The future of this country

[Ray From Cleveland]

Trump said he had a health care plan ready to roll out that everyone was going to love. I said he didn't..

So why are you changing the subject from his businesses to healthcare?

Your excuses are why we are in this mess.

And what mess might that be? The mess was caused by the Communists passing a bill to give extra unemployment. In many cases people were making more on unemployment than they did working. When employers have to compete with government by drastically increasing wages, you have inflation now at 8.5%. You have a labor shortage, a supply chain shortage, and it's a domino effect that includes transportation costs.

This was not caused by me or people who vote Republican. We haven't had power in years. This was all started when the country went full Democrat led and it's been that way for the past year and a half and getting worse every day.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

 

[AntonToo]

So why are you changing the subject from his businesses to healthcare?



And what mess might that be? The mess was caused by the Communists passing a bill to give extra unemployment. In many cases people were making more on unemployment than they did working. When employers have to compete with government by drastically increasing wages, you have inflation now at 8.5%. You have a labor shortage, a supply chain shortage, and it's a domino effect that includes transportation costs.

This was not caused by me or people who vote Republican. We haven't had power in years. This was all started when the country went full Democrat led and it's been that way for the past year and a half and getting worse every day.

You are calling Trump, who signed expanded unemployment benefits, communist?

And btw those benefits long expired, worker shortages persist. Kinda puts at question your effect claims don't it?

 

[YoursTruly]

It's really not relevant what a CEO makes or what a worker makes. The two have nothing to do with each other. CEO's and workers alike are paid by what it would cost a company to pay another person do the same exact job with the same exact quality of work or results. Good CEO's are high in demand, just like very famous actors, musicians, athletes and so on. So they can call their own shots.

It's relevant to me because wages, including salaries and bonuses are one reason why prices are so high. You can't pay CEO's millions in salaries and bonuses and then claim the reason why your product is so expensive is only because of what you're paying your employees.
The over inflated USD is the main problem. But doing business this way helps perpetuate the problem.

Every company can make their own decisions. I'm not saying the government should pass a law. But I do think it's morally wrong. This is why I don't do business with places like "Goodwill." They pay their employee's squat. Much of their labor is free because many city judges allow people to serve community service working at Goodwill.

Their CEO makes about $730,000 per year.

My opposition to their salaries and what they pay their employee's is purely moral.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's relevant to me because wages, including salaries and bonuses are one reason why prices are so high. You can't pay CEO's millions in salaries and bonuses and then claim the reason why your product is so expensive is only because of what you're paying your employees.
The over inflated USD is the main problem. But doing business this way helps perpetuate the problem.

Every company can make their own decisions. I'm not saying the government should pass a law. But I do think it's morally wrong. This is why I don't do business with places like "Goodwill." They pay their employee's squat. Much of their labor is free because many city judges allow people to serve community service working at Goodwill.

Their CEO makes about $730,000 per year.

My opposition to their salaries and what they pay their employee's is purely moral.

I think your average CEO pay is a little inflated.

Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Salary in 2024 | PayScale

The average salary for a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is $164,880 in 2024. Visit PayScale to research chief executive officer (ceo) salaries by city, experience, skill, employer and more.

www.payscale.com

A company does not employ people if it makes their company worth less. They pay CEO's to increase their profit far beyond their pay.

It works like that with all jobs. If you are getting paid $20.00 an hour to run a milling machine, your employer is making $30.00 to $40.00 an hour on your work. He wouldn't pay you $20.00 an hour if he could only sell your work for $18.00.

Same applies to CEO's. You and I both open up widget companies. A CEO who is an expert in widget manufacturing wants 2 million dollars a year. You decide you are not paying him that kind of money, so I hire him. We will sell our products cheaper, increase our profits, and eventually run you out of business.

What I don't understand when it comes to pay scale is how it's not understood. A company doesn't pay you based on how much money they have, what they pay their management, or what their stocks are. They pay you based on your worth to the company. You are only worth as much as your employer can pay somebody else to do the same quality of work that you do.

Morality? So where is your morality at? When you need your lawn care done, do you not get several estimates first? And when you do, choose the highest one? Of course not. As long as you can get the same quality of lawn care, you choose the cheapest one. Same thing if you need your transmission rebuilt, a major plumbing job, an addition to your house. You don't care what the person is paying their employees. All you care about is paying the least for the work you need done. Companies work the same exact way regardless what a CEO makes.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You are calling Trump, who signed expanded unemployment benefits, communist?

And btw those benefits long expired, worker shortages persist. Kinda puts at question your effect claims don't it?

Not at all. As to your apples and oranges comparison, Trump signed for additional unemployment when places had to close up when we first got hit with covid. Unemployment shot up over 14%. Much different than when Dementia signed the bill a year from last March. Unemployment dropped to 6% from nearly 15%, companies opening back up, vaccines out for three months, people going back to work.

Trump added unemployment to stop a free fall of the economy. Dementia added unemployment for vote buying and creating more government dependency. Because our warehouses were empty, there were plenty of jobs when he signed that extension. It did nothing but hurt the economy.

 

[AntonToo]

Not at all. As to your apples and oranges comparison, Trump signed for additional unemployment when places had to close up when we first got hit with covid. Unemployment shot up over 14%. Much different than when Dementia signed the bill a year from last March. Unemployment dropped to 6% from nearly 15%

Ooooh, so you are saying at certain economic conditions communism is good. Right?

If Trump thought unemployment is too high and we needed expanded unemployment then he is definetly not a communist. But if Biden thought unemployment is still too high, and that we needed to extend those benefits a few more months then he is therefore a communist.

Aren't you just a LITTLE ashamed to peddle this partisan tripe and special pleading?

 

[AntonToo]

And btw those benefits long expired, worker shortages persist. Kinda puts at question your effect claims don't it?

BrokeLoser too heavy of a lift?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ooooh, so you are saying at certain economic conditions communism is good. Right?

If Trump thought unemployment is too high and we needed expanded unemployment then he is definetly not a communist. But if Biden thought unemployment is still too high, and that we needed to extend those benefits a few more months then he is therefore a communist.

Aren't you just a LITTLE ashamed to peddle this partisan tripe and special pleading?

Aren't you a little slow to not see the false comparisons?

Trump agreed to unemployment when it was absolutely necessary to save the American economy. Dementia agreed to it when it wasn't. When we first got hit with covid-19 we knew absolutely nothing about it, how long it would last, how many it would kill. By the time Dementia invaded the White House, we had much more knowledge about it, three vaccines, plenty of testing supplies and PPE that we didn't have under Trump. By that time we knew where we were going.

Trump supplied the country with additional unemployment when there were no jobs. Dementia supplied the country with additional unemployment when there were plenty of jobs.

 

[AntonToo]

Aren't you a little slow to not see the false comparisons?

Trump agreed to unemployment when it was absolutely necessary to save the American economy. Dementia agreed to it when it wasn't. When we first got hit with covid-19 we knew absolutely nothing about it, how long it would last, how many it would kill. By the time Dementia invaded the White House, we had much more knowledge about it, three vaccines, plenty of testing supplies and PPE that we didn't have under Trump. By that time we knew where we were going.

Trump supplied the country with additional unemployment when there were no jobs. Dementia supplied the country with additional unemployment when there were plenty of jobs.

No it's you that's slow. Communism is not defined by WHEN you partake in the policy. The policy is either communist or it's not. It's either communism to pay people out of work, or it isn't.

When Biden signed 6 month extension we were still 6 million jobs down and 3% unemployment higher than before the Covid recession started.

Those benefits have now been expired since September of 2021, and not only did labor shortages eased, THEY GOT WORSE. Clearly it WAS NOT unemployment befits that are causing the current situation.

 

[YoursTruly]

I think your average CEO pay is a little inflated.

Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Salary in 2024 | PayScale

The average salary for a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is $164,880 in 2024. Visit PayScale to research chief executive officer (ceo) salaries by city, experience, skill, employer and more.

www.payscale.com

A company does not employ people if it makes their company worth less. They pay CEO's to increase their profit far beyond their pay.

It works like that with all jobs. If you are getting paid $20.00 an hour to run a milling machine, your employer is making $30.00 to $40.00 an hour on your work. He wouldn't pay you $20.00 an hour if he could only sell your work for $18.00.

Same applies to CEO's. You and I both open up widget companies. A CEO who is an expert in widget manufacturing wants 2 million dollars a year. You decide you are not paying him that kind of money, so I hire him. We will sell our products cheaper, increase our profits, and eventually run you out of business.

What I don't understand when it comes to pay scale is how it's not understood. A company doesn't pay you based on how much money they have, what they pay their management, or what their stocks are. They pay you based on your worth to the company. You are only worth as much as your employer can pay somebody else to do the same quality of work that you do.

Morality? So where is your morality at? When you need your lawn care done, do you not get several estimates first? And when you do, choose the highest one? Of course not. As long as you can get the same quality of lawn care, you choose the cheapest one. Same thing if you need your transmission rebuilt, a major plumbing job, an addition to your house. You don't care what the person is paying their employees. All you care about is paying the least for the work you need done. Companies work the same exact way regardless what a CEO makes.

The more money you take out of any company, the less money you have to put into the company. My moral stand point is those that run the company and pay their employee's very little, but take huge amounts for themselves.
Obviously, it's their company. They can take as much as they want. I support that. But morally I can't support them when they do.
I used to shop at the goodwill a lot, until I found out how they do this very thing. Now I donate things to local charities and shop at local thrift stores and garage sales.

 

[Independent thinker]

So the question is, why are US products too expensive? You have to look at what creates the cost. Labor is the #1 factor. So it's the #1 reason why Obama's & Trumps China trade deals would've never worked.
It's also the #1 reason why American manufacturers don't manufacture in the USA near as much as they did in the 70's & 80's.
To solve the problem, one has to address why companies have to pay $15 to $35hr for blue collar workers. The answer is easy. But solving the problem is almost impossible to accomplish because that would take the government forcing lower prices and wages on everything.

Who ever I would support for president would have to address this issue and then at least attempt to gather economic geniuses to come up with a way to get it done. To ignore it will only perpetuate the problem. And within a decade, the problem will continue to push manufacturing out of the country. Allowing automation to take over even the easiest jobs. Which is already happening to millions of jobs.

Automation only requires a mimicking of humans abilities and functions. Computers can be programmed to do just about anything a human can do. From moving objects, joining them together to thinking of solutions.
They just need to be programmed to the specifics of each task.

The end result is an economy where robots and computers do almost everything, leaving the US work force lazy and without incentive. It also means that the only money that too many Americans will have at their disposal comes in the form of welfare. IE Yang's idea of a guaranteed income (Those $1,000 checks)

So unless the government, with the help of those who run the economy and the corporation force, this country into a massive deflation cycle that leads our economy, wages and prices back to levels around the 1960's, the GenZ's and their kids and their kids, in this country will not be producing enough to keep the economy from dying a miserable horrible death.


Can anyone else (that isn't a surface level thinker) come up with a solution?

Amen. Unfortunately, we can't go back on wages. The best we can do is hope we can grow the economy at a non-inflationary rate and not let wages increase at the same time. Some wages could fall but for the most part, what's done is done. The leftists got wage increases but are too stupid to see that inflation increased at a higher rate than wages did. So, if we let them, they will claim we need to raise wages again. And again. And again. And again. And again.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Amen. Unfortunately, we can't go back on wages. The best we can do is hope we can grow the economy at a non-inflationary rate and not let wages increase at the same time. Some wages could fall but for the most part, what's done is done. The leftists got wage increases but are too stupid to see that inflation increased at a higher rate than wages did. So, if we let them, they will claim we need to raise wages again. And again. And again. And again. And again.

They do know it and see it. Dementia ran on a national MW of $15.00 an hour. Once he had the ability to do that, he told his own people forget about it. Even in his confused state he knew what the end result would have been and didn't want that history on his record.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The more money you take out of any company, the less money you have to put into the company. My moral stand point is those that run the company and pay their employee's very little, but take huge amounts for themselves.
Obviously, it's their company. They can take as much as they want. I support that. But morally I can't support them when they do.
I used to shop at the goodwill a lot, until I found out how they do this very thing. Now I donate things to local charities and shop at local thrift stores and garage sales.

You are correct, companies don't want to take out more money. They'd rather leave it in there to boost profits and share prices. That's why they pay their labor what they do.

There is nothing really immoral about it. If I sell you my car for $20,000, you agree to pay me the $20,000, where is the immorality? I offered a car for sale and you agreed to the price I was asking. The same holds true for labor. Nobody is forced to work anywhere in this free country.

We also don't live in a country where if my grandfather was a shoemaker, my father was a shoemaker, that means I have to be a shoemaker. What I mean is that what you make is entirely up to you. not your employer. It may take some educational or trade investments, it may take some sacrifices, but ultimately you are responsible for your own income unless you have physical or mental hurdles that are impossible to get around.

Take my former line of work for instance. Right now our country is short about 60,000 drivers industry can't find. Nobody wants to do it any longer. That's a choice a person makes. If they'd rather work at McDonald's where there is much less responsibility, much less requirements, and of course much less money, that was a decision they decided to make. Truck driving pays in the mid 50s in many cases, and depending on what line of driving you wish to do, can pay into the six figures. But again, it's out there for just about anybody, but they don't want to do the work.

 

[initforme]

The unemployment stimulus had nothing to do with today. Zero.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

This is what the global elites have planned and its coming fast and furious:

Globalists have entered the kill phase of Great Reset; Remember the Deagel population forecast? It now makes total sense

May 26, 2022 This was a big week for the globalists. They feel it’s their time, go time, to launch the most difficult phase of the Great Reset so they can get on with what they call the Fourt…

leohohmann.com

Globalists have entered the kill phase of Great Reset; Remember the Deagel population forecast? It now makes total sense.​

https://www.ahava528.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Deagel-Analysis-updated.pdf

"Because the vast majority of Americans suffer from extreme normalcy bias, they can’t see what’s coming. They will be caught completely off guard. The sporadic shortages they see in the grocery stores now, these folks believe that’s just a temporary glitch that will soon iron itself out. Nothing to worry about.

They don’t see that war and famine are right around the corner. So when it arrives, they will be ruled by fear and confusion. Anxiety levels will be off the charts.

Most will submit to the beast system that’s being erected on the backs of these pre-arranged crises."

 

[Independent thinker]

They do know it and see it. Dementia ran on a national MW of $15.00 an hour. Once he had the ability to do that, he told his own people forget about it. Even in his confused state he knew what the end result would have been and didn't want that history on his record.

I remember when Hillary was running in 2016. She ran against a $15 "living wage", saying it would be bad for businesses. Then when a reporter asked her that if a Democratic House and Senate sent her a bill for a $15 minimum wage, would she sign it and she said, "Sure".

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I remember when Hillary was running in 2016. She ran against a $15 "living wage", saying it would be bad for businesses. Then when a reporter asked her that if a Democratic House and Senate sent her a bill for a $15 minimum wage, would she sign it and she said, "Sure".

Of course she was lying, but on the other hand, she is a Democrat so that's to be expected.

 

[YoursTruly]

Amen. Unfortunately, we can't go back on wages. The best we can do is hope we can grow the economy at a non-inflationary rate and not let wages increase at the same time. Some wages could fall but for the most part, what's done is done. The leftists got wage increases but are too stupid to see that inflation increased at a higher rate than wages did. So, if we let them, they will claim we need to raise wages again. And again. And again. And again. And again.

Who says we can't go back? The people who control the value and the supply of money? We could. And we could do it tomorrow if it was explained in a lot better way than I could.
Change, especially when it comes to money. But money's value gets depreciated (over inflated) with every economic bust cycle. Inflation goes up. The the prices come down 1/2 of their increase, and people are just glad the prices came down a little.
In 10 years, today will seem like the good ole days. And it'll constantly repeat that cycle until robots replace almost all human labor. To the point that the only ones making money will be those that own the robots.

Could it lead to a moneyless society? Or will we still be enslaved by a currency that's extremely hard to get? Chances are, we'll be taken over by another country, financially.
What will actually happen, probably can't even be predicted. And that's scarier and will be much harder than returning our economy back to say the 80's.

 

[Independent thinker]

Who says we can't go back? The people who control the value and the supply of money? We could. And we could do it tomorrow if it was explained in a lot better way than I could.
Change, especially when it comes to money. But money's value gets depreciated (over inflated) with every economic bust cycle. Inflation goes up. The the prices come down 1/2 of their increase, and people are just glad the prices came down a little.
In 10 years, today will seem like the good ole days. And it'll constantly repeat that cycle until robots replace almost all human labor. To the point that the only ones making money will be those that own the robots.

Could it lead to a moneyless society? Or will we still be enslaved by a currency that's extremely hard to get? Chances are, we'll be taken over by another country, financially.
What will actually happen, probably can't even be predicted. And that's scarier and will be much harder than returning our economy back to say the 80's.

I don't think we can go back without destroying the economy even further. Wage gains would be hard to roll back.