Walter Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 (This is in response to IpMan's post above)^^ Yep and how were the working conditions back then? What changed that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 That works both ways LIVIN, the market is supposed to set prices for goods, not the corporate monopolies but yet that is exactly what has happened, yet I hear no outcry about that which is a much, much bigger problem. Five corporations currently control all of American media, about four control the banking industry, three control the grocery chains, and only five (I believe) control all hospitals and health care in general. This is what Theodore Roosevelt busted his ass to prevent through his trust busting, yet 110 years later and we are back to the 1890's where everything is pretty much a monopoly and the corporations have completely rigged the system. If you think what we have in America now is capitalism, you are way, way off. If you look up the definitions of both capitalism & fascism you will find we are much closer to the later than the former, just instead of the government supporting corporations we have corporations which have completely taken over and control our government. You do realize that the government regulates monopolies. While I worked for one of the biggest distribution companies in the country the government blocked their buying of their biggest competitor on the grounds it would establish a monopoly. The only genuine monopolies are created when the government tells other businesses they can't operate under penalty of law in order to promote a single company, such as the case with utilities. Corporations can only influence greedy politicians, they can't and don't control the government that regulates them. I agree we aren't even close to a capitalist nation any longer but Monsanto isn't sitting behind the scenes dictating policy and law either. Rich? Yes. And money creates influence. Actual control? No. If it were, all the big corporations would be monopolies and corporate taxes, as well as high income tax on the top 1%, wouldn't exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deborah J Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 I truly hope this does not turn into a political thread..if it does count me out!!! ^^zooma- I agree with you that you should not be having children unless you can afford them. But those dynamics can change if you are married and one partner screws it up and the family is broken up and if the Father or Mother is a deadbeat..in other words shit happens that is sometimes out of our control. As far as the minimum wage going to $15 I agree with this. If you are willing to work a full time job you should be able to have some sort of a life. I do not go to fast food places but there are many other jobs that are important and have been underpaid for some time. I can tell you that housekeepers, dishwashers etc. at a luxury hotel work there asses off and have long been looked down upon in both society and pay. Sad really. You can work your way up but believe me it takes many,many years to start to earn a decent wage. I am all for capitalism. But what we have here is not that. When a CEO makes about 3000 times more than the average worker in a company that is just pure selfish greed. There is no other way to put it IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the chase Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 ^^ Yep and how were the working conditions back then? What changed that? fair point. Many of us grew up and got responsible. But even still, I don't think LZ have been thought of along those lines in decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IpMan Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 You do realize that the government regulates monopolies. While I worked for one of the biggest distribution companies in the country the government blocked their buying of their biggest competitor on the grounds it would establish a monopoly. The only genuine monopolies are created when the government tells other businesses they can't operate under penalty of law in order to promote a single company, such as the case with utilities. Corporations can only influence greedy politicians, they can't and don't control the government that regulates them. I agree we aren't even close to a capitalist nation any longer but Monsanto isn't sitting behind the scenes dictating policy and law either. Rich? Yes. And money creates influence. Actual control? No. If it were, all the big corporations would be monopolies and corporate taxes, as well as high income tax on the top 1%, wouldn't exist. Is this a joke? The government stopped enforcing the Sherman Anti-Trust laws in the 80's and when only a literal handful of corporations control an entire marketplace that is the very definition of a monopoly, especially when the CEO's of those corps meet regularly to set pricing. If the government regulated monopolies as you said the 2008 collapse would never have happened. In fact our own government said, on air, too big to fail, which means only one thing...monopoly. If those corporations did not in fact control the government then how do you first explain how the banking industry became too big to fail, and then was bailed out by US tax dollars, and finally, no one held accountable and no regulation put in place to prevent this happening in the future? Oh, and even though too big to fail became the catch phrase, none of these banking giants were forced to be broken up so they are still too big to fail. As to your last sentence, they still need to keep a slight veneer of accountability to keep the rubes (us) from causing problems. The Occupy movement was a start, but it was disorganized, had no leaders, and had way too many idiots on camera making the movement look like a bunch of morons. They (the powers that be) know the average American has become too decadent, so all they need to do is keep extending them credit so they can buy their useless devices and we march merrily on, hardly realizing we have become serfs & indentured servants which must feed the beast in perpetuity to survive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIVIN Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 I truly hope this does not turn into a political thread..if it does count me out!!! When it is politicians who create laws which force small businesses and other businesses into paying people salaries much higher than the labor market supports, it is a political discussion. As far as the minimum wage going to $15 I agree with this. If you are willing to work a full time job you should be able to have some sort of a life. I do not go to fast food places but there are many other jobs that are important and have been underpaid for some time. I can tell you that housekeepers, dishwashers etc. at a luxury hotel work there asses off and have long been looked down upon in both society and pay. Sad really. You can work your way up but believe me it takes many,many years to start to earn a decent wage. Low skilled jobs should get low pay. It doesn't matter how hard they work, what matters is what their skills are worth. When anyone can walk in the door and pick up a mop without any training, how much should that job pay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 fair point. Many of us grew up and got responsible. But even still, I don't think LZ have been thought of along those lines in decades. Sorry for the confusion, Chase, but I was referring to IpMan's post. I didn't quote him and when my post hit the board yours had gotten in between. Btw, I've never heard that about Zep fans either. Many wealthy and high profile people I come into contact with are huge Zep fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 I truly hope this does not turn into a political thread..if it does count me out!!! ^^zooma- I agree with you that you should not be having children unless you can afford them. But those dynamics can change if you are married and one partner screws it up and the family is broken up and if the Father or Mother is a deadbeat..in other words shit happens that is sometimes out of our control. As far as the minimum wage going to $15 I agree with this. If you are willing to work a full time job you should be able to have some sort of a life. I do not go to fast food places but there are many other jobs that are important and have been underpaid for some time. I can tell you that housekeepers, dishwashers etc. at a luxury hotel work there asses off and have long been looked down upon in both society and pay. Sad really. You can work your way up but believe me it takes many,many years to start to earn a decent wage. I am all for capitalism. But what we have here is not that. When a CEO makes about 3000 times more than the average worker in a company that is just pure selfish greed. There is no other way to put it IMHO. I guess you'll have to be counted out. Here comes the steam train, Deb! For what it's worth - CEO's making that much more than the people who actually make the business successful is glutinous. There's nothing political about that - just extreme greed! That's not even factoring in the retirement benefits and eventual severance package... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIVIN Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 If a CEO is earning more money than a company is making in profits then that makes sense. But what about the Steve Jobs and others who create tremendous wealth and jobs? If the shareholders are making a profit on their investment and it is the CEO who is the driving force; why not the sky is the limit on their potential salary? Sometimes people act like "profit" is a bad word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the chase Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Sorry for the confusion, Chase, but I was referring to IpMan's post. I didn't quote him and when my post hit the board yours had gotten in between. Btw, I've never heard that about Zep fans either. Many wealthy and high profile people I come into contact with are huge Zep fans.no problem Walter! Wasn't quite sure. As far as minimum wage is concerned, it should reflect the times. 15 an hour seems high. LpMan showed if it moved according with inflation and what the dollar is worth now, minimum wage would be $10.74 an hour. That sounds fair and reasonable to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 no problem Walter! Wasn't quite sure. As far as minimum wage is concerned, it should reflect the times. 15 an hour seems high. LpMan showed if it moved according with inflation and what the dollar is worth now, minimum wage would be $10.74 an hour. That sounds fair and reasonable to me. Yes, that does sound about right. What is minimum wage right now anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 If a CEO is earning more money than a company is making in profits then that makes sense. But what about the Steve Jobs and others who create tremendous wealth and jobs? If the shareholders are making a profit on their investment and it is the CEO who is the driving force; why not the sky is the limit on their potential salary? Sometimes people act like "profit" is a bad word. "Profit" is not a bad word. "Profit at the expense of product quality, job security, pensions, workplace safety, customer service, and the environment" is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Czervik Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 "Profit" is not a bad word. "Profit at the expense of product quality, job security, pensions, workplace safety, customer service, and the environment" is. Only self-serving dousche bags don't understand that. My own company keeps all salaries within percentages. If profits allow, I do very well but not to detriment of the rest of my employees and the company as a whole. That's just smart business on many levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the chase Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Yes, that does sound about right. What is minimum wage right now anyway? $7.25 an hour. 29 states have elected to go higher. I'm on my cell phone so I can't copy the link I found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Is this a joke? The government stopped enforcing the Sherman Anti-Trust laws in the 80's and when only a literal handful of corporations control an entire marketplace that is the very definition of a monopoly, especially when the CEO's of those corps meet regularly to set pricing. If the government regulated monopolies as you said the 2008 collapse would never have happened. In fact our own government said, on air, too big to fail, which means only one thing...monopoly. If those corporations did not in fact control the government then how do you first explain how the banking industry became too big to fail, and then was bailed out by US tax dollars, and finally, no one held accountable and no regulation put in place to prevent this happening in the future? Oh, and even though too big to fail became the catch phrase, none of these banking giants were forced to be broken up so they are still too big to fail. As to your last sentence, they still need to keep a slight veneer of accountability to keep the rubes (us) from causing problems. The Occupy movement was a start, but it was disorganized, had no leaders, and had way too many idiots on camera making the movement look like a bunch of morons. They (the powers that be) know the average American has become too decadent, so all they need to do is keep extending them credit so they can buy their useless devices and we march merrily on, hardly realizing we have become serfs & indentured servants which must feed the beast in perpetuity to survive. A monopoly is a single entity. If you have multiple corporations then by definition it is not a monopoly. And they clearly enforce monopoly laws as in the case of my employer who got blocked from a huge buy out on the grounds that it would establish a monopoly. If that isn't enforcing the law I don't know what is. Lastly, there is a HUGE difference between getting bailed out and owning the government. I really don't understand why people take this conspiracy theory so seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Duck Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Low skilled jobs should get low pay. It doesn't matter how hard they work, what matters is what their skills are worth. When anyone can walk in the door and pick up a mop without any training, how much should that job pay? The job should pay a living wage. Anything less is both exploitative and short-sighted. Your opinion, while common, is mean-spirited and hypocritical. Someone has to mop floors, clean hotel rooms, etc. It's honest work and it's necessary for American society to function. You expect to work in a clean office and sleep in a clean hotel room, but you don't want the people who make both possible to earn a living wage. What ever happened to the dignity of labor and the value of hard work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIVIN Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 The job should pay a living wage. Anything less is both exploitative and short-sighted. Your opinion, while common, is mean-spirited and hypocritical. Someone has to mop floors, clean hotel rooms, etc. It's honest work and it's necessary for American society to function. You expect to work in a clean office and sleep in a clean hotel room, but you don't want the people who make both possible to earn a living wage. What ever happened to the dignity of labor and the value of hard work? I never said that there was no dignity in moping floors. An honest days work earns and honest days pay, and moping floor does not pay much, nor is it supposed to. I've moped floors, cleaned bathrooms, mowed lawns and broken my back doing hard labor. And what it made me want was a better job that paid more, but that required more education and training. Besides, what is a "living wage"? Sorry to inform you but $15 per hour isn't going to be enough even at full time if you are living in San Francisco or New York city. So call me "mean spirited" if you like, but what you are asking for is charity and redistribution of wealth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Besides, what is a "living wage"? Sorry to inform you but $15 per hour isn't going to be enough even at full time if you are living in San Francisco or New York city. So call me "mean spirited" if you like, but what you are asking for is charity and redistribution of wealth. I live in the Midwest and $15 an hour really won't get you much here either. You pretty much have to have a multiple income home to survive. The job should pay a living wage. Every job should, but not every job can. If we paid every job a high wage (baggers, fast-food clerks, gas station attendants, etc) the cost of living would sky rocket as operation costs would increase dramatically. That is why they are considered entry level opportunities and not careers. There is honor in hard work and ambition. They can get you a better life, you just have to want it. I know a very small percentage of people are legitimately unable to help themselves but most who think their job deserves twice what it's making just want an easy payday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Just posting this article here because it has a graph that shows how American productivity has had a steep increased while pay rates basically flat lined over the past 35 years: http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/09/politics/jeb-bush-hillary-clinton-work-hours/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IpMan Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Sorry for the confusion, Chase, but I was referring to IpMan's post. I didn't quote him and when my post hit the board yours had gotten in between. Btw, I've never heard that about Zep fans either. Many wealthy and high profile people I come into contact with are huge Zep fans. I have no idea how you inferred what I wrote to mean I feel LZ fans are decalsse or low income. What I said was no one on this forum will become a CEO of a Fortune 500 company which is statistically speaking true. I never said there were not members of this forum who currently are CEO's of Fortune 500 companies. Big difference as the point I was trying to make reflected the lack of upward mobility in the US vs. 40 years ago. I would have made the same post on a forum of small business owners as well and it would have been just as statistically accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IpMan Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 (This is in response to IpMan's post above)^^ Yep and how were the working conditions back then? What changed that? Working conditions were horrible back then and several things changed them, the number one thing being increased regulation in the workplace as a result of worker deaths and dismemberments as well as expose's by authors such as Upton Sinclair. This is why regulations are required. Human nature proves time and again that the majority, when given power, will not give two shits about his / her fellow human being and will view them not as human, but as a commodity and nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
in_the_evening Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Just posting this article here because it has a graph that shows how American productivity has had a steep increased while pay rates basically flat lined over the past 35 years:http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/09/politics/jeb-bush-hillary-clinton-work-hours/index.html Really, THIS is the great story NO ONE wants to talk about. Earnings when accounted for inflation, have been largely stagnant as the US has shifted into a services based economy. And being very involved in technology, I lay much of this blame at the feet of technology. While it does create some new jobs, it has destroyed many more jobs. A great book, Race Against The Machine details a lot of this. A Univ of Mich researcher did some really detailed research and economic testing, and concluded that for McD's to pay $15 an hour, they would have to raise the price of the Big Mac by 67 cents. While his research is highly touted and respected, I think he may have missed out on the whole franchise thing, and how they have to build their prices so they have enough to feed back to corporate. But really, raise the price of that dog by $1.25 or so, and they could pay everyone $15 an hour (this is pretty oversimplified, I imagine all other menu items would have to increase as well). As we have seen with cigarettes, it apparently doesn't matter how much you charge, people keep buying.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IpMan Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 A monopoly is a single entity. If you have multiple corporations then by definition it is not a monopoly. And they clearly enforce monopoly laws as in the case of my employer who got blocked from a huge buy out on the grounds that it would establish a monopoly. If that isn't enforcing the law I don't know what is. Lastly, there is a HUGE difference between getting bailed out and owning the government. I really don't understand why people take this conspiracy theory so seriously. Definition of monopoly: the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service. This can mean one single entity or several entities joining together to set prices, however I concede the latter is what is more commonly referred to as a trust but the result is the same. A monopoly or a trust, under the Sherman Anti-Trust Laws, are viewed exactly the same. You employer who was blocked could have been blocked for several reasons yet the reason given being a possible monopoly, They did the same thing to B of A in the early 90's but not for the reasons presented to the public. The government claimed they did this because B of A was monopolizing several markets, particularly in the SW, but the real reason had much more to do with typical political bullshit (lack of political contributions to certain politicians to be exact). When the corporations pay off the politicians, they never seem to have a problem as B of A now has more branches in the SW market then they ever did in the early 90's before they were forced to sell off branches to competitors. Now all we have is B of A, Wells Fargo, & Chase for all intent and purpose. You still have a few smaller banks here and there plus credit unions but in the grand scheme they mean nothing. I have the majority of my soft money investments at my local CU because they have a much better rate of return of CD's & MM accounts vs. the big banks, however I a forced to keep two checking accounts at a big bank due to ease of device is moving funds and paying bills. Regarding your last sentence, there was no conspiracy regarding the bailout, the shit was put front and center. The government said, too big to fail, and the bailout was passed. Where do you get that there is / was a conspiracy? The government came right out and said to America, yeah, we seriously fucked up by not enforcing the Sherman Anti-Trust Laws and repealing regulation such as glass-spiegel which would have prevented this in the first place...oh well, here is your shit sandwich, take a big old bite! Oh and the assholes that caused all this? Too bad, we will not do a damn thing to them. No conspiracy there, they government just out and out pimp slapped us then sent our asses back out hustle. That is how bold the corporations and the government has become, they fear the American population about as much as they fear the possibility of an alien invasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 I have no idea how you inferred what I wrote to mean I feel LZ fans are decalsse or low income. What I said was no one on this forum will become a CEO of a Fortune 500 company which is statistically speaking true. I never said there were not members of this forum who currently are CEO's of Fortune 500 companies. Big difference as the point I was trying to make reflected the lack of upward mobility in the US vs. 40 years ago. I would have made the same post on a forum of small business owners as well and it would have been just as statistically accurate. I didn't infer anything from your post - I was agreeing with it. If you go back and re read from the top of page 2 to where I responded to your post, you understand what I'm talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Working conditions were horrible back then and several things changed them, the number one thing being increased regulation in the workplace as a result of worker deaths and dismemberments as well as expose's by authors such as Upton Sinclair. This is why regulations are required. Human nature proves time and again that the majority, when given power, will not give two shits about his / her fellow human being and will view them not as human, but as a commodity and nothing more. That was a soft ball question to you. Of course working conditions, child labor laws, etc were horrible back then. It wasn't until workers were able to create unions to stand up for themselves, did their conditions, laws, benefits and pay get better. Have unions been perfect? no. Nothing is. But all this talk about abolishing them is a step in the wrong direction for the Amrrican workers. We already know how corporations treat their employees if they are not made to do the right thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.