Jump to content



Photo

We are the 99%


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#31 arbman

arbman

    Quant

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 19,504 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 03:10 PM

US capitalism basically failed, but perhaps the global capitalism succeeded...



I don't think US capitalism has failed, we have become the wealthiest nation in about 200 years...


The production culture and the momentum of innovation in the US companies have been actually the biggest assets of the US that created the wealth. However, I think the capitalism has been failing slowly due to abuse, some of the poorest run companies such as banks should've been allowed to fail before becoming systematic risks to the society. It would've slowed down the growth, but also get rid of the bad debt, instead the govt subsidized them. Now we have constant systematic risk, this must definitely change.

Currently, the national debt after the bail outs and additional debt to "run" the capitalism is already enough to wipe out the equity built up over 200 years, if US is forced to settle only part of its debt today. US has simply an horrendous amount of debt and you cannot extract the value faster from the equities to pay it off, such as in higher taxes, neither by inflating the currency with more debt any faster. So, the existing debt is pretty much now permanent and it is still growing, the govt's goal is now reduced down to only pay its interest to sustain the growing debt and I doubt it is a long term viable solution...

As I said, US capitalism could've provided the long term, sustainable, but slower growth, and the debt could've been better settled against the equity making the society sustainable. The social benefits and govt spending would've then had to be adjusted better on a regular basis and balanced. But instead the profits got capitalized and the losses got socialized over and over, the liability of social entitlements are just choking the govt and in fact, the business liability of social security is also another problem preventing the hiring too as the additional profit margins are just too small, this must probably change...

Now, even though the private property is protected, there is nationally just too much debt and the govt has the right to sell private property to pay off the national debt as Treasuries are basically backed by the full faith of the people of US, if in fact US becomes bankrupt (the day the debt ceiling cannot be fiscally raised due to the interest liability ONLY). Basically even the richest Americans' paper wealth may not have any equity value in this case...

BUT, all hope is not lost, there is one solution and it also comes from the innovation and production culture of American companies. Americans and in fact all human civilization became strong because we learned to invent machines and produce cheaper and consume more. This production and consumerism are basically what built the American economy. It happened because of cheaper energy over and over. So, if we can find a way to produce significantly more energy (equivalent of $1-10 per bbl oil) again, I think the bottlenecks preventing the strong growth in US can be fixed. However, it can be abused to its destruction again with the current crony capitalist mentality, this must still change...

Anyway, the humanity and in fact people working in US companies definitely have more know-how about systematically producing better goods, but as I said, also being held down by the cost of energy. I believe the big oil, big coal and in fact even uranium must be ALL replaced with at least 10 times cheaper energy, or better perhaps 100 times cheaper. So, this reconsidered thorium fission (nuclear) reactor which had its proof of concept built about 50 years ago and yet buried away apparently due to the momentum of uranium reactors and weapon programs, or Rossi's fusion catalyzer, if it really works, will change the humanity and I am sure US companies can still grow faster and better since it has the culture of innovation intact and US is still one of the biggest consumer market of the world.

I am not as much concerned about the US Dollar and the oil trade supporting the US Dollar. I believe all nations, EU or China, must inflate their currencies to overcome many resource challenges. The idea is to grow the equity faster than the debt though, it can only happen with cheaper energy and more efficient use of resources. US still has the technological capability to lead. In US, every rally after the govt interventions ended up with the energy prices going significantly higher and choking any reflation effort, this must also basically change...


#32 arbman

arbman

    Quant

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 19,504 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 03:28 PM

If minimum wage in a corporation is $20,000 annually, then by using a maximum factor of let's say 50 would limit CEO pay at $1 million, annually. Before the CEO can get a raise, he would have to raise all wages proportionally, which will require that the company makes a profit. If the company has a loss, no one gets a raise, including the CEO.


pdx. this is what I said above;

US could have chosen to either advance as a society to keep its middle class or destroy it, I think the decision is clear.


Basically this kind of decision comes from Congress and it just didn't because I also said;

Roger, perhaps 99% figured out that Congress only passes the laws that 1% approve of, so there is no point in talking to or protesting the govt. The govt doesn't have the authority to represent the people anymore.


Basically, people lost their hope and they are going to those controlling the money, Wall Street. They are controlling the govt, they are controlling the people. But people do not want to work for them or pay taxes to the govt to eventually feed them...

The US capitalism over the past decade has basically failed, maybe these movements will change the mentality a bit. It has to start from somewhere.

BTW, these are all compensation issues, but if you start up a company in your garage and grow it by hiring over time, you still own the company's equity or billions like Steve Jobs did. This is completely a different issue and has nothing to do with compensation. You can sell your entire company for billions (if you can find a buyer) or keep it, this is still a decision at the discretionary of the company's founder.

Normally, if you own a company as a shareholder, you would only make money from sales after paying your employees and suppliers. So, it makes little sense for a shareholder to have absolutely no authority to get rid of the board of directors basically taking the company's profits into their pockets, worse company's revenue before any profits.

#33 salsabob

salsabob

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,164 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 03:36 PM

I see some are comparing today to what it was like when they got out of school back in the 60s or 70s.

But here is what has really changed -

Posted Image



You're likely in the top 2-5% (over $200k/yr household), possible in top 1% (est for 2011 to be over $400K) but how long do you think this is sustainable?

Also, if you're in that 2-5%, you might want to know that the top 1% is leaving you faster behind than between any other segments. :bye:
John Galt shrugged, outsourced to Red China and opened a hedge fund for unregulated securitized credit derivatives.

If the world didn't suck, wouldn't we all just fly off?

#34 arbman

arbman

    Quant

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 19,504 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 05:14 PM

Salsa, this is the best representation I have ever seen about what's going on, thanks for sharing. I do not get how the average household is earning less given they are now two income earners, but I can relate to the fact that there is a faster wealth transfer in between the different segments of the society... Basically, this is not about sucking up and working harder, the top 1% is just farming the bottom 99% better now completely legally.

#35 colion

colion

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,169 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 07:58 PM

Critique of Hacker-Pierson

#36 DrSP

DrSP

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 2,391 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 08:33 PM

I see some are comparing today to what it was like when they got out of school back in the 60s or 70s.

But here is what has really changed -

Posted Image



You're likely in the top 2-5% (over $200k/yr household), possible in top 1% (est for 2011 to be over $400K) but how long do you think this is sustainable?

Also, if you're in that 2-5%, you might want to know that the top 1% is leaving you faster behind than between any other segments. :bye:


Excellent Salsabob. I agree with Arbman.

I used the classic case of teachers struggling for money. Compared to teachers, Doctors make 20x, lawyers make 40x, small execs make 50x, corporation execs make 50,000-50,0000x. I mean is there a limit to money? Tell me what is the difference between Qadaffi and any CEO who is making 50 million $ and above in this country. Why is Qadaffi killed for making billions and those in this country are not?

I agree with Keith we should all work hard. But, even upon working very hard without complaining, millions of people in this country are not earning anything compared to the 1%. Working hard doesn't mean people need to work like slaves without proper wages.
You could be a billionaire or an industrial worker or a teacher or a moderator of a forum - Hold a good conscience because that is what matters.

#37 CLK

CLK

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 10,787 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 09:24 PM

I see some are comparing today to what it was like when they got out of school back in the 60s or 70s.

But here is what has really changed -

Posted Image



You're likely in the top 2-5% (over $200k/yr household), possible in top 1% (est for 2011 to be over $400K) but how long do you think this is sustainable?

Also, if you're in that 2-5%, you might want to know that the top 1% is leaving you faster behind than between any other segments. :bye:


Excellent Salsabob. I agree with Arbman.

I used the classic case of teachers struggling for money. Compared to teachers, Doctors make 20x, lawyers make 40x, small execs make 50x, corporation execs make 50,000-50,0000x. I mean is there a limit to money? Tell me what is the difference between Qadaffi and any CEO who is making 50 million $ and above in this country. Why is Qadaffi killed for making billions and those in this country are not?

I agree with Keith we should all work hard. But, even upon working very hard without complaining, millions of people in this country are not earning anything compared to the 1%. Working hard doesn't mean people need to work like slaves without proper wages.




I'm all for hard work , while I'm there for 8 hours......no person should feel they have to work 10-12 hours
every day and a lot of Saturdays just to get ahead or survive, there are other things to life besides working
for a company.

#38 pdx5

pdx5

    I want return OF my money more than return ON my money

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 9,527 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:12 PM

Question for salsabob & DrSp & arb What in your opinion is the best method of redistributing the assets? You know and I know the rich will not just donate them.
"Money cannot consistently be made trading every day or every week during the year." ~ Jesse Livermore Trading Rule

#39 DrSP

DrSP

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 2,391 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:51 PM

Question for salsabob & DrSp & arb

What in your opinion is the best method of redistributing the assets?
You know and I know the rich will not just donate them.


1, Why is FICA capped at & > 108k? Suggest to correct it and make it payable on increments.
2, The Rich argue that the lower they are taxed, the higher their hiring rate is. In reality, the rich corporations with cash in hand are buying assets, merging with companies, buying patents to boost their future. Are they employing more people? No. So, stop assuming that lower taxes lead to higher employment. Extract more and distribute more. They will hire later when economy improves...that is all BS. Every company will try to restrict employees and expand by buying assets first and then look for employing more people.
3, Cap the CEO bonuses, severence pays, and stock packages. Why does Brian Moynihan need 9 M $ and 10 M $ stock bonuses? To fire 30,000 employees? If Moynihan's pay is capped to 500K, or even 1 Million $, how many employees can you hire using the 9 M $? There are 1000s of companies publicly listed in USA. I am sure you can employ at least half a million people if you cap salaries of CEOs, Board of Directors, officers etc.

4, I am not even talking salaries of Doctors and lawyers. In a litigation or malpractice case, if the award win is 700K $ (as an example), do you know how much the patient gets? May be about 30 - 50 K max. that is. Rest of the 600K$ goes to the lawyers' firm.
You could be a billionaire or an industrial worker or a teacher or a moderator of a forum - Hold a good conscience because that is what matters.

#40 DrSP

DrSP

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 2,391 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 12:23 AM

pdx, Do you know the doctors are not happy the way they are paid. :lol: If you sit in a social gathering with the doctors, you will know they will vent frustation at various issues like underpaid, health care reform bill, medicare/ medicaid payments etc. An example of a popular rant: Typically birth of a baby costs 13k - 15k. Obstetricians rant that they are paid only 750$ - 1000$ per delivery while the significant work is done by them. Their rant is that the hospital takes majority of the payment and they are not happy that many staff in the Hospital administration are paid higher than them while doing no important work. Most of the hospitals are non-profit, 99%. Means they somehow declare either they don't make profits or they declare they are running in losses. As a result, they don't pay taxes or simply put, they avoid taxes. :huh:
You could be a billionaire or an industrial worker or a teacher or a moderator of a forum - Hold a good conscience because that is what matters.