Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 101 to 107 of 107

Thread: Missouri man's incendiary sign on U.S. 71 draws fire

  1. #101
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    07-01-10 @ 02:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    157

    Re: Missouri man's incendiary sign on U.S. 71 draws fire

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    Well, do you want a product that is good and lasts for life, or do you want something that's designed to last at least as long as the warranty?
    Something that lasts a lifetime won't do me any good if I can't afford to buy it.

    Well, you have to examine the quality of the work area for these individuals. You should look up the conditions of the iPad's... after a series of 16 suicides from the people that worked somewhere around 16 hrs a day for 6-7 days a week, they now have a 'suicide clause' in the employment contract, where if they cause grief they are treated as though the might commit suicide.

    Oh, and, also recently, the workers in China have started fighting to unionize (essentially, from my understanding)....
    What's your point?

    I only disagree in the sense that we no longer live in a 'free-market'... we live in a 'crony capitalist' state, which is teetering on the fascist (not as in hitlers germany, that was sold as socialism, I'm talking about the mix of government and corporate entities.)
    You're disagreeing with an argument I never made. I understand perfectly well that we do not have a "free market". I was merely commenting on the theoretical aspects of Smith's economic philosophy, which Guy labeled as "irrelevant dogma".

    You have to work to have a healthy economy, where the first 1000 books you might print will cost you 5000$, but if you print 10000 books it will cost you 8000$ (as an arbitrary illustration).

    What we have to do before that can happen is to break up the monopolies, duopolies and oligolopolies in the economy, and rewrite the legistlation with teeth to prevent them from simply forming newer and more intricate crony systems, end the federal reserve, bring the US currency back to something in line with a hard currency, work to produce that hard currency, etc...

    In other words, we need a hollistic fix for the economy... not a 'green jobs' that costs more jobs then it creates, and are short term jobs (as greece offers the cautionary tale).
    We need jobs to have a healthy economy? Really?

    DO YOU know just how much of a premium is put on chinese made goods??? You're Ipod / Ipad actually gets produced for about 20-30$ a piece + shipping overseas, storage expenses + markups. (If I remember they are several hundred dollars each).
    Markups are not the same thing as a labor premium. A markup is simply a way to increase profit after the product comes to market; a labor premium, however, is built in to the cost of production and cannot be reduced like a markup.

    So, I think I'd feel safe paying for a 75000$ car that'll snap those cheap arse foreign models like a twig if there's an accident... that'll run for 15 years if it's taken care of, and has balls so big they drage on the ground and make sparks.
    1. Not everyone can afford to pay $75,000 for a gas-guzzling, steel monster.
    2. Not everyone who can afford such a car even wants one.
    3. Many of the cheap foreign models you're deriding are very reliable and cost-effective.

    regardless though, that's besides the point, there needs to be COMPETITION with these other producers... and at the very least start reducing our trade deficit.
    Why do you keep telling me things I already know? I understand that competition is necessary. It's a point I've made continually by highlighting the prohibitive cost of American labor.

    As it stands, our standard of living is bloated and our labor is overpriced. Both of these factors serve to undermine our global competitiveness, and protectionist/populist economic policies will only exacerbate the situation.

    Globalization is going to teach us Americans are very harsh lesson in the coming decades. We've become too soft and complacent. The emerging middle classes of India, China, and Brazil are going to crush us unless we lower taxes and relax our labor laws.

    Ultimately if the trend was for protectionist BUYING habits, then american made products would eventually become cheaper as the REAL economy would be properly stimulated by internal production.
    How would they become cheaper when the labor premium is built into the cost of production?

    The way things are going now, if you were to use a baseball analogy , you would say that we are in 'inning 2' of a 9 inning collapse. Soon will be inning 3.
    Lower taxes and relaxed labor laws; less government. That's the solution.

  2. #102
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: Missouri man's incendiary sign on U.S. 71 draws fire

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    I like this guy. My type of American.
    Seems some Lakers fans were passing by the sign with gas and matches in the car.

    .
    This is how farking stupid this argument has become.

    So, the 72-year-old who takes Medicare and lives off government farm subsidies is complaining about parasites?

    I'd roll my eyes at it, but it would be a waste of energy.

  3. #103
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: Missouri man's incendiary sign on U.S. 71 draws fire

    Quote Originally Posted by alms View Post
    Something that lasts a lifetime won't do me any good if I can't afford to buy it.



    What's your point?



    You're disagreeing with an argument I never made. I understand perfectly well that we do not have a "free market". I was merely commenting on the theoretical aspects of Smith's economic philosophy, which Guy labeled as "irrelevant dogma".



    We need jobs to have a healthy economy? Really?



    Markups are not the same thing as a labor premium. A markup is simply a way to increase profit after the product comes to market; a labor premium, however, is built in to the cost of production and cannot be reduced like a markup.



    1. Not everyone can afford to pay $75,000 for a gas-guzzling, steel monster.
    2. Not everyone who can afford such a car even wants one.
    3. Many of the cheap foreign models you're deriding are very reliable and cost-effective.



    Why do you keep telling me things I already know? I understand that competition is necessary. It's a point I've made continually by highlighting the prohibitive cost of American labor.

    As it stands, our standard of living is bloated and our labor is overpriced. Both of these factors serve to undermine our global competitiveness, and protectionist/populist economic policies will only exacerbate the situation.

    Globalization is going to teach us Americans are very harsh lesson in the coming decades. We've become too soft and complacent. The emerging middle classes of India, China, and Brazil are going to crush us unless we lower taxes and relax our labor laws.



    How would they become cheaper when the labor premium is built into the cost of production?



    Lower taxes and relaxed labor laws; less government. That's the solution.
    Do any of your arguments address the fact that productivity, profits, and CEO pay have all risen dramatically in America while the average worker's salary has barely risen at all vs. inflation?

    CEO-to-worker pay imbalance grows
    Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

    In 1965, the average CEO made 24X what his employee did. Today, he makes approximately 262X what the average worker makes.

    In, 2005 - the average CEO made (including bonuses and stock) made over $10,000,000. The average worker made $41,000.

    So, can you prove to me that if you lessen labor laws and regulations that it will come down to my pocket? Because we are A LOT less regulated than we were in the 1960's, and I've got plenty more evidence than what I've posted there that all that's happened is that the money's risen to the top. Deregulation and relaxed labor laws would only quicken the flow.

    Even conservative economists will tell you that income disparity is a real problem. It rose sharply before the Great Depression; it rose sharply again in the 2000s leading up to the Great Recession.
    Trends in American Income Inequality Prior to the Recession-Becker - The Becker-Posner Blog

    Your suggestions, I fear, would only continue the disparity; which always begets disaster.

  4. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Missouri man's incendiary sign on U.S. 71 draws fire

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    I will grant you that Obama's bailouts and his nationalization of car companies contains elements of fascism, but this is where Obama and I diverge in our beliefs. I'm with you on this McFly, and I feel that those companies should have just been allowed to fail.
    I know the dictionary definition of fascism is an 'unusual' way of interpretation, but yes, by bailing out, and taking controls over various corporations and industries IS the shifting of America from this crony capitalist democratic republic into a much simpler system : fascism. As the president (Obama at present, but just like how Obama took what Bush did and ran with it, the next president will likely do the same), the more government claims control over the corporations and states of america, the more america will become an actual fascist state.

    America right now is a sinking ship... and while there are people that are bailing the water out, there are these interests that bailing water INTO the boat.

    Quote Originally Posted by alms View Post
    Something that lasts a lifetime won't do me any good if I can't afford to buy it.
    Ok... fair, but this is such a vague statement to start. There's problems on ALL ends of this that would need to be addressed.

    What's your point?
    Ok, we get 'cheap' products... like the iPads that have about a 500-700% markup from production to point of sale. What will happen if the chinese all of a sudden successfully unionize and get a proper 'living wage'?? Say that production of the iPad goes from 20$ to 150$ because of a fair pay system... by the time it makes it to america, instead of paying 500$ for an iPod, you'll be 900$ for that ipad because the rule is that the costs are 'social' (in this example, re: passed on to the consumer) the profits are private.

    You're disagreeing with an argument I never made. I understand perfectly well that we do not have a "free market". I was merely commenting on the theoretical aspects of Smith's economic philosophy, which Guy labeled as "irrelevant dogma".
    I was simply pointing out that if your making an economic analysis as though we actually lived in a free market system, it's going to be flawed... I don't know what those historical economists were saying, per se... but unless they take into account the level of cronyism that we now see, it's more or less irrellevant.

    We need jobs to have a healthy economy? Really?
    That's not the point I was making... my point was that we can't just look at one facet of a fix... we need a proper fix that will deal with all aspects of our economy; production, services, industries, academia, etc...

    1. Not everyone can afford to pay $75,000 for a gas-guzzling, steel monster.
    2. Not everyone who can afford such a car even wants one.
    3. Many of the cheap foreign models you're deriding are very reliable and cost-effective.
    Sorry, I got a little carried away...

    Ultimately I can't make a proper argument because what is a dollar 'worth' today?? I mean, prior to the 70's the currency was tied to a value in gold... now, it's not tied to anything, and it takes over 1200$ to buy an ounce gold coin. Just to show how messed up the economy is,

    That said, not all american made cars would necessarily be the steel, gas guzzling beasts.... there would be cars made for people of all economic status, and I was being excessively harsh on foreign made cars... I was more trying to illustrate my point rather then deride foreign products and services.

    Why do you keep telling me things I already know? I understand that competition is necessary. It's a point I've made continually by highlighting the prohibitive cost of American labor.
    Apologies...

    As it stands, our standard of living is bloated and our labor is overpriced. Both of these factors serve to undermine our global competitiveness, and protectionist/populist economic policies will only exacerbate the situation.
    It used to be called 'conspiracy theory' when I said that globalization would lead to a lowering the first world to the second world status, more then it would raise the world to the first world status as it was sold when people were discussing NAFTA / GATT etc.

    Globalization is going to teach us Americans are very harsh lesson in the coming decades. We've become too soft and complacent. The emerging middle classes of India, China, and Brazil are going to crush us unless we lower taxes and relax our labor laws.
    No... F the rest of the world and globalization. They can trade with us once we fix our issues at home and return to a state of self-suffinciency... rather then easy credit and easy living.

    I hate to think of what the world would be like if the government of the world was run as a corporation... which, not sure if that's your intention, but what it sounds like you are proposing.

    How would they become cheaper when the labor premium is built into the cost of production?
    In short, because with more effective means of production, the labour premium would be spread out over a greater number of units of production, since all the high efficient factories and industries have been shipped overseas, there would be a need for alot of 'starting over'.


    Lower taxes and relaxed labor laws; less government. That's the solution.
    Lower taxes, YES...
    Relaxed labour laws... I hesitate on this one...really depends on HOW these laws are relaxed.
    Less goverment : YES!!!

    I would also add ensuring equal enforcement of our laws... there are SO MANY monopolies / duopolies that off the top of my head I could think of about 10 anti-trust lawsuits that could be looked into.
    Last edited by BmanMcfly; 06-23-10 at 10:08 PM.

  5. #105
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Missouri man's incendiary sign on U.S. 71 draws fire

    Quote Originally Posted by FilmFestGuy View Post
    Do any of your arguments address the fact that productivity, profits, and CEO pay have all risen dramatically in America while the average worker's salary has barely risen at all vs. inflation?

    CEO-to-worker pay imbalance grows
    Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

    In 1965, the average CEO made 24X what his employee did. Today, he makes approximately 262X what the average worker makes.

    In, 2005 - the average CEO made (including bonuses and stock) made over $10,000,000. The average worker made $41,000.
    Couple points:

    -CEO of what? There are millions of small, medium, and large businesses out there with CEOs who are not making anything near that. I'm assuming this is CEOs of F500 companies, but that's not a very good measure of anything.

    -One reason why the CEO to worker ratio might have increased since the 1960's is that CEO's are overseeing drastically larger companies now. Using made up numbers as an illustration, if the average CEO in 1965 led a company with 2000 workers and $50m in annual sales, then in 2005, I would guess that the average CEO leads a company with 50,000 workers and $5b in annual sales. While the CEO's responsibilities and profit-making ability have increased in tandem with that, Joe Smith who cleans the building or answers the phones has the exact same amount of responsibility and profit-making ability.

    I would be more concerned if the ratio wasn't increasing.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  6. #106
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: Missouri man's incendiary sign on U.S. 71 draws fire

    Wow, one dumb hick with a trailer and a can of paint gets 11 pages.

    We're screwed as a country.

  7. #107
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: Missouri man's incendiary sign on U.S. 71 draws fire

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Couple points:

    -CEO of what? There are millions of small, medium, and large businesses out there with CEOs who are not making anything near that. I'm assuming this is CEOs of F500 companies, but that's not a very good measure of anything.

    -One reason why the CEO to worker ratio might have increased since the 1960's is that CEO's are overseeing drastically larger companies now. Using made up numbers as an illustration, if the average CEO in 1965 led a company with 2000 workers and $50m in annual sales, then in 2005, I would guess that the average CEO leads a company with 50,000 workers and $5b in annual sales. While the CEO's responsibilities and profit-making ability have increased in tandem with that, Joe Smith who cleans the building or answers the phones has the exact same amount of responsibility and profit-making ability.

    I would be more concerned if the ratio wasn't increasing.
    But, the point is about disparity. If all of the spending comes from the upper echelons, it isn't good for our country. Our economy NEEDS a strong middle class. The policies from the early 80's on have sent the money upward and upward. The argument is that by sending it upward, it will trickle back down. But there's ample evidence that it doesn't come back down.

    There is, however, ample evidence that sending money upwards results in hoarding that doesn't improve the economy. It destroys it.

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •