Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality

[georgephillip]

You understand that Americans hire undocumented workers so they can pay those workers less which decreases expenses in order to maximize profits.

You understand that if we deported those 20 million illegals, those employers would have to hire Americans and pay them more? Fuckstick.

First, you constantly claim to support the poor, and here you are advocating the poorest among us.

Now I happen to be in favor of deporting illegals, not because of some mindless theory that it will be an economic boon for Americans, but because I believe in having laws, and enforcing laws.

Illegal, is illegal. We should punish those who break the law. Period.

But if we made legal immigration, what reason do you have to hold down the poorest in our country? Why should Americans benefit, at the expense of the poor immigrant? Because that is what you are advocating. We should harm those people, for our benefit. I don't believe that.

And lastly, your entire premise is simply not true.

The $210,000 Cow-Milking Robot - Businessweek

This is what you people on the left, never seem to grasp.

Every time that you drive up the cost of labor, regardless of method, the end result is people purchase less labor.

You grasp this is any other situation. If the cost of a burger at Wendy's was to go up to $30 a burger, you wouldn't buy very many.

But the same is true of employers and labor. If you drive up the cost of labor, the amount of labor bought will decline.

In this case, Dairy Farmers in Wisconsin, have started buying these milking robots. Unlike even robots in Auto manufacturing, where you still need human labor to work with the robots, this system is completely automated. The cows are lured into the milking cage with food. They are scanned, to determine which cow it is, and then fed and milked automatically, then released. No human is required at any point.

In an interview, the company selling the robot, said the entire reason they even conceived of the robot, was because farmers were worried about what will happen if a shortage of cheap labor comes about. This was their solution.

NO THEY ARE NOT GOING TO PAY PEOPLE HIGH WAGES JUST BECAUSE YOU DEPORTED IMMIGRANTS.

Just like higher wages in Europe have resulted in McDonald's cashiers being replaced by kiosks.

McDonald's hires 7,000 touch-screen cashiers | Crave - CNET

Why do you people keep repeating these false claims?

The value of the labor determines the wage of the labor. The value doesn't change because of minimum wage laws, or health care mandates, or labor laws, or deporting immigrants, or anything. The value of the labor is determined by the customer.

I'm not going to pay $20 for a cheap Wendy's burger, just because you people demand people get paid $20/hr or whatever dumb "livable wage" you come up with.

Wendy's knows this. McDonald's knows this. Thus if you raise up the cost of labor, you end up earning ZERO, and replaced with robots. Which is worse $7/hr, or $0/hr?

McDonald's also knows how much corporate revenues and profits increase at labor's expense.

"Key financials $ millions % change
from 2010
Revenues 27,006.0 12.2
Profits 5,503.1 11.3
Assets 32,989.9 —
Stockholders' equity 14,390.2 —
Market value (3/29/2012) 99,451.8"

McDonald's - Fortune 500 - MCD

The most recent third quarter numbers reveal McDonald's true cost to US consumers and taxpayers, something conservative robots have trouble grasping:

"McDonald's announced Monday that it raked in $1.5 billion in profits in the third quarter, up 5 percent from last year.

"The number is strikingly close to the $1.2 billion taxpayers are shelling out each year to help pay public assistance to the McDonald's workforce, according to a report released last week by the National Employment Law Project."

Privatize profit; Socialize cost.
The key to how capitalism concentrates wealth into fewer and fewer hands with each passing generation, thereby increasing economic inequality in the US.

McDonald's Billion-Dollar Profit Is Awkwardly Close To The Amount It Costs Taxpayers Every Year

 

[georgephillip]

Since you're clearly opposed to "government" then how do you explain your idea of economic decisions being decided by an elite group of the B&B?

The government is not different from private corporations in kind, only by degree.

What I mean is that governments and corporations/private sector business exercise authority. The only difference is how much. Our government has less influence than international businesses like Google and JP Morgan except when it comes genuine combat. The difference is we tend to think the military is an outgrowth of government (and it was originally). What happens when government is in cahoots with corporations? A secret alliance where corporations can pressure the US into certain military campaigns for profit. We saw this in the last decade very openly.

According to George's link to the blog, this tangled web of private sector and the government are ontological necessities born from such massive concentrations of power and wealth.

When action arises from government, you say it's coercive.

When action arises out of the private sector, you call it reality.

They are hardly different in our 21st century yet you insist government is bad and private sector is natural and desirable. And I tend to agree with the blog: when you allow elites to make decisions with such centralized wealth, corruption is a necessary result. Regardless of how bright one is, absolute power (exemplified by the Kochs) is absolutely corrupting.

The government is not different from private corporations in kind, only by degree.

Corporations can't force you to buy anything.
Government can.
Corporations can't force you to give them money.
Government does that everyday.

Better yet, corporations are government creations. They simply exist to shield executives from liability.

Executives and shareholders, as the good citizens around Elk River are in the process of discovering:

"The Elk River chemical spill occurred on January 9, 2014 when crude 4-methylcyclohexanemethanol (MCHM) was released from a Freedom Industries facility into the Elk River, a tributary of the Kanawha River, in Charleston in the U.S. state of West Virginia."

2014 Elk River chemical spill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[georgephillip]

Actually Democrats hate off-shoring.......... they are just too stupid to figure out they are causing it.

Hey Leftists........... Which car companies declared bankruptcy?

GM and Chrysler? Or was it Toyota and Honda?

Let me ask it another way....

Was it Unionized GM and Chrysler? Or non-Union Toyota and Honda?

Funny how the first question get's an easy response, and the second get's blank stares.

The left is who is driving out business, with regulations, mandates, taxes, and red tape.

Actually US capitalists hate democracy and embrace a race to the bottom in order to maintain increasing economic inequality in America.

Ask Roger (and Me) and Jessica about how German labor unions with voting members sitting on the boards of directors of the corporations they work for reverse that effect:

"In 2010, Germany produced more than 5.5 million automobiles; the U.S produced 2.7 million.

"At the same time, the average auto worker in Germany made $67.14 per hour in salary in benefits; the average one in the U.S. made $33.77 per hour.

"Yet Germany’s big three car companies—BMW, Daimler (Mercedes-Benz ), and Volkswagen—are very profitable.

"There are 'two overlapping sets of institutions' in Germany that guarantee high wages and good working conditions for autoworkers.

"The first is IG Metall, the country’s equivalent of the United Automobile Workers.

"Virtually all Germany’s car workers are members, and though they have the right to strike, they 'hardly use it, because there is an elaborate system of conflict resolution that regularly is used to come to some sort of compromise that is acceptable to all parties,' according to Horst Mund, an IG Metall executive.

"The second institution is the German constitution, which allows for 'works councils' in every factory, where management and employees work together on matters like shop floor conditions and work life.

"Mund says this guarantees cooperation, 'where you don’t always wear your management pin or your union pin.'”

How Germany Builds Twice As Many Cars As The U.S. While Paying Its Workers Twice As Much - Forbes

See, only those totally blinded by the ideology of American Exceptionalism fail to see how corrupt union officials and Wall Street parasites, like Mitt, destroyed much of the US auto industry.

Your post appears to be a fail from start to finish.

2010 Statistics | OICA

Your link:

Germany produced 5,552,409 cars.
The US produced 2,731,105 cars.

 

[georgephillip]

Okay, so if they knew that they would have to eventually retire, the question is why didn't they save enough Money for Retirement??

Because they weren't paid enough money every month for their labor to support their family and save for retirement.

The government took 12.4% of their income, for decades, and that's not enough for retirement?
I put less than that in my 401K and have hundreds of thousands saved.

Different income levels, you think?
Most seniors I know saw their income stagnate over the past four decades.
How about you?

 

[LibertyLemming]

The government is not different from private corporations in kind, only by degree.

Corporations can't force you to buy anything.
Government can.
Corporations can't force you to give them money.
Government does that everyday.

Better yet, corporations are government creations. They simply exist to shield executives from liability.

Executives and shareholders, as the good citizens around Elk River are in the process of discovering:

"The Elk River chemical spill occurred on January 9, 2014 when crude 4-methylcyclohexanemethanol (MCHM) was released from a Freedom Industries facility into the Elk River, a tributary of the Kanawha River, in Charleston in the U.S. state of West Virginia."

2014 Elk River chemical spill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Everyone blames the evil corporations but still cheers for having a government, its retarded

 

[dblack]

Better yet, corporations are government creations. They simply exist to shield executives from liability.

Executives and shareholders, as the good citizens around Elk River are in the process of discovering:

"The Elk River chemical spill occurred on January 9, 2014 when crude 4-methylcyclohexanemethanol (MCHM) was released from a Freedom Industries facility into the Elk River, a tributary of the Kanawha River, in Charleston in the U.S. state of West Virginia."

2014 Elk River chemical spill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Everyone blames the evil corporations but still cheers for having a government, its retarded

And cheers for it actively supporting corporations. ACA is the perfect case study for their hypocrisy. They complain about corporate dominance, and then support a law that forces us to buy their products. WTF??

 

[LibertyLemming]

Executives and shareholders, as the good citizens around Elk River are in the process of discovering:

"The Elk River chemical spill occurred on January 9, 2014 when crude 4-methylcyclohexanemethanol (MCHM) was released from a Freedom Industries facility into the Elk River, a tributary of the Kanawha River, in Charleston in the U.S. state of West Virginia."

2014 Elk River chemical spill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Everyone blames the evil corporations but still cheers for having a government, its retarded

And cheers for it actively supporting corporations. ACA is the perfect case study for their hypocrisy. They complain about corporate dominance, and then support a law that forces us to buy their products. WTF??

It doesn't just support corporations, it creates them.

Novel idea people, govern yourselves

 

[dblack]

Everyone blames the evil corporations but still cheers for having a government, its retarded

And cheers for it actively supporting corporations. ACA is the perfect case study for their hypocrisy. They complain about corporate dominance, and then support a law that forces us to buy their products. WTF??

It doesn't just support corporations, it creates them.

Novel idea people, govern yourselves

Indeed. I wonder if we'll ever wake up...

 

[georgephillip]

But what about social security??

SSA and SSI which includes Medical benefits generate most of their incomes.
Part time jobs increase the amount of money they have to spend every month; however, too many hours will require sacrificing either medical coverage or their low income housing.

And who is to blame for the higher inflation and higher costs of living??
Both Republicans and Democrats alike.. Thanks for looking out for our seniors.. Now y'all want them to pay even higher premiums for healthcare that they May or May Not Have Access to because of the government wanting to take control over the people..

As I recall, the woman responsible for writing most of the ACA took a leave of absence from WellPoint, where she was a VP, and went to work for a senate Democrat from Montana.

You should consider the possibility that Obama sold out the seniors, and others, in pursuit of greater corporate profits and not because he wanted to socialize healthcare.

If socialization had been his intent, he would have listened to many on the left advising him to spend the first fifteen months of his administration prosecuting the control accounting fraud on Wall Street that put him in office in the first place.

Based on the much smaller S&L looting of the late 1980s, we could have seen thousands of bankers indicted, tried, and convicted for their role in collapsing the global economy in 2008.

By the summer of 2010,(just before mid-terms) Obama could have proposed health care reform by pledging to remove three words for the 1965 Medicare Act: citizens over sixty-five would have become: citizens. Period.

Apparently Goldman Sachs gave Obama's 2008 campaign over $900,000 to prevent such history from ever occurring.

 

[dblack]

SSA and SSI which includes Medical benefits generate most of their incomes.
Part time jobs increase the amount of money they have to spend every month; however, too many hours will require sacrificing either medical coverage or their low income housing.

And who is to blame for the higher inflation and higher costs of living??
Both Republicans and Democrats alike.. Thanks for looking out for our seniors.. Now y'all want them to pay even higher premiums for healthcare that they May or May Not Have Access to because of the government wanting to take control over the people..

As I recall, the woman responsible for writing most of the HCA took a leave of absence from WellPoint, where she was a VP, and went to work for a senate Democrat from Montana.

You should consider the possibility that Obama sold out the seniors, and others, in pursuit of greater corporate profits and not because he wanted to socialize healthcare.

If socialization had been his intent, he would have listened to many on the left advising him to spend the first fifteen months of his administration prosecuting the control accounting fraud on Wall Street that put him in office in the first place.

Based on the much smaller S&L looting of the late 1980s, we could have seen thousands of bankers indicted, tried, and convicted for their role in collapsing the global economy in 2008.

By the summer of 2010,(just before mid-terms) Obama could have proposed health care reform by pledging to remove three words for the 1965 Medicare Act: citizens over sixty-five would have become: citizens. Period.

Apparently Goldman Sachs gave Obama's 2008 campaign over $900,000 to prevent such history from ever occurring.

Indeed. Obama is no socialist. Neither is he a capitalist. He's a corporatist, seeking a government 'managed', privately-profited-from, economy.

 

[RKMBrown]

And who is to blame for the higher inflation and higher costs of living??
Both Republicans and Democrats alike.. Thanks for looking out for our seniors.. Now y'all want them to pay even higher premiums for healthcare that they May or May Not Have Access to because of the government wanting to take control over the people..

As I recall, the woman responsible for writing most of the HCA took a leave of absence from WellPoint, where she was a VP, and went to work for a senate Democrat from Montana.

You should consider the possibility that Obama sold out the seniors, and others, in pursuit of greater corporate profits and not because he wanted to socialize healthcare.

If socialization had been his intent, he would have listened to many on the left advising him to spend the first fifteen months of his administration prosecuting the control accounting fraud on Wall Street that put him in office in the first place.

Based on the much smaller S&L looting of the late 1980s, we could have seen thousands of bankers indicted, tried, and convicted for their role in collapsing the global economy in 2008.

By the summer of 2010,(just before mid-terms) Obama could have proposed health care reform by pledging to remove three words for the 1965 Medicare Act: citizens over sixty-five would have become: citizens. Period.

Apparently Goldman Sachs gave Obama's 2008 campaign over $900,000 to prevent such history from ever occurring.

Indeed. Obama is no socialist. Neither is he a capitalist. He's a corporatist, seeking a government 'managed', privately-profited-from, economy.

All socialists are lying scum bag crooks by definition. You really thought he was there to distribute just to you?

 

[dblack]

As I recall, the woman responsible for writing most of the HCA took a leave of absence from WellPoint, where she was a VP, and went to work for a senate Democrat from Montana.

You should consider the possibility that Obama sold out the seniors, and others, in pursuit of greater corporate profits and not because he wanted to socialize healthcare.

If socialization had been his intent, he would have listened to many on the left advising him to spend the first fifteen months of his administration prosecuting the control accounting fraud on Wall Street that put him in office in the first place.

Based on the much smaller S&L looting of the late 1980s, we could have seen thousands of bankers indicted, tried, and convicted for their role in collapsing the global economy in 2008.

By the summer of 2010,(just before mid-terms) Obama could have proposed health care reform by pledging to remove three words for the 1965 Medicare Act: citizens over sixty-five would have become: citizens. Period.

Apparently Goldman Sachs gave Obama's 2008 campaign over $900,000 to prevent such history from ever occurring.

Indeed. Obama is no socialist. Neither is he a capitalist. He's a corporatist, seeking a government 'managed', privately-profited-from, economy.

All socialists are lying scum bag crooks by definition. You really thought he was there to distribute just to you?

What?

 

[gipper]

And who is to blame for the higher inflation and higher costs of living??
Both Republicans and Democrats alike.. Thanks for looking out for our seniors.. Now y'all want them to pay even higher premiums for healthcare that they May or May Not Have Access to because of the government wanting to take control over the people..

As I recall, the woman responsible for writing most of the HCA took a leave of absence from WellPoint, where she was a VP, and went to work for a senate Democrat from Montana.

You should consider the possibility that Obama sold out the seniors, and others, in pursuit of greater corporate profits and not because he wanted to socialize healthcare.

If socialization had been his intent, he would have listened to many on the left advising him to spend the first fifteen months of his administration prosecuting the control accounting fraud on Wall Street that put him in office in the first place.

Based on the much smaller S&L looting of the late 1980s, we could have seen thousands of bankers indicted, tried, and convicted for their role in collapsing the global economy in 2008.

By the summer of 2010,(just before mid-terms) Obama could have proposed health care reform by pledging to remove three words for the 1965 Medicare Act: citizens over sixty-five would have become: citizens. Period.

Apparently Goldman Sachs gave Obama's 2008 campaign over $900,000 to prevent such history from ever occurring.

Indeed. Obama is no socialist. Neither is he a capitalist. He's a corporatist, seeking a government 'managed', privately-profited-from, economy.

Agreed...I think one could make a strong argument that Obama is a soft Fascist. He has done all he could to protect the big banks and Wall Street...making them even more powerful and wealthy. At the same time, he is making sure they provide lots of cash for the D party. But also his policies hurt small business with overwhelming regulations, that cost small business dearly.

He has done all he could to make government bigger, while also centralizing the private sector.

 

[RKMBrown]

Indeed. Obama is no socialist. Neither is he a capitalist. He's a corporatist, seeking a government 'managed', privately-profited-from, economy.

All socialists are lying scum bag crooks by definition. You really thought he was there to distribute just to you?

What?

It's entirely possible to be both a socialist, and a corporatist. They are not mutually exclusive. All socialists are lying crooks by definition because, re-distributing assets is theft by definition. Once you have established "what" they are, why then would you be surprised that the crooks are also liars who distribute our assets to their cronies first before throwing bread crumbs over the castle walls to the wailing peasants?

 

[RKMBrown]

As I recall, the woman responsible for writing most of the HCA took a leave of absence from WellPoint, where she was a VP, and went to work for a senate Democrat from Montana.

You should consider the possibility that Obama sold out the seniors, and others, in pursuit of greater corporate profits and not because he wanted to socialize healthcare.

If socialization had been his intent, he would have listened to many on the left advising him to spend the first fifteen months of his administration prosecuting the control accounting fraud on Wall Street that put him in office in the first place.

Based on the much smaller S&L looting of the late 1980s, we could have seen thousands of bankers indicted, tried, and convicted for their role in collapsing the global economy in 2008.

By the summer of 2010,(just before mid-terms) Obama could have proposed health care reform by pledging to remove three words for the 1965 Medicare Act: citizens over sixty-five would have become: citizens. Period.

Apparently Goldman Sachs gave Obama's 2008 campaign over $900,000 to prevent such history from ever occurring.

Indeed. Obama is no socialist. Neither is he a capitalist. He's a corporatist, seeking a government 'managed', privately-profited-from, economy.

Agreed...I think one could make a strong argument that Obama is a soft Fascist. He has done all he could to protect the big banks and Wall Street...making them even more powerful and wealthy. At the same time, he is making sure they provide lots of cash for the D party. But also his policies hurt small business with overwhelming regulations, that cost small business dearly.

He has done all he could to make government bigger, while also centralizing the private sector.

Obama's a drug using, drug dealing, bastard son of a communist anti-colonialist father, raised by communists, who buddies up with convicted domestic terrorists, and convicted felons who took money for the poor to line their own pockets. The guy is really just a piece of shit, and that's being nice.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Indeed. Obama is no socialist. Neither is he a capitalist. He's a corporatist, seeking a government 'managed', privately-profited-from, economy.

Agreed...I think one could make a strong argument that Obama is a soft Fascist. He has done all he could to protect the big banks and Wall Street...making them even more powerful and wealthy. At the same time, he is making sure they provide lots of cash for the D party. But also his policies hurt small business with overwhelming regulations, that cost small business dearly.

He has done all he could to make government bigger, while also centralizing the private sector.

Obama's a drug using, drug dealing, bastard son of a communist anti-colonialist father, raised by communists, who buddies up with convicted domestic terrorists, and convicted felons who took money for the poor to line their own pockets. The guy is really just a piece of shit, and that's being nice.

Anyone who works for the government is either a) a piece of shit or b) really ignorant

 

[dblack]

Agreed...I think one could make a strong argument that Obama is a soft Fascist. He has done all he could to protect the big banks and Wall Street...making them even more powerful and wealthy. At the same time, he is making sure they provide lots of cash for the D party. But also his policies hurt small business with overwhelming regulations, that cost small business dearly.

He has done all he could to make government bigger, while also centralizing the private sector.

Obama's a drug using, drug dealing, bastard son of a communist anti-colonialist father, raised by communists, who buddies up with convicted domestic terrorists, and convicted felons who took money for the poor to line their own pockets. The guy is really just a piece of shit, and that's being nice.

Anyone who works for the government is either a) a piece of shit or b) really ignorant

? C'mon...

 

[LibertyLemming]

Obama's a drug using, drug dealing, bastard son of a communist anti-colonialist father, raised by communists, who buddies up with convicted domestic terrorists, and convicted felons who took money for the poor to line their own pockets. The guy is really just a piece of shit, and that's being nice.

Anyone who works for the government is either a) a piece of shit or b) really ignorant

? C'mon...

I stand by it. Government is about as evil and enterprise as has ever existed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You understand that if we deported those 20 million illegals, those employers would have to hire Americans and pay them more? Fuckstick.

By your "logic", if we end outsourcing then American corporations will have to hire Americans again at a real wage, too, right? Because that option of exploiting cheap labor won't be available, right?

Oh, but companies outsource because of the HUGE tax burden, right? The MASSIVELY HUGE TAXES that corporations have to pay force those poor international conglomerates to pay foreign workers slave wages in order to make those record-breaking quarterly profits, right? Those poor, poor multibillion-dollar multinational corporations.

They're the real victims in all of this, right?

By your "logic", if we end outsourcing then American corporations will have to hire Americans again at a real wage, too, right?

How do you stop Ford from building a factory in Ireland or Kuwait?

Oh, but companies outsource because of the HUGE tax burden, right?

We do have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. And regulations continue to cost jobs.

But you keep supporting importing competition for our workers, cause that'll help.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You understand that Americans hire undocumented workers so they can pay those workers less which decreases expenses in order to maximize profits.

You understand that if we deported those 20 million illegals, those employers would have to hire Americans and pay them more? Fuckstick.

First, you constantly claim to support the poor, and here you are advocating the poorest among us.

Now I happen to be in favor of deporting illegals, not because of some mindless theory that it will be an economic boon for Americans, but because I believe in having laws, and enforcing laws.

Illegal, is illegal. We should punish those who break the law. Period.

But if we made legal immigration, what reason do you have to hold down the poorest in our country? Why should Americans benefit, at the expense of the poor immigrant? Because that is what you are advocating. We should harm those people, for our benefit. I don't believe that.

And lastly, your entire premise is simply not true.

The $210,000 Cow-Milking Robot - Businessweek

This is what you people on the left, never seem to grasp.

Every time that you drive up the cost of labor, regardless of method, the end result is people purchase less labor.

You grasp this is any other situation. If the cost of a burger at Wendy's was to go up to $30 a burger, you wouldn't buy very many.

But the same is true of employers and labor. If you drive up the cost of labor, the amount of labor bought will decline.

In this case, Dairy Farmers in Wisconsin, have started buying these milking robots. Unlike even robots in Auto manufacturing, where you still need human labor to work with the robots, this system is completely automated. The cows are lured into the milking cage with food. They are scanned, to determine which cow it is, and then fed and milked automatically, then released. No human is required at any point.

In an interview, the company selling the robot, said the entire reason they even conceived of the robot, was because farmers were worried about what will happen if a shortage of cheap labor comes about. This was their solution.

NO THEY ARE NOT GOING TO PAY PEOPLE HIGH WAGES JUST BECAUSE YOU DEPORTED IMMIGRANTS.

Just like higher wages in Europe have resulted in McDonald's cashiers being replaced by kiosks.

McDonald's hires 7,000 touch-screen cashiers | Crave - CNET

Why do you people keep repeating these false claims?

The value of the labor determines the wage of the labor. The value doesn't change because of minimum wage laws, or health care mandates, or labor laws, or deporting immigrants, or anything. The value of the labor is determined by the customer.

I'm not going to pay $20 for a cheap Wendy's burger, just because you people demand people get paid $20/hr or whatever dumb "livable wage" you come up with.

Wendy's knows this. McDonald's knows this. Thus if you raise up the cost of labor, you end up earning ZERO, and replaced with robots. Which is worse $7/hr, or $0/hr?

NO THEY ARE NOT GOING TO PAY PEOPLE HIGH WAGES JUST BECAUSE YOU DEPORTED IMMIGRANTS.

You want to bet?
Let's deport 20 million and look at wages a year later.