CultureCitizen
Silver Member
- Jun 1, 2013
- 1,932
- 140
- 95
... and why do you think this is so ?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have yet to see a common worker or a union worker hire or pay anyone.
I have yet to see a common worker or a union worker hire or pay anyone.
My bet is you are rather young ... or are a cuban immigrant. As a common worker I have hired :
1) A plumber
2) A construction worker
3) A personal trainner
4) A literature teacher
5) A music teacher
The list goes on but I guess it is enough to serve as an example.
Out of context reply.I have yet to see a common worker or a union worker hire or pay anyone.
My bet is you are rather young ... or are a cuban immigrant. As a common worker I have hired :
1) A plumber
2) A construction worker
3) A personal trainner
4) A literature teacher
5) A music teacher
The list goes on but I guess it is enough to serve as an example.
Significant skills and education back an executive. Often, they have attended specific schools and courses for the proper management of large organizations. These skills are rare in a majority of the population, and the acquisition of these skills is expensive as well as difficult.
I have yet to see a common worker or a union worker hire or pay anyone.
My bet is you are rather young ... or are a cuban immigrant. As a common worker I have hired :
1) A plumber
2) A construction worker
3) A personal trainner
4) A literature teacher
5) A music teacher
The list goes on but I guess it is enough to serve as an example.
I wouldn't consider 65 young.
and if that is your criteria, your OP is misleading.
I have yet to see a common worker or a union worker hire or pay anyone.
My bet is you are rather young ... or are a cuban immigrant. As a common worker I have hired :
1) A plumber
2) A construction worker
3) A personal trainner
4) A literature teacher
5) A music teacher
The list goes on but I guess it is enough to serve as an example.
I wouldn't consider 65 young.
and if that is your criteria, your OP is misleading.
Well , I find it obvious that any worker ( white or blue collar) has had a chance to hire someone else to perform some task ( add a room to a house, fix a car , get some lessons , take care of a child) . It is a misconception that "only" CEOs or big companies are "job creators". Large companies are important because they have the resources to create "capital goods", but that doesn't mean they are the only ones creating jobs.
Now , regarding the post. The people I've "employed" are mostly self-employed. Their salary is determined by the laws of supply and demand, as with regular workers. Union workers have more leverage, and EO's have even more leverage. In many cases their income is not proportional to their performance.
I have yet to see a common worker or a union worker hire or pay anyone.
My bet is you are rather young ... or are a cuban immigrant. As a common worker I have hired :
1) A plumber
2) A construction worker
3) A personal trainner
4) A literature teacher
5) A music teacher
The list goes on but I guess it is enough to serve as an example.
I wouldn't consider 65 young.
and if that is your criteria, your OP is misleading.
Well , I find it obvious that any worker ( white or blue collar) has had a chance to hire someone else to perform some task ( add a room to a house, fix a car , get some lessons , take care of a child) . It is a misconception that "only" CEOs or big companies are "job creators". Large companies are important because they have the resources to create "capital goods", but that doesn't mean they are the only ones creating jobs.
Now , regarding the post. The people I've "employed" are mostly self-employed. Their salary is determined by the laws of supply and demand, as with regular workers. Union workers have more leverage, and EO's have even more leverage. In many cases their income is not proportional to their performance.
why on earth does the culture creep care the tiniest bit about who has the greatest flexibility? The issue is liberalism v conservatism.
dear liberal culturecreep, you failed to provide your best example of rent seeking and attitudes as it relates to this thread. Or, how liberal violence toward CEO's would help those who lost their jobs after liberals shipped their jobs to China.I have yet to see a common worker or a union worker hire or pay anyone.
My bet is you are rather young ... or are a cuban immigrant. As a common worker I have hired :
1) A plumber
2) A construction worker
3) A personal trainner
4) A literature teacher
5) A music teacher
The list goes on but I guess it is enough to serve as an example.
I wouldn't consider 65 young.
and if that is your criteria, your OP is misleading.
Well , I find it obvious that any worker ( white or blue collar) has had a chance to hire someone else to perform some task ( add a room to a house, fix a car , get some lessons , take care of a child) . It is a misconception that "only" CEOs or big companies are "job creators". Large companies are important because they have the resources to create "capital goods", but that doesn't mean they are the only ones creating jobs.
Now , regarding the post. The people I've "employed" are mostly self-employed. Their salary is determined by the laws of supply and demand, as with regular workers. Union workers have more leverage, and EO's have even more leverage. In many cases their income is not proportional to their performance.
why on earth does the culture creep care the tiniest bit about who has the greatest flexibility? The issue is liberalism v conservatism.
Imbalances created by rent-seeking policies and attitudes.
Well Dubya's example was clear enough, but , admitedly that is a worst-case-scenario which I don't think applies to most of the executive officers.dear liberal culturecreep, you failed to provide your best example of rent seeking and attitudes as it relates to this thread. Or, how liberal violence toward CEO's would help those who lost their jobs after liberals shipped their jobs to China.My bet is you are rather young ... or are a cuban immigrant. As a common worker I have hired :
1) A plumber
2) A construction worker
3) A personal trainner
4) A literature teacher
5) A music teacher
The list goes on but I guess it is enough to serve as an example.
I wouldn't consider 65 young.
and if that is your criteria, your OP is misleading.
Well , I find it obvious that any worker ( white or blue collar) has had a chance to hire someone else to perform some task ( add a room to a house, fix a car , get some lessons , take care of a child) . It is a misconception that "only" CEOs or big companies are "job creators". Large companies are important because they have the resources to create "capital goods", but that doesn't mean they are the only ones creating jobs.
Now , regarding the post. The people I've "employed" are mostly self-employed. Their salary is determined by the laws of supply and demand, as with regular workers. Union workers have more leverage, and EO's have even more leverage. In many cases their income is not proportional to their performance.
why on earth does the culture creep care the tiniest bit about who has the greatest flexibility? The issue is liberalism v conservatism.
Imbalances created by rent-seeking policies and attitudes.
the union worker never has any say, he gets what the union says he will get... and why do you think this is so ?
As a hypothetical example imagine the following scenario :
a) the executive officers set a rather handsome payment increase and bonus for themselves.
b) as a result the average workers get a meager payment increase.
c) another possible result is that some jobs get offshored to compensate.
Now, I don't know if this scenario is frequent or not ( maybe it just applies for worst case scenario CEOs like G.W.Bush ), but it would sure explain (in part) how the lowest 10% got poorer while the top 1% got richer.
That's exactly what happened to those unlucky firms who had to suffer Dubya as a CEO, Enron is another notable case.2) if paid too much competition can under sell them and drive them into bankruptcy
That's exactly what happened to those unlucky firms who had to suffer Dubya as a CEO, Enron is another notable case.
Granted that is not the norm of American corporations, but rather a new and disquieting development.
Unions : cut the crap Ed, the number of unionized workers has almost dropped to zero ...