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.
Some of those increases in productivity have been because of technological advances and equipment but they don't necessarily make the jobs easier. In fact using computerized equipment means a higher skill level is required. I don't believe that ALL of the gains from increased productivity should go to the people at the top. I believe some should also be going to the workers.
Do you understand how business works? These "people at the top" that you speak of include investors that give the company money with the expectation of getting more back in return. Unless the employee spent their own money to get better trained or buy a tool to improve their work, then no, they don't have any claim to those increased profits.
They may be operating within the law, but why, as a taxpayer do you want to subsidize them? Wouldn't you rather they reduce their profits or that the Walton family make a few less billion a year?
Again, do you think these profits are going directly to the walton family alone? Investors get dividents for every share of stock, so no I don't want to see investors hurt because you want to GIVE $7B to people that are not necessarily EARNING $7B
I think you have that backwards. The "rich" rely on the "poor" to provide for THEM. Rich people cannot exist without poor people. However, poor people exist with or without the rich.
I guess too many have bought into the lie that if EVERYONE works hard, EVERYONE can be rich!
Nobody should begrudge rich people.... especially those that actually worked for what they have (key phrase... ACTUALLY worked...). But "the rich" in America should take note that they are what they are because of what AMERICA has afforded them.
Oh, so you are in the Elizabeth Warren camp. You are a collectivist. America has never been about "collectivisim." It has been about individualism. It has been individualism that has made us great, and a wealthy nation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
The rich own a higely disproportionate share of the entire wealth,
Please explain this. Wealth is not finite. Wealth is created. There is not one big "pie." People who are wealthy created their wealth through hard work, and prudent investment. My father always told me, "Put your money to work for you."
That is what investment is about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
assets and income of the United States. Excuse me while I go cry when they whine that they have to pay a bit more than average in taxes, etc. to help keep the whole show running smoothy.... IN THEIR FAVOR AND TO THEIR BENEFIT!
Perhaps if Americans traveled a bit more they'd see what extreme wealth inequality can do to a country. Provincial Americans with little world experience invite real revolution, and REAL class warfare if they do not watch out. Plenty of history in the early 20th century to show the great compromises the rich of the time made and understood was necessary to avert a REAL socialist revolution in this country.
You are totally messed up in the head. You need therapy.
Actually, if you are willing to give their employees that type of money it would help the economy better than any stimulus. They would spend the money on any and everything inside and outside of Walmart.
The stocjk would not decline because they would become more profitable through sales and expansion, I cannot in good logical conscience believe that if they paid their employeees better it would wreck the economy or (heavens forbid) harm the stock.
So you want to encourage the company that everyone says is "bad for America" because they import so much from China to ....import even MORE from China through cranking out more volume of junk to their employees?
And the key word in your statement is GIVE money to their employees. They are doing nothing of additional value in return for this money.
How do you assume that the stock of a company that just announced a $7 billion annual increase in expenses wouldn't see their stock value go down drastically, especially since it would be about 1/3 of their current profit. That makes absolutely no sense.
And why do you put so little value in the importance of the stock price? You do realize that billions of $ of pension fund and retirement money is invested in that stock and helping to provide a retirement income for people all over this country, dont you?
TAXPAYERS shouldn't be subsidizing Walmart's bottom line by funding part of their workers cost of living. We shouldn't be held accountable for shortcomings in Walmart's business model.
How about the guy at Taco Bell drive through ? Should he be pulling in $30-40k a year to take your order ?
Taco Bell employees a lot of people at minimum wage. Are they bad also ?
Thus, if you don't have a lot of money, you didn't work hard enough. This is the childish gibberish that is force-fed into the little minds of the young. Some grow past it. Many do not. Some of you wonder aloud why so many vote against their economic interests. Much of it is due to this indoctrination. The acceptance of this doctrine leads to, at first, belief that a little more hard work will land them on Park Place, and then, as that does not come to fruition, self-loathing which they transfer to others in similar economic strata. "Hey, at least I'm not as bad as one of those filthy moochers over there."
Many people are not smart enough to become wealthy. They do not how to manage money, nor do they know how to invest.
Others simply don't care. They only want to make a living and live reasonably well.
Some, because they are prudent, become wealthy not because they are so smart, but because they are careful with what they have, and they seek the wisdom of financial planners. They are also eager to get ahead in their jobs. They seek advancement. They are not satisfied with doing just enough to get by. They work hard. They do more than is asked of them. The boss notices, and they are promoted, which means higher pay.
Some will always do just enough to get by. They will never become rich. They are likely Union workers. They think the world owes them a living. They think their employer is "out to get them." They will always be slaves (thought they won't admit it).
Many people are not smart enough to become wealthy. They do not how to manage money, nor do they know how to invest.
Others simply don't care. They only want to make a living and live reasonably well.
Some, because they are prudent, become wealthy not because they are so smart, but because they are careful with what they have, and they seek the wisdom of financial planners. They are also eager to get ahead in their jobs. They seek advancement. They are not satisfied with doing just enough to get by. They work hard. They do more than is asked of them. The boss notices, and they are promoted, which means higher pay.
Some will always do just enough to get by. They will never become rich. They are likely Union workers. They think the world owes them a living. They think their employer is "out to get them." They will always be slaves (thought they won't admit it).
You were actually making sense until you went off the rails with your "all union workers are lazy" nonsense. Stereotypes and absolutes are dangerous things. I'm a hardworking union member, actually rose from the ranks and have run a successful business that allowed me to retire in my early 50's.
The ones I see as lazy are the ones locked onto a computer monitor for 8 hours a day that spend most of that time make lame post on forums like this INSTEAD of doing their bosses business. Yep they're the takers, wouldn't know "real work" if it hit them in the head. They'll be the ones sitting on the edge of the road waiting to die when the power goes out.
You were actually making sense until you went off the rails with your "all union workers are lazy" nonsense. Stereotypes and absolutes are dangerous things. I'm a hardworking union member, actually rose from the ranks and have run a successful business that allowed me to retire in my early 50's.
The ones I see as lazy are the ones locked onto a computer monitor for 8 hours a day that spend most of that time make lame post on forums like this INSTEAD of doing their bosses business. Yep they're the takers, wouldn't know "real work" if it hit them in the head. They'll be the ones sitting on the edge of the road waiting to die when the power goes out.
And there YOU go running off the rails. Just because one doesn't pick up a hammer or sweat every day doesn't mean that they don't work as hard or harder as you. Get over yourself.
So you want to encourage the company that everyone says is "bad for America" because they import so much from China to ....import even MORE from China through cranking out more volume of junk to their employees?
And the key word in your statement is GIVE money to their employees. They are doing nothing of additional value in return for this money.
How do you assume that the stock of a company that just announced a $7 billion annual increase in expenses wouldn't see their stock value go down drastically, especially since it would be about 1/3 of their current profit. That makes absolutely no sense.
And why do you put so little value in the importance of the stock price? You do realize that billions of $ of pension fund and retirement money is invested in that stock and helping to provide a retirement income for people all over this country, dont you?
The amount amount of junk from China will not change even if they pay their employees more or less, people are going to buy the cheap stuff anyway.
Give, should not have been used since they are working for them, they should be provided with better wages than what they are getting now. Do you realize that many of them are on food stamps and are working ft? That is not right no matter how you look at it.
My question to you is why are you putting more emphasis on the stockholders than the people that actually worker there? If they paid more one of two things will happen, the price of goods would go up or they will make less profit. The stock aspect it is not that important considering that brokers will simply find another company to make up for any losses. Why do you think the fall of Walmart would be the end of mankind as you know it anyway?
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.
