The future of the Forex industry - page 22
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I don't think we can ever come to a consensus, so I don't see the point in further debate).
Yeah, well... I mean, there's no argument... So let's write down that the socialist wing has once again failed and failed to present convincing evidence 😋
I say - can a cleaner do the same to defend the honour of the region/country and also so that thousands/millions of people stare at her with admiration and discuss and re-watch every frame of her movement, hmm?
That's an empty question... be specific... So everyone knows that consultants and traders do the most good - obviously 😉
Some kind of twist in thinking too... why would a footballer produce machines? how many machines have you produced yourself, eh? - Well there you go. 🤩
So when you come back from the factory and turn on TV or YouTube or watch a movie or listen to music, you think it didn't take any effort to create all these works of art, right? - after all actors, musicians, poets and athletes - they only consume, yeah... I'm shocked of course at the narrowness of such thinking... 😯
Suddenly yes! bingo!
pay the one who can
and who can't, don't get paid
talent is very expensive and talent management policy is an important part of any modern enterprise
Shocker! We found out that people are unequal! That's news to me! I'll call Interfax and tell them 😄
Yeah, I get it, I'm post-ironic too... Actually we all realise that the market tends to greatly overvalue some creative people...
Thanks. Your explanations have made me a lot wiser).
whtd )
This is how it usually happens - people dogmatically repeat one phrase that seems to them to be infallible truth - and when you ask them why you decided so - it turns out they can't answer anything...
This was a question why you can not have an income of more than 10 times the average and why do you have to share the profits with those who do not create it ...
The situation is exactly the same with ideological and religious dogmatists...
If anyone else is interested in the topic of the thread.
Information from the trade like a pro website
New investor inflows have dropped sharply since the start of the year, judging by the chart of active accounts, which sagged by 4% during the reporting quarter. Some analysts claim that PAMM investors are withdrawing funds to invest directly in cryptocurrencies as well as stocks. Some securities and digital assets show hundreds of percent returns, which can be achieved with a simple Buy&Hold strategy.
And a chart from alps
Now we have to keep in mind that not only crypto is growing but also the fund, and what is going on in telegram and other platforms can be called nothing but investment madness, so it is logical that some investors have migrated... and i'm really waiting for the day when the fund and crypto will start a deep correction, according to years of statistics it might be May (see the picture) and the woe-investors will be screaming wildly, and the Russian proverb will be in effect: bought on hai - rode on fui 😁 and there was also a statistic that since March growth is provided by purchases of small and small investors, and large funds sell to them, fixing their profits, cautious investors / traders now refrain from buying, some are shorting the sp500, while the masses keep buying and boasting of the profits in your Telegrams, especially in a rising market, heh, the day of frost is coming, we just need some special news to push it up, we need more frost! They'll all go to the factory! 😆
Thank you. Your explanations have made me a lot wiser).
You're welcome.
Yeah... I mean there is no argument... So let's write down that the socialist wing has once again failed and failed to present convincing arguments 😋
I have made enough arguments, but my arguments are not arguments to you, your arguments are not arguments to me. Who fails is not for you to decide. I think if a referendum was held across the country my position would get more support than yours. Capitalism can exist, but within certain limits. And I think the majority would support it. Although there are those who do not accept it at all.
Just answer me one question: is there a single billionaire in the world who has made his fortune without using hired labour? I don't think so. And why not, because you can't do it without using hired labour, can you? Isn't it? Or can you think of another reason? After all, according to you he alone could produce an income that 1,000 or more people receive. Why is there no example of a creative entrepreneur who has not made a fortune in the billions on his own?
I have made enough arguments, but my arguments are not arguments to you, your arguments are not arguments to me. Who fails is not for you to decide. I believe that if a referendum was held across the country, my position would get more support than yours. Capitalism can exist, but within certain limits. And I think the majority would support it. Although there are those who don't accept it at all.
You had no argument at all, you didn't explain anything, you just repeated the same phrase like a spell.
It turns out I missed some of the posts because they were squeezed into the quoted text, so onwards:
If the entrepreneur does not use hired labour, then all profits are his. And whatever it is, there should be no claims against him. It is a different matter when he uses hired labour.
To clearly demonstrate the fallacy of this opinion it is enough to imagine that Brad Pitt hires a cloakroom attendant and after a while the cloakroom attendant says: - Look William, you make $40 000 000 a year, let me have half of this amount, or at least 1/3, because we worked together 😁😂🤣
Realise at last that the fact of working in this or that business, does not entitle you to claim a profit, unless you are a partner/founder/shareholder.
If the above example seems unsuccessful then this is it: after many years of hard work you created an efficient trading system (hypothetically🤣) and started trading and earning, and you hire yourself an admin to monitor the computers and the network and everything, the admin is not involved in trading in any way, he doesn't understand what these charts and numbers are on the screen, he even comes only once a week, and here you have traded a decent amount for a year (hypothetically🤣) and the admin says - lets share! where is my share of the profit? - I've been working! (and then you wake up in a factory).
The profits of the business should be distributed fairly, there should not be a monstrous disproportion like 1:1000 or more.
Now let's quickly and decisively get the definition of fairness into the studio!
This is only because the laws that are supposed to regulate the distribution of profits on a fair basis have not been created.
Here you are working in a factory and it so happens that the factory is not making a profit but is making a loss... The factory manager comes to you and says, "You should compensate for the loss along with the rest of the factory workers. How do you like this turn of events? 😁😂🤣 will you pay the losses of the factory?
You can't give an entrepreneur the freedom to essentially rob his employees by taking the lion's share of the company's income.
Again, no one is robbing anyone, the profits never belong to the employees, they work for a wage.
The state should create laws to prevent this.
That would be an unlawful state, or one with a wildly distorted notion of law.
The only option you suggest is possible when the company is collectively owned by all employees and for that you must first invest in the creation of the company and only then will you have a share in it and the right to profit sharing.
Please read this carefully again.
You can claim profits, which are the product of what you own and nothing else.
If you only own your body and brain (strength+knowledge+skills) then you can only claim the product of your labour, which you sell to your employer.
I think it is not difficult to objectively calculate the labour contribution of each participant in the production of the product and to distribute income with this labour contribution.
In fact it is very difficult, especially in high-tech or consulting industries where it is even mega difficult, and therefore in practice the cost of work is determined by contract, which means that the parties agree on payment, which will be reflected in the personnel record, and then in the statements, and agree on the subject of work, which will be reflected in the job description / job description, or in a contract format that describes the work, performance requirements, payment amount and timing.
The amount of money you can get depends on your uniqueness and competences, on the demand for the job, on the labour market (if you ask for too much the employer might just hire someone else) and on your abilities in rhetoric and self-presentation.
As for the distribution of company income, I have already explained above - you have no right to it unless you have a stake in the company.
Because he is not a genie. He doesn't have the fantastic physical or mental capacity to make such a contribution to a product that is 1000 times or more the average contribution of his employee.
But it is not true, and you know yourself that there are outstanding developers and talented designers, say, Tupolev certainly was 1000 times ahead of his co-workers, and he could certainly claim a 1000-fold profit if the commercial form of activity was possible.
Also, you look solely through the prism of"fantastic physical and mental capabilities", and how do you measure successful intuition? After all, many ingenious inventions were obtained through intuition.
Do you think Thomas Edison didn't make a fair amount of money either?
You keep referring to the national average wage of a specialist. And you think it's adequate. Well, that's only from your point of view. I think it's inadequate.
I understand that you want more money, and everybody does... But here's the thing: if you think that you can qualify for a salary above the others, then you should present something more unique and valuable, logically? Otherwise if you get more than others for the same work, it would be unfair to others, wouldn't it?
And this level of it has developed precisely because the laws of the fair distribution of company profits and the overall underestimation of the wage fund in companies have not been created.
No, it is only because none of the employers want to pay more for the work you do. Nothing personal. 😊 your salary is already fair. It's the market, not a conspiracy of understating the payroll.
It's the only way a business owner has excess profits on account of it.
Once again you are not reading carefully or do not want to understand the simple thing that the main source of profit for any healthy enterprise is not so much cost optimisation as increasing revenue, stop for a second and take a breath before fanatically repeating learned Marxist talking points.
A business owner earns the most when his product/service is in demand and sales are booming - how can you not understand that?
Read about the elasticity of costs and ABC-analysis, read something from the elementary course of economics, so as not to make such an absurd statement.
Finally, learn that with the growth of volumes, the TCF slope is not decreasing, unlike other costs, but increasing. Finally, read the Shapiro-Stiglitz model and stop saying that you are being ripped off 😁 because you are not earning 🤔 No offense.
A salary of 10 times the average for his creativity may well be sufficient reward. Such a ratio may well stimulate a person's creativity.
As for me, I think you can quite live with one kidney, that's quite enough, donate the second kidney immediately. 😊
Also you again forgot to give a reason why there should be a 10x income limit...
Agreed. But if you create laws for fair wages the labour market will change and of course not in favour of the entrepreneur and he will no longer be able to have exorbitant personal income.
I get the impression that the most important thing in life for you is that no one can earn more than you 😂🤣😃 Are you just unbearably sick of it?
Yes you could create a law to ban having any kind of profits, what a joy that would be...
And by the way again you forgot to state the reason why you can't have exorbitant personal income.
Not for yourself, but for people. I'm retired.
Go to the factory 🤣
No you don't. He is being exploited by the shop owner if he doesn't pay him a fair wage.
What would you say is a fair wage for a shopkeeper? I'm even curious to hear...
The state does not and should not have the task of making you rich.
I agree. But the state must create laws for fair wages.
That's for sure - but the way you propose to rob business owners is criminal! - Worse than that - it's communism/socialism!
By the way I'm still waiting for the definition of fair pay 😀 will there be, no?
I have made enough arguments, but my arguments are not arguments to you, your arguments are not arguments to me.
Sorry, I missed that post, you deigned to paste your replies right inside the quoted block and I didn't notice right away, so I trashed you a bit later 😃 (see post on previous page).
Who failed is not for you to decide.
The market decides 😁
I think if a countrywide referendum was held, my position would get more support than yours.
Of course - because there are always more ordinary working people than capitalists/entrepreneurs - and most people usually feel underpaid regardless of the absolute level of income - simply because they compare themselves to others and feel jealous - this is typical of any time and any country (although in Russia it may be more acutely felt) - so what I mean is that if you ask the crowd: - are you happy? - they're bound to say that they're not - that's the point: panem et circenses! = bread and circuses! - the crowd will always want more and more - that is the dangerous trap of socialism...
And in reality their quality of life is many times (if not dozens of times) better than it was a hundred years ago, while they complain in the same way that they are not paid enough - and it will always be so...
Capitalism can exist but within certain limits. And I think the majority would support it. Although there are those who do not accept it at all.
There is no capitalism for a long time 😁
And ancap of course no one is cool with it, and it never was either...
Answer me one question: is there any billionaire in the world who made his fortune without using hired labour? I don't think so.
It's like asking if there's a person who does all his/her own handiwork without buying anything at all? Well it's kind of pointless to even look in that direction... and as if hired labour is a bad thing...
And why, probably because it can't be done without the exploitation of hired labour? Isn't it?Or can you think of another reason?
Again you have the Marxist presupposition and sophism, understand that hired labor != exploitation.
Sometimes even the opposite is true, a salaried employee exploits the employer, in fact I personally can "boast" about it, when my salary in office slavery in a consulting factory was knowingly higher than the value I created for the company (maybe I even created more harm, I do not know 🤣)
So your argument is not valid and cannot be taken seriously...
After all according to you he alone could produce an income that 1000 or more people get.
It doesn't matter, it's the other thing that matters:
The most important thing you can't understand is that if you take all the employees of a well-known large company and separate them from the evil man-eating capitalist, together they are unlikely to repeat that success, most likely they will just scatter to other places ...
And wage labour is trivial...
So why are there no examples in life where a creative entrepreneur hasn't made a billion dollar fortune single-handedly?
In IT it's relatively easier, examples of Google - started in a garage, grew into a giant, a brilliant idea shot everyone on the envy of the world.
Also, just in case I'm not afraid to repeat myself:if you work for a company/enterprise you have no right to claim the profits of that enterprise without being a shareholder/owner.