A question for Republicans

[beagle9]

A large set of false premises and assumptions.

1. All people are greedy and seek every opportunity to profit at the expense of another.
2 The richer someone is, the greedier they are.
3. There are two choices on business ownership: Innocent beatific government or corrupt greedy capitalists.
4. The Government always has everyone's best interest at heart.
5. When people of similar industry or wealth get together, they conspire against the rest.
6. The only way to profit and grow wealth is by stealing from another.
7. Self regulation is always corrupt and unfair.
8. The government is somehow an outside entity not tied into or part of the problem and equation.

It seems that so many people have no concept of how wealth is generated. Let's give a little example that is so 'econ 101' they shouldn't have trouble getting it.

Joe is an engineer. He sees a problem with life and decides to invent something to fix it. Joe works at the problem for a while, and finally realizes a nifty solution to the problem and wishes to build a prototype. Ignoring the process to get funding to go to production, Joe builds his solution and starts to sell it for 10 dollars each. The product actually costs Joe only 2 dollars each, but he now has a few employees to pay and his creditors expect to get their money back plus interest so his real cost is 5 dollars each. So Joe makes a tidy profit and becomes successful. He is earning 5 dollars per unit sold above his costs. Should he be forced to give that money back? No. The consumer thought the product was a fair price to fix their problem. The employees thought it was a fair wage to be paid them. The creditors thought it was a fair interest rate to be reimbursed. So Joe gets to keep his modest profit from modest sales.

Now, let's suppose Joe's product goes Crazy Popular! Say Oprah advertised it with Billy Mays and Ron Popiel and Joe gets orders for 10,000% more than normal! He can't keep up, and so he starts taking money he's been earning, reinvesting into his own company and expanding! It's not fast enough, and he needs to grow more, faster, so he takes out loans AND to help slow down demand and deal with the growing cost of business (which has jumped from 5 to 8 dollars per unit) he raises the price to 20 dollars a unit, profiting him 12 dollars each. This does little to slow demand, and even with rapid expansion he's still not able to keep up, so the price goes up to 30 a unit profiting the company 18. Most of the money at this time goes right back into the business to solidify growth, but throughout all of this, Joe keeps earning his personal 5 dollars a unit while the remaining 13 went to expansion. Now, millions of units later, those 5 bucks a unit profit that he kept personally, has amassed a vast fortune for him.

Now a strange thing happens. The business no longer needs to expand. The expenses have stabilized and there is no further need to grow bigger so fast. The cost of business drops back from 12 dollars a unit to 9. Plus the expansion which was needed is now building up, unused. What is to be done with that capital? Technically it's all Joe's, because he owns the company and it's just sitting in expansion funds doing nothing. It's time to reorganize the money.

Joe has many options and all of them, since it is HIS profit, earned fairly from the public. His workers were fairly paid and the creditors got their money back fairly too. So, Joe, deciding that he doesn't need the whole extra 13 bucks per unit decides to share it with other as well. He ups HIS profit per unit to 10. (30 bucks is a fair price to the public because the value the product gives) He then gives 5 more dollars per unit to the workers in his corporation, 2 dollars he chooses to give to charities, and 1 dollar he gives back to the public in lower prices.

Is this fair? Joe is a wealthy man, he has manyy well paid employees, he donates to charities he supports and he's even cuts the price a little to the consumer who already thinks it is a fair value to them.

This is how MOST businesses and self made rich (which is most of them) become so.

Hmmmm, highlighted in bold is where the questions do lay in these senario's. Did Joe do what was right in these areas of bolded text? This is what people are having huge problems with these days, because the reality isn't panning out as you have described it for the many, and this (((Joe))) along with his buddies, have become marked men because of, but of course no matter what the facts are, the senario in it's entirety and final conclusion of as was written above by you, will stand no matter what, and this even if the senario was found to be different and more hostile to the workers in the deal than what was shown in the senario above, yet it will still stand no matter what by apologist for crooked corporations or crooked companies that lie cheat and steal within the senario as would be then re-written above in contrast to. People understand what you have written here, but what they are trying to get a handle on, is when this senario or hypothetical goes wrong in the numbers being shown or handled.

If it went just as you described, then their would be no discussion or any problem at all, but the reason these discussions exist at all, is because the senario has been tainted by corruption and greed, and the people know it, experience it, and do see it first hand in the nation now.

 

[Big Fitz]

A large set of false premises and assumptions.

1. All people are greedy and seek every opportunity to profit at the expense of another.
2 The richer someone is, the greedier they are.
3. There are two choices on business ownership: Innocent beatific government or corrupt greedy capitalists.
4. The Government always has everyone's best interest at heart.
5. When people of similar industry or wealth get together, they conspire against the rest.
6. The only way to profit and grow wealth is by stealing from another.
7. Self regulation is always corrupt and unfair.
8. The government is somehow an outside entity not tied into or part of the problem and equation.

It seems that so many people have no concept of how wealth is generated. Let's give a little example that is so 'econ 101' they shouldn't have trouble getting it.

Joe is an engineer. He sees a problem with life and decides to invent something to fix it. Joe works at the problem for a while, and finally realizes a nifty solution to the problem and wishes to build a prototype. Ignoring the process to get funding to go to production, Joe builds his solution and starts to sell it for 10 dollars each. The product actually costs Joe only 2 dollars each, but he now has a few employees to pay and his creditors expect to get their money back plus interest so his real cost is 5 dollars each. So Joe makes a tidy profit and becomes successful. He is earning 5 dollars per unit sold above his costs. Should he be forced to give that money back? No. The consumer thought the product was a fair price to fix their problem. The employees thought it was a fair wage to be paid them. The creditors thought it was a fair interest rate to be reimbursed. So Joe gets to keep his modest profit from modest sales.

Now, let's suppose Joe's product goes Crazy Popular! Say Oprah advertised it with Billy Mays and Ron Popiel and Joe gets orders for 10,000% more than normal! He can't keep up, and so he starts taking money he's been earning, reinvesting into his own company and expanding! It's not fast enough, and he needs to grow more, faster, so he takes out loans AND to help slow down demand and deal with the growing cost of business (which has jumped from 5 to 8 dollars per unit) he raises the price to 20 dollars a unit, profiting him 12 dollars each. This does little to slow demand, and even with rapid expansion he's still not able to keep up, so the price goes up to 30 a unit profiting the company 18. Most of the money at this time goes right back into the business to solidify growth, but throughout all of this, Joe keeps earning his personal 5 dollars a unit while the remaining 13 went to expansion. Now, millions of units later, those 5 bucks a unit profit that he kept personally, has amassed a vast fortune for him.

Now a strange thing happens. The business no longer needs to expand. The expenses have stabilized and there is no further need to grow bigger so fast. The cost of business drops back from 12 dollars a unit to 9. Plus the expansion which was needed is now building up, unused. What is to be done with that capital? Technically it's all Joe's, because he owns the company and it's just sitting in expansion funds doing nothing. It's time to reorganize the money.

Joe has many options and all of them, since it is HIS profit, earned fairly from the public. His workers were fairly paid and the creditors got their money back fairly too. So, Joe, deciding that he doesn't need the whole extra 13 bucks per unit decides to share it with other as well. He ups HIS profit per unit to 10. (30 bucks is a fair price to the public because the value the product gives) He then gives 5 more dollars per unit to the workers in his corporation, 2 dollars he chooses to give to charities, and 1 dollar he gives back to the public in lower prices.

Is this fair? Joe is a wealthy man, he has manyy well paid employees, he donates to charities he supports and he's even cuts the price a little to the consumer who already thinks it is a fair value to them.

This is how MOST businesses and self made rich (which is most of them) become so.

Hmmmm, highlighted in bold is where the questions do lay in these senario's. Did Joe do what was right in these areas of bolded text? This is what people are having huge problems with these days, because the reality isn't panning out as you have described it for the many, and this (((Joe))) along with his buddies, have become marked men because of, but of course no matter what the facts are, the senario in it's entirety and final conclusion of as was written above by you, will stand no matter what, and this even if the senario was found to be different and more hostile to the workers in the deal than what was shown in the senario above, yet it will still stand no matter what by apologist for crooked corporations or crooked companies that lie cheat and steal within the senario as would be then re-written above in contrast to. People understand what you have written here, but what they are trying to get a handle on, is when this senario or hypothetical goes wrong in the numbers being shown or handled.

If it went just as you described, then their would be no discussion or any problem at all, but the reason these discussions exist at all, is because the senario has been tainted by corruption and greed, and the people know it, experience it, and do see it first hand in the nation now.

Every product is worth what it's purchaser will pay. This includes labor and loans. The employer PURCHASES labor. The Laborer accepted the deal as fair because he felt it improved his life and was advantageous to do so. The fact that a secondary party thinks it is unfair or not worth it, is irrelevant.

Treat yourself to a "Dirty Jobs" marathon and ask yourself, how much would YOU be willing to take for some of those jobs? I like the 'hand made brick' episode, or when Mike Rowe joins the USArmy motorpool. THAT was cool.

I do a job that 90% of Americans flinch at hearing: Driving schoolbus. I transport 60 screaming kids on the highway at rush hour in a bus that seems to be 'blaze orange' to drivers. I think I'm paid a fair wage... and I enjoy it immensely finding it very rewarding. I've met so many peoplewho hear what I do and tell me "you couldn't PAY me to do that job". Fine. DON'T do it! It keeps my wages higher because so few out their are ready willing and able. All bus companies pay about the same, but they have mild variations to it. The point is the market found an equalibrium for the amount of stress, time, responsibility, skill and training for the job and assigned a price. If you don't want the work, it's none of your fucking business what the worker's paid. if the worker doesn't like it, quit. Get another job working as a fast order cook or mailroom attendant or customer service rep. Now THERE are some jobs you couldn't pay me enough to do. So you know what? I've priced myself out of the market, and that's fine.

A fair deal. You seem to obsess about fairness in matters that are none of your concern. If I tried to sell you a two pound pet rock for 100 dollars, you (probably) wouldn't buy it. Now if that rock was actually an uncut diamond... you'd snap it up as a steal. On the otherhand there are people who wouldn't recognize the value and say 'no thanks' because it looks like shit at that stage. The point is that YOU assign the value, just as everyone else does for what is good in their life. Your fair deal is their raw deal.

And yes, most businesses DO make their earning honestly. This is not gangsterland. Not everyone who owns a business is a fucking crook. It's actually the minority. Why? Because otherwise you'd be screwed every day by some crooked businessman. Do you trust your favorite mechanic? Barista owner? hardware store? Game shop? Are they somehow scheming to steal from you and give you crappy product for an inflated price? Very paranoid and let's face it, if you DO believe this, you need therapy. Lots and lots of therapy. Crooked employers are the EXCEPTION, not the rule.

Or... is this just projection of what YOU would do if you were Joe? Hmmmmmmm.....

 

[Big Fitz]

oh, and even in the 90's... you know, the halcyon days of clintopia? Yeah, even the the average business failure rate was over 50%. More if you were a franchise.

 

[Liability]

How can the libbies WHINE so endlessly about the rich paying less (percentage wise) than the middle income earners or the poor?

IF you don't like it, libs, then stop demanding a "progressive" income tax that comes with shitloads of loopholes.

Establish a fucking flat tax (starting at whatever level of income is rationally based).

Hell, for that matter, you can even skew the starting point based on number of dependents. Have a blast.

But then, stop fucking around. Go flat.

The rich will then NOT pay less as a percentage of their income than the middle income earners of the "poor." In fact, the less affluent (given the staggered start mentioned above) might pay a whole lot lower percentage.

But once you do that, then stop with all loopholes and other gimmicks. Do away with taxing corporations altogether since that only passes the increased cost along to consumers costing the less affluent to pay even MORE. So just cut the shit.

Are you GAME to put up or shut up, libs?

 

[Big Fitz]

How can the libbies WHINE so endlessly about the rich paying less (percentage wise) than the middle income earners or the poor?

IF you don't like it, libs, then stop demanding a "progressive" income tax that comes with shitloads of loopholes.

Establish a fucking flat tax (starting at whatever level of income is rationally based).

Hell, for that matter, you can even skew the starting point based on number of dependents. Have a blast.

But then, stop fucking around. Go flat.

The rich will then NOT pay less as a percentage of their income than the middle income earners of the "poor." In fact, the less affluent (given the staggered start mentioned above) might pay a whole lot lower percentage.

But once you do that, then stop with all loopholes and other gimmicks. Do away with taxing corporations altogether since that only passes the increased cost along to consumers costing the less affluent to pay even MORE. So just cut the shit.

Are you GAME to put up or shut up, libs?

they aren't.

 

[logical4u]

The Buffet Rule would be fair to all those whose wealth was accumulated because of the sacrifices of those who preserved this great nation. But CONs have no problem sending OTHER people to DIE for this nation; they just don't want to pay money to live here.

"Everybodys got to pay their fair share".... according to the President. What are the lower 48% paying? Why does the 52% have to pay for them? Are you saying that none of the "upper classes" of wealth have children that died on the battlefield?

 

[logical4u]

I am saying that $1100 gain is NOT equal to $100 loss. Not even after you decide to call them both "aggregate". And the sum of them is not zero either.

So stop talking nonsense.

In one example you say that my gain is a loss somewhere else in the economy in another you say only some of my gain is a loss somewhere else in the economy.

make up your mind.

Of course it's the later -- only some of your gain is someone else's loss (on average). I never said othervise.But if that some is 90%, or even 50%, then the results are not much different from that of the zero sum game.

It would lead to more inequality and the question remains -- do you want to live as part of tiny superrich elite surrounded by the poor. Is this what America should become?

And if the answer is "no", then we need more social transfers -- like it is done in most adwanced countries, BTW.

Before this country the "most advanced countries" kept "subjects" in the serf class. In this country, with the resources at hand, most people can generate their own wealth. They do not need to 'accept scraps from the master's table'. Look at some of the wealthy: Rockefeller (drilled for oil and supplied a consistant product), Ford (a tinkerer that liked machines and figured out how to use an assembly line to produce vehicles), Gates (a nerd that figured out how to make computers 'user friendly'); none of them started wealthy, yet, they built industrial/intellectual companies that gave, not only them, but their employees more than they had ever imagined possible.
To have 'citizens' stating we should be acting like socialist countries, not only proves that public schools are really good at producing idiots, it proves that once they become a graduate of the propaganda machine, they have no intention of learning the truth or observing any hard evidence (part of science, that subject the left and socialists want to use to deny the Lord, but ignore anything else of relevence).

 

[logical4u]

OK, I made a little mistake, I'm sorry. But org direct not change anything on the substance -- it is still a fact that the middle class income stagnated beacause the rich incomes were growing super fast.

And you still have not answered if this is America you want to live in.

The middle class is more stagnant, physically too. Are you suggesting we hamstring or break the bones of the "super athletes" so that the 'middle atheletes' have a chance to play in the big leagues? It would make the game "fair".

 

[logical4u]

In one example you say that my gain is a loss somewhere else in the economy in another you say only some of my gain is a loss somewhere else in the economy.

make up your mind.

Of course it's the later -- only some of your gain is someone else's loss (on average). I never said othervise.But if that some is 90%, or even 50%, then the results are not much different from that of the zero sum game.

It would lead to more inequality and the question remains -- do you want to live as part of tiny superrich elite surrounded by the poor. Is this what America should become?

And if the answer is "no", then we need more social transfers -- like it is done in most adwanced countries, BTW.

More social transfers? What is that or what does this mean?

The rich need only to be outted and embarassed for what they do, and trust me, before the eyes of their families once outted, they will do better about what they do. The nations wrath and scorn upon them once outted, is enough of a motivator to get them to do better.

The reason they do what they do, is because they are not outted for what they do, otherwise they hide their hand in a sea of buisness dealings and operations, until the government starts getting the huge influx of economic reffugee's layed upon it's door steps to take care of, after the corps or nations companies start to conduct themselves in a manor that is greed driven, short sighted, wrong headed, morally wrong, indecent and in some cases highly illegal. A national grading system could do the job quite well, and would get this nation back on track to doing the right thing. The government need only to look at this through a grading system, along with a bill board campaign, that will show the nation who the scumbags and villans really are, and who the good guy's are in contrast to, but to engineer through social programs, a way to take wealth from all as if they are all guilty, and to give it to another is just plain wrong.

Amusing: the left/libs/progressives/socialists/communists/homosexual activists/environmentalists/islamist extremists (choose one, they all act the same) work for DECADES to eliminate the Lord from society, scream if they see the Ten Commandments posted, and now, NOW that their efforts are coming to fruition, they are crying they don't like the immoral results.....
The irony....

 

[Chris]

How can the libbies WHINE so endlessly about the rich paying less (percentage wise) than the middle income earners or the poor?

IF you don't like it, libs, then stop demanding a "progressive" income tax that comes with shitloads of loopholes.

Establish a fucking flat tax (starting at whatever level of income is rationally based).

Hell, for that matter, you can even skew the starting point based on number of dependents. Have a blast.

But then, stop fucking around. Go flat.

The rich will then NOT pay less as a percentage of their income than the middle income earners of the "poor." In fact, the less affluent (given the staggered start mentioned above) might pay a whole lot lower percentage.

But once you do that, then stop with all loopholes and other gimmicks. Do away with taxing corporations altogether since that only passes the increased cost along to consumers costing the less affluent to pay even MORE. So just cut the shit.

Are you GAME to put up or shut up, libs?

A flat tax is a tax on the poor.

Are you happy to pay more taxes, so the rich can pay less?

 

[Chris]

Of course it's the later -- only some of your gain is someone else's loss (on average). I never said othervise.But if that some is 90%, or even 50%, then the results are not much different from that of the zero sum game.

It would lead to more inequality and the question remains -- do you want to live as part of tiny superrich elite surrounded by the poor. Is this what America should become?

And if the answer is "no", then we need more social transfers -- like it is done in most adwanced countries, BTW.

More social transfers? What is that or what does this mean?

The rich need only to be outted and embarassed for what they do, and trust me, before the eyes of their families once outted, they will do better about what they do. The nations wrath and scorn upon them once outted, is enough of a motivator to get them to do better.

The reason they do what they do, is because they are not outted for what they do, otherwise they hide their hand in a sea of buisness dealings and operations, until the government starts getting the huge influx of economic reffugee's layed upon it's door steps to take care of, after the corps or nations companies start to conduct themselves in a manor that is greed driven, short sighted, wrong headed, morally wrong, indecent and in some cases highly illegal. A national grading system could do the job quite well, and would get this nation back on track to doing the right thing. The government need only to look at this through a grading system, along with a bill board campaign, that will show the nation who the scumbags and villans really are, and who the good guy's are in contrast to, but to engineer through social programs, a way to take wealth from all as if they are all guilty, and to give it to another is just plain wrong.

Amusing: the left/libs/progressives/socialists/communists/homosexual activists/environmentalists/islamist extremists (choose one, they all act the same) work for DECADES to eliminate the Lord from society, scream if they see the Ten Commandments posted, and now, NOW that their efforts are coming to fruition, they are crying they don't like the immoral results.....
The irony....

There is nothing more immoral than the Republican Party.

Since the New Deal, Republicans have been on the wrong side of every issue...Medicare, Social Security, the war in Vietnam, equal rights, civil liberties, church state separation, consumer issues, public education, reproductive freedom, national health care, labor issues, gun policy, campaign finance reform, the environment, and tax fairness. No political party could remain so consistently wrong by accident. The only rational conclusion is that, despite their cynical "family values" propaganda, the Republican Party is a criminal conspiracy to betray the interests of the American people in favor of plutocratic and corporate interests, and extremist religious groups.

 

[Big Fitz]

How can the libbies WHINE so endlessly about the rich paying less (percentage wise) than the middle income earners or the poor?

IF you don't like it, libs, then stop demanding a "progressive" income tax that comes with shitloads of loopholes.

Establish a fucking flat tax (starting at whatever level of income is rationally based).

Hell, for that matter, you can even skew the starting point based on number of dependents. Have a blast.

But then, stop fucking around. Go flat.

The rich will then NOT pay less as a percentage of their income than the middle income earners of the "poor." In fact, the less affluent (given the staggered start mentioned above) might pay a whole lot lower percentage.

But once you do that, then stop with all loopholes and other gimmicks. Do away with taxing corporations altogether since that only passes the increased cost along to consumers costing the less affluent to pay even MORE. So just cut the shit.

Are you GAME to put up or shut up, libs?

A flat tax is a tax on the poor.

Are you happy to pay more taxes, so the rich can pay less?

so? why should they be exempt?

.... Aaaahhhh the trillion dollar question!

 

[Big Fitz]

More social transfers? What is that or what does this mean?

The rich need only to be outted and embarassed for what they do, and trust me, before the eyes of their families once outted, they will do better about what they do. The nations wrath and scorn upon them once outted, is enough of a motivator to get them to do better.

The reason they do what they do, is because they are not outted for what they do, otherwise they hide their hand in a sea of buisness dealings and operations, until the government starts getting the huge influx of economic reffugee's layed upon it's door steps to take care of, after the corps or nations companies start to conduct themselves in a manor that is greed driven, short sighted, wrong headed, morally wrong, indecent and in some cases highly illegal. A national grading system could do the job quite well, and would get this nation back on track to doing the right thing. The government need only to look at this through a grading system, along with a bill board campaign, that will show the nation who the scumbags and villans really are, and who the good guy's are in contrast to, but to engineer through social programs, a way to take wealth from all as if they are all guilty, and to give it to another is just plain wrong.

Amusing: the left/libs/progressives/socialists/communists/homosexual activists/environmentalists/islamist extremists (choose one, they all act the same) work for DECADES to eliminate the Lord from society, scream if they see the Ten Commandments posted, and now, NOW that their efforts are coming to fruition, they are crying they don't like the immoral results.....
The irony....

There is nothing more immoral than the Republican Party.

Since the New Deal, Republicans have been on the wrong side of every issue...Medicare, Social Security, the war in Vietnam, equal rights, civil liberties, church state separation, consumer issues, public education, reproductive freedom, national health care, labor issues, gun policy, campaign finance reform, the environment, and tax fairness. No political party could remain so consistently wrong by accident. The only rational conclusion is that, despite their cynical "family values" propaganda, the Republican Party is a criminal conspiracy to betray the interests of the American people in favor of plutocratic and corporate interests, and extremist religious groups.

There is nothing more immoral than the Republican Party.

yeah... that's ummmm... rational. I'd like to get to the morality of people who believe it's right to steal from one person, regardless of wealth and give it to another they feel deserving. I want your computer. It's probably better than mine. Gimme. I've a need and want. You owe it to me.

 

[ilia25]

In one example you say that my gain is a loss somewhere else in the economy in another you say only some of my gain is a loss somewhere else in the economy.

make up your mind.

Of course it's the later -- only some of your gain is someone else's loss (on average). I never said othervise.But if that some is 90%, or even 50%, then the results are not much different from that of the zero sum game.

It would lead to more inequality and the question remains -- do you want to live as part of tiny superrich elite surrounded by the poor. Is this what America should become?

And if the answer is "no", then we need more social transfers -- like it is done in most adwanced countries, BTW.

Before this country the "most advanced countries" kept "subjects" in the serf class.

Nobody cares about the "before" -- they have learnt their lesson and now they are doing much better, while America turns into a banana republic.

The middle class is more stagnant, physically too

That is not true. The cause of stagnating incomes is the new technologies that are making the blue collar jobs obsolete.

The modern technology simply does not allow for that many good paying jobs. So unless we have more social transfers, this is going to turn into a banana republic.

 

[beagle9]

A large set of false premises and assumptions.

1. All people are greedy and seek every opportunity to profit at the expense of another.
2 The richer someone is, the greedier they are.
3. There are two choices on business ownership: Innocent beatific government or corrupt greedy capitalists.
4. The Government always has everyone's best interest at heart.
5. When people of similar industry or wealth get together, they conspire against the rest.
6. The only way to profit and grow wealth is by stealing from another.
7. Self regulation is always corrupt and unfair.
8. The government is somehow an outside entity not tied into or part of the problem and equation.

It seems that so many people have no concept of how wealth is generated. Let's give a little example that is so 'econ 101' they shouldn't have trouble getting it.

Joe is an engineer. He sees a problem with life and decides to invent something to fix it. Joe works at the problem for a while, and finally realizes a nifty solution to the problem and wishes to build a prototype. Ignoring the process to get funding to go to production, Joe builds his solution and starts to sell it for 10 dollars each. The product actually costs Joe only 2 dollars each, but he now has a few employees to pay and his creditors expect to get their money back plus interest so his real cost is 5 dollars each. So Joe makes a tidy profit and becomes successful. He is earning 5 dollars per unit sold above his costs. Should he be forced to give that money back? No. The consumer thought the product was a fair price to fix their problem. The employees thought it was a fair wage to be paid them. The creditors thought it was a fair interest rate to be reimbursed. So Joe gets to keep his modest profit from modest sales.

Now, let's suppose Joe's product goes Crazy Popular! Say Oprah advertised it with Billy Mays and Ron Popiel and Joe gets orders for 10,000% more than normal! He can't keep up, and so he starts taking money he's been earning, reinvesting into his own company and expanding! It's not fast enough, and he needs to grow more, faster, so he takes out loans AND to help slow down demand and deal with the growing cost of business (which has jumped from 5 to 8 dollars per unit) he raises the price to 20 dollars a unit, profiting him 12 dollars each. This does little to slow demand, and even with rapid expansion he's still not able to keep up, so the price goes up to 30 a unit profiting the company 18. Most of the money at this time goes right back into the business to solidify growth, but throughout all of this, Joe keeps earning his personal 5 dollars a unit while the remaining 13 went to expansion. Now, millions of units later, those 5 bucks a unit profit that he kept personally, has amassed a vast fortune for him.

Now a strange thing happens. The business no longer needs to expand. The expenses have stabilized and there is no further need to grow bigger so fast. The cost of business drops back from 12 dollars a unit to 9. Plus the expansion which was needed is now building up, unused. What is to be done with that capital? Technically it's all Joe's, because he owns the company and it's just sitting in expansion funds doing nothing. It's time to reorganize the money.

Joe has many options and all of them, since it is HIS profit, earned fairly from the public. His workers were fairly paid and the creditors got their money back fairly too. So, Joe, deciding that he doesn't need the whole extra 13 bucks per unit decides to share it with other as well. He ups HIS profit per unit to 10. (30 bucks is a fair price to the public because the value the product gives) He then gives 5 more dollars per unit to the workers in his corporation, 2 dollars he chooses to give to charities, and 1 dollar he gives back to the public in lower prices.

Is this fair? Joe is a wealthy man, he has manyy well paid employees, he donates to charities he supports and he's even cuts the price a little to the consumer who already thinks it is a fair value to them.

This is how MOST businesses and self made rich (which is most of them) become so.

Hmmmm, highlighted in bold is where the questions do lay in these senario's. Did Joe do what was right in these areas of bolded text? This is what people are having huge problems with these days, because the reality isn't panning out as you have described it for the many, and this (((Joe))) along with his buddies, have become marked men because of, but of course no matter what the facts are, the senario in it's entirety and final conclusion of as was written above by you, will stand no matter what, and this even if the senario was found to be different and more hostile to the workers in the deal than what was shown in the senario above, yet it will still stand no matter what by apologist for crooked corporations or crooked companies that lie cheat and steal within the senario as would be then re-written above in contrast to. People understand what you have written here, but what they are trying to get a handle on, is when this senario or hypothetical goes wrong in the numbers being shown or handled.

If it went just as you described, then their would be no discussion or any problem at all, but the reason these discussions exist at all, is because the senario has been tainted by corruption and greed, and the people know it, experience it, and do see it first hand in the nation now.

Every product is worth what it's purchaser will pay. This includes labor and loans. The employer PURCHASES labor. The Laborer accepted the deal as fair because he felt it improved his life and was advantageous to do so (what about when that employee was lied to by his or her employer?). The fact that a secondary party thinks it is unfair or not worth it, is irrelevant (secondary maybe, unless it is a representitive of that employee or is the actual employee him or herself that is complaining in these matters, and rightfully so ?).

Treat yourself to a "Dirty Jobs" marathon and ask yourself, how much would YOU be willing to take for some of those jobs? (not a question about how much one is willing to take, but what would be better described for many these days, is how much that employer is willing to start them out at, especially if a person needs a job bad enough, then it is up to that employer to treat them right if they do the job and give it 110% afterwards, thus considering raises and other bonuses/benefits given once evaluated properly, and if the employee proves to be very valuable to the employer at this point, then it is just all icing on the cake for all involved afterwards) I like the 'hand made brick' episode, or when Mike Rowe joins the USArmy motorpool. THAT was cool. (yes I like the "dirty jobs" shows also, it just shows that there is respect to be found in all work, no matter what the job, now if we could just get corporations and companies to understand this once again, and to get away from communism or socailism style operational tactics when dealing with their employee's in America, and abroad, then we would be getting back to where we need to be in America)

I do a job that 90% of Americans flinch at hearing: Driving schoolbus. I transport 60 screaming kids on the highway at rush hour in a bus that seems to be 'blaze orange' to drivers (or rather just another huge block of government cheeze "yellow" to drivers like me). I think I'm paid a fair wage.(think?).. and I enjoy it immensely finding it very rewarding. I've met so many people who hear what I do, and they tell me "you couldn't PAY me to do that job". Fine. DON'T do it! It keeps my wages higher (?) because so few out their are ready willing and able. All bus companies pay about the same, but they have mild variations to it. The point is the market found an equalibrium for the amount of stress, time, responsibility, skill and training for the job and assigned a price (so it matters not what you do or who you are in the situation, because the market has spoken, as figured by who in the deal?). If you don't want the work, it's none of your fucking business (none of mine or anyone elses business eh, but why so hostile, are you losing your own argument here?) what the worker's paid. if the worker doesn't like it, quit (tell that to workers in towns that have been devastated in this recession or factories leaving in droves, and no new business projected on the horizon), leaving very little to choose from in many peoples situations). Get another job working as a fast order cook or mailroom attendant or customer service rep. Now THERE are some jobs you couldn't pay me enough to do. So you know what? I've priced myself out of the market, and that's fine (ok, that is your choice, but what if your preffered market doesn't exist anymore in your town, and you can't afford to leave, then where do you turn, the government for help if your in need?).


A fair deal. You seem to obsess about fairness in matters that are none of your concern. (tell this to millions that have been underpaid or abused badly in the situations that have been found out about, explained in detail now about, watched as their savings took the hit of a lifetime because of wall street corruption, companies stealing from the government, their employee's and etc.), If I tried to sell you a two pound pet rock for 100 dollars, you (probably) wouldn't buy it. Now if that rock was actually an uncut diamond... you'd snap it up as a steal. On the otherhand there are people who wouldn't recognize the value and say 'no thanks' because it looks like shit at that stage. The point is that YOU assign the value, just as everyone else does for what is good in their life. Your fair deal is their raw deal.

And yes, most businesses DO make their earning honestly. This is not gangsterland. Not everyone who owns a business is a fucking crook. It's actually the minority. Why? Because otherwise you'd be screwed every day by some crooked businessman. Do you trust your favorite mechanic? Barista owner? hardware store? Game shop? Are they somehow scheming to steal from you and give you crappy product for an inflated price? Very paranoid and let's face it, if you DO believe this, you need therapy. Lots and lots of therapy. Crooked employers are the EXCEPTION, not the rule.

Or... is this just projection of what YOU would do if you were Joe? Hmmmmmmm.....

Note the bold writings in response to your words written to me above!

Your desperation in this post, is duly noted, as you sank to levels that allow others to see exactly how you think, when responding to another in this way, even so much as accusing a person of things that are just not so and wouldnot be so, but you did this anyway, but why?

 

[Big Fitz]

Hmmmm, highlighted in bold is where the questions do lay in these senario's. Did Joe do what was right in these areas of bolded text? This is what people are having huge problems with these days, because the reality isn't panning out as you have described it for the many, and this (((Joe))) along with his buddies, have become marked men because of, but of course no matter what the facts are, the senario in it's entirety and final conclusion of as was written above by you, will stand no matter what, and this even if the senario was found to be different and more hostile to the workers in the deal than what was shown in the senario above, yet it will still stand no matter what by apologist for crooked corporations or crooked companies that lie cheat and steal within the senario as would be then re-written above in contrast to. People understand what you have written here, but what they are trying to get a handle on, is when this senario or hypothetical goes wrong in the numbers being shown or handled.

If it went just as you described, then their would be no discussion or any problem at all, but the reason these discussions exist at all, is because the senario has been tainted by corruption and greed, and the people know it, experience it, and do see it first hand in the nation now.

Every product is worth what it's purchaser will pay. This includes labor and loans. The employer PURCHASES labor. The Laborer accepted the deal as fair because he felt it improved his life and was advantageous to do so (what about when that employee was lied to by his or her employer?). The fact that a secondary party thinks it is unfair or not worth it, is irrelevant (secondary maybe, unless it is a representitive of that employee or is the actual employee him or herself that is complaining in these matters, and rightfully so ?).

Treat yourself to a "Dirty Jobs" marathon and ask yourself, how much would YOU be willing to take for some of those jobs? (not a question about how much one is willing to take, but what would be better described for many these days, is how much that employer is willing to start them out at, especially if a person needs a job bad enough, then it is up to that employer to treat them right if they do the job and give it 110% afterwards, thus considering raises and other bonuses/benefits given once evaluated properly, and if the employee proves to be very valuable to the employer at this point, then it is just all icing on the cake for all involved afterwards) I like the 'hand made brick' episode, or when Mike Rowe joins the USArmy motorpool. THAT was cool. (yes I like the "dirty jobs" shows also, it just shows that there is respect to be found in all work, no matter what the job, now if we could just get corporations and companies to understand this once again, and to get away from communism or socailism style operational tactics when dealing with their employee's in America, and abroad, then we would be getting back to where we need to be in America)

I do a job that 90% of Americans flinch at hearing: Driving schoolbus. I transport 60 screaming kids on the highway at rush hour in a bus that seems to be 'blaze orange' to drivers (or rather just another huge block of government cheeze "yellow" to drivers like me). I think I'm paid a fair wage.(think?).. and I enjoy it immensely finding it very rewarding. I've met so many people who hear what I do, and they tell me "you couldn't PAY me to do that job". Fine. DON'T do it! It keeps my wages higher (?) because so few out their are ready willing and able. All bus companies pay about the same, but they have mild variations to it. The point is the market found an equalibrium for the amount of stress, time, responsibility, skill and training for the job and assigned a price (so it matters not what you do or who you are in the situation, because the market has spoken, as figured by who in the deal?). If you don't want the work, it's none of your fucking business (none of mine or anyone elses business eh, but why so hostile, are you losing your own argument here?) what the worker's paid. if the worker doesn't like it, quit (tell that to workers in towns that have been devastated in this recession or factories leaving in droves, and no new business projected on the horizon), leaving very little to choose from in many peoples situations). Get another job working as a fast order cook or mailroom attendant or customer service rep. Now THERE are some jobs you couldn't pay me enough to do. So you know what? I've priced myself out of the market, and that's fine (ok, that is your choice, but what if your preffered market doesn't exist anymore in your town, and you can't afford to leave, then where do you turn, the government for help if your in need?).


A fair deal. You seem to obsess about fairness in matters that are none of your concern. (tell this to millions that have been underpaid or abused badly in the situations that have been found out about, explained in detail now about, watched as their savings took the hit of a lifetime because of wall street corruption, companies stealing from the government, their employee's and etc.), If I tried to sell you a two pound pet rock for 100 dollars, you (probably) wouldn't buy it. Now if that rock was actually an uncut diamond... you'd snap it up as a steal. On the otherhand there are people who wouldn't recognize the value and say 'no thanks' because it looks like shit at that stage. The point is that YOU assign the value, just as everyone else does for what is good in their life. Your fair deal is their raw deal.

And yes, most businesses DO make their earning honestly. This is not gangsterland. Not everyone who owns a business is a fucking crook. It's actually the minority. Why? Because otherwise you'd be screwed every day by some crooked businessman. Do you trust your favorite mechanic? Barista owner? hardware store? Game shop? Are they somehow scheming to steal from you and give you crappy product for an inflated price? Very paranoid and let's face it, if you DO believe this, you need therapy. Lots and lots of therapy. Crooked employers are the EXCEPTION, not the rule.

Or... is this just projection of what YOU would do if you were Joe? Hmmmmmmm.....

Note the bold writings in response to your words written to me above!

Your desperation in this post, is duly noted, as you sank to levels that allow others to see exactly how you think, when responding to another in this way, even so much as accusing a person of things that are just not so and wouldnot be so, but you did this anyway, but why?

Point of TOS order. Never quote IN someone else's quote. Pull em out and format normally.

 

[ilia25]

Of course it's the later -- only some of your gain is someone else's loss (on average). I never said othervise.But if that some is 90%, or even 50%, then the results are not much different from that of the zero sum game.

It would lead to more inequality and the question remains -- do you want to live as part of tiny superrich elite surrounded by the poor. Is this what America should become?

And if the answer is "no", then we need more social transfers -- like it is done in most adwanced countries, BTW.

More social transfers? What is that or what does this mean?

The rich need only to be outted and embarassed for what they do, and trust me, before the eyes of their families once outted, they will do better about what they do. The nations wrath and scorn upon them once outted, is enough of a motivator to get them to do better.

The reason they do what they do, is because they are not outted for what they do, otherwise they hide their hand in a sea of buisness dealings and operations, until the government starts getting the huge influx of economic reffugee's layed upon it's door steps to take care of, after the corps or nations companies start to conduct themselves in a manor that is greed driven, short sighted, wrong headed, morally wrong, indecent and in some cases highly illegal. A national grading system could do the job quite well, and would get this nation back on track to doing the right thing. The government need only to look at this through a grading system, along with a bill board campaign, that will show the nation who the scumbags and villans really are, and who the good guy's are in contrast to, but to engineer through social programs, a way to take wealth from all as if they are all guilty, and to give it to another is just plain wrong.

Amusing: the left/libs/progressives/socialists/communists/homosexual activists/environmentalists/islamist extremists (choose one, they all act the same) work for DECADES to eliminate the Lord from society, scream if they see the Ten Commandments posted, and now, NOW that their efforts are coming to fruition, they are crying they don't like the immoral results.....
The irony....

Please! For the rights lying is like breathing. And why would not they -- there is plenty of gullible voters out there.

 

[beagle9]

Amusing: the left/libs/progressives/socialists/communists/homosexual activists/environmentalists/islamist extremists (choose one, they all act the same) work for DECADES to eliminate the Lord from society, scream if they see the Ten Commandments posted, and now, NOW that their efforts are coming to fruition, they are crying they don't like the immoral results.....
The irony....

There is nothing more immoral than the Republican Party.

Since the New Deal, Republicans have been on the wrong side of every issue...Medicare, Social Security, the war in Vietnam, equal rights, civil liberties, church state separation, consumer issues, public education, reproductive freedom, national health care, labor issues, gun policy, campaign finance reform, the environment, and tax fairness. No political party could remain so consistently wrong by accident. The only rational conclusion is that, despite their cynical "family values" propaganda, the Republican Party is a criminal conspiracy to betray the interests of the American people in favor of plutocratic and corporate interests, and extremist religious groups.

There is nothing more immoral than the Republican Party.

yeah... that's ummmm... rational. I'd like to get to the morality of people who believe it's right to steal from one person, regardless of wealth and give it to another they feel deserving. I want your computer. It's probably better than mine. Gimme. I've a need and want. You owe it to me.

I don't think that people are actually saying or wanting what you are writing and speaking about in this away, it is just that people are saying (I think) that they just want to be treated fairly, and after that it is all good.. We do understand that there was a huge problem, where as the rich were getting filthy richer by any means nessesary, and the poor working class in the nation were getting super poor as a result of their new found dis-respect for their American workers, now don't we? I mean hec, they were even trying to replace the American worker on a grand scale, with illegal Mexican labor as much as they possibly could, and using terms such as "they (the illegals) are just doing the job's that Americans won't do". Am I imagining this fact or making that up also ?

 

[Big Fitz]

More social transfers? What is that or what does this mean?

The rich need only to be outted and embarassed for what they do, and trust me, before the eyes of their families once outted, they will do better about what they do. The nations wrath and scorn upon them once outted, is enough of a motivator to get them to do better.

The reason they do what they do, is because they are not outted for what they do, otherwise they hide their hand in a sea of buisness dealings and operations, until the government starts getting the huge influx of economic reffugee's layed upon it's door steps to take care of, after the corps or nations companies start to conduct themselves in a manor that is greed driven, short sighted, wrong headed, morally wrong, indecent and in some cases highly illegal. A national grading system could do the job quite well, and would get this nation back on track to doing the right thing. The government need only to look at this through a grading system, along with a bill board campaign, that will show the nation who the scumbags and villans really are, and who the good guy's are in contrast to, but to engineer through social programs, a way to take wealth from all as if they are all guilty, and to give it to another is just plain wrong.

Amusing: the left/libs/progressives/socialists/communists/homosexual activists/environmentalists/islamist extremists (choose one, they all act the same) work for DECADES to eliminate the Lord from society, scream if they see the Ten Commandments posted, and now, NOW that their efforts are coming to fruition, they are crying they don't like the immoral results.....
The irony....

Please! For the rights lying is like breathing. And why would not they -- there is plenty of gullible voters out there.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5l0K62n8B4&feature=related]Incredible Tank Implosion - YouTube[/ame]

sillia seems a little off his A game.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Amusing: the left/libs/progressives/socialists/communists/homosexual activists/environmentalists/islamist extremists (choose one, they all act the same) work for DECADES to eliminate the Lord from society, scream if they see the Ten Commandments posted, and now, NOW that their efforts are coming to fruition, they are crying they don't like the immoral results.....
The irony....

Please! For the rights lying is like breathing. And why would not they -- there is plenty of gullible voters out there.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5l0K62n8B4&feature=related]Incredible Tank Implosion - YouTube[/ame]

sillia seems a little off his A game.