9 out of 10 Americans completely wrong

[Lonestar_logic]

The only way to be a Texan, is to be born a Texan.

Thank Goodness!!

That means that we can put a razor-wire fence around the place and keep the disease from spreading.
.

Really?

That the best you got?

Don't quit your day job!

 

[Polk]

Oh cue the violins for the chorus of, "It's not fair"

No one is stopping any of you from making more, saving more or increasing your wealth.

I have a pretty successful career. This isn't a "woe is me" story.

Sorry but when I hear the same old hackneyed blame the "rich" the corporations, the CEOs blah blah blah it all sounds like whining to me.

Yeah life's not fair. It never was. It never will be. It's not supposed to be.

But at the same time anyone can improve their situation if they have the desire and act upon it.

Saying "well, it's not totally fair, so we shouldn't care about ways we can make it less unfair" is a pretty weak argument, from my perspective. As for your last sentence, it's just not true.

 

[Polk]

It's not a false premise.

Scenarios like that are quite common.

Talk about false premises.

Who are you to judge the value of experience or the price paid for that experience?

My salary is based on a contract I made with my employer, if he didn't think my experience was 10 times more valuable and opted to pay me 30 times more than an apprentice he wouldn't have employed me.

Fact is, you are not the one to set the standard or to say what standard is acceptable. That choice is exclusively between the employer and employee.

Sucks to be you huh!

It's an absolutely false premise. I've never stated that people should be paid the same amount regardless of experience.

Placing a value on your experience is not a value judgment. It's an economic measure. You're producing some definable output for your employer than has an economic value.

What exactly gives you the authority to say what that value is?

I'm not claiming any authority.

 

[AmazonTania]

Amazon...you act as though people have a choice. Let's see..

As long as you have free will, you have a choice.

A. Starve
B. Go on welfare
C. Take shitty job

Those are the "big three" choices that a HELL of a lot of Americans.are looking at. The fact that so many are choosing C over B should tell you that it's not LAZINESS that is the problem.

If you have limited your choices to only three, then you have a big problem.

But...that's the mentality you guys have been trained to accept. Once again...80% of this country has only 7% of the wealth...there are banana Republics in Central America that has a better ratio than that.

That is true, those Republlics do have a better ratio, because everyone is poor. Everyone is equal, but everyone is poor. There is no wealth in many of those countries.

 

[RKMBrown]

Wages are still going up, and have been going up past the 80's.

To be fair wages in the private sector took a hit at the start of the recession. In big part to due to the number of "underemployed" but also through layoffs of the "experienced" employees to replace them with h1b and fresh-out employees. Many corporations are working under a policy of layoffs and fresh hires to reset their average wages that were admittedly pumped up during the dot com boom.

 

[AmazonTania]

When workers are a dime a dozen, they are all underpaid. That doesn't mean their work is worth less, only that people who take advantage pay less.

Yes. Yes it does. When your skills are common, it is not worth as much as skills which are not as common. It's a basic law of economics. Resources which are common are worth less than resources which are rare. This is not to say that just any job people will have a nack for, but these are jobs which does not require much training or alot of skills.

When the state makes up for the pay difference with food stamps and welfare, then there is something wrong, the taxpayers are subsidizing the greedy.

I don't know what you are getting at here.

 

[RKMBrown]

When the state makes up for the pay difference with food stamps and welfare, then there is something wrong, the taxpayers are subsidizing the greedy.

I don't know what you are getting at here.

It's the argument that the presence of welfare is proof that we need welfare to resolve the disparity in pay. It's like saying the presence of red lights is proof that we have bad drivers.

 

[Steelplate]

You know what I think? I think we need a little "solidarnosk" here in America. We need some kind of Lech Walesa to rally the Nationwide workforce into a Nationwide private sector strike.

 

[ELITEofWarman8]

There is actually an easy why for anyone (even the deadbeats in this forum) can obtain Top 1% status. It's very simple actually.

Yeah, it's so darn simple that the US has the lowest income mobility rate in the western world. Hard work only gets you taxed more. You have to start out with money so you can avoid taxes on your income. You simpletons lost my vote when you started taxing work & small business harder than rich investment dividends. It's simple, cut tax on workers & small business or continue losing elections. Close the big corporate tax loopholes.

Or just work harder?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

It's an absolutely false premise. I've never stated that people should be paid the same amount regardless of experience.

Placing a value on your experience is not a value judgment. It's an economic measure. You're producing some definable output for your employer than has an economic value.

What exactly gives you the authority to say what that value is?

I'm not claiming any authority.

But you did say "If the labor of the veteran employee is 10 times more valuable than the apprentice, but he's being paid 30 times more there is something askew about that."

So what I'm basically asking is how did you arrive at these numbers, 10 times more valuable and 30 times more pay?

Did you just pull this out of your ass with no real world experience to back it up?

 

[rightwinger]

Besides a college education, what programs are you referring to?

Tax subsidies
Government incentives
Capital gains
Government R&D subsidies

There are economic and/or policy arguments to be made for several of those, but you're right that the moral argument is pretty weak.

Most of theses Government handouts to the wealthy are sold on one thing.....Jobs

The promise of jobs and trickle down wealth has not happened. Why do we continue these programs that only line the pockets of the rich?

 

[rightwinger]

There is actually an easy why for anyone (even the deadbeats in this forum) can obtain Top 1% status. It's very simple actually.

Yeah, it's so darn simple that the US has the lowest income mobility rate in the western world. Hard work only gets you taxed more. You have to start out with money so you can avoid taxes on your income. You simpletons lost my vote when you started taxing work & small business harder than rich investment dividends. It's simple, cut tax on workers & small business or continue losing elections. Close the big corporate tax loopholes.

Or just work harder?

Then what?

Wealth and prosperity? I don't think so

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Yeah, it's so darn simple that the US has the lowest income mobility rate in the western world. Hard work only gets you taxed more. You have to start out with money so you can avoid taxes on your income. You simpletons lost my vote when you started taxing work & small business harder than rich investment dividends. It's simple, cut tax on workers & small business or continue losing elections. Close the big corporate tax loopholes.

Or just work harder?

Then what?

Wealth and prosperity? I don't think so

Then you die.

 

[PaulS1950]

The owner of a public corporation like GE or most of the other large corporations in this country are individuals like you and me. If you don't own stock then you aren't part owner but your neighbor might be. The reason the top executives of these corporations get such high salaries is because it is their responsibility to improve the standings of the corporation. It is like running a large city and they have to stay on top of all the details all the time.
It's a lot like running your own business but not as complex a job as the CEO's job.
Knowing what your product costs, what the labor costs, what transportation costs, what warehousing costs, what predictable expenses cost, what to expect for incedental expenses and how you can provide your service or goods at a price that pays for all that and still provides a profit for you to grow the business and provide a living wage for yourself and your family is a time consuming job that most people don't want. It is worth more to find someone who does want it and better yet is good at it.
My bet is that 99% of the working stiffs across the country wouldn't put in the hours necessary or even know how to do the job.

How do I know?
I ran a not-for-profit coalition, a non-profit corporation, and my own business. It is a lot easier to go to work for eight hours and then go home and get a reliable paycheck twice a month than to gamble on making more by putting in 16 hour days and barely getting by until the business gets going. If it does then you hire your first employee and your taxes go up, profits go down and the new employee doesn't care about your pruduct as much as you do and quality starts to go down. You train the employee and work with him for six months to a year to get him up to speed and then he leaves to work someplace where he doesn't have to worry about doing a good job - even if it oesn't pay as well. I have seen it all and I would still rather risk it all working for myself than work for someone else.
Thats me - but it is not most of the people in the work force - not by a long shot.

 

[numan]

That the best you got?

Oh, no!
I think these come nearer to your Heart of Evil.

 

[AmazonTania]

It's the argument that the presence of welfare is proof that we need welfare to resolve the disparity in pay. It's like saying the presence of red lights is proof that we have bad drivers.

Again, I keep pointing out to Hong Kong and Singapore as examples, but they are really one of the few who choose not to follow in our stupid example.

Hardly any welfare in those countries, but somehow acquired American style prosperity.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is actually an easy why for anyone (even the deadbeats in this forum) can obtain Top 1% status. It's very simple actually.

Yeah, it's so darn simple that the US has the lowest income mobility rate in the western world. Hard work only gets you taxed more. You have to start out with money so you can avoid taxes on your income. You simpletons lost my vote when you started taxing work & small business harder than rich investment dividends. It's simple, cut tax on workers & small business or continue losing elections. Close the big corporate tax loopholes.

You simpletons lost my vote when you started taxing work & small business harder than rich investment dividends.

In 1988, Reagan cut the top rate to 28% and raised the capital gains tax to 28%.
You want to go back to those rates?
Clinton is the one who signed the bill cutting capital gains taxes.

 

[Wyatt earp]

It's the argument that the presence of welfare is proof that we need welfare to resolve the disparity in pay. It's like saying the presence of red lights is proof that we have bad drivers.

Again, I keep pointing out to Hong Kong and Singapore as examples, but they are really one of the few who choose not to follow in our stupid example.

Hardly any welfare in those countries, but somehow acquired American style prosperity.

You can not prove a point with Hong Kong or Singapore, thats a culture thing, America is a melting pot we are to diverse.

 

[RKMBrown]

There is actually an easy why for anyone (even the deadbeats in this forum) can obtain Top 1% status. It's very simple actually.

Yeah, it's so darn simple that the US has the lowest income mobility rate in the western world. Hard work only gets you taxed more. You have to start out with money so you can avoid taxes on your income. You simpletons lost my vote when you started taxing work & small business harder than rich investment dividends. It's simple, cut tax on workers & small business or continue losing elections. Close the big corporate tax loopholes.

You simpletons lost my vote when you started taxing work & small business harder than rich investment dividends.

In 1988, Reagan cut the top rate to 28% and raised the capital gains tax to 28%.
You want to go back to those rates?
Clinton is the one who signed the bill cutting capital gains taxes.

ROFL yeah cause no one ever invests in the middle class.... ROFL Let's roll back all taxes and spending and government programs to the Clinton era. If the Bush cuts were gone... and we went back to clinton era the result is 50%-80% tax increase for the lowest income bracket.

I really don't think you democrats have a clue what your talking about sometimes.

 

[Wyatt earp]

You know what I think? I think we need a little "solidarnosk" here in America. We need some kind of Lech Walesa to rally the Nationwide workforce into a Nationwide private sector strike.

And why? I am very happy with my little job, I talk with the plant manager like 50 times a day and the owner when he is in town. Would I like to make $25~30 bucks an hour instead of what I make now? yup, but then I would have to drive an hour away and work for shit heads I dont like. The owner of my company pays me what he can afford and I get "thank you" texts all the time from the plant manager and the owner. Guess that means more to me now then chasing a buck...like I used to do.