patrick.net

Not to my question.

tatupu70 says

In any event, my answer was an answer

xrpb11a says

Not to my question.

Sorry, I can't read the minds of the union leaders. I didn't think the question really deserved an answer because it was based on a faulty premise.

wthrfrk80 says

Except that American corporations don't want skilled workers. They want dumbed-down obediant workers that are easier to dispose of. It's called "de-skilling." Google it.

Or, you could phrase this as;"American (and other) consumers want to buy the highest quality product at the least costly price, and it is a businesses job to constantly meet this demand."

If you saddle an economy with massive tax and regulatory complexity that feeds the parasite-service provider economy, these businesses will adjust accordingly. Those with economies of scale thrive at the expense of smaller, more localized competitors who struggle to comply and lose jobs while those capable of global navigation simply offshore. Many stupid laws fast forwarded the economy to spend $$ to reduce labor overhead via tech and off-shoring...

No doubt the biggies like the highly complex laws since they knock out localized competition. They are in cahoots with the parastic PhD'd welfare crowd. (tax specialists, regulatory compliance experts, who suck blood from the real producers of wealth / better standards of living.)

HRHMedia says

saying many unionized workers were paid well above market rates"

That beats closing the factory down and moving it to Mexico.

Ruki says

If it is a bad business decision, they pay for the consequences (unless they get bailed out by Obama).

No, it's really not. It's the shareholders' money.

Ruki says

Do you own shares in that company? If so, bitch at the next board meeting.

There's the rub. One vote at a shareholder meeting is worthless. The BODs at public companies are complete shams. They exist solely to line the pockets of executives at this point.

If we had real directors that actually looked out for the company's best interest, then that would be a different story.

Leopold B Scotch says

No doubt the biggies like the highly complex laws since they knock out localized competition. They are in cahoots with the parastic PhD'd welfare crowd. (tax specialists, regulatory compliance experts, who suck blood from the real producers of wealth / better standards of living.)

A fair assessment, I think. It's amazing how much of our economy is essentially "non productive." I'd say the entire legal profession and the entire "finance" sector are parasitic.

HRHMedia says

Caterpillar says it needs to keep its labor costs down to ensure its future competitiveness."

Maybe they don't want to pull a GM / Chrysler?? E.g., they don't want to give away the farm while the sun shines only to pay for it when the rain clouds come out?

Herman Cain "If You Don't Have A Job And You Are Not Rich, Blame Yourself"

Depends. Lots of people voted for and got exactly what they were asking for (though they thought they were voting for something else!) So blame yourself if you've voted a whole life voting for anti-liberty proposals. Whatt'd you expect?

If you were a flunky through HS and blamed the man for all your problems, and never took the initiative to embrace an entrepreneurial mindset, but instead cast your lot with unionistas who treat excellence with disdain ("you're making the rest of us look bad, stick to your own job and payscale") while protecting shitstains in the workplace (worst in govt and education)... .and now you're finding yourself out on your own? Blame yourself.

If you keep defending the federal reserve cartel system and big government and you suddenly found yourself out of work with a mortgage thanks to the housing bubble the partnership between the banking cartel and government created? Your fault!

Now, I don't totally agree with herman cain, but there are nuances that make perfect sense. Sure, there are things out of everyone's control, but there's a whole hell of a lot more in all of our control than anyone cares to admit, left and right.

GO LIBERTY!

wthrfrk80 says

A fair assessment, I think. It's amazing how much of our economy is essentially "non productive." I'd say the entire legal profession and the entire "finance" sector are parasitic.

Amen! (Well, some finance is legit, all very basic intermediary stuff IMO. But finance for fiance sake? Or the banking cartel's legalized counterfeiting system? etc etc!)

Leopold B Scotch says

Maybe they don't want to pull a GM / Chrysler?? E.g., they don't want to give away the farm while the sun shines only to pay for it when the rain clouds come out?

Fair enough--but why pay their top execs so much then?? They can't have it both ways.

A lot of our problems come from organization on too-large a scale. That creates ineffciency, corruption, and opportunity to "game the system."

HRHMedia says

$13 ph is disgusting

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

HRHMedia says

In 2010, Germany produced more than 5.5 million automobiles; the U.S produced 2.7 million. At the same time, the average auto worker in Germany made $67.14 per hour in salary in benefits; the average one in the U.S. made $33.77 per hour.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-09/gm-ford-to-accelerate-growth-at-mexico-plants-where-workers-get-26-a-day.html

GM, Ford Accelerate Shift to Mexico Workers Making $26 a Day

Why should they even pay $33.77 per hour when they can pay $26/day?

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.

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.