Union Boss salaries- They have a lot in common with the people they represent

[Foxfyre]

That's the problem, isn't it.

Maybe you should read up on the history of the union movement. That's EXACTLY what it did. And it needed to.

I have, dipshit. Most of the violence perpetrated by unions 80-90 years ago was because company owners used violence against them for wanting to organize. If companies were doing that today, I'd have more sympathy. But that's not happening today.

Of course, you take it to another level when you start targeting wives and kids, psycho.

So when a big corporation cuts off Sally's dad's health insurance, they arent' threatening Little Sally.

Or is that all okay because it was done with lawyers and shit.

Like I said, when the shit hits the fan, you will have no one to blame but yourself.

Where is it written that anybody is responsible for your health care other than you? If the corporation has to go out of business because it is bankrupt, who pays your wages and provides your healthcare then? If the corporation has to cut back half its work force and scale back expansion, are you more worthy to keep your job trhan the next guy? If you go to work for somebody, that somebody is then on the hook to provide for your every need forever? How many people do you think would go into business if that was the case? And if nobody is willing to take the considerable risks and suffer the considerable grief to be in business, who is going to hire you and provide a healthcare plan for you then?

 

[JoeB131]

Where is it written that anybody is responsible for your health care other than you? If the corporation has to go out of business because it is bankrupt, who pays your wages and provides your healthcare then? If the corporation has to cut back half its work force and scale back expansion, are you more worthy to keep your job trhan the next guy? If you go to work for somebody, that somebody is then on the hook to provide for your every need forever? How many people do you think would go into business if that was the case? And if nobody is willing to take the considerable risks and suffer the considerable grief to be in business, who is going to hire you and provide a healthcare plan for you then?

Hey, I'd have absolutely no problem if we had Single Payer, Universal health care like every other industrialized nation has had for decades.

You nitwits are the ones who insist that health care should be provided as an alternative to salary...

Because it just gave you something else to hang over the heads of the wage slaves.

 

[Foxfyre]

Where is it written that anybody is responsible for your health care other than you? If the corporation has to go out of business because it is bankrupt, who pays your wages and provides your healthcare then? If the corporation has to cut back half its work force and scale back expansion, are you more worthy to keep your job trhan the next guy? If you go to work for somebody, that somebody is then on the hook to provide for your every need forever? How many people do you think would go into business if that was the case? And if nobody is willing to take the considerable risks and suffer the considerable grief to be in business, who is going to hire you and provide a healthcare plan for you then?

Hey, I'd have absolutely no problem if we had Single Payer, Universal health care like every other industrialized nation has had for decades.

You nitwits are the ones who insist that health care should be provided as an alternative to salary...

Because it just gave you something else to hang over the heads of the wage slaves.

I don't want single payer insurance because it takes the free market out of the equation. I want government out of the health care industry because that is the ONLY chance we have to again have affordable health care for everybody in this country. Those other countries who have reached the maximum taxes people will tolerate and are now struggling to manage unsustainable systems are looking for ways to begin privitazation again.

Your problem seems to be that you have been conditioned by the 'me generation' mentality to think that you are entitled to other people's money just for getting out of bed in the morning. That you are owed a living, health care, or anything else you want just because you're you.

There are still about half of us Americans left who don't think that way. God willing we will begin to swing the pendulum back the other way and return to a society that values earning what we have and that does not feel entitled to other people's money. If we don't do that soon, however, then you will win. And we will all be screwed.

 

[JoeB131]

I don't want single payer insurance because it takes the free market out of the equation. I want government out of the health care industry because that is the ONLY chance we have to again have affordable health care for everybody in this country. Those other countries who have reached the maximum taxes people will tolerate and are now struggling to manage unsustainable systems are looking for ways to begin privitazation again.

Uh, no, they aren't. IN fact, most other countries pay LESS per capita than we do, live longer, have lower infant mortality rates and less obesity....

Your problem seems to be that you have been conditioned by the 'me generation' mentality to think that you are entitled to other people's money just for getting out of bed in the morning. That you are owed a living, health care, or anything else you want just because you're you.

There are still about half of us Americans left who don't think that way. God willing we will begin to swing the pendulum back the other way and return to a society that values earning what we have and that does not feel entitled to other people's money. If we don't do that soon, however, then you will win. And we will all be screwed.

Sister, I've been working since I was 16 years old. And usually for an asshole who worked less hard and took more of the profits, so I really, really, really don't need to hear this shit.

For instance, I keep a spreadsheet of all the savings that I've pioneered or gotten in my current job in the last four years. The total of just savings acheived is over $500,000. That's not for the value of the day to day work I do, that's savings on special projects beyond my job description.

I didn't see that money. The shareholders did. The problem is that we aren't rewarding work, we reward exploitation.

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't want single payer insurance because it takes the free market out of the equation. I want government out of the health care industry because that is the ONLY chance we have to again have affordable health care for everybody in this country. Those other countries who have reached the maximum taxes people will tolerate and are now struggling to manage unsustainable systems are looking for ways to begin privitazation again.

Uh, no, they aren't. IN fact, most other countries pay LESS per capita than we do, live longer, have lower infant mortality rates and less obesity....

Your problem seems to be that you have been conditioned by the 'me generation' mentality to think that you are entitled to other people's money just for getting out of bed in the morning. That you are owed a living, health care, or anything else you want just because you're you.

There are still about half of us Americans left who don't think that way. God willing we will begin to swing the pendulum back the other way and return to a society that values earning what we have and that does not feel entitled to other people's money. If we don't do that soon, however, then you will win. And we will all be screwed.

Sister, I've been working since I was 16 years old. And usually for an asshole who worked less hard and took more of the profits, so I really, really, really don't need to hear this shit.

For instance, I keep a spreadsheet of all the savings that I've pioneered or gotten in my current job in the last four years. The total of just savings acheived is over $500,000. That's not for the value of the day to day work I do, that's savings on special projects beyond my job description.

I didn't see that money. The shareholders did. The problem is that we aren't rewarding work, we reward exploitation.

I won't comment on the European woes with their healthcare systems further so as not to sidetrack the thread. If you are interested in the truth, however, you are as capable of looking that up as I am.

As for you resenting your employer getting rich off your labor, well that is pretty much the only reason he would hire you in the first place. He funds the infrastructure including the physical property, maintenance utilities, insurance, and taxes. He provides the raw materials, transportation costs, clerical support, marketing expense, and assumes all the risks of doing business--have you priced a business owner's policy recently? In addition he funds whatever bonding is necessary, E & O, and whatever licenses are required to do the business. On top of the wages you see in your paycheck, he is most likely paying additional for liability insurance to cover you, work comp, FICA, SUTA, FUTA, Medicare, and, if he makes a profit, state and federal taxes on top of that. If he goes bust, he could take a financial hit that would set him back decades. You lose a pay check or two or draw unemployment until you find another job. If he loses a contract he takes the loss. You get your paycheck anyway.

It's funny how some who assume none of the risks of doing business think they are entitled to as much as the ones who do.

If you don't like the system, however, then do what I've done for the last 25 years. I haven't drawn more than a half dozen paychecks in all that time because I worked strictly for commission except for the last 10 years in which I ran my own business. In both cases I provided my own transportation, paid most of my own expenses, and furnished almost all of the tools or other equipment I used in my work. And provided my own healthcare. When you work for yourself and/or for commission, if you don't work you don't get paid. But you can't be underpaid or overpaid.

 

[Toro]

Union guys going out and doing their jobs didn't fuck up the system.

Union guys who drove up the price of labour beyond what businesses were willing to pay, with inflexible work rules and rigid pay structures regardless of productivity fucked up their own jobs. The decline in unionism didn't happen because of offshoring to China. It happened as companies closed down plants in the north of the United States and moved them to the south of the United States where companies were treated better and made to feel more welcome.

That should come as a surprise to someone who thinks the world owes him a living and is willing to use violence to take from others what he thinks is his.

 

[JoeB131]

[


I won't comment on the European woes with their healthcare systems further so as not to sidetrack the thread. If you are interested in the truth, however, you are as capable of looking that up as I am.

Yeh, I have looked it up. I've even been to some of those countries. What I don't do is listen to Insurance company propaganda of the parasites trying to convince you they are vital organs.

As for you resenting your employer getting rich off your labor, well that is pretty much the only reason he would hire you in the first place. He funds the infrastructure including the physical property, maintenance utilities, insurance, and taxes. He provides the raw materials, transportation costs, clerical support, marketing expense, and assumes all the risks of doing business--have you priced a business owner's policy recently? In addition he funds whatever bonding is necessary, E & O, and whatever licenses are required to do the business. On top of the wages you see in your paycheck, he is most likely paying additional for liability insurance to cover you, work comp, FICA, SUTA, FUTA, Medicare, and, if he makes a profit, state and federal taxes on top of that. If he goes bust, he could take a financial hit that would set him back decades. You lose a pay check or two or draw unemployment until you find another job. If he loses a contract he takes the loss. You get your paycheck anyway.

It's funny how some who assume none of the risks of doing business think they are entitled to as much as the ones who do.

If you don't like the system, however, then do what I've done for the last 25 years. I haven't drawn more than a half dozen paychecks in all that time because I worked strictly for commission except for the last 10 years in which I ran my own business. In both cases I provided my own transportation, paid most of my own expenses, and furnished almost all of the tools or other equipment I used in my work. And provided my own healthcare. When you work for yourself and/or for commission, if you don't work you don't get paid. But you can't be underpaid or overpaid.

Blah, blah, blah...

I'd make life a lot more miserable for the whining businessman.

I deal with small businesses all day, if you want to know why I have a real contempt for capitalism and the free market. Because I'm a buyer, they blow smoke up my ass all day, and frankly, I'm happy to put the screws to them.

Frankly, we worked a lot better when we were mostly unionized, things were strictly regulated, and we looked out for working people first. (THis would be the period after FDR and before Reagan). Unfortunately, the Democrats embraced the hippies, and got a lot of working folks to vote against their own interests by playing the God Bullshit.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We were never "mostly unionized", but the playing field was a bit more level.

Union bosses salaries are far closer to the workers then are the CEO salaries and compensation packages.

Just a fact of life.

 

[JoeB131]

Union guys going out and doing their jobs didn't fuck up the system.

Union guys who drove up the price of labour beyond what businesses were willing to pay, with inflexible work rules and rigid pay structures regardless of productivity fucked up their own jobs. The decline in unionism didn't happen because of offshoring to China. It happened as companies closed down plants in the north of the United States and moved them to the south of the United States where companies were treated better and made to feel more welcome.

That should come as a surprise to someone who thinks the world owes him a living and is willing to use violence to take from others what he thinks is his.

Well, appealing to your decency or common sense doesn't work, so obviously threats of imminent violence, yeah, that'll get your attention. Too bad the world works that way, but sometime you don't get justice without violence or the threat of violence.

Now here's the bullshit. We are not in a problem because the people who do the actual work are making too much.

Since 1980, wages of working people have remained flat. After adjusting for inflation, people are making about what they did in 1980. The people who've driven up prices are the stockholders and exectives.

When Ronald Reagan became president, Average CEO pay was 44 times what a line worker makes... Today it is 475 times.

And this is a uniquely American thing. A CEO in Germany and Japan only makes 12 times what a line worker makes on average.

Again, Put all these links at the beginning of the thread, but you ignored them.

 

[The Rabbi]

Now here's the bullshit. We are not in a problem because the people who do the actual work are making too much.

.

Just tell that to the steel workers, railroad workers, auto workers and others. Government union employees make more than those in the private sector.
Yes, they are making too much. Appeals to broad statistics do not refute that notion.

 

[JoeB131]

Now here's the bullshit. We are not in a problem because the people who do the actual work are making too much.

.

Just tell that to the steel workers, railroad workers, auto workers and others. Government union employees make more than those in the private sector.
Yes, they are making too much. Appeals to broad statistics do not refute that notion.

I think it depend what you consider "Too much".

$28.00 an hour to assemble cars is not "too much".

78 Million to run a health insurance company, probably too much.

Happy to have cleared that up for you.

 

[The Rabbi]

Now here's the bullshit. We are not in a problem because the people who do the actual work are making too much.

.

Just tell that to the steel workers, railroad workers, auto workers and others. Government union employees make more than those in the private sector.
Yes, they are making too much. Appeals to broad statistics do not refute that notion.

I think it depend what you consider "Too much".

$28.00 an hour to assemble cars is not "too much".

78 Million to run a health insurance company, probably too much.

Happy to have cleared that up for you.

"Too much" is when labor costs make the company uncompetitive. I dont care if union thugs are making $28/hr or 500/hr or whatever. If unit labor cost is above their competitors then it is too much.
You have cleared up that you are a moron of galactic proportions. Not that anyone had much doubt.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Just tell that to the steel workers, railroad workers, auto workers and others. Government union employees make more than those in the private sector.
Yes, they are making too much. Appeals to broad statistics do not refute that notion.

I think it depend what you consider "Too much".

$28.00 an hour to assemble cars is not "too much".

78 Million to run a health insurance company, probably too much.

Happy to have cleared that up for you.

"Too much" is when labor costs make the company uncompetitive. I dont care if union thugs are making $28/hr or 500/hr or whatever. If unit labor cost is above their competitors then it is too much.

"Too much" is when CEOs are making stupid money and their employees are not paid a living wage. Bring down the CEO compensation to make the product competitive.

 

[The Rabbi]

I think it depend what you consider "Too much".

$28.00 an hour to assemble cars is not "too much".

78 Million to run a health insurance company, probably too much.

Happy to have cleared that up for you.

"Too much" is when labor costs make the company uncompetitive. I dont care if union thugs are making $28/hr or 500/hr or whatever. If unit labor cost is above their competitors then it is too much.

"Too much" is when CEOs are making stupid money and their employees are not paid a living wage. Bring down the CEO compensation to make the product competitive.

Thus sayeth JAKE, King of the Unsubstantiated Statement. All hail King!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Family Dollar created a plan two years ago to require the cashiers to up sell products to a certain rate or lose their jobs. The employees company wide simply ignored the mandate and told the company bosses through anonymous email they were looking forward to unemployment compensation for 99 weeks.

Boy, did that plan disappear.

The Rabbi was unable to respond intelligently to the comment about CEO compensation. We have arranged it in our companies that the pension fund is secure, and in case of a financial problem the CEOs and senior personnel will get their pension payouts after the regular employees. That is fair: we are making a boat load because of their hard work, and they deserve it.

 

[JoeB131]

"Too much" is when labor costs make the company uncompetitive. I dont care if union thugs are making $28/hr or 500/hr or whatever. If unit labor cost is above their competitors then it is too much.
You have cleared up that you are a moron of galactic proportions. Not that anyone had much doubt.

As I pointed out before, wages for working people have remained flat since 1980. The only thing that has gone up are CEO wages.... So maybe we need to cut CEO Wages.

Oh, yeah, and the companies which are beating the pants off of us in Germany and Japan? Their CEO's only make about 12 times what their workers make.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Rabbi tries to return with increased wages but will not talk about purchasing power actually dropping in the last thirty years.

 

[Toro]

Since 1980, wages of working people have remained flat. After adjusting for inflation, people are making about what they did in 1980. The people who've driven up prices are the stockholders and exectives.

When Ronald Reagan became president, Average CEO pay was 44 times what a line worker makes... Today it is 475 times.

And this is a uniquely American thing. A CEO in Germany and Japan only makes 12 times what a line worker makes on average.

Again, Put all these links at the beginning of the thread, but you ignored them.

Total compensation - including salary and wages, pensions, medical, etc. - for all income strata has risen since 1970, 1980 and 1990 adjusted for inflation. If you are a white male who dropped out of high school, your inflation-adjusted compensation is lower than it was in 1968. But if you are a black educated female, your compensation has risen faster than anyone since that time. Most of the gains have accrued to those at the top end of income scale, but all income strata have grown albeit at a slower pace. The biggest gains have come to those who are educated. The more education you have attained, the more your income has risen. I do think it is bothersome that CEO pay has risen so much. That is a function of weak corporate governance laws in America compared to other places. Gains have also accrued to capital faster than they have to labour. Much of the gains to the wealthiest have to do with broad structural factors that have little to do with them. This is why I have no problem with raising taxes on people who make more. However, income taxes are skewing too far up the income scale. Wealthier people should pay more, but given that half of all Americans pay no federal income tax, we should get rid of the deductions that the middle class get so they have a bigger stake in the system.

Here is one study on compensation. I have several more.

This article is the second in a Region series that seeks to reconcile the apparent conflict between statistics indicating stagnation in standards of living and statistics indicating robust growth. The issue addressed here is whether income growth over the past three decades bypassed middle America and accrued almost entirely to the rich. I find that—contrary to many reports—middle America did quite well. ...

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, median household income adjusted for inflation increased a scant 18 percent over the past 30 years (see Chart 1).1 In contrast, data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) indicate that income per person was up 80 percent, almost doubling (see Chart 2). A widely reported explanation for these statistics is that the rich reaped most of the benefits of economic growth over this period, while middle-income households gained little. Findings on rising inequality are consistent with this view. ...

The main finding is that—after adjusting the Census Bureau data for three key factors—inflationadjusted median household income for most household types increased by roughly 44 percent to 62 percent from 1976 to 2006. The only household types with substantially lower growth were “working-age male householder without spouse present” and “male householder with children but without spouse,” but these types constitute just 10 percent of all households. Household income inequality increased notably over this period; nonetheless, middle American households had substantial income gains. ...

But even with the increase in inequality, income gains for a broad set of middle-income households of most types were substantial. Incomes of the middle 50 percent of households—between the 25th and 75th percentiles—increased by at least 22 percent and as much as 59 percent for most household types, with gains exceeding 30 percent for most households. Retirement-age male householders had much larger gains, while working-age male householders and male householders with children had much smaller increases.

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/pubs/region/08-09/income.pdf

 

[JakeStarkey]

Toro, how much has purchasing power risen for Americans since 1980?

 

[Toro]

Toro, how much has purchasing power risen for Americans since 1980?

Purchasing power is how much you can buy adjusted for inflation. How much you can buy is a function of income. Those graphs are of income adjusted for inflation.