231–240 of 280 posts
Am I crazy for thinking it seems naive to not anticipate that current employees may not take kindly to people who earn half as much as them getting bumped up to their salaries?
I know what you're saying, but I've never understood this logic personally. How does someone else earning more money hurt you? It's not like a person doing better than you is taking your money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really, because he's pushing towards a completely arbitrary minimum $70k salary for everyone. That's certainly his right as the business owner, and that sentiment shared more widely might be better for society, but there's nothing particularly "capitalistic" about it.
It's his money, he's the capital-holder, he can do what he wants with it. If he thinks it's better for his business to do this, that's entirely up to him. Capitalism doesn't mean "pay your employees out according to some made-up scheme of who's-worth-what," though the weird calvinist pseudo-capitalism we love in the U.S. sure likes that kind of ranking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How about observing how well they perform before bringing in your Ayn Rand propaganda. While I agree with the rest of your post, your portrayal of Ms. Rand's work is woefully inaccurate. No where do I recall she wrote of demeaning blacks, suppressing wages and preventing the equal participation of all capable people in a common market. Rand was very clear that racism and discrimination hindered the free market by p…
Hahahahah fuck off "They (Native Americans) didn't have any rights to the land, and there was no reason for anyone to grant them rights which they had not conceived and were not using. What was it that they were fighting for, when they opposed white men on this continent? For their wish to continue a primitive existence, their 'right' to keep part of the earth untouched, unused and not even as property, but just keep…
Seems there are some fundamental but overlooked assumptions running through these comment threads, the stance that companies "should" pay higher salaries to workers who create more value for the company being one. The assumption is that the company, or its management, is like a parent that must treat each of its children equally. Why should this be the case? Who says a company should be a full-fledged meritocracy? If…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me that's just a weird reaction; isn't their wage the incentive they have to work? Is that no longer how it works in the USA?
The myth of "hard work = high wages" is one of the most pernicious and persistent of American lies, I'm afraid. It has never been the case for as long as the country has lived.
Conversely, paying employees too little would make them indifferent to their jobs and difficult to replace, naturally removing incentives to work hard and deliver value to their employer.
This does ignore the point that poorly paid employees might work hard to get bonuses or promotions, though, and well paid ones might not need them. I don't know whether these sorts of jobs get performance-based pay, or come with opportunities for career advancement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So some people would get paid more, and you'd switch to a more balanced lifestyle? I'm struggling to see the downsides :)
> you'd switch to a more balanced lifestyle? Don't force your value system on others. I personally am happiest when I'm working 70-80 hours a week and appreciate being compensated for my hard work. Just because that doesn't describe you doesn't mean I should be forced to attain an artificial "balance."
Secondly, Ensorceled specifically said (s)he would start "enjoying the weekends", which implies the long hours were, unlike for you, not being particularly enjoyable.
The most repulsive thing to read here is the reaction of some of the customers. “What’s their incentive to hustle if you pay them so much?” Really? Do you ask that same question when a CEO gets millions of dollar in bonus? Nah, the CEOs simply "deserve" it. The employees though, they must hustle. Roughly transposed to the 17th century, that statement reads "What's the incentive for this n * to pick more cotton if he…
Back to our subject, the pay scale that this business owner proposed is not actually socialist much less communist. It was just a communitarianist approach with centrist leaning on the right-left spectrum but these Limbaugh bots just freaked out like useful idiots that they are when they heard about this more egalitarian, considerate, humane compensation scheme barking at the business owner.
This is really pathetic and it's really disheartening to know about this silly reaction from these brainwashed people.
Finally, I must congratulate this brave guy on his ethics and I wish him all the luck even though I might have some reservations or concerns regarding infusing the workplace with political messages and using business ventures as political conduits to spread these messages about certain social causes but after all I support his decision of seeking a flatter pay scale and doing what he could to close the income inequality gap between the poor and the rich even on a micro-scale like what he did inside his organization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hahahahah fuck off "They (Native Americans) didn't have any rights to the land, and there was no reason for anyone to grant them rights which they had not conceived and were not using. What was it that they were fighting for, when they opposed white men on this continent? For their wish to continue a primitive existence, their 'right' to keep part of the earth untouched, unused and not even as property, but just keep…
I think you, and those below, have misunderstood this quote, in the usual knee-jerk liberal ("fuck off") fascist manner. She is complaining about the lack of productive use of the land. She is saying that the native Americans didn't have rights to keep the land from being used productively. She is saying that they are maintaining a way life that is not progressing - she is not saying they should be excluded from prog…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Ie the cost of the employee is set above their value to the company. My salary has never been set by my value to the company - it has been set by my ability to negotiate.
How far (in %) is your salary from the average for the position / industry / city you are in?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've always wondered how pro athletes in their weird economy deal with this issue. With salary caps, max contracts and scarcity there are all sorts of constraints that change from year to year, and a superstar on a max contract signed a few years ago can be making less than a merely good player who just signed a contract. (One of the rare cases where one's actually voiced displeasure: http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/…
They make a lifetime supply of money each year, and plenty from non-league sources (endorsements, etc). Their energy is better spent learning how to manage the money they have, than fighting over who gets paid more of it.