JoePatroni707 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 199 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3468 times:
In last nights speech, Obama stated he wanted to raise the minimum wage to $9.00 per hour. I for one think this is a huge mistake was a lot of small businesses could not afford to do this, and be forced to reduce headcount leading to more unemployment making matters worse.
I for one do now belive the government should have the right to tell any business owner how much to pay his emlployees. I dont think there should be any minimum wage laws at all, and it should be up to the free market to determine wages.
I am in the SF bay area and the "living wage" is nearly $11.00, which was forced many companies to lay off people to afford the higher wages.
Combining these higher wages with Obama care will spell economic disaster.
DFWHeavy From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 469 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3464 times:
He doesn't know economics 101 of capitalism and the free market economy. There will ALWAYS be some unemployment (though it can get down to the 3-4% range) and you can raise the minimum wage all you want, but prices will just go up to compensate for it. There will ALWAYS be people at the bottom. Minimum wage could be raised to $100 an hour and the people that make that minimum wage will be in the same boat they are now.
"Head knocking against the wall" with these asinine policies.
cmf From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 2485 posts, RR: 35 Reply 2, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3444 times:
Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter): I for one do now belive the government should have the right to tell any business owner how much to pay his emlployees. I dont think there should be any minimum wage laws at all, and it should be up to the free market to determine wages.
Great utopian theory. There was a time not that long ago when it was like that. It wasn't fun.
Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter): Combining these higher wages with Obama care will spell economic disaster.
If you can't pay enough to provide reasonable living you should not be in business. All you are doing is dragging everyone down.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 3, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3445 times:
Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter): Combining these higher wages with Obama care will spell economic disaster.
Hmm, here in Oregon, it's illegal to pump your own gas. It's estimated that there are the equivalent of 20K or more full-time jobs maintained due to having this "unnecessary" service. Yet our gas doesn't cost any more than it does in Washington or California, even though wages at gas stations are higher than elsewhere due to having gas jockeys employed. We also don't have an appreciable difference in the number of gas stations per capita/per car/per miles driven.
So with higher wages, how come it hasn't spelled economic disaster for our gas stations in comparison to neighboring states?
mt99 From United States of America, joined exactly 14 years ago today! , 6354 posts, RR: 7 Reply 6, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 3395 times:
venus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1410 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 3374 times:
He can raise the minimum all he wants. All it will do is make the employers pass on costs to the consumer, lower his payroll and cut hours to the remaining employees especially if is a major corporation like McDonald's or and other chain store that answers to shareholders and not their employees and customers. It seems every time Washington opens its mouth about business the ranks of the part time and unemployed rise. It will be a harder in the future to find full time entry level work.
WestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1275 posts, RR: 7 Reply 8, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3344 times:
I never gave a thought to minimum wage in the US until seeing this thread and I'm surprised how low it is! Here it is $10.25, and nobody is shutting their doors because the raises.
But with that said, Obama isn't solving the underlying problem. The idea of "minimum wage" never designed to be a living wage. It was designed so that part-timers, students, etc. weren't taken advantage of because they weren't full-time employees. Raising minimum wage to $9 won't have a positive impact (nor will it have a disastrous effect that some people are suggesting).
Also, Boehner needs to crack a smile once in a while. I've never seen a more sour-faced man in my life than I did during the SOTU last night. Can't be good for his health to be so pissed off all the time. Perhaps a few less trips to the tanning salon would help as well...
Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter): I for one do now belive the government should have the right to tell any business owner how much to pay his emlployees. I dont think there should be any minimum wage laws at all, and it should be up to the free market to determine wages.
I generally promote a total free market economy, but in this instance we would have to tread incredibly lightly.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 4): here in Oregon, it's illegal to pump your own gas
Stabilator From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 487 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3338 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 9): The idea of "minimum wage" never designed to be a living wage. It was designed so that part-timers, students, etc. weren't taken advantage of because they weren't full-time employees
Not enough liberals and people in general understand this.
So we beat on against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
hOmsar From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 804 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3314 times:
The "minimum wage" was never intended to be a living wage, perhaps. But these days, when Wal Mart is the biggest employer in some towns and entire families' wages are dependent on what essentially amount to minimum-wage jobs, the minimum wage has become the de facto living wage for these people.
We're not in the 1950s anymore. Back then, a college student could work a part-time summer job and pay for his entire tuition, books, room and board.
Nowadays, the jobs that sustained the middle class are leaving (and have been for a few decades now). The only jobs left for lots of people are these minimum-wage jobs.
It completely sucks, but that's the way it is. Unless and until this fact changes, then you can't keep treating the minimum wage as if it's just for part-time college students looking for extra spending money.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 11, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3294 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 9): That's absolutely asinine. What is the justification for these laws?!
Jobs is the usual reason given these days, but Oregon law actually codifies 17 separate reasons for banning self-dispensing of gasoline in the state:
480.315 Policy. The Legislative Assembly declares that, except as provided in ORS 480.345 to 480.385, it is in the public interest to maintain a prohibition on the self-service dispensing of Class 1 flammable liquids at retail. The Legislative Assembly finds and declares that:
(1) The dispensing of Class 1 flammable liquids by dispensers properly trained in appropriate safety procedures reduces fire hazards directly associated with the dispensing of Class 1 flammable liquids;
(2) Appropriate safety standards often are unenforceable at retail self-service stations in other states because cashiers are often unable to maintain a clear view of and give undivided attention to the dispensing of Class 1 flammable liquids by customers;
(3) Higher liability insurance rates charged to retail self-service stations reflect the dangers posed to customers when they leave their vehicles to dispense Class 1 flammable liquids, such as the increased risk of crime and the increased risk of personal injury resulting from slipping on slick surfaces;
(4) The dangers of crime and slick surfaces described in subsection (3) of this section are enhanced because Oregon’s weather is uniquely adverse, causing wet pavement and reduced visibility;
(5) The dangers described in subsection (3) of this section are heightened when the customer is a senior citizen or has a disability, especially if the customer uses a mobility aid, such as a wheelchair, walker, cane or crutches;
(6) Attempts by other states to require the providing of aid to senior citizens and persons with disabilities in the self-service dispensing of Class 1 flammable liquids at retail have failed, and therefore, senior citizens and persons with disabilities must pay the higher costs of full service;
(7) Exposure to toxic fumes represents a health hazard to customers dispensing Class 1 flammable liquids;
(8) The hazard described in subsection (7) of this section is heightened when the customer is pregnant;
(9) The exposure to Class 1 flammable liquids through dispensing should, in general, be limited to as few individuals as possible, such as gasoline station owners and their employees or other trained and certified dispensers;
(10) The typical practice of charging significantly higher prices for full-service fuel dispensing in states where self-service is permitted at retail:
(a) Discriminates against customers with lower incomes, who are under greater economic pressure to subject themselves to the inconvenience and hazards of self-service;
(b) Discriminates against customers who are elderly or have disabilities who are unable to serve themselves and so must pay the significantly higher prices; and
(c) Increases self-service dispensing and thereby decreases maintenance checks by attendants, which results in neglect of maintenance, endangering both the customer and other motorists and resulting in unnecessary and costly repairs;
(11) The increased use of self-service at retail in other states has contributed to diminishing the availability of automotive repair facilities at gasoline stations;
(12) Self-service dispensing at retail in other states does not provide a sustained reduction in fuel prices charged to customers;
(13) A general prohibition of self-service dispensing of Class 1 flammable liquids by the general public promotes public welfare by providing increased safety and convenience without causing economic harm to the public in general;
(14) Self-service dispensing at retail contributes to unemployment, particularly among young people;
(15) Self-service dispensing at retail presents a health hazard and unreasonable discomfort to persons with disabilities, elderly persons, small children and those susceptible to respiratory diseases;
(16) The federal Americans with Disabilities Act, Public Law 101-336, requires that equal access be provided to persons with disabilities at retail gasoline stations; and
(17) Small children left unattended when customers leave to make payment at retail self-service stations creates a dangerous situation.
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4544 posts, RR: 28 Reply 12, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3290 times:
Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter): I am in the SF bay area and the "living wage" is nearly $11.00, which was forced many companies to lay off people to afford the higher wages.
Combining these higher wages with Obama care will spell economic disaster
Together, they are an added cost of doing business. The reality is, doing business requires making money, and most business owners are pretty smart people. You can only raise your prices so much in this economy before demand begins to fall, so you have to balance price increases with other measures. In the case of labor, you are going to mitigate the increases by reducing hours, gaining efficiencies, and avoiding added burdens such as ObamaCare.
The end result will be a lot more people working, but a lot less of them working full-time.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 4): Hmm, here in Oregon, it's illegal to pump your own gas. It's estimated that there are the equivalent of 20K or more full-time jobs maintained due to having this "unnecessary" service. Yet our gas doesn't cost any more than it does in Washington or California, even though wages at gas stations are higher than elsewhere due to having gas jockeys employed. We also don't have an appreciable difference in the number of gas stations per capita/per car/per miles driven.
So with higher wages, how come it hasn't spelled economic disaster for our gas stations in comparison to neighboring states?
1. Washington state has one of - if not the - highest gas taxes in the country, at 37.5 cents per gallon. Oregon is at 30 cents, so even adding in the cost of labor for pumping it might still come out a wash. There are also many people in Washington who work in Portland and who probably will fuel up there if it's a nickel a gallon less.
2. You NEED gas, and there is NO alternative. If McDonald's raises the price of a Big Mac, Kohl's raises the price of underwear, or Starbucks raises the price of coffee, I have options. But I can't get gas from Joe's Espresso, Fuel, and Towing without paying all of the same things that Chevron charges.
Quoting hOmsar (Reply 11): We're not in the 1950s anymore. Back then, a college student could work a part-time summer job and pay for his entire tuition, books, room and board.
And that says as much about the rising cost of college as it does about the need for a rise in the minimum wage.
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 7451 posts, RR: 2 Reply 14, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3286 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 4): Hmm, here in Oregon, it's illegal to pump your own gas. It's estimated that there are the equivalent of 20K or more full-time jobs maintained due to having this "unnecessary" service. Yet our gas doesn't cost any more than it does in Washington or California, even though wages at gas stations are higher than elsewhere due to having gas jockeys employed. We also don't have an appreciable difference in the number of gas stations per capita/per car/per miles driven.
It's an unnecessary cost. It is the same thing as mailing welfare checks to those same guys. You say you don't notice the cost of that. Okay. But it's there. The reality is, you are paying a tax and receiving nothing of value for it. The model is NOT promising.
Edit: Just want to add, my parents just came back from Cuba. They also have trouble creating prosperity out of pure government planned economics. When government makes these decisions for us, the decisions aren't very good. Investment in useful activities that improves people's lives goes down. Motivation to succeed goes down. Society ends up without a business sector -- meaning, people do nothing you'd be willing to pay them for.
BN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5289 posts, RR: 52 Reply 15, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3287 times:
Quoting Stabilator (Reply 10): Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 9):
The idea of "minimum wage" never designed to be a living wage. It was designed so that part-timers, students, etc. weren't taken advantage of because they weren't full-time employees
Not enough liberals and people in general understand this.
Oh well .. in that case, let's just put things back in there proper place shall we...
...women were meant to stay at home, not taking up a job that man could have.
And none of this, working two jobs to make ends meet..one job will do.
That job not paying enough to make ends meet??? Too bad for you, keep looking ...because this
..
Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 1): Minimum wage could be raised to $100 an hour ...
Is out there for you somewhere... but wait..
Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 1): ...and the people that make that minimum wage will be in the same boat they are now.
...oh then never mind, that's just not going to do you any good, is it?
That's what it was 'meant to be' is an acceptable answer??? Society 30 years ago was meant to be something else too and guess what it's completely different 30 years later - meaning, times have changed, good lord!
If only common sense stood a chance against insanity..
How is it that some seriously twisted mindsets have no problem with fuel prices rising exponentially (because the oil companies MUST maintain profit levels), distribution cost continually on the increase, warehousing cost must rise along with the steady climb of production cost resulting in inflated rates and prices for virtually everything sold...but heaven forbid a person be able to obtain or seek a reasonable minimum wage?
This is hilarious, most of you are 9-5 clock punchers (or living of your parents - or worse gov't bennies) and here demanding that people settle for less while completely ignoring (and wholly excepting) unjustifiable skyrocketing prices on nearly everything you consume?
How on earth do you keep from falling over head first?
BN747
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
einsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 2045 posts, RR: 6 Reply 16, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3281 times:
While I will agree with many that the minimum wage is not something that should be treated as the wage for living, keep in mind something that the OP conveniently left out:
Quote: In fact, working folks shouldn’t have to wait year after year for the minimum wage to go up while CEO pay has never been higher. So here’s an idea that Governor Romney and I actually agreed on last year: let’s tie the minimum wage to the cost of living, so that it finally becomes a wage you can live on.
Notice the two bold areas:
1) If a company can afford to give its CEO millions upon millions in benefits, it can certainly afford to give its employees a more decent wage. When a CEO makes millions in salary, ask yourself: does a CEO really need all the bonuses? If profits for companies are going up, then why aren't the profits among all the workforce?
2) Of course, if a President Romney had said this, then perhaps this thread would be nonexistent or in support of the policy.
Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter): I dont think there should be any minimum wage laws at all, and it should be up to the free market to determine wages.
If we did this, then unemployment would certainly drop but wages would be a fraction of what they are now. If a free market decides the minimum wage, I'll bet you anything that a board of directors locked up in a building would decide to keep the wages low and split the profits among themselves. Free market supporters give too much credit to the integrity of big executives. We were told to give millionaires a tax rate so that they create jobs. It's been 10 years since the Bush tax cuts were enacted. Where did employment go?
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 7451 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3266 times:
Quoting BN747 (Reply 16): but heaven forbid a person be able to obtain or seek a reasonable minimum wage?
People are allowed to ask for and get whatever wage they want. If you want $100/hr I guarantee there are jobs that will pay $100/hr. Lots of them. Millions of people make $100/hr.
People making $7 now seeking $9 now will be either losing their job or getting $9... at the expense of the poor guy or gal who was laid off. Most likely, robotics will see a boost, further reducing the need for low skill workers.
It's just not a solution that helps ANY group of people. The $7 group overall will not be helped. Certain individuals will be... and others will be hurt.
If people are unwilling to work for under $16, let them quit! Nobody is forcing them to work. Or they can apply for a $16/hr job with the necessary skills. Plenty of Wal Mart employees make $16/hr and much, much more.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 18, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3259 times:
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 13): Washington state has one of - if not the - highest gas taxes in the country, at 37.5 cents per gallon.
Offset by higher other taxes, such as income and higher property taxes in Oregon. WA has a sales tax to cover what OR collects via other means. CA gas taxes are about on par with WA. Regardless, the difference in pricing just on a direct tax basis is barely $1-$1.50 per fill-up.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29352 posts, RR: 62 Reply 19, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3259 times:
I have to wonder if this proposal is Obama's way of compensating those that will be going to part time next year when Obummercare take effect and companies scramble to get under the 50 full time employee limit.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
BN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5289 posts, RR: 52 Reply 20, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3243 times:
Quoting Flighty (Reply 18): Quoting BN747 (Reply 16):
but heaven forbid a person be able to obtain or seek a reasonable minimum wage?
People are allowed to ask for and get whatever wage they want. If you want $100/hr I guarantee there are jobs that will pay $100/hr. Lots of them. Millions of people make $100/hr.
Yes, I know..I'm above that. But that's not point.
My point is this..
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 17): If a company can afford to give its CEO millions upon millions in benefits, it can certainly afford to give its employees a more decent wage. When a CEO makes millions in salary, ask yourself: does a CEO really need all the bonuses? If profits for companies are going up, then why aren't the profits among all the workforce?
$100 an hour is certainly a far cry from 'reasonable minimum wage'.. but what the Prez was proposing, $11 I believe seems very reasonable in the face of what's been going on in this country. The rest of the developing nations has CEO average pay at 10-12 x ratio vs that of the average worker...in America it's 35X and more. And the disparity shows no sign of letting up.
BN747
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 21, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3240 times:
Quoting Flighty (Reply 15): my parents just came back from Cuba. They also have trouble creating prosperity out of pure government planned economics.
A Federal Minimum Wage is not equal to a planned economy. The minimum wage could be $5 or $10, and it will still be business owners, not the gov't, who decide on what jobs to hire people to fill, their expected productivity, and what benefits to offer.
DFWHeavy From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 469 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3223 times:
I was ascertaining a point by using the "$100/Hr". If it goes to $11, $15 or whatever doesn't matter. Prices will rise and those making the minimum wage will still be at the bottom scraping by. If you aren't happy making that pay, educate yourself and find a higher paying position.
Why can't people learn to take care of themselves and rely on others and the government so much. Our founding fathers would be appalled with what is going on today.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 23, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3258 times:
Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 24): Our founding fathers would be appalled with what is going on today.
Considering how many slave owners were among them ...
BN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5289 posts, RR: 52 Reply 24, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3254 times:
Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 24): Why can't people learn to take care of themselves and rely on others and the government so much. Our founding fathers would be appalled with what is going on today.
..exactly, as their slaves were making them rich...
Concept of minimum wage making sense yet, or are you still advocating everyone just become CEOs and be happy?
BN747
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
hOmsar From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 804 posts, RR: 0 Reply 25, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3305 times:
Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 24): educate yourself and find a higher paying position.
Of course, how easy that is.
Quoting hOmsar (Reply 11): We're not in the 1950s anymore. Back then, a college student could work a part-time summer job and pay for his entire tuition, books, room and board.
As noted, education expenses have skyrocketed, and even college graduates and other well-educated people have been struggling to find jobs.
Of course, as economics teaches us, the more supply of "educated" people in the labor market, the lower the wages for the "higher-paying positions" will be over time. You'll still have more people competing for relatively few jobs. Which means some folks are going to wind up without jobs, or with jobs much lower than their abilities.
This actually happened a few years ago. There were anecdotes (granted, just anecdotes, I don't have full data right now) of well-educated folks who had good-paying jobs and lost those jobs when the economy tanked. Some were so desperate that they went looking for any low-paying job they could find. I guess the real answer was that they should just go educate themselves some more, and then they could find a better job, right?
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19722 posts, RR: 56 Reply 26, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3296 times:
Quoting hOmsar (Reply 11): It completely sucks, but that's the way it is. Unless and until this fact changes, then you can't keep treating the minimum wage as if it's just for part-time college students looking for extra spending money.
That's true, but I'm still not sold on the idea that you should be above the poverty line on a minimum wage job. But one thing that we should definitely do is tie the minimum wage to inflation or the cost of living.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 28, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3234 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 32): Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 12):
(7) Exposure to toxic fumes represents a health hazard to customers dispensing Class 1 flammable liquids;
So then why don't the station attendants wear masks if they're around it all day?
Hey now, you're dealing with a service that's almost an institution now. Who says it has to be logical?
I will say this though, once you get used to having your gas pumped for you, it's a rather nice little luxury. Almost all of it is "mini-serv" though, so you don't get your oil and air checked, etc. I only know of one real full-service gas station, but not a single one where they still do car repairs like the olden days.
pvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 549 posts, RR: 0 Reply 29, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3220 times:
Good idea, healthy amount of socialism will bring the United States to this century and make it a better place for a human to live in.
I would also love to see more taxes for the rich, progressive taxing is awesome. Nobody should have need to earn more than a couple of millions of dollars.
Then you need only free universities and proper healthcare system available to everyone and paid by the government, then you could enjoy the welfare and life quality we have in here Europe.
And don't worry about what it costs, just raise taxes and cut from completely useless military spending. Nobody is going to attack you anyway.
RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6296 posts, RR: 23 Reply 30, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3200 times:
Quoting pvjin (Reply 37): Good idea, healthy amount of socialism will bring the United States to this century and make it a better place for a human to live in.
Amazing to see the level of fear created by the prospect of not being able to just leech off the super-low-paid.
One well-paid and looked-after worker held to high productive standards is worth five workers who know their employer pays them dog turds and couldn't give a rat's arse about them. Don't let that ruin your anti-socialist, Obama's a communist scare stories though. After all, it's wonderful entertainment.
✈ Don't like it? That's just your tough chuff. ✈
BN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5289 posts, RR: 52 Reply 31, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3174 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 32): Quoting BN747 (Reply 16):
This is hilarious, most of you are 9-5 clock punchers (or living of your parents - or worse gov't bennies) and here demanding that people settle for less while completely ignoring (and wholly excepting) unjustifiable skyrocketing prices on nearly everything you consume?
How on earth do you keep from falling over head first?
Great generalization there. I'm actually a student, I've made only minimum wage, and for some people it is definitely overpaying them.
And while you are soooooo certain that you're going to get that great education, and make 'all the right choices' then secure that great paying job and fly off into Donald Trump orbit...
I just wish you could have 'a shelter lunch' with former (now homeless) pilots, people with masters degrees in all sorts of occupations who lost their homes and everything else they own thru corporate mismanagement, buyouts, downsizing, mergers and acquisitions and anything else I'm missing.
As a student, I'm not trying to spook you.. but the biggest mistake most young people make is 'that can't happen to me..' ... those people who lost everything, thought that too. Just look around.
How many pilots are moonlighting to care for their families? how many cops take on security jobs at supplement income..it just goes on and on.
One thing is for certain.. either wages remain exceptionally low vs skyhigh CEO pay with no limit in sight will yield extraordinary large poor class than today or a higher minimum wage and closer to commensurate CEO salaries* - leads to a more sustained middle class keeping the poor class numbers from spiraling out of control.
* by that I mean, the man or woman who builds up his own business should be able to pay himself as much as he or she wants or thinks to be fair.
Versus a Ivy Legacy stepping to a public traded company like AA or GM... well 'he did not build' that.. he's just a place holder - cap those dudes because their arrival was anticipated since their days as a freshman at Whatever U.
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 32, posted (3 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3147 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 39): Well up here it is customary to tip the station attendant who pumps your gas (and often will do your windows). Do you guys still tip them then?
Not at each visit. The kids at my local Texaco usually work while they're attending school, so they aren't too transient. One guy is on his third year now, I think it is. I give them GCs at Christmas—nothing more than $20 for iTunes or something.
brilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 3183 posts, RR: 1 Reply 33, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3020 times:
Quoting cmf (Reply 14):
Quoting Stabilator (Reply 10):
Not enough liberals and people in general understand this.
Not enough right wingers understand that it is what many companies pay full time employees.
I did not realize how little the wages are in the States. I certainly don't pay my employee that little. I should evaluate their compensation, although they do have to live. I might add that she also gets benefits on top of her salary.
Geezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1430 posts, RR: 1 Reply 35, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2922 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 12): Jobs is the usual reason given these days, but Oregon law actually codifies 17 separate reasons for banning self-dispensing of gasoline in the state:
Now that we know what the "law" relative to pumping gasoline in the state of Oregon is.....let me ask you this;
Do you have ANY credible statistics showing that there are any fewer fires started while cars are being "gassed up" in Oregon, than in any OTHER state ?
In addition.......while I am very aware of the inherent, potential dangers involved in pumping gasoline, I'm also just as aware of the potential dangers involved in DRIVING all those cars, once they are "fueled up"; so are the liberal law-makers in Oregon going to "pass a law" requiring that everyone MUST have their cars driven by some "professional driver", (who MUST be paid at least $11 per hour ?)
Also.......do you have any credible statistics showing that "Oregonions" have any better driving records than do drivers in any other state ?
I think what the state of Oregon is about to find out is.........there are a hell of a lot of places to live in the U.S., OTHER than Oregon; I'll even go a bit further; now that I'm "aware" of that idiotic law, I will no longer set foot in the state of Oregon; so when I go to Seattle the next time, I'll just travel I-90 across Idaho and into Washington State, and just "pretend" that Oregon doesn't exist !
As for New Jersey.......I haven't been there since 1997, but unless there have been an awful lot of changes made since then........you'll have to show me documented PROOF that N.J. has a law against people pumping their own gas !
Let's face it; are "average" Americans too stupid, too ignorant, too careless, too irresponsible to pump their own gasoline ? To start with, there is NO such thing as an "average American"; and yes, a very large % of Americans definitely ARE too stupid, ignorant, careless, and irresponsible to pump their own gas, and a great many of them are also too (all of the preceding), to drive their own vehicles safely, also. ( just a glance at national MV statistics will PROVE that once and for all.)
But back to Oregon for a minute; Have the liberal pin-heads in the Oregon State Legislature ever taken the trouble to give 17 different reasons why they think THEY are so much smarter than the pin-heads in the other 49 State Legislatures ?
I'm sure glad I found out about this ridiculous law when I did ! I was thinking about going through California, and up I-5 clear through Oregon; now I'll just avoid both of them ! ( I sure wouldn't want to take a chance on "running into" Nancy Pelosi or Diane Feinstein while I'm "passing through" the state !)
Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
jpetekyxmd80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4245 posts, RR: 29 Reply 36, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2893 times:
Quoting Geezer (Reply 35):
I think what the state of Oregon is about to find out is.........there are a hell of a lot of places to live in the U.S., OTHER than Oregon; I'll even go a bit further; now that I'm "aware" of that idiotic law, I will no longer set foot in the state of Oregon; so when I go to Seattle the next time, I'll just travel I-90 across Idaho and into Washington State, and just "pretend" that Oregon doesn't exist !
And oral sex is illegal in Indiana. Do you think have the patent on 'freedom' or immunity from stupid or archaic laws? I'm sure Oregon will really miss you.
hOmsar From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 804 posts, RR: 0 Reply 37, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2869 times:
Don't forget that raising the minimum wage increases the income of the people who have the greatest financial need. That money will almost immediately be spent, meaning it goes right back into the economy, quite possibly benefiting the same companies that currently pay their employees minimum wage.
That little detail gets overlooked quite often by folks who don't think it's worth it for poor folks to earn more money.
Now, all that said, one thing I'd definitely like to see is the elimination of the exception to the minimum wage for waiters/waitresses at restaurants. Their minimum wage is considerably lower because it's assumed they'll be earning tips (so, basically, not only are the customers paying the restaurant for food, we're paying their employees' salaries too).
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 38, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2847 times:
Quoting Geezer (Reply 35): Do you have ANY credible statistics showing that there are any fewer fires started while cars are being "gassed up" in Oregon, than in any OTHER state ?
Why should I care? Gas doesn't cost any more here than anywhere else.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 35): Also.......do you have any credible statistics showing that "Oregonions" have any better driving records than do drivers in any other state ?
What on earth could that possibly have to do with anything?
Quoting Geezer (Reply 35): But back to Oregon for a minute; Have the liberal pin-heads in the Oregon State Legislature ever taken the trouble to give 17 different reasons why they think THEY are so much smarter than the pin-heads in the other 49 State Legislatures ?
Okay, now you've really lost the plot and totally blown your credibility. Outside of the metro areas of Portland/Salem/Eugene, Oregon is a HUGELY rural, red/conservative state. Banning self-serve gas has full bipartisan support. Even though the current legislature is held by a slight Democratic margin, that's not always been the case. Even our record of governors is split nearly down the middle half and half between parties, and our US senators have more often been Republican than Democrats.
FlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1626 posts, RR: 3 Reply 39, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2832 times:
Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter):
In last nights speech, Obama stated he wanted to raise the minimum wage to $9.00 per hour. I for one think this is a huge mistake was a lot of small businesses could not afford to do this, and be forced to reduce headcount leading to more unemployment making matters worse.
The number 1 employer of minimum wage employees are fast food and big box stores. Most small business pay more than minimum wage for retention purposes. Also by raising the minimum wage you raise the disposable income of people which will in turn increase demand and help the economy.
jpetekyxmd80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4245 posts, RR: 29 Reply 40, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2829 times:
Quoting Geezer (Reply 35): I'll even go a bit further; now that I'm "aware" of that idiotic law, I will no longer set foot in the state of Oregon
Hard to believe you've ever set foot in Oregon. You must not have been very observant. That's been the law for 60+years.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 35): I think what the state of Oregon is about to find out is.........there are a hell of a lot of places to live in the U.S.
LOL. Just because you didn't know about something doesn't mean it didn't exist. Yes, imagine the massive bloodletting of population Oregon will suffer at the hands of the indignity of sitting in your car to get gas for the same price. The horror. Get over yourself..
BN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5289 posts, RR: 52 Reply 41, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2833 times:
Quoting hOmsar (Reply 37): Don't forget that raising the minimum wage increases the income of the people who have the greatest financial need. That money will almost immediately be spent, meaning it goes right back into the economy, quite possibly benefiting the same companies that currently pay their employees minimum wage.
That very notion is SO lost on conservatives (even poor conservatives in the Red States who consistently vote against their own interest because they;d rather do that than vote for the black dude) talk about about ironic.
But exactly right, the poor or minimum wage people spend every cent they get in and wait to the same to the week around. It goes for food, utility bills, buses, gas (if they have a car), rent and yes,righties drugs - just like you guyswho smoke weed, do meth or 'legal drugs'. But they spend every single cent back into the economy - they DO NOT save. They can not afford it.
Do think it adds up?
Look at how Obama outspend McCain 5-1 in their race and it was done with nickel and dime low-dollar donations. But all their low wage and benfit money goes to one place - into the economy, not stocks, investments, 401s or any of that ...they collectively inject more cash back into the economy more so than those that sphincter out every penny after weeks of consideration. and the wealthy who sends out a servant to load up at Costco every other month.
More of them do the jobs many of you find beneath you and jobs you'd dare not be seen at. And no question (aside from the DMV ppl [but that's gov't employment not private]) fewer of them slack off at the water cooler than none mini-workers - of which more and more are morphing into WFHs - working from home.
BN747
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
AR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 4850 posts, RR: 27 Reply 42, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2807 times:
Obama should do well to learn from Latin America in the 70s.
Raising the minimum wage by decree is a wash. The employers just pass the cost on to the customers. Doing that once in a while, for election purposes for example, is harmless.
The dangerous part is to index it to inflation or the cost of living. That just creates an uncontainable, self-reinforcing monster that just generates more inflation, which generates increases in the minimum wage that generates more inflation etc. etc. etc and ad nauseaum.
zkojq From New Zealand, joined Sep 2011, 785 posts, RR: 1 Reply 43, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2795 times:
Quoting hOmsar (Reply 37):
Don't forget that raising the minimum wage increases the income of the people who have the greatest financial need. That money will almost immediately be spent, meaning it goes right back into the economy, quite possibly benefiting the same companies that currently pay their employees minimum wage.
DINGDINGDING We have a winner. Give an extra $20 to one of the working-poor and it will be spent (put back into the economy), give an extra $20 to someone higher up the wage scale and it is most likely going to be put into a savings account and not re-enter the economy for a good while. As it happens, The Economist agrees with me to some degree: http://www.economist.com/news/financ...inimum-wages-can-do-more-good-harm
Obviously, the above theory has its limits as the effect a wage floor change has on an economy will depend on the margin by which the wage floor was changed.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 30): Don't let that ruin your anti-socialist, Obama's a communist scare stories though. After all, it's wonderful entertainment.
It certainly is. Kinda sad actually that some people here seem to be advocating some kind of serfdom.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 30): One well-paid and looked-after worker held to high productive standards is worth five workers who know their employer pays them dog turds and couldn't give a rat's arse about them.
Another good point. When you pay the minimum wage you generally get the minimum wage attitude and skillset that comes with that, even if the employee has a higher skill-set than their wage would suggest.
That extra money is going to have to come from somewhere.
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 16): When a CEO makes millions in salary, ask yourself: does a CEO really need all the bonuses?
Doesn't matter. They signed a deal that says he does.
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 16): If profits for companies are going up, then why aren't the profits among all the workforce?
For the same reason your salary doesn't get deposited into my checking account: it isn't their money.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 29): Good idea, healthy amount of socialism will bring the United States to this century and make it a better place for a human to live in.
Socialism will only drag an economy, and the best and brightest people in it, downwards. Enforcing mediocrity leads nowhere. It is impossible to have an economic system where everyone is rich. It is, however, possible to have one where nobody is rich.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 30): Amazing to see the level of fear created by the prospect of not being able to just leech off the super-low-paid.
It's exceptionally scary to see how giddy many people are at the prospect of getting their hands on some of the money controlled by millionaires. Liberals love to spew crap about how "they didn't build it" and they owe us something for some reason, but the truth of it is that liberals want to tax the rich for the same reason that John Dillinger robbed banks: that's where the money is.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 30): One well-paid and looked-after worker held to high productive standards is worth five workers who know their employer pays them dog turds and couldn't give a rat's arse about them.
Many workers are completely replaceable, commodity labor.
Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 39): The number 1 employer of minimum wage employees are fast food and big box stores.
...which are patronized by lower and middle class people. There isn't going to be a net flow of money to the poor from increasing minimum wage. People working at Neiman Marcus aren't making minimum wage, it's the Walmart employees making minimum wage.
Quoting AR385 (Reply 42): Obama should do well to learn from Latin America in the 70s.
I agree. Let's start exporting cocaine.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Geezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1430 posts, RR: 1 Reply 45, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2783 times:
Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter): I am in the SF bay area and the "living wage" is nearly $11.00, which was forced many companies to lay off people to afford the higher wages.
Combining these higher wages with Obama care will spell economic disaster.
I agree with your viewpoint completely, Joe, but I would point out one additional thing; Obama's "un-affordable" Health Care law is doing that ALREADY ! And while we're at it, I'll point out something else it's doing, (or very SOON will be doing); it's going to put a VERY big SCREW into the very "individuals" who voted for him ! I have a very good friend; he's self employed, and does very well for himself; he's also a HUGE obama supporter; thanks to the un=affordable HC "act", his health insurance is very soon about to MORE than double ! Also.....he has a 40 year old son, who is "supposed" to be a "near genius" he's "so smart"; just after Christmas, I was talking with my friend, asking him "how everything is", now that the holidays are behind us; his answer was classic ! Quote: "Well, now that all of our out-of-town guests have gone home.........we're STILL "stuck" with one"; ME; "Let me guess.........your eldest, genius son, Christopher, ?"
Mike; "uh, well...yeah";
Hey....I'm no "psychic" .......I can't tell you what number will win next week's "Power Ball" drawing; but I CAN tell you how to "avoid" having 40 yr old "genius" offspring "lean on you for support" because it's soooooooo, much "trouble" working all the time ! You point to the front door......and say "don't let it hit you in the ass on the way out"!
Or......there's even a MUCH better way; starting when they are about 6 yrs old, you teach them a little "something" every day; by the time they start high school, if your "teaching" was on the money, they will already be headed in the "right direction". My oldest son told me one day when he was about 15 or 16 yrs old, "I'm going to be an electrical engineer"; ( I don't remember what I said, only what I was thinking); ( yeah, sure you are) When he graduated HS, he applied for and was accepted in University of Cincinnati's 5 yr co-op program; 6 months college, 6 months at a company; (he co-oped at Texas Instruments, in Houston) after 5 yrs of back and forth between Cincinnati and Texas, he graduated with a BS in EE; had offers from Kodak, IBM, and Motorola, in Chandler, AZ. He spent the next 4 years living in Chandler, AZ. While he was with Motortola, he spent much of his time working on a contract that Motorola had with the Navy in California; after a year or two, the Navy made him an offer, (which he didn't refuse); after about 10 yrs, (and quite a few nights), he got his PhD. (and he's still just "as smart" as he always was).
I think my friend Mike's son is possibly just as smart as my kid is; (but "smart" is almost impossible to accurately measure) I'm more inclined to be impressed by results; I haven't had to give my kid anything since he was running back and forth to Houston every six months; (I did give him a van to move his junk back and forth) ( he's in his early 50's now, so I think he'll probably "make it").
So...........what does all that have to do with "minimum wage" you ask ? Just this; some people go out and make it on their own; about 25 times as many sit around on their butts, crying about how "unfair" the cruel world IS; Where do you suppose they ever heard that ?
If you are really serious about wanting to really understand "minimum wage", just look up Dr. Milton Friedman's classic work on the subject; he says it better than any one else ever has, or ever will.
I'll make a prediction right now; NO ONE will read what Milton Friedman wrote; what many WILL do, is that will "show that old fool" how ignorant HE is, and how "smart" THEY are !
Quoting hOmsar (Reply 43): But you forget that raising minimum wage increases the income of the people who have the greatest financial need. That money will almost immediately be spent, meaning it goes right back into the economy, quite possibly benefiting the same companies that currently pay their employees minimum wage.
See what I mean ? So the "Gubmint" should GUARANTEE all people who have the "greatest need" X amout of $$ per hour, based on their "need" ? Looking at it through YOUR rose colored glasses, why not just pass a law saying ALL young people, (who OBVIOUSLY have a LOT of NEED), should be paid $100,000 per year; (and maybe we should only require them to work about 24 hours a week ); that way, they can have more "fun", and maybe even have more "self esteem" ! I'm sure if we put it to a vote, they will DEFINITELY ALL voted for it ! There's only one problem; (and if you need me to point it out, you're dumber than I give you credit for, and I don't even want to waste any more time discussing it with you) !
The "Gubmint" has only TWO sources of money to "hand out" to all the people who always have their "hands out";
they have the ability to confiscate it from the people who WORK, and they can "turn on the printing presses at the Bureau Of Printing And Engraving, and ..........make"something" out of "nothing" ! (And the present "clown" (with the ridiculous whiskers) is about the best there is at that !)
"the people with the greatest need" ? I'm wondering.........so many here seem to favor RAISING the "mimium wage"; have ANY you folks ever studied science ? If you do, (or if you already have), you'll run into a lot of "laws" there as well; there's this one that states........."if you throw something UP, it will come back DOWN"; (regardless of what obama, Nancy Pelosi, or Harry Reid tell you), things that get thrown up, always come down; If you ever read any book about simple economics, you'll hear about another "law"; "The amount people receive for their labor is in direct proportion to the difficulty of replacing them".
If you're have any trouble comprehending that. it simply points out that brain surgeons and astro physicists are "more difficult to replace" than Big Mac flippers, and car washers, so they tend to be compensated somewhat better. ( Have you ever heard of a brain surgeon screaming to get "minimum wage" ?)
Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19722 posts, RR: 56 Reply 46, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2776 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 34): I will say this though, once you get used to having your gas pumped for you, it's a rather nice little luxury.
All it gets me (in New Jersey) is wasted time waiting for the attendant to finish with other cars and get to me. It sucks.
Quoting zkojq (Reply 43): When you pay the minimum wage you generally get the minimum wage attitude and skillset that comes with that, even if the employee has a higher skill-set than their wage would suggest.
That's certainly true, but raising the minimum wage isn't going to make people more motivated. Rather, it'll just change the level of pay that companies have to give to people with minimum-wage attitudes.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
Geezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1430 posts, RR: 1 Reply 48, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2766 times:
Quoting AR385 (Reply 47): Nah. You are not producers. You should try pot though, it´s your biggest cash crop, and meth.
it's funny that you should mention meth ! That's the No.1 cottage industry with all of the "no-goodniks" around here; the big problems are though, first, all their teeth fall out, and then they always get caught and end up in the slammer for the next 20 years or so; personally, (all you libs cover your eyes now, cause you'll think this is "harsh"), I think we should make dealing in meth a Capital crime; (You know, one strike and you're "outa here"!)
Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 49, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2766 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 46): All it gets me (in New Jersey) is wasted time waiting for the attendant to finish with other cars and get to me. It sucks.
I rarely wait a moment. It usually takes me longer to bend down and flip the filler cap button, than it takes for an attendant to come over to the car to find out how much gas I want.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16831 posts, RR: 57 Reply 50, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2772 times:
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 12): 2. You NEED gas, and there is NO alternative. If McDonald's raises the price of a Big Mac, Kohl's raises the price of underwear, or Starbucks raises the price of coffee, I have options. But I can't get gas from Joe's Espresso, Fuel, and Towing without paying all of the same things that Chevron charges.
You do have options. Go to a different gas station.
Your argument makes no sense. How is gas different from coffee? Assuming you need both to operate, why is it OK if the price of coffee goes up but not the price of gas?
seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9835 posts, RR: 17 Reply 51, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2753 times:
Quoting Stabilator (Reply 9): Not enough liberals and people in general understand this.
Here is the problem the radical right understand: since they decided it was in America's best interest to move jobs overseas, the only jobs left here are minimum wage jobs. That's why there are so many over qualified people working at Wal-Mart, McDonalds, Macys, etc. Somehow, their policies are the "liberal's" fault.
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4544 posts, RR: 28 Reply 52, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2709 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 18): Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 13):You NEED gas, and there is NO alternative.
Sure there is, you can always drive less, buy at a more competitively priced station, get a more economical car ...
Well, if I drive less, then I need less gas, which means they need less attendants, which doesn't exactly help with the labor pool.
Quoting zkojq (Reply 43): Quoting RussianJet (Reply 30):One well-paid and looked-after worker held to high productive standards is worth five workers who know their employer pays them dog turds and couldn't give a rat's arse about them.
Another good point. When you pay the minimum wage you generally get the minimum wage attitude and skillset that comes with that, even if the employee has a higher skill-set than their wage would suggest.
Hmmmm.... I'm not sure I agree with that generalization. Having worked with many different pay levels around me, I probably couldn't say that any one group is more or less committed, capable, or hard working than the next. Pay is but one aspect of the whole picture. Work environment, work hours, quantity of hours, other benefits, etc. can certainly make a lower-paying job a good compromise.
Also, minimum wage should be a starting wage that people can grow from. The problem is that when you are doing a job that requires little skill, you have a huge pool of applicants that are more than willing to work at minimum. Those types of jobs are not - and should not - be a place to park yourself for 10 years. I understand that in a down economy there are less options, but that doesn't make them suddenly more valuable or productive or skilled than before.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Some people get a raise. Others won't.
That extra money is going to have to come from somewhere.
True.
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 50): Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 12):2. You NEED gas, and there is NO alternative. If McDonald's raises the price of a Big Mac, Kohl's raises the price of underwear, or Starbucks raises the price of coffee, I have options. But I can't get gas from Joe's Espresso, Fuel, and Towing without paying all of the same things that Chevron charges.
You do have options. Go to a different gas station.
Your argument makes no sense. How is gas different from coffee? Assuming you need both to operate, why is it OK if the price of coffee goes up but not the price of gas?
The question was how come in Oregon there hasn't been financial ruin to these service stations because they have the extra labor cost? I replied that it's because they ALL have the same cost added and there isn't an alternative for me to get around that cost. Gas from station to station doesn't vary the same as other products do - if I don't like paying $3.87 a gallon and having John the Gas Pumper pump it in my car, my only option is to go across the street, pay $3.83 a gallon, and have Jim the Gas Pumper pump it in my car. The added cost of the labor is just passed along to the consumer and there really isn't an alternative for the consumer to do anything about it.
I can by a 16 oz cup of coffee at McDonalds for $1. I can by a 16 oz cup of coffee at the grocery store for $2. I can buy a 16 oz cup of coffee at Starbucks for $3. I have choices. And, unless you are absolutely addicted, you can just choose not to buy it at all, which would likely lead to lower prices as demand falls.
When I go out to buy gas, it isn't like there's a dollar store version of gas stations. There is very little variane in a given area between prices, they all have a huge chunk of tax per gallon added in, so regardless of where I go to get gas, it's going to cost me pretty much the same - there isn't a competitive alternative.
Regardless, I'm not arguing against the price of gas going up, I'm just explaining why the added cost from every gas station in the state of Oregon employing these people to pump my gas is not going to ruin them. They just pass on the cost to the consumer, who has virtually no option but to pay it or not drive.
BN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5289 posts, RR: 52 Reply 53, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2698 times:
Quoting Geezer (Reply 48): (all you libs cover your eyes now, cause you'll think this is "harsh"), I think we should make dealing in meth a Capital crime; (You know, one strike and you're "outa here"!)
Must be a phenomenon where you are, this is the 1st I'm hearing of libs having thing to do with meth-heads
or their treatment. It's largely a red-state.district issue.. any source to back you claims?
BN747
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 54, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2679 times:
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 52): Well, if I drive less, then I need less gas, which means they need less attendants, which doesn't exactly help with the labor pool.
The more gas costs, the less volume some people fill their tanks with at each purchase, creating more trips to the gas station, increasing the need for a larger labor pool to staff gas stations. Two can play this game.
The facts of the situation really are that an extra 20K minimum wage jobs are maintained in the state due to this law being in effect. Some of those employed may very well have been drawing unemployment instead. As a resident of Oregon, I'd much rather have the 20K jobs, even if there was a marginal price difference as a result, which there isn't.
KiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 5306 posts, RR: 3 Reply 55, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2670 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Socialism will only drag an economy, and the best and brightest people in it, downwards.
Look at Norway then come back to me, it kicks the US's arse in just about any metric I can think of and it's one of the most socialist countries on the planet. Most Americans could only dream about the lifestyle that all Norwegians live.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): It is impossible to have an economic system where everyone is rich.
Norway gets pretty close. Just about everyone I know and work with would be a dollar millionaire if cashed up. I guarantee you that the percentage of people who would be cashed up millionaires in Norway would be significantly higher than in the US.
Geezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1430 posts, RR: 1 Reply 56, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2664 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 38): Why should I care? Gas doesn't cost any more here than anywhere else.
How do you know that ? Have you bought gasoline in every state ?
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 38): Okay, now you've really lost the plot and totally blown your credibility. Outside of the metro areas of Portland/Salem/Eugene, Oregon is a HUGELY rural, red/conservative state. Banning self-serve gas has full bipartisan support. Even though the current legislature is held by a slight Democratic margin, that's not always been the case. Even our record of governors is split nearly down the middle half and half between parties, and our US senators have more often been Republican than Democrats.
Don't worry about my "credibility", I'm not; and now you're trying to tell us that Oregon is a "red" state ? where ? out in the boondocks where the bears live ? It sure doesn't sound so "red" around Portland; (or haven't you noticed ?)
So you think a state has the "right" to BAN self-service gas pumping do you ? Then you're lucky; (if you live in Oregon) Personally, I think it's a crock of you know what! And as long as other states do allow self service gas pumping, (and I'm VERY confident that will be FOR EVER), I am hereby declaring my life-long boycott of Oregon ! (I'll see to it that MY tax dollars go to a state that isn't living in the dark ages !
Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 40): Hard to believe you've ever set foot in Oregon. You must not have been very observant. That's been the law for 60+years.
Fortunately, the last time I was there, I didn't have to worry about running into libs like you ! ( you weren't even born yet!) (and inasmuch as I'm officially never coming back, I can assure you we will never have to "put up with" each other ! (unless of course, you go to Vegas a lot) (then we may)
Quoting seb146 (Reply 51): Here is the problem the radical right understand: since they decided it was in America's best interest to move jobs overseas, the only jobs left here are minimum wage jobs. That's why there are so many over qualified people working at Wal-Mart, McDonalds, Macys, etc. Somehow, their policies are the "liberal's" fault.
Tell me Seb, what's the difference between a "radical" right, and any other kind of "right" ? And now all of a sudden it's ALL the "right's" fault that all the jobs moved overseas ? There's only one thing wrong with that statement......it's wrong! It just isn't true!
And you're wondering why so many people are working at McDonalds ? Actually, the "reason" varies greatly from person to person; both of my sons worked at McDonalds at one point; during the summer while they were still in High School, or very shortly after they graduated; neither one has had to work there since though; when you get out of college with a degree in engineering, you seldom have to worry about working for McDonalds any more. About all you have to worry about is some lib trying to blame you because "all of the jobs have moved overseas" ! (and even then, you don't have to worry very much)
While we're on this "all the jobs have moved overseas" kick, let me ask you this; if "all the jobs have moved overseas" as you say, please explain to me why millions of people from "overseas" have moved from "overseas" to "over here", and seem to be "making it" without too much trouble ? How is that possible, Seb, if "all of the jobs have moved overseas" as you say they have ? Could it possibly be that the people from "overseas" are more "flexible", or more "industrious" than many of the people from "over here" ?
You seem to have a mind-set that it's almost impossible for anyone to "get by" in the U.S. because of "all the jobs moving overseas"; I'm going to pour a bit of cold water on that ridiculous statement, with just two very good examples, which are VERY close to me.
We live in rural Indiana; the closest town of any size is Brazil; Brazil isn't exactly the kind of a small town where one would expect people from other countries to be able to move to, and end up making a very handsome living; I would have thought that myself back in the 80s and 90s when I had occasion to deliver a few new cars here from time to time;
however, in just the last 3 years, I have become personally acquainted with two different families who have not only "done quite well", they have done extremely well! One is a very nice man who came here from Mexico; he opened a restaurant, serving NOTHING but mexican food; (I always "assumed" I didn't "like' mexican food, mainly because I don't know a whole lot of Spanish Lucky for me, I recently married a lady that DOES know enough Spanish to be able to order mexican food anyplace, (including Mexico) Since this fellow opened Mario Brothers in Brazil, he's also opened about five more restaurants; I like to go to his restaurant for three reasons; 1. the food, while not "cheap", is excellent !
2. The place is absolutely beautiful! All of the booths and chairs were hand carved in Mexico, and all of his staff are also from Mexico. Are they "legal" ? I have no idea; nor do I care. The man is very good for Brazil; that's all I care about. 3. I like to eat there because, notv only is the food great, I also like the people; (most "Brazilians are hill-billies)'
The other example is a small fellow from Viet Nam; my wife has her nails done at his shop about every two weeks; I think he may even be makin more money that Mario is, as he has a tremendous business; he and his wife both work long hours, 6 days a week; I can't think of anyone, less likely to end up "affluent" in the U.S., than some one who lived in Viet Nam during the "war" there. ( and I can think of very few people from this country, who could move to any country and "do as well" as either one of these people have, ( even though all of the jobs have moved overseers.)
Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6296 posts, RR: 23 Reply 57, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2657 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Many workers are completely replaceable, commodity labor.
Pay more, be more discerning, enfornce higher standards.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Liberals love to spew crap about how "they didn't build it" and they owe us something for some reason
Liberals? Why do you consider anyone who desires a certain amount of wealth distribution to be 'liberal'? It's not necessarily the case at all. Plus, I for one am not in favour of something for nothing or getting a free ride. Far from it in fact.
✈ Don't like it? That's just your tough chuff. ✈
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 58, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2654 times:
Quoting Geezer (Reply 56): How do you know that ? Have you bought gasoline in every state ?
Where a price comparison would be instructive, right across the river in Washington State, it has been well-established that there's no discernible price difference.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 56): Don't worry about my "credibility", I'm not; and now you're trying to tell us that Oregon is a "red" state ? where ? out in the boondocks where the bears live ? It sure doesn't sound so "red" around Portland; (or haven't you noticed ?)
Already answered in my post. I even said, and you quoted (!), "Outside of the metro areas of Portland/Salem/Eugene."
Quoting Geezer (Reply 56): So you think a state has the "right" to BAN self-service gas pumping do you ? Then you're lucky; (if you live in Oregon)
What I said is that I don't have a problem with the law, and I recognize its overall benefits.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 56): I am hereby declaring my life-long boycott of Oregon !
It's a free country, you may choose to travel where ever you'd like or not. No skin off my nose, LOL
jpetekyxmd80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4245 posts, RR: 29 Reply 59, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2647 times:
Quoting Geezer (Reply 56):
So you think a state has the "right" to BAN self-service gas pumping do you ?
So it's all about states rights until its not?
I'm confused now. I thought conservatives wanted a smaller federal government and states having more control over their issues. Silly me, to actually consider these issues in context of overarching principles like federalism, or individual liberties, but in actuality its all about what Charley likes and doesn't like.
Do you think a state has a 'right' to let a man marry a man?
Do you think a state has a right to let citizens openly carry firearms?
Quoting Geezer (Reply 56): Personally, I think it's a crock of you know what! And as long as other states do allow self service gas pumping, (and I'm VERY confident that will be FOR EVER), I am hereby declaring my life-long boycott of Oregon ! (I'll see to it that MY tax dollars go to a state that isn't living in the dark ages !
Is this some sort of running contest on who can find the least important issue to take some grand principled stand and declaration of boycott? If it is, you're winning.
I myself find the Oregon law quirky and rather pointless, but I just get to chill in the car.
What about Indiana and all the stupid laws of Indiana? Should I boycott Indiana because the state books technically say I cannot get a blow job? Now we've finally arrived at some real personal liberties!
Quoting Geezer (Reply 56):
Fortunately, the last time I was there, I didn't have to worry about running into libs like you ! ( you weren't even born yet!) (and inasmuch as I'm officially never coming back, I can assure you we will never have to "put up with" each other ! (unless of course, you go to Vegas a lot) (then we may)
Cannot even imagine what you could possibly mean by this, much less something relevant to Oregon gas. My point, if you've been to Oregon in the last 63 years, you've encountered this. Spoiler alert: I don't live in Oregon.
pvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 549 posts, RR: 0 Reply 60, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2626 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Socialism will only drag an economy, and the best and brightest people in it, downwards. Enforcing mediocrity leads nowhere. It is impossible to have an economic system where everyone is rich. It is, however, possible to have one where nobody is rich.
High amount of welfare we have in here Europe has proven that the system we have around here is totally superior to yours in the US. It's possible to have a system where almost nobody is filthy rich but still those who work hard can become reasonably rich and those who are in the least favorable situation get enough money not to have to live on the streets & have access to healthcare just like every human being should have.
In the end also our economy here in Europe in general hasn't done much worse than yours in the US although you have way less social policies to add equality.
Any society where a person can't get proper healthcare because of not having enough money is totally unethical and sucks.
BN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5289 posts, RR: 52 Reply 61, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2620 times:
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 55): Look at Norway then come back to me, it kicks the US's arse in just about any metric I can think of and it's one of the most socialist countries on the planet. Most Americans could only dream about the lifestyle that all Norwegians live.
Miami is like that, it has no real industry that matches all those mansions on the intercoastal..
*hint, hint* International Banking aka Money Laundering for 'the product'..
What exactly is it that Norway produces that enriches it so? Cars? nope. Airplanes? nope? Diamond capital? Nope.
I've heard they've got quite abit of international banking biz going on there too. No offense but what exactly does Finland produce? Because I just don't see Norway & Finland trading on par with Greece & Portugal and those guys are flat broke - with harbors and ports far more hustling and bustling than the aforementioned Nordic lands...so what is it if it isn't 'creative banking'?
BN747
[Edited 2013-02-14 03:10:05]
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 62, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2610 times:
Quoting BN747 (Reply 61): What exactly is it that Norway produces that enriches it so? Cars? nope. Airplanes? nope? Diamond capital? Nope.
Norway just saves a little out of the lunch money to squirrel away.
BN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5289 posts, RR: 52 Reply 63, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2597 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 62):
Norway just saves a little out of the lunch money to squirrel away.
Ahh Oil and Gas.. has it always been that way?
So with Alaska 'taking care of it's citizens' with socialist Oil stipends... the answer to KiwiRob's question would be for the US to Alaskanize the entire USA with Oil and Gas stipends for all citizens - everyone's a millionaire and there are no Oil Barons. Hmmmmm... with poverty gone, Americans would have to find something else to divide themselves over. And they would.
BN747
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
AY-MD11 From Finland, joined Feb 2001, 443 posts, RR: 2 Reply 64, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2592 times:
Quoting BN747 (Reply 15): This is hilarious, most of you are 9-5 clock punchers (or living of your parents - or worse gov't bennies) and here demanding that people settle for less while completely ignoring (and wholly excepting) unjustifiable skyrocketing prices on nearly everything you consume?
How on earth do you keep from falling over head first?
Maybe they think if act the same than the rich they will get richer?! my advice is not crave more than you earn.
KiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 5306 posts, RR: 3 Reply 65, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2585 times:
Quoting BN747 (Reply 61): What exactly is it that Norway produces that enriches it so?
Oil of course, plus it's also a major exporter of electricity to Europe, the oil service industry is massive, Stavanger is one of the oil capitals of the world, Norwegian fisheries are worth billions. The Norwegian people are healthy, happy and productive, damn socialism sucks Can you say that about your lot?
I could also have said Sweden, they are right up there on all the nice states which splat the US, they produce cars, planes, heavy construction equipment, Volvo is the largest producer of heavy trucks, armaments, steel, Sweden is a highly industralised country which produces a hell of a lot of stuff, and they pay there people more than what US citizens get paid plus they are well educated (for free) and get free healthcare, I bet the average Swede is far happier and better off than the average American, plus the women are better looking over here.
zkojq From New Zealand, joined Sep 2011, 785 posts, RR: 1 Reply 66, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2569 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Many workers are completely replaceable, commodity labor.
But it still costs the employer to train them. Additionally, new employees are much more likely to make mistakes which can potentially cost the firm plenty. This depends on the business model though and certain types of firms are fine with a high turnover of staff.
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 52): Having worked with many different pay levels around me, I probably couldn't say that any one group is more or less committed, capable, or hard working than the next.
If you want/need employees to 'go the extra mile', those who are seen as 'valued' by the firm are more likely to do so. This does tie in with what you say below.
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 52): Pay is but one aspect of the whole picture. Work environment, work hours, quantity of hours, other benefits, etc. can certainly make a lower-paying job a good compromise.
Certainly.
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 52): Also, minimum wage should be a starting wage that people can grow from. The problem is that when you are doing a job that requires little skill, you have a huge pool of applicants that are more than willing to work at minimum. Those types of jobs are not - and should not - be a place to park yourself for 10 years.
Agreed. Problem being that lots of western manufacturing jobs have been outsourced in recent years.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 55): Norway gets pretty close. Just about everyone I know and work with would be a dollar millionaire if cashed up. I guarantee you that the percentage of people who would be cashed up millionaires in Norway would be significantly higher than in the US.
And here is some evidence that sortof backs that up (I don't think the graph is corrected for income inequality which is quite high in the US). http://econ.st/12LQseP
Quoting pvjin (Reply 60): It's possible to have a system where almost nobody is filthy rich
There are plenty of very rich people in Europe. Sadly, a small portion of them move to tax havens like Monaco, Switzerland and Lichtenstein.
Darksnowynight From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 986 posts, RR: 1 Reply 67, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2555 times:
Quoting Geezer (Reply 56): Personally, I think it's a crock of you know what! And as long as other states do allow self service gas pumping, (and I'm VERY confident that will be FOR EVER), I am hereby declaring my life-long boycott of Oregon !
So, forever avoid Oregon because of gas pumping laws. I'm sure you'd be the first.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 56): Fortunately, the last time I was there, I didn't have to worry about running into libs like you !
Cause everybody knows liberals will bite your face off and drink your blood. Did you know there are liberals in Indiana too?
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 57):
Liberals? Why do you consider anyone who desires a certain amount of wealth distribution to be 'liberal'? It's not necessarily the case at all.
It's an American point of view. Almost anywhere in the world, I'd be pretty conservative across a large amount of fronts. But here in 'merka, still pretty left of center. I'm sure you can see FOX where you are, and I know that looks positively insane, but it you have to understand that it does speak very well for mainstream right-wing america. So, yes, to us, virtually anything reasonable, weather we're talking finances, safety, or human rights, will appear radically liberal, thanks to the extremist positions the GOP has adopted. It's pretty sad, but "normal" in most places pretty much has to be "liberal" here. We have a long way to go, as you can see.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 60):
Any society where a person can't get proper healthcare because of not having enough money is totally unethical and sucks.
And can also be known as America. We have a long way to go here, and we will get there, but yes, it's downright pitiful how much we still need to educate people on what's normal and/or correct about these things. There's a lot of pride here, and a lot of breathtakingly short-sighted "values" at play. I'm sure it will be a while before that all gets worked out and we're really with the program on these things...
Quoting BN747 (Reply 63): Hmmmmm... with poverty gone, Americans would have to find something else to divide themselves over. And they would.
That's what sports are for. I really don't mind that we like to divide on issues. Just so the important ones (like this and a few others) get sorted out in a fashion that raises the economic standards of the most people and lowers the same for the least. It's ugly that people feel the need to resist that, but it won't be like that forever...
Posting without Talent is simply Tolerated Vandalism... We are the Vandals.
cmf From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 2485 posts, RR: 35 Reply 68, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2564 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Socialism will only drag an economy, and the best and brightest people in it, downwards. Enforcing mediocrity leads nowhere. It is impossible to have an economic system where everyone is rich. It is, however, possible to have one where nobody is rich.
Without some socialism the best and brightest people are unlikely to get a chance. We need to stop thinking of socialism and capitalism with blinds. It is about what brings best result for everyone. Without dogma.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): It's exceptionally scary to see how giddy many people are at the prospect of getting their hands on some of the money controlled by millionaires. Liberals love to spew crap about how "they didn't build it" and they owe us something for some reason, but the truth of it is that liberals want to tax the rich for the same reason that John Dillinger robbed banks: that's where the money is.
There are two ways to make money. You can create something that bring value or you can take it from others. Not paying fair salary is taking.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Many workers are completely replaceable, commodity labor.
The mentality that has brought us so much problem. Employee turnover is very costly. Doesn't matter what the position is.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
WestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1275 posts, RR: 7 Reply 69, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2525 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Socialism will only drag an economy, and the best and brightest people in it, downwards. Enforcing mediocrity leads nowhere. It is impossible to have an economic system where everyone is rich. It is, however, possible to have one where nobody is rich.
There are too many assumptions going on here. I don't think (at least I hope not) anybody is advocating blanket socialism over the US. The fact is that "socialism" can come in many forms. Example: Canada is a fairly conservative country, yet we have what Americans fearfully know as "socialized healthcare" ("universal healthcare" to us) that actually works quite well. The US would be better off to take a more socialized stance in some areas; but with that said, wages isn't one of them.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Many workers are completely replaceable, commodity labor.
True, but the most effective companies are those that are able to extract all the potential from their resources.
Quoting seb146 (Reply 51): Here is the problem the radical right understand: since they decided it was in America's best interest to move jobs overseas
Nonsense. It's the radical right that is screaming about foreigners taking their jobs. It's the right that wants to lower corporate taxes so that companies maintain their operations in the US instead of offshoring.
If you want to play that game, then we can also say that the radical left is responsible for jobs leaving the country because of their propensity to tax the shit out of corporations which prompts them to leave with their middle fingers in the air.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 55): Norway gets pretty close. Just about everyone I know and work with would be a dollar millionaire if cashed up.
I guess you don't know many fast-food employees, housekeepers, or civil servants? Surely they aren't millionaires by any stretch of the mind.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 56): Are they "legal" ? I have no idea; nor do I care.
That's rather contradictory. I've seen you ramble on about illegal immigrants in other threads. So which is it?
Quoting AY-MD11 (Reply 64): my advice is not crave more than you earn.
So then where is the incentive to strive for more? No economy grows based on the mindset that "we're happy with what we have, and we won't try to do any better".
starbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 592 posts, RR: 5 Reply 70, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2518 times:
Just in case you wanted to know, here is a list of the average gas prices by state and the gasoline taxes per state. http://gasbuddy.com/GB_Price_List.aspx
My wife is a civil servant, she makes about 90K USD, plus has an amazing pension plan. I delivered newspapers for the first 6 months I lived here, my salary for this was 45k USD. So whilst CEO's and upper management aren't as well paid as they would be in the US, the rank and file are significantly better paid.
I used to think the salaries of CEO's were ok, they do a big job so pay them big, but now I don't, paying someone 100m per year to run a company is stupid and not justifiable, when they can easily make do with 10m and still have a fantastic lifestyle.
AY-MD11 From Finland, joined Feb 2001, 443 posts, RR: 2 Reply 72, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2496 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 69): Quoting AY-MD11 (Reply 64):
my advice is not crave more than you earn.
So then where is the incentive to strive for more? No economy grows based on the mindset that "we're happy with what we have, and we won't try to do any better".
Sure it's good to try to do better and strive for more but in reason. Not take more loan than u can handle and so on..
WestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1275 posts, RR: 7 Reply 73, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2448 times:
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 71): My wife is a civil servant, she makes about 90K USD, plus has an amazing pension plan. I delivered newspapers for the first 6 months I lived here, my salary for this was 45k USD. So whilst CEO's and upper management aren't as well paid as they would be in the US, the rank and file are significantly better paid.
FDI in Norway must be terribly low. I can't see any MNE wanting to have any part of that unless they got the bargain of the century.
But what does your wife do as a civil servant? I may have been too broad, since civil servant pretty much describes every government employee. I was going more towards street cleaners and the like.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 71): I used to think the salaries of CEO's were ok, they do a big job so pay them big, but now I don't, paying someone 100m per year to run a company is stupid and not justifiable, when they can easily make do with 10m and still have a fantastic lifestyle.
I'm pretty sure the number of CEOs making 100m+ you could count on one hand. Also keep in mind that all of the highest earning CEOs accrue most of their compensation through stock and other compensatory vehicles such as travel and benefits, not salary and bonuses.
Quoting AY-MD11 (Reply 72): Sure it's good to try to do better and strive for more but in reason. Not take more loan than u can handle and so on..
Well yes, I agree when you put it that way, but there's a difference between incentivizing success and taking out inappropriate loans in order to reach them.
Quoting cmf (Reply 68): Not paying fair salary is taking.
But you can't quantify "fair", therefore it's totally based on opinion, which is going to vary from person to person.
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 73): it's totally based on opinion, which is going to vary from person to person.
There's no one generally accepted definition of "fair" when it comes to wages at any level. There's no one accepted wage scale. There's at least 30 posters on this thread, and I wouldn't be surprised if we had 30 different ideas of what "fair" really is, whether we're talking about wages or otherwise.
Some more data on who is getting screwed in this country. Heaven forbid that people on the bottom make more, that is a disaster waiting to happen. But it is wonderful if people who make it big, get more of the pie. Read the charts. Of course this is all liberal boloney. We are tying to destroy the country by advocating for the 99%. Just ask the followers on the "Right". Funny that.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6296 posts, RR: 23 Reply 77, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2414 times:
Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 67): It's an American point of view. Almost anywhere in the world, I'd be pretty conservative across a large amount of fronts. But here in 'merka, still pretty left of center. I'm sure you can see FOX where you are, and I know that looks positively insane, but it you have to understand that it does speak very well for mainstream right-wing america. So, yes, to us, virtually anything reasonable, weather we're talking finances, safety, or human rights, will appear radically liberal, thanks to the extremist positions the GOP has adopted. It's pretty sad, but "normal" in most places pretty much has to be "liberal" here. We have a long way to go, as you can see.
Certainly pretty common here. As soon as you give an opinion on a particulat topic, you are immediately pigeon-holed and labeled as being one thing or another, even though you may hold a different political stance on other matters. Is it really so difficult to grasp that people might hold a range of views? It is just so black and white for many here. You're either 'them' or 'us'. Would be good to just debate the opinion given rather than immediately assume you're one thing or another.
✈ Don't like it? That's just your tough chuff. ✈
Superb sourcing of an openly liberal think-tank to support a liberal perspective. There are moderate thinktanks out there you know...
Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 76): But it is wonderful if people who make it big, get more of the pie. Read the charts.
I read the charts. I don't particular like that they source all of their stats from a single reference point, but I'll tell you this: they don't exactly support your argument.
Yes, it's true that the top 1% have rebounded the most during the recovery. But you know what else the statistics say? They say that the top 1% was also the hardest hit in the recession. The wealthy aren't safeguarded against anything, they are at a far greater risk to fluctuations in their wealth because for most of them it's entirely dependent on market strength. The good days are good for the rich, but the bad days are just as bad.
I make the same argument in the CBA talks between owners and athletes: Those who bear the greatest risk should enjoy the greatest reward.
Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 76): Of course this is all liberal boloney. We are tying to destroy the country by advocating for the 99%. Just ask the followers on the "Right". Funny that.
Obama said during his SOTU address that both sides need to start getting along. I guess some didn't get the memo...
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 77): As soon as you give an opinion on a particulat topic, you are immediately pigeon-holed and labeled as being one thing or another, even though you may hold a different political stance on other matters.
I'm decidedly conservative, but often the fellows on the far-right will often accuse me of being a "lib" (as if it's the worst thing in the world) simply because I don't prescribe to every conservative value. I'm honestly not offended in the slightest at being called a liberal, it's actually more amusing how much some people will close-mindedly tow the party line. I don't know why it's so hard for some people to understand that others can have views in certain areas that fall to either side of centre depending on the area.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 79, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2390 times:
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 52): The question was how come in Oregon there hasn't been financial ruin to these service stations because they have the extra labor cost? I replied that it's because they ALL have the same cost added and there isn't an alternative for me to get around that cost.
That and looking at the tax rates, of the states that border Oregon, only Idaho has lower gas taxes.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 55): Most Americans could only dream about the lifestyle that all Norwegians live.
That's because too many Americans are too busy decorating their trailers and having babies rather than going to school. You can't tax your way out of a stupid populace.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 55): Just about everyone I know and work with would be a dollar millionaire if cashed up. I guarantee you that the percentage of people who would be cashed up millionaires in Norway would be significantly higher than in the US.
How much will that buy you? Being a paper millionaire is not particularly rich here, let alone Norway where a BMW 328i will set you back the equivalent of $97,000.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 57): Pay more, be more discerning, enfornce higher standards.
When you're talking about jobs like being a janitor or burger jock, why do any of that? Those jobs don't require any standards for the most part.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 57): Why do you consider anyone who desires a certain amount of wealth distribution to be 'liberal'?
Seeking artificial redistribution of wealth is a cornerstone of the liberal economic policy.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 60): It's possible to have a system where almost nobody is filthy rich but still those who work hard can become reasonably rich and those who are in the least favorable situation get enough money not to have to live on the streets & have access to healthcare just like every human being should have.
That's exactly the system I don't want. Having it set up to keep people from becoming filthy rich and engaging in artificial redistribution of wealth is generally an awful thing to do. Be hands off with the market and let the cream rise to the top and rest go wherever their abilities can take them.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 60): Any society where a person can't get proper healthcare because of not having enough money is totally unethical and sucks.
Ah, yes. The pure evil of not giving people things they don't pay for.
Quoting zkojq (Reply 66): But it still costs the employer to train them.
Jobs that take more training are better paid. Most minimum wage jobs require little more than a warm body.
Quoting cmf (Reply 68): Without some socialism the best and brightest people are unlikely to get a chance.
I'm not saying we should dismantle public education.
Quoting cmf (Reply 68): Not paying fair salary is taking.
Strictly speaking, fair salary is whatever the market will bear. Whatever you can get away with paying is fair, not what some bleeding heart liberal believes a job is worth.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Acheron From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1418 posts, RR: 1 Reply 80, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2383 times:
Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter): I for one do now belive the government should have the right to tell any business owner how much to pay his emlployees. I dont think there should be any minimum wage laws at all, and it should be up to the free market to determine wages.
While we are at it, let kids work again and reintroduce 18 hours shifts.
Usually those who support this kind of idiocy, do it under the assumption that such wage cuts and hour increase wouldn't affect them as well.
RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6296 posts, RR: 23 Reply 81, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2376 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): Seeking artificial redistribution of wealth is a cornerstone of the liberal economic policy.
......and a view held by a range of others.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): When you're talking about jobs like being a janitor or burger jock, why do any of that? Those jobs don't require any standards for the most part.
Seriously? It doesn't matter how menial you might consider the work, of course there are always standards and differing levels of efficiency. Pay peanuts, get monkies. I don't care if it's the cleaner or the CEO, I would want all workers to be fully effective, efficient and loyal. If you want the extra expense of a revolving door, where you have stupidly high staff turnover and the costs of hiring people new on a regular basis, then I guess disastrously low pay is desirable for you. It doesn't make much sense though.
✈ Don't like it? That's just your tough chuff. ✈
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7467 posts, RR: 5 Reply 82, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2367 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): That extra money is going to have to come from somewhere.
I spent a lot of years working retail budgets and there is ample ability to increase minimum wages without impacting company performance. If you can't handle a 5¢ or 10¢ increase in the cost of your trip to McDonalds then see if you can get on food stamps.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): It's exceptionally scary to see how giddy many people are at the prospect of getting their hands on some of the money controlled by millionaires.
Actually it is exceptionally scary to see how the tax system favors ultra high earners. The one think that Mitt Romney's tax filings presented was just how much the wealthy can get away with. 300+ pages for a tax return?
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Liberals love to spew crap about how "they didn't build it"
Can you name me one person in the US that was able to gain wealth without some parts of the US business environment?
Start with Bill Gates. Forget the illegal activities of his company - just consider how great his wealth would have been if IBM had chosen another company for their PC OS. And how dependent Bill was on customers actually spending money on his products.
And, of course, that is where the major loopholes are. Just think about personal tax returns of 300+ pages to get an idea of the games being played.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): Many workers are completely replaceable, commodity labor.
The problem we, as a country, face when embracing commodity labor is that tax dollars are needed to cover the poverty wages that employees pay.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44): ...which are patronized by lower and middle class people. There isn't going to be a net flow of money to the poor from increasing minimum wage. People working at Neiman Marcus aren't making minimum wage, it's the Walmart employees making minimum wage
You don't believe that Neiman Marcus has low paid workers?
Let's start with the cleaners who make sure the stores look great.
Then lets go to their receiving facilities where merchandise is unpacked and prepared for the floor. And RTMs are packed up and sent back to their suppliers.
Poverty level wages are pervasive in this country - and that leads to corporate welfare.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 45): he's also a HUGE obama supporter; thanks to the un=affordable HC "act", his health insurance is very soon about to MORE than double !
Considering that my health insurance doubled during the first term of W & Dick I'm not surprised. Maybe he can find a better insurance company as many are actually sending customers refunds. Current law required that 85% of premiums be spent on actual health care. If an insurance company doesn't get up to that level then they have to send out refunds.
The biggest factor for me with ObamaCare is the elimination of pre-existing conditions. That can have a huge impact on the country's quality of care as demonstrated in outcomes. The US is first in the world in outcomes for women with breast cancer, but that is the only place where we are first. The average guy might find 15 or 20 countries with better outcomes for his potential conditions. Infants? We're 22nd in infant mortality. Tied with Cuba. Bloody Cuba.
Next important factor is going to be Medicaid improvements. Bit queer, but some southern states are actually letting the Federal Government handle the new programs. Big time having the Feds getting their nose under the tent and really queer that those states would do it.
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4544 posts, RR: 28 Reply 83, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2355 times:
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 82): I spent a lot of years working retail budgets and there is ample ability to increase minimum wages without impacting company performance. If you can't handle a 5¢ or 10¢ increase in the cost of your trip to McDonalds then see if you can get on food stamps.
Perhaps. However, if you want to imply that the only increases going on with the McWhatever is labor, then you are missing the bigger picture. Food, fuel, insurance, taxes, changing regulations, equipment, etc are ALL going up.
I don't dispute that the labor impact per burger is going to be manageable, but I don't think your example should stand alone. Those very people are going to get priced out of a job because there is only so much that Ronald can charge for a burger before they get priced out of the market. In fact, I'd be curious what the same-store guest counts are for their units year-over-year (don't know if that stat exists). I think that same-store sales are important but price increases and so forth can affect those.
WestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1275 posts, RR: 7 Reply 84, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2342 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): That's because too many Americans are too busy decorating their trailers and having babies rather than going to school. You can't tax your way out of a stupid populace.
Best comment on this thread so far.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): The pure evil of not giving people things they don't pay for.
They pay for it through taxes. Governments with universal healthcare don't just pull it out of their a**es. Do you think it's a coincidence that Canadians pay higher taxes for consumer goods than you do?
Quoting Acheron (Reply 80): While we are at it, let kids work again and reintroduce 18 hours shifts.
Oh please. Getting rid of minimum wage legislation doesn't automatically get rid of other labour laws. They are independent of each other. Your argument is using the same tactic as the folks who say "If we let men marry men, then it's only a matter of time before men are marrying animals".
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 82): I spent a lot of years working retail budgets and there is ample ability to increase minimum wages without impacting company performance. If you can't handle a 5¢ or 10¢ increase in the cost of your trip to McDonalds then see if you can get on food stamps.
So you admit then that the burden of cost will be passed to the consumer and not the multi-billion dollar businesses?
KiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 5306 posts, RR: 3 Reply 85, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2329 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 73): But what does your wife do as a civil servant?
She works for NAV which is the social welfare agency.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): How much will that buy you? Being a paper millionaire is not particularly rich here, let alone Norway where a BMW 328i will set you back the equivalent of $97,000.
Which is interesting because BMW is currently the best selling car in the county I live in and last year I believe they were the fifth best selling marque in Norway. People here have money to burn.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 82): I spent a lot of years working retail budgets and there is ample ability to increase minimum wages without impacting company performance.
That, by definition, cannot really be true. You could say that budgets can increase and the company will still be profitable, but there is no way to increase costs without either making less profit or passing the increase on to customers. Of course, at this point it is important to remind people that companies are not run for the benefit of employees.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 82): Actually it is exceptionally scary to see how the tax system favors ultra high earners.
...and yet they still pick up most of the bill for the entire country.
There need to be changes to the tax code. But, rather than trying to break into the millionaires' vault the changes need to be focused on making the lower and middle classes pay. They need to be in the taxation crosshairs, and only then will the importance of spending become clear to people who at this point either don't know or don't care.
Right now it's Friedman's fourth way of spending money and that's why governmental budgets are so messed up. The old saying about liberals trying to fix everything with other people's money is for the most part true.
Drives on the same roads, uses the same post office, and is protected by the same military as you or I. And I'm pretty sure he never even went to public school. The reason he is a billionaire and you and I are not billionaires has nothing to do with government policies giving him anything special.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 82): The problem we, as a country, face when embracing commodity labor is that tax dollars are needed to cover the poverty wages that employees pay.
That's why welfare programs need to go.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 82): You don't believe that Neiman Marcus has low paid workers?
They have some, but I'd wager that most of their workers get paid more than equivalent workers at Walmart or Target. The businesses with large numbers of minimum wage employees are ones that are patronized largely by lower and middle class people. Raising minimum wage won't pull money from the pockets of millionaires, it will pull money from the pockets of regular people.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
pvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 549 posts, RR: 0 Reply 87, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2334 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): Ah, yes. The pure evil of not giving people things they don't pay for.
Health is not something you should need to pay for, totally different from all the useless material stuff that you don't really need.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): That's exactly the system I don't want. Having it set up to keep people from becoming filthy rich and engaging in artificial redistribution of wealth is generally an awful thing to do. Be hands off with the market and let the cream rise to the top and rest go wherever their abilities can take them.
In the US and countries with similar society and economic system it's not your abilities that matter so much but how much money your parents have. No matter how intelligent and how good working morals you have if you don't have the money to educate yourself your chances of becoming rich and getting high quality of life quality are very small. And I'm talking now how things go in general, of course every now and then somebody with incredible luck manages to rise from total poverty to the top, but that's extremely rare.
In the end at least in the US how much money your parents have, your social status and contacts to right people seem to matter way more than your actual abilities.
I'm really glad we have these state funded universities and institutes in here Finland, they allow even poor people with normal abilities to educate themselves to higher levels and that way obtain higher social status instead of staying poor like in the US.
Inequality is something that should be always fought against and proper state funded school system all the way to higher education levels is one of the most important parts of this fight. I dislike any society where lack of money prevents you from studying as high as your abilities would make you go.
Which means that some people pay far more than they get out of it and some people take far more than they put in.
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 84): Governments with universal healthcare don't just pull it out of their a**es.
Tell that to people who continually talk about providing "free" healthcare. But given how tax revenue is distributed here, that may actually be the case for many people.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 85): Which is interesting because BMW is currently the best selling car in the county I live in and last year I believe they were the fifth best selling marque in Norway. People here have money to burn.
It's hard to trumpet how much money Scandinavians have when they also top the list in cost of living. Not to mention the flawed logic of trying to apply to the US as a whole policies from a country with the population of Colorado spread over an area similar to Montana.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 87): Health is not something you should need to pay for, totally different from all the useless material stuff that you don't really need.
And yet nobody has any problems letting food be a for-profit industry.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 87): In the US and countries with similar society and economic system it's not your abilities that matter so much but how much money your parents have.
Bullshit. Having family money can make an easier road for some people but anyone who tells you they can't succeed because their parents don't have enough money is lying to you.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 87): I'm really glad we have these state funded universities and institutes in here Finland, they allow even poor people with normal abilities to educate themselves to higher levels and that way obtain higher social status instead of staying poor like in the US
There is tons of student aid in the US, both need and merit based. If it were me, I would require all government student aid to become solely merit based. I don't care if your parents are homeless or billionaires, if you demonstrate the ability, the government can help you be educated to a high level.
For that matter, I think that some Ivy League schools have enacted policies that do not allow students to graduate with debt, but I'd have to check that.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 87): Inequality is something that should be always fought against
No. Inequality and competition should not just be allowed, but encouraged. I personally make it my life's goal to build up as much inequality economically as possible.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
KiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 5306 posts, RR: 3 Reply 89, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2320 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): Having it set up to keep people from becoming filthy rich and engaging in artificial redistribution of wealth is generally an awful thing to do. Be hands off with the market and let the cream rise to the top and rest go wherever their abilities can take them.
You've got it all wrong there again, there are plenty of people in Norway who are self made and stinking rich. There are also plenty of stinking rich families with old money in Norway as well. The system here doesn't hinder anyone from becoming rich if they want to, for those that don't the average wage gives Norwegians a pretty good lifestyle, those that need help get it, but not many people here need help, unemployment is under 4%. I'll take the Scandinavian socialist system over the failed US system any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6296 posts, RR: 23 Reply 90, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2313 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 86): Exactly. Some jobs can be done perfectly well by monkeys.
Monkeys that you should want to work hard, do a good job, turn up, and not leave the job every five minutes so you have to hire more, be able to afford to look after themselves and keep themselves healthy.
✈ Don't like it? That's just your tough chuff. ✈
KiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 5306 posts, RR: 3 Reply 91, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2305 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88):
It's hard to trumpet how much money Scandinavians have when they also top the list in cost of living.
It's hard to bitch about the cost of living when you're living the good life, you'd be surprised but most people here don't really care that the cost of living is high, nearly 30% of Norwegian households also own a holiday home so go figure. The standard answer to a foreigner complaining about the costs of everyday items in Norway is 'so what we earn a lot so it doesn't matter'.
I've complained about the cost of living in Norway, but when push comes to shove I know I'm far better off here than anywhere else.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88): Not to mention the flawed logic of trying to apply to the US as a whole policies from a country with the population of Colorado spread over an area similar to Montana.
What's flawed about it, the US system clearly doesn't work for everyone, IMO it only really works for a select few the rest are just cheap (but increasingly not cheap enough) labour. I really don't see the problem with implementing some socialist policies.
WestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1275 posts, RR: 7 Reply 92, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2291 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88): Which means that some people pay far more than they get out of it and some people take far more than they put in.
Many people don't drive, yet their tax dollars still pay for the DMV.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88): Tell that to people who continually talk about providing "free" healthcare.
Half of them know it's not free and only refer to it as "free" because they can leave the hospital with their credit card intact; while the other half are morons. I never said that there weren't stupid people in Canada too.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88): Bullshit. Having family money can make an easier road for some people but anyone who tells you they can't succeed because their parents don't have enough money is lying to you.
Just for fun, I checked my university's scholarship page. Of the ones I looked at, over 80% have "demonstrate financial need" as a requirement to be considered for the scholarship/bursary. There's a boatload of money out there for students that can't afford post-secondary education out of their own pocket (or family's pocket).
pvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 549 posts, RR: 0 Reply 93, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2281 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88): And yet nobody has any problems letting food be a for-profit industry.
As long as government offers even most unfortunate people enough money to buy food or directly offers them free food I have no problem with food being a for-profit industry. You don't need that much food to stay alive and healthy, for many in western countries less food would do just better.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88): Bullshit. Having family money can make an easier road for some people but anyone who tells you they can't succeed because their parents don't have enough money is lying to you.
Then tell me how somebody whose parents have barely enough money to eat and have some place to live could study in some good US university?
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88): There is tons of student aid in the US, both need and merit based. If it were me, I would require all government student aid to become solely merit based. I don't care if your parents are homeless or billionaires, if you demonstrate the ability, the government can help you be educated to a high level.
I've seen plenty of news from the US about people who struggle to get enough money to study in universities. Obviously those aids aren't big enough or are only for people with exceptionally good abilities. In my opinion anybody with average abilities (for that whatever education level they are joining) should be able to get enough of those aids to study, not just those who are way better than average. Only then there can be true equality.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88): No. Inequality and competition should not just be allowed, but encouraged. I personally make it my life's goal to build up as much inequality economically as possible.
Competition and inequality are rubbish. People should work together to make world a better place to live in instead of competing with each other. Whole idea of infinite economic growth and endless competition is flawed and will only result in misery when that whole piece of garbage collapses.
Things can't continue like this, eventually it will all lead into a big disaster. I bet it will be combination of wars, natural disasters such as climate change and simply endless greed will cause it and worldwide economics and capitalism in its current form will cease to exist.
Too bad it most likely won't happen in our lifetime, would be just awesome to witness total collapse of this "civilization" run by money and greed.
RomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, RR: 1 Reply 94, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2270 times:
The minimum wage is probably the best ever example of forceful government policy having the completely opposite result of what it was intended to do.
By setting a price that people can sell their labour at above the market rate, you essentially just destroy all of the jobs for people who don't provide productivity at or above that level.
Now these people will end up on benefits, won't have a chance of progressing their skills, won't experience on their CV. A person is forced into a life of benefit dependency because people thought they were protecting him from terrible exploitive employers who had the cheek to offer somebody a job.
The saddest thing of all though is even though life is now worse for these people (as well as the taxpayer and the consumer) even suggesting its remove results in many people foaming at the mouth and quoting this mythical "race to the bottom" theory. And shameful politicians who probably know the consequences play on this myth to win votes.
If you absolutely must give people who are unproductive some financial assistance then working tax credits are a far superior way of achieving this. Essentially, let's say for every 2 pennies a person earns below £5 the government will subsidise him 1 penny up to a cap of what would be his dole money if he had no job.
Now we have a system where
A) It never makes more sense to stay on benefits
B) It'll never make sense not to improve your skills and push for a payrise
C) Employers will never be forced to pay above the market rate for employees and we can hope to provide work for everyone that wants it.
Really though the government should stay out of voluntary employment agreements. Out of wages, out of redundancy packages, pension packages, working hours, holidays. The only thing the government should do is provide a system where if one party breaches the terms of their working agreement then the other is retributed accordingly.
As for the socialism debate.
The problems with the world today aren't due to a lack of socialism, the problems are due to a lack of capitalism.
If we got rid of this ludicrous corporative system where central banks give commercial banks money that they've just created on a computer and instead went back to a system where there are no central banks, the monetary base is static and the market sets the interest rates, humanity might progress and the standard of living would rise for everyone instead of for the small banking elite in The City or on Wall Street.
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7467 posts, RR: 5 Reply 95, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2260 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): That's because too many Americans are too busy decorating their trailers and having babies rather than going to school. You can't tax your way out of a stupid populace.
Cute picture of poverty in the US. At least you recognize that it's a problem.
As for education for many, you assume that everyone has IQ to be moderately successful in school. You'd probably be critical of someone with anencephaly for not doing their homework.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): When you're talking about jobs like being a janitor or burger jock, why do any of that? Those jobs don't require any standards for the most part.
The level of public or company training might not be that high, but those jobs are necessary for generating revenues (flipping burgers) or maintaining various standards customers expect - your Neiman's example.
Just because the job does not require a university education doesn't mean it is a worthless job. To trivialize a job in order to justify poverty level wages is exactly why we need federal laws to protect the population.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): Seeking artificial redistribution of wealth is a cornerstone of the liberal economic policy.
We have had redistribution of wealth under Bush & Cheney - shifting wealth from the middle class to the moneyed class. Great wealth that can hire an army of lobbyists to get the loopholes they want, even if it required a 300+ page income tax return.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): Ah, yes. The pure evil of not giving people things they don't pay for.
When you talk about doctors, you will have a hard time finding a US trained doctor who did not benefit from public generosity in obtaining his education.
We have hospitals receiving major federal funding so they are not giving away anything for free.
We also have major funding of medical research at various hospitals and have every right as taxpayers to receive the benefit of that research without additional costs.
And the list can go on for most companies.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): Jobs that take more training are better paid. Most minimum wage jobs require little more than a warm body.
Regardless of the education needed for a position there is no excuse for companies to pay poverty level wages. We don't need a serf class in this country - even if it would make the rich even richer.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): Strictly speaking, fair salary is whatever the market will bear. Whatever you can get away with paying is fair, not what some bleeding heart liberal believes a job is worth.
That's a cute game. Carnival might have been playing that game and it might end up being the cause of the fire.
So we might actually see a balance to those low wages - a few thousand lawsuits from passengers who were made to endure the operation of the ship after the fire. Let's let all those juries in all those suits help Carnival understand what is fair. What ever the trial lawyers "can get away" with is the other side of your coin.
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3227 posts, RR: 9 Reply 96, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2251 times:
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 52): Well, if I drive less, then I need less gas, which means they need less attendants, which doesn't exactly help with the labor pool.
That statement explains why the North American and Euro economies are growing at a snail's pace while places like China, India, and Brazil are slowing down.
Basically a capitalistic economy requires spending to function and with the lower and middle classes squeezed who are the engines of a modern economy they won't spend the money on gas to take a road trip then the attendant will get laid off. Same with retail as we are all reluctant to buy clothes and new electronics etc. (I could go on).
In an economy your spending in my income and my spending is your income and if no one spends then no one earns. Right now there is far less spending out of fear and the only way to get this going again is for someone to invest.
What we need is a large number of game changing Entrepreneurs and it would be good for the education system to find a way to teach something that is not that easy to teach.
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 52): The question was how come in Oregon there hasn't been financial ruin to these service stations because they have the extra labor cost? I replied that it's because they ALL have the same cost added and there isn't an alternative for me to get around that cost.
Australia has a $16 per hour minimum wage and while some things are more expensive it has hardly ruined their economy and they have the second best standard of living in the world next to Norway IIRC.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): That's because too many Americans are too busy decorating their trailers and having babies rather than going to school.
That is a huge generalization but I will say that in Norway many more people get higher education because it is paid for by the state though taxes (or heavily subsidized). Where as in the US many cannot afford it because of astronomical costs and if they do they are paying essentially a mortgage in student loans that even in a good economy an entry level salary isn't going to cover.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 86): And I'm pretty sure he never even went to public school.
He did go to a private school but he didn't finish college and neither did Steve Jobs, also when these guys were growing up the US had one of the best public education systems out there. Education is important yes but a lot of the time you can't judge the intelligence of a person by how they do in the classroom.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 93): Whole idea of infinite economic growth and endless competition is flawed and will only result in misery when that whole piece of garbage collapses.
There is truth to that, we cannot grow forever in a planet that is finite.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 93): Things can't continue like this, eventually it will all lead into a big disaster. I bet it will be combination of wars, natural disasters such as climate change and simply endless greed will cause it and worldwide economics and capitalism in its current form will cease to exist.
What is more likely is something similar to the French revolution is where the masses who are suffering say "I've had enough and am not going to take in anymore". Hopefully it's not as violent as that was.
RomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, RR: 1 Reply 97, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2242 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 96): That statement explains why the North American and Euro economies are growing at a snail's pace while places like China, India, and Brazil are slowing down.
Basically a capitalistic economy requires spending to function and with the lower and middle classes squeezed who are the engines of a modern economy they won't spend the money on gas to take a road trip then the attendant will get laid off. Same with retail as we are all reluctant to buy clothes and new electronics etc. (I could go on).
One must be careful to define what economic growth is. Economic growth is an increase in an economy's productivity, not an increase in the amount of spending.
It is an increase in productivity, normally achieved through savings and capital investment that results in more spending thanks to surplus productivity. it's not the other way round.
Both the UK and the US have been spending their little hearts out over the last 10 years. But the embarrassing trade deficits say, we're not at all very productive any more.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 98, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2227 times:
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 89): The system here doesn't hinder anyone from becoming rich if they want to,
They just have to pay dearly for the privilege.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 89): but not many people here need help, unemployment is under 4%.
Now you're getting it. The real solution is real growth and real prosperity, not rearranging the economic deck chairs. Build actual value rather than using the government to shovel money at people who don't really deserve it. It's supply side economics that are the actual answer.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 91): It's hard to bitch about the cost of living when you're living the good life,
Not really. People love to talk about those making $250,000 per year are the fat cats who need to be taxed more when in reality that's only middle class even in the cheaper parts of the country. You could make twice that and still be very much middle class, even in places like California.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 91): I really don't see the problem with implementing some socialist policies.
It has to come from somewhere. Money doesn't just appear.
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 92): Half of them know it's not free and only refer to it as "free" because they can leave the hospital with their credit card intact; while the other half are morons. I never said that there weren't stupid people in Canada too.
In the US, with the current tax system, for a lot of people it actually will be free. Somebody else will have to pay for it since they pay little in taxes.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 93): As long as government offers even most unfortunate people enough money to buy food or directly offers them free food I have no problem with food being a for-profit industry. You don't need that much food to stay alive and healthy, for many in western countries less food would do just better.
That's not what socialized healthcare is proposing though. What you're talking about is more like the current system where an ER will treat you and keep you alive even if you can't pay.
What the universal healthcare people are actually talking about would be more like something where everyone gets to eat steak. The richest and the poorest all get the best healthcare, at government expense.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 93): Then tell me how somebody whose parents have barely enough money to eat and have some place to live could study in some good US university?
Scholarships and financial aid. There is plenty of money out there for students. I'm pretty sure that Princeton and Harvard will not allow students to have loans, either the families have money to pay or the student gets grants and scholarships.
Furthermore, many top schools are making a concerted effort to add economic and ethnic diversity among their students. Personally, I very much dislike that and think it should be a complete meritocracy.
The bottom line is that family money might get someone into a spot they don't really deserve, but lack of family money won't keep deserving students out of schools they deserve to be at.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 93): Only then there can be true equality.
"True equality" just means forcing everyone to be average. It's a terrible idea.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 93): Competition and inequality are rubbish. People should work together to make world a better place to live in instead of competing with each other.
Competition and inequality is what is responsible for every improvement in the world. Somebody wanted something. That's the bottom line. A caveman wanted to kill bigger animals to get more food so he made a spear and mankind was off and running. Greed is good.
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 94): The minimum wage is probably the best ever example of forceful government policy having the completely opposite result of what it was intended to do.
Actually I think that award has to go to the American CAFE laws.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 95): Cute picture of poverty in the US. At least you recognize that it's a problem.
Not my problem.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 95): As for education for many, you assume that everyone has IQ to be moderately successful in school.
The bar for being moderately successful in school is not that high. I'm not saying everyone has to go to an Ivy League college, or even college at all. There are many people who are too dumb to get a Ph. D. but very few are too stupid to lay tile or be a welder.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 95): To trivialize a job in order to justify poverty level wages
Some jobs actually are trivial. That's why it's "minimum wage job" and not "minimum wage career."
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 95): We don't need a serf class in this country
Yes we do. We absolutely do because we like cheap things. In fact we need a serf class in other countries too. A serf class is a necessity because fries don't fry themselves, fruit doesn't pick itself, and floors don't sweep themselves.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 96): He did go to a private school but he didn't finish college and neither did Steve Jobs, also when these guys were growing up the US had one of the best public education systems out there.
The reasons Jobs and Gates made billions and many other people did not has nothing to do with the education system. The difference was not in the government policy and the government does not get to lay a claim to their success. In short, they did build it.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7467 posts, RR: 5 Reply 99, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2218 times:
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 94): The minimum wage is probably the best ever example of forceful government policy having the completely opposite result of what it was intended to do.
The minimum wage in the US is so low that it cannot adversely impact any but the most incompetent business owners. THe proposed raise will basically have very little impact on normal business operations. We are not looking at a $50,000 a year minimum wage.
Unless, of course, you happen to be diagnosed with one of those conditions were that are 20+ countries delivering better outcomes.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 98): but very few are too stupid to lay tile or be a welder
Maybe you haven't seen a wide range or people with Downs, or CP.
In terns of welders or construction workers, I'm all for formal programs that deliver on the apprenticeship side, with a real tradesman being the result. I've used Qantas as an excellent example in the past. Start young and receive a decent wage when you graduate. And, by decent, I mean above the poverty line.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 98): Some jobs actually are trivial. That's why it's "minimum wage job" and not "minimum wage career."
The issue isn't how long someone would stay in a job, though some would want to make it a career. The issue is the pay level. You pay below poverty levels and we taxpayers have to pitch in to cover your abusive actions. If you can't pay above the poverty line then you should be fined, or shut down.
Again, it may cost 5¢ to 10¢ more when you go for your Happy Meal. BFD.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 100, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2214 times:
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 99): Maybe you haven't seen a wide range or people with Downs, or CP.
How much of the population do they make up?
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 99): The issue isn't how long someone would stay in a job, though some would want to make it a career.
That is an issue because in the liberal economic narrative, people are stuck with such jobs and have no way out.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 99): You pay below poverty levels and we taxpayers have to pitch in to cover your abusive actions.
That's something that needs to end too.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 99): If you can't pay above the poverty line then you should be fined, or shut down.
If you can't earn above the poverty line, get a second job. If two jobs can't do it, get a third job. Or an education.
You can't have a bunch of people who have no skills and no education but still expect the government or business owners to pay them more than they are worth.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 99): Careful, you are one drunk driver away from joining that group.
That doesn't change macroeconomics.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 101, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2211 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 98): Quoting Ken777 (Reply 95):
Cute picture of poverty in the US. At least you recognize that it's a problem.
Not my problem.
Is that because you're still living with your parents while you suck up federal benefits for schooling? Never did find out how your job search went—did you get to put your degree to work, or are you at the federal trough again for more schooling benefits?
pvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 549 posts, RR: 0 Reply 103, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2205 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 98): "True equality" just means forcing everyone to be average. It's a terrible idea.
Wrong, we have plenty of rich people in here Finland too. If you truly deserve to be rich you will become rich even with a bit higher taxes.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 98): Competition and inequality is what is responsible for every improvement in the world. Somebody wanted something. That's the bottom line. A caveman wanted to kill bigger animals to get more food so he made a spear and mankind was off and running. Greed is good.
If all these cavemen had been intelligent enough to stop fighting each other and had started to work for better future together we would probably already have colonies in space. Instead humans keep competing with each other creating wars and poverty. That's because of greed. You don't need to be greedy or wish to compete with other people to seek for improvements.
RomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, RR: 1 Reply 104, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2193 times:
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 99): The minimum wage in the US is so low that it cannot adversely impact any but the most incompetent business owners. The proposed raise will basically have very little impact on normal business operations. We are not looking at a $50,000 a year minimum wage.
You're look at it the wrong way. Businesses want to maximise profit. They'll do this by organising labour and capital in the most efficient way they can.
If the government increases the minimum wage, no, it won't put his company out of business, but he will think, what way can i organise my labour and capital in order to maximise my profits. Now that labour is more expensive, it will likely make sense to remove 1 or 2 of his least productive employees who now cost more to employ than the value they add to the company from their labour.
This particularly impacts the young who often don't need to earn a lot as they still live at home. But they have now lost their first step on the job ladder.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 105, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2198 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 101): Never did find out how your job search went%u2014did you get to put your degree to work, or are you at the federal trough again for more schooling benefits?
Funny you should mention that.
I did get an offer for a pretty decent job, but I turned it down because I didn't like the location. This was, in hindsight, a mistake. I learned a lesson, namely to not care about things besides money. Worrying about things other than the almighty dollar will only make me miserable, I'm much better off following the money. It was admittedly a lapse in judgement and I won't make that mistake again.
In the mean time, I have gotten a menial retail job. It pretty much sucks, is totally commodity labor, and offers little besides filling in a gap on my resume. It requires no skills whatsoever other than being alive and ambulatory, and a trained ape could do the job as well as me. The most difficult thing was going through the process and pretending that I don't plan on bolting at the first opportunity.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 103): That's because of greed. You don't need to be greedy or wish to compete with other people to seek for improvements.
Everything good that's ever happened was because of greed. Even altruism can be traced back to selfishness and greed. Parents sacrifice for their kids so their family line can continue. Soldiers give their lives for their country so their country can survive and thrive. People act as part of a team so that the team, and by extension themselves, can win in whatever form that may be.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
pvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 549 posts, RR: 0 Reply 106, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2171 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 105): Soldiers give their lives for their country so their country can survive and thrive. People act as part of a team so that the team, and by extension themselves, can win in whatever form that may be.
Nah, soldiers fight for "their" country because they either earn money/other benefits by doing so or in case of common conscription because they are forced to do so. Or alternatively they might be brainwashed with nationalism and other such nonsense. Most of the time wars are fought for rich ruling elite to get more power and wealth, not for the people.
Countries rise and fall, personally I would never give away my life for any country.
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3227 posts, RR: 9 Reply 107, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2170 times:
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 97): Both the UK and the US have been spending their little hearts out over the last 10 years. But the embarrassing trade deficits say, we're not at all very productive any more.
I blame that on the decisions made my corporations in each country to move their production to places like China and India, places where the middle class is growing. We need to start making things again.
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 97): It is an increase in productivity, normally achieved through savings and capital investment that results in more spending thanks to surplus productivity. it's not the other way round.
Savings and Capital investment have been very limited since 2008 both from the private sector (where you ideally want it from) where corporations are still very profitable as the world's stock exchanges reflect and have loads of cash. Governments aren't investing either as many of them are taking Austerity measure.
As for savings there have been none at the personal and government level so we can't dip into them to invest or spend either and at the corporate level they sit on their cash because they don't see a return.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 98): The reasons Jobs and Gates made billions and many other people did not has nothing to do with the education system. The difference was not in the government policy and the government does not get to lay a claim to their success. In short, they did build it.
They were the visionaries and had the ideas but they had plenty of investments and surrounded themselves with the right people who could do things that they were not able to do well. Those investors took a chance on them as well and without them their success may not have been possible.
If you have seen the Social Network you will see that even a genius like Mark Zuckerburg would likely never have made Facebook what it is today without his supporting cast.
No one hits the top alone and if you do get the massive amount of money you seek out you will probably realize that your success was possible because of people who took a chance on you and your ideas be it investors, partners or employees.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 108, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2170 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 105): In the mean time, I have gotten a menial retail job.
After all that angst you put us through? At least you're honest about the mistake you made, but you really shouldn't be lecturing us on economics in future. When it comes down to it, you aren't able to put into motion that which you advocate so strongly in words.
cmf From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 2485 posts, RR: 35 Reply 109, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2167 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 75): How DO you quantify fair? As I mentioned:
In the SAME way you quantify so many other things. Look at how ROI is quantified for guideline.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): engaging in artificial redistribution of wealth is generally an awful thing to do.
Yet that is what the current what today's conservatives want.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 79): Strictly speaking, fair salary is whatever the market will bear. Whatever you can get away with paying is fair, not what some bleeding heart liberal believes a job is worth.
Whatever you can get away with. By your definition bank robbery is fine, just get away with it.
Fair salary isn't what the market will bear. Fair salary is based on the time, skill and risks involved in performing a task. But as usual right wingers want employees who are so starved they will take any job just to give their children a grain of rice.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 110, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2168 times:
Quoting pvjin (Reply 106): Nah, soldiers fight for "their" country because they either earn money/other benefits by doing so or in case of common conscription because they are forced to do so.
All of that is still greed. Want steady pay or a free college education so you join the military? That's still greed. Want to not pay a fine or be imprisoned? That's still greed.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 107): If you have seen the Social Network you will see that even a genius like Mark Zuckerburg would likely never have made Facebook what it is today without his supporting cast.
The government didn't do anything special for Zuckerburg that should make him have to pay more.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 108): At least you're honest about the mistake you made
Let's be clear that the mistake was not chasing the money. Letting things cloud economic judgement causes problems, it's much better to be greedy.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 108): but you really shouldn't be lecturing us on economics in future.
Sure I should. None of my experience changes reality.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 108): When it comes down to it, you aren't able to put into motion that which you advocate so strongly in words.
I still have a six figure education that I was quite successful with getting that isn't going anywhere. I have no intention of keeping a retail job even a day longer than necessary. Furthermore, none of the economic changes liberals want will help me, they'll all do the opposite.
Quoting cmf (Reply 109): Whatever you can get away with. By your definition bank robbery is fine, just get away with it.
Nobody is saying that coercion is something that should be allowed. That's not the market and you know it.
Quoting cmf (Reply 109): Fair salary is based on the time, skill and risks involved in performing a task.
The market recognizes that. See how much a truck driver in Afghanistan gets paid versus one in the US.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 111, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2160 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 110): I still have a six figure education that I was quite successful with getting that isn't going anywhere. I have no intention of keeping a retail job even a day longer than necessary. Furthermore, none of the economic changes liberals want will help me, they'll all do the opposite.
So your menial retail job pays more than $11 per hour?
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 112, posted (3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2158 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 111): So your menial retail job pays more than $11 per hour?
Nope. But that doesn't guarantee that I wouldn't have to be cut because others have to be paid more. Plus much of what I pay for involves minimum wage workers, so I'd have to pay more for a lot of things. It's just not worth it.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 113, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2149 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 112): Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 111):
So your menial retail job pays more than $11 per hour?
Nope.
If you can't see the inaccuracy in your previous statement, then there isn't anything you purvey on economic topics that can taken as relevant in real world applications.
RomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, RR: 1 Reply 114, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2148 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 107): I blame that on the decisions made my corporations in each country to move their production to places like China and India, places where the middle class is growing. We need to start making things again.
Its not the corporation's fault, they're just doing what's in their best interest like any rational person would.
When the government make a high tax and spend environment, with onerous regulations and a central bank giving everyone the illusion of wealth which is actually being fuelled by debt and debauchery of the local currency, it's not surprising that these corporations choose foreign workers. Even with geography working against them.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 115, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2144 times:
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 114): Its not the corporation's fault, they're just doing what's in their best interest like any rational person would.
Where are our manners? Welcome back to a.net, RomeoBravo.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 117, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2121 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 113): If you can't see the inaccuracy in your previous statement, then there isn't anything you purvey on economic topics that can taken as relevant in real world applications.
All it takes is recognition of the fact that this isn't something that exists in isolation. Increasing minimum wage increases costs, unless of course businesses try to increase productivity or just get by with fewer employees. You could raise minimum wage to $50 per hour, and a lot of people would lose their jobs and some would get raises.
There is also the fact that to cover the increased labor costs, I and everyone else will have to pay more for many things. Overall the change in policy is a loser. Let the market set the cost.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4544 posts, RR: 28 Reply 118, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2117 times:
Interesting stats, regardless of where you stand on the issue:
Quoting pvjin (Reply 103): If all these cavemen had been intelligent enough to stop fighting each other and had started to work for better future together we would probably already have colonies in space. Instead humans keep competing with each other creating wars and poverty. That's because of greed. You don't need to be greedy or wish to compete with other people to seek for improvements.
I wonder who'd be in charge? Who's interests will be best represented? How will this new world design avoid the power and corruption that has so far plagued us? I'm not asking that to be rude, I really am curious how we get from here to there?
Quoting pvjin (Reply 106): Countries rise and fall, personally I would never give away my life for any country.
"Country" is another way of saying people.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 108): After all that angst you put us through? At least you're honest about the mistake you made, but you really shouldn't be lecturing us on economics in future. When it comes down to it, you aren't able to put into motion that which you advocate so strongly in words.
But he's willing to accept what comes his way, versus the moron who was on a radio show awhile back with a six figure student loan portfolio who refused to work for less than $100,000/year.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 105): The most difficult thing was going through the process and pretending that I don't plan on bolting at the first opportunity.
Well, you always accept life, so I hope you accept that attitudes like that are perceptable to your employers. The current ones may not care, particularly if you are little more than a monkey to them, but some will. Good luck with getting everything you want - sincerely.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 119, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2123 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 117): All it takes is recognition of the fact that this isn't something that exists in isolation.
Let's see, going from $7.25/hr to $9.00/hr (for some reason I mistyped $11 in my earlier post) is an increase of almost 25%. Of course nothing works in a vacuum, but if you think the inflation rate would rise by 25% in tandem as a result, then you have more economic theory problems than first suspected.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 120, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2115 times:
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 118): But he's willing to accept what comes his way, versus the moron who was on a radio show awhile back with a six figure student loan portfolio who refused to work for less than $100,000/year.
Go back to some of the election threads from last November, and that's exactly what he said he was prepared to do. Emphatically. Across a multitude of threads. Flatly declaring that his education made him too good to take a job outside of what he was educated for, even to gain work experience.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 121, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2106 times:
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 118): I hope you accept that attitudes like that are perceptable to your employers.
I'm not sure that's the case. I don't think I changed colors when people go on about "personal growth" or how all their managers started out as hourly. I have no intention of doing any of that unless they want to triple my pay in a hurry.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 119): Let's see, going from $7.25/hr to $9.00/hr (for some reason I mistyped $11 in my earlier post) is an increase of almost 25%.
But how many people get the increase and how many are made redundant?
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 120): Flatly declaring that his education made him too good to take a job outside of what he was educated for, even to gain work experience.
It does. I have no interest in pretending that the job isn't completely beneath me, because it is. I am too good for it, I just have to pretend otherwise sometimes.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
RomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, RR: 1 Reply 122, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2099 times:
It really depends on the supply/demand curve how many people are made redundant.
It's not just about that though.
The whole point in wages (prices) is that they are signals to say where people should be looking for jobs. Low wages say, oversupply of this job, don't do this job, go do something else. High wages say the opposite.
If we go around fixing the prices of things, the very elegant way that the invisible hand tells people where to work is distorting, resulting in the sub-optimal allocation of resources. This means society isn't working as efficiently as it should be.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 123, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2097 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 121): But how many people get the increase and how many are made redundant?
You're the one making the argument, so the burden is on you to provide those numbers to back up your assertions. What you're exposing is that the theories you're arguing are rooted merely in what you think might happen, not necessarily what will happen, and that you've not done sufficient research on this topic to argue it one way or the other. Well, other than it was proposed by a "liberal", and therefore bad. ::chuckle::
WestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1275 posts, RR: 7 Reply 124, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2087 times:
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 99): Quoting BMI727 (Reply 98):
but very few are too stupid to lay tile or be a welder
Maybe you haven't seen a wide range or people with Downs, or CP.
Be careful when comparing persons with mental disabilities to people who are just plain stupid. There's a big difference.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 105): I learned a lesson, namely to not care about things besides money. Worrying about things other than the almighty dollar will only make me miserable, I'm much better off following the money.
I, too, believe cash is king, but never make a decision based on a single variable. I don't know what your degree is in or what classes you've taken, but anyone in business will know what every alternative needs to be weighed on decision matrix with no less than three variables. You and I just happen to weigh money a little more than the average person, but never discount other factors.
The best job I ever had was at RIM. Sure, they paid VERY well, but that was only a component of how awesome that job was. Other factors that weighed heavily into my experience was a great location and a young working environment (average age of my coworkers was about 25).
I'm not saying your way of thinking is wrong, because I don't know you or what's best for you, but just a little bit of perspective there.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 107): I blame that on the decisions made my corporations in each country to move their production to places like China and India, places where the middle class is growing. We need to start making things again.
That happens because the US has made the labour market and overall business operating environment unattractive.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 107): Those investors took a chance on them as well and without them their success may not have been possible.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 107): If you have seen the Social Network you will see that even a genius like Mark Zuckerburg would likely never have made Facebook what it is today without his supporting cast.
Those investors weren't the government. They were private investors and venture capitalists.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 108): but you really shouldn't be lecturing us on economics in future. When it comes down to it, you aren't able to put into motion that which you advocate so strongly in words.
That's unnecessarily discriminatory. What about me then? I don't have a high-paying job right now that relates to my (almost finished) degree, so does that mean I can't school most of the people here in my field of study?
Quoting cmf (Reply 109): In the SAME way you quantify so many other things. Look at how ROI is quantified for guideline.
The variables used in an ROI formula are easily quantifiable because they are based in dollars. How do you put a dollar figure on "fairness"?
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7467 posts, RR: 5 Reply 125, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2081 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): How much of the population do they make up?
More than you think. Remember that, by definition, half the population has an IQ under 100.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): That is an issue because in the liberal economic narrative
So everything that doesn't meet your hard right standards is "liberal"? I guess you get a thrill using that word, even if it's a moderate's position.
Real world is that there will always be a group of workers who will stay at the lower job levels because of their limited capacity. That doesn't mean that they cannot make a wage above the poverty line.
From a conservative position, why should we pay out federal benefits simply to allow company owners pay poverty level wages?
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): people are stuck with such jobs and have no way out.
That goup has increased dramatically thanks to the Bush/Cheney Great Recession. 750,000 jobs lost a month
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): That's something that needs to end too.
End poverty level wages and it can be significantly reduced.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): If you can't earn above the poverty line, get a second job.
What we are talking about is employers paying above the poverty line. As long as we are allowing it we are pouring out a lot of taxpayer dollars for corporate welfare. That corporate welfare is what needs to end.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): You can't have a bunch of people who have no skills and no education but still expect the government or business owners to pay them more than they are worth.
If a job position isn't worth a wage above the poverty line then close that position down. If the employers play games then shut that company down through major fines.
I don't think so. I'm against corporate welfare via allowing below poverty line wages. There is a huge difference between maximizing profits and operating a responsible company. I have no problems going after those companies who play games at the lower levels of employees.
One of the saddest comments in this thread is this one - and your inability to understand that some people join the military because they actually believe in serving their country.
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 104): This particularly impacts the young who often don't need to earn a lot as they still live at home. But they have now lost their first step on the job ladder.
Flipping burgers may be considered by some to be a "kids" job, but adults are also working those positions - especially after Bush/Cheney's FUBARs.
If you want a special "kids wage" then tie it to a real apprenticeship program during the high school years with tradesman level jobs on graduation. I'll repeat the Qantas Maintenance Apprenticeship program again as a solid example.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 105): I learned a lesson, namely to not care about things besides money.
That's a great way to be branded in a company. Why should supervisors or managers promote you with that attitude?
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 105): I did get an offer for a pretty decent job, but I turned it down because I didn't like the location.
So you didn't even consider that the ladders for success may well involve transfers to different locations?
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 105): In the mean time, I have gotten a menial retail job.
The primary reason it is menial is because you make it so. A lot of retailers promote from within - some on a pretty rapid basis. I still recall one of the top CEOs in Australia who started with a "menial job" in retailing (right out of growing up in an orphanage) and going all the way to the top.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 121): But how many people get the increase and how many are made redundant?
Take your burger flipper example. You might pay a few cents for your Happy Meal, but we all know that most owners won't be flipping burgers because of an increase in the minimum wage. Reality is that most people will not notice cost increases in their purchases because of an increase in minimum wages.
Some companies may try to cut staff. Delta Airlines is a classic example of that game - pax raised hell and Delta rapidly apologized and increased their employe count.
Maybe you need to remember that a company's competition will also face that cost increase and they are ready to take care of customers the greedy companies won't.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 126, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2081 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 124): That's unnecessarily discriminatory. What about me then? I don't have a high-paying job right now that relates to my (almost finished) degree, so does that mean I can't school most of the people here in my field of study?
You have to read my comments in context to all of the arguments he was making last November in relation to his education in aerospace engineering (I believe it was), the job market, and economic theories, accompanied with flat declarations that he wouldn't even consider a position outside of his educated field as an interim job, as it would be beneath him.
PPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8493 posts, RR: 43 Reply 127, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2070 times:
There is not one aspect of minimum wage laws that actually yields a social positive. It's a very well understood problem, but it's too easy for people like Obama to sell the idea to millions who are economically illiterate as something that is a good thing. After all, it's not like he is faking that he wishes well, and it's very feel-good talk, so it is easy to fall for it.
If you could solve poverty with minimum wage laws, this world would have been fixed a long time ago. The whole idea should be just plain silly, too good to be true to anyone with both of their feet on the ground.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 128, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2061 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 124): I'm not saying your way of thinking is wrong, because I don't know you or what's best for you, but just a little bit of perspective there.
I think I'm much better off paying less attention to jobs and more attention to just chasing the money. If I like doing something that much, I'll find a way to do it whether I'm getting paid for it or not.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): More than you think. Remember that, by definition, half the population has an IQ under 100.
And the vast majority of them have perfectly satisfactory careers. How many people are so disabled or just dumb that they can't have any job?
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): So everything that doesn't meet your hard right standards is "liberal"? I guess you get a thrill using that word, even if it's a moderate's position.
Not at all, but liberals support economic policies like increasing minimum wage based on the ideas that people with low paying jobs will never move up and that things like retiring or supporting a family are God given rights.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): Real world is that there will always be a group of workers who will stay at the lower job levels because of their limited capacity.
Fine. That's their problem.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): From a conservative position, why should we pay out federal benefits simply to allow company owners pay poverty level wages?
We shouldn't.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): If a job position isn't worth a wage above the poverty line then close that position down.
That's already been happening, in case other people didn't notice jobs moving offshore.
I have no idea where this idea that everyone's job has to pay above poverty level came from. It sure didn't come from the free market. Either way, it is a damaging economic fallacy that must be exterminated.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): One of the saddest comments in this thread is this one - and your inability to understand that some people join the military because they actually believe in serving their country.
Why do you believe in serving your country? So YOUR country and YOUR culture can survive? So YOUR family can have a safe environment to live? So you leave a better place for YOUR children?
I'm not saying it's bad, but even selflessness and altruism ultimately is rooted in self centered interests.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): That's a great way to be branded in a company. Why should supervisors or managers promote you with that attitude?
Just don't tell them.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): So you didn't even consider that the ladders for success may well involve transfers to different locations?
It wasn't likely in this case. Either way, I made a mistake in even considering it relevant. From now on it has to be all about the Benjamins.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): The primary reason it is menial is because you make it so.
There's really no way in which it isn't. A middle schooler could do the work with no problems.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): A lot of retailers promote from within - some on a pretty rapid basis.
It better be early and often if I'm expected to stick around.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): Maybe you need to remember that a company's competition will also face that cost increase and they are ready to take care of customers the greedy companies won't.
...and all of that will ultimately have to come from the pockets of customers.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Aesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 4810 posts, RR: 9 Reply 129, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2046 times:
I think it's a good proposition, although he also mentioned a free trade agreement with the EU, so I'm guessing it's one chip to get that. I hope it fails because there is nothing in it for us, especially while the US wages a currency war by printing money like there is no tomorrow.
Minimum wage is 9,43€ an hour here (such a strange number is caused by it being indexed on inflation, and governments giving X or Y % more once in a while, not a round number). That's about 12$ at current rates, and is typically what McDonald's pay its waiters (with some benefits on top). Typically we work 35 hours only, though, so you have to take that into account. On the other hand this is not what the employers spend, since they also pay "taxes" for your pension, health care etc., and the worker also pays a little for that (a little at that wage anyway).
All in all it's a living wage, you have to be careful with your money and if you live in expensive cities get some government help to pay the rent or get a low rent flat.
As for McDonald's, they seem to survive fine, in fact France is their biggest market after the US (I know, a disgrace), and French McDonald's make more money than US ones.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
warri1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6496 posts, RR: 8 Reply 130, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2045 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 128): ...and all of that will ultimately have to come from the pockets of customers.
I ask, is this not how the system works? You make, we take, we pay. I do not remember any other way in this country, of course their is always bartering. Not very practical these days.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 131, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2049 times:
Quoting PPVRA (Reply 127): There is not one aspect of minimum wage laws that actually yields a social positive.
The minimum wage was introduced in the U.S. in the 1930s in reaction to the proliferation of sweatshops, who employed mainly women and younger workers. Even if the minimum wage does nothing other than provide a barrier from one form of blatant workplace exploitation, then it does indeed yield a social positive.
warri1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6496 posts, RR: 8 Reply 132, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2031 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 78): Superb sourcing of an openly liberal think-tank to support a liberal perspective. There are moderate thinktanks out there you know...Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 76):But it is wonderful if people who make it big, get more of the pie. Read the charts.I read the charts. I don't particular like that they source all of their stats from a single reference point, but I'll tell you this: they don't exactly support your argument. Yes, it's true that the top 1% have rebounded the most during the recovery. But you know what else the statistics say? They say that the top 1% was also the hardest hit in the recession. The wealthy aren't safeguarded against anything, they are at a far greater risk to fluctuations in their wealth because for most of them it's entirely dependent on market strength. The good days are good for the rich, but the bad days are just as bad.
I wonder, did you read table 3 and below, about the share of wages from 1947 until ? It seems that the top have doubled their share in recent years, after many years of stability. I would appreciate some figures refuting my figures from the ultra liberal site that I provided. Please, nothing from Fox.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3227 posts, RR: 9 Reply 133, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2020 times:
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 124): Those investors weren't the government. They were private investors and venture capitalists.
I never mentioned the government and ideally you don't want the government doing that job because I don't think that is their duty.
What I am getting at is that when someone says "I built that" its not a one person effort as those venture capitalists took a risk in the success of most if not all successful entrepreneurs.
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 124): That happens because the US has made the labour market and overall business operating environment unattractive.
In a way yes so how can that be fixed?
Do we strip wages and regulations to those of China?
I do think we can get corporations to bring some jobs back for a tax incentive but I don't think they many businesses would pay the market wage in the west because its too high and our cost of living is much higher with no sign of dropping.
Note this isn't just unskilled work being off-shored, now a lot of highly technical work is being sent overseas.
warri1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6496 posts, RR: 8 Reply 134, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2015 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 131): The minimum wage was introduced in the U.S. in the 1930s in reaction to the proliferation of sweatshops, who employed mainly women and younger workers. Even if the minimum wage does nothing other than provide a barrier from one form of blatant workplace exploitation, then it does indeed yield a social positive.
I applaud your common sense. You hit it right on the head. Exploitation is the name of the game, then as well as now. Imagine no laws at all to protect from the exploiters.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3227 posts, RR: 9 Reply 135, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2012 times:
Quoting warri1 (Reply 134): I applaud your common sense. You hit it right on the head. Exploitation is the name of the game, then as well as now. Imagine no laws at all to protect from the exploiters.
They are hated by a lot of people here but employee exploitation is the reason unions were created.
warri1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6496 posts, RR: 8 Reply 136, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2004 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 135): They are hated by a lot of people here but employee exploitation is the reason unions were created.
As a union member for 42 years, and a member here for a few years, trust me, I know about union hatred. There is no question, you are absolutely correct about exploitation being the cause of the union movement. The unions will rise again if this period of exploitation continues too long. The Robber Barons of the old days could learn something from the modern day Robber Barons. They were pikers back then. They did not own our governments as is the case now.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
Pyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 3538 posts, RR: 28 Reply 137, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1998 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 3): Hmm, here in Oregon, it's illegal to pump your own gas. It's estimated that there are the equivalent of 20K or more full-time jobs maintained due to having this "unnecessary" service. Yet our gas doesn't cost any more than it does in Washington or California, even though wages at gas stations are higher than elsewhere due to having gas jockeys employed. We also don't have an appreciable difference in the number of gas stations per capita/per car/per miles driven.
So with higher wages, how come it hasn't spelled economic disaster for our gas stations in comparison to neighboring states?
The price of gas at the pump is more dictated by gas taxes than distribution costs (the profit made by governments on a gallon of gas is higher than that of any member of the value chain). But of course, thinking that mandating inefficiencies somehow creates value is a central tenet of liberals, and should tell you everything you need to know about how economically illiterate they are. This from the party that believes ATMs somehow cause unemployment, so should not surprise you.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
Geezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1430 posts, RR: 1 Reply 139, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1984 times:
Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 59): Do you think a state has a right to let citizens openly carry firearms?
You're trying to talk about 3 things at once; No one has said ANYTHING about "openly" carrying firearms; I don't just "think" Indiana has "the right" to issue me a permit to carry, I have it in my possession; but it's NOT to "openly carry"; that doesn't work; If I ran around "flaunting" the fact that I have a .40 caliber pistol dangling from my belt, it would cause many unneeded problems. That's exactly why permits are called "CC" permits; (which is the whole basis of citizens "carrying" that you "gun grabbers" still just don't seem to understand; we can explain it to you until we're blue in the face, but you STILL "don't get it".
There always HAVE been, and there always WILL be, criminals running around armed with weapons; they have weapons for one reason.......to commit crimes with; (read: ROB PEOPLE) If all the customers of a particular store are known to NEVER carry weapons, (because of security searches before entering), and the customers of the store next door were known to be 50% armed and trained, the second store would have FAR LESS problems with armed robberies that the first store; criminals may be dumb, but they're NOT completely stupid; they would much prefer to rob a person they know will be un-armed, than to risk robbing someone who has a 50% chance of being armed, and trained to "shoot back"; That's really a very simple concept; there's only ONE reason if anyone doesn't "grasp" that concept; ( they prefer to remain ignorant ) (and vulnerable)
Some people just don't wish to be "vulnerable".
The sad fact in all of this "right to bear arms" bru-ha-ha is...........so very many of you "gun grabbers" are too "timid" to defend yourselves, to lazy to train yourselves in self defense, and knowing that you will NEVER have a means of self defense when the "need arises", you're jealous ! You don't want ANYONE ELSE to have that ability either. (I can just hear all of the screaming and yelling now, when you read this) you have never faced a criminal with a weapon, when you were empty handed; I have; and I have no intention of ever allowing it to happen again. Just keep one thing in mind; if you ever come to Indiana, and if you ever get the "urge" to rob someone here, be advised..........MANY potential "victims" here have NO INTENTION of becoming victims. Many citizens in Indiana are fully prepared to "shoot back", should then need arise.
Do you really think that if it became known that EVERY airliner had 10 armed guards aboard on every trip, that terrorists would still try an occasional high-jacking ? No they wouldn't; they would "re-group", and try to come up with a safer means attacking our airplanes.
Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 59): Cannot even imagine what you could possibly mean by this, much less something relevant to Oregon gas. My point, if you've been to Oregon in the last 63 years, you've encountered this. Spoiler alert: I don't live in Oregon.
News flash to you, genius: I couldn't possibly care LESS where you live ! ( if I were you, I wouldn't "let it out" where you live either, because any potential robber is going to know that you're an "easy target"!
As far as "what you can't imagine".............I'm sure there are many things that you "can't imagine"; (perhaps you should consider taking a "course" to improve your "imagination" ?
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 69): Canada is a fairly conservative country, yet we have what Americans fearfully know as "socialized healthcare" ("universal healthcare" to us) that actually works quite well. The US would be better off to take a mo
Yes.......tell us all about your health care that "works so well" ! (so "well" the Canadiens must sometimes WAIT for 2 or 3 years to have a surgical procedure performed, that is likely to be fatal if not performed "shortly"; you can rattle on all day about hiow great "your" health care is, but you're talking to someone that SEES the constant line of Canadiens who come to the U.S. EVERY DAY to have procedures performed, that they would have to wait 2 years for in Canada. ( Incidentally, ever hear of "Canada Drugs" in Winnepeg ? I'm a customer of theirs.) Believe me, we Americans know ALL ABOUT how "great" YOUR "socialized medicine" is !
Quoting pvjin (Reply 87): 'm really glad we have these state funded universities and institutes in here Finland, they allow even poor people with normal abilities to educate themselves to higher levels and that way obtain higher social status instead of staying poor like in the US.
I'm really glad you have all of those "state funded" universities also ! But I'm afraid I have bad new for you; you don't have a CLUE as to how "higher education" in the U.S. "works" ! Not a CLUE" ! You're talking to a non-college educated man, whose 5 "off spring" ALL have college educations, none of them are "poor", (as you seem to think everyone in the U.S. is), and at age 80, I'm NOT on "public assistance" myself ! So how do you account for that ? How do you think we ever "survived" without "socialism" as you put it ?
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 91): I've complained about the cost of living in Norway, but when push comes to shove I know I'm far better off here than anywhere else.
I'm glad you're happy there, Rob ! ( The cost of airfare to visit your family in N.Z. must be a "bitch" though ?)
[quote=pvjin,reply=93]Then tell me how somebody whose parents have barely enough money to eat and have some place to live could study in some good US university?
I think I've pretty well covered that already; You know, anyone reading your question will immediately realize that you are attempting to talk about something which you very obviously know absolutely NOTHING about ! Your "thinking" is completely negative! Every College and University in the U.S. is FILLED with students whose parents are; everything from "dirt poor", "slightly poor", "not so poor", to "getting by O.K", and all the way up to "filthy rich" ! We don't try to FORCE everyone to be in the exact same economic situation as you do in Europe; and you know what ? We're really GLAD all of you folks in Europe are doing so well ! WE really are; But if it's not too much trouble, please explain this to me; If Europe is in such marvelous economic shape, if it's the veritable "Paradise" that you paint it to be.............then why in the hell are so many people from Europe still FLOCKING to the U.S. every year, seeking to "improve their lives" ? I really would love to hear your "explanation" of that.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 93): 've seen plenty of news from the US about people who struggle to get enough money to study in universities. Obviously those aids aren't big enough or are only for people with exceptionally good abilities. In my opinion anybody with average abilities (for that whatever education level they are joining) should be able to get enough of those aids to study, not just those who are way better than average. Only then there can be true equality.
You know........I had fully intended to try and address every one of your "questions"; but after reading through the last one again, I'm afraid it's an "exercise in futility"! I'm sure anyone else reading that last statement / question, will understand what I'm talking about; There are a couple of things that come to mind; such as.........."you can give a man fish, and he won't be hungry today".................or.........."you can TEACH a man to fish, and he "should" be able to feed himself (at least until he gets tired of eating fish ?) ...........or..........."you can spend 10 years trying to teach trigonometry to a three toed sloth, and he will probably still just go hang in a tree" ! (in which case, you will have just wasted 10 years, much like I have no doubt just wasted 10 minutes ?)
Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
Here we go, whoa is me. Let the employee's collect food stamps, and welfare so we can eat a not so cheap burger. I wonder who pays for welfare and food stamps in the end? Is that government welfare for McDonald's etc?
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
jpetekyxmd80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4245 posts, RR: 29 Reply 141, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1968 times:
Quoting Geezer (Reply 139):
You're trying to talk about 3 things at once; No one has said ANYTHING about "openly" carrying firearms; I don't just "think" Indiana has "the right" to issue me a permit to carry, I have it in my possession; but it's NOT to "openly carry"; that doesn't work
Jesus. No. You completely miss the point. I'm not starting a gun argument, i'm not talking about gays and i'm hardly even talking about gas pumping. I only used open carry as an example because many states have it, and many do not. I'm talking about your completely self-serving and erratic views of federal vs. state power. Your opinions on it simply reflect your whims on a particular issue rather than any overarching principle or ideology.
You are the one who said you don't think Oregon has the "right" to have their own gas pumping laws? Why not? What laws shouldn't states be allowed to make? Do you find this law unconstitutional? Even someone who generally prefers federal consistency (like me) realizes states have much power, and this is perfectly within their authority.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 139):
The sad fact in all of this "right to bear arms" bru-ha-ha is...........so very many of you "gun grabbers" are too "timid" to defend yourselves, to lazy to train yourselves in self defense, and knowing that you will NEVER have a means of self defense when the "need arises", you're jealous ! You don't want ANYONE ELSE to have that ability either. (I can just hear all of the screaming and yelling now, when you read this) you have never faced a criminal with a weapon, when you were empty handed; I have; and I have no intention of ever allowing it to happen again. Just keep one thing in mind; if you ever come to Indiana, and if you ever get the "urge" to rob someone here, be advised..........MANY potential "victims" here have NO INTENTION of becoming victims. Many citizens in Indiana are fully prepared to "shoot back", should then need arise.
Wow, you really are in love with hearing yourself talk, aren't you. BTW, that diatribe was relevant to precisely nothing.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 139):
News flash to you, genius: I couldn't possibly care LESS where you live ! ( if I were you, I wouldn't "let it out" where you live either, because any potential robber is going to know that you're an "easy target"!
Yes, so listen here all you potential robbers- be sure to make that correlation that since I recognize the State of Oregon's ability to make their own laws pursuant to the Constitution, i must not be a gun owner. You really are a fallacy machine, Charlie. If only you cared.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 139):
As far as "what you can't imagine".............I'm sure there are many things that you "can't imagine"; (perhaps you should consider taking a "course" to improve your "imagination" ?
Is this an ultra liberal site also? I am sorry if it is. There seems to b e a pattern to all these articles about the top of the heap raking it in while minimum wage workers get nothing but hard work.
[Edited 2013-02-14 19:33:47]
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 143, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1939 times:
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 137): But of course, thinking that mandating inefficiencies somehow creates value is a central tenet of liberals, and should tell you everything you need to know about how economically illiterate they are.
LOL!! What part of the ban on self-service gas is supported by both Republicans and Democrats did you miss? Unbelievable.
Skyservice_330 From Canada, joined Sep 2000, 1384 posts, RR: 6 Reply 144, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1918 times:
Quoting Geezer (Reply 139): Yes.......tell us all about your health care that "works so well" ! (so "well" the Canadiens must sometimes WAIT for 2 or 3 years to have a surgical procedure performed, that is likely to be fatal if not performed "shortly"; you can rattle on all day about hiow great "your" health care is, but you're talking to someone that SEES the constant line of Canadiens who come to the U.S. EVERY DAY to have procedures performed, that they would have to wait 2 years for in Canada. ( Incidentally, ever hear of "Canada Drugs" in Winnepeg ? I'm a customer of theirs.) Believe me, we Americans know ALL ABOUT how "great" YOUR "socialized medicine" is !
For someone that b*tches and moans that non-Americans shouldn't participate in US political debates on this forum, you really should be more careful about posting pure, stinking, bullsh*t about another country - find me one reliable study (and they are out there, from conservative Canadian think tanks even) that reports a 2-3 year wait time for surgery.
Oh, and in the spirit of using your favourite phrase, I DON'T CARE what you supposedly 'see' or about some anecdotal story about your neighbours cousins brother that you think will back up the 2-3 year stat you quoted - just give me one link from a reputable source that shows a 2-3 year wait time in Canada.
If you are going to post bullsh*t do us all a favor and stick to posting the blatantly false email forwards you love to share - at least they are somewhat amusing.
zkojq From New Zealand, joined Sep 2011, 785 posts, RR: 1 Reply 145, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1890 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88): And yet nobody has any problems letting food be a for-profit industry.
That is because food is a commodity. Healthcare is not. Apart from anything else I have an interest in for-profit food as my parents own a beef farm.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 93): As long as government offers even most unfortunate people enough money to buy food or directly offers them free food I have no problem with food being a for-profit industry.
Sad thing is that there is a small minority of people (in nearly every country) who want to do away with this.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 93): Too bad it most likely won't happen in our lifetime, would be just awesome to witness total collapse of this "civilization" run by money and greed.
Here I disagree. It might be fascinating to watch, but the quality of life for us in the Western World will decline substantially.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 96): Australia has a $16 per hour minimum wage and while some things are more expensive it has hardly ruined their economy
Australia's issue is that the minerals boom is pushing up the value of their dollar (nearly doubled compared to the US Dollar in the last several years) which makes things much tougher for those who export products that aren't minerals.
Quoting pvjin (Reply 103): If you truly deserve to be rich you will become rich even with a bit higher taxes.
As I said before, there are still plenty of rich people in Europe NZ Australia Canada etc. The difference being that (compared to the Libertarian's Wet Dream of an economic policy that some on here preach) they contributed slightly more to the state treasury on their way to the top. Anyway, most of the super-rich get rich by selling a business that they have owned; often without paying any capital gains tax.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 117): You could raise minimum wage to $50 per hour
And why would anyone do that?
Quoting Geezer (Reply 139): I couldn't possibly care LESS where you live
Then why did you mention in reply 56 that you live in 'rural Indiana'?
Quoting Geezer (Reply 139): ( if I were you, I wouldn't "let it out" where you live either, because any potential robber is going to know that you're an "easy target"!
Why would a potential robber log onto airliners.net, read through an economics thread all for the purpose of robbing jpetekyxmd80?
KiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 5306 posts, RR: 3 Reply 146, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1875 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 98): They just have to pay dearly for the privilege.
But they don't, the top tax rate here is 45%.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 105): The most difficult thing was going through the process and pretending that I don't plan on bolting at the first opportunity.
Would be very funny and somewhat poetic if the one opportunity you turned down was your big opportunity and you end up in the trained monkey position for the rest of your life. Some people only get that one chance.
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4544 posts, RR: 28 Reply 147, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1857 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 121): It does. I have no interest in pretending that the job isn't completely beneath me, because it is. I am too good for it, I just have to pretend otherwise sometimes.
As a manager, let me just say that we aren't [usually] that stupid. It's pretty easy to tell what kind of person you are after just a few hours or days of working with you. Stripes don't lie.
Let me also say that we DON'T REALLY CARE if you are only going to be around a while. While we love GOOD employees who stick around, we also understand the role that retail jobs play for people. I have four assistants at my business. One just turned 19. He is going to school to be an Aeronautical Engineer. His goal is to work for Boeing. He is a Christian. He is awesome - more put together and more of a man than most guys I've worked with. Yet I know that this job is only a transient job for him and I think that's great. He's getting some real life work experience, dealing with customers, managing a team of people, learning leadership skills, etc. When he graduates from the University of Washington I'm probably not going to see him again. lol But I applaud him for it.
That's what a retail job is geared towards. It doesn't have to be a secret, though in your case I understand why. If you are going to jump ship at a moments notice, most people wouldn't want to give you the time of day. I think most would agree that that attitude is going to bite you more than once in your life, and that you'll probably have a point where you'll realize you're missing "something". But you'll be rich, so who cares?
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): So everything that doesn't meet your hard right standards is "liberal"? I guess you get a thrill using that word, even if it's a moderate's position.
Isn't that sort of the pot calling the kettle black? I mean, how often do you deride the conservative right? Daily? Hourly?
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): If a job position isn't worth a wage above the poverty line then close that position down. If the employers play games then shut that company down through major fines.
What is the poverty line currently? Are you talking hourly wage based on 40 hours a week or 20? With benefits or without? Paid time off? Vacation pay? Could you please define this for me, because for the life of me I'm trying to figure out how most retailers should be shut down because they are so horrible providing jobs to these people?
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): There is a huge difference between maximizing profits and operating a responsible company.
Not really. How responsible is it to run a company with mediocre earnings? You do realize that they must reinvest in their facilities, training, technology, etc just to stay current? Plus keep up with the rising cost of food and utilities and taxes and insurance and ObamaCare-mandated expenses? Do you own a business?
BTW, I'm in Washington State, where our Minimum Wage is $9.19 an hour. Trust me, people don't appreciate that they are actually making a decent starting wage for having no skills other than a light on upstairs and valid ID (I'm being somewhat rude here. I love most of my employees!). That high school student or otherwise new employee is earning $700+ per month - just walking in the door. That's $8500-ish per year.
That's not a lot of money if you are raising a family, but most of those part-timers AREN'T raising a family. My employees that are raising a family are either in management or are making a few dollars an hour more than a new person and are working 30-40 hours per week. That will change, though, because with ObamaCare it doesn't make sense to employee someone for 30-32 hours per week because we will be paying the same penalty each month for their insurance as we will be to the 38-40 hrs/week person. So some will see their hours increase substantially (3-6 hours more per week whether they like it or not) while others will see their hours drop (3-6 hours per week whether they like it or not) because we will logically want to maximize the hours worked per insurance premium. Thus, fewer full-time employees.
In the end, is it responsible to continue to reduce your profit as a business over the long term? I doubt it. We run our home as a business of sorts. It's called a budget. We have zero debt (other than our dwindling mortgage). We need to run a profit every month if we want to put money away, prepare for college tuitions, have retirement, repair our home, etc. Every time a piece of that revenue get's taken away from us we are forced to make tough choices elsewhere. Maybe you defer maintenance. Maybe you stop providing special benefits to the family (no eating out, no cable, keeping the heat turned down). Etc. It's no different for a business. You take away from the money pie, they will need to find a way to make it work. You can't raise prices forever and you can't always force vendors to reduce theirs. But you can schedule people less, manage the government mandates that come your way, and try to continue to make some money for future investment in your exisiting locations, opening new locations, and hopefully one day (as a business owner) having something to hand off to your kids.
I read many years ago this quote: "Profit isn't a four letter word. But loss is."
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): Flipping burgers may be considered by some to be a "kids" job, but adults are also working those positions - especially after Bush/Cheney's FUBARs.
Having been in retail for nearly 30 years, I can say that might personal experience is that the ratio hasn't changed. If you have a stat that shows otherwise, I'll defer to it, but for me, I've gotten older but the employees seem to stay the same age.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): If you want a special "kids wage" then tie it to a real apprenticeship program during the high school years with tradesman level jobs on graduation. I'll repeat the Qantas Maintenance Apprenticeship program again as a solid example.
Hey, here's an idea. Why doesn't President Obama do that as part of a minimum wage proposal? My opinion: It's easier to say a one-liner and get votes. The reality is that there are a variety of factors that should play into minimum wage but that few seem willing or even interested in addressing. Things like local cost of living, age, abilities, education, type of job, etc. Why should a high school drop out be entitled to the same pay as a high school graduate? Or college graduate? Or adult versus a minor? Or part time versus full time? I'm not saying these all need to be included, but I think a lot of us who question the motives and effectiveness behind a minimum wage increase would like to at least know that it makes sense for all parties involved - employees, employers, and government.
Employers and not bad out-of-hand because they want to make money. My employer is not against paying [more] for employee health costs, though we will certainly manage it appropriately. My employer also is in favor a a tiered pay scale that rewards adults - who actually are earning a "living" - differently than students who are earning spending money and saving for the next big purchase. My employer isn't bad or greedy or irresponsible. My employer is intelligent, has business sense, and want to have a well-run business earning a fair and decent profit. He (and others) deserve to not have a knee-jerk, feel-good minimum wage thrown at them as if they aren't already doing a good thing by providing jobs.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): Reality is that most people will not notice cost increases in their purchases because of an increase in minimum wages.
Again, I disagree, but I'm willing to stand alone on that.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): Maybe you need to remember that a company's competition will also face that cost increase and they are ready to take care of customers the greedy companies won't.
I think you'll see most respond exactly the same to any minimum wage increase. Most will manage it to the best of their ability in order to maintain profit margins. Then they will react as needed to preserve them.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 128): Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125):That's a great way to be branded in a company. Why should supervisors or managers promote you with that attitude?
Just don't tell them.
Again, we're not that stupid.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 128): There's really no way in which it isn't. A middle schooler could do the work with no problems.
Well then I hope you are employee of the month because otherwise you should be embarrassed.
Quoting warri1 (Reply 132): I would appreciate some figures refuting my figures from the ultra liberal site that I provided. Please, nothing from Fox.
Of course. Please don't use conservative figures to balance the liberal figures. Good one.
Quoting zkojq (Reply 145): Quoting BMI727 (Reply 117):You could raise minimum wage to $50 per hourAnd why would anyone do that?
RomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, RR: 1 Reply 148, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1844 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 131): The minimum wage was introduced in the U.S. in the 1930s in reaction to the proliferation of sweatshops, who employed mainly women and younger workers. Even if the minimum wage does nothing other than provide a barrier from one form of blatant workplace exploitation, then it does indeed yield a social positive.
Slavery is exploitation. A voluntary offer to work in a sweatshop is not exploitation. Otherwise, people would't take the job - would you choose to be exploited? But the best thing is, if running a sweatshop is so lucrative for the owner, then somebody else is gonna come in a build their own sweatshop next to him, and steal his employees for slightly more money. Then you will have wage competition until salaries are close to the actual productive output of each employee.
If you go around setting a minimum wage, not even one sweatshop might set up, and no-one would have gained a job.
Price fixing was a major theme of the great depression and one of the main reasons it took until after WWII to recover. If you just let the market readjust and do its own thing, it'd probably have been over in a year or 2.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 149, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1837 times:
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 148): A voluntary offer to work in a sweatshop is not exploitation.
Aesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 4810 posts, RR: 9 Reply 150, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1813 times:
Can someone provide examples of a country where their "free market extremism" work ? I seem to remember Milton Friedman advising several countries and the results weren't that great.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
Can you back this statement up with a reasoned argument?
If nobody's forcing anyone to do anything, they can't be being exploited, otherwise they wouldn't do it.
By taking a sweatshop job you are saying, this is better than my alternative. And if someone's offering something that's better than an alternative then they are hardly exploiting them are they, they are in fact, benefiting them.
RomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, RR: 1 Reply 152, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1811 times:
Quoting Aesma (Reply 150): Can someone provide examples of a country where their "free market extremism" work ? I seem to remember Milton Friedman advising several countries and the results weren't that great.
Really, Friedman had a great influence on Pinochet, Thatcher and Reagan and all 3 administration heavily prospered economically.
Hong Kong, Singapore, Switzerland are a few present day examples.
19th century Britain, 19th century America.
Now can you give an example of where the current socialist-corporative administrations that we currently have work?
Pellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1845 posts, RR: 8 Reply 153, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1788 times:
Minimum wage should be $12.00/hr or more. I'm educated in economics and I'm not about to have any lecture. That some people go unemployed is a given.
The problem is the (non)growth in the current economy. There are graduates with masters/professional degrees and doctorates who cannot find jobs. There are many HS graduates who can't either.
That more people will be unemployed at a higher minimum wage than what is, it is of no consequence. This is the reason for government programs which look after un/underemployed people.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 154, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1785 times:
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 151): And if someone's offering something that's better than an alternative then they are hardly exploiting them are they, they are in fact, benefiting them.
Perhaps you don't understand the conditions of sweatshops in the 30s which helped prompt labor laws such as minimum wage and others. There's no need for me to type it all out for you, Google is easy enough. Educate yourself.
Some of the same types of conditions exist even today, where immigrants are exploited in the same way.
RomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, RR: 1 Reply 155, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1780 times:
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 153): That more people will be unemployed at a higher minimum wage than what is, it is of no consequence.
Well, that's easy to say but it kind of is a big deal for the people who now can't get a job. A really big deal.
It's also a big deal for the taxpayer who now not only has to pay their benefits, but also experiences higher prices and/or a lower quality service from businesses they use.
So all in all, it's a big loser for everyone.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 154): Perhaps you don't understand the conditions of sweatshops in the 30s which helped prompt labor laws such as minimum wage and others. There's no need for me to type it all out for you, Google is easy enough. Educate yourself.
It doesn't matter how bad the conditions were, if people still voluntarily took the jobs, it was better than the alternative so it is not exploitation.
AY-MD11 From Finland, joined Feb 2001, 443 posts, RR: 2 Reply 156, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1781 times:
It's not so rosey here in Finland.. since 2007 the conservative government has been driving the public sector down with hard hand. Food,housing and other goods prices has skyrocketed even the European central bank had to warn Finland of the high inflation that's #1 in EU. Plus we have only 2 companies that control most of the retail industry. We are going fast to US style of economy but with high taxes and high cost of living.
Quoting zkojq (Reply 145): Quoting pvjin (Reply 93):
Too bad it most likely won't happen in our lifetime, would be just awesome to witness total collapse of this "civilization" run by money and greed.
Here I disagree. It might be fascinating to watch, but the quality of life for us in the Western World will decline substantially.
cmf From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 2485 posts, RR: 35 Reply 157, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1763 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 110): Nobody is saying that coercion is something that should be allowed. That's not the market and you know it.
Then why do you insist on it? Just you want it to be to the advantage of employees.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 110): The market recognizes that. See how much a truck driver in Afghanistan gets paid versus one in the US.
Does it? What is the comparable purchase power vs rest of population?
But back to the point. Are truck drivers in US compensated fairly?
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 112): Nope. But that doesn't guarantee that I wouldn't have to be cut because others have to be paid more. Plus much of what I pay for involves minimum wage workers, so I'd have to pay more for a lot of things. It's just not worth it.
Your theory is based on that the work they perform doesn't add value. Because only then can you cut without consequences. If consumers don't want to pay for the effort going in to a product then that product does not have a right to exist. What you're promoting is exploitation.
The market can only set the cost when it is set by equal parties. It doesn't work when one side is much more powerful than the other and insist on keeping it like that. History is clear what happens when it gets too lopsided. Why create that situation?
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 121): But how many people get the increase and how many are made redundant?
If they don't do valuable work then the company should not have them employed anyway. If the company can't afford to pay the extremely low minimum pay then they have no place in the market.
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 122): This means society isn't working as efficiently as it should be
Society frequently isn't working as efficient as it should. Too low salaries create as many problems as too high salaries. Good government is to avoid both.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 125): I don't think so. I'm against corporate welfare via allowing below poverty line wages. There is a huge difference between maximizing profits and operating a responsible company. I have no problems going after those companies who play games at the lower levels of employees.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 128): ...and all of that will ultimately have to come from the pockets of customers.
..and as people have less and less purchase power there are less and less customers.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 135): They are hated by a lot of people here but employee exploitation is the reason unions were created.
A history lesson our hard right wingers fail to remember.
Quoting warri1 (Reply 140): Here we go, whoa is me. Let the employee's collect food stamps, and welfare so we can eat a not so cheap burger. I wonder who pays for welfare and food stamps in the end? Is that government welfare for McDonald's etc?
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 147): As a manager, let me just say that we aren't [usually] that stupid. It's pretty easy to tell what kind of person you are after just a few hours or days of working with you. Stripes don't lie.
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 147): Not really. How responsible is it to run a company with mediocre earnings? You do realize that they must reinvest in their facilities, training, technology, etc just to stay current? Plus keep up with the rising cost of food and utilities and taxes and insurance and ObamaCare-mandated expenses? Do you own a business?
There is a big difference between maximizing and mediocre. It is easy to maximize for a short period but it takes responsibility to maintain something that keeps providing profit year after year. It takes more than reinvesting in facilities, training, etc. It also takes good labor. Sure some jobs are more transient than others but turnover is extremely expensive. How many customers do retailers lose due to inexperienced employees? How much inventory is damaged?
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 147): He (and others) deserve to not have a knee-jerk, feel-good minimum wage thrown at them as if they aren't already doing a good thing by providing jobs.
Minimum wage is so low that raising it should not have any measurable effect if companies didn't exploit.
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 148): A voluntary offer to work in a sweatshop is not exploitation. Otherwise, people would't take the job - would you choose to be exploited? But the best thing is, if running a sweatshop is so lucrative for the owner, then somebody else is gonna come in a build their own sweatshop next to him, and steal his employees for slightly more money. Then you will have wage competition until salaries are close to the actual productive output of each employee.
There is nothing voluntary about working in a sweatshop, it is all about exploitation. Counting on that people will rather work for a piece of bread for their kid than no bread at all.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 158, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1751 times:
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 155): It doesn't matter how bad the conditions were, if people still voluntarily took the jobs, it was better than the alternative so it is not exploitation.
RomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, RR: 1 Reply 159, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1745 times:
Quoting cmf (Reply 157): There is nothing voluntary about working in a sweatshop, it is all about exploitation. Counting on that people will rather work for a piece of bread for their kid than no bread at all.
Yes there is, nobody is being forced to work in a sweatshop. It's very important to make the distinction between force (slavery) and voluntary actions.
If you don't understand what exploitation is, sorry for you.
There is nothing cynical or unfair about giving people an offer, especially if they choose to take that offer. This suggests they are helping these people, not exploiting them.
Pellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1845 posts, RR: 8 Reply 160, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1745 times:
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 155): Well, that's easy to say but it kind of is a big deal for the people who now can't get a job. A really big deal.
It's also a big deal for the taxpayer who now not only has to pay their benefits, but also experiences higher prices and/or a lower quality service from businesses they use.
So all in all, it's a big loser for everyone.
And how is this a significance for an American who is paid the minimum wage and still can't pay their way. They still require government assistance. And for an illegal worker who gets paid under the table and less than the minimum wage?
And with regards to higher prices...I do not patronize Walmart or any other business which destroys small communities, pays women less, pays nonsense wages, and is against unionization in any case.
KiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 5306 posts, RR: 3 Reply 161, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1738 times:
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 159): Yes there is, nobody is being forced to work in a sweatshop. It's very important to make the distinction between force (slavery) and voluntary actions.
If you've got no other choice then you are (kinda) forced into taking a job in sweatshop.
Pellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1845 posts, RR: 8 Reply 162, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1735 times:
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 161):
If you've got no other choice then you are (kinda) forced into taking a job in sweatshop.
And that is so incredibly sad. It is why governments in developed countries protect against this horrible possibility.
RomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, RR: 1 Reply 163, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1733 times:
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 160): And how is this a significance for an American who is paid the minimum wage and still can't pay their way. They still require government assistance. And for an illegal worker who gets paid under the table and less than the minimum wage?
They probably don't require government assistance. You really can live off remarkably little if you get your priorities straight, and i'm sure it would be even easier if the government stopped continually destroying the economy.
Never the less, it is unfortunate that some people can't pay their way. The point is though, as outlined, the minimum wage does nothing to help this situation, it just makes it worse, so why lobby for it?
It really is a sad situation where people think if you have good intentions, you will somehow see good results.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 161): If you've got no other choice then you are (kinda) forced into taking a job in sweatshop.
It's definitely an employer's market but it's still not force. As stated though, if it's such a good employer's market, more employers are likely to set up, and drive pay up organically.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 164, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1708 times:
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 159): This suggests they are helping these people, not exploiting them.
It's difficult to understand why someone would sign back up onto a.net simply to attempt wind-ups on non-aviation topics, but there you go, it happens. You won't find me gullible enough to fall for such activity, though.
RomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, RR: 1 Reply 165, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1706 times:
They really aren't wind ups. Disappointing that you can only resort to insults and not raise a logical argument really. If my arguments were so off-base, it should be oh so simple to point out why.
Pyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 3538 posts, RR: 28 Reply 166, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1694 times:
Quoting warri1 (Reply 138):
I suggest you ask the thousands of tellers laid off, forced into retirement, displaced because of them.
Yes, of course. And computers cause unemployment, too, right? Think of all those typists that lost jobs. And what about those buggy whip manufacturers who lost their jobs because of the car? This is why I laugh when socialists try to call themselves "progressives" - they are the biggest bunch of regressive reactionaries there is.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 143): What part of the ban on self-service gas is supported by both Republicans and Democrats did you miss?
Since when are there any Republicans in Oregon?
Quoting Aesma (Reply 150): Can someone provide examples of a country where their "free market extremism" work ? I seem to remember Milton Friedman advising several countries and the results weren't that great.
Chile is by far the most successful country in Latin America, and could actually teach a thing or two to developed economies. Your economic idol Argentina, on the other hand, managed to go from the wealthiest country in the world to a laughing stock in a century by implementing populist policies.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 167, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1682 times:
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 166): Since when are there any Republicans in Oregon?
In the past presidential election, Romney won the majority of Oregon counties and 42.7% of the vote. Also see my comments in Reply #38 earlier.
Boeing717200 From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 161 posts, RR: 0 Reply 168, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1673 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 3): Hmm, here in Oregon, it's illegal to pump your own gas. It's estimated that there are the equivalent of 20K or more full-time jobs maintained due to having this "unnecessary" service. Yet our gas doesn't cost any more than it does in Washington or California, even though wages at gas stations are higher than elsewhere due to having gas jockeys employed. We also don't have an appreciable difference in the number of gas stations per capita/per car/per miles driven.
Its not an issue of your gas costing anymore, its an issue of how much less would it be if you pumped it yourself. Self service vs. Full Service typically had a $0.20 a gallon premium. If you use a tank a week on gas as most people do, then that inability to pump yourself is costing you and everyone else over $150 a year. In tough economic times, $150 a year matters.
pvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 549 posts, RR: 0 Reply 170, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1665 times:
Quoting windy95 (Reply 169): Hey the illegal aliens need a living wage when they are made legal citizens. Somebody has to pay for their living and healthcare.
These illegal aliens work 10x harder than average American, let alone any Israeli who wastes years of his/her life in training to become better at killing native people of that are called Israel instead of doing something productive.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 171, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1654 times:
Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 168): Self service vs. Full Service typically had a $0.20 a gallon premium.
As I stated in Reply #28, I only know of one true full service station in this area, and the price there is somewhat higher. All others have 'mini-serv', where they simply pump the gas for you. Sometimes you pay the gas pumper, sometimes you go up to a cashier to pay. I've never read any rational argument that mini-serv adds any appreciable cost to the price of gasoline in Oregon, and there have been many for and against. Gas stations have to be staffed regardless of whether there's an attendant to pump your gas or not.
Pellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1845 posts, RR: 8 Reply 172, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1656 times:
Boeing717200 From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 161 posts, RR: 0 Reply 173, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1637 times:
It absolutely adds to the cost of gas. Just because they don't point it out to you by differentiating self serve from full serve doesn't mean the premium doesn't exist. Arguing that it doesn't add to the cost is an irrational argument in and of itself.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 174, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1634 times:
Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 173): Arguing that it doesn't add to the cost is an irrational argument in and of itself.
If you've actually read my posts, I don't claim that 'mini-serve' is a no-cost service. Only that it doesn't add an appreciable amount (even using those exact words in the post you quoted). If you require more info, I encourage you to read through the thread, and read what's there, not what you want to be there.
KiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 5306 posts, RR: 3 Reply 175, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1605 times:
Quoting Geezer (Reply 139): Yes.......tell us all about your health care that "works so well" ! (so "well" the Canadiens must sometimes WAIT for 2 or 3 years to have a surgical procedure performed, that is likely to be fatal if not performed "shortly"; you can rattle on all day about hiow great "your" health care is, but you're talking to someone that SEES the constant line of Canadiens who come to the U.S. EVERY DAY to have procedures performed, that they would have to wait 2 years for in Canada. ( Incidentally, ever hear of "Canada Drugs" in Winnepeg ? I'm a customer of theirs.) Believe me, we Americans know ALL ABOUT how "great" YOUR "socialized medicine" is !
I can't comment on the Canadian system but I can on the NZ and Norwegian systems, I've torn the cartilage in my left knee twice, once in NZ and one in Norway, both time I was operated on within weeks of the accident, my father was diagnosed with bowel cancer on Monday morning, he was operated on the following Thursday, all on the public system. My wife and I have three kids, one born in NZ the other two in Norway, the births have cost us nothing, nada, zip, even things like scans and post natal care, free, I hear having a baby in the US can cost 10's of thousands. But if you want to also have private medical care in NZ this is an option, it costs but then that's your choice, you're not forced into it.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 176, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1564 times:
Quoting zkojq (Reply 145): That is because food is a commodity
Not really. Everyone has a favorite food. Many food components are commodities (can you tell the difference between a Florida orange and a California one?) but even then often only to a point, like standard vs. organic beef, for example.
Quoting zkojq (Reply 145): And why would anyone do that?
So everyone can have more money and be happier. Duh.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 146): But they don't, the top tax rate here is 45%.
Plus a hefty VAT.
Either way, I think you may be falling for the correlation vs. causation fallacy. High taxes, government regulation, and socialist type policies are something you succeed in spite of and not because of. Not to mention the problems one could have applying policies of a country with the population of Colorado to a country 60 times larger. The number of illegal immigrants in the US almost certainly far exceeds the total population of Norway.
Yeah. See how much the PMCs working in Iraq made vs. the guy working in the US. Or the electricians in an Alaska oil field vs. the guy putting in a new circuit breaker at your house.
Quoting cmf (Reply 157): Are truck drivers in US compensated fairly?
I don't think they're compensated unfairly.
Quoting cmf (Reply 157): Your theory is based on that the work they perform doesn't add value. Because only then can you cut without consequences. If consumers don't want to pay for the effort going in to a product then that product does not have a right to exist.
It's entirely possible, and in fact likely, that some positions are a net positive at one wage but could not be justified at a higher wage. A fast food joint that pays all their workers $30 per hour would go out of business pretty fast.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7467 posts, RR: 5 Reply 177, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1564 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): How much of the population do they make up?
More than you think. Remember that, by definition, half the population has an IQ under 100.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): That is an issue because in the liberal economic narrative
So everything that doesn't meet your hard right standards is "liberal"? I guess you get a thrill using that word, even if it's a moderate's position.
Real world is that there will always be a group of workers who will stay at the lower job levels because of their limited capacity. That doesn't mean that they cannot make a wage above the poverty line.
From a conservative position, why should we pay out federal benefits simply to allow company owners pay poverty level wages?
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): people are stuck with such jobs and have no way out.
That goup has increased dramatically thanks to the Bush/Cheney Great Recession. 750,000 jobs lost a month
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): That's something that needs to end too.
End poverty level wages and it can be significantly reduced.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): If you can't earn above the poverty line, get a second job.
What we are talking about is employers paying above the poverty line. As long as we are allowing it we are pouring out a lot of taxpayer dollars for corporate welfare. That corporate welfare is what needs to end.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 100): You can't have a bunch of people who have no skills and no education but still expect the government or business owners to pay them more than they are worth.
If a job position isn't worth a wage above the poverty line then close that position down. If the employers play games then shut that company down through major fines.
I don't think so. I'm against corporate welfare via allowing below poverty line wages. There is a huge difference between maximizing profits and operating a responsible company. I have no problems going after those companies who play games at the lower levels of employees.
One of the saddest comments in this thread is this one - and your inability to understand that some people join the military because they actually believe in serving their country.
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 104): This particularly impacts the young who often don't need to earn a lot as they still live at home. But they have now lost their first step on the job ladder.
Flipping burgers may be considered by some to be a "kids" job, but adults are also working those positions - especially after Bush/Cheney's FUBARs.
If you want a special "kids wage" then tie it to a real apprenticeship program during the high school years with tradesman level jobs on graduation. I'll repeat the Qantas Maintenance Apprenticeship program again as a solid example.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 105): I learned a lesson, namely to not care about things besides money.
That's a great way to be branded in a company. Why should supervisors or managers promote you with that attitude?
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 105): I did get an offer for a pretty decent job, but I turned it down because I didn't like the location.
So you didn't even consider that the ladders for success may well involve transfers to different locations?
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 105): In the mean time, I have gotten a menial retail job.
The primary reason it is menial is because you make it so. A lot of retailers promote from within - some on a pretty rapid basis. I still recall one of the top CEOs in Australia who started with a "menial job" in retailing (right out of growing up in an orphanage) and going all the way to the top.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 121): But how many people get the increase and how many are made redundant?
Take your burger flipper example. You might pay a few cents for your Happy Meal, but we all know that most owners won't be flipping burgers because of an increase in the minimum wage. Reality is that most people will not notice cost increases in their purchases because of an increase in minimum wages.
Some companies may try to cut staff. Delta Airlines is a classic example of that game - pax raised hell and Delta rapidly apologized and increased their employe count.
Maybe you need to remember that a company's competition will also face that cost increase and they are ready to take care of customers the greedy companies won't.
Quoting warri1 (Reply 140): Let the employee's collect food stamps, and welfare so we can eat a not so cheap burger
Yep. That's where corporate welfare comes in.
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 147): I mean, how often do you deride the conservative right? Daily? Hourly?
I don't really bash the traditional conservative - just the ultra hard right that seems to me to have taken over the term. Same with the Tea party.
And when you think about it, my comments on "socialized medicine" as been to get the unnecessary costs of employer based health insurance off of the P&L and budgeting efforts. Based on 8 years in Australia where no employer has that burden hanging around their neck pretty well convinced me. I consider that a pretty conservative idea, but the hard right here calls me a liberal.
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 147): What is the poverty line currently? Are you talking hourly wage based on 40 hours a week or 20? With benefits or without? Paid time off? Vacation pay? Could you please define this for me, because for the life of me I'm trying to figure out how most retailers should be shut down because they are so horrible providing jobs to these people?
Here's a good starting point. Remember that these numbers are just a hair above poverty.
MSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1575 posts, RR: 4 Reply 178, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1551 times:
So Obama is advocating to raise the unemployment level. Doesn't that sound like a good idea?
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 3): Hmm, here in Oregon, it's illegal to pump your own gas. It's estimated that there are the equivalent of 20K or more full-time jobs maintained due to having this "unnecessary" service. Yet our gas doesn't cost any more than it does in Washington or California, even though wages at gas stations are higher than elsewhere due to having gas jockeys employed. We also don't have an appreciable difference in the number of gas stations per capita/per car/per miles driven.
So with higher wages, how come it hasn't spelled economic disaster for our gas stations in comparison to neighboring states?
Interesting you bring up Oregon since I've pumped my own gas there. It was my first time in Oregon and had no clue about that law. Once I learned about it I thought of many choice adjectives to describe what I thought about it.
And somewhere you are paying for that inefficient law. That is a guarantee; you just probably can't see it. Millions of Oregon drivers will just want a gas and go. Well look what happens under the law. They have to wait while doing nothing productive. An economy is all about efficiency of production. Two people being available to pump gas when only one is needed is not efficiency. It's unique. It can be convenient for the driver if they like the service (I don't). But it is not economically sound.
Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 155): It doesn't matter how bad the conditions were, if people still voluntarily took the jobs, it was better than the alternative so it is not exploitation.
Bingo. This is a free market society. People that accept a minimum wage job (I've done it), do so under their own will because it's better for them than the alternative. I don't have to accept that job, and I know that a better job is available if I make myself capable of that job. There's nothing unfair or exploitative here.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 161): If you've got no other choice then you are (kinda) forced into taking a job in sweatshop.
"No other choice" really isn't a problem in America. You may be below the official poverty line with a minimum wage job, but you can make a pretty good living for yourself (a rich life compared to most of the world) with one. And the opportunity for a better life is there for you. It's up to the individual, not the government.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 179, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1531 times:
Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 178): And somewhere you are paying for that inefficient law. That is a guarantee; you just probably can't see it.
Ahh, the third person this morning who hasn't read the thread! LOL
As I've already stated earlier, yes, I recognize there's a cost, but not an appreciable cost for 'mini-serve' gas. It's also widely considered here, as I've stated before, that we'd probably be paying for at least part of the service anyway through unemployment benefits with the equivalent of 20K full-time jobs taken out of the labor market, but receiving nothing tangible in return. Talk about inefficiency!
Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 178): Millions of Oregon drivers will just want a gas and go. They have to wait while doing nothing productive.
Again, as I've stated before, there's usually an attendant standing at my window by the time I've popped the button to release the filler cap door. In real terms, there's virtually no wasted time—our system may even be more efficient by not having to wait for every Tom, Dick, Harry and Martha to fumble around pumping their gas and paying for it as two separate steps. Here I just hand the guy a couple of 20s while I'm comfortably seated in the car listening to the stereo, get my gas, and go. I actually believe that the 'mini-serve' system is somewhat faster than what I experience when filling my own tank out of state, especially where I've had to stand in line for the cashier while people ahead of me are paying for their gas plus all of their mini-mart purchases. Talk about inefficiency!
And how many states in the US have a Sales Tax? Actually multiple sales taxes - state, county, & city/town.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 176): High taxes, government regulation, and socialist type policies are something you succeed in spite of and not because of.
Far too many government regulations are a result of abuses or crimes in the private sector. You want to cut taxes? Start with Defense and starting unnecessary 10 year wars. Overall our system of axes, las, regulations, federally funded infrastructures, etc. provide an environment where people can be successful.
Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 178): This is a free market society. People that accept a minimum wage job (I've done it), do so under their own will because it's better for them than the alternative.
There is no effort to keep people from taking a minimum wage job - the focus is to update the minimum wage levels.
Reality is that a frozen minimum wage actually reduces the buying power of the worker because of inflation. That is the nasty little factor that opponents of an increase don't want us to talk about.
So what VAT hits everyone rich and not so rich alike, if anything it's hitting the not so rich more than the super rich, again it's not punishing wealthy folks or acting as a disincentive to become wealthy, if anything it acts as an incentive to earn more.
WestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1275 posts, RR: 7 Reply 182, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1524 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 126): You have to read my comments in context to all of the arguments he was making last November in relation to his education in aerospace engineering (I believe it was), the job market, and economic theories, accompanied with flat declarations that he wouldn't even consider a position outside of his educated field as an interim job, as it would be beneath him.
I don't recall those claims, so I'll take it at face value. But the point remains, he can't be written-off simply for making what may appear to be outrageous claims. I could tell all of you right now that I'll be Prime Minister by 2020, but despite my ludicrous claim, it doesn't change the fact that I have an advanced knowledge in my field of study.
Quoting Aesma (Reply 129): and French McDonald's make more money than US ones.
French McDonalds are more profitable simply because they charge a premium over comparative US prices.
Quoting warri1 (Reply 132): I wonder, did you read table 3 and below, about the share of wages from 1947 until ? It seems that the top have doubled their share in recent years, after many years of stability. I would appreciate some figures refuting my figures from the ultra liberal site that I provided. Please, nothing from Fox.
I have no problem with the numbers. The thing about statistics, and economics as a whole, is that the numbers are only half the story. The other half is how you interpret them. You're no doubt believing the very liberal interpretation of the provided data.
Again, you fail to understand how a risk-and-reward system works. I'm not going to waste my time giving a long-winded explanation, but in brief: If you bear the greatest risk, you benefit the greatest reward. Many of the 1% folk that you hate so much happen to draw much of their compensation purely from vehicles that are based on market performance. That's the definition of risk. Whereas the union folk get paid the same every thing week no matter how the company performs.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 133): In a way yes so how can that be fixed?
Do we strip wages and regulations to those of China?
As you mention, tax incentives are a huge part of that. Lowering corporate taxes will definitely give reason for companies to stay in North America, and possible even draw some back.
Second, and more controversially, unions need to either go under serious reform, or get out. Most (but not all) unions are lost on the fact that they are part of the problem, and NOT the solution.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 139): so "well" the Canadiens must sometimes WAIT for 2 or 3 years to have a surgical procedure performed, that is likely to be fatal if not performed "shortly"
What are you going on about?!?! That is so egregiously untrue that I'm almost personally offended that you would try to fool the other members of this board with that nonsense.
Unlike in the good ol' US of A, timely treatment of our citizens isn't based on insurance plans or how much money they pay. The poor and the rich wait in the same line, which happens to be nowhere near the figures you give. I've had two surgeries, one for a life-threatening condition and the other for a serious sports injury the needed to be treated promptly. On both occasions I was under the knife within hours, with both surgeries having positive results. Even better, I walked out of the hospital without having to take a second mortgage on my home.
I have never heard of anyone waiting more than a few months for a surgery, and that was only for minor surgery. If you can provide empirical proof to the contrary, I welcome (read: demand) you do so. Otherwise, keep your untruths to yourself.
But hey, what do I know about effective healthcare, I only happen to live in a country that has a significantly higher life expectancy than that of our neighbours to the south.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 179): Ahh, the third person this morning who hasn't read the thread! LOL
In all fairness, it is getting pretty long. I just spent half my class catching up
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 183, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1525 times:
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 180): And how many states in the US have a Sales Tax? Actually multiple sales taxes - state, county, & city/town.
Adding up to 25%? That's a rarity, I'm sure.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 180): Start with Defense and starting unnecessary 10 year wars.
Actually that's about the last place we should be going.
This article, from the left leaning New York Times no less, indicates that conservatives have actually been right the whole time: it was the entitlements.
Quote: To clarify: all of the major categories of government spending have been increasing relative to inflation. But essentially all of the increase in spending relative to economic growth, and the potential tax base, has come from entitlement programs, and about half of that has come from health care entitlements specifically.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 184, posted (3 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1512 times:<
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 199 posts, 
, 6354 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1275 posts, 
From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 2045 posts, 
From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 549 posts, 
From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6296 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 4850 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Sep 2011, 785 posts, 
FDI in Norway must be terribly low. I can't see any MNE wanting to have any part of that unless they got the bargain of the century. 
There are moderate thinktanks out there you know...
From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1418 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 444 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8493 posts, 
From France, joined Nov 2009, 4810 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 3538 posts, 
That is so egregiously untrue that I'm almost personally offended that you would try to fool the other members of this board with that nonsense. 