The Reaganomics Fraud:

[mrplunkey]

How about worker safety, industrial pollution, child labor, hours, that sort of thing, should those be determined by the market, or regulated?

First of all, don't kid yourself. Worker safety has and will be regulated by the trial lawyers. So that one is a done deal.

Industrial pollution: If it's a truly hazardous material, then sure, establish laws to regulate it. But look at the garbage we regulate now. CO2? That's the most ridiculous crap I've seen in a while. An even better solution would be to qualify private businesses to implement the standards to completely avoid the EPA debacle we have right now.

Child Labor: Who is going to do business with companies that use child labor? Companies that use child labor legally who are half-way across the planet get shelled publicly for that. There's no way that would fly in the US.

You have a misguided notion that businesses simply want to rape and pillage. The don't. They want to make money. And making money requires a host of skills, some of which involve making sure you don't do things that turn-off your customers (i.e. child labor, pollution).

 

[PICK3]

First of all, don't kid yourself. Worker safety has and will be regulated by the trial lawyers. So that one is a done deal.

no law ... no lawyers

just sayin'

Industrial pollution: If it's a truly hazardous material, then sure, establish laws to regulate it.

what about "special interest group" influences

 

[mrplunkey]

no law ... no lawyers

just sayin'

Yeah, but when you get sued, you don't get sued for violating some OSHA guideline. You get sued for negligence or some other general-purpose tort. Even if there's a law for the safety shield not being high enough, they'll get you for the broader stuff.

what about "special interest group" influences

How could it possibly be any worse than it is now?

 

[PICK3]

Yeah, but when you get sued, you don't get sued for violating some OSHA guideline. You get sued for negligence or some other general-purpose tort. Even if there's a law for the safety shield not being high enough, they'll get you for the broader stuff.


How could it possibly be any worse than it is now?

my point was (I guess agreeing with db) we prob need some govmint regulation

can't return to cost estimating mining jobs by the lives of coal miners and associated payouts

just sayin'

 

[mrplunkey]

my point was (I guess agreeing with db) we prob need some govmint regulation

can't return to cost estimating mining jobs by the lives of coal miners and associated payouts

just sayin'

There's nothing wrong with setting up broad rules of the road. But what we do now it 1,000x that.

 

[PICK3]

There's nothing wrong with setting up broad rules of the road. But what we do now it 1,000x that.

agreed, butt when you define one of govmint's functions as to regulate ... the line between "regulate whom" and "how much" gets blurred


just sayin'

 

[Mr. dB]

You have a misguided notion that businesses simply want to rape and pillage. The don't. They want to make money. And making money requires a host of skills, some of which involve making sure you don't do things that turn-off your customers (i.e. child labor, pollution).

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Some businesses will do anything to gain an advantage, and with no regulations or other oversight someone will push the limits of good taste, and as soon as one does it, everyone will have to if they want to compete.

 

[javaguru]

Good lord that's a load of pie in the sky. The greed that Capitalism is most susceptible to is Corruption.

In honor of the royal wedding, I should point out that Capitalism has been the best ism humans have ever embraced, Feudalism is shitty and I can't understand celebrating monarchy.

 

[javaguru]

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Some businesses will do anything to gain an advantage, and with no regulations or other oversight someone will push the limits of good taste, and as soon as one does it, everyone will have to if they want to compete.

Interesting, I've contracted with fortune 100's and 500's and have always been treated well even though as a small independent contractor I would have no real recourse if they fucked me over. I did my law school thesis in banking law (S&L Crisis), a highly regulated industry, and it doesn't prevent abuse it just means the regulated divert capital to compliance, politicians, and the regulators. That means that taxpayers pay for the increased government bureaucracy as well as the increased cost of the regulated product to pay for compliance, politicians and regulators. After every bubble congress passes a law claiming it will never happen again and within the next twenty years it happens again. Nobody remembers the Clinton Peso bailout of Wall Street because there was a dot com bubble.

 

[mrplunkey]

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Some businesses will do anything to gain an advantage, and with no regulations or other oversight someone will push the limits of good taste, and as soon as one does it, everyone will have to if they want to compete.

Have you ever worked in or for a medium or large-sized business?

You believe you have this in-depth knowledge of how business works. I'd like to hear why.

 

[binö]

this thread put me into a regan-esque fog

 

[Mr. dB]

this thread put me into a regan-esque fog

We've induced Oldtimer's Disease?

 

[Mr. dB]

Have you ever worked in or for a medium or large-sized business?

You believe you have this in-depth knowledge of how business works. I'd like to hear why.

I don't think I have any in-depth knowledge of how business works at all. I think it's just human nature, without oversight abuses will occur and in time will become the new norm. 'Cause that's how it was when the Capitalists had free reign before.

 

[javaguru]

I don't think I have any in-depth knowledge of how business works at all. I think it's just human nature, without oversight abuses will occur and in time will become the new norm. 'Cause that's how it was when the Capitalists had free reign before.

Honestly, from a historical perspective, we have little to fear from corporations and a lot to fear from elected officials and particularly the fed government.... who polices the dudes with absolute authority that can control every aspect of your life because they have the guns?

Even if you hate Bush and the cost plus contracts, which I do, Haliburton wasn't the perpetrator of the Iraq war..it was your elected officials...both Dem and Repub... Haliburton just benefited from the political system created by both parties.....Just sayin'.

 

[mrplunkey]

I don't think I have any in-depth knowledge of how business works at all. I think it's just human nature, without oversight abuses will occur and in time will become the new norm. 'Cause that's how it was when the Capitalists had free reign before.

And who exactly do you think "oversee" these would-be abusers? Hint: They are humans too.

What do you think is more difficult to unseat? A sitting congressman or a sitting CEO? Shareholders will gut a CEO when he stops doing his job whereas a congressman like Barney Frank, or Nancy Pelosi can stick around forever.

Average US CEO career: ~5 years (According to Booz Allen)
Average US Congressman career: 10 years (based on 110th congress)

So 535 people last twice as long in their jobs than thousands (if not tens of thousands) of private sector leaders.

 

[calveless wonder]

I like chicken

 

[mrplunkey]

Honestly, from a historical perspective, we have little to fear from corporations and a lot to fear from elected officials and particularly the fed government.... who polices the dudes with absolute authority that can control every aspect of your life because they have the guns?

Even if you hate Bush and the cost plus contracts, which I do, Haliburton wasn't the perpetrator of the Iraq war..it was your elected officials...both Dem and Repub... Haliburton just benefited from the political system created by both parties.....Just sayin'.

Exactly.

One wants to make a profit so as to satisfy its shareholders.

The other wants to retain power forever and had the authority to implement its will through violent means.

I think I'll stick with the corporation.

 

[musclemom]

Have you ever worked in or for a medium or large-sized business?

You believe you have this in-depth knowledge of how business works. I'd like to hear why.

I'm going to tell you a story, but I have to run kind of long to do it to explain it properly. I think I tell a pretty good story, though, so it shouldn't be too painful to read.

My husband has worked for a Fortune 500 company for 35 years. He's a facilities manager, one of the most potentially dangerous jobs in the organization. One year two people died, one in a cardboard compactor (yes, just like out of some fucking horror movie) and one guy had a heart attack in a ceiling working on wiring, and he wasn't discovered until he started stinking up the place.

How could such a situation arise? Well I'll tell you, when these buildings were designed it was with the expectation that a small team of facilities people would be on site every day. One day some beancounter said, "Hey, why do we pay these three guys?" and someone else said "I dunno," because, you see, it's a whole crop of beancounters who weren't around when the buildings were designed, they never spoke to the architects, and they sure as hell don't come down from their penthouse offices to talk to the guys in the field and ask what all three people actually DO, so one guy gets cut.

A few years go by, along comes another crop of beancounters who are all hot to show the bosses how much money they can save the company (to justify their salaries) and GUESS WHAT?! Someone says "Hey, why do we pay these two guys?" and someone else said "I dunno." And we've gone from three men to one man scrambling around, playing triage with facilities maintenance. He's a good man, and he cares about his job and does the best he can, so now the place is looking a little rattier at times, and sometimes toilets don't work or the odd light is out but the doors lock at night and the heating and air conditioning work, which is all the beancounters give a fuck about.

Then the corporation is purchased by ANOTHER corporation and we have the same scenario ONCE AGAIN. Except now the beancounters ask "Why is this one guy sitting around in this one building all day long? He could be maintaining two buildings just as easily." (an aside, it's been my observation that people who don't actually DO maintenance have ZERO idea what goes on behind the scenes to maintain major building systems).

At one point, my husband was taking care of three buildings. I was afraid he was going to stroke out from the stress alone.

And no, the job isn't being done properly anymore. He can't get on top of his preventative maintenance, and on top of that the budget for facilities systems has been cut to dirt. As an example, I can tell you for a fact that nearly every building has TWO chillers but only one works, and virtually ALL of those chillers are using the outlawed refrigerant.

All this time, every year he gets outstanding reviews and a raise of about 25 to 50 cents an hour (which, conveniently enough, is usually just enough to cover his share of the group health insurance). Meanwhile, the top echelon guys? Oh, their salaries go up by the hundreds of thousands, every year. And this company gives MILLIONS to charity (which is tax deductible, unlike employees).

Oh, and by the way, outsourcing was a disaster, they did that for a couple of years. The buildings virtually disintegrated, it was impossible to get the preventative maintenance done at all because everything was on the clock and needed to be justified on paper, a work order had to be put it ... NOBODY thinks about putting in the work order for the start up procedures for the furnace or chiller! Simply put, you cannot maintain a building that was designed the way these buildings are, to be stand alone facilities with their own systems of heating, cooling, plumbing, etc., to be run like a strip mall store. They don't care that industrial equipment is not a window air conditioning unit.

The beancounters don't think about any of this, they don't care about it. They just want it done, expecting people to grease up their assholes and shit out this work as fast as it takes to explain it and not wanting it to cost so much as a dime while they're at it.

That is the facts of life for someone who works in the trenches of a Fortune 500 corporation.

 

[mrplunkey]

I'm going to tell you a story, but I have to run kind of long to do it to explain it properly. I think I tell a pretty good story, though, so it shouldn't be too painful to read.

My husband has worked for a Fortune 500 company for 35 years. He's a facilities manager, one of the most potentially dangerous jobs in the organization. One year two people died, one in a cardboard compactor (yes, just like out of some fucking horror movie) and one guy had a heart attack in a ceiling working on wiring, and he wasn't discovered until he started stinking up the place.

How could such a situation arise? Well I'll tell you, when these buildings were designed it was with the expectation that a small team of facilities people would be on site every day. One day some beancounter said, "Hey, why do we pay these three guys?" and someone else said "I dunno," because, you see, it's a whole crop of beancounters who weren't around when the buildings were designed, they never spoke to the architects, and they sure as hell don't come down from their penthouse offices to talk to the guys in the field and ask what all three people actually DO, so one guy gets cut.

A few years go by, along comes another crop of beancounters who are all hot to show the bosses how much money they can save the company (to justify their salaries) and GUESS WHAT?! Someone says "Hey, why do we pay these two guys?" and someone else said "I dunno." And we've gone from three men to one man scrambling around, playing triage with facilities maintenance. He's a good man, and he cares about his job and does the best he can, so now the place is looking a little rattier at times, and sometimes toilets don't work or the odd light is out but the doors lock at night and the heating and air conditioning work, which is all the beancounters give a fuck about.

Then the corporation is purchased by ANOTHER corporation and we have the same scenario ONCE AGAIN. Except now the beancounters ask "Why is this one guy sitting around in this one building all day long? He could be maintaining two buildings just as easily." (an aside, it's been my observation that people who don't actually DO maintenance have ZERO idea what goes on behind the scenes to maintain major building systems).

At one point, my husband was taking care of three buildings. I was afraid he was going to stroke out from the stress alone.

And no, the job isn't being done properly anymore. He can't get on top of his preventative maintenance, and on top of that the budget for facilities systems has been cut to dirt. As an example, I can tell you for a fact that nearly every building has TWO chillers but only one works, and virtually ALL of those chillers are using the outlawed refrigerant.

All this time, every year he gets outstanding reviews and a raise of about 25 to 50 cents an hour (which, conveniently enough, is usually just enough to cover his share of the group health insurance). Meanwhile, the top echelon guys? Oh, their salaries go up by the hundreds of thousands, every year. And this company gives MILLIONS to charity (which is tax deductible, unlike employees).

Oh, and by the way, outsourcing was a disaster, they did that for a couple of years. The buildings virtually disintegrated, it was impossible to get the preventative maintenance done at all because everything was on the clock and needed to be justified on paper, a work order had to be put it ... NOBODY thinks about putting in the work order for the start up procedures for the furnace or chiller! Simply put, you cannot maintain a building that was designed the way these buildings are, to be stand alone facilities with their own systems of heating, cooling, plumbing, etc., to be run like a strip mall store. They don't care that industrial equipment is not a window air conditioning unit.

The beancounters don't think about any of this, they don't care about it. They just want it done, expecting people to grease up their assholes and shit out this work as fast as it takes to explain it and not wanting it to cost so much as a dime while they're at it.

That is the facts of life for someone who works in the trenches of a Fortune 500 corporation.

That is a good story.

As a guy who hears the bean counters every day, let me tell you how the conversation goes:

BC: "Brian, costs in our XYZ facility are killing us. We're up 25% over prior year but revenues are flat."

Me: "How? We haven't had any huge raw materials increases and our pay rates aren't that outrageous."

BC: "Well, FDA came through and want us to redo the entire lighting system. Even though the fluorescent lights are 25 feet high, CFR 389823-F says that every flourescent light must have a plastic cover that meets ASTM standard 938823-L-8. That's going to cost us $125,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's the sexual harassment lawsuit. Apparently the assistant to the plant manager told a secretary that she looks nice in green. That's going to run us about $100,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's the product liability lawsuit. Even though we stitched the product up and put a label over the stitches explicitly stating not to put the product on backwards, the customer removed the label, cut-out the stitches and put it on backwards, even as our sales rep begged them not to do it. That's going to cost us another $150,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's the worker's comp claim. As we were calling Joe in to fire him (he's been on probation for the last 9 months), he decided he hurt his back opening the door to the conference room. He's been spotted playing basketball with his buddies, but officially he's at home on disability. That's going to cost us $75,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's OSHA. The requirements are that a stop button must be no less than 2.5" in diameter. Our machines are from Japan and the buttons are 6cm which is 0.35cm too small. They insist we replace all of those, which is another $100,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's DoL. Apparently we didn't track our Vietnam veteran applicants properly. You aren't allowed to ask them where they served during the interview, but you are allowed to ask them how long. DoL is willing to settle for $250,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's ..."

Me: "It's ok. I got it. What are our choices?"

BC: "Either close the plant or move it overseas."

Me: "Anything else?"

BC: "Well, we could shake down every vendor for a 5% concession, cut staff 10%, and freeze salaries. Plus we'll have to take a look at the dental and vision plans. They are too expensive. Let's start by cutting the maintenance staff."

So what do you do?

 

[binö]

We've induced Oldtimer's Disease?

triggered by all natural pot smoke and inducing o ane into unproductive fog that only vibram grounded accupunture will alleviate

 

[mrplunkey]

triggered by all natural pot smoke and inducing o ane into unproductive fog that only vibram grounded accupunture will alleviate

But it has to be all-natural pot smoke run through an ecosustainable, locally-produced, 400% efficient turbine.

 

[PICK3]

Exactly.

One wants to make a profit so as to satisfy its shareholders.

The other wants to retain power forever and had the authority to implement its will through violent means.

I think I'll stick with the corporation.

butt the root of capitalism is exploiting labor

if someone has skills that the market value deems to be $50/hr and you can sub his services out at $100/hr either by directly sub-contracting him or marketing his widgets ... you're a successful capitalist!

 

[mrplunkey]

butt the root of capitalism is exploiting labor

if someone has skills that the market value deems to be $50/hr and you can sub his services out at $100/hr either by directly sub-contracting him or marketing his widgets ... you're a successful capitalist!

But if the market is willing to pay you $100 for his services, then it didn't deems them to be $50. It deems them worth $100.

If he wasn't getting $100 for his services alone, then whoever is sub-contracting him is providing some service that the market deems worth of that difference.

That's why it's incredibly dangerous to tamper with the price discovery function in capitalism. Everything gets really messed-up if you do.

 

[PICK3]

But if the market is willing to pay you $100 for his services, then it didn't deems them to be $50. It deems them worth $100.

If he wasn't getting $100 for his services alone, then whoever is sub-contracting him is providing some service that the market deems worth of that difference.

That's why it's incredibly dangerous to tamper with the price discovery function in capitalism. Everything gets really messed-up if you do.

know how the "price discovery function" is determined in a dark alley adjacent to Cutter's?

 

[mrplunkey]

know how the "price discovery function" is determined in a dark alley adjacent to Cutter's?

I would assume your indoor bathroom stall rates would still apply.

Or do you offer a street discount?'

 

[-SD-]

Price discovery function is whatever the anal market will bear.

 

[mrplunkey]

Price discovery function is whatever the anal market will bear.

Exactly. That's the hidden genius in the system.

 

[mrplunkey]

It's been 17 hours and no one has answered my question.

Do we close the plant, move it overseas, or start the mean-spirited draconian measures?

It seems like the libtards scatter like rats when it's time to make a real financial decision...

 

[PICK3]

T
BC: "Well, FDA came through and want us to redo the entire lighting system. Even though the fluorescent lights are 25 feet high, CFR 389823-F says that every flourescent light must have a plastic cover that meets ASTM standard 938823-L-8*.

*ASTM D4587 - 05

ASTM D4587 - 05 Standard Practice for Fluorescent UV Condensation Exposures of Paint and Related Coatings

 

[mrplunkey]

*ASTM D4587 - 05

ASTM D4587 - 05 Standard Practice for Fluorescent UV Condensation Exposures of Paint and Related Coatings

That example was rooted in a recent experience.

We converted an older plant into a clean assembly area for wound care kits. It had really high ceilings (probably close to 25') and fluorescent lighting.

The work involved taking a soft plastic tray, adding a wound dressing (basically a large band-aid), a piece of foam, a couple of soft plastic fittings and a piece of cotton gauze. The entire thing was then wrapped in a plastic sheet (CSR wrap) and bagged.

So FDA comes in and tells us those florescent lights are unsafe, because they aren't covered. They ask what would happen if something flew up, hit the lights and broke them in the room.

How far can you throw a plastic sheet? How far can you throw a piece of cotton gauze? What about a small piece of low-density foam? I tried. I could throw the foam about four feet horizontally.

Then explain to me how it's going to fly 25 feet upward with enough force to break a florescent light.

We did, of course, redo all the lights. Hello higher health care costs!

 

[-SD-]

Mean spirited outsourcing for the win

 

[PICK3]

The work involved taking a soft plastic tray, adding a wound dressing (basically a large band-aid), a piece of foam, a couple of soft plastic fittings and a piece of cotton gauze. The entire thing was then wrapped in a plastic sheet (CSR wrap) and bagged.

want to know what I do with a soft plastic tray, a wound dressing a piece of foam, a couple of soft plastic fittings and a piece of cotton gauze after wrapping them in a plastic sheet?

 

[mrplunkey]

want to know what I do with a soft plastic tray, a wound dressing a piece of foam, a couple of soft plastic fittings and a piece of cotton gauze after wrapping them in a plastic sheet?

Treat skin sores from teh aids?

 

[mrplunkey]

Mean spirited outsourcing for the win

Everyone always has suggestions when times are good. But they seem to be MIA for the tough calls. That's probably why Barry voted "Present" so often.

I really great mentor if mine told me that when it's time to make hard choices, all you're going to hear is the sound of crickets.

 

[PICK3]

Everyone always has suggestions when times are good. But they seem to be MIA for the tough calls. That's probably why Barry voted "Present" so often.

I really great mentor if mine told me that when it's time to make hard choices, all you're going to hear is the sound of crickets.

know what a great mentor of mine told me?

 

[Mr. dB]

Do we close the plant, move it overseas, or start the mean-spirited draconian measures?

A combination of raising prices and cuts to CEO and Board of Directors' salaries.

 

[-SD-]

Everyone always has suggestions when times are good. But they seem to be MIA for the tough calls. That's probably why Barry voted "Present" so often.

I really great mentor if mine told me that when it's time to make hard choices, all you're going to hear is the sound of crickets.

I started up in the vending machine business and have about 10 machines at 5 locations and Im already seeing the benefits of outsourcing things like having someone find me locations instead of me going out and pounding the pavement trying to convince business owners to allow my machines in their businesses. I would rather pay a professional locating company to place my machines for me because the time it takes me to find one decent location, it would exceed my internal hourly rate Ive placed on myself compared to what I would pay the locator for. Plus Im just not a hard sales guy. Sometimes outsourcing is for teh good.

 

[mrplunkey]

A combination of raising prices and cuts to CEO and Board of Directors' salaries.

Heck yeah! Just have a price increase! Why didn't I think of that??? Oh wait... If I couldn't have gotten a higher price before, what makes you think I'll get a higher price simply because my costs went up?

Is that what you guys do? Just raise prices at the club you work at? Maybe SD can test this idea for us. Dave, can you make everything in your machines cost $20? Will your machines take a $20? We gotta test this out.

And if you can cut executive pay and board member pay and keep them (assuming you want them), then you should regardless of whether costs went up.

I'm still waiting to hear your flash of genius insight into how to solve the original dilemma....

 

[musclemom]

It's been 17 hours and no one has answered my question.

Do we close the plant, move it overseas, or start the mean-spirited draconian measures?

It seems like the libtards scatter like rats when it's time to make a real financial decision...

Um, how about the guys who are making 6 and 7 figure salaries take pay cuts and maintain the buildings the way they need to be maintained instead of beating up the guys who are doing the maintenance that is needed or cutting hours of people who already make only slightly better than minimum wage or forever postponing needed facilities improvements.

My heart did not ache when I heard the CEO or some other suit was voted only a 15% raise in the years when I couldn't afford the copay to also be covered under my husband's health insurance, sorry.

 

[-SD-]

Heck yeah! Just have a price increase! Why didn't I think of that??? Oh wait... If I couldn't have gotten a higher price before, what makes you think I'll get a higher price simply because my costs went up?

Is that what you guys do? Just raise prices at the club you work at? Maybe SD can test this idea for us. Dave, can you make everything in your machines cost $20? Will your machines take a $20? We gotta test this out.

Sure i can just change my price from $2 to $4 on my breathalyzer machines and see what happens.
Or change my candy machines from a quarter to a dollar, should be a four fold revenue increase!
Genius!

 

[mrplunkey]

Um, how about the guys who are making 6 and 7 figure salaries take pay cuts and maintain the buildings the way they need to be maintained instead of beating up the guys who are doing the maintenance that is needed or cutting hours of people who already make only slightly better than minimum wage or forever postponing needed facilities improvements.

My heart did not ache when I heard the CEO or some other suit was voted only a 15% raise in the years when I couldn't afford the copay to also be covered under my husband's health insurance, sorry.

You'd be the perfect person to help me understand this.

Let's run with the premise that companies are slaves to profit. That they are willing to sacrifice workers, the environment, product safety, quality, etc. etc. -- all in the name of the mighty dollar.

Then why would a company ever pay an executive six figures unless that was the necessary price? If I could get a VP of sales or a VP of manufacturing for $20,000/year, why in the world wouldn't I do it? Do you think CEO's and boards like paying managers six figures? Those costs are just another line on the income statement and they're paid with the same currency that everything else requires.

And I'm being serious here. Help me understand this view. Why in your world would something as evil and greedy as a company suddenly want to see an entire cadre of people be overpaid?

 

[PICK3]

You'd be the perfect person to help me understand this.

Let's run with the premise that companies are slaves to profit. That they are willing to sacrifice workers, the environment, product safety, quality, etc. etc. -- all in the name of the mighty dollar.

Then why would a company ever pay an executive six figures unless that was the necessary price? If I could get a VP of sales or a VP of manufacturing for $20,000/year, why in the world wouldn't I do it? Do you think CEO's and boards like paying managers six figures? Those costs are just another line on the income statement and they're paid with the same currency that everything else requires.

And I'm being serious here. Help me understand this view. Why in your world would something as evil and greedy as a company suddenly want to see an entire cadre of people be overpaid?

It's knot all companies/executives, butt when BP hands out "Safety" bonus checks to execs, makes you wonder


just sayin'

 

[mrplunkey]

It's knot all companies/executives, butt when BP hands out "Safety" bonus checks to execs, makes you wonder


just sayin'

Exxon Mobil Corporation (NYSE:XOM) Gets Safety Award

 

[musclemom]

You'd be the perfect person to help me understand this.

Let's run with the premise that companies are slaves to profit. That they are willing to sacrifice workers, the environment, product safety, quality, etc. etc. -- all in the name of the mighty dollar.

Then why would a company ever pay an executive six figures unless that was the necessary price? If I could get a VP of sales or a VP of manufacturing for $20,000/year, why in the world wouldn't I do it? Do you think CEO's and boards like paying managers six figures? Those costs are just another line on the income statement and they're paid with the same currency that everything else requires.

And I'm being serious here. Help me understand this view. Why in your world would something as evil and greedy as a company suddenly want to see an entire cadre of people be overpaid?

People from a certain level up are protecting their interests, period. They make the rules. It's right up there with state representatives being able to vote themselves raises.

If they cared about doing things properly and taking care of their employees, then people who have shown diligence in their work and been loyal employees would sure as hell deserve to at least have wages that stay in line with the cost of living.

As best as I can understand it's a selective blindness. They don't care what working conditions are like for people, they just want their profits. Who makes the rules? Frigged if I know. People who sit at boardroom tables, who have no idea what it's like in the real world, I assume. They treat "little people" like a disposable commodity, and make darned sure that everyone knows just how replaceable they are.

I'm pretty sure why that show "Undercover Boss" is so successful. I've only watched it once or twice but I clearly remember one owner saying "I wouldn't do this job for that amount money." Most of the time when these suits get in the field they suddenly start realizing just how shitty the working conditions THAT THEY DICTATED, are.

So you explain it to me.

 

[mrplunkey]

People from a certain level up are protecting their interests, period. They make the rules. It's right up there with state representatives being able to vote themselves raises.

And exactly what interest would a CEO be protecting by overpaying a manager in the corporation? The interest to make less money? You can't have it both ways. Either the company is greedy and selfish, or this guy is doing a blatant act of selflessness for an entire band of people.

If they cared about doing things properly and taking care of their employees, then people who have shown diligence in their work and been loyal employees would sure as hell deserve to at least have wages that stay in line with the cost of living.

Absolutely not. No. Not now, not ever.

If the employee is doing relevant, competent work.

And the company the employee is working for is functioning at or beyond it's peers.

And the industry the company is operating in is viable.

Then the employee has a chance to make a good living from the company, which would presumably include wages that at least stay in line with the cost of living.

The word "deserve" is completely misplaced.

As best as I can understand it's a selective blindness. They don't care what working conditions are like for people, they just want their profits. Who makes the rules? Frigged if I know. People who sit at boardroom tables, who have no idea what it's like in the real world, I assume. They treat "little people" like a disposable commodity, and make darned sure that everyone knows just how replaceable they are.

Again, you can't have it both ways.

I'm pretty sure why that show "Undercover Boss" is so successful. I've only watched it once or twice but I clearly remember one owner saying "I wouldn't do this job for that amount money." Most of the time when these suits get in the field they suddenly start realizing just how shitty the working conditions THAT THEY DICTATED, are.

So you explain it to me.

I'm not sure you should form opinions based on a TV show. Besides, what's the undercover boss going to say? "Hey, I sure am glad I got an education so I don't have to shovel this shit as a real job!!!" ? I don't think that would go over so well.

 

[Dial_tone]

You'd be the perfect person to help me understand this.

Let's run with the premise that companies are slaves to profit. That they are willing to sacrifice workers, the environment, product safety, quality, etc. etc. -- all in the name of the mighty dollar.

Then why would a company ever pay an executive six figures unless that was the necessary price? If I could get a VP of sales or a VP of manufacturing for $20,000/year, why in the world wouldn't I do it? Do you think CEO's and boards like paying managers six figures? Those costs are just another line on the income statement and they're paid with the same currency that everything else requires.

And I'm being serious here. Help me understand this view. Why in your world would something as evil and greedy as a company suddenly want to see an entire cadre of people be overpaid?

The executives of said company generally set their own salaries, with approval of the board they're probably pretty chummy with. They're all washing each other's backs.

 

[Mr. dB]

Is that what you guys do? Just raise prices at the club you work at?

Well, if a band costs $5000 for a show, the ticket price is a lot higher than a band that will play for $100...

If you can't afford big red stop buttons and sleeves on your fluorescent lights, what the heck happens to your company when you have to buy a new 5-axis CNC rig? Fire ten workers?

 

[mrplunkey]

Well, if a band costs $5000 for a show, the ticket price is a lot higher than a band that will play for $100...

If you can't afford big red stop buttons and sleeves on your fluorescent lights, what the heck happens to your company when you have to buy a new 5-axis CNC rig? Fire ten workers?

You buy the 5-axis CNC rig... And take delivery of it in the Dominican Republic.

And there will always be more big red stop buttons and more sleeves for fluorescent lights. The details change each month but the underlying theme never changes. Until, of course, you've had enough and decide it's time to move production overseas.

 

[mrplunkey]

The executives of said company generally set their own salaries, with approval of the board they're probably pretty chummy with. They're all washing each other's backs.

The executives do not set their own salaries. That's spectacularly wrong. It's typically done through a subcommittee of the board (the compensation committee) and is virtually always a contentious, ugly, nasty mess. Boards are notorious for keeping a few shmucks around just to put on committees like that.

There are some huge misconceptions here (not singling you out).

 

[javaguru]

I'm curious as to how much the liberal economists predict they can bring in under high tax rates for the "rich." I'm not against taxes per se, I'm against taxes that promote misallocation of resources in the private sector due to the government spending, how does raising taxes on the " rich" change the deficit? You could raise the top rate to 90% and it wouldn't change the deficit.

 

[musclemom]

Absolutely not. No. Not now, not ever.

If the employee is doing relevant, competent work.

And the company the employee is working for is functioning at or beyond it's peers.

And the industry the company is operating in is viable.

Then the employee has a chance to make a good living from the company, which would presumably include wages that at least stay in line with the cost of living.

Not my experience, nor of my husband, sorry. Have we had bad luck in employers, maybe. I've only been employed by small companies and honestly I received, overall, better treatment than he has. The company that I subcontract now for still treats me like a dog. They raise the rates on the customers and have never, in nearly 15 years of being in business, once increased the pay of the transcriptionists. I've been threatened by the owner that if I don't turn my work around in the time limits then he'll assign my regulars to someone else, doesn't matter if I was ill or my computer went down.

Employers treat the people who work for them like pieces of shit. In a market when jobs are hard to come by, and particularly when you're 46 and 57 like my husband and I and you have a house you can't sell profitably because your neighborhood has totally devalued, you put your head down, STFU and do what you're told to do and go to bed praying you don't get laid off when some asshatted beancounter finds a way to cut expenses that destroy your life.

We have a mortgage, debt, and an adult child with Asperger's syndrome. We have no choice. We need money and cannot afford to live on reduced incomes. Moving to a location to find new jobs in a better market, as I've explained, isn't an option.

 

[calveless wonder]

Musclemom, you're clueless about corporate structure.

Instead of complaining about how corporations treat their employees, get
More marketable skills. There's a reason executives get paid what they do. Their skills are
inimitable and thus given a certain value

 

[calveless wonder]

I laugh at when people complain about being able to support their family in the long term (not talking about layoffs, disability, etc) but those who's current or optimal wage for their trade is insufficient or barely able to sustain them and their family.

Those people made a conscious decision to have children, or at least keep them.
Don't have fuckin children if you cant give them a proper life or if you'ee gonna be scraping by your entire life. There's a reason I don't plan on having kids for at least another 6-7 years.
Because I know I can't give them a proper upbringing in a stable environment

 

[musclemom]

Yes, well hindsight is 20/20 isn't it dear? *sarc* Must be nice to have a good foundation educationally and/or parents who guide your decisions and/or an intellect that allowed you to feel you had a wide range of options available to you. Unfortunately, I had none of those things. I did the best with what I had and I was severely damaged goods.

And honestly, stick the whole "who told you to be breeders" argument up your ass. That's something I've had homos say to me. I didn't expect to be supporting an adult four years after I finally got her off child support. And things would have been just fine if the economy didn't do what it has. Face it, you own a house in what was considered a pretty good neighborhood for 20 years (and when I bought this house, it wasn't a bad neighborhood, still isn't bad, just not what it was but actually it was on the edge of a GREAT neighborhood) the rules USED to be that property should fully be worth two or even three times what it was originally purchased for, not less than what it was originally purchased for.

I think I'd best leave this thread permanently. I'm obviously too ignorant and bitter to make any useful contributions and clearly my opinions, born out of extreme ignorance and bitterness, are only worthy of derision, certainly not any degree of consideration.

 

[bigpokey]

that's the corporate spirit c dub!

 

[calveless wonder]

personally, i rather work at a smaller to midsize company (as long as they have adequate resources to operate) than a big corporation. Too much politics for me.There's a lot less flexibility in a corporation in every aspect(product development, policy changes etc) and you ultimately have less control/say in the bottom line.

but they exist for a reason, and in order to operate on that type of scale they have to be constructed that way. There's nothing wrong with that. As far as "treating your employees like crap" or whatever, anyone who has half a brain when it comes to business knows how expensive turnover is. It's one of the most crippling costs for any company, both directly and ancillary. Not only that, but a happy employee is a productive employee. Firms spend billions on organizational behavior related studies or protocols to ensure their employees are happy. They're not stupid. Retention is a huge part of business. It's PROFITABLE to be good to your people. I guess all these big bad corporations go out of their way to be evil and lose money?

 

[calveless wonder]

southwest airlines was such a shitty company when they decided to not fire any of their employees or cut anybody's pay after 9/11 despite meaning major short term losses.

 

[Redrocker13]

I laugh at when people complain about being able to support their family in the long term (not talking about layoffs, disability, etc) but those who's current or optimal wage for their trade is insufficient or barely able to sustain them and their family.

Those people made a conscious decision to have children, or at least keep them.
Don't have fuckin children if you cant give them a proper life or if you'ee gonna be scraping by your entire life. There's a reason I don't plan on having kids for at least another 6-7 years.
Because I know I can't give them a proper upbringing in a stable environment

You're being a little harsh Wonder, don't ya think?! And this is coming from a died in the wool captialist/conservative. It certainly dosen't sound like MuscleMom isn't a pretty hard working lady. My other interactions with her give me the same impression. Not only that but you really didn't give any place for her point. She's right, there are many corporations, regardless of size, where cutting costs becomes a blood bath and truly isn't done with any real good sense and very little compassion. Someone in an office somewhere is making a numbers decision based upon a spreadsheet and not any actual boots on the ground experience. And when that hits the people on the front line, well it's just bad business.

It's good business to take great care of the people who take care of your customers.

I have lived long enough to find myself in tough spots. Some spots take longer than others to fight out of. MuscleMom strikes me as a fighter. She'll figure it out.

 

[calveless wonder]

You're being a little harsh Wonder, don't ya think?! And this is coming from a died in the wool captialist/conservative. It certainly dosen't sound like MuscleMom isn't a pretty hard working lady. My other interactions with her give me the same impression. Not only that but you really didn't give any place for her point. She's right, there are many corporations, regardless of size, where cutting costs becomes a blood bath and truly isn't done with any real good sense and very little compassion. Someone in an office somewhere is making a numbers decision based upon a spreadsheet and not any actual boots on the ground experience. And when that hits the people on the front line, well it's just bad business.

It's good business to take great care of the people who take care of your customers.

I have lived long enough to find myself in tough spots. Some spots take longer than others to fight out of. MuscleMom strikes me as a fighter. She'll figure it out.

probably a little harsh,but maybe you misunderstood my post.i wasn't speaking of short term things. shit happens....industries fall apart, you may get laid off, maybe your business goes under.

that's not what i'm speaking of. that happens to everyone at some point or another, but those people often rebound and are fine.

i'm talking about people who have families yet lack the sufficient skills or have dead end jobs/jobs where they're already reached their ceiling and can barely get by or support themselves...AND THEN COMPLAIN ABOUT IT.it's not about working hard as much as it is about working smart and having marketable skills. there are many things you can do to increase your marketability. those people really have no business having kids or more kids than they can support

people victimize themselves way too often. it's a huge problem in this country

so is lack of accountability. no one put a gun to your head and made you have whatever number of kids. unless you were raped and had a child as a result, then there's no excuse.

 

[bigpokey]

the only reason for a corporation is to protect business owner's personal assets and escape ramifications from externalities jmo

 

[calveless wonder]

the only reason for a corporation is to protect business owner's personal assets and escape ramifications from externalities jmo

no

you can do that with an LLC or limited partnership too (as long as you're not the general partner). LLC has the same singular tax (pass through) benefits as an S corp, and shielding of personal liability. If that's your only motive, a corporation is stupid because of the amount of regulation and scrutiny you have to deal with. that's why you see most small businesses established as LLC's.

the reason you form a corporation is so you can issue stock and have shareholders, along with a board of directors. obviously if you plan on being a publicly traded company you have to be a corporation.

 

[bigpokey]

sorry shouldve specified i meant the general structure including llc's and s-corps

 

[cindylou]

sorry shouldve specified i meant the general structure including llc's and s-corps

plus LLCs have not always been around so you used to see even small business form corps to protect personal assets etc

 

[calveless wonder]

sorry shouldve specified i meant the general structure including llc's and s-corps

It's ok, you're black. I understand

 

[bigpokey]

naa niga u a cracka u cain't walk to the fridge in these shoes honky mufuka

 

[calveless wonder]

Lol

 

[-SD-]

If you fog out then advanced global economics all makes sense

 

[bigpokey]

dooooood bro i totally get it now bro

 

[billfred]

First of all, don't kid yourself. Worker safety has and will be regulated by the trial lawyers. So that one is a done deal.

Industrial pollution: If it's a truly hazardous material, then sure, establish laws to regulate it. But look at the garbage we regulate now. CO2? That's the most ridiculous crap I've seen in a while. An even better solution would be to qualify private businesses to implement the standards to completely avoid the EPA debacle we have right now.

Child Labor: Who is going to do business with companies that use child labor? Companies that use child labor legally who are half-way across the planet get shelled publicly for that. There's no way that would fly in the US.

You have a misguided notion that businesses simply want to rape and pillage. The don't. They want to make money. And making money requires a host of skills, some of which involve making sure you don't do things that turn-off your customers (i.e. child labor, pollution).

Don't kid yourself. We had unregulated labor in this country before. Go check at what age your Grandfather started working.

Also, go check with most blacks in this country how much their ancestors were paid for their first job. They is unregulated labor.

In addition, I know you have travelled around the world enough to see what you get without environmental regulations. Yes the environmentalist are whackos but there is a place for some regulation or waters get polluted, fish get over fished, and air quality sucks.

 

[mrplunkey]

Also, go check with most blacks in this country how much their ancestors were paid for their first job. They is unregulated labor.

Odd, since slavery was abolished before modern-day labor unions OR the US Department of Labor were ever established...

 

[Spartacus]

The reason is that socialism doesn't work in practice. The Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba...Pilgrims are all historical examples of the failure of socialism. The pilgrims lived under a socialist commune charter initially but once they adopted private ownership they thrived. The colony leader remarked in his diary that once private ownership was adopted the women that used to complain of sickness and weakness as an excuse to avoid toiling in the fields became strong of body and spirit when they were working for themselves. In economics it's called the tragedy of the commons....something owned by everyone isn't properly cared about by anyone.

The top producers already pay most of the income tax in the country, while over 40% of Americans pay no income tax. As far as corporations are concerned, higher taxes on corporations are a tax on everyone that buys goods or services from that corporation. Likewise, the current progressive tax code is a burden on economic development in this country because corporations will buy some politicians to modify the tax code and pass it on to consumers as part of doing business. Microsft learned the hard way that spending millions of dollars on lobbyists is cheaper than defending against a government lawsuit that went nowhere.

socialism hardly/barely manages to work even in a family unit and perhaps a church org is the "best" situation I can see that concept working. and even then not often and still riddled with politics
but back to anyone with siblings. you likely griped more than be pleased that your sister/brother did less than yourself in the family campsite

except for the third reich
national socialism without doubt pulled germany from one of the deepest,if not the deepest positions in a worldwide depression
and perched Germany at the top circa 1936
the top

how could that be?

 

[billfred]

Odd, since slavery was abolished before modern-day labor unions OR the US Department of Labor were ever established...

Yeah - by businesses or the government?

 

[Spartacus]

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Some businesses will do anything to gain an advantage, and with no regulations or other oversight someone will push the limits of good taste, and as soon as one does it, everyone will have to if they want to compete.

and gov't is just as open to corruption as corporations

 

[WODIN]

That is a good story.

As a guy who hears the bean counters every day, let me tell you how the conversation goes:

BC: "Brian, costs in our XYZ facility are killing us. We're up 25% over prior year but revenues are flat."

Me: "How? We haven't had any huge raw materials increases and our pay rates aren't that outrageous."

BC: "Well, FDA came through and want us to redo the entire lighting system. Even though the fluorescent lights are 25 feet high, CFR 389823-F says that every flourescent light must have a plastic cover that meets ASTM standard 938823-L-8. That's going to cost us $125,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's the sexual harassment lawsuit. Apparently the assistant to the plant manager told a secretary that she looks nice in green. That's going to run us about $100,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's the product liability lawsuit. Even though we stitched the product up and put a label over the stitches explicitly stating not to put the product on backwards, the customer removed the label, cut-out the stitches and put it on backwards, even as our sales rep begged them not to do it. That's going to cost us another $150,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's the worker's comp claim. As we were calling Joe in to fire him (he's been on probation for the last 9 months), he decided he hurt his back opening the door to the conference room. He's been spotted playing basketball with his buddies, but officially he's at home on disability. That's going to cost us $75,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's OSHA. The requirements are that a stop button must be no less than 2.5" in diameter. Our machines are from Japan and the buttons are 6cm which is 0.35cm too small. They insist we replace all of those, which is another $100,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's DoL. Apparently we didn't track our Vietnam veteran applicants properly. You aren't allowed to ask them where they served during the interview, but you are allowed to ask them how long. DoL is willing to settle for $250,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's ..."

Me: "It's ok. I got it. What are our choices?"

BC: "Either close the plant or move it overseas."

Me: "Anything else?"

BC: "Well, we could shake down every vendor for a 5% concession, cut staff 10%, and freeze salaries. Plus we'll have to take a look at the dental and vision plans. They are too expensive. Let's start by cutting the maintenance staff."

So what do you do?

I would freeze salaries and revisit the vendors. But given all these basic fuck ups costing this much money the company probably should just fold due to incomptenance in the first place.

 

[WODIN]

The reason is that socialism doesn't work in practice. The Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba...Pilgrims are all historical examples of the failure of socialism. The pilgrims lived under a socialist commune charter initially but once they adopted private ownership they thrived. The colony leader remarked in his diary that once private ownership was adopted the women that used to complain of sickness and weakness as an excuse to avoid toiling in the fields became strong of body and spirit when they were working for themselves. In economics it's called the tragedy of the commons....something owned by everyone isn't properly cared about by anyone.

The top producers already pay most of the income tax in the country, while over 40% of Americans pay no income tax. As far as corporations are concerned, higher taxes on corporations are a tax on everyone that buys goods or services from that corporation. Likewise, the current progressive tax code is a burden on economic development in this country because corporations will buy some politicians to modify the tax code and pass it on to consumers as part of doing business. Microsft learned the hard way that spending millions of dollars on lobbyists is cheaper than defending against a government lawsuit that went nowhere.

China, The Soviet Union and Cuba were selling themesleves as communist states, not socialist, really big difference there. Also they were, in practice, totalitarian regimes more than anything else which is an even greater departure from socalism.

The U.S. is a socialist country. We collect taxes at the federal and state level in support of various social programs and institutions. The very existance of a library or a public school is the existance of a "socialist state."

 

[mrplunkey]

I would freeze salaries and revisit the vendors. But given all these basic fuck ups costing this much money the company probably should just fold due to incomptenance in the first place.

So you'd pass the problem on to the vendors, which then forces someone else to downsize, freeze salaries and cut corners? That doesn't sounds very mean-spirited and conservative of you.

And don't think for a second that you're going to avoid your so-called "fuck ups". The regulations are written so loosely and are so open to interpretation that no one can avoid them. The plant with the lighting issue had been operating since 1983 and was being inspected every 18-24 months by FDA between now and then.

 

[Redrocker13]

China, The Soviet Union and Cuba were selling themesleves as communist states, not socialist, really big difference there. Also they were, in practice, totalitarian regimes more than anything else which is an even greater departure from socalism.

The U.S. is a socialist country. We collect taxes at the federal and state level in support of various social programs and institutions. The very existance of a library or a public school is the existance of a "socialist state."

What?! The presence of a public school or library? What dope smoking idiotic professor taught you that horse shit? That is one of the most ridiculous explanations of socialism I think I've ever heard. Just out of morbid curiousity, how does that equate to shared wealth? One of socialism's tenets by the way.

 

[mrplunkey]

The U.S. is a socialist country. We collect taxes at the federal and state level in support of various social programs and institutions. The very existance of a library or a public school is the existance of a "socialist state."

The US has some socialist elements in it, but is not a purely socialist country (yet).

And don't cite weak examples like public libraries and our morally corrupt and failing public school systems.

Better examples are medicare (which leads the country in health care denials, yet is still bankrupting us) and social security (which is also bankrupting us). Those are more fun to talk about.

 

[Redrocker13]

The US has some socialist elements in it, but is not a purely socialist country (yet).

And don't cite weak examples like public libraries and our morally corrupt and failing public school systems.

Better examples are medicare (which leads the country in health care denials, yet is still bankrupting us) and social security (which is also bankrupting us). Those are more fun to talk about.

Hmmmm, well put Plunk.

 

[WODIN]

So you'd pass the problem on to the vendors, which then forces someone else to downsize, freeze salaries and cut corners? That doesn't sounds very mean-spirited and conservative of you.

And don't think for a second that you're going to avoid your so-called "fuck ups". The regulations are written so loosely and are so open to interpretation that no one can avoid them. The plant with the lighting issue had been operating since 1983 and was being inspected every 18-24 months by FDA between now and then.

I don't equate liberal or conservative ideologies with running a business. A lot of the people I know across all these spectrums who do run succesfful businesses do so with the same basic philosophy of setting a profit goal and working towards that goal. If it means hiring less people or letting people go it happens. If it means outsourcing, it happens. Poltical ideologies tend ot fall to the side.

The fundamental notion of this thread was weather or not Supply Side economics with a focus on the Financing arm of the economy as the driver is a better model for growth than some other. I would say it failed fantastically over the past 10 years.

I really don't see this as a kock against captialism. I think capitalism has proven to be the most accepted model for resource management in terms of providing people with the means to meet their needs and wants. With SSE though the main driver of the economy has been dictated by financial institutions rather than the institutions that manage resources for production which is where the failure lies.

Any resource user would fair far better if left outside the bonds of the financial markets that are centrally controled through the Federal Reserve Bank. If these users had alternatives to financing for use in meeting their production needs then prices in the financial sector would be driven downward through greater competitive forces than are currently present in todays markets.

My statements on socialism are correct and factual. You may not like them or value them, however, none the less, they are true.

 

[WODIN]

Oh yea..Roads. Another form of Socialism in America.

 

[mrplunkey]

Oh yea..Roads. Another form of Socialism in America.

The entire DoT runs about $79B.

Barry wants to spend $3.82T next year.

Nice work focusing on 2% of the total budget.

I miss Bush deficits.

 

[Mr. dB]

BC: "Well, FDA came through and want us to redo the entire lighting system. Even though the fluorescent lights are 25 feet high, CFR 389823-F says that every flourescent light must have a plastic cover that meets ASTM standard 938823-L-8. That's going to cost us $125,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's the sexual harassment lawsuit. Apparently the assistant to the plant manager told a secretary that she looks nice in green. That's going to run us about $100,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's the product liability lawsuit. Even though we stitched the product up and put a label over the stitches explicitly stating not to put the product on backwards, the customer removed the label, cut-out the stitches and put it on backwards, even as our sales rep begged them not to do it. That's going to cost us another $150,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's the worker's comp claim. As we were calling Joe in to fire him (he's been on probation for the last 9 months), he decided he hurt his back opening the door to the conference room. He's been spotted playing basketball with his buddies, but officially he's at home on disability. That's going to cost us $75,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's OSHA. The requirements are that a stop button must be no less than 2.5" in diameter. Our machines are from Japan and the buttons are 6cm which is 0.35cm too small. They insist we replace all of those, which is another $100,000 or we can always fight it in court."

BC: "Then there's DoL. Apparently we didn't track our Vietnam veteran applicants properly. You aren't allowed to ask them where they served during the interview, but you are allowed to ask them how long. DoL is willing to settle for $250,000 or we can always fight it in court."

$800,000. Is a corporate expense like that really enough to force you to start making personnel and relocation type decisions? Can't you just have one quarter with sucky profits and then move on?

 

[WODIN]

The entire DoT runs about $79B.

Barry wants to spend $3.82T next year.

Nice work focusing on 2% of the total budget.

I miss Bush deficits.

IF you haven't noticed our infrastructure has been neglected for over 20 years and is in dire need of repair and upgrade.

 

[mrplunkey]

IF you haven't noticed our infrastructure has been neglected for over 20 years and is in dire need of repair and upgrade.

Well of course it is screwed-up. It's brought to us by the same people who did Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the US Postal Service, Public Education and every other screwed-up agency we have.

It boggles my mind how some people want to shovel even more money down a rathole that clearly has no bottom. Government is the ultimate example of "failing up" -- the worse they do, the more money they get.

 

[mrplunkey]

$800,000. Is a corporate expense like that really enough to force you to start making personnel and relocation type decisions? Can't you just have one quarter with sucky profits and then move on?

Next quarter there will be another $800k. The details change, but the overall theme doesn't.

And no, one "sucky" quarter never goes over well.

Most people don't realize the vast amount of regulatory tools that federal agencies have. The goal isn't to establish some gold standard for businesses. The goal is to give these agencies enough leverage to get basically anything they want. The CFR's are intentionally written very vaguely for exactly that purpose.

 

[the.gladiator1987]

plunkey i never understand what u say or even know what any of it means, but you sound very smart and I would listen to you if u ever gave me advice, id really appreciate more feedback from you on my threads I would contribute to yours but they wouldnt mean shit

 

[Redrocker13]

Well of course it is screwed-up. It's brought to us by the same people who did Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the US Postal Service, Public Education and every other screwed-up agency we have.

It boggles my mind how some people want to shovel even more money down a rathole that clearly has no bottom. Government is the ultimate example of "failing up" -- the worse they do, the more money they get.[/QUOTE]


There you have it ladies and gentlemen. Thats the problem in a nutshell. And by the way, in the last fifty years, the entity which controls the federal purse strings (the house and senate) has been controlled by conservatives (loosely described) for an ever so brief period in the nineties. It also happens to be the only time the budgets were supposedly balanced and a surplus recorded. Odd huh?

Like it or not, it is liberal policies which are killing our country. I give them credit though...they truly know how to frame an argument in their favor.

 

[Mr. dB]

Next quarter there will be another $800k. The details change, but the overall theme doesn't.

And no, one "sucky" quarter never goes over well.

One has to wonder about the viability of your business model then.

 

[PICK3]

plunkey i never understand what u say or even know what any of it means, but you sound very smart and I would listen to you if u ever gave me advice, id really appreciate more feedback from you on my threads I would contribute to yours but they wouldnt mean shit

If you can't add anything constructive to his threads, just call him a homo or better yet ... PM him some cawk pics

he really thrives on that

 

[mrplunkey]

One has to wonder about the viability of your business model then.

Yeah, there are a lot of business models out there that aren't impacted by government agencies.

We can't all luck-out and work in a nightclub.

 

[javaguru]

Oh yea..Roads. Another form of Socialism in America.

Mitch Daniels privatized the Indiana toll system and it not only decreased costs... it improved efficiency and enriched the public treasurey. I have no problem paying taxes for the public good...including roads... but for profit entities always seem to do it better than the government and cheaper. The GAO released a report... even though Haliburton raped American taxpayers with cost plus accounting it was cheaper than if the U.S. military had filled those roles through their channels.

 

[Mr. dB]

Yeah, there are a lot of business models out there that aren't impacted by government agencies.

We can't all luck-out and work in a nightclub.

(1) Way to play the asshole card. Yeah I'm a loser, so what? If my line of work doesn't meet the minimum requirements to qualify for having an opinion, then why do you even bother replying to my thread? Why don't you go hang with the other bigshots, there's plenty of other millionaires on EF with whom you can share a brandy and cigar and have a laugh at the proles.

(B) My point is that if your whole profit structure can't stand up to the occasional unexpected expense, how the heck do you survive? How do your competitors survive? Do the prices of your products and/or services fail to cover operating expenses and a provide tidy profit? Are things so tight that a few big red "STOP" buttons are gonna upset the whole cart?

 

[javaguru]

(1) Way to play the asshole card. Yeah I'm a loser, so what? If my line of work doesn't meet the minimum requirements to qualify for having an opinion, then why do you even bother replying to my thread? Why don't you go hang with the other bigshots, there's plenty of other millionaires on EF with whom you can share a brandy and cigar and have a laugh at the proles.

(B) My point is that if your whole profit structure can't stand up to the occasional unexpected expense, how the heck do you survive? How do your competitors survive? Do the prices of your products and/or services fail to cover operating expenses and a provide tidy profit? Are things so tight that a few big red "STOP" buttons are gonna upset the whole cart?

You are a taxpayer and citizen...your vote matters and I would never belittle your input or intelligence.

However, the corporations do what is required under what the political situation dictates. I already mentioned how Microsoft went from spending $0.00 on lobbying congress to spending hundreds of millions after the anti-trust lawsuit they won...money they could have spent on employing people and innovating as opposed to supporting parasites that produce nothing of value. They now spend outrageous amounts of money as an insurance policy against political backlash. The oil companies make single digit profit margins and they're labeled evil under dems but Apple sells products with a 40% profit margin and nobody cares.

 

[mrplunkey]

(1) Way to play the asshole card. Yeah I'm a loser, so what? If my line of work doesn't meet the minimum requirements to qualify for having an opinion, then why do you even bother replying to my thread? Why don't you go hang with the other bigshots, there's plenty of other millionaires on EF with whom you can share a brandy and cigar and have a laugh at the proles.

(B) My point is that if your whole profit structure can't stand up to the occasional unexpected expense, how the heck do you survive? How do your competitors survive? Do the prices of your products and/or services fail to cover operating expenses and a provide tidy profit? Are things so tight that a few big red "STOP" buttons are gonna upset the whole cart?

1) Yeah, I assume you were being smug and I fired back. If your question was legitimate, then I apologize.

2) Our profit structures used to have slack in them to absorb these kinds of hits. The problem is two fold: 1) The hits have gotten steadily greater over the last 20 years while 1) Global competition and pricing efficiency have removed all that slack from the system. It leaves employers with a very dismal set of choices: Offshore, downsize, cut overhead costs, reduce benefits, etc. etc. Employers don't do the things they do because they want to -- it's a miserable process. But typically the same people who yell the loudest when we react to this new environment are the same ones who support the politicians and bureaucrats who created these unlivable conditions in the first place.

I'll post-up another example on this thread... this one is hot off the press!

 

[mrplunkey]

I was recently with our regulatory affairs director and asked for an example of the latest FDA crazyness. This one is hot off the press (less than three days old).

Here's the back story:

We do a fairly large amount of chemistry, which means we use a lot of scales. Originally we used scales in the appropriate range (i.e. for measurements in the 20-40g range, we used a 50g scale). That left us with a number of scales and a number of calibration points and procedures (scale calibration procedures vary a little by manufacturer).

A couple of years ago, FDA had problems with the fact that there were so many different scales and procedures. They said we were out of compliance with 21 CFR 820.72(a).

So here's what we did: We bought some incredibly expensive scales, that were dead-flat and precise across a huge range (0g-500g). These things were at least 3x more expensive than normal scales. The beauty was they had three calibration points total: 0, 200g and 400g. So we could use the same standard weights and the same procedure for every scale in the plant, knowing that every scale would be dead-nuts accurate. And it only cost us about $50,0000 -- which is a steal by FDA corrective action standards.

So two years later, we get a different FDA inspector. Here is an cut-and-paste directly out of their report:

So guess what we get to do? Buy scales like we used to use. Yes, this is our government at work.

I can crank-out examples like these on a near daily basis.

 

[Redrocker13]

1) Yeah, I assume you were being smug and I fired back. If your question was legitimate, then I apologize.

2) Our profit structures used to have slack in them to absorb these kinds of hits. The problem is two fold: 1) The hits have gotten steadily greater over the last 20 years while 1) Global competition and pricing efficiency have removed all that slack from the system. It leaves employers with a very dismal set of choices: Offshore, downsize, cut overhead costs, reduce benefits, etc. etc. Employers don't do the things they do because they want to -- it's a miserable process. But typically the same people who yell the loudest when we react to this new environment are the same ones who support the politicians and bureaucrats who created these unlivable conditions in the first place.

I'll post-up another example on this thread... this one is hot off the press!

WOW!!! That's about as spot on as it gets! PLUNKEY for Pres 2012!!!

 

[Redrocker13]

DB, I work in the auto industry. Have for years. I assure you that what Plunkey is describing is our same experience here. I have also had occasion to closely mingle with managers, ceo's and other captains of industry over the years and their shared experience is remarkably the same. Here's my point...Our federal and state governments try to do far too much, demonstrably beyond their constitutional scope. And a great deal of it is bad attitude. Bad attitude that we the people need these fools to take care of us. Somehow we're not bright enough or resiliant enough to fend for ourselves. And certainly when we are confronted by images of a thousand people stranded on an overpass in New Orleans because they didn't have the moxy or the brains to believe the weather-man and therefore get out of dodge ahead of time, it only helps cement this idea in the minds of politicians willing to take advantage of it. Needs other examples?? No problem.

Freddie and Fannie....We need these 2 institutions because some people can't find a way to maintain a good credit score or appropriately govern their finances so as to afford a home. We see clearly now how well that has worked. And thanks Barney. You truly are brilliant!

Medicare/aid...AND
Social security...We're not able to prepare for our own retirement (and since when is retirement a constitutional right OR a moral expectation?!?!?) and therefore we need the federal government to provide medical care in our old age. So now we have an entire dependent class on our hands costing the american taxpayer several hundred BILLION dollars a year to care for what they themselves should have provided for. I'm surprised it has taken 70 years to catch up to us.

I could keep going and going and going. And please, I mean NO disrespect whatsoever. I actually kinda hope you will start to see the conservative aspect of these issues and think differently when it comes time to vote. We need more of an attitude of rugged individualism and self sufficiency. Yes, people do need help from time to time. But our government is soooooooo far beyond that it's beginning to become incalculable. And this attitude and course will kill the United States. It's only a matter of time.

 

[WODIN]

Mitch Daniels privatized the Indiana toll system and it not only decreased costs... it improved efficiency and enriched the public treasurey. I have no problem paying taxes for the public good...including roads... but for profit entities always seem to do it better than the government and cheaper. The GAO released a report... even though Haliburton raped American taxpayers with cost plus accounting it was cheaper than if the U.S. military had filled those roles through their channels.

Why have the tolls gone up over 80% on that road since 2006 if costs have decreased ?

 

[Mr. dB]

1) Yeah, I assume you were being smug and I fired back. If your question was legitimate, then I apologize.

2) Our profit structures used to have slack in them to absorb these kinds of hits. The problem is two fold: 1) The hits have gotten steadily greater over the last 20 years while 1) Global competition and pricing efficiency have removed all that slack from the system. It leaves employers with a very dismal set of choices: Offshore, downsize, cut overhead costs, reduce benefits, etc. etc. Employers don't do the things they do because they want to -- it's a miserable process. But typically the same people who yell the loudest when we react to this new environment are the same ones who support the politicians and bureaucrats who created these unlivable conditions in the first place.

I'll post-up another example on this thread... this one is hot off the press!

So did these oppressive regulations only hit you during the Clinton and Obama administrations? Or did you have any of these crisis moments during the Regan, Bush41 and Bush43 years too?

My point being do the GOP administrations show any sign of lightening the load of oppressive regulations?

And have you ever tried to express your concerns to your Congressperson or Senator?