Not sure Republicans understand difference between "capitalism" and "exploitation"

[EdwardBaiamonte]

No - they just have to maximize profits. In fact, American-style capitalism has little with how much owners pay workers.

wrong wrong wrong!!. If they don't pay the highest amount possible they lose their best workers to someone who will pay more. Just as they must produce the best product in the world to survive they must provide the highest pay too. How is possible that you would not know something so obvious? Where did you get your liberal brainwashing Sam?

IN American-style capitalism the CEO is tasked with maximizing shareholder value or else the board will replace him with someone who will.

and can you have shareholder value without the best products made by the best workers?? Isn't thinking fun??

 

[samjones]

wrong wrong wrong!!. If they don't pay the highest amount possible they lose their best workers to someone who will pay more.

They don't care. It's about the bottom-line. In fact, I think that big business loathes relying on great workers to produce a great product. Management believes that it has done its job best when it can get a great product out of mediocre replaceable workers.

It's true.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

wrong wrong wrong!!. If they don't pay the highest amount possible they lose their best workers to someone who will pay more.

They don't care. It's about the bottom-line. In fact, I think that big business loathes relying on great workers to produce a great product. Management believes that it has done its job best when it can get a great product out of mediocre replaceable workers.

It's true.

Hiring the best people improves the bottom line; hiring TM and Rdean because they are cheap is not a great idea

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

They don't care. It's about the bottom-line.

and of course nothing contributes to the bottom line like great employees

In fact, I think that big business loathes relying on great workers to produce a great product.

sure it would be far better if they could count on the Girl Scouts or Martians but sadly they are 100% dependent on great workers

Management believes that it has done its job best when it can get a great product out of mediocre replaceable workers.

It's true.

OMG!!!! great products from mediocre workers?? That company would instantly perish when locked in world wide competition against a company that paid for fantastic workers.

PLease show your posts to your parents before you post them here. Where did you get your brainwashing Sam??

 

[samjones]

OMG!!!! great products from mediocre workers?? That company would instantly perish when locked in world wide competition against a company that paid for fantastic workers.

No. A company that gets great products from mediocre workers thrives in a competition with a company that must employ fantastic workers.

It is the business definition of "quality" to be able to simply reproduce to a given standard over and over again and that's all corporate America ever really tries to do. Those of us who drink good beer understand this.

Corporation really don't (or shouldn't) view their labor costs as anything other than another line item and if they can reduce that line item then that's a good thing.

This is the difference between American Capitalism and your Ayn Rand-inspired fantasy Capitalism.

Sorry to have to be the one who finally revealed that to you.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

No. A company that gets great products from mediocre workers thrives in a competition with a company that must employ fantastic workers.

Of course a company with low paid mediocre workers will get killed against a company with great high paid workers. Do you think you're worth talking to Sam??

 

[samjones]

No. A company that gets great products from mediocre workers thrives in a competition with a company that must employ fantastic workers.

Of course a company with low paid mediocre workers will get killed against a company with great high paid workers.

No. That's not true. Companies thrive all the time by union-busting and offshoring and moving operations to places where they can exploit a less expensive labor force.

In fact, I would find it almost impossible to support a claim that they best way to remain competitive is to hire the highest paid people, but if I could make and support that claim then I would find it ever so easy to draw those people away from my competitors with the promise of more money.

*IN FACT* I would maintain that the statement "to be competitive we have to hire the highest paid workers" would be so controversial as to be nearly illegal, or at the very least highly suspect, especially when dealing with government contracts.

It just isn't part of "Capitalism". Sorry to have burst your bubble.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

In fact, I would find it almost impossible to support a claim that they best way to remain competitive is to hire the highest paid people,.

You ought to be a consultant. If you could teach IBM to hire the lowest paid people and still thrive you'd be the genius of the Century. You'd replace Peter Drucker.

 

[samjones]

In fact, I would find it almost impossible to support a claim that they best way to remain competitive is to hire the highest paid people,.

You ought to be a consultant. If you could teach IBM to hire the lowest paid people and still thrive you'd be the genius of the Century. You'd replace Peter Drucker.

Like every other corporation, IBM works hard to keep labor costs low. They love off-shoring. It's one of IBMs favorite things to do.

I'm sorry if it angers you to find out that big publicly traded corporations don't happily pay their workers the maximum justifiable amount, but that simply isn't how the world works.

 

[midcan5]

"Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone." John Maynard Keynes

 

[editec]

Capitalism is a highly adaptable system that can thrive under a wide variety of cirucumstances, types of government and rapidly changing conditions.

Trying to impose a single definition on it, or trying to peg down exactly how it works, is just a fools' mission.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Like every other corporation, IBM works hard to keep labor costs low.

and of course they work hard to have the best products in the world which means they must pay through the nose for the best employees, unless you thnk the Girl Scouts design their products?.
Technical employees earn around 100K. They pay triple average wages because the free market demands it.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

"Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone." John Maynard Keynes

it sure is wicked to produce products that people want to buy more than any others in the entire world! It would be far better to live back in the stone age!!

 

[samjones]

Technical employees earn around 100K. They pay triple average wages because the free market demands it.

IBM tries to keep the wages of its good engineers low just like it does its office staff. Some engineers at IBM will make over 100K, some will make less. Same's true for it's sales staff and accounting staff and legal staff (but the lawyers will make more), and HR staff and every other functional aspect of its business.

They don't make a habit of overpaying. Good engineers were/are treated preferentially in Socialist economies as well - don't you agree?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

IBM tries to keep the wages of its good engineers low?

sure as low as it can consistent with their engineers inventing and providing the best products in the world.

Just like the Yankees try to keep salaries low consistent with being the best team in baseball!

Sadly for you the free market drives wages up to the highest possible level. Saintly capitalism forces them to provide us the best possible products and the best possible jobs.

Now even you should be able to understand that the USA has the most capitalism and so the highest standard of living in human history.

Did you think it was caused because we had the Girl Scouts??

 

[samjones]

IBM tries to keep the wages of its good engineers low?

sure as low as it can consistent with their engineers inventing and providing the best products in the world.

*YES*. You got it. "As low as it can". This is really part of the mystique. They portray it as a privilege to work for them so they can pay you less. It works for awhile. Truthfully, the best engineers at IBM really can't go work anywhere else. They're just happy to have someone to finance their research. They aren't the ones with the lake homes. The engineers are just doofusly looking people who are meek and harmless. You go to the movies, right?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

*YES*. You got it. "As low as it can".

yes IBM and the Yankees are forced by capitalism to provide the best paying jobs possible and best products possible or go bankrupt. Capitalism is unfair to owners who really become our slaves thanks to capitalism.

Now even a liberal can understand why Red China just switched to capitalism and how doing so replaced 15 million starving individuals with 15 million who could afford cars. Its another capitalist miracle.

 

[expat_panama]

...IBM and the Yankees are forced by capitalism to provide the best paying jobs possible and best products possible or go bankrupt. Capitalism is unfair to owners who really become our slaves thanks to capitalism...

--and owners are better off by willing to become slaves --you nailed it!

Too many people have the mistaken idea that a manager is a king that presides over his 'inferiors'. Sure, it can happen but it never works out very well that way. Companies succeed only when managers know that they're servants constantly attending to the needs of their subordinates. There're a lot of cases with both IBM and the Yankees where a manager gets paid a fraction of what his workers are paid. It doesn't matter because those managers can be paid a lot more than most of the owners.

 

[expat_panama]

No - they just have to maximize profits. In fact, American-style capitalism has little with how much owners pay workers.

wrong wrong wrong!!. If they don't pay the highest amount possible they lose their best workers to someone who will pay more...

The little understood fact here is that workers get paid far more than owners. Let's ditch the Marxist fantasy image of those "fat cat investors" we're supposed to hate, and deal with real life where most employees work with corporations where employee compensation is the bulk of corp expenditures, and any dividends are an after thought.

Economies prosper when prices are set by mutually accepted markets and not forced on us either by thugs in back alleys or thugs in government agencies.

 

[samjones]

No - they just have to maximize profits. In fact, American-style capitalism has little with how much owners pay workers.

wrong wrong wrong!!. If they don't pay the highest amount possible they lose their best workers to someone who will pay more...

The little understood fact here is that workers get paid far more than owners. Let's ditch the Marxist fantasy image of those "fat cat investors" we're supposed to hate, and deal with real life where most employees work with corporations where employee compensation is the bulk of corp expenditures, and any dividends are an after thought.

Your examples, not mine, are IBM and the YES Network (New York Yankees).

Largest shareholders, Warren Buffet and the Steinbrenner family, respectively.

"Fat cat" enough for you? You think those guys really consider dividends to be an afterthough?