If you became head of state tomorrow

[garethom]

Ideally, everyone in a business should be paid the same (or at least very close) because the way I see it one guy's job is just as important as the next. Sure, the leadership skills of a boss are very valuable, but they're worthless if he doesn't have workers doing "shittier" jobs to make it all possible. They both have equally important roles imo. But the idea behind workplace democracy is that we would move beyond "bosses" so to speak. Workers would have a say in how the company runs and what decisions are made. There could still be leaders within in the organization, but they would be elected by their peers and all terminations would have to be voted on by everyone.


Being overly idealistic, I'm sure, but this is all hypothetical and that's my ideal scenario.

Interesting idea I guess, but doesn't really deal with skills and the amount of work or what you'd have to give up to do it, i.e. not everyone has the skills to be a financial director for a massive firm a job that can have hours and hours of overtime, but millions of people can stack shelves in a set time. Like you said though, it's all hypothetical.

[SCope13]

Ideally, everyone in a business should be paid the same (or at least very close) because the way I see it one guy's job is just as important as the next. Sure, the leadership skills of a boss are very valuable, but they're worthless if he doesn't have workers doing "shittier" jobs to make it all possible. They both have equally important roles imo. But the idea behind workplace democracy is that we would move beyond "bosses" so to speak. Workers would have a say in how the company runs and what decisions are made. There could still be leaders within in the organization, but they would be elected by their peers and all terminations would have to be voted on by everyone.


Being overly idealistic, I'm sure, but this is all hypothetical and that's my ideal scenario.

Interesting idea I guess, but doesn't really deal with skills and the amount of work or what you'd have to give up to do it, i.e. not everyone has the skills to be a financial director for a massive firm a job that can have hours and hours of overtime, but millions of people can stack shelves in a set time. Like you said though, it's all hypothetical.

You're right, not everyone has the skills to do that but it doesn't make the skills they DO have any less valuable imo

[garethom]

Ideally, everyone in a business should be paid the same (or at least very close) because the way I see it one guy's job is just as important as the next. Sure, the leadership skills of a boss are very valuable, but they're worthless if he doesn't have workers doing "shittier" jobs to make it all possible. They both have equally important roles imo. But the idea behind workplace democracy is that we would move beyond "bosses" so to speak. Workers would have a say in how the company runs and what decisions are made. There could still be leaders within in the organization, but they would be elected by their peers and all terminations would have to be voted on by everyone.


Being overly idealistic, I'm sure, but this is all hypothetical and that's my ideal scenario.

Interesting idea I guess, but doesn't really deal with skills and the amount of work or what you'd have to give up to do it, i.e. not everyone has the skills to be a financial director for a massive firm a job that can have hours and hours of overtime, but millions of people can stack shelves in a set time. Like you said though, it's all hypothetical.

You're right, not everyone has the skills to do that but it doesn't make the skills they DO have any less valuable imo

Disagree based on how easy it would be to replace someone if they left, just saying, there's no incentive to take on added work or stress when you can just fill a low level position for the same wage.

[garethom]

Big up SNH on this thread by the way, one of the more interesting threads for a while imo.

[Lucifa]

Change that to sub-100 uni`s, they`re alright up until that point.

yeah they are (i went to an ex-poly), but theres still too many graduates. Not point in subsidising 3 years of higher-tier education for someone to end up retail.

scrap austerity measures, abandon zero deficit targetting, sustained public exp. to maintain employment figures and restart growth.

idiot.

dont tell me youve bought into the tory propoganda regarding deficits. Zero structural budget deficits are a myth, an impossibility without a maintaining a balance of payments (exports) surplus. Why do you think they keep revising the target year? You shrink expenditure, which shrinks the economy, thereby enlarging debt as a % of GDP, i.e. a self-defeatist policy.

Only deregulated financial markets and free market capitalists caused the crisis, despite Cameron's insistence on blaming labour

[Lucifa]

Ideally, everyone in a business should be paid the same (or at least very close) because the way I see it one guy's job is just as important as the next. Sure, the leadership skills of a boss are very valuable, but they're worthless if he doesn't have workers doing "shittier" jobs to make it all possible. They both have equally important roles imo. But the idea behind workplace democracy is that we would move beyond "bosses" so to speak. Workers would have a say in how the company runs and what decisions are made. There could still be leaders within in the organization, but they would be elected by their peers and all terminations would have to be voted on by everyone.


Being overly idealistic, I'm sure, but this is all hypothetical and that's my ideal scenario.

Interesting idea I guess, but doesn't really deal with skills and the amount of work or what you'd have to give up to do it, i.e. not everyone has the skills to be a financial director for a massive firm a job that can have hours and hours of overtime, but millions of people can stack shelves in a set time. Like you said though, it's all hypothetical.

You're right, not everyone has the skills to do that but it doesn't make the skills they DO have any less valuable imo

Then what incentive is there for the director to put up with more pressure, longer hours, higher costs of learning?

Do agree that pay scales should be fairer though, i remember reading there is a factory in Argentina that operates on a similiar concept.

[nowaysj]

Disagree based on how easy it would be to replace someone if they left, just saying, there's no incentive to take on added work or stress when you can just fill a low level position for the same wage.

In the states though, we're in a curious position, there are scads of MBA's and JD's, and joint MBA's and JD's working for 9 dollars an hour (which doesn't even begin to cover interest on their student loans) because there is such a glut of highly skilled/educated workers with no work for them to do. It is an upside down world. Most of them could run a complex multinational finance firm.

[garethom]

Disagree based on how easy it would be to replace someone if they left, just saying, there's no incentive to take on added work or stress when you can just fill a low level position for the same wage.

In the states though, we're in a curious position, there are scads of MBA's and JD's, and joint MBA's and JD's working for 9 dollars an hour (which doesn't even begin to cover interest on their student loans) because there is such a glut of highly skilled/educated workers with no work for them to do. It is an upside down world. Most of them could run a complex multinational finance firm.

A glut of highly skilled/educated workers with no experience then? That's gonna factor down the amount of able applicants for a lot of companies by a significant amount!

[SCope13]

Ideally, everyone in a business should be paid the same (or at least very close) because the way I see it one guy's job is just as important as the next. Sure, the leadership skills of a boss are very valuable, but they're worthless if he doesn't have workers doing "shittier" jobs to make it all possible. They both have equally important roles imo. But the idea behind workplace democracy is that we would move beyond "bosses" so to speak. Workers would have a say in how the company runs and what decisions are made. There could still be leaders within in the organization, but they would be elected by their peers and all terminations would have to be voted on by everyone.


Being overly idealistic, I'm sure, but this is all hypothetical and that's my ideal scenario.

Interesting idea I guess, but doesn't really deal with skills and the amount of work or what you'd have to give up to do it, i.e. not everyone has the skills to be a financial director for a massive firm a job that can have hours and hours of overtime, but millions of people can stack shelves in a set time. Like you said though, it's all hypothetical.

You're right, not everyone has the skills to do that but it doesn't make the skills they DO have any less valuable imo

Disagree based on how easy it would be to replace someone if they left, just saying, there's no incentive to take on added work or stress when you can just fill a low level position for the same wage.

Well the idea is that as the companies profits go up, everyone within that company would see increased wages. So there would be incentive. There's really no incentive the way it is now because you're likely still gonna be making the same shitty wage regardless of how hard you work/how well the company does.

[SCope13]

Big up SNH on this thread by the way, one of the more interesting threads for a while imo.

I echo this statement. Threads like this are why I don't think SNH is the giant shitfest some members make it out to be.

[garethom]

Well the idea is that as the companies profits go up, everyone within that company would see increased wages. So there would be incentive. There's really no incentive the way it is now because you're likely still gonna be making the same shitty wage regardless of how hard you work/how well the company does.

Want to understand your point of view, but I'm really struggling There is an incentive how it is now, I got a huge pay rise with my last promotion, which will trigger a big role change for me. Unless you're saying shitty wage compared to the directors of the company, but again, I understand why they earn more than me. Their decisions can make or cost hundreds of millions. There's a lot more responsibility and work on their shoulders.

[hugh]

Well the idea is that as the companies profits go up, everyone within that company would see increased wages. So there would be incentive. There's really no incentive the way it is now because you're likely still gonna be making the same shitty wage regardless of how hard you work/how well the company does.

Want to understand your point of view, but I'm really struggling There is an incentive how it is now, I got a huge pay rise with my last promotion, which will trigger a big role change for me. Unless you're saying shitty wage compared to the directors of the company, but again, I understand why they earn more than me. Their decisions can make or cost hundreds of millions. There's a lot more responsibility and work on their shoulders.

Indeed, with greater power comes greater responsibility. There must surely be reward for the greater amounts of responsibility, stress and other prerequisites (education, experience?)
Has anybody read this book?




The main character (A scientist, primarily) in this book comes from an anarchical world. This is a true anarchy state, and to summarise everyone does every kind of job at every level and the benefits are distributed evenly. At the same time, this also has the negative effect of inefficiency. However, the people are not really found wanting as they only know of what they have. This is completely juxtaposed to the planet that our main character must travel to in order to continue his experiments in his field, where a true capitalist republic state exists. The journey of him having to adjust to this new lifestyle and the problems it brings with it results in a fascinating read.
Anyway, sorry for thread derailment, Scope's posts were really reminding me of this novel.

[Dystinkt]

scrap austerity measures, abandon zero deficit targetting, sustained public exp. to maintain employment figures and restart growth.

idiot.

dont tell me youve bought into the tory propoganda regarding deficits. Zero structural budget deficits are a myth, an impossibility without a maintaining a balance of payments (exports) surplus. Why do you think they keep revising the target year? You shrink expenditure, which shrinks the economy, thereby enlarging debt as a % of GDP, i.e. a self-defeatist policy.

Only deregulated financial markets and free market capitalists caused the crisis, despite Cameron's insistence on blaming labour

my view is that if your household is in debt, it makes no sense to borrow more to pay off the first debt, a bit of an oversimplification but much more sensible than any other thinking. I do agree that they need to look at investing to boost growth, but public expenditure isn't the place for it. far too much waste and inefficieny in the public sector as it is, its just throwing good money after bad. it was labour that allowed a lot of the deregulation to happen on a certain mr blair's watch.

[ehbes]

On a less important issue, I would get of Internet providers and make that a government program

[SCope13]

Well the idea is that as the companies profits go up, everyone within that company would see increased wages. So there would be incentive. There's really no incentive the way it is now because you're likely still gonna be making the same shitty wage regardless of how hard you work/how well the company does.

Want to understand your point of view, but I'm really struggling There is an incentive how it is now, I got a huge pay rise with my last promotion, which will trigger a big role change for me. Unless you're saying shitty wage compared to the directors of the company, but again, I understand why they earn more than me. Their decisions can make or cost hundreds of millions. There's a lot more responsibility and work on their shoulders.

Indeed, with greater power comes greater responsibility. There must surely be reward for the greater amounts of responsibility, stress and other prerequisites (education, experience?)
Has anybody read this book?




The main character (A scientist, primarily) in this book comes from an anarchical world. This is a true anarchy state, and to summarise everyone does every kind of job at every level and the benefits are distributed evenly. At the same time, this also has the negative effect of inefficiency. However, the people are not really found wanting as they only know of what they have. This is completely juxtaposed to the planet that our main character must travel to in order to continue his experiments in his field, where a true capitalist republic state exists. The journey of him having to adjust to this new lifestyle and the problems it brings with it results in a fascinating read.
Anyway, sorry for thread derailment, Scope's posts were really reminding me of this novel.

Got it for my birthday actually! Haven't read it yet, so I avoided reading that last paragraph.

[SCope13]

Also, I highly recommend at least skimming through the first few chapters of this: http://libcom.org/library/what-is-anarc ... er-berkman

[NiGHTS_24]

i'd change the national anthem to "party all the time"

[knell]

On a less important issue, I would get of Internet providers and make that a government program

you'd want the government to control the internet? that can only end in tears...

(or am i misunderstanding you?)

[ehbes]

On a less important issue, I would get of Internet providers and make that a government program

you'd want the government to control the internet? that can only end in tears...

(or am i misunderstanding you?)

No i mean connection to the Internet

[knell]

i still dont get what you mean... are you talking about the actual infrastructure of the internet (servers and cables) or the IPS, or both?

im confused because you essentially said that you'd get [rid] of providers and substitute it with a single government program, which implies that they would have full control over the availability of the internet