Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The Warehouse Wage Slave  
User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2093 posts, RR: 2
Posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2773 times:

I thought this was a pretty good (however long) read:


http://motherjones.com/politics/2012...e-online-shipping-warehouses-labor

Quote:

"Don't take anything that happens to you there personally," the woman at the local chamber of commerce says when I tell her that tomorrow I start working at Amalgamated Product Giant Shipping Worldwide Inc. She winks at me. I stare at her for a second.

"What?" I ask. "Why, is somebody going to be mean to me or something?"

She smiles. "Oh, yeah."

And then, people again wonder "with all the profits these companies are making, can't they afford to treat their workers more humane?" Sure they can, but that's not the issue. In Capitalism, the important point is not whether you make a profit or not, it's how large that profit is. And the investors' money will go to whoever makes the largest profit and can offer the largest return on investment. The true reason those workers suffer is not that their companies couldn't operate otherwise, it's that somebody else would undercut them and make an even larger profit, and that's where the money would go. It was true in 18th century Manchester, and it is still true today.


Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
132 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11660 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2751 times:

But, we were told when we give tax breaks to the billionares, it will trickle down and we will all be rich and work in high paying jobs.


Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 2, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2726 times:

Quoting Rara (Thread starter):
In Capitalism, the important point is not whether you make a profit or not, it's how large that profit is.

  

Quoting Rara (Thread starter):
And the investors' money will go to whoever makes the largest profit and can offer the largest return on investment.

  

Quoting Rara (Thread starter):
The true reason those workers suffer is not that their companies couldn't operate otherwise, it's that somebody else would undercut them and make an even larger profit, and that's where the money would go.

  

I'm missing something here. Is this supposed to be considered a bad thing? Because it isn't.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2093 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2717 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 2):

I'm missing something here. Is this supposed to be considered a bad thing? Because it isn't.

Tell that to the "wage slaves" who get zapped whenever they touch the shelf..  

It depends on your viewpoint, I'd say - but you're right, it wasn't making the point that it's a "bad thing" as such, it's just a fact of Capitalism. However, it is also a fact that those mechanisms benefit the few, and disadvantage the many. And I don't have the impression that most people are aware of that.



Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
User currently offlineAcheron From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1656 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2689 times:

Quoting Rara (Thread starter):
. It was true in 18th century Manchester, and it is still true today.

I certainly can't see much of a difference between the working conditions of the people in the article and those in factories during the industrial revolution.

And I'm pretty sure there are a few out there who would be more than happy to allow a return of said conditions.


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4628 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2688 times:

Not sure what is wrong with this. This is Capatilism at it's finest.

1. There is a steady supply of workers
2. The wage means the job requires skills and has demands.
3. There is nothing stopping someone from walking right out the door. after a one week expose.

If #1 and #2 get out of balance due to #3, then the company will have to adjust.

However currently the company has enough workers to fill the jobs that are in place.

Nothing really wrong here. Those that survive long enough move up and become supervisors.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8964 posts, RR: 39
Reply 6, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2641 times:

Why should I listen to you or the author of this piece when neither of you even know what slavery actually is?

The title is obviously intended to inflame, so I would take anything from the article with a boulder of salt to begin with.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlinedfwrevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 977 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2640 times:

Quoting Rara (Reply 3):
It depends on your viewpoint, I'd say - but you're right, it wasn't making the point that it's a "bad thing" as such, it's just a fact of Capitalism. However, it is also a fact that those mechanisms benefit the few, and disadvantage the many

No, that is not a fact. The mechanisms of free market capitalism produce vastly better outcomes for people of all income levels than do the mechanisms of centrally planned and heavily regulated economies.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 5):
Nothing really wrong here. Those that survive long enough move up and become supervisors.

And more importantly, anyone who chooses to take an ownership stake can do so.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 1):
But, we were told when we give tax breaks to the billionares, it will trickle down and we will all be rich and work in high paying jobs

And in reality, fiscal liberals consider "billionaires" to be anyone earning $250k household income.  

As a point of historical fact, we know that investors heavily modulate their investing decisions based on capital gains tax rates. Investors know the rates are subject to change, so they will buy/hold/sell accordingly. Jack up the tax rate and people will sit on their investments until the next administration lowers them. We also know that when rates are lower, the total revenue generated by capital gains taxes grows faster than when rates are higher. This trend has been verified through multiple business cycles.

What you sarcastically suggest is that the government should take action that would ultimately make it less effective at collecting revenue for some narrowly-defined appearance of "fairness."


User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2093 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2572 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 6):
Why should I listen to you or the author of this piece when neither of you even know what slavery actually is?

Please. Wage slavery is a long-established concept; if you're not familiar with it, I suggest you look it up.

The conditions described by the article are not a textbook case of wage slavery, but they bear some resemblance, and that's the point the author is trying to make.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7):

No, that is not a fact. The mechanisms of free market capitalism produce vastly better outcomes for people of all income levels than do the mechanisms of centrally planned and heavily regulated economies.

Well THAT is definitely not a fact.   Unless you somehow define "outcome". If you mean material riches, then you may be correct. But some people may also define a satisfying job that doesn't rob them of their dignity as "better outcome". And jobs that are designed to make people feel bad to maximize their output (at least until a replacement takes their place) don't rank very highly on that.



Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
User currently offlineGBLKD From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2011, 345 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2566 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7):
No, that is not a fact. The mechanisms of free market capitalism produce vastly better outcomes for people of all income levels than do the mechanisms of centrally planned and heavily regulated economies.

I think the Chinese and Indian factory workers who live on site, work 12 hour shifts, and "hot bunk" for less pay in a week than I earn in an hour driving a truck just so the developed world can have cheap trinkets would heartily disagree. Free market global capitalism has certainly given them a choice, work in a sweatshop in terrible conditions or your kids starve. If you start to organise and want higher pay and better conditions the factory closes and production moves on to somewhere else with fresh meat to exploit.

Nice.


User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7957 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2532 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7):
The mechanisms of free market capitalism produce vastly better outcomes for people of all income levels than do the mechanisms of centrally planned and heavily regulated economies.

Perhaps we can agree that capitalism improves the material living conditions more effectively in a society characterized by chronic shortages. As far as affluent societies are concerned, evidence doesn't appear to be clear. A capitalist economy is heavily dependent on growth, and it seems that most of the growth necessary can be found outside wealthy states such as the U.S., Canada or most European countries where one company can at best drive a competitor out of the market, which doesn't really qualify as growth.
Besides, when a western economy grows by say: 1 billion Dollars, you'll find that the federal dept has grown by ~ 1 billion Dollars as well. So for every additional Dollar generated by growth we generate ~ 1 Dollar in dept as well. Is that really growth? It is more like a give and take, I dare say, only that wealthy people have disproportionately benefited from the economic growth. You can witness the same effect in basically every industrial nation with the exception of China and other societies where a) workers' rights are poor to non-existent and b) that are generally far less affluent.

Capitalism is dependent on growth. Always. But growth is necessarily limited. You don't need a third freezer, a fifth bicylce, and then there is the environmental factor: Every company, in one way or another, turns natural values into monetary values. Since natural values are limited, economic growth is limited as well.

As a result, we need to reform capitalism by heavily diminishing its dependence on growth but still maintain its free and market driven character.



I support the right to arm bears
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12564 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2514 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7):
And in reality, fiscal liberals consider "billionaires" to be anyone earning $250k household income.

I'm not sure what point you are making. According to http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/10/19/what-percent-are-you/ having a $250k household income puts you in the top 4% of income in the US, definitely on the "have" side of the "have" / "have not" border.

If you consider the definition of middle class to mean at the 50% line, that is all of $43k of family income.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8279 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2487 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7):
The mechanisms of free market capitalism produce vastly better outcomes for people of all income levels than do the mechanisms of centrally planned and heavily regulated economies.

Which is why the middle class has been shrinking in this century. To build the middle class and increase the buying power of this group will take away from the wealthy.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7):
As a point of historical fact, we know that investors heavily modulate their investing decisions based on capital gains tax rates

Maybe they need to invest based on corporate performance. Take a look at Apple - they are delivering investment performance without regards to tax rates.

In reality, lower capital gains tax rates simply prop up the shares of companies that are poor performers.

Maybe we need to simply say that income of all types is Income for tax purposes. That will put significant pressures on companies to deliver performance.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7):
Jack up the tax rate and people will sit on their investments until the next administration lowers them.

Then they are sitting there with their head where the sun doesn't shine. If you can turn stock and make an after tax profit then you should be turning that stock.

In terms of the warehouse jobs, this is not the first time they have been in the news. There was recently a story about the Riverside CA area warehouses. From the articles it seems that pure capitalists need serf level labor in order to be successful. Maybe if we shut those companies down new ones will start up and perform better on the employment side.


User currently offlinedfwrevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 977 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2481 times:

Quoting Rara (Reply 8):
Well THAT is definitely not a fact. Unless you somehow define "outcome". If you mean material riches, then you may be correct. But some people may also define a satisfying job that doesn't rob them of their dignity as "better outcome". And jobs that are designed to make people feel bad to maximize their output (at least until a replacement takes their place) don't rank very highly on that.

Yes it is. This is not an area for reasonable disagreement. You are just dead wrong, period.

Centrally planned and heavily regulated economies diminish opportunities in all areas of life, not just wealth creation. Fulfillment, self-determination, health, well-being, individual liberty, all of that stuff. A market economy creates more choices and more opportunities for people to align their lives to the way they want to live.

The exploitation you describe becomes more wide-spread as regulation/planning increases because worker's opportunity to go elsewhere decreases.

Quoting GBLKD (Reply 9):

I think the Chinese and Indian factory workers who live on site, work 12 hour shifts, and "hot bunk" for less pay in a week than I earn in an hour driving a truck just so the developed world can have cheap trinkets would heartily disagree.

And both the Chinese and Indian economies are characterized by decades of state management and central planning. You are proving my point.

Quoting GBLKD (Reply 9):
Free market global capitalism has certainly given them a choice, work in a sweatshop in terrible conditions or your kids starve.

The choice between work and starvation is just biological. You have to act to sustain yourself.

The Chinese who must choose between working in a sweatshop and starvation are the result of the Chinese state.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 11):
According to http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/10/19/what-percent-are-you/ having a $250k household income puts you in the top 4% of income in the US, definitely on the "have" side of the "have" / "have not" border.

That's not really for you to decide. I'm "above average" in that I make more than $43K, but I'm not close to the income I eventually want to earn. So I work for it. You could argue that I have enough today and that it is selfish for me to work for more than I absolutely need.

A market-driven economy is defined by the absence of ceilings, which fuels the aspirations of our creative, innovative, and productive class.


User currently offlinedfwrevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 977 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2471 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
Which is why the middle class has been shrinking in this century

You have no perspective. The standard of living for the middle class is orders of magnitude greater than it was a century ago. We hit a recession and a weak recovery and the progressives start talking about the good old days of 1912...  
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
To build the middle class and increase the buying power of this group will take away from the wealthy.

False, wealth creation is not a zero sum game. Someone does not have to lose for me to win, and vice versa.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
Maybe they need to invest based on corporate performance. Take a look at Apple - they are delivering investment performance without regards to tax rates.

Your infatuation with comparing the entire range of private businesses to AAPL is tiresome. AAPL is a phenomenal company because they are delivering innovative new products into markets that didn't exist before they created them. They grow rapidly because they are expanding into a vacuum.

By that standard, no one should invest in growing an established industry. We would have no power companies, construction companies, insurance providers, clothing companies, etc. Different investors have different objectives, which drives different investment decisions. Not everyone is looking to ride the next hot stock with 50% annual growth.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
Maybe we need to simply say that income of all types is Income for tax purposes. That will put significant pressures on companies to deliver performance.

You'll just drive them out of business. People don't work and take risks for the sake of paying taxes.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
Then they are sitting there with their head where the sun doesn't shine. If you can turn stock and make an after tax profit then you should be turning that stock.

Not if I can expect a greater return by holding.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11660 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2471 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 13):
I'm "above average" in that I make more than $43K, but I'm not close to the income I eventually want to earn. So I work for it. You could argue that I have enough today and that it is selfish for me to work for more than I absolutely need.

And that is great. More power to you. "Liberals" do not hate anyone like that. What "liberals" hate are the people who sit back and wait for money to roll in. Like Romney, Cheney, Bush, et cetera.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 13):
A market-driven economy is defined by the absence of ceilings, which fuels the aspirations of our creative, innovative, and productive class.

But, because of huge tax breaks for the 1%, we do not have a productive class. We have a class that is just scraping by and paying for the few that are getting rich off tax breaks and off-shoring their wealth. It may not look like we have ceilings, but no one can afford to even think about getting to that point. We have to pay for housing, food, and getting to and from work. We can't even afford health care.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinedfwrevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 977 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2466 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 15):
What "liberals" hate are the people who sit back and wait for money to roll in. Like Romney, Cheney, Bush, et cetera.

Running multi-billion dollar enterprises like a capital management firm, one of the largest oil field services companies, and an MLB franchise is really "sitting back."

That you actually "hate" these people shows derangement.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 15):
We have a class that is just scraping by and paying for the few that are getting rich off tax breaks and off-shoring their wealth.

How does one "get rich" off tax breaks? Think about what you are saying. Tax breaks on what? Oh that's right, a huge income that they earned by doing extremely high-value work. God forbid they keep what they earn. Are you actually more entitled to their work than they are?

And you are most certainly not "paying for the few" as the top 1% of income earners alone contribute 36% of all income tax revenue. The bottom 50% only pays 2.5% of income taxes.


User currently offlinevin2basketball From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 317 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2433 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 16):
And you are most certainly not "paying for the few" as the top 1% of income earners alone contribute 36% of all income tax revenue. The bottom 50% only pays 2.5% of income taxes.

While earning 20-22% of the income


User currently offlinevin2basketball From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 317 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2431 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
Which is why the middle class has been shrinking in this century. To build the middle class and increase the buying power of this group will take away from the wealthy.

Ken777, two things.

Firstly, the middle class has gotten smaller, because more people have moved into the higher income distribution

(Source: http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2012/04/burkhauser_on_t.html)

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2011/07/...nging-middle-class-stagnation.html

Also from that source, the real purchasing power of the middle class has grown by leaps and bounds over the last 30 years, as has its quality of life. Now this new middle class may not be the same as the old manufacturing based middle class, but it is better off.

[Edited 2012-04-13 19:28:23]

User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19727 posts, RR: 58
Reply 19, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2414 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 13):
Centrally planned and heavily regulated economies diminish opportunities in all areas of life, not just wealth creation. Fulfillment, self-determination, health, well-being, individual liberty, all of that stuff. A market economy creates more choices and more opportunities for people to align their lives to the way they want to live.

Likewise, in a fully unregulated environment the same is true. Workers become slaves and have no upward mobility. A caste system forms.

The most prosperous situation for all concerned is a partially free-market economy with reasonable regulation. Europe, and particularly France, is a very good example of how to do it. Yes, Europe has had economic and financial crises, but so have we.

Let's not forget that the root of just about every violent revolution in history has been that the gap between the few "haves" and the many "have nots" got too big. If communism ever comes to America, it will be because capitalism was allowed to go completely out of control.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8279 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2395 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 13):
Centrally planned and heavily regulated economies diminish opportunities in all areas of life

And centrally planned and heavily regulated jobs like those warehouse jobs increase opportunities in all areas of life?

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 13):
Fulfillment, self-determination, health, well-being, individual liberty, all of that stuff.

Unless you have a serf level job in a warehouse.  
Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 13):
A market economy creates more choices and more opportunities for people to align their lives to the way they want to live.

And I'm sure those people in the warehouse serf jobs appreciate that.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 13):
A market-driven economy is defined by the absence of ceilings, which fuels the aspirations of our creative, innovative, and productive class.

The warehouse in the article has enough ceilings for most people. A Serf Economy Company if I ever saw one.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
The standard of living for the middle class is orders of magnitude greater than it was a century ago.

But todays standard of living for the middle class is lower than it was in, say, the Clinton Years. I didn't realize you would have had problems with the comparison i made. Maybe I should have just said "Since Bush & Cheney screwed up the economy, started an unnecessary war, etc.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
Someone does not have to lose for me to win, and vice versa.

No doubt about that.

At the same time we don't need to diminish the middle class in order for the wealthy to continue to grown their wealth.

Nor do we need to allow serf economy jobs.

If someone works a full time job they should earn enough to not need welfare (a good way to cut the debt and tax rates over time).

And companies should not be allowed to cut per hour wages for part time workers. Those part time jobs should actually cost more per hour.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
Your infatuation with comparing the entire range of private businesses to AAPL is tiresome.

I've been comparing companies to Apple for years because of their overall performance. Is your preference a lower level of performance?

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
AAPL is a phenomenal company because they are delivering innovative new products into markets that didn't exist before they created them.

Like computers, MP3 payers, mobile phones, tablets?

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
They grow rapidly because they are expanding into a vacuum.

With computers, MP3 payers, mobile phones, tablets?

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
By that standard, no one should invest in growing an established industry.

The mobile phone industry was pretty well established before Apple released the iPhone. Same with the MP3 industry before the iPod.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
We would have no power companies,

[

Power companies (utilities) are generally monopolies with maximum profit levels allowed, which leaves them to be a stable source of income.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
construction companies

When I look at construction companies my first thoughts are of construction companies I see working on the roads and bridges - via government contracts.

Then there are the construction companies building military projects, like carriers, fighters, war ships, etc.

Also under government contracts.

Then the decent paying jobs from these programs allow people to buy homes and othe stuff that requires construction companies and construction workers.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
Not everyone is looking to ride the next hot stock with 50% annual growth.

Doesn't matter to me either way, as one as they pay their taxes on the income generated. And that includes all income being taxed at the same level.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
You'll just drive them out of business.

And they will be replaced with companies that understand that it is net profit that counts and are able to be successful under that standard.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
People don't work and take risks for the sake of paying taxes.

That's not an excuse for eliminating taxes. You sound like it's better for the taxes to go away and we can just print money instead.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
Not if I can expect a greater return by holding.

Take your chances if you want. Investments go up and down so take your pick (risk) - it's the American way.

But that has nothing to do with our deterioration of the middle class. Unless your investments will grow with a serf economy.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 21, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2373 times:

Quoting GBLKD (Reply 9):
Nice.

It is, isn't it.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 10):
As a result, we need to reform capitalism by heavily diminishing its dependence on growth but still maintain its free and market driven character.

We actually need to break down barriers to allow the most free competition and encourage growth.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
Maybe if we shut those companies down new ones will start up and perform better on the employment side.

Certainly if you shut those companies down new ones will start up and perform better in Mexico or Malaysia, or any number of other places.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 14):
The standard of living for the middle class is orders of magnitude greater than it was a century ago.

   But, let's take this a step further: what's with the deification of the middle class? Why is that considered the end all be all of American life?

I don't know about anyone else, but screw middle class. I don't want that. I want to be upper class. If I make a million dollars, I want to go for two million.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 15):
What "liberals" hate are the people who sit back and wait for money to roll in.

You mean investors. The very lifeblood of a market economy. Yeah, hate them. They're evil.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 19):
Europe, and particularly France, is a very good example of how to do it.

Their workers have a tendency to not work a whole lot though. Somebody in France is on strike? It must be Thursday.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 20):
Nor do we need to allow serf economy jobs.

You do if you want a strong and complete economy. People complain about losing blue collar jobs, but they only want them with better than blue collar wages. The real problem is that Americans think that simply being alive should punch their ticket for the middle class. The truth is that being uneducated, unskilled labor sucks. It sucks in this society and pretty much every other. The solution is to not be uneducated, unskilled labor.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinePyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 4022 posts, RR: 28
Reply 22, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2359 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 6):
Why should I listen to you or the author of this piece when neither of you even know what slavery actually is?

You should have stopped as soon as you saw the name "Mother Jones" pop up.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 13):
The exploitation you describe becomes more wide-spread as regulation/planning increases because worker's opportunity to go elsewhere decreases

Not for him I am sure. He is a "social scientist" so I am sure he would be one of the wise annointed bureaucrats in the Politburo telling everyone else how to live. It would suck for those who actually work for a living, though.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 15):
And that is great. More power to you. "Liberals" do not hate anyone like that. What "liberals" hate are the people who sit back and wait for money to roll in. Like Romney, Cheney, Bush, et cetera.

Oh, you mean like book royalties?

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 19):
France, is a very good example of how to do it
Yes, if you are an ENA-graduated bureaucrat or part of one of the hundreds of parasitic classes that live off the government (from artists, to "intellectuals", to farmers, etc.) life is great. If you are one of the three people in France that actually produces more than what they take in life sucks. Good thing those people are smart enough to know where the train station is and that London is only two hours away.



Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2093 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2308 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 13):
You are just dead wrong, period.

Ah this is great.   "Hey Capitalism may not be ideal for everyone at every time." "NO YOU'RE WRONG PERIOD"   Signs of open-mindedness.

You still haven't said how you define "ideal outcome". Do it and we can discuss that. From reading between the lines, I suppose you're talking about quantifiable material riches, but you somehow refuse to say so.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 21):
The truth is that being uneducated, unskilled labor sucks. It sucks in this society and pretty much every other. The solution is to not be uneducated, unskilled labor.

The truth is that the working conditions of the warehouse workers in the article could have been improved easily and without rendering the company unprofitable.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 22):

You should have stopped as soon as you saw the name "Mother Jones" pop up.

Don't know who that is, but I find it amusing that you folks keep advocating not reading the article.   Which I find very reasonable from your side. Because if you religiously believe that a completely unregulated free market is some sort of divine perfection, you better keep your eyes tightly shut from the many ugly consequences it has.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 22):

Not for him I am sure. He is a "social scientist" so I am sure he would be one of the wise annointed bureaucrats in the Politburo telling everyone else how to live. It would suck for those who actually work for a living, though.

And now we arrive at the ad-hominem attacks. Really classy of you to suggest that I don't work for a living. Just FYI, I don't work for the government (I wouldn't see anything wrong with it if I did, I should add). Now if you find it acceptable to construct insults from profile information, I could add that one could also construct something from someone over the age of 26 still labelled a "student", but I'm certain there's a good reason for that, so I'm not going to. Just don't assume from what people have written in their profiles, is the point.



Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21641 posts, RR: 55
Reply 24, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2278 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 19):
Likewise, in a fully unregulated environment the same is true.

   Capitalism is great, no doubt about it. But, like pretty much everything else, let it run amok and you're going to have problems. There's a reason the term "market failure" exists.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 21):
But, let's take this a step further: what's with the deification of the middle class? Why is that considered the end all be all of American life?

I don't know about anyone else, but screw middle class. I don't want that. I want to be upper class. If I make a million dollars, I want to go for two million.

You're basically advocating a caste system, where those who are lucky enough to make it to the upper class live very well, and those who don't get to live off of nothing, with very little mobility between the two. That will eventually lead to a revolution, when there are so many in the lower class who are sick of being stuck there while the rich get richer and richer that they revolt and set up something else.

Not everybody can be upper class - the economy couldn't sustain it. You need some people doing unskilled labor. That doesn't mean you should look down on them, treat them like crap, and then say that it's their own fault.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 21):
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 19):
Europe, and particularly France, is a very good example of how to do it.

Their workers have a tendency to not work a whole lot though.

And yet their economy is not in shambles, and they enjoy a high standard of living and a good quality of life.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
25 Revelation : We in the US live in a democracy and so there are a lot of things that others do decide for us, especially when it comes to money and in particular t
26 Rara : My grandfather left school after 9th grade and started working in the metal industry. He never got a high school diploma, let alone a university degr
27 Ken777 : You might be surprised. Shutting down companies the operate outside the laws and regulations doesn't mean that another, more reputable company can't
28 DocLightning : Nice to admit that you are purely motivated by greed. But worry you not, you can't possibly become upper class. The upper class has made that much cl
29 johns624 : The difference between an American liberal and conservative is this-- A liberal hates his country but loves its people--"America is the world's bully
30 NoUFO : The question remains where, in the long run, growth is supposed to come from. Let's assume Beiersdorf (Nivea) sells 1 million cans of deodorants in 2
31 BMI727 : Just like the economy can't sustain itself without $9 per hour warehouse jobs...somewhere. Why would I do that? Of course I am. One could call it amb
32 johns624 : I see from your profile that you're a student. You need to take some investing and economics classes. One million dollars ain't sh*t. Someone making
33 BMI727 : Believe me, I know a million isn't much, I was just throwing out a number. I was just having this conversation with my dad, who still thinks that a m
34 Revelation : Ambition: An earnest desire for some type of achievement or distinction, as power, honor, fame, or wealth, and the willingness to strive for its attai
35 johns624 : Nine figures??? What line of work are you planning on getting into? With the market just averaging around 4-5% the last decade (if that), that'll be
36 NoUFO : Well, your dad is right. And so is Revelation: Ambition and greed are not the same. You sound like a spoiled brat here.
37 PPVRA : Slavery is a very simple concept: forced labor. Nothing more, nothing less. Even the COMPLETE absence of a wage does not imply slavery.
38 Revelation : I guess it's my night to go to dictionary.com: slavery: the condition of a slave slave: a person who is the property of and wholly subject to another
39 BMI727 : Where the rubber meets the road it is. The only meaningful borderline is the line between legal and illegal. I want to start in aerospace and end up
40 StarAC17 : You won't make that much money with hard work alone, you need to create something that people want. You could do it the Mitt Romney way as well or ge
41 Post contains links Revelation : Maybe for your definition of "meaningful". Wikipedia now: Good luck with that.
42 Mir : How exactly can you be the greatest ever at owning a Porsche? Seems like that would be a very hard thing to objectively measure. -Mir
43 sccutler : An imperfect system. Just better than any other conceived thus far. And they've all been tried.
44 Post contains links and images Rara : I suggested you look up wage slavery, and again you talk about slavery, which in the context we're discussing really isn't particularly relevant. Her
45 johns624 : So basically, you have no ideas or talents in any particular area. You just want to make money. Like StarAC17 said, you won't make that money working
46 PPVRA : AGAIN, the term is ridiculous and designed to do nothing more than to inflame. I am perfectly aware of it's definition. And I continue to stick to wh
47 darksnowynight : Or maybe just having your pension wiped out in the last five years before retirement...
48 seb146 : Actually, it is. Have you paid for a gallon of gas lately? Or gone to a baseball game? Or bought stocks? That the middle class can not afford. It is
49 Rara : Do you object to the existence of the term wage slavery in general, or to the use of the term wage slavery in the article that I linked to? If the la
50 PPVRA : In general. From the wiki article you linked: "It is a negatively connoted term used to draw an analogy between slavery and wage labor, and to highli
51 dfwrevolution : Do you think it would be "spoiled" to say that there is no excuse for an adult not to maintain a healthy body weight? $1 million in retirement saving
52 johns624 : I don't believe that that is true anymore. The flat market of the last 10 years has skewed the average return over the life of the market.
53 PanHAM : Now, I did not read all the 40 plus answers here and I read only the first page of that article by the human rights editor. The working conditions sh
54 Flighty : Thanks to industrial Manchester and American factories, a lot of peace, prosperity and freedom has been gained. Today, we are past the damage from al
55 dfwrevolution : If the rate of return is dampened, it would just mean that more principle is required to achieve your target future value. The values I provided are
56 dfwrevolution : Please elaborate on how this means executives aren't doing work. Because gasoline and baseball games are more expensive than you would like? Because
57 Pyrex : Market crashes are corrections and they are good things. And the only reason those corrections happen is because of, yes, greed - because some people
58 Post contains images aloges : God, I love these threads. Doubt the neoliberal belief system, prepare for the wrath of The Free Marketers. A right shame that unregulated markets lea
59 kric777 : Can't speak for folks in other countries with different economic systems, but ....having been born and raised in the US, in a blue-collar, Dad-busted-
60 Post contains images Ken777 : You forgot the moderates. Loving our country isn't a problem, not is serving in uniform. We support private enterprise with the same vigor that we su
61 Pyrex : That is why defined benefit plans (both public and private) should be banned, but every time you see an employer try to switch people to a 401(k) typ
62 Rara : Ah OK, then I'm afraid we can't do much about it. It's a term that has been established centuries ago and used by a great number of economists, polit
63 Pyrex : Maybe in some social "science" class among fellow lefties the term has traction but that does not mean it makes any sense (just like calling East Ger
64 Post contains images Rara : Yes, very clever. Why do I get the feeling that you're simply too lazy to do some reading about it. You describe the dependency on a wage as somethin
65 BMI727 : What middle class people do you know? Pretty much everyone has some money invested with mutual funds, etc. They're all investors and shareholders, no
66 NoUFO : Right on both accounts, and at the same time a pretty superficial sort of thinking. It does not negate the fact that we will need a market driven eco
67 Post contains images aloges : Absolutely, there's a reason why greed is one of the mortal sins. I suppose the "problem" here is that ambition is more abstract than greed; it's muc
68 Revelation : And too many seem to think if one questions the income inequity in this country that one must be saying that one supports putting as many people on t
69 johns624 : Something that it appears you know nothing about.
70 PPVRA : Great, people like Marx? LOL You speak as if owning the means of production is the only difference between slavery and wage workers. Zero credibility
71 Flighty : So... it was a middle class, between the peasants and the lords. Most people are very proud that Western history made that phenomenon happen. Exactly
72 seb146 : Cashiers at Wal-Mart, forklift drivers, nurses, bus drivers, mechanics, teachers....
73 BMI727 : Didn't know that working at Walmart disqualifies one from walking into their local Edward Jones office or the equivalent.
74 johns624 : People at WalMart don't have a lot of disposable income to invest. Most of it goes towards things like food, gas, shelter, etc. What you have to real
75 PPVRA : Virtue only exists where free choice exists. There is no virtue in the government mandating (i.e., threatening you) to help someone else, no matter h
76 johns624 : You missed my point. I was addressing the above quote by BMI727 where he states that everyone who doesn't succeed and get rich is an idiot or sucks a
77 johns624 : I didn't forget us. It's just that our leaders try to polarize us to one extreme or the other.
78 PanHAM : from an accounting point of view the corporation owes the capital to the investor. Many start ups are financed with borrowed money. People having ide
79 Post contains images Rara : I'm not sure whether Marx used the term himself but even if he did - what's with the LOL? Marx is one of the great economists along with Adam Smith,
80 PanHAM : yoiu know the difference between Marx and Adam Smith? Adam Smith's theory works. Without blaming anyone and especially Marx, but Marx's theory can on
81 MD11Engineer : As has been seen in early 19th century Britain as well as now in China, capitalism works quite well in non-liberal societies and dictatorships (Brita
82 PanHAM : Sorry, but "capitalism" works at its best only in a free society. Communism or socialism are ideologies whereas "capitalism" is nothing but the summa
83 MD11Engineer : I´m talking about Ehrhardt´s "social market economy" (or Soziale Marktwirschaft), as designed in Western Germany in the 1950s based on experiences
84 Post contains images Rara : No, sorry. Neither theory "works", both are approximations of economic processes, and both have strong points and weak points in explaining the pheno
85 Post contains images Pyrex : Hmm, no it doesn't - that is why the Liability schedule on a balance sheet is different from the Equity one (and A = L + E). Equityholders have no cl
86 Post contains images PanHAM : What is "cutthroat capitalism" ? Take SIN for instance, a market economy where even the government is rated and paid according to achievements. Defic
87 FlyPNS1 : True, but largely because of government intervention. In 1912, we had a vastly more free-market economy with little or no government interference. It
88 Post contains images Rara : If something doesn't make sense to you, it may be from lack of sense, or it may be from lack of understanding. "Staying on a point" apparently isn't
89 MD11Engineer : Engels was a curious figure. Born into a factory owning capitalist family, he was sent to Manchester as a young man in 1842to learn how to run his fa
90 Post contains links PPVRA : That's absurd. Marx, and even Keynes, have created massive amounts of suffering in this planet. And no, this has nothing to do with the murderous ten
91 Rara : Please elaborate. The division of labour has enabled us to amass incredible material riches and to attain a level of development that would have been
92 Flighty : He's right, probably over 100 million people died in Marxist famines alone in China and the USSR due to blatant economic violence caused by Marx and
93 MD11Engineer : As opposed to the Irish famine of the 1840s, which was purely capitalist caused? Ok, the harvests of the staple food potato failed for several years
94 Post contains images Rara : What in the world is a "Marxist famine"? I'm talking about Karl Marx, economist, 1818-1883. You seem to be talking about Lenin, Stalin and Mao Zedong
95 seb146 : Actually, I was talking about people with degrees and certificates in things like engeneering, electrical, computers, teaching, who have had their jo
96 PPVRA : Marx: do we really need to elaborate on this? History is full of examples of it's failure. Keynes: this man is responsible for our current economic c
97 MD11Engineer : Yes, you do. Don´t come with platitudes "like do we really need to elaborate?" What were explicitely Marx (or Keynes´s) faults and what was atribut
98 johns624 : I agree with you. I was replying to BMI727 who seems to think that all people who aren't rich are just lazy and not trying.
99 PPVRA : Marx's and Keynes's ideas have brought economic misery to billions of people, even leaving the bloodshed caused by others aside. Marx never implement
100 Rara : Okay, list ONE idea of Marx (that he actually wrote down somewhere) that would bring misery to a large number of people when implemented.
101 MD11Engineer : What now? Marx´s analysis of early to mid 19th century industrial practices? Or his conclusions (about which one can indeed argue, like the Communis
102 PPVRA : Elimination of property rights.
103 PPVRA : Again, in neither the 19th century or the 1920s was there a proper free market functioning. Not in Germany, nor in the US. Because there was no unemp
104 MD11Engineer : You pure market fanatics just sound like your opponents from the extreme left. Both of you think that you own the full truth. How far do you want me t
105 Post contains images aloges : Now, now... they're the only ones who make and don'tyouforgetit! As I was saying: "Neoliberal" and "Free Marketers" may of course be replaced by "com
106 johns624 : That's what so many people either forget or ignore. We're talking about fellow humans here, not animals or machines.
107 PPVRA : So, obviously a large amount of government intervention in many different ways. On the contrary, I care about people and their rights first and forem
108 Post contains links PPVRA : Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I Let's see who is throwing who under the bus.
109 Post contains images aloges : You will only see the problem if you think that people and their well-being are more important than the so-called freedom of the market. Ah, labels..
110 PPVRA : Illogical. The "market" is an abstract concept: it does not exist, it does not have freedoms. People have freedoms - including freedom to own propert
111 MD11Engineer : A pure market driven economy and society, where everybody only makes educated decisions based on facts and reason, is just as illusory as pure commun
112 aloges : Ah, semantics... where would we be without them? In an actual discussion, perhaps... "Freedom of the market" as used by myself in the above post refe
113 johns624 : That has nothing to do with what I said.
114 PPVRA : I am perfectly aware that a free market society would not be perfect, nor am I or any other free market economist suggesting we pursue some utopian d
115 aloges : Well, I did clear it up. So to insist that I meant something else is silly at best.
116 Acheron : The main reason why communism tends to fail its because while the theory is good and overall its a good system, in practice it fails to take human na
117 PPVRA : Ah, but the very reason capitalism works is because it takes into account human nature. Heck, it basically *IS* human nature minus any violent/fraudu
118 seb146 : How is it free? At some point, people put a value on metal and used that as a substitute for the barter system. "I have pieces of what we dub preciou
119 Flighty : Don't forget laziness! When you give me a free place to live and free food, I will become lazy. Especially when the rewards of working diminish by ha
120 Post contains images PPVRA : That's not the kind of free I was talking about. That's what thieves do, or governments. Not market participants. Again: Any person is free to choose
121 StarAC17 : Conservatives (the ones running the US congress today more so) only care for their interests and in don't give a crap about the well being of others.
122 Post contains images BMI727 : I bet managers do. How many people do you think work there who are going to be greeters or cashiers their whole careers? How many people could there
123 MD11Engineer : Yes, in your ideal world, every market partizipant would be purely ethical. He would only make purely rational descisions based on facts. He would ha
124 StarAC17 : That's fine but don't expect to have a lot of friends and significant others stick around you if you are unwilling to care for them. Caring about you
125 Post contains images Rara : Okay, that was in the ill-advised "Manifesto" which I consider more of an angry rebuttal against various allegations, and more Engels' doing that Mar
126 Post contains links aloges : But it as proven time and again in places like the Congo. They've got the mineral and have it extracted, corporations buy it and there are few (if an
127 johns624 : You're just full of negative stereotypes, aren't you? I'm surprised that you even shop at Walmart, what with having to associate with the great, unwa
128 FlyPNS1 : Most jobs are menial, so where are all these people going to work? There aren't enough non-menial jobs around to keep even a tiny fraction of the pop
129 PPVRA : Oh, it's got to do with human nature - the very dark side of human nature that government is supposed to deal with. I like how the idiot minister of
130 Post contains links aloges : How interesting... so government is supposed to deal with something after all? SInce it was once the private property of the King of Belgium, you mig
131 PPVRA : Yes, violent individuals. You should try paying attention. King? Isn't that the government? Strongest VIOLENT player, just like the German government
132 Post contains images aloges : Too funny. As I was saying right at the start: I don't think I've ever read as many preposterous claims about a complete stranger in as little space
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
When The First Lady Is A Man... posted Wed Apr 11 2012 17:33:02 by Canadi>n
Got Windows XP? Well, The Clock Is Ticking... posted Wed Apr 11 2012 11:31:48 by varigb707
Where's The Outrage? posted Wed Apr 11 2012 07:28:42 by sprout5199
Location Of The Simpsons Hometown Revealed posted Tue Apr 10 2012 16:04:03 by dragon-wings
Could Dodge Drop A Cummins In The Sprinter posted Mon Apr 9 2012 09:05:07 by 747400sp
Tallest Building In The World Planned For Tucson posted Thu Apr 5 2012 16:08:05 by mke717spotter
"God Bless (no,no,no) We Love The Usa" posted Thu Apr 5 2012 08:27:28 by fr8mech
Muhammad Ali At The Miami Marlins Game posted Wed Apr 4 2012 16:10:19 by airtran737
Porsche Cayenne Diesel For The US posted Tue Apr 3 2012 22:27:41 by KiwiRob
New Uniforms For The NFL: Nike posted Tue Apr 3 2012 14:03:16 by AirframeAS