Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

No Mr. Romney, Rich People Do Not Create Jobs

page: 15
60
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by MystikMushroom

Originally posted by Sparky63

Originally posted by MystikMushroom

Originally posted by Sparky63
reply to post by inverslyproportional
 
As a shareholder I want and expect as much return on my money as possible. I am not interested in making the employees rich.


...or the employees of that company for that matter either. What company do you work for? I'd like to buy some share in it and push for lower wages and make more money for myself.


I don't want lower wages for my employees. I want the choice to pay them what I think is fair. If they don't think it's fair they are welcome to find another job with no hard feelings on my part. I love nothing more than giving my employees a raise when they deserve it.


Did you not say in the above that you want to make the most on your money? How about investing in your employees? Or is that not a "smart business move"?



Investing in my employees is already being done. However there is a tipping point where one has to decide if it better to do that or put the money back into the company by buying more equipment, building a new facility. ect.
years ago my boss once spent about $2,000,000 on a new plant addition. He could have divided that $2,000,000 up between the employees, that would have made them very happy. But, later, when it came time to turn down a huge contract because our plant didn't have the capacity we would all have been hurt.

One of the biggest concerns any good business has is retaining good employees. This is a no brainer. Not all employees are worth the effort though.




posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


Thoughts?

1. Romney is proposing a 1/5 tax cut for every tax bracket. Obama, at best, wants to keep current tax rates. Advantage Romney, middle and working class consumers DO spend that money.

2. Romney is proposing cutting taxes for small and large businesses. Obama wants to raise those taxes. Businesses DO create jobs. I've never had a road or a bridge for a boss.

We can debate a 1/5 tax cut (with closed loopholes) for the rich all day. But assuming we agree that businesses and more spending by middle and working class people create jobs? Romney wins.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
In my version, the employees and the companies would be investing in eachother, to help build the best company possible, the employer invests in the financial independents of the workers, the workers invest their time and efforts, into improving the company, so they can make a better living.


Do you have any successful models of this that we can study? Would GM Motors/ Government Motors be in line with what you are describing?



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


Job creation is kind of a dirty business. Why bother? We can make more money just moving money There are job creators and they are creating jobs where labor resources are favorable. and there exists a strong demand. What I mean by favorable labor resources covers quite a range that I am not going to get into here, but let's just say, cost and skill are two words you might want to think about.The arbitrage on labor is about to play out. what do you have left? Demand. Job creators are to be left with one road to profit. and that road is demand. In the end, demand is what drives markets, production, jobs and then profits. Jobs first always. Profits will come from increased demand brought on by the movement of capital, that has been invested in wages. Not profits pretending to be wages, but wages in the hands of the those preforming in those jobs created. Hire them an assistant and get some cash in the hands of that fellow. You'll see a happy work force, buying everything you got to sell.

Increase demand. It's simple, get more money out to be spent, and the American entrepreneur will find a way to get them to spend it.

Have to, avoid shoddy, promote and maintain pride in meaningful well paying work, reward excellence to a point of sparking the desire to achieve.

The bottom line is the dough has to flow. Get the American worker up off his ass and back in the plant where he belongs.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Sparky63
 


As I said, this particular model is new and has never been tried before. The closest any company has come, is also the company with the highest profit margin per worker in the history of the world. It pays its employees incredibly well, and theu return the favor by showing incredible loyalty and productivity.

Google.

But it isn't really the same thing as my model, as it is still based in the model used by the current system. It is and has been known across many hundreds of years that one gets what they pay for. When you pay crap, you will receive it in return. When you pay well yur employees will treat you well, and be more productive.

In the 50s and 60s when companies still had a soul, they took their workers ability to be able to properly care for their families to be their personal responsibilities, as it should be.

Only in these times today do they say and act like profits are the only thing that matters. Things haven't been this bad for workers since the turn of the century, and those were dark times indeed, about to be repeated unless things change soon.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   
Today's REAL job creators are pension funds who invest in all the corporations big & small out there. Rich people sitting on their money for generations have a small impact on all this, it's the retirement savings of the middle class and the cities and states that really invest into the market.

Unfortunately the corporations that take the money create growth by shipping jobs overseas at 50 cents/hour. We need real "fair trade" agreements that will penalize imports made with "slave labor". So really an iPhone should cost 2-3 times as much, same for everything else, except for food and stuff made in the USA.

How many people are willing to pay 3 times more for most consumer goods they buy? I would, but I'm at the top of the working/middle class. I usually look for the most affordable US made product, if there's none then I go to the dollar store to buy the cheapest Chinese stuff. Unfortunately most people have to pick between eating healthy or their next mortgage payment so paying more for anything is out of the question.

Still there's hope on the horizon. China's slave labor is becoming more expensive and the quality isn't going up. Companies have already started re-shoring back into the US. I'd say within the next 20 years we'll see a trend of corporations bringing jobs back. Maybe even sooner if the concept of "economic patriotism" catches on.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by okyouwin
 


Very well said, you post is the cusp of what I speak of. But the greedy rich bastards don't understand that by spending their money to reward workers, they will make more by the workers having more money to spend, thus sperring demand.

They only understand greed and the want of more more more, they don't see paying more means more dispossable income to reinforce demand, they only see that they want to keep more, so they can become richer.

Which was why minimum wage was created to begin with orinally. To make them turn loose of money, and allow it to flow, thus creating growth, and prosperity.

This is the reason for the need of a system that forces them to put out more to their employees in the first place. As they are the ones killing the economy by hoarding money, instead of spending it on their workers that make it for them to begin with.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by chameleonwalker


What built and made American Great are dead and gone and their children have become spoiled idiots.
edit on 18-10-2012 by MajorKarma because: (no reason given)


I AGREE AT 10000000%

The only way that things will change in the United-States in the future will be by pain. I mean intense, strong, constant wicked pain. That's the ONLY way people will learn something. People need to suffer to understand what they've and what they're losing right now. Most of the people do not understand the sacrifices that the founding fathers and the people in the past had to do to build what we've right now. The reality is not in the TV.


I really make a point of not commenting here and elsewhere anymore because I no longer see a nice and positive way out of the mess our world is in. Fortunately, I don't believe I have to do anything except make sure me and mine are secure and ready for whatever comes; that the stupid dregs will do themselves in inevitably. I hear laughs when I make comments like this but just imagine if the electrical grid goes down for weeks or even months. All these people whose lives are founded upon this artificial system will be victims of it. Meanwhile, me and mine will be fine. Sure, I will miss the internet but we also have Shortwave and if things get bad enough, we will just load up my catamaran and sail away to where ever we decide. I sleep just fine knowing I can cut it and my children will have a better than average chance to inherit the earth.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
I tried my hardest to track down any and all pro GOP/Republican studies and watch as many videos as I could -- they simply don't offer as much solid, concrete evidence that their method of economics works.

If the bulk of the consumers in this country have more money to spend, demand on products/services will go up. It's quite basic.

I've heard that Reganomics was a success in the 80's. Looking back at the numbers since then we can clearly see that in the short term it worked, however, in the long term we ended up with drastic increases in government spending that we are STILL paying off to this day.

Thanks Mom and Dad for voting for Regan right as I was born.


For real? You would have had Carter instead?



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sparky63
reply to post by inverslyproportional
 

As a shareholder I want and expect as much return on my money as possible. I am not interested in making the employees rich.


I understand this perspective and I can understand the risk investors take in the market. Without investors a lot of what we have today wouldn't be here. On the other hand, IMHO, making 10% ROI vs making 5% ROI + helping American workers/investors/businesses to better themselves, it's an easy call. I would still be making profit off of my initial investment, albeit less than optimal, but at the same time I would be helping other people get to where I am now so they too could invest and save for retirement etc.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   
The key is service or product demand, along with international export, to bring from Europe and Asia and everywhere else, dollars into the USA and Canada (don't forget Canada, eh?) which are not hoarded by the wealthy few, but distributed as profit sharing to the employees or workers-participants, combined with a philanthropic innitiatve focused on the most urgent need of the suffering and the starving, which from what I can tell involves clean water and sanitation. The person who initiates such a company and model, they'll be wealthier than their wildest imagination from the small flow off the top, while allowing anyone and everyone to get a pipeline into such a flow whereby they get back out of it precisely in accordance with what they put in in the form of time and energy and inspired inginuity. Wouldn't that be something, eh?



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Sparky63
 

You know what sucks? That they SAY we live in a FREE world, when all the while certain if not many "employers" actually function as little dictators and thus, since our livelihood stems from our career activity, places us into some form of servitude within the framework of a class system of empoyers and employees and of haves and have nots. This is why education and inspired inginuity by the individual, to start a small business, is key, not mere reliance on mid to large sized companies to provide for their livelihood, while perhaps even subtly or covertly undermining the "employees" individual worth and value, as a person. It's insane. My object would be to help individuals break free of such a relationship, which to be fair isn't always one of "I'm over you as your employer or "boss" but quit a bit it's like that.

We need a whole new model of the corporation, as an actual incorporation, not just some dictator at the top with a bunch of minions or supervising management and the little worker bee "employee" at the bottom, like a serf or a pion.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by thov420
 


Very well said sir, star for your wisdom!

I just don't see how someone with millions or billions already, could not want to give others the same chance at a better life that they have achieved already.

To many of these types just simply will never have enough no matter what, pure unadulterated greed is the sole driver of their actions. That or they simply enjoy forcing suffering and despare on others. It could be either, as the end result of both actions is the same.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   
Only in the US of Gullible could some be duped into believing a proposition as patently ludicrous as the rich getting richer equates to more jobs for the working class!


It's all well and good espousing the fanciful ideals of unbridled freedom. But when this freedom applies only to the few and it comes at the expense of the many, the notion is proved fundamentally flawed.




posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 09:58 PM
link   
I'll give a personal story. I was employed for nearly 5 years to the day at my last job before getting laid off. For my area my job paid really well. I ran a plastic extrusion line. It was hard dirty work, but I put in my time/effort to produce the highest quality plastic pellets I could because I knew if I didn't I would get an earful from my supervisor, his boss, and my lines engineer. My sup and his boss I didn't really care about but I respected my lines engineer.

One day the engineer came over to me as I was running a product and asked how fast I was going. I told him 250#(pounds) per hour. Keep in mind this isn't your average plastic, what I was making is used to hold silicone platters for CPU's so everything had to be the best quality with ESD protection. The engineer wanted to up the production to 500# per hour. I flat out told him it was going to run like crap at those speeds but what do I know right? I bumped it up for him while he was standing there watching. I thought it was hilarious as he tried to string out the lines and they kept breaking/popping or the holes got clogged up from carbon black build up. He honestly did the math and figured with twice the screw speed and slightly higher temps everything would work out. It wasn't that easy but eventually with enough tweaking he got it to work at 500# per hour.

The moral of the story is this: the company got twice the output out of me without any bonus or increase in benefits whatsoever. But I bet the engineer got a bonus. Not to knock the company, they did treat their employees very well. I got an Easter ham and Thanksgiving turkey every year for free as well as a Christmas bonus and fairly regular pay increases. But they were a private company, not some public corporation that relies on endless growth.

I believe the idea of you're either growing or dying is just ridiculous. Profits year after year is a good thing, unless those profits aren't higher than they were last year. It's totally unsustainable. This CO professor speaks much truth and uses math to prove continuous growth is impossible in a finite environment, aka Earth.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by thov420
 


I have been saying the same for a long time now, and this is the poproblem, this is why "too big to fail" is so dumb, companies running on the infinite growth model are doomed to fail, as they keep growing and pay well, with benefits and all, like back in the 50s and 60s.

Until in modern times, where they have no more room for growth, and they run to dropping pay, and benefits and then quality, and then they raise their prices to almost entirely unaffordable rates.

Then they run into the ground, as their business model is flawed, so instead of dying like they should have, now we bail them out, so they can continue their insane business model, even though it will still fail, as there is no more growth room, they have maxed it out, and their model doesn't allow for this event.

Which is why now all the big banks are screwing everyone over, and killing the economy, by not lending money, as they are trying to hoard it for better times, instead of realizing it is their model that caused this, and there will be no better times while they rein and ruin the worlds economies.

I have tried to talk sense into some here today, but they all believe the profits before any other concern model that has ruined the economy, and the lives of millions is still the way to go.

I think you are falling on deaf ears. Much like myself.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 10:25 PM
link   
This is such a moot debate. In a free market society in order to achieve financial gain you must always first create value for others. So in a way those who have achieved greater financial gain have quite simply engaged in a process that delivers either greater value, highly specialized value for specific purposes or more value for more people.

Very often in the context of developing processes to deliver value to others, and hence financial gain for themselves, employment opportunity is created. Why would anyone have a problem with this?

I'm so tired of this tax the rich BS, forget attempting to use taxation to level the field. It's ineffective and furthermore it's stupid for anyone to want to forcibly extract money out of the communities where it is earned to send it to an incompetent far away city so some of it can be sent back with strings attached. Does anyone else see the absurdity of this practice?



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by thov420
Not to knock the company, they did treat their employees very well. I got an Easter ham and Thanksgiving turkey every year for free

There's always a cost in this eat or be eaten world. I hope you said grace and gave thanks for the food..!



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 10:48 PM
link   
I understand there are no free lunches in this world. I didn't really consider them as hand outs because I worked my butt off for that company. I have a chiropractor that will attest to me hurting my back there. I never really liked the CEO but in hindsight, I can see where he was coming from. He actually took care of his workers when I first started there. Shortly after, the union was busted and things started to go downhill from there. He opened up a shop in Mexico and my bosses boss was sent down there to train them. They also opened a plant in China and told us it wouldn't affect our jobs. Ha. I started in 2005 and the first round of layoffs came in 2008. Luckily I had enough seniority that my layoff didn't come until 2009, but it was probably in the works for a long time before that.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
My conclusion after 6 hours of intense study of both Democratic and Republican spin sites is


Thank God. The world is saved!






top topics



 
60
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join