Folks, there's already class warfare...

Paulos23 · Feb 12, 2021

Hammster said:
Why is it his responsibility to make sure you live up to some sort of standard?

The fact that you ask that question is a flaw in the Capitalist system.

If they want to keep their employees, or even have good employees, then yes it should go to some base standard. Because the one with the jobs has the power, which is why unions have been formed to balance the power.

OldWiseGuy · Feb 12, 2021

A2SG said:
Sure, management always looks out for management, but if its cost effective to close down an entire factory and move it to some third world country so they can pay workers pennies, they will. And the loyal employees are left unemployed, no matter how well they did their jobs.

That's what corporate loyalty means. Employees, without whom nothing could get done, have no voice.

-- A2SG, at least a union would speak for them, if left only to the corporation, silence.....

Offshoring is a mostly a result of exorbitant corporate taxes, restrictive regulations, and dissatisfaction with the work force.

Recall Piper Aircraft Co. reporting internal theft of tools by employees in the $millions. Many such companies are pillaged by their employees. Unnecessary and unjustified absenteeism also plagues American companies. As soon as the company offers paid sick leave half the employees suddenly get sick.

A2SG · Feb 12, 2021

Hammster said:
Businesses aren’t in business to create jobs.

They kinda are. Without employees, few companies would be able to stay in business. So owners owe their employees a fair wage and decent working conditions.

If the employer fails to do so, what can an employee who needs the job do? Unions give them a voice when they don't otherwise have one.

Without that, employers have all the power and the employees, without whom there would be no company, have none.

-- A2SG, seems only fair.....

FenderTL5 · Feb 12, 2021

Paulos23 said:
The fact that you ask that question is a flaw in the Capitalist system.

If they want to keep their employees, or even have good employees, then yes it should go to some base standard. Because the one with the jobs has the power, which is why unions have been formed to balance the power.

Apparently the history of the labor movement in the US is no longer taught. There's a whole generation ignorant of that aspect of US history.

Hammster · Feb 12, 2021

Paulos23 said:
The fact that you ask that question is a flaw in the Capitalist system.

If they want to keep their employees, or even have good employees, then yes it should go to some base standard. Because the one with the jobs has the power, which is why unions have been formed to balance the power.

There’s no flaw in the system. If the employer is paying such little wages that he can’t keep employees happy, then he needs to do something to fix it.

Hammster · Feb 12, 2021

A2SG said:
They kinda are. Without employees, few companies would be able to stay in business. So owners owe their employees a fair wage and decent working conditions.

If the employer fails to do so, what can an employee who needs the job do? Unions give them a voice when they don't otherwise have one.

Without that, employers have all the power and the employees, without whom there would be no company, have none.

-- A2SG, seems only fair.....

They kinda aren’t. If they were, then every company would have way more employees than it needs. As it is, they try to keep just as many as will get the job done.

OldWiseGuy · Feb 12, 2021

A2SG said:
They kinda are. Without employees, few companies would be able to stay in business. So owners owe their employees a fair wage and decent working conditions.

How is shoveling snow in sub zero conditions "decent working conditions". How about city workers repairing ruptured water mains in subzero weather? Lots a jobs are done in awful conditions; broiling heat, freezing cold, dangerous, stinky, etc.

Paulos23 · Feb 12, 2021

Hammster said:
There’s no flaw in the system. If the employer is paying such little wages that he can’t keep employees happy, then he needs to do something to fix it.

It is a flaw in the system because there is no other part of the system not encouraging Capitalists from paying as little as possible to their employees. It doesn't look at all the other costs, other than money, that their actions cause. Money is the only driver, and many of us have figured out that is not enough to account for all costs.

That is why Unions had to come about, and the labor strikes, and the riots. That is why there are laws now about benefits and time off and how long people can work, because Capitalists didn't care. That is why there are environmental laws, because Capitalists, on the whole, don't care.

They don't factor in the other costs. They are starting to in other places in the world, but not here. Here we have to force them, and even then that is hampered by the money Capitalists pump into the political process.

To the Capitalist, there are always more people to hire and everyone is a replaceable cog. The American worker has been treated like that for years. They should not be surprised that the workers will revolt if they don't change.

Hammster · Feb 12, 2021

Paulos23 said:
It is a flaw in the system because there is no other part of the system not encouraging Capitalists from paying as little as possible to their employees.

You’ll have to explain why that is wrong.

Paulos23 · Feb 12, 2021

Hammster said:
You’ll have to explain why that is wrong.

I thought I did in my last post.

The flaw in Caplistum is that it only focuses on money. It doesn't account for how workers are to be treated, how the environment is to be cared for. It just focuses on money that can be earned for the Capitalist. And that is the flaw, and all you have to do is look at labor history to see this.

The mining strikes in the west are good examples. Poor pay, poor work conditions. They had to strike just to survive because there was no other work for miles around. That is still happening now, workers are getting paid as little as possible just so the Capitalist can pull in as much money as possible.

But this is not a sustainable system. The Capitalist is siphoning off wealth from the worker as the customer and ends up hoarding it. The money goes nowhere as stocks, and if it is in bonds it might get invested in something, but it still has to be paid back. If the money were in the average person's pocket, it would get circulated around and stimulate the economy.

Paying the workers more helps them afford the product the Capitalist is selling and helps them spend more so that other people can afford the product the Capitalist is selling.

Hammster · Feb 12, 2021

Paulos23 said:
I thought I did in my last post.

The flaw in Caplistum is that it only focuses on money. It doesn't account for how workers are to be treated, how the environment is to be cared for. It just focuses on money that can be earned for the Capitalist. And that is the flaw, and all you have to do is look at labor history to see this.

The mining strikes in the west are good examples. Poor pay, poor work conditions. They had to strike just to survive because there was no other work for miles around. That is still happening now, workers are getting paid as little as possible just so the Capitalist can pull in as much money as possible.

But this is not a sustainable system. The Capitalist is siphoning off wealth from the worker as the customer and ends up hoarding it. The money goes nowhere as stocks, and if it is in bonds it might get invested in something, but it still has to be paid back. If the money were in the average person's pocket, it would get circulated around and stimulate the economy.

Paying the workers more helps them afford the product the Capitalist is selling and helps them spend more so that other people can afford the product the Capitalist is selling.

But you still are acting as if the business owner is in business to provide jobs. He’s not. He’s in business to make money.

A2SG · Feb 12, 2021

Hammster said:
They kinda aren’t. If they were, then every company would have way more employees than it needs. As it is, they try to keep just as many as will get the job done.

Right. In order to stay in business, they create jobs.

And because those employees are necessary to the company's success, the employer has a responsibility to his employees, such as a fair wage and decent working conditions.

Some employers shirk these responsibilities, usually because employees need the job to survive, pay their bills, support their families, etc. Unions came about as a way for workers to have a voice, and ensure employers are responsible. Without the power unions give workers, there is nothing to keep employers from shirking their responsibilities.

That's why we need unions again.

-- A2SG, it's the only way to level the playing field.....

A2SG · Feb 12, 2021

Hammster said:
But you still are acting as if the business owner is in business to provide jobs. He’s not. He’s in business to make money.

If he doesn't provide jobs, he can't stay in business.

-- A2SG, unless, of course, he can do everything himself.....

Direct Driver · Feb 12, 2021

rambot said:
You may just not know it yet
Quick quiz; which type of theft has the largest momentary impact. Maybe larceny then robbery right!
Nahhh.
Your bosses have been stealing money you deserve

Wage theft is, by a lot, the largest misappropriation of dollars.

And you can't even get it back. It's just gone.

And it's not a crime? What's going on down there?

By wage theft, do you mean people who get a good paycheck but don't really do much work? Or do you mean employers that agree to pay you, but then don't? Or do you mean governments that steal your wages in the form of income tax?

Direct Driver · Feb 12, 2021

Hammster said:
Maybe not worse, but equal. Employers should pay what they agreed to pay. But they shouldn’t be forced to pay an arbitrary amount.

Exactly. Love it or hate it, the minimum wage is textbook fascism. And it's destroyed employment for teenagers.

OldWiseGuy · Feb 12, 2021

Paulos23 said:
It is a flaw in the system because there is no other part of the system not encouraging Capitalists from paying as little as possible to their employees. It doesn't look at all the other costs, other than money, that their actions cause. Money is the only driver, and many of us have figured out that is not enough to account for all costs.

That is why Unions had to come about, and the labor strikes, and the riots. That is why there are laws now about benefits and time off and how long people can work, because Capitalists didn't care. That is why there are environmental laws, because Capitalists, on the whole, don't care.

They don't factor in the other costs. They are starting to in other places in the world, but not here. Here we have to force them, and even then that is hampered by the money Capitalists pump into the political process.

To the Capitalist, there are always more people to hire and everyone is a replaceable cog. The American worker has been treated like that for years. They should not be surprised that the workers will revolt if they don't change.

Most businesses operate on a model that assures profitability and long term viability. If employees did the same they wouldn't have so many problems. Businesses can't meet the employment needs of an ever growing, largely unneeded workforce, especially with AI and automation. The biggest problem is global overpopulation.

Hammster · Feb 12, 2021

A2SG said:
Right. In order to stay in business, they create jobs.

And because those employees are necessary to the company's success, the employer has a responsibility to his employees, such as a fair wage and decent working conditions.

Some employers shirk these responsibilities, usually because employees need the job to survive, pay their bills, support their families, etc. Unions came about as a way for workers to have a voice, and ensure employers are responsible. Without the power unions give workers, there is nothing to keep employers from shirking their responsibilities.

That's why we need unions again.

-- A2SG, it's the only way to level the playing field.....

We don’t need unions. We need people to live within their means.

Sparagmos · Feb 12, 2021

Hammster said:
But you still are acting as if the business owner is in business to provide jobs. He’s not. He’s in business to make money.

And the business owner could make even more money if they sell illegal products, ignore safety regulations, refuses to let employees take breaks, and commits wage theft. But as a society, we’ve decided that those things are immoral. Capitalism is amoral. When we say that full time workers deserve good healthcare or a certain share of profits, we are intentionally bringing morality into an amoral system to keep the system from harming people.

So we know he’s in the business to make money. And we think he has a moral obligation to also meet minimum standards of morality in his endeavor.

Hammster · Feb 12, 2021

A2SG said:
If he doesn't provide jobs, he can't stay in business.

Right.

Hammster · Feb 12, 2021

Sparagmos said:
And the business owner could make even more money if they sell illegal products, ignore safety regulations, refuses to let employees take breaks, and commits wage theft. But as a society, we’ve decided that those things are immoral. Capitalism is amoral. When we say that full time workers deserve good healthcare or a certain share of profits, we are intentionally bringing morality into an amoral system to keep the system from harming people.

So we know he’s in the business to make money. And we think he has a moral obligation to also meet minimum standards of morality in his endeavor.

Deserve healthcare? How do you come to that conclusion?

Folks, there's already class warfare...

Never tell me the odds!

Wake me when it's soup.

Gumby

Κύριε, ἐλέησον.

Psalm 144:1

Psalm 144:1

Wake me when it's soup.

Never tell me the odds!

Psalm 144:1

Never tell me the odds!

Psalm 144:1

Gumby

Gumby

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Wake me when it's soup.

Psalm 144:1

Well-Known Member

Psalm 144:1

Psalm 144:1

Similar threads