I am serious..you felt inclined to reply now back it up with more than generic drivel and sarcasm.
What you posted is only worthy of sarcasm.
Rich people don't make money "off the backs" of a few poor people, and simple math confirms this.
Also, VC firms don't always make "fast dividends and payouts" in fact a lot of VC investments fail entirely.
(About three-quarters of venture-backed firms in the U.S. don't return investors' capital, according to recent research by Shikhar Ghosh, a senior lecturer at Harvard Business School)
You seem to think framing these questions on silly premises deserves serious answers.
It doesn't.
0
I am serious..you felt inclined to reply now back it up with more than generic drivel and sarcasm.
What you posted is only worthy of sarcasm.
Rich people don't make money "off the backs" of a few poor people, and simple math confirms this.
Also, VC firms don't always make "fast dividends and payouts" in fact a lot of VC investments fail entirely.
(About three-quarters of venture-backed firms in the U.S. don't return investors' capital, according to recent research by Shikhar Ghosh, a senior lecturer at Harvard Business School)
How do they earn those fast dividends and payouts?
They don't
Venture capitalists are long-term investors who take a very active role in their portfolio companies. When a venture capitalist makes an investment he/she does not expect a return on that investment for 7-10 years, on average.
https://www.nvca.org/index.php?Itemid=147
0
How do they earn those fast dividends and payouts?
They don't
Venture capitalists are long-term investors who take a very active role in their portfolio companies. When a venture capitalist makes an investment he/she does not expect a return on that investment for 7-10 years, on average.
How do they earn those fast dividends and payouts?
They don't
Venture capitalists are long-term investors who take a very active role in their portfolio companies. When a venture capitalist makes an investment he/she does not expect a return on that investment for 7-10 years, on average.
https://www.nvca.org/index.php?Itemid=147
Hilarious..
You think ON AVERAGE of 7-10 yrs is long term?
Talk about a joke..long term is not 7-10 years ON AVERAGE..
Long term is 20-30 yrs, 7-10 ON AVERAGE is not at all long term, it is considered mid term at best.
Nice one 14..love that in depth research..more sarcasm and a link.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
How do they earn those fast dividends and payouts?
They don't
Venture capitalists are long-term investors who take a very active role in their portfolio companies. When a venture capitalist makes an investment he/she does not expect a return on that investment for 7-10 years, on average.
https://www.nvca.org/index.php?Itemid=147
Hilarious..
You think ON AVERAGE of 7-10 yrs is long term?
Talk about a joke..long term is not 7-10 years ON AVERAGE..
Long term is 20-30 yrs, 7-10 ON AVERAGE is not at all long term, it is considered mid term at best.
Nice one 14..love that in depth research..more sarcasm and a link.
You pro union people don't seem to understand that it is your high wages that push up the cost of living which further pushes poor people out on the cliff.
Also, you don't seem to understand that the union wages were unsustainable. Do you really think the old hostess people were inflexible as the boat sank?
Get a freaking clue, they were just baking twinkies and transporting twinkies on a trailer to be shipped. Is that such a skilled labor job that deserved being paid 20 bucks per hour?
0
You pro union people don't seem to understand that it is your high wages that push up the cost of living which further pushes poor people out on the cliff.
Also, you don't seem to understand that the union wages were unsustainable. Do you really think the old hostess people were inflexible as the boat sank?
Get a freaking clue, they were just baking twinkies and transporting twinkies on a trailer to be shipped. Is that such a skilled labor job that deserved being paid 20 bucks per hour?
wasnt this thread posted on the other site.... similar to the thread where sara had his complete meltdown and started his homospeak about "puppet holes"?
a site where you can edit change your posts/bets... so perfect for bob and his track record of being covers biggest liar/welcher in the history of the site...
Super
Bad
Reputation
0
Quote Originally Posted by Stiln:
Truck driver 14 strikes again
wasnt this thread posted on the other site.... similar to the thread where sara had his complete meltdown and started his homospeak about "puppet holes"?
a site where you can edit change your posts/bets... so perfect for bob and his track record of being covers biggest liar/welcher in the history of the site...
Of course. To me it isnt about the union, it is about middle class jobs with benefits and wages that can support families AND put away for the future being replaced with lower wage jobs which does nothing more than keep heads above water while saddling society with future costs.
wsc - honest question:
How does this arrangement saddle society with future costs?
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Of course. To me it isnt about the union, it is about middle class jobs with benefits and wages that can support families AND put away for the future being replaced with lower wage jobs which does nothing more than keep heads above water while saddling society with future costs.
wsc - honest question:
How does this arrangement saddle society with future costs?
someone puts up money, assumes the risk and hopes it pays off.
Anyone has the ability to start their own company....go do it!
If it were sooo easy, everyone would be an entrepreneur now wouldnt they....its a lifestyle choice by many. Who wants the stress of owning your own company and growing it and taking risks anyways.....let some other sucker do that.
0
someone puts up money, assumes the risk and hopes it pays off.
Anyone has the ability to start their own company....go do it!
If it were sooo easy, everyone would be an entrepreneur now wouldnt they....its a lifestyle choice by many. Who wants the stress of owning your own company and growing it and taking risks anyways.....let some other sucker do that.
How does this arrangement saddle society with future costs?
Here is the scenario..
Worker A has a job making 60k a year, taking care of his family, hopefully investing in a 401k and some savings..
The company worker A was employed at goes BK, private equity comes in and fires everyone..all jobs lost.
Worker A has to go out and take a job making 12 bucks an hour or worse..so now worker A has to take two jobs and flood their CC's, sap 401k, savings etc to keep afloat..some worker A employees lose their houses and savings and dont fare so well.
Private equity takes company over and offers positions for less with less benefits, no 401k contribution or pension benefits..
Now this scenario could swing in either direction, but in reality the new jobs should not be better pay/benefits than the previous or the private equity loons are not good at their theft objective and wont make their bonuses.
So these people that had pensions/benefits/etc etc and now either take jobs making less or go back to the new company making less, their savings and assets reduced, who do you think bares the cost of this change?
Society as a collective bears the costs of events like this..either through the government and higher taxation or higher rates on loans or higher property taxes or higher cost of goods etc..thats the nature of a collective.
So when someone who had savings and a decent paying job loses it, the collective suffers..especially since the collective is in the majority of population size and the minority in wealth accumulation.
0
Quote Originally Posted by atlheatholder:
wsc - honest question:
How does this arrangement saddle society with future costs?
Here is the scenario..
Worker A has a job making 60k a year, taking care of his family, hopefully investing in a 401k and some savings..
The company worker A was employed at goes BK, private equity comes in and fires everyone..all jobs lost.
Worker A has to go out and take a job making 12 bucks an hour or worse..so now worker A has to take two jobs and flood their CC's, sap 401k, savings etc to keep afloat..some worker A employees lose their houses and savings and dont fare so well.
Private equity takes company over and offers positions for less with less benefits, no 401k contribution or pension benefits..
Now this scenario could swing in either direction, but in reality the new jobs should not be better pay/benefits than the previous or the private equity loons are not good at their theft objective and wont make their bonuses.
So these people that had pensions/benefits/etc etc and now either take jobs making less or go back to the new company making less, their savings and assets reduced, who do you think bares the cost of this change?
Society as a collective bears the costs of events like this..either through the government and higher taxation or higher rates on loans or higher property taxes or higher cost of goods etc..thats the nature of a collective.
So when someone who had savings and a decent paying job loses it, the collective suffers..especially since the collective is in the majority of population size and the minority in wealth accumulation.
Lots of generalizations wall. I don't want ppl to have to struggle in life but supplying jobs at these dormant plants is a good thing. My guess is that many of the jobs in these plants are low skill jobs. My question I guess is what is a fair wage for such jobs? If its a $15 an hour job should any company pay $20 out of good will? Not all VC's are evil in my opinion. On top of that, to leave a plant shuttered and leave a community with 1500 less employed ppl would be a long term negative on the area...in my opinion
0
Lots of generalizations wall. I don't want ppl to have to struggle in life but supplying jobs at these dormant plants is a good thing. My guess is that many of the jobs in these plants are low skill jobs. My question I guess is what is a fair wage for such jobs? If its a $15 an hour job should any company pay $20 out of good will? Not all VC's are evil in my opinion. On top of that, to leave a plant shuttered and leave a community with 1500 less employed ppl would be a long term negative on the area...in my opinion
The reality is the scenario I described is the crux of our economy for the last 30 yrs..
Companies have been offshoring middle class jobs for decades and the chasm between the upper and lower class is growing.
Who bears the cost when the middle class and their savings are trashed and the very people have no retirement or healthcare benefits?
Thats what our economy has turned into..a portion has a great ammt of assets and wealth while the majority is fighting to survive with dwindling future prospects.
So who pays for this economic evolution? The collective..
As for the jobs issue, the context is important..reasonable jobs were lost and while yes ANY job in a destitute environment is good, the real loss cannot be discarded by the any jobs mentality.
0
lords,
The reality is the scenario I described is the crux of our economy for the last 30 yrs..
Companies have been offshoring middle class jobs for decades and the chasm between the upper and lower class is growing.
Who bears the cost when the middle class and their savings are trashed and the very people have no retirement or healthcare benefits?
Thats what our economy has turned into..a portion has a great ammt of assets and wealth while the majority is fighting to survive with dwindling future prospects.
So who pays for this economic evolution? The collective..
As for the jobs issue, the context is important..reasonable jobs were lost and while yes ANY job in a destitute environment is good, the real loss cannot be discarded by the any jobs mentality.
Worker A has a job making 60k a year, taking care of his family, hopefully investing in a 401k and some savings..
The company worker A was employed at goes BK, private equity comes in and fires everyone..all jobs lost.
Worker A has to go out and take a job making 12 bucks an hour or worse..so now worker A has to take two jobs and flood their CC's, sap 401k, savings etc to keep afloat..some worker A employees lose their houses and savings and dont fare so well.
Private equity takes company over and offers positions for less with less benefits, no 401k contribution or pension benefits..
Notice the assumptions here.
That if you take 2 jobs you have to "flood" credit cards.
You can't cut spending, downsize, re-adjust, no siree, just flood your credit cards or tap a 401K
This is utter nonsense. I know people with 2 jobs who are getting out of debt.
And, as a point of fact, "private equity" firms don't take over companies and offer no 401K benefits.
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Here is the scenario..
Worker A has a job making 60k a year, taking care of his family, hopefully investing in a 401k and some savings..
The company worker A was employed at goes BK, private equity comes in and fires everyone..all jobs lost.
Worker A has to go out and take a job making 12 bucks an hour or worse..so now worker A has to take two jobs and flood their CC's, sap 401k, savings etc to keep afloat..some worker A employees lose their houses and savings and dont fare so well.
Private equity takes company over and offers positions for less with less benefits, no 401k contribution or pension benefits..
Notice the assumptions here.
That if you take 2 jobs you have to "flood" credit cards.
You can't cut spending, downsize, re-adjust, no siree, just flood your credit cards or tap a 401K
This is utter nonsense. I know people with 2 jobs who are getting out of debt.
And, as a point of fact, "private equity" firms don't take over companies and offer no 401K benefits.
That if you take 2 jobs you have to "flood" credit cards.
You can't cut spending, downsize, re-adjust, no siree, just flood your credit cards or tap a 401K
This is utter nonsense. I know people with 2 jobs who are getting out of debt.
And, as a point of fact, "private equity" firms don't take over companies and offer no 401K benefits.
Actually stats prove exactly what I posted. Consumer debt goes up during higher unemployment periods..and yes SOME people do catch two jobs and make things work..but that isnt how all or even most function.
If someone loses a high paying job, initially they go looking for a similar job, well maybe you dont but most do. They try all avenues they can to find a similar or better job, not many people leave jobs and immediately seek out MORE work to earn the same or less than they were before.
I love that stat you listed, household income is up 57% in a mere 34 years, well that is AWESOME..how much is the real CPI up over the same period? How much is energy costs, housing costs, medical costs up over the same period?
It looks like as usual you are fighting a debate with bad info just to fight.
You actually think people immediately run to work more and make less, that consumer debt and retirement assets are not touched during periods of unemployment?
Well I cannot stop you from erroneous thinking I suppose.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
Notice the assumptions here.
That if you take 2 jobs you have to "flood" credit cards.
You can't cut spending, downsize, re-adjust, no siree, just flood your credit cards or tap a 401K
This is utter nonsense. I know people with 2 jobs who are getting out of debt.
And, as a point of fact, "private equity" firms don't take over companies and offer no 401K benefits.
Actually stats prove exactly what I posted. Consumer debt goes up during higher unemployment periods..and yes SOME people do catch two jobs and make things work..but that isnt how all or even most function.
If someone loses a high paying job, initially they go looking for a similar job, well maybe you dont but most do. They try all avenues they can to find a similar or better job, not many people leave jobs and immediately seek out MORE work to earn the same or less than they were before.
I love that stat you listed, household income is up 57% in a mere 34 years, well that is AWESOME..how much is the real CPI up over the same period? How much is energy costs, housing costs, medical costs up over the same period?
It looks like as usual you are fighting a debate with bad info just to fight.
You actually think people immediately run to work more and make less, that consumer debt and retirement assets are not touched during periods of unemployment?
Well I cannot stop you from erroneous thinking I suppose.
Well I cannot stop you from erroneous thinking I suppose.
From 1967 to 2009, the real mean household income of the top quintile increased by 71 percent, meaning the rich became much richer. Over the same period. The real mean household income in the bottom quintile increased by 25 percent. This means the poor became richer as well. This measure shows that Americans in the lowest quintile could afford more goods and services in 2009 than in 1967.
0
Well I cannot stop you from erroneous thinking I suppose.
From 1967 to 2009, the real mean household income of the top quintile increased by 71 percent, meaning the rich became much richer. Over the same period. The real mean household income in the bottom quintile increased by 25 percent. This means the poor became richer as well. This measure shows that Americans in the lowest quintile could afford more goods and services in 2009 than in 1967.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
