Socialism.. does anyone have a clue.

Epignosis wrote: micky wrote: Slartibartfast wrote: I don't view CEOs being fairly compensated and workers being fairly compensated as opposing ideas.  No one's talking about taking away the profit motive.  And it should be remembered that without the workers to do the work and buy the stuff that is produced the CEO's would all be out of a job.   exactly... re-distribution of wealth... is exactly what it means.... paying the CEO's what they are worth (less).. and the American worker what they are worth (more).  If anyone here thinks that the current balance is fair... 262 times the average worker.... you are truly beyond help and discussion here in this thread.  Without the worker..the the main producer.. and also the main consumer.. the whole thing falls apart. But that's the question: Who says what they are worth?  As it is now, companies and workers both have a role in deciding what they get paid.  Workers compete with each other to obtain jobs (by pursuing education, experience, etc), and companies compete to earn a profit. If a company wants to pay me minimum wage and I believe that based on my skills and experience, I should be paid more, I'll look elsewhere.  And if a company wants to pay their CEO millions a year, that's for the company to decide.  It's their money that they (presumably) legally made. If I want to make millions, I can either work my way up, or take the risk (yes- business owners took a huge risk) of starting my own business.

the answer is easy.... the govenment does... the free market has failed in that respect... it has allowed those CEO saleries to skyrocket.. and worker wages to barely account for inflation...  free market as you lay out is a failure... a de-regulated free market...  and has led this country to the brink of finanical disaster...

the government thorugh regulation... can help make things.. not equal.. that is rediculous... but more equitable.  That is the role of government... to govern... to manage ....to protect this country... and this.. make NO misake... is a direct threat to the well being of this country. Without workers producing... and spending.. the machine breaks down...

"From each according to their means, to each according to their needs"

I need a beer and a cigarette... any offers?

Epignosis wrote: But that's the question: Who says what they are worth?  I do, of course. As it is now, companies and workers both have a role in deciding what they get paid.  Workers compete with each other to obtain jobs (by pursuing education, experience, etc), and companies compete to earn a profit. Yeah the employer says this all I'm going to give you and good luck trying to better elsewhere. If a company wants to pay me minimum wage and I believe that based on my skills and experience, I should be paid more, I'll look elsewhere. And if there isn't anyone offering you a better job, you're screwed.  And if a company wants to pay their CEO millions a year, that's for the company to decide.  Actually it isn't, that's become a good old boy's network. If you aren't from the privileged club, you don't get in.   It's their money that they (presumably) legally made. If I want to make millions, I can either work my way up, The Horatio Alger myth must die. or take the risk (yes- business owners took a huge risk) of starting my own business.  If you don't have the money to start with you can't do that out of thin air.

Edited by Slartibartfast - March 26 2009 at 12:33

NaturalScience wrote: Jim Garten wrote: "From each according to their means, to each according to their needs" I need a beer and a cigarette... any offers? Sure, Mr. Garten, just stand in this line for a couple of hours... Ooo, I'm sorry, looks like we're out of beer.  Maybe come back tomorrow?

Slartibartfast wrote: Epignosis wrote: But that's the question: Who says what they are worth?  I do, of course. As it is now, companies and workers both have a role in deciding what they get paid.  Workers compete with each other to obtain jobs (by pursuing education, experience, etc), and companies compete to earn a profit. Yeah the employer says this all I'm going to give you and good luck trying to better elsewhere. If a company wants to pay me minimum wage and I believe that based on my skills and experience, I should be paid more, I'll look elsewhere. And if there isn't anyone offering you a better job, you're screwed.  And if a company wants to pay their CEO millions a year, that's for the company to decide.  Actually it isn't, that's become a good old boy's network. If you aren't from the privileged club, you don't get in.   It's their money that they (presumably) legally made. If I want to make millions, I can either work my way up, The Horatio Alger myth must die. or take the risk (yes- business owners took a huge risk) of starting my own business.  If you don't have the money to start with you can't do that out of thin air.

exactly...... every red word of it.

Slartibartfast wrote: Epignosis wrote: But that's the question: Who says what they are worth?  I do, of course. As it is now, companies and workers both have a role in deciding what they get paid.  Workers compete with each other to obtain jobs (by pursuing education, experience, etc), and companies compete to earn a profit. Yeah the employer says this all I'm going to give you and good luck trying to better elsewhere. If a company wants to pay me minimum wage and I believe that based on my skills and experience, I should be paid more, I'll look elsewhere. And if there isn't anyone offering you a better job, you're screwed.  And if a company wants to pay their CEO millions a year, that's for the company to decide.  Actually it isn't, that's become a good old boy's network. If you aren't from the privileged club, you don't get in.   It's their money that they (presumably) legally made. If I want to make millions, I can either work my way up, The Horatio Alger myth must die. or take the risk (yes- business owners took a huge risk) of starting my own business.  If you don't have the money to start with you can't do that out of thin air.

At some point you have to recognize the power of "Stop bitching and work harder to get what you want."  It's a fairly proven method.

My father owns a business, and he works his ass off maintaining it.  If his business becomes highly successful, and he employs many people (who agree to work for him at an hourly wage), and he can sit on his ass the rest of his life making millions, I say good for him.

Slartibartfast wrote: Epignosis wrote: If our education system is any indication of the government's managerial skills, then they should stay out of business. The quality of our educational system is entirely dependent on the wealth of your neighborhood.

hahahhah   and if the government even tried to intrude on that uniquely local govenment responsibility....  oh how the people on the right would cry socialism

Epignosis wrote: Slartibartfast wrote: Epignosis wrote: If our education system is any indication of the government's managerial skills, then they should stay out of business. The quality of our educational system is entirely dependent on the wealth of your neighborhood. Entirely?  Really?

Oh, I'm sorry, mostly.


Edited by Slartibartfast - March 26 2009 at 12:38

NaturalScience wrote: huh?  They already do!  The Department of Education has something like a $70 billion budget!

And the only way to do a better job of educating is to cut out all the money spent on it.


Edited by Slartibartfast - March 26 2009 at 12:38

In Sweden you're given a government paid "salary"  each month for studying at university. A third of it is simply given to you, paid by the tax payers, while two thirds are loaned money, which you have to pay back (with quite low interest) once you've graduated and started working. Naturally, you have to finish the courses, naturally you have pass the courses. You're only allowed to get this money for 7 years of studying, which covers a master programme + 2 years extra.

The point is of course to give everyone who wants to study, the chance to study, no matter how wealthy your family is.

Just to shift the discussion from CEOs. What do you think about this?


Edited by LinusW - March 26 2009 at 12:40