Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Dec 24, 2017 - 10:11pm PT
|
Without a bargaining power, the workers are powerless
I speak as a former Teamster, who remains a supporter of unions.
Workers are not powerless. Even more powerful than their organizing into unions, is their vote. On a consistent basis, even in national elections, 40% don't vote. Here in LA, in off-year votes, the rate county wide is about 10%
This means that the people who vote control the lives of the people who don't. Notably in other western countries, voting is taken far more seriously.
We progressives need to figure this out.
|
|
nah000
climber
now/here
|
|
|
Dec 24, 2017 - 10:51pm PT
|
chipper_shredder wrote: Trying not to rant....but.
This has been on my mind awhile and wondering why more
Are not down right mad and ready to take a stand.
because at the end of the day, even if things were more [historically defensibly] proportionately distributed, we would be talking about wage changes for the bottom 50% that in the more [historically] realistic scenarios would only be about +20% of where they are currently at.
to be blunt, for most that is prob not worth standing in front of a tank over.
ie. even if there was a system where the 1% [and more importantly the 0.1% and 0.01% as the rest of the 1% have stayed very near to stagnant] weren't taking quite the share of the pie that they are currently taking it's not like the bottom 50% would suddenly all be millionaires... or even multi thousandaires:
ex. the top 1% is currently [as of 2014] taking about 20% of the total u.s. income, while the lower 50% is taking about 12% of the total u.s. income:
so... even if we somehow, with a magic hammer, knocked the top 1% back to a more historically sustainable 10% and gave all of that -10% back to the lower 50% and so increased their share of the income from 12 to 22%, this would mean an average increase for them of about +80%.
but! and this is a big but: that is basically the most extreme [historically defensible] scenario. more likely that 10% would be distributed throughout the full lower 99% [meaning an increase of only about +40% to the lower 50%] and also more likely the magic hammer would only be able to knock back the top 1%'s overall income distribution by -5%, meaning [including the point above] that the lower 50% would only increase their incomes by about +20%. [have you been brought to +20% more tears yet? ha!]
ie. imo, Reilly has a point re: Only you can make yer life better.
this is because if you're waiting for the masses to join you, you need to keep in mind, that the frog is currently only really being warmed. and if your wages haven't really increased in 20 years, there is likely more to the story than the unfairness of the system. [to be sure i don't know your (c_s's) situation, so am only speaking based on statistical likelihood, and so if i am wrong i pre-emptively apologize]
right now the main folks [from my perspective] who are getting seriously fUcked by the american/globalized "western" system are the american youth [due to the draconian shifts re student loans and at least the funding of defence and homeland "security" vs eduction] and a few of those outside of the u.s.'/"west's" borders.
because, as far as i can see, that's the point of the american [and globalized "western"] system: to warm the frog as near to boiling as is possible [without killing it], while bringing gasoline/gelling agents, and hellfire or tomahawk missiles to those who dare to thwart the international economic empire's extra border missives.
and so as an american, look at it this way: at least you don't have to worry about hellfire missiles killing your nephew or niece because they tried to take a short cut to school.
edit to add: and a merry christmas and good night to all! ha!
no in all seriousness: a merry christmas and happy new year to all who take the time to post here, regardless of whether i agree with you or not. the day this board becomes homogenous in its opinions is the day i'm done with this place... and so... so far, so good.
|
|
Bruce Morris
Trad climber
Soulsbyville, California
|
|
|
Dec 25, 2017 - 12:22am PT
|
When I worked in the Professional Services Division for new product development at Fujitsu Ltd., everyone in the department made over six figures. A product line manager (PLM) made $495,000 to sit in his private office and look at teen porn sites. He also had a "golden parachute" that paid out over a hundred a year for five years straight if they laid him off. Why these huge salaries? We all worked for the CFO of Fujitsu and he was worth $40 billion dollars. Of course, when he turned 50, he had a "crisis", paid off his wife and kids, and went on a rampage drinking and chasing young chics. Lots and lots of saki and intimate dinners. He even had a "pet" Ph.D. who put on a monkey suit and drove him around in a limousine to his romantic rendezvous.
However, on the other side of an imaginary line running through the building were "the workers" who made crap and all got laid off when the CFO lost $10 billion on the Nikkei and had to bid a hasty retreat back to Japan.
Moral? Money sticks with money. The closer you get to big money and power the more they pay you. Pay it out at the top, never pay it out at the bottom. Those are the rules. Get it straight.
|
|
Byran
climber
Half Dome Village
|
|
|
Dec 25, 2017 - 04:38am PT
|
Wages are supposed to remain flat when adjusted for inflation. This should be obvious if you think about it. If wages (in real dollars) were to rise continuously over a long enough time period it would lead to one of two outcomes:
1) Business would be paying out more in wages than they take in from sales of goods and services. This is impossible.
2) Productivity would have to increase infinitely. This maybe isn't impossible, but highly unlikely given our current position on a single finite planet with finite resources. Just to be clear, this would require that we extract and consume more resources every year than we did the previous year, and we go on maintaining this exponential increase of consumption for as long as we hope to increase wages.
The ideal scenario is to maintain a flat level of wage earnings, while reducing hours worked. The reduction of average work hours should naturally match up with whatever gains are being made in productivity. We haven't seen this unfortunately. And I think one of the main reasons is that the economy and technology have been progressing so rapidly.
This is something of a paradox, because technological progress is exactly what's supposed to drive us towards a shorter work week. But many jobs and whole new industries have been created which require highly trained workers, and our education and training institutions haven't been able to keep pace. The result is that we have skilled workers who are highly paid and required to work long hours (because their skills are in short supply and their education/training is costly either to the company or to the workers themselves who have student loans to pay off). This is the situation in the Silicon Valley for instance.
Then at the other end you have people who aren't skilled or who's previous skills are rendered obsolete by the rapidly changing economy (ie, automotive workers who saw their factories pack up and leave the states). These workers are paid little because their labor isn't in demand, and so they must work long hours and even multiple jobs just to make ends meet, further reducing the value of their labor. This is the situation all over the Midwest. This might also be the main reason (but not the only reason) we have seen such an increase in the wealth gap.
So I think there's a little more to it than "Greedy-ass companies, corporations and bosses not wanting to pay people more" That much can be assumed as a constant in all societies at all times. Businesses are businesses, not charities, and they will only pay as much as is needed to keep their employees from seeking work elsewhere.
Read more on this topic here
http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/rauch/worktime/
|
|
hooblie
climber
from out where the anecdotes roam
|
|
|
Dec 25, 2017 - 04:44am PT
|
whatever happened to "chop wood, carry water," it seems to have lost its fizz ... xmas morning?
|
|
okie
Trad climber
|
|
|
Dec 25, 2017 - 07:34am PT
|
What Tom said!
I was just reading about another CEO giving himself a massive Christmas bonus and in other news China is investing billions in GLOBAL infrastructure. We can't even invest in our own domestic infrastructure.
America has become a big money grab by the do-nothing modern version of Robber Barons. We are on our way to becoming an irrelevant third world country.
|
|
Byran
climber
Half Dome Village
|
|
|
Dec 25, 2017 - 09:11am PT
|
We can't even invest in our own domestic infrastructure. If you count prisons as domestic infrastructure then we maybe have China beat. And don't forget the $70,000,000,000 wall Trump promised us. At least when it comes to providing for future generations by surrounding them with layers of walls and razor wire, no country can outspend the USA.
|
|
Mike Honcho
Trad climber
Glenwood Springs, CO
|
|
|
Dec 25, 2017 - 09:37am PT
|
Workers now seem to be more 'contracted' to work than hired on with a company. A relatively good remuneration may be provided but it has zero benefits and no worker rights. Yer on yer own. (YOYO!)
Full time hours are very difficult to come by. Workers stitch together several part-time situations.
I'm a Journeyman Electrician, State of Colorado. Before the recession I was taking home $28 an hour and NEVER worked over 40hrs a week. Life was grand.
Fast forward to now and I start at $22 an hour and am expected to work at least 60-70hrs a week.. f*#k that. You get hired, they work you to death and then when a company is all caught up on their work load you get cut because you're the "new guy". And the circle goes around and they can't figure out why the Trades are suffering.
|
|
chipper_shredder
Social climber
outinthecuts
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 25, 2017 - 10:59am PT
|
YES !
chop wood, carry water...love it !
Americans just strait up need to... need less.
Change the paradigm.
We would all gain from a simpler exsistance, especially globally.
Insted this " fake it till you make it " BS
Noticed even people pretty well off, do not consider themselves
Rich or even well of..because the don't have " kardasian money "
Who's gonna stand up and say this "consumer based economy " is NOT working
At least for the VAST majority.
Why..divisive conservatives AND elite liberals....pull the " socialist" card, then term has gained so much power,
seems to silence any body critical,
Challenging the powers had lost its true patriotic roots.
Who ever thought this was sustainable,or even something to be proud of or herrold as strong financial sense....just buying sh*t...sh*t we don't need..& more sh*t
Then we have to get a storage unit to put our sh*t in.
Remember the corporations that played roulette with the global economy
And lost.
Not only did they not even get a slap on the wrist,
The current regime just gave them a huge & permanent tax break
And are you still NOT....PISSED. ?
The capitalist treadmill has sped up and now has an incline.
I agree w/some, I'm working harder, longer... for less
Time to get off.
Who's with me ?
Inequality hasn't been this bad since the " guided age" people
Grinding this consumer economy to a halt...
Is the most patriot thing we can do right now..IMO
Just really think what our founding fathers would say about our current
State or affairs...the corporations & enept corrupt politicians (ON BOTH SIDES )!!
are today's kings & queens.
Time for a revolution.
Merry xmas !
When you can collect cans, and make the same as many jobs.
__
Article from the wire-
Meet John Culpepper, bottle and can collector extraordinaire. Today The New York Times highlighted this 35-year-old Brooklyner in its piece on the beverage-container scavengers who frequent the borough's Thrifty Redemption Center, which entices customers by offering 6 cent instead of the standard 5 for each empty can or bottle redeemed there. The entire article is worth a read, but what stuck out from the piece was just how much Culpepper makes foraging for old soda cans.
Laid off two years ago from food preparation at La Guardia Airport, Mr. Culpepper, 35, said he had turned scavenging into a full-time job paying $400 most weeks, more on holidays. That goes toward the $1,159 rent on the one-bedroom apartment on Ocean Parkway where he lives with his wife and their 2-year-old son. He also does part-time work as a porter in his building, mostly for the stash space.
He has to earn that $400 a week at 6 cents a pop, or 6,600 bottles and cans. He figures he's making the equivalent of what a $10-an-hour fast-food job would bring in. If Culpepper can keep that average going for a full year, and never gets sick or takes a vacation or stays home in a blizzard, that's about $20,000 a year. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics that's about $1,400 higher than the average pay for fast-food preparation and service workers earn. It's also in the ballpark of what cashiers, restaurant hostesses, dishwashers, lifeguards, fitness trainers, and farmworkers make. But this statistic probably says less about the lucrativeness of can collecting than it does about the meager wages of working-class jobs.
|
|
Contractor
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
|
Dec 25, 2017 - 01:38pm PT
|
X Con-the 'legit' guys hate me but ive no idea how to operate the way they do and ive got to do something
not like its taught anywhere in a way guys like me could learn...
I have a legit operation yet guys like you provide a critical service to people that need to streamline the process or can't afford to pay for all the superfluous bull crap; Title 24 reports, soil reports, OSHA manuals, special inspection reports, comp and liability audits, EPA rule, Best Management Practices, circuit cards, Utilities regulations, Dig Alert, mandated record of Survey, etc., etc...
Behind every legit contractor is most likely a demanding female or two helping keep all that sh#t straight (not meaning to stereotype).
|
|
Roger Brown
climber
Oceano, California
|
|
|
Dec 25, 2017 - 08:20pm PT
|
It appears that there is a shortage of skilled craftsmen out there right now, so the jobs are there. I got on the Carpenters out of work list just now and I am number 15. I have lived here for 32 years and that is the lowest I have ever seen it. I am union so my wages are fixed, but you other craftsmen have some bargaining power now. I would expect them to be calling you for a change. I got a call and I'm old!
|
|
Byran
climber
Half Dome Village
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2017 - 01:04am PT
|
It's not a rocket science.
AFAIK we live in a capitalist market driven country.
Impact of the following two factors is rather predictable:
1. Globalization and offshoring. Many jobs with high wages are being transferred to China and India. MacJobs with low wages are created instead.
2. Legal and illegal immigration increases a pool of workers competing for these jobs.
Then we need to apply a law of supply and demand.
As a result we receive flat or decreasing income and standard of life of majority of Americans.
Some counterpoints to consider:
1. When companies save money by offshoring labor, they are able to lower the cost of goods. Thanks to Walmart we all have "higher wages" because our money has more purchasing power.
2. Immigration increases the demand for goods and services, thereby creating jobs. Do you really think we can increase wages by simply having a smaller population?
But don't worry, if you're right and globalization and immigration are really the reason for lower wages, then we need only weather the storm a little longer. Once wages drop enough, immigrants will stop moving here for work and all those offshore jobs will start rushing back.
|
|
Byran
climber
Half Dome Village
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2017 - 06:33am PT
|
Apple is able to sell their products at a high markup because of their clever marketing and brand recognition. There is sufficient competition within the consumer electronics industry that most companies sell their products at thin margins. The Kindle I'm using to post this I purchased new for $35. I'm sure Amazon sold it to me at a loss, with the expectation that they'd turn a profit off of software sales (which they no doubt have). This cutthroat competition means that savings in labor are passed on to the consumer, which was the point I was raising. The price in real dollars of electronic devices has dropped substantially over the last few decades. Consider that the original Nintendo cost $200 in 1985 ($470 in 2017 dollars) while Nintendo's latest console, despite being an unbelievably more complex piece of technology, costs $300.
Globalization is not responsible for children working in factories. This has happened in every country that has become industrialized. The United States, England, and France saw perhaps even more abuses of workers during their early periods of manufacturing, and there were no foreign owned corporations to point the finger at. It is illegal to employ children in China. If the law isn't enforced, that's a failure of the Chinese government. If US corporations aren't held accountable after exploiting child labor, that's a failure of the US government. The solution is to have sane laws that protect workers rights and to enforce them, not to hide behind a wall of trade tariffs and sanctions. It's also ridiculous to view China as victim of globalization. They have seen one of the most rapid increases in standards of living in history. By some metrics, they outrank the US in education, and they have less income inequality than we do. I also doubt there are now as many children employed in factories as were previously employed in agriculture.
|
|
Byran
climber
Half Dome Village
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2017 - 06:47am PT
|
xCon, suicide rates have always been high in all East Asian countries. In China, suicide rates have fallen dramatically over the last 15 years, and this decline is primarily attributed to urbanization. Suicide rates are 3 times higher in rural areas in China than in cities.
You can read the abstract, but annoyingly it costs 35 EUR to view the full paper.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00127-013-0789-5
"The benefits of economic growth, such as higher employment and more educational opportunities for the rural population in particular, may have contributed to the reduced suicide rate in China. However, the recent rapid changes in socioeconomic conditions could have increased stress levels and resulted in more suicides, especially among the elderly. Despite the significant reduction reported here, the latest figures suggest the declining trend is reversing. It will be important to continue monitoring the situation and to examine how urbanization and economic changes affect the well-being of 1.3 billion Chinese."
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2017 - 06:56am PT
|
The solution is simple. Eugene Debs stated it long ago:
“We want a system in which the worker shall get what he produces and the capitalist shall produce what he gets.”
|
|
Yury
Mountain climber
T.O.
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2017 - 07:02am PT
|
Byran:
Some counterpoints to consider:
1. When companies save money by offshoring labor, they are able to lower the cost of goods. Thanks to Walmart we all have "higher wages" because our money has more purchasing power.
2. Immigration increases the demand for goods and services, thereby creating jobs. Do you really think we can increase wages by simply having a smaller population? I agree that these are significant mitigation factors.
Byran:
But don't worry, if you're right and globalization and immigration are really the reason for lower wages, then we need only weather the storm a little longer. Once wages drop enough, immigrants will stop moving here for work and all those offshore jobs will start rushing back. I agree. In case of a single global economy we should have the same wages in the US and China, India, Mexico etc.
We just need to wait until US wages are about the same as wages in Sudan, Somalia etc. and immigration and outsourcing/offshoring won't be a problem anymore.
|
|
Bad Climber
Trad climber
The Lawless Border Regions
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2017 - 07:54am PT
|
This is a fascinating and important discussion, with, of course, no easy fix to the problem. There is a lot of truth on both sides of the debate--rich vs. worker. Yep, in as many ways as they can, the elite, the captains of industry, the Trumps et al. are doing what they can--and successfully, I might add--to make bank. Also, there are plenty of people who could do more to improve their lot. For example, this country needs lots more skilled welders, machinists, etc. The skilled trades get short shrift in the schools and too many people push for college degrees that will do them little good in terms of earnings.
Off-shoring is a problem for many workers--and not just assembly line drones, either. Ever advancing tech is making more and more jobs workable from great distances. I understand that even reading MRI's and other medical scans are being outsourced! I know in some cases, "outsourced" engineers are brought into the US on special visas to replace expensive home-grown workers. Bust your ass at CalPoly for that engineering degree and high student loans then get replaced by Sanjit from Deli working at a fraction of your wages. This is a real deal.
The tech revolution in general is posing a greater threat to employment all the time. We have held as sacred the "lump of labor" fallacy, that the Luddites were wrong about the number of jobs being some static figure, that once the machines were developed there would be fewer jobs. Well, there WERE fewer jobs weaving because the power looms kicked ass, but the tech development created ever more--albeit different--jobs. As AI and other very high tech get better, this may no longer be the case. Some serious economists and business types are starting to argue for a basic universal income to off-set the concentration of capital as labor gets more and more devalued. It's hard to imagine the future. Oy.
BAd
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2017 - 11:33am PT
|
all Walmart does is bring products manufactured by children and women locked into factories that don't have bathrooms back onto our shelves
What would those women and children be doing for a living if not that?
I always find it ironic to hear the proponents of globalism decry "all of us" for having "blood on our hands."
So, please explain the fix, you know, how you're going to make not just the USA but the whole planet a global utopia.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2017 - 11:36am PT
|
Some serious economists and business types are starting to argue for a basic universal income to off-set the concentration of capital as labor gets more and more devalued.
LOL
Seems like the "devalued" are the ones with the most extra time/energy to breed. So, more "devalued" kids that all need that "basic universal income" is surely the answer. Yeah, right.
I'm agreed with you. The future looks BaD!
[Click to View YouTube Video]
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!