I recognize that there are other valuable factors of production. The provider of land can be compensated via rent; the providers of capital can be compensated via interest or dividends. The provider of managerial skills and social capital is compensated via a higher salary.
I dispute the assertion that managerial skill and social capital is worth 50 times the value of labor.
I dispute the assertion that executive pay is decided in a free market; the ecology of shareholders and executives more closely resembles a feudal oligarchy. At the very least the executive market is an entirely different market than the labor market, and I assert that it should not be so different.
Do you think the CEOs of today are 10x more effective than they were in the 60s? Why do you suppose that executive compensation, and in particular the ratio of compensation between executives and labor, has raised so drastically?
Yes the brain consumes 20 percent of calories at resting metabolic rate -- i.e. when nobody else is doing anything. The percentage goes way down when work is being done. For animals with smaller cortices than humans, the percentage is lower still. The important part of my analogy is that when the fingers are falling off you'd better find some more calories or redistribute the ones you have, or you will soon go under or offshore in a last ditch attempt to sew some more fingers on.
This is despite the fact that you will have to pay the maintenance and replacement costs of the lawnmowers from your own pocket.
Not exactly from my own pocket; it comes out of the profits of the company. This operating cost comes out before the $5 per yard.
You... have no savings to boot from because of the 12:1 rules
Maybe the company would have some savings if I had planned a little better, or if I hadn't been so greedy taking $700 an hour for... doing what exactly? Owning 140 lawnmowers?
Do CEOs labor 50 or even 12 times harder than janitors?
in the end, it is telling companies they cannot pay someone over a certain amount
No, in the end it is telling companies that they must pay all employees closer to the average amount. Companies may freely choose to raise the average instead of limiting the top outliers.
Companies succeed or fail as an organism and rely on the performance of every part.
Your philosophy is like saying the brain deserves 50 times more calories than the hands because it's smart enough to negotiate a better salary from the stomach. And that this continues to be morally correct even when the fingers are starving and falling off.
What is the discounted marginal value product that a CEO brings to a company?
I have seen no evidence that the salary of the CEO has any correlation with the success of a company. Nor have I seen evidence that past success is any better than random chance as a predictive indicator of future success by a CEO.
The ecology of CEOs and shareholders has more in common with feudal oligarchy than it does with free market economics.
Most atmospheric radiation goes right through your body. The rest is generally absorbed evenly throughout your body mass. The airport scanners concentrate ALL their emissions on the surface of your body, no more than a few millimeters deep.
These scanners probably are safer than people think, but according to those same current models of radiation-cancer association, more people WILL develop cancer and die from being exposed than if the scanners were not used. The question must be: does this increased risk justify the reward? Are we saving lives by preventing terrorist attacks? How many?
Exactly two things have made air travel safer since 2001: reinforced cockpit doors and passenger awareness. EVERY other airport or airplane security scheme serves not to make us actually safer, but to make people who don't know any better FEEL safer. If a terrorist gets to the airport with a plan and means to blow up a plane, our security efforts have already failed.
If we heard that a United States General had been captured, crucified, and fed to rats, would that soothe the average American or aggravate him? Would he be more or less likely to support violent retribution or volunteer to fight?
Trumpeting a triumph in victory against our foes is all well and good, but purposeful desecration of the body? We're better than that. A slap in the face against deeply conditioned religious beliefs? I would hope we're smarter than that.
To be fair, Steam was released on Mac last May. Nearly 5% of the user base in 7 months isn't too shabby, especially when you consider how few of the games on Steam are available for Mac. Steam was first released for Windows in 2002.
Not that this invalidates your points about performance.
"The people" are, on the whole, intellectually unfit to govern themselves.
Anything, on the whole, is pretty much only capable of governing itself. From the perspective of any arbitrary constituent part, the whole is unfit to govern that part. From the perspective of the whole, its constituent parts generally fail to enter into consideration at all. Think of your body, a harmonious collection of trillions of cells perfectly capable of perpetuating its existence for decades. Yet every day billions of your cells die violently from radiation, poison, attack by invaders, or mandated apoptosis. The human species, the class of all human bodies, hums along for millennia. Yet every day thousands die of starvation, disease, warfare, and chromosomal degeneration
Now I realize that you probably didn't mean "the people" as a whole when you referred to people "on the whole". Given "themselves" I rather think you meant people' as a collection of individuals, rather than as an aggregate entity like your body or "the government". I find that any given person is, in general, perfectly fit intellectually to govern himself. Just as your body is predisposed to physically perpetuate itself, and genetically predisposed to perpetuating the species, as long as possible. But on the other hand, I have also found that very few people are intellectually fit to govern anyone else. I agree with the rest of your post.
Solidity isn't a measure of molecular or atomic density, of how much of an object's actual volume is 'matter' as opposed to empty space. It's a measure of the arrangement of those molecules and their resistance to change in that arrangement.
Solidity could be thought of as a resistive force being provided as an aggregate of the energy bonds between atoms & the arrangement of and repulsive force between adjacent molecules. In particular therefore, measurement of solidity is dependent on the size and force of the measurement device.
This table in front of me is solid relative to my hand as I push on it. It's not solid relative to an object small enough to slip between the wood grain, such as perhaps a gamma ray photon. It's also not solid relative to an ax or sledge swung at high velocity, at least not at the time and location of impact.
Myths ought not be interpreted as literal depictions of historical events, but as frameworks for us to work within when dealing with events in our own lives. It doesn't matter if God shaped the world from the darkness on the deep in seven days, or sneezed man into life from snot, or breathes the Brahmanic big bang on the exhale and the corresponding crunch on the inhale. These stories allow us to live our lives with meaning rather than cold facts and fear of the dark.
Barbaric acts arise from a thirst for power and a fear of the different. If those followers didn't have religion as an excuse for their acts, they would have found another excuse. Don't blame religion for those acts any more than you would blame the science of genetics for a eugenic massacre.
The sale hole is very easily plugged: require all patent transfers to be registered, and another tiered fee paid by the buyer. No refunds on the original fee. In other words, the fee is charged every time a patent changes ownership, including the first time when it previously had no owner.
What? 03014159? The digit 0 does not appear in pi until the 32nd position after the decimal point. Surely you're not trying to equate 0 with a decimal point?
Please just let go of this archaic month/day/year standard. Obviously it's not even used consistently - 03/01 vs. January 3? If the month should come first when spelled out, how can one with clear conscience insist that it come second when in numeric form?
Really, why deny any day its connection to pi? Find any reason at all to equate any date with pi and eat pie as often as you can, because pie is good.
Have we learned nothing? Though since you switched units once in each direction the math is still correct.
I probably spend less than $200 directly on TP per year. But I probably use more than $730 worth, most of that provided gratis and its cost hidden to me. Your point stands.
Slashdot Mirror
I recognize that there are other valuable factors of production. The provider of land can be compensated via rent; the providers of capital can be compensated via interest or dividends. The provider of managerial skills and social capital is compensated via a higher salary.
I dispute the assertion that managerial skill and social capital is worth 50 times the value of labor.
I dispute the assertion that executive pay is decided in a free market; the ecology of shareholders and executives more closely resembles a feudal oligarchy. At the very least the executive market is an entirely different market than the labor market, and I assert that it should not be so different.
Do you think the CEOs of today are 10x more effective than they were in the 60s? Why do you suppose that executive compensation, and in particular the ratio of compensation between executives and labor, has raised so drastically?
Yes the brain consumes 20 percent of calories at resting metabolic rate -- i.e. when nobody else is doing anything. The percentage goes way down when work is being done. For animals with smaller cortices than humans, the percentage is lower still. The important part of my analogy is that when the fingers are falling off you'd better find some more calories or redistribute the ones you have, or you will soon go under or offshore in a last ditch attempt to sew some more fingers on.
Not exactly from my own pocket; it comes out of the profits of the company. This operating cost comes out before the $5 per yard.
Maybe the company would have some savings if I had planned a little better, or if I hadn't been so greedy taking $700 an hour for... doing what exactly? Owning 140 lawnmowers?
Do CEOs labor 50 or even 12 times harder than janitors?
No, in the end it is telling companies that they must pay all employees closer to the average amount. Companies may freely choose to raise the average instead of limiting the top outliers.
Companies succeed or fail as an organism and rely on the performance of every part.
Your philosophy is like saying the brain deserves 50 times more calories than the hands because it's smart enough to negotiate a better salary from the stomach. And that this continues to be morally correct even when the fingers are starving and falling off.
Remind me, who is it that decides what the law says?
You are asserting that "more utilitarian" == "better". Did you intend to do so?
What is the discounted marginal value product that a CEO brings to a company?
I have seen no evidence that the salary of the CEO has any correlation with the success of a company. Nor have I seen evidence that past success is any better than random chance as a predictive indicator of future success by a CEO.
The ecology of CEOs and shareholders has more in common with feudal oligarchy than it does with free market economics.
Probably Entry of the Gladiators
Absolutely. So why is the DOJ involved?
Sure he could buy one, but the higher ups won't let him wear it at work.
Most atmospheric radiation goes right through your body. The rest is generally absorbed evenly throughout your body mass. The airport scanners concentrate ALL their emissions on the surface of your body, no more than a few millimeters deep.
These scanners probably are safer than people think, but according to those same current models of radiation-cancer association, more people WILL develop cancer and die from being exposed than if the scanners were not used. The question must be: does this increased risk justify the reward? Are we saving lives by preventing terrorist attacks? How many?
Exactly two things have made air travel safer since 2001: reinforced cockpit doors and passenger awareness. EVERY other airport or airplane security scheme serves not to make us actually safer, but to make people who don't know any better FEEL safer. If a terrorist gets to the airport with a plan and means to blow up a plane, our security efforts have already failed.
Esc, the Windows key, or any arrow key will get you out of the search box.
If we heard that a United States General had been captured, crucified, and fed to rats, would that soothe the average American or aggravate him? Would he be more or less likely to support violent retribution or volunteer to fight?
Trumpeting a triumph in victory against our foes is all well and good, but purposeful desecration of the body? We're better than that. A slap in the face against deeply conditioned religious beliefs? I would hope we're smarter than that.
Try a software keyboard with Swype. It's downright miraculous.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/32009/All_New_Game_Engine_For_Next_Elder_Scrolls.php
To be fair, Steam was released on Mac last May. Nearly 5% of the user base in 7 months isn't too shabby, especially when you consider how few of the games on Steam are available for Mac. Steam was first released for Windows in 2002.
Not that this invalidates your points about performance.
Except that those fuels are already being recycled into soil, then grass, then more cattle.
"The people" are, on the whole, intellectually unfit to govern themselves.
Anything, on the whole, is pretty much only capable of governing itself. From the perspective of any arbitrary constituent part, the whole is unfit to govern that part. From the perspective of the whole, its constituent parts generally fail to enter into consideration at all. Think of your body, a harmonious collection of trillions of cells perfectly capable of perpetuating its existence for decades. Yet every day billions of your cells die violently from radiation, poison, attack by invaders, or mandated apoptosis. The human species, the class of all human bodies, hums along for millennia. Yet every day thousands die of starvation, disease, warfare, and chromosomal degeneration
Now I realize that you probably didn't mean "the people" as a whole when you referred to people "on the whole". Given "themselves" I rather think you meant people' as a collection of individuals, rather than as an aggregate entity like your body or "the government". I find that any given person is, in general, perfectly fit intellectually to govern himself. Just as your body is predisposed to physically perpetuate itself, and genetically predisposed to perpetuating the species, as long as possible. But on the other hand, I have also found that very few people are intellectually fit to govern anyone else. I agree with the rest of your post.
Solidity isn't a measure of molecular or atomic density, of how much of an object's actual volume is 'matter' as opposed to empty space. It's a measure of the arrangement of those molecules and their resistance to change in that arrangement.
Solidity could be thought of as a resistive force being provided as an aggregate of the energy bonds between atoms & the arrangement of and repulsive force between adjacent molecules. In particular therefore, measurement of solidity is dependent on the size and force of the measurement device.
This table in front of me is solid relative to my hand as I push on it. It's not solid relative to an object small enough to slip between the wood grain, such as perhaps a gamma ray photon. It's also not solid relative to an ax or sledge swung at high velocity, at least not at the time and location of impact.
Fairy tales are more than true. ~Chesterton
Myths ought not be interpreted as literal depictions of historical events, but as frameworks for us to work within when dealing with events in our own lives. It doesn't matter if God shaped the world from the darkness on the deep in seven days, or sneezed man into life from snot, or breathes the Brahmanic big bang on the exhale and the corresponding crunch on the inhale. These stories allow us to live our lives with meaning rather than cold facts and fear of the dark.
Barbaric acts arise from a thirst for power and a fear of the different. If those followers didn't have religion as an excuse for their acts, they would have found another excuse. Don't blame religion for those acts any more than you would blame the science of genetics for a eugenic massacre.
The sale hole is very easily plugged: require all patent transfers to be registered, and another tiered fee paid by the buyer. No refunds on the original fee. In other words, the fee is charged every time a patent changes ownership, including the first time when it previously had no owner.
Sure, during the day. At night only sleeping.
What? 03014159? The digit 0 does not appear in pi until the 32nd position after the decimal point. Surely you're not trying to equate 0 with a decimal point?
Please just let go of this archaic month/day/year standard. Obviously it's not even used consistently - 03/01 vs. January 3? If the month should come first when spelled out, how can one with clear conscience insist that it come second when in numeric form?
Really, why deny any day its connection to pi? Find any reason at all to equate any date with pi and eat pie as often as you can, because pie is good.
Grow food on your balcony.
$0.02 != 0.02 cents
Have we learned nothing? Though since you switched units once in each direction the math is still correct.
I probably spend less than $200 directly on TP per year. But I probably use more than $730 worth, most of that provided gratis and its cost hidden to me. Your point stands.