Moiraine Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Capitalism and democracy are opposites. That's kind of a stupid statement. One is an economic system and one is a form of government. Economic systems and governments are two different things. My problem with his way of thinking is that (it has a small class of owners that decides what is produced, where it is produced, how it is produced, and what to do with the profits.) Anytime I get deep into this discussion it boils down to someone then saying...."Oh...I'm not talking about small and midsize companies. I'm talking about mega corporations". Well, first of all to that train of thought. Most people do not work for mega corporations. They work for small and midsize companies that make things and more and more people have more say in what happens. Also, to the mega corporations. The "ownership" of those public corporations are you and me. We own those stocks in either private accounts or retirement accounts. Do rich people own more stock? Sure. But, since we own stock too, they aren't the only ones who benefit from that. Heck, I purchased Facebook at $47 right after it came out and I am happy happy happy with that mega corporation's performance. I get so tired of the story line that those evil rich people have all the money and power. Yes, I said that when it comes to politics. However, YOU control your life. Not some rich person. YOU can make it better. YOU can start a company and be self employed if you want. There are loads of opportunity out there for someone who wants to be a business owner. YOU can get educated and get a better job. Just because Bill Gates has billions, that doesn't change your life. It might not control 100% of our lives but when $ buys policy it most certainly affects our lives. People with enough money can have safety standards eroded which directly affects public health. That's just one example. That's not to say "all rich people are evil." But the ones who buy off politicians so they can have laws passed just to increase their bottom line and care sh#t all for how those laws will negatively affect people, those are evil. Money should not have the power that it does in politics/policy. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Just so I understand it... The Chicago Political Machine - by all accounts one of the most openly corrupt political "entities" imaginable - gets a man elected President and it takes some comments by Jimmy Carter 8 years later for this to be discussed ;-)... The Republic vs Democracy distinction aside, I don't think Democracy in this country is any more dead than it's always been. If anything, it's just more transparently obvious than it has been since the "Democratic process" of the 1800s. Obama's funding came from way more small income voters than the Republican funding. It wasn't some sinister psychological brain child of a group that made people vote the way they did. There might have been more small donations to Obama. However, if you don't think the Democrat's political machine isn't greased with money from extremely wealthy people and groups then you are naive. Of course it is Then people can give all the $50 donations they want and think it's having an affect on the candidate and narrative but it's not. Nearly 50% of Obama's funding was from donations under $200. (However, this was when the max per person was $2,000 so that doesn't necessarily mean much). I just know it was a lot more than Romney's. It was about the same as lots of other Republican candidates, though. Part of that is probably because they were waiting to see who won the nomination. I'd much rather have the candidate who had backing from more people than from few people with lots of money, but it's really the lesser of two evils in any election. Link to comment
cornographic Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Capitalism and democracy are opposites. That's kind of a stupid statement. One is an economic system and one is a form of government. Economic systems and governments are two different things. My problem with his way of thinking is that (it has a small class of owners that decides what is produced, where it is produced, how it is produced, and what to do with the profits.) Anytime I get deep into this discussion it boils down to someone then saying...."Oh...I'm not talking about small and midsize companies. I'm talking about mega corporations". Well, first of all to that train of thought. Most people do not work for mega corporations. They work for small and midsize companies that make things and more and more people have more say in what happens. Also, to the mega corporations. The "ownership" of those public corporations are you and me. We own those stocks in either private accounts or retirement accounts. Do rich people own more stock? Sure. But, since we own stock too, they aren't the only ones who benefit from that. Heck, I purchased Facebook at $47 right after it came out and I am happy happy happy with that mega corporation's performance. I get so tired of the story line that those evil rich people have all the money and power. Yes, I said that when it comes to politics. However, YOU control your life. Not some rich person. YOU can make it better. YOU can start a company and be self employed if you want. There are loads of opportunity out there for someone who wants to be a business owner. YOU can get educated and get a better job. Just because Bill Gates has billions, that doesn't change your life. I--and others--have already thoroughly discussed the 'corporate welfare' system: socialize the costs and risks, privatize the profits. So you can lump Bill Gates into that pile of 'self made men'. As to your other point: economics and politics(gov'ts) are hand in glove, not separate from each other and as soon as you drive into your corporate parking lot, you by and large give most of your rights away: it's a top down dictatorship', 'my way or the highway'. Sure, you may have a say as to 'casual Fridays', or what's in the vending machine, or who's turn it is to make coffee, but not as to how the profits are utilized, etc. It's as described in the quote. A person may have stock in a company, but that person doesn't control how it's traded, you can only sell your shares. ~ 50% of U.S. workers don't have stock options or pensions. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Capitalism and democracy are opposites. That's kind of a stupid statement. One is an economic system and one is a form of government. Economic systems and governments are two different things. My problem with his way of thinking is that (it has a small class of owners that decides what is produced, where it is produced, how it is produced, and what to do with the profits.) Anytime I get deep into this discussion it boils down to someone then saying...."Oh...I'm not talking about small and midsize companies. I'm talking about mega corporations". Well, first of all to that train of thought. Most people do not work for mega corporations. They work for small and midsize companies that make things and more and more people have more say in what happens. Also, to the mega corporations. The "ownership" of those public corporations are you and me. We own those stocks in either private accounts or retirement accounts. Do rich people own more stock? Sure. But, since we own stock too, they aren't the only ones who benefit from that. Heck, I purchased Facebook at $47 right after it came out and I am happy happy happy with that mega corporation's performance. I get so tired of the story line that those evil rich people have all the money and power. Yes, I said that when it comes to politics. However, YOU control your life. Not some rich person. YOU can make it better. YOU can start a company and be self employed if you want. There are loads of opportunity out there for someone who wants to be a business owner. YOU can get educated and get a better job. Just because Bill Gates has billions, that doesn't change your life. I--and others--have already thoroughly discussed the 'corporate welfare' system: socialize the costs and risks, privatize the profits. So you can lump Bill Gates into that pile of 'self made men'. As to your other point: economics and politics(gov'ts) are hand in glove, not separate from each other and as soon as you drive into your corporate parking lot, you by and large give most of your rights away: it's a top down dictatorship', 'my way or the highway'. Sure, you may have a say as to 'casual Fridays', or what's in the vending machine, or who's turn it is to make coffee, but not as to how the profits are utilized, etc. It's as described in the quote. A person may have stock in a company, but that person doesn't control how it's traded, you can only sell your shares. ~ 50% of U.S. workers don't have stock options or pensions. Then start your own company and be self employed. You then control what you do, who does it, when you do it and how. Link to comment
cornographic Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Capitalism and democracy are opposites. That's kind of a stupid statement. One is an economic system and one is a form of government. Economic systems and governments are two different things. My problem with his way of thinking is that (it has a small class of owners that decides what is produced, where it is produced, how it is produced, and what to do with the profits.) Anytime I get deep into this discussion it boils down to someone then saying...."Oh...I'm not talking about small and midsize companies. I'm talking about mega corporations". Well, first of all to that train of thought. Most people do not work for mega corporations. They work for small and midsize companies that make things and more and more people have more say in what happens. Also, to the mega corporations. The "ownership" of those public corporations are you and me. We own those stocks in either private accounts or retirement accounts. Do rich people own more stock? Sure. But, since we own stock too, they aren't the only ones who benefit from that. Heck, I purchased Facebook at $47 right after it came out and I am happy happy happy with that mega corporation's performance. I get so tired of the story line that those evil rich people have all the money and power. Yes, I said that when it comes to politics. However, YOU control your life. Not some rich person. YOU can make it better. YOU can start a company and be self employed if you want. There are loads of opportunity out there for someone who wants to be a business owner. YOU can get educated and get a better job. Just because Bill Gates has billions, that doesn't change your life. I--and others--have already thoroughly discussed the 'corporate welfare' system: socialize the costs and risks, privatize the profits. So you can lump Bill Gates into that pile of 'self made men'. As to your other point: economics and politics(gov'ts) are hand in glove, not separate from each other and as soon as you drive into your corporate parking lot, you by and large give most of your rights away: it's a top down dictatorship', 'my way or the highway'. Sure, you may have a say as to 'casual Fridays', or what's in the vending machine, or who's turn it is to make coffee, but not as to how the profits are utilized, etc. It's as described in the quote. A person may have stock in a company, but that person doesn't control how it's traded, you can only sell your shares. ~ 50% of U.S. workers don't have stock options or pensions. Then start your own company and be self employed. You then control what you do, who does it, when you do it and how. Correct, if you become the owner/employer, then you can be the dictator, you just confirmed my whole point. Most people are employees. Of course, there are more worker run enterprises cropping up these days that are more democratic. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Capitalism and democracy are opposites. That's kind of a stupid statement. One is an economic system and one is a form of government. Economic systems and governments are two different things. My problem with his way of thinking is that (it has a small class of owners that decides what is produced, where it is produced, how it is produced, and what to do with the profits.) Anytime I get deep into this discussion it boils down to someone then saying...."Oh...I'm not talking about small and midsize companies. I'm talking about mega corporations". Well, first of all to that train of thought. Most people do not work for mega corporations. They work for small and midsize companies that make things and more and more people have more say in what happens. Also, to the mega corporations. The "ownership" of those public corporations are you and me. We own those stocks in either private accounts or retirement accounts. Do rich people own more stock? Sure. But, since we own stock too, they aren't the only ones who benefit from that. Heck, I purchased Facebook at $47 right after it came out and I am happy happy happy with that mega corporation's performance. I get so tired of the story line that those evil rich people have all the money and power. Yes, I said that when it comes to politics. However, YOU control your life. Not some rich person. YOU can make it better. YOU can start a company and be self employed if you want. There are loads of opportunity out there for someone who wants to be a business owner. YOU can get educated and get a better job. Just because Bill Gates has billions, that doesn't change your life. I--and others--have already thoroughly discussed the 'corporate welfare' system: socialize the costs and risks, privatize the profits. So you can lump Bill Gates into that pile of 'self made men'. As to your other point: economics and politics(gov'ts) are hand in glove, not separate from each other and as soon as you drive into your corporate parking lot, you by and large give most of your rights away: it's a top down dictatorship', 'my way or the highway'. Sure, you may have a say as to 'casual Fridays', or what's in the vending machine, or who's turn it is to make coffee, but not as to how the profits are utilized, etc. It's as described in the quote. A person may have stock in a company, but that person doesn't control how it's traded, you can only sell your shares. ~ 50% of U.S. workers don't have stock options or pensions. Then start your own company and be self employed. You then control what you do, who does it, when you do it and how. Correct, if you become the owner/employer, then you can be the dictator, you just confirmed my whole point. Of course, there are more worker run enterprises cropping up these days that are more democratic. I never denied that when you work for someone else, they pretty much make the decisions. I have no problem with that and I always kind of chuckle and roll my eyes when someone does have a problem with it. If you don't like it, go work for yourself. Like I said, there are tons of opportunity to do so. Basically what you just said is that you hate working for someone else but you won't go and do that. You just want to sit back and complain that you are working for someone else. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Capitalism and democracy are opposites. That's kind of a stupid statement. One is an economic system and one is a form of government. Economic systems and governments are two different things. My problem with his way of thinking is that (it has a small class of owners that decides what is produced, where it is produced, how it is produced, and what to do with the profits.) Anytime I get deep into this discussion it boils down to someone then saying...."Oh...I'm not talking about small and midsize companies. I'm talking about mega corporations". Well, first of all to that train of thought. Most people do not work for mega corporations. They work for small and midsize companies that make things and more and more people have more say in what happens. Also, to the mega corporations. The "ownership" of those public corporations are you and me. We own those stocks in either private accounts or retirement accounts. Do rich people own more stock? Sure. But, since we own stock too, they aren't the only ones who benefit from that. Heck, I purchased Facebook at $47 right after it came out and I am happy happy happy with that mega corporation's performance. I get so tired of the story line that those evil rich people have all the money and power. Yes, I said that when it comes to politics. However, YOU control your life. Not some rich person. YOU can make it better. YOU can start a company and be self employed if you want. There are loads of opportunity out there for someone who wants to be a business owner. YOU can get educated and get a better job. Just because Bill Gates has billions, that doesn't change your life. I--and others--have already thoroughly discussed the 'corporate welfare' system: socialize the costs and risks, privatize the profits. So you can lump Bill Gates into that pile of 'self made men'. As to your other point: economics and politics(gov'ts) are hand in glove, not separate from each other and as soon as you drive into your corporate parking lot, you by and large give most of your rights away: it's a top down dictatorship', 'my way or the highway'. Sure, you may have a say as to 'casual Fridays', or what's in the vending machine, or who's turn it is to make coffee, but not as to how the profits are utilized, etc. It's as described in the quote. A person may have stock in a company, but that person doesn't control how it's traded, you can only sell your shares. ~ 50% of U.S. workers don't have stock options or pensions. Then start your own company and be self employed. You then control what you do, who does it, when you do it and how. I have done that. I'm not talking about working for someone here. I'm talking about those who have enough money to do things like deregulate pollution standards on a nationwide scale. Not just talking greenhouse gases here but also dumping into water and fracking. Or make it so their food processing plant health inspectors are employeed by the company itself, stuff like that. Or trying (and succeeding? - I never found out) to limit the amount a billion/trillion $ business can get sued for if they dump thousands of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. Going and starting my own business isn't going to net me enough millions and billions of $ to change American policy with. Most people with this kind of money were born into wealth and turned it into a bit more. Having my own business gives me no power to keep drinking water/food clean for myself or anyone else unless I'm insanely successful like Zuckerberg. There are lots of things out of our control whether we want to admit it or not, and policy should protect people as a whole. It shouldn't be made by people who have $ and are just going to do what's good for them and a few other people. I'm not talking about people who make $100-200k here. I'm talking about the 100 or so people in the entire country who can afford to buy policy. I don't care how hard I try, it's more unlikely than winning the lottery that I'll become one of those and can make that type of difference. 1 Link to comment
cornographic Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Capitalism and democracy are opposites. That's kind of a stupid statement. One is an economic system and one is a form of government. Economic systems and governments are two different things. My problem with his way of thinking is that (it has a small class of owners that decides what is produced, where it is produced, how it is produced, and what to do with the profits.) Anytime I get deep into this discussion it boils down to someone then saying...."Oh...I'm not talking about small and midsize companies. I'm talking about mega corporations". Well, first of all to that train of thought. Most people do not work for mega corporations. They work for small and midsize companies that make things and more and more people have more say in what happens. Also, to the mega corporations. The "ownership" of those public corporations are you and me. We own those stocks in either private accounts or retirement accounts. Do rich people own more stock? Sure. But, since we own stock too, they aren't the only ones who benefit from that. Heck, I purchased Facebook at $47 right after it came out and I am happy happy happy with that mega corporation's performance. I get so tired of the story line that those evil rich people have all the money and power. Yes, I said that when it comes to politics. However, YOU control your life. Not some rich person.%2 Link to comment
Alamo City Husker Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 The funny thing is Bernie Sanders, Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump all agree on this point. But, people are too stupid to unite in a non-partisan manner under this issue. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Capitalism and democracy are opposites. That's kind of a stupid statement. One is an economic system and one is a form of government. Economic systems and governments are two different things. My problem with his way of thinking is that (it has a small class of owners that decides what is produced, where it is produced, how it is produced, and what to do with the profits.) Anytime I get deep into this discussion it boils down to someone then saying...."Oh...I'm not talking about small and midsize companies. I'm talking about mega corporations". Well, first of all to that train of thought. Most people do not work for mega corporations. They work for small and midsize companies that make things and more and more people have more say in what happens. Also, to the mega corporations. The "ownership" of those public corporations are you and me. We own those stocks in either private accounts or retirement accounts. Do rich people own more stock? Sure. But, since we own stock too, they aren't the only ones who benefit from that. Heck, I purchased Facebook at $47 right after it came out and I am happy happy happy with that mega corporation's performance. I get so tired of the story line that those evil rich people have all the money and power. Yes, I said that when it comes to politics. However, YOU control your life. Not some rich person. YOU can make it better. YOU can start a company and be self employed if you want. There are loads of opportunity out there for someone who wants to be a business owner. YOU can get educated and get a better job. Just because Bill Gates has billions, that doesn't change your life. I--and others--have already thoroughly discussed the 'corporate welfare' system: socialize the costs and risks, privatize the profits. So you can lump Bill Gates into that pile of 'self made men'. As to your other point: economics and politics(gov'ts) are hand in glove, not separate from each other and as soon as you drive into your corporate parking lot, you by and large give most of your rights away: it's a top down dictatorship', 'my way or the highway'. Sure, you may have a say as to 'casual Fridays', or what's in the vending machine, or who's turn it is to make coffee, but not as to how the profits are utilized, etc. It's as described in the quote. A person may have stock in a company, but that person doesn't control how it's traded, you can only sell your shares. ~ 50% of U.S. workers don't have stock options or pensions. Then start your own company and be self employed. You then control what you do, who does it, when you do it and how. Correct, if you become the owner/employer, then you can be the dictator, you just confirmed my whole point. Of course, there are more worker run enterprises cropping up these days that are more democratic. I never denied that when you work for someone else, they pretty much make the decisions. I have no problem with that and I always kind of chuckle and roll my eyes when someone does have a problem with it. If you don't like it, go work for yourself. Like I said, there are tons of opportunity to do so. Basically what you just said is that you hate working for someone else but you won't go and do that. You just want to sit back and complain that you are working for someone else. Yeah, you kinda did attempt to deny it, but then I blew up your argument, LOL! Self employment has it's pluses and minuses, but it piggy backs on the thrust of the industrial economic situation, which is where most people are and what my point centers around. Ummm...no, and if you think that then you need reading comprehension lessons. I said the smaller the company the more say you have in what happens. That is totally different than what you are claiming. (if that is even the statement you are talking about.) Oh....so now you are saying owning a business has it's minuses. I thought they had all the power and rule the earth in all it's glory with no worries. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Buster, IIRC you own a business. I'm not talking about people like you here unless you're someone who'd purposely try to get a law changed so you can make more money even if it harms lots of people. I'm having trouble understand how/why you think it's okay that people can use their money to do this type of thing. We should be protected from that. Link to comment
cornographic Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Capitalism and democracy are opposites. That's kind of a stupid statement. One is an economic system and one is a form of government. Economic systems and governments are two different things. My problem with his way of thinking is that (it has a small class of owners that decides what is produced, where it is produced, how it is produced, and what to do with the profits.) Anytime I get deep into this discussion it boils down to someone then saying...."Oh...I'm not talking about small and midsize companies. I'm talking about mega corporations". Well, first of all to that train of thought. Most people do not work for mega corporations. They work for small and midsize companies that make things and more and more people have more say in what happens. Also, to the mega corporations. The "ownership" of those public corporations are you and me. We own those stocks in either private accounts or retirement accounts. Do rich people own more stock? Sure. But, since we own stock too, they aren't the only ones who benefit from that. Heck, I purchased Facebook at $47 right after it came out and I am happy happy happy with that mega corporation's performance. I get so tired of the story line that those evil rich people have all the money and power. Yes, I said that when it comes to politics. However, YOU control your life. Not some rich person. YOU can make it better. YOU can start a company and be self employed if you want. There are loads of opportunity out there for someone who wants to be a business owner. YOU can get educated and get a better job. Just because Bill Gates has billions, that doesn't change your life. I--and others--have already thoroughly discussed the 'corporate welfare' system: socialize the costs and risks, privatize the profits. So you can lump Bill Gates into that pile of 'self made men'. As to your other point: economics and politics(gov'ts) are hand in glove, not separate from each other and as soon as you drive into your corporate parking lot, you by and large give most of your rights away: it's a top down dictatorship', 'my way or the highway'. Sure, you may have a say as to 'casual Fridays', or what's in the vending machine, or who's turn it is to make coffee, but not as to how the profits are utilized, etc. It's as described in the quote. A person may have stock in a company, but that person doesn't control how it's traded, you can only sell your shares. ~ 50% of U.S. workers don't have stock options or pensions. Then start your own company and be self employed. You then control what you do, who does it, when you do it and how. Correct, if you become the owner/employer, then you can be the dictator, you just confirmed my whole point. Of course, there are more worker run enterprises cropping up these days that are more democratic. I never denied that when you work for someone else, they pretty much make the decisions. I have no problem with that and I always kind of chuckle and roll my eyes when someone does have a problem with it. If you don't like it, go work for yourself. Like I said, there are tons of opportunity to do so. Basically what you just said is that you hate working for someone else but you won't go and do that. You just want to sit back and complain that you are working for someone else. Yeah, you kinda did attempt to deny it, but then I blew up your argument, LOL! Self employment has it's pluses and minuses, but it piggy backs on the thrust of the industrial economic situation, which is where most people are and what my point centers around. Ummm...no, and if you think that then you need reading comprehension lessons. I said the smaller the company the more say you have in what happens. That is totally different than what you are claiming. (if that is even the statement you are talking about.) Oh....so now you are saying owning a business has it's minuses. I thought they had all the power and rule the earth in all it's glory with no worries. Now you're obfuscating. Oh, give me a clear example of alleged 'smaller company' that allows the employee to have a say in on what good or service is produced, how it's produced, and how the good/service and profits are distributed. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Buster, IIRC you own a business. I'm not talking about people like you here unless you're someone who'd purposely try to get a law changed so you can make more money even if it harms lots of people. I'm having trouble understand how/why you think it's okay that people can use their money to do this type of thing. We should be protected from that. I think you're confusing my conversation with you and the one I'm having with Cornographic. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Buster, IIRC you own a business. I'm not talking about people like you here unless you're someone who'd purposely try to get a law changed so you can make more money even if it harms lots of people. I'm having trouble understand how/why you think it's okay that people can use their money to do this type of thing. We should be protected from that. I think you're confusing my conversation with you and the one I'm having with Cornographic. Yes you're right Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Capitalism and democracy are opposites. That's kind of a stupid statement. One is an economic system and one is a form of government. Economic systems and governments are two different things. My problem with his way of thinking is that (it has a small class of owners that decides what is produced, where it is produced, how it is produced, and what to do with the profits.) Anytime I get deep into this discussion it boils down to someone then saying...."Oh...I'm not talking about small and midsize companies. I'm talking about mega corporations". Well, first of all to that train of thought. Most people do not work for mega corporations. They work for small and midsize companies that make things and more and more people have more say in what happens. Also, to the mega corporations. The "ownership" of those public corporations are you and me. We own those stocks in either private accounts or retirement accounts. Do rich people own more stock? Sure. But, since we own stock too, they aren't the only ones who benefit from that. Heck, I purchased Facebook at $47 right after it came out and I am happy happy happy with that mega corporation's performance. I get so tired of the story line that those evil rich people have all the money and power. Yes, I said that when it comes to politics. However, YOU control your life. Not some rich person. YOU can make it better. YOU can start a company and be self employed if you want. There are loads of opportunity out there for someone who wants to be a business owner. YOU can get educated and get a better job. Just because Bill Gates has billions, that doesn't change your life. I--and others--have already thoroughly discussed the 'corporate welfare' system: socialize the costs and risks, privatize the profits. So you can lump Bill Gates into that pile of 'self made men'. As to your other point: economics and politics(gov'ts) are hand in glove, not separate from each other and as soon as you drive into your corporate parking lot, you by and large give most of your rights away: it's a top down dictatorship', 'my way or the highway'. Sure, you may have a say as to 'casual Fridays', or what's in the vending machine, or who's turn it is to make coffee, but not as to how the profits are utilized, etc. It's as described in the quote. A person may have stock in a company, but that person doesn't control how it's traded, you can only sell your shares. ~ 50% of U.S. workers don't have stock options or pensions. Then start your own company and be self employed. You then control what you do, who does it, when you do it and how. Correct, if you become the owner/employer, then you can be the dictator, you just confirmed my whole point. Of course, there are more worker run enterprises cropping up these days that are more democratic. I never denied that when you work for someone else, they pretty much make the decisions. I have no problem with that and I always kind of chuckle and roll my eyes when someone does have a problem with it. If you don't like it, go work for yourself. Like I said, there are tons of opportunity to do so. Basically what you just said is that you hate working for someone else but you won't go and do that. You just want to sit back and complain that you are working for someone else. Yeah, you kinda did attempt to deny it, but then I blew up your argument, LOL! Self employment has it's pluses and minuses, but it piggy backs on the thrust of the industrial economic situation, which is where most people are and what my point centers around. Ummm...no, and if you think that then you need reading comprehension lessons. I said the smaller the company the more say you have in what happens. That is totally different than what you are claiming. (if that is even the statement you are talking about.) Oh....so now you are saying owning a business has it's minuses. I thought they had all the power and rule the earth in all it's glory with no worries. Now you're obfuscating. Oh, give me a clear example of alleged 'smaller company' that allows the employee to have a say in on what good or service is produced, how it's produced, and how the good/service and profits and are distributed. Obfuscating....that's funny. Fine.... I have a Sales manager, VP of Production, VP of finance and a board of directors that has employees on it. My sales team, through my Sales Manager gives our management team input into what products are needed on the market. We work with many outside suppliers and sources to develop those products and determine the best way to produce them. VP of production and and his team have a lot of input into how it is produced. The VP of finance has a lot of say into how it is all financed. Like most companies my size, most of the profits are reinvested back into the company in the form of equipment, advertising, labor...etc. Those decisions are made within my management team that almost all of them are not owners of the company. Going on down the chain, my maintenance manager has a lot of say into what equipment is purchased, how it is used and where it goes. Shift managers have a say in how their team is managed and they give feedback as to changes that need to be made. Very very few hiring and firing decisions are even done by ownership in this company. A common question that is constantly asked to people that are being managed..."What do you need to be able to do your job better?" Heck, come to think of it, even my house keeper has complete control over how she does her job. When she does it and what products and equipment she uses to do that job. Any major (macro) decisions that need to be made go through the board of directors (with employees on it). This includes investments, profit distribution and even employee benefits...etc. My wife works for a company that has 5 departments. Those departments work basically as independent businesses. The owner of the company really doesn't do much because he has a great management team under him. He basically spends his time in public relations and doing things outside the company. Those departments have many managers that determine what work is going to be bid on, how it's bid on and how it is ultimately accomplished. They have control over their own budgets, and what income they bring in and what their departments spend it on. If a new facility is to be built or purchased in a department, that decision is done within that department with input from many people down the chain of command. Again, even in that company, most of the profits are reinvested back into the company with the department heads and their teams making the decisions as to what to do with it. Now, I know people who didn't like working for her company and they went out and started their own company and they are very happy. Heck, they even subcontract back to her company and still have a relationship. Link to comment
Recommended Posts