A living profit

[ksen]

Yeah, I'm not answering your questions until you answer my question from earlier in the thread:

So what do you think are some of the reasons historically high profits are happening right now?

 

[coloradoatheist]

I think there a variety of reasons

Let's hear some.

Not in any order. A skills mismatch between what people have and companies need. Companies found out in their recent downsizing that they could identify ZMP employees. Obamacare. Other regulations. Learning from past mistakes. Uncertainty in the upcoming economy.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Yeah, I'm not answering your questions until you answer my question from earlier in the thread:

So what do you think are some of the reasons historically high profits are happening right now?

You're not answering my questions either apparently. And I haven't commented at all on the historicity of current corporate profits.

 

[untermensche]

Profits can rise in several ways. Costs can go down. Revenues can go up. Or both can happen at once.

Presently what is happening is that most labor costs are remaining stagnant or dropping slightly and revenues are rising and tax costs are dropping slightly or remaining stagnant.

Basically a lot of people are not sharing in the fruits of increased revenues.

The people who have dictatorial control over those revenues are taking them all for themselves.

All they want is everything, all available funds from growth in revenue. They aren't greedy.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Profits can rise in several ways. Costs can go down. Revenues can go up. Or both can happen at once.

Presently what is happening is that most labor costs are remaining stagnant or dropping slightly and revenues are rising and tax costs are dropping slightly or remaining stagnant.

Basically a lot of people are not sharing in the fruits of increased revenues.

The people who have dictatorial control over those revenues are taking them all for themselves.

All they want is everything, all available funds from growth in revenue. They aren't greedy.

I agree with your first part. But to get the money back from the profits they need to do one of several things. Increase their salary, increase dividends, buy back stock. The last one we said was there, but even buying back stock is more of a gamble than increasing dividends. However the same question applies, why did they start doing it now?

 

[prideandfall]

why did they start doing it now?

i already answered this question, so well done on dodging having it covered.

playing along... what is your definition of "now"?
because nobody is suggesting that this started in the last say 5 years, so that's a straw man you can go out back and light on fire right now.

 

[coloradoatheist]

why did they start doing it now?

i already answered this question, so well done on dodging having it covered.

playing along... what is your definition of "now"?
because nobody is suggesting that this started in the last say 5 years, so that's a straw man you can go out back and light on fire right now.

My answer would be from 2011 to now. How has the rebound after the recession/depression etc been. Has the job growth recovered like it has in the past. Why are the profits right now, today, at record highs, etc.

 

[untermensche]

Profits can rise in several ways. Costs can go down. Revenues can go up. Or both can happen at once.

Presently what is happening is that most labor costs are remaining stagnant or dropping slightly and revenues are rising and tax costs are dropping slightly or remaining stagnant.

Basically a lot of people are not sharing in the fruits of increased revenues.

The people who have dictatorial control over those revenues are taking them all for themselves.

All they want is everything, all available funds from growth in revenue. They aren't greedy.

I agree with your first part. But to get the money back from the profits they need to do one of several things. Increase their salary, increase dividends, buy back stock. The last one we said was there, but even buying back stock is more of a gamble than increasing dividends. However the same question applies, why did they start doing it now?

Why did they start doing what? Wages for workers have been pretty stagnant for almost 50 years.

The skyrocketing pay and benefits and free perks to top management has been going on for a while too.

This is the way the system is designed to work. It is almost entirely a top down dictatorial system.

In a top down dictatorial system the dictators take as much as legally possible for themselves and give as little as possible to those with no power.

 

[coloradoatheist]

and with regard to your rising profits, are you talking absolute dollars and profit margins, or just absolute dollars?

 

[prideandfall]

Why are the profits right now, today, at record highs, etc.

because the economy and corporate profits have been, in aggregate, on a steadily increasing and exponentially expanding upward spike since the Industrial Revolution - a self sustaining perpetual motion machine that, functionally speaking, can not go backwards until/unless entire economic systems utterly collapse.

there's ever more people, there's ever more developed technology to push the ratio of cost to the margin of profit, and for right now you also have things like outsourcing and the exploiting of 3rd world resources.

and note that, interestingly, it wasn't until post-the great depression and the government stepping in that the average quality of life for the majority of the populace started actually going up even fractionally relative to the economic growth that started in the 1820s.

 

[coloradoatheist]

I agree with your first part. But to get the money back from the profits they need to do one of several things. Increase their salary, increase dividends, buy back stock. The last one we said was there, but even buying back stock is more of a gamble than increasing dividends. However the same question applies, why did they start doing it now?

Why did they start doing what? Wages for workers have been pretty stagnant for almost 50 years.

The skyrocketing pay and benefits and free perks to top management has been going on for a while too.

This is the way the system is designed to work. It is almost entirely a top down dictatorial system.

In a top down dictatorial system the dictators take as much as legally possible for themselves and give as little as possible to those with no power.

Except it isn't designed that way. The best description is that it's more like a sports playoff bracket where each level gets you more money so that you play better to move on. It applies to people and it applies to corporations competing with each other. The payoff has gotten bigger, just like sports.

- - - Updated - - -

Why are the profits right now, today, at record highs, etc.

because the economy and corporate profits have been, in aggregate, on a steadily increasing and exponentially expanding upward spike since the Industrial Revolution - a self sustaining perpetual motion machine that, functionally speaking, can not go backwards until/unless entire economic systems utterly collapse.

there's ever more people, there's ever more developed technology to push the ratio of cost to the margin of profit, and for right now you also have things like outsourcing and the exploiting of 3rd world resources.

and note that, interestingly, it wasn't until post-the great depression and the government stepping in that the average quality of life for the majority of the populace started actually going up even fractionally relative to the economic growth that started in the 1820s.

In terms of amounts or margins?

 

[prideandfall]

In terms of amounts or margins?

either?
the industrial revolution, which let's say for the sake of this argument began in the 1770s and lasted through the early 1900s, absolutely exploded manufacturing capabilities in every sector in existence, by a factor of up to 1000% or more per worker, proportionally.
it was also in the mid 1800s that the idea of trust corporations or multi-corporate entities was basically created out of thin air in order to thwart anti-monopoly laws in the US, which set the stage for ever exponentially rising single entity profits.

 

[untermensche]

Except it isn't designed that way. The best description is that it's more like a sports playoff bracket where each level gets you more money so that you play better to move on. It applies to people and it applies to corporations competing with each other. The payoff has gotten bigger, just like sports.

The salaries of athletes rose due to unions and an opening up of the books of owners. Athletes now know what their services are bringing in.

Workers without unions never see this and their pay has no relation to the value of their labor. Their pay is determined in a labor market. Not determined in relation to the value of what the labor produces.

Add another reason why this is happening now. The severe destruction of American unions.

 

[coloradoatheist]

In terms of amounts or margins?

either?
the industrial revolution, which let's say for the sake of this argument began in the 1770s and lasted through the early 1900s, absolutely exploded manufacturing capabilities in every sector in existence, by a factor of up to 1000% or more per worker, proportionally.
it was also in the mid 1800s that the idea of trust corporations or multi-corporate entities was basically created out of thin air in order to thwart anti-monopoly laws in the US, which set the stage for ever exponentially rising single entity profits.

If that was the case then you would see a step function over time, but that's not what we see with regards to profit margins. They cycle instead. And here is another chart where the historic average has been a little over 6% for the profit margin, and now we are around 10% which is the highest it's been.

https://www.lordabbett.com/content/lordabbett/en/perspectives/equityperspectives/are-high-profit-margins-here-to-stay.html

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

What would be an appropriate maximum profit? How would you calculate it?

Should there be a maximum wage?

 

[PyramidHead]

Germany has been capping executive pay since 2009 and hasn't seen much of a brain drain as a result.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You've been told and shown before that we are at historically high levels of corporate profits.



You ask a lot of questions without ever really giving any answers. Probably easier that way.

And you can't answer the question "why now" Did companies just decide to start making profits? Did they not have profits before a few years ago? People all of a sudden became greedy?

The answer to that is the 2008 crash and Management. All Management have is how much money the companies make to indicate their effectiveness.

Those that survived 2008 did so by cutting the workforce to survive and now look like economic geniuses because they are making twice the profit by overworking their minimized workforce. If they hire more people to create a sustainable work environment, their "genius" becomes less noticable, so the proles that actually generate the extra revenue (management lives off of the proles revenue generation ... also known as "overhead") at the cost of low morale and their private/family live... and management looks so smart.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yes, it's currently above average. Reigning them in a bit would be good if it could be done in a non-destructive way.

The problem is that our opponents are looking at that average and applying it to all businesses and they're also treating it as permanent rather than a temporary abberation as a result of our economy being out of whack. (That's the only way they can justify what they want to do--soak business to fund social programs.)

Perhaps what we need is a tax that's indexed to profit ratio. A general tax increase is not the answer because it will bite hard when things go back to normal.

or simply a "you must be this tall to get on this ride" standard applied to employee wages.

a minimum standard living wage is set for an area, and for a company to do business in that area it has to pay employees there that much. clean, simple, easy.
if a company can't afford to pay that amount without going bankrupt, then that company doesn't get to exist - survival of the fittest.

if the company's then jack up the price of their products and services, then jack up the living wage - it's an economic arms race that 'business' can lose, and SHOULD lose.

You're still missing the basic problem: Your approach causes lots of unemployment.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Germany has been capping executive pay since 2009 and hasn't seen much of a brain drain as a result.

The usual result of salary caps is companies find other ways to compensate the people they want.

For example, that's how we ended up with health insurance coming from one's employer.

 

[arkirk]

Germany has been capping executive pay since 2009 and hasn't seen much of a brain drain as a result.

The usual result of salary caps is companies find other ways to compensate the people they want.

For example, that's how we ended up with health insurance coming from one's employer.

So they all get healthcare too. What does that have to do with capping a bigshot's salary? You didn't address the fact that these employees didn't flee this awful imposition on their genius. It is possible they know a good thing when they see it and it is not always greed that motivates people...as you seem to think.