(January 26, 2014 at 9:01 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:And what exactly will that give you?

Satisfaction.


I'm not out to win the Lady Byng Trophy, you know.

Well, I guess you're not one to actually get your hands dirty either. Let the peasants do the job while you watch and laugh.

(January 26, 2014 at 8:59 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: The issue here is value of labour. You get just about any body that will make a good employee at macdonalds, where as few people have what it takes to run one of these massive companies. Some of those guys spend 16 hours a day building those companies from the ground up, others slit some throats to get into position, and many do both.

I understand that and I'm not suggesting that a burger flipper deserves to earn wages equal to the salary of the CEO. I'm suggesting that the difference in labor value is not exponential. CEOs should make more, no argument there. What I want to know is, what is the justification for CEOs making obscene amounts of money off the backs of people he pays so little that those people can't afford to live a life secure from poverty?

I can never be a libertarian because I cannot come up with even the slightest justification for the proposition that people who literally have no material need should be able to continue accumulating unnecessary personal wealth at the direct expense of people who can't afford basic survival with (or in many tragic cases, without) government assistance, let alone a moderate, minimally secure lifestyle.

CEOs of major companies can still be ridiculously wealthy while paying their employees enough for a financially-secure lifestyle. Owners of small businesses can still make enough for a comfortable lifestyle while paying their employees enough for a financially-secure lifestyle. If they can't, why should they be owning or operating buisnesses? They are clearly not good at it.

Quote:What I want to know is, what is the justification for CEOs making obscene amounts of money off the backs of people he pays so little that those people can't afford to live a life secure from poverty?

In my world, there is no such justification. But in an internationalist, globalistic capitalist worldview, self-interest is the only justification they'll ever need.
That's what today's worldview gives the people.
They do not have to think about their workers beyond of how they view a piece of machinery.

Quote:I can never be a libertarian because I cannot come up with even the slightest justification for the proposition that people who literally have no material need should be able to continue accumulating unnecessary personal wealth at the direct expense of people who can't afford basic survival with (or in some tragic cases, without) government assistance, let alone a moderate, minimally secure lifestyle.

I don't think that anyone that works for a corporation or in a factory as skilled labor is unable to afford a minimally secure lifestyle.
That's not even the case in my country.

(January 26, 2014 at 9:42 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: I don't think that anyone that works for a corporation or in a factory as skilled labor is unable to afford a minimally secure lifestyle.
That's not even the case in my country.

It's extremely common in the United States.

(January 26, 2014 at 9:50 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote:

(January 26, 2014 at 9:42 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: I don't think that anyone that works for a corporation or in a factory as skilled labor is unable to afford a minimally secure lifestyle.
That's not even the case in my country.

It's extremely common in the United States.

What is the minimum wage in the US for skilled workers?

(January 26, 2014 at 10:07 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote:

(January 26, 2014 at 9:50 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: It's extremely common in the United States.

What is the minimum wage in the US for skilled workers?

The same as it is for unskilled. Which is to say, not much. $7.25 per hour.

(January 26, 2014 at 10:07 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: What is the minimum wage in the US for skilled workers?

The minimum wage is far too low for unskilled workers to acquire the skills necessary to participate in most middle-class jobs without putting themselves in virtually perpetual debt, which is one of the big problems.

(January 26, 2014 at 10:13 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(January 26, 2014 at 10:07 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: What is the minimum wage in the US for skilled workers?

The same as it is for unskilled. Which is to say, not much. $7.25 per hour.

To put that in perspective, as a qualified diesel mechanic in Oz I'm on almost $37.00 an hour plus penalties.

(January 26, 2014 at 8:23 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: Since you don't believe in religion, why don't you go on to murder a few CEO's?

Perhaps because he doesn't believe in religion?

(January 26, 2014 at 9:26 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote:

(January 26, 2014 at 8:59 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: The issue here is value of labour. You get just about any body that will make a good employee at macdonalds, where as few people have what it takes to run one of these massive companies. Some of those guys spend 16 hours a day building those companies from the ground up, others slit some throats to get into position, and many do both.

I understand that and I'm not suggesting that a burger flipper deserves to earn wages equal to the salary of the CEO. I'm suggesting that the difference in labor value is not exponential. CEOs should make more, no argument there. What I want to know is, what is the justification for CEOs making obscene amounts of money off the backs of people he pays so little that those people can't afford to live a life secure from poverty?

I can never be a libertarian because I cannot come up with even the slightest justification for the proposition that people who literally have no material need should be able to continue accumulating unnecessary personal wealth at the direct expense of people who can't afford basic survival with (or in many tragic cases, without) government assistance, let alone a moderate, minimally secure lifestyle.

CEOs of major companies can still be ridiculously wealthy while paying their employees enough for a financially-secure lifestyle. Owners of small businesses can still make enough for a comfortable lifestyle while paying their employees enough for a financially-secure lifestyle. If they can't, why should they be owning or operating buisnesses? They are clearly not good at it.

Actually I think that if we had a true libertarian system this would not happen as they would be too much competition for them to take those wages. As it is with mixed economies they lobby the government to do whatever they want.