Jump to content


The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

You know that's not a real alternative. I can also turn it around and say if the owners don't like having to given a small portion to their employees, then they should take their skills and build the business without any employees - it's just as silly.

 

I simply don't understand the thinking that an owner who's business has not just made it, but has $100+ million is somehow so put upon to only keep 80%. And even more crazy is that the 20% isn't just evaporating or going to competitors but going to the people who helped the owner make the business survive and thrive.

This type thinking is completely foreign to me. There are so many fallacies. What does it matter how much the company is worth? $1000 or $100M, it's just arbitrary. You have no way of proving or assuring that the employees who may gain ownership had anything at all to do with helping the success of the company.  What about intellectual property? Are others entitled to the ideas that made it successful also? Companies that are built from the ground up take more work and sacrifice than the typical 9 to 5er can even imagine.  You may get your wish though. If I had started and built a company to this level and then was told I had to give 20% away, I would liquidate every cent I could get out of it, take MY money and leave it and all the entitled employees to rot. But no worries, Im sure that forklift operator or newly hired welder could do just as fine a job as I ever did rebuilding the damned thing. It's asinine that anyone can begin to think this is right or fair. If we want to begin to fix wealth inequality in this country, and we do, I would suggest there are about a thousand better ways to go about it than common thievery and commandeering.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

You know that's not a real alternative. I can also turn it around and say if the owners don't like having to given a small portion to their employees, then they should take their skills and build the business without any employees - it's just as silly.

 

I simply don't understand the thinking that an owner who's business has not just made it, but has $100+ million is somehow so put upon to only keep 80%. And even more crazy is that the 20% isn't just evaporating or going to competitors but going to the people who helped the owner make the business survive and thrive.

The company pays employees. 
 

people act like it’s slave labor and they are forced to do it. 
 

and, why is starting their own company not and option? It happens all the time. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

You know that's not a real alternative. I can also turn it around and say if the owners don't like having to given a small portion to their employees, then they should take their skills and build the business without any employees - it's just as silly.

 

I simply don't understand the thinking that an owner who's business has not just made it, but has $100+ million is somehow so put upon to only keep 80%. And even more crazy is that the 20% isn't just evaporating or going to competitors but going to the people who helped the owner make the business survive and thrive.

You do realize that the value of the company isn’t necessarily tied to the income of the owners, right?

 

Nobody has said if these employees that were Given stock are also going to guarantee loans and inject capital if needed. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, RedDenver said:

but rather giving a piece to the people who built the company.

 

This is where you lose the true believers of Rugged Individualism™‬. They built their companies from the ground up with their own bare hands damnit. All these spoiled brat employees are lucky to be fortunate enough to work an exhausting full time+ job for $15/hr and should stop sucking off the teet of those more successful more accomplished more capable business owners making millions. 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, JJ Husker said:

If I had started and built a company to this level and then was told I had to give 20% away, I would liquidate every cent I could get out of it, take MY money and leave it and all the entitled employees to rot.

 

1 hour ago, JJ Husker said:

It's asinine that anyone can begin to think this is right or fair. If we want to begin to fix wealth inequality in this country, and we do, I would suggest there are about a thousand better ways to go about it than common thievery and commandeering.

 

Leaving people to rot is what you consider 'right', huh? 

 

Sorry, I don't believe someone who would have such a selfish, greedy, proud attitude towards their fellow man actually gives a single s#!t about wealth inequality. You would leave the non-wealthy that work for YOUR company to rot.

 

 

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
9 hours ago, husker98 said:

The Democratic party has a bit of a communist problem, they agree and like a number of policies they implemented. The issue is that a fair number of people that live in this country had a number of their family members killed by communists, me included, although a ways back in my families history. So it ends up being inconsiderate and insensitive to those who have suffered because in their eyes Obama or Sanders Complimenting Castro is one in the same as those two idiots complimenting Hitler for anyone of his policy successes. 

 

Our modern politicians are increasingly history deaf, and it's becoming very alarming.

Yeah but Carter Page was gossiping in a bar!

 

Just a decade ago it was considered an 'insult' to call the Ds socialists with lot's of fake outrage.  Now they all but confirmed their opponents.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

I think people should read the employee ownership plan beyond the ownership stake portion. Alot of good ideas in there. One particular idea I like besides the banning of stock buy backs is the idea to educate retiring business owners and employees in employee ownership and working to help retiring owners sell businesses to their employees with low interest government loans. I think that is a very solid idea personally. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, The Dude said:

Grew up in communist countries?  As in, they fled communist countries to come here?

 

 

If they fled that’d make my point even stronger. But no. 

 

I know several people from former Soviet:Soviet Bloc countries and China. The former weren’t  living in Communist countries anymore when they left and the latter didn’t flee. 

Link to comment

  

8 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

You do realize that the value of the company isn’t necessarily tied to the income of the owners, right?

 

Nobody has said if these employees that were Given stock are also going to guarantee loans and inject capital if needed. 

 

You can ask the employees when they get the stock if they would like to do those things?

 

Link to comment

11 minutes ago, teachercd said:

f#&% it, I am going to start my own business.  From what I can gather from a lot of you it is super easy to do and there is no chance of it failing and I will be super rich.

I'm not sure how you gathered that from absolutely anything that has been said in this thread, but you should go for it. 

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment
14 minutes ago, teachercd said:

f#&% it, I am going to start my own business.  From what I can gather from a lot of you it is super easy to do and there is no chance of it failing and I will be super rich.

 

It's actually pretty hard and rare...The percentage of firms to achieve sales of $100 million or more has remained pretty much the same since 1980, at 0.04% (that's 4 hundredths of one percent).  (Of course that is counting all businesses that start up, which some posters say you can't do...?)

 

According to IRS stats from 2013, out of 5,887,804 corporations only 18,504 had receipts over $100 million (0.3%).  

 

But I believe in you!

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, FrankWheeler said:

 

It's actually pretty hard and rare...The percentage of firms to achieve sales of $100 million or more has remained pretty much the same since 1980, at 0.04% (that's 4 hundredths of one percent).  (Of course that is counting all businesses that start up, which some posters say you can't do...?)

 

According to IRS stats from 2013, out of 5,887,804 corporations only 18,504 had receipts over $100 million (0.3%).  

 

But I believe in you!

Thank you!

 

I would like to bring you on staff!

9 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

I'm not sure how you gathered that from absolutely anything that has been said in this thread, but you should go for it. 

Thank you!

 

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
13 hours ago, BlitzFirst said:

I'd say we're a LONG way from the top on many things.  And here we are squabbling over a guy who wants to help us get back to the top by educating people, reducing income inequality, and providing social programs to assist people who need help

So giving employees 20% stake in a company will solve all of America's ills??  I don't think so.  I do agree that there are a lot of things to 'fix'  that is why I said deal with corporate welfare.  Level the playing field by not picking winners through what Bernie calls Corp Socialism.   Create tax incentives so more people can build companies and compete in the free market.  Many of the issues you mention are worthy of our attention and should be dealt with holistically but 20% company ownership rule isn't the way to do so. 

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...