Social Unrest?

well no system is perfect i can tell you about the system in place when slovenija was still in yugoslaviathe system was a mix of communisem and free trade basysicly a combo of the former ussr and the us.the good stuff
very hard to get ritch and very hard to be poor
payments 1:6, if the cleaning lady had a wage of 10$ per hour the boss had 60$
factories belonged to the workers
health care was in the top 10 of the world
anyone who wanted to work could get a job
anyone who worked could build/buy a house and pay it of relatively quick
you could study whatever you wanted to and get a job later in that field
virtualy no homeless peoplethe bad
some rights where limited
no motivation to work hard
do to it being a relatively closed economy shortages of some imports where common like coffe and oil
free travel to other countries was allowed tough buying there was limited, one could buy a limmited value of goods in a forighn country and bring them back.why it fell apartwell for starters it was composed of 6 nations that do not like each other slovenians, croatian, serbians, bosinans, macedonians, albaniansand it had 3 mayor religions that fought for power, muslims, chatolics, protestants.and the fact that we imported more than we exported ment we where running out of money.

well people do not have enough money to buy their stuff so they haveto make the stuff cheaper by fireing people or cutting wages. Their products get cheaper, cause less money is needed to make them and more can buy it. There is only one tiny problem in all of this the less people are payed the less they can buy. But in typical human fassion no company is looking at that problem all they want is a quick fix so they can start earning big bucks again. Edited by frako, : No reason given.

well no it does not cost you more, by paying your kid you invest in him. You teach him the value of money. And he will probably not ask you for more money very soon.would you given only 2 possible options pay a mexican 70$ to mow your lawn, or 100$ to an american. these are the only 2 options and you do not know anyone of them personaly.

and the same problem lies evrywhere in the world, we import bosinans and serbs. The chinese started to import africans lol. All for profit and greed if there is a cheper option every one will go for the cheper option.bare in mind that cutting import of foreign labure would be disasterus for any country not because no one would do their jobs but because no one would do it for the money that they do it. Say slovenia kicks out every foreign laburer the prices for, road construction and maintainence skyrocket, the price for sewer maintainence skyrocket, the prices of everything that has to do whit foreign labure goes up and you have to pay for it. be it in bigger taxsation, or larger prices at the mall.

The rich are too rich and the pore are too pore. well a no money world would fix the problem how to implement it is a nother problem.what i mean by no money world is that you get what you deserve. your basic, and luxsury goods would be calculated depending on the typ of work you do and what risks and gains are involved in it. Edited by frako, : No reason given.Edited by frako, : No reason given.

Well there is a problem whit money that can never be fixed if you have enough you or your children never have to work again so you are no longer a productive member of society and you still profit form society's goods.say you invested in microsoft back in the 80, you do not have to do anything any more and live of the work of others because you have tones of money.If money did not exsist drug lords could not exsist, they do nothing but force others to grow their drugs and sell it for them and they have mansions, and anything they want. While a poor child in africa works for 16 hours to get a bite to eat.if you would get your goods depending on what you do and the risk and gains involved in your work the drug lord would be sweeping floors gettin only basic gods and a few luxury goods a year and the poor kid in africa would not be so poor cause digging for diamonds is dangerus work and his work conditions are dangerus so he would get more basic goods and more luxury goods. And importing a mexican to do his job would make no difference to the employer cause he would get payed the same amount of goods.the problem is the whole world would haveto abandon money, and impliment the same laws of goods distribution. Edited by frako, : No reason given.

the market does, supply and demand, or in some cases you can if you have enough money mostly in stocks though.

do to the system in place deflation is bad for the economy thouhg good for the people in short term.Why?your wages stay the same for the period that your country has to sync inflation/deflation whit your wage, in my case one month. So your employer is selling things for less money and pays you the same wage every month this is good for you cause you can buy more stuff bad for him cause he is loosing money in short term it is no biggy and relatvly good for workers if the deflation continues your employer makes no profit he goes bankrupt and you get no money every month.inflation works backwards he pays you less and gets more money from what he sells.

it is impossible to fix the people sad but true greed is what drives us and if the system alowes us to abuse it we will abuse it for our own personal gain. The fix will haveto come from a system that cannot be abused for personal gain. cause it has a relative monopoly, not that there are not any other os out there there are not many that work whit everything like microsoft does, and few come as a standard on your pc.

simple lots would get better whit 2 laws.that the wages of the owner or maneger of any company cannot surpass the wage of the least payed worker by 10 times.and that a portion of the exses profits the ones usualy payed to the owner/s has to be payed to the workers.say a company has a pure profit of 100 000 $some or all of it can be invested in the company for more profit but if some of the profit gets "payed out" to the owners say 30 000$ the rest gets invested then say a portion say 15% of that gets payed to the workers employed that year proportional to the time they are employed there and their wagesthese simple 2 laws would do tones to strop the gap between the ritch and the poor from getting larger and raising the standrard of living every where.small note currently 90% (could be more) of money is in the hands of 5% (could be less) of the people

that what is happening now, this law would allowe for all the workers to be payed a reasnoble wage, and they would get rewarded if their work helped the company make profit. well i should know how little i do to keep my company running and i know how much more my workers do. still i can set my wage as hig as i like and set them to minimal wage if they dont like it i get others to do the work. And thanx to their hard work i can take as much profit out of the company i like they dont see s*/*/ of it. and still they are the ones doing moste of the work all i do is tell them wat to do and arrange a few deals whit others like me. So setting a limit to my wage based on the wage i pay my workers would make their wages more representative to their work cause i like my high wage i would haveto find a ballance betwean my wage and the lowest wage and the profit of the company. since i am also the owner i could set my wage to a minimal wage and live of the profits of the company but do to the second law i could not screw over my workers like that they would get a portion of the profits too. And importing labure would not help cause i would haveto pay them the same wage if i want to keep my high wage. you think your wage is representative of your output in your workplace dont make me laugh a true representative of your output could be calculated based on the profit of the company and the work you do but no one would want to own a company like that where the workers are payed more than the manegers.my 2 laws would bring the gap closer than it is there would still be ritch people and poor people only less of them. there would be more of high middle class and low middle class people. the maid would not have to worry what she will eat tomorow, and i would not buy a new car every year.

Who says the owner does anything ensuring the companies success as i said i tell my workers what to do in the morining make a few phone calls and then i go watch tv and surf the net. If i did not own the company i would get fired preaty quick the workers could do their jobs on their own and the phone calls could be made by the secretary. But i do own the company so tough luck for the workers.So if the owner would feel over worked he could do the same, hire others to do his job for him and still get paied. And the others would get paied somwhere close to what they should get paied some more some less but better than what we have now where every one but the ones on top get payed more than they should and everyone else gets payed less. The worker compared to the boss well no, in moste cases the worker should be payed more than the one in charge or the owner, but that would never work there is not enough magic in the world to make that work. Though my model would get us reasnobly close to how it should be. if you payed based on work the maid would get more than the boss in moste cases. It would be paying based on profit and the boss. Slacking off would now not be tolarated neither by the boss or the workers cause less done meens less money for all of them. Now slacking off is not tolerated only by the boss. no and nothing can, though it comes closer to the way it should be. as said if it would be fair i would be jobless and my workers would split my wage, i would only charge them rent of machinery and place. And that would not work cause one hasto be in charge even if he does not own the place or machinery.

nope they are morrons if i tell them to crush rocks so long that water comes out they will do it lol , and if i specificly do not tell them to use a hammer they will use their fists. well cause no one would want to be the boss if a maid ernd more money, and a maid does more than dust your keybord her work lets your work go one uninterupted. well the real value of money is the paper it is printed on, (a few cents for paper and a bit more for coins), our faight in money assighns it value. To maintain the value you would haveto "lock" it to something gold, eggs, ciggarets anything.well in my moddel if inflation gets to high the boss will want a bigger pay the nominal profit is bigger and so the workers get payd "more" evan though the value of the money they get is roughly the same as before. relative to both and profit too. say a maid gets 1000$ per month so the boss gets 10 000$, the secretary will want more than the maid but will haveto settle for less than the boss the law would haveto incorporate education and workplace too for the other workers. though they are curently not the problem of our society cause they are alredy in the middle class.it has to be relative to all 3.
if it is only relative to profit the boss can lift his wage high enough so there is no or very litttle profit and the workers get screwedif it is only relative to the bosses wage he can cut his wage down and live of the profit.if it is only relative to the work one does then one hasto calculate how much ones work contributes to the profit of the company and if your work is needed at all for the profit of the company. As i said the workers could organise themselves and the secertary could make my phone calls so i am not needed. unless you cont in a signature every now and then so a few bucks per month should cover my work. umm what loop holes, like the ones in place now where i can get some cash from the state if i hire some one, and still keep it if i fire him the next day you have to be imaginative to find them i dont see any yet though they could be fixed the same way as they get fixed now when we see them being exploited.

depends did you employ them as in sighning a contract with each individual in this case yes you haveto cut your pay.If you hired a nother company to do it and you sighned the contract whit that company you do not haveto for their bosses wages and their wages are tied not yours.the system actualy worked in yugoslavia though a bit different the wage ratio was 1:6 and only in state owned firms. You could only have a private owned firm whit a max of 6 employies and your wages did not follow that rule. there where ways to get more employies though i forgot how. there was also a nominal max sallery for state owned firms. This would not work today cause there are no state owned firms so for workers to get a fair share their wages haveto be tied to something in the company. And law detirmend nominal salleries would still not be fair to the workers

yes, you are paying the company not the workers in this case what they pay the workers is not your problem.