The future of the Forex industry - page 28
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
At my house, by the waste bin, there is already a pile of rubbish bags piled up. When the bins overflow, people leave the bags next to them. The waste is mechanised and the refuse collection truck driver is well paid, but they cannot find people for manual work, because they do not want to pay a decent wage.
Maybe you do not take into account a whole range of factors, namely: to increase the wages of street sweepers you need to increase the MRTF, and in order to do that you yourself have to pay more contributions to the housing and utilities, suddenly 😁 - so it is you who actually pay the wages of street sweepers - and you probably get angry every time the bills for housing and utilities go up, do you not? 😆 - so what's the point? - The point is that, on average, in the area where you live people do not want to (or cannot) pay more for utilities - so that's it... And the solution for you is obvious - just move to a less depressed area.
Perhaps you are not considering the full range of factors, namely: in order to increase the wages of the janitors, you need to increase the FTSH, and in order to do that you yourself must pay more deductions to the housing and utilities, suddenly 😁 - so it is actually you who pays the janitors' wages - and you probably get very angry every time the housing and utilities bills go up, don't you? 😆 - so what's the point? - The point is that, on average, in the area where you live people do not want to (or cannot) pay more for utilities - so that's it... and the solution is obvious to you - just move to a less depressed area.
The upper management of the housing and utilities sector have big salaries, and they steal more money. They have offshore accounts and go to Maldives twice a year. So there is no money left for the janitors.
However, on reflection, I have to abandon my original thesis that private property will eventually disappear as a concept. Any particular class of things can be imagined outside of this concept (imagined as state, collective, social or public property, for example), but it is hard to imagine it being completely devoid of content. Perhaps, here is the case when the statement that nature does not abide to emptiness is true).
Theoretically speaking, your supposition may be true when people move to full cyberpunk or Plato's eidos - and then nobody will give a damn about material values in view of their notorious excess - but the question what to do with intangible values will remain...
Secondly, property presupposes three legal aspects: to possess, to use, to dispose of, each of which has its own interpretation in the contemporary codes, but even from a purely philosophical point of view it is obvious that property must satisfy 1. the ownership title (recognition), 2. exploitation in one way or another, 3. the possibility to give/sell to someone.
Digital assets fall under this, but I have questions about the newfangled NFT - how much ownership is it really? - Isn't it charlatanism as in the case of selling distant stars? - So nominally they register you as the owner - and what to do about it? - In fact, it's the sale of a ranking line or an entry in the registry - that is, not the object itself is sold, but the entry in a particular registry is bought, which is generally insignificant or just symbolic...
It's evenmore hilarious to read about the free market.
No one said anything about a completely free market, please reread it again.
So no one here said anything about a completely free market, reread again please.
Ridiculous.
Why bash in the open door. I wrote that there should be no equalisation .
It's very good that a few pages later you wrote that.
The whole question is that the minimum wage should be decent.
What do you mean decent? All countries have a minimum wage, you can live on it, it is not very rich, but you will not die of hunger, and then yourself ...
If you want to live a decent life, offer society something worthy.
Other people's wages must be multiplied by a certain coefficient, which each has his own.
Who said that this should be so? - can you give us a reason? - Why does it have to be true?
Only when the owner of the company takes the lion's share of the income, it is of course difficult to make the minimum wage decent.
Firstly it's not income but profit and secondly it's his profit, realise that at last.
I see that you have a point that you don't understand, I will try to explain: you own your body and you have the right to do anything that doesn't infringe on the rights of others, any product of your labour initially belongs to you and you are free to keep it or exchange it with others (sell it), you can also own some property (like a vegetable garden) and then any product using that property is your product, which again you are free to keep (eat the crop) or exchange it with others (sell it for fish).
An entrepreneur owns a business not because he fell from Mars to him, but because he invested = fully paid all costs to create / build assets (fixed assets, licenses, etc.) and made efforts to integrate everything so that it would work, I write this because some may not understand that by itself the purchased assets do not generate profits yet, it takes effort to come up with a product / service, calculate efficiency, find external funding (if needed) and so on.
When you come to work in a factory, you do not own the factory in any part of it, you did not invest in its creation, it is not owned by you or all the workers together, the factory is owned by those who invested in its construction - should that be clear?
Therefore, you do not have the right to claim the products created by the factory and the sales revenue and net profit, you are already receiving a salary.
And the owner owns the plant and rightfully owns also the products of the plant, which he sells and already from the proceeds covers all costs, including: materials, rent, royalties/contributions, general business expenses, commercial-administrative and FTE (employee wages), the remainder is called operating profit (EBIT or EBITDA in western finance practice, depending on the inclusion of depreciation and asset revaluation) taxes and interest on loans are paid out of operating profit, Net profit remains (I am writing very simplified, because there may be all sorts of interest income/expenses, deferred income/expenses/taxes) and now the net profit is the legal property of the owner (owners-partners or many), and if it is a joint stock company, the net profit will be distributed to shareholders as dividends by the Board - everything is clear here?
This legal practice exists in Russia and in other countries with slight differences (the differences mainly concern the methods of financial accounting and reporting) and there is nothing you can do about it.
Let me stress it again: the owners/shareholders are free to take any part of the profits for themselves.
Funny.
Very happy for you, I wish you profits 😁
The top of the housing and utilities sector have big salaries and also steal from them. They have offshore accounts and go to Maldives twice a year. So there's no money left for janitors.
If you think that there is stealing as part of a crime, write a complaint to the prosecutor's office, what is the problem? - Criminal offences are beyond the scope of our discourse, and it is not worth trying to shift the focus away from the economic essence.
What do you mean by decent? All countries have a minimum wage, you can live on it, not fat of course, but you won't starve to death, and then it's up to you...
Not fat is a relative concept.
Decent, to work not for food.
Someone will be lying motionless and a nurse will take out a duck. How much do we pay her? Would 10 packets of buckwheat be enough? She won't starve to death. She is not a neurosurgeon, he studied there and should have a high salary because he is a qualified specialist.
And if this worker and others do not want to take the poo for such a salary, what will we do? He will stay in the shithouse.
Not fat is a relative term.
Decent to work for something other than food.
Then what level would be considered decent? - Can we define it?
"Not for food" is a very broad definition - Bill Gates and the factory worker fall under it as well (because he has his own clothes of some kind).
So what counts as worthy? - Doesn't it always seem to be relative to others?
Now the average factory worker lives better than a medieval prince in terms of comfort - isn't that obvious?
But people can't get enough, they want more and more... 😁
Here's someone lying still and the nurse will be taking the duck out. How much do we pay her? Would 10 packets of buckwheat be enough? She won't starve to death, she's not a neurosurgeon or anything, he was trained, he should have a high salary because he's a trained professional.
All right, if she only knows how to carry a duck - there is no reason to pay her a high salary - let her study and be more useful to society - when she qualifies as a nurse, she will get more money.
And if that nurse and others do not want to carry the crap for such a salary, what will we do? She will stay in the shithouse.
It is a very low skilled job that does not require any special talents, there is no reason to pay high wages for it, think about it.