The Scarcity Trap

[carpedm9587]

Well yeah, that is what I meant. I was speaking of opportunity. Not ability.

Why?

First, who says life is fair? Why does the rich guy owe the poor guy anything?

If the rich man achieved his wealth at the expense of the poor man, in my moral framework, an injustice has occurred. It (morally) should be righted. If it is a pattern (and it is) it should be prevented from occurring again in the future.

As a Christian, I am commanded to help my fellow man. Personally. But I think forced assistance is not mandated. If I steal money from you to give to a poor person, I am still a thief and not a good person.

I believe we should all assist the needy, but voluntarily, not forceably.

If the needy were created by the unjust action of the rich...then forceably is justified.

Usually the free market takes care to even things out in the long run. Sure, you will have some greedy rich people who get away with it, but generally such people end up losing what they took. People will refuse to work for them or with them. They generally will isolate themselves or do something illegal and end up in jail. Most "rich" people are not bad. They are business owners who employ a lot of people and treat them right, and the employees prosper and the company prospers and the owner prospers.

I think you are moving through life with some combination of rose-colored glasses and blinders on. The history of the U.S. (and other capitalist countries) is replete with the the rich taking advantage of the poor. The meat industry (Upton Sinclair), the Coal Industry, the Robber Barons, the Lead industry, the Tobacco Industry and the list goes on and on and on. That very reality gave rise to unions (which have long since become corrupt power centers of their own).

I mean just look at Uber. The owner was a total creep. He ran Uber using very shady business practices. He treated him employees like crap. He was brought to task and booted out. Where are his friends now?

I mean, YOU said you were a business owner right? And I bet you treat your employees well. If you have a successful company, you are probably more well off financially than most people. Does that make you evil for being successful?

I have never said being successful or rich is a problem. I have explicitly been clear on that, so returning to this meme is just a tactic to paint the position in the light the right wants it painted so it can be knocked down. I believe that is called a strawman. I explicitly designed my business so that no person is succeeding on the backs of anyone else. My comments are specifically about companies (and people) where that is NOT the ethic.

[Sparko]

If the rich man achieved his wealth at the expense of the poor man, in my moral framework, an injustice has occurred. It (morally) should be righted. If it is a pattern (and it is) it should be prevented from occurring again in the future.



If the needy were created by the unjust action of the rich...then forceably is justified.

Usually that would be illegal. But again, this is a free country. Nobody is forcing anyone to work for anyone they don't want to. If I were being mistreated by the company I work for, I would leave. If enough people did the same, the rich guy would not be so rich any more.

I think you are moving through life with some combination of rose-colored glasses and blinders on. The history of the U.S. (and other capitalist countries) is replete with the the rich taking advantage of the poor. The meat industry (Upton Sinclair), the Coal Industry, the Robber Barons, the Lead industry, the Tobacco Industry and the list goes on and on and on. That very reality gave rise to unions (which have long since become corrupt power centers of their own).

well we agree on the uniions at least. And yes there have been some misuses in the past. The unions did serve a purpose at one time. But how much of this is going on now? Any current examples?

And I find it a bit ironic that you are complaining about "taking advantage of the poor" when you in another thread seemed to be for allowing illegal immigrants into this country so they can work at low paying jobs that nobody else wants. Make up your mind.

Here in Vermont, itinerant workers are the lifeblood of many of our farms. When the workers were not permitted in under Trump, many farms went under because they could not find the labor they needed to survive.

I have never said being successful or rich is a problem. I have explicitly been clear on that, so returning to this meme is just a tactic to paint the position in the light the right wants it painted so it can be knocked down. I believe that is called a strawman. I explicitly designed my business so that no person is succeeding on the backs of anyone else. My comments are specifically about companies (and people) where that is NOT the ethic.

I think most companies do the same. They want their employees to succeed so they do better work and make them more money.

[rogue06]

I was thinking of the Vietnam and Chinese refugees that have come over here. Many of them, fresh of the boat, so to speak, were able to just start up restaurants and make a living without having an education, or even knowing English. In their native country, they had to depend on the communist governments to allow them to have a business, or work where the government told them to. I have always been impressed especially by the Vietnamese people who came over during and after the war. It was when I was still a teenager and I went to school with many vietnamese children (being an Army brat we lived in many of the same locations that they were relocated to) - They didn't ask for handouts. They just started their own businesses, worked hard to learn the language and become part of American society. The kids I went to school with excelled and many went to the top of the class. I was very impressed. They took the opportunity they saw and ran with it.

Back in the 90s when I managed five Dry Cleaners (one plant with four pickup stations) for a friend it was difficult to compete with those owned by immigrants who didn't have to pay federal income taxes for their first five years. Several simply closed for a couple weeks at the end of the five years and then re-opened with the brother or sister of the previous owner now running it and with five more years of not having to pay taxes.

I'm not sure but I think that the law has been changed since then.

[Sparko]

Back in the 90s when I managed five Dry Cleaners (one plant with four pickup stations) for a friend it was difficult to compete with those owned by immigrants who didn't have to pay federal income taxes for their first five years. Several simply closed for a couple weeks at the end of the five years and then re-opened with the brother or sister of the previous owner now running it and with five more years of not having to pay taxes.

I'm not sure but I think that the law has been changed since then.

I did not know they got a tax break.

[rogue06]

I did not know they got a tax break.

They still had to pay payroll taxes.

When Jim sold the business to one of the larger competitors the new owner cut my pay in half (without telling me). I found out the morning of the third day he took over and quit (he wanted to replace me with his nephew). It took me almost three months to get him to finally pay me and when he finally did he gave me a personal check in which he deducted nearly another third with notations on the check citing the amounts for state and federal income taxes and social security. I immediately went to the Kinkos across the street and made a photocopy and when I never received a W-2 form I handed the copy to my new boss who was also a supervisor at the IRS.

Three months later the government seized all his businesses and he was facing jail time.

[Sparko]

They still had to pay payroll taxes.

When Jim sold the business to one of the larger competitors the new owner cut my pay in half (without telling me). I found out the morning of the third day he took over and quit (he wanted to replace me with his nephew). It took me almost three months to get him to finally pay me and when he finally did he gave me a personal check in which he deducted nearly another third with notations on the check citing the amounts for state and federal income taxes and social security. I immediately went to the Kinkos across the street and made a photocopy and when I never received a W-2 form I handed the copy to my new boss who was also a supervisor at the IRS.

Three months later the government seized all his businesses and he was facing jail time.

Yeah like I said to carp, the greedy ones often get caught when they mistreat their employees, or they lose their employees. I think in most cases the free market works. Not all the time, but enough so that we don't need to change it and turn this country into some sort of socialist mess.

[carpedm9587]

Usually that would be illegal. But again, this is a free country. Nobody is forcing anyone to work for anyone they don't want to. If I were being mistreated by the company I work for, I would leave. If enough people did the same, the rich guy would not be so rich any more.

Sparko, your view of how the poor function in this world is pretty naive. Sorry, but when people are hungry or fighting to pay the next bill, they are not always thinking long-term, or even capable of it (see the research linked to in the original OP). And there are always those ready to jump on an open job just so they don't starve, and rich people/companies willing to take advantage of that dynamic. I think some part of you knows that what you describe is not what happens.

well we agree on the uniions at least. And yes there have been some misuses in the past. The unions did serve a purpose at one time. But how much of this is going on now? Any current examples?

Personally, I think unions have become as much corrupt power centers as many companies.

And I find it a bit ironic that you are complaining about "taking advantage of the poor" when you in another thread seemed to be for allowing illegal immigrants into this country so they can work at low paying jobs that nobody else wants. Make up your mind.

Since I never made that argument, I have no response.

I think most companies do the same. They want their employees to succeed so they do better work and make them more money.

Then you have your head placed deeply in the sand. We only need to look to the last economic crisis (and its aftermath) to see what I'm talking about in effect. Are their ethical companies out for the best for their employees? Absolutely. Are there companies out only for the bottom line and shareholder return? Far too many. And they tend to be the companies with the lowest paying line jobs.

[carpedm9587]

Back in the 90s when I managed five Dry Cleaners (one plant with four pickup stations) for a friend it was difficult to compete with those owned by immigrants who didn't have to pay federal income taxes for their first five years. Several simply closed for a couple weeks at the end of the five years and then re-opened with the brother or sister of the previous owner now running it and with five more years of not having to pay taxes.

I'm not sure but I think that the law has been changed since then.

I would hope. Such laws would be grossly misaligned.

[QuantaFille]

One of the jobs I worked in retail had an employee stock ownership program. Basically, at one year of employment, you automatically get stock in the company. I think I made a grand total of $150 on it when it was cashed out to me when I quit working there. That job was one of the lowest paying jobs I've ever had, to the point that I moved back in with my parents.
If the employees are the shareholders, where'd all that money go?

[Sparko]

Sparko, your view of how the poor function in this world is pretty naive.

Your condescension is noted.

Carp, I grew up poor. My dad was a sergeant in the Army, from Appalachia. I had to pay for my own school, I could not even afford college so I had to go to trade school, I worked multiple jobs at a time, and I had to live in a freaking school bus on a KOA camp ground with a friend for nearly 2 years because we didn't have enough money for an apartment.

Then you have your head placed deeply in the sand.

Well one of us does, and it isn't me.

[Sparko]

Since I never made that argument, I have no response.

Yes you did. I quoted you right there in the post:

here it is again:

Here in Vermont, itinerant workers are the lifeblood of many of our farms. When the workers were not permitted in under Trump, many farms went under because they could not find the labor they needed to survive.

You are arguing that we need to let in Mexican workers to work the farms because they will work for less money than anyone else and the farms will go under unless they can exploit cheap labor.

[carpedm9587]

Your condescension is noted.

Carp, I grew up poor. My dad was a sergeant in the Army, from Appalachia. I had to pay for my own school, I could not even afford college so I had to go to trade school, I worked multiple jobs at a time, and I had to live in a freaking school bus on a KOA camp ground with a friend for nearly 2 years because we didn't have enough money for an apartment.

Well one of us does, and it isn't me.

No...I'm pretty sure it is you. Sorry Sparko, your upbringing not withstanding, your perspective about what is and is not possible for the poor is pretty badly slanted to right-wing memes. Somehow, I doubt that is likely to change - at least not based on discussions thus far.

And I'm reasonably sure you have the same view of me, just "left-wing" instead.

[carpedm9587]

Yes you did. I quoted you right there in the post:

here it is again:

You are arguing that we need to let in Mexican workers to work the farms because they will work for less money than anyone else and the farms will go under unless they can exploit cheap labor.

No. I am arguing that our tight restrictions on itinerant workers are ridiculous when it causes businesses to go under. If no one here wants the jobs, and itinerant workers do, why would we let these small businesses fail? As far as I know, in Vermont, it is not about the pay. It is about the work. No one here wants the jobs...not the salary level. They are temporary, seasonal jobs that are manually intensive. It does not attract most American workers.

And I said nothing about "Mexican" workers. The itinerant workers we usually have in Vermont hail from many places. They are not predominantly Mexican.

[Starlight]

I was thinking of the Vietnam and Chinese refugees that have come over here. Many of them, fresh of the boat, so to speak, were able to just start up restaurants and make a living without having an education, or even knowing English. In their native country, they had to depend on the communist governments to allow them to have a business, or work where the government told them to.

I don't know much about Vietnam, but I have a Chinese sister-in-law and can say that in China there is very very much a culture of small business ownership, and basically everyone there aspires to running their own business (wages are very poor if you work for someone else). The situation might have been different decades ago, but certainly now everyone there is free to start their own small businesses (both her siblings have done so) and run them without any kind of excessive interference from the communist government there.

If you trust the World Bank (I don't, as they're a right-wing US-centric globalist organisation), their rankings of the "ease of doing business" in different countries, have Chinese-controlled Hong Kong at #5, just ahead of the US at #6 and the UK at #7, with social democracies like New Zealand at #1, Denmark at #3, Norway at #8 and Sweden at #10.

[Sparko]

No...I'm pretty sure it is you. Sorry Sparko, your upbringing not withstanding, your perspective about what is and is not possible for the poor is pretty badly slanted to right-wing memes. Somehow, I doubt that is likely to change - at least not based on discussions thus far.

And I'm reasonably sure you have the same view of me, just "left-wing" instead.

You seem to think I have it out for the poor. I don't. I have no problem with the poor getting a handout when they need it. My problem is with people assuming they are useless and can't pick themselves off the ground and need help constantly like they are crippled or something. Most poor people have the ability to succeed if they want to. I did. My friends did. The town my dad grew up in was a coal mining town, where people were poor but they worked hard. There were some though that just sat on their rear ends and expected the government to hand them a check every month. I could have done the same, but instead, I left and put myself through school and now have a decent job. I am not rich by any means. You are probably rich compared to me, you have a college degree and your own business and employees. So for you to lecture me on how to treat poor people is condescending and foolish.