patrick.net

HRHMedia says

Maybe those Caterpillar workers should wait for the trickle down

They can buy Caterpillar stock and profit that way. Plus when the stockholders vote on executive pay, they can vote to stop all the outrages executive pay packages (which I always do).

zzyzzx says

They can buy Caterpillar stock and profit that way. Plus when the stockholders vote on executive pay, they can vote to stop all the outrages executive pay packages (which I always do).

lol--How often have the pay packages been voted down?

tatupu70 says

zzyzzx says

They can buy Caterpillar stock and profit that way. Plus when the stockholders vote on executive pay, they can vote to stop all the outrages executive pay packages (which I always do).

lol--How often have the pay packages been voted down?

You have to wait for the next Gordon Gekko.

tatupu70 says

lol--How often have the pay packages been voted down?

That's just it. The executives have no REAL accountability to anyone. When a business is owned by a few million people, there's no real accountability.

Maybe all of our problems really do come from the very existence of corporations, just like the far-left says. Maybe the whole concept of a corporation should be outlawed.

wthrfrk80 says

tatupu70 says

lol--How often have the pay packages been voted down?

That's just it. The executives have no REAL accountability to anyone. When a business is owned by a few million people, there's no real accountability.

Maybe all of our problems really do come from the very existence of corporations, just like the far-left says. Maybe the whole concept of a corporation should be outlawed.

I disagree. Every person can start his own corporation. I support corporate personhood. It may be public ownership that is the problem.

tatupu70 says

lol--How often have the pay packages been voted down?

I don't know, I can only say that I always vote against them. If you only read a few of these things it's easy enough to see how self serving they are.

Peter P says

It may be public ownership that is the problem.

I thought "public ownership" was the definition of a corporation. As opposed to a business owned by an individual (or small group of individuals). What am I missing?

How do people survive on $13 an hour? By my math that's $27,040 annually before taxes. I don't know anybody who makes that little.

epitaph says

How do people survive on $13 an hour?

A lot more easily than they survive on $7/hour (with no benefits) at Wal-Mart.

wthrfrk80 says

Peter P says

It may be public ownership that is the problem.

I thought "public ownership" was the definition of a corporation. As opposed to a business owned by an individual (or small group of individuals). What am I missing?

There is closely-held vs public. The there is corporation vs partnership etc.

zzyzzx says

I don't know, I can only say that I always vote against them. If you only read a few of these things it's easy enough to see how self serving they are.

Of course they are. And I'm glad you vote against them--I do the same. But, unfortunately, our votes are completely meaningless. The game is rigged. Not only against the workers who actually make the products, but also against the average Joe that owns shares in a public company.

tatupu70 says

But, unfortunately, our votes are completely meaningless. The game is rigged.

Absolutely. Who do you think owns most of the shares (and thus most of the votes)? All of their buddies in the top 0.1%.

Again, if they are too far out of line hedge funds and private equity firms will tackle them.

Peter P says

Again, if they are too far out of line hedge funds and private equity firms will tackle them.

I guess your idea of too far out of line and mine are pretty far apart. Do you think the Caterpillar CEO pay is too far out of line? Because I sure do.

Yep, you can easily control a corporation by owning just a few shares. Most pension funds and mutual funds don't vote their shares (and often are forbidden by their own bylaws to do so), who own far and away the biggest portion of most large companies. The insiders can then vote as a block, stock the BOD with their pals, and work with them to exact as much money as possible from the company, to the detriment of the majority shareholders.

Most BOD elections resemble the Soviet Union. There is one candidate, and you can either vote for him or not.

thunderlips11 says

Most pension funds and mutual funds don't vote their shares (and often are forbidden by their own bylaws to do so), who own far and away the biggest portion of most large companies. The insiders can then vote as a block, stock the BOD with their pals, and work with them to exact as much money as possible from the company, to the detriment of the majority shareholders.

Exactly. There's no real accountability because there is no real owner. There's just an amorphous cloud of a few million "owners" with no real power.

tatupu70 says

Peter P says

Again, if they are too far out of line hedge funds and private equity firms will tackle them.

I guess your idea of too far out of line and mine are pretty far apart. Do you think the Caterpillar CEO pay is too far out of line? Because I sure do.

No. Profit and salary are disconnected concepts. Each has its own market.

wthrfrk80 says

Exactly. There's no real accountability because there is no real owner. There's just an amorphous cloud of a few million "owners" with no real power.

Word.

I remember as a kid, opening my first notice of elections for a "big US bank" chaired by a "Sandy" guy, and noticing that there were 4 candidates, for 4 open BOD positions. And their statements were so uninformative and bland, you had no idea what they were going to do as directors.

Now my old, cynical ass knows why.

epitaph says

How do people survive on $13 an hour? By my math that's $27,040 annually before taxes. I don't know anybody who makes that little.

You're not serious, right? Something like half of all working Americans make within 25% of the minimum wage. That's well under $13.00

Hell yes, why work for that pittance? Simply go in government assistance and net MORE than you would with the median wage, after paying TAXES. Only in AmeriKa, thanks Uncle Sam !!

wthrfrk80 says

zzyzzx says

$13/hour is way more then what they will be making if the factory moves to Mexico.

$13/hour with benefits isn't great, but where I live the cost of living is low enough to make that doable.

Odd how so many of us backwards engineer your formulation for what's doable. Cost of living should be derived from wages, not the other way around. And you wonder, why that is,,,,,,

That's why the cries for higher wages rightfully fall on deaf ears. Sure, pay that union jagoff more, so he can turn around and drive up the cost of living more. Thanks friend!

HRM - when its your company, do what ever you want. In the meantime, stop whining.

HARM - hahaha. I love your vocabulary, you accuse others of being: vile, disgusting, racist, predatory, abusive, hostile, fake, greedy, malicious, profane, homophobic, perverted, xenophobes, selfish, obscene, and I probably left out a few.

You keep mixing up "your" [it belongs to you] with "you're" [you are] despite the fact someone already corrected you on the difference - are you a slow learner, or what?

WAY TO GO ABE!!

Honest Abe says

HRM - when its your company, do what ever you want. In the meantime, stop whining.

His Royal Highness Media

HRHMedia says

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich says

These lazy fucks need to flip condos! There ought to be a law!

Child.

How dare you proclaim these workers are lazy. Your disgusting.

Social Media Guru Since 1999

Ruki says

Your views on this matter doesn't change anything

Hopefully, others will realize what is going on and if there are enough of us, then we can change things.

Ruki says

If it isn't your company, it isn't any of your business. If your say in how the company is ran is diluted by inconsequential shares held by you, pretty much it is the same thing.

Well, I'll have to disagree. I know you'd love to get back to the days when companies could hire children to work in sweatshops, but I like to think that we can do better than that. There is a reason why we have regulations. And, at this point, I think the whole BOD model is completely broken. It's begging for some oversight.

errc says

That's why the cries for higher wages rightfully fall on deaf ears. Sure, pay that union jagoff more, so he can turn around and drive up the cost of living more. Thanks friend!

Seriously? You're angry at the union workers?? You have a problem with the guy who comes home dirty, sweaty, with aching muscles who's forced to work overtime whenever management decides. Who has to use 1 week of his vacation for the factory shutdown whether he wants to or not.

How about you direct your anger where it belongs--at the exec that makes decisions not based on whether it helps the company long term, but rather whether it helps him get a bonus this year. Who makes quality decisions by weighing the cost of fixing the problem vs. the expected cost of the lawsuits from the people that get injured (or die). Who cut the wages of the workers so they can donate (bribe) politicians to lower their tax rate.

Seriously--wake up.

@tatupu post #88

Why do I have to be angry at anything. I choose to be happy, and not let insignificant stuff like that work me up. Besides, I have no problem with the guy who comes home dirty, banged up, sweaty, with aching muscles, after working long hours, BECAUSE HE IS I AND I IS HIM.

The union workers I know are the ones that stand on a factory line, watching a machine do all the work, and when the scabs come in and do their jobs for half the wages, nobody skips a beat

errc says

Why do I have to be angry at anything

Good. When you said jagoff, then I assumed you were angry at him. I agree-better to be happy.

errc says

The union workers I know are the ones that stand on a factory line, watching a machine do all the work, and when the scabs come in and do their jobs for half the wages, nobody skips a beat

Just curious--where do these people work?

It is not a monopoly game. You cannot print money in that game.

Money and debt is the same thing nowadays.

Just curious--where do these people work?

Armstrong world industries
Kunzlers
J&J

Look, I know people get all worked up over the topic, but as someone who has labored back breaking work my entire life, and have had these friends (who are no more jagoffs then myself) get a taste of real work, they'll admit that its absolutely a racket. My friend at armstrong would say how uncomfortable he felt when he started because he was used to working, and they told him not to make them look bad(the union workers). When the plant locked the union workers out, and replaced them with 12/hr no bennies scabs, production kept moving right along

What's fair is fair, if I'm going to bitch about those that seek economic rent for their personal benefit, then the union worker, while minute in comparison, is participating

Honest Abe says

Secondly demand doesn't decrease because other people have money

Of course it does. In order to have demand, one must have the means to buy the product.

"Demand is the want or desire to possess a good or service with the necessary goods, services, or financial instruments necessary to make a legal transaction for those goods or services."

So, when 1 person has all the money instead of 100, demand obviously goes down.

From a WSJ article discussing the shortage of skilled workers:
Mr. Madden of Group One offers $18 to $30 an hour for fire-alarm technicians and $16 to $22 an hour for security-alarm technicians, depending on their experience and skills...Over the past two years, there have been about 10 instances where prospective hires with no skills asked Mr. Madden for a job. He provided them with a low-level burglar-alarm manual, he says, and asked them to come back and show they could operate the alarm panel. "None have come back," he says.

EBGuy says

From a WSJ article discussing the shortage of skilled workers:
Mr. Madden of Group One offers $18 to $30 an hour for fire-alarm technicians and $16 to $22 an hour for security-alarm technicians, depending on their experience and skills...Over the past two years, there have been about 10 instances where prospective hires with no skills asked Mr. Madden for a job. He provided them with a low-level burglar-alarm manual, he says, and asked them to come back and show they could operate the alarm panel. "None have come back," he says.

Sounds to me that he needs to train people.

xrpb11a says

Rich people create jobs in R&D, where there is no demand, but lots of risk. Demand will be a byproduct of a successful R&D project.

Not really. People invest in R&D to develop products to cater to unmet demand. Pure research (fundamental) is usually funded by the government because "rich" people won't.

xrpb11a says

Rich people will not invest in R&D if their funding is threatened by excessive taxation

Huh? I don't get this theory. So, rich people would rather make 0 by not investing as opposed to making 70% of something large (profits from the development)?? How do you figure?

xrpb11a says

Demand is decreasing because rich people have all the money and are holding on to it due to being threatened with tax increases, both hidden and public, coupled with not enough tax benefits to mitigate the risks investing in R&D.

The risks of investing in R&D are rewarded with profits, not tax benefits. You invest to make money, not save on your taxes.

That entire post is just one huge rationalization. You know that it's BS but it's all you can come up with.

Wealth may be zero sum but currency certainly is not.

Blue collar workers are also suffering from environmental regulations. Are you willing to compromise those?

Wealth disparity is not a bad thing. We are NOT communists.

Construction of one large yacht employs hundreds of people for a few years.

I do think we need a safety net.