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.
I suppose we could be pedantic and say "no you're wrong, look at the data, it was in 2010!!!!", But the trend is pretty clear.
It's not a fair measurement. It compares wages to GDP. GDP rose because of the massive infusion of wealth into the markets by the government. That is NOT production. That is not something a company can base raises on.
Once again I ask you WHO is it, defending crony capitalism?
Crony capitalism is defended by most politicians who receive money from donors and in a sense I expect that. However, sometimes crony capitalism is defended by the "average Joe Blow Republican" that is struggling with a very average middle class salary. I see it on this forum on a daily basis. All they do is repeat the recycled old sayings of the GOP. BUt, don't get me wrong the Dems are equally bad, perhaps even worse.
You're talking about way back when the country had a soul. I can't even remember that far back. Our own corporations have been exploiting poor workers in other countries pretty much my entire life.
One of my daughters went on a mission trip to Bangladesh when she was in High School. They had the option to either stay in the hotel or stay with a family that works at the Nike factory in the city. She chose to stay with the family. The house was essentially a big cardboard box with some plywood. The father supported the family on something like $10 per week from Nike but there were no benefits at all.
He actually got hurt on the job, and to Nike's credit they didn't fire him for it. But they did make him pay his own medical bills and of course he didn't get paid when he was off work.
Disgusting what American Corporations do in the world. And our government (Democrat and Republican) enables them all the way.
Ahhh, so now employee salaries are to be determined by a % of the profits the companies "earn"..
says who?
This is not a mandate, but one would think that a business owner who has any humanity should improve compensation to the employees as the business makes more money and has greater success. Any boss with common sense should think about rewarding the employees when the profits soar.
I do understand greed is a normal trait in all humans and needed for survival, but excessive greed is almost always not a good thing. Many highly successful business owners become philanthropists because more wealth accumulation becomes redundant. However, others will fight to death for $5.00 and see themselves as authentic capitalists. I understand if you cannot imagine the concept of redundant wealth.
This is not a mandate, but one would think that a business owner who has any humanity should improve compensation to the employees as the business makes more money and has greater success. Any boss with common sense should think about rewarding the employees when the profits soar.
It depends on why the profits are soaring. My point is otherwise but I'll use a less political example. You have two oil refineries......Refinery A has an explosion and is out of service for 6 months. Refinery B does very well during this time. Profits are very good but they know it will not last. They could give raises equal to rising profits but what do they do when the other refinery comes back online and profits fall back to a more natural level?
Also, should the employee's working to put refinery A back online take big pay cuts because profits have fallen?
Much of today's corporate profits derived because of Q.E. A business knows this will end. Can they just take the raises back after it does?
Quote:
I do understand greed is a normal trait in all humans and needed for survival, but excessive greed is almost always not a good thing. Many highly successful business owners become philanthropists because more wealth accumulation becomes redundant. However, others will fight to death for $5.00 and see themselves as authentic capitalists. I understand if you cannot imagine the concept of redundant wealth.
It's not my call. Giving trillions to these people to maintain their wealth is though.
It depends on why the profits are soaring. My point is otherwise but I'll use a less political example. You have two oil refineries......Refinery A has an explosion and is out of service for 6 months. Refinery B does very well during this time. Profits are very good but they know it will not last. They could give raises equal to rising profits but what do they do when the other refinery comes back online and profits fall back to a more natural level?
If employees are treated well they they will gladly accept a pay cut during difficult times. And I am not talking about a salary hike. If the business does exceptionally well the owner could simply give bonuses. This sort of thing is often done in smaller firms that employ computer programmer millenials. It certainly creates a highly dedicated efficient company.
Quote:
Also, should the employee's working to put refinery A back online take big pay cuts because profits have fallen?
Yes, pay cuts are OK. And the employees always have the option to leave.
Quote:
Much of today's corporate profits derived because of Q.E. A business knows this will end. Can they just take the raises back after it does?
Bonuses work quite nicely in times of prosperity. This promote a lot of loyalty when things become difficult.
Quote:
It's not my call. Giving trillions to these people to maintain their wealth is though.
Salaries are compensation for work, not a give away. And in most cases the company makes money on the employee. In other words the salary of the employee is less than his work output. And that is the way it should be because there is no pint in having an employee for no gain.
If employees are treated well they they will gladly accept a pay cut during difficult times. And I am not talking about a salary hike. If the business does exceptionally well the owner could simply give bonuses. This sort of thing is often done in smaller firms that employ computer programmer millenials. It certainly creates a highly dedicated efficient company.
No one happily gives back raises. Some business do provide bonuses. Where I work, they do. It's based upon more than profits but profits is in the equation.
Quote:
Yes, pay cuts are OK. And the employees always have the option to leave.
As they always do. If they do not understand that the financial boon is temporary, they are free to leave. If they can make more elsewhere, they are free to leave.
Quote:
Bonuses work quite nicely in times of prosperity. This promote a lot of loyalty when things become difficult.
As I said, some do. OT is also pretty good money. There is generally lots of OT in the scenario I posted.
Quote:
Salaries are compensation for work, not a give away. And in most cases the company makes money on the employee. In other words the salary of the employee is less than his work output. And that is the way it should be because there is no pint in having an employee for no gain.
I was speaking about the government printing tons of money to increase their stock prices.
Crony capitalism is defended by most politicians who receive money from donors and in a sense I expect that. However, sometimes crony capitalism is defended by the "average Joe Blow Republican" that is struggling with a very average middle class salary. I see it on this forum on a daily basis. All they do is repeat the recycled old sayings of the GOP. BUt, don't get me wrong the Dems are equally bad, perhaps even worse.
But you are directing this thread towards POSTERS, not politicians, claiming WE support it.
hint, WE DONT.. NO ONE here has done such a thing..
This is not a mandate, but one would think that a business owner who has any humanity should improve compensation to the employees as the business makes more money and has greater success. Any boss with common sense should think about rewarding the employees when the profits soar.
I do understand greed is a normal trait in all humans and needed for survival, but excessive greed is almost always not a good thing. Many highly successful business owners become philanthropists because more wealth accumulation becomes redundant. However, others will fight to death for $5.00 and see themselves as authentic capitalists. I understand if you cannot imagine the concept of redundant wealth.
No, one wouldnt think that at all. This type of mentality leads to the stupid ass liberals "minimum wage" increase argument, citing all businesses are profitable, and scum, and if you cant pay more, than they shouldnt exist nonsense we hear nonstop..
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.
