Connected Wages

[Paradoxum]

Have you started and managed a business?

If you're passionate about this, you can start your business and run it however you wish.

The last protection? Leave me alone from your liberating equality! Apply it to the few, not the many!

 

[Paradoxum]

In practical terms, if a business is not providing an effective wage then someone else is bound to come along and steal those employees.

That isn't true in practice.

Your argument only does you a disservice.

How do, you haven't explained.

Tell me, are you willing to use a bullet to get a wage?

I don't know what your point it.

But no. Democracy.

 

[381465]

Why? Companies exist while inequality increases. They could pay more to employees.

Why what?
Companies base wages on performance of the company (sales), employee talent and contribution and the company's position with competitors.
If a company is forced to raise wages artificially, the NOI increases. This raises the cost of the product. This makes the product less marketable and less desirable to the targeted consumer. Less units are sold. This means less production is needed. Compound this with the increased NOT from increased wages, the company makes much less money.
Thus the death spiral of the company.
Increased expenses and decreased sales is not a sustainable business model.

 

[Paradoxum]

Why? What happens if he/she doesn't?

Fine or prison. Exploitation and slavery is no acceptable.

 

[381465]

The last protection? Leave me alone from your liberating equality! Apply it to the few, not the many!

?


Go get em comrade...you got this!

 

[Paradoxum]

Raising wages raises the cost of doing business, thus the price of the products.

They also raise the spending power of consumers, and so the gain by employers. It stimulates the economy.

 

[tstor]

Fine or prison. Exploitation and slavery is no acceptable.

Not raising the wages of employees is the same as slavery? I can see we have left the realm of rational discussion.

 

[Vyrzaharak]

That isn't true in practice.

In practice, it very much is true. If a company fails to supply its demand, that gives someone else room to come in to create the supply to fulfill that demand. The only reason it isn't so widespread is because of the same government you beg to enforce your views, and well, the fact most labor can be done by a mere child.

How do, you haven't explained.

How do... what?

I don't know what your point it. But no. Democracy.

If I decide my business is not going to abide by your law, how do you expect your law to be enforced? With rainbows? No, if someone refuses to abide by a law, they're arrested and imprisoned, and barring that they're shot.

 

[Vyrzaharak]

They also raise the spending power of consumers, and so the gain by employers. It stimulates the economy.

Yes, which would help the businesses profit even more. Yet somehow, you're left believing that businesses keep them down for some sinister purpose.

 

[RDKirk]

They also raise the spending power of consumers, and so the gain by employers. It stimulates the economy.

If prices have gone up, they haven't gained anything. That's called "inflation."

 

[Paradoxum]

Not necessarily.

Yes necessarily. Money to the richest doesn't improve the economy as much as normal people spending money.

If the CEO by his intelligent decisions really does raise the profit of the company by, say, 5% and everyone else is merely doing their jobs, then he does deserve a raise and they don't, and certainly not more of a raise. He was a hero, they just participated.

That isn't true. It's their role to make good decisions. They aren't doing their job any more than a cleaner.

I get the feeling you don't actually know what profit is. I own a business. The profit is not my salary. My salary is a business expense. The "profit" is what's left over after I've paid myself and employees, paid all the bills, paid for maintenance. The profit is the capital used to expand the company, to do more things, to add more products.

Well I guess a silly little woman wouldn't know that.

"Good pay" has to come from good business. This is not "the chicken or the egg"---there is no money to pay anyone until after the product has been produced and sold. There is no money for increased wages until after the company's income has increased.

Good pay in society can produce good profit, because the money goes into society, instead of banks of useless money.

Numerous studies have shown that raises do not increase productivity. People believe the work they're already doing is worth the raise.

And studies show that more free time allows people to recover and be more productive.

Because I'm already paying them a fair wage.

My point is the economy in general, not your specific company.

If I can make this point: Your job is to make good decisions. You think is separate, so should enjoy extra appreciation. Am I wrong?

 

[Paradoxum]

If prices have gone up, they haven't gained anything. That's called "inflation."

Why aren't we all in the stone age then?

 

[Paradoxum]

Yes, which would help the businesses profit even more. Yet somehow, you're left believing that businesses keep them down for some sinister purpose.

I don't think it's 'sinister'. Quote where I said that please....

I think it's because of ignorance, but primarily fear of others competing against them. If everyone is forces to pay higher it's ok.

 

[RDKirk]

Yes necessarily. Money to the richest doesn't improve the economy as much as normal people spending money.

The average business owner isn't "the richest" by any means.

That isn't true. It's their role to make good decisions. They aren't doing their job any more than a cleaner.

To use an example mentioned earlier, if a professional basketball player "does his job" excellently, it brings more wealth into the organization than the janitor who does his job excellently. Therefore, he should get a larger raise.

Well I guess a silly little woman wouldn't know that.

Is that true? I know a good many women who are business owners...I would never have thought that being women meant they didn't understand what profit was.

Why do you think so?

Good pay in society can produce good profit, because the money goes into society, instead of banks of useless money.

You realize that money doesn't just "sit" in banks, right? You realize that bank deposits are going into society, right?

But you seem to have moved the goalpost--you were talking about linked wages before, now you're just talking about "good" pay.

And studies show that more free time allows people to recover and be more productive.

You moved that goalpost again. Now you're talking about free time. When you say "free time," are you talking about real "free" time, or are you talking about paid time off?

My point is the economy in general, not your specific company.

But it's got to get down to specifics. Like setting up an invasion army. To the generals, it's all divisions and battalions. But at some point, some particular sergeant has to point to some particular solder and say, "You!"

If I can make this point: Your job is to make good decisions. You think is separate, so should enjoy extra appreciation. Am I wrong?

Depends on the impact of my decisions on the profitability of the company.

 

[RDKirk]

Why aren't we all in the stone age then?

I strongly suspect that the leader of the hunting party got a bigger piece of the elk than the guy whose spear missed entirely.

 

[Paradoxum]

In practice, it very much is true. If a company fails to supply its demand, that gives someone else room to come in to create the supply to fulfill that demand.

As I said, that isn't true in real life. It's just companies doing whatever they want. There is not perfect competition.

The only reason it isn't so widespread is because of the same government you beg to enforce your views, and well, the fact most labor can be done by a mere child.

Okay, is there proof or reasons beyond statement?

How do... what?



If I decide my business is not going to abide by your law, how do you expect your law to be enforced? With rainbows? No, if someone refuses to aide by a law, they're arrested and imprisoned, and barring that they're shot.

I'm not sure what point either of us are making here.

 

[381465]

I strongly suspect that the leader of the hunting party got a bigger piece of the elk than the guy whose spear missed entirely.

That's not fair!
A few should do the heavy lifting while everyone gets an equal share.

 

[Paradoxum]

Not raising the wages of employees is the same as slavery? I can see we have left the realm of rational discussion.

Well it's not much different from minimum wage.

 

[Vyrzaharak]

I don't think it's 'sinister'. Quote where I said that please...

I think it's because of ignorance, but primarily fear of others competing against them.

Why oppose it if you don't view it as being sinister? If they can better profit otherwise, is it not impossible they have a good reason to not profit more?

If everyone is forced to pay higher it's ok.

How do you expect to force someone to do something?

Mind you, this is exactly why I am against such authoritarian activity: in truth, the big businesses are not only more than capable, but they are the ones that support the bigger wages; whereas it is smaller, less-established businesses like those in my family who suffer from floor premiums such as wage hikes. But you don't see that, because you don't want to work for the small business; you want to work for the big guys, and be the big guy yourself instead.

 

[Paradoxum]

Why what?
Companies base wages on performance of the company (sales), employee talent and contribution and the company's position with competitors.
If a company is forced to raise wages artificially, the NOI increases. This raises the cost of the product. This makes the product less marketable and less desirable to the targeted consumer. Less units are sold. This means less production is needed. Compound this with the increased NOT from increased wages, the company makes much less money.
Thus the death spiral of the company.
Increased expenses and decreased sales is not a sustainable business model.

Why does increasing the wage of the employee increase the wage of the product? Could it not it come from the lack of increase from the upper middle management?