Why government should always have more power than private business.

[Len Larson]

The slave is property, and owned by the master. The slave cannot "go be a slave for someone else." That isn't even what we are telling you. We are telling you to own yourself. You are the one saying that a corporate master is so awful that you long for new chains from the Government instead.

This bears repeating. So long as the OP is convinced he is the property of someone else and is dependent on them for his welfare, he can never be free.

 

[angelatc]

While unemployment is high? While nobody is hiring? What if every business treats their workers poorly? That's not a legitimate option. It's like saying to a slave, "well, go be a slave for someone else then!"

Some people are too stupid to live.

75% of the people that want to work are currently working. That's a pretty big majority.

There are indeed companies hiring. Lots of them.

If every business in the whole world decided to treat their workers poorly you could start a business and treat them better. You'd get the best of the best from the labor pool.

 

[angelatc]

This bears repeating. So long as the OP is convinced he is the property of someone else and is dependent on them for his welfare, he can never be free.

Yep. That's our public schools at work. We're all victims now.

 

[The_Honorable_Doug]

Ok, so, it seems to me that most of the evidence supplied in these posts is severely flawed. You cannot say "well I have a good job so..." or "these few people were poor but now they are rich so..." Also, I'm talking about analyzing society as it is, not as we would want it to be. And the truth is that working people are NOT in positions to leisurely pick and choose employers as many of you seem to suggest (this is a luxury enjoyed by the upper classes, which, perhaps, maybe most of the members here belong to.)

Overall, though, I find it interesting that in whereas in government, you get one equal vote and community discussion/input, and in a business, where you take orders from a boss all day and have half your paycheck stolen to the investor's profit, somehow it's the government that "enslaves" you. Only in America...!

 

[BattleFlag1776]

But only because they have corrupted government. Workers could just as easily seize the government for themselves (through elections or revolution or buying influence). Government is fundamentally an empty field. It's where we come together to make public decisions. Today, however, powerful businesses, giant corporations, banks, etc, run the government.

You left out the Unions. Since you are using Caterpillar as your example you need to also discuss the concessions made by the AFL-CIO and the IAM and why.

 

[The_Honorable_Doug]

http://www.epi.org/publication/job-seekers-ratio-improves-highest-rate/

There are way more people looking for jobs than there are jobs available:

"The total number of unemployed workers in December was 13.1 million (unemployment is from the Current Population Survey). Therefore the ratio of unemployed workers to job openings was 3.9-to-1 in December, an improvement from the November ratio of 4.3-to-1."

"To put this figure in context, it’s useful to note that the highest this ratio ever got in the early 2000s downturn was 2.8-to-1, and in December 2000, the month the JOLTS survey began eleven years ago, the ratio was 1.1-to-1. While the job seekers ratio has been slowly improving since its peak of 6.9-to-1 in the summer of 2009, today’s data release marks three years and three months that the ratio has been above 3-to-1. A job seekers ratio of more than 3-to-1 means that for more than two out of every three unemployed workers, there simply are no jobs. In December, there were 9.7 million more unemployed workers than job openings. Furthermore, the lack of job openings is in no way limited to particular industries such as construction—unemployed workers dramatically outnumber job openings across every major industry."

 

[angelatc]

Ok, so, it seems to me that most of the evidence supplied in these posts is severely flawed. You cannot say "well I have a good job so..." or "these few people were poor but now they are rich so..." Also, I'm talking about analyzing society as it is, not as we would want it to be. And the truth is that working people are NOT in positions to leisurely pick and choose employers as many of you seem to suggest (this is a luxury enjoyed by the upper classes, which, perhaps, maybe most of the members here belong to.)

Overall, though, I find it interesting that in whereas in government, you get one equal vote and community discussion/input, and in a business, where you take orders from a boss all day and have half your paycheck stolen to the investor's profit, somehow it's the government that "enslaves" you. Only in America...!

You don't know anything about us. I haven't worked in 10 years, and am filling out applications like crazy. My husband lost his job several months ago, and is definitely still looking too.

Job hopping at will is definitely easier at the lower income levels. The higher the income, the less chairs are available to fill, idiot.

I posted links to studies put out by universities and the government, but that evidence is severely flawed? Where's your evidence, big boy?

 

[The_Honorable_Doug]

http://www.epi.org/publication/job-seekers-ratio-improves-highest-rate/

There are way more people looking for jobs than there are jobs available:

"The total number of unemployed workers in December was 13.1 million (unemployment is from the Current Population Survey). Therefore the ratio of unemployed workers to job openings was 3.9-to-1 in December, an improvement from the November ratio of 4.3-to-1."

"To put this figure in context, it’s useful to note that the highest this ratio ever got in the early 2000s downturn was 2.8-to-1, and in December 2000, the month the JOLTS survey began eleven years ago, the ratio was 1.1-to-1. While the job seekers ratio has been slowly improving since its peak of 6.9-to-1 in the summer of 2009, today’s data release marks three years and three months that the ratio has been above 3-to-1. A job seekers ratio of more than 3-to-1 means that for more than two out of every three unemployed workers, there simply are no jobs. In December, there were 9.7 million more unemployed workers than job openings. Furthermore, the lack of job openings is in no way limited to particular industries such as construction—unemployed workers dramatically outnumber job openings across every major industry."

 

[The_Honorable_Doug]

Oh? But I thought that if you were unskilled then nobody would want your labor? There is some inconsistency now.

 

[Len Larson]

You're already distracting from my original point. Of course there are an exceptional few who "work their way up" but for most people this is not a possible option. And besides, where would we all go? There is limited room "on top" in a capitalist society.

This is simply not true in a capitalist society. Wealth is created for both parties to every voluntary exchange. Only govt. coercion leads to a zero-sum business environment.

 

[Origanalist]

Ok, so, it seems to me that most of the evidence supplied in these posts is severely flawed. You cannot say "well I have a good job so..." or "these few people were poor but now they are rich so..." Also, I'm talking about analyzing society as it is, not as we would want it to be. And the truth is that working people are NOT in positions to leisurely pick and choose employers as many of you seem to suggest (this is a luxury enjoyed by the upper classes, which, perhaps, maybe most of the members here belong to.)

Overall, though, I find it interesting that in whereas in government, you get one equal vote and community discussion/input, and in a business, where you take orders from a boss all day and have half your paycheck stolen to the investor's profit, somehow it's the government that "enslaves" you. Only in America...!

I believe the reason the boss hired you was to "take orders" and perform the tasks he or she hired you to do, no? And just how is half of your paycheck "stolen"?

 

[Tod]

While unemployment is high? While nobody is hiring? What if every business treats their workers poorly? That's not a legitimate option. It's like saying to a slave, "well, go be a slave for someone else then!"

I started my own business, and now I am a slave for my customers......lol

 

[Mundane]

No one owes anyone a job. Don't like it? Work for someone else or start your own business.

 

[The_Honorable_Doug]

Some people are too stupid to live.

75% of the people that want to work are currently working. That's a pretty big majority.

There are indeed companies hiring. Lots of them.

If every business in the whole world decided to treat their workers poorly you could start a business and treat them better. You'd get the best of the best from the labor pool.

Whoa. So you're saying that it's totally ok that 1 out of 4 people in this country looking for work cannot find it? What a waste of human potential!

 

[The_Honorable_Doug]

I believe the reason the boss hired you was to "take orders" and perform the tasks he or she hired you to do, no? And just how is half of your paycheck "stolen"?

Let's say that I inherit a ton of money. I decide to invest it in a restaurant somewhere, and maybe I've never been there, doesn't even matter. So I give the money to someone who wants to start a restaurant. Well, a restaurant doesn't run itself, right? We need workers. So we hire some desperate people to do boring, monotonous, stressful work (cooking, cleaning, serving, dealing with annoying customers all day, etc.) And so long as they keep working, and so long as customers keep coming, I, the investor, keep making money, whether I am doing any work or not. Part of the value produced by the worker's labor is siphoned off so that I keep making money. I can then invest money all over the place, reaping profits from my investments, and if I don't want to, I never have to work again! Isn't capitalism wonderful? (And I want more money! Cut the workers' wages! And if I hear one peep about a union you're ALL FIRED!)

 

[BattleFlag1776]

Ok, so, it seems to me that most of the evidence supplied in these posts is severely flawed. You cannot say "well I have a good job so..." or "these few people were poor but now they are rich so..." Also, I'm talking about analyzing society as it is, not as we would want it to be. And the truth is that working people are NOT in positions to leisurely pick and choose employers as many of you seem to suggest (this is a luxury enjoyed by the upper classes, which, perhaps, maybe most of the members here belong to.)

Overall, though, I find it interesting that in whereas in government, you get one equal vote and community discussion/input, and in a business, where you take orders from a boss all day and have half your paycheck stolen to the investor's profit, somehow it's the government that "enslaves" you. Only in America...!

Operations vs. Support. Though the latter does not have "half their paycheck stolen to the investor's profit" as you suggest.

 

[TheTexan]

Just get government to pay half the unemployed people to dig holes, and pay the other half of the unemployed people to fill holes. Problem solved!

 

[Adrock]

Also, I'm talking about analyzing society as it is, not as we would want it to be. And the truth is that working people are NOT in positions to leisurely pick and choose employers as many of you seem to suggest (this is a luxury enjoyed by the upper classes, which, perhaps, maybe most of the members here belong to.)

We are telling you that in the past when the United States had more of a capitalist economy, working people were in more of a position to pick and choose employers. Today we have more of a crony capitalist economy and people have less of a choice of employers. This is effect of more government power and intervention into the economy in recent history. The solution you are advocating only leads to more pain for the working class.

Overall, though, I find it interesting that in whereas in government, you get one equal vote and community discussion/input, and in a business, where you take orders from a boss all day and have half your paycheck stolen to the investor's profit, somehow it's the government that "enslaves" you. Only in America...!

The wage or salary you work for is a private agreement between you and your employer. You are not entitled to anything more than that. The government is the only one taking money from your paycheck. If the evil investor didn't put capital into the company in the first place, you never would of even had a job.

 

[Swarmed]

Just get government to pay half the unemployed people to dig holes, and pay the other half of the unemployed people to fill holes. Problem solved!

Yes, and the government should also set a minimum wage of $20 an hour while they're at it. If every countries' government used this brilliant solution, poverty would be eradicated!

 

[Adrock]

Let's say that I inherit a ton of money. I decide to invest it in a restaurant somewhere, and maybe I've never been there, doesn't even matter. So I give the money to someone who wants to start a restaurant. Well, a restaurant doesn't run itself, right? We need workers. So we hire some desperate people to do boring, monotonous, stressful work (cooking, cleaning, serving, dealing with annoying customers all day, etc.) And so long as they keep working, and so long as customers keep coming, I, the investor, keep making money, whether I am doing any work or not. Part of the value produced by the worker's labor is siphoned off so that I keep making money. I can then invest money all over the place, reaping profits from my investments, and if I don't want to, I never have to work again! Isn't capitalism wonderful? (And I want more money! Cut the workers' wages! And if I hear one peep about a union you're ALL FIRED!)

So the solution should be to use the government to take most of the inheritance? That way no investment is made, no restaurant is started, and no jobs are created?