The Glade 4.0

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

False analogy Khross. A consumed product does NOT fit the same model for this particular topic.

There's no false analogy, because all I've done is ask you a question. So, you can either answer the question; or, as you did in your last post, keep trying to pretend you know where I'm going with my questions.

How much is that sandwich worth? What is that sandwich's value?

_________________

You don't need my answer to this question to make your point, so just get to it. I have little interest in being baited by you. So make your point, so I can show you why its doesn't apply in this situation.

TheRiov:

It's a simple question. What is the value of a McDouble? I'll even give you some hints.

1. Consider how you can quantify a McDouble in terms other than currency or labor that might explain the item.

2. Consider how much time it takes to acquire a McDouble.

If, hypothetically speaking, a McDouble has 400 Calories, and you burn less than 400 Calories acquiring a McDouble (which includes the time it takes to earn the currency equal to its price), then you quite possibly are gaining value by purchasing a McDouble.

Then, you have all of those esoteric and intangible valuations you make about the sandwich which further alters you consideration of value.

So, indeed, a McDouble might very well be of more value than a 1 dollar-bill, especially if it constitutes a net-labor gain (even if consumed).

The labor market really isn't much different. 80% of Americans make less than $78,000 a year. 80% of Americans are nothing more than fungible commodities in the ledger books of labor units and labor costs. They are ALL absolutely replaceable and absolutely interchangeable. (Any gains to salaries over time by employees retaining their positions come from the opportunity cost gains of their employment as a function of time and efficiency).

At this level of employment, wages and salaries are based solely on movable units of labor over time. The work is so mundane, menial, and rote that it requires little more than basic higher brain function. And this includes people all the way up through middle management and into entry level executive positions. As soon as it costs more to keep you employed than it does to let you go, you're replaced or eliminated. You are nothing more than a number in a ledger and a spreadsheet. You have no name, no personality, no anything except a basic valuation of menial productivity.

The other 20% of Americans are asset level talent; they bring far more to a company than their demand in compensation.

And, either way, they're pay is based on the total cost of employment. Their value relative my expenditure determines what I pay them, how I pay them, and what they do. I don't consider their tax burdens; I don't consider living costs; I don't consider their habits or behaviors outside of work ...

None of that matters, because at the end of the day, for 80% of the people working out there it's all about whether or not they're costing me more than they're making me. Raises, retention, benefits, taxes, fees, insurance, etc. ... some of those are simply opportunities to increase the value I get from a given labor machine.

_________________

No, they can't estimate it captain mcdouchenozzle. They can't ask me if I'm married (and never have) because discrimination of employment on such terms is illegal and jointly filing with a spouse who makes 150% of my gross salary would change my net income by over 18% according to a 2010 Federal Income Tax Schedule versus having no spouse.

Furthermore, were I to become married, by your severely autistic logic, they should greatly increase my gross salary since I would effectively be taking a paycut to my net pay.

I don't mean to imply that they estimate it for YOU, I mean they estimate it for position.

But the name calling is amusing. keep it up.

They don't estimate it for the position, either ...

So, keep trying to defend a point that's so widely absurd and discredited because you can't accept you have no idea how a payroll works ...

_________________

Oh you mean to say that buisnesses dont base pay on the minimum they can hire & Keep the right people for and remain competitive? If that were the case, companies wouldn't scale pay around cost of living and regionally competitive salaries. (since I know for a fact my own employer does this, and given the fact that they're one of the largest IT companies in the world, the mere fact that THEY do it, kinda dictates that other companies do it even if the smaller companies are just following suit so they can hire quality people)

...

You really should just exit this conversation with a mea culpa and flee Hellfire for about week now, TheRiov. Quite simply, your ignorance and stupidity are giving my rock garden a migraine.

1. You don't understand the difference between price, cost, and value.

2. You don't understand opportunity costs.

3. You're still talking out of your ***, because you have an ideologically vested interest in employers being evil.

Businesses base an employees salary on their value to the company. In determining that value, businesses evaluate the material and opportunity costs of employment for a given individual (asset employees) or a given position (commodity labor). Competitive salaries and cost of living adjustments are opportunity costs take into account when one makes a labor valuation. These are things which increase the cost of employment at some level to defer other costs or value losses at other levels.

Again, your employer doesn't care how much you take home; your employer cares how much value you bring to the company. If your value exceeds your cost, the company keeps you. If your value is less than your cost to the company, it eliminates you or your job.

It's really that simple.

_________________

Khross, shut up and send me all your money.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

I know what you meant here, but I can't help reading this as though there's a possibility that my employer is going to have me killed.

_________________
Sail forth! steer for the deep waters only!
Reckless, O soul, exploring, I with thee, and thou with me;
For we are bound where mariner has not yet dared to go,
And we will risk the ship, ourselves and all.

Khross's social responsibility is to Americans with disabilities like crack addiction, not Canadians.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

More foreign aid to Canada!

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

I am loading my foreign aid as fast as I can.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Oh, Stathol and Elmo, you make me laugh the funnies.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

Anyone else notice that Khross has become more and more rabid as time goes on? I used to be able to respect him for what were occasionally intelligent posts, but these days he's so angry all the time. I wonder if he's thought about therapy? A stress ball? Maybe its senility. I had a great grandmother that Khross kind of reminds me of. She'd launch into these paranoid conspiracy theories, refuse to even listen to what others were saying, and then insult them or call them stupid when they made perfectly cogent points that she was incapable of following. It turned out it was Alzheimers.

Yeah I've noticed it. Hes stopped taking the recommended doses of adorablicioussnugglediebumbwleiugumszes.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Apparently the definition of "rabid" has been expanded to include insufficient enthusiasm for TheRiov's politics and misrepresentation of financial and economic realities. If that's all you have, then just concede that you really have no idea what you're trying to discuss in this thread; just admit you're ignorant about the realities of payroll and move on.

You've made no cogent or relevant points in this thread; every post you've made has been demonstrated to be both factually and logically fallacious on every level. So, please stop trolling ...

_________________

*adorablicioussnugglediebumbwleiugumszes*

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Khross, I'm not arguing your point (a fact that you've clearly missed) Of course those are huge factors in the determination of salary. At what point have I disagreed with you other than to say that take home pay is a factor? (I wouldn't begin to suggest that it was the only factor or even the primary factor.) There's a longer explanation but you've dismissed it without me actually making it, something I'm not particularly interested in doing for a %$#% who insists on insulting anyone he disagrees with.

Oh, you're not? Hmmms, I seem to remember reading a different thread:Demonstrably false on both accounts.Demonstrably false on all accounts.Still demonstrably false on all accounts as demonstrated by the thread ...

viewtopic.php?p=164221#p164221Here's you arguing my point, thus invalidating your initial statement in the post I'm now responding to ...

Here's also you defending the same demonstrably false points again, despite a lengthy and civil explanation of why your arguments are false and flawed.

viewtopic.php?p=164243#p164243

This post contains a question you haven't answered yet ... mostly because it disproves the argument you started and lost with the first set of posts.

viewtopic.php?p=164310#p164310
Here's you again trying to defend the original argument that was completely debunked and dismantled ...

viewtopic.php?p=164411#p164411
Here's you trying to tell me that thought exercises on value, price, and cost have no place in this thread ... and erroneously I might add.

viewtopic.php?p=164431#p164431Here's you pretending to be smarter than me and asserting you're going to "show [me] why [my point] doesn't apply in this situation.

viewtopic.php?p=164595#p164595Here's you continuing to defend the original point that's already been demonstrated to be false and fallacious; and you arguing with my point that ... Employers employ you based on their cost and your value; your take home doesn't mean dick to them.

viewtopic.php?p=164613#p164613 Here's you shifting the goal posts to a completely different topic that you don't understand in any attempt to the original point you've already lost ...

viewtopic.php?p=164656#p164656Here's you attempting to sound smart while insulting me because you still can't respond to a single substantive point against your arguments in this thread ...

But, you're still trying to argue against me...

Hmms, I dunno, I have a litany of quotes above that indicate you're doing all sorts of things in an attempt to avoid being wrong.No one ever said you called it a primary or only factor; we simply disputed and disproved your notion that is a factor.And now you're going to take your ball and go home because obviously your special response is too special for those of us you haven't been arguing with all thread ...

So, could you please tell me which thread you're reading wherein you're not arguing my point and not attempting to troll because you've lost the argument? I'd really like it to read it ...

_________________

Watch out for nearly unhindered capitalism and low taxes guys, it might turn out like this:

Ahh, good old Milton Friedman:

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko