BaltACD charlie hebdo One way to start to change the situation is altering corporate governance to include fair input from all stakeholders: employees, shareholders and customers. In today's world - I have a bridge to sell you, Cheap!
charlie hebdo One way to start to change the situation is altering corporate governance to include fair input from all stakeholders: employees, shareholders and customers.
In today's world - I have a bridge to sell you, Cheap!
Jeez! Short of a violent and stupid revolution, what's your idea?
Euclid Lithonia Operator That's the thing. Someone else pointed this out earlier in the thread also. The idea that CEO pay is the result of some kind of meritocracy is a huge myth. The people at the top take care of each other. These people make this kind of money largely because it's them deciding how much they get. Yes, I have heard that a thousand times. The evil CEOs who contribute nothing are taking way more than their fair share because they can and nobody can stop them. And I have asked a thousand times: What are you going to do about it? You might then say there is nothing that can be done about it. But let ask it this way: If you could wave a magic wand and solve the problem of CEOs robbing society; what solution to the problem would you produce? It is a little fishy that nobody seems to want to solve the problem.
Lithonia Operator That's the thing. Someone else pointed this out earlier in the thread also. The idea that CEO pay is the result of some kind of meritocracy is a huge myth. The people at the top take care of each other. These people make this kind of money largely because it's them deciding how much they get.
Yes, I have heard that a thousand times. The evil CEOs who contribute nothing are taking way more than their fair share because they can and nobody can stop them. And I have asked a thousand times: What are you going to do about it? You might then say there is nothing that can be done about it.
But let ask it this way: If you could wave a magic wand and solve the problem of CEOs robbing society; what solution to the problem would you produce?
It is a little fishy that nobody seems to want to solve the problem.
Okay, I'll bite.
You alone have decided to create some arbitrary litmus test. That somehow, if no one who opposes greedy corporate conduct can come up with a magic solution, then that means it's not a real problem. There is zero logic in that.
What I would LIKE is if corporations would be better citizens and care more about the society and their employees than they do about stockholders and their bigwigs. Or at least as much.
Conservatives do not like government intervention in most things, they say. So I am sure that if I propose a law to address this gap, it will be decried as unAmerican. But I'll do it anyway.
I could totally be happy if there was a federal law that said that no single employee can make more than 50 times the average pay of all the employees combined. So if a company's average pay is $60K, the CEO could draw 3 million. That's a pretty nice check.
But legislation is not what I want. What I want is a different culture, one that places more emphasis on the people who do the actual work, and the communities they are in. Changing a culture requires a change in values, and that must be conyeyed by leaders in business, government, religion, education and so on. There is a lack of moral leadership in this country.
You say "nobody seems to want to solve the problem." That's ridiculous. You are grabbing that out of thin air. Where is the evidence for that?
You are creating your own bogus rules of the game, then acting as the sole referee to determine whose points have some validity.
I reject your straw dogs. Unwillingness to buy into these made-up constructs has absolutely nothing to do with the validity of one's points.
Admittedly, I said I was bowing out. But I let myself get sucked back in. I shouldn't have.
Anyway, I'm going to try again. My failure to respond to anyone challenging my views going forward doesn't mean anything one way or the other.
Meanwhile, are carloadings up yet ... ?
EuclidBut let ask it this way: If you could wave a magic wand and solve the problem of CEOs robbing society; what solution to the problem would you produce? It is a little fishy that nobody seems to want to solve the problem.
Yancey Strickler, the founder of Kickstarter, is presently on a book tour (he's in NYC on the 30th) having written a book that purports how to set up one kind of organizational alternative being bruited around here.
charlie hebdo BaltACD charlie hebdo One way to start to change the situation is altering corporate governance to include fair input from all stakeholders: employees, shareholders and customers. In today's world - I have a bridge to sell you, Cheap! Jeez! Short of a violent and stupid revolution, what's your idea?
In as much as it is known that excrement rolls down hill - You have to start at the top of the country's power pyramid - which must not consider itself above the law.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Lithonia Operator Okay, I'll bite. You alone have decided to create some arbitrary litmus test. That somehow, if no one who opposes greedy corporate conduct can come up with a magic solution, then that means it's not a real problem. There is zero logic in that. What I would LIKE is if corporations would be better citizens and care more about the society and their employees than they do about stockholders and their bigwigs. Or at least as much. Conservatives do not like government intervention in most things, they say. So I am sure that if I propose a law to address this gap, it will be decried as unAmerican. But I'll do it anyway. I could totally be happy if there was a federal law that said that no single employee can make more than 50 times the average pay of all the employees combined. So if a company's average pay is $60K, the CEO could draw 3 million. That's a pretty nice check. But legislation is not what I want. What I want is a different culture, one that places more emphasis on the people who do the actual work, and the communities they are in. Changing a culture requires a change in values, and that must be conyeyed by leaders in business, government, religion, education and so on. There is a lack of moral leadership in this country. You say "nobody seems to want to solve the problem." That's ridiculous. You are grabbing that out of thin air. Where is the evidence for that? You are creating your own bogus rules of the game, then acting as the sole referee to determine whose points have some validity. I reject your straw dogs. Unwillingness to buy into these made-up constructs has absolutely nothing to do with the validity of one's points.
I think that when most people say executive pay is too high, they are definitely thinking of a solution arising from the application of law such as something like wage and price controls. I don’t think they are thinking of a remedy based on changing the culture, moral values, etc. But I do agree that either approach could change everything.
But for me personally, I just don’t see a problem that needs fixing. I don’t think that executive pay is causing any problem. The people that do think it is a problem seem to believe that high executive pay makes other peoples’ pay lower. It seems to be based in the belief that there is only so much money that is somehow provided for us, and we are to divide it up fairly. And we should all get together and agree how much is too much. It should not be up to the people that hire CEOs to decide how much to pay them.
I do not believe there is just a finite amount of money. Money is created by human effort. There is more money every day. Each person creates their own money and gets to keep it. We are free to spend it on things we want or to just give it away.
One way to start to change the situation is altering corporate governance to include fair input from all stakeholders: employees, shareholders and customers.
Yes, the German corporatist model. I think it would be the perfect solution, but I think it would take an existential crisis to make that happen in the U.S. - and even then, I have my doubts that such a model would be adopted. Unfortunately, corporations and unions have poisoned their own relationship to such an extent that I can't see any corporate board allowing a union rep into the boardroom, unless it's to get them coffee.
I'm not sure it's just about the German model. Not many employees here are unionized. And I think customers are also stakeholders. Also the communities in which they do business. And governments. All are stakeholders.
A lot depends on the attitudes. Those are very different today compared to the roots of capitalism in the middle class of free-city dwellers in late-medieval Europe. Those bourgeoisie had a sense of responsibility to all, not just making profits.
Third quarter: US economy grew at only 1.9%. Anyone who sees no connection with the trade wars has their eyes closed.
charlie hebdo Third quarter: US economy grew at only 1.9%. Anyone who sees no connection with the trade wars has their eyes closed.
Euclid charlie hebdo Third quarter: US economy grew at only 1.9%. Anyone who sees no connection with the trade wars has their eyes closed. I suspect that the slowdown may be a lagging economic indicator of the tariffs. So even if we ended the dispute today, we may be surprised as the lagging effect all comes crashing in over the next months. But then again, this slowing cannot be due to the tariffs because we are assured by the architect that the tariffs cannot hurt us because we are not the ones paying them. If anything, our "roaring economy" should be roaring even louder now due to the windfall of free money we are getting by taxing the dickens out China on the products they import to us.
I suspect that the slowdown may be a lagging economic indicator of the tariffs. So even if we ended the dispute today, we may be surprised as the lagging effect all comes crashing in over the next months. But then again, this slowing cannot be due to the tariffs because we are assured by the architect that the tariffs cannot hurt us because we are not the ones paying them. If anything, our "roaring economy" should be roaring even louder now due to the windfall of free money we are getting by taxing the dickens out China on the products they import to us.
I feel no compulsion to listen to such noise.
When offshoring began after year 2000, an unstoppable bandwagon carried it forward. I cautioned that we would lose jobs, but was told that we simply must compete, and that would be fair. Trade would be worldwide, free, and fair.
But I knew that you cannot compete with someone who has a natural advantage, and China’s low overhead was an insurmountable advantage over us. It was only offset by the added difficulty of doing business in a foreign country, communicating with them, playing by their rules, and poor product quality. So this new outsourcing divided America into the two camps of "World Free Trade" and "Made in America".
Only when enough time had passed, would China's cost of overhead rise enough to make us competitive with them. In the meantime, we were indeed on an unlevel playing field. But nowhere was the premise that this unlevel feature was unfair or illegal. Nobody ever said China was cheating. This idea has only come up within the last couple years.
So I anticipated this problem and was not surprised to see the jobs fly out the door. But what I never imagined was that this imbalance would lead to a war declared against China over a manifesto of grievances that we demand must be satisfied; or we will destroy their economy. Now, it is said that China stole our jobs, and we won't stop fighting until those jobs are returned. Who would have ever thought it would come to this?
I just figured we would drift off into some kind of economy where half the people needed services and the other half provided them. But we now seem to be turning into a country that says, “China must be stopped before they become the number one world manufacturing power.”
EuclidBut then again, this slowing cannot be due to the tariffs because we are assured by the architect that the tariffs cannot hurt us because we are not the ones paying them. If anything, our "roaring economy" should be roaring even louder now due to the windfall of free money we are getting by taxing the dickens out China on the products they import to us.
I think he is intelligent and does not agree with "the architect," and is poking fun. Am I right, Euclid? We all know who "The Architect" in this case is.
Of course. He refers to the screwball "economist" and the current occupant.
Euclid When outsourcing began after year 2000, an unstoppable bandwagon carried it forward. I cautioned that we would lose jobs, but was told that we simply must compete, and that would be fair. Trade would be worldwide, free, and fair. But I knew that you cannot compete with someone who has a natural advantage, and China’s low overhead was an insurmountable advantage over us. It was only offset by the added difficulty of doing business in a foreign country, communicating with them, playing by their rules, and poor product quality. So this new outsourcing divided America into the two camps of "World Free Trade" and "Made in America". Only when enough time had passed, would China's cost of overhead rise enough to make us competitive with them. In the meantime, we were indeed on an unlevel playing field. But nowhere was the premise that this unlevel feature was unfair or illegal. Nobody ever said China was cheating. This idea has only come up within the last couple years. So I anticipated this problem and was not surprised to see the jobs fly out the door. But what I never imagined was that this imbalance would lead to a war declared against China over a manifesto of grievances that we demand must be satisfied; or we will destroy their economy. Now, it is said that China stole our jobs, and we won't stop fighting until those jobs are returned. Who would have ever thought it would come to this? I just figured we would drift off into some kind of economy where half the people needed services and the other half provided them. But we now seem to be turning into a country that says, “China must be stopped before they become the number one world manufacturing power.”
When outsourcing began after year 2000, an unstoppable bandwagon carried it forward. I cautioned that we would lose jobs, but was told that we simply must compete, and that would be fair. Trade would be worldwide, free, and fair.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Euclid When outsourcing began after year 2000, an unstoppable bandwagon carried it forward. I cautioned that we would lose jobs, but was told that we simply must compete, and that would be fair. Trade would be worldwide, free, and fair.
Outsourcing began well before 2000.
Well guess who BLINKED first and it wasn't the USA in the trade War. China just folded and from what my husband was told by his classmates in China they folded HARD. They are agreeing to 100 precent of all our demands in the new trade deal. No required IT Property transfers required anymore. All Patents will be protected going forward no tariffs on US made goods going into China. No restrictions on US Businesses opening in China. All Tariffs on US Ag products removed.
Why in the last quarter China's own economy shrank 30 PERCENT from the loss of trade with the USA from the Tariffs we slapped them with. China is also scrambling to come up with enough food to feed their nation for this winter they already bought all the surplus grain on the market that was not US based and are still an estimated 200 Million Tons short for just getting thru this winter.
This new deal is to be signed in Chile at the next meeting between world leaders where Xi and Trump are to be there November 17th.
Shadow the Cats ownerThis new deal is to be signed in Chile at the next meeting between world leaders where Xi and Trump are to be there November 17th.
I believe I just read that Chile isn't going to host that conference now...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
daveklepper I think he is intelligent and does not agree with "the architect," and is poking fun. Am I right, Euclid? We all know who "The Architect" in this case is.
By “architect,” I am referring to Peter Kent Navarro, an American economist who currently serves as the Assistant to the President, and Director of Trade and Manufacturing Policy. He alone is the source of the premise that the U.S. consumers will not have to pay any of the cost of our tariffs on our Chinese imports. Mr. Navarro does have a boss and he apparently shares the same beliefs on this matter as Mr. Navarro.
In my opinion, Mr. Navarro holds incredibly radical views on what he considers to be the evils of China which he has developed over several years of study and writing. It seems to be a personal vendetta with him. Now, he has been empowered to finally put his radical views into practice, and he vows to reverse the entire outsourcing movement and bring back all of our lost jobs.
So consider his zeal to take this action, and consider that the only impediment might be that the action will hurt us besides hurting China. The public might object to this crusade if they thought it would hurt us. In my opinion, this explains why Mr. Navarro is assuring us that the tariffs will no impose any added cost to Chinese imports purchased by the American people. He says the tariffs are a direct tax on China. That is economically absurd. We don’t have the power to tax China. What we are doing is levying import tariffs. They do hurt China by slowing down our demand for their imports to us. But to accomplish this, the tariffs cause price increases on products we buy from China. And that hurts us by reducing the spending power of U.S. citizens.
Shadow the Cats ownerChina just folded and from what my husband was told by his classmates in China they folded HARD. They are agreeing to 100 precent of all our demands in the new trade deal.
Time will tell. However, recent past occupants of the oval office have indicated to me that all China has to do is bribe someone with a large donation or graft type job and they get special favors via the White House. We'll see if Congress actually does any oversight on this issue or looks away like they did in the past.
BaltACDOutsourcing began well before 2000.
For Information Technology it started around Y2k, Clinton opened the flood gates to India in exchange for who knows what in $$$. Thats when raises and promotions started to really lag because they now had a never ending supply of IT workers. Then the mass outsourcing of IT to Banglagore started. The sales pitch of Indian firms was hire 1 Indian locally and you get 5 back in India to assist him. Employers in the United States started to upgrade Indian college degrees to be equal to U.S. College degrees when in fact they lagged behind quite a bit. So they even softened the College Degree requirement substantially in some cases to get the cheaper labor. I use it as a marker now, if a firm has outsourced it's IT department in whole or in part to India then it's not worthy of me working there because their pay or benefits will be fairly bad. It's worked out pretty well as a marker.
CMStPnP BaltACD Outsourcing began well before 2000. For Information Technology it started around Y2k, Clinton opened the flood gates to India in exchange for who knows what in $$$. Thats when raises and promotions started to really lag because they now had a never ending supply of IT workers. Then the mass outsourcing of IT to Banglagore started. The sales pitch of Indian firms was hire 1 Indian locally and you get 5 back in India to assist him. Employers in the United States started to upgrade Indian college degrees to be equal to U.S. College degrees when in fact they lagged behind quite a bit. So they even softened the College Degree requirement substantially in some cases to get the cheaper labor. I use it as a marker now, if a firm has outsourced it's IT department in whole or in part to India then it's not worthy of me working there because their pay or benefits will be fairly bad. It's worked out pretty well as a marker.
BaltACD Outsourcing began well before 2000.
The Rust Belt was created well before 2000 as heavy industry was outsourced to other 'cheaper' countries. In the 1990's the worry was that Japan would would own all the US means of production - then Japan had their own financial issues and divested themselves of much that they had bought.
BaltACD CMStPnP BaltACD Outsourcing began well before 2000. For Information Technology it started around Y2k, Clinton opened the flood gates to India in exchange for who knows what in $$$. Thats when raises and promotions started to really lag because they now had a never ending supply of IT workers. Then the mass outsourcing of IT to Banglagore started. The sales pitch of Indian firms was hire 1 Indian locally and you get 5 back in India to assist him. Employers in the United States started to upgrade Indian college degrees to be equal to U.S. College degrees when in fact they lagged behind quite a bit. So they even softened the College Degree requirement substantially in some cases to get the cheaper labor. I use it as a marker now, if a firm has outsourced it's IT department in whole or in part to India then it's not worthy of me working there because their pay or benefits will be fairly bad. It's worked out pretty well as a marker. The Rust Belt was created well before 2000 as heavy industry was outsourced to other 'cheaper' countries. In the 1990's the worry was that Japan would would own all the US means of production - then Japan had their own financial issues and divested themselves of much that they had bought.
True. Even in the mid-1980s in Michigan, there was a lot of anti-Japanese feeling. Why? Detroit was still churning out junk while Japan was taking a sizable market share with better-made autos.
When I referred to outsourcing starting after 2000, I should have called it offshoring. As for the date, I only offer it as a signficant marker along the path. I am referring to 2001 when China joined the WTO. Here is an interesting article about that and the suggestion that the 2001 date marks the beginning of our current trade confrontation with China:
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/08/china-trump-trade-united-states/567526/
Shadow the Cats owner Well guess who BLINKED first and it wasn't the USA in the trade War. China just folded and from what my husband was told by his classmates in China they folded HARD. They are agreeing to 100 precent of all our demands in the new trade deal. No required IT Property transfers required anymore. All Patents will be protected going forward no tariffs on US made goods going into China. No restrictions on US Businesses opening in China. All Tariffs on US Ag products removed. Why in the last quarter China's own economy shrank 30 PERCENT from the loss of trade with the USA from the Tariffs we slapped them with. China is also scrambling to come up with enough food to feed their nation for this winter they already bought all the surplus grain on the market that was not US based and are still an estimated 200 Million Tons short for just getting thru this winter. This new deal is to be signed in Chile at the next meeting between world leaders where Xi and Trump are to be there November 17th.
Unfortunately, there's no mention of the salient structural issue: hidden subsidies for state-owned enterprises, an issue on which China isn't going to budge. Another sticking point is that China is insisting that all punitive tariffs be stopped as part of the first phase deal, whereas the U.S. administration doesn't want to do that. So we're not quite there yet.
I also have serious doubts that China is suddenly going to stop demanding intellectual property transfers.
Call me a cynic, but I doubt if the trucking hubby's classmates in China have access to internal PRC government documents. Anonymous sources are not necessarily accurate.
I would not conclude that this trade dispute has been settled. The stakes are very high, and there is no doubt, a lot of pressure on the leaders of both countries to claim success for the sake of their popularity at home. What is claimed to have been agreed to falls miles short of Navarro's goals. This could turn out like claiming that a threat of tariffs against Mexico scared them into fixing the immigration problem.
charlie hebdo Call me a cynic, but I doubt if the trucking hubby's classmates in China have access to internal PRC government documents. Anonymous sources are not necessarily accurate.
EuclidMoney is created by human effort. There is more money every day. Each person creates their own money and gets to keep it.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.