Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 04-03-2013, 07:07 AM
 
2,930 posts, read 2,220,884 times
Reputation: 1024

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
derosterreich is saying it like it is. If you are not happy with what you make then take a risk like the company owner you complain about and start your own business. Starting and running a business is not easy and actually the wage earner route is the easier road.
Wonder how many employees worry about all the overhead (taxes, rents, salaries/wages, etc.) involved with running a business? Having been on both sides of the business equation, it is much easier to go to work, get the coffee breaks/lunch breaks, and leave at the end of eight hours. Most people who work for someone else give little thought to anything outside their immediate job description, and most only worry about things that directly affect them. Most know that they will get a paycheck even it they don't perform above the minimum required of them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-03-2013, 07:27 AM
 
41,111 posts, read 25,671,868 times
Reputation: 13868
Quote:
Originally Posted by sol11 View Post
Wonder how many employees worry about all the overhead (taxes, rents, salaries/wages, etc.) involved with running a business? Having been on both sides of the business equation, it is much easier to go to work, get the coffee breaks/lunch breaks, and leave at the end of eight hours. Most people who work for someone else give little thought to anything outside their immediate job description, and most only worry about things that directly affect them. Most know that they will get a paycheck even it they don't perform above the minimum required of them.
Being on both sides of the fence myself when my shift was done I was done. As a business owner, it is never ending and very different. I remember when I pulled out of the red and taxes were due... talk about feeling raped and a kick in the pants. I never dreamed the government took so much money and yes I've been to 3 different CPA's.

Run a business and you quickly learn that the government is the huge expense and will make any business owner afraid to spend. If Obama would have gotten his way at $250K he would have put many small businesses out of business and many more people would have lost their jobs. It was pure ignorance of the people that Obama was playing on. People were actually voting for their own job loss. Because employees are uneducated in business and taxation matters it was an easy sell for Obama. So the question is, is Obama really that bad with economics or does he understand completely and wanted to increase his welfare rolls increasing dependance on the government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2013, 07:36 AM
 
7,473 posts, read 4,000,240 times
Reputation: 6462
Quote:
Originally Posted by hnsq View Post
The point about younger/older workers is exactly about loyalty. Incentivizing long term stays at companies is an essential part of management. With all due respect, have you ever managed another person in your life?

And if you don't want to discuss realistic scenarios instead of your typical whining about people not making enough money (even though you refuse to put an ounce of effort into research), then I am not sure what to say.



What is the person's educational background and how many years experience do they have?



Unions are a positive for the employees currently in a firm, they are a negative for the economy as a whole. Unions create a disincentive for competition, growth, and hiring while providing a positive system for current employees. Given the fact that the rail industry is one of the most lagging industries in transportation for decades now, how can you claim that unions were a positive force?

You picked one of the most highly substantiated, highly regulated, most non-competitive industries in the country as your arguing point?

But fine, let's look at BNSF. Looking at their balance sheet, 14B of their 70B in assets is goodwill! The perceived value above the market is currently 3.5x less than the actual value of equipment held. Additionally, their 10k's footnotes state that given the high involvement of unions, any fight to bring about market level wages and benefits would result in a loss of liquidity at the expense of the viability of the company. Unions are holding the company hostage, not working with it.

Looking at the direct fiscal drain of the unions, looking into the footnotes again, insurance premiums on union employees above and beyond relative non-union employees was $71 million in 2012. The difference between union and non-union workers pay is roughly $30k/worker/year. Supposing only half of the employees of the company are unionized (a low number by design), that is $615 million paid to union employees annually above and beyond market rates. That is $615 million plus the $71 million of insurance premiums is that much less of growth investments to take place to maintain competitiveness in an industry that has grown at 9% less annually for some time now.

All of that is public information from BNSF's 10k. Right now they are profitable, however claiming that the unions are anything but a drain on the company is nothing short of ignorant. Buffett has seen decreasing domestic energy prices and is cashing in on that. Buffett's interest in BNSF is capitalizing on an industry that is fuel-dependent with little competition. It speaks very little to the company as a whole on a longer term time frame.

Since you worked for them I assume you already know where to find their annual 10k report to check my numbers.
it seems the Wall street journal has a different asessment than yours concerning Railroads and their future....... Boom Times on the Tracks: Rail Capacity, Spending Soar - WSJ.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2013, 07:43 AM
 
2,930 posts, read 2,220,884 times
Reputation: 1024
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
Being on both sides of the fence myself when my shift was done I was done. As a business owner, it is very different. I remember when I pulled out of the red and had to pay taxes... talk about a kick in the pants. I never dreamed they took so much and yes I've been to 3 different CPA's. Run a business and you quickly learn that the government is the huge expense and will make any business owner afraid to spend. If Obama would have gotten his way at $250K he would have put many small businesses out of business and many more people would have lost their jobs. It was pure ignorance that Obama was playing on. People were actually voting for their own job loss. Because employees are uneducated in business and taxation matters it was an easy sell for Obama. So the question is, is Obama really that bad with economics or does he understand completely and wanted to increase his welfare rolls increasing dependance on the government.
I'll admit to being biased, but I personally think Obama knew exactly what he was doing when he asked for the $250K tax increase. Based upon my knowledge of Obama, it's difficult for me to believe that he is anything but a labor-loving, anti-business president whose roots are firmly planted in community organizing using Alinsky methodology. One only has to look at the methods used in handling the GM bandruptcy and pushing for the card check in unionizing. Obama's continued support for big business was forced upon him because of the weak economy, and the fear of making matters even worse if he pushed his agenda further.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2013, 11:40 AM
 
Location: Pluto's Home Town
9,982 posts, read 13,734,011 times
Reputation: 5689
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeaveWI View Post
I don't have all the answers, I can only speak from personal experience. After moving to Australia, I do the exact same job as I did in America (after going back to school for it) I work 38 hours a week here, and enjoy an excellent quality of life, much better than in America. The best pay I could get for my field back in Oklahoma was $10 per hour with no benefits. Here I make $26 per hour, enjoy a perfect work/life balance, enjoy a high standard of living, and am not worried about being let go and out on the street for no reason. My company is doing just great, even after paying their people a decent wage-stunning isn't it? My education and work ethic is the same here as it was back in the U$, but it wasn;t until I moved here, that I was able to make a decent living. I live a very modest low-key lifestyle, but could barely make ends meet in America, due to nothing but low paying jobs. If Australia can do it, why can't America? I just don't get how these corporate apologists can't see that decent, educated, hard working Americans are underpaid, and taken advantage of. I'll take living in Australia ANY day-at least here hard work actually pays off!

Communist!!!!!!

Seriously, your post describes exactly what I'd like to see, a better balance for workers. The numbers you quote are about $20k USA and $54k in AUS. Seems like a hardworking employee in a multinational, successful company could expect to earn $50k, especially if the CEO and upper management are earning high five or six figures. But folks here will act like that is an outrage. They'll say, "$20k? Be thankful you are not in China working for $10k! Don't get uppity, you CAN be replaced!"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2013, 11:59 AM
 
41,111 posts, read 25,671,868 times
Reputation: 13868
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead View Post
Communist!!!!!!

Seriously, your post describes exactly what I'd like to see, a better balance for workers. The numbers you quote are about $20k USA and $54k in AUS. Seems like a hardworking employee in a multinational, successful company could expect to earn $50k, especially if the CEO and upper management are earning high five or six figures. But folks here will act like that is an outrage. They'll say, "$20k? Be thankful you are not in China working for $10k! Don't get uppity, you CAN be replaced!"
Obama didn't go after "high" six figure incomes. He went after low 6 figure incomes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2013, 12:24 PM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,570,473 times
Reputation: 22474
Forget the American workers -- Obama and his Senate have. They know the third world labor is more than happy to work for low wages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2013, 12:31 PM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,075,058 times
Reputation: 17204
Quote:
Originally Posted by KS_Referee View Post
So with all your knowledge on the inner workings of the Hostess business, including its supposed lack of debt, why didn't YOU buy it and keep those union people employed even with all their psychotic demands?


No one wanted to buy Hostess. Those that looked at it as a potential purchase ONLY looked at it due to brand recognition. Hostess is a bad investment.
Hostess was purchased. Now I have no idea if management will be better but I am sure they got rid of the demands that bread and snack cakes not be delivered on the same truck.

Hostess Bread Brands Purchased by Ga. Company | 13wmaz.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2013, 12:34 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,001,245 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by KS_Referee View Post
There are MANY forms of bankruptcy. Do you think Hostess was allowed by a judge to have ALL its debts just magically disappear, only to continue down the same psychotic business model?

So NO. I am not saying I know "absolutely NOTHING about bankruptcy laws". I am suggesting you know a lot less about bankruptcy laws than you think.
When you buy out a bankrupt company the new corporation is not saddled with the debt from the old one, unless of course the buyer accepts it.

Thats why you go into bk court to begin with, so you dont seem to know very much about the topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2013, 12:41 PM
 
Location: So. of Rosarito, Baja, Mexico
6,987 posts, read 21,885,428 times
Reputation: 7007
Always the reference to China and their SLAVE? wages which are NOT SLAVE wages when you take into consideration the cost of Food and Lodging and the need or avg daily items.......NO comparison to the US.

As a teen worked part time for $0.25 cents an hr.....bought a piece of pie and a Coke for $0.20 cents.....now compare that to todays prices and the hourly rates.

$50K, $75K or $100K a yr sounds NICE but wait........

Time may come when you go to McDonalds for a bite and the young person behind the register says......

Big Mac and Fries with a large coke will be $31.75 with Tax.
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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 > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:14 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top