Capitalism at its worst

While I'm not familiar with that law or the details of the relationship, it would seem unlikely that these quarters were "rented" to the staff, but rather provided to them as a condition of employment. I would think that would be a very different situation. And while I am speculating without knowledge of details either way, I would doubt that the hotel is unfamiliar with the laws they are subject to, or that they arbitrarily made such a move without knowing the legal position they had.

For example where there are maid's quarters, the quarters are not the separate residence of the maid- the maid lives there with and at the pleasure of her employer. That space isn't rented by the maid, and she is not a "tenant". The living quarters are a fringe benefit of the job. If you lose your job, you lose your fringe benefits as well.

 

Whoa!!!!! And I like your choice of language!

 

Okay. The brain is a complex system, and some people are born without the capacity to empathyze with others. It's not their fault.

 

We must not become prisoners of abstractions.

Here's a scenario for you. You're flying from LA to NYC and your plane crashes in the desert in Utah. You're the sole survivor. Unfortunately, the plane's wreckage has landed in a deep gully and won't be spotted from the air. You'll have to walk out. (I think an A10 was flown into obscurity by a deranged pilot in this area a few years ago and never found. Maybe a flying saucer scooped it up, but I reckon it's somewhere in the mountains.)

You stagger along for three days, without water... and then... you spot my little cabin. You manage to crawl to the door ... and I appear. "Water, water ... " you croak. "Sure ... I've got plenty ... nice cold water....", I say. "How much is it worth to you?" "What?" you gasp. "I said, I've got water, and you can have some ... but what will you give me in exchange? Do you own a house, for example? Stocks and shares? A car?" "All of those things, yes, but please... water ... water".
"Okay," I say, "You'll have some." I return after a minute with a wonderful large glass of water, with beads of moisture on it, and little rivulets down the side where drops have formed and rolled down. And also a piece of paper, and a pen, plus a neighbor as a witness. You reach for the water... but I say, "Not so fast!! Here's a contract I have just drawn up. You turn over ownership to me of all your property .. .house, car, shares... and in return, I give you all the water you can drink. And I'll even throw in a bacon sandwich!"

Comment?

 

I believe this is right. The hotel management were entirely within the law in what they did. It may have been an "administrative" error (ie something that has enraged every decent person in Britain, from the Communist Party to the English Nazis and everyone in between), but it's not illegal.

 

I think you're missing some irony there, in my characterization of Communists. Other people have ... a side effect of the Chinese Communist virus?
I couldn't quite figure out the rest, probably because it's 2am here and my brain has decided to go on strike. I'll have a look tomorrow.

One point I can still make: "socialism" and "communism" are just words, without any inherent meaning. People give them meanings, often contradictory ones.
There is a huge difference, for example between actually-existing Nordic social democratic welfare states, and, say the actually-existing society of North Korea or Cuba. (And there is a huge difference between Cuba and North Korea, even though in both countries, the means of production are mainly owned by the state and the economy is 'planned'.)

And with respect to theoretical aspirations, few people who call themselves socialists today want a totalitarian system. They want market socialism, or cooperatives, or workers control, or some other nice-sounding thing, and many of them call themselves 'libertarian socialists'. It's not fair for my side to simply lump them in together with Mao and Stalin etc., just as it's not fair to lump us in with David Duke.

What is fair, however, is to assert that “In a country where the sole employer is the State, opposition means death by slow starvation. The old principle: who does not work shall not eat, has been replaced by a new one: who does not obey shall not eat.”

I'll leave it for the rare political butterfly collectors to identify the author of that quote.

 

I think you have just illustrated an extreme abstraction- trying to compare a scenario and it's sympathetic logic to something entirely different, and that has no relationship to losing a job and the fringe benefits. Those people did not become employees by force, nor were they victims of a crash. They would have applied for the positions and agreed to the terms- which would include them being entitled to terminate their employment at will (quit, leave) and entitled their employer to terminate their employment at will (fired, leave), UNLESS they had a contractural agreement that extended other right to either or both parties. I don't know it that was the case, but if so they need lawyers. The last rule that applies to this is one where we will use some kind of socialistic concept of justice to impose obligations never agreed to, because we think what was agreed to doesn't matter when it's inconvenient.

There are millions of people in the world that never provide themselves with a plan b, or a reserve of saved money to cover inconveniences- so small bumps in the road don't become a major crisis. There is always an excuse for this, and "I can't" because of something not their fault. There are other millions who have done just that, and their lives don't get blown off the road at every gust of wind, because they have thought ahead and prepared for a future- rather than expect someone else to do it for them. Everyone has left someone who relied on their support out of choice- you quit shopping at a grocery, because of any reason you choose. They lose the benefits of your patronage, and you don't apologize for that. If they fail to keep you happy- you leave them. If you fail to keep you employer happy- they leave you. It's business with equal rights to that on either side.

 

On this site, of maybe at most say 500 give or take 200 posts, that I've read to date, the points you've written in this thread are at the forefront of any that seem to match my political ideology.

Given that, I would suggest that nevertheless you seem to harbor sentiments of being a part of a team that, possibly, has so extremely abandoned your positions with respect to politics that it is no longer worthy of claiming to be any part of. Abandon them I say. Live free or Die. Gotta love New Hampshire for that. It should replace In God We Trust. Except, what is it to live free? Maybe it truly is only what keeps us in this world all alone??? Reference me that pop culture musical butterflies....

Its URL is politicalforum.com, so your assertion that socialism and communism are equivalent, per my previous post complaining they are not, and now asserting they are words without inherent meaning does not increase your credibility - which heretofore was quite high on my list and to be honest remains so. Don't equivocate - retract, which you've done here perhaps a bit, but not quite clearly or honestly by claiming I have poor reading comprehension. They are two separate and distinct philosophies - especially when socialism is prefixed by democratic socialism. In any event, your use of such language as evil and morally corrupt is seemingly to me based on simply your posts in this thread: absolutely out of context of everything else you've stated with reason, accuracy and a bit of humor.

To be familiar with such a quote is a far world different than to leave it to a rare political butterfly to find the source these days, https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1936/revbet/ch11.htm

An honor I consider it to have read your posts in this thread and to have attempted to challenge a couple of very minor complaints I've noticed - have a happy Friday Doug....

 

Ugh - I need a new monitor ffs. Anywho, as long as I'm giving out compliments I read a post of yours that was a bit inspirational aside from the egotistical elements that you seem to associate with the successes of your, what were they, eight businesses? All of which have presumably failed by now but left you with financial independence? Please tell me you at least have one of your endeavors that continues to provide employment opportunities and value added products or services or information.

Do you really choose to ignore the thought experiment? Ignore the limits of our current interpretation of "capitalist" ideals versus common humanity? Spiritguide is your chosen usr name here and you choose, at least in this thread, to maintain a capitalist owners perspective of the situation of which inspired Doug to create this thread? Ah, the Spirit - And What Should It Profit A Man That He Gain The World And Loose His Soul....

You've skipped over a previous question of mine, btw: is it staff or management responsibility to assure quality?

 

FFS - of what worth is it bandying about our thoughts here if we're not being completely honest? These daft users here that just want to throw feces at the wall - ffs, let's just put them all on Iggy eh?

xxx for example is on my iggy list - dude, chic or bot, never, or near next to ever posted more than 10 words of polarized bs, how it's account isn't banned is a mystery and a reason I'm not funding this site anytime soon.

 

If I were to respond to you the monitors would rightly stop the post. I do not understand why people think personal insults are effective debate tactics.

 

Thank you for the kind compliment! And congratulations on your quick discovery! Everyone should look at Marxists.org -- a goldmine of interesting reading.

And it's always a pleasure to meet someone who shares one's prejudices.

There are so many good people, Left and Right, on this forum -- intelligent, thoughtful ... . It's the best political debate forum I've come across in al ong time.. I think it's important to argue with skilled opponents, because it makes you better. Sometimes they're even right, and you can eliminate an unsound belief from your inventory. Usually they're not, of course, but they sharpen up your game.

It's like playing tennis -- if you only play against people who are much worse than you, you'll get lazy and your own game will deteriorate. Better to play against people who can beat you unless you really exert yourself and even then, it's usually a tie. With respect to online political debate, the main thing I've learned is -- always check your assertions. Yes, you read it in National Review last year ... 73% of charity-donors are conservatives [ATTENTION: I just made that up!] ... but before you go quoting it, you had better do some research, or a smart-aleck lib will come back and point out that the particular survey on which that fact was based, counted donations to missionary projects to convert the heathen as charity ... and that if you eliminate that component , then ... etc. ... so... source your assertions. Sometimes honored in the breach but always at one's peril, on a forum like this. (I use National Review as an example of a fairly reliable source ... but there are literally hundreds of reckless, careless, demagogic rightwing sites that just cater to the prejudices of their readers ... rightwing Al Sharptons, so to speak. They're the ones, if you sign up to them, you start getting ads for burning off belly fat and curing cancer by taking a miraculous vitamin, etc.)

There used to be a very good forum at an excellent site called LibraryThing.com -- a place for booklovers (the political debate forum is very incidental, and is moribund now anyway), and I'm happy to recommend it to the booklovers who post here -- and a forum on that site called ProAndCon collected a really high class of debater. It faded away, in part I think because of the human equivalent of that old Russian saying, "A spoonful of tar can spoil a barrel of honey."

Here's an example of the kind of debate we used to have there: https://www.librarything.com/topic/11208 (leftist readers here might like to carry it on, although I think it's just a curiousity - a case of a prominent liberal icon asserting that one particular racial/tribal group was genetically superior in intelligence to another, something that I had always believed was absolute Thoughtcrime for a Leftist to even admit the theoretical possibility of) ... and here is what it has been reduced to: https://www.librarything.com/topic/318096 .. .go down to post number 6 if you're in a hurry.

Anyway ...I'm on Final Approach, which no doubt influences my world-view, but ... I've come to the conclusion that it's very likely that the USA is going to undergo some profound political shifts, probably accompanied by great upheavals. I won't elaborate here on why I believe that. And I believe it's critically important for the conservative movement to change course. We can't just say, free trade, yay, let the unemployed 54 year old steel worker become a website designer; we can't just sit and watch the white working class follow the Blacks into Lumpenworld while saying "Well, it's their choice".

We've already made a profound, if unacknowledged shift on foreign policy: we got mugged by reality, OORAH!!! THESE COLORS DON'T RUN, etc etc. I remember it all. The ******ned liberals were right!!! Okay, we're not going to admit it. But I don't see many Republican leaders calling for more troops to new Muslim snakepits. Let's just give American passports to the Yazidis and Kurds and our interpreters and our soldiers' mistresses and be done with it. And tell the Germans to start building Panzers again, because we're tired of paying for their welfare state.

We need to make a similar shift on domestic policy, and hammer out what the proper conservative attitude to the uses of the state is, giving some tough-love reality to that old lib favorite, "Not a hand out, but a hand up."

Again: every conservative should read F H Buckley's THE REPUBLICAN WORKERS PARTY.

 

It's not a personal insult. It's an objective observation. You said you don't care if these pigs who threw their workers onto the street hear your voice opposing it, etc. You don't care. etc. Okay, you're some sort of Randian me-me-me type. No doubt thinking how very cool you are. So I'm replying in kind. If you want to argue that way, you'd better not have a thin skin.

Let me make it plain: people who are indifferent to the suffering of others, and even make a virtue of their indifference, are defective human beings. I don't 'debate' such people, as it's a waste of breath, for men to argue with beasts.

 

Another personal insult.

 

Well ...maybe I'm wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.
So, tell me: you read about people being thrown out on the street, losing their job with no notice ... read the links I posted if you haven't... and what's your response?

 

You will notice he did not reply..

 

Because there is a special group of posters here that constantly get away with it. Meanwhile if you dont dot an I you will get an infraction..

Enjoy.

 

OK....
The point of the listing experience is not ego, it is to say that I am speaking from long experience. IF you are going to look for something you can have confidence in, it usually pays to ask someone who can do what you seek to do- proven by past performance and experience. My opinion is not from passing thoughts or ideology, it's from having been and done and succeeded in doing what most people cannot. Yes, I realize many who have never been where they are going now think they already know what's there, so need no advice. That is their problem.

My first business failed after fast growth for 5 years. Reason- I knew the trade very well, but did not realize (at age 26) that management was a skill in it's own right that had little to do with trade skill or knowledge. The business grew beyond my ability to manage at the time, and went bankrupt. I went back into business within 6 months, walked into the same bank that had been financing me- took out a loan for the amount of the loss, endorsed the check to them, and began paying it back.

My second business was profitable, but I didn't like it, the emotional paycheck or feeling of reward I also need wasn't there- it was all paperwork and sales, I'm hands-on. So I wound up giving that to a brother. He's retired and it has been given to a son and is running strong. Both are multi-millionaires because of it. The others all worked too- some better than others, but the processes migrated and opened doors to better things, and took me to new enterprises. I now only operate one; it is the best of all in that I need few employees, have very low overhead and high margins- and clients all over the world. We develop specialty products- new ideas, inventions- and market them, mostly professional applications, not consumer goods. Never wanted to have a huge company, just a very successful one that I could enjoy running.

Now in the last year- I've gifted a number of things to people in need. Put on a new roof and bought a car for a widow who couldn't afford either, allowing her to keep her home. Just two weeks ago- bought a car for a man who is talented but jobless and broke, because what he had was a unreliable junker. Set up a grandson in his own home. Taught him how to find, negotiate, make good deals- so now he is in his own home with a 40% equity going in. I put up the cash because he couldn't qualify for a loan, and my trust carries the mortgage. Not any gifts, just wise choices. This is my way of giving back- and I will control what is done so that I know what I give away serves a good purpose rather than subsidize dependence. That is what capitalism does regularly- place the benefits it creates with a great deal more effectiveness than government can. Warren Buffet for example is leaving the bulk of his fortune to specific charities. So is Bill gates. A friend who was one of those who gave me great business guidance, Frank Barton, financed a new college of business in his will, and provided endowment to support it. Most of these people are very generous- but not stupid, they want the gifts they leave behind to do far more than subsidize the unmotivated of the world.

Capitalism allows the best performers to produce the wealth that produces the taxes that both funds the nations necessary processes as well as fund the welfare and social programs, while simultaneously allowing half the nation to pay no taxes at all. 10% ot the taxpayers pay 70% of the bills..... Yet those who tout socialistic ideals spit on those who pay the bills, declaring profit and success to be evil, somehow proof that they have been stolen from those who do nothing more than they have to to get by.

And it's not about profit in the first place- it's about the emotional experience of accomplishment, success in life. That automatically does produce profit- but profit does not produce the experience.
One of my businesses arose out of a success in the pursuit of the knowledge that allowed us to become a whole person, to develop genuine self esteem, self-confidence, empathy, the capacity to be more. That business was called "Lifeskills", and it's sole purpose was to share the secret of achieving that with anyone who wanted to learn. Sadly- things then (1979) were like they are now, and most people wanted to know how they could accomplish these things, but do so without change or effort... they wanted the easy button. I tired of people who desperately needed what I was willing to give them insisting that it wasn't possible- just too few people ready to change to make me feel my efforts were justifiable. This was free to public classes, paid for my classes for business. One of the people who did use the class to change her life called me her spiritguide. That has stuck ever since, shortened to spiritgide to fit constraints on email names at the time.

On this forum, and all my life since I put this in place, I've seen the same thing over and over. Can't be real, so I don't believe it. No need to try, the world doesn't want me to succeed. Somebody elses fault, The government should make it easier to live. The rich people are stealing everything. Society owes me. Yet, the understanding of how to make the most of yourself is about 1" away, right behind the brick wall people build to avoid personal responsibility. Did my Lifeskills business fail? Failed to meet it's objective of giving life-changing secrets to large numbers of people. Not for lack of trying- but for lack of people's ability to accept and use it. I'd give up everything I ever owned if I could find a way to solve that problem. Nothing anybody could give you would be worth more that what can be achieved with the knowledge I was willing to give away free. There are many people in the world who do understand this knowledge; perhaps in different words, but the same concept. Most of them are very successful, because of it. Some take it for granted, lucky enough to have parents and environment that kept it in sight as they grew up. Sadly that is rare, and sadly- once a mind is filled with flawed concepts, it's very hard to re-program- and that is precisely what I sought to teach people to do. IF you understand and live by these principles, you do have an advantage over most people. Not an unfair one, because the same option is available to all of us.

I have a old quote that I found very appropriate.
"When the student is ready- the teacher will appear". What that means is that the truth, the teacher, is all around us all the time. WHEN you develop the ability to see past the limitations of your mindset, you realize it always has been, and your entire world changes from that moment on.

Now you can think whatever you want, of course. But the human race is in reality a pitiful example of success. We lie, cheat, steal, fight, squabble, kill, drug ourselves, trash the planet and consume all the natural resources, apply laws and governments and endless rules trying regulate ourselves- and still can't get the job done. That is because the power to do that in individual- I am the only person who can regulate me, you the only person who can regulate you. Man made laws can't change that.

Every other species on the face of the planet knows how to thrive with nothing more than nature gave it. No laws other than what natures decrees, and they all understand them. Those same laws DO apply to humans, but we are so damn smart we think we are the only thing making rules. That is the difference- the reason we are the only living thing that lacks the ability to understand what makes us tick. That, sir, is the essence of what I taught. It is the essence of what I live by, and the essence of both my success and happiness in life. It's only three rules, I can write them on the back of a business card. The teaching task is to get past all the garbage that most people have had their minds stuffed with since birth, which has buried the gift that we, like all other living things, have been given.


Now to your question of who is responsible for quality- staff or management.

Management is responsible for setting quality and performance standards and being sure those standards are being met by staff.
Staff is responsible for supporting those standards as have been set.
Management is responsible for dismissing staff who cannot or will not support the standards.
Staff is responsible for maintaining their own self-esteem and pride in their work, and leaving an employ that does not allow them to do so.

A good relationship requires a sort of partnership towards the objectives.
Supporting that requires that people are paid what they are worth- and that they are worth what they are paid.

I feel that in most cases where someone if fired, it is proper- because one of two situations exist.

The first- you were not doing your job, and deserved to be fired. That action can be the motivation to do better in the next job, and you grow.
The second- The company does not see or appreciate your value- there is no future for you there anyway, and the sooner you move on, the better, because someone else will see that value.

It may not happen at a convenient time, but one of those two conditions generally apply, and can have beneficial effects.
Answer your question?

 

So .. I think your implied answer is: I -- the person selling the water to the man dying of thirst, in exchange for all his property -- am wrong. You didn't act like that as an employer -- that is, you were NOT guided in your life by an immediate calculation of material self-interest. You say,

I believe you, because this matches my experience with about 90% of the financially successful people I have met. You should have been running the Britannia Hotel chain, not the selfish (and incompetent) bunch of swine who now do.

And I hope the market will punish them. They are part of the 10% who give capitalism a bad name, who the Left seize upon to stigmatize all the others.
But that 10% definitely exist, and I have met them as well, including people very high up in the system. We need not apologize for them, and in fact should call them out whenever we can, stigmatize them, make their selfish lives a misery.

All our sympathies should be with ordinary people who work hard and try to do their best. Life is not fair ... all the good qualities of intelligence, emotional control, good looks, strength, health, are distributed in a normal curve. Some people get unlucky on all of these. So long as they try to make the best of things, we ought to support them however we can, and not say, "Hey, it's a free market! Tough luck!"

The problem is, American conservatism has been captured by people who are really economic libertarians, not conservatives.

The libertarians have one big truth, a very important one, and we should never forget it. They really really understand the dangers of the state -- with its monopoly of force and claim to our allegiance as the guarantor of our security. BUT this Big Truth is not the only truth, and when they then conclude that we should auction off the National Parks -- I'm not kidding, they really believe this -- you can see that something has gone wrong. It's like those trick algebra 'proofs' where you end up showing that 1 = 2. Somewhere you've made a mistake -- or you've done something that normally you can do, but in this case you cannot. (usually, you've inadvertently divided by zero).

 

The typical result of running a business with abusive values is that the business fails. Not necessarily this year or next, but over time it seems pretty consistent.
Anytime you abuse your staff, you insure that you will not retain good people- because they know they don't have to allow that to keep a job. Customers the same way; poor service or unacceptable conditions or practices ultimately result in your competition taking your business.. and most likely, your best help.

Whenever such entities survive- it is the customers and employees that permit it. We do have a choice of where we will spend our money, who we will hire, what price or wage we will accept, what conditions we will tolerate. Strong people know that, and don't sell themselves out. Weak people think they have no choice... so they settle for it. The stronger people become as individuals, the stronger our society becomes, the better it performs. The weaker people become, the more the opposite is true. Because I have learned to read people's character very quickly, I rarely find myself doing business with unscrupulous people. If I do- I resolve that quickly and firmly. How good or bad government is, what it allows, directly reflects what we as people want and are willing to tolerate. In other words- government is the reflection of us; If we were to improve us- government would improve in kind. The danger of the state IS the danger of who we are, what we will tolerate. Inseparable truth.

 

It is tragic. How do I know? It has happened to me a few times. I wish I could fix it.

 

Well, then, what should the federal government do in this time of crisis?

That's how Apple, Microsoft, and Facebook got started.

Ho hum.

I bet you will.

If your brand of capitalism works so well, why are there so many poor people in this country and a much lower poverty rate in countries like Denmark?

They don't pay income taxes, but they pay, directly or indirectly, a lot of other taxes--property taxes, sales taxes, tariffs, and on and on.

Trumper drivel. This is what's happened to workers over the past four decades...



Real wages have increased just 7.5% for full-time workers in 41 years.



Are all these people lazy and needing your advice and guidance? Why isn't the capitalist system "delivering" for them?

I can just see you holding forth to a line of unemployed Americans.

So.... what should the government do at this time to help unemployed Americans and businesses shuttered to help fight COVID-19? Don't spare us your wisdom.

 

The unintended consequence of putting our workforce in competition with cheaper ones in other countries. Are you a fan of globalism?

 

Well, then, I don't really understand your response to my post.
I'm trying to get the people at Britannia Hotels to change the way they treat their staff. I'm not appealing to their consciences, because they clearly have none, but to their self-interest. if enough people bombard them with angry emails, they might just change their behavior ... and maybe rehire the poor devils they threw out on the street. But I think you were dismissive of this. If not, great.

 

You don't understand that I don't care about the Britannia Hotels? Here it is. I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE BRITANNIA HOTELS