Only in America

Originally posted by KellyJay
I fail to see the difference between profits and obscene profits! Good for anyone who can
make a lot of money legally with low cost and effort!

Suppose one man owned all land on earth and charged rent for it. Would his profits be just profits or would they be obscene profits? Would you still say 'good for him'?

Originally posted by KellyJay
No you can negotiate whatever you can get, demand or force is another thing.

Is unionising 'force'? Is strike action 'force'?
How do the uneducated poor masses negotiate successfully with the rich and powerful who are either well educated and good at negotiation or capable of hiring people who are.

Originally posted by KellyJay
I fail to see the difference between profits and obscene profits! Good for anyone who can
make a lot of money legally with low cost and effort!

I go back to who are you to tell someone else what they "should do" with the money
we now agree is earned through legal means! Anyone who is smart will be putting money
back into the system, but the world does ...[text shortened]... hem into giving you
more! Go get a guy and stand in the dark and rob people its the same thing.

I suppose that it is more how the profit is generated, than how much it is, that makes it obscene. Who am I, well actually a nobody, but that does not make my observation wrong. Legally earned???? obviously corporations "legally" earn their money. They coerce governments to protect them because if they don't then they go somewhere else. they are protected and often subsidized.
You are under a delusion if you think that it is always easy for everyone to simply "find" a better job. Many people have trouble finding "any" job.
"force someone to put their money where I want them to"??. I understand where you get that from and as I have stated before, some cannot afford to even pay a fair wage. but "force?? is that not on the same logical level as forcing them to take low pay. which it can be perceived as being."take this low pay or starve, your not even worth this", the last bit added because there are many corporations that would pay even less if the could, to make even bigger profits.
We agree 100% on the level playing field. 100%. But I suspect that we are meaning different things. The corporations do not allow for level.
By the way, my main gripe is not so much about individuals making money, it is in reference to corporations. Those entities that are run by CEO,s detached from the reality of the damage that they do to society.

Originally posted by jimmac
I suppose that it is more how the profit is generated, than how much it is, that makes it obscene. Who am I, well actually a nobody, but that does not make my observation wrong. Legally earned???? obviously corporations "legally" earn their money. They coerce governments to protect them because if they don't then they go somewhere else. they are protected and ...[text shortened]... entities that are run by CEO,s detached from the reality of the damage that they do to society.

I am in complete agreement that if we find a government making it easy on one company
while hindering its competition that is not a level playing field and those profits are not
fairly earned. If you are speaking about profits of that sort being bad, you and I are on the
same side! Competition drives up money better than anything else, you have a great
need to hire good people and they have a choice to where they want to work, those that
work will be making more money.

I don't mind a country allowing companies breaks to setup in them as long as they are
being applied to everyone else setting up in their country. When the government picks
winners and losers, it is no different than the complaints about fairness in every other
topic that has to do with business, there isn't a level playing field if someone is being
paid off in some way.

If jobs are so scare that you cannot find a better one, than you should be damn happy to
have what you got! There is no such thing as a fair wage! The word fair can mean so
many different things it isn't funny! If you can not improve your lot in life where you
currently are, if you cannot make yourself into someone worth more to those that would
hire you where you live, move the first chance you get, because you'll never get above
the hand outs until you do.

Originally posted by jimmac
I suppose that it is more how the profit is generated, than how much it is, that makes it obscene. Who am I, well actually a nobody, but that does not make my observation wrong. Legally earned???? obviously corporations "legally" earn their money. They coerce governments to protect them because if they don't then they go somewhere else. they are protected and ...[text shortened]... entities that are run by CEO,s detached from the reality of the damage that they do to society.

I think your view of corporations is warped, they are companies run by people. Your
smearing CEO as out of touch just goes to show you that you have no clue. I would be
willing to bet more CEO have greater understanding of real life then some people in
government who write the rules and pander to those that are clueless.

Originally posted by KellyJay
I think your view of corporations is warped, they are companies run by people. Your
smearing CEO as out of touch just goes to show you that you have no clue. I would be
willing to bet more CEO have greater understanding of real life then some people in
government who write the rules and pander to those that are clueless.

Sorry about crack of having no clue...I was over the line....we just disagree there!

Originally posted by jimmac
quote 1/ Fair is what people agree to without coercive force.

is not the threat of starvation or the possibility of losing your house etc not coercive enough for you.

quote 2/ Not really. Income in dollars is not the only way to measure well being. As a nation, and as a world we are better fed than a century ago. In just the last few decades, technolog ...[text shortened]... disabled and yet there are millions mentally incapable and then the 10s of millions in between.

[b]is not the threat of starvation or the possibility of losing your house etc not coercive enough for you.

If people place consumer goods ahead of food, society can't be blamed, and most people who lose their houses, bought more house than was rational in the first place. If we excuse poor decisions, we only get more poor decisions.

You seem to be concerned that the cost of some people prospering, is that others may be in poverty. I can't argue that not to be true, but if there were no incentives for doing well, then most people wouldn't try.

Based on you definition, the dole bludger has been too loyal, and at the same time too dependent on his employer, and invested little or no time and effort in himself. Why not?

Originally posted by jimmac
By the way, my main gripe is not so much about individuals making money, it is in reference to corporations. Those entities that are run by CEO,s detached from the reality of the damage that they do to society.

As with the rank and file of employees, there are good and bad executives. The good ones usually keep a company healthy, the employees well compensated, and improved performance in terms of new and better products.

As with rank and file production workers, there are also poor executives who can be destructive of a company, or wasteful of its resources.

Originally posted by normbenign
[b]is not the threat of starvation or the possibility of losing your house etc not coercive enough for you.

If people place consumer goods ahead of food, society can't be blamed, and most people who lose their houses, bought more house than was rational in the first place. If we excuse poor decisions, we only get more poor decisions.

You seem to be ...[text shortened]... me too dependent on his employer, and invested little or no time and effort in himself. Why not?

I feel that you are mainly right, yet??? again I say ( as I have stated in other threads) We need to harness that fact that humanity is basically greedy. We need to encourage people to strive.We need good businesses.We need innovators etc etc. We can not get these people if we stifle individuals. Again I repeat, This is not how corporations work. They do not build,They destroy( obviously not all, but some.) When one large corporation takes over another they shed jobs and infrastructure., etc, thereby shrinking one part of society to expand another.This in and of itself may not be bad, but then the company, Having reduced its impact on society, tries its very best to pay less back to that society that it disenfranchised.When a business is built out of a society, does it not then owe back? esp when they receive government grants.
My definition of the dole bludger, is an ironic " for example". I know many are pathetic individuals that should be put out of everyone's misery. The problem that I have is that this is the minority, yet often portrayed by some as stereotypical. they are only a small % yet as there numbers are large, they are more in your face.
The "cost" of some people prospering should be balanced by TAX. though defining "fair" is beyond me.

Originally posted by KellyJay
I think your view of corporations is warped, they are companies run by people. Your
smearing CEO as out of touch just goes to show you that you have no clue. I would be
willing to bet more CEO have greater understanding of real life then some people in
government who write the rules and pander to those that are clueless.

I am not offended at all by the clueless jibe, you may indeed be right, I just feel VERY strongly that I something very bad is happening. I am not stupid enough to think that it has not been happening for a very long time, it is just that my eyes have been opened recently. I AM trying to digest the replies that I get, though I am a bit slow to digest information.The fact that many CEOs may well be great people does not mean that they are not trapped in the cycle of competing with the hard core narcissist. He pays less pay and therefore you have to as well. A CEO that earns enough in 1 year for most to retire on forever would be an extraordinary individual to have a real understanding, though I am sure that there are many extraordinary individuals out there.

I might add that I talk this talk to PPG directors and they do not entirely disagree, I told an analogy about slave fighting ( gladiators) in the arena and the slave masters not being to concerned about who survived.As long as the competition was fierce and the people came they made a fortune. Dying was a necessary part of the game. This is how they operate now. My job is to force sites in India,China and even the U.S of A. to cut costs, and I do that my being productive. If we do the best the others get forced to take pay cuts or face closure. Who wins????? if they take a pay cut then they come back to us and say that they are now winning, take a pay cut or face closure. is that not how it works??? The director that I talked to agreed, adding that that was just the way it was. He did not add " BAD LUCK" but his tone and mannerisms felt like it.

In 34yrs at PPG I have just witnessed this cycle over the last 10yrs. Beware, the Americans have arrived, and Australia is heading downhill fast. The Union movement ( that I do not like) used to force companies to share and everyone was better of for it. Now the union movement is dead we are @#@&$@#.
I notice that your warped comment got one "like" lol. it shows me that I have a lot of convincing to do. I will Never give up, oh well.

Originally posted by jimmac
I am not offended at all by the clueless jibe, you may indeed be right, I just feel VERY strongly that I something very bad is happening. I am not stupid enough to think that it has not been happening for a very long time, it is just that my eyes have been opened recently. I AM trying to digest the replies that I get, though I am a bit slow to digest informat ...[text shortened]... ne "like" lol. it shows me that I have a lot of convincing to do. I will Never give up, oh well.

It wasn't my warped comment that got the like.
Cutting cost can happen a million ways, through Lean Six Sigma, or a number of others
methods. Bottom line is always going to be the bottom line, if the company is not
productive it goes under. So in my opinion if you force all companies to do things counter
to them being productive such facing a mandatory wage increase the company cannot
handle they go under. Seattle Washington is finding this out as wages were artificially
raised by local government not those that have to pay the bills including the wages of
those that work for a living.

Originally posted by KellyJay
It wasn't my warped comment that got the like.
Cutting cost can happen a million ways, through Lean Six Sigma, or a number of others
methods. Bottom line is always going to be the bottom line, if the company is not
productive it goes under. So in my opinion if you force all companies to do things counter
to them being productive such facing a mandatory ...[text shortened]... nment not those that have to pay the bills including the wages of
those that work for a living.

Thank you for persevering with me. All you are saying is right but it does not necessarily make me wrong. I repeat, being productive is good and necessary, yet at what cost. They go under for a number of reasons.
Where I work, many years ago, the labor costs per liter where known to be very low. productivity has vastly improved since then. PPG makes a fortune, being reflective on their share price going from US$30.00 to over US$200.00 in less than 7 years. We were told that we had to bring our costs ( wages) down 46% to align with their nearest competitor.The fact that we were probably much more productive was never important.I tried to raise the issue.
We were recently asked to make 6 extra products to cover the loss of production from a fire in Cipy( India ).No idea where that is. anyway at a site " face to face" we were told that they had not yet determined the cause but among the contributing factors inc many many safety breaches that quoting here may not be wise. I asked them how could a mega rich company make paint in a sweat shop. THAT IS WHAT THEY DO. STUFF THEM TO HELL I SAY. We have to bring our costs down to compete with that. We no longer compete on level playing fields. Multinationals with bureaucracy helping them are keeping those at the bottom down and creating more at the bottom ( here in Australia at least). Not seeing it does not mean it is not happening. I believe that there "may" be many good CEO'S ( definitely some) but they are up against the tide. Even those at the bottom do not see and seek to protect them.
The companies that make good profits should share that around and the best way is not tax but with better wages. that way individuals can improve their lot in life and THEY then pay tax. Personal income tax is a more reliable way to raise revenue.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Is unionising 'force'? Is strike action 'force'?
How do the uneducated poor masses negotiate successfully with the rich and powerful who are either well educated and good at negotiation or capable of hiring people who are.

So right,They cannot and here in Australia unions are pathetic. even when the union government ( labour ) is in power they are so scared that the multinationals will pack up and go home that they will not allow workers to negotiate on any fair basis. though some on this site think that a strike is not "fair". We can strike, but only under strict circumstances, and the company is allowed to replace you straight away anyway. penalties for "changing" these"fair" fights are tough. "secondary" strikes are illegal under any circumstances. that means, if your fellow workers elsewhere are getting shafted you CAN NOT HELP THEM. even though you KNOW that once their pay has been cut, you WILL be next. "they" must be stopped.
Workers internationally need to stand up and fight.

Originally posted by jimmac
Thank you for persevering with me. All you are saying is right but it does not necessarily make me wrong. I repeat, being productive is good and necessary, yet at what cost. They go under for a number of reasons.
Where I work, many years ago, the labor costs per liter where known to be very low. productivity has vastly improved since then. PPG makes a f ...[text shortened]... lot in life and THEY then pay tax. Personal income tax is a more reliable way to raise revenue.

Money flows where it can no different than water, you get a country that taxes everyone from
companies to people and one near by that does not, soon the one that allows everyone to
keep what they make will be getting all the growth. Personal income tax can be designed
several different ways, I don't mind it, don't like it, but understand it. What I don't like is a
progressive system that does not treat everyone the same way. Tax everyone at the
same rate and I'm good from the rich to the poor, if you don't do that than the tax code
will be carrot and a stick used by those in power.

Originally posted by jimmac
I am not offended at all by the clueless jibe, you may indeed be right, I just feel VERY strongly that I something very bad is happening. I am not stupid enough to think that it has not been happening for a very long time, it is just that my eyes have been opened recently. I AM trying to digest the replies that I get, though I am a bit slow to digest informat ...[text shortened]... ne "like" lol. it shows me that I have a lot of convincing to do. I will Never give up, oh well.

"I am not offended at all by the clueless jibe, you may indeed be right, I just feel VERY strongly that I something very bad is happening."

Thank you for your reply, you are kind!