HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Non-Sports > Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated"
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated" Rated PG13, unmoderated but threads must stay on topic - that means you can flame each other all you want as long as it's legal

Switzerland voting Sunday on a MAXimum wage

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-24-2013, 10:31 PM
  #26
SocialismFTW
Registered User
 
SocialismFTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: St Louis
Posts: 630
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Calhoun View Post
Yes, they absolutely should.

People who run businesses with thousands of employees, with tens of billions of dollars in revenue, and with presence in a hundred different countries absolutely should make A LOT more money than some easily replaceable grunt who runs a cashier, simply because they are A LOT more valuable to the company they work for. It's reality.
The average McDonald's worker would have to work 550 years to make what the CEO would earn in a year according to this example. (by my calculations they would have to work 1062 years to earn what their CEO earns in a year) (17 mil/16,000)

http://www.powerinaunion.co.uk/mcdon...earn-ceos-pay/

SocialismFTW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2013, 10:35 PM
  #27
SocialismFTW
Registered User
 
SocialismFTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: St Louis
Posts: 630
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ugmo View Post
And if you are a worker who has helped the company to make more money for its stockholders, you should reap the fruits of that as well, rather than just the CEO. That's the problem with this equation. The "Eh, that's how the market works, whatcha gonna do?" attitude is detrimental to society in cases like this.
My point exactly. Should a CEO make more money than an average worker? ABSOLUTELY

But at the same time the average worker is helping the company succeed as well and should get a piece of the action and not shiht on at every available opportunity especially at the expense of the taxpayer. I don't eat McDonald's food and I don't enjoy my tax dollars supporting McDonald's unwillingness to pay it's employees properly. It's sickening.

SocialismFTW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2013, 10:39 PM
  #28
Steve Doan
RIP Oscar
 
Steve Doan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Eureka
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 10,237
vCash: 500
Yea, there's is only so much money in this world so we gotta keep the greedy pig CEO's from getting it all!

Steve Doan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2013, 10:41 PM
  #29
Steve Doan
RIP Oscar
 
Steve Doan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Eureka
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 10,237
vCash: 500
The classic, "prop up the poor by bringing down the rich" argument never gets old.

Steve Doan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2013, 10:42 PM
  #30
WarriorOfGandhi
Was saying Boo-urns
 
WarriorOfGandhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: Scotland
Posts: 14,846
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by finchster View Post
Maximum wage, bad idea.

However, there shouldn't be working poor. Companies like McDonald's and Walmart make billions and many of the full time staff make so little they collect government assistance. In a sense, tax payers are subsidizing these companies so they can pay so little.
as a general rule I'm not a fan of government controls on pricing and wages. That said, I'd love it if it was a requirement that any goods purchased included information on how much tax money was necessary to subsidize the cost of getting a piece of cheap Chinese plastic onto the shelf.

WarriorOfGandhi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2013, 10:55 PM
  #31
Tim Calhoun
Tim Calhoun
 
Tim Calhoun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: Mexico
Posts: 8,851
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SocialismFTW View Post
Do you have any proof whatsoever that the average CEO work more than 38 hours a week or should I just take your word for it because you're so smart?
There is obviously no official data on how much someone works.

But if you want some examples, Google can be your friend:

Quote:
Top CEOs Work Crazy Hours Even On Normal Days

Below are some typical schedules when they're at home and things are as close to normal as they get. But the life of a CEO is also full of travel and corporate crises, which are likely to stretch many days even further.

AOL CEO Tim Armstrong wakes up around 5 a.m., is out of the house and working from his car by 7 a.m., and works until 7 p.m. He used to start sending emails immediately after waking up, but now restrains himself until 7 a.m.

Weekends are family time, but he's back at it again after 7 p.m. on Sundays.

Helena Morrissey, CEO of Newton Investment, gets up "at 5 in the morning, sometimes earlier," and immediately starts sending emails until her kids get up. She has family dinner scheduled at 7:30 p.m., but works again after that, sometimes for as much as two hours, prepping for the next morning's meetings.

Vodafone CEO Vittorio Colao is up at 6 a.m., exercises for 40 minutes, then works nearly continuously until 10:45 p.m., pausing for family dinner.
http://www.businessinsider.com/top-ceo-schedules-2013-4

Quote:
For some, working 80-100 hours a week will lead to burnout. But others (like Musk) have been doing it for years and recommend it to others. He says:

“Work like hell. I mean you just have to put in 80 to 100 hour weeks every week. [This] improves the odds of success. If other people are putting in 40 hour work weeks and you’re putting in 100 hour work weeks, then even if you’re doing the same thing you know that….you will achieve in 4 months what it takes them a year to achieve.”
http://blog.kissmetrics.com/the-mind-of-elon-musk/

Tim Calhoun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2013, 10:59 PM
  #32
Tim Calhoun
Tim Calhoun
 
Tim Calhoun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: Mexico
Posts: 8,851
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ugmo View Post
And if you are a worker who has helped the company to make more money for its stockholders, you should reap the fruits of that as well, rather than just the CEO. That's the problem with this equation. The "Eh, that's how the market works, whatcha gonna do?" attitude is detrimental to society in cases like this.
People who provide higher value to their employers do get paid for doing so, which is why ~98% of the workforce makes more than minimum wage.

Tim Calhoun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2013, 11:09 PM
  #33
SocialismFTW
Registered User
 
SocialismFTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: St Louis
Posts: 630
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Calhoun View Post
There is obviously no official data on how much someone works.
You really think this guy works 100 hours a week?? There are only 168 hours in a week and if he is sleeping 8 hours a day (56 hours a week) that leaves him 12 hours a week (1.7 hours a day) to do everything else (drive to work, shower, eat, take out the dog, kiss his wife/kids). Maybe he works 100 hours a week once a year or quarterly or something but I just can't realistically see anyone working 100 hour weeks every week.

That being said even if a CEO worked 168 hours a week which would be every second of every single day to earn their 17 million a year I still would feel like they were overpaid.

SocialismFTW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2013, 11:16 PM
  #34
Tim Calhoun
Tim Calhoun
 
Tim Calhoun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: Mexico
Posts: 8,851
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SocialismFTW View Post
You really think this guy works 100 hours a week?? There are only 168 hours in a week and if he is sleeping 8 hours a day (56 hours a week) that leaves him 12 hours a week (1.7 hours a day) to do everything else (drive to work, shower, eat, take out the dog, kiss his wife/kids). Maybe he works 100 hours a week once a year or quarterly or something but I just can't realistically see anyone working 100 hour weeks every week.

That being said even if a CEO worked 168 hours a week which would be every second of every single day to earn their 17 million a year I still would feel like they were overpaid.
Elon Musk is an extreme case, and it probably is slightly exaggerated, but the point still stands. Plus I find his account more believable than the one about your alcoholic boss.

Even if you think he's overpaid, the shareholders of his company don't think so, and it's their money.

Tim Calhoun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2013, 11:17 PM
  #35
SocialismFTW
Registered User
 
SocialismFTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: St Louis
Posts: 630
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by We're Doan Here View Post
The classic, "prop up the poor by bringing down the rich" argument never gets old.
Another brilliant contribution to the hfboards by their brightest and most articulate poster. Why would it get old?? I'm surprised you didn't enlighten us with a fake quote from Abraham Lincoln

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/lincoln/prosperity.asp

When people are working their lives away to not even be able to feed and house themselves it is nothing more than slavery.

SocialismFTW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2013, 11:19 PM
  #36
SocialismFTW
Registered User
 
SocialismFTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: St Louis
Posts: 630
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Calhoun View Post
Elon Musk is an extreme case, and it probably is slightly exaggerated, but the point still stands. Plus I find his account more believable than the one about your alcoholic boss.

Even if you think he's overpaid, the shareholders of his company don't think so, and it's their money.
I never called him an alcoholic. I said I have personally seen him drinking on the job, which I have.

SocialismFTW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2013, 11:52 PM
  #37
Steve Doan
RIP Oscar
 
Steve Doan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Eureka
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 10,237
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SocialismFTW View Post
Another brilliant contribution to the hfboards by their brightest and most articulate poster. Why would it get old?? I'm surprised you didn't enlighten us with a fake quote from Abraham Lincoln

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/lincoln/prosperity.asp

When people are working their lives away to not even be able to feed and house themselves it is nothing more than slavery.
First off, it is a quote that is usually attributed to Margaret Thatcher, never said anything about Lincoln. Second, I work a minimum wage job, I know what it is like, and comparing it to slavery is an absurd comparison. Would making 15 dollar an hour be nice, yea it would, but I probably would not find any work if employers were forced to pay 15 an hour, which some people are wanting.

And back to your OP, enlighten me as to how capping the top earners would, in any way, improve the economy as a whole?

Steve Doan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 12:09 AM
  #38
Steve Doan
RIP Oscar
 
Steve Doan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Eureka
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 10,237
vCash: 500
Kyle, this forum is a terrible place to try to get serious answers aside from hockey facts and hockey discussions.

Steve Doan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 12:10 AM
  #39
SocialismFTW
Registered User
 
SocialismFTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: St Louis
Posts: 630
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by We're Doan Here View Post
First off, it is a quote that is usually attributed to Margaret Thatcher, never said anything about Lincoln. Second, I work a minimum wage job, I know what it is like, and comparing it to slavery is an absurd comparison. Would making 15 dollar an hour be nice, yea it would, but I probably would not find any work if employers were forced to pay 15 an hour, which some people are wanting.

And back to your OP, enlighten me as to how capping the top earners would, in any way, improve the economy as a whole?
Gladly, so the whole idea is if the top earners made less and the lowest paid workers made more there would be more spending. The top earners trends tend to be acquiring money and holding onto it as opposed to the lowest earners whose trends differ in that they tend to spend the money that they have. So more money in lower earners pockets means more spending and in turn a more stable higher GDP economy. Also paying the lowest earners more money would ease the burden of the taxpayers because the lower earning employes would no longer qualify for food stamps, section 8 or other government assistance programs. Furthermore the lower earning employees would have incentive to work harder knowing that the work that they do is actually of importance and worth a living wage thus driving up product production and profits for said companies. That's just looking at it from an economic viewpoint. Imagine the social ramifications.

SocialismFTW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 01:26 AM
  #40
Roughneck
Registered User
 
Roughneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Calgary
Country: Ireland
Posts: 8,866
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Roughneck
Quote:
Originally Posted by SocialismFTW View Post
If the minimum wage in America is 8 dollars per hour that means the highest a CEO (of a company using minimum wage workers) could make would be $96 an hour. If the CEO put in 2000 hours that year that would still be $192,000.

Currently the CEO of McDonalds makes 17 million dollars per year. If you did this process in reverse and he worked 2000 hours he would be making $8500 an hour. The average worker would then be making $708 an hour which is $700 dollars more per hour than they are currently making.

And McDonald's says it can't afford to pay workers $15 an hour.
Well if McDonald's were to pay their workers $15/hr it would cost them $10Billion+ more a year so no, they can't afford it. Pretty basic budgeting really.

Though that ignores the fact that McDonald's doesn't really pay the front line employees, the franchisees do and that changes depending on the market. A McDonald's employee in Ft. McMurray isn't making anything close to minimum wage but one in Jackson, Mississippi probably is.

Roughneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 01:46 AM
  #41
Howard Beale
Registered User
 
Howard Beale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Calhoun View Post
There is obviously no official data on how much someone works.

But if you want some examples, Google can be your friend:


http://www.businessinsider.com/top-ceo-schedules-2013-4


http://blog.kissmetrics.com/the-mind-of-elon-musk/
That's anecdotal evidence, just as you dismissed earlier

But seriously, I don't doubt that CEOs tend to work more than the average employee. But do they really need to earn 250x the earnings of other workers as incentive for them to do those jobs well? Would they all opt out of managerial roles and work 40 hour weeks if they only had they potential to make $500,000 or $1,000,000 each year as CEO?

Also the hours argument doesn't really mean much by itself. One summer I worked at a large construction company where many of the constructions crews started at 6:30 or 7am, and worked until 6:00pm or later each day Monday-Friday and every second Saturday. In that company roughly 60-65 hour weeks were pretty standard for many workers during the summer months.

There's plenty of people willing to work long hours, but most of them aren't making $6,000,000 or more as many executives do.


Last edited by Howard Beale: 11-25-2013 at 01:52 AM.
Howard Beale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 01:51 AM
  #42
Howard Beale
Registered User
 
Howard Beale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SocialismFTW View Post
Gladly, so the whole idea is if the top earners made less and the lowest paid workers made more there would be more spending. The top earners trends tend to be acquiring money and holding onto it as opposed to the lowest earners whose trends differ in that they tend to spend the money that they have. So more money in lower earners pockets means more spending and in turn a more stable higher GDP economy. Also paying the lowest earners more money would ease the burden of the taxpayers because the lower earning employes would no longer qualify for food stamps, section 8 or other government assistance programs. Furthermore the lower earning employees would have incentive to work harder knowing that the work that they do is actually of importance and worth a living wage thus driving up product production and profits for said companies. That's just looking at it from an economic viewpoint. Imagine the social ramifications.
There are also serious political consequences from having wealth and power highly concentrated among a small percentage of the population. Political parties and institutions are left with no choice but to cater to the interests of the wealthy and powerful, in order to attract donations and favours.

Howard Beale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 04:47 AM
  #43
Hossa
Registered User
 
Hossa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Abroad
Posts: 9,259
vCash: 500
Just for context, Switzerland has several referendums a week, some nationwide and others at canton-level. It's part of the country's whole citizen's initiative system (I think that's what it's called), and from my experience living there it's not unusual to have all sorts of creative/unrealistic ballot initiatives throughout the course of the year. Of course, sometimes you have crazy ideas like banning minarets that actually get passed, but that's the risk Switzerland takes with its promotion of direct democracy and the absence of an independent judiciary.

Hossa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 06:08 AM
  #44
Ugmo
Registered User
 
Ugmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Austria
Posts: 11,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by We're Doan Here View Post
The classic, "prop up the poor by bringing down the rich" argument never gets old.
Know what else never gets old? Working schlubs who for some reason identify more closely with people who make tens of millions a year than with people in their own tax bracket.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Calhoun View Post
People who provide higher value to their employers do get paid for doing so, which is why ~98% of the workforce makes more than minimum wage.
I didn't mention minimum wage. You're saying if the value of the company increases, the CEO's salary should increase at the same rate (or you're at least you're saying that it does increase at the same rate). Employee wages however don't. The benefits of the market capitalization increase go disproportionately to the CEO, which is an accurate reflection of the general trend in America: the economy has grown by leaps and bounds over the past couple of decades, but all the extra wealth generated (through the hard work of everyone) has gone to a small section of the population while average wages have stagnated. If that's just "how the market works" then I'm in favor of the government regulating that market more stringently. The problem in this case is that Switzerland can't do that alone, because the disadvantages in Switzerland would likely outweigh the benefits.

Ugmo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 06:12 AM
  #45
Ugmo
Registered User
 
Ugmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Austria
Posts: 11,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by We're Doan Here View Post
Second, I work a minimum wage job, I know what it is like, and comparing it to slavery is an absurd comparison. Would making 15 dollar an hour be nice, yea it would, but I probably would not find any work if employers were forced to pay 15 an hour, which some people are wanting.
Wait, you work a minimum wage job and you're still defending the system that disproportionately awards the value you help to create to the multimillionaire at the top? I guess that's the definition of masochism.

Ugmo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 06:45 AM
  #46
Ilkka Sinisalo
Amazing American
 
Ilkka Sinisalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Perth, W.A.
Country: Australia
Posts: 12,907
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorOfGandhi View Post
they can, but they'd probably axe and automate at least half of their workforce to do so.
I'm sure you have zero evidence to back up your assertion.

In Australia the minimum wage is $16/hour and the fast food industry is hardly automated or running on bare bones.

Ilkka Sinisalo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 08:35 AM
  #47
PredsV82
No
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Grumpyville
Country: St Kitts and Nevis
Posts: 16,825
vCash: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilkka Sinisalo View Post
I'm sure you have zero evidence to back up your assertion.

In Australia the minimum wage is $16/hour and the fast food industry is hardly automated or running on bare bones.
and if I understand you right the people who work nights and weekends are making $24 or $32/hr, right??

or does the night and weekend shift premium only apply to certain industries?

because if the guy flipping burgers on the saturday late shift is making $32/hr I would have to think a Big Mac would have to sell for about $25

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 10:15 AM
  #48
Doppler Drift
Registered User
 
Doppler Drift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12,038
vCash: 500
CEO's and high level executives do indeed (usually) work long hours. However we must realize that these include, luncheons, dinners, sporting events, concerts, operas, ballets, etc where they are entertaining clients. They also include attending events which their corporations sponsor such as golf tournaments, theater, or even charitable events such as walk-a-thons, telethons, etc. Granted this takes time from family and friends, but it isn't exactly drudgery is it? They also tend (as in almost always) to include travel time as work time. Something that many employees don't or if they do it is limited to something like 2 hours, instead of the total time taken to fly, train, taxi/drive. etc, from say Houston to Berlin.

And there are many other people who work 10/12 hours per day, 6/7 days per week for months on end that, while often compensated well, don't receive anywhere even remotely close to the same pay as the upper echelon. Executive compensation has gotten totally out of hand.

Doppler Drift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 10:23 AM
  #49
Ugmo
Registered User
 
Ugmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Austria
Posts: 11,536
vCash: 500
I think the long hours explanation is a cop-out. Are we saying they deserve more pay because they work longer hours, or are we saying they deserve more pay because they're worth more to the company? If it's the former then it makes no sense that they get paid hundreds of times more than regular employees, because they certainly don't work hundreds of times more hours. They deserve twice as much, if that. Not to mention there will be other people in the company who work just as much as the CEO and earn hundreds of times less.

And if it's the latter, then the former is completely irrelevant. But what it really sounds like is people here are making excuses for obscene managerial pay and are jumbling together whatever questionable justifications they can come up with.

Ugmo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 10:47 AM
  #50
Hnidy Hnight
Registered User
 
Hnidy Hnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North of Boston, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Don't most CEO's have law, and finance degrees? I think that alone justifies the pay amount. They have an elite tool set of skills. Not to mention most responsibility. A screw up by them isn't a $20 register shortage. It's loss of jobs and shareholders. It's extremely stressful.

Hnidy Hnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:13 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.