Posted on 12/11/2012 6:54:56 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
Why hasn’t her salary been redistributed yet? Not taxed just split up with those making less than her.
And how many poor people does she bunk with in her home? Surely, there’s room for many.
Until your point is addressed, there is no hope, no conclusions of worth, regardless how much ink we waste penning the same complaints over and over.
Any hope for an American comeback, short of Divine Intervention, requires Christianity and education. A classical education. This form of third world pablum thinking that we are presently passing off as public education is simply shaping and not educating, and worse is that we have at least another generation of the indoctrinated coming at us.
God help us, and forgive us for not preserving the Church and the country.
I fear we haven’t a prayer to avoid disastrous decline.
That is the dumbest site I have ever viewed - blue font on a dark blue background - it cannot be read!!!
Move an office of 50-100 people, and you'll see just how infantile they all are. "His cubicle is bigger than mine." "She got TWO trashcans!" "Why does HE get to print first?" and so on.
The only one that really bothered me was the guy who had brought in his own recliner (!!) to work. He couldn't move it himself, I guess it was too heavy. However, he didn't trust anyone *else* to touch it, either, for reasons known only to him. So, he sat in it during the entire moving process. 8-10 hours. Guarding it, like my kid guards his cookies from his brother.
At the end of the day, we couldn't coax him out of it. So, the lights in the old office were turned off (permanently, I threw the switch myself) and we locked him in and left him there in the dark. No clue what happened to him, and frankly at that point, I didn't care.
Working with people made me lose all faith in humanity. And these are people...more-or-less...at their best. 8 to 5, in a structured corporate environment, populated with people who are mostly socialized and minimally intelligent. Or at least socialized and smart enough to fool their way past HR.
I can't imagine what, for instance, cops think of humanity.
Fiscal conservatives can still dominate the state legislatures. This should be our focus. As for you assessment of our chances nationally, I agree with you.
… “These so-called right to work laws,they don’t have to do with economics,” Obama said. “They have everything to do with politics. What they’re really talking about is giving you the right to work for less money. You only have to look to Michigan,where workers were instrumental in reviving the auto industry,to see how unions have helped build not just a stronger middle class but a stronger America.” …
C’mon Mark, you know you’d stuff her olive...
I prefer the term "leftist" since so much of what they do and say is quite illiberal, but yes they can and some are much worse.
Everything else follows from there.
Here’s a ‘simple’ solution, Mika. Cut everyone’s taxes — then they will take home more money.
Labor is a commodity like steel or gasoline and is not entitled to profits other than that they earned on stock in the company or provided by profit sharing/bonuses..
If what you say is true they really are ignorant. Because you can’t change the laws of economics anymore than you can legislate away gravity.
There are no laws of econ, only the law of supply and demand. That is immutable.
Well, if there is a law of supply and demand, there is at least one law of economics. Unless you classify it under a different discipline. Psychology, maybe, or logic?
Ok, how much profit should the owners distribute to the workers?
This isn't a mandate on the owners, it's a tax deduction that is over and above the actual amount distributed -- if the owner wants to use it. So the answer to your question is "whatever the owner wants".
Also, the profit is the result of discounting all expenses running the business, including taxes and benefits. So the amount available to satisfy a profit-sharing distribution could be zero.
Or it could be a large number. The owner gets to decide how much of that large number makes up the profit-sharing pool. Just like owners get to decide how large the manager's "bonus pool" is.
If properly designed, it can also take into account merit-based distributions: if I come up with an idea that saves my company one million dollars a year, then the company can reward my skull sweat by distributing, say, five percent of one years' savings. One company I worked for has a program like that, and it worked wonders for the company's bottom line.
You bring up an interesting questions about union bargaining. I would stipulate that "equitable" is defined that everyone -- union and non-union -- are treated identically for the purpose of earning the extra profit-sharing deduction. So distributions could be divvied based on the employee's other compensation as a percentage of the total non-owner compensation paid at the company. You make one percent of the compensation, you get one percent of the profit-sharing pool. The owner sets the size of the pool based on the company's performance and how much he wants to deduct on the company's tax return.
The tax deduction would be some percentage of the size of the profit-sharing pool; as a starting point, say it's 125 percent. That would be incentive for owners to consider this.
Strange, it appears to be normal black print on a white background on my computer.
You are correct about the childishness of people, but the article I referenced was a review of another book sort of in the vein of “Everything I needed to....”
It might even be a better description of liberal thinking.
you had it, just didn’t think it was what you wanted to spend it on
How did that work out for Hostess and the Ding Dongs and Twinkies that USED to work for them?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.