/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.53227936]

>Sorry anon, we have to keep raising the price of your groceries and gas because things are so bad. We definitely aren't incentivized to keep doing it at all. We're doing everything in our power to lower profits for ourselves so that things can be more affordable for you. In the meantime, why don't you turn on the news to see how bad everything is?

[Anonymous No.53228082]

Why don't people understand how retarded this argument is?

Example:
>McDonalds brings in ~$445m
>McDonald's CEO salary is $20m ($385k/week)
>The CEO could take home $0 and the cost of your food won't even go down by 0.1%

>Remember when every liberal demanded $18/hr minimum wage and claimed prices wouldn't increase?
>Mcdonalds has ~200k employees
>Every $5/hr increase in Mcdonald's worker pay reduces revenue by 10%, making food cost at minimum 10% more

[Anonymous No.53228209]

What? No response? I thought you'd at least challenge my math or grasp at another straw like you usually do when you come here to troll

[Anonymous No.53228315]

>>53228082
>>53228209
We aren’t talking about just the CEO here. There are at least dozens of fat cats at the top who make millions while the people doing real work can’t afford homes. If you haven’t seen the executive compensation vs profits vs mean income plots then you should check them out. What happened in 1972 or whatever year, that website has all the plots. I am opposed to the average nigger spitting in people’s McDonald’s getting $18/hr, but I am equally opposed to the state we’re in when people like me — PhD educated in STEM working two full time jobs and a side gig with wife working full time — struggle to afford homes before wife hits the age where it’s dangerous to have kids. It’s ludicrous and if you think otherwise then you are on the side suppressing white birthrates.

[Anonymous No.53228345]

>>53228315
just have sex holy shit, you even have a wife, stop making excuses and impregnate her

[Anonymous No.53228470]

>>53228345
>just raise a kid in your 1 bedroom apartment
I’m not a nigger, so no.

[Anonymous No.53228534]

>>53228315

Your complaint is against foreigners parking their money in real estate in western nations.

Also kill yourself Dr. Faggot and I hope your useless cunt of a wife gets raped by a pack of niggers

[Anonymous No.53228559]

>>53228315
>PhD educated in STEM
that's where you fucked up. gl competing with Ranjesh and Chingchong across the pond

[Anonymous No.53228633]

>>53228315
The OP was about inflation. Even if a hundred executives cut their salary by $10m each, that's $1b saved (if there even is that much going to executive salaries). That's <%1.6. That isn't the cause of inflation. You affording homes is not because of these executives either.

I feel for you but also I don't believe you are having trouble with a household of 3 full time jobs and a side gig unless you're trying to build a mansion or trying to live in city center. Answer these questions
>How much are you bringing in from each of these jobs/gigs
>What is your degree in exactly?

[Anonymous No.53228642]

>>53228082
>>Remember when every liberal demanded $18/hr minimum wage and claimed prices wouldn't increase?
such a red herring. The problem with wage increases is that when the employees wage increases, the executive compensation rises at the same rate. This should not be happening. Think of it all in terms of pieces of a giant pie. Workers need MORE of the pie, not a proportionately increasing size of a bigger pie. For instance. If a company pulls $100 in profits and the ceo makes $30 of that, and all employees together make $10. When employees get a raise to say, $15 the ceo salary should not increase to $45. When this happens inflation occurs. If instead, the company simply reallocates its profits purely to employee compensation, inflation wont occur. Employees need a larger share of the current pie.

[Anonymous No.53228657]

>>53228642
>the executive compensation rises at the same rate.
Should say, that rises at a faster rate than employees, that is what we have been seeing happen.

[Anonymous No.53228668]

>>53228642
>Think of it all in terms of pieces of a giant pie. Workers need MORE of the pie, not a proportionately increasing size of a bigger pie.
Yeah this is true. But once again, THE OP WAS ABOUT INFLATION. Executive salaries are not the cause of inflation. Low-level employee wages are.

[Anonymous No.53228709]

>>53228668
no, if companies simply reallocated their resources to increase employee wages, there would be no inflation. The fact that when employee compensation rises, so too does CEO and investor profits is what causes inflation. A bigger piece of the pie is what is needed, not making the pie larger. Just because a number is larger, doenst mean that it is more, most people cant wrap their head around percentages.

[Anonymous No.53228748]

>>53228709
say, employees make 2% (say this comes out to making $15 an hour)of the companies profits. Right now in order to increase this to $20, the company with their current pay schemes, will raise prices in order to keep the % employees make at 2%. If instead, moving employee pay $20, would make their % of the profits earned 2.6% of the total company profits inflation would be nonexistent (at least when talking about it in terms of employee pay.)

[Anonymous No.53228750]

>>53228633
Together we bring in about $200K/yr, been doing this for a year and a half. My degree is in physics. We want a rural home away from city centers with 3 bedrooms (boys room girls room master room) and 2 baths (master bath kids bath), ideally with 5 acres. But you’re sort of missing the point by focusing on me. It should be insanely easy for someone in my shoes to afford a home, especially with such modest demands as we have. The fact that it isn’t that easy to get should have you asking “how bad is the situation for minimum wage earners?”
This is the question OP was getting at. If millionaires have to tighten their belt down from a size 50 to a size 25 so that others can actually lead livable lives, that shouldn’t be a subject of debate. I’ll point out that it wasn’t in Hitler’s economy, which was arguably the best economy Germany ever saw.

[Anonymous No.53228776]

>>53228082
based logic

[Anonymous No.53228799]

>>53228709
You missed my entire point here >>53228082 and here >>53228633
Even if for argument's sake we pretend there are $1b in executive salaries that could be reallocated to employee wages, that amounts to an additional $2.40/hr 200k full time workers. Again this is well beyond actual numbers for McDonalds. Reallocation isn't feasible when woekrers are demanding a bump from $7.25->$18/hr requiring over 20% of McDonald's revenue! That is why prices must increase by 20%+

[Anonymous No.53228901]

>>53228799
You forget that there is also investor pay. What you are talking about is company waste. Companies are incentivized to waste money. If we took away incentives to destroy profits and goods, companies would be forced into better business practices and the money can then be allocated to employee compensation. The problem is, people were asking for that wage because it was what was required to live. This requirement didnt necessarily have anything to do with employee compensation, but rather COL expenses. The solution to things isnt simply making more money, or even earning a larger piece of the pie, but to get rid of the idea that EVERYTHING has to be able to be invested in. We already have exceptions for taxes on certain things, we should also have exceptions for certain things in terms of not having them be investable. I am talking about things like, water, food, housing, medicine, transportation. Those things, are NEEDED to actually be a part of society. If you have large parts of the population that cannot afford them because the people who are earning a larger piece of the compensation (executives, and investors) are driving the prices up by speculating, then there is a feedback loop that causes inflation rapidly.

[Anonymous No.53228923]

>>53228750
I already proved my point about minimum wage workers is why I'm focusing on you specifically, challenging your claims because I think they're total bullshit.

If you bring in $200k/y and you can't find a rural home you are retarded. You can literally work and save for 3 years and buy one outright.
Name your state

[Anonymous No.53228941]

>>53228901
I believe wholeheartedly that we need to have a 2 tier good system. Necessities (whatever is decided is the "needed" items to be human) and Luxury, things that are extras and nice to have. If we segregated things like this, things would get better practically overnight. Imagine a massive tax on anything aside form your main residence, something progressive that increases with the number of properties you own. Suddenly the market would be flooded with dirt cheap housing.

[Anonymous No.53228949]

>>53228901
I'm no saying investor pay isn't a problem. Once again, the OP was about executive salaries causing inflation. That is what I am here to disprove. If you're gonna say
>Okay yeah but what about these other things
you are proving me right and agreeing that the OP is wrong.
That's my entire point

[Anonymous No.53229006]

>>53228949
im just spewing my point out, not agreeing or disagreeing with OP at all, his post was a troll....But your argument misses the point that with increased executive compensation, the areas where that executive lives are going to basically be gentrified, which causes the prices to rise in that area, making it more difficult to afford anything. Its a massive feedback loop that can be culled by reducing executive pay (although this is just a single piece of the puzzle like i mentioned in my other posts).

[Anonymous No.53229064]

>>53228949
going off point a bit here....
but something that is happening that should be acknowledged is that right now, the US population s in a weird situation. The US allows for outsiders to invest in literally anything that we have. These outsiders make most of their money due to our government. Whether it be saudis having the benefit of our government cooperation to keep our oil production low, or us providing aid packages to areas that then use those packages to enrich their citizens who then look to the US and buy up housing and other assets (meaning that the US gov paid for them to have to those investments). There is no reciprocity though for our citizens, we cannot go to most places and buy up housing or even their precious metals. Other countries keep their resources locked down. We have our government handing out our resources to outside nations.

[Anonymous No.53229068]

>>53229006
I'm going to ignore the fact that you're just jumping from one argument to the next. You seem very defensive.

Ignoring that, increasing the salary of one person or another isn't going to just magically cause their area of residence to be gentrified. For one thing, executives making $10m don't live in an area that could even be gentrified. Even doubling their salary, best case scenario for your argument, they will move to a more expensive house in a more expensive area. Now you could even argue they're adding to the supply of cheaper houses by selling and only increasing the price of even more expensive homes that they're now possibly trying to buy. Not only is this ridiculous, it only applies to housing. They aren't going to magically start spending more on groceries. That's even more ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.53229078]

>>53229064
So we as US citizens, not only have to fight out executives and investor class for scraps, but we then have to fight US government sponsored interlopers for those tiny scraps as well. Not a single other country on earth has to deal with this.

[Anonymous No.53229101]

>>53229068
Your partially right, a single executive doing this probably wont be an issue, however, they dont live off on their own. There are areas of every city that is considered the "elite" area. They band together. Also I am not jumping from idea to idea, I am pointing out that this problem doesnt exist as as a silo. ITs not a single cause and effect, its a myriad of causes which are causing a single effect: inflation.

[Anonymous No.53229108]

>>53228642
>muh pie argument
lmao

[Anonymous No.53229163]

>>53229101
Again you're argument is that
>majority of executives in a single area to get massive salary increases
>Executives live in an area that could be gentrified
>Executives being paid more magically makes their groceries cost more

[Anonymous No.53229252]

>>53229163
Its a much longer chain than that, its not straightforward at all and it happens over years and years.
>>53229108
What other way would you have me describe it? We are literally talking about ratios and percents. When you talk about percents, you mean a number out of 100. The way that we can visualize this is with a "pie chart" Try not to be so retarded next time anon.

[Anonymous No.53229317]

>>53229252
I'm trying to show you that the chain requires a catalyst and executives having more money is not it. Like I explained here >>53228082 and here >>53228633 the catalyst is large increases in operating costs (employee wages, dividend payments, supplier costs). A few dozen people (executives) having more money doesn't cause their groceries to become more expensive.

[Anonymous No.53229375]

>>53229163
It would be waaay beyond the scope of this discussion, to be able to plot out the way this works. But to give it a shot.....executives get paid more, They move to an area that has, say "standard" living conditions. They buy up some property but dont like the riff raff, They then start to buy up the nearby houses and buildings. People catch wind of this and begin to raise the price because these newcomers are paying any price. Because of the prices rising, other areas in town feel like they can start asking for higher prices for their properties too. Rent increases, and eventually becomes untenable for the residents to afford. They demand additional wages to make payments. wages go up (executive pay rises too, but faster) inflation occurs due to this, stores cant magically get more money to pay employees, now because executive compensation occurs faster than employee, the executive has more money than before. They start to buy more properties with this additional pay because they see the price of housing is going up and they decide to speculate. This goes on and on and on. Whereas, if the executives didnt get more of the pie, the chain of inflation is broken.
This is super simplified, there are a shitton more steps but I hope you see what I am getting at.

[Anonymous No.53229397]

>>53229375
remember too, inflation lags so there is a period of time after employee wages go up that things seem great.

[Anonymous No.53229529]

>>53229375
You just explained what gentrification is. Your original argument was
>the areas where that executive lives are going to basically be gentrified
which I've explained is nonsense. Now you're saying
>executives get paid more, They move to an area that has, say "standard" living conditions
which would never happen. And you're also shifting the discussion to executives buying and speculating on property as the cause of the gentrification. Again an entire different argument. But ignoring the jumping around, let's assume every executive pay increase sees proportional gentrification (again, ridiculous, but let's pretend). The strongest argument you have now is that gentrification leads to inflation. Will it cause property price increases in the local area of gentrification? Yes by definition. Will it cause groceries to cost more? This is a yes but only in the local area and within the range that the grocery company let's prices fluctuate based on location. It's not going to double the price of milk, let alone make a dozen eggs cost $10.

[Anonymous No.53229557]

>>53229317
>non white here
you’re not including the fact that these ceos are not paying taxes, and they are getting kick backs that’s not monterary. Wealth into the hands of the mcdonald’s employees will be spent into the real economy. Wages haven’t kept up to prices of consumer goods yes but it’s not as simple as pay people less. Macdonalds has shell corporations that the average employee doesn’t have. Jeff bezos pays less in taxes than your local middleschool teacher makes millions per week and lounges with his goblin princesses while currying favor to both political parties. Stop drinking the kook aid

[Anonymous No.53229600]

>>53229557
Taxes don't even make an order of magnitude of difference. Stop drinking the commie-aid

[Anonymous No.53229622]

>>53229600
taxes don’t make a difference? Are you being serious?

[Anonymous No.53229655]

>>53229622
An order of magnitude of difference, please read again.
My point here >>53228315 was that the effect of executive salaries is several orders of magnitude different from that of employee wages and other business costs. Meaning taxes won't change the argument.

[Anonymous No.53229682]

>>53228668
You wanna say the higher wages are the reason for inflation and not the insane amount of speculation and pumping on the markets? okay...

[Anonymous No.53229693]

>>53229529
this happens on a large scale though, My example was a town/city. But the truth is this is happening at the world scale, with things being weighted against americans.

[Anonymous No.53229717]

>>53229529
You also have to realize, the single biggest driver of inflation is housing expenses, which is why I am focusing on this. Extrapolating on ideas is not jumping around.

[Anonymous No.53229740]

>>53229557
This is why I said its out of the scope of this discussion to really lay it out. The reality is, my example is in every single industry and every facet of your life.

[Anonymous No.53229758]

>>53227936
>>Sorry anon, we have to keep raising the price of your groceries and gas because things are so bad. We definitely aren't incentivized to keep doing it at all. We're doing everything in our power to lower profits for ourselves so that things can be more affordable for you. In the meantime, why don't you turn on the news to see how bad everything is?
I snagged a mouth with a butter knife, a dollop of peanut butter and a five gallon bucket.
Go away, faggot.

[Anonymous No.53229786]

>>53227936
Interesting that people on a /biz/ board would be shitting on capitalism and business moves that make more profit in general.

[Anonymous No.53229808]

>>53229682
Please read the thread first. My entire point is that executive salaries don't affect inflation more than 0.1%, as opposed to OP's claim, whereas employee wages, in McDonald's case, can have an effect of >20%, which then has a positive feedback effect of much more.

>>53229693
I don't think you understand the kind of "scale" that would be required for executive salary increases to cause what you're saying.

>>53229717
>the single biggest driver of inflation is housing expenses
I'm gonna need a source on this one

[Anonymous No.53229835]

>>53228668
>. Executive salaries are not the cause of inflation. Low-level employee wages are
>>53228642
Both of you retards are wrong and gay.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/111314/what-causes-inflation-and-does-anyone-gain-it.asp
It is merely the economy, cost of living goes up.
How the fuck would low paying cause inflation which is due to increase in supply?
Fucking most retarded website.

[Anonymous No.53229852]

>>53229786
The US does NOT have capitalism. Capitalsim doesnt include too big to fail, subsidies, tax breaks for certain people, artificial markets, price caps, paying people to not utilize their farmland, etc. Its not exactly socialism, but its not capitalism at all either.

[Anonymous No.53229857]

>>53228082
>McDonalds brings in ~$445m

Holy lying piece of shit, kys.

[Anonymous No.53229875]

>>53229655

[Anonymous No.53229917]

>>53229808
>I'm gonna need a source on this one
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/18/housing-costs-inflation-00015808
Literally typed into google, "single biggest driver of inflation" and this was the first link. you reddit guys need to learn how to use google to find shit. finding this info on your own should have been nothing.

[Anonymous No.53229918]

>>53229852
>The US does NOT have capitalism

[Anonymous No.53229925]

>>53229835
If you'd read the thread, my point is increasing low-level employee wages can cost more than 20% of revenue, possibly requiring a company to raise prices proportionally. My main argument is that OP is wrong about executive salaries causing inflation anyway

>>53229857
I meant per week. I missed that.

>>53229875
This does not help your point

[Anonymous No.53229929]

>>53229835
get your broken english out of here.

[Anonymous No.53229934]

>>53228901
>The problem is, people were asking for that wage because it was what was required to live.
Because the Federal Reserve prints money and your corporations increase costs because your politicians increase taxes you dumb fuck.

[Anonymous No.53229947]

>>53229934
seriously get the fuck out, you are speaking in jargon terms that you just string together, word salad.

[Anonymous No.53229949]

>>53228901
>water, food, housing, medicine, transportation.
The logistics of all of those modern necessities.

[Anonymous No.53229983]

>>53229852
I think the us is more of a new form of feudalism. The invisible hand your referring to is long gone.

[Anonymous No.53229984]

>>53229068
>it only applies to housing. They aren't going to magically start spending more on groceries.
Could easily see a budding family going from one mouth to feed and clothes to multiple ones.
Are you dumb?
Even the price of utilities changes over time.

[Anonymous No.53230010]

>>53229949
>>53229984
seriously get your broken english word salad shit out of here. you arent saying anything, just using jargon.

[Anonymous No.53230011]

>>53229983
>capitalism is a new form of feudalism
huh, people are finally waking up

[Anonymous No.53230025]

>>53229557
>>non white here
Stick to the argument at hand and stop trying to play guess who on the anonymous image board because a non white one upped you in highschool.
Jesus fuck, rent free.

[Anonymous No.53230032]

>>53227936
it s because of Putin. we wish we could lower our price but russia bad.

[Anonymous No.53230058]

>>53229917
First of all the burden of proof is on the claimer (you).
Second, I was under the impression you were claiming housing prices were indirectly causing higher prices in things like groceries. Not just that housing prices were the only increases you were focused on, and that you were ignoring things like grocery price increases.

Anyhow, again jumping to a different argument, directly quoted from your link
>Home prices rose a blistering 18.8 percent in 2021, and rent has climbed 17.6 percent nationwide over the last year, industry data shows.
>But those prices, the result of a severe supply shortage fueled by municipal government restrictions across the country, haven’t fully shown up in inflation figures because leases are typically annual.

[Anonymous No.53230061]

>>53230011
seems so.
lets not forget that 65 years ago houses only took 1 year of work or less for a minimum wage earner to afford.

[Anonymous No.53230080]

>>53229557
>>non white here
>you’re not including the fact that these ceos are not paying taxes,
The irony here, yes the fuck they do pay taxes, they just do not PAY AS MUCH in "Income tax" as some one like me or even you.
Highschool tier arguments here guys, honestly.
No, everyone pays so much in taxes a rich man buying butts and nips is still paying taxes on those smokes and nips.
EVERYTHING is taxed, my suburban fagoi.
Even an inheritance gets taxed.

[Anonymous No.53230092]

>>53229984
Let me get this straight. Are you saying, >Executive now gets $15m instead of $10m
>Executive can finally afford to start a family
>This is the primary source of population increase

[Anonymous No.53230122]

>>53230058
>you were claiming housing prices were indirectly causing higher prices in things like groceries.
I chose a spot and dug in. This is why its so hard for normal people to talk about, There is so beginning or end to this, its just a big circle. Higher housing prices, mean employee pay has to go up to afford them, which means prices rise due to the way executive and investor compensation work. Housing is just one of the best examples to use because of how inflated the prices have become. You add up all of the little shit that we need as humans living in society, and even small increases to things add up to become untenable. Its a giant loop. The easiest way to destroy the loop is to cut off the part that causes the least amount of harm. Either hurt 1% of the populations earning power, or hurt 99% of the populations. Thats what it ends up coming down to, someone has to give things up, and the 99% has been giving everything up for decades now. We have nothing left to give, while the 1% has taken it all because its on the table and there is nothing stopping them from taking.

[Anonymous No.53230129]

>>53229852
capitalist socialism. You're taxpayers are there to support the big ones, in case they fail, even though they shouldn't cause they should be too big to fail

[Anonymous No.53230170]

>>53230058
>First of all the burden of proof is on the claimer (you).
Thats not how it works at all. When you come across a claim, if you dismiss it out of hand because of something like "no sources" when the person is clearly talking about data (which had to come from somewhere) it is in your best interest to see if that info is correct. The raw data is out there and its in your best interest to get it, read it, and understand it. It makes YOU grow as a person and makes your words have more weight behind them. We are shitposting on a vietnamese basket weaving forum. Many things people say are false, but also many things said are true. Some of the truths are vehemently denied by those in power. So it is in your best interest to learn how to discern truth from reality on your own. Instead of outright dismissing things because someone else other than you said it.

[Anonymous No.53230185]

>>53230129
>capitalist socialism.
kek, thats a good term.

[Anonymous No.53230193]

>>53230122
>I chose a spot and dug in
This is what I'm trying to tell you is wrong lmao
Just because inflation is the result of a feedback loop, doesn't mean you can arbitrarily pick one point of it as the cause. You need to carefully analyze what is the catalyst that started the loop. Increased wages across the board is the catalyst, and the size of the increase in total dollars is the size of the catalyst. Executive salaries aren't the catalyst

[Anonymous No.53230224]

>>53228470
You are literally against the increase of white birthrates. Dirt poor Eastern Europeans have 5-7 kids. Never understood this mentality that you need to make $100k to have kids. You can have a kid in a 1 bedroom apartment. But sure go play a losing game.

[Anonymous No.53230238]

>>53230170
The burden of proof has nothing to do with what's "in my best interest". Otherwise I could just add a little claim in every one of my posts and require you to do a a bunch of research before every post. Watch this
Executive salaries in the US totaled only 0.001% of low-level employee salaries.
Good luck verifying that

[Anonymous No.53230242]

>>53230193
>you can arbitrarily pick one point of it as the cause.
Its not that at all. You pick a point and dig in. Then you start removing components, when you see the loop unravel, you have found your cause. But unless you pick a point and dig in, you wont even be able to start (if you are looking for the cause from the get go) I could have started with food prices...but those prices have only really just started to rise. it didnt make sense to start from there. Could have started with transportation cost...What do you think would happen if employee pay was cut to 0? Now imagine if executive pay was cut to 0. One lets the system continue in a fixed state, the other causes the system to disappear

[Anonymous No.53230260]

>>53230238
>Good luck verifying that
dont need to, we can pull a chart of executive pay in relation to employee pay and see immediately that it is wrong. same thing you could have done with what the biggest driver of inflation is.

[Anonymous No.53230285]

>>53230242
Okay fine but now you're admitting that you don't even know executive pay to be the cause, and that you did indeed choose it arbitrarily as a starting point for argument.

>>53230260
Okay please do. Be sure your chart is for the entire country as that's what I'm claiming to be true.

[Anonymous No.53230286]

>>53228315
Have kids already (if you love your wife), leave the rest up to God and stop bitching.

[Anonymous No.53230347]

>>53230285
>Okay fine but now you're admitting that you don't even know executive pay to be the cause
I know that it is a massive part of it(clump it with investors compensation too). I know this because of this: there is 0 doubt I hope we can agree that speculation causes prices to increase. Now who are the main speculators? Certainty not mr $15 an hour who can barely afford to eat. The speculators then, by virtue of elimination are the investors and executives. Now there are additional causes outside of this, namely mortgages. Which allow people to leverage their future earnings NOW. Before mortgages housing prices were more reasonable. Its such a complex layering of issues. There is definitely not a single silver bullet. But like I mentioned previously, the 99% have nothing else to sacrifice, only the 1% have things left, in fact they have everything.