Economy still sucks, unemployment is still high, yet the rich just keep getting richer.

[DARK 0]

Quote

Can somebody explain to me why it's in the interest of the average American to even consider extending the tax cuts to the wealthy?

The 400 richest people in the US control $1.37 trillion dollars, more than at any other time in history.
http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/22/news/companies/forbes_400/index.htm?hpt=T2

That's just crazy.

how much wealth they personally own is only relevant when you compare it to how much wealth they generate for the economy, come back when you find that out and then tell me if you still think its good to cut the legs out from underneath of the business leaders in your country

[quade 3]

Quote

You still really haven't defined the question in a way that will allow anyone to "prove" it to you, presuming (laughably) that it could be done.

Because it's not a question. It's a statement that we're not paid according to how "hard" we work (however you want to define it) but rather, just like any other commodity (bacon, coffee, cars), we're paid according to how much somebody else thinks that commodity is worth.

Do people pay more for coffee at Starbucks because the people at Starbucks work "harder" to make the coffee, or do they do it simply because they think it's worth the $4?

Have you ever in your entire life considered the price of anything based on how "hard" it was to produce? I doubt it. You may have considered the quality of the product, but that's not usually an indication of working "harder", but rather a better process that obtains better results.

Labor of any type, at ANY level, is no different.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Wow, what a pathetic retreat, Quade. Not only won't you defend your stance, you refuse to even define it.

Quote

Have you ever in your entire life considered the price of anything based on how "hard" it was to produce? I doubt it.

Ever? Quite often. Surely at least once in your life you've opted to DIY. The above question is generally a big part of that decision. And for purchases of a non essential nature, it's the key determinant in assessing if the item is priced as a value or not. That is, I'm generally not going to pay $300 for a bauble or an electronic toy that I think is only costing them $10 to build. I let first adopters pay that premium.

[billvon 2,470]

>That is, I'm generally not going to pay $300 for a bauble or an
>electronic toy that I think is only costing them $10 to build.

Really? So you'd buy something that cost $300 only if it had expensive components or took a lot of labor?

Hmm. I think most people decide what they want to buy based on its cost (and its value to them) rather than its BOM or labor costs.

[quade 3]

Quote

Wow, what a pathetic retreat, Quade. Not only won't you defend your stance, you refuse to even define it.

What retreat? My statement still stands, you don't get paid for how hard you work.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 3]

Quote

Ever? Quite often. Surely at least once in your life you've opted to DIY. The above question is generally a big part of that decision. And for purchases of a non essential nature, it's the key determinant in assessing if the item is priced as a value or not. That is, I'm generally not going to pay $300 for a bauble or an electronic toy that I think is only costing them $10 to build. I let first adopters pay that premium.

Then you didn't make the decision based on the amount of work done to produce it, but rather the value it had to you.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

Ever? Quite often. Surely at least once in your life you've opted to DIY. The above question is generally a big part of that decision. And for purchases of a non essential nature, it's the key determinant in assessing if the item is priced as a value or not. That is, I'm generally not going to pay $300 for a bauble or an electronic toy that I think is only costing them $10 to build. I let first adopters pay that premium.

Then you didn't make the decision based on the amount of work done to produce it, but rather the value it had to you.

So are you saying that hard work never pays off then, or is it just a coincidence that people get rewarded for hard work?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[quade 3]

Quote

So are you saying that hard work never pays off then, or is it just a coincidence that people get rewarded for hard work?

I'm saying most people use the wrong metric for determining how much they "think" they should get paid.

I understand it. It's an example of the Law of Primacy where early in life a person is told things like, "work hard and you'll get good grades." That actually IS true, but has no relationship with how people are paid for whatever job they do in the real world.

If you run a business, no matter how hard one of your employees works, there is a limit to how much he can earn because you, as the employer will ONLY value his effort to the extent his job requires. You may promote him, but again, he's limited by how much you're willing to pay him to do that job.

While it's true you may be rewarded for working harder, there's no guarantee. In fact, you may find yourself in a position where you've worked incredibly hard, been compensated fairly well and then some bean counter runs a calculation one day and determines they can get results that are still within spec but cheaper if they hire somebody else.

Guess what? You've just been laid off.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

So are you saying that hard work never pays off then, or is it just a coincidence that people get rewarded for hard work?

I'm saying most people use the wrong metric for determining how much they "think" they should get paid.

I understand it. It's an example of the Law of Primacy where early in life a person is told things like, "work hard and you'll get good grades." That actually IS true, but has no relationship with how people are paid for whatever job they do in the real world.

If you run a business, no matter how hard one of your employees works, there is a limit to how much he can earn because you, as the employer will ONLY value his effort to the extent his job requires. You may promote him, but again, he's limited by how much you're willing to pay him to do that job.

While it's true you may be rewarded for working harder, there's no guarantee. In fact, you may find yourself in a position where you've worked incredibly hard, been compensated fairly well and then some bean counter runs a calculation one day and determines they can get results that are still within spec but cheaper if they hire somebody else.

Guess what? You've just been laid off.

Are you familiar with piece work?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[quade 3]

Quote

Are you familiar with piece work?

Whoever has contracted out the piece work has placed a very specific value on the amount of money they're willing to pay for each piece. They would be just as happy to have the work done by robots or humans; it doesn't matter. It's simply a commodity.

While the individual may make more or less if they do more pieces, the amount of pay per unit of work remains exactly the same.

It's kind of funny you should mention piece work since that actually is a perfect example of how hard a person works has nothing to do with how much they get paid. While that may seem contradictory on the surface or in the paycheck of the poor schlub turning out widgets, the fact is, the company is getting a per unit price on the piece of work. They don't care if it took you all day or an hour, they're ONLY going to pay $0.xx per unit.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

Are you familiar with piece work?

Whoever has contracted out the piece work has placed a very specific value on the amount of money they're willing to pay for each piece. They would be just as happy to have the work done by robots or humans; it doesn't matter. It's simply a commodity.

While the individual may make more or less if they do more pieces, the amount of pay per unit of work remains exactly the same.

It's kind of funny you should mention piece work since that actually is a perfect example of how hard a person works has nothing to do with how much they get paid. While that may seem contradictory on the surface or in the paycheck of the poor schlub turning out widgets, the fact is, the company is getting a per unit price on the piece of work. They don't care if it took you all day or an hour, they're ONLY going to pay $0.xx per unit.

Correct.

But say worker X gets 5/piece, te same as worker Z.

Worker X works harde and longer and completes 1000 pieces in a week, while worker z completes 100 pieces ina week.

Are you still saying that hard work will not make you more money?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[champu 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Have you ever in your entire life considered the price of anything based on how "hard" it was to produce? I doubt it. You may have considered the quality of the product, but that's not usually an indication of working "harder", but rather a better process that obtains better results.

Ever? Quite often. Surely at least once in your life you've opted to DIY. The above question is generally a big part of that decision.

Then you didn't make the decision based on the amount of work done to produce it, but rather the value it had to you.

When you said, "based on how 'hard' it was to produce" I think he (and I) read that to be equivalent to "based on how 'hard' it would be to produce."

When it comes to consumer services type labor, to which I think he was referring, the distinction between "value to you" and "how hard the work is" can become pretty silly, at least for most DIY'ers who are fairly handy.

In the case of consumer goods however I'm inclined to agree you really have to talk about value and difficulty separately. An injection molding machine can stamp out a plastic doo-dad without anyone exerting much effort, but the more I value the doo-dad, the more I'll pay for it.

In any event, everyone has heard the "work smarter not just harder" mantra at some point. Getting ahead does take a bunch of hard/stressful/etc. work along the way, but you have to be exerting the effort in the right direction. Going to the beach and pounding the sand with a sledge hammer for 12 hours a day is some seriously hard work but only a fool would expect any reward for that.

[quade 3]

Quote

Are you still saying that hard work will not make you more money?

I'm saying you don't get paid for how hard the work is. You get paid according to how much somebody else thinks that work is worth.

Subtle distinction; too subtle for a couple of folks here I guess.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Wow, what a pathetic retreat, Quade. Not only won't you defend your stance, you refuse to even define it.

What retreat? My statement still stands, you don't get paid for how hard you work.

Tell a good waitress that

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,470]

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

I'm saying you don't paid for how hard the work is. You get paid according to how much somebody else thinks that work is worth.

I can agree with this.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

No, but she will make more than a lazy one.

The answer to the question depends entirely on the job. Many jobs do pay more for working harder, many do not. But, in the end, the pay is pretty much whatever somebody is willing to put out for getting the job done.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

No, but she will make more than a lazy one.

The answer to the question depends entirely on the job. Many jobs do pay more for working harder, many do not. But, in the end, the pay is pretty much whatever somebody is willing to put out for getting the job done.

Who works harder for their money; the $5000 a night prostitute or the $100 a trick one?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

While it's true you may be rewarded for working harder, there's no guarantee.

versus

Quote

What retreat? My statement still stands, you don't get paid for how hard you work.

When you can't even stick to a stance, it's hard to comment further.

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

While it's true you may be rewarded for working harder, there's no guarantee.

versus

Quote

What retreat? My statement still stands, you don't get paid for how hard you work.

When you can't even stick to a stance, it's hard to comment further.

There are many ways to reward a person without increasing how much money you are willing to pay for a position.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

No, but she will make more than a lazy one.

The answer to the question depends entirely on the job. Many jobs do pay more for working harder, many do not. But, in the end, the pay is pretty much whatever somebody is willing to put out for getting the job done.

Who works harder for their money; the $5000 a night prostitute or the $100 a trick one?

Couldn't tell you. I never had a $5000/night prostitute . But it's a pretty sure bet both are getting the maximum the market will pay for their services.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

And a bad one doesn't get tips

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,470]

>No, but she will make more than a lazy one.

Definitely agreed there. In general, working harder will make you more than being lazy in a given job. But even the hardest working waitress generally won't make more than the laziest petroleum engineer.

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

No, but she will make more than a lazy one.

The answer to the question depends entirely on the job. Many jobs do pay more for working harder, many do not. But, in the end, the pay is pretty much whatever somebody is willing to put out for getting the job done.

Who works harder for their money; the $5000 a night prostitute or the $100 a trick one?

Who worked harder in the past to get where they are?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[futuredivot 0]

and it takes more work to become a petroleum engineer than to become a waitress

You are only as strong as the prey you devour