|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
01-30-2014, 06:41 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: colorado
Posts: 1,595
|
|
Just a thought, and obviously it would likely never happen.
What if legislation was passed that tied the top salary earner in a corporation to the bottom salary earner.
To clarify, what if the top paid ceo or salary earner at walmart could only make 100x what the very bottom earner made. So, we have a person who makes maybe $8k a year, and the CEO could only make $800k? I think our middle class would come back. It would behoove the CEO's to pay their employees better. Just a crazy thought I had. I'd bett the Ceo would try to get the bottom paid earners up to 100k. I also bet there would not be a walmart employee making less than $25k a year after this happened.
__________________
Instead of a debate, how about a discussion? I want to learn, I don't care about winning.
|
01-30-2014, 08:28 AM
|
|
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
|
|
Yes, 3 meals from revolution. Otherwise, we've got it too good, just enough to be complacent.
Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
|
01-30-2014, 09:14 AM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,454
|
|
The middle class in the US which started it by the way.
Is not getting crushed by employers and what the other guy earns.
But by monetary policies, interest rates, salaries not keeping up with inflation.
Over regulation of goods and service pushes the production cost higher.
When you lose the purchasing power of your currency is that the employer's fault.
When you put your earn currency into the banking system, and it loses value it really doesn't matter what the employer pays.
It's a snowball - earn more currency- You and the employer get taxed more- The banks steel more- goods and services cost more.
PS: not saying all companies/corporations are fair.
|
01-30-2014, 10:00 AM
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,554
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCricket
Just a thought, and obviously it would likely never happen.
What if legislation was passed that tied the top salary earner in a corporation to the bottom salary earner.
To clarify, what if the top paid ceo or salary earner at walmart could only make 100x what the very bottom earner made. So, we have a person who makes maybe $8k a year, and the CEO could only make $800k? I think our middle class would come back. It would behoove the CEO's to pay their employees better. Just a crazy thought I had. I'd bett the Ceo would try to get the bottom paid earners up to 100k. I also bet there would not be a walmart employee making less than $25k a year after this happened.
|
Agreed. Lowering and eliminating business taxes took away the incentive, and let's face it, corporate CEO's and company owners don't seem to feel like they have any moral obligation to their workers any more. IE: the pay as low as they can get away with regardless of impact.
|
01-30-2014, 10:02 AM
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,554
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4-2-7
The middle class in the US which started it by the way.
Is not getting crushed by employers and what the other guy earns.
But by monetary policies, interest rates, salaries not keeping up with inflation.
Over regulation of goods and service pushes the production cost higher.
When you lose the purchasing power of your currency is that the employer's fault.
When you put your earn currency into the banking system, and it loses value it really doesn't matter what the employer pays.
It's a snowball - earn more currency- You and the employer get taxed more- The banks steel more- goods and services cost more.
PS: not saying all companies/corporations are fair.
|
Yet corporations are making record profits.....
|
01-30-2014, 10:20 AM
|
|
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,916
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPots
Yet corporations are making record profits.....
|
And it appears to be a clear correlation between low wages and high corporate profits. Corporate CEO's are far more concerned about shareholder wealth than employee earnings (for better or worse).
In a report released earlier this month, Goldman Sachs chief U.S. chief economist Jan Hatzius noted that the strength in corporate profits is “directly related to the weakness in hourly wages.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...y-wont-listen/
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|
01-30-2014, 11:54 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: colorado
Posts: 1,595
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4-2-7
The middle class in the US which started it by the way.
Is not getting crushed by employers and what the other guy earns.
But by monetary policies, interest rates, salaries not keeping up with inflation.
Over regulation of goods and service pushes the production cost higher.
When you lose the purchasing power of your currency is that the employer's fault.
When you put your earn currency into the banking system, and it loses value it really doesn't matter what the employer pays.
It's a snowball - earn more currency- You and the employer get taxed more- The banks steel more- goods and services cost more.
PS: not saying all companies/corporations are fair.
|
Do you really believe what you just posted? I think you need to run a few basic numbers based on YOUR example given.
Use the tables the IRS putts out for tax rates..........
Unless of course you think the left has figured out a way to manipulate the laws of mathematics and thus make them lie as well. Then I guess you might be right, maybe.
__________________
Instead of a debate, how about a discussion? I want to learn, I don't care about winning.
|
01-30-2014, 02:29 PM
|
|
Area Man
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPots
Agreed. Lowering and eliminating business taxes took away the incentive, and let's face it, corporate CEO's and company owners don't seem to feel like they have any moral obligation to their workers any more. IE: the pay as low as they can get away with regardless of impact.
|
I'm watching this change take place right before my eyes. The new tactic is to lower starting salaries, because that's the easiest way to make a cut, then start running more senior employees off the job, where ever they can. Reduced wages through attrition, basically.
Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
|
01-30-2014, 02:37 PM
|
|
Area Man
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
|
|
When it's your job to show the big bosses increased efficiencies and a continuously improving bottom line, and no matter what you do equipment or system-wise you just can't seem to pull it off, all that's left is the employees.
And, in todays atmosphere of weak to non-existent union activity, and a workforce that has come to think standing up to the boss makes you a whiner, or whatever.................There is no push back.
I keep wondering how much longer that can last.
Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
|
01-30-2014, 02:41 PM
|
|
Persona non grata
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 12,654
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCricket
Just a thought, and obviously it would likely never happen.
What if legislation was passed that tied the top salary earner in a corporation to the bottom salary earner.
To clarify, what if the top paid ceo or salary earner at walmart could only make 100x what the very bottom earner made. So, we have a person who makes maybe $8k a year, and the CEO could only make $800k? I think our middle class would come back. It would behoove the CEO's to pay their employees better. Just a crazy thought I had. I'd bett the Ceo would try to get the bottom paid earners up to 100k. I also bet there would not be a walmart employee making less than $25k a year after this happened.
|
That would be an excellent idea.
Here's some interesting historical data.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3184623.html
Quote:
We’ve made progress on a lot of things since the 1950s and so have CEOs -- in their quest for more money that is.
The ratio of CEO-to-worker pay has increased 1,000 percent since 1950, according to data from Bloomberg. Today Fortune 500 CEOs make 204 times regular workers on average, Bloomberg found. The ratio is up from 120-to-1 in 2000, 42-to-1 in 1980 and 20-to-1 in 1950.
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:26 PM.
|