Time Magazine Cover May 25th 2009

[LATruth]

http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/2009/1101090525_400.jpg


Throw away the briefcase, you're not going to the office. You can kiss your benefits goodbye too. And your new boss wont look much like your old one. There's no longer a ladder and you may never get to retire, but there is a world of opportunity if you figure out a new path. 10 lessons for succedding in the new American workplace.

I almost threw up in the checkout lane at my local grocery store...

Discuss.

[MyLibertyStuff]

...? whats the big deal

[nate895]

I don't even know what that means.

[Kludge]

...? whats the big deal


I don't even know what that means.

These.

Sounds like a dream environment for entrepreneurs.

[coyote_sprit]

The bottom half of that dude is a mass murderer. No business man dresses like that.

[dannno]

It means the corporate structure is changing from a vertical model to a more horizontal arrangement. There are more team oriented projects, more automation in the workplace, and thus less monotonous tasks. Upper management is more involved in the lower end, and general employees are more involved with upper management.

This means a more level playing field. This means you don't just get promoted because of how many years experience you have or even your education. We're talking more skill and performance based promotions.

[dannno]

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h273/onefootoff/lebowski_time_mirror-1.jpg

[zach]

It means the corporate structure is changing from a vertical model to a more horizontal arrangement. There are more team oriented projects, more automation in the workplace, and thus less monotonous tasks. Upper management is more involved in the lower end, and general employees are more involved with upper management.

This means a more level playing field. This means you don't just get promoted because of how many years experience you have or even your education. We're talking more skill and performance based promotions.

I like this structure more.

[LATruth]

It means the corporate structure is changing from a vertical model to a more horizontal arrangement. There are more team oriented projects, more automation in the workplace, and thus less monotonous tasks. Upper management is more involved in the lower end, and general employees are more involved with upper management.

This means a more level playing field. This means you don't just get promoted because of how many years experience you have or even your education. We're talking more skill and performance based promotions.

I would love to think this is what that meant, but IMO, not being able to retire, new boss instead of the old boss( could your new boss me the government with all the nationalization going on?), no benefits... sounds like slavery to me.


I like this structure more.

Personally, I liked benefits and the idea of retirement...

[dannno]

I like this structure more.

I think what happened in the past was that people who had high qualifications would have the ability to attract more capital. It was more about who you knew that what you knew. If you could gain significant capital using your qualifications, then you could take out the competition by either buying them up or lowering your prices just enough to strangle the competition. So you didn't have to make something more efficient, you just had to do it well enough to take away competitors' business and then you're home free. Think about a small, local doughnut shop, and pretend that a big chain moves in next door. The big chain starts by offering better deals and drawing customers away from the local shop, even though they are losing money. They lose money for so long, then their competitor quits, and they take in their business and raise prices back up. Now, in a free market if the company had saved money from their other chain stores to drown out competition somewhere, then they would at least have been drawing on their prior successes..whereas this easy and vast capital resource lets the big corporations essentially cheat against the small guy.

I think what we're seeing is an example of the free market shining through in a corporatist world. As Ron Paul says, the current market is trying to correct itself by lowering prices, and that is precisely what SHOULD be happening.. but the government sees it as a bad thing and tries to stop it.

[dannno]

I would love to think this is what that meant, but IMO, not being able to retire, new boss instead of the old boss( could your new boss me the government with all the nationalization going on?), no benefits... sounds like slavery to me.



Personally, I liked benefits and the idea of retirement...

Well you have to remember that employers don't give a rats ass what form your salary comes in unless there are tax breaks involved.. Even then, the net cost is their only concern. They don't care if they give you benefits or not, a higher salary, medical coverage, etc, they ONLY care about the total cost of all of those things for each employee. Personally, I'd rather my company give me all of it so that I can determine for myself what kind of medical coverage I want, how much I want to save, etc.. but currently the government is giving companies big incentives (through tax breaks) to give us medical coverage. If I ask my company to just give me the money instead, they'll tax it and I won't get as much. If I take that money and go get health coverage, I probably won't get as much because the government has mandated that companies should be including medical coverage in their salaries.

So anyway, the reason employees might not be offering the same benefits is because they want to offer a higher salary.. but the main thing to consider is that the dollar is being devalued, and that is why the prices are high, medical or otherwise, and that is what we should really be concerned with.

[BenIsForRon]

I think the cover is about the hope that smart people will put their skills towards a useful profession, like medicine or science, versus finance, where many college grads have gone for past couple decades.

I totally agree with this, the financial sector should not be the biggest sector in our economy.

[moostraks]

I would love to think this is what that meant, but IMO, not being able to retire, new boss instead of the old boss( could your new boss me the government with all the nationalization going on?), no benefits... sounds like slavery to me.



Personally, I liked benefits and the idea of retirement...

I interpreted the statements the same way you did....but then I am a cynic of the worst sort.

I think it is sad that they are touting the loss of retirement and the loss of benefits. It is one thing in youth and arrogance to think "hey cool!" but a whole 'nother to embrace just exactly what they are saying here. I have said it before but I will repeat...this whole economic fiasco was to force american workers to accept the concept of the new work environment which benefits only those at the top of the food chain.:(

[nobody's_hero]

I would like to read the article.

Can I haz article?

(at first the bit about benefits struck me, but perhaps they're talking about the days of $30 UAW wages with $50 worth of benefits are gone, and realistically, I must agree)

(unless someone can figure out how to make that absurdity work and maintain a competitive edge in the free market, or what is left of it)

[MRoCkEd]

I think there's an article about Peter Schiff in there - right?

[LATruth]

I would like to read the article.

Can I haz article?



http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1898024_1898023_1898169,00.html

[phill4paul]

"And your new boss wont look much like your old one"

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

[LATruth]

I interpreted the statements the same way you did....but then I am a cynic of the worst sort.
(

With our government, everything has a duality of meaning. The passage on the cover could be interpreted in a very libertarian point of view as Danno has laid out for us, however, it can also be a wolf in sheep's clothing type of message. One thats so in your face you don't see it, IT IS TIME MAGAZINE after all...

[jkr]

EVERONE is talking bout this round here...we are all consultants now...so PAY me like one. Please?

[jkr]

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h273/onefootoff/lebowski_time_mirror-1.jpg

...yes he was...:D

[LittleLightShining]

I would love to think this is what that meant, but IMO, not being able to retire, new boss instead of the old boss( could your new boss me the government with all the nationalization going on?), no benefits... sounds like slavery to me.



Personally, I liked benefits and the idea of retirement...Me, too.


"And your new boss wont look much like your old one"

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."Exactly.


With our government, everything has a duality of meaning. The passage on the cover could be interpreted in a very libertarian point of view as Danno has laid out for us, however, it can also be a wolf in sheep's clothing type of message. One thats so in your face you don't see it, IT IS TIME MAGAZINE after all...Yep.

[angelatc]

Well you have to remember that employers don't give a rats ass what form your salary comes in unless there are tax breaks involved.. Even then, the net cost is their only concern. They don't care if they give you benefits or not, a higher salary, medical coverage, etc, they ONLY care about the total cost of all of those things for each employee.
.

It is obvious you've never run a business. Thanks for helping to perpetrate the "capitalism is evil" dichotomy.

[angelatc]

With our government, everything has a duality of meaning. The passage on the cover could be interpreted in a very libertarian point of view as Danno has laid out for us, however, it can also be a wolf in sheep's clothing type of message. One thats so in your face you don't see it, IT IS TIME MAGAZINE after all...

I saw this and thought "Oh look - left leaning propaganda."

[moostraks]

With our government, everything has a duality of meaning. The passage on the cover could be interpreted in a very libertarian point of view as Danno has laid out for us, however, it can also be a wolf in sheep's clothing type of message. One thats so in your face you don't see it, IT IS TIME MAGAZINE after all...

My thoughts as well (This is TIME magazine...). I get so tired of trying to disect and interpret the news. I think that the general public speaks at one level and often does not realize that those in more elite circles utilize innuendo frequently. It is like a cat toying with a mouse the way they use media. The more ego driven an individual is, the more they tend to embrace this method of communicating.

[silverhawks]

From the article:


It's commencement day at the Thunderbird School of Global Management, a highly regarded if off-the-beaten-track business school housed on a former military base (Thunderbird Field) in Glendale, Ariz., a suburb of Phoenix. The 279 graduates have gathered on a May afternoon in a convention center next door to the Arizona Cardinals football stadium. After a presentation of the flags of 35 nations and a speech by school president Angel Cabrera, something unusual happens.

"As a Thunderbird and a global citizen, I promise," Cabrera begins. The graduates repeat after him. Then the recitation continues:

I will strive to act with honesty and integrity. I will respect the rights and dignity of all people. I will strive to create sustainable prosperity worldwide. I will oppose all forms of corruption and exploitation. And I will take responsibility for my actions. As I hold true to these principles, it is my hope that I may enjoy an honorable reputation and peace of conscience.

This is the Thunderbird Oath of Honor, the unlikely leading edge of an assault on business as usual at business schools. It's part of a broader rethinking of the balance between doing well and doing good that could reshape the economy and the workplace in coming years — or could just stay a debating point. B schools, Thunderbird president Cabrera and his fellow rebels contend, are ethical wastelands partly to blame for the Wall Street collapse of the past year. Even those who defend B schools don't claim that they're moral beacons. Debating Cabrera in April at the annual convention of the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), Purdue business-school dean Richard Cosier attributed the crisis to "personal greed" and too much debt. "Personal greed reflects personal values," Cosier asserted when I caught him on the phone a few days later, "and you can't blame business schools for determining personal value systems."

Remember folks, capitalism is only good as long as its GLOBAL. Because non-global capitalists obviously lack ethics.

Ethical business practices are not enforced by reciting an oath, same as ethical government practices are not enforced by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

And I'm with angelatc - this entire article is globalist propaganda. This isn't heralding the birth of a free market, this is the rebranding of corporate America to look "user-friendly". This is a clear message to the workers of America: either go along with the agenda, or you're done.

[LATruth]

I saw this and thought "Oh look - left leaning propaganda."

My statement, or the cover?

[MyLibertyStuff]

The bottom half of that dude is a mass murderer. No business man dresses like that.

lol

[LATruth]

this entire article is globalist propaganda. This isn't heralding the birth of a free market, this is the rebranding of corporate America to look "user-friendly". This is a clear message to the workers of America: either go along with the agenda, or you're done.

Yes, this is what I took from it. And, it is spun so deceptively that many will read it, absorb it, adhere to it, and be fine with it.

[purplechoe]

http://www.armyof1.us/ron_paul_(MOTY).jpg

[LATruth]

http://www.armyof1.us/ron_paul_(MOTY).jpg

:D

[Reason]

The article isn't bad at all.

[Reason]

Didn't know this O.o

"The death of American manufacturing has been greatly exaggerated. According to U.N. statistics, the U.S. remains by far the world's largest manufacturer, producing nearly twice as much value as No. 2 China. Since 1990, U.S. manufacturing output has grown by nearly $800 billion — an amount larger than the entire manufacturing economy of Germany, a global powerhouse. "

[Objectivist]

I guess I was too busy looking at Megan Fox to see that story.
http://www.esquire.com/cover-detail?year=2009&month=6

The video is prime.
http://www.esquire.com/the-side/video/megan-fox-video

[Reason]

I guess I was too busy looking at Megan Fox to see that story.
http://www.esquire.com/cover-detail?year=2009&month=6

The video is prime.
http://www.esquire.com/the-side/video/megan-fox-video

+10

[moostraks]

Didn't know this O.o

"The death of American manufacturing has been greatly exaggerated. According to U.N. statistics, the U.S. remains by far the world's largest manufacturer, producing nearly twice as much value as No. 2 China. Since 1990, U.S. manufacturing output has grown by nearly $800 billion — an amount larger than the entire manufacturing economy of Germany, a global powerhouse. "

Cute statistics quote and the reason I don't trust them. Want to stroke a subject? Find the right statistic...

"The most significant counterbalance to the drop in total employment has been the dramatic rise in productivity....According to NAM, over the past two decades, manufacturing productivity has grown by 94%"

"The percentage of U.S. workers employed in manufacturing has dropped from 16.5% in 1987 to 10.8% today."

Article was from June 2007

http://www.industryweek.com/articles/the_face_of_american_manufacturing_14159.aspx

Did you know those statistics from your article?