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.
to put (money) to use, by purchase or expenditure, in something offering potential profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.
Would you care to explain how your statement above DOESN'T make you look like a complete whackaloon?
Or maybe you have a definition of "work" that you haven't shared with us... OR, maybe you believe that people will invest their money without expecting any gain from that investment... I'll bet that's it.
The next time someone asks me why I make fun of OWS, I am pointing them at this thread.
That's weird, because in that case, the investment would either be a gift, or an interest free loan. There would be no investing.
That was my point, which will surely be lost on the OP. In his world of unicorns and leprechauns, people work their arses off and take all kinds of financial risks simply because they like doing it.
How would start up businesses afford these salaries? How would salaries be able to be supported by companies that don't make that much money in income without raising their prices?
When a new company is launched, no matter what the system, they are usually unprofitable. It takes time to build the company.
New companies will launch the same way they do in today's system. You will apply for investment funding. That initial round of financing will provide you with enough money to pay all the workers and the rest of the expenses of the business.
Eventually, the company, if successful, will generate enough revenue to cover its expenses. Otherwise, the company will be shut down. Most start ups are not successful.
Quote:
You've stated that everyone is required to work. If they are lazy, they get fired and get another job and get fined. If they get fired and get another job, wouldn't that job have the same salary they were making in their old job? $115K? What would be the driving force to keep people active in their work?
For lazy people who do not care about their job? Their driving force will be not to incur that financial penalty again. But I would tell that person to just do a job they enjoy.
Quote:
I, for one, love my job and I am well compensated for what I do...but if your economy was put into place, I think I'd gladly take a fast food job at $115K and just sit back and watch the world go by.
How well paid is your job and how much do you really love it if you are saying you would rather work at a fast food restaurant for $115k?
Fast food workers don't "sit back and watch the world go by." They work. If you didn't work, you would get fired.
But sitting around and doing nothing is boring. I would recommend you find something you love to do and get paid to do that instead.
Quote:
There is no room for growth in your economy. No need to strive for bigger and better things. No upward mobility.
Yes there is. You need to read the actual post. Not everyone is paid equally.
We will pay workers enough additional income that is necessary to get workers to do mentally or physically difficult work and to get them to give their maximum effort in performance based jobs.
So there is just as much incentive as there is in today's system.
Quote:
It's a stupid plan that could never, and will never work.
This plan is what informed social activists who understand economics and business have been advocating for the past 150+ years.
The basic idea is peer reviewed in mainstream economics journals and advocates have been publishing on the subject in peer reviewed journals for nearly 100 years from Oskar Lange debunking Mises and Hayek in the famous Economic Calculation Debate to Paul Cockshott today.
And nearly every component of this idea already works in practice today.
So it is a good plan that is already proven to work. And it will significantly raise your standard of living.
...Then, once again, why don't you start a car company and utilize the concepts you propose?
What I am proposing is a change to our economic system, not a change to a single company. I don't know what else I can say if you don't understand the difference between a company and an economic system.
I'd call it fantasy. In reality, I'd protect myself and my property and you'd cease to exist. And since you were planning on stealing from me and killing me, I'd have an iron clad case of self defense.
But let's say someone was successful at taking your home and land that you were living on by force. You wouldn't call that stealing? If not, what would you call it?
And that's what we're doing. You're saying that I'm being exploited. It's in your post. In order to debate the merits of that statement, you need to try and convince me that it's true, because as far as I'm concerned, it's not. That's what "debating the merits of the post" is.
So convince me. How am *I* (personally - not in vague Orwellian generalities) being exploited? Let's have it - "debate the merits of your post."
I do not know whether you are being exploited. Roughly 97% are. You may be among the top 3%.
Worker productivity in the US is $65 per hour. So each full-time worker produces, on average, $135,000 in income each year.
That is because we have a corrupt economic system that allows a tiny ruling elite to use their bargaining power and their ability to collect unearned income to take most of the income workers produce.
Since workers are unfairly getting paid a tiny fraction of what they produce, because most of their income is being taken unfairly by this tiny elite, they are being exploited.
Certainly some workers do deserve to get paid more than others. That is not exploitation. It is only when you pay workers less in order to pay other workers more than what they deserve do you begin to exploit.
This tiny ruling elite do not deserve to get paid the incomes they do, they do not deserve to get paid 50 to 150,000 times more than others, because:
1) They are not working at all for any of the unearned income they are collecting, 2) They don't work 50 to 150,000 times harder than everyone else, 3) They didn't earn this money from willing consumers in the market, 4) They do not provide 50 to 150,000 times more value than everyone else, 5) There is no economic justification that requires us to pay them this amount in order for the economy to work well, 6) They shouldn't have the power to force the rest of society into poverty or financial struggle, 7) It makes society undemocratic.
We Should Raise The Minimum Wage to $115,000 per Year And Reduce The Workweek to Just 20 Hours...and stuff...
Read the opening post...um...wow...the right and ability to be wretched should not be taken as advocacy as a recommendation for the aformentioned.
How'd that plan work in Greece?
Bring substanitive and realistic and plausible solutions or shut up.
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.
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.
