U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-14-2018, 10:21 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
6,225 posts, read 1,731,958 times
Reputation: 2054

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
So you've gone from their job is only putting money in their pockets to them possibly putting money in their pockets but also taking risk of losing that money.


Poor analogy, casino gambling has negative odds. If you have more capital you have in play, the more you'll lose over time.
Risking capital to gain capital is the same basis by which gambling exists, just because the odds are different doesnít make the fundamentals any different.

And managing capital is the same and the goal is the same, funneling money into your own pocket. Moving around capital that is performed by laborers is not production.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-14-2018, 10:21 AM
 
5,152 posts, read 2,344,999 times
Reputation: 1848
How come whenever any of these threads come up, the most common rebuttal is to start your own business if you do not like it, when the highest paid CEOs did not start the business.?

Did Lloyd Blankfein or Jamie Dimon start Goldman Sachs or JPMorgan?

Also, another rebuttal to the pay CEOs get is they take the risk so deserve a big reward.
That may be true for a small business owner but with big corporations or banks like Goldman Sachs, during down times, the risk gets passed down to workers while the CEO gets a bonus for doing so, there was a reward, not risk for the CEO.

And if a Big Bank like Goldman Sachs were to go bankrupt, the CEO would walk away with a golden parachute. I am looking for the downside for the CEO and do not see it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2018, 10:25 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
6,225 posts, read 1,731,958 times
Reputation: 2054
Quote:
Originally Posted by SWFL_Native View Post
Hahahahahahashsa this is hilarious.

A company run democratically for its workforce would be less effective than the US Govenrment. You would call that company bankrupt and far far faster than Sears.

Thatís why they have the suggestion box at work to make the employees feel empowered!
Ahh the effective argument.

What you actually mean by Ďeffectiveí is whatever maximizes profit for shareholders the quickest and to the largest extent.

The goal of cooperative work (as it should be) is based on mutual aid and creating wealth for workers while benefiting the community. These concepts are foriegn to people who are raised to believe maximizing production is required to benefit sales, despite the fact that these wasted resources hurt the overall environment and are not produced with the intention of benefiting the community.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2018, 10:28 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
6,225 posts, read 1,731,958 times
Reputation: 2054
Quote:
Originally Posted by jiminnm View Post
Wow. Thanks for all your posts. It's been a long time since I've seen someone attempt to pass off this much gibberish and gobbledygook as economics theory.
Yeah, I know arguing against corporations controlling the majority of capital is extreme for someone who is brainwashed in believing that we need people working for their own profit to keep Americans out of poverty instead of Americans working for themselves and among themselves to benefit wider society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2018, 10:28 AM
 
5,152 posts, read 2,344,999 times
Reputation: 1848
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
Competing statements. Executives control the output through budgeting and capital allocation plans that are approved by the board of directors. The board of directors are individuals elected by shareholders. We'll leave out the Googles and other companies where the founders control the companies. So the shareholders, who are the owners, own and control the output.
How many business were responsible to giving shareholders a cut of the money in our countries history timeline?
Most small business were started with savings, did not have stocks on wall street, number one was the customer,not shareholders.

That was a time when Made In America meant something.
The customers got high quality goods and the workers were paid well.

Contrast that to today where customers get low quality crap and workers wages have stagnated so that shareholders can get a cut of other peoples money.

With the financialization of everything, it is impossible to take out the middle man shareholders in my purchases.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2018, 10:33 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
6,225 posts, read 1,731,958 times
Reputation: 2054
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
Finding another country would accomplish that objective, it's called a win-win.

For your credit union post, is every customer managing the credit union? Are all the employees of the credit union paid the same? Do they get to vote on their own wages? Do they get to vote on who gets hired or fired? Do they get to vote on opening or closing new branches? Do they get a say in the annual budget?
How is the capital surplus allocated when it's distributed, per capita or based on deposits?

If evergreen is so popular, why is Ohio losing residents?
Being paid the same has nothing to do with input=output. And while it may be surprising to you but production centers that give worker/costumer control over production tend to be more effective in supporting the common wealth than private corporations.

Do credit unions have all the factors you list, no. They are a bank, not a production center. But you know that already, similarly evergreen is still a capitalist institution, but one being owned by the workers.

Evergreen is still relatively small but growing, the reason it exists is because the private and state industries have left their community to dry. That model of large companies deciding which communities are to prosper and which are to fail is the exact reason evergreen exists. Itís a claim that a community should be allowed to create wealth for itself. Furthermore Evergreen only operates are Cleveland, not all of Ohio (yet).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2018, 10:38 AM
 
5,152 posts, read 2,344,999 times
Reputation: 1848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX View Post
It's not a matter of what they deserve, it's a matter of what their labor is worth in the market.
And that labor is based more on supply and demand rather than skill.
That is why a factory worker could live the middle class lifestyle in the 70s

That is before banking and corporate lobbyists went out on campaign to become heavily involved in politics in order to increase the number of workers via trade with slave labor nations and encouraging illegals here in order to depress American wages and redistribute it to shareholders and upper management.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2018, 10:39 AM
 
5,152 posts, read 2,344,999 times
Reputation: 1848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
Market values are distorted by outside influence and lead to the commiditization of human labor for the profit of others.
The commidization of labor should be made illegal and rather than a fine be issued, the law breakers should be sent to prison.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2018, 10:44 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
6,225 posts, read 1,731,958 times
Reputation: 2054
Quote:
Originally Posted by WRM20 View Post
You said you want input to equal output. Now you are arguing something different, where input is less than output.

All of your arguments include only manufacturing of goods, but exclude services. Absent cash, how do I pay for a service that's sourced far away? Or am I limited to only what's available near me?

To quote Professor Kingsfield, you came in here with a head full of mush, but you won't be leaving thinking like a lawyer, because you are unwilling to consider any position that doesn't agree with your preconceived notions.
Again you mix up structure and compensation. Ideally when all excess goods are available to the public, production in cooperatives will create these goods and services while those who perform beyond the schedule labor output take the rest for themselves.

Similarly independent work like self farming all goes to yourself, and needs based services like plumbing, teaching, electric power maintenance, etc. are all handled by the subsequent syndicate (as all base goods are provided for). Other services for entertainment purposes by some individuals can still have a charge, but you donít need cash for that.

But you are so invested in for profit production that you will never consider the concepts that I communicate to you. Furthermore current worker cooperatives required some degree of cash to retain production levels, but even then they benefit the workers and the community first. But you canít accept that model because self profit for the executives and shareholders are your number 1 concern.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2018, 10:49 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
6,225 posts, read 1,731,958 times
Reputation: 2054
Quote:
Originally Posted by J746NEW View Post
The commidization of labor should be made illegal and rather than a fine be issued, the law breakers should be sent to prison.
It is just meant to devalue labor as to make no one want to do it. That is the same basis everyone on this thread makes for their arguments, work is not desired but required.

Conversely if private capitalist didnít control or extremely limit all labor and make it so that work is not a choice, production would be based on worker benefit.

Instead all we have today is private capitalist making wealth for themselves and all the people on this thread defending them (because they need to believe the richest in this country are responsible for the creation of wealth, even if all evidence suggests otherwise).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top