Red1966
Well-Known Member
Buffet is so greedy, he buys old pieces of shit to drive he buys at the police auction. Sky doesn't need no facts. Ideology trumps reality.
Do you believe Americans who work full time should earn a living wage?
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
Red1966
Well-Known Member
He should hire servants to carry him up and down stairs like everyone else.to make matters worse, those of us who paid in to SS for everyone's granny at 62 will eventually lose (to age 72)..bargaining power ya know..the peasants are sold a line 'for the greater good', yet i was listening sunday to morning talk (FM) about the 'most overated items of wealth in your home' i think the kid who called in about the elevator getting stuck between floors in his house won
how is that greedy?
he's the 'millionaire nextdoor'..read the book sometime..you'd be surprised how some wealthy people live.
Fact is, Warren Buffett doesn't take a pay check. If he did, he'd pay the top marginal rate of 35 percent on his income. His secretary DOES receive a pay check and therefore DOES pay income tax. Therefore, his secretary could be at the lowest possible rate (above zero percent) and still pay a higher rate than her boss. But, I thought he was worth 50 billions dollars. How does that happen if he has no income? Buffett's income comes from dividends and capital gains. They are taxed at 15 percent. "Well, that's not fair," you might say. Hold on just a minute. Consider where the money Buffett invests comes from. It's not like he was born with buckets of money (and that would be a lot of buckets) just waiting to be invested. He had to either a. earn it through paychecks with which he would have paid the progressive tax rate the rest of us pay or b. from other investments on which he would have paid 15 percent.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/joe-pags/so-warren-buffett-pays-less-income-tax-than-his-secretary-huh/10150319231973950
Well if you don't want to put skill into the equation this is all you got:
As an employee you don't own the company. If you feel mistreated vote with your feet. As a consumer vote with your pocket book. You aren't anybodies patsy unless you want to be.
Are you a Glutton for punishment or just really really stupid?
You have no idea what a fact is, so you already got your entire argument 100% wrong.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-13/buffett-follows-avarice-warning-by-sticking-to-100-000-salary
Buffet receives a salary of $100,000 hun, any argument to the contrary is just you digging a really really deep hole that you will never be able to squirm out of.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
As an employee, you own your labor
Where did the money come from to increase average CEO income from 25 x's an average worker's wage in 1965 to over 325 x's in 2015?
I wonder why you keep avoiding that question..
Red1966
Well-Known Member
He wants the money more than the things it can buy.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
As an employee, you sold your labor. The employer owns it. Better leadership, management, equipment, etc.. The employees certainly give back their wages. How am I avoiding a question no one asked?
Red1966
Well-Known Member
This seem to be 180 degrees opposed to your earlier claim that he paid zero taxes.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Where is your evidence?
OddBall1st
Well-Known Member
How do you produce $30 driving a forklift ? How do you produce $30 by finishing that drywall in the room ? Where does the $30 come from if you pave for a road crew ?
I can`t believe how F`n stupid your post is,...I had to read it again to make sure that`s what you posted......
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
The $30 was just an example, but you produce economic growth by performing your job. If you didn't, then why the fuck would an employer employ you?
Workers have produced so much economic growth since 1965, average CEO income of the top 350 corporations in America (thanks @NoDrama for clarifying that) (who employ the overwhelming majority of workers in America) have gone up by more than 325 x's in 2015.
Do you think it's OK to steal workers surplus labor and give it to the CEO, top executives, board of directors and shareholders and leave the employees with minimum wage jobs that require them to utilize public assistance to pay their bills?
Nope.
Small businesses employ the most people.
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/FAQ_Sept_2012.pdf
The US Government employs TWICE AS MANY PEOPLE AS WAL-MART.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I stand corrected
I would like to clarify my stance on this issue, just so it's known in the thread. $155K (the average CEO income sub the 350 top corporations) is completely acceptable. I'd go as far as saying the 1965 rate is still pretty acceptable (~25 x's average workers income), when I'm criticizing the kinds of business practices I've brought up in this thread, those people are not included in said criticisms. I think small businesses that can't afford to increase their employees wages to a living wage should be subsidized by the government so they can. And this is also why I use Walmart as an example, because currently, they're being subsidized for their workers ($7.8 billion a year), then they're "double dipping" when their employees utilize government assistance programs ($13.5 billion a year) and spend it at Walmart because they don't make enough money to pay their bills. We're talking on the order of over $20 billion annually.. Give that to the 5.6 million small businesses to make up the difference in cost of their employees earning a living wage.
Make Walmart pay their fair share, ensure small businesses don't get harmed and ensure all workers in America can pay their bills if they work full time, 40 hours a week
Last edited:
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
goddamn you are insufferably stupid.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Low enough prices they can easily absorb the negligible increases in prices by paying their employees a living wage (if it was up to me those negligible increases would, by law, be absorbed by Doug McMillon, and the Walton aires)