Obviously there's a difference between crying girls and men who take care of things.
Of course... men get better paid jobs than women... and a man just gets better pay than everyone else doing the same job... NOT.
The problem with complainers who blame others for their lack of ability is that they want to tax the overachievers.
The problem with people who support full balls capitalism ignore a few fundamental problems... especially regarding corruption.
If everyone has small businesses then there would not be so much of a problem, but if you get a business that expands to other areas and becomes a chain it gets an advantage of purchasing and advertising. Which of course should help to make it become even more successful... which means more money and more power. If Fred Smith from the corner store tells the local MP the trading hours laws need to be changed so he can open later, the MP might think about it perhaps, but most wont do more work than they need to so ignoring the request is easier than actually doing anything about it. Tim Apple from the Apple company that is world wide and employs millions of people and is worth more than many countries buys the people around the PM and says... would be much better if we could open longer... and guess what... a little hundred thousand dollar donation and guess what.
Worse than that, when a government is planning new laws they don't talk to corner shop guys, they talk to the major companies for expertise... do you think those laws will be fair and balanced.
So basically big companies make laws and don't pay tax because they spend large amounts of money on accountants so they don't have to pay tax for whatever loophole reason.
All their assets are in Ireland because they get enormous tax breaks for doing so... but the instant there was a problem they left there pretty quick and abandoned Ireland when it could have used some help... but big business is not about being nice or doing the right thing... it is about making as much money as possible.
The structure of most companies means most employees earn the minimum the law says they have to be paid, while the managers get a little more, but not always that much more. Last time I worked in retail the managers were on salaries so if they had to come in on their day off they didn't get paid for those extra hours... if someone is sick they might end up earning less than minimum wage... it is the CEOs and owners of the company that make the big money... the only other structure like that would be a pyramid scheme... but that is illegal.
The irony is that it was not actually worth being a manager because if you could get enough hours to actually match what they had to do some times you could earn as much or more than what they earned.
Capitalism is broken... the rich have too much say and too much power, and they tend to direct any attempts at regulation in their industry area which normally just makes things worse.
There's no reason for someone to stay in a country with free healthcare and universities, if taxes steal half of his salary.
I would rather pay half my income on tax and have free healthcare and education, than pay nothing and have to pay for healthcare and education... in this day an age you have to be able to change job areas at least 4-5 times, which means student loans and eventually your body will slow down and need the health system for assistance... look at the corrupt system in the US... the best healthcare system in the world... that three quarters of the population can't afford... but it is OK because the people on minimum wage are not paying a few cents in the dollar extra for healthcare...
That system of course sounds very nice to the life-is-hard socialists who don't feel like studying and working hard and just want the state to pay their bills.
Well when the rich control the government what do you get... the American system... and they bribe both parties so you can't change anything with a vote.
The super rich like it the way it is... they can afford private healthcare and private schooling... why should they care about any other fellow Americans... they are poor because they are stupid and lazy right?
Socialism on the other hand fails when it comes to efficiency. Why would you try hard and innovate to produce efficiently if your salary remains the same in any case. Some market is required to let the inefficient guys go bankrupt and let larger market share to cheap producers.
This is a Gem... capitalism means 30 different brands of toothpaste all promising to be 20% better than the other brands... so 29 of them must be lying. Some areas don't need to be "efficient".
Not everyone needs a university degree, yet that is the focus of most education systems... to prepare you for further study... but the majority of jobs don't require tertiary education levels... most trades you need apprenticeships... but here big companies stopped those because it was cheaper to hire already skilled workers... except over time those skilled workers got hired or started working for themselves and there were no applicants who could do the work.
At the heart of it... socialism means we are in this together and we are working together to make a better place to live... company picnics, companies paying tuition for the children of their workers, and helping them with housing, instead of paying everything to the mostly foreign investors that "own" the company.
In New Zealand the electrical power grid and the telecommunications network was all government owned and controlled, but money got a bit tight so they decided to make a bit of money by privatising both and a few other things too. The telecommunications and electrical system were MAKING MONEY, they were bloated and had lots of well paid government employees, but everything worked and all the equipment was maintained properly. They sold both... the telecommunications network was sold to a Canadian company for a ridiculously low price... the first thing they did was fire the entire staff and then hired back 1/3rd of the best, which probably saved them a lot of money, and about two years after the sale their yearly profit was more than what they paid to buy Telecom... the problem is that they were Canadian... they didn't give a shit about outlying regions, which suffered. Even in busy areas the lack of staff meant there were delays for getting anything done and it was usually rushed and half arsed. They eventually sold to someone else, but the promise of cheaper phone and communications never happened... the prices went up, just like the company profits... but the change in the company was fundamental... previously thousands of people had paid employment and got good wages, even if a lot of the time they weren't working very hard, and the government had a country with stable communications everywhere that was practical. After privatisation most of the people fired changed jobs... lots of cowboys ripped off a lot of old people, but the industry was made much worse.
I decided a couple of years ago to get fast internet... it took over a year to get it put in...
The story about the electrical power grid is much much worse... why should the government not control critical infrastructure?
Auckland is out biggest city... 2 million of four million NZrs live there and it had 6 main power lines going in to the city. Christchurch is a much much smaller city... smaller after the earthquakes and also has 6 main power lines going in to the city... they were put there by the government. A few years back there were electricity cuts because only two of the main power lines in to Auckland are working and they can't turn off either to do maintenance that needs to be done to keep it going... but they are making a nice profit that is going over seas to the owners...
Some market is required to let the inefficient guys go bankrupt and let larger market share to cheap producers.
Inefficient guys go bankrupt anyway, the problem is that when successful guys go bankrupt because they can't compete with the big chain stores that can artificially reduce prices in one area for a few years to kill off the competition and then when it is either gone or they bought them out the prices go back up again and they can make a good profit out of those people who no longer have a choice.
A free market economy is like the trickle down effect... rich people are good because they have to spend their money so the whole community benefits and everybody gets money... except that is bullshit... the guy is rich because he owns all the shops and major money making companies, so more often than not it is the poor people buying stuff from his shops and making him more rich... rich people are not rich because they are generous... they only make donations so they can claim that money back in tax, and even then it is more likely a dirty offshore company that is losing money that allows them to not pay any tax at all.