Debate Mansion

   

Most overpaid/underpaid profession? (Page 35)

Post Reply New Post

Page 35 of 37

return_to_hades

IF-Veteran Member

return_to_hades

Joined: 18 January 2006

Posts: 20232

Posted: 18 July 2010 at 11:14pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Gauri_3

Originally posted by souro

Actually, there is so much that can be said on this. Most probably you also might've realised this, that when explaining things about this topic, posts can tend to be very lengthy. Thinking and saying something is much simpler as both have almost the same speed but thinking and typing it out on a forum is totally out of sync as the typing part is so time consuming. I had to cut down many points simply because I didn't want to type any more.
True that.  I saw Sarina's posts on monopolies and oligopolies etc.  I so wanted to point out how we see more of them during socialism and communism.  Free market does not encourage such maladies.  In fact, all capitalist countries have rules and regulations to check such maladies and these rules are enforced strictly.  But then, who has the time to type out all the examples out there to support this fact!!!

I believe in my post I pointed out the flaws and limitations of communism and concluded that it is a failed system. Monopolies and oligarchies result in laissez faire capitalism. The minute you introduce regulation you are introducing a 'socialist' concept. The extent of socialism is what varies. Most economies are mixed. I think that most economies still lean too much towards the laissez faire end and that we need more regulation.

For example free markets typically do not have minimum and maximum markup laws. Not unfairly undercutting a fair trader or not overcharging because you are the only seller is a parity concept. There was a time when predatory pricing in most US states was legal, in many it still is. Minimum wage, benefits, vacation etc are actually 'socialistic' concepts that promote equity and parity.

The telephone services and communications enjoyed in United States is completely because of a very socialistic stance of breaking up Bell Corporation into seven competing sub companies.

Now in the Nike sweat shop example in the free market Nike finds a country with cheap labor and goes there. Fair game. But this country does not have minimum wages and work condition laws that Nike must comply with. Over population, unemployment, economic desperation make these markets work far below fair wages and benefits. There is an ethics to fair employment and what is wrong in pushing Nike to pay these people more so that these people can uplift themselves above poverty and actually get better education and lifestyle. Especially because Nike can afford to.

Based on a purely fair trade aspect slavery and bonded labor would be perfectly kosher if overpopulation and economic hardship create a market where labor is available for full time sale and there are buyers. People illegally buy west Africans as slaves all the time. Many agree to be 'bought and sold' to escape their country, rape and a chance at the 'American Dream' Why not legalize it as fair trade of domestic labor? There is a buyer - there is a willing seller. 
 
Same with K's schemes - sau baar point out kiya and that too with examples how such schemes have been failing all across the world.   In India, equal opprtunities translate into repeated opportunities for rich sc/st/backward classes.  It is not reaching the root levels.  In US, majority of the kids avail the public school system where schooling is free.  Elementary edication is mandatory by law and most universities offer scholarships, grants and education loans.  We get citations from court if my high schooler misses more than five classes of the same subject - we have to go to the court and explain the reasons to the judge behind all those unexcused absences.  Citations are issued if an elementary or middle school student missed more than 14 days out of a school year - even if they are excused absences.  Even after all these measures, if most ghetto kids prefer to be stuck in ghetto life style than how is it a professional's fault?  Why would  a CEO be forced to earn less just because so many chose to drop out of high school and ended up making min wage flippin burgers?!?!?!  So much so for "equal opportunity" rants! 
 
I am dead against reservation and certain principles of affirmative action that provide unfair opportunities to undeserving people simply because they belong to some minority. I have never opposed that education, employment and compensation should be fair and based on due merit.

However, taking education in India. We have a very limited education system. Education is not reaching the lower classes and rural parts of the country. We all realize that education is a critical aspect in personal and career development. There are children out there who are gifted intellectually and have the perseverance to succeed. Perhaps more so that children who are sailing through school. It is just that they either don't have access to education or are limited to cheap and low quality public education. It is not a child's fault that they were born into a family and a social background that holds them down. We do need to work on finding some system that provides parity and fairness to all students.

In the United States yes, public education is free. The government even provides several grants and loans so that people can have an education. Yet we have many high school drop outs and entire societies where education is not a priority. Again the problem is not always the child who is less capable or stupid, or that the child had no potential at all. History has created beaten down backward societies where even capable children are held behind, and their intellect beaten down and held back by abusive parenting and crime. We need to work on finding some system that ends this cycle.

For this the CEO does not have to earn less, but every person in society reinvests a small percentage of their income into improving the quality of labor in society. And I consider it a reinvestment, not a loss or giving up of money. Of course government schemes and certain policies have failed. At the same time many private institutions and charities have had success stories in impoverished neighborhoods. Maybe that is the way to go in the education aspect.


Europe's economic downfall is the most current and apt example for failed socilistic schemes with forced floor and ceiling put on compensation ranges.  There goes your egalitarian rants!!!  Ab iss sey zyada koi aur kya boley!!!

Let us not be hasty to conclude that all of Europe has fallen. There are still several 'stable' European economies. The Euro is also rapidly gaining again after that one crash. In terms of long term economics it will be at least another 10 years before we can draw legitimate economic conclusions on Europe.

 
Socialism discourages enterprenuership and that discourages creation of new jobs - even if they are menial low paying jobs.  Unions and higher wages for the laborers were the main reasons American businesses were running losses and many were forced to close shop and most were forced to outsource operations and other admin tasks.  What was the end result ---  Jo doh paisey kama rahey thhey uss sey bhi gaye.  Ab yeh sab koi samajhna hee na chahey toh kya kar saktey hain!!!  Kitna type kartey rahey jab ek baar type karney sey bhi samajh naheen aayaa!

I have never proposed discouraging entrepreneurship nor have I ever said that demand/supply or free market are not the right systems. I have always encouraged meritocracy - people succeeding on merit. However, I find current systems failing in the aspect of fairness and not giving enough chance to let people prove their merit.

And yes Unions are the other extreme. If its dangerous for corporates to have too much power, it is dangerous for workers to have too much power too. And social equity puts checks in place to prevent unions from being runaway. Here recently we had the GM plant close down in Janesville, leaving many unemployed. We had a couple apply at jobs at our place. We laughed at their resumes and applications. A lot of people were high school drop outs, who only knew to drive forklifts from point A to point B and expected $25+ an hour wages + benefits for that.

A functional social equity system would prevent idiotic unions from negotiating over the moon wages for dumb ***** and bringing down potentially successful companies.

Similarly unemployment is another abused system. We have some legitimate unemployed people who are skilled and qualified but lost jobs because of runaway unions and/or poor company management. At the same time we have people abusing the system. We received a couple of applications where people said in the phone interview that they applied only to meet their weekly job application quota.

I feel corporates/high earning CEO should pay higher taxes so that unemployment offices do not just give out money like that. People go to the offices. Attend workshops and acquire real job skills. They sit down in workshops, look for and apply for jobs they are qualified for. These offices also give displaced workers training so that they are not just dumb ***** and can do something. I know corporate taxes sounds unfair and people doubt that the government can do it right. However, I find this more fair that people just siphoning money.

Other ideas - encouraging collective entrepreneurship, - employee owned LLC's so that the profits and losses are equitably distributed - making people to have higher stakes in their own success and forcing them to be more competitive. Fair trade guilds and trading coops - like we farmers do. We have checks and balances in place so that one years or one farms crop failure is not the end all and there is a safety net for the local industry or that farm to bounce back into fair competition.

Maybe someday if we meet, we can argue in length in person so you don't have to read or type as much. I plan to recruit doppelganger on my side.


I am actually happy that this discussion has ended. Tongue
I hated the way it ended though. 
 

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

qwertyesque

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "Most overpaid/underpaid profession? (Page 35)" in Debate Mansion forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

Gauri_3

IF-Sizzlerz

Joined: 12 November 2006

Posts: 13617

Posted: 19 July 2010 at 12:18am | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

return_to_hades

IF-Veteran Member

return_to_hades

Joined: 18 January 2006

Posts: 20232

Posted: 19 July 2010 at 12:31am | IP Logged
^ Could you fix the colors in your post.

Few points

 - When I speak of Europe - I refer to the modern EU and the Eurosocialism that is more recent. There is no doubt that Eastern Europe and East Germany failed. Here is an interesting read if you care - http://www.amazon.com/Sixty-Million-Frenchmen-Cant-Wrong/dp/1402200455

- The system includes everything including government and citizens. Current processes fail. We need new ones. At the same time citizen has to accept part of the blame.

- There are steps
a) Acknowledge the problem
b) Acknowledge the need to fix the problem
c) Propose and test solutions
d) Back to the drawing board.
I'm at c. I am thinking. There is no magic solution I can randomly pull out. I have ideas some expressed roughly, some still forming. I'm sorry that is not satisfactory.

- There is no my side or K's side. I agree with his perspective and have support some points. At the same time I believe I have made posts summarizing my views. There are differences too. There are no two sides to a debate - there can be multifaceted debates. I'm for balancing economy without hampering the meritocracy.

- Too bad that you too wish not to debate further.



 

souro

Moderator

souro

Joined: 27 January 2007

Posts: 13871

Posted: 19 July 2010 at 12:33am | IP Logged
Originally posted by Mister.K.

Originally posted by cuckoocutter


lol i see we painted ourselves a nice rosy picture, where we got ourselves a hard-working owner who takes risks. but why we talking about them? for most part, owners are either mom and pop shop keepers (and no one wud grudge them their earnings), or small-pension-shareholders (who earn measly amounts in their mutual funds).

That's easy to explain.
a. supply and demand
b. take it or leave it
c. top management risks all
d. people who make tons of money are brilliant and hard working.
e. people at the bottom of the totem pole are some lazy dimwits.


what we shud actually be talkin about are the top execs of companies they dint start. that's the main problem we got. it seem to me these blue suits take nowhere the level of risk that wud be commensurate with their earnings.it's not even all performance-based with them. that dont happen on wall street where numbers are objective and measurable... yet people can and do get ahead because of non-performance factors.

Oh! I got this. This is easy as 1-2-3.
a. supply and demand
b. take it or leave it
c.
top management risks all
d. people who make tons of money are brilliant and hard working.
e. people at the bottom of the totem pole are some lazy dimwits.


[U}when we talk of value generation, we also gotta be clear what value we talkin about. is it value to larry flynt and penthouse? lol.[/U] come on, he sees value pimpin women in his tabloid. his girls make a million bucks or so for the fine art of being able to lie spread-eagled on some bed wearing frilly laces. perfectly justifiable you wud say, right?does he deserve his hundreds of millions? do the chicks deserve the mill? lol.

C'mon! I can't believe you are making these silly points. This one, by far, is the easiest of all to explain.
a. supply and demand
b. take it or leave it
c.
top management risks all
d. people who make tons of money are brilliant and hard working.
e. people at the bottom of the totem pole are some lazy dimwits.


see [U} there's ethical societal value and there's business value to a pimp or someone who knows how to pander or pull a fast one on people[/U]. i am all for people who create ethical societal value, not people who can get paid fortunes because of somethin notorious they did.

Dude, you are just not getting it. The response is clear as crystal.
a. supply and demand
b. take it or leave it
c.
top management risks all
d. people who make tons of money are brilliant and hard working.
e. people at the bottom of the totem pole are some lazy dimwits.


coming to wall street bankers, what risks do they take? heads, they make millions. tails, at worst they lose their jobs, but find another one because they got experience lol (albeit a losing one at that). it aint their own money they were plying to begin with. its same thing with so many of the execs.

Scams on wall street? Who cares? It's irrelevant. You are missing the big picture. It's all about
a. supply and demand
b. take it or leave it
c.
top management risks all
d. people who make tons of money are brilliant and hard working.
e. people at the bottom of the totem pole are some lazy dimwits.


based on my observations, there's very few owners who really create societal value that get paid huge sums (more power to them i say). that's a red herring and it's distraction talking about them. we shud be talking about others who get ahead big without creating much value. that's what's sick about the system we got. it's the rare case where we got an owner who creates value and where he gets paid big. that i got no problem with.

Nice try. But you are forgetting something
a. supply and demand
b. take it or leave it
c.
top management risks all
d. people who make tons of money are brilliant and hard working.
e. people at the bottom of the totem pole are some lazy dimwits.



That's so nice to see, you making a well thought out post backed with good evidence. No doubt our shouting from rooftop advocate of factual argument couldn't resist liking your post.

All those grand words. I want to do this and I want to do that. Go and start a venture, distribute all the profit earned evenly among your employees and once your method becomes successful, come back and say that yes this is how it should be done. But for now all such attempts has given us failed ventures and failed states and we're going by that real life fact.

return_to_hades

IF-Veteran Member

return_to_hades

Joined: 18 January 2006

Posts: 20232

Posted: 19 July 2010 at 12:39am | IP Logged
Originally posted by souro


That's so nice to see, you making a well thought out post backed with good evidence. No doubt our shouting from rooftop advocate of factual argument couldn't resist liking your post.


That is because it is downright funny. Perhaps not much of an argument, it is funny. C'mon even someone on the other side has to see that its funny. Heck Republicans laugh at Bush jokes, Democrats laugh at Obama jokes - because sometimes even between the lines - somethings are just funny. I don't know if Mister. K meant it to be that humorous - but I laughed.

Gauri_3

IF-Sizzlerz

Joined: 12 November 2006

Posts: 13617

Posted: 19 July 2010 at 12:48am | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

Gauri_3

IF-Sizzlerz

Joined: 12 November 2006

Posts: 13617

Posted: 19 July 2010 at 12:53am | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

Gauri_3

IF-Sizzlerz

Joined: 12 November 2006

Posts: 13617

Posted: 19 July 2010 at 12:53am | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
Most overrated / underrated profession is?

2 3 4 5

raj5000 39 3825 12 July 2009 at 9:39am
By U-No-Poo
Mistakes in Medical Profession

2 3 4

raj5000 31 1365 21 December 2007 at 6:41pm
By ~globetrotter~
Profession and Potential raj5000 3 361 03 July 2007 at 1:27am
By mermaid_QT
Profession Vs Hobby IdeaQueen 2 434 21 September 2006 at 11:45pm
By IdeaQueen

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.