But it actually said "Three sentences no one should forget about unions." I would never have clicked on that. And now I'm sad not to have 3 sentences not to forget about onions. Please help me do better than this:
1. "Get those onions out of here!" (That's what Philo Kvetch said to "Onions" Oregano on "The Soupy Sales Show.")
2. "That was strange, having real onions and the rest of the stuff phony." (Andy Warhol's diary entry for Monday, August 27, 1979, commenting on a sandwich he ate at McDonald's.)
3. "Be an onion!" (According to Mark Twain, that's what a Bermudian says to his son.)
September 2, 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
64 comments:
The second sentence (of the three sentences about unions) has nothing to do with the other two, and is incorrect.
Unions are, indeed, conservative (in the "resistant to change" sense of the word), did develop alongside capitalism, and do in fact use contracts to tie themselves to companies. But it doesn't follow that they are part of capitalism.
Unions are entities that formed to try to capture, for themselves, some of the wealth created by capitalist enterprises. They aren't a part of capitalism any more than a remora is part of a shark.
Ogres are like onions
"How do you practice being an onion?" Harriet the Spy
Never mistake an onion for a credible news source.
Professor-
On the side of the article you linked there is a link to a flowchart for determining if you should wear shorts in public
I thought you might appreciate it.
Who knew onions could be sweet!
1015
From Erica Jong's "Fruits and Vegetables"
I am thinking of the onion again, with its two O mouths,
like the gaping holes in nobody. Of the outer skin, pinkish
brown, peeled to reveal a greenish sphere, bald as a dead
planet, glib as glass, & an odor almost animal. I consider
its ability to draw tears, its capacity for self-scrutiny,
flaying itself away, layer on layer, in search of its heart
which is simply another region of skin, but deeper &
greener. I remember Peer Gynt; I consider its sometimes
double heart. Then I think of despair when the onion
searches its soul & finds only its various skins; & I think
of the dried tuft of roots leading nowhere & the parched
umbilicus, lopped off in the garden. Not self-righteous
like the proletarian potato, nor a siren like the apple. No
show-off like the banana. But a modest, self-effacing
vegetable, questioning, introspective, peeling itself away,
or merely radiating halos like lake ripples. I consider it
the eternal outsider, the middle child, the sad analysand
of the vegetable kingdom. Glorified only in France (other-
wise silent sustainer of soups & stews), unloved for itself
alone-no wonder it draws our tears! Then I think again
how the outer peel resembles paper, how soul & skin
merge into one, how each peeling strips bare a heart
which in turn turns skin...
You have to buy the book to read the rest. Read it 40 years ago and still remember.
You got labradoodled big time.
I hate onions. They are the grossest food imaginable.
tits.
My only ex-wife, a year after our divorce, told me, "I miss onions on your breath."
Carmelized onions are heaven on earth. I may cook some now.
Thanks, Althouse.
That is disappointing. Even more disappointing than the fact that the unions themselves forgot those 3 sentences.
Looking through the bent backed tulips
To see how the other half live
Looking through a glass onion
Twain's description of Bermuda made it sound like paradise. The cats, the whitewash like frosting on the houses, the loungers at the port (though, come to think of it, they may be self-plagiarized from similar port-loungers described in Life on the Mississippi).
The onion thing did not surprise me. Some years ago, a French (Alsatian, actually) girl startled me by praising one of her teachers as "vachement chouette". Must be something about farms...
Covet onion.
Take onion.
Give her the onion.
Leora that was quite nice.
Thank you.
"Unions are entities that formed to try to capture, for themselves, some of the wealth created by capitalist enterprises. They aren't a part of capitalism any more than a remora is part of a shark."
corporations form syndicates for the same reason workers organize unions. In a free market, you cannot sell an item for more than its cost to produce. Nobody -- corporation or worker -- wants to be in that straight jacket.
When you peel away the layers of free market capitalism, or trade unionism, you find its heart is avarice. It wants to get a dime for something that's worth a nickel.
Don Quixote's advice to Sancho:
“Don’t eat garlic or onions, so people won’t be able to tell your low birth by the way you smell."
SHAKESPEARE: The Taming of the Shrew
And if the boy have not a woman's gift
To rain a shower of commanded tears,
An onion will do well for such a shift.
-----------------------
SHREK:
Shrek: For your information, there's a lot more to ogres than people think.
Donkey: Example?
Shrek: Example... uh... ogres are like onions!
[holds up an onion, which Donkey sniffs]
Donkey: They stink?
Shrek: Yes... No!
Donkey: Oh, they make you cry?
Shrek: No!
Donkey: Oh, you leave 'em out in the sun, they get all brown, start sproutin' little white hairs...
Shrek: [peels an onion] NO! Layers. Onions have layers. Ogres have layers... You get it? We both have layers.
[walks off]
Donkey: Oh, you both have LAYERS. Oh. You know, not everybody like onions. CAKE! Everybody loves cake! Cakes have layers!
Shrek: I don't care what everyone likes! Ogres are not like cakes.
Donkey: You know what ELSE everybody likes? Parfaits! Have you ever met a person, you say, "Let's get some parfait," they say, "Hell no, I don't like no parfait."? Parfaits are delicious!
Shrek: NO! You dense, irritating, miniature beast of burden! Ogres are like onions! End of story! Bye-bye! See ya later.
Donkey: Parfait's gotta be the most delicious thing on the whole damn planet!
-----------------
WILL ROGERS
An onion can make people cry but there's never been a vegetable that can make people laugh
Grandpa Simpson: "The important thing was that I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. I didn't have any white onions, because of the war. "
When you peel away the layers of free market capitalism, or trade unionism, you find its heart is avarice.
But free market capitalism is the means for preventing anyone from getting a dime for a nickel, while trade unionism is a means for ensuring it.
Every businessman, bgates, wants to buy in a free market and sell in a closed market. So does every worker. They are not different in that respect.
How's that free market capitalism going these days? How much do you pay MS for a copy of win8 that it costs MS 0.01 to create?
In a free market, you cannot sell an item for more than its cost to produce.
Correction:
In a free market in a perfect universe in which everybody had full information about all options and there were no differences in skill, ability, quality, or aesthetics, it would be impossible to sell an item for more than its cost to produce.
In the real world, in a free market, it is entirely possible to sell products for more than they cost to produce. Easy, in fact, if you're making something the market wants.
How's that free market capitalism going these days? How much do you pay MS for a copy of win8 that it costs MS 0.01 to create?
I opted to purchase one of the dozens of other operating systems and give Microsoft $0 for 0 copies of Windows 8. Such are the benefits of a free market economy. :)
"Easy, in fact, if you're making something the market wants."
Not in a free market. If we were in a free market, I could sell you a copy of Win8 for the cost of the disk, power to run my computer, depreciation on my computer, the substitution value of my time, etc.
A better way to put it would be "in a perfect free market, you cannot sell a product for more than it costs to produce." This is because someone else would be willing to sell it for a smaller margin over the cost to produce it.
Ever hear the joke about the two economists who spot a $20 bill on the sidewalk? First economist says "Hey! There is a twenty dollar bill on the sidewalk!" The second economist says "No there isn't. If there were. someone would have picked it up already."
The job of businesses (and workers) is to do the best that they can to insure that they do not sell in a free market so they can earn an economic profit.
I also use free operating systems whenever possible, Ravenant.
its cost to produce.
Of course, the "cost to produce" is the thing, the thang, the point, the argument over and out of which meaning gets made (especially in terms of money).
What gets to get counted as cost and what does not? The answer both affects and effects profit, yes? Or, no? Or, what?
C'mon, guys. Take on the "cost to produce" notion. Won't you?
What are all of the things that can be built into that notion?
And then: Which things are chosen to be built into that notion and which things are not chosen to be built into that notion, given various scenarios?
Pick one scenario that most fits your context and answer those questions.
Pick one scenario that least fits your context and answer those questions.
There is a pretty standard economic definition of cost, rcommal. It includes everything spent to produce the item, including depreciation costs, and importantly entrepreneurial talent. Give two guys each identical boxes of brushes to sell. One makes more money. All else being equal, that's entrepreneurial talent.
Think of it as substitution cost. My time to do something has value. If I can make $50 in an hour talking on the phone, it's worth it to pay a kid $49 to spend an hour mowing my lawn (though I'd pay less if I could).
People won't work for less than their time is worth. Adam Smith used the example of women who would pick up pretty agates on Scottish beaches and sell them as trinkets. all that they invested was their time, and consequently the price of 'scottish pebbles' was so low that if it were any less, the women simply wouldn't bother to collect the pebbles. The value the pebbles sold for was precisely the value of their time, nothing more or less.
It wasn't worth very much.
"Boy, she really stepped on your onions."
-- Dennis Franz, "Hill Street Blues"
In a free market, you cannot sell an item for more than its cost to produce.
True, as far as it goes, when you've sold the last unit *at the margin*.
Until then, you sell all of the item for what the market will bear.
Terry said...
Every businessman, bgates, wants to buy in a free market and sell in a closed market. So does every worker. They are not different in that respect.
How's that free market capitalism going these days? How much do you pay MS for a copy of win8 that it costs MS 0.01 to create?
You show a profound lack of understanding on what it costs to create software. MS spent many million dollars developing Win8. They also spend a lot of money supporting their products. Are they not allowed to recoup those costs? Sure, the production costs of an individual copy of Win8 are trivial but that's only a tiny fraction of what the product costs. All companies pass on their costs (R&D, production, regulatory compliance, corporate taxes, etc.) in the costs of their products. If they don't, they won't be in business for very long.
It's similar to how US drug companies are restricted on passing along their R&D costs when selling to many countries, so we Americans get to subsidize those other countries.
Unions are entities that formed to try to capture, for themselves, some of the wealth created by capitalist enterprises.
Creation of wealth requires labor. Workers who collectively bargain for a larger share of the profits are not parasites, they are partners.
In a free market, you cannot sell an item for more than its cost to produce.
For such advocates of capitalism, you don't even understand the basics.
If this statement were true, there would be no such things as retail.
You show a profound lack of understanding my argument, bgates.
Whether or not MS should be allowed to recoup the costs of producing Win8 by use of a government granted monopoly is a political question, not a question about the marginal cost to produce a Win8 DVD in a free market. It is not a free market for Win* DVD's. There are very few free markets. I can't think of any at all at the moment.
not a question about the marginal cost to produce a Win8 DVD in a free market.
You seem to forget that you are not paying for the disc but the contents.
Give two guys each identical boxes of brushes to sell. One makes more money.
That doesn't make one a better entrepreneur, it makes one a better salesman than the other.
"If this statement were true, there would be no such things as retail."
Do you understand the difference between a normal profit and an economic profit, Freder?
In a free market, the profit a retailer earns (say, 5%) above all of his costs including economic costs is an economic profit.
Any person who wants to cover all of his costs and is willing to settle for 4% will take all his business.
That is why businesses hate to be stuck in a free market. They'll do anything to get out of it. Form cartels, use IP and product branding, use the government regs to amplify the advantages of economy of scale. Anything.
Freder Frederson said...
Workers who collectively bargain for a larger share of the profits are not parasites, they are partners.
Very true, much like in the '70s when American motorists and OPEC were partners.
Terry said...
Any person who wants to cover all of his costs and is willing to settle for 4% will take all his business.
That assumes that both businesses have the same costs. Why would you assume that? A significant amount of effort goes into finding ways to reduce costs. A business that does that better can make a larger profit then their competitor.
Workers who collectively bargain for a larger share of the profits are a syndicate. These syndicates would normally be subject to laws against restraint of trade, but they were explicitly legalized in the 1914 Clayton Antitrust Act.
Unions embrace the idea of forcing buyers (businesses) to choose their product. What business wouldn't do the same? What businesses welcome lower price competitors?
"That assumes that both businesses have the same costs."
That's what economists do. To discover the dynamics you have to remove all other variables. "All things being equal . . ."
Microeconomics assumes that a person will never expend more than they have to to get the same value. If it costs two bakers the same amount to make the same donut,and one sells it for one cent more then the other, all things being equal, none of the more expensive donuts will ever be sold. In reality it is nearly impossible to have two products of exactly equal value -- unless it is a commodity, like, say, table salt.
Hard to make an economic profit selling table salt.
This is textbook, econ 101 stuff.
And econ 101 has very little relevance to the real world.
And econ 101 has very little relevance to the real world.
Terry said...
That's what economists do. To discover the dynamics you have to remove all other variables. "All things being equal . . ."
And that's a perfectly reasonable assumption to make when trying to determine what happens when you remove all other variables.
However, if you take such an assumption and think that it applies in the real world, you end up saying stupid things like In a free market, you cannot sell an item for more than its cost to produce.
Of course it does, Freder. How do you think business make money? Guesswork? What do you think they teach people at business school? What do you think product branding is other than a way to increase the products value by 2% by spending 1.5% on advertising?
How poor and tasteless life would be without onions. There are those that hate onions, I hear. I understand there are also those who abhor sex. There's no accounting for taste.
You would think that someone on this thread other than myself would have taken micro and macro economics. It's one of the humanities, for God's sake. The math isn't even hard.
I think, Ignorance is Bliss, it might help you to understand better if you tried to think of why you would pay more something than its total cost to produce.
Because no one else can sell you the something? Then it's not a free market.
Because no one else can sell it cheaper?
Then it is already being sold at its lowest cost to produce.
You would think that someone on this thread other than myself would have taken micro and macro economics.
I think the problem is that you only took micro and macro economics and then stopped. Very little of 6 credit hours of theory applies to the real world.
Because no one else can sell you the something? Then it's not a free market.
That is only true if the reason no one else can sell it is because a law stops them. Maybe nobody else knows the secret technique or ingredients. Maybe I'm buying a specific brand because of my expectation of quality or future support. Maybe what I'm buying has requires a large investment in production facilities, and no competitors thought it would be worth the investment.
Because no one else can sell it cheaper?
Then it is already being sold at its lowest cost to produce.
Only if you assume that all competitors are as well managed and efficiently run as the place from which I buy.
Here is a question for you:
Why would anyone bother to start a business in a free market if it would not be possible to sell items for more than it costs to produce them?
Freder Frederson said...
And econ 101 has very little relevance to the real world.
"Das Kapital" on the other hand, is "TRUTH".
Creation of wealth requires labor. Workers who collectively bargain for a larger share of the profits are not parasites, they are partners."
Excellently and succinctly put!
(Its excellence derives in part from its succinctness.)
"You would think that someone on this thread other than myself would have taken micro and macro economics. It's one of the humanities, for God's sake."
Since when has economics been considered one of the humanities?
Andy Warhol was an idiot.
It's useful to be reminded of that, sometimes.
if you tried to think of why you would pay more something than its total cost to produce.
The newest iPhone.
The early-model Mazda Miatas.
Just to name two that fall under the category of SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!!.
How much do you pay MS for a copy of win8 that it costs MS 0.01 to create?
Ummm, only if you overlook the man-years of software engineering and developer relations that go into bringing a product like Win8 to market.
Despite Will Rodger's quote, sweet potatoes make me laugh. That's because I had an uncle, a farmer, who, whenever a car pulled up in front of his rural home, would walk out the door with a sweet potato sticking out the fly of his overalls. That made me laugh.
"Das Kapital" on the other hand, is "TRUTH".
Das Kapital (even if you don't agree with its premise or conclusions) is a lot more intellectually rigorous than anything you will learn in Freshman economics.
1. "Solidarity forever, for the onion makes us strong!" Ancient harvest festival song, circa 1915 B.C.
2. "You don't bring a note and a gun to a bank to shoplift onions." Sheriff R.Q. Reventlo, Nonesuch County, East Dakota, in response to questions about the shooting of independent redistributionist Thirty-eight Caliber Calloway.
3. "The newsstand had a stack of Le Mondes, a dozen In These Times's and a whole mess of The Onions." Feature writer Wadia Tink, in an article on the restored Aerodrome just outside Madison, Wisconsin and just inside The United States.
Yeah Fred, just wait till you get to the part about the Jews. Now that's what I call rigor!
If we were in a free market, I could sell you a copy of Win8 for the cost of the disk, power to run my computer, depreciation on my computer, the substitution value of my time, etc.
You appear to think "can" and "would" are synonyms. They are not.
Microsoft CAN sell you Win8 for cost, or for below cost, or for $1 billion per disk. What they opt to sell it to you for, instead, is the price they think will maximize their profits. That's how free markets work.
@terry. It would say branding is more of a way to use an imaginary voodoo multiplier to inflate the company and stock's value (by a lot.) See Millward Brown.
Product branding for 2% is mid-level misery.
And personal branding can go suck a dick.
Post a Comment