Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on October 14, 2017, 02:02:53 AM
To be fair, it's generally a bad idea to read any version of the PD. But for sure one without pictures should be avoided.
Why is it a bad idea to read it?
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Show posts MenuQuote from: tyrannosaurus vex on October 14, 2017, 02:02:53 AM
To be fair, it's generally a bad idea to read any version of the PD. But for sure one without pictures should be avoided.
QuoteTwo principal measurement mistakes have led some analysts to conclude that the rise in labor income has not kept up with the growth in productivity. The first of these is a focus on wages rather than total compensation. Because of the rise in fringe benefits and other noncash payments, wages have not risen as rapidly as total compensation. It is important therefore to compare the productivity rise with the increase of total compensation rather than with the increase of the narrower measure of just wages and salaries.
The second measurement problem is the way in which nominal output and nominal compensation are converted to real values before making the comparison. Although any consistent deflation of the two series of nominal values will show similar movements of productivity and compensation, it is misleading in this context to use different deflators for measuring productivity and real compensation.
Quote35 percent of the variance in the change between 1987 and 2013 in sector-level log hourly labor compensation is explained by changes in log labor productivity over the same period. A one-percentage point increase in productivity generated a 0.41-percentage-point increase in compensation.
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 14, 2015, 05:01:01 PM
He cited the Heritage Foundation as evidence that workers are compensated fairly. There is zero further reason to attempt to engage in serious conversation with him.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 13, 2015, 11:35:25 PMQuote from: thewake on November 13, 2015, 11:33:24 PMQuote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 13, 2015, 11:32:01 PMQuote from: thewake on November 13, 2015, 11:28:09 PM
As far as value to the company goes, a CEO adds more value than any one individual worker. The decisions and leadership of a the people running a company have a lot more to do with how well a company does than any individual plastics worker.
The Koch brothers in particular? I wouldn't know for certain.
Have you ever worked for a large company?
No.
The CEO does not make decisions. That's what the board does. What the CEO does is stand there with good teeth, looking like a leader until shit goes in the pooper and someone needs to be sacrificed to the Gods of the media.
The only proof of which I need offer is Tony Hayward.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 13, 2015, 11:32:01 PMQuote from: thewake on November 13, 2015, 11:28:09 PM
As far as value to the company goes, a CEO adds more value than any one individual worker. The decisions and leadership of a the people running a company have a lot more to do with how well a company does than any individual plastics worker.
The Koch brothers in particular? I wouldn't know for certain.
Have you ever worked for a large company?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 13, 2015, 10:27:01 PMQuote from: thewake on November 13, 2015, 07:21:53 PM
They do produce very little on the margin. The addition of one more low-skilled laborer doesn't add as much in terms of production as the addition of one more highly-skilled laborer. People don't tend to get paid more than their marginal revenue product.
I'm not making a morally judgemental statement whatsoever, or calling them lazy. Quite a lot of the working poor work very, very hard. To give an extreme example, subsistence farmers work very hard, but they produce very little.
Who personally produces more? The Koch brothers, or two minimum wage people pulling plastic parts out of injection molding machines?
Quote from: LMNO on November 13, 2015, 07:39:30 PM
You really don't stop talking, do you?
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on November 13, 2015, 05:03:47 PMQuote from: thewake on November 13, 2015, 04:43:12 PM
Generally when I think of the "meaning of the universe," I take it to mean that it was made, or exists, for a purpose in the same way a burrito exists and its meaning is for me to eat it. Similarly with the "meaning of life." Aka, I'm talking some kind of inherent meaning. Not a subjective meaning/purpose. In fact, purpose would be a better word to get at how I'm thinking about it.
I do not mean to say that we cannot all individually, or collectively, assign a purpose to our particular lives and the world we live in from our particular point of view. But I rather think it's impossible to know if the universe has some kind of inherent meaning, at least it seems impossible for me to know it right now. On the other hand, it can be show that inherent in the burrito is the fact that it was made to be eaten (even if it never is eaten, and instead just sits in a freezer).
I'm going to quibble with your use of "inherent" here. The burrito has inherent properties, but meaning isn't one of them. You could have a burrito that was created for a television ad or a weird art project that was never intended to be eaten. The burrito has two meanings: the intended meaning from the one who created it (an internal interpretation of the creator "I am making this burrito for this asshole to eat") and the inferred meaning from the observer of the burrito (an internal interpretation of the object based on context and other factors "that burrito is meant for this asshole to eat because he paid for it," "this burrito is meant for me to eat," "this burrito is meant for me to eat but that asshole is eating it instead," etc).
Quote from: Meunster on November 09, 2015, 07:48:19 PMQuote from: thewake on November 09, 2015, 07:26:26 PMTechnically we aren't supposed to be able to digest the stuff anyway.
pretty sure I've developed a lactose intolerance
Odd to develop one though. Probably related to some other dietary change.