Blame the corporations.

[GG]

http://www.dol.gov/minwage/. check out the myths on this labor dept site. sound familiar? not much of a surprise that you all think you know better than people whose career it is to study and analyze such issues. but it will be discounted because the folks behind this site will be labelled liberals. and gg, one doesn't need to be an accountant to understand the issues here. it's quite simple: a lot of people in the us have little money and a very few have enormous sums. and it becomes more unbalanced every day. and you still haven't pointed out an inaccuracy in my restatement of your position just that you don't like my position.

 

You do need to know accounting, since you're arguing accounting topics. You are comparing compensation to wages and then invoke Drucker, who was comparing wages.

 

I don't like your position because it's a classic deflection of the issue. A CEO's compensation matters little to the wages of the workers in that company. In a private sector those wages are almost always determined by the supply & demand of labor and the company's market position. The people whose wages you so frequently complain are in industries that hire largely low skill, high turnover workers in industries that generate very little profit margins. You may think it would benefit workers to pay them more, but that could make the difference between staying in business or closing up shop. Who wins then?

 

Chances are, the boss will pick up the pieces and move to another venture or town. While the workers are out of luck, unless they also move or develop a more marketable skill. And people like you will hold a candle light vigil and feel bad for them, while sipping a glass of wine.

[DC Tom]

You do need to know accounting, since you're arguing accounting topics. You are comparing compensation to wages and then invoke Drucker, who was comparing wages.

 

Didn't I try to point that out a while back? You really think he's going to get it now?

[Alaska Darin]

Didn't I try to point that out a while back? You really think he's going to get it now?

He admitted he didn't go to business school and thinks Obama is smart because he has a diploma. It's like trying to teach a monkey to type.

[DC Tom]

He admitted he didn't go to business school and thinks Obama is smart because he has a diploma. It's like trying to teach a monkey to type.

 

Well, apparently it's entirely unlike teaching a monkey to type, since judging by his mere presence here someone's accomplished THAT.

[Chef Jim]

Well, apparently it's entirely unlike teaching a monkey to type, since judging by his mere presence here someone's accomplished THAT.

 

There is no hard evidence that he is doing the typing. He could just be dictating via a series of grunts which would explain a lot.

[Nanker]

True. He didn't make that happen. Somebody else made Birdbrain happen.

[....lybob]

While CEO salary will be limited to 20x the average hourly worker don't forget there will be other compensation in the form of voluntary tips from the stockholders similar to what waitresses get- who knows what a CEO could make doing a good job, smiling and showing a little cleavage.

[DC Tom]

While CEO salary will be limited to 20x the average hourly worker don't forget there will be other compensation in the form of voluntary tips from the stockholders similar to what waitresses get- who knows what a CEO could make doing a good job, smiling and showing a little cleavage.

 

Seriously? Your "average hourly worker" (still trying to figure out what an "average worker" is - what, maybe 5'7", 32 years old, liberal arts degree...?) is now a waitress who makes below minimum wage but gets tips that are somehow equivalent to deferred executive compensation?

 

You're an idiot.

[3rdnlng]

Seriously? Your "average hourly worker" (still trying to figure out what an "average worker" is - what, maybe 5'7", 32 years old, liberal arts degree...?) is now a waitress who makes below minimum wage but gets tips that are somehow equivalent to deferred executive compensation?

 

You're an idiot.

 

I never viewed lyrbob as the brightest bulb in the world, but do you get the impression that he has gone the way of birdog and is now a candidate for Nurse Cratched's own little get together?

[Koko78]

I never viewed lyrbob as the brightest bulb in the world, but do you get the impression that he has gone the way of birdog and is now a candidate for Nurse Cratched's own little get together?

 

My impression is that he's just spouting random nonsense in an effort to get attention, while going out of his way to avoid engaging in actual discussion where he may have to admit that the random nonsense is random nonsense.

Edited October 26, 2013 by Koko78

[meazza]

 

 

No, basically you are a complete idiot. Income disparity is bad when it gets to the point where people are working their ares off for almost nothing and can't afford to support stronger consumer spending and you have these few people making a hundred times more than they will ever need of government issued currency. I'm sure you can't understand this, or choose to ignore it, but if those workers made more money there would be more jobs.

 

And....I'm sure it would eventually mean those jobs would be lost/replaced to technology, but most jobs probably will in the not too distant future. But that's another story. You are still a complete idiot though

 

Amazing. You're not even a useful idiot.

[birdog1960]

You do need to know accounting, since you're arguing accounting topics. You are comparing compensation to wages and then invoke Drucker, who was comparing wages.

 

I don't like your position because it's a classic deflection of the issue. A CEO's compensation matters little to the wages of the workers in that company. In a private sector those wages are almost always determined by the supply & demand of labor and the company's market position. The people whose wages you so frequently complain are in industries that hire largely low skill, high turnover workers in industries that generate very little profit margins. You may think it would benefit workers to pay them more, but that could make the difference between staying in business or closing up shop. Who wins then?

 

Chances are, the boss will pick up the pieces and move to another venture or town. While the workers are out of luck, unless they also move or develop a more marketable skill. And people like you will hold a candle light vigil and feel bad for them, while sipping a glass of wine.

bs. we used cost based accounting in my private practice for almost 20years. i had no idea of the accounting nuances. we paid someone else to do that and give us the ckliff notes version at the end. our manager scoured the numbers for mistakes. and we did pretty well. consistently, compensation wise, taxable bottom line near zero every year etc. and we retained employees (and continue to) at an impressive rate.

 

so, no. i don't need to k now much accounting to understand and debate the issue just like i didn't need much to run a comp[any. i don't want to know much accounting. i know accountants that wish they didn't know much accounting. it's mind numbing.

 

if you look at the data presented on the linked state dept site, it tends to counter most of your arguments like increasing unemployment. high turnover is counterproductive. eliminating that is good. the fast food industry IS the way you describe but might it run better with more dedicated employees. finally, what ever you want to call it, that compensation buys 2nd and 3rd houses, 4th and 5th cars, 30 foot sailboats and frequent weekends at 5 star resorts in other continents. should ceo's be able to buy these things? sure, i'll bet most could do all that at some reasonable multiple of minimum wage as their wages or with additional compensation.

[Rob's House]

Whenever I hear someone complain about CEO wages, I wonder if they've divided the CEO's pay by the number of employees in the organization, or if instead they've based their argument on abstractions.

[GG]

bs. we used cost based accounting in my private practice for almost 20years. i had no idea of the accounting nuances. we paid someone else to do that and give us the ckliff notes version at the end. our manager scoured the numbers for mistakes. and we did pretty well. consistently, compensation wise, taxable bottom line near zero every year etc. and we retained employees (and continue to) at an impressive rate.

 

so, no. i don't need to k now much accounting to understand and debate the issue just like i didn't need much to run a comp[any. i don't want to know much accounting. i know accountants that wish they didn't know much accounting. it's mind numbing.

 

if you look at the data presented on the linked state dept site, it tends to counter most of your arguments like increasing unemployment. high turnover is counterproductive. eliminating that is good. the fast food industry IS the way you describe but might it run better with more dedicated employees. finally, what ever you want to call it, that compensation buys 2nd and 3rd houses, 4th and 5th cars, 30 foot sailboats and frequent weekends at 5 star resorts in other continents. should ceo's be able to buy these things? sure, i'll bet most could do all that at some reasonable multiple of minimum wage as their wages or with additional compensation.

 

And there it is, the economics of envy. As if CEOs buying two or three homes is the main issue. I noticed that you don't have the same level or ire when Mr. Bundschen and wife are splunking down on yet another Manhattan penthouse. And what does he do for a living? Throw a little ball around, while she just poses for pictures. Oh the injustice.

[Tiberius]

And there it is, the economics of envy. As if CEOs buying two or three homes is the main issue. I noticed that you don't have the same level or ire when Mr. Bundschen and wife are splunking down on yet another Manhattan penthouse. And what does he do for a living? Throw a little ball around, while she just poses for pictures. Oh the injustice.

 

Ya, Mitt had that same stupid claim that people are just envious of his wealth. Funny how when we have a "budget problem" its time to cut food, health and housing for the poor and to throw middle class people out of work but if you look for more revenues as a budget solution all of a sudden its attributed to baser instincts. So many right wing arguments are just the stupidest crap

[Chef Jim]

Ya, Mitt had that same stupid claim that people are just envious of his wealth. Funny how when we have a "budget problem" its time to cut food, health and housing for the poor and to throw middle class people out of work but if you look for more revenues as a budget solution all of a sudden its attributed to baser instincts. So many right wing arguments are just the stupidest crap

 

How about we cut the billions of waste in the government and continue to help those that can't help themselves? Would you agree to that because that's what most of us are talking about. Oh and to be clear those that can't help themselves does not equal the poor. Many are poor due to their own volition. And let me ask you, would you also agree with the that statement?

[Nanker]

And there ya have it folks... an object lesson in how the Low Information Left hasn't got a clue as to how the economy works and how wealth is created and how capitalism has raised the standard of living in the western world to beyond what any ruler of a country could afford prior to the 20th century.

[Tiberius]

Laws favor the wealthy. Who's going to jail for this massive crime?

 

 

JPMorgan Chase will pay $5.1 billion to settle allegations it misled mortgage-finance agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac about the quality of residential mortgages the banking giant sold them during the national real estate boom, the Federal Housing Finance Agency announced Friday.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/10/25/jpmorgan-fhfa-settlement/3192809/

[Chef Jim]

Laws favor the wealthy. Who's going to jail for this massive crime?

 

 

 

 

http://www.usatoday....lement/3192809/

 

Life favors the wealthy.

[DC Tom]

bs. we used cost based accounting in my private practice for almost 20years. i had no idea of the accounting nuances. we paid someone else to do that and give us the ckliff notes version at the end. our manager scoured the numbers for mistakes. and we did pretty well. consistently, compensation wise, taxable bottom line near zero every year etc. and we retained employees (and continue to) at an impressive rate.

 

Since you, by example and admission, know jack **** about accounting, maybe you should pay someone else to write your posts in this thread.