Scientific Forums


Pages: (2) 1 [2]   ( Go to first unread post )

Add replyStart new topicStart new poll


> You Might Be..., right wing if
NymphaeaAlba
Posted: Mar 6 2013, 07:44 PM


Secular Sanity
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 1928
Joined: 30-March 10

Positive Feedback: 73.17%
Feedback Score: 61


QUOTE (Mekigal @ Mar 6 2013, 09:23 AM)
it is fetus dependent < If you grow the baby then you are entitled to equal compensation of growing the baby.

So if are reasonable for making a corporation x amount you are entitled to fair compensation by the abilities you bring to the table . Now back in the day money was worth more or less depending on your perspective . Another words it didn't take as much to have the same value as today . It looks obscene now  but percentages of compensation really have not changed much and some even have come down .
6 percent of a mill looks a lot different when it is 6% of a bill .


From the article.

"The more optimistic story draws an analogy between the explosion of C.E.O. pay and the explosion of baseball salaries with the introduction of free agency. According to this story, highly paid C.E.O.'s really are worth it, because having the right man in that job makes a huge difference. The more pessimistic view -- which I find more plausible -- is that competition for talent is a minor factor. Yes, a great executive can make a big difference -- but those huge pay packages have been going as often as not to executives whose performance is mediocre at best. The key reason executives are paid so much now is that they appoint the members of the corporate board that determines their compensation and control many of the perks that board members count on. So it's not the invisible hand of the market that leads to those monumental executive incomes; it's the invisible handshake in the boardroom."

Well, (supposedly) you know what they say...

Luke 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
Send PM
Top
Mekigal
Posted: Mar 6 2013, 09:37 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 3210
Joined: 22-March 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


No I agree with that < Run aground on the rocks and the ship is sinking , but that was the intent in monetary systems of the past ( fair compensation )and abuse of that system by cronyism is taking it down < but it is geared that way . For mediocrity to settle .

It is a natural progression of degeneration of a eventual failed system as the claws come out an scratch at depleting resources.


So as of late and I mean just before the crash and after it was name driven < If you had a reputation you can command the price and performance seem to go out the window. They say the big bonus was for past performance even though the past records of profit didn't reflect the over all health of a corporation < It was short term gains by robbing the system of the gray and leaving it in shambles which the heads have never had to account for as far as I see to this day < They robed the banks with luxury and big bonuses off a violation in tested true banking principles , made short term gains by the traitorous act and then collected big bonuses off the scam .

It was a shill game all the way

But it was before if you ask me . Right from the git go for the day had to /has to come when the working stiff can no longer support the rich and famous with his back braking work . Yet the world will hang onto the notion for some time to come as there is no other way insight that can automatically take its place with out total disruption in the flow of goods distributed .

I kind of agree with Kruger on a few points but not totally sold on his throw money at it solution . Somethings money can't fix and this I believe is one of them .

I do agree with shortening transportation distance to market , but that now is not reality < the theory that got him the noble prize is but the displacement of work forces is to great to make that practical and when you through in fair compensation to a work force even more so not realistic . Cheap labor dictates the the farm or distribution and if it hubs out in central location because of more affordable work environment that is where it will go because of cost savings even being short sighted by doing so . In the individual life span it makes no difference to the ones fiduciary requirements of fair business practices and there duty to the stock holder and that being the short sightedness of an entity that is suppose to be eternal by definition of corporation as a person-hood .


It is all a snake eating its own tail my dear and it will crumble as an eventual out come < the best we can do is prepare and make aware of the impending danger.
Unless baby boomers all die around the same time then it could be glory days once again for young survivors like when the black death left a much smaller population to rebuild and grow.
Never know ? That could happen by a catastrophic population crash predicted in about 30 years .

It depends on what camp you are in ? Scientist already have brought up the idea for the bubble being predetermined to population crash by a derivative gone negative in the early 80s , There was a mini boom of baby boomer children booming but it was way small in comparison to the actual boomers . Now it is not a sustainable population growth in developed countries and if not immigration job dependent government income would even be worse by the decline in populations dependent on internal growth that is not happening due to 1st world mind set of replacement of your self or less . But it takes 2.2 % growth to brake even and that would not be met with out immigration bolstering the growth of 1st world .

The thought is < as third world adopts 1st world they to will experience population decline by the education offered in 1st world bases of operations.

The track is set and the world follows that track . It is going to get interesting .

I do believe population decline is a real event and we will see it in our life time and we are as boomers die left and right day by day . I can't believe Hugo died ? Blow me away < Yeah he had cancer and all but lots of people get cancer and hang on by advanced methodologies of sustaining by medicine and treatments . He had the advantage of the best of the best in care ? Unbelievable . He is dead . That is big world changing right there

Top
Mekigal
Posted: Mar 6 2013, 10:14 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 3210
Joined: 22-March 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


The other shoe will worsen the effect and that is the educated consumer . As they consume less and figure out the non essential goods are not worthy of purchase as we have seen in the last several years even with global needs sky rocketing for even the labor force in china is rising at an alarming rate faster then consumers can keep up with salary wise . The need for cheaper labor become essential in oiling the machine but being consumer driven the less a consumer can afford the less they spend and the house of cards continues in decline by the fact that the salaried worker can't purchase due to the inequality gap growing bigger year over year . It feels good to the third world reaping right now but that is still short sighted in the over all scheme of things for what we are going though as a nation in decline so will they as an eventual out come by following the business model projected .

It is not sustainable at all and there is much pain to be had .

You take that automatic roll backs and the cuts of 85 billion that just happened and that is a drop of water in a sea the size of an ocean < the pain of just that is more then most can bare by there mind set of tolerance and entitlement. That is nothing in the scheme of things .

To have to compete with a global market , emerging markets and such is the deal breaker of any recovery hoped for by the U.S. populace and shipment of jobs to those emerging markets is where the eb and flow of the market will move to until those markets them selves experience to much growth to fast as is happening in China . It feels good now just like Reaganomics felt good to us but with growth comes escalating rate of cost of the goods to be produced . They have a ways to go in there rise in global markets as the expansion continues but the inevitable end is still out there and when robotics takes its hold on workforce goods may drop by the ability of the machine being more dependable then a human work force that is when human productivity comes to a screeching halt. No jobs for average humans and then the consumer based model of wealth will really be obsolete . Then what ?

Continue to Hold humans feet to the fire ? What ? It is a house of cards all the way and a matter of time before the youth robbed of there future take over the world .

I think Jim Messina has a good feel for this , Exactly what I am talking about. I bet he stole it from Me when we was hanging at the Union Club and I lamb basted his anus about economics 101 . My one college course that was not real property oriented that I get naturally from being a son of a development family and real property education continued in main stream .

I am out of the loop though for I don't think that much about anymore.

Besides that people will trudge along for quite some time as that is all theoretical deep time stuff at best
Top
ontheleft
Posted: Mar 7 2013, 08:22 AM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 357
Joined: 17-June 12

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


QUOTE (NymphaeaAlba @ Mar 6 2013, 04:24 PM)
Lefty/RightyÖI donít have a political label, yet.  Iím politically illiterate, partly due to lack of trust.  The number-flinging is as bad, if not worse, than the poo-flinging.  Itís difficult to sift through all the ѕhit. 


You probably know this. It's surprising how many years the names have held true.

QUOTE
The terms "left" and "right" appeared during the French Revolution of 1789 when members of the National Assembly divided into supporters of the king to the president's right and supporters of the revolution to his left. One deputy, the Baron de Gauville explained, "We began to recognize each other: those who were loyal to religion and the king took up positions to the right of the chair so as to avoid the shouts, oaths, and indecencies that enjoyed free rein in the opposing camp."


Then you read that Lincoln was a Republican and abolished slavery. Yet that same party did it's damnedest to keep descendants of slaves from voting last year.

The South was solid Democrat till the civil rights movement came along.

QUOTE
I donít know. What do you think? Was it due to a social change, rather than an economic force?

At least that's what this cup of coffee has been telling me. 


Social, always social. It is a rare individual who becomes wealthy and doesn't get drawn into The Club and it's mores. And The Club takes care of it's own. It may lay low for a while, because it's prudent to do so, but it will have it's way.

Who in their right mind would say that C- George Bush belonged in a university, much less become president of the United States of America? In any merit-based society he would have been washing cars.

The Club got him in and madness ensued. God and flag, tax cuts and wars.

Coors isn't around but the still, small voice is telling me to shut the hell up before I go any further.

Top

Topic Options Pages: (2) 1 [2] 

Add reply Start new topicStart new poll


 

Terms of use