Still no answer: Whats a fair days work?

[Jarhead]

Good point. The girl selling tickets at the theater is doing just as fair a day's work as the guy digging a ditch for the same 8 hours in my view.

Tom Hanks does just as fair a days work as the girl selling tickets to his movies too.

So why does Tom Hanks get 50K an hour and the ticket girl getting 8 an hour?

( I dont know what Tom Hanks makes....but you get my point)

It doesn't matter. The market values Mr. Hanks contribution at 50K an hour and hers at 8. Mr. Hanks has a skillset in demand by those who watch his movies and television dramas. The skillset being applied by the girl behind the booth is limited.

On a similiar note, I always wondered why a waitress would work at Denny's instead of the Grand Lux or Fleming's. Same exact job. Why would you not work where the tips are going to be astronomically better?

You are correct. It doesnt matter...and you are correct.....Hanks is paid based on what his value is to the consumer.

And exactly the point the right is making when they say "stop copmplaining about the salaries of corporate executives. They are paid based on what the end user...be it consumers or businesses...allow them to be paid. If the end user did not like the price of the prodcut, they would stop buying the product.

Sorry Candy......I sucked you right into it.

 

[Jarhead]

Corporate profits are at an all time high..........


that's not revenue...


that's profits.



While the average worker's pay is remaining stagnant.

The video is false propoganda. It implies that Obama has made it too expensive to do business............while ignoring the fact that Corporate business is BOOMING.

You're 100% right on both counts which is why I'm having this disagreement with Pymlico Pilgrim; too many corporate managers see their workers as disposable operatives and is trying to make them as generic as possible so they can be replaced like a fuse when they start acting up.

those corporate managers were "workers" at one point....and they got to where they were by displaying a differential and NOT being disposable...and NEVER acting up.

Perhaps a tough concept to comprehend...but as a buisness owner, I would NEVER get rid of an employee with a differential that proves to be to my advantage.

 

[Photonic]

Corporate profits are at an all time high..........


that's not revenue...


that's profits.



While the average worker's pay is remaining stagnant.

The video is false propoganda. It implies that Obama has made it too expensive to do business............while ignoring the fact that Corporate business is BOOMING.

You're 100% right on both counts which is why I'm having this disagreement with Pymlico Pilgrim; too many corporate managers see their workers as disposable operatives and is trying to make them as generic as possible so they can be replaced like a fuse when they start acting up.

That is what happens when you have a decline in workers rights.

 

[G.T.]

So why does Tom Hanks get 50K an hour and the ticket girl getting 8 an hour?

( I dont know what Tom Hanks makes....but you get my point)

It doesn't matter. The market values Mr. Hanks contribution at 50K an hour and hers at 8. Mr. Hanks has a skillset in demand by those who watch his movies and television dramas. The skillset being applied by the girl behind the booth is limited.

On a similiar note, I always wondered why a waitress would work at Denny's instead of the Grand Lux or Fleming's. Same exact job. Why would you not work where the tips are going to be astronomically better?

You are correct. It doesnt matter...and you are correct.....Hanks is paid based on what his value is to the consumer.

And exactly the point the right is making when they say "stop copmplaining about the salaries of corporate executives. They are paid based on what the end user...be it consumers or businesses...allow them to be paid. If the end user did not like the price of the prodcut, they would stop buying the product.

Sorry Candy......I sucked you right into it.

Except you're clearly ignoring that they're not Raising the price of the product to pay themselves more....................thus retaining Consumers.

To pay themselves more, they are keeping their workers wages stagnant, as their pay sky rockets.

There's two realities that you need to face:

-The income disparity is REAL.
-It's not because the Majority of the Country all of a sudden became Lazy.

 

[candycorn]

So why does Tom Hanks get 50K an hour and the ticket girl getting 8 an hour?

( I dont know what Tom Hanks makes....but you get my point)

It doesn't matter. The market values Mr. Hanks contribution at 50K an hour and hers at 8. Mr. Hanks has a skillset in demand by those who watch his movies and television dramas. The skillset being applied by the girl behind the booth is limited.

On a similiar note, I always wondered why a waitress would work at Denny's instead of the Grand Lux or Fleming's. Same exact job. Why would you not work where the tips are going to be astronomically better?

You are correct. It doesnt matter...and you are correct.....Hanks is paid based on what his value is to the consumer.

And exactly the point the right is making when they say "stop copmplaining about the salaries of corporate executives. They are paid based on what the end user...be it consumers or businesses...allow them to be paid. If the end user did not like the price of the prodcut, they would stop buying the product.

Sorry Candy......I sucked you right into it.

I'll be gladly sucked into that intellectual debate because in a market economy, the market decides.

I will also add in however that in the past there was this compact to where the company's leadership would look out for the long term interest of the company which would almost inevitably translate into long careers for their employees who built equity, added value, and served their employers well. Now these CEO's and their puppet boards are very much in it for themselves and their shareholders to whom they answer more than anybody else. Which is why Wall Street loves layoffs.

However...

The answer isn't to bitch about it; the answer is to not become a victim of it or prepare for the enevitable downsizing that comes with each money grab made by these creeps.

Diversify your 401K with other investments. If you can't split your 401K among mutuals offering something other than stocks and bonds. Avoid amassing large amounts of debt,
and keep your resume updated and be on the lookout for new opportunities because you could be out of work tomorrow. Corporate America does not care. They are in it for themselves.

Good post. Good Discussion.

 

[Jarhead]

It doesn't matter. The market values Mr. Hanks contribution at 50K an hour and hers at 8. Mr. Hanks has a skillset in demand by those who watch his movies and television dramas. The skillset being applied by the girl behind the booth is limited.

On a similiar note, I always wondered why a waitress would work at Denny's instead of the Grand Lux or Fleming's. Same exact job. Why would you not work where the tips are going to be astronomically better?

You are correct. It doesnt matter...and you are correct.....Hanks is paid based on what his value is to the consumer.

And exactly the point the right is making when they say "stop copmplaining about the salaries of corporate executives. They are paid based on what the end user...be it consumers or businesses...allow them to be paid. If the end user did not like the price of the prodcut, they would stop buying the product.

Sorry Candy......I sucked you right into it.

Except you're clearly ignoring that they're not Raising the price of the product to pay themselves more....................thus retaining Consumers.

To pay themselves more, they are keeping their workers wages stagnant, as their pay sky rockets.

There's two realities that you need to face:

-The income disparity is REAL.
-It's not because the Majority of the Country all of a sudden became Lazy.

lets just say that congress passes a law that says that profits over a certain percentage MUST be divied equally amongst the employees and refelcted in their raises..

I know...its not that easy...but lets just say it is the law..

So everyone in the country find their salaries going up nicely...execs making a bit less, em0ployees making a bit more....more equality in income...

How do you think that will affect the spending power of the employees?

 

[Jarhead]

It doesn't matter. The market values Mr. Hanks contribution at 50K an hour and hers at 8. Mr. Hanks has a skillset in demand by those who watch his movies and television dramas. The skillset being applied by the girl behind the booth is limited.

On a similiar note, I always wondered why a waitress would work at Denny's instead of the Grand Lux or Fleming's. Same exact job. Why would you not work where the tips are going to be astronomically better?

You are correct. It doesnt matter...and you are correct.....Hanks is paid based on what his value is to the consumer.

And exactly the point the right is making when they say "stop copmplaining about the salaries of corporate executives. They are paid based on what the end user...be it consumers or businesses...allow them to be paid. If the end user did not like the price of the prodcut, they would stop buying the product.

Sorry Candy......I sucked you right into it.

I'll be gladly sucked into that intellectual debate because in a market economy, the market decides.

I will also add in however that in the past there was this compact to where the company's leadership would look out for the long term interest of the company which would almost inevitably translate into long careers for their employees who built equity, added value, and served their employers well. Now these CEO's and their puppet boards are very much in it for themselves and their shareholders to whom they answer more than anybody else. Which is why Wall Street loves layoffs.

However...

The answer isn't to bitch about it; the answer is to not become a victim of it or prepare for the enevitable downsizing that comes with each money grab made by these creeps.
Diversify your 401K with other investments. If you can't split your 401K among mutuals offering something other than stocks and bonds. Avoid amassing large amounts of debt,
and keep your resume updated and be on the lookout for new opportunities because you could be out of work tomorrow. Corporate America does not care. They are in it for themselves.

Good post. Good Discussion.

what I bolded.

I live my life by that philosophy.

When I get hurt by the actions of someone else, I blame mysoelf for letting it happen.

I just lost a bopat load of money on a deal that went bad with a client. He went under owing me a lot of money.

My mistake? I should have asked for his financials before committing to the deal. (My industry requires me to lay out salaries for clients...and they pay me back the salary money plus a mark up).

Do I blame him? No. I feel bad he went under.

I blame me for not doiung MY due dilignece.

You sure you are not a conservative? Personal responsibility is a conservative way of thinking.

 

[G.T.]

lets just say that congress passes a law that says that profits over a certain percentage MUST be divied equally amongst the employees and refelcted in their raises..

I know...its not that easy...but lets just say it is the law..

So everyone in the country find their salaries going up nicely...execs making a bit less, em0ployees making a bit more....more equality in income...

How do you think that will affect the spending power of the employees?

I don't think it would be good to mandate it. You can incentivize a greater sharing in the prosperity built on the worker's backs in other, more creative ways I'm sure. It's 2011, we've discovered hundreds of planets as opposed to the ole' 9, for fuck's sakes. We are intelligent people, and when the Buying power of the Middle Class is being depleted in such a way, something will have to happen or else Economies WILL be horrendous.

I keep having to smile when it's brushed off as "laziness" when people even mention a very REAL scenario in our Country (the disappearance of the Middle Class). It's also funny that (even though some do it) it's called class envy, or demonizing the Rich, when I don't think they're bad, or demons. That's redonkulous. I'm happy for them.

It's statistics. The numerals don't lie, like political agendas do.

 

[candycorn]

Corporate profits are at an all time high..........


that's not revenue...


that's profits.



While the average worker's pay is remaining stagnant.

The video is false propoganda. It implies that Obama has made it too expensive to do business............while ignoring the fact that Corporate business is BOOMING.

You're 100% right on both counts which is why I'm having this disagreement with Pymlico Pilgrim; too many corporate managers see their workers as disposable operatives and is trying to make them as generic as possible so they can be replaced like a fuse when they start acting up.

That is what happens when you have a decline in workers rights.

Also true.

 

[Jarhead]

You are correct. It doesnt matter...and you are correct.....Hanks is paid based on what his value is to the consumer.

And exactly the point the right is making when they say "stop copmplaining about the salaries of corporate executives. They are paid based on what the end user...be it consumers or businesses...allow them to be paid. If the end user did not like the price of the prodcut, they would stop buying the product.

Sorry Candy......I sucked you right into it.

Except you're clearly ignoring that they're not Raising the price of the product to pay themselves more....................thus retaining Consumers.

To pay themselves more, they are keeping their workers wages stagnant, as their pay sky rockets.

There's two realities that you need to face:

-The income disparity is REAL.
-It's not because the Majority of the Country all of a sudden became Lazy.

lets just say that congress passes a law that says that profits over a certain percentage MUST be divied equally amongst the employees and refelcted in their raises..

I know...its not that easy...but lets just say it is the law..

So everyone in the country find their salaries going up nicely...execs making a bit less, em0ployees making a bit more....more equality in income...

How do you think that will affect the spending power of the employees?

Let me answer it...

We are better off with 1% salaries increasing faster than the other 99% becuase the 1% does not affect market prices.

Increase the salaries of 99% and prices will go up accordingly....and we will feel no affect whatsopever....but the unemployed and the elderly will struggle even more.

 

[Jarhead]

You're 100% right on both counts which is why I'm having this disagreement with Pymlico Pilgrim; too many corporate managers see their workers as disposable operatives and is trying to make them as generic as possible so they can be replaced like a fuse when they start acting up.

That is what happens when you have a decline in workers rights.

Also true.

where is there a decline in workers rights?

As an HR solutions consultant/ hbusiness planner/recruiter I see..

OSHA laws protecting the well being of workers
Discrimination laws protecting against biased hiring practices
HR laws protecting against employer abuse of employees
Right to work laws protecting the employee who decides to resign without a reason
Individuals have the right to quit, accept an offer, negotiate a salary and decide if they are happy with it or quit.
They have the right to sign a contrasct or refuse and get a job elsewhere. They have the right to sign a no compete clause or refuse to and get a job elsewhere..
I can go on....

What rights have they lost?

 

[Photonic]

That is what happens when you have a decline in workers rights.

Also true.

where is there a decline in workers rights?

As an HR solutions consultant/ hbusiness planner/recruiter I see..

OSHA laws protecting the well being of workers
Discrimination laws protecting against biased hiring practices
HR laws protecting against employer abuse of employees
Right to work laws protecting the employee who decides to resign without a reason
Individuals have the right to quit, accept an offer, negotiate a salary and decide if they are happy with it or quit.
They have the right to sign a contrasct or refuse and get a job elsewhere. They have the right to sign a no compete clause or refuse to and get a job elsewhere..
I can go on....

What rights have they lost?

They don't have those options you speak of. That's the decline. When you have a high demand for jobs, workers have MANY more rights. The inverse is proportionally true.

 

[jillian]

Now how can anyone describe something so nebulus as "a fair days work"?

It depends on the job description.

they don't even know what they mean by the question... other than the fact it gives them the chance to bash half the country

 

[Mr Natural]

A fair day's work is what you do the keep from getting fired.

 

[G.T.]

Now how can anyone describe something so nebulus as "a fair days work"?

It depends on the job description.

they don't even know what they mean by the question... other than the fact it gives them the chance to bash half the country

I think it's what it all boils down to.

Liberals are lazy, don't own businesses, aren't self reliant and don't know economics.

That's the strong meme as pushed by anyone who can find youtube of Liberals behaving as such.

 

[Jarhead]

Also true.

where is there a decline in workers rights?

As an HR solutions consultant/ hbusiness planner/recruiter I see..

OSHA laws protecting the well being of workers
Discrimination laws protecting against biased hiring practices
HR laws protecting against employer abuse of employees
Right to work laws protecting the employee who decides to resign without a reason
Individuals have the right to quit, accept an offer, negotiate a salary and decide if they are happy with it or quit.
They have the right to sign a contrasct or refuse and get a job elsewhere. They have the right to sign a no compete clause or refuse to and get a job elsewhere..
I can go on....

What rights have they lost?

They don't have those options you speak of. That's the decline. When you have a high demand for jobs, workers have MANY more rights. The inverse is proportionally true.

I respect that answer...and yes, it is accurate.
Well...sort of...they still DO have those options, but they are less likely to want to exercise them as there may be no alternative.
But that is the fault of the economic conditions...not the fault of the employers.

Now, I know...why cant the employers take in less money and hire more people.

I can see that for the mega companies.

But most companies are like me.....I make a nice living....very nice...top 5%er....but with thinghs so bleak out there, why am I going to "HOPE" that things get better and take in less money now?

What if they dont get better? THen I have a greater overhead, and less money to fall back on.

Are you willing to spend more now just so you can do your part in helping the economy? What if you spent more, and used your savings to do it and things got worse?

Where will that leave you?

And if you are not willing to do it as a consumer...why should I do it as a business owner?

 

[Jarhead]

Now how can anyone describe something so nebulus as "a fair days work"?

It depends on the job description.

they don't even know what they mean by the question... other than the fact it gives them the chance to bash half the country

I think it's what it all boils down to.

Liberals are lazy, don't own businesses, aren't self reliant and don't know economics.

That's the strong meme as pushed by anyone who can find youtube of Liberals behaving as such.

Yeah...sure...thats what I have been saying.
Take that rheotric "other side bashing crap" and use it on someone else.

 

[Photonic]

where is there a decline in workers rights?

As an HR solutions consultant/ hbusiness planner/recruiter I see..

OSHA laws protecting the well being of workers
Discrimination laws protecting against biased hiring practices
HR laws protecting against employer abuse of employees
Right to work laws protecting the employee who decides to resign without a reason
Individuals have the right to quit, accept an offer, negotiate a salary and decide if they are happy with it or quit.
They have the right to sign a contrasct or refuse and get a job elsewhere. They have the right to sign a no compete clause or refuse to and get a job elsewhere..
I can go on....

What rights have they lost?

They don't have those options you speak of. That's the decline. When you have a high demand for jobs, workers have MANY more rights. The inverse is proportionally true.

I respect that answer...and yes, it is accurate.
Well...sort of...they still DO have those options, but they are less likely to want to exercise them as there may be no alternative.
But that is the fault of the economic conditions...not the fault of the employers.

Now, I know...why cant the employers take in less money and hire more people.

I can see that for the mega companies.

But most companies are like me.....I make a nice living....very nice...top 5%er....but with thinghs so bleak out there, why am I going to "HOPE" that things get better and take in less money now?

What if they dont get better? THen I have a greater overhead, and less money to fall back on.

Are you willing to spend more now just so you can do your part in helping the economy? What if you spent more, and used your savings to do it and things got worse?

Where will that leave you?

And if you are not willing to do it as a consumer...why should I do it as a business owner?

Because they have more to lose than a "top 5%er."

So much more.

 

[JDzBrain]

So why does Tom Hanks get 50K an hour and the ticket girl getting 8 an hour?

( I dont know what Tom Hanks makes....but you get my point)

Cause she can't act for squat and she wouldn't know which side of a soccer ball to paint the face on if her life depended on it!

On the other hand, an orangutan on LSD could hand out tickets at the box office....and they'd work for peanuts. LOL

 

[G.T.]

they don't even know what they mean by the question... other than the fact it gives them the chance to bash half the country

I think it's what it all boils down to.

Liberals are lazy, don't own businesses, aren't self reliant and don't know economics.

That's the strong meme as pushed by anyone who can find youtube of Liberals behaving as such.

Yeah...sure...thats what I have been saying.
Take that rheotric "other side bashing crap" and use it on someone else.

You do it, except you don't think so.

You drop little assumptions that people pointing out the reality of the situation aren't "self reliant!" like ole' Jarhead is! Hardest workers of evaaa!"

Gimme a break.

MOST PEOPLE are bust ass, hard workers like everyone else.