05-22-2015, 12:34 PM
Zona pretty well already covered my thoughts.
I will add, though, that one hurdle in 'just go be smarter' is the few million years of breeding where 'just go be stronger' was of more need than an individual's ability to add. When we were nomadic and agrarian societies, the hardiest, healthiest and strongest multiplied more readily. Studies have shown men and women still respond sexually and in mate selection better to those with primal attributes — people whose occupations involve heights, heavy lifting, etc.
Your genes determine your potential. If they determine you aren't going to have the learning capacity for quantum mechanics, then tough luck.
And that lower paying jobs take less "skill, experience, or talent " is silly. Try working one. If those CEOs you mention running billion dollar companies had answers besides reducing the workforce and paying people less, I might agree they were worth what they're paid. But take GM. Their answer to losing money was to lose more money to get funds from the government, and move their product out of manufacturing hubs and hire unskilled workers. The result? GM has produced decades of really, really ****** cars. Which resulted in more loses and more government money. Which meant more cuts, which meant more crappy product, which meant more cuts, which meant more crappy product...
In that never ending cycle of bad management paid for by customers and tax payers, you have executives making hundreds of millions.
That's messed up. It's got nothing to do with innovation, ability, hard work or intelligence — it's cronyism. Why do you think guys like Dick Cheney go back and forth from political jobs that pay nearly nothing to making tens of millions being in charge of companies — because it allows them to manipulate the system for their contemporaries to make money. They make it by changing laws that protect workers and consumers, they make it in the form of no bid contracts, they make it in the form of tax loopholes not available to regular businesses.
I've got no issue with guys who made billions by being smart. Most people don't. Give me a Warren Buffet, Bill Gates or Sara Blakely and I'll agree, those people need to be lauded for their ingenuity and effort.
But a Carly Fiornia (whose answer was to massively cut jobs and tank her company), Ron Johnson (nearly took Apple and Target off track and turned JC Penney from a profitable business with $40 stock to nearly bankrupt with shares at around $10), or mary Barra, the last GM CEO failure who basically pawned off 11 years of internal reports being ignored — which resulted in 13 deaths — as low-level employee responsibility. And nothing was done to the people responsible in management. Those type of executives are what's wrong with the system.
True. But that's only half the story as about half of the country still works at small businesses (200 workers or less). At those types of places, or even ones a little larger, it can make a huge difference. Take...
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/kentucky-state-university-president-gives-90000-salary
"Raymond Burse, the interim president of Kentucky State University, recently gave up more than $90,000 of his salary so 24 employees earning the state’s $7.25 minimum wage could collect $10.25 per hour. The minimum wage rate in Kentucky is the same as the federal amount, which took effect on July 24, 2009."
For those 24 employees, that works out to about $100 per week extra bring home. That's enough for a monthly car payment, a better mortgage, or money to go back to school. To many people an extra $400ish a month isn't going to change their lives. For someone making $7.25, it could.
I will add, though, that one hurdle in 'just go be smarter' is the few million years of breeding where 'just go be stronger' was of more need than an individual's ability to add. When we were nomadic and agrarian societies, the hardiest, healthiest and strongest multiplied more readily. Studies have shown men and women still respond sexually and in mate selection better to those with primal attributes — people whose occupations involve heights, heavy lifting, etc.
Your genes determine your potential. If they determine you aren't going to have the learning capacity for quantum mechanics, then tough luck.
And that lower paying jobs take less "skill, experience, or talent " is silly. Try working one. If those CEOs you mention running billion dollar companies had answers besides reducing the workforce and paying people less, I might agree they were worth what they're paid. But take GM. Their answer to losing money was to lose more money to get funds from the government, and move their product out of manufacturing hubs and hire unskilled workers. The result? GM has produced decades of really, really ****** cars. Which resulted in more loses and more government money. Which meant more cuts, which meant more crappy product, which meant more cuts, which meant more crappy product...
In that never ending cycle of bad management paid for by customers and tax payers, you have executives making hundreds of millions.
That's messed up. It's got nothing to do with innovation, ability, hard work or intelligence — it's cronyism. Why do you think guys like Dick Cheney go back and forth from political jobs that pay nearly nothing to making tens of millions being in charge of companies — because it allows them to manipulate the system for their contemporaries to make money. They make it by changing laws that protect workers and consumers, they make it in the form of no bid contracts, they make it in the form of tax loopholes not available to regular businesses.
I've got no issue with guys who made billions by being smart. Most people don't. Give me a Warren Buffet, Bill Gates or Sara Blakely and I'll agree, those people need to be lauded for their ingenuity and effort.
But a Carly Fiornia (whose answer was to massively cut jobs and tank her company), Ron Johnson (nearly took Apple and Target off track and turned JC Penney from a profitable business with $40 stock to nearly bankrupt with shares at around $10), or mary Barra, the last GM CEO failure who basically pawned off 11 years of internal reports being ignored — which resulted in 13 deaths — as low-level employee responsibility. And nothing was done to the people responsible in management. Those type of executives are what's wrong with the system.
(05-22-2015, 10:44 AM)michaelsean Wrote: But with a lot of these giant corporations, where the CEO is making mega-bucks, if you took all his money and gave it to the employees it doesn't amount to much. I looked at Wal Mart, and it came to like $60 a year per employee if the CEO took no money.
True. But that's only half the story as about half of the country still works at small businesses (200 workers or less). At those types of places, or even ones a little larger, it can make a huge difference. Take...
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/kentucky-state-university-president-gives-90000-salary
"Raymond Burse, the interim president of Kentucky State University, recently gave up more than $90,000 of his salary so 24 employees earning the state’s $7.25 minimum wage could collect $10.25 per hour. The minimum wage rate in Kentucky is the same as the federal amount, which took effect on July 24, 2009."
For those 24 employees, that works out to about $100 per week extra bring home. That's enough for a monthly car payment, a better mortgage, or money to go back to school. To many people an extra $400ish a month isn't going to change their lives. For someone making $7.25, it could.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
