# 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers



## Donald Polish (Aug 7, 2015)

9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
This story doesn't surprise me. 
The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 7, 2015)

You jealous?


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Aug 7, 2015)

Private corporations can pay CEO's what they want. It's none of your business and if you don't like it then don't patronize them


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.



Two quick responses:

1. We are resembling France prior to their revolution, and
2. We demonize poor, illegals for washing  dishes at our restaurants and exalt greedy CEOs who while collecting millions, sit around trying to figure out how to avoid paying any taxes.

Capitalism works best when human frailties are taken out of the equation.


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

YAWN

 if you split up the compensation of every single super high-paid executive in America among all the workers each one would get a few dollars; there's that many more workers than executives of the kind you are speaking of

 it's all about class warfare with you douchebag lefties; ironically too since INCOME INEQUALITY GOT WORSE AND IS STILL GETTING WORSE UNDER PROGRESSIVES

Progs are losers who lie.....................to themselves


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 7, 2015)

Maybe you should have higher aspirations than collecting unemployment and EBT


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.



"The middle class has been buried these past four years." Joe Biden, Oct 2012


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.



Meanwhile wages are stagnant for workers and the economy is slow.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 7, 2015)

SassyIrishLass said:


> Private corporations can pay CEO's what they want. It's none of your business and if you don't like it then don't patronize them


Why is billionaires always on the left's mind? What is there fascination with them all the time?

I never think about them and only defend them when they want to raise taxes...because I know that trickles down to me paying more.


----------



## defcon4 (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.


Envy much?


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

and? everyone of these elected ASSES in congress AND that thug Obama MAKE MORE than the people they employ? does that surprise you?

SERIOUSLY


----------



## Flash (Aug 7, 2015)

Stop being a greedy envious Moon Bat.  If you don't like the salary that a CEO gets from a corporation then your remedy is simply not buy any goods or services provided by the corporation.  That way you won't be contributing to the salary that you don't like.  Problem solved. 

You need to worry about the money that you make and not be obsessed with worrying about what other people make.  It just makes you look greedy.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.


cry baby


----------



## jon_berzerk (Aug 7, 2015)

Flash said:


> Stop being a greedy envious Moon Bat.  If you don't like the salary that a CEO gets from a corporation then your remedy is simply not buy any goods or services provided by the corporation.  That way you won't be contributing to the salary that you don't like.  Problem solved.
> 
> You need to worry about the money that you make and not be obsessed with worrying about what other people make.  It just makes you look greedy.


leftists are the most greedy


----------



## jon_berzerk (Aug 7, 2015)

bear513 said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > Private corporations can pay CEO's what they want. It's none of your business and if you don't like it then don't patronize them
> ...



they  want their money without having to work for it

that is why


----------



## jon_berzerk (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> Donald Polish said:
> 
> 
> > 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> ...


obama admin = stagnant wages


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Based on this recurring topic regarding the outrageous "compensation" of greedy CEOs......it would be somewhat refreshing for right wingers to expand their vocabulary when countering democrats, a bit more than the inane stating of: 
 "Are you jealous?"........"Envy is a bad thing"......Or, "Get a job so you can become a CEO too..."


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 7, 2015)

jon_berzerk said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > Stop being a greedy envious Moon Bat.  If you don't like the salary that a CEO gets from a corporation then your remedy is simply not buy any goods or services provided by the corporation.  That way you won't be contributing to the salary that you don't like.  Problem solved.
> ...


 yup they are greedy, envious of people who work 60 hours plus a week to get ahead, when they just don't want to even get a job. They blow their money on the lottery and when one of them hits , they are flat broke a few years latter or dead or in jail...

They should be blessed and thank God they don't have millions...


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.




good for them.    You have no concept of what it takes to become a CEO, do you?


----------



## Iceweasel (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Two quick responses:
> 
> 1. We are resembling France prior to their revolution, and
> 2. We demonize poor, illegals for washing  dishes at our restaurants and exalt greedy CEOs who while collecting millions, sit around trying to figure out how to avoid paying any taxes.
> ...


Who exactly is demonizing the poor? Is it possible the CEO is bringing in 800 times the money the dishwasher is? Taking human frailties out means reducing government, I'm all for that.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

jon_berzerk said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Donald Polish said:
> ...



Was stagnant before that.


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Iceweasel said:


> Who exactly is demonizing the poor? Is it possible the CEO is bringing in 800 times the money the dishwasher is? Taking human frailties out means reducing government, I'm all for that.



As expected, your comprehension skills are wanting. "Who is demonizing the poor"??? What's your party saying abut, both "illegals" and other minorities?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Based on this recurring topic regarding the outrageous "compensation" of greedy CEOs......it would be somewhat refreshing for right wingers to expand their vocabulary when countering democrats, a bit more than the inane stating of:
> "Are you jealous?"........"Envy is a bad thing"......Or, "Get a job so you can become a CEO too..."




You mean you don't want to deal in the truth but want to fixate on he envy, jealousy and greed we,ascribe to your kind...?  got it......

CEO compensation has nothing to do with the pay of other workers.......and in order to compete you have to attract the best...it is no different than professional athletes....if you lefties look at it like that perhaps you would understand it....sometimes you pay the big salary and get a star..sometimes you pay a big salary to the quarterback out of college and they suck...no different in the business world...the 100 million dollar quarter back, works a month or two and gets more money than the ticket taker...yet you silly people never bring that up......and sports is far less important than American business......

or, look at it like actors......they get paid far more than CEOs for much less,actual,work......far more than the union electrician on the set.......the 100 million dollar actor works a few weeks.....and still gets,paid if the movie flops......for a while....the union electrician......works the same few weeks....and gets paid 70 bucks an hour.......yet you guys focus on CEOs who actually work really hard to run all aspects of a business 24/7, 365 days a week...and they are hired by those companies....and if they don't perform well...those companies suffer for their choice just like the pro teams or the movie company.....


----------



## Iceweasel (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Who exactly is demonizing the poor? Is it possible the CEO is bringing in 800 times the money the dishwasher is? Taking human frailties out means reducing government, I'm all for that.
> ...


I don't have a party, "illegals" is not synonymous with "the poor" nor is the right condemning minorities. You're 100% full of shit.


----------



## there4eyeM (Aug 7, 2015)

Ethics and morality seem to escape a large number of people.

It looks as if it is going to have to be done the hard way.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Who exactly is demonizing the poor? Is it possible the CEO is bringing in 800 times the money the dishwasher is? Taking human frailties out means reducing government, I'm all for that.
> ...




illegals broke the law, passing over people who followed the laws for entering the country legally......you are essentially saying the bank robber is just as valid as the bank customer simply because they are both withdrawing money because they need it....


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

Iceweasel said:


> nat4900 said:
> 
> 
> > Two quick responses:
> ...



do these people on the left ever come up a new line. they use the POOR like they use everyone else. They champion abortion so they CAN not claim they care about ANYONE. People are beginning to see right their lines of BS


----------



## Iceweasel (Aug 7, 2015)

Stephanie said:


> do these people on the left ever come up a new line. they use the POOR like they use everyone else. They champion abortion so they CAN not claim they care about ANYONE. People are beginning to see right their lines of BS


These guys are just idiots taking marching orders from above. Their thought masters tell them what to get outraged about so they can gain power. It's no more complicated than that.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 7, 2015)

there4eyeM said:


> Ethics and morality seem to escape a large number of people.
> 
> It looks as if it is going to have to be done the hard way.


 well put down your play box and lead the charge

I will grab a box of popcorn and laugh at you taking a crap on a cop car, like I did with occupy wall street 

What ever happens to you guys anyways?  Had to go home?


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.


Why that's 7200 more..


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

OMG. But figures. they spew one thing for class warfare/division while doing the opposite
SNIP:
*Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Has a Gender Pay Problem*
Analysis: Women made less money than men in first months of Clinton campaign
Share
Tweet
Email

AP

BY: Brent Scher 
August 6, 2015 5:00 am


Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has consistently paid its female staffers less than it has paid males, according to a _Washington Free Beacon_ analysis of the campaign’s public payroll records.

In both May and June, the only two full months of available data since the campaign launched, the median salary of a female on Clinton’s staff was found to be far smaller than that of a man.

In May, women on her staff earned 88 cents for each dollar that was earned by men. In June, the campaign staff grew by 55 employees and women fared even worse, earning just 87 cents for each dollar earned by men.

When projected out to reflect annual salary figures, it was calculated that the median annual salary for a woman would be about $7,000 less than the median male salary.

all of it here:
Hillary Clinton s Campaign Has a Gender Pay Problem Washington Free Beacon


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

bear513 said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> > Ethics and morality seem to escape a large number of people.
> ...



first they need to get off their computers in their mommies basement.


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 7, 2015)

Stephanie said:


> OMG. But figures. they spew one thing for class warfare/division while doing the opposite
> SNIP:
> *Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Has a Gender Pay Problem*
> Analysis: Women made less money than men in first months of Clinton campaign
> ...


So you are saying that Hillary earns 800% more than the average staffer?


----------



## CowboyTed (Aug 7, 2015)

Flash said:


> Stop being a greedy envious Moon Bat.  If you don't like the salary that a CEO gets from a corporation then your remedy is simply not buy any goods or services provided by the corporation.  That way you won't be contributing to the salary that you don't like.  Problem solved.
> 
> You need to worry about the money that you make and not be obsessed with worrying about what other people make.  It just makes you look greedy.



I think most people don't understand how these corporations are actually run... The main shareholders in these organisations are Pension Funds and Unit Funds which are controlled by Financial Institutions. These Financial Institutions are a cartel especially in the Investment banks.

So is this Capitalism or Cronism?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.




No..?Making other people happy is the basis of American existence...otherwise people don't pay you for things......exploitation is the np hallmark of socialism...where you can choose not to work and live off of the work of others, and everyone is poor...except for the political leadership and their friends...


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

CowboyTed said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > Stop being a greedy envious Moon Bat.  If you don't like the salary that a CEO gets from a corporation then your remedy is simply not buy any goods or services provided by the corporation.  That way you won't be contributing to the salary that you don't like.  Problem solved.
> ...




and who is the beneficiary of those pensions....teachers, union painters......who would like their own pension funds to do well enough that they can live off of them....right?


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> CowboyTed said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...


Or lose them, like in the last recession...


----------



## PredFan (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.



Hey dumbfuck! They are CEOs, of course they make a lot more. How fucking dense are you?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > CowboyTed said:
> ...




That is called investing....how else do you make more than you put in...unlike social security that steals,from one worker to pay another worker, pensions need to generate money...and that involves,risk...no way to avoid it.


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

CowboyTed said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > Stop being a greedy envious Moon Bat.  If you don't like the salary that a CEO gets from a corporation then your remedy is simply not buy any goods or services provided by the corporation.  That way you won't be contributing to the salary that you don't like.  Problem solved.
> ...



sounds just like some state Governments and the workers in the Government UNIONS. how does it feel to know they live high off the hog while you peons struggle in life?

but you then sing the praises of Unions.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

PredFan said:


> Donald Polish said:
> 
> 
> > 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> ...



Why so much more than in the 70s?  Same job.

Too much greed and inequality slows the economy.  We are proof of that.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Stephanie said:


> CowboyTed said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...




Look at Illinois or any other democrat controlled state...billions in debt and no way to get out of it....because the government agents, politicians, had 0 accountability for the decisions they have made....and will still get their pensions and benefits when they default on the state worker pensions.....


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Donald Polish said:
> ...


 


corporations made less money under bush, income inequality was LOWER, yet the Left insists we are doing so much better now under obama. not according to what you just posted "brain"


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Donald Polish said:
> ...




No...too much taxation and greedy politicians spending too much money...that slows,an economy.


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


Investing has risks, yes...So you like people to lose money on a risk.....Invest in Social Security, the risk is lower and the account cost..


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > CowboyTed said:
> ...



Yep, and look what it did to Detroit, is doing to Baltimore. Look at our OWN federal government. but you talk about CUTTING them down to size and the lefts HEADS explodes.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Donald Polish said:
> ...




More competition brain...you want the best you have to pay for it......just like in sports or Hollywood....


----------



## AvgGuyIA (Aug 7, 2015)

Are there any numbers on liberal movie stars versus the cameramen and the discrepancy in pay between them.  Are there more than 9 movie stars in that category?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...




No...social security is stealing...they take the alleged,contributions of today's workers and pay the pension payments of retired workers...and there isn't enough money coming in to cover those payments anymore...it isn't "risk" it is theft.........


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Yes those bush tax cuts really helped the economy.  Tax rates are at historical lows.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

AvgGuyIA said:


> Are there any numbers on liberal movie stars versus the cameramen and the discrepancy in pay between them.  Are there more than 9 movie stars in that category?


Some ceo is deciding to pay them that much.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

AvgGuyIA said:


> Are there any numbers on liberal movie stars versus the cameramen and the discrepancy in pay between them.  Are there more than 9 movie stars in that category?




Robert Downey jr. Made 80 million dollars for the last Avengers movie, he is the highest paid star this year.........how much can his assistant be,making?   Or the union carpenter for the same few months work?


----------



## AvgGuyIA (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> Donald Polish said:
> 
> 
> > 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> ...


Thanks to barrack Hussein Obama.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




and spending at historical highs...the problem is government spending, not low taxes.


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > CowboyTed said:
> ...


What is the excuse for Kansas.??


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

bedowin62 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



I haven't said it is better under obama.  But we do have a republican congress.


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 7, 2015)

AvgGuyIA said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Donald Polish said:
> ...


He's been president for 35 years?


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

Income inequality hurts economic growth researchers say - The Washington Post


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...



Kansas is turning around......but since it didn't get messed up in one day it won't be fixed in a day either......but thanks for trying...


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> bedowin62 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 


yawn

since January of this year yes


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Spending doesn't slow an economy.  Look at what reagan did.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> Income inequality hurts economic growth researchers say - The Washington Post




Wow, left wing economists say that not taxing people enough and giving it to greedy politicians hurts an economy........who would have thought?


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 

it does when it's more on welfare than things that are useful

try again


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




Reagan cut taxes......and Reagan didn't spend...the democrats in congress spent all the money his tax cuts,brought in.....and they lied to do it...typical democrats


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> bedowin62 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




after they had congress for two years and initiated obamacare and spent more money than ever before...


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


So you are nice to GOP lead states that have and are losing inflow of revenues, but the dem ones are hell holes...


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Income inequality hurts economic growth researchers say - The Washington Post
> ...



All the money going to the top slows an economy.  The rich guy only eats 3 times a day.  If you own a restaurant do you want 100 people who can afford to eat out or just the 1.  You seem to lack common sense on all subjects.


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> > Are there any numbers on liberal movie stars versus the cameramen and the discrepancy in pay between them.  Are there more than 9 movie stars in that category?
> ...



Isn't funny how they don't seem to CARE about that. AND he doesn't EMPLOY anyone FULL time except his Personal assistants, house maids, gardeners, etc. and according to Kelly Osborne those are all LATINOS who cleans everyone's toilets


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > bedowin62 said:
> ...


Wars are free now...


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > bedowin62 said:
> ...



Spending was real slow under bush.


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 

the economy is slowing; and for just about every other reason than the narrative you are spewing

YOU seem to lack common sense


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

Stephanie said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > AvgGuyIA said:
> ...



A ceo is deciding to pay him that much.


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

more money is "flowing to the top" under Progressives though, than was under Republicans. that much is true


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

bedowin62 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



You seem to have no clue about economics.  Are you actually claiming spending slows an economy too?


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.



Why are the employees settling for such comparatively low pay?


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

bedowin62 said:


> more money is "flowing to the top" under Progressives though, than was under Republicans. that much is true



Seems to be the case.  Or at least they haven't slowed it at all.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




Are you really that dumb brain...does the rich guy put the rest of his money under his bed,after he gets,done eating?   They put their money in investments...you know...job creators.......you are an idiot.........

Like Mark Steyn always says, you leftists think that the rich are like Scrooge Mcduck...they have their gold coins piled up in a warehouse and spend their day pushing it from one side of the warehouse to the other....you are,an idiot...the rich put their money out in investments which go to other people trying to create businesses which hire people to do work, which gives them money and benefits.....

You morons should never get your hands on the levers of power....


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

people are spending money that came from the government (taxes) in the first place in the enlarged Nanny State

not good for the economy overall


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



How does that help the restaurant owner? He need customers moron.  The rich guy investing does not help him.


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



The green eyed monster of this generation is nothing to behold. It's too bad they didn't give a crap about the monies THIS FEDERAL government takes from US and spends


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> Income inequality hurts economic growth researchers say - The Washington Post



The researchers do not say that income inequality hurts economic growth. They say lack of income growth within the bottom 95% of wage earners harms the economy. Not quite the same thing.

The research claims that economic growth in the past was fueled by increasing personal debt (not to mention national debt). To me then that indicates that economic growth of the past was an unsustainable bubble, just like the housing market, fueled by the same, excessive debt.

What's your solution to this problem? 

Seems to me the best solution would be to increase exports, which could be achieved by free trade deals. I don't think punishing CEOS for their income would accomplish much. Wealth redistribution could put more money in the hands of those who will spend more, but I don't think that would help because the economy needs investors as well as buyers of goods.


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 7, 2015)

Stephanie said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


So which US is it? United States or US as in more then one person?


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



Do you deny that stocks and bonds help businesses grow?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




You are too fucking stupid....when someone who has an idea for a restaurant but has no money for it, he gets the investor....that guy gives him the money to get the building the staff the food...moron...and hen shares in the profits......people get jobs,, the vendors make money, and pay their people....capitalism at work...


Like trying to explain math to a dog...but eventually a dog will pick up on the math...leftists?  there is no hope for them.....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Income inequality hurts economic growth researchers say - The Washington Post
> ...




Taking from one simply based on "they don't need it" is stealing.  and it also reduces incentives for making more money.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

bedowin62 said:


> corporations made less money under bush, income inequality was LOWER, yet the Left insists we are doing so much better now under obama. not according to what you just posted "brain"



So are you saying that businesses are making more money under Obama than they were under Bush?


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> bedowin62 said:
> 
> 
> > corporations made less money under bush, income inequality was LOWER, yet the Left insists we are doing so much better now under obama. not according to what you just posted "brain"
> ...


 

absolutely!!


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

how awesome is that WashingtonCompost?

REASEARCHERS say income equality hurts the economy.

what a pos rag. they don't have to NAME names they just spew "researchers" say

Pure propaganda fed to the low information crowd in this country. and some will swallow it


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> A ceo is deciding to pay him that much.



Maybe, if he's the owner of a privately owned company.  But if it's a corporation, the CEO reports to the board.  But even then, it's true that in many ways the CEO still decides how much to be paid.  He/she does this through _negotiation_.

The number one reason wages have been stagnant for so long is because so many Americans nowadays *settle* for whatever is thrown out there.  It's the stupidest thing in the world, and it drags down the market for the rest of us who are smart enough to be assertive.  Wages will continue to stagnate (i.e. go down when you take into account inflation) until the American public starts taking personal responsibility for their pay, starting with the wage negotiation prior to job acceptance.


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

Stephanie said:


> how awesome is that WashingtonCompost?
> 
> REASEARCHERS say income equality hurts the economy.
> 
> what a pos rag. they don't have to NAME names they just spew "researchers" say



If you had clicked the link, you'd see that they did name names.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

bedowin62 said:


> SwimExpert said:
> 
> 
> > bedowin62 said:
> ...



I had no idea Obama was so good for the economy.


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > A ceo is deciding to pay him that much.
> ...



You can only negotiate wages if you are not desperate for work.

I would guess that a majority of hires are in no position to negotiate anything.


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> SwimExpert said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



BS, everyone is in a position to do it. they might get turned down but what's it hurt to try?

such defeated attitudes. no wonder this country is failing in this day and age


----------



## Defiant1 (Aug 7, 2015)

bear513 said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> > Ethics and morality seem to escape a large number of people.
> ...



Winter happened.


----------



## PredFan (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Donald Polish said:
> ...



Yeah it's called inflation.

Don't be jealous and try to take thier money like some thief, become a CEO.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

Stephanie said:


> how awesome is that WashingtonCompost?
> 
> REASEARCHERS say income equality hurts the economy.
> 
> ...



Well, in the interest of facts and truth, they *do* actually name names.

_The paper by Barry Z. Cynamon and Steven M. Fazzari, economists working with the Weidenbaum Center on the Economy, Government and Public Policy at Washington University in St. Louis, says that stagnant income for the “bottom 95 percent” of wage earners makes it impossible for them to consume as they did in the years before the downturn._

The article even contains a link to their work (that is, a link that then leads to this link).  Stephanie, maybe if you had something more in your head than crotch rot, you'd have realized it would be really fucking stupid to post your claim without actually checking the link.  But alas, just like Donald Trump, your reactionary anus that you call a mouth is even worse than what the liberals say.


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> bedowin62 said:
> 
> 
> > SwimExpert said:
> ...


 

he isnt dullard. what makes you say that?


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 7, 2015)

Defiant1 said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> > there4eyeM said:
> ...


 Winter is your excuse? What happened to global warming?

Occupy wall street happened at the same time as the tea party...

Who is still around and who went home to suck on their mother's boobs?


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> You can only negotiate wages if you are not desperate for work.



1 - False
2 - On what basis do you suggest that the majority of Americans are desperate for work?
3 - I'm pretty sure I already know what your answers will be, more or less.  The problem is that _*you're doing it wrong!*_


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > how awesome is that WashingtonCompost?
> ...


 

as was explained earlier Mr Left-wing nutjob Crotch-rot; what you think is the conclusion isnt necessarily the case dullard


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

bedowin62 said:


> SwimExpert said:
> 
> 
> > bedowin62 said:
> ...



You're the one who said it.  Make up your mind.  Either Obama has been good for the economy, or he hasn't.


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> Davros said:
> 
> 
> > You can only negotiate wages if you are not desperate for work.
> ...


 

you mean the tens of millions not employed dont want a job after-all?


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> SwimExpert said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> bedowin62 said:
> 
> 
> > SwimExpert said:
> ...


 

um no i didnt leftard. i said corporations are making record profits. are record corporate profits the main factor in determining a good economy?

try again


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

under obama corprations are making record profits while the very richest get richer and the very poorest get, got poorer; both at a FASTER PACE then was happening under Bush and Republicans



hurray for good ol Progressive values!!


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

Stephanie said:


> Davros said:
> 
> 
> > SwimExpert said:
> ...



The job offer can be withdrawn if you try to negotiate. If it took 2 years to finally get a job offer, you'd be foolish to take that risk.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > A ceo is deciding to pay him that much.
> ...




also....illegal immigrant labor brings down wages.......but no one cares,about that...


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

bedowin62 said:


> as was explained earlier Mr Left-wing nutjob Crotch-rot; what you think is the conclusion isnt necessarily the case dullard



And if you would simply keep your mouth shut, we wouldn't have so many Democrats in the country.  Idiots like you and Stephanie make such a spectacular demonstration of the deepest cess-pits of human stupidity, it's no wonder there are so many people who would rather look like an ass than be associated with anything you say.

What "conclusion" is there to be drawn in regards to the fact that Stephanie claimed that article didn't "name names" when the names were clearly listed in the second paragraph of the article?  How can there be any conclusion whatsoever, beyond the simple fact that Stephanie didn't bother to click the link?

Oh, you weren't talking about that?  I see.  You jumped to some asinine conclusion that I'm a liberal just because I'm not siding with Stephanie.  Seeing as Stephanie is a piece of shit, I will never side with her.  I will side with the truth, always.  Seeing as I'm a conservative, I reject the arguments these liberals are making.  If you'd bother to scroll up a bit, you'd see my repudiations of their arguments.

Seeing as I'm intelligent, I reject you.  Period.


----------



## Defiant1 (Aug 7, 2015)

Defiant1 said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> > there4eyeM said:
> ...




Um, I was just offering an answer to your question. Not an excuse.

Now way would I ever be associated with any of those occupied assholes.

I was trying to be funny, pointing out that once it became uncomfortable the commitment to ows waned.


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> bedowin62 said:
> 
> 
> > as was explained earlier Mr Left-wing nutjob Crotch-rot; what you think is the conclusion isnt necessarily the case dullard
> ...


 

you're simply laughable. one of the arrogant losers who think they know more than anybody. you're all butthurt because for the most part nobody left OR right cares what you have to say. i "assumed" you were a left-winger because you come off with the arrogance so many of them display. so you think a 100-line lecture is going to change that ^^^^^?????

lol


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

9 CEOs out of a nation with more than 300 Million People.

Of course the loons want to base National Policy on such an outlier statistic.


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> Davros said:
> 
> 
> > You can only negotiate wages if you are not desperate for work.
> ...



The majority are desperate for work because they're deep in debt and we've had high unemployment for several years. Most of the jobs available don't pay enough to live on, so many need 2 or 3 jobs. They're not in position to negotiate wages. Most of these jobs, e.g. service industry and low wage healthcare, have wages that are set in stone and there is no negotiation of wages even if you tried.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.


I believe a general tax on firms could solve one social dilemma and lower our tax burden at the same time; regarding unemployment compensation on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

Full employment of capital resources in any capital economy is always a good thing especially if by a Standard such as a form of minimum wage.


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> 9 CEOs out of a nation with more than 300 Million People.
> 
> Of course the loons want to base National Policy on such an outlier statistic.



the brainwashing by this Progressive/democrat/commie party is showing its working.
which should the scare the hell out of us more than anything else


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

danielpalos said:


> Donald Polish said:
> 
> 
> > 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> ...


 

you're saying it is the job of government to dictate how ALL capital resources are used

that's why nobody takes you seriously


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 7, 2015)

bedowin62 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Donald Polish said:
> ...


your simply not having a clue or a Cause with your diversions does not mean my line of reasoning is unsound.

Full employment of capital resources in any capital economy is always a good thing especially if by a Standard such as a form of minimum wage.

Fixing Standards is delegated to our legislative branches of Government.

Correcting for market failures and inefficiencies is one function of government.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Income inequality hurts economic growth researchers say - The Washington Post
> ...



Workers need to make more, not execs.  Problem is not just ceos.   We need a tax system that gives incentives to pay workers more and hire more.


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

danielpalos said:


> bedowin62 said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


 


YAWN

every time you get cornered with your own bullshit and exposed for the far-left freak you are, you start crying that others "dont have a clue"
it's so old, tiring, boring and predictable palos

what a tool you are


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



And then he still doesn't have customers.  So all that doesn't matter.  If only one guy can afford to eat out that's only 3 meals a day.  The restaurant needs lots of people who can afford to eat out.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> SwimExpert said:
> 
> 
> > Davros said:
> ...



Well, that's what happens when the economy is growing at HALF THE RATE it should be and generating a paltry amount of jobs.

Crushing regulation, high taxes, and increased federal power do not lead to economic growth.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

Stephanie said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > 9 CEOs out of a nation with more than 300 Million People.
> ...



The transformation that Obama has wrought for America consists of Envy Driven Group Think Totalitarian Mobs.

This is not going to end well.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> SwimExpert said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



I agree.  We shouldnt have lots of immigration in our current economic climate.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > SwimExpert said:
> ...




No, we shouldn't.

As Milton Friedman said:  "You cannot simultaneously have free immigration and a welfare state."

If we want increased immigration levels, we need to get rid of entitlements.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 7, 2015)

bedowin62 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > bedowin62 said:
> ...


nothing but diversion?  how clueless and how Causeless of you.  

i even try to keep my banter, propaganda, and rhetoric, relevant if not always poetic.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Lots of cheap labor lowers wages for everyone.


----------



## bedowin62 (Aug 7, 2015)

danielpalos said:


> bedowin62 said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


 
and there you go again; with the "clueless thing. you cant even help yourself. i know it's killing you that a right-winger is calliing you boring and predictable, because as is so typical of many of your ilk you are overly impressed with yourself for no apparent reason. but it is what it is.................


----------



## frigidweirdo (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



Good for the rich, not good for the poor.


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.


 
I'm much more outraged by what we pay athletes....

I player can make more in one game (much more!) on  BENCH then I do or an entire year....
What a messed up world we live in..........


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Stephanie said:


> do these people on the left ever come up a new line. they use the POOR like they use everyone else. They champion abortion so they CAN not claim they care about ANYONE. People are beginning to see right their lines of BS



Here's where your lack of LOGIC comes through......

1. We on the left respect a woman's right to choose, and sometimes that means abortions.

2, We all know that the vast number of abortions are performed on minorities.

3. If there were less abortions, the number of minorities would increase.

4. We also should know that minorities usually and overwhelmingly vote democrat.

5. Ergo, if it was just "political" and we wanted more "lefties" voting and beating the crap from right wingers, we TOO would be against abortions.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> also....illegal immigrant labor brings down wages.......but no one cares,about that...



Yes, but I don't think it has anywhere near the suppressant effect as the apathy of the typical present day American to their own wages.  We have always had illegal immigration, but we haven't always had the insane stagnation of wages as we've seen in the past couple decades.  The widespread apathy has become so systemic that it's reaching a critical mass point.  And it's also the place where people have more direct opportunity to take charge and change things.  I'm starting to see more and more hiring managers who themselves don't seem to have any idea that salary negotiation is supposed to be a normal part of the hiring process.  

Earlier this year I had a company ask me to come in for an interview for a position they were looking to fill.  They asked me, mind you.  I agreed to interview with them, and it turned out to go well.  I became interested, they were interested.  Then made an offer.  It was not the kind of offer I found especially appealing.  So, I asked when they needed a decision.  The HR woman was shocked.  She seemed to expect me to make a decision right there, over the phone.  A couple days later, I emailed her with a modest counter offer that would have been more in line with the market.  She seemed befuddled.  "I already told you this is what it pays" was basically her response.  She also said something to the effect that I was confusing her because she's never seen anyone do things the way I was doing them.  Which was ironic, because I was having the same thoughts about her.  Anyway, I declined the offer, but my point is that eventually there was someone out there who eventually filled that role.  Someone who had no idea what their market value should have been, someone who obviously had no interest or intention of asserting their market rate.  Someone who simply was going to catch whatever low wage was thrown at them.  That is the going to be a much more significant deterrent from me being able to command the price I believe I'm worth, than will some dirty Mexican washing dishes under the table.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

Bonzi said:


> Donald Polish said:
> 
> 
> > 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> ...



Talk to the ceos that decide to pay them that much.


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Iceweasel said:


> These guys are just idiots taking marching orders from above. Their thought masters tell them what to get outraged about so they can gain power. It's no more complicated than that.




Stupid....as usual.....who are these "guys from above"??? Presumably they would be the wealthy and influential, don't you think?
Therefore, the "guys from above" would be arguing AGAINST their own best interests.....Which would make them dumb.....as you are.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

Bonzi said:


> Donald Polish said:
> 
> 
> > 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> ...




And I am not outraged by any pay earned in the private sector.

I'll save my outrage for Politicians, Public Employees and Big Government Cronies who enrich themselves by selling influence and raiding taxpayer coffers.


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> > Donald Polish said:
> ...


 
Actually WE can control that.
Stop going to and watching the games.

If every bad team was boycotted, let's see what happens then..........


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 7, 2015)

I think if you have the drive to start a business or climb the ladder, you deserve the $

I'm an underachieving slacker... I don't complain about my pay.
I know how to make more $

I just am too lazy to do it.


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

bear513 said:


> I will grab a box of popcorn and laugh at you taking a crap on a cop car, like I did with occupy wall street




A follow-up form a NY newspaper, determined that the guy taking a crap was a homeless veteran........most likely a poor bastard who had no where else to go....Are you against veterans?


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

bedowin62 said:


> are record corporate profits the main factor in determining a good economy?
> 
> try again



It is under the supply side economics bullshit you have been otherwise spouting.  The real problem is that you're an uneducated idiot.  You don't know what you're talking about, and you're too stupid to know that you don't know what you're talking about.  So you regurgitate a smattering of sound bytes you've heard others say, and then you regurgitate another smattering of sound bytes you heard somewhere else.  At the end of the day, you'll say anything whatsoever as long as you think you can turn it into an insult against Obama.  In the process, you cross so many wires that you end up convincing people to vote for Obama.

Stop talking.  Just stop.  You are the Democrats MVP.  The best way you can help the team is to ride the bench.  And maybe die.  Whatever you do, just don't talk.


----------



## Iceweasel (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > These guys are just idiots taking marching orders from above. Their thought masters tell them what to get outraged about so they can gain power. It's no more complicated than that.
> ...


Yes, wealthy rich liberals that want more power. You think they're helping you but they're using you. They are using other people's money and getting richer.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

Bonzi said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Bonzi said:
> ...



It is the owners.  The players are just pawns.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


It is why we simply need a fixed Standard regarding any form of minimum wage.


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 
It's the owners AND the agents....
The agents  the one's driving the prices up but yes, it's the owners that ultimately make the buy............


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Aug 7, 2015)

So?


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> > I will grab a box of popcorn and laugh at you taking a crap on a cop car, like I did with occupy wall street
> ...



LOL What a load.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

danielpalos said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...




Absolute nonsense.

The CEO who tried that with his $70K wage is seeing his company crater.

The more you loons try to put Fixed Standards in place, the worse off everyone is except for the Government Cronies who lobby for how the standard is set, the politicians who sell the influence, and the massive bureaucracy which gets lifetime employment and huge retirement benefits for enforcing Fixed Standard.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Aug 7, 2015)

bear513 said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > Private corporations can pay CEO's what they want. It's none of your business and if you don't like it then don't patronize them
> ...



The left seeks to build nothing, only destroy.... it's always about reducing things to the least common denominator, which is  them.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

bedowin62 said:


> SwimExpert said:
> 
> 
> > Davros said:
> ...



See, here yo go, you're doing it again.  I'm trying to educate a liberal on why the government should stay out of the problem, and how he can achieve his own solutions.  But you just gotta jump in and stay something insanely stupid that it even Jonathan Gruber would be left aghast.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

Bonzi said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Bonzi said:
> ...


Owners are feeding their egos.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


We have a Commerce Clause that we are entitled to.


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Robert Downey jr. Made 80 million dollars for the last Avengers movie, he is the highest paid star this year.........how much can his assistant be,making? Or the union carpenter for the same few months work?




...and exactly who.......in your feeble, half-brain....is "defending" the outrageous salaries of some movie star???


----------



## nuhuh (Aug 7, 2015)

LOL, No wonder why Bernie Sanders is gaining ground.


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> after they had congress for two years and initiated obamacare and spent more money than ever before...




Why don't you (as the nitwit that you are,) explain exactly how the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were paid with.....and while you're at it, how GWB planned to fund Medicare [DID] Advantage while cutting taxes??? Go on, give it a try.


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 7, 2015)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> So?


 
So... what? What do you think is a "non issue"?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > after they had congress for two years and initiated obamacare and spent more money than ever before...
> ...



Wow, so when it is pointed out that Obama has driven up more debt than all his predecessors.. _combined_, you respond with Boooooosh?


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 
anyone with power and money is... it's what they thrive on.
why people resent that I will never understand..........


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Are you really that dumb brain...does the rich guy put the rest of his money under his bed,after he gets,done eating? They put their money in investments...you know...job creators.......you are an idiot.........




No, they are NOT putting that excess cash under their beds....but most likely in Swiss and Cayman banks in order to avoid taxation....

WE ARE BUILDING AN "ELITE", NOBILITY CLASS.....AND WE ALL KNOW WHAT HAPPEN TO MARIE ANTIONETTE.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Aug 7, 2015)

Bonzi said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> > So?
> ...



It is a non-issue.


----------



## buddhallah_the_christ (Aug 7, 2015)

Who cares? The leaders of the largest unions make far, far more than their workers, too. Does it really matter whether it's 100 times or 800 times as more?
Oh, sorry, you like calculation so much.


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> bedowin62 said:
> 
> 
> > SwimExpert said:
> ...



But you're not doing a very good job at that.

How the F is some person applying to work retail, restaurant, or Healthcare supposed to negotiate about their wage? You admit that even in your line of work, you're finding that hiring managers,don't allow negotiation of salary. Well, I can guarantee you it's not done in the fields where most of the jobs are.

Most people don't have the kind of background and experience you have that allows you the luxury of picking and choosing where you're going to work and for how much.


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 7, 2015)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> > Soggy in NOLA said:
> ...


 
I actually happen to agree.
If you don't like the way the USA works, leave.
Anyone can get rich.  It's a matter of "want to".............


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Are you really that dumb brain...does the rich guy put the rest of his money under his bed,after he gets,done eating? They put their money in investments...you know...job creators.......you are an idiot.........
> ...



Maybe if you lowered capital gains taxes they'd have more incentive to invest here.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

danielpalos said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



I bet you can't explain what the Commerce Clause actually is.


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

Bonzi said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> > Bonzi said:
> ...



Anyone can get rich? No. Not true. Most cannot.


----------



## Flash (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> Income inequality hurts economic growth researchers say - The Washington Post




Since Obama has been elected income equality has grown because he is destroying the middle class.  Family income has decreased and poverty has increased.  .His little idea of making America more prosperous by taking money earned by some people and giving it to those that elected him didn't work out very well.  Redistribution of income has failed in America just like it has failed every place else in the world.

In America with over 40% of the GNP going for the combined cost of government the economy cannot grow to its potential so that those at the lower end of the scale can prosper along with the rich.

A person is not poorer because somebody else is richer.  I am not concerned with what CEOs make.  That has absolutely zero bearing on me.  I am not greedy and envious of what other people earn.  However, I am concerned with the enormous amount of money that I have to give to the combined state, federal and local governments each year.  That affects me directly and makes me poorer.  The filthy ass government has taken much more wealth from me than any CEO.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Aug 7, 2015)

Bonzi said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> > Bonzi said:
> ...



Well, for me it is more basic.  If you look at the salaries of CEO's. CFO's etc. of these huge multinationals, their salaries are actually a small percentage of gross revenues.. actually, when I was CFO of a small, privately owned shipping company, my salary while miniscule compared to these guys, was a larger percentage of gross revenues.


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> nat4900 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



You don't think the state of the law and economy of the US that Obama inherited contributed to the defects he ran? Ha ha ha.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> > Soggy in NOLA said:
> ...



Nah, most _can_, but human nature is a bitch... the vast majority are not as motivated.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

Bonzi said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Bonzi said:
> ...



Yes but don't blame the players.  The owners are the issue.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

Flash said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Income inequality hurts economic growth researchers say - The Washington Post
> ...




Obama wants to get rid of income inequality by making everyone Equally Poor and Dependent Upon the Government, except of course for the Elite Overlord Class that will manage our lives for us.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> > nat4900 said:
> ...



No... that's a copout... and the shit that contributed to the meltdown was all shit Obama supported and is still advocating.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> The job offer can be withdrawn if you try to negotiate. If it took 2 years to finally get a job offer, you'd be foolish to take that risk.



1 - The job offer can be withdrawn if you don't negotiate, you accept the job offer, and then some beautiful blond bombshell walks in the door and says she wants that job.  Anything _can_ happen.  Your job is not to be a wuss, and to be a badass.  Stop being scared about what _can_ happen, and start getting pumped about what _you can can make happen._

2 - The numbers are actually on your side from the very beginning.  Research has shown that 85% of hiring managers _expect_ a candidate to negotiate.  Did you hear that!?!  The vast majority of the time they are expecting it, which means that their first offer is intentionally *less than what they plan on paying you*.  They are leading on the lowball side so they can have room to accommodate your anticipated negotiation.  Accepting the first offer is a horrible way to agree to work for _less than_ the company wanted to give you.

3 - Research also has shown that withdrawing a job offer because a candidate attempts to negotiate is virtually unheard of.  The only time it really happens is when the counter offer is unreasonable or absurd.

4 - All in all, if you are having a job offer withdrawn after attempting to negotiate, _*you're doing it wrong!*_  Think about it this way....the company has just spend a great deal of time interviewing you at many levels.  You've probably had at least three interviews, maybe four.  The company has dedicated hours and hours of time directly to getting to know you.  They've run background checks, they've called your previous employers for references.  They've also probably done at least some portion of this for multiple other candidates.  Meanwhile, the job is still vacant.  They're either paying overtime, or they're losing sales opportunities, or they are having operational troubles, or morale is suffering because the people who are having to pull extra weight to make up the difference are not going to be happy for long.  Now, in all of this, they have a serious need for someone like you, and after an extensive process *they picked you!!*  They like you, they want you, they need you, they are excited as shit all for you.....

You really think after all of that they are going suddenly withdraw their offer simply because you tried to negotiate?  No, they won't.  If they withdraw their offer, it's because you *did it wrong*.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

buddhallah_the_christ said:


> Who cares? The leaders of the largest unions make far, far more than their workers, too. Does it really matter whether it's 100 times or 800 times as more?
> Oh, sorry, you like calculation so much.



It shows inequality is growing.  That slows the economy and is bad for everyone.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> > Soggy in NOLA said:
> ...


 not true?

Guess your pathetic ass can't get rich but this 12 year old can, you crying little bitch 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...6T41MG_I2LMdPgGLA&sig2=Vdmonuy12eYCJA7wxJYxFA


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 
Actually I don't blame the players.
That the SYSTEM works in such a way to over-compensate is what I have a problem with.
The root problem really is OUR (the general public's) priorities.
Instead of $ and attention to football, baseball and basketball, how about soup kitchens and helping the poor...? Addressing REAL issues.


----------



## whitehall (Aug 7, 2015)

Top Hollywood actors are paid about a thousand times more than other union workers in tinsel town. Force "stars" to accept union wages and let us know how you make out before you go after CEO's who actually produce a product.


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 7, 2015)

whitehall said:


> Top Hollywood actors are paid about a thousand times more than other union workers in tinsel town. Force "stars" to accept union wages and let us know how you make out before you go after CEO's who actually produce a product.


 
Again, agents.......


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> buddhallah_the_christ said:
> 
> 
> > Who cares? The leaders of the largest unions make far, far more than their workers, too. Does it really matter whether it's 100 times or 800 times as more?
> ...




9 PEOPLE show that inequality is growing?

Talk about Stupid.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 7, 2015)

You poor ass leftist democrats are such cry baby's 

Any one in America can be a millionaire if you just wanted it


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> nat4900 said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...



Idiot.....the wars were funded through loans(from China and other countries) and those loans have an interest rate........How was Obama to pay on that interest and principal?


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

Bonzi said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Bonzi said:
> ...



It's hard for me to blame poor people from enjoying some mindless entertainment.  Wages are stagnant and good jobs hard to find.


----------



## Flash (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> [
> 
> 
> All the money going to the top slows an economy.  The rich guy only eats 3 times a day.  If you own a restaurant do you want 100 people who can afford to eat out or just the 1.  You seem to lack common sense on all subjects.



I think you are simply confused.

Money "going to the top" is either spent or invested.  That is a good thing for the economy.  Without investment  there would be no pool of money for business to grow or for pensions to increase or risk taking or anything else.  Our economy would be very stagnant without the money from the rich.  

If you are a restaurant owner you need to have money to build the restaurant in the first place and if you are good to expand and you get that money from some rich guy's investment portfolio.  Without that there would be no restaurant. 

This filthy ass socialist idea of taking money away from the rich is nothing more a manifestation of simple greed and envy.  It is disastrous to an economy as we have seen all over the world.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > buddhallah_the_christ said:
> ...



It is not just those 9.  Ceo pay is out of control across the board.  You can't be this dumb.


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

Flash said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Income inequality hurts economic growth researchers say - The Washington Post
> ...



Obama did not increase taxes.

If you cut taxes drastically as you hope to do, you are going to have to greatly cut government services. At least in the short run, that would cause a major jolt and shock that would harm the economy. 

You have a bit more money ... great. Well, millions of people who have a lot less money because they depended on government would overwhelm any increase in spending you'd do. The economy would tank, the debt would get worse, and crime would go up.

Changes have to be gradual and targetted. Start with capital gains tax decrease to incentivize investment. Next, gradually cut spending and taxes, while simplifying the tax code to make sure everybody pays their fair share. No drastic changes like what the Tea Party wants.


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Nah, most _can_, but human nature is a bitch... the vast majority are not as motivated.




So, the poor, unwed mother who works 3  part-time jobs is NOT motivated?


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> > nat4900 said:
> ...


 the feds you dumb ignorant troll

Btw China don't own most of our foreign bonds Europe does...


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

Flash said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...



A great restaurant with no customers doesn't make money.  The restaurant needs lots of people that can afford to eat out.  The rich guy only eats 3 meals a day regardless of how rich he is.  This is how too much inequality slows the economy.  Just common sense.


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 
.... there's always internet message boards.....oh... I see your point....


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Hatred of Obama clouds even common logic among right wingers.....Like some slaves who defended their owners for...at least...giving them lodging and food, right wingers"defend" the rich and have fallen into the fallacy that they too could do the same..... if only.......


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



You're the moron, bub.

The average CEO in the U.S. IS NOT in a Mega Public Corporation.   The average CEO manages a small or medium sized business.

According the BLS, the Median Pay of top executives was $100K per year in 2012; for CEOs it was $168K.  This is based on a pool of 2.3M top executives, not NINE PEOPLE.

Top Executives Occupational Outlook Handbook U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> > Nah, most _can_, but human nature is a bitch... the vast majority are not as motivated.
> ...



Apparently not...


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Hatred of Obama clouds even common logic among right wingers.....Like some slaves who defended their owners for...at least...giving them lodging and food, right wingers"defend" the rich and have fallen into the fallacy that they too could do the same..... if only.......



Man, you're such a whiny little baby.


----------



## Flash (Aug 7, 2015)

whitehall said:


> Top Hollywood actors are paid about a thousand times more than other union workers in tinsel town. Force "stars" to accept union wages and let us know how you make out before you go after CEO's who actually produce a product.




These Liberals that bitch about income equality should put their money where their mouth is.

I read an article a couple of months ago (I am too lazy to look it up today) where Keanu Reeves did exactly that.  He contributed tens of millions of dollars that he made on the Matrix movies to the lower paid movie staff.

Liberals love to bitch about what other people make but very few want to give up what they make.  Keanu Reeves may be the one exception.


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> nat4900 said:
> 
> 
> > Soggy in NOLA said:
> ...



Or maybe she just doesn't have the smarts and talent to make it.

You're naive if you truly think anyone can get rich.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



Every indicator I have seen shows the rich getting richer and everyone else left behind.  You in a different country?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> > nat4900 said:
> ...



So what then?  Jesus... stop whining.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

Flash said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > Top Hollywood actors are paid about a thousand times more than other union workers in tinsel town. Force "stars" to accept union wages and let us know how you make out before you go after CEO's who actually produce a product.
> ...




Rich Liberals like to buy indulgences for their sin of Income Inequality by spending Other People's Money, not their own.

Just sayin'.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 and why do you care? Cry baby loser in life?


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



The poor in this country are FAT and sit around watching big screen TVs in air conditioned homes while eating junk food.  They have indoor plumbing, computers, cellphones and automobiles.

The MIDDLE CLASS is being destroyed by Obamanomics.  To the extend that THE RICH are Big Government Cronies complicit in Obamanomics, then they are guilty as well.  But most people who are now defined as Rich (per The Won), meaning people who earn more than $200K per year, just work hard for a living in the private sector.   It would behoove you to think about why the PROGS demonize such people.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

bear513 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



Not at all.  But the economy is very slow, bad for our country.  Too much inequality does that.


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Davros said:
> 
> 
> > Soggy in NOLA said:
> ...



I'm not whining. But you're perpetuating a myth. Not everyone can get rich. Some have to settle for getting by.


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



Too much inequality is slowing our economy.  That is what I care about.  You are foolish if you think there are not consequences for out of control inequality.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> The majority are desperate for work because they're deep in debt and we've had high unemployment for several years.



1 - Stop going deep into debt.  That'll solve alot of problems.

2 - In case you missed it, unemployment is remarkably low.  Yes, it was high for a while there, but it's not anymore.  It's a worker's market out there right now.

3 - You are demonstrating how badly you are doing it wrong by talking about your personal debt.  Your personal debt has nothing to do with it.  Nobody is going to pay you based on how much debt you have.  They are going to pay you based on what you bring to the table.  If you go into the interview process with your personal debt at the forefront of your mind, you're doing it wrong!  You're sabotaging yourself.  You and you alone are the source of your problems!



> Most of the jobs available don't pay enough to live on, so many need 2 or 3 jobs.



1 - How much does it take to "live on"?  The real problem is that what it takes to "live on" is not what people are after.  They are after what it takes to "live like a king on," with all their extras.  But certainly, they want to work multiple jobs so they can afford all those other things, that's their prerogative.

2 - That aside, I am very much aware that the wage market is dangerously low nowadays.  I never said otherwise.  That is not an excuse for people to simply settle for low wages.  In fact, *it is all the more reason for people to stop being passive and become assertive and negotiate*!!  You're using the result of bad decisions as your excuse for making the bad decisions, which is insane!  

Low wages are the *result* of people not being willing to negotiate.  They are not an excuse for not negotiating.  Would you expect someone to believe you if you said condoms aren't worth using, because nowadays there are so many people with HIV in the world?  Of course not!  But that is exactly the reasoning you are using here!  Break out of your self defeatism!



> They're not in position to negotiate wages.



1 - False.  Insanely false.  So false, it ought to be a crime to say what you have said.  If yo have been selected for the position and they have made you a job offer, then you are in a position to negotiate wages.  



> Most of these jobs, e.g. service industry and low wage healthcare, have wages that are set in stone and there is no negotiation of wages even if you tried.



Nothing is set in stone, unless people like yourself have become so passive and have given in to accepting whatever is dictated to them, that the normalcy and appropriateness of negotiating has been forgotten to history.

Now, I find it quite interesting that you have narrowed your position from "most people" to a select set of industries, and specifically to low level line positions at that.  If you're stuck in a low level line position in an industry that is so overfilled with passive junk employees, then either get into management today, or *get the fuck out, get out now, and never look back*.  You'd be better off flipping burgers in fast food.

At the end of the day, nobody is forced to accept a job offer.  When you accept, you are making an agreement to do the work at a certain price.  When two sides have made an agreement, the only one who can be blamed if the agreement is not satisfactory is yourself.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...




No, it's not.  Too much Regulation, Taxes, Government Spending, Debt, and Centralized Federal Power are slowing the economy.


----------



## Flash (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> [
> 
> 
> Obama did not increase taxes.
> ...



You are confused.  You must be watching MSNBC again.

Obama did increase taxes.  The income tax rate has increased since Obama has become President.  There were 21 tax increases just for Obamacare alone.  

I am much better at spending the money that I make rather than some corrupt bureaucrat that was elected by special interest groups.  How about you?

There are very few government services that are actually needed like defense, police, courts etc.  The rest are mostly wasted money that we get very little benefit from at tremendous cost.  We don't need the welfare state and we don't need redistribution of income and wealth and we sure as hell don't need the government paying off union pensions and putting money in the pockets of Solyndra executives that had bundled money for the Democrat Party, do we?


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> If we want increased immigration levels, we need to get rid of entitlements.



Yes.  And when the increase immigration leads to Americans starving in the streets, the liberals will no longer want immigration.  Some people have to learn the hard way.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...


 its obvious the left wants to destroy the middle class and make us into sheep. They hate the middle class because they can't corral us


----------



## Brain357 (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



Is that why the economy continued to slide with the bush tax cuts?  Why was the economy so good under Reagan when he was spending like crazy?  We don't have any more federal power now than we have had in strong economies.  Your claims are obviously false.


----------



## Darkwind (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.


What exploitation would that be?

Detail it very specifically.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > If we want increased immigration levels, we need to get rid of entitlements.
> ...



The Dems-Progs are already splitting into factions of Minorities vs. Minorities.   U.S. born black and hispanic who have low education levels and are unskilled are pitted against cheaper illegals in the jobs market.   At some point, the blowback is going to be very severe.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 7, 2015)

bear513 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 I want anyone to refute my this post.... Because we will never bow down to anyone, us blue collar guys Will never give up and quit.

Its who we are.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> The CEO who tried that with his $70K wage is seeing his company crater.



The reason he's having such problems are more political than anything.  He's lost clients and tenured employees simply out of spite.  It's not the financials of the scheme, it's his implementation.  The fundamental concept of what he is doing is essentially sound, but he did it all the wrong way.  What he should have done was develop a generous incentive plan, and transition into a base pay with performance bonuses pay scale.  That would have been far better for morale and motivation.  His second mistake was to make a loud spectacle of it.  In a hyper polarized age of political insanity there were bound to be people who would abandon him just for the political spite of it, and he should have anticipated that.

Either way, he's made his bed, he has to lay in it.


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


They do the same thing with investments..


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > The CEO who tried that with his $70K wage is seeing his company crater.
> ...



Uh, it is the financial aspect.   More valuable employees felt that they were not paid properly when their lower value comrades were given huge increases.  Customers felt that the increased costs would be passed along to them.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

Davros said:


> But you're not doing a very good job at that.



You need to open your mind.  You really don't want to hear, so you just won't listen.



> How the F is some person applying to work retail, restaurant, or Healthcare supposed to negotiate about their wage?



Well it's retail, so you can start with the numbers.  Retail is all about making sales.  Are you good at retail sales?  How do your sales compare to other people?  Do you lead the way in sales performance?  Then you should lead the way in pay!

A sales based job is the *best and easiest* kind of job to negotiate for better pay!  go here and find out what the market pay band is for your job in your area.  Type yourself up a nice resume that focuses on the numbers.  What are your sales per hour?  What are your sales per customer?  How much above the store average are your own sales?  Go into your interview, and hammer away at your sales strengths.  Tell them all about what makes you so good as a sales person.  Tell them about how you have a natural ability to read customers and figure them out.  Tell them about your strategies that you use to appeal to the individual and convince them to buy.  And when they ask you if you've applied anywhere else, tell them *yes*.  Even if it's a lie, say you have been interviewing with a few other companies.  And if they ask where, simply tell them you'd rather not say at the moment, and immediately segue into something about this company that makes you think you'd be happy there.  (Honestly, if you _aren't_ applying with multiple companies, then _*you're doing it wrong!*_)

Now, when it's time and they offer you a job, DO NOT accept it right away.  Ask them when they need an answer by.  Tell them you want to sleep on it/think it over a day or two/whatever.  In the meantime, identify where the offer rates in the pay band, and how does that compare to your personal abilities.  After a day or two, email the manager with a counter offer:

_Dear Mr. Smith,

Thank you again for the job offer as the Widget Sales Schmuck.  I'm really excited and I think Widget-Ink Inc. would be a great company to work for.  But I am a little concerned about the hourly pay of $8.25.  Based on my research, the current "going" market rate for a retail sales associate ranges from $8-$13 an hour.  Considering my experience and my proven history to be among the strongest sales associates in my previous stores, I think that something closer to $13/hr. would be a more appropriate figure.  If you consider the fact that based on my past performance, and from what we've talked about in my interviews, I can generate $50,000 more in yearly sales than a novice or less talented candidate, I'm sure you'll agree that the extra $9800 a year in pay will be well worth it for your company as much as it is for me.

I look forward to hearing from you soon, and I look forward to the exciting future as we deliver the joys of Widgets to the world._



> You admit that even in your line of work, you're finding that hiring managers,don't allow negotiation of salary.



I said that it's starting to happen that even hiring managers are out of touch with hiring.  I also said that I *did not accept* the non-negotiable offer.  See how that works?  Let the stupid foolish companies who insist on non-negotiable offers (whether through their own stubbornness or the incompetence of their HR people) suffer their consequences, as they get left with the bottom pickings of the barrel.  *You* go out and get *your* fair market value.



> Well, I can guarantee you it's not done in the fields where most of the jobs are.



And I can guarantee you that you are wrong.  You are simply making an assumption.  It never occurred to you to negotiate, you don't want to negotiate, you are scared to negotiate, you want your wage handed to you on a silver platter.  So you are acting petulant and defeating yourself by assuming from the get-co that it's impossible.  



> Most people don't have the kind of background and experience you have that allows you the luxury of picking and choosing where you're going to work and for how much.



And what do you know about my experience and background?  Nothing, of course.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> I bet you can't explain what the Commerce Clause actually is.



Of course he can't.  A voice in his head keeps whispering that phrase to him.  That's why he keeps talking about it.  Why everyone insists on giving Daniel crap is beyond me.


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.


Your envy is ugly


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 7, 2015)

boedicca said:


> Uh, it is the financial aspect.   More valuable employees felt that they were not paid properly when their lower value comrades were given huge increases.  Customers felt that the increased costs would be passed along to them.



Those are not financial reasons, they are political.  If Bobby wants to quit because he's jealous that when he was first starting out he didn't get paid as much as Sally is getting, then his reasons for quitting are political, not financial.  If Bobby thinks he can get paid more elsewhere, and convinces someone to do so, then by all means may Bobby find good fortunes in his job search as he attempts to do so.  But no matter how much Bobby disapproves of Sally's pay check, the fact of the matter is that Sally's pay has nothing to do with Bobby's pay.  And Bobby's quitting his job simply because he doesn't approve of Sally's pay is not a financial issue for the employer.  It is a political/morale issue.

Same thing with the clients who bailed.  They claim it was because they were worried about their prices going up.  That's hogwash.  They haven't raised prices, and those clients didn't even bother to see if it would happen.  Considering the fact that the company has firmly insisted that they are not raising prices on their customers, and that the most prominent aspect of the media coverage in all of this has been that *the owner is voluntarily slashing his $1 million salary to $70K*, the excuse that the clients were worried the company would increase prices is impossible to believe.  They left for the political spite of it.


----------



## Davros (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> Davros said:
> 
> 
> > But you're not doing a very good job at that.
> ...



If you tell them you'll think it over,  what's to stop them from moving on to the next candidate? If you're going to negotiate wages and you don't have the luxury of losing this job offer, you negotiate right then and there. Do not leave without accepting the job unless you're prepared to lose the job.

I know you have considerable experience and a rock solid background because of what you say you do ... you negotiate from a place of power ... which most of us don't have the luxury of. We need any job offer we can get.


----------



## Roadrunner (Aug 7, 2015)

Hey, the are free to quit.


----------



## Roadrunner (Aug 7, 2015)

Hey, they are free to quit.


----------



## Teddy Pollins (Aug 7, 2015)

Many of these rich egoists just think this way: "If you don't like how much your boss makes, then simply find a boss who makes less money... It's all about choice. So, exercise your choice and move on". Every worker are just a replaceable pawn for them.


----------



## Muhammed (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.


Could you explain the  reasoning that you used to come to that ridiculous conclusion?


----------



## Flash (Aug 7, 2015)

Teddy Pollins said:


> Many of these rich egoists just think this way: "If you don't like how much your boss makes, then simply find a boss who makes less money... It's all about choice. So, exercise your choice and move on". Every worker are just a replaceable pawn for them.




There is a market for labor just like any other commodity.

Most businesses are not created to provide welfare and bloated wages to workers.  They are created to earn money.  They need to keep wages at market value.  That is economics.

The best way to earn a good living is to work hard and smart and don't vote for Liberals that screw up the economy with failed Left economics.


----------



## kaz (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.



Why does that mean anyone is exploiting anyone?


----------



## kaz (Aug 7, 2015)

Muhammed said:


> Donald Polish said:
> 
> 
> > 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> ...



I want it!  I want it!


----------



## Missouri_Mike (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Based on this recurring topic regarding the outrageous "compensation" of greedy CEOs......it would be somewhat refreshing for right wingers to expand their vocabulary when countering democrats, a bit more than the inane stating of:
> "Are you jealous?"........"Envy is a bad thing"......Or, "Get a job so you can become a CEO too..."


The only reason this topic is recurring is because of you people bringing it up all the time. The economy still sucks after 7 years of your crap policies but you refuse to blame the real problem so go all spastic over someone elses paycheck size. When you have no answers you look for excuses and when those fail you look for someone to blame. It's how the left does shit.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 7, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Uh, it is the financial aspect.   More valuable employees felt that they were not paid properly when their lower value comrades were given huge increases.  Customers felt that the increased costs would be passed along to them.
> ...




B'loney.  An employee who quits because a lower performer receives a huge increase and he doesn't is making a financial decision.

The same thing goes for customers who don't want to expose themselves to an increase in fees or disruption of service if the provider goes under.


----------



## Stephanie (Aug 7, 2015)

Teddy Pollins said:


> Many of these rich egoists just think this way: "If you don't like how much your boss makes, then simply find a boss who makes less money... It's all about choice. So, exercise your choice and move on". Every worker are just a replaceable pawn for them.



wth. find another boss who make LESS money. okey dokey. you go do that


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > do these people on the left ever come up a new line. they use the POOR like they use everyone else. They champion abortion so they CAN not claim they care about ANYONE. People are beginning to see right their lines of BS
> ...




No...your innate racism gets the better of you...the democrat party is the party of racism....it fought for slavery, created the klan and jim crow....today, the other racists from the other races also find a home in the democrat party...why?   Because they see being in control of the government gives them power over the other races...the Republican party doesn't care about race and kicks out the openly racist, the democrats, they don't care if you are a racist if you help them acquire power over other Americans...

So when you say you know abortions murder minorities.....you are exposing your inner racist.....and your general dislike of other human beings..........


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Missouri_Mike said:


> nat4900 said:
> 
> 
> > Based on this recurring topic regarding the outrageous "compensation" of greedy CEOs......it would be somewhat refreshing for right wingers to expand their vocabulary when countering democrats, a bit more than the inane stating of:
> ...




Just heard, close to 94 million Americans are no longer looking for work...that is how you keep the unemployment rate low...just destroy the job market to the point no one looks for work...keep it up long enough and we will have 0 to negative unemployment.....


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 7, 2015)

Missouri_Mike said:


> nat4900 said:
> 
> 
> > Based on this recurring topic regarding the outrageous "compensation" of greedy CEOs......it would be somewhat refreshing for right wingers to expand their vocabulary when countering democrats, a bit more than the inane stating of:
> ...


1929 was worse; thank goodness for socialism bailing out capitalism, like usual.


----------



## Flash (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> [Q
> 
> 
> Just heard, close to 94 million Americans are no longer looking for work...that is how you keep the unemployment rate low...just destroy the job market to the point no one looks for work...keep it up long enough and we will have 0 to negative unemployment.....



This is how President Shit for Brains has kept the official BLS rates low. 

It is just another one of his many lies.


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> *Just heard, close to 94 million Americans are no longer looking for work*...




You do realize what a true MORON you are (along with the other right wing nitwits)

*94 MILLION* unemployed??? 

Gee, our population is about 315 million; take away children, retirees, invalids and armed forces....your "source" points out that NO ONE in the US is working (they just hang around message boards swallowing right wing crap?)


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Flash said:


> This is how President Shit for Brains has kept the official BLS rates low.



Must be a bitch for you to live with a constant hate-filled gut.........Try a laxative.


----------



## Flash (Aug 7, 2015)

danielpalos said:


> 1929 was worse; thank goodness for socialism bailing out capitalism, like usual.



Sorry but you are confused, like most Left  Wingers.

FDR s policies prolonged Depression by 7 years UCLA economists calculate UCLA

*FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate*

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Flash said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > 1929 was worse; thank goodness for socialism bailing out capitalism, like usual.
> ...



Had the right wing nitwit continued reading the article, even his low IQ would have had to contend with this:


*Recovery came only after the Department of Justice dramatically stepped up enforcement of antitrust [which right wingers hate]cases nearly four-fold and organized labor suffered a string of setbacks, the economists found.*

*"The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes*


----------



## Flash (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...




If you would have understood the article it was Left Wing big government interference that resulted in the US having seven years more depression than the rest of the world.  Even post WWI Germany got out of the depression faster than the US.

Like other Panics and downswings the 1929 depression would have been relatively short lived had it not been for the Left Wing interference of shitheads like Roosevelt.  That is what the article said.  Government doesn't fix things, it breaks things and the Great Depression was an example of that.

Not much different from this jackass Obama failing to establish a recovery after the recession caused by the Barney Queerboy, Harry Reid, Nancy Peloski and the 2006 elected Democrat Congress.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 7, 2015)

Flash said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > 1929 was worse; thank goodness for socialism bailing out capitalism, like usual.
> ...


Prolonged it with what?  WPA.  All the Right had was Hooverviles.


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Flash said:


> That is what the article said. *Government doesn't fix things, it breaks things* and the Great Depression was an example of that.



Obviously you have severe comprehension issues.....

Re-read what YOU wrote above...and then re-read what the article states:

*.......that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes*


----------



## Missouri_Mike (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > That is what the article said. *Government doesn't fix things, it breaks things* and the Great Depression was an example of that.
> ...


When has significant government intervention ever produced a good outcome for the people?

What socialist, communist based government has ever resulted in the rising prosperity of the people? There isn't a single example of socialism ever raising the people from poverty. But there are plenty of examples of capitalism doing that. How about we just go with what is proven to work?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> 9 CEOs paid 800 times more than their workers
> This story doesn't surprise me.
> The normal nature of American capitalism. Exploit workers an benefit off the backs of their labor. Meanwhile families rely on credit and struggle to provide a decent chance at opportunity for their children.
> Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.




10 movie stars make a lot more than their union buddies......

The top 10 highest paid actors of 2015 10 Photos theCHIVE


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Missouri_Mike said:


> nat4900 said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...




yeah...they will point to the social welfare states of Europe...but they are running out of people who want to work to support the state...they have to import their workers...and now they are importing violence into their tranquil countries.....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Donald Polish said:
> 
> 
> > Exploitation is the very basis of American existence.
> ...




Socialism works best when human frailties are put into mass graves...by the millions.....

Actually, that doesn't make socialism work either....but they keep doing it.....


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Missouri_Mike said:


> When has significant government intervention ever produced a good outcome for the people?
> 
> What socialist, communist based government has ever resulted in the rising prosperity of the people? There isn't a single example of socialism ever raising the people from poverty. But there are plenty of examples of capitalism doing that. How about we just go with what is proven to work?




Your problem is both your ignorance and entrenched biases....


China

Denmark

Finland

Netherlands

Canada

Sweden

Norway

Ireland

New Zealand

Belgium

The above countries are all "socialist"...successful and most are lenders to our huge debts.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> > When has significant government intervention ever produced a good outcome for the people?
> ...




You do realize they are all starting to collapse..right?


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Among their many, many other flaws right wingers like to lie to themselves by revising history.....
So FDR prolonged the great depression???

(IDIOTS !!)


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

2aguy said:


> You do realize they are all starting to collapse..right?



Don't be an eternal idiot....Quit while you can.


----------



## Missouri_Mike (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> > When has significant government intervention ever produced a good outcome for the people?
> ...


Not a single one of those examples ever raised the quality of life for their people. In any way. The fact you actually listed China first is amazing. Not that the others have done any better but you actually think China of all places is making their citizens lives better. Were you born stupid or did you actually have to work on it?


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > You do realize they are all starting to collapse..right?
> ...




Let's look at Europe....

Dark lands the grim truth behind the Scandinavian miracle World news The Guardian


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Missouri_Mike said:


> nat4900 said:
> 
> 
> > Missouri_Mike said:
> ...




Well...for the 70 million murdered..yeah...life wasn't so great......

Sweden, the rape capitol of Europe...


----------



## Missouri_Mike (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Among their many, many other flaws right wingers like to lie to themselves by revising history.....
> So FDR prolonged the great depression???
> 
> (IDIOTS !!)


He did. Maybe we should look at obies prolonged depression. It's the same thing only the media is presenting it as different.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

And why Denmark sucks....

DENMARK 

Why do the Danes score so highly on international happiness surveys? Well, they do have high levels of trust and social cohesion, and do very nicely from industrial pork products, *but according to the OECD they also work fewer hours per year than most of the rest of the world*. *As a result, productivity is worryingly sluggish. How can they afford all those expensively foraged meals and hand-knitted woollens? Simple, the Danes also have the highest level of private debt in the world (four times as much as the Italians, to put it into context; enough to warrant a warning from the IMF), while more than half of them admit to using the black market to obtain goods and services.*

Perhaps the Danes' dirtiest secret is that, according to a 2012 report from the Worldwide Fund for Nature, they have the fourth largest per capita ecological footprint in the world. Even ahead of the US. Those offshore windmills may look impressive as you land at Kastrup, but Denmark burns an awful lot of coal. Worth bearing that in mind the next time a Dane wags her finger at your patio heater.

I'm afraid I have to set you straight on Danish television too. Their big new drama series, Arvingerne (The Legacy, when it comes to BBC4 later this year) is stunning, but the reality of prime-time Danish TV is day-to-day, wall-to-wall reruns of 15-year-old episodes of Midsomer Murders and documentaries on pig welfare. The Danes of course also have highest taxes in the world (though only the sixth-highest wages – hence the debt, I guess). As a spokesperson I interviewed at the Danish centre-right thinktank Cepos put it, they effectively work until Thursday lunchtime for the state's coffers, and the other day and half for themselves.

Presumably the correlative of this is that Denmark has the best public services? According to the OECD's Programme for International Student Assessment rankings (Pisa),* Denmark's schools lag behind even the UK's. Its health service is buckling too. (The other day, I turned up at my local A&E to be told that I had to make an appointment, which I can't help feeling rather misunderstands the nature of the service.) According to the World Cancer Research Fund, the Danes have the highest cancer rates on the planet. "But at least the trains run on time!" I hear you say. No, that was Italy under Mussolini. The Danish national rail company has skirted bankruptcy in recent years, and the trains most assuredly do not run on time. Somehow, though, the government still managed to find £2m to fund a two-year tax-scandal investigation largely concerned, as far as I can make out, with the sexual orientation of the prime minister's husband, Stephen Kinnock.*


----------



## KissMy (Aug 7, 2015)

SassyIrishLass said:


> Private corporations can pay CEO's what they want. It's none of your business and if you don't like it then don't patronize them



Up yours asshole! Government subsidizes them with my tax dollars. If we don't patronize them them Government bails them out with my tax dollars.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

Finland....

With its tarnished crown jewel, Nokia, devoured by Microsoft, Finland's hitherto robust economy is more dependent than ever on selling paper – mostly I was told, to Russian porn barons. Luckily, judging by a recent journey I took with my eldest son the length of the country by train, the place appears to be 99% trees. The view was a bit samey.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

And more on the way the wheels are coming off the social welfare paradises.....

Stop the Scandimania Nordic nations aren t the utopias they re made out to be - The Washington Post


I suspect that few Americans would truly embrace a Scandinavian-style society. The tax rates alone would likely be a sufficient deterrent. Though I’m a freelance journalist, I essentially work until Thursday lunchtime for the state. And it’s not as if the money that is left in my pocket goes all that far: These are fearfully expensive countries in which to live.

The Scandinavians’ collective modesty, distrust of boasting and self-censoring of ambitions would also be hard for Americans to comprehend, I suspect. A Danish acquaintance who lives in Washington was recently back in Copenhagen having coffee with friends. She remarked, proudly, that her son was doing especially well in math. “There was a silence, and then someone changed the conversation,” she told me. “If I had said he was great at role-playing or drawing it would have been fine, but it was totally wrong to boast about academic achievement.”


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 7, 2015)

Missouri_Mike said:


> Not a single one of those examples ever raised the quality of life for their people. In any way. The fact you actually listed China first is amazing. Not that the others have done any better but you actually think China of all places is making their citizens lives better. Were you born stupid or did you actually have to work on it?



I listed China because that country is one of our bankers.....The issue was and is whether socialist countries work.....they do. Get off your jingoism.....flying a flag on your front lawn on the 4th of july does not make you some great American.;


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 7, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> > Not a single one of those examples ever raised the quality of life for their people. In any way. The fact you actually listed China first is amazing. Not that the others have done any better but you actually think China of all places is making their citizens lives better. Were you born stupid or did you actually have to work on it?
> ...




The government run economy is about to go belly up.....


----------



## jon_berzerk (Aug 7, 2015)

Brain357 said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


that is not what you pointed out before


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 8, 2015)

2aguy said:


> nat4900 said:
> 
> 
> > Missouri_Mike said:
> ...


you mean like after 1929?


----------



## Flash (Aug 8, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > That is what the article said. *Government doesn't fix things, it breaks things* and the Great Depression was an example of that.
> ...




Like most Libtards you are either very confused or suffer from a lack of reading comprehension.  Probably both.

Here is the statement you are quoting:

_"The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. *"Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."*_

The study proved that the assumption that economist had for years that capitalism "could not be trusted" was absolutely wrong and that government interference caused the depression to continue.

Please learn to read before you post on an internet discussion forum.  That way you won't look like a fool whenever you do post.


----------



## Missouri_Mike (Aug 8, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> > Not a single one of those examples ever raised the quality of life for their people. In any way. The fact you actually listed China first is amazing. Not that the others have done any better but you actually think China of all places is making their citizens lives better. Were you born stupid or did you actually have to work on it?
> ...


Socialist countries only work for the dictator's you moron. The people all suffer under socialism.


----------



## nat4900 (Aug 8, 2015)

Missouri_Mike said:


> Socialist countries only work for the dictator's you moron. The people all suffer under socialism.



".....and now a few words from our sponsors, Fox news will be right back...."


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 8, 2015)

Missouri_Mike said:


> nat4900 said:
> 
> 
> > Missouri_Mike said:
> ...


I think the People benefited after the social bailout of capitalism in 1929.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 9, 2015)

boedicca said:


> B'loney.  An employee who quits because a lower performer receives a huge increase and he doesn't is making a financial decision.
> 
> The same thing goes for customers who don't want to expose themselves to an increase in fees or disruption of service if the provider goes under.



No, that's not a financial reason any more than it's a financial reason when a customer stops eating at Chick-fil-a because the company donated to a GOP candidate.

If an employee leaves their job because they are given an offer for more money, that's a financial reason.  If they leave their job because they object to _someone else_ making $X, then that's a political reason.  It's also petty and stupid, and is no better than the liberals whining about what other people make.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 9, 2015)

thief's and crooks all!


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 9, 2015)

Davros said:


> If you tell them you'll think it over,  what's to stop them from moving on to the next candidate?



You stop them.  They chose you for a reason.  _They_ picked you.  They want you.  That's what stops them.

What did I say earlier?  Stop obsessing on what _might_ go wrong, and start focusing on everything *you* can make go right!  I can tell from your questions that you are inexperienced.  The truth of the matter is that what you are afraid of happening is not a realistic scenario.  In the off chance you run into a hiring manager who demands a response the very moment he gives you an offer, _you're better off letting him move on, because he's a piece of shit to work for_.  If that's how they are going to be, then they don't respect their employees.  



> If you're going to negotiate wages and you don't have the luxury of losing this job offer, you negotiate right then and there. Do not leave without accepting the job unless you're prepared to lose the job.



Quite incorrect.  It is best to wait before making your counter offer.  First, it gives you leverage.  Another (better) offer may come through.  The company has no idea whether that's happening or not.  It leaves you with much better control of the situation.  Second, an immediate response comes across as too anxious and desperate.  This tends to be a huge turn-off, and will almost always cause your counter to be met with increased resistance.

Instead, ask for the offer in writing, and ask when they desire/need a response.  If they really need a response immediately they will say so.  But if that's how they conduct their employment matters then you should run like Hell.  No decent manager would expect you to make such an impulsive decision.  After all, if I force you to make an immediate decision, you'll probably accept.  But if a much better offer comes through for you in a day or two, you'll naturally go with that, and end up blowing me off in the process.  I've already made plans, have already written a training schedule, may have already ordered uniforms.  Demanding a candidate make an immediate decision is shooting myself in the foot.



> you negotiate from a place of power ... which most of us don't have the luxury of.



You gotta learn how to play poker, it'll really help you learn how to negotiate.  It's not about luxury.  Well, it's rarely about luxury.  Most of the time, it's just about playing a good poker face.

Here's a true story that happened not too long ago....I was in a job that I was desperately wanting to leave.  Most of the people I was working with were douche bags.  After being there a year I had come to see that most of my colleagues were low class trash.  The upper management wasn't particularly bright, yadda-yadda-yadda.  Point is, I hated it so badly that every day walking in I felt myself on the verge of quitting on the spot.  It was time to find something else, and find something fast.

I started looking for new options.  Sent my resume a few places.  I'm going to be perfectly honest with you here...my resume isn't exactly the most impressive for the work I now do, and for what I was looking.  I'm very good and have some solid experience.  But I also have some holes that can lead some companies to toss my resume into the "filed for 90 days" pile.  Anyway, came up with two primary target jobs.  The first one I had already made the decision to reject because they tried to massively low-ball me on price, and played hard ball on the negotiations.  Besides, I wanted to move out of town and it was a local company.  By the time the second one was ready to make an offer, I knew I didn't have anymore logs on the fire.  But _they_ didn't know that.  A third log I pretty much lost; I was emailed an invite to an interview day of all their candidates, but I blew it off because I had already set up an interview that same day for log 2, so I had to pick one.  Fact is, I was desperate to get this job.  But the only person who needed to know that was me.  When I finally made my way in for an interview, I knew that I had no other options that I really wanted.  I could have given a call back to the first one, but honestly I would have eventually ended up just as miserable there.

Interviews all went great, I thought.  Then I had to do one of those stupid "talent assessment" personality tests, which I think are complete bullshit.  I tend to bomb those things, so I started to get concerned.  I remind you, _*I desperately needed this job*_.  After that was done I felt like it actually went well.  I asked what the next steps would be, and they told me they would contact me when they made a decision.  A whole seven days passed, and I hear not one word.  I wondered whether I had bombed the personality test after all, just like I always do.  I wondered if they had gotten a bad reference from one of my previous jobs where I left on strained terms.  I wondered if the background check turned up that very old youthful indiscretion which wasn't even anywhere near as bad as it might look on the background check results.  Then I started wondering if I'd worn the wrong color suit, which answers to which questions had made me look weak, whether I had a piece of egg stuck in my teeth that day, and all kinds of other crazy stuff.

After those 7 days, I'm terrified that they've picked someone else, and my finger is desperately on the trigger to hand in my notice at my rapidly deteriorating job.  So, finally, I send an email.  *Here is where the poker face comes into play*:  When I emailed the HR person to follow up, I included a very important hint for them.  "I feel that XXXX company would be a wonder fit, and if I'm still in consideration I'd like to entertain the company's offer before I respond to other job offers I currently have pending."

What job offers?!?!  They don't need to know that shit!  The one offer was the the low-ballers who wanted to pay me next to nothing to be their 65 hr a week slave.  But then again, by this point I had already waited weeks without responding, and they told me they wanted a response within 72 hours (I completely blew them off, I didn't even give them so much as an email to tell them to fuck themselves), so I was certain that they had moved on without me.  The second job "offer" was for me to stay at my current position with these trailer park rejects who weren't worth my spit, much less my blood, sweat, and tears.  Luxury was not something I had.  Not in the slightest.  But none of that mattered.  Here I am desperate and afraid that they've rejected me, and yet I manage to open the pre-negotiation by upping the ante on the price they should expect to pay me!  Within 20 minutes of sending my email I'm getting a phone call informing me that they've had some problems verifying my work history.  Long story as to why, but suffice it to say I was able to get it addressed, which then led to an offer.

When the offer came through, it was lower than I expected, even knowing they'd low-ball to open.  I asked for it in writing and asked for a cut-off time, then countered a couple days later, throwing out something a little bit higher than I thought they'd be willing to pay me.  I just wanted to have a little room for them to re-counter so we could meet in the middle.  This was the email response I got from the HR woman:  "I'll have to discuss this with my General Manager, and she's out of town for the rest of the week."  That was it.  It scared me shitless.  Aside from the fact that it was so abrupt, it seemed so bizarre.  She's the HR person, she's supposed to have the range to work with.  Not to mention, my position would have had two levels of management between myself and the GM.  Why in the world does the GM have to become involved?  Was I really blowing the budgeted/forecasted range that badly?

Well, within 48 hours I received the call that they would accept my counter.  Bam!  Just like that I was being offered above market.  Here I was, desperate and scared shitless that any day I'm going to be unemployed because I'm about to go postal, and yet through *sheer will and testicles* I negotiated my way into above market pay.

You should never be desperate in the first place.  But if you are, just don't admit it to anyone other than yourself.



> We need any job offer we can get.



That's probably not true.  The job market is swinging very favorably into the hands of workers.  Unemployment is low, positions are going longer before they can be filled, fewer people are applying.  You don't need _any_ offer.  You need the nerve to not get spooked so easily.

Negotiating from a position of power is not about what you have or what you can afford.  It's about successfully leveraging what _the other person_ needs, so they'll agree to the terms you want from them.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 9, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > B'loney.  An employee who quits because a lower performer receives a huge increase and he doesn't is making a financial decision.
> ...



Sorry, bub.  If someone quits because he feels underpaid, that is a financial reason.

If a customer cancels because they fear future price increases, that is a financial reason.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 9, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > B'loney.  An employee who quits because a lower performer receives a huge increase and he doesn't is making a financial decision.
> ...


Neither is complaining about paying income taxes, since the right can always work for less and pay no income tax.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 10, 2015)

boedicca said:


> Sorry, bub.  If someone quits because he feels underpaid, that is a financial reason.
> 
> If a customer cancels because they fear future price increases, that is a financial reason.



No.  Repeating the same absurd bullshit does not make it magically turn into gold.  Especially when your only leg to stand on is feelings that have no corroboration with any objective reality.  It doesn't matter of someone "feels" like they are under paid.  If they can't find someone else who is willing to pay them more for the work they are doing, then they aren't under paid a single penny.  If their "feeling" is based on nothing more than their own jealously about someone else's paycheck, then they are nothing more than a whiny piece of shit liberal.


----------



## boedicca (Aug 10, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry, bub.  If someone quits because he feels underpaid, that is a financial reason.
> ...




You're wrong, but I'm not going to repeat myself.  Peace.


----------



## xdangerousxdavex (Aug 11, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> No.  Repeating the same absurd bullshit does not make it magically turn into gold.  Especially when your only leg to stand on is feelings that have no corroboration with any objective reality.  It doesn't matter of someone "feels" like they are under paid.  If they can't find someone else who is willing to pay them more for the work they are doing, then they aren't under paid a single penny.  If their "feeling" is based on nothing more than their own jealously about someone else's paycheck, then they are nothing more than a whiny piece of shit liberal.


Why can't employees be jealous when they hear that their CEO is being paid hundreds if times more? You want them to go find another job? Tables won't be turned, what you defend is only the right of CEO to have sky-high wage, but not those people's rights who work for him.


----------



## SwimExpert (Aug 11, 2015)

xdangerousxdavex said:


> SwimExpert said:
> 
> 
> > No.  Repeating the same absurd bullshit does not make it magically turn into gold.  Especially when your only leg to stand on is feelings that have no corroboration with any objective reality.  It doesn't matter of someone "feels" like they are under paid.  If they can't find someone else who is willing to pay them more for the work they are doing, then they aren't under paid a single penny.  If their "feeling" is based on nothing more than their own jealously about someone else's paycheck, then they are nothing more than a whiny piece of shit liberal.
> ...



There you have it Boed.  The people who quit are just whiny little shits singing the liberals' theme song.


----------



## xdangerousxdavex (Aug 21, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> There you have it Boed.  The people who quit are just whiny little shits singing the liberals' theme song.


Damn, some kind of negative energy recirculation. Can you have a fellow feeling for people, not blame them? Employees who were skunked have nothing to do except blaming too.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 21, 2015)

SwimExpert said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry, bub.  If someone quits because he feels underpaid, that is a financial reason.
> ...


what if they are not liberal enough to not feel exploited by Capitalism?


----------

