Class Warfare?

[merrylander]

Regarding these brilliant managers who have not raised wages in line with inflation. Those same guys are saying we will hire more people when the market demand improves. Now even a Republican must know that the market demand is 70% consumer driven. Oh but the consumer's wages have not kept pace with inflation. Do you think that could possibly be why demand is not increasing? Nah, couldn't be. Farking idiots!

[flacaltenn]

Originally Posted by JonL

You're looking through your lens again. I'm NOT saying that the "fix" (if there is one) involves redistribution or taking from anyone. What I am saying (and I think it is obvious) is this: (I'll lay it out nice and simple for you.)

1. The wealthy and highly-paid executives have tremendous power over business activities and national policy.

Ok. We could end their influence on national policy by reducing the size of the regulatory club that Congress wields. Less power to be doled out -- less lobbying -- less interest in D.C.

2. Most people act most of the time out of self-interest. The wealthy and corporate executives are no exception.

3. Given 1 and 2, it would be logical to assume that the current state of affairs - reduced income for workers, lots of overseas labor - has benefitted the wealthy and corporate executives. Otherwise they would have pursued paths that didn't lead to where we are.Their choice was to be patriotic and die, to be patriot and innovate, or to move their production overseas. If they weren't worried about their direct competitors, then it would have been that some fat-ass French company would have their label on all our shoes. It hasn't resulted in reduced income due to CUTS in salaries as much as it has simply made the TOTAL job dissappear. That's the bigger effect. The displaced workers are now UNDEREMPLOYED either by talent or time sharing of jobs.

4. Given 3, if worker income rises and there is less overseas labor, it stands to reason that it is likely that the wealthy and corporate executives will suffer some diminution in wealth and income, otherwise they would have already pursued strategies that increase the lot of the domestic worker.

You don't have to worry about this. Jobs to manufacture tee shirts and toasters are NOT coming back at higher wages. In fact, they may not stay in China. Incomes can rise if we create new METHODS of producing goods and services that are not pegged to "cheap labor". Those new products will be sold at different prices and margins and MAY NOT affect executive pay which (as I've told you) is completely irrelevant to solving the crisis. HOWEVER, those new industries require CHEAP ENERGY, CHEAP EDUCATION, and LOW entry costs to start-up a business. BTW: I don't think sending manufacturing overseas was a brilliant move either. We laughed when the Japanese set out to do electronics. Then we set up plants there. Then they didn't need us anymore. Did WE LEARN ANYTHING? F'IN NO! And many of my clients are starting to realize their mistake.

OK, get it? I'm not saying that TAKING from the wealthy is the method or even the desired outcome. I'm not saying REDISTRIBUTION is the method or even the desired outcome. If the wealthy could stay just as wealthy as they are, and the rest of us could get up to where maybe the 30%ers are... that'd be just peachy.

BUT... I don't think that's possible. If the current situation didn't benefit the wealthy, it wouldn't exist. Plain and simple. So the converse is undoubtedly true. If the current situation changes, it is likely to be at the detriment (even if slight) to the wealthy. Hurting the wealthy isn't the goal here, but I cannot see how it wouldn't happen. Stop FIXATING on the wealthy and FIX the problem.

Seems that some of your ideas about investing in new technology and changing the way the educational system works would require - gasp - government investment and intervention. Oh the horror. JonL, I'm not a dogmatic Libertarian. I'm smart enough to realize that I MIGHT want to see another APOLLO type program. Don't mind SPONSORSHIP of TRUE research. NOT SUBSIDIES (like the $100/dishwasher type), NOT wars abroad, NOT penalizing politically motivated regulation. IN FACT -- another of the LARGE leaps I'd to see done (beside Virtual Ed) would be an IMMEDIATE demonstration of next gen nuclear power plants. A cook-off of the best new designs that are available. We'd make far more progress than subsidizing any of the "alternatives" that have reached their scientific plateaus. And YES- I'd take govt money for either of those (I've got a longer list). BUT -- It wasn't NASA that got us to the moon. They served as the peanut gallery and bean counters. I know. I worked at KSpaceC.

Don't blame the current educational system on the unions or the teachers. How about the bizarrely named "no child left behind" unfunded mandate that requires standardized testing up the wazoo and makes it absolutely impossible to do some of the things in education that you propose? How does state subsidized higher education fit into your world view? How about the fact that even state schools are now getting priced out of the range of many? Whoa! Testing to a standard DOES NOT preclude what I propose. The testing is so dumbed downed and tuned to the lowest denominator as to be useless. AND YET -- Theres' a problem getting kids to achieve that level? Something stinks. The whole method of shoveling knowledge needs different tools.

C'mon. Not only was none of that redistributed, it also isn't real! That $1B increase in market capitalization is a paper number. (And it isn't "Net Worth.") It's based on a portion of the outstanding shares of the company trading at a higher price today than they traded at yesterday. The market cap is about $7.5B. If every stockholder decided to sell their stock tomorrow, what do you think the market cap would be? Not $7.5B, that's for sure. I don't begrudge highly competent people making a lot of money. If this guy can increase the corporation's PROFITS by $1B a year, he's worth some money. The fact that a bunch of Wall Street speculators bid up the stock today doesn't mean the guy is worth a damn thing. All that happened today is that some old speculators got really lucky, and some new speculators are guessing that it'll get even better before it gets worse. No value was added to society.

Don't think many of those sold today JonL. It's down about the amount as the market dive. Competition was preserved. Meaning that JC Penney might survive as an alternative to Macy's. Actually that IS a benefit to society. Otherwise, the most highly paid would win all the time.

[flacaltenn]

MerryLander:

Now even a Republican must know that the market demand is 70% consumer driven. Oh but the consumer's wages have not kept pace with inflation. Do you think that could possibly be why demand is not increasing? Nah, couldn't be. Farking idiots!

If you want to see what an economy looks like when you shut down manufacturing and start SERVICING each other and consuming, tune into the CNBC ticker today. Unless we figure what this country PRODUCES -- we're doomed. I always thought that at least -- we'd have Hollywood and Disney and Entertainment.. But even there, I now have doubts. Our entertainment diet has become political parody and reality crap.

The decline continues. The wealth is evaporating. And the left is still fixated on a scavenger hunt for the carcass.

BlueStreak:

I'd really like to care about what's going on in Wisconsin. But I care more about the private sector right now. You can understand my reasons for that, can't you? I've got a dear uncle/aunt who dedicated their lives to TRYING to educate slum-bound NYC school kids. They are retired in absolute luxury. They deserve to be happy. Maybe -- Just not THAT Damn happy..

[BlueStreak]

Holy Cow, Flac! Now you're responding in RED! JonL has really got you riled up, I guess.

Dave

[flacaltenn]

I just did that to match your ride...

[BlueStreak]

My rides are Blue and Green. The one in the avatar was in honor of a post about Romney.
(We're were talking about AMC cars.)

There, changed it. That's the real Mighty Bluestreak in my avatar.

Dave

[flacaltenn]

Now THAT's a cop magnet..

I'm not riled at anyone here (today ). JonL is an honest and challenging sparring partner. I come here to lower my blood pressure (listening to MSNBC, and other news) and because I'm not in a huge office with a lot of other distractions.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

Now THAT's a cop magnet..

I'm not riled at anyone here (today ). JonL is an honest and challenging sparring partner. I come here to lower my blood pressure (listening to MSNBC, and other news) and because I'm not in a huge office with a lot of other distractions.

We will do our best to distract you.

Regards,

D-Ray

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Regarding these brilliant managers who have not raised wages in line with inflation. Those same guys are saying we will hire more people when the market demand improves. Now even a Republican must know that the market demand is 70% consumer driven. Oh but the consumer's wages have not kept pace with inflation. Do you think that could possibly be why demand is not increasing? Nah, couldn't be. Farking idiots!

That's exactly what it is.

So, what that means, Rob, is that we need to outsource more work. Bring prices down so the "working poor" can afford to buy stuff. Oh that's right, they're unemployed now. We just laid them off and sent their jobs elsewhere in the name of saving them money. Okay, so now we'll just cutoff their unemployment benefits. That way we can cut their taxe.......Oh, that's right, they're not paying taxes now that their unemployed. Okay, here's what we do; First, we defund NPR, Planned Parenthood and bust the teachers union so we can make it easier to fire them...well maybe.....someday...........

Where does this end?

Dave

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

Now THAT's a cop magnet..

I'm not riled at anyone here (today ). JonL is an honest and challenging sparring partner. I come here to lower my blood pressure (listening to MSNBC, and other news) and because I'm not in a huge office with a lot of other distractions.

I had a cop pull me over and let me go-----Just so he could look at it.
Asked me what the top speed is...."Well, according to Car and Driver, it'll top 150."

"Really? Sweet! How much do they run?"

A cop, inquiring about the top speed of my car, because he's thinking of buying one.................

Think about that.

Dave