Log in
Register
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
News
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Features
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to thread
Home
Forums
Off Topic
The Basement
Money $$$$$
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="John Roberts" data-source="post: 97440" data-attributes="member: 126"><p>Re: Money $$$$$</p><p></p><p></p><p>This is a variant on simple supply and demand. If too many people want to do a job for little or no pay, there is no benefit from paying more. While there are plenty of undesirable jobs that do not pay well, just because they are undesirable. Again supply and demand enters if the employer can not find anybody to shovel the sh__, they may pay a premium to get the job accomplished. Sometimes this will encourage robots/automation to handle most undesirable tasks. </p><p></p><p>This is an interesting point about how people make economic decisions. When spending our own money we are more responsible about wasteful or overly generous spending decisions. This is one dominant criticism of how healthcare spending decisions are made. If the individual made personal healthcare spending decisions, like they were spending their own money, instead of insurance company or government money our healthcare spending would be significantly reduced by the negative feedback of first person self-interest at work. ( This is why insurance companies use added co-pay charges to try to discourage customers from using more expensive name brand drugs, and drug companies simultaneously try to provide credits to diminish the negative feedback effect of co-pays. ) </p><p></p><p>OTOH if running a small business or working for a company owned by a single individual they will often look at company purchases as if spending their own money, because they are. So I would refine Brian's advice to try to sell to large companies that may be more disconnected from spending responsibly. </p><p></p><p>Working in live sound is a little like running away to join the circus. </p><p></p><p>There are other generalities about making money... In small companies and better managed large companies your work effort must create value to support your pay. In the short term, and in larger poorly managed companies you can beat the system by managing your boss, but in the average if the work doesn't create more value than pay the business will not succeed. </p><p></p><p>A variant or corollary to work effort needing to create value, is the multiplier effect. Some types of work do not create sellable product but do create an intangible value, like cleaning bathrooms. This would be 1:0 work where 1 hour of work does not create sellable goods but one unit of service value. The next kind of work is 1:1 where a factory worker sits on a production line and creates an hours worth of widgets an hour. To make more money means spending more hours at 1:1 tasks. Next are higher multiplier jobs 1:X like managing other workers. One hour of management has the capability to create more than one hour of output. Another high multiplier task is designing gear, but this is non-linear with hits and misses, just like writing a hit song is a high multiplier task, easier said than done. Of course there are exceptions to 1:0 tasks being low pay, brain surgeons are arguably a service job but well compensated. </p><p></p><p>A generality about making more money in a large organization is to be close to the money. In a large corporation there are two power centers involving money. Money coming in and money going out. In all cases this gross money flow through a corporation could be 10x the profit. Money coming in is the work of the sales organization. Money flowing out is the work of purchasing departments. Just like congress spending tax dollars, purchasing agents gain power and influence from the money they spend. </p><p></p><p>Of course at the end of the day it depends on the individual, these are just generalities. </p><p></p><p>JR</p><p></p><p>PS: minimum wage rules are the exact opposite of allowing free market forces to determine wages. Politicians like to believe they can get more pay for low level workers by waving their legislative wand. A recent situation in Wash DC reveals the folly in believing that. 24 hours after Walmart warned the council that it could affect their expansion plans in the region, the council ruled that large retailers (like Walmart) would have to pay workers a 50% premium over the current minimum wage. Walmart cancelled plans for a few stores and several hundred jobs. This will no doubt lead to worse economic conditions for citizens, while DC is an interesting paradox with uber-wealthy living off the government teat side by side with high unemployment and low wages. The much discussed wealth gap is not something that can be fixed with legislation. If anything government can help educate unemployed workers to perform higher skilled tasks. When they can create more wealth they can get paid more.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="John Roberts, post: 97440, member: 126"] Re: Money $$$$$ This is a variant on simple supply and demand. If too many people want to do a job for little or no pay, there is no benefit from paying more. While there are plenty of undesirable jobs that do not pay well, just because they are undesirable. Again supply and demand enters if the employer can not find anybody to shovel the sh__, they may pay a premium to get the job accomplished. Sometimes this will encourage robots/automation to handle most undesirable tasks. This is an interesting point about how people make economic decisions. When spending our own money we are more responsible about wasteful or overly generous spending decisions. This is one dominant criticism of how healthcare spending decisions are made. If the individual made personal healthcare spending decisions, like they were spending their own money, instead of insurance company or government money our healthcare spending would be significantly reduced by the negative feedback of first person self-interest at work. ( This is why insurance companies use added co-pay charges to try to discourage customers from using more expensive name brand drugs, and drug companies simultaneously try to provide credits to diminish the negative feedback effect of co-pays. ) OTOH if running a small business or working for a company owned by a single individual they will often look at company purchases as if spending their own money, because they are. So I would refine Brian's advice to try to sell to large companies that may be more disconnected from spending responsibly. Working in live sound is a little like running away to join the circus. There are other generalities about making money... In small companies and better managed large companies your work effort must create value to support your pay. In the short term, and in larger poorly managed companies you can beat the system by managing your boss, but in the average if the work doesn't create more value than pay the business will not succeed. A variant or corollary to work effort needing to create value, is the multiplier effect. Some types of work do not create sellable product but do create an intangible value, like cleaning bathrooms. This would be 1:0 work where 1 hour of work does not create sellable goods but one unit of service value. The next kind of work is 1:1 where a factory worker sits on a production line and creates an hours worth of widgets an hour. To make more money means spending more hours at 1:1 tasks. Next are higher multiplier jobs 1:X like managing other workers. One hour of management has the capability to create more than one hour of output. Another high multiplier task is designing gear, but this is non-linear with hits and misses, just like writing a hit song is a high multiplier task, easier said than done. Of course there are exceptions to 1:0 tasks being low pay, brain surgeons are arguably a service job but well compensated. A generality about making more money in a large organization is to be close to the money. In a large corporation there are two power centers involving money. Money coming in and money going out. In all cases this gross money flow through a corporation could be 10x the profit. Money coming in is the work of the sales organization. Money flowing out is the work of purchasing departments. Just like congress spending tax dollars, purchasing agents gain power and influence from the money they spend. Of course at the end of the day it depends on the individual, these are just generalities. JR PS: minimum wage rules are the exact opposite of allowing free market forces to determine wages. Politicians like to believe they can get more pay for low level workers by waving their legislative wand. A recent situation in Wash DC reveals the folly in believing that. 24 hours after Walmart warned the council that it could affect their expansion plans in the region, the council ruled that large retailers (like Walmart) would have to pay workers a 50% premium over the current minimum wage. Walmart cancelled plans for a few stores and several hundred jobs. This will no doubt lead to worse economic conditions for citizens, while DC is an interesting paradox with uber-wealthy living off the government teat side by side with high unemployment and low wages. The much discussed wealth gap is not something that can be fixed with legislation. If anything government can help educate unemployed workers to perform higher skilled tasks. When they can create more wealth they can get paid more. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Off Topic
The Basement
Money $$$$$
Top
Bottom
Sign-up
or
log in
to join the discussion today!