this particular topic

[slomove]

It is difficult to resist flaming the drivel ........

 

Well, Jerry. With the word 'drivel' you started the flaming.

 

I don't agree with everything that was written here but so far this was a pretty civilized discussion. Not much drivel that I could see.

 

The other thing that kind of disqualifies your opinion is bringing up the constitution and soldiers. I appreciate the wisdom of the people who wrote that and the sacrifice of soldiers but WTF does that have to do with employment issues? You can have the best constitution and a fabulous military and still suck your employees dry (or pamper them to no end).

 

So, sorry that was kind of drivel IMO.

 

The OP reported frustration from a situation in an industry I don't know much of. I am working as Operations Manager in electronics manufacturing and it is not as bad there. I most similar companies I know of employees are reasonably, sometimes well paid (I know, all relative) and well treated. That said, when interviewing new manufacturing engineers lately we had a few applicants who were still losing their jobs because their company is moving to Mexico or China. I read somewhere this tide was turning but then, maybe not.

 

I think these are all valid points. I admit I am right now on the winning side, but I believe the ongoing turbo-capitalism is going to ruin this country.

Edited July 14, 2014 by slomove

[powderbrake]

Well, Jerry. With the word 'drivel' you started the flaming.

 

Yes, I agree

 

I don't agree with everything that was written here but so far this was a pretty civilized discussion. Not much drivel that I could see.

 

Example of drivel:

small businesses are just as guilty, a business that employs just a small number of workers will deduct income tax from its employees wages before the worker even sees them and at tax time claims a deduction for buying a new vehicle and the gas it used in the year, the result being that the workers paid for that new vehicle and its running expenses not only by the fruits of their labour generating profits for the business but also with the taxes they thought were going to provide various government services they need.

 

 

The other thing that kind of disqualifies your opinion is bringing up the constitution and soldiers.

 

My opinion disqualified? by what standards? Yours? It is equally as valid as the "drivel" I have read.

 

I appreciate the wisdom of the people who wrote that and the sacrifice of soldiers but WTF does that have to do with employment issues?

 

Absolutely nothing, it was in reference to the right to bitch.

 

You can have the best constitution and a fabulous military and still suck your employees dry (or pamper them to no end).

 

So, sorry that was kind of drivel IMO.

 

I agree, IMO is your qualifier.

[Manshoon11]

but I believe the ongoing turbo-capitalism is going to ruin this country.

Which country are you talking about?

[Mondo]

I try to avoid this section most of the time but got sucked in too... I've never seen a political thread where someone has said "Gee, you make a good point, my thoughts about this were completely wrong and now I agree with you".

 

Except maybe for this thread I just wrote:)

[john hennessy]

Powder brake,

 

i have been looking for an employer who still understands that your staff are your best asset since comming to America some 20 years ago.

 

it would appear that i have now found that employer, alas you are on the wrong side of the country.

 

when employers loose site of the best asset they have, then the work force becomes appathetic.

[slomove]

Which country are you talking about?

 

Interesting chart, have not seen it in that form but not really what I meant.

 

Of course I was talking of the good old USA.

 

Disclaimer: I believe most people here would count me as liberal of European descent, sorry about that. But it is not that easy, I am with the reviled Tea Party on issues like deficit and debt. I pay me credit card bills in full every time and I think the government should do the same. There can of course be some discussion how fast we can stop the madness and start paying back without screwing up everything. That would surely include major cutbacks and tax increases that will hurt.

 

But what I meant is the growing inequity how wealth is distributed (as mentioned in the video). There is nothing natural about that and it is surely not related to the stellar performance of the "rich" other than bending over and have the political class lick their behind (any party). There is some kind of parasitic quality to this and it does lead to a race to the bottom as mentioned earlier.

 

I may also be a romantic not believing in unbridled free trade. It sounds great that we all can gorge on cheap stuff from China and Vietnam. But besides the (for me) unsettling fact that we don't produce much consumer/quantity goods anymore with related job losses, the piled up trade deficit will come to haunt the US in the future. I do not like that more and more assets are owned by foreign owners who need to do something with the dollars they get for all the junk. As a country it is comparable the homeowner who takes more and more mortgages to finance big cars and vacations just to end up in foreclosure.

 

But who am I to worry. I buy that stuff as well.

Edited July 15, 2014 by slomove

[slngsht]

John, if such employers don't exist, or you can't find one, start a business. The nice thing about it is anyone is allowed to try. If it grows and you have employees, the shoe will be on the other foot, and you'll be the one trying to balance salaries, benefits, reinvesting in the business, when to decide something is not working and lay people off, pay loans, market, etc...

 

Now, the US is FAR from a perfect free market economy. Rather than get into an argument on a complex topic, may I suggest you read "Free to Choose" by Milton Friedman. It's not a long book, and it may give you a fresh perspective on these issues.

[Manshoon11]

Slomove,

 

Isn't it interesting tht you note a rising inequality despite an increase (inflation adjusted) in welfare spending by 16x in 40 ish years? As per the graph, the complaint you have is correlating with an explosion in the size of government. Does it look like that complaint you have is going to change?

 

Free markets don't guarantee equality, but allow for all to be better off in real terms. Who cares what the distribution is if the case by case outcomes are better than the current trajectory.

 

Also, what is the deal with the trade deficit. It is no different than you buying items from your neighbor an he decides to accumulate financial assets. It is nothing that needs to be regulated. And we especially don't need export suvsidization (see ex-I'm bank).

We also can NOT pay off the national debt. You must understand the monetary system to comprehend why. The alternative, which I favor, is free market money. (Fat chance of that though)

[Mondo]

On a related topic.... What about this solution being talked about?

 

"Single Sales Factor Apportionment of Global Profits to Broaden the Tax Base" shows that as an alternative to the U.S. corporate tax system – called a single sales factor apportioned corporate tax – would not only simplify the tax code and reduce the burden of corporate tax compliance, but also promote the principle that all businesses pay their fair share.

 

The idea of “single sales factor apportionment” is to tax corporations based on where sales are made, not where profits are reported. So the share of a corporation’s total profit that the U.S. would tax would be based solely on the share of the corporation’s worldwide sales that occur in the U.S. If a company shows 10 percent of its sales occur in the U.S., then the U.S. taxes the company on 10 percent of its worldwide profits.

 

This new system treats foreign multinationals just the same way it treats American multinational corporations – and the same way it treats smaller U.S. domestic companies

 

http://crooksandliars.com/2014/07/simplified-way-tax-multinational

[Manshoon11]

Yeah.... If your mentality is punishment, but taxes aren't to fund the federal government.