Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: What is the difference between corporate wage pressure and a lunch money bully?

  1. Top | #21
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    12,524
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    30,737
    Rep Power
    57
    Look at the smoke signals. We are about to inflict real work on environment, droughts are rampant in ME, we've used up our get out of disease card through bad use of antibiotics and we haven't found another one and and everybody hates everybody else very much. We are at the edge of destruction as the song read back in the sixties. Hell we're removing the need for workers so what are we going to do with humans in an economy that needs very little labor.

    Seems to me some social solution needs be forthcoming if we are going to retain value in self. From my view the back is out, data specialties are dying, and service ist zer tote, and monetary/competition incentive is losing value. We need find other incentives like with the arts to sustain self worth. Right now we're demonstrating just how bad we are at communicating our value via the cloud. Seems to me some sort of incentive fosterer can be built by making those tools more art worthy. It needn't be religious but it does need be satisfying, rewarding and community sustaining.

  2. Top | #22
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    5,769
    Rep Power
    15
    It is way the free market system works. Wages and prices are set mostly by supply and demand. The system is driven by profit and return on investment. Competition leads to lower consumer prices by reducing cost of doing business.

    The system is not to create jobs or provide income for workers, jobs are a consequence not a goal. The principle is a rising tide raises all boats, which has generally been true in the long term.


    Today in the USA some companies push it o the limit. Amazon pushes warehouse workers physicals limits. Despite l its wealth a high percentage of full time Amazon workers are on some form of government assistance.

    There is certainly abuse. Corporations do wield power. MS has bought out completion to destroy it. IBM the same in the past.

    The system encoded in COTUS is intellectual property rights and the right to keep profit for yourself. The real question today is what is the purpose of the system. Should it directly provide for everyone? What should the limits of the free market system be?

    Personally I do not think it will survive as is.

    Who wants to invest in a house or a career if it can all be lost in an economic downturn.

  3. Top | #23
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    4,016
    Rep Power
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    It is way the free market system works. Wages and prices are set mostly by supply and demand. The system is driven by profit and return on investment. Competition leads to lower consumer prices by reducing cost of doing business.

    The system is not to create jobs or provide income for workers, jobs are a consequence not a goal. The principle is a rising tide raises all boats, which has generally been true in the long term.


    Today in the USA some companies push it o the limit. Amazon pushes warehouse workers physicals limits. Despite l its wealth a high percentage of full time Amazon workers are on some form of government assistance.

    There is certainly abuse. Corporations do wield power. MS has bought out completion to destroy it. IBM the same in the past.

    The system encoded in COTUS is intellectual property rights and the right to keep profit for yourself. The real question today is what is the purpose of the system. Should it directly provide for everyone? What should the limits of the free market system be?

    Personally I do not think it will survive as is.

    Who wants to invest in a house or a career if it can all be lost in an economic downturn.
    Here's how it generally works: I need a couple more engineers. So, I've hired an HR firm to identify the market wage and benefits for engineers in our area. Then, most people don't want to move unless you pay them more. So, we'll offer the market wage + 10%. If we don't get enough applicants, we'll offer more.

  4. Top | #24
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    12,524
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    30,737
    Rep Power
    57
    I only worked trough post graduate headhunters that I knew and trusted when seeking a new position. Kind of a you feed me I'll feed you good old boy sort of arrangement. Only did it twice so it's isn't really trend worthy. It's a club at the level I was working. Market conditions minimally apply because things like being known, membership and published reputation factored into the mix. More like how daughters and sons of nobles found comfortable appointments back in the day.

  5. Top | #25
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    27,142
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    123,894
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rousseau View Post

    Sure, but have people had the choice of how they survive at any point in history, in any society? That the situation can be otherwise is fantasy.

    There is definitely an argument to be made that corporate power should be reeled in, but there are elements of truth to the competition argument.
    Really? People oft don't have choice of how to survive. Effectively monopolies give one the choice to work for what is offered or lump it. People don't opt to die very often. Unless government intervenes in low market competition areas wages tend to fall. If one looks at all the states where Right-to-Work laws prevail, limiting the constraints labor applies to corporations you'll find lower wages in comparable industries than in state that support unionization. Unfortunately since these states are also anti-worker in every respect there are fewer parks, family services, social support and generally worse utilities, roads ,etc., than in Union states.
    Note that the union jobs are mostly government. You're the one paying those higher wages with taxes.

  6. Top | #26
    Senior Member OLDMAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    NB
    Posts
    724
    Archived
    2,107
    Total Posts
    2,831
    Rep Power
    47
    The only difference is usually there is a boss whose job it is to cut expenses and maybe his bonus is connected to it. They have all the power and usually are short sighted, because there is only one truth in business. There is no such thing as a successful business where the employees do not care.

  7. Top | #27
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    5,769
    Rep Power
    15
    The complete cycle. The wealthy don't sit on a vault of cash. They have to do something with it or it looses value from inflation.

    It gets invested. Even a small savings account in a bank is put to work by the bank.

    Your retirement plans are invested in future profit. Job and economic growth is fueled by investment.

    The progressive public views on the wealthy are narrow and shallow, not that the wealth disparity is not a serious issue.

  8. Top | #28
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    12,524
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    30,737
    Rep Power
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post

    Note that the union jobs are mostly government. You're the one paying those higher wages with taxes.


    A large proportion government union jobs are in maintenance and cleaning which are actually usually run by for profit businesses.

    Only teachers in AFT are actually union members. NEA, not a union, but a teacher member accreditation and standards organization still represents teachers in many districts outside of the largest states so they technically aren't union employees. Also most scientific and engineering positions in government pay less than those run by private companies, 10 to 25% less without options.

    And fair being fair, Private enterprise brings in six or seven times what the government taxes. We are a 20 trillion p/y country where the three richest corporations make more than the rest of the US population resulting in only a three or four trillion dollar tax base. Obviously being one of the 200 million who gross less than the top three companies means I'm not paying for much of anything. That's especially true when taxes that pay for income and benefits in education, day care, medical, expenses result in bankruptcy in those fields for millions every year.
    Last edited by fromderinside; 02-08-2020 at 07:02 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •