The working class revolution in America

What really ticks people off and what could lead to real problems down the road is the same companies who claim they can not afford to pay workers more are making billions in profits every quater. So the question becomes how do you balance a companies drive for max profits while also paying workers a living wage. Perhaps a max profit law like is done with power companies and other monopolies. What is also kind of silly is those people would spend that money and drive the economy.

Say if you took a billion of McDonalds 5.5 billion yearly profits and put that into paying the labor force a living wage. That billion would be spent on food, rent, car, etc. and go back into the economy. As it is the billion end up with people who already have billions who just keep it with the rest. That makes zero economic sense.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I'm talking about being able to provide food and shelter, not xboxes and smart phones. The government doesn't subsidize cable TV and video games...

a reply to: MrSpad

Right. I've said it so many times I almost feel nauseated:

People with money increase demand and create the need for more jobs!

If you want to sell more crap, then you need people with money to buy your crap.

Corporations posting record profits and earning billions for their top few shareholders are cutting themselves off at the knees. Pretty soon they won't have any customers to afford their products!

This isn't rocket science people.

originally posted by: MrSpad
What really ticks people off and what could lead to real problems down the road is the same companies who claim they can not afford to pay workers more are making billions in profits every quater. So the question becomes how do you balance a companies drive for max profits while also paying workers a living wage. Perhaps a max profit law like is done with power companies and other monopolies. What is also kind of silly is those people would spend that money and drive the economy.

Say if you took a billion of McDonalds 5.5 billion yearly profits and put that into paying the labor force a living wage. That billion would be spent on food, rent, car, etc. and go back into the economy. As it is the billion end up with people who already have billions who just keep it with the rest. That makes zero economic sense.

You seem to have no real concept of how markets work. You have more money in your pockets as do your neighbors and me, from higher wages. Well guess what happens to prices of stuff we buy? Have a clue about that?

originally posted by: agenda51
a reply to: Bilk22

a truly communistic society is a pipe dream as is a truly capitalistic society. Yes both could work. But not with Human beings.

two things rule jealousy and greed. the greedy use jealousy as a tool to dictate the citizenry. Most common people are dictated by their own feelings of jealousy than some personal greed. Thats why there is so much hate going around. turn on the television....look at all the beautiful people....look what they have....these people are all just so great. Life is not fair......now go apply for food-stamps...free phones...etc. etc. make other people pay for it. Forget about hard work and self sacrifice...other people help you because because your so relevant to the world while you do nothing....and produce nothing.

Unfortunately you're not telling me anything I didn't already know. It's called advertising. Make something seems as if you can't live without it and everyone will demand it or feel they got the short end.

originally posted by: ketsuko
Cloward-Piven.

The top comes down while the bottom rises up, and those of us left in the middle are squashed out and destroyed. Then you replace it with a truly communist society. The Workers Paradise.

Well something like that, but in the end, no one will be happy - well except those who are on the top. They'll remain there. The lower economic class and the middle will be one. We will all live on an allowance. There may be some tolerances in the formula of how things are apportioned, but does anyone think this is a good idea or a workable idea?

People like Hillary Clinton and others have spoken about this idea. You mentioned where it came from. These leeches on our society (one previously mentioned) are nearing their expiration dates and want to see this happen in their life times. The full press has been on for the last decade.

a reply to: MrSpad

I may be wrong here, but I believe individual franchise holders set their own wage rates for the 85% of McDonald's restaurants which are not directly owned and operated by McDonald's corporate. Anyone whose upset about their McJob can most likely track someone down in their own hometown who should be the target of their dissatisfaction (aside from the obvious, Man in the Mirror, that is).

Bottom line here, all eyes should be turned towards DC to resolve the worker wage gripes inside America. The solution, however, doesn't lie in neutering capitalism on the national level via profit caps and minimum wage increases... it lies SOLELY in passing national protectionist policies which are a boon to national level capitalism. I'm talking about massive import tariffs and foreign corporate investment taxes, here. Remove the shiny gold plating from outsourcing and offshoring, return to the pre globalism policies America built her empire on immediately following WWII.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: MrSpad

Right. I've said it so many times I almost feel nauseated:

People with money increase demand and create the need for more jobs!

If you want to sell more crap, then you need people with money to buy your crap.

Corporations posting record profits and earning billions for their top few shareholders are cutting themselves off at the knees. Pretty soon they won't have any customers to afford their products!

This isn't rocket science people.

You might need a course in economics. How do they arrive at record profits if they don't have enough consumers now to buy their crap? You do know that if everyone had a million dollars, everyone would be poor?

Eventually prices on basics like food and housing are going to have to go DOWN or wages are going to have to go UP.

One or the other, and neither has been happening for quite some time. What we have seen are wages staying pretty much the same, with prices continuing to rise. The profit from those increased prices is floating to the top and staying there.

I really don't know what'll happen -- because eventually the system is going to get to top heavy to support itself. There simply won't be any customers anymore if one of the two things I mentioned doesn't happen.

a reply to: Bilk22

A lot of the multi-national corporations are making profits from their operations in other countries. China, for example has a ton of new potential customers. The iPhone in China for example is how Apple is pulling its profit and success.

The purchasing power of the average American has diminished dramatically in the last 50 years, you cannot deny that.

just think how much violent crime would occur if the government did not pay off the lower class and provide an entire lifestyle. there would be all out anarchy. once the middle class is totally milked dry its going to get interesting. WW3 and probably a nice civil war of some sort to thin the herd to pose less of a threat to the 1%. probably a few nuked metropolitan areas. maybe throw some disease outbreak in there as well.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Bilk22

A lot of the multi-national corporations are making profits from their operations in other countries. China, for example has a ton of new potential customers. The iPhone in China for example is how Apple is pulling its profit and success.

The purchasing power of the average American has diminished dramatically in the last 50 years, you cannot deny that.

OK I don't disagree, but what does this have to do with the price of tea in China?

originally posted by: agenda51
just think how much violent crime would occur if the government did not pay off the lower class and provide an entire lifestyle. there would be all out anarchy. once the middle class is totally milked dry its going to get interesting. WW3 and probably a nice civil war of some sort to thin the herd to pose less of a threat to the 1%. probably a few nuked metropolitan areas. maybe throw some disease outbreak in there as well.

Well, we're already seeing versions of "bread & circus" reminiscent of the Roman Empire. I think that history tends to repeat itself, so if we look at the Roman Empire we might catch a few clues on what might be issues facing America in the future.

Perhaps we won't be sacked by barbarians in the traditional sense, but we may be sacked financially by other nations in this age of globalization.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I'm talking about being able to provide food and shelter, not xboxes and smart phones. The government doesn't subsidize cable TV and video games...

They do when people who should be spending their earnings on food instead buy toys and then hold their hands out for those food stamps.

a reply to: Bilk22

There are a lot more customers in China these days, and their middle class is growing -- while ours is shrinking.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Bilk22

There are a lot more customers in China these days, and their middle class is growing -- while ours is shrinking.

Not disagreeing, but make a point. How does this apply to the conversation? Off-shore profits aren't taxed - well they are taxed, but corporations can defer that tax almost indefinitely. Obama was going to address this. The House and Senate were both run by democrats. Did you see him fix this? I didn't but maybe I missed it.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Well, I can't speak for those people as I'm not one of them -- but I can tell you the price of rent is insane (and probably justified given the market) -- so is the cost of everything.

You're right that personal responsibility needs to be included, but living on minimum wage is impossible. When the minimum wage was first enacted, it was meant to be a living wage:

The federal minimum wage was made law by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1933. It was declared unconstitutional in 1935, reenacted in 1938, and subsequently ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court in 1941 under the commerce clause. During this period, Roosevelt said many things in support of the minimum wage law and is very clear about what he intended. In 1933, FDR says:

No business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country.

He’s remarkably specific:

By living wages, I mean more than a bare subsistence level—I mean the wages of a decent living.

Source
For some, It's not so easy to pull themselves up by their bootstraps when they don't have any boots coming into the world either.

a reply to: Bilk22

Maybe you should pay closer attention to the conversation of the thread.

Just saying.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Your going to spawn the skilled jobs and value of a job crowd who are totally amoral.

Nope they don't care if they have to arm themselves to teeth because people are killing each other for pennies or bread as long as we follow business principles and analyze our economy from a strictly profit based perspective that has absolutely nothing to do with the health of the community and the nation at large.

a reply to: onequestion

Probably.

Oh well, greed is good and "I gots mine". That is the new American motto these days, right?