Royal Wulff Products
Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast
Results 109 to 120 of 122
  1. #109
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    1060 West Addison, Chicago....
    Posts
    4,160
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,098
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    965
    Thanked in
    644 Posts
    Chats
    4391
    Groans
    27
    Groaned 12 Times in 12 Posts


    Re: Coming to a city near you!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Future Fanatic View Post
    If your business doubled because the chef was amazing and drew twice as many people in...

    Would you double your dishwashers wages or would you hire a second dishwasher or would you hire a second AND double the wages?
    The scenario you propose is impossible, as we are full to capacity every evening.....the chef is amazing, and business is booming......we are maxed out on dishwashers, our Hobart couldn't be running more efficiently....

    "I'm not out on the river to win." -Kieth Rutherford

  2. #110
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Unadilla, New York
    Posts
    5,153
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    657
    Thanked in
    468 Posts
    Chats
    683
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 23 Times in 21 Posts


    Re: Coming to a city near you!!

    Quote Originally Posted by lightenup View Post
    The scenario you propose is impossible, as we are full to capacity every evening.....the chef is amazing, and business is booming......we are maxed out on dishwashers, our Hobart couldn't be running more efficiently....
    So extend me a little fictional latitude...

    Maxed out... so you'll expand... build a new wing... does the dishwasher help the owner with the costs of that build(since the dishwasher will be getting more of the profits)? Or is it just the owner who has to invest and risk HIS money while the "workers" JUST expect to get more of a share of the profits?

    Or should he get a share of the profits at all since it is the amazing chef who is bringing in all the new business? It's the skills HE amassed over his lifetime (and at his expense) that are bringing up the profits, while the owner can find just about ANYBODY can wash a dish. Maybe the dishwasher should be paying the chef a little bit because he owes the safety of HAVING a job to that amazing chef who keeps bringing 'em in...

    John
    Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.--Henry David Thoreau

  3. #111
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    704 Hauser Street
    Posts
    3,690
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,266
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,140
    Thanked in
    807 Posts
    Chats
    1619
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 40 Times in 37 Posts


    Re: Coming to a city near you!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Future Fanatic View Post
    So extend me a little fictional latitude...

    Maxed out... so you'll expand... build a new wing... does the dishwasher help the owner with the costs of that build(since the dishwasher will be getting more of the profits)? Or is it just the owner who has to invest and risk HIS money while the "workers" JUST expect to get more of a share of the profits?

    Or should he get a share of the profits at all since it is the amazing chef who is bringing in all the new business? It's the skills HE amassed over his lifetime (and at his expense) that are bringing up the profits, while the owner can find just about ANYBODY can wash a dish. Maybe the dishwasher should be paying the chef a little bit because he owes the safety of HAVING a job to that amazing chef who keeps bringing 'em in...
    Fictional is the proper word here. We are speaking about fortune 500 companies that are PUBLIC, the CEO and all upper level management have no skin in the game, it isn't their money they are using to grow the business, yet they posture themselves and reward themselves as if they deserve their largesse. In private business I would agree with you, the owner has the risk.Todays CEO has no risk, no special or unique skill that isn't posessed by thousands of others, yet is rewarded as if he does, and should he fail he loses nothing other than his position and walks away with a prenegotiated golden parachute, while everyone else gets a golden shower.

    Hell no and it aint over now.......

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Trouser Trout For This Useful Post:

    CTobias (06-21-2013), Lonewolve (06-21-2013)

  5. #112
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Unadilla, New York
    Posts
    5,153
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    657
    Thanked in
    468 Posts
    Chats
    683
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 23 Times in 21 Posts


    Re: Coming to a city near you!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Trouser Trout View Post
    Fictional is the proper word here. We are speaking about fortune 500 companies that are PUBLIC, the CEO and all upper level management have no skin in the game, it isn't their money they are using to grow the business, yet they posture themselves and reward themselves as if they deserve their largesse. In private business I would agree with you, the owner has the risk. Todays CEO has no risk, no special or unique skill that isn't posessed by thousands of others, yet is rewarded as if he does, and should he fail he loses nothing other than his position and walks away with a prenegotiated golden parachute, while everyone else gets a golden shower.
    OK

    Why is THAT person hired to be the CEO over any of the thousands who possess his skills? And why would the Board pay him ANY MORE than what THEY feel is necessary? If there are so many people with the same skills (those needed to run a fortune 500 company), why would a company pay so much when they could get someone cheaper?

    Any "prenegotiated golden parachute" is just that. It's what the corporation deemed necessary to ensure that THEIR CHOICE became the CEO. How is that any different than any other company negotiating a contract with any other worker? Is it the huge sums of money? Do you think that these boards don't know what is best for the company and its owners/investors? Who are we to tell ANY company how to value the skills of any of their workers. If they are unhappy with the performance of their CEO, they can get a new one. If owners/investors don't like the bottom line of a company or how it spends its money, they can always sell the stock and invest in another...

    As far as business is concerned, people are a product like any other. Supply and demand. You "buy" that product for whatever price the market decides it is worth. Hiring someone is an investment. You pay an amount based upon what you believe the return on that investment will be.

    John
    Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.--Henry David Thoreau

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Future Fanatic For This Useful Post:

    Pete (06-21-2013)

  7. #113
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wasilla, Alaska
    Posts
    4,221
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,149
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    896
    Thanked in
    549 Posts
    Chats
    825
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 25 Times in 25 Posts


    Re: Coming to a city near you!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Future Fanatic View Post
    If the legislation causes the corporation to increase production 20%...

    does that not also benefit the 1000s (or tens of 1000s) of people that the corporation employs? Or new employees that the corporation needs to hire? Or the businesses that supply that corporation with raw materials? Or subcontrators...

    Or all the people who risked their money and bought shares?
    Or all the working folks who have their retirement funds invested in those corporations?
    Sure it would benefit investors. That is of course if the stock market wasn't propped up with fiat money.

    Increased business will mean more money. One plus one does still equal two. But when Sen. Roy Blunt helps Monsanto right a provision in the law that in effect allows them to keep selling seeds even in the event they are found to be harmful for human consumption, something is very wrong.

    Basically your government is making it legal to poision you whle certain companies make millions. Well, that's been going on for a long time now anyways.

    Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
    Mark Twain

    http://www.savebristolbay.org/

    REAL FRIENDS DON'T LET FRIENDS SPOON FEED

    http://www.roehard.com

    http://www.glsteelheadco.com




  8. #114
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wasilla, Alaska
    Posts
    4,221
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,149
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    896
    Thanked in
    549 Posts
    Chats
    825
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 25 Times in 25 Posts


    Re: Coming to a city near you!!

    Getting back on topic. Guess they are getting ready for what's coming here.

    Riot Control Training - kcentv.com - KCEN HD - Waco, Temple, and Killeen

    Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
    Mark Twain

    http://www.savebristolbay.org/

    REAL FRIENDS DON'T LET FRIENDS SPOON FEED

    http://www.roehard.com

    http://www.glsteelheadco.com




  9. #115
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    815
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    556
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    123
    Thanked in
    87 Posts
    Chats
    0
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Re: Coming to a city near you!!

    I'll take the bait, even though I suspect you're just arguing for the sake of argument.

    Executive compensation is very often totally detached from the performance of the company. This is at least partly because the CEOs and the Board members take care of each other. The vast majority of Board members are current or former executives and the Executives often sit on the boards of other companies so there's a "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours mentality" - basically it's a circle jerk. There's also a culture surrounding it - if every other company in your field is handing out large bonuses to attract executives then you have to compete. There are always exceptions to every rule - look at Costco's executive pay structure.

    Another reason why the problem persists is due to the use of proxy voting. Shareholders technically have the right to vote on many of these decisions but they don't. They ignore the voting forms that arrive by mail and by doing nothing, they just cede their proxy votes to the Board members. So the board excercises the proxy rights, and votes for the shareholders. The effect of which is that the Board can basically do whatever they want.

    Lately though we've started to see shareholder rebellions, where shareholders actually use their votes to disapprove of the bonuses and other crappy decisions that the Boards make. This actually happened at Citibank, where the shareholders rebelled against the board and nullified the proposed bonuses and compensation. I don't think that had ever happened before.

    "The two best times to go fishing is when it's rainin' and when it ain't."--Patrick McManus.

    www.creekaddict.com

  10. #116
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    1060 West Addison, Chicago....
    Posts
    4,160
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,098
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    965
    Thanked in
    644 Posts
    Chats
    4391
    Groans
    27
    Groaned 12 Times in 12 Posts


    Re: Coming to a city near you!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Future Fanatic View Post

    Maxed out... so you'll expand... build a new wing... does the dishwasher help the owner with the costs of that build(since the dishwasher will be getting more of the profits)? Or is it just the owner who has to invest and risk HIS money while the "workers" JUST expect to get more of a share of the profits?

    Or should he get a share of the profits at all since it is the amazing chef who is bringing in all the new business? It's the skills HE amassed over his lifetime (and at his expense) that are bringing up the profits, while the owner can find just about ANYBODY can wash a dish. Maybe the dishwasher should be paying the chef a little bit because he owes the safety of HAVING a job to that amazing chef who keeps bringing 'em in...
    Unfortunately the government has labeled our building an historic landmark.......and we are in the highlands......and we already have the limit of impervious surface on our plot.....again an impossible scenario

    "I'm not out on the river to win." -Kieth Rutherford

  11. #117
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Unadilla, New York
    Posts
    5,153
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    657
    Thanked in
    468 Posts
    Chats
    683
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 23 Times in 21 Posts


    Re: Coming to a city near you!!

    Quote Originally Posted by CTobias View Post
    Sure it would benefit investors. That is of course if the stock market wasn't propped up with fiat money.

    Increased business will mean more money. One plus one does still equal two. But when Sen. Roy Blunt helps Monsanto right a provision in the law that in effect allows them to keep selling seeds even in the event they are found to be harmful for human consumption, something is very wrong.

    Basically your government is making it legal to poision you whle certain companies make millions. Well, that's been going on for a long time now anyways.
    That's not the way I read it.

    Farmers bought seeds that the government said were Okie Dokie.
    The government then changed their mind.
    The law would allow farmers to plant the seeds they ALREADY purchased back when the government had said they were fine.
    It wasn't to protect Monsanto per se, but the farmer who had already invested thousands of dollars in seed the GOV said were ok before they said they weren't.

    John
    Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.--Henry David Thoreau

  12. #118
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey's scenic Ramapo Valley
    Posts
    2,773
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    155
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    453
    Thanked in
    301 Posts
    Chats
    42
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 4 Times in 4 Posts


    Re: Coming to a city near you!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Gonzo View Post
    I'll take the bait, even though I suspect you're just arguing for the sake of argument.

    Executive compensation is very often totally detached from the performance of the company. This is at least partly because the CEOs and the Board members take care of each other. The vast majority of Board members are current or former executives and the Executives often sit on the boards of other companies so there's a "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours mentality" - basically it's a circle jerk. There's also a culture surrounding it - if every other company in your field is handing out large bonuses to attract executives then you have to compete. There are always exceptions to every rule - look at Costco's executive pay structure.

    Another reason why the problem persists is due to the use of proxy voting. Shareholders technically have the right to vote on many of these decisions but they don't. They ignore the voting forms that arrive by mail and by doing nothing, they just cede their proxy votes to the Board members. So the board excercises the proxy rights, and votes for the shareholders. The effect of which is that the Board can basically do whatever they want.

    Lately though we've started to see shareholder rebellions, where shareholders actually use their votes to disapprove of the bonuses and other crappy decisions that the Boards make. This actually happened at Citibank, where the shareholders rebelled against the board and nullified the proposed bonuses and compensation. I don't think that had ever happened before.
    I don't what kind of companies you've been working for, but that's contrary to my experience (1967 - 2005).
    Directors are generally also large stockholders, an ineffective executive is wasting their money.

    The person most likely to be fired is the executive in charge of a company/division/plant that's not making a profit that meets or exceeds it's goals.

    Bonuses were a small percentage of the profits that exceeded the goals.
    "Golden Parachutes" and other perks, are recruitment/retention tools, to get them to take what could easily be a career killing position.

    As to compensation... There's only one CEO, and a handful of VPs. Their compensation is a drop in the bucket compared to the total payroll cost.


  13. #119
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wasilla, Alaska
    Posts
    4,221
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,149
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    896
    Thanked in
    549 Posts
    Chats
    825
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 25 Times in 25 Posts


    The way I am reading (now that I found the exact verbiage) is that even if a seed and crop has been found harmful they can continue to sell those seeds and crops, as you stated.


    Sec. 735. In the event that a determination of non-regulated status made pursuant to section 411 of the Plant Protection Act is or has been invalidated or vacated, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon request by a farmer, grower, farm operator, or producer, immediately grant temporary permit(s) or temporary deregulation in part, subject to necessary and appropriate conditions consistent with section 411(a) or 412(c) of the Plant Protection Act, which interim conditions shall authorize the movement, introduction, continued cultivation, commercialization and other specifically enumerated activities and requirements, including measures designed to mitigate or minimize potential adverse environmental effects, if any, relevant to the Secretary's evaluation of the petition for non-regulated status, while ensuring that growers or other users are able to move, plant, cultivate, introduce into commerce and carry out other authorized activities in a timely manner: Provided, That all such conditions shall be applicable only for the interim period necessary for the Secretary to complete any required analyses or consultations related to the petition for non-regulated status: Provided further, That nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the Secretary's authority under section 411, 412 and 414 of the Plant Protection Act.[1]


    Here's an idea! Have the company (that knowingly created) compensate the farmers for their lost revenue. This is the same company the said DDT and agent orange was safe.

    Not to get too off topic.

    Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
    Mark Twain

    http://www.savebristolbay.org/

    REAL FRIENDS DON'T LET FRIENDS SPOON FEED

    http://www.roehard.com

    http://www.glsteelheadco.com




  14. #120
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    704 Hauser Street
    Posts
    3,690
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,266
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,140
    Thanked in
    807 Posts
    Chats
    1619
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 40 Times in 37 Posts


    Re: Coming to a city near you!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Future Fanatic View Post
    OK

    Why is THAT person hired to be the CEO over any of the thousands who possess his skills? And why would the Board pay him ANY MORE than what THEY feel is necessary? If there are so many people with the same skills (those needed to run a fortune 500 company), why would a company pay so much when they could get someone cheaper?

    Any "prenegotiated golden parachute" is just that. It's what the corporation deemed necessary to ensure that THEIR CHOICE became the CEO. How is that any different than any other company negotiating a contract with any other worker? Is it the huge sums of money? Do you think that these boards don't know what is best for the company and its owners/investors? Who are we to tell ANY company how to value the skills of any of their workers. If they are unhappy with the performance of their CEO, they can get a new one. If owners/investors don't like the bottom line of a company or how it spends its money, they can always sell the stock and invest in another...
    The hiring of upper level management is a very flawed and faulty practice, but your question is logical and one to be expected from a naive Alpaca farmer. Yet , the compensation system is completely flawed and flies in the face of what these so called capitalists actually profess. Do you really think that on a planet of over 6 billion people there are 500 persons who have this unique and unparalelled ability to CEO a company? We're not talking about the rare ability to farm Alpacas. Why do you think it is that CEO compensation has risen over the last 60 years as fishhead cited? Are you saying that quality CEO's have become rarer while lower level employees have become more available? Really?

    Hell no and it aint over now.......

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Participants: 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •