patrick.net

Aren't we all equal under the law?

To your post, well said sir.

The theory is that we all have equal opportunity but as AF so eloquently states the cronies are more equal. The problem is that for every entitled unearned dollar that is extracted from the economy which makes that much less economic opportunity.

7 edvard2 2013 Dec 30, 12:33am

mmmarvel says

Moral of the story. No matter what job you have, if you work hard enough you stand a good chance of moving up (sometimes this will involve moving to a different employer). However, there are far too many folks who want to get increased pay for merely occupying space in an establishment. As a result, customer service is a RARE thing any more.

The problem with that assertion is that the largest retail employers in the country have a system setup that basically provides hardly any incentives or move-up opportunities for their employees. They've even gone as far as to actually De-centivize their employees by doing things like working them 38 hours versus a full 40 hours a week , slashing benefits, and basically making it to where their employees cost them as little as possible. People aren't dumb and when workers get a sense that they're not getting a fair end of the deal, then naturally why would they feel any sense of loyalty to that company? Why would anyone want to work harder or do a better job when in the end it means nothing for them?

I'll tell a story from my own experiences working in retail all through high school, college, and a few years afterwards until I landed on my feet. My first job was at a big box retailer. The starting wage was low even back then. I worked there for a year and in that time I got a 20 cent per hour wage. Big whooopty-doo. The raise was simply tied to how long I had been at the company, not my performance, which being the young whipper-snapper I was did in fact do a honest, hard day's work. But for the entire time I worked for the company I never got the sense that the company cared a thing about me. I was simply there to move and sell product.

After graduation I got a job in a Mom-n-Pop contractor supply company. The first thing I noticed was that most of the employees had been there for years, some for over 30 years. Second of all, within a month of being there and proving my abilities I was given a fairly decent raise. We got holiday bonuses when the company sold more stuff. We were given full healthcare, dental, and matching 401k's. There were company parties, picnics, and get togethers. We had all of the holidays plus usually 2-3 days before and after off. We were closed Sundays. By the time I left I was making $15 an hour, which back then was actually not too bad.

With the big box retail place I worked at, by the time I left I was basically like " an old man" because everyone else that had been there when I started, save for a few, had already left for somewhere else. Absolutely no loyalty. They would jump the minute something better came along- which wasn't saying much. With the Mom-N-Pop place I later worked at I was there for 3 years and STILL the most recent hire. Nobody left during that whole time and to thus day, many are still there.

Lastly, just because we got paid more didn't mean the company did poorly. our prices were a bit higher, but then again we sold higher quality products and our customers were very loyal to us. I knew many on a first name basis. It was the fact that we all felt well taken care of that we in turn took care of the company and this translated to better customer service.

So to me its not just about wages. Its also how an employee is treated. Make them feel like they are important, take care of them and they will then in turn take care of the company. This is something big box retailers don't do and frankly I can't see their employment model working like it is forever.

8

indigenous 2013 Dec 30, 1:11am

edvard2 says

The problem with that assertion is that the largest retail employers in the country have a system setup that basically provides hardly any incentives or move-up opportunities for their employees.

Montgomery Ward ruled the market at one time followed by Sears followed by Walmart followed by Amazon. Costco is known for having the attributes you are talking about.

The market dictates what policies will succeed.

Something that is little recognized is how much the market is influenced by international monetary policy. The declining rate of consumption is related to the FED devaluing the dollar just as China's low rate of consumption is due to China's central bank diverting money from households and putting it into business investment by keeping the interest rates low, in spite of the fact that the only investment left in China is malinvestment. I don't know why investment is low in the US other than the herd mentality.

9

MisdemeanorRebel 2013 Dec 30, 1:20am

Costco is fantastic. Every year they are under intense pressure to cut wages from investors, even though they have the highest per-employee revenue of any national retailer.
indigenous says

I don't know why investment is low in the US other than the herd mentality.

Low Wages + End of Easy Credit = anemic spending. Anemic consumer spending = fewer new investment opportunities.

10 spydah_hh 2013 Dec 30, 1:28am

Low Wages + End of Easy Credit = anemic spending. Anemic consumer spending = fewer new investment opportunities.

Sooo.... you're suggesting that borrowing money that we don't have to spend is the ideal to economic growth and prosperity? Give me a break...

How about this idea....

Sound Money + Higher Saving - Debt = Good Capital Investments. Good Capital Investments = Better Standard of Living.

11

indigenous 2013 Dec 30, 1:40am

Costco is fantastic. Every year they are under intense pressure to cut wages from investors, even though they have the highest per-employee revenue of any national retailer.

Yup the employees invest more (have more intention) in their jobs which creates a culture that predisposes workers to be this way. I see a similar phenomena at In and Out Burger.

Low Wages + End of Easy Credit = anemic spending. Anemic consumer spending = fewer new investment opportunities.

Ok captain obvious, that is typical progressive blather...

We have historically low interest rates yet credit is at historically low levels, that does not add up, save the herd mentality of the banks.

Investment is primary to spending, of course you don't agree, I won't waste my time explaining why.

12 mmmarvel 2013 Dec 30, 2:06am

edvard2 says

The problem with that assertion is that the largest retail employers in the
country have a system setup that basically provides hardly any incentives or
move-up opportunities for their employees.

Hmmmm, how odd. I've got a neighbor who lives across the street. She is a divorced woman about 55 years old. She had been a stay-at-home mom for over 20 years with her kids, and out of the blue husband divorces her. So here she is with a degree in english and 20+ years of being out of the work force. She trys for this job and that job and in the end the WalMart less than a mile from our house hires her. She is hired as part time, but within 2 months they've upped her hours to 30 - 39 hours per week. After being there 6 months, they make her full time and she gets health care. She has been there just over a year and they are talking about moving her to management. Why??? Simple, because she showed up every day, she didn't complain, she didn't try to get out of work, she worked hard at the work that was assigned, she did all she could to help customers when asked.

13

lostand confused 2013 Dec 30, 2:14am

As someone who has been on both sides of the fence-looking for jobs and hiring-good employees are hard to get. People who care and actually want to contribute without having to be told vs folks who just view this as a necessary evil and are always compalining about something. Funny thing is that the latter category seems to be the ones with the most inflated sense of self worth.

Work ethic is a lost art and at minimum wage, I am not sure how one can be motivated, when welfare pays the same or more.

14 edvard2 2013 Dec 30, 2:21am

mmmarvel says

Hmmmm, how odd. I've got a neighbor who lives across the street. She is a divorced woman about 55 years old. She had been a stay-at-home mom for over 20 years with her kids, and out of the blue husband divorces her. So here she is with a degree in english and 20+ years of being out of the work force. She trys for this job and that job and in the end the WalMart less than a mile from our house hires her. She is hired as part time, but within 2 months they've upped her hours to 30 - 39 hours per week. After being there 6 months, they make her full time and she gets health care. She has been there just over a year and they are talking about moving her to management. Why??? Simple, because she showed up every day, she didn't complain, she didn't try to get out of work, she worked hard at the work that was assigned, she did all she could to help customers when asked.

An ancedotal story doesn't represent the general outcome of anything.

15

tatupu70 2013 Dec 30, 2:46am

Not as long as the "minimum wage" that is passed is below what the market would have determined on its own. To prove this point, what would happen if minimum wage went to 95$ an hour? Wouldn't that help people?

I gather you're being sarcastic here, but it likely would help our economy.

The market is the market. I think the real thing people are afraid of is what the real, true market determined wage really is? Where would it settle at?

This is basic supply and demand. Right now, there is high unemployment. With true market determined wage rates, there would not be unemployment: everything, from labor, to houses, has a "market clearing" price.

Not afraid. Smart people know that the market doesn't yield an ideal wage structure for the economy overall. Owners will continue to take more and more and give less and less to workers. Because they can. The result is large wealth inequality and eventually destabilization of society. AF will be proven correctd.

16

tatupu70 2013 Dec 30, 2:50am

If wages go too high, and customers start to reduce purchases as a result of increased costs causing higher prices, there will be layoffs

You're kidding right? Those customers are the ones getting the raises. They're going to stop buying because they got raises??

17

tatupu70 2013 Dec 30, 2:54am

The problem is that for every entitled unearned dollar that is extracted from the economy which makes that much less economic opportunity.

You are 100% incorrect there. Every dollar that is transferred from the 1% to the bottom 20% via welfare is one dollar of INCREASED economic activity. The bottom 20% spends it almost immediately whereas the 1% hoard it and take it essentially out of circulation.

18

tatupu70 2013 Dec 30, 2:55am

I don't know why investment is low in the US other than the herd mentality.

I'll give you a clue. 50% of the US population have no money. Why invest in an area with no qualified demand?

19

MisdemeanorRebel 2013 Dec 30, 2:56am

Sound Money + Higher Saving - Debt = Good Capital Investments. Good Capital Investments = Better Standard of Living.

"Paradox of Thrift"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_thrift

Also, the US went into the Great Depression on "Sound Money" of Precious Metals, as did almost every other industrialized nation.

20

tatupu70 2013 Dec 30, 2:57am

Sound Money + Higher Saving - Debt = Good Capital Investments. Good Capital Investments = Better Standard of Living.

lol--so how do the 50% with nothing save? How does "sound money" help anything?? It will only force more jobs overseas.

Sorry, that theory is pure BS.

21

lostand confused 2013 Dec 30, 2:58am

You are 100% incorrect there. Every dollar that is transferred from the 1% to
the bottom 20% via welfare is one dollar of INCREASED economic activity. The
bottom 20% spends it almost immediately whereas the 1% hoard it and take it
essentially out of circulation

Well if they didn't get welfare,then they may actually demand better jobs and the politicians to do their jobs. Put up trad ebarriers and make their leaders responsible. Welfare breeds laziness, lack of drive and just wasted human potential. Temporary to get back on your feet is different-especially for epople who have contributed heavily to the system and now fell on hard times-but not what we have now.

22

tatupu70 2013 Dec 30, 2:58am

Investment is primary to spending, of course you don't agree, I won't waste my time explaining why.

Because you can't.

Because you're wrong.

23

tatupu70 2013 Dec 30, 3:01am

lostand confused says

Well if they didn't get welfare,t hen they may actually demand better jobs and the politicians to do their jobs

You're living in a fantasy world. You think people on welfare are there because they aren't "demanding" better jobs? I didn't know that was an option. Where can I go to "demand" a better paying job? Board of Director meetings? City Hall? Please share the process.lostand confused says

Welfare breeds laziness, lack of drive and just wasted human potential. Temporary to get back on your feet is different-especially for epople who have contributed heavily to the system and now fell on hard times-but not what we have now.

I know it probably helps you sleep at night to think that all welfare recipients are lazy SOBs, but I challenge you to live on welfare and then get back to me with how easy it was.

24

lostand confused 2013 Dec 30, 3:25am

You're living in a fantasy world. You think people on welfare are there because
they aren't "demanding" better jobs? I didn't know that was an option. Where can
I go to "demand" a better paying job? Board of Director meetings? City Hall?
Please share the process

The streets and the vote box. As long as they get fed, clothed and have free shelter-there is apathy and they don't care.tatupu70 says

I know it probably helps you sleep at night to think that all welfare
recipients are lazy SOBs, but I challenge you to live on welfare and then get
back to me with how easy it was.

Compared to what I make -yes difficult. But compared to what someone on minimum wage makes-not that different.

25 spydah_hh 2013 Dec 30, 3:32am

spydah_hh says

Sound Money + Higher Saving - Debt = Good Capital Investments. Good Capital Investments = Better Standard of Living.

lol--so how do the 50% with nothing save? How does "sound money" help anything?? It will only force more jobs overseas.

Sorry, that theory is pure BS.

Sorry bro but you clearly have no understanding how a real economy works. You're so stuck into the phony belief that spending creates growth and that if we don't spend everything we have we get no economic activity and etc.

So lets assume this...

If everyone spent all their money for the year, then how is it credit can be established? How can the average person take out a loan for mortgage if all the money has been spent? In reality you can't but in our phony world, we just print it and pay back the phony debt through inflation.

In a sound real economy a loan is from SAVINGS. If everyone decided to save 10% of their money for the year then we can establish credit and investments. Banks will lend money to sound investments and not these phony BS stuff like twitter which hasn't made a fuking profit since day one but yet is worth 47 billion dollars or to students who are doomed to repay their loans.

Because if the banks did things like derivatives or CDOs or giving mortgages to people that can't afford it, they'll lose customers let alone their assets and literally cease to exists.

But hey in today's world why would a bank even care if their loaning money out recklessly? Because a.) the government will bail them out and b.) the government is encouraging everyone to spend their money since it's counterfeiting it anyway. Oh wait I forgot the FDIC will come in and bail everyone out with more counterfeits. Giving people still more of a reason to not care about reckless spending and malinvestments.

You sir need to learn how a real economy works and stop living in the lie. You'll soon sadly wake up to it WSHTF, but with your knowledge you'll be too late to do anything about it.

26

MisdemeanorRebel 2013 Dec 30, 3:40am

Sorry bro but you clearly have no understanding how a real economy works. You're so stuck into the phony belief that spending creates growth and that if we don't spend everything we have we get no economic activity and etc.

Spending creates growth.

If you can't sell anything, you can't make money, even if you can get a loan or have money saved.

If everybody just buys the minimum, and hoards the rest seldom buying anything they want, there will be no growth. See Japan.

27

indigenous 2013 Dec 30, 3:45am

The problem is that for every entitled unearned dollar that is extracted from the economy which makes that much less economic opportunity.

You are 100% incorrect there. Every dollar that is transferred from the 1% to the bottom 20% via welfare is one dollar of INCREASED economic activity. The bottom 20% spends it almost immediately whereas the 1% hoard it and take it essentially out of circulation

More Keynesian blather

28

lostand confused 2013 Dec 30, 3:51am

Spending creates growth.

If you can't sell anything, you can't make money, even if you can get a loan
or have money saved.

If everybody just buys the minimum, and hoards the rest seldom buying
anything they want, there will be no growth. See Japan.

Yes, but a nation with wealth concentrated in a small subset and the rest on welfare-with the middle struggling is hardly a place for growth. It can go on for a while-but will collapse under its own weight. Then cannibal anarchy will reign. :)

Welfare is stopgap and the country should look to regain its competetive advantage. if we can't compete against dollar a day wages, then at least restrict access to our markets or force our leaders to come up with better solutions.

29

indigenous 2013 Dec 30, 3:52am

ndigenous says

I don't know why investment is low in the US other than the herd mentality.

I'll give you a clue. 50% of the US population have no money. Why invest in an area with no qualified demand

You cannot give something you do not have...

30

MisdemeanorRebel 2013 Dec 30, 8:36am

lostand confused says

Welfare is stopgap and the country should look to regain its competetive advantage. if we can't compete against dollar a day wages, then at least restrict access to our markets or force our leaders to come up with better solutions.

I agree with your post.

Here's one way to get a competitive advantage:

* Tariff trade partners who don't float their currency.
* Weaken the US dollar.
* Abrogate the WTO and GATT agreements. They'd fail without our 100% support anyway. Got back to bilateral trade agreements, negotiated one on one for maximum gain for both parties, rather than for the corpratists.
* Make a 50% minimum US origin for any and all government contracts, or any programs sponsored in part by Federal Taxpayers.

* Adopt the Swedish Unemployment System, where before getting a visa a company must prove there are no qualified Swedes by interviewing multiple candidates that the Labor Department has judged as qualified based on the job description and explaining why each and every one wasn't qualified when the government's HR people said they were. Then paying a fine if they reject all of them.
* Also, before applying for a visa, company must publish salary at 15% above market rates, according to the BLS and not their HR's BS, and advertise it nationally in national papers and websites, not in the local Laotian Community Newsletter (which is what they do today to get around a different version of this law, that only requires 'publication'). If you can't find a qualified applicant in a country with a third of a billion people, with the highest college attendance rates and the finest schools in the world, it's probably your fault for being a cheapskate. Or, more likely, HR is lying to you about applications they received and are only showing you a portion of the candidates.

31 thomaswong.1986 2013 Dec 30, 9:02am

lostand confused says

Welfare is stopgap and the country should look to regain its competetive advantage. if we can't compete against dollar a day wages, then at least restrict access to our markets or force our leaders to come up with better solutions

its hardly $1 dollar a day wage in all cases, given other nations industries are dumping below cost to produce... therefore your not competing against wages.. just reinforce anti-dumping polices.... and there is plenty of that going on !

for one..let US companies sue foreigner companies for dumping on US markets below cost to manufacture.

32 thomaswong.1986 2013 Dec 30, 9:05am

* Adopt the Swedish Unemployment System, where before getting a visa a company must prove there are no qualified Swedes by interviewing multiple candidates that the Labor Department has judged as qualified based on the job description and explaining why each and every one wasn't qualified when the government's HR people said they were. Then paying a fine if they reject all of them.

so how is that going to prevent a foreigner from switching professions... say a Chinese engineer coming to SV and withing 2-3 years drops from the profession and becomes a Real Estate agent selling homes for newer Chinese buyers.

33 thomaswong.1986 2013 Dec 30, 9:12am

https://www.pwcmoneytree.com/MTPublic/ns/index.jsp

You are 100% incorrect there. Every dollar that is transferred from the 1% to the bottom 20% via welfare is one dollar of INCREASED economic activity. The bottom 20% spends it almost immediately whereas the 1% hoard it and take it essentially out of circulation.

there is no hoarding... they are freeling investing it into new ventures... we read about it very often every quarter... Billions every quarter are spent on new jobs, purchases, and renting new facilities.. Very Very Very much added to our economy and freely circulating... Billions Billions Billions!

34

MisdemeanorRebel 2013 Dec 30, 9:49am

thomaswong.1986 says

so how is that going to prevent a foreigner from switching professions... say a Chinese engineer coming to SV and withing 2-3 years drops from the profession and becomes a Real Estate agent selling homes for newer Chinese buyers.

I don't see how immigrants switching careers has anything to do with this. This is about a company being forced to consider qualified applicants by the Unemployment Office, and having to explain why each and every one isn't qualified. It stops visa abuse to get lower wage workers, which isn't what visas are for. They're for crucial shortages.

Those who think people simply enjoy being unemployed, kicking back and collecting the money should back this 100%.

35 thomaswong.1986 2013 Dec 30, 10:05am

I don't see how immigrants switching careers has anything to do with this. This is about a company being forced to consider qualified applicants by the Unemployment Office, and having to explain why each and every one isn't qualified. It stops visa abuse to get lower wage workers, which isn't what visas are for. They're for crucial shortages.

The employer has to go back and import a second and maybe the third time another immigrant for that same position. That too is a form of abuse.
Now we have more supply of labor than demand can cover.

36 mmmarvel 2013 Dec 30, 11:31am

I know it probably helps you sleep at night to think that all welfare recipients are lazy SOBs, but I challenge you to live on welfare and then get back to me with how easy it was.

See the difference is that it would be (just as being on unemployment was for me) incentive for me to change something, anything to get off it and do better for myself and my family. I've done some crappy jobs that would have made working for McDonalds or WalMart a walk in the park. Far too many welfare folks lack that incentive, that motivation - and if you can and do get by on welfare than there is very little reason to change. I can't say I'd be off welfare in a year, but odds are pretty high that I would be.

37

zzyzzx 2013 Dec 30, 11:51am

Make a 50% minimum US origin for any and all government contracts, or any programs sponsored in part by Federal Taxpayers.

Why so low? I'd make it 100%.

38

tatupu70 2014 Jan 5, 10:32pm

You're so stuck into the phony belief that spending creates growth and that if we don't spend everything we have we get no economic activity and etc.

Spending does create growth, but the second part of your statement is typical hyperbole gibberish.

If everyone spent all their money for the year, then how is it credit can be established? How can the average person take out a loan for mortgage if all the money has been spent?

Strawman. Nobody is advocating for everyone to spend all their money.

In a sound real economy a loan is from SAVINGS. If everyone decided to save 10% of their money for the year then we can establish credit and investments. Banks will lend money to sound investments and not these phony BS stuff like twitter which hasn't made a fuking profit since day one but yet is worth 47 billion dollars or to students who are doomed to repay their loans.

Nobody is arguing that people shouldn't save some of their money.

But hey in today's world why would a bank even care if their loaning money out recklessly? Because a.) the government will bail them out and b.) the government is encouraging everyone to spend their money since it's counterfeiting it anyway. Oh wait I forgot the FDIC will come in and bail everyone out with more counterfeits. Giving people still more of a reason to not care about reckless spending and malinvestments.

Got it. You hate bailouts. I wish they weren't necessary either. What does that have to do with the topic at hand?

You sir need to learn how a real economy works and stop living in the lie. You'll soon sadly wake up to it WSHTF, but with your knowledge you'll be too late to do anything about it.

lol--I pretty secure in my knowledge of how the real economy works. The shit may hit the fan, but it won't be because of a weak dollar--that much is clear. It will be because the wealth disparity is at record levels--levels not seen since 1929. Funny, some people just don't learn from history.

39

tatupu70 2014 Jan 5, 10:33pm