Minimum wage. Should it be $15?

[Jeff Matthews]

Mr. Buffett goes on to acknowledge that the innovations from the Sam Walton and the Steve Jobs of the world have changed how we live, and does not believe that they are not undeserving of their wealth.  However, he tends to believe that these innovations are significant contributors to the widening gap as a consequence of the U.S. shift from an agrarian-based economy to a technology-based one.

 

Exactly.  Embrace it.  Change.  We aren't putting out hand-crafted horse buggies anymore.  Brokering is hot.  Make things?  That's for the Chinese to do.  We sell things!  You can't legislate us back into ancient rituals.  Get with the program.  That's how you narrow the wealth gap as regards yourself... one person at a time.  You can't just sweep them all in by some wholesale restructuring of the economy "effective January 1."

Edited November 11, 2015 by Jeff Matthews

[Jim Naseum]

They are paid AHEAD of their performance.

An assumption. The business model that has been in place for many years would argue against it.

Let me be clear of the meaning of paid ahead of performance:

Joe Slugger negotiates a contact for $3M to play first base. He will get the money whether he hits .220 with 6 homers, or .320 with 35 homers. It's a bet being placed by the owners. This happens all the time with draft picks, and phenoms, and CEOs.

Yes, a good past helps the player negotiate, but no one has to give the money back when they fail. "Past performance is no predictor of the future."

I only bring this up to counter the persistent belief that CEO are always deserving of huge pay. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. In the SP 500 there are only a few really great CEOs out of 500.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

[Jeff Matthews]

 

 

They are paid AHEAD of their performance.

An assumption. The business model that has been in place for many years would argue against it.

Let me be clear of the meaning of paid ahead of performance:

Joe Slugger negotiates a contact for $3M to play first base. He will get the money whether he hits .220 with 6 homers, or .320 with 35 homers. It's a bet being placed by the owners. This happens all the time with draft picks, and phenoms, and CEOs.

Yes, a good past helps the player negotiate, but no one has to give the money back when they fail. "Past performance is no predictor of the future."

I only bring this up to counter the persistent belief that CEO are always deserving of huge pay. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. In the SP 500 there are only a few really great CEOs out of 500.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

 

 

You are only telling half of the arrangement.  Here's the half you aren't telling:

 

Joe Slugger has all kinds of incentive clauses where, if he performs well in the future, he gets paid a whole lot more money!

[Bella]

 

 

 

 

 

Fifty years ago the "wealth pie" was $21 and split in a manner of CEO $20 and median workers $1. Today the $301 of the "wealth pie" is now split CEO $300 and median workers still $1.

 

And this is immoral and nothing but greed run amuck.

I don't care who you is you ain't worth $100 million a year, sorry your job is not 2 thousand times harder than mine.

Just my $.02

 

 

 

 

Just a very simplistic example if you take the "wage/salary/benefits" as a "pool of funds" in a corporate budget to be divided and distributed amongst everyone in the corporation. 

 

It makes sense why the NFL players association will bargain for wages to be a percentage of the gross revenues.  We also know that it is very lucrative to be an NFL owner even with roughly 2/3 of the total NFL revenues going to the players and having a wage structure with a minimum salary for the players that increases each year.

 

I find it interesting that in the 1970's Peter F. Drucker (during this time, a well-respected American management guru) had endorsed the 20 to 1 ratio for CEO to median worker in sustaining robust growth.  Up until this time the U.S. was very prosperous with this 20 to 1 ratio, yet, look where we are today.  A survey of the S&P 500 index companies, during 2012 the compensation received by the CEO was 354 times that of the median of the rank-and-file worker and look at the general downward trends in prosperity.

 

 

 

I agree with your point, but it's not actually "CEOs" which are the trouble. It's the billionaires who often are just speculators, hedge fund runners, and raiders, where most of the wealth is going. Not to minimize the CEO pay, but making $50M a year isn't the troouble spot. It's he guy making $2B a year through other means, which is the problem.

 

 

 

 

I do realize that the CEO pay isn't the trouble spot and have some familiarity with the speculators, hedge funds and the leveraged-buyout business and I agree with your other posts on the bigger picture. 

 

I suspect that a good portion is the result of manipulation of the system by the conflict of interest that arises in a 'self-dealing' situation where the CEO is in a position to greatly take advantage of the position in transactions and acting in his or her self-interest rather than in the best interests of the shareholders.

 

For example, it seems plausible that CEOs get these enormous pay packages in part because they are often the persons that hire the compensation consultant, appoint the compensation committees on the boards that decide executive pay.  I suppose that in other instances to “appear competitive” the boards may not want to be seen by investors as not having hired a “top-tier” CEO and may not want to be seen as paying less than the CEOs of their major competitors.  

 

 

 

 

 

CEOs and ballplayers negotiate a piece of pie from the future success. Sometimes it pays off for employers and sometimes it doesn't. Contrast that to golf, where you actually have to win to collect the price money!

Negotiating power, not rules, not morality, not fairness, is the essential difference between CEOs and dishwashers. You got the power or you don't.

Yes but the only reason they have negotiating power is from past performance that they can offer as proof. You can't just be a good negotiator and land one of these jobs.

 

 

 

 

They are paid AHEAD of their performance.

 

An assumption. The business model that has been in place for many years would argue against it.

 

 

 

 

The CEO compensation information is available in the Schedule 14A proxy statements regarding the benchmarking, among other aspects in setting that compensation that goes on, in addition to various other “high level” and "legal-type" Compensation Discussion & Analysis that provides insights into how the CEO compensation is set (along with similar compensation information of other highly compensated executives of the corporation).  I linked the McDonald’s proxy a few pages back; however, I’ve read more of these disclosures than I care to think about and none show a clear link to historical performance and compensation.  If it was that simple in paying for historical performance, I’m curious as to why the "historical performance for compensation" link isn’t clear in the proxy statements as it could easily help our discussions here?

 

In the first quote above, I fully realize that CEO pay isn’t the significant issue.  To expand on that, in a Wall Street Journal column from May 2015 that Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway (one of the richest men in the world), provided these two sets of data in that column that I found interesting:

 

1. “In 1982, the first year the Forbes 400 was compiled, those listed had a combined net worth of $93 billion.  Today, the 400 possess $2.3 trillion, up 2400% in slightly more than 3 decades, a period in which the median household income rose only about 180%.”

 

2. “Meanwhile, a huge number of their fellow citizens have been living the American Nightmare – behaving well and working hard but barely getting by.  In 1982, 15% of Americans were living below the poverty level; in 2013 the proportion was nearly the same, a dismaying 14.5%.  In recent decades, our country’s rising tide has not lifted the boats of the poor.”

 

Mr. Buffett goes on to acknowledge that the innovations from the Sam Walton and the Steve Jobs of the world have changed how we live, and does not believe that they are not undeserving of their wealth.  However, he tends to believe that these innovations are significant contributors to the widening gap as a consequence of the U.S. shift from an agrarian-based economy to a technology-based one.

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/better-than-raising-the-minimum-wage-1432249927

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm more interested in knowing how many large corporations you have either run/advised/directed/or was a member of the boards of?  Of those, how many did you advise or vote to reduce CEO/your own pay?  How long did you serve for each of those large corporations giving that advice?

 

Did you consider yourself overpaid then? Now? Would you consider the demands of the uninformed/those outside your field and do not know the intricacies of your job, that you are overpaid and that you should lower your wages?

[Jeff Matthews]

I'm more interested in knowing how many large corporations you have either run/advised/directed/or was a member of the boards of?  Of those, how many did you advise or vote to reduce CEO/your own pay?  How long did you serve for each of those large corporations giving that advice?   Did you consider yourself overpaid then? Now? Would you consider the demands of the uninformed/those outside your field and do not know the intricacies of your job, that you are overpaid and that you should lower your wages?

 

To be fair, the article quoted Buffet as saying he does not believe the super-rich CEOs are undeserving of their money.

[Jim Naseum]

This is the perfect example which brings the whole thing back down to earth.  This is life!  It ain't fair.  Ain't no politician gonna come to your rescue.  Forget it.  Either accept low pay, or play by the rules and find the ways which increase your pay.  It's really that simple.

 

Such malarky! Honestly, Mr. Jeff, do you pay no attention at all to what happens in the halls of Congress?  

Do you actually think CEOs and Billionaires "just accept what is and move on." No Sir, they do not. They connive and conspire and fanagle and bribe and pursuade from morning till night for favorable rule changes. The entirety of the US Congress is a begging station where the privileged go to receive new blessings from those who make rules.

 

I think your advice is not only wrong, but extremely condescending to those who have little influence and privilege. You've no doubt heard the expression, "Let them eat cake!"

 

24 hours a day, the privileged (who have gained power and access) are working full time to tilt the table to their corner, and they do, and they benefit wildly from doing it, but your advice to the less fortunate is just "suck it up, and accept your lot."

 

Mama mia, what a place!

 

Note: all in good humor.  

[Fjd]

 

in a Wall Street Journal column from May 2015 that Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway (one of the richest men in the world), provided these two sets of data in that column that I found interesting:

 

1. “In 1982, the first year the Forbes 400 was compiled, those listed had a combined net worth of $93 billion.  Today, the 400 possess $2.3 trillion, up 2400% in slightly more than 3 decades, a period in which the median household income rose only about 180%.”

  

 

 

 

 

I wanted to put the statistic above into more of a table form.

 

 

 

Forbes 400 net worth:

1982:      $       93,000,000,000.00

2014:      $ 2,300,000,000,000.00

 

Median income (half above / half below)

1982:      $ 28,070.00

2014:      $ 53,657.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mr. Buffett goes on to acknowledge that the innovations from the Sam Walton and the Steve Jobs of the world have changed how we live, and does not believe that they are not undeserving of their wealth.  However, he tends to believe that these innovations are significant contributors to the widening gap as a consequence of the U.S. shift from an agrarian-based economy to a technology-based one.

 

Exactly.  Embrace it.  Change.  We aren't putting out hand-crafted horse buggies anymore.  Brokering is hot.  Make things?  That's for the Chinese to do.  We sell things!  You can't legislate us back into ancient rituals.  Get with the program.  That's how you narrow the wealth gap as regards yourself... one person at a time.  You can't just sweep them all in by some wholesale restructuring of the economy "effective January 1."

 

 

 

 

 

For the lower half in the median income figures above, I suspect there are still too many internal and external "barriers to entry" for most to do it through working for a corporation.  Given how many barriers have been lifted with the internet, it sure seems like some type of entrepreneurship and exploiting a niche market may be the way to go since it seems very difficult to chip away at the wealth accumulation of a few. 

 

From another perspective, in 1982 it would take 3.3 million years to accumulate the Forbes 400 wealth through the median wage.  By 2014, even with that 180% increase in the median income, it would take 42.9 million years to accumulate the Forbes 400 wealth through the median wage.

Edited November 11, 2015 by Fjd

[Bella]

 

I'm more interested in knowing how many large corporations you have either run/advised/directed/or was a member of the boards of?  Of those, how many did you advise or vote to reduce CEO/your own pay?  How long did you serve for each of those large corporations giving that advice?   Did you consider yourself overpaid then? Now? Would you consider the demands of the uninformed/those outside your field and do not know the intricacies of your job, that you are overpaid and that you should lower your wages?

 

To be fair, the article quoted Buffet as saying he does not believe the super-rich CEOs are undeserving of their money.

 

 

Perhaps. But someone on these forums appears to think they have more insider knowledge, more collective intelligence than all of the corporations and business managers, to determine that others are overpaid in relation to the rest of the public. 

 

Socialism and communism are proven failures as forms of government.  I cannot for the life of me figure out why people continue to foster them.

[Jeff Matthews]

 

This is the perfect example which brings the whole thing back down to earth.  This is life!  It ain't fair.  Ain't no politician gonna come to your rescue.  Forget it.  Either accept low pay, or play by the rules and find the ways which increase your pay.  It's really that simple.

 

Such malarky! Honestly, Mr. Jeff, do you pay no attention at all to what happens in the halls of Congress?

Do you actually think CEOs and Billionaires "just accept what is and move on." No Sir, they do not. They connive and conspire and fanagle and bribe and pursuade from morning till night for favorable rule changes. The entirety of the US Congress is a begging station where the privileged go to receive new blessings from those who make rules.

 

I think your advice is not only wrong, but extremely condescending to those who have little influence and privilege. You've no doubt heard the expression, "Let them eat cake!"

 

24 hours a day, the privileged (who have gained power and access) are working full time to tilt the table to their corner, and they do, and they benefit wildly from doing it, but your advice to the less fortunate is just "suck it up, and accept your lot."

 

Mama mia, what a place!

 

Note: all in good humor.  

 

 

I just call it like I see it.  In my career, I've seen a few rich guys, a whole lot of climbers and a whole lot of people content not to be climbers.  The latter complain just the way all humans complain.  Humans are programmed by nature to complain that things aren't fair.  It's what we do.  We want to rig the game.  All of us.  The only difference is some actually do.  If you want to be in that group, you have to seek it out.  You have to really have a zest for that kind of lifestyle.  It is doable; it's just not many people's "cup of tea."  As I said, in my career, I saw lots of climbers.  Hustling away.  Trying to grow something big.  Many fall on their faces.  Some do well.  But you know what about the ones who fell on their faces?  They swung hard to the fence.  Not everybody has the stomach to swing for the fence, and many who do are not going to hit homers all the time.

 

As I said, I call 'em like I see 'em.  If you want to win, you gotta play.  Or you can make your complaints known and wait for some politicians to come save you...  Pick your poison.

[Paducah Home Theater]

Curious as to who all here owns a business. I do, and what I have found is that as soon as you start doing ok, everybody's got their hand out wanting a piece of it. Sorry if I've sounded harsh in this conversation but I view this subject as more hands sticking out. That doesn't mean I don't want people to succeed though.

[Paducah Home Theater]

As I said, in my career, I saw lots of climbers.  Hustling away.  Trying to grow something big.  Many fall on their faces.  Some do well.  But you know what about the ones who fell on their faces?  They swung hard to the fence.  Not everybody has the stomach to swing for the fence, and many who do are not going to hit homers all the time.

 

As I said, I call 'em like I see 'em.  If you want to win, you gotta play.  Or you can make your complaints known and wait for some politicians to come save you...  Pick your poison.

I know the brothers who own Rockcastle Shooting Center in Kentucky and they use this phrase, swing for the fence. One is just a cop, yet he bought a 2,600 acre golf complex with a lodge and turned it into probably the top shooting destination in this country. They seem to be doing pretty well and are always happy. I'm sure it would be easy to sit back and say they should pay 90% in taxes and double their employees salaries but that ain't reality.

[oldtimer]

 

 

This is the perfect example which brings the whole thing back down to earth.  This is life!  It ain't fair.  Ain't no politician gonna come to your rescue.  Forget it.  Either accept low pay, or play by the rules and find the ways which increase your pay.  It's really that simple.

 

Such malarky! Honestly, Mr. Jeff, do you pay no attention at all to what happens in the halls of Congress?

Do you actually think CEOs and Billionaires "just accept what is and move on." No Sir, they do not. They connive and conspire and fanagle and bribe and pursuade from morning till night for favorable rule changes. The entirety of the US Congress is a begging station where the privileged go to receive new blessings from those who make rules.

 

I think your advice is not only wrong, but extremely condescending to those who have little influence and privilege. You've no doubt heard the expression, "Let them eat cake!"

 

24 hours a day, the privileged (who have gained power and access) are working full time to tilt the table to their corner, and they do, and they benefit wildly from doing it, but your advice to the less fortunate is just "suck it up, and accept your lot."

 

Mama mia, what a place!

 

Note: all in good humor.  

 

 

I just call it like I see it.  In my career, I've seen a few rich guys, a whole lot of climbers and a whole lot of people content not to be climbers.  The latter complain just the way all humans complain.  Humans are programmed by nature to complain that things aren't fair.  It's what we do.  We want to rig the game.  All of us.  The only difference is some actually do.  If you want to be in that group, you have to seek it out.  You have to really have a zest for that kind of lifestyle.  It is doable; it's just not many people's "cup of tea."  As I said, in my career, I saw lots of climbers.  Hustling away.  Trying to grow something big.  Many fall on their faces.  Some do well.  But you know what about the ones who fell on their faces?  They swung hard to the fence.  Not everybody has the stomach to swing for the fence, and many who do are not going to hit homers all the time.

 

As I said, I call 'em like I see 'em.  If you want to win, you gotta play.  Or you can make your complaints known and wait for some politicians to come save you...  Pick your poison.

 

There are those who think

That life has nothing left to chance

A host of holy horrors

To direct our aimless dance

 

A planet of playthings

We dance on the strings of powers we cannot perceive

The stars aren't aligned or the gods are malign

Blame is better to give than receive

 

You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice

If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice

You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill

I will choose a path that's clear, I will choose freewill

 

There are those who think

That they were dealt a losing hand

The cards were stacked against them

They weren't born in Lotus Land

 

All preordained, a prisoner in chains

A victim of venomous fate

Kicked in the face, you can pray for a place

In heaven's unearthly estate

 

You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice

If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice

You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill

I will choose a path that's clear, I will choose freewill

 

Each of us, a cell of awareness

Imperfect and incomplete

Genetic blends with uncertain ends

On a fortune hunt that's far too fleet

 

You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice

If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice

You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill

I will choose a path that's clear, I will choose freewill

Songwriters

CHOI, WHEE SUNG / KIM, YANG WOO / LEE, JUN KYOUNG / JUNG, SEOK WON N

 

[oldtimer]

I'm sure it would be easy to sit back and say they should pay 90% in taxes and double their employees salaries but that ain't reality.

 

I'm fairly sure no one here is saying that.

[Jeff Matthews]

Songwriters CHOI, WHEE SUNG / KIM, YANG WOO / LEE, JUN KYOUNG / JUNG, SEOK WON N

 

LOL!

 

Great tune.  Peart is a literary genius in the music world. 

[Jim Naseum]

 

 

This is the perfect example which brings the whole thing back down to earth.  This is life!  It ain't fair.  Ain't no politician gonna come to your rescue.  Forget it.  Either accept low pay, or play by the rules and find the ways which increase your pay.  It's really that simple.

 

Such malarky! Honestly, Mr. Jeff, do you pay no attention at all to what happens in the halls of Congress?

Do you actually think CEOs and Billionaires "just accept what is and move on." No Sir, they do not. They connive and conspire and fanagle and bribe and pursuade from morning till night for favorable rule changes. The entirety of the US Congress is a begging station where the privileged go to receive new blessings from those who make rules.

 

I think your advice is not only wrong, but extremely condescending to those who have little influence and privilege. You've no doubt heard the expression, "Let them eat cake!"

 

24 hours a day, the privileged (who have gained power and access) are working full time to tilt the table to their corner, and they do, and they benefit wildly from doing it, but your advice to the less fortunate is just "suck it up, and accept your lot."

 

Mama mia, what a place!

 

Note: all in good humor.  

 

 

I just call it like I see it.  In my career, I've seen a few rich guys, a whole lot of climbers and a whole lot of people content not to be climbers.  The latter complain just the way all humans complain.  Humans are programmed by nature to complain that things aren't fair.  It's what we do.  We want to rig the game.  All of us.  The only difference is some actually do.  If you want to be in that group, you have to seek it out.  You have to really have a zest for that kind of lifestyle.  It is doable; it's just not many people's "cup of tea."  As I said, in my career, I saw lots of climbers.  Hustling away.  Trying to grow something big.  Many fall on their faces.  Some do well.  But you know what about the ones who fell on their faces?  They swung hard to the fence.  Not everybody has the stomach to swing for the fence, and many who do are not going to hit homers all the time.

 

As I said, I call 'em like I see 'em.  If you want to win, you gotta play.  Or you can make your complaints known and wait for some politicians to come save you...  Pick your poison.

 

 

Can you try on my hypothetical?

 

Hypothetical Change in Economy

 

20M low paid workers unite (somehow) and create a war chest of $500M for lobbying. They hire the 5 best lobbyists in government, and send them into the legislature to buy a better minimum wage law. They come out a year later with $25/hr. and future indexing. And the net effect is that the top 1/2 percent suffer a reduction of say, 10% of their typical income. 

 

Q: When those 1/2% complain like mad, and scream about unfairness, would you say also, "Toughen up. Live with it!" 

[Jim Naseum]

 

 

This is the perfect example which brings the whole thing back down to earth.  This is life!  It ain't fair.  Ain't no politician gonna come to your rescue.  Forget it.  Either accept low pay, or play by the rules and find the ways which increase your pay.  It's really that simple.

 

Such malarky! Honestly, Mr. Jeff, do you pay no attention at all to what happens in the halls of Congress?

Do you actually think CEOs and Billionaires "just accept what is and move on." No Sir, they do not. They connive and conspire and fanagle and bribe and pursuade from morning till night for favorable rule changes. The entirety of the US Congress is a begging station where the privileged go to receive new blessings from those who make rules.

 

I think your advice is not only wrong, but extremely condescending to those who have little influence and privilege. You've no doubt heard the expression, "Let them eat cake!"

 

24 hours a day, the privileged (who have gained power and access) are working full time to tilt the table to their corner, and they do, and they benefit wildly from doing it, but your advice to the less fortunate is just "suck it up, and accept your lot."

 

Mama mia, what a place!

 

Note: all in good humor.  

 

 

I just call it like I see it.  In my career, I've seen a few rich guys, a whole lot of climbers and a whole lot of people content not to be climbers.  The latter complain just the way all humans complain.  Humans are programmed by nature to complain that things aren't fair.  It's what we do.  We want to rig the game.  All of us.  The only difference is some actually do.  If you want to be in that group, you have to seek it out.  You have to really have a zest for that kind of lifestyle.  It is doable; it's just not many people's "cup of tea."  As I said, in my career, I saw lots of climbers.  Hustling away.  Trying to grow something big.  Many fall on their faces.  Some do well.  But you know what about the ones who fell on their faces?  They swung hard to the fence.  Not everybody has the stomach to swing for the fence, and many who do are not going to hit homers all the time.

 

As I said, I call 'em like I see 'em.  If you want to win, you gotta play.  Or you can make your complaints known and wait for some politicians to come save you...  Pick your poison.

 

 

That's a fair approximation of "survival of the fittest." Would you subscribe to that theory?

[Fjd]

 

Humans are programmed by nature to complain that things aren't fair.  It's what we do.  We want to rig the game.  All of us.  The only difference is some actually do.  .

 

 

 

 

The link is of a video that studies human nature in a rigged game of Monopoly where certain players were randomly selected to receive double the pay for "passing go" and got to roll two dice to calculate the spaces to advance on the board instead of one.

 

 

https://youtu.be/bJ8Kq1wucsk

[Arrow#422]

 

I just call it like I see it.  In my career, I've seen a few rich guys, a whole lot of climbers and a whole lot of people content not to be climbers.  The latter complain just the way all humans complain.  Humans are programmed by nature to complain that things aren't fair.  It's what we do.  We want to rig the game.  All of us.  The only difference is some actually do.  If you want to be in that group, you have to seek it out.  You have to really have a zest for that kind of lifestyle.  It is doable; it's just not many people's "cup of tea."  As I said, in my career, I saw lots of climbers.  Hustling away.  Trying to grow something big.  Many fall on their faces.  Some do well.  But you know what about the ones who fell on their faces?  They swung hard to the fence.  Not everybody has the stomach to swing for the fence, and many who do are not going to hit homers all the time.

 

As I said, I call 'em like I see 'em.  If you want to win, you gotta play.  Or you can make your complaints known and wait for some politicians to come save you...  Pick your poison.

 

Well put - playing the game, trying to find a niche position, rigging or solidifying that position, or simply swinging for the fences is at the very heart of attaining the ever sought American dream.  Sitting back, waiting for a hand out, or waiting for Big Brother to distribute wealth and assistance to the less fortunate is the new expectation.  Most likely because it's been ongoing for so long.

[Jeff Matthews]

 

 

 

This is the perfect example which brings the whole thing back down to earth.  This is life!  It ain't fair.  Ain't no politician gonna come to your rescue.  Forget it.  Either accept low pay, or play by the rules and find the ways which increase your pay.  It's really that simple.

 

Such malarky! Honestly, Mr. Jeff, do you pay no attention at all to what happens in the halls of Congress?

Do you actually think CEOs and Billionaires "just accept what is and move on." No Sir, they do not. They connive and conspire and fanagle and bribe and pursuade from morning till night for favorable rule changes. The entirety of the US Congress is a begging station where the privileged go to receive new blessings from those who make rules.

 

I think your advice is not only wrong, but extremely condescending to those who have little influence and privilege. You've no doubt heard the expression, "Let them eat cake!"

 

24 hours a day, the privileged (who have gained power and access) are working full time to tilt the table to their corner, and they do, and they benefit wildly from doing it, but your advice to the less fortunate is just "suck it up, and accept your lot."

 

Mama mia, what a place!

 

Note: all in good humor.  

 

 

I just call it like I see it.  In my career, I've seen a few rich guys, a whole lot of climbers and a whole lot of people content not to be climbers.  The latter complain just the way all humans complain.  Humans are programmed by nature to complain that things aren't fair.  It's what we do.  We want to rig the game.  All of us.  The only difference is some actually do.  If you want to be in that group, you have to seek it out.  You have to really have a zest for that kind of lifestyle.  It is doable; it's just not many people's "cup of tea."  As I said, in my career, I saw lots of climbers.  Hustling away.  Trying to grow something big.  Many fall on their faces.  Some do well.  But you know what about the ones who fell on their faces?  They swung hard to the fence.  Not everybody has the stomach to swing for the fence, and many who do are not going to hit homers all the time.

 

As I said, I call 'em like I see 'em.  If you want to win, you gotta play.  Or you can make your complaints known and wait for some politicians to come save you...  Pick your poison.

 

 

Can you try on my hypothetical?

 

Hypothetical Change in Economy

 

20M low paid workers unite (somehow) and create a war chest of $500M for lobbying. They hire the 5 best lobbyists in government, and send them into the legislature to buy a better minimum wage law. They come out a year later with $25/hr. and future indexing. And the net effect is that the top 1/2 percent suffer a reduction of say, 10% of their typical income. 

 

Q: When those 1/2% complain like mad, and scream about unfairness, would you say also, "Toughen up. Live with it!" 

 

 

You are not getting it.  If, indeed, they can do that, and if, indeed, that kind of leverage will really buy them the prosperity they are seeking, then, just like any other adventurous scheme, I say, "Go for it, and good luck to you!"  I just am too pessimistic to believe the odds of getting 20 million people together to give $25 each to a common cause are higher than one guy trying his luck as an entrepreneur or joint venturer.

[Jim Naseum]

I just call it like I see it. In my career, I've seen a few rich guys, a whole lot of climbers and a whole lot of people content not to be climbers. The latter complain just the way all humans complain. Humans are programmed by nature to complain that things aren't fair. It's what we do. We want to rig the game. All of us. The only difference is some actually do. If you want to be in that group, you have to seek it out. You have to really have a zest for that kind of lifestyle. It is doable; it's just not many people's "cup of tea." As I said, in my career, I saw lots of climbers. Hustling away. Trying to grow something big. Many fall on their faces. Some do well. But you know what about the ones who fell on their faces? They swung hard to the fence. Not everybody has the stomach to swing for the fence, and many who do are not going to hit homers all the time.

As I said, I call 'em like I see 'em. If you want to win, you gotta play. Or you can make your complaints known and wait for some politicians to come save you... Pick your poison.

Well put - playing the game, trying to find a niche position, rigging or solidifying that position, or simply swinging for the fences is at the very heart of attaining the ever sought American dream. Sitting back, waiting for a hand out, or waiting for Big Brother to distribute wealth and assistance to the less fortunate is the new expectation. Most likely because it's been ongoing for so long.

People wanting a raise in minimum wage are not asking for a handout, any more than a businesses asking for higher rates of electricity from the utility commission.

When CEO begs board members to give him some stock, is that also a handout?

Sent from my ALCATEL A564C using Tapatalk