PDA

View Full Version : So you want things to be like the way they used to be?



Blowtorch
07-18-2011, 01:07 AM
Then tax a Millionare, support the Unions and Buy American!!

ramillett
07-18-2011, 01:24 AM
You just don't get it . You don't just turn on a business . It takes time to build a company , and taking the money from the "millionaires" the doers in this country , and giving it to the fat cats in government , you mite as well flush it .

Blowtorch
07-18-2011, 01:48 AM
Something like 80 per cnt of all millionairs either inherited it and didnt have to work for it, or are entertainers or athletes. You think Derek Jeter and Oprah can afford to pay in a little more?

We talk ablout how good things were in the 50s but back then the unions were strong everythin was made here and the very rich paid a lot of Tax. So if we want to have an economy like that again, all we have to do is follo that roadmap.

PeterSibley
07-18-2011, 01:51 AM
Something like 80 per cnt of all millionairs either inherited it and didnt have to work for it, or are entertainers or athletes. .

Now there's an interesting point .

Waddie
07-18-2011, 02:17 AM
Something like 80 per cnt of all millionairs either inherited it and didnt have to work for it, or are entertainers or athletes. You think Derek Jeter and Oprah can afford to pay in a little more?

We talk ablout how good things were in the 50s but back then the unions were strong everythin was made here and the very rich paid a lot of Tax. So if we want to have an economy like that again, all we have to do is follo that roadmap.

You may just be venting, but you make a couple of good points. I wish union membership in the private sector was much higher, especially in the service and retail industries. However, I don't believe in public sector unions for the same reasons FDR opposed them. We need solid private sector unions that have an ownership stake in the companies they work for. It's always better to have skin in the game. Our traditional union/management hate relationship is counterproductive in the 21st century.

Yes, the rich definitely need to pay progressively more in taxes than they do now. But don't expect that revenue to solve all our fiscal problems. We still won't have a balanced budget, not by a long shot. And with the way the rich can move money around to different countries and accounts, you won't collect as much as you might think. But it's still worth the effort, even if it turns out to be largely symbolic.

As far as making things here again, I'm all for it. Manufacturing has to be the foundation of any economy. Trying to make the service sector our foundation was doomed to failure. This is one area that Mit Romney has it right. We need to re-negotiate these so-called "free trade" agreements and make this country a favorable environment for manufacturing. Some people say manufacturing is too polluting to be feasible, but the Germans have cleaned up their manufacturing and they are prosperous. And they make, and have a market for, quality products. There are many people in this country who just aren't right for "college", and we need more hands-on jobs.

You're on the right track. We just forgot what made us a great country.

regards,
Waddie

PeterSibley
07-18-2011, 02:19 AM
You're on the right track. We just forgot what made us a great country.


Manufacturing superiority ? That doesn't seem to be the position right now .

ramillett
07-18-2011, 02:23 AM
Blowtorch unions were great when the working man needed some clout to deal with big business , but when they control the government , schools , police , fire , and chase all the manufacturing jobs out of the country , I think we need some control .

Waddie
07-18-2011, 02:26 AM
You just don't get it . You don't just turn on a business . It takes time to build a company , and taking the money from the "millionaires" the doers in this country , and giving it to the fat cats in government , you mite as well flush it .

Ray, nobody is saying starting or running a business is easy. But the top 5% just don't pay their way right now. Much of their money is taxed at 15%. Nobody wants to take all their money, but a modest increase is in order. They will still have more than enough left to create new jobs, if that's their plan....:)

And as for sending money to Washington, maybe it does get flushed sometimes, but we regular folk don't get to choose if we're going to pay our taxes--the rate of which is often higher than the rich.

regards,
Waddie

Waddie
07-18-2011, 02:31 AM
Blowtorch unions were great when the working man needed some clout to deal with big business , but when they control the government , schools , police , fire , and chase all the manufacturing jobs out of the country , I think we need some control .

Ray, I've personally seen some pretty stupid and unproductive union work rules, and that type of unionism is what being a part owner in the company should be able to change. When the workers have a financial interest in the company aside from just a job their attitudes often change quite a bit, and they begin to work with management.

regards,
Waddie

PeterSibley
07-18-2011, 02:50 AM
Ray, I've personally seen some pretty stupid and unproductive union work rules, and that type of unionism is what being a part owner in the company should be able to change. When the workers have a financial interest in the company aside from just a job their attitudes often change quite a bit, and they begin to work with management.

regards,
Waddie

Worker shareholding ? That would be an interesting variation on capitalism .The only large scale version I've heard of was when the Triumph workers bought out their factory , which was of course damn near bankrupt by then .

Meli
07-18-2011, 05:22 AM
Worker shareholding ? That would be an interesting variation on capitalism .The only large scale version I've heard of was when the Triumph workers bought out their factory , which was of course damn near bankrupt by then .

Fletcher Jones based in Warnambool was one. Think they fell due to cheap overseas labour.

Still, the idea is sound in the right industries.

McMike
07-18-2011, 05:33 AM
You just don't get it . You don't just turn on a business . It takes time to build a company , and taking the money from the "millionaires" the doers in this country , and giving it to the fat cats in government , you mite as well flush it .

Sorry about your luck buddy but the millionaire are not the doers, not by a long shot. If you take all the lower 90% an poof them into oblivion nothing would get done, you'd have a lot of money with no one to pay to "do" the work.

Now that we have this fact established we can deal with the actual problem of wealth distribution.

Paul Pless
07-18-2011, 06:17 AM
Now there's an interesting point .'cept its a lie

Paul Pless
07-18-2011, 06:19 AM
We talk ablout how good things were in the 50s but back then the unions were strong everythin was made here and the very rich paid a lot of Tax. So if we want to have an economy like that again, all we have to do is follo that roadmap.Hate to break it to ya, but the fifties weren't the real heyday of the unions. Also you seem to have a bit of causation/correlation issues. . .

Paul Pless
07-18-2011, 06:20 AM
Worker shareholding ? That would be an interesting variation on capitalism .The only large scale version I've heard of was when the Triumph workers bought out their factory , which was of course damn near bankrupt by then .


An even bigger and more successful venture was when the Harley Davidson employees bought themselves out of AMF induced bankruptcy.

Tylerdurden
07-18-2011, 06:36 AM
Take money from millionaires and give it to organized crime as in Unions and government. Good idea!

elf
07-18-2011, 08:10 AM
Another fruitless thread.

Kevin T
07-18-2011, 08:28 AM
Was not a good part of the 50's prosperity due to a lack of competition, as most of the European economies, and manufacturing bases were destroyed in the war? Couple that with a great worldwide need for every conceivable product, which our non-bombed and still standing factories could provide gave us quite an advantage

Blowtorch
07-18-2011, 11:08 AM
'cept its a lie

If you call me a Liar You had best be able to Prove me wrong Sir.

hokiefan
07-18-2011, 11:33 AM
Was not a good part of the 50's prosperity due to a lack of competition, as most of the European economies, and manufacturing bases were destroyed in the war? Couple that with a great worldwide need for every conceivable product, which our non-bombed and still standing factories could provide gave us quite an advantage

You're right. This created a huge structural advantage for the US which is vastly underestimated by most of us looking back on those days. From what I read the effects lasted well into the '60's. And once you're ahead of the game, you can stay ahead for a long time even if the other guy is gaining on you.

Cheers,

Bobby

S.V. Airlie
07-18-2011, 11:38 AM
Still looking for someone to pay your bills? Malloy has just cut approx. 6,000 state jobs because hehas been forced to by unions.

Kevin T
07-18-2011, 11:49 AM
Still looking for someone to pay your bills? Malloy has just cut approx. 6,000 state jobs because hehas been forced to by unions.

Please clarify.

stevebla
07-18-2011, 04:00 PM
Lets go back to the spending levels of the fifties also!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

hokiefan
07-18-2011, 04:02 PM
Lets go back to the spending levels of the fifties also!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I suspect they weren't as low as you'd like to think. Remember we were rebuilding Japan, Germany, and most of Europe at the time.

Cheers,

Bobby

Kevin T
07-18-2011, 05:41 PM
We were also absorbing a couple of million returning vets into the workforce and assisting with college costs for those returning Vets as part of the GI Bill.

wardd
07-18-2011, 06:15 PM
We were also absorbing a couple of million returning vets into the workforce and assisting with college costs for those returning Vets as part of the GI Bill.

the gi bill made the country what it became

stevebla
07-18-2011, 06:44 PM
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6013/5952646318_1cb803edcb_z.jpg

ccmanuals
07-18-2011, 06:54 PM
I remember when I joined the AF in 1969 the pay was about $120 a month. Yea, let's return to the spending of the 50's and the 60's, that makes alot of sense.

SMARTINSEN
07-18-2011, 06:55 PM
Malloy has just cut approx. 6,000 state jobs because hehas been forced to by unions. I do not believe that that is quite correct, Jamie. Layoffs of state workers in CT may be pending, but have not happened yet, and the state unions are trying to get another chance to vote on the question in an attempt to try to avert them.

stevebla
07-18-2011, 07:30 PM
I remember when I joined the AF in 1969 the pay was about $120 a month. Yea, let's return to the spending of the 50's and the 60's, that makes alot of sense.

I would like a $3,631 Corvette and 18 cent a gallon gas.
Money and Inflation 1950's

To provide an estimate of inflation we have given a guide to the value of $100 US Dollars for the first year in the decade to the equivalent in today's money
If you have $100 Converted from 1950 to 2005 it would be equivalent to $835.41 today

In 1950 a new house cost $8,450.00 and by 1959 was $12,400.00 More House Prices (http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/50s-homes.html)

In 1950 the average income per year was $3,210.00 and by 1959 was $5,010.00

In 1950 a gallon of gas was 18 cents and by 1959 was 25 cents

In 1950 the average cost of new car was $1,510.00 and by 1959 was $2,200.00 More Cars and Car Prices (http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/50scars.html)



A few more prices from the 50's and how much things cost
Chrysler New Yorker $4347

Chevrolet Corvette $3631 1958

ishmael
07-18-2011, 08:22 PM
A friend, Griff, an uncle by marraige, ran a very successful wooden toy business. He didn't get uber rich, but he and his family weren't hurting. He was a Quaker, a religious man. If you've had kids in the last forty years they've probably played with his toys. Simple stuff, ya know horses you could ride on with wheels and a pull rope.

Griff believed strongly in a system of profit sharing. If the company does well you get more money in your paycheck. Direct incentive to make the company run well. It puts at least a part of the honus on the workers, makes them co-owners. Okay, this shaper operation can work better if we change it like this. Stuff like that.

Blowtorch
07-18-2011, 09:33 PM
So why dont we have more operations like that today? Simple. Greed.

Show me five CEOs of Fortune 5oos Today who pass on their bonuses. Dare you to. Today its all about paying the minimum wage while the Suits get bonus after Bonus and To Hell with the ppl on the production line.

Mrleft8
07-18-2011, 09:50 PM
Today its all about paying the minimum wage while the Suits get bonus after Bonus and To Hell with the ppl on the production line.

Mostly true. Most companies I've had experience with want to pay the least they can get away with. That doesn't always equate to minimum wage, but it might as well to the worker making $15 an hour when his union counterpart is making $50 an hour. Trouble is, the widget isn't worth half of what it wholesales for, but everyone has to have one, so the price goes up. The boss makes his profit, the union worker goes home to his artificially price inflated over mortgaged home and finds his highschool sweetheart wife out by the pool. The non-union guy goes home to his modest hme and finds his highschool sweetheart wife out by the clothesline...
Union guy's wages forced to price up, and corporate boss made the profit.

Blowtorch
07-18-2011, 11:49 PM
Seems to me that MGMT/Labor diisputes mostly come becaus MGMT don't want to be told how its goiing to have to be by a bunch of guys with dirt under their fingernails. Make the suits run the punch presses for a week every 6 Mo. and take home that pay and see how things change, maybe that snotty little wimp in HR might see things a little different. And maybe the punch op might see that juggling a Schedule isnt as easy as he thinks.

Waddie
07-19-2011, 12:16 AM
Seems to me that MGMT/Labor diisputes mostly come becaus MGMT don't want to be told how its goiing to have to be by a bunch of guys with dirt under their fingernails. Make the suits run the punch presses for a week every 6 Mo. and take home that pay and see how things change, maybe that snotty little wimp in HR might see things a little different. And maybe the punch op might see that juggling a Schedule isnt as easy as he thinks.

Exactly....!!! For us to return to prosperity we are going to have to abandon our time honored adversarial relationship between labor and management. I think an ownership position, and substantial profit sharing would be a good way to do it, is the way in this 21st century market. We need robust manufacturing to be the foundation of the service and transportation industries. We've learned in other areas that more gets done when everyone has a stake in the process, (and profits).

skuthorp
07-19-2011, 12:56 AM
There was some concern in large public companies that with the explosion of cash workers super funds they might buy enough of a companies shares to be the controlling interest. But banks and finance co's have got into the market too, and even Industry funds want to maximise their profit. But the cash is there if properly directed and the pool is getting bigger all the time. Industry funds have less fees and in the GFC did better than privately run ones.

Paul Pless
07-19-2011, 08:04 AM
Show me five CEOs of Fortune 5oos Today who pass on their bonuses. Dare you to. Today its all about paying the minimum wage while the Suits get bonus after Bonus and To Hell with the ppl on the production line.

Steve Jobs, Vikram Pandit, John Mackey, Eric Schmidt, Donald Graham, Warren Buffet, Ian Cumming, Kenneth Stecher, Jeff Bezoz, Harris Simmons.

I could give you another couple dozen or so if you'd like. Technically John Mackey (Whole Foods) did take a bonus, but his entire compensation package including stock options was only worth $45,969.23. You may throw him out if you like.

Paul Pless
07-19-2011, 08:15 AM
Something like 80 per cnt of all millionairs either inherited it and didnt have to work for it, or are entertainers or athletes. You think Derek Jeter and Oprah can afford to pay in a little more?

We talk ablout how good things were in the 50s but back then the unions were strong everythin was made here and the very rich paid a lot of Tax. So if we want to have an economy like that again, all we have to do is follo that roadmap.


'cept its a lie


If you call me a Liar You had best be able to Prove me wrong Sir.

Actually your facts are exactly backwards; so you're either horribly misinformed, or you're lying. Which is it?

Eighty percent of all American millionaires are first generation wealthy.

Hwyl
07-19-2011, 08:18 AM
Boy, I hate what this forum has become.

Tylerdurden
07-19-2011, 08:35 AM
Boy, I hate what this forum has become.

You have been a cheerleader in the past. Seems the cheap avoidance perfume works wonders for some. :)

Blowtorch
07-19-2011, 12:57 PM
Whoops! My typing got Ahead of my brain, I meant to say Hunderd-millionaires. The VERY wealthy.