A six figure job is piss in the face? Cry me a river. I guess there will always be people who piss and moan and think they deserve the world. Keep whining and demonizing the rich people who sign your paycheck, I’m sure it will get you far.
If the oil industry were nationalized tomorrow you can bet your hind quarters we wouldn’t get paid what we do now. We’d be lucky to make a livable wage. Trickle down economics absolutely works, unquestionably so.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;129363]If the oil industry were nationalized tomorrow you can bet your hind quarters we wouldn’t get paid what we do now. We’d be lucky to make a livable wage. Trickle down economics absolutely works, unquestionably so.[/QUOTE]
No argument about nationalization, but there’s a lot of daylight between state-run monopolies and unregulated capitalism. Many people who work for non-governmental corporations (both publicly traded and privately held) are not very lucky. Wal-Mart, anyone?
Without spending a lot of time researching this, I’ll simply quote a citation in Wikipedia: “A 2012 study by the Tax Justice Network indicates that wealth of the super-rich does not trickle down to improve the economy, but tends to be amassed and sheltered in tax havens with a negative effect on the tax bases of the home economy.”
Corporations and their directors and officers have a legal responsibility to maximize profits for shareholders. That is their only responsibility. Unless or until improvements in employee wages, benefits, working conditions, etc., improve that bottom line (and many boat company owners/operators don’t seem to be sufficiently mentally agile or far-sighted to appreciate that they might), we just suck it up.
That said, given the continuing (for many people) slow economic recovery here, the transition from an industrial to a digital society in this part of the world, globalization, etc., etc., six figures for driving a boat ain’t too shabby.
[QUOTE=txh2oman;129381]No argument about nationalization, but there’s a lot of daylight between state-run monopolies and unregulated capitalism. Many people who work for non-governmental corporations (both publicly traded and privately held) are not very lucky. Wal-Mart, anyone?
Without spending a lot of time researching this, I’ll simply quote a citation in Wikipedia: “A 2012 study by the Tax Justice Network indicates that wealth of the super-rich does not trickle down to improve the economy, but tends to be amassed and sheltered in tax havens with a negative effect on the tax bases of the home economy.”
Corporations and their directors and officers have a legal responsibility to maximize profits for shareholders. That is their only responsibility. Unless or until improvements in employee wages, benefits, working conditions, etc., improve that bottom line (and many boat company owners/operators don’t seem to be sufficiently mentally agile or far-sighted to appreciate that they might), we just suck it up.
That said, given the continuing (for many people) slow economic recovery here, the transition from an industrial to a digital society in this part of the world, globalization, etc., etc., six figures for driving a boat ain’t too shabby.[/QUOTE]
I’m afraid that “Tax Justice Network” study just isn’t correct. As long as any of those “super-rich” live here, they’re undoubtedly spending money, and probably a lot more of it than most people. They might be “amassing” it somewhere else for a rainy day but the fact still remains, a lot of it still gets spent. That’s “trickle-down”. Every dollar they spend is another job that someone gets to keep because people like them are spending money to keep the economy in motion. That’s “trickle-down”.
You also have to consider the impact that they have on business. They only become super-rich if business is good. If business is bad they loose their jobs, or possibly even their entire fortunes. The rich becoming richer is a sign of the health of the economy. If they were stealing it directly out of the pockets of lesser classes then that would be bad, but they’re not doing that. What they are doing is creating jobs. They make more money because their businesses become bigger. As their businesses become bigger they employ more people. That’s “trickle-down”.
As for Walmart, they’re employees may not be what anyone considers “lucky” but all I have to say to that is, you’re paid what you’re worth. We make 6 figures and up in our business because of the demands of our jobs. We’ve earned it. If the employees of Walmart aren’t making as much money as they think they’re worth then they should find higher paying jobs. If they can’t find higher paying jobs then they aren’t worth a higher paying job. Walmart does not equal Welfare.
They are under no obligation other than the federal minimum wage, which does not need to be raised to $15 by the way, to pay their employees any more than what they want to. I’m sure working at Walmart has challenges of its own, it’s certainly not a job that I would want, but whatever those challenges are, working for Walmart is still one of the basest forms of employment that exists in this country. It is the modern “ditch digger”, and yes, the world does need those too.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;129388]I’m afraid that “Tax Justice Network” study just isn’t correct. [/QUOTE]
Are you sure? I mean, Nobel laureates are still arguing about this, so I’m not prepared to discount the study (which I have not read in its entirety) completely.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;129388]As long as any of those “super-rich” live here, they’re undoubtedly spending money, and probably a lot more of it than most people. They might be “amassing” it somewhere else for a rainy day but the fact still remains, a lot of it still gets spent. That’s “trickle-down”. Every dollar they spend is another job that someone gets to keep because people like them are spending money to keep the economy in motion. That’s “trickle-down”.[/QUOTE]
Well, I’d call it “economic impact,” but whatever.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;129388]The rich becoming richer is a sign of the health of the economy. If they were stealing it directly out of the pockets of lesser classes then that would be bad, but they’re not doing that. What they are doing is creating jobs. They make more money because their businesses become bigger. As their businesses become bigger they employ more people. That’s “trickle-down”.[/QUOTE]
No, really it’s not. Or not necessarily. Stealing directly out of the pockets of “lesser classes” is a pretty good description of what happened during and after the mortgage crisis. Let’s look at this headline, for instance: Corporate profits hit record as wages get squeezed I do concede that there is a difference between the folks (or companies) who make their money off of making money and those that make their money providing tangible goods and services.
If everyone was becoming richer, if a rising tide were indeed lifting all boats, then I’d buy your argument. But as it is, in this country, an increasingly smaller percentage of the population controls an increasingly large portion of the economic pie. That’s not trickle-down, that’s oligarchy.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;129388]As for Walmart, they’re employees may not be what anyone considers “lucky” but all I have to say to that is, you’re paid what you’re worth. We make 6 figures and up in our business because of the demands of our jobs. We’ve earned it. If the employees of Walmart aren’t making as much money as they think they’re worth then they should find higher paying jobs. If they can’t find higher paying jobs then they aren’t worth a higher paying job. Walmart does not equal Welfare.[/QUOTE]
I think what you said was that nationalization would leave us lucky to have a livable wage (as opposed to profit-seeking companies, in which we are assured a livable wage) – that’s what I took from it, anyway, and I was only making the point that there are many for-profit companies that do not pay a living wage, whether it is the federal minimum or not.
I don’t agree with the OP’s rant, though I’ve really, really enjoyed this thread. But I do think income inequality is a huge and important issue with profound implications for our lives generally and the future of the Republic. Just sayin’ …
[QUOTE=txh2oman;129381]
Without spending a lot of time researching this, I’ll simply quote a citation in Wikipedia: “A 2012 study by the Tax Justice Network indicates that wealth of the super-rich does not trickle down to improve the economy, but tends to be amassed and sheltered in tax havens with a negative effect on the tax bases of the home economy.”
Corporations and their directors and officers have a legal responsibility to maximize profits for shareholders. That is their only responsibility. Unless or until improvements in employee wages, benefits, working conditions, etc., improve that bottom line (and many boat company owners/operators don’t seem to be sufficiently mentally agile or far-sighted to appreciate that they might), we just suck it up.[/QUOTE]
Here’s a pic pulled from another GCaptain forum heading. A nice new little boat.
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=1953552
Yeah, these evil “billionaires” are just socking away their money. They’re not doing things like spending tens of millions of dollars to build something like that little boat. How many people were employed designing the thing? How many people were employed by all the suppliers who provided materials and equipment? How many people were employed building the thing? How many people will be employed working on that “little boat”?
Those “evil billionaire” Choust’s forked out a lot of bucks on that tiny little boat. They’ve forked out many, many millions more building others. They employ a lot of people in their shipyards. They employ people at CPort. They employ a lot of people working on those little boats.
By the way, do you have car payments? What do you think the monthly payment for that tiny little ECO boat are? What do think the insurance payments on that one boat are? What do think it costs to “gas up” that one boat? What do you think just one engine for that little boat cost? How about the electronics?
Yes the “evil billionaires”, like the Choust family, are just socking their money away and not doing anything to build the economy and create jobs.
You know, the Chousts, just like every other OSV operator, and every tug operator, and every ship owner, started out real small and grew their business. They risked their own money to accomplish something. There’s absolutely nothing preventing you from doing the same thing. Then you can treat your employees in the way you wish, showering dollars upon them.
Of course, if you just want to be safe, collect a paycheck, and then bitch and moan about your evil employer, who has risked many millions of his dollars to give you a job, you can do that too. You just look like an idiot.
[QUOTE=Rich Bogad;129390]Yeah, these evil “billionaires” are just socking away their money. They’re not doing things like spending tens of millions of dollars to build something like that little boat. How many people were employed designing the thing? How many people were employed by all the suppliers who provided materials and equipment? How many people were employed building the thing? How many people will be employed working on that “little boat”?
Those “evil billionaire” Choust’s forked out a lot of bucks on that tiny little boat. They’ve forked out many, many millions more building others. They employ a lot of people in their shipyards. They employ people at CPort. They employ a lot of people working on those little boats.
By the way, do you have car payments? What do you think the monthly payment for that tiny little ECO boat are? What do think the insurance payments on that one boat are? What do think it costs to “gas up” that one boat? What do you think just one engine for that little boat cost? How about the electronics?
Yes the “evil billionaires”, like the Choust family, are just socking their money away and not doing anything to build the economy and create jobs.
You know, the Chousts, just like every other OSV operator, and every tug operator, and every ship owner, started out real small and grew their business. They risked their own money to accomplish something. There’s absolutely nothing preventing you from doing the same thing. Then you can treat your employees in the way you wish, showering dollars upon them.
Of course, if you just want to be safe, collect a paycheck, and then bitch and moan about your evil employer, who has risked many millions of his dollars to give you a job, you can do that too. You just look like an idiot.[/QUOTE]
Not sure why you build your rant on a quote by me … I don’t think I really disagree with anything you you wrote there, I never used the words “evil billionaires,” and I’ve never worked for Chouest. Having been an entrepreneur more than once in my life, I understand the concepts of risk and reward, as well as the impact of capital investment in local economies. But thanks for the economics lesson. 
[QUOTE=txh2oman;129394]Not sure why you build your rant on a quote by me … I don’t think I really disagree with anything you you wrote there, I never used the words “evil billionaires,” and I’ve never worked for Chouest. Having been an entrepreneur more than once in my life, I understand the concepts of risk and reward, as well as the impact of capital investment in local economies. But thanks for the economics lesson. ;-)[/QUOTE]
Because you’re the one who quoted “A 2012 study by the Tax Justice Network indicates that wealth of the super-rich does not trickle down to improve the economy, but tends to be amassed and sheltered in tax havens with a negative effect on the tax bases of the home economy.”
Sounds like we have gone from one extreme view to another. Surprised the “collective bargaining” hasn’t entered into the discussion.
It’s a free market. It’s free to work for cock smoking billionaires, wal-mart, or whatever. It’s free to complain, be happy, or not. I think it’s wrong for people to get uptight over other folks opinions, as many have been addressed in this thread. If you are happy at your current wage, even time or not, then be happy. But don’t put others down that strive for more. That is what built these companies… striving for more. And I think that is what built this country… people striving for more. There is nothing wrong with pushing to obtain the most compensation! I am sure some will move on to other greener pastures, some will wait it out. But that is their choice, so don’t be down on them. Some people say they won’t work 28/14 because they “have a life”, great for them. Some people work 28/14 to that they can retire several years ahead of the people having a life. It’s called compound interest… check it out.
But it all boils down to free choice in a free market and free speech to bitch about all our opinions of the situation. If you can’t have a discussion without attacking maybe there is something wrong with your argument. Stickin it to the man is one of my favorite pastimes… but I work for that right, I earn it and it is my choice to wield it as I see fit.
Viva la boat trash!
The industry is feasting and those in the industry should be eating well. I guess the question is “when profits go up significantly should those profits be shared with the employees or should the companies/shareholders who invest their money get to keep all the gains?”
Currently companies in the OSV market are growing at 20+ percent per year, over the previous two years. With vessel orders back logged through 2016 and day rates maintaining all time highs why shouldn’t mariners be looking for raises?
[QUOTE=Number360;129398]Currently companies in the OSV market are growing at 20+ percent per year, over the previous two years.[/QUOTE]
Is this company size or company profits? If it’s size then then they are putting a whole lot of people to work and a huge raise to you would impact that growth.
The simple fact is if you want a raise, and the company isn’t gong to give one in the foreseeable future, go find a company that pays more, and if they won’t hire you then sad to say maybe you’re not worth that much right now. So the only thing you can do is figure out what they are looking for and get that certificate, license, or experience under your belt so that next time you go back to them you are worth that much to them.
[QUOTE=Number360;129398]With vessel orders back logged through 2016 and day rates maintaining all time highs why shouldn’t mariners be looking for raises?[/QUOTE]
The thing is we have gotten raises. The better companies have gone from paying around $500 a day in 2011 to some paying almost $1000 today. ECO them selves have given out a 50% raise in this time period.
With all the new boats coming out by everybody I do foresee another round of raises coming. Especially if the new Drill Ships coming to the GOM push the day rates up a good bit, with utilization according to Workboat staying at dam near 100% for everything over 2000 DWT since the summer things should get interesting on the day rate side this summer. Hopefully this will allow for some wage growth for us peons.
BTW these day rates are not all time highs, they are just now getting back to where they were in 2008 for OSV’s, and anchor handlers still haven’t gotten back up to the $100k a day they where making by a long shot back then.
As for hating on all the Boat Owners, let me ask you this. What was the last time a poor man signed your paycheck?
Although sometimes it’s just fun to bitch, lord knows my wife will say I do.
Well said…read it and weep!
[QUOTE=Jemplayer;129426]
As for hating on all the Boat Owners, let me ask you this. What was the last time a poor man signed your paycheck?[/QUOTE]
True… and they are taking the big risks (investing in new boats and such) so they get the big reward. Of course, there isn’t anything wrong with wanting to earn more… as long as you do something that makes you more valuable to the employer. There isn’t even anything wrong with some amount of envy/complaining that other companies might pay a better rate but if you are so angry at your employer that you are contemplating sabotage… then you really need to find a place where you are happier. I honestly wouldn’t want to be on a boat with someone so highly disgruntled… doesn’t sound particularly pleasant or safe.
I wish we had some kind of profit-sharing deal, even just in the form of a almost guaranteed bonus or more formal system. Company does well, they share some of that with us in exchange for controlling fixed expenses with a more attractive wage to them. If they can profit from me not having accidents that cost them money, then can afford to share some of that. Unlikely, but i can dream!
[QUOTE=z-drive;129443]I wish we had some kind of profit-sharing deal, even just in the form of a almost guaranteed bonus or more formal system. Company does well, they share some of that with us in exchange for controlling fixed expenses with a more attractive wage to them. If they can profit from me not having accidents that cost them money, then can afford to share some of that. Unlikely, but i can dream![/QUOTE]
Profit sharing is certainly not an earth-shatteringly new idea for any industry but some industries’ ways of doing business are just a little more archaic than others. I’m sure the many offices in our industry understand the concept of profit-sharing, I think we’re just so far behind the times in how we do business that the idea still seems totally foreign to them.
So really was the meeting worth attending?