Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc
Quote:
The story you hear frequently about why Henry Ford made this decision was that he wanted to allow his workers to be able to afford to buy his cars. The wage increase certainly made the cars (and many other products) more affordable for Ford employees, but the historical consensus is that Ford actually made this decision for a different reason: To reduce employee turnover--and, in so doing, reduce recruiting and replacement cost.
Regardless, it worked.
Thousands of people immediately lined up to get jobs at Ford (F). Employee turnover plummeted, and recruiting and training costs dropped. The new wages allowed Ford employees to live middle-class lives, instead of being poor. And it presumably made Ford, Ford's senior executives, and Ford's shareholders even more proud of what they had created.
|
|
None of that is relevant. You might want to update your calendar. This is 2012, not 1908.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc
This is Capitalism,...
|
Sorry, you failed ECON 101. That is not Capitalism, it is the Free Market in action.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc
I think the point that the article is making and what was so successful for Ford is evident in the last line of the article...
In short, instead of viewing "shareholders" and "customers" as the only two corporate constituencies that matter, Ford introduced the idea that great companies should also serve a third constituency: Employees.
|
Again, nothing there is relevant to the present.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc
That is what stood out. It is in direct opposition to not raising the minimum wage and all of the middle class worker attacks by the right wing. Workers have been demonized, OMG even teachers and fire fighters are under siege.
|
Explain, in incredible detail, how someone in the Balkans making $2.80/hour can afford to buy products made by Americans making the average median wage of $22.50/hour.
When you finish, you can explain how a Filipino making $1.60/hour can afford to buy something made by an American getting $22.50/hour and then you can explain how someone in Tajikistan earning $1.31/hour can afford to buy American made products.
You keep talking about facts, I just gave you facts. Why are you unable to understand?
Look, you cannot compete globally, because you are nauseatingly over-paid.
So the solution is what, raise minimum wage? How does that make US workers globally competitive?
Unions should demand more wages? How does paying US workers more money make them globally competitive?
There should be tariffs/taxes on imports? How does tariffs/taxes on imports make American workers more competitive?
Explain that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc
There are many websites that offer Made in The USA if people have the social conscience and care to research them.
|
Ah, I get it. You failed math in grade school.
Let me explain it to you -- the US has 312 Million people, the world has 6.6 Billion people.
Get it? Here, maybe this will help.
US worker makes $22/hour, makes one alarm clock per hour, company needs $5 profit to say in business, so sale price is $27
Mexican worker makes $2/hour, makes one alarm clock per hour, company needs $5 profit to say in business so sale price is $7.
Now, do you get it? Okay, is a Filipino making $1.60/hour going to pay $27 for a made-in-USA alarm clock, or $7 for a made-in-Mexico alarm clock of equal quality?
This is like common sense, you know?
312 Million Americans, but 300 Million Chinese Middle Class, 300 Million Indian Middle Class and 300 Million Eastern Europe Middle Class.
312 Million * $5 profit = $1.56 Million
900 Million * $5 profit = $40.5 Million
Which is bigger?
Does the phrase "Global Economy" have any meaning to you at all?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc
|
ECON 101 Fail.
The reason you're in the mess you're in, is because you violated the Laws of Economics. So why would you continue to violate the Laws of Economics and suffer even more by raising minimum wage?
And again, explain how raising the minimum wage makes US workers globally competitive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc
Minimum wage earners generally do not get to participate in profit sharing.
|
Yes, they do. Minimum wage earners can own their own houses, too. In fact, there were 1,036,535 Tax-Payers with an Adjusted Gross Income of less than $15,000 who took the mortgage interest deduction, because they own their own homes.
Other fun facts:
53,543 people with an AGI of <$10,000 took the mortgage insurance deduction.
620,197 people with an AGI of <$10,000 took the mortgage interest deduction.
You can't afford a mortgage of $299.78 per month, insurance and taxes included?
Have fun refuting that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc
No...more like some people not having the ability to get the moral of a story.
|
There is no moral. Economics is amoral. There is only reality, which you refuse to accept.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc
Instead of the idiotic nitpicking with numbers, I see some here are unable, either because they are willfully ignorant or just plain lacking in common sense, to understand why this article was given the title it was.
|
The only willful ignorance I see is from the left.
You are in a global economy, and there is no going back. You cannot change it; you cannot end it; you cannot stop it; and you cannot isolate yourself from it.
You're just like the Big Star 8th Grader.
He's bigger, runs faster, is quicker, more coordinated, stronger and has greater agility than everyone else. And so he's the "Star."
But then he rides the bench his freshman year. Why? Because everyone caught up to him, and he is no longer the biggest, fasted, quickest, most coordinated, strongest or most agile.
That's you.
Your median wage is $22.50/hour. That is a mistake. It should never have been that high. The only reason it got that high because of WW II, and the Bretton Woods Agreement, and the Petro-Dollar, and your repressive foreign policy, and your unions and your own greed.
The countries you refused to develop, they're being developed by BRIC. And now you cannot compete globally. You're just going to have to wait until your wages fall enough to reach equilibrium with the rest of the world.
Equilibrium is not the same as equality. I'd say when your wages are about $12-$14/hour and the rest of the world is at $6/hour, you'll have equilibrium of sorts.
You only have to wait 30-35 more years for that to happen. In the mean-time, get over it already.
Debunking...
Mircea
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.
