Are you paid what you're worth?

[PETRUS]

Over the last 30 years, productivity (output per hour) has roughly doubled, but the median wage has stagnated and executive compensation has soared.

This has nothing to do with tax policy, which is discussed endlessly (and has so far, gone nowhere - in spite of a supermajority of Americans favoring a more progressive tax code, it hasn't happened).

What's the real story here?

[Betty88]

1. I am but only because I'm in a union, nt

[Omaha Steve]

99. Same here

That is the only reason. The state changed the law on how public unions bargain this summer. We start negotiating a new contact for 2013 sometime next year. Meanwhile a tea party type group wants to eliminate my right to be in a union completely next year by a petition and vote. :-(

[Luciferous]

124. My husband's union just negotiated a contract that freezes their pay for the next 5 years...

he's definitely not paid enough :(

[truebrit71]

2. Not even remotely....

...and I despise the motherfuckers in my office that are severely overpaid...But, being a wage-slave what's my alternative in the current economic climate but to shut my mouth, take my beatings and be grateful I am still able to stay (barely) afloat...

[MineralMan]

3. I was, at one time, paid more than I was worth.

Now, I'm paid less than I'm worth. I'm glad I still have work that I get paid for. Another time, I may be paid more than I'm worth again.

[SomethingFishy]

4. The real story is the workers do ALL the work

while the exec's and shareholders make all the money. Republicans like to tell you to pick yourself up by your bootstraps. The truth is it's the execs and shareholders who are getting the free ride. We live in a country where hard work is scorned and being born with a silver spoon in your mouth is praised. It's pretty fucked up.

[moondust]

37. Bingo.

It's a parasitic relationship that has troubled me for 50 years.

Collective ownership is probably a big part of the solution. Coops, whatever.

:hi:

[Abq_Sarah]

56. Oh yeah

I work 80+ hours a week and my employees work 40. If they were doing all the work, I might get a damned day off once a month.

[SomethingFishy]

95. Are you the CEO of a huge corporation?

Do you make 400 times as much money as your employees? Are your shareholders making more money than your employees?

If not then I'm not talking about you.

[MedicalAdmin]

100. Like you I run a company. I was at the office until 8 PM last night ...

... and I got to work today at 4AM.

Wash, rinse, repeat.




I assume that you run a small company... Now the investor class and their enabling toadies are another story.

[LibDemAlways]

101. +1000 and then some. Years ago I worked for an

insurance company in what was then called the "personnel" department. I was privy to the salary of every person in the company. The peons who did the grunt work that kept things running made 800-1300 a month. The two guys at the top were pulling in 50K a month with million dollar bonuses every quarter. They sat up on the luxuriously appointed top floor enjoying meals from a personal chef while everyone else ate out of a "roach coach." They outlawed vacation time during the winter holidays while they were off on ski trips to Aspen - taken in their private jet. Free ride, you bet.

[SoCalDem]

105. In the early 70's lots of companies had "profit sharing"

My husband worked for one, and every fiscal year, every employee got a folder showing what everyone's salary was, what projects they were working on, and how those projects were faring(profit-wise).

It was an architectural firm. Once a year every employee got a profit sharing check based on a formula that took into account their years of service, their job performance and the over-all profitability of the company.

There was no backstabbing, no petty jealousy, and of course EVERYONE went out of their way to not waste money.. They all shut off lights when not necessary, did not waste paper & supplies, and it translated into money in their pockets.. My husband was the new kid on the block back then, and we were thrilled when he got an extra check for hundreds of dollars...later on thousands, as he had been there longer and worked on more projects.

Employees used to be assets...


There was also a company in town (Sullair) that installed their own full scale gym for employees to use for free, weight room, napping lounge....they had free daycare onsite, full-size indoor basketball court , swimming pool, tennis courts,and a French Restaurant inside the plant where employees got fantastic food and rock bottom prices..

Of course people never wanted to quit, and they never had any problem filling vacancies

[SomethingFishy]

112. Yup I worked at a place in the early 80's that had profit sharing

Talk about an incentive to do good work...

[stevedeshazer]

5. Hell, no.

I made more than double what I make now in 2001.

Not adjusted for inflation.

[leftstreet]

6. Under Capitalism you're paid by the hour, not by what you produce

Nothing to do with 'worth'

[ThomWV]

12. That is such a silly comment its hard to imagine anyone wrote it.

Have you never heard of the term "piece-work" or the notion of working on "commission"?

[leftstreet]

13. That's still not based on the value or worth of what you produce

When are piece rate and commissions determined by value?

[itsallhappening]

15. Wrong.

I produce something that, once produced, sells over and over again. The hours I work have nothing to do with it.

I like working this way. The competition is fierce and makes my product better, which has increased my sales and I increase my earnings every month...working the same (and sometimes fewer) hours.

[leftstreet]

16. The employer pays you by the hour

not by a percentage of what you've produced and how often it gains value as it sells over and over

[itsallhappening]

17. Absolutely incorrect.

I'm self-employed. I create my product. I sell it.

Once I got established and demand went up, my prices went up on some of my best-selling products.

[leftstreet]

18. Oh. You're self employed n/t

[itsallhappening]

19. Yep. The only business entities I deal with are online retailers.

And with little interference.

What kind of work do you do?

[itsallhappening]

21. Where did you learn about economic theory?

[leftstreet]

23. What did you want to know? n/t

[itsallhappening]

27. I was wondering why you think everyone is paid by the hour.

For instance, an ex-girlfriend's father used to sell kitchen appliances to restaurants.

He got to a point where he barely worked at all. His name was out there, he was a good rep, and he basically just took orders after two years of working to establish his name in the area.

So, how was he paid by the hour?

How are bond traders paid by the hour?

How are wedding planners paid by the hour?

someone has given you a screwed up version of economics.

[leftstreet]

28. It was a generalized statement. You're self employed, pay yourself well, all is good!

:shrug:

[itsallhappening]

30. Yep.

[fascisthunter]

36. you are self-employed... the majority are not. I thought it was pretty clear.

you are an exception.... most people who work for somebody else, do get paid what they are worth. If they did, the CEO's and others at the top wouldn't be living as well off as they do.

[itsallhappening]

39. That person said people are paid by the hour.

I gave examples (not limited to my own) of various lines of work in which that's not true.

The person refused to explain their theory.

Why? Because they don't understand the economy.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[itsallhappening]

43. I see now.

The short, direct statement is true...unless you get into specifics. Then it's true, or not. But if you get a job that pays by the hour, it's true!

:shrug:

Their statement means nothing.

[Leftist Agitator]

29. "How are bond traders paid by the hour?"

How do bond traders produce anything of real economic value again?

[itsallhappening]

31. It doesn't matter whether they do or not.

What matters is whether the market supports the price.

We could make all kinds of value judgments on different things people sell. If something sells, someone thinks it's worth something. That's how capitalism works.

[Leftist Agitator]

44. What you say is, on the surface, completely true.

However, I challenge you to make the argument that someone who does nothing but profit from arbitrage benefits society as a whole in any tangible manner.

[itsallhappening]

47. When did that become a requirement in ANY economic system?

And from what other occupations do you demand that answer?

Take the person who sells hot dogs out of a cart on the street. How do they "benefit society as a whole in any tangible manner"? It's just hot dogs, right? People could eat elsewhere. And they certainly could eat something else. Hell, we could say the person selling hot dogs out of a cart on the street is actually hurting society.

Should we shut him down?

I knew someone who sold baseball cards for a living. Baseball cards. Absolutely worthless pieces of cardboard...until some folks decided they were worth something, and so they were. But does that guy (who, by the way, made a decent side income) "benefit society as a whole in any tangible manner"?

How about professional athletes?

Tell me how someone blathering night after night on TV about politics, ginning up "breaking news" stories that do nothing more than stir people up (usually over something that won't be talked about after three days)...tell me how that person "benefits society as a whole in any tangible manner."

Try it.

The bottom line is: Creative, innovative, smart people who work hard can make money in our system. The disdain for those who achieve their dreams (whether their dream is to act in an off-Broadway play, or whether their dream is to make a trillion dollars) is really nothing more than envy.

Folks who are able-bodied and not otherwise stricken with a disastrous situation beyond their control (health crisis, layoff, etc.) don't have a right to receive portions of other people's money in perpetuity, yet we have some around here who seem to think they do.

[Leftist Agitator]

50. OK, point by point...

"Take the person who sells hot dogs out of a cart on the street. How do they "benefit society as a whole in any tangible manner"?"

They vend food, a product that is a necessity for everyone. That isn't making money solely by the virtue of swapping imaginary financial instruments. They benefit society as a whole in a tangible manner by providing access to a necessary commodity, albeit a nutritionally deficient one.

"I knew someone who sold baseball cards for a living. Baseball cards. Absolutely worthless pieces of cardboard...until some folks decided they were worth something, and so they were. But does that guy (who, by the way, made a decent side income) "benefit society as a whole in any tangible manner"?"

Yes. Yes he does. Baseball cards bring an immense amount of enjoyment to people who like baseball cards. Trading bonds only brings an immense amount of enjoyment to those who are obsessed with money.

"How about professional athletes?"

How about them? I enjoy professional sporting events, and so do millions of other. Granted, I think that they are very overpaid, but they do indeed benefit society as a whole in a tangible manner. Can you name one person who isn't a bond trader who enjoys watching others trade bonds?

"Tell me how someone blathering night after night on TV about politics, ginning up "breaking news" stories that do nothing more than stir people up (usually over something that won't be talked about after three days)...tell me how that person "benefits society as a whole in any tangible manner."

Are you saying that people like Bill Moyers or John Stewart don't benefit society in any tangible manner? Because if you are, you're either terminally naive, deliberately obtuse, or worse...

Granted, most of the shitheels who helm the network "news" shows are beyond useless, but there are notable exceptions that are not deserving of derision.


"Folks who are able-bodied and not otherwise stricken with a disastrous situation beyond their control (health crisis, layoff, etc.) don't have a right to receive portions of other people's money in perpetuity, yet we have some around here who seem to think they do."

Wow. Just... Wow. You, sir or madam, are 100% correct. Those "folks" of whom you speak are the fucking bond traders, the ultracapitalists who *do* think that they have a right to receive a portion of other people's money in perpetuity. To reiterate, in case you are too dense to get the point:

"Folks who are able-bodied and not otherwise stricken with a disastrous situation beyond their control (health crisis, layoff, etc.) don't have a right to receive portions of other people's money in perpetuity, yet we have some around here who seem to think they do."

Indeed. And apparently, you are one of them.

[itsallhappening]

57. So, here's what we have.

Hot dogs are a "necessary commodity." Really?

You make value judgments based on what you enjoy (baseball cards, pro athletes, etc.). Guess what? Everyone does. You don't get to decide that for other people. You didn't explain how those things "benefit society as a whole in a tangible manner" (your words).

Bill Moyers and Jon Stewart? Absolutely, I'd say they don't "benefit society as a whole in a tangible manner." And I'd bet you couldn't make an argument that they do.

And I'm not among those who believe I have a right to other people's money in perpetuity. I work. I earn money engaging in transactions with people who willingly give me money to buy what I create.

That seems to be a foreign concept to you. How much of my money are you entitled to?

[A HERETIC I AM]

69. The funniest thing about the above exchange....

is what you apparently think "Bond Traders" do.


LOL

[Ikonoklast]

54. A Randian!

Hooray for you!

You just explained a lot about your posts.


Love that last paragraph, it's so total bullshit as to make anything else you might have said get drowned out by the massive ignorance.

[itsallhappening]

59. Well, give me a number.

How much of the money that I earn through my own work, making legal and voluntary transactions, are you entitled to receive in perpetuity?

And when you give me that number, please tell me what you base that on -- the number and the legal reasoning.

[Ikonoklast]

63. You present a false premise as a basis for an argument.

Any rebuttal would be meaningless, as it, too, would have no factual basis on which to support any meaningful response.

[itsallhappening]

64. Thought so.

[Ikonoklast]

68. You got nothin', pally.

Libertarianism and Objectivism are just excuses for politically naive people who do not understand the role of government in society to hide behind instead of just declaring themselves greedy freeloaders who wish to keep all of *their* money, while coasting on the taxes paid by others.

You have more to fear from any investment house trader or banker in this country than anyone else, after all, they get more of your hard-earned money form both you directly, and indirectly from you than any other single class of people in this nation on a per-capita basis.

Enjoy your stay.

[itsallhappening]

70. You seem frustrated.

I didn't think anyone would answer my question.

[stevenleser]

89. When you use straw men and other logical fallacies as the basis for your points, they do not deserve

responses

[JuniperLea]

121. I just love it when you argue...

With ignored!

I'm glad someone has the intestinal fortitude that I lack!

:patriot:

[PETRUS]

60. You just spoke truth

"When did that become a requirement in ANY economic system?"

Time to rethink our options, eh? My guess is you have no interest in that project, but many of us do.

[itsallhappening]

61. I trust people.

When people decide something is of value, they assign a value to it.

What do you want? A committee deciding what jobs are okay and which aren't? Based on whose "values"?

[PETRUS]

62. That's been attempted, sorta...

...and it doesn't work. Thanks anyway, keep trying. Use your imagination. New things and new ideas are invented all the time. The human brain never ceases to amaze...

[itsallhappening]

65. What's your idea?

Seems like you're convinced you have a good one. Share it.

[PETRUS]

66. Nope.

My peabrain hasn't come up with anything, sorry. I could really, really use your help.

[itsallhappening]

71. Oh.

You want someone else to do the thinking and the work. Shocking! :rofl:

[PETRUS]

74. You misunderstand (again)

Two heads are better than one. I'm suggest you, me, everyone both think for themselves and work together, not accept received wisdom uncritically and make an attempt to address the significant problems the world faces. What's your plan?

[itsallhappening]

75. Weren't you the one who said we might want to rethink our options

as related to the idea of deciding who should be allowed to do what kind of work, based on whether it benefits society?

How would you do that?

I don't have to come up with a plan. I like the current plan. I create something, people decide what it's worth, they pay me, I give them the product, if demand goes up then so do my prices, etc. It works fine for me and the people who buy what I create.

So, who exactly should step between my customers and me and decide whether our transaction, entered into voluntarily on both sides, is worthy to continue?

[PETRUS]

76. Not what I said

I said we need to rethink the economic system. I could trade with you all day, buddy, but I probably won't because I have to work, study, caring for an ailing parent, brainstorm with constructive-minded folks, agitate for change - you know, contribute, help people, that sort of thing.

My premise - that we can do better - is inherently superior to yours, and history is on my side. Presidents replaced kings, iron replaced stone, etc.

You're keeping the thread active, though. Which is nice, because people need to see this.

Making any friends or winning converts here?

[itsallhappening]

79. That's certainly what you said.

Why lie?

Yes, your premise is inherently superior to mine. It's brilliant. And I'm sure the brilliance of it is what makes it so complicated you can't explain even the first step in how you want to achieve it.

I'm not here to make friends. And I'm certainly not trying to "convert" anyone. I'm simply asking questions and, not surprisingly, folks like you have no answers. Your slogans fit nicely on protest signs, but there's no substance to anything you're saying.

[PETRUS]

80. It's not - reread

But your tough talk is arousing. *swoon*

[lumberjack_jeff]

92. Yes and no.

An employee is selling... liquidating... the hours of his or her life.

An employer is purchasing anticipated productivity. If your skills and training imply high productivity (measured in dollars per hour) then your life hours are worth more to him or her, unless there are many applicants who have the same skills.

The first sentence is an important one to internalize. When you're born, you are given about 700,000 hours. Imagine them as coins. You trade them in exchange material needs, literally spending time. IMHO, too many people treat the transaction as a garage sale.

The hours of your life are a supply/demand commodity. It is in your interest to maximize the value of the ones you trade so that you can keep more of the remaining ones.

Americans invest too much identity in their jobs. "What are you?" should be a different question than "What do you do for money?". If we didn't rely on our jobs for our identity, we'd reposess some of those hours and thus drive the value of ones spent working up.

[FloriTexan]

7. I have to say yes...

I believe I am fairly paid for what I do as a legal secretary. Considering that we are a dying breed I just hope that my job is around in five years. I stay very involved with my assignments (forget the days of 1 on 1 - we are now 1 secretary to 5 attorneys) and make them continue to find me useful.

[white_wolf]

26. Just wondering. Why is that a dying breed?

Lawyers are a dime a dozen. I would think they all need sectaries.

[FloriTexan]

87. A number of factors...

Technology mostly, as attorneys come in with basic computer skills and can edit their own documents. Almost everything, including closings can be done electronically. We used to be one attorney to one secretary, now its 5-6. Most secretaries I know are over the age of 35 so there are no youngsters coming into the positions if there are any to fill. I'd be surprised if there were any secretarial schools remaining, most prefer to go into the paralegal field, which most secretaries are qualified to do, save for a college diploma. If a secretary retires or leaves for any other reason we are not replaced. Where I work now, they think we are way over paid now too, so raises are basically non-existent. All that said, I work in downtown Dallas and I believe the salaries here for secretaries are some of the best in the country.

[PETRUS]

88. Have you ever heard

Dean Baker's complain that our trade agreements and immigration policies combine to open up manufacturing and service jobs to international competition while protecting doctors and lawyers and certain other "prestige" jobs? If he had his way (wide open), do you think that would be good news or bad news for your job, or make no difference?

[FloriTexan]

118. I don't think it would make a difference...

at least not from a secretarial perspective.

[DFW]

106. I don't know if they all NEED secretaries

But my daughter just celebrated her first year as a lawyer at a big law firm
and she sure as hell doesn't have a secretary--not of her own anyway. Plus,
she pays 49% of her gross pay in taxes, so it's not like she has a lot of
loopholes to take advantage of. Also, though she's in a relationship, she's
unmarried, so she pays the max.

On the other hand, she makes €110,000 a yaer gross salary, so even if she has
to sometimes pull 20 hour days, for the pay, the full health coverage, and the
six weeks paid vacation, she is willing to put in the time. Ironic: she graduated
from law school in New York near the top of her class, and couldn't find anything.
She applied to the German arm of a British law firm and got a job offer first thing.

By the way, don't try this at home, boys and girls: she has German citizenship, and
is bi-lingual in English and German.

[FloriTexan]

119. I have 5 attorney "assignments" (as they are now called)...

2 partners, 3 associates. Truth be told, secretaries are still a lot of help. I fix a lot of corrupt documents because while attorneys can do their own edits because they tend to not be familiar with some of the automated functions that keep the documents usable. Lots of tables of content with cross-referencing. I have one associate that probably doesn't know I exist, one that never uses me except for mail outs. My advice to your daughter is to cozy up to her assigned secretary and partner with her and learn from experience and tips. We will tell you what others won't like...um, probably not a good idea to put your cc notations in the footer of a document because you think it looks "cool". Others will laugh at you and I will miss it entirely :)

[DFW]

123. Get me the German translation of that

And I'll pass it along!

(She probably knows most of it, and just doesn't bother to tell me--I know less about German legalese than I do about the southernmost dialects of Mongolian).

[Rex]

8. Yes, for the first time in my life lol!

[Hosnon]

9. Replacement value is the relevant metric.

We are all paid no more than someone else would do the same job for.

[PETRUS]

84. So they say

But it doesn't seem to apply to everyone. I'm sure plenty of people would run companies for less than the going rates. And I'm sure plenty of the 1% could be taxed more before fleeing the country.

[ileus]

10. No one's paid what they believe they're worth.

At my "job" I'm paid 21 bucks an hour.


I charge between 65 and 500 dollars an hour when working on the side. What am I really worth?

[mainer]

93. A very good point.

A lot of it depends on nationality and expectations. Americans think their labor is "worth" more than a Mexican would.

Honestly? I think I'm paid way more than I'm worth. But the marketplace seems to disagree with me.

[doc03]

11. I am not sure about that, I am retired now. I worked a union job

and if not for the union they could have hired someone for half my wages. So I guess according to some I was overpaid.

[itsallhappening]

14. Getting there. Self-employed.

[bigwillq]

20. Nope

Underpaid and overworked, like so many of my brothers and sisters.

No union, to boot.

[fizzgig]

42. you still at the paper?

print is getting rougher and rougher

[bigwillq]

46. Yes

It's not that it's getting rougher as much as folks that run the business (and of those all over the country) still don't have a clue as to their game plan.
The folks that run my place are so clueless.

[stevenleser]

22. I did some calculations a few months back. The average non-supervisory worker is getting paid 1/2 to

1/3rd what they should be getting paid. This is based on a 60-1 CEO to non-supervisory worker pay ratio that we had back in the 1950's/1960's instead of the 300-1 or greater ratio that we have now.

The average non-supervisory worker is getting paid around $30K per year right now. That should be between $60-$90K. Everyone else should be in proportion from there.

[JNinWB]

94. Employees are paid whatever the employer can, or will pay them.

Nothing more, nothing less.

"Should be" does not enter in to the equation.

Those who feel they should be paid more leave and find a new employer.

[stevenleser]

97. That is wrong for a number of reasons.

First of all, it is destructive to the economy as a whole for employees to be underpaid, to include those businesses who are underpaying the employees. It is a short sighted approach that businesses do not seem to be able to handle correctly.

Second of all, if you and I are the decision-makers as far as pay is concerned for a company of 1000 to include our own salaries, no matter how much we try to be fair, year after year, we are going to give preferences to ourselves that have nothing to do with fairness or business needs or anything else.

What I have just described in the second point is what has happened over the last 40 years and as I indicated in the first point, has resulted in a middle class that does not have the buying power to buy goods and services.

There are many other reasons as well, but those are the big ones.

There is nothing good, or economically smart about allowing those in power to set the wage because they feel like setting a wage at a particular point.

My suggestion to remedy this would be a law that companies whose CEO to non-supervisory employee compensation is over 60-1 are disallowed percentages of their expenses as tax deductions. A similar law needs to be put into place regarding non-supervisory employee overall compensation in relation to stock dividends.

[JNinWB]

102. I own a business that has varied between 30 to 50 employees over 3 decades.

Tell me again how this "CEO" can pay employees more if that means the business must fold.

Perhaps your answer would be that if the business cannot pay more it should just close its doors and throw the remainder of employees out of work.

It is fun to strategize from behind a keyboard, but life on the front line of this economic collapse is far from pleasant.

Price deflation, competition from China, a customer base with limited access to credit creates the worst business environment I have ever seen. I have not had a paycheck since 2001, another owner since 2006. All of our (potential) pay has gone into supporting the paychecks of our employees.

This has continued for three years now, so we are resolved to the reality that employees seeking higher wages will move on.

[stevenleser]

104. One offs are not useful in discussing overall policies.

These are averages.

Do you pay your non-supervisory workers 1/365th of what you pay? What is your pay ratio? If you are within 60-1, then you are not part of the problem.

[JNinWB]

108. There are millions of "one-off" businesses in this country....

[stevenleser]

109. And I would say the same thing to them that I said to this poster. Is your ratio

60-1 or less? THen you are not part of the problem and my proposed legislation would have no effect on you.

[JNinWB]

110. The owners no longer get salaries so I guess we don't have to deal with ratios...

[stevenleser]

113. I also have a proposed dividend to salary ratio n/t

[JNinWB]

116. Money-losing S Corp----no dividends, either.

Do you have a proposal for this type of entity?

[stevenleser]

117. that is considered Salary nt

[supernova]

24. No, and I never have

been paid the going rate for my profession.

I'm unemployed now, so I make nothing. :P

But even when I was working as a contractor for a large three lettered corporation, I was making about 1/3 less than the going rate for my skills and years of experience. That's what they offered and would not negotiate because they would just pass you by and hire someone else. I have never caught up and most likely will not catch up. I'll be 50 next year. :-(

[Capitalocracy]

25. Well, that's a matter of opinion. Maybe I'm worth shit.

I dunno. I'm certainly not paid what I need.

[badtoworse]

32. Yes, definitely - nt

[MadHound]

33. I'm a teacher, of course I'm not paid what I'm worth. n/t

[kelly1mm]

34. Yes. Self employed with 2 businesses. One is solo, one has 2 employees. nt

[fascisthunter]

35. I don't know.... I've been paid shit my whole life so...

:rofl:

[TNLib]

38. Nope

I work in IT as an application developer. When I started in 1999, experienced developers were making 100k/year in my area. With the influx of cheap developers from overseas wages dropped. After 10 years of experience I make considerably less than what someone made in the mid 90's doing what I do now. And I'm at the high end of my pay scale as a senior level analyst.

[RagAss]

41. Fuck no !

[KoKo]

45. LoL's.....Look to China or the "Emerging Markets" to see what educted Americans are Paid

(Those who aren't on Wall Street, that is) :puke:

[Marrah_G]

48. I'm 41, single mother

hours at main job were cut in half. I didn't make big money but it was a survivable living wage. Now I have a second part time job making minimum wage, ringing a cash register and just got my first two week paycheck of less then 300 bucks. It was really pretty discouraging.

[rbnyc]

49. I'm paid 4.8 % of the annual revenue...

...for which I'm directly responsible.

I'm also paid about 10K less per year than the median in my field.

My employer would give me a raise if they weren't so overburdened paying 2/3 of our health insurance premiums.

[Honeycombe8]

51. The story is class warfare. The REAL class warfare.

I think it started with Reagan.

The GOP wants a Superman. I want a Superman, too.

[Starry Messenger]

52. No.

No one in teaching is, really. "The further away your job is from the children, the more money you make".

[LWolf]

53. No. Note even close. nt

[mucifer]

55. Yes, but I only support myself and a cat. nt

[lonestarnot]

58. "There must be more money, there must be more money."

[mopinko]

67. i'm not paid at all. 25 years raising kids, 10 years making art.

trying to get some work doing graphic design, but not likely to cover the expense of the technology to do that.
over that 10 years i sunk $100K into making art and got back less than $1K. not unusual, either.

fortunately dh makes about what he is worth, considering how much he has made for his employer.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

72. not just no but, hell no.

my paycheck is a sick joke.

[raccoon]

73. Same here, and no benes. nt

[blindpig]

77. They steal the hours of our lives, all we got.

Capitalist profit comes from what you are not paid, in capitalism the employer pays you less than the value of your work, which the capitalist appropriates for themselves.

The hours of our lives are all we got, it is a monstrous system.

[PETRUS]

78. I got a lousy T-shirt...

:D

[metalbot]

81. I think productivity is something of a red herring

The fact that a worker is twice as productive doesn't mean they are working twice as hard.


The analogy that I'd make (and bear with me as it's simply meant as an analogy) is this:

I start a lawn mowing business. I buy a $25 push mower. I walk around my neighborhood and offer lawn cutting services for $20. I hire a worker who can cut, on average, 1 lawn an hour. I pay him $10 an hour. After he's been working for a while, I use my profits to buy a riding lawn mower. My worker can now cut 2 lawns per hour. His productivity has doubled, but that's because of the capital investment that I made in better equipment.

The rise in productivity that we've seen in office environments in the last 30 years is due to massive investment in computer systems. If management buys a new software package that makes their accountants twice as efficient, them the improvement in efficiency had nothing to do with the accountants.

A worker who is more productive because they work harder, or find ways to work more efficiently should be paid more. A worker who gets more things done because their company has invested in better tools to help them do their job isn't by themselves more productive.

[JVS]

82. There is another side to those productivity gains than just investment in capital.

The workers' ability to use the computer systems is also contributing to the productivity gain and should share in the benefit as well. A lot of families and schools spent significant amounts of money in the past 30 years to make sure that the kids they were in charge of would be able to work with computers. It doesn't seem fair that the business people hog the entire productivity gain while just demanding knowledge of computer systems as a given without compensation.

[PETRUS]

83. That's a really good argument

And I've thought about exactly that. My problem with strict adherence to its logic is that it fails to promote the general welfare, and only increases unequal access to capital and other forms of inequality of opportunity that are already pervasive. There are plenty of people who would buy their own damn riding mowers rather than working for you but just can't. For example.

[JackDragna]

85. I'm a teacher.

There's your answer. :)

[Ganja Ninja]

86. I should probably be making at least twice what I'm making plus a pension.

And getting 6 weeks off a year with pay.

[belcffub]

90. yup... more or less

I work in IT... 15 years of experience... don't do half bad... never been laid off and always seemed to make the right decisions... since starting in this industry my income has tripled.... I keep my expenses low and have a comfortable life...

[LibDemAlways]

91. Hell no! Im a substitute teacher, fully credentialed, and

available at a moment's notice to take over classes from K-12 in any and all subject areas.

Substitutes in my area receive no benefits. Pay is less than a hundred dollars a day. After a substitute works 10 days in a row, the district is supposed to up the pay to $129.00 per day. That never happens. After 10 days, the substitute is replaced with another substitute who is assigned for another 10 days. Because of an abundance of teachers and a shortage of jobs, there are many people in the "sub" pool and few opportunities available. I am usually called only 5 -6 times per month. It's a struggle.

[KamaAina]

96. ROFLMAO!

:rofl:

Over a quarter-century out of Yale, I am making nearly as much as the average travel agent around here.

[B Calm]

98. Hell no! It took me six or seven years to learn my job.

[MilesColtrane]

103. Sometimes

The work I do under union contract pays what it should.

There's just not enough of it.

[DFW]

107. Probably more

But my wife (a social worker) and elder daughter (works for a department store chain in NYC)
are both severely underpaid, so it balances out.

[ItNerd4life]

111. Yes, actually I am. But that's not the issue.

The issue is your comment about how median wages haven't increased and executive income has skyrocketed.

I think liking worker income increase to executive income increase would really help. Executive only get increases based upon what the worker wages are increased.
They want more money? They have to pay their workers better.

This also then helps the demand side of the job situation and economics.

[rury]

114. NO!!!!!

[yewberry]

115. Not even close. I'm a public employee.

Over the past 2 years, the salary survey for my group has shown us to be 47% below other PUBLIC employees doing the same work. I don't have any idea how far below private industry we are, but the gap is huge.

[JuniperLea]

120. I think so...

I've worked long and hard to get where I am. I'm in the shark tank, and it's hard to hold my tongue sometimes, but I am paid well. I got a nice raise this year and expect a nice bonus come spring... I am grateful, and I appreciate that my situation is rather unique. I know full well how fortunate I am, and I'm always on the lookout for ways to help others.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

122. No.

We are the lowest paid in the mortgage industry. My friend who works at the evil bank in Dallas makes double what I do.
DOUBLE.