 |
| |
|
|
Velociryx
|
 |
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:35
|
|
Then please learn the skill "reading for comprehension" as it will enhance the debate.
To do your work for you (again), the question is this:
People are different. They HAVE different skills and natural abilities. Some might be smarter or faster, or physicially stronger, or whatever.
That happens quite naturally in some cases, and is nurtured or enhanced in others.
Skills, on the other hand, are not natural, but learned (ie - learning a second language, or how to fix computers). No one is "lucky" to have a skill....they are industrious, and take the required time and effort to learn it.
Going back to the moving example, let us add the fact that I've been a People's Mover for fifteen years, and have vast experience at it, while my partner has been on the job for three days.
In the real world (ie, the world as it is today), you would tell me that these natural gifts (strength), and my acquired skills (experience) are "unfair" to my partner, because they enable me to do things that my partner cannot do. Thus, you devise a system to correct these imbalances, whereby we both make the same baseline wage, HOWEVER
Under your proposed system, he who works harder, earns more, so in the world according to Kid, my vertically challenged partner should be paid more, becuase he is less strong and less experienced, and so, must "work harder" to accomplish the same goals as me.
Thus, you turn my natural abilities and skills into a curse. I get a paycut for being better at my job.
This is the point I would like you to address. If you can.
If that's clear enough.
Comprende?
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
|
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:35
|
|
By my count, I have asked nearly two dozen specific questions about your proposed system (EDIT: In this thread alone).
Not misrepresenting you...asking for points of clarification about what YOU propose.
So far, I've gotten one answer.
One. (edit: actually three, but one was a non-answer, and one has changed several times, so I can't really count it)
On the other hand, I have answered every question you had for me.
I've got better things to do.
I appreciate the invite, but will take a recess before I get agitated to the point of saying something cruel.
-=Vel=-
EDIT: It's YOUR system, Kid. I do not have the answers to these questions, because you are the one and only authority on YOUR system. So I've been attempting to get the answers straight from the one guy who should know.
If you feel I have misrepresented you, kindly quote me doing so to point it out, and I will remedy the situation.
-v.
Last edited by Velociryx on 22-08-2004 at 19:06
|
|
| |
|
|
|
aneeshm
|
 |
Indore , Madhya Pradesh
Jul 2001
time: 11:05
|
|
Well , I think that they would have a chance .
Here's how :
The original founder of this small-scale industry is an innovator at heart . Also , he has a guiding hand in this business , because the family admits that they owe most of their good fortune to his brilliant idea . So now that they have economies of scale an order of magnitude smaller than their competitiors , but still bigger than the original garage-based cottage-industry business , they choose to diversify .
Instead of making just plain potato chips , they start flavouring them differently , and hire a few people for research into optimising their chips to make them the best . Thus , the people , who earlier had only one chip to choose from ( the state-manufactured one ) now has more , and also different flavours . So , the family business earns more .
From the profits of this venture ( of whom the workers age getting 50 % , the business 49 % , and the owners 1 % ) , they expand even further , making some products that the Board believed did not have a market , because they were rather trivial and that nobody would have so much money anyway . But these products have a market in the prosperous areas , and nearby regions , so the products are successful .
Because the national board considered these products too trivial , the family ties up with a few umemployed workers in nearby districts , and they set up small units for producing chips and other small things the Board conidered too trivial . Thus , the market for these things is totally theirs . The money for these units comes from the family business , because they want to exapnd . In these little sub-units , 50 % of profits go to workers , 15 % to the member of the family who has been told to govern it (family business has grown , and the top jobs are reserved for the most hardworking family members) , and the rest to expanding that branch (the family member or manager gets 15 % because the profits are rather small , the thing being only a branch) .
So , the family is creating a market for it's own goods by paying their workers more . The city they are living in becomes a sort of food-capital of the nation , simply because there are now many branches producing many goods the state had mandated trivial or frivolous . The city is big enough to meet their supply and productioan capacities . Now , they go on a spree of expansion , and they are able to compete because their a products have two things the state-owned ones lack : novelty and lots of choice (remember that they manufacture things that the state has no interest in at all) .
This ensures that even if their profits from chips are hurt , they can always survive by the profits and the market where the state doesn't compete at all .
Then , seeing that the city is a good place for business , some innovator comes up with a new invention and takes a loan from the chip-makers to start a business to make machines that makes the chip-making process cheaper . They give it . He approaches them because he knows that they will pay him more for the same thing than the state . They tell him that he will get 20 % of the money he saves them . He agrees . The management of the state-owned enterprises , being largely indifferent to innovators who don't come to them , ignore this . So now , not only has the origianl family-run business expanded , they can also pose a serious challenge to the government hegemony in this field by having better methods . Soon enough , the Natioanl Board of Industry decides that it requires the innovation for their own factories . So it goes ahead and takes them , but does not pay anything to the inventor because he already sold it to someone .
Tell me , is the prosperity of that city's workers fair or unfair ? And is it fair to take the invention without paying the inventor anything ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Odin
|
 |
Biology Nerd at Minnesota State University Moorhead
Sep 2000
time: 23:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by aneeshm
Well , I think that they would have a chance .
Here's how :
The original founder of this small-scale industry is an innovator at heart . Also , he has a guiding hand in this business , because the family admits that they owe most of their good fortune to his brilliant idea . So now that they have economies of scale an order of magnitude smaller than their competitiors , but still bigger than the original garage-based cottage-industry business , they choose to diversify .
Instead of making just plain potato chips , they start flavouring them differently , and hire a few people for research into optimising their chips to make them the best . Thus , the people , who earlier had only one chip to choose from ( the state-manufactured one ) now has more , and also different flavours . So , the family business earns more .
From the profits of this venture ( of whom the workers age getting 50 % , the business 49 % , and the owners 1 % ) , they expand even further , making some products that the Board believed did not have a market , because they were rather trivial and that nobody would have so much money anyway . But these products have a market in the prosperous areas , and nearby regions , so the products are successful .
Because the national board considered these products too trivial , the family ties up with a few umemployed workers in nearby districts , and they set up small units for producing chips and other small things the Board conidered too trivial . Thus , the market for these things is totally theirs . The money for these units comes from the family business , because they want to exapnd . In these little sub-units , 50 % of profits go to workers , 15 % to the member of the family who has been told to govern it (family business has grown , and the top jobs are reserved for the most hardworking family members) , and the rest to expanding that branch (the family member or manager gets 15 % because the profits are rather small , the thing being only a branch) .
So , the family is creating a market for it's own goods by paying their workers more . The city they are living in becomes a sort of food-capital of the nation , simply because there are now many branches producing many goods the state had mandated trivial or frivolous . The city is big enough to meet their supply and productioan capacities . Now , they go on a spree of expansion , and they are able to compete because their a products have two things the state-owned ones lack : novelty and lots of choice (remember that they manufacture things that the state has no interest in at all) .
This ensures that even if their profits from chips are hurt , they can always survive by the profits and the market where the state doesn't compete at all .
Then , seeing that the city is a good place for business , some innovator comes up with a new invention and takes a loan from the chip-makers to start a business to make machines that makes the chip-making process cheaper . They give it . He approaches them because he knows that they will pay him more for the same thing than the state . They tell him that he will get 20 % of the money he saves them . He agrees . The management of the state-owned enterprises , being largely indifferent to innovators who don't come to them , ignore this . So now , not only has the origianl family-run business expanded , they can also pose a serious challenge to the government hegemony in this field by having better methods . Soon enough , the Natioanl Board of Industry decides that it requires the innovation for their own factories . So it goes ahead and takes them , but does not pay anything to the inventor because he already sold it to someone .
Tell me , is the prosperity of that city's workers fair or unfair ? And is it fair to take the invention without paying the inventor anything ? |
This is why i prefer Co-ops over state run industries, you get the best of both worlds.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-08-2004 18:12
Point, LC!
|