Under $2/mile loads with $6/gal diesel.

I realize I sound like a troll at this juncture but that's because I need to be consequent with my line of thought which inevitably leads me to my third conclusion:
We, as carriers/owner operators ought to seek a method by which we are compensated equally for the same level of quality of service and workload.
That's an utopian view but it hurts my feelings to see one owner operator doing the same amount of work, with the same amount of dedication and performance efficiency as well as the work ethic as the other, and the other is compensated arbitrarily more - due to his 'unrelated skills' such as ability to utilize connections, nepotism, bribes, even the ability to negotiate. The one making less does not deserve to be called a bottom feeder or a fool or be belittled for he does the same thing as the one who looks down him.

That's not only demoralizing but also hurts the industry as a whole.

I'd rather see a system in which ONLY the volume and quality of work is rewarded the same way.

You would say that the free market takes care of it. Yes, but only in theory.
The 'free' part is questionable.

I repeat, that's my sentiment ONLY and any attempt to put it to reality is foolish.
That's why I called it utopian.

 

So you, choosing to rely solely on the spot market, deserves the same amount for moving a load as someone who has built a company and has contract freight? Or do you mean the spot rates should be equal for everyone?

When you were making $4-5 a mile last year how many checks did you send out to owner operators running contract freight? Or does distribution of profit only go one way?

 

From my perspective- the people complaining really would have nothing to worry about on that front: they don’t make enough money net to cover the 15% spread.

 

You want to talk demoralizing? How about coming on this forum and seeing @TallJoe and others talk about the big weeks and months you were having while I was doing contract work for a fair amount less. In fact, earlier this year someone pm’d me and asked why I was leased on and not on my own. My reply was that I’m banking on our contract work staying at least tolerable.

 

So you used a form of a proverb for a slogan, thumbs up to you sir.

It's not about feelings. Free markets are self organizing systems and just because people constantly think they can grasp the whole system and move it into their utopian vision doesn't change the scoreboard. You can't satisfy all the people all the time because people inherently have different wants and needs so their is no single outcome that satisfies all. The free market remains undefeated at the macro level because it is the sum of all competing interests.

However, what the vast majority of all participants have all agreed upon for generation upon generation is a standard of morality.

Your arbitrary 15% price cap is what is considered a price control. Taking guesses based on the theory that you "don't think it would be that difficult to build an econometrical model" is pure rubbish. People's lives aren't toys for philosophical armchair musings.

A few times throughout this long thread you have asked what's morally wrong with what you want and said something along the lines of you can't think of anything wrong with what you want, so I will summarize it as succinctly as I can:

You are pleading for government intervention in a private transaction between multiple parties that imposes a competitive disadvantage on one party to benefit another party. You are weilding government to oppress others which is morally bankrupt.

 

Did I not ask you not to take it literally?
Forget spot market for a moment and see big picture.
In order for the system to be in the optimal balanced stare, you and I must be compensated equally for the same amount of input.

 

Nonsense
There is a clear difference between a proverb and a slogan.
I used a proverb, exactly the way proverbs are used.

 

You are trying to reduce the system down to components you deem important such as "volume and quality of work" while ignoring the countless other inputs that are used in the decision making process.

 

I apologize I don't have time now.
I'll get back to you later.

 

Rubbish, you are guilty of using your disjointed form of a well known proverb as a slogan or meme and the irony is that you earlier criticized another poster for communicating in a very similar manner.