ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
FSpjK-gWUAEqWUh
 
Yes, of course. No one I’ve ever met lobbies for equal pay for unequal work. It’s about working for yourself, not an owner who gets a cut of your production.
Ah yes...so if I own a landscape company and have purchased the mowers, plants, whatever else I should eat that cost myself. I'm sure those jobs would totally exist if that were the case.

Or are we talking about a corporation because it's still good on paper only fantasy. Several problems as always...socialism in this manner never sustains because it compulsively forces people in situations they don't want to be in, but the means of ownership, and we'll specifically take bernies plan that doesn't consider reality at all.

Marxist view says workers are exploited because they do not own the means of production and so do not receive a share of the profits. Their solution is always collective ownership of the means of production, employee-owned businesses, or equity payments. All three aim to ensure that workers share in the firm’s profits.

In a market economy firms and their employees reach an employment agreement where the firm provides a total payment, the components of which might take many forms - wages, 401k, medical insurance premiums, etc - in exchange for the employee services. To be simple, assume the firm and employee initially agree to a set of payments comprised exclusively of wages. What happens then if the gov requires the firm to pay the employee partially in the form of company stock? --this is bernies plan

If the requirement does not boost the worker productivity, it will not affect the total payment the firm is willing to pay. It just changes the composition of the payment. Simply- instead of receiving 50k per yr in wages, the employee receives 40k per yr in wages and 10k per year in company stock. The firm’s financial outlay is the same. So you did nothing except hurt take home.

Not to mention its an unnecessarily risky portfolio...what if your firm does poorly. When times are good your portfolio of assets (i.e., stock and wages) performs very well. When times are bad, their portfolio performs very poorly. An employee would likely gain from diversifying their portfolio....meaning exchanging the company stock for some other asset that is not so highly correlated with their wages.

I can go on and on about this...its just lunacy once again by socialists who font understand numbers or how real life works
 
If any of you guys have any Rep/conservative friends who may want to move to Ky, tell them to come one. Need a conservative vote to override Katie Perry. See on FoxNews that she moved to Ky about a month ago.
I saw that. I'm not sure where she moved to but I can guarantee it's not downtown Louisville.
 
It's also why progressives, as we've seen twice now with bernie, will never capture the black vote. This class warfare rhetoric, while African Americans are disadvantaged, are upward aspirational and want entrepreneurs and take pride in those that are wealthy in their community. Whereas this bernie idea that all money is in some zero sum pie...meaning what exists is all that exists so we must take from others as opposed to give others a way to make their own will never work.

And of course, we can pretend the US is the only country that has these problems of socioeconomics or we could ignore it all together by doing gestures like france where they don't even keep track on race which seems cute but is a disaster.

That French model you linked is what conservatives want here. Never mention race because you're "colorblind". We just want the best! If that happens to be all rich white men who come from uppercrust households who can afford all the best private tutors, who cares? They're the best, most qualified candidates dontcha know!

Ah yes...so if I own a landscape company and have purchased the mowers, plants, whatever else I should eat that cost myself. I'm sure those jobs would totally exist if that were the case.

Or are we talking about a corporation because it's still good on paper only fantasy. Several problems as always...socialism in this manner never sustains because it compulsively forces people in situations they don't want to be in, but the means of ownership, and we'll specifically take bernies plan that doesn't consider reality at all.

Marxist view says workers are exploited because they do not own the means of production and so do not receive a share of the profits. Their solution is always collective ownership of the means of production, employee-owned businesses, or equity payments. All three aim to ensure that workers share in the firm’s profits.

In a market economy firms and their employees reach an employment agreement where the firm provides a total payment, the components of which might take many forms - wages, 401k, medical insurance premiums, etc - in exchange for the employee services. To be simple, assume the firm and employee initially agree to a set of payments comprised exclusively of wages. What happens then if the gov requires the firm to pay the employee partially in the form of company stock? --this is bernies plan

If the requirement does not boost the worker productivity, it will not affect the total payment the firm is willing to pay. It just changes the composition of the payment. Simply- instead of receiving 50k per yr in wages, the employee receives 40k per yr in wages and 10k per year in company stock. The firm’s financial outlay is the same. So you did nothing except hurt take home.

Not to mention its an unnecessarily risky portfolio...what if your firm does poorly. When times are good your portfolio of assets (i.e., stock and wages) performs very well. When times are bad, their portfolio performs very poorly. An employee would likely gain from diversifying their portfolio....meaning exchanging the company stock for some other asset that is not so highly correlated with their wages.

I can go on and on about this...its just lunacy once again by socialists who font understand numbers or how real life works
We can go on and on all day about logistics. That's all reasonable debate that in a sane world would make up the day to day drudgery of politics. Instead we live in one where Bezos goes joyriding in space for shits and giggles.
 
If he wants to work himself to the grave he’s more than welcome to if that makes him happy. Just tax it and use that money to improve all of society without whom he couldn’t’ve made it.


Same is true of all laws. We can have that conversation about state sanctioned violent enforcement but usually y’all are all in on backing the blue.
Huh? How about Society couldn’t have made it without his working his ass off. How about you let him keep what he justly earned and consider the extra 30-40 hours a week he worked as his contribution as it makes up for one lazy person sitting on their ass benefitting from his labor.
 
If he wants to work himself to the grave he’s more than welcome to if that makes him happy. Just tax it and use that money to improve all of society without whom he couldn’t’ve made it.


Same is true of all laws. We can have that conversation about state sanctioned violent enforcement but usually y’all are all in on backing the blue.
What has defunding the police done to benefit the urban areas? Less murder? Less robbery, less vandalism? Less violent assaults? Less crime in general? How’s that policy working out?
 
You failed to answer my earlier question. If I choose to work twice as much and work twice as hard and am twice as productive as the next guy, should I get a bigger reward? If not and everyone is rewarded equally, why would one person choose to work harder than another? That is your problem with government being the owner.
What he fails to understand is that if his system took over you’d only be motivated to work half as much if at all. Yet there will equally be zero incentive fir the lazy to get off their ass and pick up the slack.

Tell us Dion, what’s the motivation for anyone to produce?
 
What he fails to understand is that if his system took over you’d only be motivated to work half as much if at all. Yet there will equally be zero incentive fir the lazy to get off their ass and pick up the slack.

Tell us Dion, what’s the motivation for anyone to produce?
Dont you guys remember that time the "workers" bailed out their company and shared all the losses?

Oh yeah, that only happens when govt picks the "winners" and the rest of us "real workers with jobs" end up paying.
 
Yes, of course. No one I’ve ever met lobbies for equal pay for unequal work. It’s about working for yourself, not an owner who gets a cut of your production.
If I work for you myself in your society, I damn well sure am going to keep everything I earn. Whatever I produce or provide will be my contribution. And people will have to pay me for it. How is everybody going to work for themselves. Ultimately some businesses have to have employees. How’s that work if everyone is working for themselves?
 
I've worked for the government both military and at a uranium enrichment plant. I've seen first hand how inefficient they are. People tend to do no more than they have to in that situation. It is very demoralizing to watch people with no incentive to work hard. Its one of the reasons I decided to work for myself. If Joe Blow isn't willing to work hard, why should I bust my butt to reward him?
 
Capital is total assets minus total liabilities. So a person who starts a new business and not only invests their personal assets as “capital“, but also must guarantee any bank loans that the business obtains. If the business fails, they lose their capital and must also pay off the bank loan. This can be substantial and may bankrupt the person willing to take a risk to open a new business and create jobs for others who are not willing to take a risk like this.

Bill Cosby can explain this much better than I.

45CJ.gif
 
Yes, it is real. Europe has been ringing the warning bells about this for weeks now. Remember that the UN and the WEF just signed an agreement to accelerate agenda 2030.

Seems like a traitorous move to me. The UN and WEF have to accelerate the agenda because Trump set them back and they know more and more Americans are starting to come around to what’s going on and want no part of it. So they now have to force it on us in rapid pace before Trump gets back into power. I’m legitimately frightened fir what this summer is going to bring.

If they phuch up this football season where we actually have the most legit shot at winning the SEC East in decades, I’m gonna be hellapissed.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT