Should salaries be capped?

[anthony022071]

What’s the difference in effect between murder and a natural death?

Not much,if your monetary circulation is cut off when Wal Mart sets up shop next to you.

His claim is that capitalism is somehow causative – and it is clearly not. He is painting a picture that implies that because the world isn’t perfect, it’s somehow the fault of capitalism.

I don’t think that capitalism is causative of monopolies,but it certainly allows for the evolution and growth of monopolies – hence the anti-trust laws.

< And to do the things he cites, one must do them outside the economic system. >

But those are things (mergers,buy-outs,takeovers,aggressive corporate lawsuits,disregard of zoning laws,government favoritism) that the economic system allows for.
It’s like a football game where the players are allowed to obstruct the performance of the other team by attacking them off of the playing field.
There’s no ethical code of conduct inherent in the modern system,it’s all just technique and process;and businessmen are free to do their business outside the Even feudalism had an ethical component,whether or not feudal lords lived up to it.

< What part of “in a competitive environment” did you fail to understand? >

The practice of capitalism is one thing,the context of the competitive free market systemis another. A company that has a monopoly does practices capitalism much the same way that it did before it came to monopolize. The difference is that a monopoly has all the leverage in its favor.

< Which is outside the economic system. And laws favoring one company over another are done outside the economic system. >

I know that. I was wondering why you asked how some countries went from feudalism or capitalism to communism,when obviously it happens by way of revolution,not evolution.
But again,government favoritism is an allowable business practice in itself,because there’s about capitalism that forbids it.

 

[consumedconvert]

No, it doesn’t.

Can you give us the names of these “aggressive businesspeople” and show us where they have said that?

Sure, if you accept that actions speak louder than words. Stephen Jay Gould, Andrew Carnegie, and many other “Captains of Industry.”

And as for Wal-Mart, I have a hard time thinking much of a multi-million dollar corp paying rock-bottom wages and (in some places) encouraging its employees to go on welfare.

 

[consumedconvert]

Regarding Monopolies:

“The problem with Capitalism is not that there are too many capitalists, but too few.”

        --G. K. Chesterton

Capitalism is a neutral environment, sure. But it is very very very easy to abuse, and lends itself to abuse. Old school distributism, however, protects the “small capitalist” from the mega-corp.

 

[stinkcat_14]

You cited cable TV, for example, and ignored the sattelite providers, giving us a distorted picture.

Your logic skills need some help here. Let’s look at the claim you made: Businessmen prefer competition to monopoly. I asked for evidence of this preference, but of course, you couldn’t produce any.

Now, I mentioned the cable companies trying to keep out A T And T. Why are they doing this? They are doing it to keep out competition. In other words, by their behavior, the prefer less competition. Now, the fact that the satellite companies were able to enter the market says absolutely nothing about whether the cable companies prefer competition over monopoly. My guess is that they probably lobbied the government to keep the dish companies out.

I have offered several examples of businesses voting with their dollars to attempt to keep out competition. Whether or not they are successful is irrelevant. The fact that they are spending the money is a clear indication that they prefer less competition to more competition.

So once again, where is your evidence that businessmen prefer more competition to less competition? After all, you were the one who made the claim, the burden of providing the evidence is on you.

 

[consumedconvert]

Variation on a theme:

What is executive compensation was capped in proportion to the average company employee? Would the business world be a better place if the CEO could only make, say, ten times more (in total compensation) than his average established employee? That would create real motive to make sure your own employees were taken care of!

I think it would be a huge step in the right direction.

Thoughts?

 

[estesbob]

Variation on a theme:

What is executive compensation was capped in proportion to the average company employee? Would the business world be a better place if the CEO could only make, say, ten times more (in total compensation) than his average established employee? That would create real motive to make sure your own employees were taken care of!

I think it would be a huge step in the right direction.

Thoughts?

What I pay my employes and what I pay myself is none of your business. If you think a formula based on employee salaries is acceptable then I suggest you start your own business and implement it.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Not much,if your monetary circulation is cut off when Wal Mart sets up shop next to you.

And your “monetary circulation” was “cut off” by Wal-Mart?

Give us some cites.

I don’t think that capitalism is causative of monopolies,but it certainly allows for the evolution and growth of monopolies – hence the anti-trust laws.

No, anti-trust laws are pro-capitalism. Remember that Capitalism is “the private ownership of the means of production and distribution, operated for profit in a competitive system.”

But those are things (mergers,buy-outs,takeovers,aggressive corporate lawsuits,disregard of zoning laws,government favoritism) that the economic system allows for.

Explain how Capitalism is more this way than socialism, feudalism, or communism.

Consider the Collectivization Famine – the ultimate takeover. That’s Communism in action.

It’s like a football game where the players are allowed to obstruct the performance of the other team by attacking them off of the playing field.
There’s no ethical code of conduct inherent in the modern system,it’s all just technique and process;and businessmen are free to do their business outside the

Riiiight. There are no laws in the United States, no Constitution, no morals at all.

Even feudalism had an ethical component,whether or not feudal lords lived up to it.

Whoa! Are you saying there are no ethics in the modern world? That there are no morals?

There certainly are morals and ethics – and just like in feudal times, people sometimes fail to live up to them

The practice of capitalism is one thing,the context of the competitive free market systemis another. A company that has a monopoly does practices capitalism much the same way that it did before it came to monopolize. The difference is that a monopoly has all the leverage in its favor.

No, a monopoly is not capitalism. And monopolies – unless backed by government power, as they are in many socialist nations – are inherently unstable. Someone will always take advantage of high prices to enter the market and bring the monopoly down.

I know that. I was wondering why you asked how some countries went from feudalism or capitalism to communism,when obviously it happens by way of revolution,not evolution.
But again,government favoritism is an allowable business practice in itself,because there’s about capitalism that forbids it.

Government favoritism is a corrupt practice – and to see how it happens, look for a thread that asks “Should we favor small businesses over large ones?”

 

[vern_humphrey]

Your logic skills need some help here. Let’s look at the claim you made: Businessmen prefer competition to monopoly. I asked for evidence of this preference, but of course, you couldn’t produce any.

Actually, I did.

Look at successful businesses – they are highly competitive. the people who run those businesses are competitors. All their skills and live outlook are geared toward competition.

Now, I mentioned the cable companies trying to keep out A T And T. Why are they doing this? They are doing it to keep out competition. In other words, by their behavior, the prefer less competition. Now, the fact that the satellite companies were able to enter the market says absolutely nothing about whether the cable companies prefer competition over monopoly. My guess is that they probably lobbied the government to keep the dish companies out.

Which is so much gobbledy gook. The fact is, competition is there. While a person who wants to limit competition is locking the front door, his competitors (in this case, sattellite TV) are coming in the back.

“Lobbying for competition,” indeed!

 

[consumedconvert]

What I pay my employes and what I pay myself is none of your business.

Not that I asked what you pay yourself or your employees–that, in fact, is none of my business.

If you think a formula based on employee salaries is acceptable then I suggest you start your own business and implement it.

If I have an opportunity to do so, I will.

I don’t really see a need for offense here. We’re discussing economics and possible economic policies. No one asked how much you make or pay others; if you think this idea is a bad one, argue the point.

I think it would be a good way to encourage employers and execs to take care of their people–which I see as one of the main points of a business. (I think that the idea that a business exists to make one person or a small group of people rich is mistaken. A business should be about (a.) preserving a way of life, (b.) providing goods and services to a community, and (c.) taking good care of the people who work for you. If a man profit while doing all these things, which many certainly do, then I congratulate them).

BTW, there are plenty of business owners who treat their employees very well, especially small business owners. My boss is one of them!

 

[estesbob]

Not that I asked what you pay yourself or your employees–that, in fact, is none of my business.

If I have an opportunity to do so, I will.

I don’t really see a need for offense here. We’re discussing economics and possible economic policies. No one asked how much you make or pay others; if you think this idea is a bad one, argue the point.

I did-I said it is no ones business how and employer pays his employees in realtion t how he pays himself.

I think it would be a good way to encourage employers and execs to take care of their people–which I see as one of the main points of a business. (I think that the idea that a business exists to make one person or a small group of people rich is mistaken. A business should be about (a.) preserving a way of life, (b.) providing goods and services to a community, and (c.) taking good care of the people who work for you. If a man profit while doing all these things, which many certainly do, then I congratulate them).

None of the above is dependent on any kind of ratio between the employers comepnsation and the employees.

BTW, there are plenty of business owners who treat their employees very well, especially small business owners. My boss is one of them!

He treats you well in spite of the govt not setting how your compensation should be in relation to his.

i am sure he does not treat you as well as I treat mine

 

[consumedconvert]

Government favoritism is a corrupt practice – and to see how it happens, look for a thread that asks “Should we favor small businesses over large ones?”

So rather than favor small or smallish businesses I think we ought to trust multi-national, billion dollar businesses that have no loyalty to any particular country, creed, or people.

No thank you! I still prefer to work for, and shop at, the guy who owns the shop down the street; and I believe we should encourage his ilk.

 

[consumedconvert]

He treats you well in spite of the govt not setting how your compensation should be in relation to his.

That’s because he’s a faithful Catholic. Unfortunately not everyone has the same morals or faithfulness to those morals as faithful Catholics, like he and you, do. Hence, the need to encourage more morality–and less hoarding–in the open marketplace, where there are many whose only moral absolute is the law of profit.

i am sure he does not treat you as well as I treat mine

Don’t count on it!

 

[estesbob]

That’s because he’s a faithful Catholic. Unfortunately not everyone has the same morals or faithfulness to those morals as faithful Catholics, like he and you, do. Hence, the need to encourage more morality–and less hoarding–in the open marketplace, where there are many whose only moral absolute is the law of profit.

Again it is not the place of the Govt to determine what the proper ration between a employers earnings and an employees earning are. The marketplace determines that. The govt should be neutral.

 

[vern_humphrey]

If I have an opportunity to do so, I will.

You do have an opportunity to do so – the same opportunity eveyone else has.

I think it would be a good way to encourage employers and execs to take care of their people–which I see as one of the main points of a business. (I think that the idea that a business exists to make one person or a small group of people rich is mistaken. A business should be about (a.) preserving a way of life, (b.) providing goods and services to a community, and (c.) taking good care of the people who work for you. If a man profit while doing all these things, which many certainly do, then I congratulate them).

As I said, you are perfectly free to start your own business and run it according to your beliefs.

Do it, and let us know how it turns out.

 

[estesbob]

Tha

Don’t count on it!

Im curious -does your employer provide health insurance?

 

[consumedconvert]

You do have an opportunity to do so – the same opportunity eveyone else has.

As I said, you are perfectly free to start your own business and run it according to your beliefs.

Do it, and let us know how it turns out.

Well, no, not really. No, not at all. Different people have different opportunities, in different time frames. I’m not saying that I or many others won’t have good opportunities down the road to start businesses; but at least for me, that time is not now.

There is an innate difference in people’s opportunities in life. For instance, I will have a much easier time starting a business than a kid who went to a school which failed to teach him how to read; and someone who received some form of parental assistance will have a much easier time making the initial investment a small business requires than I would at the moment.

That’s nothing to complain about, and I’m not complaining; that’s life, and that’s the way life works. But you are absolutely wrong that everyone has the same opportunity to start a small business. That’s plainly false. But thank God for those who have started small businesses, so that lucky guys like me get to work for them and perhaps some day build up enough to start his own business, Lord Willing.

But if not, fine; I’ll still be happy where I’m at.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Well, no, not really. No, not at all. Different people have different opportunities, in different time frames. I’m not saying that I or many others won’t have good opportunities down the road to start businesses; but at least for me, that time is not now.

What a tap dance!

There’s nothing between you and a successful business but air and opportunity – and, of course, the willingness to work hard.

 

[consumedconvert]

Im curious -does your employer provide health insurance?

That’s not really any of your business, bud. But are most very small (in terms of personnel) businesses able to provide group health insurance? He provides for his people as much as possible. It’s not your place to criticize my employer if he doesn’t have the same access to health insurance as a large business has.

Besides, how is this a contest between you and my employer?

 

[consumedconvert]

What a tap dance!

There’s nothing between you and a successful business but air and **opportunity **-- and, of course, the willingness to work hard.

I’m working hard now, and plan to work hard all my life (well, at least until I’m a geriatric).

But isn’t that what I’m saying? Not everyone has or gets that opportunity.

 

[rlg94086]

That’s not really any of your business, bud. But are most very small (in terms of personnel) businesses able to provide group health insurance? He provides for his people as much as possible. It’s not your place to criticize my employer if he doesn’t have the same access to health insurance as a large business has.

Besides, how is this a contest between you and my employer?

Wow. Mighty touchy for someone who was bragging a few posts ago about how great his employer treats him.

I am taking a job with a company of only 7 people. Health benefits are part of what they offer everyone, even though it costs them a lot more than a large company. But, then there is also no cap on my earnings or the earnings of the owners. No doubt, that makes them evil.