsewhere. And the CEOs are being rewarded for "making their stockholders happy." Wall Street did it. Companies that still actually produce something are doing it.

But this whole economic system is built on vapor and cannot sustain itself this way. We're seeing that now, aren't we? Only so many jobs and salaries you can cut and so many ways you can fool the "stockholders."

OP... there are just too many people in the world for the current Capitalism Corporate Fascist Plutocratic Oligarchy to work like you think it should anymore.

You are neglecting factors such as outsourcing, automation, medical advances(technology in general), and perhaps most importantly: The Banking System.

Current trending is less jobs for more people. Especially in America, where the manufacturing base is sent overseas. On top of that, we are supposed to borrow money from the FED at interest whenever we need to provide the basic societal needs, instead of printing debt free currency from the Treasury?! That is ludicrous.

We are evolving past the need for this type of monetary economy. We have to embrace the other half of our evolutionary heritage, Cooperation. It is dangerous to think in the social darwinist "survival of the fittest" ideology.

The only thing keeping us from evolving is the Machiavellian power structure, corporate greed, bought politicians, and ideologues such as yourself.

People die every day that this system lives on.

The 21st century will see(and is seeing) a renaissance of mass proportions, accompanied by revolutions worldwide - while the previous societal paradigm squirms to keep its dominance over the masses.

My 2c.

Originally posted by spacekc929

Now I see the logic in what you're saying, but I think you're ignoring the reality - which is that there are PLENTY of people who are willing to work for it. Thousands of single women DO work 60-70 work weeks at multiple jobs just to scrape by enough to feed their children. Do you think if they had a chance to get an MBA at a prestigious school that they wouldn't jump on it? You're living in fantasy land if you think that poor people are just being lazy. They are working incredibly hard, and have the drive to work multiple jobs just to get enough money to live, but they simply do not have the resources to go to Harvard!! 98% of the people who earn MBA's and work at the tops of those companies already started out in a high enough pay bracket (ie, their parents were middle class or rich) that they had the resources to go earn that degree - the single mom with children did not start off in a place to get that. She likely started off poor, was working when she was 16 to help HER mom out, and then she tried to get with a boy to make things easier but he ran off on her.

Or did you forget that people like her exist? In mass quantities?

Therefore, single mom gets screwed by the CEO who thinks, "Well, if she really wanted my job, she'd just work harder." Get real. We don't all start at the starting line in life - a lot of us start very far behind it.

Again - we make choices that set our stage. We can't suddenly decide at 35 we don't like the bed we've made for ourselves and that NOW we want the government to step in and fix it for us.

The single mother (which my mom was one btw) made choices that brought her to that place. Just like the CEO made choices that brought him/her to their place. When I was 19 I joined the Marines instead of going to college. I then had to take school for 6 years during my off-duty time while raising two boys with my wife.

I made choices to change my situation. Was it easy? No. But I also recognized that I didn't have the option to now go back to school full time because I made OTHER choices before that.

People are very rarely locked into their circumstance because of just pure fate. We have immigrants here that own their restaurants and businesses and are doing very well for themselves. These guys came to American not even being able to speak English and had no High School education...

But government should crack in now and make things all better for the people that didn't think far enough ahead and are sitting in sucky circumstances now?

Originally posted by gncnew
He's pushed a clearly political power agenda and has done nothing for the good of the Republic. I could have gotten this out of McCain or Hillary. We had this out of Bush.

We lost the republic a long time ago (Thank you Alexander Hamilton?). We are now in a democracy. I know, it sucks, but it is reality.
The people have more say than the country's citizens.

And people care about money. And money is running the show.

Democracy. Peoples' choice. Once everyone believes money is God, then democracy's inevitable ending is USSR part 2.

The fed is already absorbing and abolishing state governments and installing pseudo-leaders who are more like messengers for the federal government and less like actual Governors (or for a better understanding, refer to ole' timey term "Lords").

Welcome to the jungle...

Originally posted by beebs
OP... there are just too many people in the world for the current Capitalism Corporate Fascist Plutocratic Oligarchy to work like you think it should anymore.

You are neglecting factors such as outsourcing, automation, medical advances(technology in general), and perhaps most importantly: The Banking System.

Current trending is less jobs for more people. Especially in America, where the manufacturing base is sent overseas. On top of that, we are supposed to borrow money from the FED at interest whenever we need to provide the basic societal needs, instead of printing debt free currency from the Treasury?! That is ludicrous.

We are evolving past the need for this type of monetary economy. We have to embrace the other half of our evolutionary heritage, Cooperation. It is dangerous to think in the social darwinist "survival of the fittest" ideology.

The only thing keeping us from evolving is the Machiavellian power structure, corporate greed, bought politicians, and ideologues such as yourself.

People die every day that this system lives on.

The 21st century will see(and is seeing) a renaissance of mass proportions, accompanied by revolutions worldwide - while the previous societal paradigm squirms to keep its dominance over the masses.

My 2c.

Look - we are a product of our own doing. We wanted to buy more than we could afford - usher in the banking system. We wanted to all be white color - usher out the U.S. manufacturing market. We want all our kids to go to college and have more than we did - usher in credit bubble.

Government regulations to fix stupid people is not an answer. Economies are not a product of evolution. They are simply supply and demand or they are artificial mechanisms created to fit the view of a narrow few.

Capitalism has been going on since dudes were trading furs with each other. The "Enlightened" Ideas behind governmental control (aka socialism) are only to placate the masses who wish to relinquish their freedoms for the security of a meal ticket.

True freedom is the ability to succeed and fail... we're trying to regulate out the ability to fail - and in doing so will remove our ability to succeed.

Originally posted by TarzanBeta

Originally posted by gncnew
He's pushed a clearly political power agenda and has done nothing for the good of the Republic. I could have gotten this out of McCain or Hillary. We had this out of Bush.

We lost the republic a long time ago (Thank you Alexander Hamilton?). We are now in a democracy. I know, it sucks, but it is reality.
The people have more say than the country's citizens.

And people care about money. And money is running the show.

Democracy. Peoples' choice. Once everyone believes money is God, then democracy's inevitable ending is USSR part 2.

The fed is already absorbing and abolishing state governments and installing pseudo-leaders who are more like messengers for the federal government and less like actual Governors (or for a better understanding, refer to ole' timey term "Lords").

Welcome to the jungle...

Shhh, you're scaring everyone.

reply to post by gncnew


I hope so!

I hope so.

Originally posted by gncnew

Originally posted by Blarneystoner

No.. I think you have it wrong here. It's not Govt. regulations that make US auto-making expensive and it's not that foreign manufacturures can make them cheaper either.

First off... the UAW has a monopoly on auto-workers. The UAW has no competition so it can basically hold the Auto-makers hostage for labor. While in other countries, there may be several Auto-workers unions that compete for contracts with the auto-makers, which in turn keeps wages reasonable. You also have to remember that Detroit is still paying pensions for retired auto-workers as well, which gets passed along to the auto-buyer.

Second... foreign auto-companies form cartels in their home markets and agree to raise prices in those home markets to offset the costs of manufacture which enables them to sell to US markets w/out the significant costs of manufacture included. US auto makers don't have that option and must include the costs in the sale of the vehicle.

Third... The import/export playing field is not level and everyone knows it.

You and I are saying the same thing. The government regulations are what have given the UAW the vice grip on the workers (funny how the UAW has a cartel - but it's legal...). It's also the reason our import/export balance is so out of whack. China et al have created artificially high prices for American goods coming into their country but we consistently refuse to return the favor.

But.... what would prevent the UAW from holding that monopoly? Govt. regulations? The reason the UAW has a monopoly is because there are no restrictions in place that could be enforced by the Fed. I might add that the only thing keeping big business from gaining a monopoly in any market are Govt. regulations.

Originally posted by stars15k
I agree with the OP completely, even though my husband is a living example of someone who is being kept from full-time work because he out-worked everyone who worked the same position.

He works in repair, and there is a company goal regarding turn-around time. My husband reached and has maintained a rate that is three times better or more. The company goal was for a full-time position, my husband works part-time hours. He's stayed caught up at a high-quality level........so why promote him to full-time with more pay and benefits? It's in any company's interest to maintain a part-time status where possible, and he's doing the work. So no promotion, no good benefits......no advancement either. If he were to slow down to their goal rate, he'll be working obviously much slower. No one is going to want someone who was doing the job at one rate suddenly not producing as he's proven he can.
The place he worked for 32 years was restructuring and he was given a very generous buy-out. Now we both wish we had stayed. He keeps gettting told they "want" him full-time and they call him in to work many departments......but still make sure he isn't getting too many hours.
So work hard, but no harder than they expect you to? That's not right either.

Totally agree, except you have to realize that the company is not going to want to put other people out who have families as well. Maybe it should to show people that they need to step their game up...

But also, this is the negative side effect of being awesome at what you do. But at the same time, he has the power and wisdom to overcome this obstacle. If you are able to pay your bills, then it is a blessing to have him around more. If you are not, then he obviously needs to find a company that is willing to pay him what 2 people are worth and fire 3 people so they can save money because he does 3 peoples' work!

But there are also many laws in place that people will manipulate because they get angry that they were fired... and they will find any discrimination excuse to lash out because they weren't busting their tail.

So remember the company's side of things as well. Maybe he should convey he understands those things to his bosses so that they understand he understands. A lot of times the human aspect will help people to come to better conclusions than hoping that the nice hard-working guy will sit back and take it while they figure it out for themselves.

Remember, bosses are human and have anxiety and weakness as well.

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by gncnew

 

My point, which I clearly failed to make, was that he merely said this was something to consider. It's not going to be a mandate. He's intelligent enough to know this. Methinks people either don't understand his language or just want to pick on everything this man says, or maybe both. And it's getting really tedious.

Anytime someone who is already in office says they are going to "consider" something, then maybe we should nip-it-in-the-bud?

Or, wait, we should wait to cast our vote when it already happened.

Now that don't make no sense...

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by gncnew

 

I understand the frustration but also view statements like this by him that expose things and make people open their eyes and ask questions as transparency in a way. Corporate greed is at the root of a lot of what ails us. Some can disagree...that's their prerogative...but that's the way many see it.

The profits they report are FALSE and I've been seeing that for years. They're not profits from innovation or a great product...they profits because they cut jobs and get their crap produced cheaper elsewhere. And the CEOs are being rewarded for "making their stockholders happy." Wall Street did it. Companies that still actually produce something are doing it.

But this whole economic system is built on vapor and cannot sustain itself this way. We're seeing that now, aren't we? Only so many jobs and salaries you can cut and so many ways you can fool the "stockholders."

Also remember that PEOPLE make up corporations. We cannot legislate the economy based on the arrogance and greed of the people who want more - regardless of how much they have! The rich and the poor alike help to bring this power to what it is - stop relying on the corporations because you are giving them power by even mentioning them in such a way!

Take responsibility for yourself. Here's a start - next time you go to a job interview, make sure that the person to whom you speak when you are applying for that job understands that you are interviewing THEM. You are the person who will be doing the work, but they are the people who will be taking care of you in return. If you act like a child, they will treat you like one. If you act like you are in control of yourself, then they will WANT you. They want you for less because that means more profit for the company, but if they want you badly enough, they'll sacrifice knowing that you will be an excellent addition.

If you have the attitude that they are in control, then they are in control.

reply to post by gncnew

Look - we are a product of our own doing. We wanted to buy more than we could afford - usher in the banking system. We wanted to all be white color - usher out the U.S. manufacturing market. We want all our kids to go to college and have more than we did - usher in credit bubble.

Government regulations to fix stupid people is not an answer. Economies are not a product of evolution. They are simply supply and demand or they are artificial mechanisms created to fit the view of a narrow few.

Capitalism has been going on since dudes were trading furs with each other. The "Enlightened" Ideas behind governmental control (aka socialism) are only to placate the masses who wish to relinquish their freedoms for the security of a meal ticket.

True freedom is the ability to succeed and fail... we're trying to regulate out the ability to fail - and in doing so will remove our ability to succeed.

I agree that this current gov't should not regulate the market - they are part of the problem(hence the Corporate Fascist Plutocratic Oligarchy).

But we as a society have to figure out something better than this - be it a return to the de jure Republic, or a grassroots bottom up localized democracy utilizing something like facebook and the internet to make decisions.

Trading furs is hardly comparable to the criminal system we have today. You couldn't create an algorithm to skim millions of pennies off of millisecond trades back then. It was resource based. Now, money itself has become the main resource - which is a problem because it isn't real and can be manipulated by those that already have money, or have positions of power to influence it.

Governmental 'control' is only scary when you are separated from the government. Don't you think we could regulate ourselves - instead of hiring a bunch of crooks to do it for us? Before it was a nuisance, but now we have the internet... of course then the internet may be corrupted or manipulated etc.

But the ideology of social darwinism is expired and very ridiculous and inhumane in this modern world.

Originally posted by gncnew
Any company that produces a product (of ANY kind) will expand their production base (i.e. hire more workers) if it will increase their profits. They will give raises to the people that increase the effecience and hence the profit margin of that production.

For more than a decade, worker productivity in the States grew, while the real wages stagnated. Simultaneously, Wall Street produced many millionaires. Do you see a pattern to this?

reply to post by TarzanBeta


Was that directed at me personally? Preaching to the choir, if so. But good points.

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by TarzanBeta

 

Was that directed at me personally? Preaching to the choir, if so. But good points.

No, my first response to you was directed at you.

The second was a continuation of your other post with my 2 cents.

Sometimes we gotta preach to the choir in order for the congregation to get the point!

reply to post by TarzanBeta

Absolutely. Thanks for clearing that up.

reply to post by gncnew


Let's get real people. You either believe that people should be paid a willing wage or you basically support slavery. It is really that simple and no middle ground. Exploitation is explotation no matter how you frame it and try to justify it.

reply to post by sligtlyskeptical



Since i do not support an ideology, i can have a slightly different perspective on this.

People will not make slave wages. The current minimum wage law....it is irrelevant in most parts of the US. There are not many jobs that will actually pay minimum wage right now, short of some hotel housekeepers and laundry. The "free market" creates a larger pay scale that the US law does.

About the only minimum wage that really is relevant is the one for wait staff. It is also one i disagree with. tips should not be considered as part of their income. It presumes income that may not actually be there, especially in todays tough economy.

But for the most part, pay scales are decided by a dance between employers and employees. As an employer that has employed at least 10% of my city at one point or another, I can assure you that you get what you pay for. Minimum wage = minimum effort. Invest just 1 dollar an hour more, and you can increase productivity substantially.

Originally posted by stars15k
I agree with the OP completely, even though my husband is a living example of someone who is being kept from full-time work because he out-worked everyone who worked the same position.

He works in repair, and there is a company goal regarding turn-around time. My husband reached and has maintained a rate that is three times better or more. The company goal was for a full-time position, my husband works part-time hours. He's stayed caught up at a high-quality level........so why promote him to full-time with more pay and benefits? It's in any company's interest to maintain a part-time status where possible, and he's doing the work. So no promotion, no good benefits......no advancement either. If he were to slow down to their goal rate, he'll be working obviously much slower. No one is going to want someone who was doing the job at one rate suddenly not producing as he's proven he can.
The place he worked for 32 years was restructuring and he was given a very generous buy-out. Now we both wish we had stayed. He keeps gettting told they "want" him full-time and they call him in to work many departments......but still make sure he isn't getting too many hours.
So work hard, but no harder than they expect you to? That's not right either.

I hope this doesn't come out wrong and I sure hope you were not expecting sympathy with that post but all the signs are evident that your hubbie should take it to the next level.

It's not just about working harder, but rather working smarter by thinking a little outside of the box.

I mean, if your husband is outshining everyone else then perhaps he should think of going into business for himself.

Yours is a perfect example or what this country needs more of these days and I have a feeling there are many more like you.

Stuff like what the op said doesn't even annoy me anymore because at the end of
the day if the world worked like the OP wants it.
You cannot force people into poverty for hundreds of years and not expect them to get mad and start a riot.


Look , You either share the pie with everybody or everybody gangs up your and takes there piece.

If you want to be a greedy person and cause mass chaos and destruction , go ahead.I'm not gonna waste my time telling you why that's wrong , you're a human being you should know that equality and fairness are good and what your doing is wrong but if you don't , that's fine with me. Just don't get mad when the system fails and America falls into anarchy.







You can say I'm wrong but look at all the bank robbers during the great depression. There were hundreds of them and alot of them were consider rock stars by general public. That's what happens when the system of wack. People we may not like when the system is fair become our heroes because they're trying to balance it out.



You can only keep people down for so long before they just snap.