Members banned from this thread: Hermes Thoth, SmarterthanYou, USFREEDOM911, cancel2 2022, PostmodernProphet, Legion, Truth Detector, Granule, canceled.2021.1, Boris The Animal, canceled.2021.2, MAGA MAN, canceled.2021.3, iewitness, Irish, CFM, Ralph, Sailor, Life is Golden, Bigdog, TTQ64, Getin the ring, Superfreak, PraiseKek, Eagle_Eye, katzgar, countryboy, Tommatthews, volsrock, The Ugly Truth, BodyDouble, coolzone, rhym3pays, LV426, Loving91390, Into the Night, Tkaffen, Enlightened One, Anarchon, artichoke and Bobb


Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 70

Thread: Maybe Companies Should Not Be Bought Or Sold But Given To The Workers Who Built Them

  1. #31 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello 10DayUserName,

    Quote Originally Posted by 10DayUserName View Post
    I am a progressive who owns small businesses. Just disregarding the whole technical problems with doing it, I think giving people stock in their employer would be a mistake. The better approach would be mandatory 401K or IRA plans that cannot be tapped into until disability or retirement that can be left to next generations. Labor is such a dropping input in terms of importance and profit margins are so thin in a global economy that people need to be able to access of the fruits of licensing, intellectual property, and huge volume sales just to eek out a decent retirement, I can see no other realistic option that avoids the pitfalls of putting one's eggs in the wrong basket. Instead of a $15 minimum wage the left's better policy would be a $9MW and a $2-$3/hour retirement account contribution. That would be $4k-$6K per year for retirement. if not a fixed amount then a fixed percentage like 10-15% of their wages. Do it for all workers regardless of hours they work, and you will be setting people up from day 1.
    And some of those workers at that wage would qualify for government assistance programs. It is absurd for taxpayers to be subsidizing workers of a profit-generating business. Why have average wages not risen in proportion to executive earnings? Where is the rising tide that lifts all boats? Why are the rich getting richer as average wages barely keep pace with inflation? I will tell you why. Because capitalism has maximized profits at the expense of the lowest paid workers. Homes foreclosed on in the Great Recession have been purchased by large financial institutions and are being rented out at payments which could be paying off a mortgage, Except the occupants will never own a home because they can't get out of credit card or student debt. As pay and benefits are downsized in jobs, and workers become increasingly dependent on credit just to live paycheck to paycheck (78% of workers,) America is creating a debt bubble that could topple the recent economic gains. Workers mired in such debts are unable to save for retirement, and many cannot even come up with $400 cash on any given day. They are one major financial event away from bankruptcy at all times.

    $15-

    It's coming.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  2. #32 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Goodbye Evmetro,

    Quote Originally Posted by Evmetro View Post
    Lefties would run the companies into the ground the way they burn their own towns down rioting, and then move onto the next free company. Animals can't have nice shit.
    PIP violation. Disrespect shown. Permanent Ignore.

    We have nothing further to talk about.

    I am always happy to discuss differing constructive viewpoints, philosophies and approaches in a civil manner. Hatred and insults are not part of that.

    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Flame on me, mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you go on my PERMANENT Ignore List. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I won't participate in your threads, you will be banned from mine. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: if you like my PIP, feel free to use it. It works well.
    Last edited by PoliTalker; 01-30-2019 at 09:55 PM.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  3. #33 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello 10DayUserName,

    Quote Originally Posted by 10DayUserName View Post
    I did not say they should not compete, but there is a time in every company in which they cannot compete. Typewriters were replaced by computers; entire companies go under because they are functionally obsolete by the time they open the doors; facebooks replace myspaces.
    You have not shown that a worker managed co-op is any less capable of staying current with the market than an elite management company is. Many businesses managed by dedicated executives make poor decisions which ruin the company. Actually most small business start-ups fail within a few years.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  4. #34 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    9,083
    Thanks
    2,345
    Thanked 3,121 Times in 2,441 Posts
    Groans
    200
    Groaned 265 Times in 242 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Goodbye Evmetro,



    PIP violation. Disrespect shown. Permanent Ignore.

    We have nothing further to talk about.
    Thank you. I work pretty hard to disturb lefties, but I wish I could figure out how to get Domer and some of the other lefties to put me on ignore. Maybe if I figure out what a pip is....
    The Truth Does Not Need To Be Supported With Censorship.

  5. #35 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
    Employees would do the job easily. They actually are doing it every day. If an owner gets killed in a car crash, the business goes on...in almost all cases. Rightys always overestimate the importance of management and owners. They don't know who does the real work. Elitists always are over sold on themselves like Trump is.
    Leftists, meanwhile, always underestimate the crucial, utmost importance of the property rights of everyone (besides themselves, of course). America was literally founded upon the liberal theory of natural law. Get with it, or GTFO.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Minister of Truth For This Post:

    Evmetro (01-30-2019)

  7. #36 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    La Pine, Oregon
    Posts
    5,218
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 1,548 Times in 1,137 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 215 Times in 201 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    How does wealth extraction work to create extreme wealth inequality?

    Well, capitalism always looks for ways to make more profits, increase profits. Small capitalism is more directly connected to people. Big capitalism is not, and that produces the extreme wealth inequality.

    If a company is begun by a highly motivated capitalist who builds it from scratch and eventually gets wildly profitable, then he gets rich. And when he wants to retire and enjoy his wealth, he sells out.

    When he began that company he had a few workers. He was personally acquainted with each of them. He hired them, he promoted them or fired them. He gave raises to the good ones and hired more to build the company. He knew every worker personally. He could relate to what happens to them as a result of his decisions. He felt a responsibility to be good to them because they are the most important part of the company.

    If the company got big, an HR department took over the hiring and firing. The leaders and decision-makers of the company no longer even know the people who work for them. That's important. Oh, the owner knows the higher level workers and the long-timers, but all those new people never even met him. And the decision-makers are making decisions for the company without even connecting to what those decisions mean to the workers. Leadership is disassociated from the rank and file. Leadership in this position is able to make tougher decisions which have devastating effects to the workers. And it doesn't bother them as much because they don't even know the people who suffer the fate of those decisions.

    What if, instead of this trajectory, there was a different path?

    What if big companies were required to have representatives of labor on their boards? Somebody to 'bring it home.' Somebody to champion the worker's rights?

    What if, when the owner was ready to sell out, that board was shifted to be entirely representative of the workers? What if workers could vote and fire a leader who did not live up to this responsibility? That would have a much better outcome for workers and communities where the company resides.

    Well?

    Where would the money come from to pay off the original owner when he sells out?

    How about the profits the company is earning? What if THAT money was used to pay the owner for selling the company?

    And what if the new owners of the company are actually hired by the workers so that they work for the workers?

    This sounds a whole lot better for society than a company focused on one thing: more profits for the owners.

    PoliTalker anti-troll thread thief disclaimer: If this thread is stolen, plagiarized, will the thief have the nerve to use the entire OP, word for word? Including this disclaimer? If you want my take on it, you'll have to post to this original PoliTalker thread. I refuse to be an enabler for online bullies, so I won't post to a stolen thread. I won't even read it. If you don't see me, PoliTalker, posting in this thread check the author. This might be a hijacked thread, not the original.

    A healthy sustainable business model would not only generate profits for the owners and workers but would also have a responsibility to the workers and the communities they reside in.

    Then you would never see your Detroits and your Flint Michigans, your devastated communities that capitalism left behind.

    And if companies could not be bought and sold like products, then there would be no giant multi-national conglomerates that are so powerful they tell nations what to do.

    Why would we want capitalism telling us what to do?

    We should be the ones who control capitalism, not the other way around.
    Jefferson would have agreed as would Adam Smith.
    Last edited by Old Trapper; 01-30-2019 at 11:54 PM.
    "2Timothy 3 "But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away"

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Old Trapper For This Post:

    PoliTalker (01-31-2019)

  9. #37 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    La Pine, Oregon
    Posts
    5,218
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 1,548 Times in 1,137 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 215 Times in 201 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Threedee View Post
    Leftists, meanwhile, always underestimate the crucial, utmost importance of the property rights of everyone (besides themselves, of course). America was literally founded upon the liberal theory of natural law. Get with it, or GTFO.
    Since you have no clue as to what Natural Law is one can then excuse your obvious ignorance.
    "2Timothy 3 "But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away"

  10. #38 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    La Pine, Oregon
    Posts
    5,218
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 1,548 Times in 1,137 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 215 Times in 201 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Threedee View Post
    Leftists, meanwhile, always underestimate the crucial, utmost importance of the property rights of everyone (besides themselves, of course). America was literally founded upon the liberal theory of natural law. Get with it, or GTFO.
    Since you have no clue as to what Natural Law is one can then excuse your obvious ignorance.

    https://www.henrygeorgefoundation.or...nd-tenure.html

    Recognising that human beings and human societies are part of the natural world George is clear that there must be laws of nature that operate through them and that they need to be discovered, described and acknowledged if man is to realise all his natural potential. The essential characteristic of the natural law that Henry George refers to is that it always operates, whatever people will, think, or do – irrespective of whether it is acknowledged or ignored. Problems arise in the socio-economic sphere, just as they do in the physical process of making artefacts, if the relevant natural laws are ignored. Hence George says: “the evils arising from the unjust and unequal distribution of wealth...are not imposed by natural laws.... they spring solely from social maladjustments which ignore natural laws”. He here identifies the source of “the social problem” as man-made - not natural.

    Probably the most familiar example of the inviolable nature of a natural law is the one that we call ‘the law of gravity’ – it operates irrespective of whether humans acknowledge or ignore it. Human well-being is however clearly affected by the extent to which such a law is understood, described, and taken into account in the adjustments human beings make. When humans fly neither human nature nor the law of gravity cease to operate, but conscious human adjustments have been made to accommodate them. When an infant looses a toy because it falls from its grasp he or she begins the learning process – it may take a Newton and then an Einstein to describe the law more fully and inspire more refined adjustments of human behaviour, but every baby child learns to acknowledge and work in harmony with the same law.

    The singular term ‘natural law’ indicates a type or class of law and does not preclude the existence of the many laws that may fall under that same type or class e.g. statute law, Roman law, English law etc. As far as human comprehension is concerned there does however seem to be a difference between the singular natural law as ‘type’ and particular manifestations of natural laws. Which comes first? Do we first observe phenomena and then identify a commonality that indicates ‘type’ or, aware of the ‘type’, do we then recognise conforming examples. Here George comes to our aid when, in The Science of Political Economy, he indicates that both the ‘inductive’ and the ‘deductive’ modes of human reason are valid and necessary. The inductive or a posteriori method – based on accurate observation and “reasoning from particulars to generals in an ascending line, until we come at last to one of those invariable uniformities that we call laws of nature”, he says, comes first. He continues, having “reached what we feel sure is a law of nature, and as such true in all times and places then an easier and more powerful method of ascertaining the truth is open to us – the method of reasoning in the descending line from generals to particulars. This is the method we call the deductive, or a priori method. For knowing what is the general law, the invariable sequence that we call a law of nature, we have only to discover that a particular comes under it to know what is true in the case of that particular”. George provides further clarification when he says “So far as our reason is concerned, induction must give the facts on which we may proceed to deduction. Deduction can safely be based only on what has been supplied to the reason by induction; and where the validity of this first step is called to question, must apply to induction for proof. Both methods are proper to the careful investigation that we speak of as scientific: induction in its preliminary stages, when it is groping for the law of nature; deduction when it has discovered that law, and is able to proceed by shortcut from the general to the particular, without any further need for the more laborious and, so to speak, uphill method of induction, except to verify its conclusions”. We might further note George’s recognition and use of a third ‘method of investigation’, which has been found to be effective in the discovery of truth in the physical sciences, i.e. where a ‘tentative deduction’ or hypothesis may be employed.

    The quotations cited above show how Henry George saw the importance of natural law in connection with political economy and human behaviour and that it does not only operate in the material world. He goes on to show how it operates through the subtle worlds in which man wills, thinks, and desires and which are critical to the social aspects of human nature and the production and distribution of wealth throughout society.
    "2Timothy 3 "But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away"

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Old Trapper For This Post:

    PoliTalker (01-31-2019)

  12. #39 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Old Trapper View Post
    Since you have no clue as to what Natural Law is one can then excuse your obvious ignorance.

    https://www.henrygeorgefoundation.or...nd-tenure.html.
    That's funny, because, the Founders were influenced by the writings of Locke and Hooker. Since the American Republic was established in the 18th Century, it may surprise you to know that they were not at all influenced by 19th Century economists like George and Marx. Georgism is obviously incompatible with any definition of the term "property," you fucking idiot.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Minister of Truth For This Post:

    Evmetro (01-31-2019), Sirthinksalot (01-31-2019)

  14. #40 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    8,490
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 3,180 Times in 2,409 Posts
    Groans
    376
    Groaned 244 Times in 225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello 10DayUserName,



    You have not shown that a worker managed co-op is any less capable of staying current with the market than an elite management company is. Many businesses managed by dedicated executives make poor decisions which ruin the company. Actually most small business start-ups fail within a few years.
    I also did not say that they could not keep current. Why is it so unfathomable to you to grasp that with 26K business bankruptcies a year, the employees of those 26K businesses would be completely wiped out if their entire life were invested in those companies. Sears and JCP were awesome and now they can barely stay afloat. When was the last time you bought Kodak film? 401K and Ira's spread risk. You want to concentrate risk in the hands of workers with a single holding It is a bad idea for workers.

  15. #41 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    8,490
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 3,180 Times in 2,409 Posts
    Groans
    376
    Groaned 244 Times in 225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello 10DayUserName,



    And some of those workers at that wage would qualify for government assistance programs. It is absurd for taxpayers to be subsidizing workers of a profit-generating business. Why have average wages not risen in proportion to executive earnings? Where is the rising tide that lifts all boats? Why are the rich getting richer as average wages barely keep pace with inflation? I will tell you why. Because capitalism has maximized profits at the expense of the lowest paid workers. Homes foreclosed on in the Great Recession have been purchased by large financial institutions and are being rented out at payments which could be paying off a mortgage, Except the occupants will never own a home because they can't get out of credit card or student debt. As pay and benefits are downsized in jobs, and workers become increasingly dependent on credit just to live paycheck to paycheck (78% of workers,) America is creating a debt bubble that could topple the recent economic gains. Workers mired in such debts are unable to save for retirement, and many cannot even come up with $400 cash on any given day. They are one major financial event away from bankruptcy at all times.

    $15-

    It's coming.
    Most of your post has zero to do with what was being discussed. Sure $15 MW is coming but it won't be anytime soon and when it does come not a single one of my tenants or customers will be better off because you know what I will do----raises prices. All rising minimum wages do is deflate the purchasing power of the dollar even more....and banks generally will not rent out foreclosed homes unless it was already under lease when they took possession of the property or is a commercial operation like an apartment complex. I have no idea what makes you think large financial institutions are in the landlording business. I bought my house at an REO auction for even less than my 50 cent on the dollar offer to the bank for it when it was listed with a realtor. I bought three houses that way, and bought others as listed REO's for a fraction of their tax assessed values. They wanted foreclosed properties off their books period because it is required by regulations that they dispose of them in a prudent manner.

  16. #42 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello 10DayUserName,

    Quote Originally Posted by 10DayUserName View Post
    I also did not say that they could not keep current. Why is it so unfathomable to you to grasp that with 26K business bankruptcies a year, the employees of those 26K businesses would be completely wiped out if their entire life were invested in those companies. Sears and JCP were awesome and now they can barely stay afloat. When was the last time you bought Kodak film? 401K and Ira's spread risk. You want to concentrate risk in the hands of workers with a single holding It is a bad idea for workers.
    Some executives were once workers themselves. They are all simply people. Most people don't know what they can accomplish until they try. This age, with the internet, makes valuable information available at the fingertips. Many use it to learn valuable skills, surprising themselves and others with novel accomplishments. A business is a risk. It involves as much skill as can be mustered, some investment, and some luck. The unforeseen can always derail the best of skill.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  17. #43 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello 10DayUserName,

    Quote Originally Posted by 10DayUserName View Post
    Most of your post has zero to do with what was being discussed. Sure $15 MW is coming but it won't be anytime soon and when it does come not a single one of my tenants or customers will be better off because you know what I will do----raises prices. All rising minimum wages do is deflate the purchasing power of the dollar even more....and banks generally will not rent out foreclosed homes unless it was already under lease when they took possession of the property or is a commercial operation like an apartment complex. I have no idea what makes you think large financial institutions are in the landlording business. I bought my house at an REO auction for even less than my 50 cent on the dollar offer to the bank for it when it was listed with a realtor. I bought three houses that way, and bought others as listed REO's for a fraction of their tax assessed values. They wanted foreclosed properties off their books period because it is required by regulations that they dispose of them in a prudent manner.
    If it's so easy to raise prices, why wait until MW goes to 15? Well, we both know why you can't do that. You can't raise prices independently of the market without suffering a decline of sales volume. The only businesses which will raise prices as a result of rising labor costs are those which have most of their costs being MW labor. Operating expenses such as rent or mortgage, utilities, capital expenditure payments, business loan payments, materials, etc, will not rise proportionally with MW rise.

    A rise in MW will not translate to a proportional rise in product prices. But it will generate more consumerism and a stronger economy.

    Raising prices to reflect rising MW also won't work if a competitor automates. Automation of most jobs is coming anyway. When that happens and many jobs vanish, our economy will have no other choice but to tax the rich more and simply pay people for not working.

    The law of supply and demand was abandoned a long time ago for wages because the point was reached where too many people sought too few jobs. The wages that some desperate applicants would accept - were too low to live on. Since all wages are influenced by the lowest wages, the result was not enough money in the hands of consumers, a lack of purchasing volume, and a muted economy. The Great Depression made America realize that there needed to be a law requiring employers to pay a basic minimum wage. We have not had a depression since the MW was enacted.

    "It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country." FDR, 1933

    "Using 2018 inflation-adjusted dollars, the federal minimum wage peaked at $11.79 per hour in 1968.[8][9][10] If the minimum wage in 1968 had kept up with labor's productivity growth, it would have reached $19.33 in 2017." - wiki

    That increase in productivity resulted in fabulous increases of profitability for capitalists. Obviously, those increases were not equitably shared with the workers who produced them. Further, since productivity has risen, that meant fewer workers were needed. Not only are those workers paid inequitably to the profits taken, more workers were laid off and fewer retained. How did the American economy continue after so many consumers were shut out of wealth acquisition? I'll tell you how: DEBT! Big finance figured out how to get America on the hook for more debt than ever before. Capitalists have bled the nation and it's people dry by not only extracting as much wealth as possible out of them, but as much FUTURE wealth as well. Now the capitalists are out of tricks. The final hand is about to be played: AI automation which will eliminate labor costs almost completely. What's next? Placing liens on the unborn? (good luck with that) Obviously capitalism as we know it is in the process of playing out.

    We will need to introduce more and more socialism into our economy if we are to survive.

    The Universal Basic Income is coming.

    Good news: Government will not need to be as large. Many government workers whose job it is to expend great effort as a part of a huge bureaucracy in order to figure out who qualifies for government assistance programs and who does not - will no longer be needed. Everybody will qualify. Including those once-employed government workers. Government will be forced to implement a massive automated payment system, with no questions asked. Just cut regular checks to every citizen and tax the super-rich capitalists to pay for it all. And you know what? The super-rich capitalists will be able to afford it without batting an eye. After they almost completely eliminate labor, their profits will soar. But only if there are customers with money to buy their products. Without consumerism, there would be no economy. Government will guarantee that with the UBI.

    Until we reach that point, workers will get a better deal if corporate boards answer to the workers.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  18. #44 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    La Pine, Oregon
    Posts
    5,218
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 1,548 Times in 1,137 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 215 Times in 201 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Threedee View Post
    That's funny, because, the Founders were influenced by the writings of Locke and Hooker. Since the American Republic was established in the 18th Century, it may surprise you to know that they were not at all influenced by 19th Century economists like George and Marx. Georgism is obviously incompatible with any definition of the term "property," you fucking idiot.
    I actually pity poor fucking idiots like you who have such a limited grasp of knowledge, or history. And yet, rather then being able to learn from those much better educated then you, you think of yourself as a "teacher". I cannot imagine what a worthless life one such as yourself must lead being so utterly stupid:

    https://www.newsweek.com/2014/02/07/...ng-245454.html


    President Obama's State of the Union speech last week focused on America's severe and growing inequality, but he stopped short of repeating the Founding Fathers' many warnings that this condition could doom American democracy.

    The founders, despite decades of rancorous disagreements about almost every other aspect of their grand experiment, agreed that America would survive and thrive only if there was widespread ownership of land and businesses.

    George Washington, nine months before his inauguration as the first president, predicted that America "will be the most favorable country of any kind in the world for persons of industry and frugality, possessed of moderate capital, to inhabit." And, he continued, "it will not be less advantageous to the happiness of the lowest class of people, because of the equal distribution of property."

    The second president, John Adams, feared "monopolies of land" would destroy the nation and that a business aristocracy born of inequality would manipulate voters, creating "a system of subordination to all... The capricious will of one or a very few" dominating the rest. Unless constrained, Adams wrote, "the rich and the proud" would wield economic and political power that "will destroy all the equality and liberty, with the consent and acclamations of the people themselves."

    James Madison, the Constitution's main author, described inequality as an evil, saying government should prevent "an immoderate, and especially unmerited, accumulation of riches." He favored "the silent operation of laws which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity, and raise extreme indigents towards a state of comfort."

    Alexander Hamilton, who championed manufacturing and banking as the first Treasury secretary, also argued for widespread ownership of assets, warning in 1782 that, "whenever a discretionary power is lodged in any set of men over the property of their neighbors, they will abuse it."
    "2Timothy 3 "But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away"

  19. #45 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    53,510
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 24,555 Times in 17,085 Posts
    Groans
    5,280
    Groaned 4,575 Times in 4,254 Posts

    Default

    When we were pushing for a 15 dollar min. wage increase before the election, the owner of Papa Romanos cried about the added cost. He said if it passed, he would have to add 50 cents to each order. That was a big deal to him. He lives in a multi million dollar estate that held election parties for Bush.
    Adding to wages does not mean a commensurate additional cost to customers. There are lots of costs that are not effected. The small labor cost is not going to make prices climb like the right pretends. It has no impact of competitiveness because all will have to pay a higher rate.

Similar Threads

  1. The 20 Companies with the Worst Pay Gaps Between CEOs and Workers
    By Text Drivers are Killers in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-13-2018, 06:50 PM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-17-2018, 10:15 AM
  3. How to Fix Sky-high CEO Pay in Companies that Pay Workers Like Serfs
    By signalmankenneth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 04-26-2014, 03:58 PM
  4. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-21-2013, 10:09 PM
  5. Have you bought stocks in companies...
    By Damocles in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-16-2009, 08:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •