DUmmy Cleita Demonstrates Jawdropping DUmmitude

[GOBUCKS]

Cleita  (1000+ posts)        Mon Apr-12-10 01:16 PM
Original message
Got to see "Capitalism, A Love Story" finally last night.
Michael Moore does it again. Especially sad was the Illinois couple being evicted from their farm that had been in the family for generations. They took out a loan on the property to put new buildings up. Then the husband ended up on disability and he couldn't keep up with the rising monthly mortgage payments. To add to the injury, the bank gave them a $1,000 to clean up the property so they could show it to prospective buyers.

However, the reason for this post is that after the end of the movie he puts up ideas to change the system we are under as he feels Greed Capitalism is a failed experiment. He suggests cooperatives where the owners of businesses are the employees and shows a few examples that are operating profitably. I'm really intrigued by this idea and wonder how many businesses could be run like this. Sure we have most of our manufacturing and customer service jobs outsourced to foreign countries, but there are still many that have to be done here. Right now I bank at a credit union bank where I am a shareholder and receive dividends every month for the amount of money that I have in the bank. Very little comes out of my pocket for fees, only if I bounce checks or the like, and I have to buy my checks. But that's it and I have all the services I had before and for free. How many businesses can adopt models like these? Now I work for a doctor. There are only two of us and he put in the investment so he is the sole owner. But I wonder if many such like business could group together like a coop to spread the profits to everyone who works in these businesses with both boss and employees getting an equal share of the profits.
I have believed for a long time that a person's eight hours of work a day is worth a share of the revenue that work brings in. It shouldn't be going to stockholders who have done nothing towards generating that cash with their labor. How do we do this? How do we change the landscape one business at a time until there are no more Wal-Marts sucking up all the countries capital? Could we change the economic face of American in fifty years? Will our descendants look back at this time as the second era of the Robber Barons, never to be revisited again, ever?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8135989
DUmmy Cleita, always DUmb, is a lot DUmber than usual today. Let's see:
1. What system is it where you can borrow money against collateral, fail to make the payments, and not forfeit the collateral? Oh, maybe O-conomics.
2. So Michael Moore judges capitalism a failure? I guess we should hang it up. And then DUmmy Cleita gives a hippie definition of communism.
3. DUmmy Cleita claims to get a few cents each month depending on the amount in her checking account, because it's a credit union. Is there anyone in America who doesn't have free checking with some nominal interest paid?
4. And why in hell can't DUmmy Cleita and that greedy doctor split his revenues 50/50? I think she should wait until DUmmy Hawkeye-X opens his veterinary practice, and go to work for him. Why should stockholders get anything? They should own shares in the company for entertainment purposes only. After all, they are just hoarding money.

[USA4ME]

And why in hell can't DUmmy Cleita and that greedy doctor split his revenues 50/50?

I must admit that line took the cake.

"Hey, what do ya say you go to school for 10 years and become a doctor, hire me, and then we'll split the profits?"   

.

[NHSparky]

Funny how hippies who believe in peace, love, and either no profits or returning profits never stay in business long.  The Interwebz is replete with such examples.

[Red October]

Hey Cletia, I'll be more than happy to rake and mow the good doctor's property... for a modest fee of eleven thousand dollars.  We're all in this together.  Whadya say?  C'mon, where's the love???

[Karin]

It shouldn't be going to stockholders who have done nothing towards generating that cash with their labor.

Then Clieta, you need to immediately give back all those vast dividends that you've received from the credit union.  You didn't clock in and work there as a teller or anything.  You don't deserve any of it. 

[DumbAss Tanker]

It shouldn't be going to stockholders who have done nothing towards generating that cash with their labor.

Other than the labor they used to accumulate their own cash in the first place, which that investment represents, of course.

 

[kenth]

Why aren't the credit union employees reaping the rewards of their labor and getting those dividends instead of Cletus?

[ScubaGuy]

Oregone  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Mon Apr-12-10 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
5. "How do we do this?"
   
Kill capitalism to start.

My replacement model is this (mixed with socialism of course for necessary goods and services)...outlaw non-employee private ownership, but allow non-employees to adopt a 20 or 25 year buy-back program. The profits a company recieves now buys-back ownership from non-employees. Any remaining profit then is distributed to the employees, according to the amount of stock they own. The bought-back stock then gets distributed to employees proportionally to their wages. When employees retire, they now have a retirement program, which consists of their former company buying the stock back off them (if the company does good, they retire well depending on the stock price). Allow some sort of disversified exchange, so employees can spread their ownership to 5 local companies max (just to protect retirement from going away if their company fails).

This model allows current workers to profit proportionally from their ownership (more profit for longer working workers), it allows them to gain ownership as they work, it allows them to retire with a retirement plan, and it also gives an initial private investor 20-25 years of finite returns on their initial investment (instead of perpetual infinite ROI, as is the current case).

Just a brainstorm Ive been tossing around. What worker wouldn't want to earn ownership as they work? What person below the top 5% would possibly be against this model?

Cleita  Donating Member  (1000+ posts)  Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Mon Apr-12-10 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. The big obstacle to me seems to be getting the seed money to set up
   
a cooperative. If there was a way, like a low interest government loan, to achieve this, I think you would see DUers setting up these coops all over the country.

I read this and now realize that I have tomato plants that are smarter than these idiots.

 

[The Village Idiot]

 

[chitownchica]

I read this and now realize that I have tomato plants that are smarter than these idiots.

 

Yeah, and I bet your tomatoes are much more productive than these fools.

[GOBUCKS]

I think I'd hesitate to characterize DUmmy Oregone's numbskull rambling as a "brainstorm".

[ColonialMarine0431]

It shouldn't be going to stockholders who have done nothing towards generating that cash with their labor.

Truly and absolutely one of the most asinine comments I've ever heard. 

[diesel driver]

Oregone  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Mon Apr-12-10 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
5. "How do we do this?"
   
Kill capitalism to start. Smiley

Kill yourself instead.  You're wasting too much space, oxygen, and natural resources....

My replacement model is this (mixed with socialism of course for necessary goods and services)...outlaw non-employee private ownership, but allow non-employees to adopt a 20 or 25 year buy-back program. The profits a company recieves now buys-back ownership from non-employees. Any remaining profit then is distributed to the employees, according to the amount of stock they own. The bought-back stock then gets distributed to employees proportionally to their wages. When employees retire, they now have a retirement program, which consists of their former company buying the stock back off them (if the company does good, they retire well depending on the stock price). Allow some sort of disversified exchange, so employees can spread their ownership to 5 local companies max (just to protect retirement from going away if their company fails).

This model allows current workers to profit proportionally from their ownership (more profit for longer working workers), it allows them to gain ownership as they work, it allows them to retire with a retirement plan, and it also gives an initial private investor 20-25 years of finite returns on their initial investment (instead of perpetual infinite ROI, as is the current case).

What you described is basically a 401K retirement plan.  We already have those, DUmbass....

Just a brainstorm brainfart Ive been tossing around. What worker wouldn't want to earn ownership as they work? What person below the top 5% would possibly be against this model?
 

There, fixed....

[ScubaGuy]

I think I'd hesitate to characterize DUmmy Oregone's numbskull rambling as a "brainstorm".

Hell I wouldn't even call it a light drizzle.  More like moderate humidity.

Notice how all their great ideas to 'fix' the economy involve them getting something for nothing.

Funny how the DUmmie cleita almost gets it when she says how hard it would be to get capital to start such a venture.  Guess what DUmmie they're not going to just give you money without something in return.  Usually that something is a piece of the company.

[Tucker]

Let's say that Cleita's point has merit and businesses were ran by co-op or employees. Just was does he propose to do to employees who are either inefficient or lazy that are currently protected by unions? Would he vote to fire them?

Not only is everyone an employee but also an employer. You evil entrepreneur you. You would have no choice to can them. They would get on the internet and talk about you like a dog for firing them.

[delilahmused]

Sometimes it's like a twisted version of Sesame Street over there.

Cindie

[Karin]

A noob tries to talk sense:

Raspberry (268 posts)      Mon Apr-12-10 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
10. I disagree
 "spread the profits to everyone who works in these businesses with both boss and employees getting an equal share of the profits."
Do you really believe that you should get an equal share of the profits of the doctor who spent many, many years learning his profession, and who takes a risk every time he prescribes something, or performs a procedure on a potentially litigious patient?

"I have believed for a long time that a person's eight hours of work a day is worth a share of the revenue that work brings in."
In a sense you already do get that--in the form of your wages/salary. That is a share of your employers' profits. The difference is that you get it even if his business takes a loss. And you DON'T have to pony up to cover "your share" of his losses.  etc. etc.

Which is responded to with more mindnumbing idiocy:

 Cleita  (1000+ posts)        Mon Apr-12-10 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Yes, I do and I spent years learning my skills as well and at no less cost than him attending
 college too, not to mention I bring years more experience to the job as I'm much older than him. Also, without me, taking care of other things so he's free to do the actual doctoring, he would be bogged down with doing everything himself and therefore bringing in much less income.   blah blah blah....

They have apparently set up a "small business forum" over there somewhere.  Let's go check it out sometime.  

[ScubaGuy]

Lord they are DUmb.

Related link from DUmmie small business forum

JustAnotherGen  Donating Member  (1000+ posts)  Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Mon Apr-12-10 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
15. First, Glad I was directed to this group on another thread
   
Second - that's my vision. An online women's magazine, NOOOOOOOOOO advertisers, subscriber driven, and growing it to the point where those who come in to work WITH me (not for me) become owners not employees. I'm launching next month. Very excited because it's a different format, and I intend to advertise liberally.

Good luck with that business model.

Cleita  Donating Member  (1000+ posts)  Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Mon Apr-12-10 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
14. Thanks OGR. Maybe it's something we can start working on together with
   
others who are interested. I have been somewhat obsessed in finding a way for a group of us to form a non-profit health insurance company modeled after Medicare that we can sell to people who can't get insurance anywhere else or for less than they are being gouged for by the big health industry insurers. If we couldn't get Congress to provide them with competition with a public option, I think it still can be done. It will just be much harder. I think it could also be fitted into the exchange model the reform bill is based on. I also would want it not only employee owned, but so that the insured also get shares. I think this way everyone would work hard at making it work. I mean there are so many details to work out but I keep thinking about it.

I saw Michael's movie on PPV on my satellite provider, but they usually get stuff just before the DVD is ready to come out. I'm sure it will show up on HBO or one of the cable movie channels in a few months as well. It's still so timely.

So you're going to take all those who can't currently get cheap insurance and charge them far less than an existing insurance company?

That should give you a net loss of a few thousand per member but I guess that you'll be able to make it up in volume.

[DumbAss Tanker]

That should give you a net loss of a few thousand per member but I guess that you'll be able to make it up in volume.

Ah yes...one of my favorite smart-ass expressions for pointing out to people that what they're doing is completely counterproductive:

"So, you're telling me we're selling ten-dollar bills for five bucks apiece, and what we lose on each one, we're going to make up on volume???"

 

[Karin]

The Small Business/Entrepeneur forum is one lonely, pathetic place.  There are a smattering of OPs from 2007, containing one or zero replies.  There's this:

shireen  (1000+ posts)      Sun Sep-13-09 02:33 PM
Original message
some questions from a clueless dreamer
 Hi ...

some of my questions are going to sound pretty naive, since i have no business experience, but please bear with me!

I'd like to start a small online business, something I can do on the side (it won't be my main source of income unless I get laid off).

My interest is indoor gardening; as I've pursued this interest for the past few years, I've been coming up with "wish lists" of things that I'd love to have that are not available in the marketplace. I've had difficulty locating very specific products for growing plants indoors. And when there were some to be found, they were ridiculously expensive.

My target customer base would be apartment dwellers who love plants. Products would be miniature plants, grow lights, terrariums.

   Perfect! 

[Tucker]

Better watch his electric bill because the man will. Any abnormal increase in usage will catch the eye of law enforcement.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

QUERY: Can a disbaled man work a job as vigorous as farming?

In a socialist uptopia where the state manages resources to their fullest utilization would the state retain a disabled farmer on property he can no longer tend or would they move him to some other sector of the economy where he could be more productive; the net result being the loss of the family farm?

[DumbAss Tanker]

QUERY: Can a disbaled man work a job as vigorous as farming?

In a socialist uptopia where the state manages resources to their fullest utilization would the state retain a disabled farmer on property he can no longer tend or would they move him to some other sector of the economy where he could be more productive; the net result being the loss of the family farm?

What are these 'Family farms' of which you speak, comrade?  There were once such dangerously revanchist institutions before collectivization, but they were grossly inefficient according to the analysis of the finest Democrat economists.  The fact that there are food shortages now is only a temporary artifact, the effect of liquidating the vicious counterrevolutionary holdouts who did not wish to work cooperatively for Hope, Change, and the greater good of the poor and oppressed mass of Democrat voters dependent on our food distributions.

[GOBUCKS]

QUERY: Can a disbaled man work a job as vigorous as farming?

In a socialist uptopia where the state manages resources to their fullest utilization would the state retain a disabled farmer on property he can no longer tend or would they move him to some other sector of the economy where he could be more productive

In the socialist utopias I've visited, I believe such peole are moved into the begging sector.

[vlad335]

Cleita  (1000+ posts)        Mon Apr-12-10 01:16 PM
Original message
Got to see "Capitalism, A Love Story" finally last night.
Michael Moore does it again. Especially sad was the Illinois couple being evicted from their farm that had been in the family for generations. They took out a loan on the property to put new buildings up. Then the husband ended up on disability and he couldn't keep up with the rising monthly mortgage payments.

You can buy disability and life insurance on real estate loans right? I did this when I bought my Harley and it added to my payment but you never know whats down the road. Also, 'rising monthly mortgage payments" tells me that it was a variable rate loan they took out which is incredibly stupid. If someone can't afford the payment of a fixed rate loan with insurance then they have no business taking out the loan in the first place.