CEO raises minimum wage to $70000, takes $70000 wage himself until profits are met.

[Nate505]

he is trying the same thing as socialism on a small scale. in this exemaple his coompany.
giving everyone not equal oppurtuinty but equal outcome

Salary isn't the only outcome of the job, but even if it were so he's a private business owner compensating his employees the way he sees fit, without any government intervention. How is that not capitalism?

 

[DutchJazzer]

Salary isn't the only outcome of the job, but even if it were so he's a private business owner compensating his employees the way he sees fit, without any government intervention. How is that not capitalism?

i am not talking about government yada yada.

i am talking about within a capitalist system. on a small scale he rpacticed socialism.
meaning within the bubble of his company meaning. everybody gets the same wether ur a highly skilled degree carrying worker. or an uneducated worker. everybody gets 70.000 salary right

so whether ur more valuable because of your skill/education or just a slacker who just shows up for work and farts his way through the day.
that is socialism whether u work hard or hardly work you get the same.

so within the bubble consisting of only the company its some sort of socialism on a small scale. within a capitalistic country

 

[Miggs]

i am not talking about government yada yada.

i am talking about within a capitalist system. on a small scale he rpacticed socialism.
meaning within the bubble of his company meaning. everybody gets the same wether ur a highly skilled degree carrying worker. or an uneducated worker. everybody gets 70.000 salary right

so whether ur more valuable because of your skill/education or just a slacker who just shows up for work and farts his way through the day.
that is socialism whether u work hard or hardly work you get the same.

so within the bubble consisting of only the company its some sort of socialism on a small scale. within a capitalistic country

Your writing would make Karl Marx proud.

 

[Miggs]

Let them quit their jobs and make burgers for the same amount of money.

I doubt many would do it. Minimum wage jobs suck for the most part. Not that I'm in favor of a $15 minimum wage, but at some point the minimum wage (if one believes in it at all) needs to rise to pace the costs of living expenses. Hell, living in Denver at $15 an hour is difficult. The average rent here for a one bedroom apartment is around $900, which comes to about 47% of the net salary (assuming one takes home around 75% of their $15 an hour after deductions). If you have a kid and need child care you're totally ****ed at that point. We are paying $840 a month for child care (aka $10,080 a year), and this includes my wife's discount at her job. It is ****ing crippling us financially now.

How old is your child?

 

[Nate505]

i am not talking about government yada yada.

i am talking about within a capitalist system. on a small scale he rpacticed socialism.
meaning within the bubble of his company meaning. everybody gets the same wether ur a highly skilled degree carrying worker. or an uneducated worker. everybody gets 70.000 salary right

so whether ur more valuable because of your skill/education or just a slacker who just shows up for work and farts his way through the day.
that is socialism whether u work hard or hardly work you get the same.

so within the bubble consisting of only the company its some sort of socialism on a small scale. within a capitalistic country

If you're not talking about the government, you're then not talking about socialism. I don't know what else to tell you. This guy owns his business and has set his salary at the rate he chose to do so. Nobody forced him to do this. He still owns the business and all the associated assets with it. he can change their salaries back whenever he wants to. Nowhere in the Capitalism Rule Book does it state that a lower skilled employee needs to make less than a higher skilled employee. In fact I've worked for companies where an idiot son in law has a high paying job because of nepotism, even though he was hardly the most skilled person in the building. Now it tends to work that way because more often than not, companies value skill and supply and demand makes skilled employees less readily available, therefore they demand a premium on their employment. But it's perfectly capitalist to pay everyone the same wage. It usually will dip into profits if you pay them too much, or leave you're company with no employees if you pay them too little, but that's all part of capitalism too.

I really think you have no clue what socialism is, at least if you think this is socialism. It isn't. If he feels an employee is lazy and not doing their job right, he's free to fire them. In fact, he should fire them. The only thing really unique here is people who have skills/experience resent that they are making the same as people who don't (I didn't read that the skilled employees had their pay cut...in fact I think they got raises, just not at the same percentage as the unskilled employees). They are free to find a job that pays them better, or find a job where that disparity exists. In fact a few have. Again, that's capitalism.

 

[Nate505]

How old is your child?

5.5 months.

 

[DutchJazzer]

If you're not talking about the government, you're then not talking about socialism. I don't know what else to tell you. This guy owns his business and has set his salary at the rate he chose to do so. Nobody forced him to do this. He still owns the business and all the associated assets with it. he can change their salaries back whenever he wants to. Nowhere in the Capitalism Rule Book does it state that a lower skilled employee needs to make less than a higher skilled employee. In fact I've worked for companies where an idiot son in law has a high paying job because of nepotism, even though he was hardly the most skilled person in the building. Now it tends to work that way because more often than not, companies value skill and supply and demand makes skilled employees less readily available, therefore they demand a premium on their employment. But it's perfectly capitalist to pay everyone the same wage. It usually will dip into profits if you pay them too much, or leave you're company with no employees if you pay them too little, but that's all part of capitalism too.

I really think you have no clue what socialism is, at least if you think this is socialism. It isn't. If he feels an employee is lazy and not doing their job right, he's free to fire them. In fact, he should fire them. The only thing really unique here is people who have skills/experience resent that they are making the same as people who don't (I didn't read that the skilled employees had their pay cut...in fact I think they got raises, just not at the same percentage as the unskilled employees). They are free to find a job that pays them better, or find a job where that disparity exists. In fact a few have. Again, that's capitalism.

why cant a business be run socialistic?
if a coutnry can be socliastic.
a small communicty can also be run that way.

so can a bussiness, it will fail msot likely. but a business can be run that way

 

[Gameface]

why cant a business be run socialistic?
if a coutnry can be socliastic.
a small communicty can also be run that way.

so can a bussiness, it will fail msot likely. but a business can be run that way

Socialism is an economic system, just like communism and capitalism. A company existing in a mixed yet predominantly capitalistic system must deal with the economic realities inherent in that system. Governments determine the economic system. Only they have the force of law.

A socialist inspired pay structure within a capitalistic enterprise in a predominantly capitalistic system is not socialism. Socialism, capitalism and to an even greater extent communism require the use of force (via the government) to make the system viable. Creating socialism independent of the overall economic system and absent government enforcement is not in any real sense socialism.

 

[DutchJazzer]

Socialism is an economic system, just like communism and capitalism. A company existing in a mixed yet predominantly capitalistic system must deal with the economic realities inherent in that system. Governments determine the economic system. Only they have the force of law.

A socialist inspired pay structure within a capitalistic enterprise in a predominantly capitalistic system is not socialism. Socialism, capitalism and to an even greater extent communism require the use of force (via the government) to make the system viable. Creating socialism independent of the overall economic system and absent government enforcement is not in any real sense socialism.

do you have a degree in economics?

 

[♪alt13]

If you're not talking about the government, you're then not talking about socialism. I don't know what else to tell you. This guy owns his business and has set his salary at the rate he chose to do so. Nobody forced him to do this. He still owns the business and all the associated assets with it. he can change their salaries back whenever he wants to. Nowhere in the Capitalism Rule Book does it state that a lower skilled employee needs to make less than a higher skilled employee. In fact I've worked for companies where an idiot son in law has a high paying job because of nepotism, even though he was hardly the most skilled person in the building. Now it tends to work that way because more often than not, companies value skill and supply and demand makes skilled employees less readily available, therefore they demand a premium on their employment. But it's perfectly capitalist to pay everyone the same wage. It usually will dip into profits if you pay them too much, or leave you're company with no employees if you pay them too little, but that's all part of capitalism too.

I really think you have no clue what socialism is, at least if you think this is socialism. It isn't. If he feels an employee is lazy and not doing their job right, he's free to fire them. In fact, he should fire them. The only thing really unique here is people who have skills/experience resent that they are making the same as people who don't (I didn't read that the skilled employees had their pay cut...in fact I think they got raises, just not at the same percentage as the unskilled employees). They are free to find a job that pays them better, or find a job where that disparity exists. In fact a few have. Again, that's capitalism.

That's not necessarily true either. It is true of Marxist socialism but isn't true of all forms of socialism.

To answer his question yes socialist businesses work but they have to obey the market like everyone else. They are called Cooperatives.

 

[Gameface]

do you have a degree in economics?

No.

 

[DutchJazzer]

No.

ok