The Terrible Fear of Paying the Poor Too Much

a reply to: macman

Sounds like you made a poor decision on employment, if you wanted to make money.

This whole idea you pitch is based on envy and jealousy.

No. It isn't.

And no, I didn't. I chose the field I was most apt in, and did it because I wanted to help people.
You've already told me your position - no need to stalk me into my own thread to repeat your insults.

"If you wanted to make money." Really?

No, I wanted to CONTRIBUTE TO SOCIETY.
Last response to you, btw. You will not get me banned.
Nice try, though.

originally posted by: benrl

Let them eat Cake...

Thats a dangerous attitude my friend.

Dangerous to whom?
This idea that business and the US is to be held hostage by the "have nots" with threats of strikes and/or violence is just that, a threat.
If they strike, they loose any income, except that of Govt handouts.
If they respond with violence, it not only shows the disgusting angry dog gnashing its teeth, but will be met with force in return.

originally posted by: benrl
WE are regressing to Industrial Revolution level of wage inequality, All the gains that american middle class and manual labor made during the past 100 years are dissolving at the hands of that very attitude.

Really?? What gains? Forcing a company to pay out artificially inflated pay to people like the janitor and line workers?
Want to see how Unions are destroying a company? Look at Telecom. Century Link is a Union Shop. They pay their Field Tech say $30 an hour, he/she pays $8 an hour into Union Dues. The tech does one job, like running a wire from point A to Point B. They are forced to take a total of about 2hrs in breaks per day. Their product, say a T1 is now $1200 a month.
Look at any Non-Union shop. Their tech gets paid $22 an hour, no union dues, the tech gets to perform different tasks. They get the 1hr lunch, the T1 to the customer is $800 a month.
Guess who is going to stay in business.

originally posted by: benrl
History repeats, and it would do all well to remember such things.


I fail to also see how corporate welfare is anything other than a TAX with out representation btw.

I agreed with you. Stop all welfare. Stop tax rights offs.

originally posted by: benrl
ETA:

Those CFO, CEO, CTO etc, just a different name for royalty screwing the surfs.

Sounds like your envy is redefining life.

But, don't forget who pushes the laws and enforces them.

Seems your anger, most others are misdirected.

Looks like out of control Govt is the real issue.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
No. It isn't.

Oh, so it is you getting offended for everyone else.
Nope, when you are honest, it is envy and jealousy that drives this crap.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
And no, I didn't. I chose the field I was most apt in, and did it because I wanted to help people.

That is great. How can you then complain about the lack of income for the career you chose?
Did you not know the salary involved with this line of work?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
You've already told me your position - no need to stalk me into my own thread to repeat your insults.

Hey, if you want to hold a private conversation to allow other like minded people to pat you on the back, I suggest PM'ing those members.
You posted, I replied.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
"If you wanted to make money." Really?

No, I wanted to CONTRIBUTE TO SOCIETY.

And that is great for you.
But, since it pays crap, you know want to complain about it.
You chose it.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Last response to you, btw. You will not get me banned.
Nice try, though.

Yeah, that is hardly my end goal.
But, nice to pin blame on others, for your actions. Typical thought pattern I suppose.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: benrl

Politicians in a Republic or Democracy should earn what the average wage of there state or county is. That will give them a incentive to do there jobs properly, maybe a bonus that the public can vote to deny

Most folks in Congress are Millionaires. Their official salaries are a drop in the bucket compared to what they make from lobbyists, inside trading, and illegal contributions.

a reply to: macman

I don't think your seeing the problem.

It not the fact people earn lots that's the issue.

Its the rate of increase while low wage jobs barely budge a fraction. Couple that with Inflation and you got the the problem.

As someone else stated in the 70's low skilled jobs paid a all right wage and had enough to buy the necessity's of life, unemployment was low and those at the top still earned millions and billions.

Now you got top CEO sucking the resource pot dry with those at the bottom unable to barely afford to live, without unsustainable government hand outs they would starve and the west would start to look like some African cesspit.

You also have the simple mathematics. If CEO wages increase exponentially and low skilled workers stay the same then eventually all the resources, including money will end up in the pockets of a very select few. You have a black hole. And remember money and resources are not unlimited. You will say not your concern? It will be! Me and you in the middle will slowly few the effect of this financial black hole. Eventually it will catch up as our money will be sucked into this financial pit. Doctors, lawyers and other high paid skilled workers will go the same way as there moneys sucked in

Its unsustainable. The constant CEO and banker increase by simple maths cant be sustained in a system of limited resources. A very few will prosper while 99.999999% of the world will suffer.

originally posted by: crazyewok

I don't think your seeing the problem.

It not the fact people earn lots that's the issue.

When people are pissing and moaning that someone is earning too much, it is in fact that issue.

originally posted by: crazyewok
Its the rate of increase while low wage jobs barely budge a fraction. Couple that with Inflation and you got the the problem.

Maybe the idea of low wage earners should probably work towards a higher paying job is just not the way to success in life.
Bringing everyone down to the level of the low end is working life to the Bell Curve. It would be controlled by the already corrupt Govt and in the end, the Govt will thrive still.

originally posted by: crazyewok
As someone else stated in the 70's low skilled jobs paid a all right wage and had enough to buy the necessity's of life, unemployment was low and those at the top still earned millions and billions.

And there were many manufacturing jobs to be had.
But, I guess we should all be mad and rioting in the streets because the career of delivering Ice Blocks to homes and business is no longer due to the ability to manufacturer ice.

originally posted by: crazyewok
Now you got top CEO sucking the resource pot dry with those at the bottom unable to barely afford to live, without unsustainable government hand outs they would starve and the west would start to look like some African cesspit.

Who's company is it?

It doesn't belong to you or the worker. It belongs to the person that created it and/or holds the most shares. It is owned by those people, not by people who work there.

There is the disconnect. It isn't owned by you or anyone here.

Like my company. I and my brother own it. No one else. The couple of guys that work for us don't own it. They have no say it what we do. They do a job, they get paid for said job. If they don't like the pay or the work, they can go elsewhere.

originally posted by: crazyewok
You also have the simple mathematics. If CEO wages increase exponentially and low skilled workers stay the same then eventually all the resources, including money will end up in the pockets of a very select few. You have a black hole.

The low skill worker doesn't own the company. They do a job, and they get a market driven income accordingly.

originally posted by: crazyewok
And remember money and resources are not unlimited. You will say not your concern?

They are not finite.

originally posted by: crazyewok
It will be! Me and you in the middle will slowly few the effect of this financial black hole. Eventually it will catch up as our money will be sucked into this financial pit. Doctors, lawyers and other high paid skilled workers will go the same way as there moneys sucked in

I already feel it. Taxes are sucked out of me to fund others.

originally posted by: crazyewok
Its unsustainable. The constant CEO and banker increase by simple maths cant be sustained in a system of limited resources. A very few will prosper while 99.999999% of the world will suffer.

Oh good hell.

Want to make a million dollars, go do it.

The only sure thing you and others will ever get from complaining about the "1%" is nothing.

a reply to: macman

You obviously cant grasp simple mathmatics

You dodged and avoided the core issue.


Resources on planet earth are finite, be it in money or raw material, get it? You might like to pretend its not but it is and anyone that really thinks resources are infinite on earth is blind. Look whats happened with the value of the USD when the idiots in the goverment decided to print more money? It went down due to the fact money is not limitless.

Now if the super rich are comsuming said resources increasingly at a expotential rate while the majority have little increase im resource distribution you end up with a massive problem.

Now unless your family name is rothchilds or rockfeller your going to be in for a world of hurt in a few decades time if the current trend continues.

This isnt about who has the rights to own what or decide what in a buisness we are talking about a vast economic problem which at best will mean the return to feudlism and at worse a complete collaspe of western civilsation IE the destructiom of the USA.


O by the way you be suprised to hear I think a more free market and more compeition is the awnser. If the goverment had let the banks fail in 2008 we likley would have had a restart and better growth.

a reply to: macman



O and for the record Im quite well off thank you very much.

At least until inflation and resource shortages devalue it

So, I will ask you this:

How much is labor worth? If you run a business as the CEO, and you have a bunch of different people working for you, what is their labor worth? You have everything from janitors, to basic secretarial, to unskilled labor an skilled labor, to management, to specialists in several different fields, to salesmen right on up to you.

Go ahead, rank what you'd pay them. Btw, consider that you have a product you are selling, so you have to take into account what that good or service costs to your customer and who your clientele is.

You also have to take into account all of your overhead - your operating costs, taxes, regulatory costs, etc., on top of just making your payroll.

But go ahead, and set the floor for you pay scale. How much is that unskilled laborer or janitor worth paying? Just remember that everyone who's skills are more refined or harder to acquire than the unskilled laborer or janitor will want to be paid more ...

a reply to: ketsuko

But you do have to avoid the problem of paying so low the goverment has to step in and top wages up so the streets dont end up looking like a African cesspit and thats not good either.

There needs to be some sort of balance, it has existed in the past so why not now?

a reply to: ketsuko

The information has been provided.
Thanks for your input.

originally posted by: benrl
We have become a nation OF the RICH, FOR the RICH, BY the RICH.

Well at least you're not socialists or communists........that's the main thing isn't it??

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Well at least you're not socialists or communists........that's the main thing isn't it??

If the above is sarcasm, please advise.
Otherwise, yes.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

BuzzyWigs, you're obviously a left leaning person. You need to get passed that. I have very bad news for you, even if every Republican was banished tomorrow you would find nothing would change. The Democrats are just as owned as the Republicans. Neither side is about to do anything their corporate masters wouldn't want. What do you think amnesty is all about? It's about expanding the pool of low paid workers. Who's pushing for it? Both sides.

a reply to: crazyewok

And that's what the market is for. You want a good janitor? You can't decide to only pay him $1.25/hour. You won't find someone to work for that. It's a balance between what someone will take and what you will offer. Additionally, there are other employers, and they all need janitors, too. So, you have to compete against them also. If you can't pay the most, you find other ways to make your company attractive like employee perks.

But imposing artificial floors and ceilings is damaging. How many people are going to hire teenagers with a so-called living wage? So, what kind of jobs are left for teens to get an entry into the market, and how sad is it that grown adults now expect to make a living on jobs that traditionally used to be teenage first jobs?

Having read only a portion of this thread---I'm moved to quote one of my favorite radio talk show hosts: "If you want something to go away---quit buying it." John B. Wells said it and I agree completely.
If you don't agree with McDonald's economic structuring---quit patronizing their business. Same with WalMart or any other of the multi-national corporate fascists. Nobody is holding a gun to your head to make you give them your money.
Asking a bunch of fully-owned corporate shills who happened to get elected to a position of power to help you bite the hands that feed them is just wasted energy.
You can flail about on internet forums all you wish but until you put the power of your own hard-earned money to work for the people doing the right things instead of the wrong things, you are powerless. You can rail all you like about the banksters but as long as you hand your money over to them you are empowering them.
Now I must warn you that if you employ this very powerful technique, you will be considered weird, strange, and a member of the fringe! Take a good long look at your needs. Not the wants and wishes that today's media tell you are "needs" but your actual, physical needs. Then take a look at how you can go about fulfilling your needs without putting money in the pockets of people you believe are being evil.
It's not rocket science but it does take a bit of research, thought and planning.

a reply to: mrnotobc

The Democrats are just as owned as the Republicans. Neither side is about to do anything their corporate masters wouldn't want. What do you think amnesty is all about? It's about expanding the pool of low paid workers. Who's pushing for it? Both sides.

I'm fully aware of that, but thanks for the warning.
I'm a registered Independent voter; and a Freethinker.

Left-leaning does not equate to pigeon-holing (or shoe-horning) one into either of the corrupt parties.

a reply to: diggindirt

Now I must warn you that if you employ this very powerful technique, you will be considered weird, strange, and a member of the fringe! Take a good long look at your needs. Not the wants and wishes that today's media tell you are "needs" but your actual, physical needs. Then take a look at how you can go about fulfilling your needs without putting money in the pockets of people you believe are being evil.
It's not rocket science but it does take a bit of research, thought and planning.

Very astute post.

Accurate. And, I don't mind being 'weird, strange, and a member of the fringe'. I already don't shop at those places.
I use a quite small local bank (made sure they were not owned by a congloomerate). I shop at Thrift Stores for clothing, and only buy the groceries that are 'on sale'...and meats that are marked half-off because their 'sell by date' is TODAY!!
Stick 'em in the freezer - still as good as fresh when you get around to defrosting/cooking it.

You're right. It is NOT rocket science.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: ketsuko

The information has been provided.
Thanks for your input.

I gave that to you as a thought exercise. Consider it from the perspective of a business owner, not the perspective of the so-called victim. There are two sides here, and you seem to perpetually be seeing only the one.

I fully endorse you starting your own business and running it however you wish with whatever pay structure you desire. Who knows? Maybe you'll be the next Costco. Just make sure you can successfully tap an affluent market share.

a reply to: ketsuko

I gave that to you as a thought exercise. Consider it from the perspective of a business owner, not the perspective of the so-called victim. There are two sides here, and you seem to perpetually be seeing only the one.

I fully endorse you starting your own business and running it however you wish with whatever pay structure you desire. Who knows? Maybe you'll be the next Costco. Just make sure you can successfully tap an affluent market share.

LOL, yeah. I know. Very condescending of you.

My father was an entreprenuer. His employees got raises when the company did really well.
Of course, it was a PRIVATE company, not a Wall-Street traded company.

He and his partners cared about how the employees were doing.
So don't preach to me, ma'am. I see both sides. And btw, Costco pays their employees quite well:

Wholesale retailer Costco pays its employees an average of nearly $21 per hour, about 65% higher than its largest rival, Wal-Mart. And, Costco's starting hourly pay is $11.50; that's $2.18 higher Costco's home state of Washington's minimum wage, right now the highest in the nation.

finance.yahoo.com...

Costco earns a third more in revenue that Walmart.
Read, watch, and learn.