It’s an asset charged as a fixed expense, depreciated over time. It is an expense, generally property or equipment, but still is an expense, which is defined as money spent in pursuit of revenue, which is determined before profit.
I agree with this statement but thought I’d have a go at challenging it just for fun. The nature of profits and wages is relative to whether or not a business model requires workers to make profit. For example some companies make money off of owning the result of a worker’s labor (patents, software, creative work etc) rather than their ongoing labor. So while not all profits are necessarily unpaid wages, they are still dependent on the exchange of labor.
My boss likes to show us how much money the company is making at our quarterly meetings. I think he thinks it’s morale-building, but I know, in at least the case of me and a co-worker, that all it does is make us think of how low our pay is.
Henry Ford may have been a prick, but even he had the common sense to realize paying your workers enough to buy your products was mutually beneficial. All this wealth hoarding going on serves nobody but the ultra rich that are simply addicted to watching numbers go up.
Which is why I’m hesitant to actually call those greedy fucks “capitalists”, because they’re the very antithesis of capitalism. They literally break the system for their own benefit, and thanks to US politicians to being corrupt enough to allow themselves to be bought out for a few bucks from said greedy fucks, nobody in power is incentivized to actually do something.
Capitalism works with money flowing constantly, and it needs that to work well. When you have some Warren Buffet and Elongated Muskrat kind of people just hoarding wealth… well, you get the shitshow that is the the US today. $300B circulating in the system would be awesome, and I would think that is a good indicator of a healthy economy; but when $300B is pretty much tied to one person, then congrats, we missed the point of capitalism.
The only goal of capitalism is to raise capital. Any method that raises capital is as valid as any other. The working class people are essentially just a bank to draw capital from, nothing more. Not to them anyway.
Anything else they told you about capitalism in school was bullshit. It does one thing. Increase capital through any means.
There is a logical end point where the working class can keep no capital for themselves, and produce it until they die. And what happens when there’s no more shareholder value to extract from the working class I wonder?
It’s a post hoc rationalization of why he paid more. He paid more because he literally couldn’t staff his factory because the assembly line work was so dull.
This chart shows the median wage has gone up since the pandemic, even if using 2023 dollars
So the wages in the US are better than they have ever been, even inflation adjusted. You can go back as long as you want, they were not higher in the 50s, contrary to popular belief
So the wages in the US are better than they have ever been, even inflation adjusted. You can go back as long as you want, they were not higher in the 50s, contrary to popular belief
That’s just obviously false. Are you saying people who could pay for college by working summer jobs, and who could buy a car and house and raise a family on a single income were making less than people today who spend decades paying off student loans, and who can barely afford rent on a one-bedroom apartment?
Sure, but people pining for the lifestyle of the 50s forget they are looking at the top 10% of incomes. Life in the 50s wasn’t that good compared to now for the AVERAGE person
Except they had things like the G.I. bill which gave them money to go to college or buy a house and improve their lives. Every man who was in the military in WWII had that as an option. Maybe some didn’t utilize it, but that was by choice. If you include their spouses and children, that’s way more than 10% of the population.
Wages were comparatively higher too.
But I don’t know anyone on the left pining for the lifestyle of the 1950s, that’s something conservatives want. I wouldn’t mind the wages of the 1950s (adjusted for inflation) and I wouldn’t mind taxing the rich at 90%, but I sure would mind the racism and the sexism.
But that’s the argument people are making, that you could live better on one income in the 50s. But actually, not really. You would have less money, even if you include inflation. People these days have higher rates of home ownership, car ownership, TV ownership than people in the 50s.
Look at ANY metric of “having money or stuff” and people today are better off
Corporations literally cannot pay you what you’re worth. The very nature of capitalism requires exploitation. For capitalism to function, there must be an inequity between a worker’s true value, i.e. their productive output, and their cost. The system is literally designed to fuck you over from the top down.
Ehhh, I’d argue the exact opposite. The people at the top hoarding so much wealth are arguably the worst capitalists. Capitalism demands cash flow, and the more the better. Few people hoarding and controlling so much of it is breaking it.
I always love to point to healthcare. Between my portion and my employer my health insurance is over $15000 for my family. Yet I have a $5000 deductible still. Imagine if all that money that my employer is paying me I was actually getting. Then apply that to every family. But instead, a few companies make all the money off that. The problem is healthcare shouldn’t be a business, but a public service just like police, firefighters, roads, etc. In an emergency I’m not going to shop hospitals, and in non emergency I don’t have a choice anyway, my insurance company decides that.
It’s the most broken system and everyone at the top is making too much money from it that it will never change until it gets so bad for the middle class it somehow starts bringing them down
This is such a weird take. You say the people at the top are the worst capitalists, but they literally succeeded the most at capitalism. You say capitalism demands cash flow, but… does it? Who or what demands that cash flow? Certainly not the free market.
You then give a perfect example of capitalism failing, medical care.
people will worry so much about this but will elect the same people over and over again to lead based on shirt color just because they change the shirt to red or blue same clothing factory
maybe younger people from a new political party might be able to help or rioting in the streets or something
63% of employees are unable to cover a $500 emergency expense, according to a new survey from SecureSave, a provider of a financial technology platform to help employers provide emergency savings benefits.
Well, they wouldn’t have any reason to lie about that, would they?
We tried to de-couple healthcare from employment about a decade ago, and all the support for some form of universal healthcare seemed to vanish overnight as the general population fell for corporate propaganda and right-wing scare tactics.
I always wondered why neighborhoods, HOAs, and apartment buildings etc don’t form their own insurance plans to entice people to live there. Businesses get better rates for group plans so why don’t other organizations? Insurance isn’t my field so I don’t know if it’s possible or how it would work, just curious.
It probably would work if you had a large enough pool of people, but how much bigger can you get than if 300 million people were pooled together and collectively they negotiated rates on drugs and doctor visits? Thus the ultimate idea of some form of universal coverage.
Where your idea kind of falls apart is that you need someone to manage all this. Good luck getting Kenny in apartment 5D to take care of this when he can’t even turn the volume of his TV down after 10 PM. But I think obama care kind of does this on a state level. I could be wrong, but I think that’s what the various marketplaces they talk about are. But each state manages it differently. Not shockingly, red states tend to mismanage things and offer worse services than blue states. In the end it is all a crutch. This should be on a national level like every other industrialized nation offers.
Kenny in 5D actually died 2 weeks ago but his body hasn’t decomposed yet because he has his AC set for 65 degrees. Eventually it will stink up the place and force Tom in 4D to relocate for 3 weeks as his apartment is cleaned up after Kenny in 5D’s body liquefied and soaks through the floor and into Tom in 4D’s ceiling.
“Where your idea kind of falls apart is that you need someone to manage all this”
This is nearly nonsensical. It’s not a completely fleshed out idea, but just because the commenter hasn’t named a possible manager doesn’t mean it’s bad.
You think anybody is gonna make the perfect proposal to solve our problems in 50 words or less?
Back in his heyday Kenny in 5D could have. But not after his divorce. That really broke him. He missed his kids, but that bitch of an ex wife wouldn’t let him see them. He was just a shell of a man after that. Of course now Kenny in 5D is dead. Rest in peace, Kenny in 5D.
This strikes me as a “you will own nothing and be happy” solution. Instead of paying workers a fair wage so they can put something into savings for a rainy day, you will be at the mercy of your employer for support.
This seems to be the trend. In the future, you will have most of your needs at least met, but not through your own means, because you will have no means whatsoever. You will not be able to take care of yourself without your corporation parent. This is a very coercive situation.
I’m not doing well healthwise right now and my employers told me that they were concerned about my health and I could take as many unpaid sick days as I want.
While wages are obviously a significant factor here, I still wouldn’t be surprised if the primary cause for this is simply the fact that most people aren’t very skilled at managing their personal finances.
I make a pretty decent living, but in discussions with my coworkers who earn as much as I do, and often even more, it becomes apparent that many of them are essentially living from hand to mouth. In contrast, I have a year’s worth of wages invested in stocks and enough cash to purchase two more cars like the one I already own. Finances and saving are subjects I enjoy discussing, but the vast majority of people have zero interest in them, and this has a real impact on their lives.
You’ve been downvoted, but I get what you’re saying. There’s just people who never really got out of the pocket money model of spending whatever you have all the time.
It’s quite possible to do everything right and still end up with not enough, but I definitely work with people who could do better. One guy, between them and their partner earn more than I do, yet are in far worse financial shape, and it’s simply because they see money in their account, and see no reason not to spend it, meaning those little events (that don’t happen all the time, but do happen) like a car failing an MOT, or a boiler breaking in winter, or a roof leak means they have no way to cover it.
I think there’s definitely a market for managed bank accounts, that handle your bills and outgoings, save up an emergency pot for you, put into investments when that fills up, and give you a spuff money pot for takeaways and other frivolous shit.
City life can also be expensive, and too few people move away when it isn’t working for them.
The first change made it so employees may save up to $2,500 in after-tax money in a separate account alongside their retirement accounts. Workers would potentially be automatically enrolled in the programs, which would defer the money automatically through payroll deductions.
Read: banks lobby to get money automatically deposited into their specific accounts so they can generate interest from it the employees will never see, make it more difficult for employees to actually get their money
Ah yes, the time proven effective strategy to get the poor back on board the against-their-own-interests train:
"Unchecked Capitalism will save you from the problems that Unchecked Capitalism directly caused!" 🤣
If that sounds reasonable, here’s a solution for climate change: lets double the amount of carbon shit we’re pumping into the air. Fuck it, double or nothing!
My dad needed $20,000 worth of dental work. So they took a trip to Costa Rica for maybe $3k-5k and got the dental work done for free. Because Costa Rica gives free healthcare, including dental, to anyone in its borders. And they got a good vacation out of it.
They could afford to do that though. Most people couldn’t.
Worse: I had a root canal done years ago. Then I found out, after the tooth broke, that the root canal was done incorrectly and the tooth needed to be removed. I had to pay for the root canal and to fix the tooth and to have it removed. Fucking dentists, man.
I just had to pay a $50 copay to get a gastroenterologist to tell me he wasn’t concerned about my problems, it was because of my ulcer, and to add Mylanta to my medications in the mornings. He literally could have told me that over the phone. American healthcare is a racket.
Add comment