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.
Why didn't the unions rescue Hostess and turn it into an employee owned company ?
Debt was the problem there Sir. The last owners of Hostess took on more debt than the company they took over. Thus they were deeper in debt from the get go and the money they borrowed was supposed to be for newer and better equipment and for the most part they didn't buy equipment they increased the management salaries and gave them large bonuses to get their loyalty. That is pretty much how it went i am sure i might be corrected abit .
If for one moment you think I like over paid CEO'S and scumbag bankers you are wrong. I despise them probably more then you. And trust me my head is not in the sand. That's why I am not a Republican or Democrat and did not even vote in the last election.
But complaining about how much money other people make is a complete waste of time. It's up to you the individual on how much you earn. We are still a free country so you have a choice what you do for a living.
And yet we are still working less hours than ever in history...
Additionally, we consume more entertainment goods that most of those countries. The middle class of today is what 'upper middle' would have been a few decades ago.
We work more because we need to 'keep up with the joneses',not because there is a fundamental problem with out economic system. You want to work less? sell your extra car, sell you 2,000 sqft home in the suburbs and live within your means.
What would you do if you didn't like anything about the candidates running. Could not find one on the ballot in my state that I liked.
I use to vote for the lesser of two evils and that turned out real bad (George Bush). And the Democrats don't even come close to having someone I like.
Turned in my good little sheep card years ago when I noticed I was being made a fool of.
Seems to me that we have been racing to the bottom for years. In the classic battle of labor and capital, labor has rolled over. Now we cheer about cutting the minimum wage, busting unions, fawning over the super wealthy,etc. But here is the thing. When workers earn a decent wage, they spend it. Much more of our money recirculates when workers are fairly paid, and the economy is healthier and more productive. Right now we are in a race for the bottom, where the workers relative wealth and health are stagnant or declining, job security is shattered, and we paper over that with low priced junk from Wal-Mart, Dollar Stores, and food stamps for the working poor.
Admittedly, paying labor more raises prices, but guess what? We are the most innovative country in the world. Why can't we appeal to the achievement drive of our employees. They want to do world class work, not produce cheap schlock. Why not ask them to do world class work, rather than work long hours for peanuts? The Germans do this, and they do it well. This will only come from the will of the people, and a respect for the drive and creativity of the workers.
When folks go from millionaires to billionaires, I think their achievement focus declines. They might have wanted to do something worthwhile at one point, but eventually it becomes ALL about aggregating wealth. That attitude is not what made America great. It is a pathology. A thirst for real innovation and achievement has always been more important than pure greed. Our workers can beat our capitalist overlords at that anytime, and when we invest in the worker, the country leads the world. The last century has shown this plainly. Tax cuts for the rich, in contrast, do almost nothing, except fund lobbyists and Super Pacs.
Funny... None of those workers were willing to take the risk and put up some investment money, knowing damn well they could lose every dime. No risk, no chance for reward. Great risk, great chance for huge reward.
What is to say they could not if they had more capital themselves? I suspect they did not have enough.
But this suggestion is also a red herring. Most workers do not have the skills to start their own businesses. I think we could meaningfully discuss whether they could or should, but the truth is most workers don't tend to be good capitalists or self-managers. Still, they are a critical part of our economy and society, even if they never become business owners.
The two biggest problems with your argument.
A little thinking will let you figure out the rest.
Well, you bring up a good point. Some workers are ambitious and some are lazy. No argument. While it is definitely true that the workers need to organize if they are ever going to pry a share of the profits from the management/CEO class, it is also true that not all workers are the same. I think merit-based pay and other incentives would be a good thing, to spur creativity. I have worked with the guys who make every ten minute break a half hour, come late, leave early,etc. I don't think most workers are like that, but it does occur.
You cannot have it both ways. If you organize (ie form a union) the union will NOT ALLOW merit based pay because unions protect and bring everyone down to the LOWEST common denominator. They do not expect more or push for more from their members, they only expect more for less work from the employer.
I am AMAZED that people simply overlook the HUGE gap in pay/benefits between upper management/CEO's of companies & the workers. The ones who are actually keeping that company chugging along. The wage increase of CEO's from back in the day to now is astonishing. Yet, people like you will never open your eyes to this, you will continue to blame the worker for it. Unreal.
So you, in your economic brilliance, have decided that the CEO that knows the business, has a degree and years of experience does NOT keep the company chugging along. But the worker, who has entered into an agreement to accept pay in keeping with their contribution to that company, and who is probably able to be replaced by many other workers exactly like him or her, is the one that DOES keep it going?
Who is "blaming" anyone? Why do liberals have to make it all about emotion? It's business. You agree to a wage, they agree to pay you that wage. Don't like it, go somewhere else. They can't find anyone for that wage, they raise the pay.
It's really quite simple.
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.
