$15.00 an hour? For WHAT????!!!

[iamwhatiseem]

Given that the vast majority of employees live pay check to pay check, the money they get goes right back into the economy.

But every transaction that takes place has an increased cost so that the transaction is profitable.

Just about every product is the result of a huge supply chain that consists of hundreds of transactions and each transaction adds a certain amount to the actual cost of production to insure a profit.

This results in a massive trickle up economy.

If we removed the profit from all transactions in all supply chains, and just paid the actual production costs, the price of everything would drop like a rock.

That's the cost of profits.

HAhaha.... funny stuff right there.
You are a regular comedian, you should have your own show.

 

[Richard-H]

HAhaha.... funny stuff right there.
You are a regular comedian, you should have your own show.

I'm just pointing out that there is such a thing a 'The cost of profits'. Obviously, if profits were eliminated, there would be no incentive for investment and the economy would stop.

Even Karl Marx cited the need for investment in 'Das Kapital'.

I'm just saying that if we discuss the 'Cost of Labor' we should also discuss the 'Cost of Profits'. There should be a balance between the two.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I'm just pointing out that there is such a thing a 'The cost of profits'. Obviously, if profits were eliminated, there would be no incentive for investment and the economy would stop.

Even Karl Marx cited the need for investment in 'Das Kapital'.

I'm just saying that if we discuss the 'Cost of Labor' we should also discuss the 'Cost of Profits'. There should be a balance between the two.

In other words companies giving their profits away to employees. Sorry, that would destroy our industries. They'd move to a country where they could keep most of what they make.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Given that the vast majority of employees live pay check to pay check, the money they get goes right back into the economy.

But every transaction that takes place has an increased cost so that the transaction is profitable.

Just about every product is the result of a huge supply chain that consists of hundreds of transactions and each transaction adds a certain amount to the actual cost of production to insure a profit.

This results in a massive trickle up economy.

If we removed the profit from all transactions in all supply chains, and just paid the actual production costs, the price of everything would drop like a rock.

That's the cost of profits.

Then if that happens, you better buy as much of those products as you can because it will be the last of them you'll ever see.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

Bonzi and I are movie buffs, so I do have pretty nice TVs.
But today I drive a 2006 Explorer. It is what I traded the old Ford F150 for... maybe around 2016 I think.
Then I bought Bonzi a 2012 Fusion when she moved here.
We like them... both in good shape. Both paid for.
I find it insane to trade cars in to get brand new ones that loses 20% of their value the minute you drive off the lot.
Not for me

Thank you for telling me about that 20%. I knew that vehicles lose value after being bought, but I never knew how much. Has it always been 20% and do homes also lose value after being bought?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah, that Big Mac might cost you an extra quarter.

That's because a McDonald's restaurant sells 300 Big Mac's every day. They sell 1000 fries a day. They sell over 2,000 beverages a day. They can spread their losses.

But Bob's hardware store doesn't sell 500 hammers a day or 2,000 boxes of nails. Joe's car wash doesn't wash 800 cars a day.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I'm just pointing out that there is such a thing a 'The cost of profits'. Obviously, if profits were eliminated, there would be no incentive for investment and the economy would stop.

Even Karl Marx cited the need for investment in 'Das Kapital'.

I'm just saying that if we discuss the 'Cost of Labor' we should also discuss the 'Cost of Profits'. There should be a balance between the two.

Oh I would agree with that.
The issue isn't profits per se - it is how the profits are distributed. And THAT is the problem.
Modern corporatism is all about driving out privately owned businesses, locally owned businesses, and replacing them with corporate owned facsimiles. You see, locally owned/privately owned businesses are not investable. They can't skim any money off if them... the revenues and the profits stay in the community.
The central banks/high investor class have fully corrupted our federal government (BOTH sides equally) into making this happen. They get all the favorable legislation, rubber stamp all their mergers and acquisitions. And the filth that occupies our government then invest their own money into this pot and become wealthy themselves.

It isn't the amount of profit that is the problem. It is the profits are going into fewer and fewer hands. With all the power that goes with it. With each day getting more and more ownership, more profits and more corruption.

 

[BWK]

You and I live next door to each other. You take your dog for a walk every day. Once a month while you're walking your dog, I go into your house and steal $100.00. After a while I begin to feel slightly guilty about stealing that much from you every month, so instead of taking $100.00 a month from you, I only take $50.00. Did I just give you $50.00 a month?

Government is not giving corporations a dime by letting them keep more of THEIR OWN money. And nobody ever got rich off of tax cuts. Companies get wealthy by selling a good product or service, making risky investments, selling stock and keeping the price attractive, but they don't get rich because of tax breaks.

If you don't like the wealth gap, then do something about it. Charity starts at home. Quit giving the rich all your money. Because after all, this week, probably several times this week, you are going to transfer your money to the top. That's how they got all that money in the first place. You are going to pay your internet and cable bill that the rich provide to you. You're going to pay your cell phone bill. You're going to buy gasoline for your car. You may stop at McDonald's or Burger King a few times this week. But one way or another, you are going to gladly hand over your money to the rich.

Government isn't giving to corporations, they are enabling corporations to control the lives of the working poor.

"Do something about the wealth gap?" I do. Besides voting, messaging is my only tool.

Corporations before Reagan used to pay 70to 90% in taxes. Now they can get away with paying practically none. Never got rich doing that? Do tell. I say a good chunk of cheese thrown into a tax shelter account overseas, can yield a handsome sum. Let me tell you something bud, they wouldn't be putting it there if it wasn't doing something.

And what about you? Do you think that a 300% jump in the wealth gap in the last 40 years, up against my flat wage is right?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

There's your inflation, right there.

If They Own a Man's Work, They Own That Man. If You're Not a Union Man, You're Not a Man at All.

Prices can also go up because of price-gouging. Or stay the same if the Plutes take a cut from their sanctified profits if wages rise. Bootlickers of the Plutes Wearing Jackboots see economics as their Masters being picked on by their employees.

 

[BWK]

I'm just pointing out that there is such a thing a 'The cost of profits'. Obviously, if profits were eliminated, there would be no incentive for investment and the economy would stop.

Even Karl Marx cited the need for investment in 'Das Kapital'.

I'm just saying that if we discuss the 'Cost of Labor' we should also discuss the 'Cost of Profits'. There should be a balance between the two.

You said it much better than I ever could. You're right, it's about balance. But that's not what some folks want to hear. They aren't interested in balancing labor costs with profit costs. That's where the disconnect comes in.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Government isn't giving to corporations, they are enabling corporations to control the lives of the working poor.

"Do something about the wealth gap?" I do. Besides voting, messaging is my only tool.

Corporations before Reagan used to pay 70to 90% in taxes. Now they can get away with paying practically none. Never got rich doing that? Do tell. I say a good chunk of cheese thrown into a tax shelter account overseas, can yield a handsome sum. Let me tell you something bud, they wouldn't be putting it there if it wasn't doing something.

And what about you? Do you think that a 300% jump in the wealth gap in the last 40 years, up against my flat wage is right?

Of course I think it's right. They developed a product or service that everybody wanted. Reagan was the pre-tech era. More and more products were coming out. More inventions made it to the market, so we bought more stuff. The more we buy, the more we send our money to the top.

Nobody ever paid an effective tax rate of 70%. Any company that came close left the country. And you have zero evidence about tax shelters overseas. You watch too much television.

The only person in control of your life is you. If you don't want to work for anybody, work for yourself. Millions of Americans are doing it as we write. If you think X company is underpaying their employees, open up a similar business and pay your employees more. Let's see how long you'd last in competition especially with overseas products.

Messaging is not fighting the wealth gap. Getting rid of your cell phone is. Getting rid of your cable or satellite television is. Getting rid of this wonderful internet is. Getting rid of your car and only relying on public transportation is. But you won't give up one thing, will you. Instead you'll send your money to all these rich people and companies, and then complain they have your money. Hey, the Quakers and Amish don't send their money to the top, you can too. Hope you have enough wood for the fireplace to stay warm in the winter since you won't be sending your money to those multi-billion dollar utility companies any longer. And if you put your money where your mouth is, nice chatting with you since you'll be signing off with no internet.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

They weren't worth $7.50 an hour.

Motto of Incompetent Businessmen: "All for One, and That One All for Himself"

Try to be logical instead of selfishly conceited. That minimum wage inspires minimum work in response to Scrooge employers.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

You're mad because you can't get a job that pays more than minimum wage. Go back to school.

A Degree Is Nothing to Brag About. Diploma Dumbos Are Nothing But Brown-noses.

College is for teenagers who are afraid to grow up. The Plutes better give qualified students the same allowance and paid-up tuition they give their son or revenge will be taken on their guillotine-fodder sons.

Graduates have no right to the jobs the economic bullies give them; they didn't have to compete with anybody who has self-respect. College is work without pay, nothing more than that and for no just reason. You bootlickers can't logically expect the talented to put up with that.

 

[gulfman]

How about $20.00 an hour.A 401k.Company car.Profit sharing.5 weeks vacation.With no more than a third grade education.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And why is that? Is a loaf of bread worth inherently more now than in the past? Is an hour a labor worth more? Or is the value of the money we use to represent our labor just worth less? And if it's worth less why is that?

Good questions. Why can I no longer buy a house for 11 grand? Why can I not by a car for a grand? Why is candy no longer 5 for a penny?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

A Degree Is Nothing to Brag About. Diploma Dumbos Are Nothing But Brown-noses.

College is for teenagers who are afraid to grow up. The Plutes better give qualified students the same allowance and paid-up tuition they give their son or revenge will be taken on their guillotine-fodder sons.

Graduates have no right to the jobs the economic bullies give them; they didn't have to compete with anybody who has self-respect. College is work without pay, nothing more than that and for no just reason. You bootlickers can't logically expect the talented to put up with that.

People want emoyees with college degrees because they are better problem solvers, are better at adjusting to new situations (software, prodicts), often have experience with the software being used, have shown they can set and meet goals, etc.

It speaks more loudly than some whiny baby who SWEARS he will do a good job. Know anyone like that?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Conservatives do. Conservatives want slavery.

In Africa, Their Only Future Was As a Lion's Lunch

Proven by all their history since then, slavery was the only way to get the lazy savages to work. Africa owes us reparations for selling us such defective merchandise.

 

[EyeBRollin]

In Africa, Their Only Future Was As a Lion's Lunch

Proven by all their history since then, slavery was the only way to get the lazy savages to work. Africa owes us reparations for selling us such defective merchandise.

No surprise we already knew conservatives support slavery. Conservatives want to see black and brown people shackled and forced into hard labor. That’s the conservative endgame.

 

[gulfman]

People want emoyees with college degrees because they are better problem solvers, are better at adjusting to new situations (software, prodicts), often have experience with the software being used, have shown they can set and meet goals, etc.

It speaks more loudly than some whiny baby who SWEARS he will do a good job. Know anyone like that?

I wouldn't hire a fast food worker unless they knew trigonometry and could recite Shakespeare.

 

[EyeBRollin]

It speaks more loudly than some whiny baby who SWEARS he will do a good job. Know anyone like that?

Is he fat, orange, and has really bad yellow hair?