Roseanne sitcom restart

Clippings from news sources involving fashion freedom and other gender equality issues.

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby PatJ » Thu Jan 24, 2019 9:50 am

A billionaire, a poor worker, and an immigrant sat together at a table
with 100 cookies. The billionaire grabbed 99 cookies and said to the
worker, "That immigrant is going to take your cookie."

The rich have become so rich that they control the government and if
we look at history, this leads to violence - both political and social.

Meanwhile nobody is paying attention to the fact the whole world is heading
for a "train wreck" that could destroy the world as we know it.
PatJ
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 302
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 9:34 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby crfriend » Thu Jan 24, 2019 10:39 am

PatJ wrote:The rich have become so rich that they control the government and if we look at history, this leads to violence - both political and social.

This is how republics are overthrown -- not by violence, not by anger, not by discontent, but rather by the greed and unbridled avarice of the few. The large country just south-of-the-border from Canada is a textbook example. The large country to the east of Europe is another -- governmental systems that today resemble conjoined twins.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
 
Posts: 10067
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby moonshadow » Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:49 am

The rich have always controlled the governments of the world, since the dawn of civilization.
"Our task is not to destroy but to build; not to hate but to find a place of yielding; not to polarize but to discover the points of commonality so that we can work together. Learn this lesson, dear friends, it will serve you well"
-Rebbe Zalman
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Lebanon, Virginia

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby oldsalt1 » Thu Jan 24, 2019 12:05 pm

PatJ wrote:A billionaire, a poor worker, and an immigrant sat together at a table
with 100 cookies. The billionaire grabbed 99 cookies and said to the
worker, "That immigrant is going to take your cookie."

This is a very lucid explanation of things.
User avatar
oldsalt1
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 8:25 pm
Location: Long Island, New York

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby moonshadow » Thu Jan 24, 2019 6:44 pm

moonshadow wrote:The rich have always controlled the governments of the world, since the dawn of civilization.


Of course... on the other hand, would we really want the poor running things? I mean, if they aren't that great at managing their personal lives, why would they do any better managing a government? I'll admit I'd probably run America into the ground quicker than most.
"Our task is not to destroy but to build; not to hate but to find a place of yielding; not to polarize but to discover the points of commonality so that we can work together. Learn this lesson, dear friends, it will serve you well"
-Rebbe Zalman
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Lebanon, Virginia

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby Pdxfashionpioneer » Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:53 am

At the risk of convincing all of you that we have not only lost the class war, but there's no way back, CR said that at the typical major corporation the CEO makes 100 or 200 times what the lowest paid worker makes. Actually, amongst the Fortune 500, the CEO's on average earn something like 425 times the AVERAGE worker's wage. God alone knows what the spread is between the very top and very bottom. For one thing, there's the issue of the corporation's employees who happen to work in their factories in the 3rd world. Count them in and you're talking about a REALLY impressive ratio!
Last edited by Pdxfashionpioneer on Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
David, the PDX Fashion Pioneer

Social norms aren't changed by Congress or Parliament; they're changed by a sufficient number of people ignoring the existing ones and publicly practicing new ones.
User avatar
Pdxfashionpioneer
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1007
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:39 am
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby crfriend » Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:11 am

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:[...] CR said that at the typical major corporation the CEO makes 100 or 200 times what the lowest paid worker makes [...]

Those numbers were several years out of date when I mentioned them (likely 5+), and need to be looked at on a curve. When the 100 to 200 times numbers were in effect we were approaching the "knee" on the [exponential] curve, and we're mostly past that now. I also very deliberately left out the third-world subsidiaries of these corporations as the salary-scales are not directly comparable.

Ironically, the CEO is merely one more employee -- albeit an obscenely-compensated one. Where the real money lies is with the owners and the primary stockholders; that's where all the billions are to be found; the CEO is just the lightning-rod. And every time that real wages are pushed downwards for the workers, more of that "bottom line" sticks to the primary stockholders instead of the citizenry -- and so it snowballs.

It's been "game over" for well over a decade now and will not return to normality without a great deal of altruism on the part of the super-wealthy or the exertion of force from some corner. And to think that I was of voting age when the brakes got let off this runaway train and it imperceptibly started to roll...
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
 
Posts: 10067
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby STEVIE » Sat Jan 26, 2019 12:50 am

There is a department store chain in the UK, John Lewis and Partners which has a cap on the Chairman's salary.
The figure is a multiplier of 75 times the average non-managerial salary. He still achieved £1.53 million in 2015, so not exactly poor house material either.
The "partnership", is actually founded on a trust and is not quoted on the Stock Market so there are no shareholders in the accepted sense.
In the past they have turned in very healthy results but this year may see a marked downturn in their fortunes.
Steve.
STEVIE
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1753
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: North East Scotland.

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby Pdxfashionpioneer » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:24 am

While we're on the subject of income ratios, Carl, you make a great point about the difficulties of comparability of nominal wages from the Developed world and the Third World.

J. P. Morgan had a hard and fast rule for the companies he financed. The President couldn't earn more than 25 times what the lowest paid worker was paid.

I'm not sure what it will take to turn this train around. Sen. Warren's and Rep. Ocasio-Cortez's tax proposals would be excellent starts. Personally, I think the top marginal rate should be in the 90's and the I'm not sure 2 or 3% will be an adequate wealth tax, but it's a great start!

The obliviousness of the folks at the top of the heap is astounding. Recently, Ocasio-Cortez's proposal was floated to a group of billionaires, one of whom laughed dismissively (shocker) and said, "Name me one country where that's worked." And was shocked to learn the United States of America in the 1950's & 60's and God knows what his reaction was when he learned that in fact the top rate was in the 90%'s. Good grief, those facts are in the popular press and have been talked about for years! What kind of bubble do these clowns live in! Maybe it's not so rare among the billionaires that when Trump was running in the primaries (Who knows? Maybe to this day … remember, even as short and condensed as they have had to make them, his daily intelligence briefings bore him to tears.) I knew more about current affairs than he did!

To clear up one other point, while in the past the super-rich made their money from their holdings, today's are the CEO's of their companies as well as making money on their portfolios.

Another glimmer of hope is people like Warren Buffet who is appalled at how ridiculous our system has become and some of the technology billionaires who are figuring out that ours is a middle class society and that hollowing it out is not only incredibly unfair, but, in the long-term, bad for their own economic interests.

It's interesting how many progressives got into office in the last election as a reaction to Trump.

Maybe, as my former pastor opined in 2016, God's Hand was in Trump's ascendance!
David, the PDX Fashion Pioneer

Social norms aren't changed by Congress or Parliament; they're changed by a sufficient number of people ignoring the existing ones and publicly practicing new ones.
User avatar
Pdxfashionpioneer
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1007
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:39 am
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby oldsalt1 » Mon Jan 28, 2019 11:16 am

Maybe they should start taxing the people in congress .like Pelosi and Feinstein. Feinstein is worth over $ 68 million and Pelosi is over $100 Million

the average net worth of congress members is over 1.02 Million and by the way Democrats are at 1.04 Million while republicans are slightly LOWER at 1 million even

And I have always said that if congress members had to participate in the health plan options that they give the people we would all be in better plans
User avatar
oldsalt1
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 8:25 pm
Location: Long Island, New York

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby Jim » Mon Jan 28, 2019 12:13 pm

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote: Sen. Warren's and Rep. Ocasio-Cortez's tax proposals would be excellent starts.

Absolutely!
oldsalt1 wrote:Maybe they should start taxing the people in congress .like Pelosi and Feinstein. Feinstein is worth over $ 68 million and Pelosi is over $100 Million

Certainly members of Congress should not be excluded.
27WOC-Double-Truck-graphic-WEB-02.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
Jim
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby oldsalt1 » Mon Jan 28, 2019 12:33 pm

When people illustrate facts on the subject there is the normal reverence to the 1% who own everything and the other 99 % us common folks.

So 535 congress and 100 senate that equals 635 total 1% of that total would be 6 people from the chart above it looks like there are a heck of a lot more than 1% of our congressional people in that Top 1% . do they really have our best interests in mind :?: :?: :?: :?:
User avatar
oldsalt1
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 8:25 pm
Location: Long Island, New York

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby crfriend » Mon Jan 28, 2019 1:17 pm

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:J. P. Morgan had a hard and fast rule for the companies he financed. The President couldn't earn more than 25 times what the lowest paid worker was paid.

It is just possible that Morgan had vague memories of not being ridiculously rich (or that his parents weren't) and tended to spread things out a little bit more evenly that others. There are other stories like this of the so-called "Robber Barons". James J. Hill comes to mind. However, that generation is now long gone, and in their place are spoilt-brat billionaires who inherited it all and haven't ever witnessed or experienced a day of privation (or actual work). Altruism is not possible for those folks.
I'm not sure what it will take to turn this train around. Sen. Warren's and Rep. Ocasio-Cortez's tax proposals would be excellent starts. Personally, I think the top marginal rate should be in the 90's and the I'm not sure 2 or 3% will be an adequate wealth tax, but it's a great start!

You can rest assured that they will never be allowed anywhere near the levers of power. Witness Bernard Sanders as a recent point of fact. He, from all the runners in the primaries, was the individual for the job -- and the political machine saw to it he never got close. He was there for comic relief and to give the vast mass of the citizenry to rally around. This is a runaway train that cannot be caught, and even if it is caught, it can't be stopped -- because there's vested interest in keeping things the way they are.
The obliviousness of the folks at the top of the heap is astounding.

Oh, they're not oblivious at all. They know precisely what's going on, and precisely how they're profiting from it. Far from being broken, the system is working precisely as designed -- it's just not a system that provides the most benefit for the largest number.
To clear up one other point, while in the past the super-rich made their money from their holdings, today's are the CEO's of their companies as well as making money on their portfolios.

CEO "compensation" is more symptom than disease. CEOs are paid that way so as to serve as lighting-rods to deflect attention to where attention needs paying -- that of the now deeply-entrenched oligarchs who are running the country for their personal profit. A CEO who's pulling down $50 million a year is still chump-change to the billionaires running the show. A billion is twenty times fifty million. The absolute numbers are mind-blowing in their magnitude, and to contemplate that it's all down to avarice and greed of a tiny number is truly and deeply sickening.
Another glimmer of hope is people like Warren Buffet who is appalled at how ridiculous our system has become and some of the technology billionaires who are figuring out that ours is a middle class society and that hollowing it out is not only incredibly unfair, but, in the long-term, bad for their own economic interests.

Buffet is lone voice howling in the wilderness. He is of no account in this regard.
It's interesting how many progressives got into office in the last election as a reaction to Trump.

And it'll be fun watching them all vote precisely the way their masters want them to [1]. Until the stranglehold that money has on politics is broken we can expect more of the same. At least until all the wealth is concentrated at the top and they start turning on each other; however, we'll all be long gone so won't see the day.


[1] The "votes" in Congress will continue to be sharply-divided and there will continue to be much heat and smoke. There will, however, be no light; to actually derive signal from the mess one needs to carefully examine how the machine as a whole behaves and ignore the side-shows. For all the rancour and spite, the oligarchs will get what they want -- every single time. The "debate" is a sham, and all the players are working for the same paymasters; it's just got to look otherwise.
Last edited by crfriend on Mon Jan 28, 2019 2:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Fixed bad arithmetic
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
 
Posts: 10067
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby Jim » Mon Jan 28, 2019 2:08 pm

crfriend wrote: A billion is two hundred time fifty million.

I think it's only 20 times fifty million.

I mostly agree with the rest of your analysis, but am not quite so pessimistic.
User avatar
Jim
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am

Re: Roseanne sitcom restart

Postby crfriend » Mon Jan 28, 2019 2:28 pm

Jim wrote:I think it's only 20 times fifty million.

Fixed it. Thanks for the catch.
I mostly agree with the rest of your analysis, but am not quite so pessimistic.

I've been watching this unfold for decades, so if I sound a bit pessimistic (OK, a whole lot pessimistic) that's why.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
 
Posts: 10067
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)

PreviousNext

Return to In the News / Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest