Forum Post: Correct me if I'm wrong...
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 6, 2011, 12:16 a.m. EST by taboo
(8)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
but, I have never been offered a job from a poor person. Now, before any of you jump on me for being "insensitive," my view is simply this: the employers are the wealth creators for others. All you have to do is look at the Microsoft Corporation. How many millionaires has Bill Gates created? The last time I checked, none of those people had taken advantage of me or made their money on my back. I would much rather have "trickle-down" wealth than "trickle-up" poverty.
And Ken Lay was a wealth-killer. All those people at Enron worked just as hard as anyone else, and were the "smartest guys in the room", until their company was destroyed.
Many CEO's are hard-working dedicated people. Some of them are hard-working sociopaths. Some of them are hard-working narcissists. One of those killed Merrill Lynch by choosing yes-men, and walked away with over $180 million.
We need to have laws and regulations to protect us and our economy from the powerful grifters, as best we can. And this economy has been trickled on enough!
The middle class is the bedrock of a healthy American economy.
So let me get this straight.
The only people who have seen inflation-adjusted wage increases in the last FORTY YEARS are the wealthiest minority of earners.
During the past 10 years, including the worst parts of the recession/depression/whatever the hell you wanna call it, the wealthiest 1% of the population has gotten exponentially wealthier, while the majority of workers have seen their wages stagnate or drop. Tax rates for the wealthy are actually lower now than at any time for at least 50 years (though I've seen some figures saying 70 years - but let's be "conservative").
You claim that wealth "trickles down."
You claim that wealthy people are the "job creators."
If what you claim is true, can you please simply explain why as the wealthy have gotten wealthier, everyone else has gotten poorer? Likewise, if the wealthy are wealthier than ever, shouldn't we have MORE and BETTER jobs, not fewer and worse?
Your logic simply makes no sense. I very honestly have asked these question to at least 20 "pro business" people and haven't received a single decent answer. The answer, of course, is pretty freaking obvious.
as a business owner (or wealthy person if that's the term you prefer), why on earth would I risk finances, capital, and other resources in a time of severe uncertainty? One of the issues right now and for the last few decades is heavy government involvement and confusion. If I don't know what my tax rate is going to be, if I don't know how much I'm going to have to the government for hiring a new employee, if I don't know what's going to happen to my overall costs, healthcare and otherwise, I'm going to hold onto my resources and not hire people. It isn't being vindictive or "out to get the little guy." It's business. This probably won't be popular on this site but I don't get into business to give people jobs. I get into business to make money, grow my business, and THEN give people jobs. I can't do that if I don't know what is coming down the pike.
It sounds nice but it makes no sense to have government incentives to hire someone. If I'm offered a $5000 tax credit to hire someone it would be fine if I paid that person $5000. But since I'm going to be on the hook for salary, training costs, healthcare costs and some retirement costs, I'm not going to put my money out there. Instead, what I'll do is put my money somewhere where it can continue to work for me instead of letting it sit there doing nothing with the government possibly getting ready to take it. I will draw interest off of that money thus increasing my wealth while at the same time not creating jobs. I'm with you, it doesn't make sense but that is reality. I would LOVE to be hiring people right now and paying them more than fair wages for the jobs and their skills. The simple fact of the matter is that it just doesn't make good business sense.
Just FYI, in multiple business surveys, government regulation and taxes have ranked at the bottom as the reason businesses are not hiring. The top reason is lack of demand. Lack of demand is caused by workers who lack disposable income. Workers get disposable income when they are paid decent wages. Inflation-adjusted wages have not risen in 40 years. It's really not that confusing.
you and I must be reading different surveys. I have not met one business owner who has identified lack of demand. If you go to a Best Buy right now, you will find someone buying a television. Also, if we want to talk about wages, if I am required to pay someone a minimum wage of $8.00/hr but that person has few skills, no work history, poor education and little motivation to do the job, does it make sense for me to pay them $8.00? Or, should I pay more to try and motivate them? (sarcastic).... Also, I'm trying to have a fairly adult conversation with anyone who is interested, please leave your condescending "it's really not that confusing" and "it's pretty freaking obvious" comments out of the discussion. They impeach any argument that you have presented because at the end you merely come across small and petulant.
Is the latest Wall Street Journal business survey good enough for you?
http://blog.aflcio.org/2011/10/25/lack-of-demand-not-regulation-caused-jobs-crunch-says-treasury-official/
"Ken Lansing, an economist at the San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank, found in July that since the the recession began in 2007, Americans spent $7,356 less per person (in inflation-adjusted dollars)."
Like I said.
Oh, and I'll be as condescending as I like, thanks. :) Enjoy your evening.
Thanks for the article. I'll take it under consideration. Listen, I'm not an "unfair" or closed-minded person. I'll pay attention to a variety of sources and do my best to take all information in. (I'm not being sarcastic here, I mean that). Also, you're right, you can be as condescending as you like. I, personally, would be embarassed to be that smug and petty but, hey, the world would be a boring place if we were all the same wouldn't it?
Lol...
Ok, ok.
I'm not unfair or closed-minded either. And I wasn't actually trying to be condescending, so that got my dander up. I just feel like if these people are getting richer and richer and they're the ones who pay everyone else, and everyone else is getting poorer, it becomes blatantly obvious what's happening. That's all I meant.
Has the wealth really been "trickling down"?
yes. It's not as "concentrated" as you think. Again, I go back to the example listed in the original post. Bill Gates and others have made countless individuals wealthy beyond their wildest dreams. These people were not the ones that jumped on board early on or took advantage of others to get it. They worked hard. I couldn't quote actual statistics and numbers but I'm pretty sure those individuals who hold what could be considered menial positions are doing well for themselves.
So the average american wage has not risen in 40 years, but somehow wealth is actually trickling down? And the top 1% of the nation owns at least 40% of the wealth (the top 20% owns 85%), but this isn't too concentrated for you? How much of the wealth do they need to own before it's too concentrated? 90%? 98%?
this whole concept of "owning" wealth is unique. There is not a finite amount of money in the world. Just because you earn a dollar doesn't mean someone loses a dollar. Also, while we're at it, let's talk about the flip side to that coin. How about the top 50% of earners in our country are on the hook for 97% of the taxes? That doesn't seem fair to me. What about the 47% who have no tax liability? Or the top 10% who cover approximately 40% of the nation's revenue? Perhaps the benefits of our tax system are concentrated toward the bottom?
The benefits of our tax system?? Uh, maybe if wages had increased in THE LAST FORTY YEARS, for criminy's sake, more people would pay taxes. Your comment is disingenous anyway, because all workers pay payroll taxes, social security taxes, and medicaid taxes. Not to mention state, local, school, property, etc. Since the ruling elite want to hoard so much wealth and refuse to raise wages, too freaking bad that they have to pay more in taxes. THEY are the ones who have to raise wages to allow for more individuals to earn incomes high enough to pay into the system.
Again, I will direct you to one of my arguments. It is not that I REFUSE to raise wages. I just want to get the best return on my money. Just like anything else, hiring someone or keeping them employed is a gamble. Sometimes is pays off, sometimes it doesn't. Where does it make sense for me to pay someone above what their skills are worth? Would you pay $40,000 for a 1972 Chevy Impala just because that's what the owner wants? Sure it may be a reliable car and it could do well for you, but is it worth what you are paying for it?
Look, the fact is that money is not really worth anything. It's not even worth gold anymore, which was an illusion as well, but at least one that actually existed in physical space. So yeah, you could say that x worker might not theoretically "deserve" x wage. At the same time, if you've got a tiny minority of people who are collecting nearly all the profit from ALL workers - whatever their minor, major, or in between part in the system - controlling wages and deciding that MOST folks - not just lower-skilled folks, but almost ALL folks - don't deserve a raise for FORTY YEARS....while simultaneously seeing their own incomes rise over and over and over again - well, you have to admit that this is not just a problem of unskilled people demanding money they aren't worth. The money is going elsewhere - to the wealthiest CEO's and executives. Most research indicates that productivity in this country is at an all-time high. Theoretically, wages should follow suit. But they don't. And that is why I say, it is pretty obvious what is going on here. This isn't a situation that is only impacting "lazy" or "unskilled" workers. Real wages have stagnated for almost ALL workers, despite the relevance or necessity of their jobs. How can you justify one tiny group's incomes going through the roof while everyone else who is working to make it happen gets pretty much nothing out of their hard work?
truth be told, I lost interest in this reply when you stated "money is not really worth anything." If that's the case, then we have both lost the argument. If money isn't worth anything, then neither is wealth. And to give someone a pay raise would be to merely give them a piece of paper. If it doesn't count then why are you keeping score?
I think you misunderstood what I'm saying. And to be honest, I'm on the east coast and have 4 kids, and it's almost 1:30 and I've been babbling on these boards for over an hour now, so just forget I said it. I didn't mean it how it "came out..." Thanks for the discussion. I'm off to bed.
Central states with 2 kids. I totally understand. It was fun. Maybe we can do it again someday! I'll make you a deal, I'll keep up with an open mind if you continue to do the same. It's through conversations like this that issues can be solved and resolved. Have a good night and thanks for the debate!
I would disagree, but thank you for intelligently and honestly joining the conversation. Where I disagree is that CEO to employee average pay scale ratios have climbed exponentially. During the "Robber Baron" era that ratio was 9 to 1. Today it is listed as anywhere from 300-425 to 1. I am an avid capitalist and having willingly read Atlas Shrugged many times (my favorite book next to the bible, if you can believe that) and see clearly all of the great points you are making. Where there is a disconnect is the belief that we are living in/under a fair economy, when many feel that we are not. If you are still sticking around, I would love to finish this conversation with examples.
How about we look at the matter in a different way. I can certainly agree that employers are wealth creators for others and I will agree that Microsoft is a good example of such. However, I can't concede that what you are saying is correct because the issue is more complicated than that.
OWS isn't a movement about jobs and job creation. It's a movement about failing security in a world that is becoming increasingly unstable for the majority of americans. I can respect your view. Employers do make wealth for others. However, What kind of wealth are we talking about? You want the best return for your buck as do I and anyone else. I understand your example about paying a fair wage and the 40,000$ for the 72 Impala. With that being said, I believe the issue is that I, as a middle class american, am not getting a fair shake at the table or fair representation because the policies in place favor business rather than the individual. Consequently, I believe (as I think many americans do) that those policies need to change.
Now, you also mentioned business and the accumulation of wealth. At what point would you consider your business successful? Part of business is cutting costs and increasing profits. At what point is the salary and benefits you provide to an employee unfair for that employee in terms of the cost of living or retirement? If the cost of living increases, shouldn't the employees wages? and has that been the trend for the last 50 years?
Where does the concept of self employment fit in to this scenario?
That's funny..I wouldn't take a job from a rich person if I didn't have to. I'll work for myself thanks or die trying..
My father started his life after the military by driving cabs and saving money..He then built from the ground up his own business. He was poor and he made it without anyone's help..The country he lived in was America..We need to get that country back. Now if only we had a government that promotes true entrepreneurship. Oh..and since you asked you're wrong. BTW your boss wants you in his office for some more trickle down..."economics"
I'm not sure I understand where I'm wrong. I think you and I are arguing the same point. I also believe that the system we are experiencing now does not promote true entrepreneurship. I began my business from the ground up and put in the required 16 & 17 hour days. I love to hear and see people make it on their own. In fact, I have assisted some of my previous employees into schooling and training that would give them an opportunity to one day open their own business.
Because you make it sound like poor people should be begging some prick for a job...You know what's wrong? We all should be trying to promote our citizens to be independent people, independent thinkers, instead of making them dependent on anything or anyone which just insures that the ones on top have a customer and no competition. This country is so f*cked right now..God help us.
Not everyone is cut out to own their own business. You should know that after watching your father work to get where he was. I'm sure you and he both saw other people attempt to do what he did but only to fail. There are those who will need to work for someone else. Through that work they will become independent people. As far as the independent thinking, I don't want just a cog in the wheel. I want people who can think for themselves to solve problems and to create. Those are the ones I trust and can count on.
Yea not everyone is cut out to own his own business...My father owned his business for 17yrs and was very successful. He was an independent dealer for what used to be Amoco gas stations..Then Amoco started to plant corporate owned stations around his and he couldn't compete..So he sold it off...You see this is what really sucks..Opportunities are evaporating just a bit too quickly in this country..Our CONgress is making sure it all happens..
http://www.brianrogel.com/the-100-percent-solution-for-the-99-percent
haha..fail2adapt.com
had to open up a can of spam on your ass!
If you're going to reply, please don't list a useless link. Try defending a stance using your own thoughts.
Thats what I don't understand about this protest.....I believe the crooks who used preadatory lending should be prosecuted .....but Wall Street more than anyone wants the economy to recover.....it means more wealth and prosperity for everyone.....
Jealousy is a cruel thing.
No ur right....poor people suck.....and smell bad too