generic image
Processing...
  • Games
  • Catalog
  • Develop
  • Robux
  • Search in Players
  • Search in Games
  • Search in Catalog
  • Search in Groups
  • Search in Library
  • Log In
  • Sign Up
  • Games
  • Catalog
  • Develop
  • Robux
   
ROBLOX Forum » Club Houses » Clans & Guilds
Home Search
 

Re: i cringe when people say the workers are most important

Previous Thread :: Next Thread 
BIoodborne is not online. BIoodborne
Joined: 02 May 2015
Total Posts: 8791
27 May 2016 02:20 AM
Stop with the "muh 1%" and "wall street monsters just abuse workers and only leech off workers and the system as a whole".


Those dirty 1 percenters, who recruit, supervise, retain, evaluate, and compensate the manager. Recruiting, supervising, retaining, evaluating, and compensating the CEO or general manager are probably the most important functions of a business/board of directors/shareholders. Value-added business boards need to aggressively search for the best possible candidate for these positions. Actively searching within your industry can lead to the indetification of very capable people. Don't fall into the trap of hiring someone to manage the business because he/she is out of work and needs a job. Another major error of value-added business is under-compensating the manager. Manegerial compensation can provide a good financial payoff in terms of attracting top candidates who will bring success to the value-added business. Provide direction for the organization. The board has a strategic function with providing the vision, mission, and goals of the organization. These are often determined in combination with the CEO or general manager of the business.

These "scum" has the responsibility of developing a governance system for the business. The articles of governance provide a framework but the board develops a series of policies. This refers to the board as a group and focuses on defining the rules of the group and how it will function. In a sense, it's no different than a club. The rules that the board establishes for the company should be policy based. In other words, the board develops policies to guide its own actions and the actions of the manager, which in turn guides the workers.

"OK, BUT THAT CAN ALL BE DONE DEMOCRATICALLY!!!!"

Something able to be done does not equate it being the best way TO BE DONE. LMFs have never grown for various reasons, the foremost being that it lacks a hierarchy and workers do not wish to do the work of the higher ups. You cannot just hire CFOs and CEOs and not grant some degree of authority over the rest of the workers unless you wish to sacrifice to some degree of allocative inefficiency. Thats why many LMFs even today have some degree of a hierarchy. Also, because inputs are committed before output value is certain, and because time passes between the utilization of input services and the realization of revenue from product sales, firms typically need the services of both >RISK BEARERS< and >FINANCIERS<. There is no technical reason why all input suppliers, including workers, could not share in providing these services by accepting payments in the future and by working for shares of an uncertain total revenue, rather than for fixed wages.

What is observed, however, is consistent with the view that the supply of risk-bearing and financing services follows comparative advantage: specialists with greater willingness to bear risk and/or ability to pay for inputs up front become the suppliers of equity and debt finance, while workers are paid within the short intervals in amounts promised in advance and not contingent on the firm's results. the fact that workers typically have less wealth and thus both less ability to supply funds or to finance their consumption from savings, as well as less willingness to bear risk, is likely to play an important part in expanding this. There is also a possibility in backwards supply responses. Failure to consider the scarcity price of capital can lead to inappropriate choice of technology. Labor would be misallocated among firms in the short run equilibrium of a labor-managed economy, since those with high marginal product of labor would have no incentive to accept workers from those with low marginal product. As an added oddity, the firm would seek more workers if the cost of its fixed factor rose, and it would reduce its membership if the opposite occurred.


Sorry for word wall.
Report Abuse
isseman6 is not online. isseman6
Joined: 16 Feb 2016
Total Posts: 3224
27 May 2016 02:26 AM
I didn't bother fully reading that nonesense.

Here is my point: American Capitalism is unsustainable and does not work. Corporations and the wealthy buy Politicians whose campaigns depend on such donations in order to have policies in favor of said benefactors.

In the next couple of decades as more jobs are automated, wealth will increase, but going under the current trend there will be 40+% unemployment and none of that wealth will be distributed but goes back to those who are able to buy them.


No one is against Companies or Employers, people are against the power over government and governments willingness to represent said power over the people, thus breaking the contract.
Report Abuse
BIoodborne is not online. BIoodborne
Joined: 02 May 2015
Total Posts: 8791
27 May 2016 02:27 AM
merciful tl;dr:

the people up top are the ones who take financial risk and in return are rewarded more than the people whom are not comfortable with the risk. at the same time, the workers are more financially secured if the business or firm fails due to them receiving timely payments.

compared to a national scale economy, the removal of risk-taking and financial support for these risks would make everything B A D

4th grader tl;dr: SOCIALISM B A D
Report Abuse
SCR0LLS is not online. SCR0LLS
Joined: 07 Oct 2009
Total Posts: 7086
27 May 2016 02:28 AM
Stop with the "muh 1%" and "wall street monsters just abuse workers and only leech off workers and the system as a whole".


Those dirty 1 percenters, who recruit, supervise, retain, evaluate, and compensate the manager. Recruiting, supervising, retaining, evaluating, and compensating the CEO or general manager are probably the most important functions of a business/board of directors/shareholders. Value-added business boards need to aggressively search for the best possible candidate for these positions. Actively searching within your industry can lead to the indetification of very capable people. Don't fall into the trap of hiring someone to manage the business because he/she is out of work and needs a job. Another major error of value-added business is under-compensating the manager. Manegerial compensation can provide a good financial payoff in terms of attracting top candidates who will bring success to the value-added business. Provide direction for the organization. The board has a strategic function with providing the vision, mission, and goals of the organization. These are often determined in combination with the CEO or general manager of the business.

These "scum" has the responsibility of developing a governance system for the business. The articles of governance provide a framework but the board develops a series of policies. This refers to the board as a group and focuses on defining the rules of the group and how it will function. In a sense, it's no different than a club. The rules that the board establishes for the company should be policy based. In other words, the board develops policies to guide its own actions and the actions of the manager, which in turn guides the workers.

"OK, BUT THAT CAN ALL BE DONE DEMOCRATICALLY!!!!"

Something able to be done does not equate it being the best way TO BE DONE. LMFs have never grown for various reasons, the foremost being that it lacks a hierarchy and workers do not wish to do the work of the higher ups. You cannot just hire CFOs and CEOs and not grant some degree of authority over the rest of the workers unless you wish to sacrifice to some degree of allocative inefficiency. Thats why many LMFs even today have some degree of a hierarchy. Also, because inputs are committed before output value is certain, and because time passes between the utilization of input services and the realization of revenue from product sales, firms typically need the services of both >RISK BEARERS< and >FINANCIERS<. There is no technical reason why all input suppliers, including workers, could not share in providing these services by accepting payments in the future and by working for shares of an uncertain total revenue, rather than for fixed wages.

What is observed, however, is consistent with the view that the supply of risk-bearing and financing services follows comparative advantage: specialists with greater willingness to bear risk and/or ability to pay for inputs up front become the suppliers of equity and debt finance, while workers are paid within the short intervals in amounts promised in advance and not contingent on the firm's results. the fact that workers typically have less wealth and thus both less ability to supply funds or to finance their consumption from savings, as well as less willingness to bear risk, is likely to play an important part in expanding this. There is also a possibility in backwards supply responses. Failure to consider the scarcity price of capital can lead to inappropriate choice of technology. Labor would be misallocated among firms in the short run equilibrium of a labor-managed economy, since those with high marginal product of labor would have no incentive to accept workers from those with low marginal product. As an added oddity, the firm would seek more workers if the cost of its fixed factor rose, and it would reduce its membership if the opposite occurred.


Sorry for word wall.
Report Abuse
isseman6 is not online. isseman6
Joined: 16 Feb 2016
Total Posts: 3224
27 May 2016 02:30 AM
Blood, the US already has socialist policies. There is socialism at the top with those same people who take the risk? Under your logic, the banks in the recession should not have been bailed

my whole point: YOUR MODEL IS FALSE because you are making the assumption that government wont intervene when said risk takers are bailed out with socialist policies, LITERALLY.

Report Abuse
BIoodborne is not online. BIoodborne
Joined: 02 May 2015
Total Posts: 8791
27 May 2016 02:33 AM
"I didn't bother fully reading that nonesense."

you're kidding right? how the hell are you going to refute it without reading it.

"Here is my point: American Capitalism is unsustainable and does not work. Corporations and the wealthy buy Politicians whose campaigns depend on such donations in order to have policies in favor of said benefactors."

>states capitalism doesnt work
>doesn't provide any economic factor on why it doesnt work, but instead talks about how ANGER he is over people spending THEIR EARNED MONEY on political support, the same way any normal citizen would.

"In the next couple of decades as more jobs are automated, wealth will increase, but going under the current trend there will be 40+% unemployment and none of that wealth will be distributed but goes back to those who are able to buy them."

Ironic how leftists and Sander's supporters are, while saying this, speeding up the process by advocating for a minimum wage hike LMAO


"No one is against Companies or Employers, people are against the power over government and governments willingness to represent said power over the people, thus breaking the contract."

you still havent refuted anything that i wrote, instead you spewed out garbage that has zero impact on economics
Report Abuse
55Altair is not online. 55Altair
Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Total Posts: 6272
27 May 2016 02:33 AM
says in uninformed degenerate voice feel the bern bro get the free college and healthcare
Report Abuse
BIoodborne is not online. BIoodborne
Joined: 02 May 2015
Total Posts: 8791
27 May 2016 02:37 AM
"Blood, the US already has socialist policies. There is socialism at the top with those same people who take the risk? Under your logic, the banks in the recession should not have been bailed"

The banks shouldn't have been bailed. It actually killed off small banks, and the ones that DID survive, became government-run with zero incentive to improve or compete.

I personally love when socialists use the post office or something dumb like that as an example, because in fact, it was absolute garbage until companies like fedex came around and forced it into a competitive field which made it improve to survive.


Report Abuse
isseman6 is not online. isseman6
Joined: 16 Feb 2016
Total Posts: 3224
27 May 2016 02:39 AM
">doesn't provide any economic factor on why it doesnt work, but instead talks about how ANGER he is over people spending THEIR EARNED MONEY on political support, the same way any normal citizen would."


Because pure unregulated capitism has NEVER existed, even the US system has socialist policies within it, subsidies, welfare and so on lmao, this is basic.


Also, legalized bribery is different than donating buddy. That is a plutocracy not democracy lmao, where the wealthy control government.
Report Abuse
isseman6 is not online. isseman6
Joined: 16 Feb 2016
Total Posts: 3224
27 May 2016 02:42 AM
I also never said Capitilism doesnt work, I said the AMERICAN SYSTEM doesnt work and it isn't a free market either LOL, you should this mr.bloodborne
Report Abuse
BIoodborne is not online. BIoodborne
Joined: 02 May 2015
Total Posts: 8791
27 May 2016 02:44 AM
i never said the US was pure unregulated capitalism so quit trying to create an argument on something i never said nor implied

legalized bribery? that's a new one LMAO. everyone donates and votes out of their own interest, and just because they have more money, doesn't mean they're evil for it.

they're doing the same exact thing as regular voters, but because they have a real impact, all of a sudden they're an enemy?





i think im starting to see the real intention here. socialists like to portray the "elites" of our economy as horrible thieves to create a dogma that will encourage people to support heavy taxes on them, which is the only way a socialized country can even THINK to survive off of.
Report Abuse
isseman6 is not online. isseman6
Joined: 16 Feb 2016
Total Posts: 3224
27 May 2016 02:46 AM
In a Democracy, all people should be represented equally.

So lets all whites were broke poor and the all blacks were hella rich and paid off the politicians, and basically ignored/did not represent the whites in any way, that you would not find anything wrong with that.

You are basically agreeing with Citizens United, im done lol

Im also not socialist
Report Abuse
BIoodborne is not online. BIoodborne
Joined: 02 May 2015
Total Posts: 8791
27 May 2016 02:49 AM
what does race have to do with any of this, it's completely irrelevant.

and if you're not socialist, stop advocating for it so vehemently.
Report Abuse
zepenguin4 is not online. zepenguin4
Joined: 09 Feb 2014
Total Posts: 16016
27 May 2016 02:52 AM
i love you and all biood but

"what does race have to do with any of this, it's completely irrelevant.

and if you're not socialist, stop advocating for it so vehemently."

he merely used an example for it, he could of used fruits or wood in it,

and hes just saying that socialism isnt as bad as you think


Report Abuse
isseman6 is not online. isseman6
Joined: 16 Feb 2016
Total Posts: 3224
27 May 2016 02:52 AM
Im just pointing out an example, the US's democracy is supposed to represent EVERYONE, not just the rich.


Im advocating for policies that make senses, there is a reason other countries life-standards are much better than America, are more educated and so on.

Report Abuse
BIoodborne is not online. BIoodborne
Joined: 02 May 2015
Total Posts: 8791
27 May 2016 02:58 AM
if you want to deal with representation in government by wealth then i'd like to see how you'd deal with super-pacs and rich individuals who aren't associated with any group but donate out of their own pockets. it's impractical.

and personally, when i hear the "better live standards" argument, i look at venezuela and canada's healthcare and shrug.
Report Abuse
isseman6 is not online. isseman6
Joined: 16 Feb 2016
Total Posts: 3224
27 May 2016 03:01 AM

Australia's election system for money is good enough

Dude bloodbourne, your way too narrow-minded putting it nicely, I promise when you get some education or actually know how the system works you will change

and im not even liberal lmao
Report Abuse
BIoodborne is not online. BIoodborne
Joined: 02 May 2015
Total Posts: 8791
27 May 2016 03:03 AM
venezuela nationalized their oil industry and killed it within a year. they also put in socialized healthcare and couldn't back it up due to the oil industry failing (due to socialism) and now you're seeing 13,000 doctors leaving the country since 2003 along with the remaining hospitals running mostly without tools or electricity.

canada's waiting times to get any healthcare period due to their system is unbearable and at some times fatal.
Report Abuse
isseman6 is not online. isseman6
Joined: 16 Feb 2016
Total Posts: 3224
27 May 2016 03:05 AM
germany,norway,sweden,etc


dude my whole point is smart policies, im not FOR SOCIALIST, just SOME policies


get that thru your damn skull omg
Report Abuse
BIoodborne is not online. BIoodborne
Joined: 02 May 2015
Total Posts: 8791
27 May 2016 03:11 AM
norway and sweden suffer from horrible waiting lines, the same way canada does.

germany's is exponentially rising in cost due to inefficiencies made by political moves.

back to my original statement, competition from private companies would encourage the programs to improve (or, they'd fall behind and wouldn't be necessary anymore.)
Report Abuse
sly_marbo is not online. sly_marbo
Joined: 07 Jul 2009
Total Posts: 18876
27 May 2016 11:45 AM
but people in those scandinavian countries make less money, their countries are poorer than most US states, and just because they have lower poverty doesnt mean their systems are what is helping prevent poverty.

our populations are different, our forms of poverty are different, and we've already sunk trillions of dollars into trying to help stop poverty. didn't work well.
Report Abuse
HailMontgomery is not online. HailMontgomery
Joined: 09 Aug 2011
Total Posts: 8257
27 May 2016 11:51 AM
I mean capitalism has got the west (and east) this far.

Your reply was the most disappointing thing since my son.
Report Abuse
Solar_Sigma is not online. Solar_Sigma
Joined: 24 Mar 2016
Total Posts: 1053
27 May 2016 11:52 AM
my god


Report Abuse
AlexiaSpolkov is not online. AlexiaSpolkov
Joined: 14 Oct 2013
Total Posts: 141
27 May 2016 12:28 PM
Allow me to say my take on this from a Marxist perspective.

All value is created through labor. However in a capitalist society, one must either sell their labor power to a boss or starve. Say you work in a factory, for every hour you make 5 products worth 50 dollars for a total of 250 dollars. Do you get the value from your labor ($250)? No, most of this value goes into the pockets of your boss, and then he gives you the minimal amount needed to survive back in the form of a wage. This is called exploitation.

Marx also saw Capitalism result in widespread unhappiness due to something called, Alienation. There are four different kinds of Alienation.
1. Alienation from Product-"I wish I could afford one of these TVs I'm making. But I can't because I am on minimum wage"

Alienation from Others- "If only I could put more time and energy into relationships that really matter. But, acting like a machine-thing, I start to see others as things."

Alienation from Self- "Only a few more mind-numbing hours for The Man before quitting time."

Alienation from Species-Essence- "I don't even know who I am anymore! I wanted to be a dancer!"


You claim that democratic workers' control over the means of production lead to loss of productivity. This is false, for example the CNT during the Spanish Civil War, The Ukrainian Free Territory (who also had more artillery power than Great Britain at the time) saw no lose in productivity. Even today, the co-ops in Argentina are rebuilding the economy even though they can get arrested. Not to mention the Mondragon Corporation(Which is a federation of worker co-ops) that started in Spain, has went international and is doing extremely well.

Here are some videos you should watch.
https://youtu.be/AVQ4LIp39Xo
https://youtu.be/jFCRYgNIV4o
https://youtu.be/pI6a7WySFsU


Report Abuse
Zullway is not online. Zullway
Joined: 21 Oct 2013
Total Posts: 15074
27 May 2016 12:29 PM
"Greater Soviet Union"

I think I've seen enough, commie


Report Abuse
Previous Thread :: Next Thread 
Page 1 of 1
 
 
ROBLOX Forum » Club Houses » Clans & Guilds
   
 
   
  • About Us
  • Jobs
  • Blog
  • Parents
  • Help
  • Terms
  • Privacy

©2017 Roblox Corporation. Roblox, the Roblox logo, Robux, Bloxy, and Powering Imagination are among our registered and unregistered trademarks in the U.S. and other countries.



Progress
Starting Roblox...
Connecting to Players...
R R

Roblox is now loading. Get ready to play!

R R

You're moments away from getting into the game!

Click here for help

Check Remember my choice and click Launch Application in the dialog box above to join games faster in the future!

Gameplay sponsored by:
Loading 0% - Starting game...
Get more with Builders Club! Join Builders Club
Choose Your Avatar
I have an account
generic image