If you think taxes should be raised...

[RetiredGySgt]

Shouldn't our elections also be the same way? I say, do away with the electoral college.

Go ahead and get a Constitutional amendment to do just that written and passed.

 

[pegwinn]

Shouldn't our elections also be the same way? I say, do away with the electoral college.

Bad idea. It is a populist fallacy that a direct vote for the presidency would be a good thing.

 

[Taomon]

Bad idea. It is a populist fallacy that a direct vote for the presidency would be a good thing.

Right, it is much easier to steal an election if we have an electoral college.

 

[Taomon]

Go ahead and get a Constitutional amendment to do just that written and passed.

Dare to dream

 

[pegwinn]

Originally Posted by pegwinn
Bad idea. It is a populist fallacy that a direct vote for the presidency would be a good thing.

Right, it is much easier to steal an election if we have an electoral college.

This is a topic that is far beyond the scope of this thread. But, if you wish to begin an "Election Process" thread and elaborate on "stolen" elections..... I am in. It would be pertinent discussion for the times.

 

[jreeves]

Corporations are private companies, first of all.

Second, you are correct about fair wages. There really is no law though, except the minimum wage. A company can pay you minimum wage, and risk losing the labor, but that's their choice.

You can't really make that argument though, and then be pissed that there are people working there for "unfair" wages, when they choose to stay there and accept them.

Like I said in my post that you quoted, if we as a society REALLY cared enough about those unfair wages, we'd boycott those companies and DEMAND that they raise their wages, and spread some of the boardroom wealth around to their employees.

The companies would respond to massive sales decreases MUCH quicker than they'd respond to losing a few disgruntled employees. MOST employees will stay because they have nothing else to fall back on, and the companies KNOW that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_company
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_company

This is what I was referring to when I said a private company and not private company or public company.

Also, as I have learned you have to pay people a market wage or they will leave for another company they can receive that pay. It doesn't have anything to do with a company being publicly held or a private company. I have observed in my own employment history, that publicly held companies usually pay a little more than privately held companies.

 

[mattskramer]

Corporations as well as private companies, have to pay their workers a fair wage, if not the workers will simply leave and work for another company. It's called the cost of labor.

Unless there comes a time in which there is a down-turn in the economy – when there is high unemployment and prospective employers are desperately competing for what few positions are available – and when employers can practically set whatever demands they want.

 

[Paulie]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_company
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_company

This is what I was referring to when I said a private company and not private company or public company.

Also, as I have learned you have to pay people a market wage or they will leave for another company they can receive that pay. It doesn't have anything to do with a company being publicly held or a private company. I have observed in my own employment history, that publicly held companies usually pay a little more than privately held companies.

Yeah after I posted that, I realized that you probably meant in terms of the market.

But there are people who are still going to complain that even that "market wage" is unfair.

The federal government is never going to regulate hard enough, or well enough, to meet the desires of the population. They are not efficient or trustworthy enough to handle such a thing. I stick by what I say. If we want those changes, WE must do it ourselves.

If there is a certain company that you think is being unfair to it's employees, start a website with a simple domain name that targets the company for a massive public boycott. Put pertinent arguments on the website that make a clear and consise case against the company, with effective start dates, and get that website to go viral. If you can get at least a couple ten thousand people or more to pledge to this, and then everyone follows through by the start date, that company will realize that we the people mean business.

It also sets a nice precedent to use against other companies as well, to pressure them into it without even having to "fire a shot", so to speak.

 

[jreeves]

Unless there comes a time in which there is a down-turn in the economy – when there is high unemployment and prospective employers are desperately competing for what few positions are available – and when employers can practically set whatever demands they want.

It's definetly not at that point now, skilled employees can find work. It's hippocritical to say that one standard applies when the market place and then another standard should be applied when the market is not good. It should be an open market regardless. Corporations as well as private companies should be regulated as little as possible. If you over regulate companies in the US they will move overseas where regulation doesn't exist or is a lot less prohibitive for operating business, that's called the global world market place.

 

[jreeves]

Yeah after I posted that, I realized that you probably meant in terms of the market.

But there are people who are still going to complain that even that "market wage" is unfair.

The federal government is never going to regulate hard enough, or well enough, to meet the desires of the population. They are not efficient or trustworthy enough to handle such a thing. I stick by what I say. If we want those changes, WE must do it ourselves.

If there is a certain company that you think is being unfair to it's employees, start a website with a simple domain name that targets the company for a massive public boycott. Put pertinent arguments on the website that make a clear and consise case against the company, with effective start dates, and get that website to go viral. If you can get at least a couple ten thousand people or more to pledge to this, and then everyone follows through by the start date, that company will realize that we the people mean business.

It also sets a nice precedent to use against other companies as well, to pressure them into it without even having to "fire a shot", so to speak.

I think that over-regulation leads to less jobs. Employers will remove themselves from American regulation and move overseas where they enjoy less strigent laws. But I agree with you, you are more than welcome to boycott whatever company you would like. I just don't believe government should over-regulate.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Wait just a minute. What about you! Show me some evidence to the contrary – that most CEOs are fair and ethical.

I didnt make that claim, and as such, I am under no burden to show anything.

You, however, DID make a claim; I asked you to support that claim, which you have failed to do.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It just doesn’t seem right when CEOs are more concerned with providing a profit for the shareholders....

For-profit companies exist for the SOLE purpose of making a profit.
Why would the CEO of the company NOT be more concerned about profit?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Unless there comes a time in which there is a down-turn in the economy – when there is high unemployment and prospective employers are desperately competing for what few positions are available – and when employers can practically set whatever demands they want.

Welcome to capitalism.

 

[mattskramer]

For-profit companies exist for the SOLE purpose of making a profit.
Why would the CEO of the company NOT be more concerned about profit?

Have you ever seen the movie “Norma Rae”? I’d highly recommend it.

 

[mattskramer]

I didnt make that claim, and as such, I am under no burden to show anything.

You, however, DID make a claim; I asked you to support that claim, which you have failed to do.

Okay. I failed to find any statistical study to support my contention. It still does not make what I said right or wrong until there is a study to refute it. It is nice to know that I’m not the only one to fail to follow through. I’m still waiting on element286 to provide statistical proof that “for every one corrupt CEO there are thousands who do their job fairly…”

 

[mattskramer]

Welcome to capitalism.

Thankfully we have a little bit of socialism to help those out who face hard times in bad economies.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Okay. I failed to find any statistical study to support my contention.

So, you admit your claim is unsubstantiated. Very well.
Why do you continue to make statements you know you cannot supprt?

It still does not make what I said right or wrong until there is a study to refute it.

No one is required to refute your statement; you are required to support it.

Dont think so?

You have yet to stop sexually abusing your dog.

No, I can't prove it, but that does not make what I said right or wrong until you refute it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Thankfully we have a little bit of socialism to help those out who face hard times in bad economies.

Its no surprise that you're happy with the state imposing your version of morality on others.

I'll be sure to point this out when someone imposes a version of morality you don't like.

 

[Paulie]

Its no surprise that you're happy with the state imposing your version of morality on others.

I'll be sure to point this out when someone imposes a version of morality you don't like.

Well, he's comfortably nestled in as a "moderate", so the convenience of morality either benefitting or disfavoring him makes for a perfect situation.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Well, he's comfortably nestled in as a "moderate", so the convenience of morality either benefitting or disfavoring him makes for a perfect situation.

Oddly enough, those "moderates" are the very people who refer to others that do the same thing as "hypocrites".