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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-07-2019, 02:38 PM
 
861 posts, read 537,520 times
Reputation: 2435

Advertisements

Income inequality? Not everyone has the same skill set, knowledge, drive, ambition, to do a job. A 9-5'er that watches the clock all day shouldn't have the same income as someone that burns the midnight oil to crank out the next widget everyone "has to have". Even if they have the same job description. Of course that second person should make more. When raises come around every year I look at who really delivered and who didn't. Then I reward based on that. Even if I hired the people at the same time, eventually someone will stand out to help the business thrive. When that happens, they are rewarded more and rightfully so.

I understood that. And as a college drop out I realized early I was not going to be smarter then those around me that did finish. I realized I was going to have to out hustle and out work all of those people. Rather then say "the man was keeping me down", I did what I could to prove myself to others. I pushed to be a manager, then director, then...etc.
Income inequality and the burning desire to provide for my very young family is what drove me. Eventually I rose through the ranks and now have employees with master degrees working for me. More need to leave the victim mentality at home and just plain work.

Last edited by 2Loud; 10-07-2019 at 02:48 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-07-2019, 03:24 PM
 
7,731 posts, read 1,773,670 times
Reputation: 18678
^^^ Good for you! (And I agree absolutely, but I can't give you any more reps.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2019, 03:28 PM
 
3,595 posts, read 2,438,058 times
Reputation: 2778
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Loud View Post
Income inequality? Not everyone has the same skill set, knowledge, drive, ambition, to do a job. A 9-5'er that watches the clock all day shouldn't have the same income as someone that burns the midnight oil to crank out the next widget everyone "has to have". Even if they have the same job description. Of course that second person should make more. When raises come around every year I look at who really delivered and who didn't. Then I reward based on that. Even if I hired the people at the same time, eventually someone will stand out to help the business thrive. When that happens, they are rewarded more and rightfully so.

I understood that. And as a college drop out I realized early I was not going to be smarter then those around me that did finish. I realized I was going to have to out hustle and out work all of those people. Rather then say "the man was keeping me down", I did what I could to prove myself to others. I pushed to be a manager, then director, then...etc.
Income inequality and the burning desire to provide for my very young family is what drove me. Eventually I rose through the ranks and now have employees with master degrees working for me. More need to leave the victim mentality at home and just plain work.
When people complain about income inequality they aren't generally talking about managers or hard-workers who earn above-average wages. They're talking about people who have so much money that their children's children will inherit more money than most people see in their lifetimes. I don't care about people who earn $500k per year, I care about people earning more in a day than most people earn in a year. That's a little more than burning the midnight oil.

Even if you could somehow think that people "deserve" to be multimillionaires and billionaires, their existence warps the economic and political systems of the country. They become too big to fail. They exercise undue influence on those around them. They become nobles and monarchs in all but name. Concentrating that much wealth into the hands of individuals is antithetical to democracy and puts to rest any notion of a free market composed of rational actors on equal footing. Unrestrained capitalism with extreme wealth inequality is not a free market democracy, it's an aristocracy with a rationalist veneer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-13-2019, 02:35 AM
 
7,110 posts, read 3,212,238 times
Reputation: 4516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
So what if it was?

I was with some Soviet army officers on Druzba '86 and I had my little boom-box with me.

They didn't know what cassette tapes were. They'd never seen them. I was trying to explain what digital audio tape (DAT) was and they didn't understand. They didn't understand CDs, either.

All they had was vinyl.

All the niceties and little things you don't appreciate in life are the result of Capitalism.

It is Capitalists who provide you with all the things you like, because Socialists -- whether government or non-government -- and Communists never will.

I gave them all my Levi blue jeans, too. In the Soviet Union, it cost too much to turn cotton into denim, so there were no denim jeans.

The cost of they fabric dyes was another factor.



That has no bearing on Capitalism.

If you were knowledgeable about Economics, you'd know we use the Free Market System paired with Capitalist Property Theory.

Because you're not knowledgeable, you made the newby mistake of conflating Capitalist Property Theory with the Free Market Economic System.

That are not the same thing.

The Free Market consists of consumers of all classes engaging in voluntary transactions.

Some sellers are lacking in morals and ethics and will lie, engage in fraudulent concealment, fraudulent inducement, or other fraudulent misrepresentations, but there are laws to punish those that do make the victims whole again.

Note that sellers who engage in fraud are not products of the Free Market System or Capitalist Property Theory, because such persons also exist in Command Systems and where the Socialist Property Theory is used.

In other words, it's part and parcel of human nature, and not any Economic System or Property Theory.



Who cares? Price is free to do whatever he wants.

The average CEO salary in the US is $236,020.

That is reality.

I'm sure you will now rush to a propaganda website that has cherry-picked 500 CEOs from 500 companies out of the 23+ Million and claim CEO salaries are whatever, but that's not reality.

Just northeast of me is an area with 100+ manufacturing companies and they average about 450 employees each.

I happen to know a few CEOs do earn more than $1 Million but 90% earn $500,000 or less and most only earn about $250,000 to $350,000.



No. "Inequality" is a nothing-burger predicated on jealousy and envy and hatred and no objective measures.



No.

Pick one of the propaganda websites you use to peddle your nonsense.

I guarantee you they have committed the Fallacy of Equivocation by equivocating income with wealth.

On your other thread, the propaganda video you posted does exactly that.

If I recall, I think I pointed out exactly where in the video the propagandist commits the Equivocation Fallacy shifting the discussion from wealth to income.

Wealth and income are not the same thing.

There are many with extraordinary wealth, but zero cash.



What do you put on a nothing-burger? Nothing mayonnaise?



No.

Because of your lack of understanding of all things-Economic, you don't understand the difference between Labor Cost and Wage Cost.

Labor Cost = Wage Cost + Benefit Cost + Tax Cost




You get nonsense threads.
Why are people no longer punished for market consolidation and anti-competitive behavior? It is now encouraged to snuff out small businesses and create a bunch of big box stores and platform monopolies.

How is this capitalistic?

I have started to hear murmerings of anti trust enforcement but if I had to wager money even if there is enforcement it will be weak and nothing like the bust up of standard oil across all market sectors. It will be one or two companies getting a hand slapped and MAYBE broke up into 2 companies. Not 1000's of companies being busted up into 8-12 small businesses per company.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-13-2019, 03:21 PM
 
Location: Ohio
20,499 posts, read 14,586,322 times
Reputation: 16729
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
Why are people no longer punished for market consolidation and anti-competitive behavior? It is now encouraged to snuff out small businesses and create a bunch of big box stores and platform monopolies.

How is this capitalistic?
Do you even know what Capitalism is?

It's a property theory, one of three current theories.

Capitalists take risks to meet the demands of the market, and you benefit from that.

While your complaint has nothing to do with Capitalism, it does have to do with the Free Market Economic System.

The Three Inviolable Laws of Economics are:

1) you must produce goods or provide services that are in demand; and
2) you must market your goods or services at the most competitive price; and
3) your goods or services must be of the highest quality relative to price.

Fail any one of those three and you fail. Period.

The Free Market consists of classes of consumers engaging in voluntary transactions.

I'd venture to guess you're complaining that Wal-Mart drove Mom & Pop stores out of business.

Wrong answer. The correct answer is Mom & Pop violated the Three Inviolable Laws of Economics.

Mom & Pop need to figure out how to compete against Wal-Mart, and if they cannot, then they do not deserve to be in business.

If Mom & Pop cannot compete, it's because they lack the education, training, certification, experience or wherewithal to compete.

The problem with Moms & Pops and even family-owned businesses, is that they're used to doing things a certain way and very resistance to change, not to mention they can't see problems that exist.

I'd also venture to guess you're whining about Amazon.

More companies have benefited from Amazon than not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by J746NEW View Post
Extreme income inequality is evil.
Why?

You're not harmed by it.

Wages and salaries are virtually limitless. You're free to earn whatever you want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-13-2019, 08:26 PM
 
7,110 posts, read 3,212,238 times
Reputation: 4516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
Do you even know what Capitalism is?

It's a property theory, one of three current theories.

Capitalists take risks to meet the demands of the market, and you benefit from that.

While your complaint has nothing to do with Capitalism, it does have to do with the Free Market Economic System.

The Three Inviolable Laws of Economics are:

1) you must produce goods or provide services that are in demand; and
2) you must market your goods or services at the most competitive price; and
3) your goods or services must be of the highest quality relative to price.

Fail any one of those three and you fail. Period.

The Free Market consists of classes of consumers engaging in voluntary transactions.

I'd venture to guess you're complaining that Wal-Mart drove Mom & Pop stores out of business.

Wrong answer. The correct answer is Mom & Pop violated the Three Inviolable Laws of Economics.

Mom & Pop need to figure out how to compete against Wal-Mart, and if they cannot, then they do not deserve to be in business.

If Mom & Pop cannot compete, it's because they lack the education, training, certification, experience or wherewithal to compete.

The problem with Moms & Pops and even family-owned businesses, is that they're used to doing things a certain way and very resistance to change, not to mention they can't see problems that exist.

I'd also venture to guess you're whining about Amazon.

More companies have benefited from Amazon than not.



Why?

You're not harmed by it.

Wages and salaries are virtually limitless. You're free to earn whatever you want.
Until walmart is the only thing that exists and then anyone who did not build generational wealth before they came to town is going to be stuck in poverty (or moving out of country) until there are sociopolitical changes that politically force walmart to be broken up.

Your looking at this from the consumer stand point but most people also have to work somewhere, the same consumers are also workers
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2019, 04:22 AM
 
430 posts, read 149,829 times
Reputation: 794
I love how hard work and long hours is only seen as something the ultra rich do. And that’s the excuse for income equality. How about the reality that housing is insane compared to wages for many jobs. People are working 2-3 jobs just for basic living expenses. Job title doesn’t indicate work ethic. Hard work, and long hours happens all across the socioeconomic spectrum. Stop making excuses for greed. Of course if someone is an entrepreneur and leading the company they should make more. We’re talking about the extreme cases on the corporate level. Where the executives make millions or billions no matter their performance, or how the company performs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2019, 10:34 AM
 
8,697 posts, read 9,410,632 times
Reputation: 7110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew_MI View Post
I love how hard work and long hours is only seen as something the ultra rich do. And that’s the excuse for income equality. How about the reality that housing is insane compared to wages for many jobs. People are working 2-3 jobs just for basic living expenses. Job title doesn’t indicate work ethic. Hard work, and long hours happens all across the socioeconomic spectrum. Stop making excuses for greed. Of course if someone is an entrepreneur and leading the company they should make more. We’re talking about the extreme cases on the corporate level. Where the executives make millions or billions no matter their performance, or how the company performs.
I don't agree with much of that. However, the portion about work ethic/TOJ being the same/similar across the socioeconomic spectrum simply isn't accurate.

Any notion that sawmill workers, bus drivers, admins, PC help-desk etc. workers devote as much time to their respective crafts as doctors, lawyers, bankers, finance people, C-suite execs. etc. is laughably naive.

I realize my personal lens isn't exhaustive but it is instructive. My wife is a CIO, my son and his wife are MD residents and my daughter is in medical school. I also own a few small businesses with a current total of 36 full time hourly employees. Any notion that our hourly employees work as hard or as long as the people in my family is crock-pot crazy.

My son just worked 21 surgical rotation days in a row. I'll ask to be sure but he probably worked a minimum of 250 hours over that span doing head and neck surgeries. The average full time MD in The US works more than 50 hrs. per week.

A good friend is a partner in a huge law firm. His firm's general expectation is that early and mid-career lawyers work 60 hr. plus weeks, trending down into the 50s later.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2019, 11:04 AM
 
430 posts, read 149,829 times
Reputation: 794
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_ View Post
I don't agree with much of that. However, the portion about work ethic/TOJ being the same/similar across the socioeconomic spectrum simply isn't accurate.

Any notion that sawmill workers, bus drivers, admins, PC help-desk etc. workers devote as much time to their respective crafts as doctors, lawyers, bankers, finance people, C-suite execs. etc. is laughably naive.

I realize my personal lens isn't exhaustive but it is instructive. My wife is a CIO, my son and his wife are MD residents and my daughter is in medical school. I also own a few small businesses with a current total of 36 full time hourly employees. Any notion that our hourly employees work as hard or as long as the people in my family is crock-pot crazy.

My son just worked 21 surgical rotation days in a row. I'll ask to be sure but he probably worked a minimum of 250 hours over that span doing head and neck surgeries. The average full time MD in The US works more than 50 hrs. per week.

A good friend is a partner in a huge law firm. His firm's general expectation is that early and mid-career lawyers work 60 hr. plus weeks, trending down into the 50s later.
This thread is mainly about the gap between CEO’s and their employees. Doctors do work long hours and everything they do is appreciated. All due respect to doctors, but often their work involves a significant amount of time not directly involved in patient care. They have on call rooms, their own lounge, and dictation areas. The nurses and techs are on the front lines providing 99% of the hands on care, with a fraction of the appreciation. They have to deal with assaults from patients and their family, cleaning up bodily fluids from patients with infectious diseases. Breaking their backs moving the many obese patients. The PA and NP suture patients many times during surgery, the CRNA gives the meds and intubates. It’s a team effort. Everyone from top to bottom is important. Wouldn’t consider doctors rich though, compared to those being payed millions per year. Anyone can work long hours, companies often mandate overtime. Healthcare workers, and first responders work 12-48 hours at a time. If those jobs don’t pay the rent, they pick up a side job. The point was income inequality, and the CEO making 250 times+ more than their workers. The gap continues to grow. Is it morally right for someone to be a billionaire at a Fortune 500 company when their worker can’t pay rent, or has to relay on government aide? Even if you use the argument that the employee should better themselves, go back to school, are lazy, or it’s their own fault...a human being still has to fill that position.

Last edited by Matthew_MI; 10-14-2019 at 11:18 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2019, 12:48 PM
 
2,896 posts, read 800,977 times
Reputation: 5101
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
Why are people no longer punished for market consolidation and anti-competitive behavior?
Assumes a false premise. Try starting with facts and data rather than unintelligible ramblings you see in posts on the Politics forum and the Work forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
It is now encouraged to snuff out small businesses and create a bunch of big box stores and platform monopolies.
Untrue, of course. Total fiction.
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.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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