Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Federal Reserve chair says decline in workers' share of profits 'very troubling'

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 289 posts

Re: Federal Reserve chair says decline in workers' share of profits 'very troubling'

#101

Post by lovich »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #70
dragonwriter wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Blaming “the rich” when voting turnout is so low Depressing turnout by demoralizing constituencies that lean to the other side and, particularly on one side, outright voter suppression, is something that the rich (both independently and acting through the major parties) fund lavishly, so why wouldn't they get blame when turnout is low?

Most people who choose not to vote aren't being systematically repressed. They're just too indifferent and/or lazy to participate.

We've had 5 occasions where the president lost the popular vote but won't the election and 2 of them were in the past 18 years. Do you think most people look at that situation and go "if only I had voted, then things would be different". Between that and a few court rulings that have turned the major elections into an event only the rich and their friends can partake in, I don't see how it's not people bring systematically repressed

Re: Federal Reserve chair says decline in workers' share of profits 'very troubling'

#102

Post by acchow »

methodover wrote: post #79

The allocation of profits in startups, at least, feels... problematic. I was the #2 engineer hire when I was hired five years ago. Since then, we haven't become super successful -- yet -- but we're at least at breakeven. We have three engineers and we're working on a huge new project that hopefully will really grow the company. I have 1.8% equity. Sometimes when I'm working late or working on the weekend, which is of…

But you're also part of the problem. Startups offer very little equity because they're able to find someone they want that will take it.

Were you coerced into this agreement?

Re: Federal Reserve chair says decline in workers' share of profits 'very troubling'

#103

Post by methodover »

tramGG wrote: post #90
methodover wrote: post #79

The allocation of profits in startups, at least, feels... problematic. I was the #2 engineer hire when I was hired five years ago. Since then, we haven't become super successful -- yet -- but we're at least at breakeven. We have three engineers and we're working on a huge new project that hopefully will really grow the company. I have 1.8% equity. Sometimes when I'm working late or working on the weekend, which is of…

Have you tried asking for more equity? Negotiating new terms is fine if you feel you deserve it and are passionate about your work.

I'm pretty sure the equity I have is already incredibly generous for an employee. But yes, I did bring up the issue a couple weeks ago. He doesn't believe we're in a position to go to the board and make any changes to stock compensation at this time. He thinks we should first figure out how to accelerate (with this new project) and then we'd be in a better position to ask for more stock for employees from the board.

Re: Federal Reserve chair says decline in workers' share of profits 'very troubling'

#104

Post by [deleted] »

wavefunction wrote: post #98
test6554 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it were me, I would consider moving my money to Latin America. Not Mexico of course, due to the recent election, but definitely would research the regions and political climates of our southern neighbors.

Sounds like you should probably start researching now if a 20% capital gains rate makes you think "Latin America" outweighs an additional 5% in taxes.

[deleted]

Re: Federal Reserve chair says decline in workers' share of profits 'very troubling'

#105

Post by Johnny555 »

methodover wrote: post #79

The allocation of profits in startups, at least, feels... problematic. I was the #2 engineer hire when I was hired five years ago. Since then, we haven't become super successful -- yet -- but we're at least at breakeven. We have three engineers and we're working on a huge new project that hopefully will really grow the company. I have 1.8% equity. Sometimes when I'm working late or working on the weekend, which is of…

If you don't need the money, then don't take it. Problem solved. If it's such a small amount of money, then self-fund.

The VC is thinking "I'm paying this guy's salary to work on something that may or may not ever pay for itself", and he's got dozens of companies that he's funding and they won't all hit it big... or even survive.

Or, another option, don't throw everything you have at a company -- join a later stage startup where the work-life balance is better, but you can still expect a decent payout if it succeeds.

Re: Federal Reserve chair says decline in workers' share of profits 'very troubling'

#106

Post by peacetreefrog »

sctb wrote: post #99
arblegobblebrbl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, for starters, you could stop with all the avocado toast.

Could you please read the guidelines and then take care to comment civilly and substantively here? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Really disagree with these comments (not as much this one as the other one in this thread) being flagged and removed. IIRC the line was basically, "many people have much more to invest then they claim, but they spend it on netflix, brunch, concerts etc instead"

Sure, obv won't apply to everyone and not everyone will agree, but seems like a reasonable sentiment that should at least be allowed to exist on the thread. Deleting it makes it seem like you're going for thought monoculture here.

Re: Federal Reserve chair says decline in workers' share of profits 'very troubling'

#107

Post by rayiner »

colordrops wrote: post #82
yardie wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, where would it go? The US Treasury sets the bond price and no one is turning it down even with completely shitty returns (like 1-2%!). If capital flees they can go to an even higher tax country in the EU. They can go to a negative return country like Switzerland. They could go to China, but guess what, it's a one way trip! I bet if lawmakers said capital gains tax is bumped to 20% everyone of them would bit…

You mean the same lawmakers that sit on the boards of so many multinational corporations? Might as well ask for world peace.

Are you thinking of any specific one out of the "so many" examples, or are you assuming? Because for Senators, it's illegal to sit on a corporate board, and for Members of Congress, it's only legal if the position is unpaid: https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/10976/legislati....

Re: Federal Reserve chair says decline in workers' share of profits 'very troubling'

#108

Post by test6554 »

wavefunction wrote: post #98
test6554 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it were me, I would consider moving my money to Latin America. Not Mexico of course, due to the recent election, but definitely would research the regions and political climates of our southern neighbors.

Sounds like you should probably start researching now if a 20% capital gains rate makes you think "Latin America" outweighs an additional 5% in taxes.

If Bernie Sanders was elected, I wouldn't just move my money. I'd take my chances with the cartels.

Free health care, free tuition, $15 minimum wage, guaranteed sick days and paid time off. Universal basic income, unicorns, etc. And the 3-5 trillion dollars it costs each year can just be paid by either the wealthy or by placing crippling debt upon future generations. Either way, free stuff is good.

Re: Federal Reserve chair says decline in workers' share of profits 'very troubling'

#109

Post by pradn »

test6554 wrote: post #58
pradn wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people barely have enough to live on, let alone invest. If wages were higher in real terms, they're lives would be better. Plus, investing is risky. Not everyone has the ability to weather business downturns without tapping into savings.

Even if people don't have money to invest, they can still go into debt. And the time value of money applies to both investments and debt. People need to know how to shop around for debt and to understand the implications of different loan terms. They need to understand the impact that bad credit can have on their future.

I'm totally with you that we need to teach people financial literacy in like high school. But there's only so much financial literacy can do for the populace if the labor share of productivity gains are low, if precarity is on the rise, if student loans are so high, if k12 education quality depends on your zipcode/parent's income, if one medical or legal mishap might mean bankruptcy or a lack of access to the job market, if assortative mating means marriage is yet another driver of the great divergence between the upper and lower quintiles of income in this country.

Re: Federal Reserve chair says decline in workers' share of profits 'very troubling'

#110

Post by Analemma_ »

hammock wrote: post #42
legitster wrote: post #27

To me it is pretty ridiculous how much labor is taxed, and how little capital is taxed. Especially if we are worried about automation and lack of productivity growth, it seems so counter-intuitive that we are completely stuck to a tax system that devalues workers.

Who is worried about automation and lack of productivity growth? Seems like the worry is over inequality.

People who would rather not change the balance of power between labor and capital worry about lack of productivity growth, because up until recently productivity growth was the bandaid hiding the underlying problems with inequality. As productivity growth stops, we have to address the actual problems, and certain people would rather not.
Post reply on HN