Socialist Seattle

[Team Sergeant]

Socialist Seattle on the fast track to destruction . I was reading some of the comments on this story and one really stood out; "this is a very good thing because in just a couple of years we will see what an epic failure socialism actually is and that Seattle will have no one to blame but it's own socialist leaders."

Seattle Approves $15 Minimum Wage, Setting a New Standard for Big Cities
By KIRK JOHNSONJUNE 2, 2014

SEATTLE — The City Council here went where no big-city lawmakers have gone before on Monday, raising the local minimum wage to $15 an hour, more than double the federal minimum, and pushing Seattle to the forefront of urban efforts to address income inequality.

The unanimous vote of the nine-member Council, after months of discussion by a committee of business and labor leaders convened by Mayor Ed Murray, will give low-wage workers here — in incremental stages, with different tracks for different sizes of business — the highest big-city minimum in the nation.

“Even before the Great Recession a lot of us have started to have doubt and concern about the basic economic promise that underpins economic life in the United States,” said Sally J. Clark, a Council member. “Today Seattle answers that challenge,” she added. “We go into uncharted, unevaluated territory.”

But some business owners who have questioned the proposal say that the city’s booming economy is creating an illusion of permanence. The fat times and the ability to pay higher wages, they warn, will not go on forever.

“We’re living in this bubble of Amazon, but that’s not going to go on,” said Tom Douglas, a prominent restaurateur in Seattle, referring to the local boom in jobs and economic growth from hiring at Amazon, the online retailer, which has its headquarters here. Mr. Douglas said the new law will inevitably result in costs being passed on to consumers. “There’s going to be some terrific price inflation,” he said.

The measure has the support of Mr. Murray, who ran last year on a pledge to raise the wage to $15 and made it one of his first priorities in office.

Cheers and jeers repeatedly erupted in the City Hall meeting room, which was packed with supporters of the plan, who often interrupted speakers in the 90-minute debate before the vote with chants.

“We did it — workers did this,” said Kshama Sawant, a socialist who campaigned for a $15 minimum wage when she was elected to the Council last year. Ms. Sawant sought to accelerate the carrying out of the measure and to strip out a lower youth wage training rate, but the council rejected her proposals.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/us/seattle-approves-15-minimum-wage-setting-a-new-standard-for-big-cities.html?_r=0

[Team Sergeant]

And what's actually going to happen...........


Forbes
6/03/2014 @ 11:08AM 15,237 views
We Can Predict The Effects Of Seattle's $15 An Hour Minimum Wage


It’s not difficult to outline some of the effect that this new $15 an hour minimum wage in Seattle is going to have. And I, for one, would rather hope that people are starting to study that labour market right now, so we can get a good idea of what it is like before that wage comes in. And then we can go back when it’s fully implemented and see what the effects have been. For my prediction is that the effects are not going to be good and it would be rather useful in future to have the evidence that large rises in the minimum wage really aren’t a good thing.

You know, before someone suggests it should be applied to the whole country? As, in fact, people already are?

The first and most obvious effect of a $15 an hour minimum is that there are going to be job losses. Don’t forget that the message from the academic literature is that “modest” increases in the minimum don’t seem to have “much” effect on employment levels. And we’d all agree that a $100 minimum would have rather large effects. So our puzzle here is to try to decide what is the definition of “modest”. Clearly $100 an hour isn’t. But also we can dismiss something like $1 an hour as being problematic. Since no one at all gets paid a sum that small making the minimum $1, or $1.50, has no effect on anything whatsoever.

The best result we have from the academic literature is that a minimum wage in the 40-45% region of the median wage has little to no effect on unemployment. The reason being similar to that of a $1 one. So few people get paid so little that it just doesn’t affect the wages of anyone very much. The same research tells us that once we get to 45-50% of the median wage then we do start to see significant unemployment effects.

This $15 an hour in Seattle will be around 60% of the local median wage. We would therefore expect to see reasonably large unemployment effects.


cont:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2014/06/03/we-can-predict-the-effects-of-seattles-15-an-hour-minimum-wage/

[Toaster]

There is a notion that I've seen in my generation, that everyone is equal. Not that we were created equal, and can become better through effort, but that we always shall remain equal. Whether that be of value to the market place, of opinion, character or any other number of things.

If someone comes to an organization and ethically increases the profits and productivity of the organization, they are due a raise. Not every dollar that they increase the profit should go to the individual, but a reasonably commensurate amount. If I doubled the sales in an organization, my commissions should go up.

Many people are lost and hostile to the idea that they are responsible for their lot in life, and where they end up. A problem that some have is that our free market system allows people to fail, but it creates the opportunity for such beautiful success.

There are a lot of very jealous people, who aren't willing to better themselves, or contribute more to benefit society as a whole. They just don't get that life isn't perfectly fair or easy.

I think that a good example of this is the person with childish thinking who comes onto this board, thinking that their opinion is just as valuable as Team Sergeant's, The Reaper's, Pete, FrostFire, or any other respected member on this board, demonstrates their willful ignorance, refuses correction, and is banned after whining and complaining that "the mean SF people hurted my feelings and now I have to hug my teddy bear". Contribution towards a society or organization allows one to grow higher in rank, position and esteem.

My concern is that the idea of becoming a better more productive contributing member of society will be an idea of the past, and our Republic shall be given over to mob rule.

To sum it up; "Four legs good, two legs baa-a-aad"

[Chili_Wango]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/15/income-distribution-visualizing-economics_n_3044892.html

The issue isn't the minimum wage; which everyone seems to focus on. The problem is with the distribution of wealth in the United States. There's a difference.

[Streck-Fu]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/15/income-distribution-visualizing-economics_n_3044892.html

The issue isn't the minimum wage; which everyone seems to focus on. The problem is with the distribution of wealth in the United States. There's a difference.

The false position is the idea that there is a fixed amount of wealth and that if certain individuals have a lot of it, there is less available for others. That is not true.

Whether Bill Gates or Donald Trump amass 11HundredBillionTeen dollars, it has nothing to do with your earnings potential.

The underlying reality of America's capitalism is that the population of "The Wealthy" is not static. Poor people become rich. People like Sam Walton, who found Wal-Mart, or Oprah grew up poor and Bill Gates did not inherit Microsoft.

At the same time, many rich people end up poor, whether through bad investment, timing, or business collapse.

The population of 'Rich' in this country has been dynamic and is not fixed. Income inequality is not the issue. The issue now is the reduced income mobility due to a suppressed economy and over regulated economy.

Also, it can't be ignored that poverty in the US is not defined the same as poverty in the rest of the world.

[Chili_Wango]

The false position is the idea that there is a fixed amount of wealth and that if certain individuals have a lot of it, there is less available for others. That is not true.

Whether Bill Gates or Donald Trump amass 11HundredBillionTeen dollars, it has nothing to do with your earnings potential.

The underlying reality of America's capitalism is that the population of "The Wealthy" is not static. Poor people become rich. People like Sam Walton who found Wal-Mart, Oprah grew up poor, and Bill Gates did not inherit Microsoft.

At the same time, many rich people end up poor, whether through bad investment, timing, or business collapse.

The population of 'Rich' in this country has been dynamic and is not fixed. Income inequality is not the issue. The issue now is the reduced income mobility due to a suppressed and over regulated economy.

The problem is that capitalism has become perverted over the years. The motivation to turn a profit corrupts people.
Minor example: The annual bonuses the managers in "my" company get are based off of the net profits of the company. There is a fixed amount of wealth that can be obtained. In order to amass a larger bonus, the managers will suppress the wages there by cutting the overhead cost of the plant.
The General Managers are then praised by the top brass of the company for increasing the net profits and thereby rewarded.

[Streck-Fu]

The problem is that capitalism has become perverted over the years. The motivation to turn a profit corrupts people.
Minor example: The annual bonuses the managers in "my" company get are based off of the net profits of the company. There is a fixed amount of wealth that can be obtained. In order to amass a larger bonus, the managers will suppress the wages there by cutting the overhead cost of the plant.
The General Managers are then praised by the top brass of the company for increasing the net profits and thereby rewarded.

Did you take any business classes in college?

Considering what you wrote, are you not motivated to become a manager and have a positive influence in the success of the company? Do you think that you deserve the same compensation as a senior manager?

[Streck-Fu]

Whole post

Most excellent. Well put.

[Chili_Wango]

Did you take any business classes in college?

Considering what you wrote, are you not motivated to become a manager and have a positive influence in the success of the company? Do you think that you deserve the same compensation as a senior manager?

Sir, there is a fallacy in your thinking. Yes I took business classes in college; however nothing above a 200 level class. In fact, I was deserving of more compensation than my senior manager. I was offered a promotion, raise, and chance to move (somewhat ironically to this thread) to Seattle.

I was too disgusted with the company to want the promotion. It was rather serendipitous that I realized my calling for the military at the exact same time.

[booker]

As T. Boone Pickens said (paraphrasing), there isn't a wealth pie of a certain size, it is a trough, and there is plenty of room for everyone, you just have to get off your butt and work for it.

I'm getting really tired of people complaining about how management holds down wages to get higher bonuses, etc. If you think you are worth more than you are getting paid, prove it - go find another company that agrees and is willing to pay you what you think you are worth. Otherwise, you are just complaining and using "capitalism" as the reason for your perceived substandard pay. Don't feed me a line of BS about how there is nothing else around either (geographic constraints). I've heard all of the excuses, and it comes down to this - if you want change bad enough, you will get off your ass and make it happen. You don't need some politician "looking out for you".

[The Reaper]

Socialist Seattle on the fast track to destruction . I was reading some of the comments on this story and one really stood out; "this is a very good thing because in just a couple of years we will see what an epic failure socialism actually is and that Seattle will have no one to blame but it's own socialist leaders."

Doesn't Detroit (or any of the other Dim-run socialist cities) demonstrate that adequately already?

TR

[Chili_Wango]

As T. Boone Pickens said (paraphrasing), there isn't a wealth pie of a certain size, it is a trough, and there is plenty of room for everyone, you just have to get off your butt and work for it.

I'm getting really tired of people complaining about how management holds down wages to get higher bonuses, etc. If you think you are worth more than you are getting paid, prove it - go find another company that agrees and is willing to pay you what you think you are worth. Otherwise, you are just complaining and using "capitalism" as the reason for your perceived substandard pay. Don't feed me a line of BS about how there is nothing else around either (geographic constraints). I've heard all of the excuses, and it comes down to this - if you want change bad enough, you will get off your ass and make it happen. You don't need some politician "looking out for you".

I believe there is a fallacy in your thinking as well. Many statistics related to economics prove your arguements to be false. Wages continue to DROP while productivity and net earnings continue to RISE. There is a huge descrepenacy that you cannot find an explanation for.

[Dean Jarvis]

Didn't any of you take a business class. The results will be a reduction in FTE's, improved productivity and the additional cost passed on to the consumer.:D

[Sdiver]

Didn't any of you take a business class. The results will be a reduction in FTE's, improved productivity and the additional cost passed on to the consumer.:D

Plus those "tip jars" so prominently displayed at EVERY Seattle coffee shop will soon be empty or even a thing of the past. Because why would anyone want to tip someone already making $15.00 an hour just to make coffee?

Tips are a two fold "extra", 1) Giving a server a little something extra for doing a good job at their job and 2) to offset their low minimum wage.

[Streck-Fu]

I was too disgusted with the company to want the promotion. It was rather serendipitous that I realized my calling for the military at the exact same time.


Is your rationale for feeling disgust for the company purely due to the observed compensation schedule?


How can you claim confidently that you are deserving of more compensation than your senior manager just because you were offered a promotion at a different location?

[Old Dog New Trick]

I believe there is a fallacy in your thinking as well. Every single statistic related to economics is proving your arguements to be false. Wages continue to DROP while productivity and net earnings continue to RISE. There is a huge descrepenacy that you cannot find an explanation for.

:munchin

[booker]

I believe there is a fallacy in your thinking as well. Every single statistic related to economics is proving your arguements to be false. Wages continue to DROP while productivity and net earnings continue to RISE. There is a huge descrepenacy that you cannot find an explanation for.

You should be careful making global statements such as "every single statistic", particularly when you are providing zero data or support for your claim. In my field (engineering), wages continue to go up, and as such, so is productivity. I worked my ass off to get into that field for a reason. Those folks with an art history degree may be experiencing a downturn in wages. YMMV. While I cannot speak for every particular wage area in the United States, the 2013 statistics from the Economic Policy Institute (August 2013) indicate, at worst, that the wages have been flat (but that doesn't tell the entire story). That being stated, almost all the data used for these studies is based upon household and/or employer surveys, which are notorious for being at best, correlative data, and are usually (when used for correlations, etc and not higher level statistics) prone to high margins of error. Additionally, the study authors state that they ran regression analyses for the parameters in the study, but do not provide said results, and state only that they did some statistical analysis on publicly available data. But, I digress.

However, if you fall within the bottom 20th percentile of folks used in the above cited study, you have experienced a fall in wages. This can be due to a number of factors, but the data appears to indicate that this may be a result of educational differences. There is also a gender difference. That has been around for a long time, and it doesn't appear to be going anywhere anytime soon.

Not sure what your statistics were, but it would be nice to see them so we can have a real discussion of what you are basing this opinion on.

[PSM]

Yes I took business classes in college; however nothing above a 200 level class.

Did the professor, by any chance, bring up the Ben and Jerry's CEO compensation model?

When they started they promised that the CEO, Ben I believe, would not make more than 5 times what the lowest worker made. When he was set to retire, they could not find anyone who wanted the job at that wage. They upped it to 7 to 1 and eventually to 17 to 1.

They eventually sold it to Unilever, a multinational corporation, for over $300,000,000. In 2011, the CEO was reported to have made $4,000,000 the previous year.

Pat

[Chili_Wango]

[QUOTE=booker;553162]You should be careful making global statements such as "every single statistic", particularly when you are providing zero data or support for your claim. In my field (engineering), wages continue to go up, and as such, so is productivity.[QUOTE]


True. Thanks for calling me out on that. The point stands though. Productivity rates and net earnings for companies continue to rise while wage stagnate.

[Streck-Fu]

The point stands though. Productivity rates and net earnings for companies continue to rise while wage stagnate.

Prove it.

[The Reaper]

You should be careful making global statements such as "every single statistic", particularly when you are providing zero data or support for your claim. In my field (engineering), wages continue to go up, and as such, so is productivity.


True. Thanks for calling me out on that. The point stands though. Productivity rates and net earnings for companies continue to rise while wage stagnate.

Would you like a larger shovel? :munchin

TR

[Dean Jarvis]

True. Thanks for calling me out on that. The point stands though. Productivity rates and net earnings for companies continue to rise while wage stagnate.

This is true. It's due to extremely high unemployment. Too many people chasing after too few job's puts the employer in the drivers seat. When unemployment is low the job applicant has a better chance of negotiating higher wages.:p

[Streck-Fu]

This is true. It's due to extremely high unemployment. Too many people chasing after too few job's puts the employer in the drivers seat. When unemployment is low the job applicant has a better chance of negotiating higher wages.:p

As booker stated, not all job seekers are created equal. Those that earned a degree for a skill in demand are not competing for the same jobs that graduates with B.A.s.

[Chili_Wango]

Would you like a larger shovel? :munchin

TR

I'm currently in my office and am unable to access the websites where I wish to provide evidence for my statements. Will provide them later.

[Dean Jarvis]

As booker stated, not all job seekers are created equal. Those that earned a degree for a skill in demand are not competing for the same jobs that graduates with B.A.s.

The operative word here is "in demand". My son graduated from Law School two years ago. There were only 5 in his graduating class that found a job. He just passed his Patent test and looking to upgrade his employment. Right now he would be considered one of those in the stagnant income categories.

As I said, when there is low unemployment, it creates more "demand" in most every job category.

[Streck-Fu]

I'm currently in my office and am unable to access the websites where I wish to provide evidence for my statements. Will provide them later.

Looking forward to it.

[plato]

http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2011/ted_20110224.htm

Here's something to go on. The productivity gains from increased automation and 'instant' communication probably don't translate into increased wages.

[Chili_Wango]

Alright. Here it goes: I prefer to use articles that draw on a number of primary sources. I believe they provide a bigger picture and a more accurate view of the topic; plus econ papers are about as dense as science papers, they author saves us the time from having to digest the primary source (unless of course I have a reason to doubt the validity of the primary source).

I am not offering a solution, merely highlighting what I believe to be serious problems that our current economic state has.

http://www.gfmag.com/global-data/economic-data/wealth-distribution-income-inequality

I find this particular represention of wealth distribution across the world to be very troubling. The US, and a hand full of other developed nations, have a wealth distrbution that mirrors those of poorer, less-developed nations. I find it rather interesting that the US appears to have similar distributions as those of communist and socialist nations as well.


Communism and Socialism is supposed to help distribute wealth somewhat evenly across the whole population. However, due to a perversion of the system and corruption, the wealth is hoarded by the guys at the top. It appears that our capitalist society is following the same lines. While i'm ont saying that the 3 types of economic systems are simliar; I'm saying the perversion and corruption of the 3 yeild the same effects.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/12/18/the-many-ways-to-measure-economic-inequality/

Pay particular attention to the fourth graph. 3,600 people hold 35% of the TOTAL wealth in the US. We condemn other economic systems, yet the distribution of wealth is begining to mirror the "others".

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3629

I find the juxtaposition of the increase in income gains between the different social classes to be quite striking. Streck-Fu mentioned earlier about mobility between the different social classes and tossed a few common names about including Bill Gates. It is impossible to justify the success of our economic system based off the successes of a very select few. While it is not impossible for those in the bottom 40% to work their way to the top, they do not relfect the overall population, they are the exception. You have the bottom 40% of the population holding only 30% of the wealth. That's about 126 million people. You cited a couple of names, and in light of the fact that they came from the bottom 40%, 2 from 126 million, you're going to have to do better than that.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3629

Here is a good explanation and summary to statistical analyses regarding the income gap since the 70s.


I do not know of solutions; I merely recognize a problem. Here is my dilemma: I cannot possibly justify ordering somone to give their hard-earned money away (we all experince this every year in April); yet, how can you justify the sequestration of wealth while the majority of the population suffers? Whether people care to admit it or not, capitalism, just like every other economic system, is susceptible to perversion and corruption. And that is exactly what has happened today.

The arguement for welfare pigs sucking on the tit of big government angers me too, but you have to realize there are an estimated 50 million on welfare, roughly 16% of the total population; they are the minority. So what about the rest of the population, the hard-working white collar workers, skilled tradesman, etc.

Streck-Fu also used the commonly tossed around examples of success stories like Bill Gates and Oprah. I believe these inaccurately reflect reality. Stories like such are the exception. We have about 60% of the populaiton holding about 60% of the wealth. That 189 million people. Compare that to the top 1%, 3,600 people. Pretty big difference eh? Then again compare it to the bottom 40% of folks who have only 30% of the wealth. Thats roughly 126 million people, and you give me 2 names to give evidence of the success of our current economic system? You have to be kidding me.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/victorlipman/2013/04/25/the-disturbing-link-between-psychopathy-and-leadership/

This is an interesting article that I have yet to to decide if the primary source is sound or not. It could be a possible explanation as to why we see the hoarding of wealth at the top, especially in the bank bailouts that the wonderful POTUS did.

Either way the system is broken.

P.S. This is my second attempt at the reply. My first attempt took too long and when I hit submit, I had to sign back in restart from scratch... :boohoo

[Streck-Fu]

http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2011/ted_20110224.htm

Here's something to go on. The productivity gains from increased automation and 'instant' communication probably don't translate into increased wages.

The original assertion, as I understand it, was that wages are dropping for employees that are more productive creating greater business profits.

Since machines are not salaried or waged, I don't see how it factors into the issue.

[Chili_Wango]

http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2011/ted_20110224.htm

Here's something to go on. The productivity gains from increased automation and 'instant' communication probably don't translate into increased wages.

While that is disturbing, it's difficult to include factors when discussing production; i.e. advancements in technology. If you make a machine that can increase the output of products by 30%, the worker isn't necessarily working any harder, it's the machine. So why should the worker be rewarded? Then again the poor fellow is most likely be making jack shit in the first place while is CEO rakes in millions.

Like I said in my previous post, I find it difficult to demand that my CEO give me money, money he earned; but how can he/she justify hoarding the wealth why giving everyone else the scraps?

[Streck-Fu]

Thats roughly 126 million people, and you give me 2 names to give evidence of the success of our current economic system? You have to be kidding me.

Are you fucking serious? Are you suggesting that you need a significant number of examples of financial success stories to counter you preference for government mandated theft...excuse me....redistribution?

Can you get a refund for that education?

[Chili_Wango]

Are you fucking serious?

Can you get a refund for that education?

Play nice. I wasn't being malicious to you. Please provide evidence that you think will contradict me. Then we can talk. Or if you think my reasoning and statments contain fallacies, then point them out. The point is to have a constructive conversation.

CW

[Chili_Wango]

Are you fucking serious? Are you suggesting that you need a significant number of examples of financial success stories to counter you preference for government mandated theft...excuse me....redistribution?

Can you get a refund for that education?


Yes (not referriing to your education spat). You insinuate that our economic system is successful. I just don't understand what you see as a successful system. If you see the mobility of a handful of folks up the latter as success, then so be it. This is entirely opinionated.

[The Reaper]

While that is disturbing, it's difficult to include factors when discussing production; i.e. advancements in technology. If you make a machine that can increase the output of products by 30%, the worker isn't necessarily working any harder, it's the machine. So why should the worker be rewarded? Then again the poor fellow is most likely be making jack shit in the first place while is CEO rakes in millions.

Like I said in my previous post, I find it difficult to demand that my CEO give me money, money he earned; but how can he/she justify hoarding the wealth why giving everyone else the scraps?

Do you believe that a $300,000 per year CEO can do an equally good job?

I believe that market forces would demand a higher level of performance and return for a multi-million dollar Chief Executive.

In a free market, how is adequate compensation determined?

TR

[ddoering]

In a free market, how is adequate compensation determined?

TR

Barry will determine it.

[Lan]

An informative video was posted here (http://professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=539904&postcount=95). Peter Schiff seems to get it- Change starts in DC, not at the doorstep of corporations.

I know the CEO of one of the worlds largest corporations. He came from a normal family, worked smart, hard, and did it without handouts. Not every hard working person will amass a ton of monetary wealth, but having a ton of money in the bank isn't the only form of wealth. Do your best and ignore the inequality of the system, because it is a hindrance. If capable people who rely on handouts, worked their asses off, we'd all be better off.

If you don't like your pay, do something about it.

[Streck-Fu]

Yes (not referriing to your education spat). You insinuate that our economic system is successful. I just don't understand what you see as a successful system. If you see the mobility of a handful of folks up the latter as success, then so be it. This is entirely opinionated.

What is your primary motivation for wanting to join the military?

[Chili_Wango]

Do you believe that a $300,000 per year CEO can do an equally good job?

I believe that market forces would demand a higher level of performance and return for a multi-million dollar Chief Executive.

In a free market, how is adequate compensation determined?

TR

We could go back to supply and demand. However, I believe that adequate compensation is determined by the discretion of the top brass. While higher education is a common factor for your income, it does not guarantee that you will be paid what you are worth.

Not sure how others feel, but at least in the hard-science related fields, having a B.S. is the new highschool diploma, they're a dime a dozen. Here you can factor in supply and demand. The supply of college grads far exceeds the demand, just look at statistics that cover this. The average intern with a BS, at least in Portland, from my personal experiences (and of friends), is at best $15.00 an hour.

Who in their right mind would pay 45k a year for 4 years just to work for 15 an hour? (the college I went to was 45k a year and I have more than a few aquintances who are in this position. This may not be reflective of the entire situation as this pertains to just one city).

The game changes once you get your masters, and further so with your doctorates.

In regards to the level of work dictating income, if that was the case, pay would be pretty much equal in "my" particular company. We operate according to the season and availability of fish, e.g. in the summer we operate 24/7. 12 hour shifts everyday until the season is over. Last year I worked 72 12's. There's a saying here good hours, shitty pay (the sheer amount of hours make up for the fact that we're getting paid shit). This particular company was bought out several years ago and the union was disbanded. It's hayday, the average production worker was making $25/hour, this was in 1980. The place fell under poor management until it was bought out. Now the same workers are makein $9.50/hour.

Just one example...

[Chili_Wango]

What is your primary motivation for wanting to join the military?

I could have made a very good amount of money if I stayed with the company I work for. I however, desire a job that brings me satisfaction. I need to be able to look back at my life and say that I did something meaningful. Making money and being concerned about material things does not bring meaning to my life.

Then again there's the topic of the Constitution. Look at history, look at how humans have regarded eachother... I find it incredible that young men 200+ years ago were able to forge a document such as this one. While I think the past adminstrations have crumpled it up into a ball and threw it over their shoulder, I still believe in it. The United States Constitution is hands down the best product of mankind. I think it is worth defending. IMHO.

CW

[Streck-Fu]

I could have made a very good amount of money if I stayed with the company I work for. I however, desire a job that brings me satisfaction. I need to be able to look back at my life and say that I did something meaningful. Making money and being concerned about material things does not bring meaning to my life.

Then why spend all this effort being concerned and expressing disgust at people's wealth and salaries.

Then again there's the topic of the Constitution. Look at history, look at how humans have regarded eachother... I find it incredible that young men 200+ years ago were able to forge a document such as this one. While I think the past adminstrations have crumpled it up into a ball and threw it over their shoulder, I still believe in it. The United States Constitution is hands down the best product of mankind. I think it is worth defending. IMHO.

CW

The problem with your views on economics is that it is counter to the individual liberties and government restrictions emphasized in the Constitution.

[DIYPatriot]

Who in their right mind would pay 45k a year for 4 years just to work for 15 an hour? (the college I went to was 45k a year and I have more than a few aquintances who are in this position. This may not be reflective of the entire situation as this pertains to just one city).


How did you fund your tuition?

[plato]

The original assertion, as I understand it, was that wages are dropping for employees that are more productive creating greater business profits.

Since machines are not salaried or waged, I don't see how it factors into the issue.

Being a FOG, I've watched a corporate 50% cut in secretaries, and a 70% cut in finance workers with the advent of the "fill in form online", as opposed to handing a hand-written form to someone to type. I've also seen robots installed to do the welding and painting in major auto plants. In both cases, with fewer employees, there were no proportional raises for those remaining, though productivity of the organization increased. If we're talking about the evils of not redistributing income, those wouldn't affect the question raised.

However, the BLS chart shows increases in real wages, though the OP claimed those increases weren't happening. Was that our disconnect?

[plato]

Like I said in my previous post, I find it difficult to demand that my CEO give me money, money he earned; but how can he/she justify hoarding the wealth why giving everyone else the scraps?

US companies are competing with foreign-based companies that pay their workers about a dollar an hour. We no longer have the advantage of a uniquely superior national infrastructure and better-educated workforce. If you can help a corporation with 100,000 workers survive, you're worth more than the lug-nut-tightener.

I belong to a nation of wealth-hoarders. I took my paycheck, educated myself to get a bigger piece of the pie, and never ONCE sent money to India to "even things out". Did you?

[GratefulCitizen]

@ Chili_Wango

Wealth "hoarders" don't get rich.
People who put their wealth to work get rich.

[Pete]

There is a difference between having a job and making a job.

Those who are self employed or who run a small - or not so small - business know it.

So for all those who bitch about how little you're paid - do you know your true worth to the company and why you get so little of it?

[cbtengr]

You will get out of life what you put into it, I had no fewer that 5 menial jobs the first two years after I left the service. Each job was better than the one before. The first really good paying job I had was a pipeline job it paid $9.04 an hr. and had free healthcare that was in November of 1980. I could not believe that anyone could make that kind of money. What struck me though was the old union guys who sat around and complained about not getting a big enough piece of the pie, their problem was that they had not been hungry in a long time and could not appreciate how good they had it.

I stayed 33 years before hanging it up in January of this year I was making over $32.00 an hour when I retired. I know my supervisor made probably 25% more than me but I did not care, he had all the headaches. Had I aspired to be a supervisor I could have, the only holding me back was me. That is the beauty of our system it's up to you how far you go.

The military is all about what you make of it, at least it used to be. I always thought it was the ultimate equal opportunity employer.

[GratefulCitizen]

Getting rich can be done, if you're willing to make the sacrifices.

My best friend had dropped out of college and "bummed" for awhile.
He got a job at Target, around minimum wage, about his 22nd birthday.

Lived cheaply (extraordinarily so), eventually went in with his brother to buy a house, and took on renters.
Spent some years learning how to manage that money, and still lived cheaply and kept working his way up at Target.

Some years later, he bought out his brother's share of the house so his brother could go to grad school.
Still kept living cheaply and kept working at Target.

Learned the ins and outs of investing, and always put into his 401k up to the match.
Still kept living cheaply and kept working at Target.

Started a little side business, researched and took advantage of all the various fringe benefits of his job, and moved into an apartment because he could make more money renting every room in his house.
Still kept living cheaply and kept working at Target.

Eventually, he had accumulated a small bit of wealth, had stellar credit, was as high on the pay scale as hourly employees could go, and had few expenses.
Then the crash of 2009 happened.

All of his preparation, cheap living, and study of investing were ready pay dividends.
Bought like mad at the bottom, made a fortune that year.

Still carefully researches all of his investments, and makes good money at it.
Passed the $1 million net worth mark a little before his 40th birthday.

Still lives cheaply.
Still works as an hourly employee at Target.

Given a couple decades of discipline and courage, anybody can do it.

[sinjefe]

Getting rich can be done, if you're willing to make the sacrifices.

My best friend had dropped out of college and "bummed" for awhile.
He got a job at Target, around minimum wage, about his 22nd birthday.

Lived cheaply (extraordinarily so), eventually went in with his brother to buy a house, and took on renters.
Spent some years learning how to manage that money, and still lived cheaply and kept working his way up at Target.

Some years later, he bought out his brother's share of the house so his brother could go to grad school.
Still kept living cheaply and kept working at Target.

Learned the ins and outs of investing, and always put into his 401k up to the match.
Still kept living cheaply and kept working at Target.

Started a little side business, researched and took advantage of all the various fringe benefits of his job, and moved into an apartment because he could make more money renting every room in his house.
Still kept living cheaply and kept working at Target.

Eventually, he had accumulated a small bit of wealth, had stellar credit, was as high on the pay scale as hourly employees could go, and had few expenses.
Then the crash of 2009 happened.

All of his preparation, cheap living, and study of investing were ready pay dividends.
Bought like mad at the bottom, made a fortune that year.

Still carefully researches all of his investments, and makes good money at it.
Passed the $1 million net worth mark a little before his 40th birthday.

Still lives cheaply.
Still works as an hourly employee at Target.

Given a couple decades of discipline and courage, anybody can do it.

And that is what liberals will never get. Income mobility. People don't stay poor unless they choose to.

[Chili_Wango]

Perhaps I will have quite the illustrious career ahead of me.

I paid for my education through blood sweat and tears.
Averaged 18 credits a semester, swam collegiately, worked as a night janitor, and mentor. Couldn't afford internships on the summer; not enough to cover tuition. Worked at cannery instead, 12 hour shifts everyday until school started. Overtime is a godsend. I have a wonderful family that are a pillar of support, just not financially. While I was envious at first of my wealthy peers, I have come to learn that I have been made stronger by adversity.

The problems I have seen at my place of work stem from the pay. We pay the lowest and it shows with the production workers. You get what you pay for, and for me, I deal with the bottom of the barrel. I worked my butt off and it would have payed off, if not for my decision to enlist.

[GratefulCitizen]

Perhaps I will have quite the illustrious career ahead of me.

I paid for my education through blood sweat and tears.
Averaged 18 credits a semester, swam collegiately, worked as a night janitor, and mentor. Couldn't afford internships on the summer; not enough to cover tuition. Worked at cannery instead, 12 hour shifts everyday until school started. Overtime is a godsend. I have a wonderful family that are a pillar of support, just not financially. While I was envious at first of my wealthy peers, I have come to learn that I have been made stronger by adversity.

The problems I have seen at my place of work stem from the pay. We pay the lowest and it shows with the production workers. You get what you pay for, and for me, I deal with the bottom of the barrel. I worked my butt off and it would have payed off, if not for my decision to enlist.


Hard work isn't enough.
You have to discard all forms of zero-sum thinking.

Zero-sum thinking is what trips up most people.
It can come in sneaky forms.

The biggest among hard workers: unwillingness to receive.
It's usually shrouded in pride and is accompanied by "I pay my own way/I pay my share/indebted to no man".

If someone can't freely "receive", then that means they don't really freely "give" either.
It's always a "trade" of some sort with a zero-sum, score-keeping account of prestige, favors, or something.

If you can, and it's appropriate, give freely with no thought of return.
Likewise, allow others to do the same for you.

This mindset allows high-trust win-win relationships.
If there are win-win deals out there where you divide the spoils 70-30 in favor of the other guy, pretty soon everyone wants to deal with you.

Your "30" shares coming from all directions add up quickly.

Good luck.

[SF-TX]

...I worked my butt off and it would have payed off, if not for my decision to enlist.

So, YOU chose to change jobs/careers to improve your _________{fill in the blank -job satisfaction, better pay, better working conditions, better benefits, better opportunities for advancement, better living conditions, etc.}

Interesting concept.

[Streck-Fu]

I worked my butt off and it would have payed off, if not for my decision to enlist.

Let me see if I am following this correctly.

You worked hard to put yourself through school. Excellent.

You had a basic entry level managerial job watching laborers. OK, good start.

You felt the company sucks because the pay was low and you observed senior managers and executives getting bonuses because the company profits were good. Hmmmm....

This led you think that capitalism has failed and that the workers deserved a share of what the executives are earning....

So when you are offered a promotion, increased salary, and relocation, you are too disgusted to accept it and quit to pursue a career in the military, preferably SF.

And while expressing a preference for a government regulated economy with wage controls and greatly reduced individual liberties, you criticize the political entities that have implemented the government regulations you seem to support.

I may be having a hard time tracking the target through the rational clutter.....

[Chili_Wango]

Let me see if I am following this correctly.

You worked hard to put yourself through school. Excellent.

You had a basic entry level managerial job watching laborers. OK, good start.

You felt the company sucks because the pay was low and you observed senior managers and executives getting bonuses because the company profits were good. Hmmmm....

This led you think that capitalism has failed and that the workers deserved a share of what the executives are earning....

So when you are offered a promotion, increased salary, and relocation, you are too disgusted to accept it and quit to pursue a career in the military, preferably SF.

And while expressing a preference for a government regulated economy with wage controls and greatly reduced individual liberties, you criticize the political entities that have implemented the government regulations you seem to support.

I may be having a hard time tracking the target through the rational clutter.....

They're putting a bandaid on a gunshot wound. And perhads tried to do chest compressions on top of that (Now we're finding employees without benefits, without OT, without tips).

I do not have an affinity to big government. I do not wish more government clutter (regulations). I want leaders with integrity who actually give a damn about their employees.

The point I was making about the bonuses was unrelated to the profit. No matter what the profit was, they would supress wages to increase theirs. Sounds like a good business model to me: swindle your employees as much as you can to inrease your profit margins.

[Chili_Wango]

Career POG E4 material in the making.

I have limited faith in the leaders of our government. I have unwaivering faith in our Constitution. Ideas persist, people come and go.

[DIYPatriot]

So, YOU chose to change jobs/careers to improve your _________{fill in the blank -job satisfaction, better pay, better working conditions, better benefits, better opportunities for advancement, better living conditions, etc.}

Interesting concept.

This is why I asked how he funded his education. Instead of choosing a school that cost $45k/year, I chose one that was a little less expensive. While I graduated in 2000 from a university that cost me $32k (total), my return on investment seems to have worked out so far. I hate debt and wanted no part of it. I don't love money. I grew up in a very poor single parent home for most of my life. My mom worked a couple factory jobs. You get the idea. I wanted to better my self for my future family's sake and because I hated having to flee the home when tornados were on the way.

I am an engineer in my civilian life. My first job out of college did for me exactly as I had hoped it would - it gave me an opportunity to prove myself. That's it. After that ticket got punched, I moved on and busted my tail to learn, gain valuable knowledge from my peers and experience from my failures. And boy, were there many! All I really learned from college was how to research and study to solve problems. The real world was quite an eye opener, especially since I am in a highly technical field.

It took me a couple years to pay off my education, but I did it in the fall of 2002. I'm not saying that to boast. I'm saying that because hard work literally paid off for me. To this day it continues. In less than 5 years I went from being a college grad looking for work to a team leader working for a fortune 500 in three different countries managing 18 employees while also being expected to deliver better results than the previous quarter. There's something about generating revenue while out-performing your competition that upper management and shareholders seem to find fascinating.

Were there times that I felt that I had been passed over for a promotion or a raise? Hell yes. Did I bitch about it? Yep for about 5 minutes because that's when my wife looked at me and said, "Good is the enemy of better. Stop being good at what you do." She was right. I needed to improve myself, not get caught up in the "woe is me" stuff and work with the intensity of a paper dog trying to catch an asbestos cat running through hell.

When I view the $15/hr minimum wage BS I just want to throw rocks at trees. Especially when politicians such as Pelosi are hailing it as the greatest thing since welfare and want to push for a federal wage no less than the same as Seattle's. They might as well go ahead and run an IV into every low-wage earner's arm and give them more of the good stuff that we fund with our tax dollars because they're gonna be hooked on the entitlements when kiosks are taking the orders and robots are flipping the burgers or baking the pizzas while drones are delivering them. (http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/04/technology/innovation/dominos-pizza-drone/index.html)

By the way, that first job I was telling you about - I got my big break at that company when my small crew of three engineers and I developed a way to automate a manufacturing process (using GPS, IR and RFID tags, etc) to replace more than 120 workers. Those 120+ workers had gone on strike a couple years prior and demanded more wages, benefits and the like. Not saying I'm opposed to everyone getting their cut of the proverbial pie, but when a 29 year old man is bitching that he only makes $34/hr to drive a forklift in an air conditioned factory, then something is wrong.

Enjoy your job cuts, higher prices and lost employer sponsored benefits, Seattle.

[MR2]

I would not want you on my team.

[Chili_Wango]

I would not want you on my team.

Perhaps it's not meant to be, only time will tell.

"I May Not Agree With What You Have To Say, But I Will Defend Your Right To Say It"

[Streck-Fu]

They're putting a bandaid on a gunshot wound. And perhads tried to do chest compressions on top of that (Now we're finding employees without benefits, without OT, without tips).

Do I dare ask WTF that is supposed to mean? Who is finding employees without......?

[Chili_Wango]

Do I dare ask WTF that is supposed to mean? Who is finding employees without......?

Look what is happening in Seattle. The 15/hour wage plan is backfiring, i was using the royal "we". Anyone looking from the outside in. I never supported the government intervention on the wage.

[Lan]

Chili, FWIW, I understand wanting to change the world with noble ideas. 10 years ago I may have agreed with you a bit. The sooner you pull your head out of the clouds, the better off you'll be.

Unless you want to be a public advocate for the 'oppressed' in our society, a word I use in jest, follow your dreams and don't worry about the problems ailing your peers. A lot of 20 something's believe they're owed something because they have a degree. I might be a generational thing, or a problem with young adults in general. Corporations don't owe degree holders shit, they owe a good return to their shareholders.

If these Starbucks types worked harder to do something with their lives, instead of complaining about the unfairness of the world, we'd all be better off. Life is too short to complain!

[cbtengr]

There is no gunshot wound to put a band aid on, these do gooder's ran for office to make a difference in peoples lives, well they are and they are making a real mess out of it.

What motivates you Chili? You seem to be all over the place. You act as if you have some sort of axe to grind. I may be wrong but I do not believe that you are going to be all that happy in the military. Right now you live in a world where if you are not happy you can say the hell with it and move on to something else. You are making a commitment to the military and it's one that many of us who have served take very seriously, I guess I do not see that level of commitment in you. I wish you well though.

[(1VB)compforce]

While that is disturbing, it's difficult to include factors when discussing production; i.e. advancements in technology. If you make a machine that can increase the output of products by 30%, the worker isn't necessarily working any harder, it's the machine. So why should the worker be rewarded? Then again the poor fellow is most likely be making jack shit in the first place while is CEO rakes in millions.

Like I said in my previous post, I find it difficult to demand that my CEO give me money, money he earned; but how can he/she justify hoarding the wealth why giving everyone else the scraps?

You're leaving out the risk factor. Take my company as an example. We're 4 years in business now. I put every penny I could into getting the business off the ground. Yes, I bootstrapped it. The silicon valley model is a whole different game.

I took no salary and lived off savings the first two years (Year 2 I was in Afghanistan). Year three I took a salary that was roughly 1/4 of what I could have earned on the open market. This year I am making slightly less than 1/2 of what I can make working for someone else. At the rate I am going, it will be year 6 before I even come close to salary parity. BUT, if I can continue to grow the company, there will come a point where I will be able to make MUCH more than I would working for someone else. Yes, if we have the profits, I will take a very large salary. Much more than anyone else in the company.

But I am also the one that took the risk. Everything I own is on the line and if the company fails, the impact to me personally will be very very severe. I'm happy to share in the wealth. I've never had an employee make the same or less than I do. But when the day comes that I can afford to make my salary right, shouldn't I?

Now let's talk about management other than a founder. When you are talking about a Senior Manager, a VP, a Director or a C-Suite occupant, you are talking about someone that the person taking all the risk (me) has delegated the authority and responsibility for running a portion of the operation. If they screw up, my personal future is impacted in a big way. A really bad decision by that manager could very well cause me to lose everything and go bankrupt. I want to have someone I can trust in that position. Joe Snuffy just isn't an option. I want to attract the best person I can possibly afford for that seat. I also want that person to have a vested interest in the company so that they are incentivized to do the very best job they can. The best way to accomplish both ends is in the form of bonuses, options and compensation packages where the amount is tied directly to the company's results. If the company loses money, they lose money (to a point). If the company makes money, they make money. Once again, they are being compensated for the risk they are taking. Bear in mind those managers are taking lower salaries in return for the bonuses.

The other side of this is the worker. Very few workers have direct impact on the overall welfare of the company. The bigger the company, the less impact the individual worker can have. Yes, they can impact the operations, but if the company has good checks and balances in place, typically they can't impact the well being of the company.

So my question is: After putting the difference in risk in perspective, do you still believe that the compensation levels should only be slightly different between the two roles?

The only (major) difference related to this discussion between the example of my small company and the big boys that are traded publicly is the ownership. I own my company and shareholders own the public company. Other than that, there isn't that much of a difference in the reasoning behind compensation plans. Yes, the plans are different, but the reasons for the incentives are still the same. (For you purists out there, I'm ignoring the senior managers that have incentives through M&A)

[Chili_Wango]

Upon further reflection on this subject I realized a few things:

Many people, including those in this forum, have fought to secure the rights that citizens have; others died. To see folks complain about their situation and not do anything to improve their situation is a slap to the face. You give them the opportunity and they squander it.

The same goes for socialism; Americans fought and died to secure the freedom of choice; not to have the government make them for you.

I also wish to articulate one idea that I failed to earlier: it's not capitalism that failed; it was some folks that have. I simply think some take advantage of the system; which happens, this isn't a perfect world. I think this is a failing in the culture, on equal parts of the public and it's leadership.

The past two discussions I've had were meant to spark interesting discussions; perhaps of my own ignorance, that failed. I'm going to do what sluggos do best now: post less and read more.

Thanks,

CW

[DIYPatriot]

And now this from the Bay State -

The House on Wednesday approved legislation raising the minimum wage to $11 over three years and authorizing a 31 percent increase in the hourly wage for tipped workers in Massachusetts.

The vote was 124-24, and comes after the proposal cleared the Senate last week 35-4. Gov. Deval Patrick, who will receive the bill after additional procedural votes, also favors an increase in the wage floor.

Why am I not surprised that he's holding a Socialist Alternative paper?


Continued (http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/06/massachusetts_house_approves_b.html)

[spottedmedic111]

Upon further reflection on this subject I realized a few things:

Many people, including those in this forum, have fought to secure the rights that citizens have; others died. To see folks complain about their situation and not do anything to improve their situation is a slap to the face. You give them the opportunity and they squander it.

The same goes for socialism; Americans fought and died to secure the freedom of choice; not to have the government make them for you.

I also wish to articulate one idea that I failed to earlier: it's not capitalism that failed; it was some folks that have. I simply think some take advantage of the system; which happens, this isn't a perfect world. I think this is a failing in the culture, on equal parts of the public and it's leadership.

The past two discussions I've had were meant to spark interesting discussions; perhaps of my own ignorance, that failed. I'm going to do what sluggos do best now: post less and read more.

Thanks,

CW

Chili it sounds like your critics share your opinion even though they don't recognize it. Your arguments are lucid, don't let anyone shut you out.

[Team Sergeant]

And now this from the Bay State -



Why am I not surprised that he's holding a Socialist Alternative paper?


Continued (http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/06/massachusetts_house_approves_b.html)

Socialism is great, until you run out of other peoples money.
The Iron Lady......


Watch the union jobs leave the state..... this will be amusing and it will be the beginning of the end for the SEIU.

[JimP]

The fallacy is thinking that you can legislate prosperity. Simple math - can't be done.

[Team Sergeant]

The fallacy is thinking that you can legislate prosperity. Simple math - can't be done.

Who says the socialist left thinks? :munchin

[Sdiver]

The fallacy is thinking that you can legislate prosperity. Simple math - can't be done.

They don't like simple math, that's why they came up with common core math. :rolleyes:

[GratefulCitizen]

FWIW: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748703561604575282190930932412?mod=WS J_Opinion_LEADTop&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB1000 1424052748703561604575282190930932412.html%3Fmod%3 DWSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

:D