President Obama Raising Minimum Wage
LOL

Krypton, KY

#186 May 8, 2013
Sandy LJ Beach wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah right, and I "anonymously" make 10 million dollars a year.
$17/hour is not exactly setting the world on fire. I would say that's about average for Costco. But they're a very lean company. They do well.
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#187 May 8, 2013
LOL wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, never bought a mortgage backed security. I did, however, form a partnership back in 2005 to start buying houses when the SHTF. Any fool could see that coming. People getting $400,000 pre-approved loans on $50,000 income and they wanted to spend it. I don't feel sorry for any of them. They spent the money now they should have to pay it back, but they won't. The government always steps in and bails fools out. It's paid off very well for my group so far and I suspect it will for the next five years.
You're right, I hedge, and it does contribute to overall wealth because it helps assure those people who should never be out there taking a risk with their money anyway, that the risk has been mitigated. Nothing wrong with hedging. I imagine most of us do it just in daily living.
You have a casino view of gambling. Very narrow, so I suspect that's how you think. Black and white with no imaginative or original thought and simply a parrot of those you envy and worship. You need to get a broader view of the world, you would be surprised. Yeah, I know but if I only knew how high up you were and you could blow my mind and all that BS. Blah, blah, blah. But at least apparently you do work. That's one thing.
Any fool could see it coming? You should have known for sure since it's your industry that made it that way. You pushed it up as far as it could go. And no, most people didn't see it coming. They simply showed their finances to a financial institution and it was the financial institution that said "hell yes, we'll give you 125% of this bogus inflated value thing" ! I don't call normal, everyday people who might be highly skilled in computer science but not Wall St., people who are suppose to be financial wizards. I know plenty of successful business people that have little clue when it comes to actual money management. People pay people to do jobs for them. Brokers were banking commissions left and right and everyone else up and down that ladder. It's just another case of the wealthy scre-ing the little guy.

Excuse me but I doubt you'd have formed a Partnership 2 yrs. or more before the collapse. But let me take another wild guess with this elementary, stupid mind of mine. I'll be you showed losses for 2005 and 2006. How close am I? And I'll bet your 1065 was a pitiful sight don't you?

No, I'm not narrow-minded regarding my theory of casinos. The rich get richer, the poor poorer. But I will say that's one industry that people get what they desserve. We can mutually agree the owners, shareholders, partners...domestic, foreign, limited, general or blind, make a Hell of alot of money!

You're right about one thing. Yes, I do work and I work plenty. It just so happens I have the major control of my hours.

Here's what I love about you Hedgers. How about converting that margin interest to capital gains? lmao Better yet, let's go figure out these 475(f) elections! Lord give me strength! And you think I'm not worldly? lmao
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#188 May 8, 2013
LOL wrote:
<quoted text>
Tough Cookie = Blowhard. You love to project your personality. You probably can't stop yourself. Of course, you don't really know what that means. It's not a good thing.
I thought you didn't live in the city. That's what you said before. You said you did not live in the city but you could see it. You need to broaden your views. Chicago is like all other cites, a microcosm here another one there. It's not special. It's dirty, impersonal and about broke. I wonder if it goes broke will they just close the gate on the Skyway. That would be great.
The world is at everybody's fingertips now. What you left behind exists equally where you live now. If you only knew. But you never will.
Here's how I perceive different parts of the country....more concrete and different size buildings. If Chicago is so dirty and impersonal, I doubt you have a need to come here...unless you're headed to UBS or somewhere? Hell, maybe even Edwards gives you some slack and trusts you to go to Jackson Blvd.! I doubt the Skyway will close anytime soon, but you can dream.

I am aware that it's pretty much the same all over. You do understand London didn't use to have much except a Rexall Drug and JB Dicks. lol But just think now, you have the world's largest downtown courthouse that thinks so highly of itself, it spreads to the sidewalk, smack dab in the middle of all the banks and lawyers! One Hell of a downtown experience!
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#189 May 8, 2013
LOL wrote:
<quoted text>
$17/hour is not exactly setting the world on fire. I would say that's about average for Costco. But they're a very lean company. They do well.
We agree on something at least. But $17/Hr. you now are saying doesn't set the world on fire, yet you are against minimum wage law and any other employee advantage. My goodness. Go figger!

Tell ya what ole' hedger, let's give all people working for minimum wage $17/Hr. of that ole' lousy money.

Yes, Costco does quite well. They aren't Sam's...not even close.
LOL

Krypton, KY

#191 May 9, 2013
SpeakUp wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's how I perceive different parts of the country....more concrete and different size buildings. If Chicago is so dirty and impersonal, I doubt you have a need to come here...unless you're headed to UBS or somewhere? Hell, maybe even Edwards gives you some slack and trusts you to go to Jackson Blvd.! I doubt the Skyway will close anytime soon, but you can dream.
I am aware that it's pretty much the same all over. You do understand London didn't use to have much except a Rexall Drug and JB Dicks. lol But just think now, you have the world's largest downtown courthouse that thinks so highly of itself, it spreads to the sidewalk, smack dab in the middle of all the banks and lawyers! One Hell of a downtown experience!
Banks only show up when there's money. The lawyers amaze me but London has more courts than any other City in Kentucky so I guess that's why. I think I remember Rexall drug and JB Dicks. Mostly I remember there used to be a little restaurant at the north end of town. Yes it was a small town and still is, but it's close to home, and the living is clean and relatively inexpensive. For what I do, I don't need a downtown office anywhere. I don't need to travel much either. I used to live on the road, or I guess in the air, but not much anymore. Last time I was in Chicago was last November. One day and that was enough for me.
LOL

Krypton, KY

#192 May 9, 2013
SpeakUp wrote:
<quoted text>
We agree on something at least. But $17/Hr. you now are saying doesn't set the world on fire, yet you are against minimum wage law and any other employee advantage. My goodness. Go figger!
Tell ya what ole' hedger, let's give all people working for minimum wage $17/Hr. of that ole' lousy money.
Yes, Costco does quite well. They aren't Sam's...not even close.
What I believe is not contradictory. Minimum wage is artificial, it should never occur. But if Costco chooses to pay its employees $17/hour, then that's good because the assumption is management makes decisions to increase the wealth of the owners (not my words, that's textbook accounting and finance). That's their job. So, they must have a reason to pay what they do and the employees must have the skills to deserve it. Supply and demand pure and simple.

But you've made my point only you won't see it. You jump on "let's raise minimum wage to $17/hour". Where does that put the average Costco worker? In case you can't figure that out he/she would then make minimum wage and would either demand more and get it, and when you apply that to everybody means jobs lost in the global economy. Or they would go somewhere where they could make just as much and do very little with no responsibility. Who wins? Answer is easy. Nobody in the United States.

“Walk With Me in Hell”

Since: Apr 13

Hell, Norway

#193 May 9, 2013
LOL wrote:
<quoted text>
What I believe is not contradictory. Minimum wage is artificial, it should never occur. But if Costco chooses to pay its employees $17/hour, then that's good because the assumption is management makes decisions to increase the wealth of the owners (not my words, that's textbook accounting and finance). That's their job. So, they must have a reason to pay what they do and the employees must have the skills to deserve it. Supply and demand pure and simple.
But you've made my point only you won't see it. You jump on "let's raise minimum wage to $17/hour". Where does that put the average Costco worker? In case you can't figure that out he/she would then make minimum wage and would either demand more and get it, and when you apply that to everybody means jobs lost in the global economy. Or they would go somewhere where they could make just as much and do very little with no responsibility. Who wins? Answer is easy. Nobody in the United States.
$17/hour for being a CSR at Costco sounds a little far fetched. I wonder if the data she was reading was including cost of healthcare and benefits into the hourly wage estimate.
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#194 May 9, 2013
_satan_64 wrote:
<quoted text>$17/hour for being a CSR at Costco sounds a little far fetched. I wonder if the data she was reading was including cost of healthcare and benefits into the hourly wage estimate.
I wouldn't downplay the job of a CSR. They work very hard and are on their feet, on concrete, their entire shift minus breaks. That's like downplaying the job of a waiter or waitress who works extremely hard. They go home and have to soak their feet. Been there done that many years ago. It's not easy. I would suggest we look at positions abit unfairly in this nation. An executive can sit behind a cherry desk, prop his feet up, look at the numbers,slap someone on the back smoking a Cuban cigar and say "job well done", head out to the golf course, on company expense for the rest of day and go home when one of the mistresses calls him in for supper and earn $10M/Yr. That is, if he hadn't decided to take one of the other mistresses out to the Ritz for dinner, on company expense.

I understand that Aldi's also pays a fair wage.
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#195 May 9, 2013
LOL wrote:
<quoted text>
Banks only show up when there's money. The lawyers amaze me but London has more courts than any other City in Kentucky so I guess that's why. I think I remember Rexall drug and JB Dicks. Mostly I remember there used to be a little restaurant at the north end of town. Yes it was a small town and still is, but it's close to home, and the living is clean and relatively inexpensive. For what I do, I don't need a downtown office anywhere. I don't need to travel much either. I used to live on the road, or I guess in the air, but not much anymore. Last time I was in Chicago was last November. One day and that was enough for me.
There were 2 at the northern end. On the main drag there, it was the Hob Nob (although I believe it changed names thereafter), and I believe there was one on the outskirts there past LHS called Chadwells. Chicago is abit scarry to those who aren't use to the hustle and bustle. Where were you downtown?

I doubt London has more courts than any other city, but it may have per capita. I just find it interesting driving through there. It's like a Beverly Hills..more banks and lawyers seemingly than people. lol The only crowd they are going to bring into Main St. there are the criminals coming in and out of court. It's no tourism attraction that might could bring some money into that town. The way I see it, the main attraction there is Walmart's superstore. ha

You sound about as old as me. I probably know you.
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#196 May 9, 2013
LOL wrote:
<quoted text>
What I believe is not contradictory. Minimum wage is artificial, it should never occur. But if Costco chooses to pay its employees $17/hour, then that's good because the assumption is management makes decisions to increase the wealth of the owners (not my words, that's textbook accounting and finance). That's their job. So, they must have a reason to pay what they do and the employees must have the skills to deserve it. Supply and demand pure and simple.
But you've made my point only you won't see it. You jump on "let's raise minimum wage to $17/hour". Where does that put the average Costco worker? In case you can't figure that out he/she would then make minimum wage and would either demand more and get it, and when you apply that to everybody means jobs lost in the global economy. Or they would go somewhere where they could make just as much and do very little with no responsibility. Who wins? Answer is easy. Nobody in the United States.
If paying an employee a decent wage is a materialistic management thought, then why doesn't others follow suit?

If you go back in history, considering your thought that wage is artificial, then you'd take us back to the days of slavery when they worked for free. Wage increase might be somewhat artificial, but not totally. Let's not forget to melt into your equation, executives giving up their $15M/Yr. Talk about artificial? That's about as phony as it gets.

IF you kept employee wages stale, and corporate America increased their prices (which by the way, payroll isn't the only thing that persuades them to do that), I'd hate then to look at the epidome to the gap between rich and poor. In my opinion, corporate America would like nothing better. They are doing a pretty good job of that now. When the wealthy let go of the moths, our country does better. That's dangerous in reality, This past year for example, due to the mass dumping gains taking advantage of 2012 over 2013, increased the govt.'s revenue substantially...that along with the economy itself and market.

So, LOL, are you willing to give up your supposed flat commission rate for mitigation? I doubt it. It's easy to talk, but I doubt you'd want to do that nor would I expect you to. Even though you probably do most of your work from home, you I suspect are working FOR a firm. You have to have the backing we know to support your license.

I don't care to discuss banks because I have no use for them. What they did in the housing crisis was, in my personal opinion, totally immoral. I was happy, however, to see some lost their address buying bogus Enron properties. It's nice to see the tables turned occasionally. And those mortgage backed securities was beyond a laugh. I wouldn't be surprised if the banker's dogs didn't make money off that scam.
LOL

Krypton, KY

#197 May 9, 2013
SpeakUp wrote:
<quoted text>
There were 2 at the northern end. On the main drag there, it was the Hob Nob (although I believe it changed names thereafter), and I believe there was one on the outskirts there past LHS called Chadwells. Chicago is abit scarry to those who aren't use to the hustle and bustle. Where were you downtown?
I doubt London has more courts than any other city, but it may have per capita. I just find it interesting driving through there. It's like a Beverly Hills..more banks and lawyers seemingly than people. lol The only crowd they are going to bring into Main St. there are the criminals coming in and out of court. It's no tourism attraction that might could bring some money into that town. The way I see it, the main attraction there is Walmart's superstore. ha
You sound about as old as me. I probably know you.
I don't know for sure about the courts. The Lexington Herald listed cities with the most courts and London was #1. Something to do with Child Court, Family Court, and a couple of financial courts mixed in with the normal fare.

Pretty much right about the rest. I guess London's main attraction may be Wal-Mart. I stay out of there personally.
LOL

Krypton, KY

#198 May 9, 2013
SpeakUp wrote:
<quoted text>
If paying an employee a decent wage is a materialistic management thought, then why doesn't others follow suit?
If you go back in history, considering your thought that wage is artificial, then you'd take us back to the days of slavery when they worked for free. Wage increase might be somewhat artificial, but not totally. Let's not forget to melt into your equation, executives giving up their $15M/Yr. Talk about artificial? That's about as phony as it gets.
IF you kept employee wages stale, and corporate America increased their prices (which by the way, payroll isn't the only thing that persuades them to do that), I'd hate then to look at the epidome to the gap between rich and poor. In my opinion, corporate America would like nothing better. They are doing a pretty good job of that now. When the wealthy let go of the moths, our country does better. That's dangerous in reality, This past year for example, due to the mass dumping gains taking advantage of 2012 over 2013, increased the govt.'s revenue substantially...that along with the economy itself and market.
So, LOL, are you willing to give up your supposed flat commission rate for mitigation? I doubt it. It's easy to talk, but I doubt you'd want to do that nor would I expect you to. Even though you probably do most of your work from home, you I suspect are working FOR a firm. You have to have the backing we know to support your license.
I don't care to discuss banks because I have no use for them. What they did in the housing crisis was, in my personal opinion, totally immoral. I was happy, however, to see some lost their address buying bogus Enron properties. It's nice to see the tables turned occasionally. And those mortgage backed securities was beyond a laugh. I wouldn't be surprised if the banker's dogs didn't make money off that scam.
Management's #1 job is to make money for the owners whether that's closely held or millions of stockholders. That's basic stuff. Their #1 motive may be to make money for themselves. So, whatever they do should have a profit motive and I suspect that those who pay premium wages get premium skills. The girl at Wendy's that has a problem counting $0.46 in change probably wouldn't make it there. Minimum wage is a great thing for her.

I don't think wage is artificial. Minimum wage is artificial. Free labor through slavery is artificial in an economic sense. But you can't compare a government mandated wage to a captive group of people forced to work, die, or be sold down the river.

I see no problem with what a corporation chooses to pay its CEO. But the motive should still be profit for the owners. Some of the salaries I find to be outrageous but I'm not there with all the information that was used to make that decision. Whatever Ford pays the Boeing guy, it's probably worth every penny.

Wages should not be stale. They should rise, but the government should not put a floor or ceiling on wages. The employee should get the skills to demand more money.

The only firm I work for is my own. I don't charge commission because all I sell is knowledge and skills. I identify risks and mitigate them to the extent possible and desired. It pays well, but all it's for is to make sure a company does not get blindsided. Mitigating risks has the effect of mitigating returns. The company would often do better without the mitigation, but owners are often risk averse.

A lot of banks are still hurting and at risk. They're carrying distressed property as unimpaired so they don't have to take a write down loss. If they lost, it doesn't bother me. They took the risk. I feel the same way about the Madoff issue. I have no sympathy. The people who invested with him were simply greedy. Greed got them.

“Walk With Me in Hell”

Since: Apr 13

Hell, Norway

#199 May 9, 2013
SpeakUp wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn't downplay the job of a CSR. They work very hard and are on their feet, on concrete, their entire shift minus breaks. That's like downplaying the job of a waiter or waitress who works extremely hard. They go home and have to soak their feet. Been there done that many years ago. It's not easy. I would suggest we look at positions abit unfairly in this nation. An executive can sit behind a cherry desk, prop his feet up, look at the numbers,slap someone on the back smoking a Cuban cigar and say "job well done", head out to the golf course, on company expense for the rest of day and go home when one of the mistresses calls him in for supper and earn $10M/Yr. That is, if he hadn't decided to take one of the other mistresses out to the Ritz for dinner, on company expense.
I understand that Aldi's also pays a fair wage.
Me thinks you misunderstood, I wasn`t downplaying the job of CSR, Hell in this day and age a job is a job and be damn glad to have it. It was the 17 per hour that had me stumped, because McDonalds in larger cities like Cincy, Indianapolis and Louisville are only starting their employees out at $9 to $10 per hour. Walmart/Sams is a much larger company than Costco, they have great benefits for their fulltime people, but only start them out at minimum wages, unless they have prior sales experience, and that is in the same towns i mentioned.

Had a GF that worked at Aldi, she made almost twelve dollars per hour, and that was 6 or 7 years ago.
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#200 May 9, 2013
LOL wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know for sure about the courts. The Lexington Herald listed cities with the most courts and London was #1. Something to do with Child Court, Family Court, and a couple of financial courts mixed in with the normal fare.
Pretty much right about the rest. I guess London's main attraction may be Wal-Mart. I stay out of there personally.
I'm sure they most likely were talking per capita. There's no way it would be true otherwise.

London is a cute town to just breeze through. Problem is, the town really doesn't offer anything except legal guidance for criminals. In my personal opinion, they handed that town over to the conglomerants. The height of a trip through Main would be to stop at Weaver's for a chili dog. ha But, I'm sure someone's making a buck.
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#201 May 9, 2013
_satan_64 wrote:
<quoted text>Me thinks you misunderstood, I wasn`t downplaying the job of CSR, Hell in this day and age a job is a job and be damn glad to have it. It was the 17 per hour that had me stumped, because McDonalds in larger cities like Cincy, Indianapolis and Louisville are only starting their employees out at $9 to $10 per hour. Walmart/Sams is a much larger company than Costco, they have great benefits for their fulltime people, but only start them out at minimum wages, unless they have prior sales experience, and that is in the same towns i mentioned.
Had a GF that worked at Aldi, she made almost twelve dollars per hour, and that was 6 or 7 years ago.
You're right, Satan. Aldi's indeed did pay that some years ago and with decent benefits as well.

Costco caters to somewhat more of a middle class to upscale audience. Their stores are nicer, cleaner...the whole 9 yds. They simple have abit of a different clientel.

Walmart, yes I've heard, starts a minimum wage. You may not be a fan of the Unions, but Chicago got $1/hr. more out of them here. Our minimum wage I believe is $8.25 and they got $9.25. The Unions did have to concede alot, but Chicago needed the jobs and Walmart's a tough negotiater. Personally, it's not one of shopping places. I'm more the Costco, Target person when it comes to that line of stuff.
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#202 May 9, 2013
LOL wrote:
<quoted text>
Management's #1 job is to make money for the owners whether that's closely held or millions of stockholders. That's basic stuff. Their #1 motive may be to make money for themselves. So, whatever they do should have a profit motive and I suspect that those who pay premium wages get premium skills. The girl at Wendy's that has a problem counting $0.46 in change probably wouldn't make it there. Minimum wage is a great thing for her.
I don't think wage is artificial. Minimum wage is artificial. Free labor through slavery is artificial in an economic sense. But you can't compare a government mandated wage to a captive group of people forced to work, die, or be sold down the river.
I see no problem with what a corporation chooses to pay its CEO. But the motive should still be profit for the owners. Some of the salaries I find to be outrageous but I'm not there with all the information that was used to make that decision. Whatever Ford pays the Boeing guy, it's probably worth every penny.
Wages should not be stale. They should rise, but the government should not put a floor or ceiling on wages. The employee should get the skills to demand more money.
The only firm I work for is my own. I don't charge commission because all I sell is knowledge and skills. I identify risks and mitigate them to the extent possible and desired. It pays well, but all it's for is to make sure a company does not get blindsided. Mitigating risks has the effect of mitigating returns. The company would often do better without the mitigation, but owners are often risk averse.
A lot of banks are still hurting and at risk. They're carrying distressed property as unimpaired so they don't have to take a write down loss. If they lost, it doesn't bother me. They took the risk. I feel the same way about the Madoff issue. I have no sympathy. The people who invested with him were simply greedy. Greed got them.
I realize management's #1 job is to make money. With that said, then their jobs should be incentive based. I am totally opposed to their upfront contracts without incentives, and, I'm opposed to their stock option packages given as part of their "compensation", yet at journey's end, it's treated as 'capital income" when it should not be. Hillary had a problem with that as well concerning this issue. I'm surprised you'd agree a CEO desserves a $10M guaranteed package, win or lose. With that, I'm being generous. I don't believe any man or woman under the sun, regardless of expertise, is entitled to the kind of money they earn. I don't need to read their credentials. When CEO's and executives siphen off that kind of money, coupled with the mega expense accounts, the finale is, it actually hurts jobs. Many workers could have jobs ...common jobs, given half that amount.

I don't put as much emphasis on "skills" as I do how hard a person can work. I agree you've got to have the higher intellect at the top for business matters no doubt (minus most of t hat $10M). Paying executives that kind of money is precisely something that drives up inflation. It costs a company alot of money to hire that "skilled" person, which they have to make up for with increase in business. That has to stop somewhere. My Lord. Anotehr reason I say they should either factually show an increase in business OR they don't get the high salary. I can't figure out why some feel it's ok to pay a $10-$15M executive that kind of money and not consider it a huge cost in doing business that drives costs up, yet complain about minimum wage increasing 50 cents and say that creates higher costs.

People who work at fast food joints and those kind of places aren't always unskilled. Some simply can't find a job elsewhere and take what they can get in the interim. I don't downplay people working in jobs like that because it's hard work. When in the name of God will some people start feeling credit is due as well to hard working unskilled people.
Whoopee

Melvin, KY

#203 May 9, 2013
You can't hurt the large corporations without also hurting the small businesses. Just be careful to not throw the baby out with the bath water.
LOL

Krypton, KY

#204 May 9, 2013
SpeakUp wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure they most likely were talking per capita. There's no way it would be true otherwise.
London is a cute town to just breeze through. Problem is, the town really doesn't offer anything except legal guidance for criminals. In my personal opinion, they handed that town over to the conglomerants. The height of a trip through Main would be to stop at Weaver's for a chili dog. ha But, I'm sure someone's making a buck.
I looked for per capita, but that's not what it said. The article gave the explanation, but truthfully I wasn't interested enough to memorize it. It was a pure number count. Now, it could have been wrong. I wasn't interested enough to research it either.
LOL

Krypton, KY

#205 May 9, 2013
SpeakUp wrote:
<quoted text>
I realize management's #1 job is to make money. With that said, then their jobs should be incentive based. I am totally opposed to their upfront contracts without incentives, and, I'm opposed to their stock option packages given as part of their "compensation", yet at journey's end, it's treated as 'capital income" when it should not be. Hillary had a problem with that as well concerning this issue. I'm surprised you'd agree a CEO desserves a $10M guaranteed package, win or lose. With that, I'm being generous. I don't believe any man or woman under the sun, regardless of expertise, is entitled to the kind of money they earn. I don't need to read their credentials. When CEO's and executives siphen off that kind of money, coupled with the mega expense accounts, the finale is, it actually hurts jobs. Many workers could have jobs ...common jobs, given half that amount.
I don't put as much emphasis on "skills" as I do how hard a person can work. I agree you've got to have the higher intellect at the top for business matters no doubt (minus most of t hat $10M). Paying executives that kind of money is precisely something that drives up inflation. It costs a company alot of money to hire that "skilled" person, which they have to make up for with increase in business. That has to stop somewhere. My Lord. Anotehr reason I say they should either factually show an increase in business OR they don't get the high salary. I can't figure out why some feel it's ok to pay a $10-$15M executive that kind of money and not consider it a huge cost in doing business that drives costs up, yet complain about minimum wage increasing 50 cents and say that creates higher costs.
People who work at fast food joints and those kind of places aren't always unskilled. Some simply can't find a job elsewhere and take what they can get in the interim. I don't downplay people working in jobs like that because it's hard work. When in the name of God will some people start feeling credit is due as well to hard working unskilled people.
I didn't say I agree with the high COO salaries, I just don't have a problem with whatever the board chooses to pay him/her. The assumption is they're worth it. If you look at a car company, specifically Ford, the last I read was that Mulally made around $26 million. When you look at how he's turned Ford around and the billions he's made the stockholder's, his salary is irrelevant. I have stock in Ford, I think he's worth what they pay him. Overall, it probably does not drive prices up very much.

So, using Ford as an example, they employ roughly 250,000 people worldwide. Give each a $0.50 raise per hour and that's approximately $25 million. Of course that does not include union benefits and other payroll related item and the fact that you would insult them by giving them a 50 cent raise.

But other payoffs to COO's and CEO's seem ridiculous to me as do golden parachutes, but I'm not there with all the facts and circumstances. So, if a board chooses to pay a Chief Operating Officer, I assume they've done so in order to make more money. I may also come to the conclusion that in my opinion the person is an idiot and choose not to buy that particular stock.

Credit is due to hard working unskilled people who work hard for a living. More credit would be due if they would become more skilled and they would get more pay for it. I realize everybody can't do that but that's the way the country is, and minimum wage will stay minimum wage regardless the number. All I'm saying in people should do something for themselves and quit waiting on the government.
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#207 May 9, 2013
LOL - I agree he's done a great job with Ford, with help, but again I personally do not feel anyone, no matter what, is worth that kind of money.$26M can't be that irrelevant to Ford. Sometimes, we are a victim of circumstance or in the right place at the right time. We come out smelling like a rose, while in fact, natural causes was the factor without the $26M. I know CEO's who have gone from one company and it wind up in the black very well, turn around go to another company and it heads downward or bottoms out. I have seen this happen over and over again at plenty of businesses that might not be a Ford, but well endowed.

Truthfully, I'm not interested in how many jobs Ford offers worldwide. I am interested in what Ford creates within America.

Just think, LOL. Ford could give 250,000 people a raise and it not be anymore than ONE single CEO earns. They certainly can't afford to do it when they have a CEO they feel is worth $26M. It's purely ridiculous. It's like a pro ball player. Some of those guys now are getting $10M/yr., can't write their names, can go through a season under that contract and not score a point and the consumer can't even take their kids to a game because of the ticket prices. Again I repeat...and you're concerned about putting extra food on the table of a minimum wage employee for fear it'll raise prices. There is NO way you eliminate the highly compensated CEO's from the world of inflation.

LOL, you don't have to be there at the board meeting to hear facts and circumstances to use your common sense.

I agree. People should strive as hard as they can and have goals in life. Yes, I agree. However, some are simply incapable. As far as the abuse, that's been going on for many many years. But here's the problem I have as well. As long as companies are paying people such low wages, it FORCES those people to find govt. supplements to exist. I know small business and I know precisely what they do. If that employee knows he can file at yearend and collect $5-$7000, that boss is doing him a favor isn't it? There's got to be a balance here. Employers know precisely what to pay and have them reep a yearend govt. harvest. Trust me on that. Corporate America is intentionally throwing a burden off on the federal govt.

If all things were cherry and worked like your economic theories, it might work to a degree. This is 21st century and employers are not 1950's thinkers. They pay like the 1970's or 80's, but think 21st century greed. It simply does not work your way any more. I see it constantly.

But I do agree those who abuse and are too lazy to work, we should just put some loadstone in their rears and dump them in the Pacific. It's generational. But we must put some blame on the Federal and State workers who pass this stuff through. Someone has to or it never gets to it's resting place. At the same time, corporate America are among the biggest abusers. You and I may have positions similar, positions that intertwine (we do). You see your side from your experience. I see mine from mine and be assured, the end ball is in my lap.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Keavy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 3 min usa 151,695
Affair 10 min Fubr 7
Mccarty rentals in london 25 min Curiousrenter 4
A Typical Republican Day 50 min Stop Censoring Me 1
getting dumped 52 min Nonlib 4
Trump says he will secure US borders with "goat... 54 min Nonlib 1
Is the "rambler" back? Or is that Shannon????? 56 min Nonlib 9

Keavy Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Keavy Mortgages