Dems and "Change"

[Harry Beanbag]

Burrito stuffer? Probably not; market pretty much sets them at minimum wage. Store manager? Corporate employee? Sure.


Well, if they have managers grunting in the beans, they have more problems than I thought.

And I'm pretty sure the market sets salaries for all employees, outside of the big wigs, not how much a company is paying for liability insurance.

[Frozen Sooner]

Well, sure. They're both liability insurance, I guess. Commercial Auto contains a liability portion as well. It's a different policy, though, and it just seems weird to equate things that are meant to cover different things.

[Vaevictis]

And I'm pretty sure the market sets salaries for all employees, outside of the big wigs, not how much a company is paying for liability insurance.

Yeah, but the market structure for the two types of jobs is different.

I think that the minimum wage employee's wage is pretty unlikely to shift around, thanks to the various characteristics associated with those jobs -- government price floor, glut of supply, easily interchangable suppliers, etc.

I think that the management positions are a little more flexible, and hence more responsive to changes in the underlying cost of retaining the employee. If you had a highly productive employee and you just couldn't afford to give him a raise because of the underlying cost, you'd pretty much have to draw the line, even if the employee announced s/he was leaving. If the underlying cost fell, you'd have room to negotiate.

[Frozen Sooner]

Well, if they have managers grunting in the beans, they have more problems than I thought.

And I'm pretty sure the market sets salaries for all employees, outside of the big wigs, not how much a company is paying for liability insurance.

Insurance costs affect price, I'm not so sure how they really effect wages.

[Vaevictis]

Well, sure. They're both liability insurance, I guess. Commercial Auto contains a liability portion as well. It's a different policy, though, and it just seems weird to equate things that are meant to cover different things.

Yeah, I understand that, especially as (IIRC) it is or has been your business to pay attention to the difference -- but from a high enough view, the desired outcome is protection from employees screwing up.

Do you think the board of a big ol' company really cares whether it's E&O or GCLI -- probably not. They only care that the screw up was covered. In that sense, they're the same.

[Harry Beanbag]

Insurance costs affect price, I'm not so sure how they really effect wages.


Oh, I totally understand costs add up and affect a company's bottom line. At a previous employer, salaries, machinery, and materials were a direct cost. Things like electricity, equipment maintenance, building leases, insurance, coffee for the break room, etc. were indirect costs that did't directly affect the operation or productivity, but were necessary in order to do business.

Efficiency is the key to a successful business, and good employees are the key to efficiency. A company isn't going to screw itself by artificially lowering wages based on arbitrary liability insurance premiums, it's just stupid. How much could it possibly be for a large corporation if you broke it down by employee?

[Big Red Ron]

Oh, and by the way, if any of ya'll mockers want to make a friendly wager, I'll be happy to provide evidence to a neutral third party on the board, and they'll confirm it.

I ain't lying, exaggerating, or anything along those lines. It happened, and I can back it up. :)Sure thing. Let's get - r - done! :rolleyes:

[Harry Beanbag]

Yeah, but the market structure for the two types of jobs is different.

I think that the minimum wage employee's wage is pretty unlikely to shift around, thanks to the various characteristics associated with those jobs -- government price floor, glut of supply, easily interchangable suppliers, etc.

I think that the management positions are a little more flexible, and hence more responsive to changes in the underlying cost of retaining the employee. If you had a highly productive employee and you just couldn't afford to give him a raise because of the underlying cost, you'd pretty much have to draw the line, even if the employee announced s/he was leaving. If the underlying cost fell, you'd have room to negotiate.


There is WAY more involved in your underlying cost than liability insurance premiums. You're talking yourself in a circle in the corner on this one.

[Vaevictis]

There is WAY more involved in your underlying cost than liability insurance premiums. You're talking yourself in a circle in the corner on this one.

If it's involved at all, it's factored. Small, yeah, but it's there.

[Vaevictis]

Sure thing. Let's get - r - done! :rolleyes:

Alright. Mike, since you're here, you want to referee?

Do you want to wager, BRR?

[Harry Beanbag]

http://www.onenet.com.hk/images/animated%20bruce%20lee.gif

[Rogue]

I wish Edwards would gain some momentum. Breck girl or not, I like him.

[Big Red Ron]

Alright. Mike, since you're here, you want to referee?

Do you want to wager, BRR?Sure, you betting you're worth more than me? :D

[JohnnyMack]

Have any of you gasbags come up with a good reason why the Architect should pay more (%) in taxes than the burrito stuffer should yet? Not counting of course Chuck Bao's alarmist revolution talk?

[Big Red Ron]

:D
Have any of you gasbags come up with a good reason why the Architect should pay more (%) in taxes than the burrito stuffer should yet? Not counting of course Chuck Bao's alarmist revolution talk?Dem dere architects shuld pay their fare shayer.

[Vaevictis]

Sure, you betting you're worth more than me? :D

Nope. I don't know you from Adam.

I'm wagering that a neutral third party (ie, unbiased) will confirm that my evidence supports my claims of having paid taxes in the highest bracket. The burden of proof level is "preponderance of the evidence", not "without a reasonable doubt" -- mostly because I am only going to show them publicly available information: press releases, SEC filings, directory listings, email archives, etc. For various reasons, I'm not going to show any non-public documents.

[JohnnyMack]

I don't give a **** how much you've made, claim to have made or think you made. I think a progressive tax system is unfair.

[Vaevictis]

I don't give a **** how much you've made, claim to have made or think you made.

If you don't want a response along those lines, don't try to discount someone's argument based on how much money they earn.


I think a progressive tax system is unfair.

We got that.

[Big Red Ron]

Nope. I don't know you from Adam.

I'm wagering that a neutral third party (ie, unbiased) will confirm that my evidence supports my claims of having paid taxes in the highest bracket. The burden of proof level is "preponderance of the evidence", not "without a reasonable doubt" -- mostly because I am only going to show them publicly available information: press releases, SEC filings, directory listings, email archives, etc. For various reasons, I'm not going to show any non-public documents.fair enough but seems a little silly for somone in the top bracket to be involved in.

[Big Red Ron]

I don't give a **** how much you've made, claim to have made or think you made. I think a progressive tax system is unfair.It is wholly unfair.

[Vaevictis]

fair enough but seems a little silly for somone in the top bracket to be involved in.

Yes, yes it is.

But I'm a computer geek. We do all kinds of silly things on the internet.

[Big Red Ron]

Yes, yes it is.

But I'm a computer geek. We do all kinds of silly things on the internet.I won't argue with that. ;) cheers

[Rogue]

Maybe I'm crazy, but don't we almost have a reverse progressive tax system? Where the lower and middle class folk don't get as many breaks, exemptions, shelters, and hideouts as the wealthy? Trust me that the richest would squeal the loudest if we even got closer to a flat tax.

[Frozen Sooner]

Maybe I'm crazy, but don't we almost have a reverse progressive tax system? Where the lower and middle class folk don't get as many breaks, exemptions, shelters, and hideouts as the wealthy? Trust me that the richest would squeal the loudest if we even got closer to a flat tax.

Regressive is the word you're looking for.

[Big Red Ron]

Maybe I'm crazy, but don't we almost have a reverse progressive tax system? Where the lower and middle class folk don't get as many breaks, exemptions, shelters, and hideouts as the wealthy? Trust me that the richest would squeal the loudest if we even got closer to a flat tax.Eh, the poor and and lower class don't pay income tax.

[Harry Beanbag]

Have any of you gasbags come up with a good reason why the Architect should pay more (%) in taxes than the burrito stuffer should yet? Not counting of course Chuck Bao's alarmist revolution talk?


No.

[1stTimeCaller]

I think Beano should hold the money.

[bluedogok]

You hire an architect to design a building for you. The building later collapses, injuring you. At this point, you're going to have a policy fight: the GCLI carrier is going to claim it's an E&O claim (the building was improperly designed) while the E&O carrier is going to claim it's a GCLI claim (the building is a product of the architect.) Generally, this is why it's best to have E&O and GCLI through the same carrier-the carrier at that point will hash out which policy applies later.
Speaking as an architectural professional, if a building collapses it is usually a structural issue, that would more than likely be the primary discipline of responsibility. Of course, others may be involved as well..when it comes to law suits, it doesn't really matter whose primary responsibility it would be as most use more of a throw crap against the wall and see if it sticks mentality when it comes time to file.

[Big Red Ron]

I think the title of this thread is funny because I just read a poll of Wall Street insiders and their number one fear for 2008 is a Democrat in the White House.

If you elect a Dem all you'll have left is change. :D

[Chuck Bao]

I think the title of this thread is funny because I just read a poll of Wall Street insiders and their number one fear for 2008 is a Democrat in the White House.

If you elect a Dem all you'll have left is change. :D

Weird that. I always thought that the stock market performed better under a Democrat regime.

Also weird that I read this thread as Democrats and some extra change or spending money left over.

Vote Democratic.

[KABOOKIE]

Speaking as an architectural professional, if a building collapses it is usually a structural issue, that would more than likely be the primary discipline of responsibility. Of course, others may be involved as well..when it comes to law suits, it doesn't really matter whose primary responsibility it would be as most use more of a throw crap against the wall and see if it sticks mentality when it comes time to file.

Why of course. architects just dream **** up. It's up to the engineers to tell them to wake up.