Posted on 12/11/2012 6:54:56 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
I post this item not to mock Mika Brzezinski. But her comments this morning were so illustrative of the liberal mindset--in ignoring fundamental principles of economics--that they are worth highlighting here.
An entire Morning Joe segment had been devoted to discussing the wage dilemma in America. In the context of analyzing the right-to-work law soon to be signed in Michigan, the panel—apparently excepting Mika—agreed that we face hard choices here. We can artificially preserve high wages for a relative few, or let wages seek their natural level, providing more jobs at lower pay. As Joe Scarborough put it, we have to decide if we want jobs to go to China, or remain here, understanding that if we want them to stay, wages cannot remain at levels in existence before America was forced to compete internationally. All this was apparently lost on Mika. In the following segment, insisting "it's kind of simple," Mika argued that employers making big profits should pay their workers more. "Why not? I don't get it," miffed Mika about "greedy" bosses. As former Obama car czar Steve Rattner gently explained, "it's capitalism."
View the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Can liberals really be this clueless about capitalism? Ping to Today show list.
Can liberals really be this clueless about capitalism? Ping to Today show list.
Unfortunately, yes.
Mika take your clothes off and shut up.
Ignorance is bliss for all liberal idiots. They probably believe in unicorns and the tooth fairy. And when you laugh at their faces, they get all angry about it and want to know why the crap coming out their mouth is so amusing for any thinking person.
Yes, they really are that clueless about the real world. They still think that the “workers should control the means of production.” I actually had a professor who espoused the idea. Having just worked commercial construction all summer, I knew who would comprise the “workers committee,” and that it would not end well.
I guess the point I missed was that the professor realized this and that the “workers committee” would require “political guidance” from the Party.
Can you imagine her reaction to being told: "Highly paid Americans like you should pay more to buy American products and help support American jobs" ?
Mika:
1. Get a bucket
2. Stand in it
3. Grab the handle and try to pull yourself up.
4. Don’t breathe until you’re at least 1 foot in the air.
The laws of economics are much more simple than those of physics, but apparently even libs cannot comprehend them.
“How Liberals think”Liberals don’t think.They feel and that’s their problem.If they thought more about what they did we wouldn’t be in the situation we’re in now.
I’m going to print this and take it to my boss. Surely he’ll see the light. /s
If Mika’a phone bill is $100, does she send $300? Does she double the allowance for her children just for the hell of it? Does she choose to pay full price when something’s on sale? After all, she can afford it.
What nonsense. There is such a thing as profit margin, and salaries and benefits are not just nice things that companies do for people. Companies need to get certain things done, and there is a benefit to getting the most things done at the lowest cost, i.e. getting the most benefit out of a dollar spent.
To this end, some workers should be paid more because they are more productive, others paid less. They should not be given raies “just because.”
our country has ORGANIZATIONAL SCLEROSIS !
go ahead and google it
I’m rereading “Free to Choose” by the Friedmans. Liberals should be forced at gunpoint to read it, except that the book is all about using less coercion. They should especially read the part about what it takes to make a pencil, if any of them remembers what a pencil is.
You mist understand that the entire lib mindset on the economy, which derives from Lord Keynes and before him mercantilism, is that there’s a big pile of money out there going to waste. All they have to do is take it away from rich people, stick it anywhere else (even with other rich people), and whammo. Problem solved.
You must understand that the entire lib mindset on the economy, which derives from Lord Keynes and before him mercantilism, is that there’s a big pile of money out there going to waste. All they have to do is take it away from rich people, stick it anywhere else (even with other rich people), and whammo. Problem solved.
It’s kind of simple, KneePad: Money that does not show up on a company’s balance sheet does not exist, and therefore cannot be redistributed.
Mika is representative of the average liberal dolt mindset.
Well, shoot, now I'm torn as to whether or not I want to read it. I don't know any other reason to read a post about her.
New headline should read “Mika is pretty simple” Thats it in a nutshell....
Today, the ramblings of a pampered media airhead.
Tomorrow, official US Government policy.
And you should be paid more if you have perky breasts and high cheekbones.
Pray for America
Mika! You ignorant Slut!
You wouldn't know what it takes to run a business if your life depended on it.
Yes.
It's like their electricity, or their phone, or their internet service. Just something that works when you pick it up, and it performs exactly as they think it should, every single time.
If the thought that "Hey, someone here is working to keep the lights on" ever crossed their minds, it would die of loneliness.
The CEO of Wal-Mart makes around $35 million a year. Wal-Mart has around 2.2 million employees.
If you took all his yearly paycheck and gave it to the workers as a raise it would be less than $16 per year for each worker. Divided by 52 weeks - it ain’t that much.
Libs like Mika just can’t do math.
She is right.
That is exactly how the Fed government works and they are a model of efficency, as long as they can print money and borrow (of it) about a third of what they spend. Why cant employers be more like that?
But don’t you know that all of these companies have a secret stash where they can get the extra money to pay higher wages. That’s what a bunch of Hope and Change types believe. We’re neck deep in trouble already and it’s only going to get worse.
Liberals just seem to think businesses are awash with money and could pay workers higher wages without producing anything.
But don’t you know that all of these companies have a secret stash where they can get the extra money to pay higher wages. That’s what a bunch of Hope and Change types believe. We’re neck deep in trouble already and it’s only going to get worse.
Mika has been upset over the fact “meester joe” is paid more than her. He was hired as a former us congressman and leftist RINO. She was hired as female chest in fuzzy sweaters.
leftists force workers to be paid more....
employeers respond by charging more....
employees have to pay more for company goods...
Ivy league morons.
You can also see the original 1980 series and the updated 1990 series here:
I really offended a lib-in-law a time when I made a statement about laws of physics and the moral law. This really stuck in my mind because of the level of outrage I perceived.
My statement was that the objective moral laws are as fixed as the physical laws of the universe, as are the consequences for violating them.
I think the offensive thing about it was the unrefutable truth of it.
In the communist world view, industry exploits workers and earns unfair profits from their work. The only fair industry is one run by the government.
In normal peoples’ view, you have a smart, hard-working risk taker who starts a business with his own money, and HAS THE RIGHT to the profit from his business.
Simple economics comes into play here. For employment to happen in a capitalist system, the employee has to be producing a sufficient amount of goods or services, to cover the cost to the employer. The employer, as entrepreneur, has to sell those goods and services to a client, with sufficient margin over costs, to earn the necessary income flow. When the costs are too high in relation to the market value of the goods or services, it makes no economic sense to continue to produce those goods or services. And if those goods and services are discontinued, there is no need for the employee, UNLESS -
Unless, either the employee agrees to change his job description to produce an alternative for the goods or services, which may be sold by the employer at a profit, or the employee reduces the cost to the employer for his labor to a point where the employer, as entrepreneur, reaches a break-even point in selling those goods and services.
Business enterprises which fail to produce a profit are soon either bankrupt, or they must rely on some other cash flow to maintain operations. They are either ADDING to the sum total of capital, or they are devouring it.
Liberals really are that clueless.
She has yet to define who are “The Workers” and How much is “Fair”? Does it apply only to Union members? Should Bosses have a Union? What about soldiers? Their goal is based on false assumptions and a 19th Century view of Labor.
The rest of this thesis is left as an exercise to the reader.
Fortunately, she grew up. . .Liberals, like Mika never do.
I am sure Mika would agree that just pay them more is equivalent with just raise your prices.
I wonder if Mika ever thinks about how much she is being paid compared to the person that does her makeup every morning. Or the person that brings her coffee. Or the hundreds of people are involved in producing her show every morning.
Combined they do not make what she makes in a year.
“well, daddy. . .if you don’t have enough money just go out and get some more money and then you can buy it!”
My guess is that part of Mika’s lack of financial smarts comes from growing up in a rich family where money was never an issue. To her it was never a limiting factor, paying more for something never meant you had less money for something else. Hence the attitude; if someone needs more money just give it to them...
pay them from what? when the wallet is empty all this living wage chorus sounds kind of stupid.
I often hear atheists, liberals and socialists (the same thing, really) talk about how religion is the opiate of the masses. I say it’s their delusions of economics and social norms that are the opiate that keep the masses stupefied (see Detroit). And many of them actually believe the propaganda. She is one of them. She thinks she sounds smart, but really, she sounds like the ass she is. Working at MSNBC really does make a person dumber.
Profit sharing? Hmm... Ok, how much profit should the owners distribute to the workers? 10%? 20%? This was the problem in sports.
The players unions wanted 53% of the profits because they play the game. The owners wanted 53% of the profits because they own the business. Next thing you know, there are no games, the owners are taking the writeoff and the players are stuck living on their million dollar a year plus salaries.
As accurate and succinct an explanation as I've read anywhere...
you lied to your daughter. You had the money, you just didn’t believe a Barbie vanity was worth you giving the store a hundred bucks. She probably knew you were lying. Kids are smart like that.
So, better you had said she could chip in, say $10 and you guys could buy it together, or she could wait for Christmas or a birthday.
Still, I understand your point was that she thought you could go get some money (which you could have because you could organize a hundred bucks). That is what liberals think and they are right. Business does have some money, but, like you, business is not convinced what is offered is worth the money. To a liberal, the fact that they “need it” is enough to make you fork it over, the fact that you don’t see how it helps your bottom line is irrelevant to a liberal.
Can liberals really be this clueless about capitalism? Ping to Today show list.
She’s never owned a business and made payroll.Like so many of these libs, they have spent their careers in academia or media, or politics. Therefore they have no practical understanding of market forces.
You learned nothing from Twinkies, you Dingdong!
I see two camps in liberalism: the low information voter and the elitists who manipulate them. Elitists are not ignorant of the laws of economics, they just despise them and want to replace them with a new set of laws. That is the whole idea of communism and socialism.
In the service of that goal it is not corrupt to resort to lying, manipulation, or even corruption itself, to destroy the corrupt system. Hence, Obama is in a win-win situation with respect to the fiscal Cliff and its sequelae, if the economy crashes he brings it one step closer to ultimate transformation.
I do not see how we can win future elections with the top down argument as effectively as Romney made it (or at least as effectively as we at the time thought he was making it), if we are dealing with about 50% of the population who are so low information they do not understand even the most elementary laws of economics. We cannot win these arguments at the polling booth anymore because the people who understood the laws of economics, much like the people who understood the Constitution or the laws of decency, have to a degree died out.
The Frankfurt School began at the bottom and worked up through our educational system, infecting our institutions, distorting our vocabulary, dominating our culture, and leaving a free people defenseless. Against this, top-down electioneering in the last nine months of a four-year cycle is probably hopeless.
Not guilty. But dumber than dirt.
Clueless isn't the appropriate word. It's "stupid". No one can be as clueless as she, without being simply stupid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.