Sorry, It's Not A 'Law Of Capitalism' That You Pay Your Employees As Little As Possible
A great article on one of the reasons why our economy isn't recovering as it should.
TL:DR - Companies are making record profits and using that to either pad their accounts or pay their top management. This is starving the middle class causing our economy to falter instead of recover. Read the article you lazy bastard. Get the details before you post your opinion.
I'm going to refrain from posting my opinion and instead write "Play nice, everybody."
Costco- The business model all companies should strive for
Great profits, great benefits, great employee retention rates.
This idea works, but not enough companies use it.
Don't worry, the wealth will trickle down...
Cone_Junky wrote: Don't worry, the wealth will trickle down...
Yeah, that's called a "Golden Shower" and it usually isn't as welcome as you'd think it might be.
wiki said: In 2003, he was charged with civil securities fraud by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.[6] He agreed to a permanent ban from the securities industry and paid a $2 million fine plus a $2 million disgorgement.[7]
Sounds like a good moral compass for how to run a business.
Sadly this isn't going to change for any publicly-traded company. Once they start squeezing employees, to go back they have to take that value back from shareholders. On paper the shareholders lose money, plain and simple. They're not in it for the long haul, they'll dump that stock like a hot potato if they want to, to the shareholder there is no "long term."
Poop, it also illustrates that this guy knows the other side. He doesn't hide from the fact that he used big data to play the system against itself.
That's maybe his best supporting evidence. Blodget knows how to use data to his advantage.
Now, we don't know how accurate his data is, but it seems to jive with pretty everything we've heard from every other news source and the Fed. Jobs are down. Wages are down. Profits are up.
Not reading the article right now, will read it later tonight, but I'm going to put my views out there:
1: You get what you pay for. This includes employees.
2: We need to do one of the following three things: Stop trade with countries that have no or little labor laws and minimum wage laws, Place big trade embargos upon said countries, or Stop with the minimum wage.
I have a pair of shoes that my Grandpa gave me. They were made in Wisconsin. He had them for 30 years, refinished them once. I'll probably send them in in about 3 years to do the same. This same pair of shoes costs about $300 if bought today, because of the quality of the materials and craftsmanship--I can guarantee you these craftsmen are making a decent wage. I will probably own these shoes until I die, unless I pass them on as well.
I have another pair of shoes that were made in Slovakia. When the soles wear out, I will probably have them replaced if I can find a shoe repair shop--they seem to be hard to find nowadays. Why? Because of my third pair of shoes:
I have a third pair of shoes. Made in India. Cost less than half of the Slovakian ones, and 6 times less than a new full retail price on the Wisconsin shoes. They're nice, but everything is a step down in quality. Some unfinished edges inside, less stiches, but still a nice shoe. When this one wears out, I'll throw them away and buy another. Why? It isn't the quality of the shoe--I'd pay to get it resoled, but the price to get it resoled is the same as the cost of the damn shoe.
Yeah, it seems crazy that the Hannity/Limbaugh crowd refuses to acknowledge the stagnating wages of the middle class since the early 80s, or when they do, lowering the taxes for the wealthy further will somehow alleviate it.
Datsun310Guy wrote: And the senior managers and owners add insult to injury by blaming the employees for this: "If they want to get paid more, they should start their own company. Or get a better job." Where I work they refuse to pay any profit related bonus's or incentive to our employees as the owner doesn't feel they have any "risk" in the business (only he has risk in the game). If we get a large order or score a high profit order? We get told; "you should because that is your job". To me our turnover is too high and we can keep folks longer.........blah, blah, blah, broken record over here, blah, blah...
if it sucks so bad, then find a better job.
In the current climate it sometimes is not that easy to do. You almost get the idea that they know that.
It's hard to believe this is not going to backfire though. It's like these companies are putting almost no value on experienced long time (not management level) workers. Worker moral and loyalty are obviously affected. There is even a big trend toward contract / leased employees.
The only real hope is that as the economy recovers, some companies, maybe new ones, will use a bit more employee centric model which will easily steal employees (and their knowledge) from the current model companies. Not sure companies can break themselves from this trend though... it looks so good on paper...
This is the prime reason why I really don't like public companies, bottom line / numbers are king. Of course, there is no guarantee a private company won't be run in the same way.
z31maniac wrote: Yeah, it seems crazy that the Hannity/Limbaugh crowd refuses to acknowledge the stagnating wages of the middle class since the early 80s, or when they do, lowering the taxes for the wealthy further will somehow alleviate it.
Ugh. I can't believe anybody actually listens to LImbaugh thinking they're going to learn something.
I learn how to talk like Limbaugh.
Another thing I've noticed as a recent college grad is that many of my peers are working full-time jobs with benefits, which is great, but they are only getting $12-16/hr.
That's just enough money to pay rent and utilities, and pay back student loan debt, but not much else. If your car leaves you sit you better hope you have a friendly co-worker who will pick you up or a family member who can.
What I hate is that instead of our government incentivising companies to pay a larger number of employees a better wage, we'll tax the rich owners of the companies, and give handouts to those who don't work at all.
I'm all for taxing the living crap out of people who get rich doing nothing, especially sports stars and thug-life rappers, but we need to find a better way of convince the rich to pay more people to do stuff.
What if we tied personal income tax rates to unemployment rates? All the rich folks would get together and hires lots of maids/butlers ala Downton Abbey.
PHeller wrote: That's just enough money to pay rent and utilities, and pay back student loan debt, but not much else. If your car leaves you sit you better hope you have a friendly co-worker who will pick you up or a family member who can.
Whole nother can of worms right there. My dad was able to pay for his (private) college tuition room and board in a summer. I worked year round, made more than probably 99% of kids my age, saved 90% of what I earned from age 13, and even with 8k in scholarship money was only able to pay for about 75% of my college career at a state school (4 years and 3 summer school classes). Thankfully my parents picked up the rest, but the fact is that college tuition has outpaced inflation for how many years?
This from a man who gamed the Stock Market Internet bubble until it went boom, got caught in fraud, and is banned from trading? Cute. He thinks he has a point, but he doesn't follow it through and find the drawbacks. Massive Profits don't last forever, ya know.
PHeller wrote: Another thing I've noticed as a recent college grad is that many of my peers are working full-time jobs with benefits, which is great, but they are only getting $12-16/hr. That's just enough money to pay rent and utilities, and pay back student loan debt, but not much else.
Man it's a good thing I never had any student loan debt.
So if company owners want to keep earnings they are selfish and people who work for them want to take home more money that isn't selfish. Aren't they both being selfish and being motivated by self interests?
Honestly if you want to make more money then find a way to make it happen. Complaining about unequal pay for unequal skill set is crazy. Do you think there is equal pay in the White House? Does Hillary deserve more pay than the staff? Hell yes!
Hillary doesn't have a job.
PHeller wrote: His data... seems to jive with pretty everything we've heard from every other news source and the Fed. Jobs are down. Wages are down. Profits are up.
Profits are up by what metric? Dollar volume, or percent of revenue, or ROI?
It's an honest - but valid - question. Each measures a different thing, and $ means less than % which means less than ROI.
So wanting to EARN a living wage is on the same scale as wanting to hoard millions/billions of dollars?
How do you "make it happen" while living paycheck to paycheck? What do you do when confronted with an unexpected medical/household expense? Borrow $20K from your parents to start a business? Hire a lobbyist to make laws that allow you to hoard more money? Buy a politician?
Workers aren't asking for a handout. They are workers, so obviously they realize WORKING is a way to make money.
PHeller wrote: Another thing I've noticed as a recent college grad is that many of my peers are working full-time jobs with benefits, which is great, but they are only getting $12-16/hr. That's just enough money to pay rent and utilities, and pay back student loan debt, but not much else. If your car leaves you sit you better hope you have a friendly co-worker who will pick you up or a family member who can. What I hate is that instead of our government incentivising companies to pay a larger number of employees a better wage, we'll tax the rich owners of the companies, and give handouts to those who don't work at all. I'm all for taxing the living crap out of people who get rich doing nothing, especially sports stars and thug-life rappers, but we need to find a better way of convince the rich to pay more people to do stuff. What if we tied personal income tax rates to unemployment rates? All the rich folks would get together and hires lots of maids/butlers ala Downton Abbey.
This is one of those scenarios where one REALLY needs to step back and look at a degree as an investment, not a requirement.
Jobs that pay that much and MORE are available without a degree.
I still believe that kids are pressured to go to college and get a degree without anyone really stopping them and forcing them to think and do their research about what they're getting into.
And what you just posted is the direct result.
Employee-owned corporations are the solution. I work for one, and I'm amazed every day how "right" it is. We are the share holders - the employees - not outside investors with no interest in the business its self.
I've worked for large multinational corporations, mom & pop owned businesses, and everything else in between. But this is the first employee-owned business I've worked for, and I never intend to work for anything else.
Mr Cone, For me work life is like a game with it's own set of rules. If you want to make more money then figure out a way to win. When you lose at racing do you think it is unfair or do you try to figure out how to do better within the rules?
My bad using Hillary as an example. Please insert John instead.
I'm going to try and play nice here, but some of you guys crack me up. I've owned my own company, worked for many others, and used to interview hundreds of corporations. My father is a partner in 3 companies currently as well.
First, you took the job, if it isn't what you want, go somewhere else. It makes zero difference how much a company banks or pays anyone else. You agreed to a salary when you took the job to begin with. Granted I think they need to be fair, but most people have no concept of the cost of doing business.
Companies exist to make a profit, nothing else. I know that's harsh, but it's true. Sure people like Tim and family love what they do and bring joy to us in the process, but if they didn't make money, they wouldn't do it. To do so, they have to make decisions that affect their employees, and I'm sure they do so as well as possible, but along the way, someone isn't going to like it. It doesn't mean they are bad though. All corporations aren't bad. They are like people, and you can't change human nature as much as many like to think they can. So what you end up with are companies that are decent, and some that are not.
By the same token, businesses get operating and investment money by floating it in the market. If they didn't have this, many would not exist to give anyone a job. And yes, the people that own the company have a HUGE investment compared to us that simply work at them, and that includes stockholders. I've made money and lost money on stocks, and you bank on a company's success. Rightly so they should get dividends, etc. as without them, you might be on the unemployment line.
And to say companies are making record profits is simply not true. Maybe a few are, but as a whole, most are struggling for survival right now. This is such a gross overstatement. I know our industry is decimated, and many I talk to are facing similar situations. In fact, only a few industries that I'm associated with are doing well, and most are on govt. contracts in a few specific areas.
In the end I think it boils down to this. Each person is responsible for themselves. I've never, ever thought a company controlled my future. If I've thought I was mistreated, I simply found a place that fit better. A company is going to look out for itself first, and while most I know value their employees and treat them well, they will do what they have to for survival.
Sorry rant off....
You'll need to log in to post.
