General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > The Pit
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Jack's raging erection
 
Jack's raging erection's Avatar
 
The only thing that trickles down...

... is leadership. It's probably a no shit thread, but leadership requires authority. Authority is required to get anything accomplished at this point, or so I think. So, how do we persuade authoritative figures to work with us to make a better America?

Clearly, the whining and bitching of OWS didn't work. Honest, hard work seems to be frowned upon in this country, seeing how we reward such behavior (You take your minimum wage and love it, assholes! /management). Then, after giving no real reward other than a good job, or 'atta boy if you work hard, they suddenly feel entitled to hard work if they pay you anything at all. Hell, some managerial douches I've met expect you to bend over backward for them just because they graced you with their presence!

So, how do we solve the entitlement issue? That problem is everywhere. I don't owe you hard work simply for subsistence wages, but I don't deserve $15/hr for sloughing off either. How does this difference get reconciled? Keep in mind, they already are forcing us to work internships for free as a sort of "trial run" for long term employment.

The way I see it, the value system somehow got screwed up. Price is the determinate for the value of something in a healthy economy. If the demand for honest, hard work is so high, why is the price set so low for it? Then, for a person whose principal function is little more than decision making, why is their labor so overpriced? Also, on a tangent, what makes them feel entitled to tax cuts on top of being grossly overpaid? Do they not understand that taxes on the wealthy business owners wouldn't have to occur if they were more fair in pricing the labor of their employees? Have they forgotten that the same rules of accountability they try to force upon me apply to them as well? Maybe Gen Y and the millennials aren't the problem here. Maybe we're all just waiting on someone with authority to own up to what they ought to be accountable for, or for the whole system to collapse because not a single person with authority understood the concept of accountability.

So, how do we force the so called leaders of this country to be accountable for their actions? Failing that, how do we strip them of their authority? We can elect a new president and congress, but we cannot elect a new CEO of some company. I think the task is impossible, now that the bailouts have occurred. That was essentially the United States government endorsing the idea that these businesses are not to be held accountable for failure. I guess that was preferable to a few million more unemployed. Like it matters since there are millions unemployed anyway. The sheer idiocy of it all. Neither presidential candidate will stand up against this. Essentially, we're voting based on how quickly we want to give big business everything it ever wanted without having to deal with any consequences of it.

Well, I'm sorry to say, but there is no escape from consequences. It's only a matter of time. The more we delay, the worse they will be. They were bad before we started deferring consequences. At present, I lack the imagination to determine how they have grown since. God, help us (You know, that elegant, pithy of saying we're really fucked).
__________________
My real name is Shaved Dog's Ass.
Old 08-10-2012, 05:43 AM Jack's raging erection is offline  
Reply With Quote
#1  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

[H]ard|On
tell me i is retarded and i will just potato
 
[H]ard|On's Avatar
 
Vote Obama and hope for the best.
__________________
Make Genmay Great Again
Old 08-10-2012, 05:50 AM [H]ard|On is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2  

JPF_
 
JPF_'s Avatar
 
You could sum up what you just said by saying this;


Man is innately corrupt. No matter what we do, it will always be a corrupt system and corrupt people. Only until we build computers that would have an no bias based system can we truly live in a world with no corruption.
Old 08-10-2012, 05:50 AM JPF_ is offline  
Reply With Quote
#3  

[H]ard|On
tell me i is retarded and i will just potato
 
[H]ard|On's Avatar
 
__________________
Make Genmay Great Again
Old 08-10-2012, 05:50 AM [H]ard|On is offline  
Reply With Quote
#4  

Caelum
 
Umm....labor demand curve works just like the regular demand curve. It slopes down and to the right. The more that is demanded, the lower the wages go. So get a job work hard, if you're not rewarded, leave and get a different job. Rinse repeat. At what point in your theory would enough be enough to work hard for your salary? You should always work hard. If the demand is high, as you say, there should be no problem finding another job. The problem now is the demand is NOT high and employers know they can take advantage of workers because "well at least you have a job." Which is also in the supply and demand of labor curves but I can't remember where and how (I just took macro and micro economics, got 2 A's and can't remember that )

And the management didn't just walk in off the street. Well shit maybe they did, but if they did they started low and then proved they were worth more and were promoted because their marginal productivity was higher than the guy who is still @ minimum wage. Why should the management be punished for excelling? Not counting the companies that were bailed out of course!
And I'm sorry but management is a necessary evil in business. Otherwise you just have 100 retard programmers or whatever going their own pace with no direction or drive pissing away the companies money. So management makes the company more money, hence their higher salary.

My problem with the tax the hell out of the rich is this:
IMO that will destroy the desire to be great. The idea is in our culture that if you work hard and get a good job you'll make money. Do real well and you'll make even more money. But if that money is taken away from the top earners to give to the bottom, why work harder than the guy next to you. Any money you earn because of your hard work is going to be taken away from you and given to the guy who doesn't work as hard as you. And maybe thats selfish of me, and of us, but if I worked for something its mine. Not yours. You are not entitled to the benefits of my hard work. Sort of like a group project in school. Why should the guy who never came to the group meetings of a group project be rewarded with the grade for my hard work? This is the supply of labor curve. Increase wages and more people will want to do it.

Or you (universal you) could go here before you get your philosophy degree:
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/home.htm
Do some research and dont expect maximum wages for 0 experience. Get over yourself. You dont deserve a trophy for participating so shut the fuck up and take responsibility for your own actions and the fact that you have a $40,000 sociology degree and can only get a job at starbux. Dont be a dumb ass. Get a useful degree.
(BTW http://www.bls.gov/ooh/life-physical...ciologists.htm there are only 4,000 sociologists in the country and are only expected to increase by 700 in the next 10 years) DONT BE A FUCKING DUMB ASS AND DO SOMETHING USEFUL!



To one of your points that I went back and reread
Quote:
If the demand for honest, hard work is so high, why is the price set so low for it? Then, for a person whose principal function is little more than decision making, why is their labor so overpriced? Also, on a tangent, what makes them feel entitled to tax cuts on top of being grossly overpaid? Do they not understand that taxes on the wealthy business owners wouldn't have to occur if they were more fair in pricing the labor of their employees?
Take a look right here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_..._and_tax_rates

If "rich" person A wants to hire you, and they make $388,351, they are taxed35% for a total of $135,922 taken out just for the privilege of earning money. Now, person A works for his money. But you want a job. So do 4 other people. So he has now $252,428 to employ 5 people. He has lets say $102,428 reserve for himself, or whatever and now only has $150,000 to employ 5 people. $30,000 per person salary. The idea of reducing his taxes is in theory that instead of having 150k to employ 5 @ 30k he will have 180k to employ either employ 6 people @ 30k or employ 5 people at 36k. Even if he decides to not increase your wages, if he spends that money on products, that money is being put in the hands of companies who can employ more people due to an increase in demand of the goods he is buying with his extra money. But that applies to anyone getting a raise, not just the rich


And look at this more about taxing the rich more:
http://www.heritage.org/federalbudge...income-earners
Quote:
Top earners are the target for new tax increases, but the federal income tax system is already highly progressive. The top 10 percent of income earners paid 71 percent of all federal income taxes in 2009 though they earned 43 percent of all income. The bottom 50 percent paid 2 percent of income taxes but earned 13 percent of total income.

Last edited by Caelum; 08-10-2012 at 07:37 AM..
Old 08-10-2012, 07:31 AM Caelum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#5  

aoeoae
 
aoeoae's Avatar
 
The entire executive branch is hand-picked. Nineteen of the last twenty-three U.S. presidents have been members of the Trilateral Commission. The Trilateral Commission is financed by the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds. Don’t tell me–
Old 08-10-2012, 10:14 AM aoeoae is offline  
Reply With Quote
#6  

Jack's raging erection
 
Jack's raging erection's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caelum View Post
Umm....labor demand curve works just like the regular demand curve. It slopes down and to the right. The more that is demanded, the lower the wages go. So get a job work hard, if you're not rewarded, leave and get a different job. Rinse repeat. At what point in your theory would enough be enough to work hard for your salary? You should always work hard. If the demand is high, as you say, there should be no problem finding another job. The problem now is the demand is NOT high and employers know they can take advantage of workers because "well at least you have a job." Which is also in the supply and demand of labor curves but I can't remember where and how (I just took macro and micro economics, got 2 A's and can't remember that )

And the management didn't just walk in off the street. Well shit maybe they did, but if they did they started low and then proved they were worth more and were promoted because their marginal productivity was higher than the guy who is still @ minimum wage. Why should the management be punished for excelling? Not counting the companies that were bailed out of course!
And I'm sorry but management is a necessary evil in business. Otherwise you just have 100 retard programmers or whatever going their own pace with no direction or drive pissing away the companies money. So management makes the company more money, hence their higher salary.

My problem with the tax the hell out of the rich is this:
IMO that will destroy the desire to be great. The idea is in our culture that if you work hard and get a good job you'll make money. Do real well and you'll make even more money. But if that money is taken away from the top earners to give to the bottom, why work harder than the guy next to you. Any money you earn because of your hard work is going to be taken away from you and given to the guy who doesn't work as hard as you. And maybe thats selfish of me, and of us, but if I worked for something its mine. Not yours. You are not entitled to the benefits of my hard work. Sort of like a group project in school. Why should the guy who never came to the group meetings of a group project be rewarded with the grade for my hard work? This is the supply of labor curve. Increase wages and more people will want to do it.

Or you (universal you) could go here before you get your philosophy degree:
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/home.htm
Do some research and dont expect maximum wages for 0 experience. Get over yourself. You dont deserve a trophy for participating so shut the fuck up and take responsibility for your own actions and the fact that you have a $40,000 sociology degree and can only get a job at starbux. Dont be a dumb ass. Get a useful degree.
(BTW http://www.bls.gov/ooh/life-physical...ciologists.htm there are only 4,000 sociologists in the country and are only expected to increase by 700 in the next 10 years) DONT BE A FUCKING DUMB ASS AND DO SOMETHING USEFUL!



To one of your points that I went back and reread

Take a look right here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_..._and_tax_rates

If "rich" person A wants to hire you, and they make $388,351, they are taxed35% for a total of $135,922 taken out just for the privilege of earning money. Now, person A works for his money. But you want a job. So do 4 other people. So he has now $252,428 to employ 5 people. He has lets say $102,428 reserve for himself, or whatever and now only has $150,000 to employ 5 people. $30,000 per person salary. The idea of reducing his taxes is in theory that instead of having 150k to employ 5 @ 30k he will have 180k to employ either employ 6 people @ 30k or employ 5 people at 36k. Even if he decides to not increase your wages, if he spends that money on products, that money is being put in the hands of companies who can employ more people due to an increase in demand of the goods he is buying with his extra money. But that applies to anyone getting a raise, not just the rich


And look at this more about taxing the rich more:
http://www.heritage.org/federalbudge...income-earners

Did you just contradict yourself several times in the same post? Told me to work hard for shitty pay because you think I'm some sort of lazy tool, then you complain about how taxing the rich (essentially working for not as much pay as they would like ) is taking away the incentive to be great?

+ YouTube Video
ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


Also, let's be honest here. The reason he hires 5 people @ 30k is because he needed 5 people to either maintain or increase to some level of production, that's the market price for it, and he's making enough profit that he feels like sharing with the rest of us to hire that many people this quarter. Lowering the tax on the rich does absolutely nothing to change that fact. All it's going to do is make the rich guy richer, and take more money away from the government, who is supporting all of the unemployed people that can't find work because the demand for labor, production... hell, everything is so low right now. That's a vicious cycle, too. Demand for labor falls, less production, less profit because people don't have the money to spend, rinse and repeat. Even then, accepting substandard jobs is just as bad. The economy continues to shrink, but they fudge the numbers to make it seem like we're growing. We're not. We've pissed away so much potential economic gain that it's laughable to say we're recovering. It's absurd!
__________________
My real name is Shaved Dog's Ass.
Old 08-10-2012, 10:32 AM Jack's raging erection is offline  
Reply With Quote
#7  

Liquid_Table
Waiting for that fateful day of bannage, c'mon Kyle be a man and push the button you big fairy.
 
Fuck, forgot this was a pit thread. Disregard.

Last edited by Liquid_Table; 08-10-2012 at 10:45 AM..
Old 08-10-2012, 10:36 AM Liquid_Table is offline  
Reply With Quote
#8  

5ive
 
5ive's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caelum View Post
Umm....labor demand curve works just like the regular demand curve. It slopes down and to the right. The more that is demanded, the lower the wages go. So get a job work hard, if you're not rewarded, leave and get a different job. Rinse repeat. At what point in your theory would enough be enough to work hard for your salary? You should always work hard. If the demand is high, as you say, there should be no problem finding another job. The problem now is the demand is NOT high and employers know they can take advantage of workers because "well at least you have a job." Which is also in the supply and demand of labor curves but I can't remember where and how (I just took macro and micro economics, got 2 A's and can't remember that )

Labor is not as mobile as you think it is
__________________
Chicho is full of win.
Member #5 of the Romeoz God R.I.P Collective
Old 08-10-2012, 10:40 AM 5ive is offline  
Reply With Quote
#9  

Xcric
i have 3 girlfriends but they dont know it yet
 
Xcric's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPF_ View Post
You could sum up what you just said by saying this;


Man is innately corrupt. No matter what we do, it will always be a corrupt system and corrupt people. Only until we build computers that would have an no bias based system can we truly live in a world with no corruption.

if we're innately corrupt can we even build a computer that isn't also innately corrupt? assuming of course we're talking about an ai advanced enough to replace us.
__________________
“My sorrow: to dream of simple times and wake in mine . . . .”
—Ola DaRiol, “Regrets”
Old 08-10-2012, 10:51 AM Xcric is offline  
Reply With Quote
#10  

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caelum View Post
Take a look right here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_..._and_tax_rates

If "rich" person A wants to hire you, and they make $388,351, they are taxed35% for a total of $135,922 taken out just for the privilege of earning money. Now, person A works for his money. But you want a job. So do 4 other people. So he has now $252,428 to employ 5 people. He has lets say $102,428 reserve for himself, or whatever and now only has $150,000 to employ 5 people. $30,000 per person salary. The idea of reducing his taxes is in theory that instead of having 150k to employ 5 @ 30k he will have 180k to employ either employ 6 people @ 30k or employ 5 people at 36k. Even if he decides to not increase your wages, if he spends that money on products, that money is being put in the hands of companies who can employ more people due to an increase in demand of the goods he is buying with his extra money. But that applies to anyone getting a raise, not just the rich

[Morbo]MARGINAL TAX RATES DO NOT WORK THAT WAY[/Morbo]

In the worst case (married, filing separately), that person will pay $120,491.24, an effective tax rate of 31%. In the best case (married, filing jointly), that person will pay $105,061.34, an effective tax rate of 27%.

However, capital formation for ventures of the sort you're talking about are funded by savings, not income. Savings taxation varies based on term (gains in the short term, taxed the same as income, midterm at either 10% or 20%, depending on the saver's income bracket, long term at 8-18%, depending on the saver's income bracket), and that's just the worst case (assuming it's being used to generate a capital gain). If it's sitting there in a money market account, earning a piddling 0.1% interest rate, that 8-20% (that's taxed only on the gain) is going to be pretty negligible. It's also worth noting that people with those kinds of AGIs 1) don't make them from income, and 2) have many ways to escape taxation (take, for example, Mitt Romney, who paid an effective tax rate, for the returns he elected to release, of ~13%). When dealing with income, it's worth noting that only 1.5% of all households manage to bring in 250,000 or above. There are literally millions of businesses out there that employ people whose owners are not in that income bracket.

So, you've taken a pretty simple issue, confused it in your little mind, and managed to come out not only with the wrong numbers, but also the wrong conclusion. Congratulations, have a participant ribbon.
__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.

Last edited by Jehannum; 08-10-2012 at 11:43 AM..
Old 08-10-2012, 11:34 AM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#11  

cc88
 
cc88's Avatar
 
Old 08-10-2012, 01:02 PM cc88 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#12  

[H]ard|On
tell me i is retarded and i will just potato
 
[H]ard|On's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caelum View Post
If "rich" person A wants to hire you, and they make $388,351, they are taxed35% for a total of $135,922 taken out just for the privilege of earning money. Now, person A works for his money. But you want a job. So do 4 other people. So he has now $252,428 to employ 5 people. He has lets say $102,428 reserve for himself, or whatever and now only has $150,000 to employ 5 people. $30,000 per person salary. The idea of reducing his taxes is in theory that instead of having 150k to employ 5 @ 30k he will have 180k to employ either employ 6 people @ 30k or employ 5 people at 36k. Even if he decides to not increase your wages, if he spends that money on products, that money is being put in the hands of companies who can employ more people due to an increase in demand of the goods he is buying with his extra money. But that applies to anyone getting a raise, not just the rich


And look at this more about taxing the rich more:
http://www.heritage.org/federalbudge...income-earners



Right except in reality that person isn't going to increase his employee salaries, nor invest it into products or the company.

Your pure hypothetical is fun to read but not accurate or relevant. If this "Person A" is hiring 5 people out of the blue, will this increase profits? Or is he doing it just for shits and gigs? You're skipping the meat and potatoes of real business. If the new hires aren't helping make more money then there is no reason to hire them in the first place.

If they are, then his total income is now more than whatever arbitrary 300k you said it was. Voila, your example falls apart It's not about taxes so much as hiring people versus profit.
__________________
Make Genmay Great Again
Old 08-10-2012, 03:25 PM [H]ard|On is offline  
Reply With Quote
#13  

joemama
Watch Toomer burn those cowboys. How bout them cowboys?
 
joemama's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by [H]ard|On View Post
Right except in reality that person isn't going to increase his employee salaries, nor invest it into products or the company.

Your pure hypothetical is fun to read but not accurate or relevant. If this "Person A" is hiring 5 people out of the blue, will this increase profits? Or is he doing it just for shits and gigs? You're skipping the meat and potatoes of real business. If the new hires aren't helping make more money then there is no reason to hire them in the first place.

If they are, then his total income is now more than whatever arbitrary 300k you said it was. Voila, your example falls apart It's not about taxes so much as hiring people versus profit.
But giving that extra money to the IRS so that our government can use it wisely for the good of all Americans is also hypothetical....if not outright unrealistic.
__________________
Rapid-fire double bass of the GenMay dru[M]mers collective

Syndrome of a Downs- drums/songwriter
._--_|\
/········\
\_.--Bumfuck Egypt
.......v
Old 08-10-2012, 03:42 PM joemama is offline  
Reply With Quote
#14  

Xcric
i have 3 girlfriends but they dont know it yet
 
Xcric's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by joemama View Post
But giving that extra money to the IRS so that our government can use it wisely for the good of all Americans is also hypothetical....if not outright unrealistic.

yeah but if you're insinuating that the government shouldn't get our money because of that, then why give alcoholics a paycheck, they'll just spend it on booze. or fat people. they'll go buy more food.
__________________
“My sorrow: to dream of simple times and wake in mine . . . .”
—Ola DaRiol, “Regrets”
Old 08-10-2012, 03:50 PM Xcric is offline  
Reply With Quote
#15  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:17 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.