"Jim -" wrote in message
news:vSDib.763168$uu5.132463@sccrnsc04...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"jps" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
nk.net...

When an H-1 visa engineer that is just as capable as a USA
born
engineer will work for $60k, you think we can compete in the
world market?

If we had our **** together and did a decent job of educating
our
kids,
we
could be pumping out labor ready technical folks who'd be
damned
pleased
to
make $40 to $60K a year. We haven't made the investment in our
own
educational infrastructure, India obviously has.

It's just another example of how we've ceded our competitive
edge to
others -- in an industry we invented.

Stupid.

You call me stupid? Read your statement and then go look in the
mirror.
We
seem to have non labor ready carpenters that require 80k a year,
longshoreman that require 100k+ and you think a college
educated,
labor
ready person will want to work for 40-60K?



It's your own fault you made the wrong career choices.



Your reply shows how much out of touch with reality you are.
Explain
how we
are to compete in the world market, given our labor costs.



We can start by lowering "executive" salary to no more than several
times what the average worker at a corporation makes.


I think that would be a terrific start. Would labor agree to
proportional
cuts, as well? In other words, would the following hypothetical
scenario be
agreeable?

Management's total income costs a company $500 million dollars split
among
500 of its top management. If you cut that by 60%, you've reduced
management labor expense to $200 million split among the top
management.

If labor's total income expense is also $500 million, but it's split
among
10000 employees, would they accept a 60% cut in pay? How about a 40%
cut?
Or even a 10% cut? Probably not...because labor is very
short-sighted.




Most successful companies overseas allow their chief execs to make only
several times the average pay of the people they employ.


Care to provide some proof to that claim?

You are nothing but a left wing socialist Harry. In your world everyone
should make
the same and share equally in the wealth, regardless of whose money was
originally at
or remains at stake to create the wealth.

I am glad I don't live in your world.



Japanese actually do pay salaries to their top exec's that are only a small
multiple of the employees. But for tax purposes the expense account is
tremendous. Expenses the US IRS would not allow without charging taxes on
them, in otherwords salary. House, vacations, unlimited charge card for
entertaining, etc.

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news

"Jim -" wrote in message
news:vSDib.763168$uu5.132463@sccrnsc04...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"jps" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
nk.net...

When an H-1 visa engineer that is just as capable as a USA
born
engineer will work for $60k, you think we can compete in the
world market?

If we had our **** together and did a decent job of educating
our
kids,
we
could be pumping out labor ready technical folks who'd be
damned
pleased
to
make $40 to $60K a year. We haven't made the investment in our
own
educational infrastructure, India obviously has.

It's just another example of how we've ceded our competitive
edge to
others -- in an industry we invented.

Stupid.

You call me stupid? Read your statement and then go look in the
mirror.
We
seem to have non labor ready carpenters that require 80k a year,
longshoreman that require 100k+ and you think a college
educated,
labor
ready person will want to work for 40-60K?



It's your own fault you made the wrong career choices.



Your reply shows how much out of touch with reality you are.
Explain
how we
are to compete in the world market, given our labor costs.



We can start by lowering "executive" salary to no more than several
times what the average worker at a corporation makes.


I think that would be a terrific start. Would labor agree to
proportional
cuts, as well? In other words, would the following hypothetical
scenario be
agreeable?

Management's total income costs a company $500 million dollars split
among
500 of its top management. If you cut that by 60%, you've reduced
management labor expense to $200 million split among the top
management.

If labor's total income expense is also $500 million, but it's split
among
10000 employees, would they accept a 60% cut in pay? How about a 40%
cut?
Or even a 10% cut? Probably not...because labor is very
short-sighted.




Most successful companies overseas allow their chief execs to make only
several times the average pay of the people they employ.


Care to provide some proof to that claim?

You are nothing but a left wing socialist Harry. In your world everyone
should make
the same and share equally in the wealth, regardless of whose money was
originally at
or remains at stake to create the wealth.

I am glad I don't live in your world.



Japanese actually do pay salaries to their top exec's that are only a small
multiple of the employees. But for tax purposes the expense account is
tremendous. Expenses the US IRS would not allow without charging taxes on
them, in otherwords salary. House, vacations, unlimited charge card for
entertaining, etc.



Harry did not say "Many successful businesses in Japan". He said "most successful
businesses overseas".

And he was wrong.

I worked for a company located in Zurich. The executives were very well paid. This
company was not an exception of the successful ones in Europe, not by a far stretch.
This included manufacturing companies and service providers.

"Jim -" wrote in message
news:LYQib.560810$cF.237779@rwcrnsc53...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news

"Jim -" wrote in message
news:vSDib.763168$uu5.132463@sccrnsc04...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"jps" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
nk.net...

When an H-1 visa engineer that is just as capable as a USA
born
engineer will work for $60k, you think we can compete in
the
world market?

If we had our **** together and did a decent job of
educating
our
kids,
we
could be pumping out labor ready technical folks who'd be
damned
pleased
to
make $40 to $60K a year. We haven't made the investment in
our
own
educational infrastructure, India obviously has.

It's just another example of how we've ceded our
competitive
edge to
others -- in an industry we invented.

Stupid.

You call me stupid? Read your statement and then go look in
the
mirror.
We
seem to have non labor ready carpenters that require 80k a
year,
longshoreman that require 100k+ and you think a college
educated,
labor
ready person will want to work for 40-60K?



It's your own fault you made the wrong career choices.



Your reply shows how much out of touch with reality you are.
Explain
how we
are to compete in the world market, given our labor costs.



We can start by lowering "executive" salary to no more than
several
times what the average worker at a corporation makes.


I think that would be a terrific start. Would labor agree to
proportional
cuts, as well? In other words, would the following hypothetical
scenario be
agreeable?

Management's total income costs a company $500 million dollars
split
among
500 of its top management. If you cut that by 60%, you've reduced
management labor expense to $200 million split among the top
management.

If labor's total income expense is also $500 million, but it's
split
among
10000 employees, would they accept a 60% cut in pay? How about a
40%
cut?
Or even a 10% cut? Probably not...because labor is very
short-sighted.




Most successful companies overseas allow their chief execs to make
only
several times the average pay of the people they employ.


Care to provide some proof to that claim?

You are nothing but a left wing socialist Harry. In your world
everyone
should make
the same and share equally in the wealth, regardless of whose money
was
originally at
or remains at stake to create the wealth.

I am glad I don't live in your world.



Japanese actually do pay salaries to their top exec's that are only a
small
multiple of the employees. But for tax purposes the expense account is
tremendous. Expenses the US IRS would not allow without charging taxes
on
them, in otherwords salary. House, vacations, unlimited charge card for
entertaining, etc.



Harry did not say "Many successful businesses in Japan". He said "most
successful
businesses overseas".

And he was wrong.

I worked for a company located in Zurich. The executives were very well
paid. This
company was not an exception of the successful ones in Europe, not by a
far stretch.
This included manufacturing companies and service providers.



Sweden used to have a 101% tax rate on all income over 100K. They corrected
that but I would guess they still have huge tax rate on middle higher
income. So the payoff is probably stock options, etc.
Bill