The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

[ttwtt78640]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Actually many had to accept lower pay as happens after every recession. How do you think companies have been able to avoid paying for raises for 40 years?

Thank you. That is an interesting graphic yet when (if ever) were US wages tied to profit levels? The simple truth is that wages are tied to replacement costs - what an employer must offer to attract and retain qualified labor.

 

[Conservative]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

LOL You have been called on your point so of course you deflect to Obama. Every single job in this country is subject to the whims and fortunes of the employer who lay you off if their sales or profits go down. But if profits go up you are entitled to a "hearty handshake" at best.

Quite telling how official verifiable results never support your claims. Notice 4 million jobs lost between January 2008 and January 2009, then Obama stimulus February 2009, 4 million jobs lost between January 2009 and December 2009. 1 million of those came back in 2010 but the loss was still 3 million, January 2011. So much for shovel ready jobs and tax revenue as most of those that did come back were part time which I will post for you as well

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Years: 2008 to 2018

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 146378 146156 146086 146132 145908 145737 145532 145203 145076 144802 144100 143369
2009 142152 141640 140707 140656 140248 140009 139901 139492 138818 138432 138659 138013
2010 138438 138581 138751 139297 139241 139141 139179 139438 139396 139119 139044 139301
2011 139250 139394 139639 139586 139624 139384 139524 139942 140183 140368 140826 140902
2012 141584 141858 142036 141899 142206 142391 142292 142291 143044 143431 143333 143330
2013 143292 143362 143316 143635 143882 143999 144264 144326 144418 143537 144479 144778
2014 145122 145161 145673 145680 145825 146267 146401 146522 146752 147411 147391 147597
2015 148113 148100 148175 148505 148788 148806 148830 149136 148810 149254 149486 150135
2016 150576 151005 151229 150978 151048 151164 151484 151687 151815 151939 152126 152233
2017 152076 152511 153064 153161 152892 153250 153511 153471 154324 153846 153917 154021
2018 154430 155215 155178 155181 155474 155576 155965 155542 155962 156562 156795

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12032194
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level - Part-Time for Economic Reasons, All Industries
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Hours at work: 1 to 34 hours
Reasons work not as scheduled: Economic reasons
Worker status/schedules: At work part time
Years: 2008 to 2018

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 4846 4902 4904 5220 5286 5540 5930 5851 6148 6690 7311 8029
2009 8046 8796 9145 8908 9113 9024 8891 9029 8847 8979 9114 9098
2010 8530 8936 9233 9178 8845 8577 8500 8800 9246 8837 8873 8935
2011 8470 8464 8645 8652 8576 8427 8281 8788 9166 8657 8447 8171
2012 8305 8238 7775 7913 8101 8072 8082 7974 8671 8203 8166 7943
2013 8151 8178 7722 7964 7937 8103 8099 7816 7764 7936 7718 7827
2014 7302 7304 7451 7516 7260 7425 7400 7169 7007 7031 6885 6817
2015 6820 6693 6653 6622 6643 6386 6234 6411 6025 5807 6159 6027
2016 5960 6021 6099 6027 6491 5751 5898 5977 5893 5955 5719 5554
2017 5776 5670 5500 5309 5268 5264 5236 5209 5148 4880 4851 4915
2018 4989 5160 5019 4985 4948 4743 4567 4379 4642 4621 4802

 

[iguanaman]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Quite telling how official verifiable results never support your claims. Notice 4 million jobs lost between January 2008 and January 2009, then Obama stimulus February 2009, 4 million jobs lost between January 2009 and December 2009. 1 million of those came back in 2010 but the loss was still 3 million, January 2011. So much for shovel ready jobs and tax revenue as most of those that did come back were part time which I will post for you as well

Since you are changing the topic, at least there was a recession to justify an expensive stimulus. What is the GOP excuse for their multi-trillion $ stimulus/tax cut when unemploymnet was already low and going lower? The tax cut for the wealthy is costing the Govt. far more than anything Obama did.

 

[iguanaman]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Thank you. That is an interesting graphic yet when (if ever) were US wages tied to profit levels? The simple truth is that wages are tied to replacement costs - what an employer must offer to attract and retain qualified labor.

Yes that is correct. Just like it was in the 1920's when all employers "needed" to pay was a few dollars a day. Starvation and homelessness was the alternative that employers had to "compete" with to set wages. Actually many enlightened companies have profit sharing programs it just is not widespread. And in the 1950's and 60's wages kept up with productivity and profits quite well leading to the explosive growth and increases in the standard of living not seen before...or again. That is the irony, wage increases increase sales and growth but greed takes precedence for today's CEO's.

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Thank you. That is an interesting graphic yet when (if ever) were US wages tied to profit levels? The simple truth is that wages are tied to replacement costs - what an employer must offer to attract and retain qualified labor.

Wages are tied to profit levels when the demand for labor is very strong. There needs to be competition for labor, not competition for jobs, before this is true.

The low unemployment numbers we are being fed now aren't truly representative of reality; lots of people simply are not counted, while many others are underemployed. Labor costs for most companies are low.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Yes that is correct. Just like it was in the 1920's when all employers "needed" to pay was a few dollars a day. Starvation and homelessness was the alternative that employers had to "compete" with to set wages. Actually many enlightened companies have profit sharing programs it just is not widespread. And in the 1950's and 60's wages kept up with productivity and profits quite well leading to the explosive growth and increases in the standard of living not seen before...or again. That is the irony, wage increases increase sales and growth but greed takes precedence for today's CEO's.

Productivity is not the same as profit. If I employ a ditch digger and supply them a $10 shovel then they are obviously going to be less productive than if I supply them a $30K backhoe but they also must be more skilled in exchange for working less hard. The question is do I subtract the cost of the supplied tools from their 'productivity' when considering their 'fair' compensation?

 

[Conservative]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Since you are changing the topic, at least there was a recession to justify an expensive stimulus. What is the GOP excuse for their multi-trillion $ stimulus/tax cut when unemploymnet was already low and going lower? The tax cut for the wealthy is costing the Govt. far more than anything Obama did.

There is no question about it, Obama and the radical left loving having people like you making fools of themselves and destroying their credibility. We came out of recession in June, any idea how much of the Obama stimulus was spent, go to recovery.org and find out before giving him too much credit. Allowing people to keep more of what they earn is truly a problem for you and the question is why? Tax cuts aren't an expense and mean people need less of that so called govt. help you want to promote, why such passion?

Tax cut for the wealthy? Really? How does that hurt you, your family, or the country? Question that remains unanswered. Since the tax cuts are costly then you shouldn't have any problem posting the treasury data that shows that. Still waiting. You really are making the left proud but it is your credibility suffering. Have you no pride?

 

[Conservative]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Wages are tied to profit levels when the demand for labor is very strong. There needs to be competition for labor, not competition for jobs, before this is true.

The low unemployment numbers we are being fed now aren't truly representative of reality; lots of people simply are not counted, while many others are underemployed. Labor costs for most companies are low.

It really bothers you with people keeping more of what they earn, how does that hurt you, your family, or the country?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Wages are tied to profit levels when the demand for labor is very strong. There needs to be competition for labor, not competition for jobs, before this is true.

The low unemployment numbers we are being fed now aren't truly representative of reality; lots of people simply are not counted, while many others are underemployed. Labor costs for most companies are low.

Not really - a cashier at a high profit store is typically paid no better than a cashier at a low profit store - they are still paid based on their replacement cost. I will agree that labor replacement costs rise during better economic times (fuller employment) but not that one cashier is 'worth' more than another cashier based on the profit margin of that particular business/location.

 

[iguanaman]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Productivity is not the same as profit. If I employ a ditch digger and supply them a $10 shovel then they are obviously going to be less productive than if I supply them a $30K backhoe but they also must be more skilled in exchange for working less hard. The question is do I subtract the cost of the supplied tools from their 'productivity' when considering their 'fair' compensation?

Productivity is tied directly to profit if a company is run correctly. Why do you think there have been so many record profits produced i the last decade?

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

People are not commodities.

true and slavery is illegal. Labor however is a commodity

 

[iguanaman]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

true and slavery is illegal. Labor however is a commodity

And commodities can be bought and sold like cattle. Workers should not be cattle.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

And commodities can be bought and sold like cattle. Workers should not be cattle.

you are rather confused. when you buy labor you are not buying the person. No wonder you are so mixed up about things. You think that when you hire someone you are buying them like a beef steer.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

And commodities can be bought and sold like cattle. Workers should not be cattle.

When you pay someone to run a cash register, mow a lawn or build a deck then you are not buying them - you are paying them to do a specific job at a mutually agreeable price. Get real.

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

It really bothers you with people keeping more of what they earn, how does that hurt you, your family, or the country?

What really bothers me is that mentally deficient Americans are still allowed to vote.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

When you pay someone to run a cash register, mow a lawn or build a deck then you are not buying them - you are paying them to do a specific job at a mutually agreeable price. Get real.

So shouldn’t workers be allowed to collectively bargain with their employers?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

So shouldn’t workers be allowed to collectively bargain with their employers?

Sure - why not? They could agree among themselves to work only for wages of $50/hour (or more). That, of course, would require some means of preventing "scabs" from taking job offers for less than that. How would you suggest that they make that work?

 

[Individual]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

So shouldn’t workers be allowed to collectively bargain with their employers?

They do, but I've always done much better bargaining for myself, and often was able to bring along a few others with me.

 

[Conservative]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

What really bothers me is that mentally deficient Americans are still allowed to vote.

Couldn't agree more

https://www.google.com/search?q=oba....69i57j0l3.20101j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[Individual]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Sure - why not? They could agree among themselves to work only for wages of $50/hour (or more). That, of course, would require some means of preventing "scabs" from taking job offers for less than that. How would you suggest that they make that work?

Should others be prevented from working for a wage they feel acceptable?

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

What really bothers me is that mentally deficient Americans are still allowed to vote.

yeah look at all the dems who voted for Maxine waters or that idiot in NYC who has become a meme generator

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

So shouldn’t workers be allowed to collectively bargain with their employers?

sure and employers should have the right to fire such people too.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Should others be prevented from working for a wage they feel acceptable?

A determination of "should" is purely a matter of opinion. The federal law only prevents paying less than the minimum wage (MW) per hour but many states can (and do) have higher MW laws.

I believe that in some states the employer may also require that you be a union member to be hired (closed shop) and, as part of that union membership conract, you must agree to accept only "scale" (union approved?) wages.

I was hoping to get a response to my reply question and expecting the mention of closed shop or "living wage" laws. Other than by force of law I can see no way of forcing an employer to offer/pay any particular amount.

 

[Individual]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

A determination of "should" is purely a matter of opinion. The federal law only prevents paying less than the minimum wage (MW) per hour but many states can (and do) have higher MW laws.

I believe that in some states the employer may also require that you be a union member to be hired (closed shop) and, as part of that union membership conract, you must agree to accept only "scale" (union approved?) wages.

I was hoping to get a response to my reply question and expecting the mention of closed shop or "living wage" laws. Other than by force of law I can see no way of forcing an employer to offer/pay any particular amount.

Some jobs simply are not meant to pay a 'living' wage, and those who do them usually have another job or are in school looking to earn some spending money. Sweeping the floor and taking out the trash or many similar jobs in a small business should noty be expected to pay a living wage, provide a pension, health care, sick leave, paid vacations, maternity leave, etc., but are necessary and more plentiful when government leaves them to be filled by consent of the employee and employer on wages.
Large businesses and corporations generally pay their career employees more than adequately, or union negotiated wages and benefits.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: The "Tax The Rich" Delusion on the Left

Some jobs simply are not meant to pay a 'living' wage, and those who do them usually have another job or are in school looking to earn some spending money. Sweeping the floor and taking out the trash or many similar jobs in a small business should noty be expected to pay a living wage, provide a pension, health care, sick leave, paid vacations, maternity leave, etc., but are necessary and more plentiful when government leaves them to be filled by consent of the employee and employer on wages.
Large businesses and corporations generally pay their career employees more than adequately, or union negotiated wages and benefits.

The situation is more complicated when you consider the effects of the many "safety net" programs. Two people doing the same job, for the same employer, at the same hourly pay are often getting paid (compensated?) differently if one of them qualifies for "safety net" assistance.

If a household requires $X/month in order to meet living expenses then what portion of that $X comes from a meager paycheck (or two) and what portion is added or made unnecessary by "safety net" assistance makes little difference. We are often reminded that a significant percentage of low wage workers (e.g. Walmart workers) receive "safety net" assistance. That is simply a direct subsidy for low wage workers allowing the employer to offer less than a "living wage" and still attract and retain qualified labor since the balance (for many of those low wage workers from "needy households") is made available from society (the taxpayers).