RE: Minimum wage in america

RE: Minimum wage in america (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tj444 -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 7:19:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic when you look into how many times they have been sued, and how huge their legal team is, how their lobbyists work.... it all becomes clear sure, its multi-faceted.. I saw a vid on walmart where the majority owners & shareholders were cheering a tax move made decades ago, which apparently still saves them money today.. they do the same shite with those Chinese factories.. line em up and let them compete to give them the best & lower price they can year after year, so the factory gets a cut in what it gets paid if it wants to keep walmart as a customer, so subsequently its the Chinese factory workers that then bear the financial brunt of it and increasingly become overworked and underpaid slaves.. they have the least choice of all.. but better them than Americans, I guess..

mnottertail -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 7:31:37 AM)
Well, no, they do it to American companies too, I used to work for Lindy Little Joe Fishing, and they would increasingly put the brunt of any policies they made on us, and we ended up paying for it. They were absolute pricks, but still they buy so much even at the skinny margins and the constant eating away of those margins (we helped pay for their central shipping database with a fee, for example) that you are caught in a deadly embrace, and have to keep doing it.

wnyThroatLover -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 7:57:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover I have a VERY simple solution... Salary Ratio Caps... In 1965 the average CEO-to-employee salary ratio was 20:1 In 2012 the average CEO-to-employee salary ratio was 273:1 Walmart is a favorite of mine to pick on, as I despise their means of practice and the way they can knock out small competition simply by use of their size. In 2012 the CEO-to-employee salary ratio of Walmart was MORE than 1000:1 (I rounded down to make the math easier, it was actually 1034:1) In 2012 the mean pay/hour of a Walmart employee was $8.81 That means that every hour the CEO of Walmart is making over $8810!! The vast majority of his employees don't even make that in a MONTH! That means he makes about $352,400 a WEEK Which is $1,409,600 a MONTH And finally $16,915,200 A YEAR!!! Seriously...I can be a very extravagant person when I want to be, but what the hell does he need all that money for EVERY YEAR?!? If we cap the ratio at 1965 values, that means for every hour the CEO would make $176.20. Over a 40 hour week that's $7048...a WEEK! (Still more than the vast majority of his employees make in a month) $28,192 a MONTH (more than his average employee currently makes in a year) $338,304 a YEAR!!! Let's assume that's not enough for him (which it obviously isn't). Lets raise his employee's pay to 20$ and hour. Working within the 1965 salary cap the CEO would now make $400 an hour. $16,000 in a 40 hour week. $64,000 a MONTH!!! $768,000 a YEAR!!! His employees make more than enough to have a liveable wage. He makes more than enough for all of his expensive toys. There is more than enough money left over in company profit to be able to provide healthcare, dental, and vision coverage (for those who don't know, these are typically separate in the US) and STILL be able to pay the company's fair share in taxes! Just curious, do you feel we should put a cap on all types of jobs or just CEOs? Actors and singers make a shit load of cash, how much do you think they should be able to take home? I absolutely do! There comes a point where salaries become ridiculous. Sports stars... They play a game. Sure...they train hard and practice a lot and have to spend lots of time away from their families...but they play a GAME! Don't even get me started on the stadiums they play in... Actors... They pretend to be someone else for a period of time. I can't say all of them train hard and practice a lot, there are a lot of actors who admit they barely even read scripts before shooting a film. They may have to spend a lot of time away from family, but they are loaded, they can bring family with them! They don't even necessarily need to memorize their scripts! There is plenty of behind the scenes video that depicts "What scene are we doing? What are my lines?" I act for work every day! Little tweaks in my persona to acclimate to the clients I am working with. I had to memorize lots of facts, most of which I will only use once...maybe twice every few months...where are my millions? I bust my ass every day. I generally put in 10 hours a day at my "9 to 5" Monday through Saturday. When I get home in the evenings (and even sometimes before I go into the office) I work on side projects to supplement my income along with setting up appointments and venues to sell my home made wares. Do I work as hard as sports players? I think so. Obviously in a different way, but I probably put more time in on the job per day than they do. Do I work harder than a big name actor? Well...every big name actor I've ever gotten to shake hands with and ask about the business (which admittedly is but a small sampling of the acting community), yes! Do I work harder than other people in my office? Undoubtedly. I may only be 28 years old, but I've been putting in the effort and determination since I started working, half my life ago, yet for all the extra effort, for all the extra training and classes that came out of my own pocket, for all of the extra time, in the past 14 years my quality of employment has actually DECLINED! (I am just using my situation to illustrate my point here...) I went from moving out of my parents house into a home of my own and having two cars just for myself at 17. Every week I had plenty of money to make sure my mortgage was paid, my bills were more than covered, I had food and still had the ability to go out and play. Fast-forward 11 years: I have had to sell the house, for a long time I had to go without a car and even now that I have one again it pushes my budget, I live in an apartment with a room mate and between the two of us we STILL scrape by to cover rent, bills, and expenses. Not to mention neither of us has money left over (save for the odd 20 dollars to on the rare side of occasionally get a bottle of cheap liquor) to have any extra fun. I want to express, in admiration for my roomie, that I have a very strong work ethic (sure, in my down time or when I have a few spare minutes at my desk I jump on here to write contrived diatribes to vent some frustrations for people who typically aren't going to appreciate my position or simply tell me I'm not working hard enough or that somehow this is all my fault and not a direct result of economic collapse...) but my roomie's is even stronger. I get 5 hours of sleep (if i'm lucky), roomie gets 4. I put in 10 hours at the office, roomie puts in 16. Granted roomie doesn't do quite as many side projects...but still... There are people that I know (quite a few that I actually work with) who do the bare minimum, slack like hell, are actually TERRIBLE at their jobs and don't know the first thing about the work they do who make exponentially more than I do and who move up the chain faster... Anyone who still believes that simply working harder and doing better than the person next to you will move you on is, in my humble opinion, a fool.

DomKen -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 7:57:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA I've just provided you a source to validate my comments. Please provide the same for your "supply side economics has destroyed the US economy" and "no legitimate economist even still consider it worth debating". Or are those, again, just derision used as argument on the left such as you "supply side stupidity" comment. Perhaps, you should, as Lucy says, get real, argue with something to back up what you say other than "all your friends believe the same thing" and don't expect derision to fly as reason. http://www.newyorker.com/online/2007/10/29/071029on_onlineonly_surowiecki?currentPage=1 http://www.itep.org/debunkinglaffer/ http://sharepoint.mvla.net/teachers/RobertF/Micro%20Economics%20AP/Documents/THE%20RISE%20OF%20SUPPLY%20SIDE%20ECONOMICS.pdf You are also welcome to search academic economics journals where the subject is no longer even written about at all. Supply side economics is thoroughly disproven. <long winded handwave deleted in the interest of good taste> You already tried this. Trying again but using more words doesn't change anything. The New Yorker is not a biased source.

HunterCA -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 8:06:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA I've just provided you a source to validate my comments. Please provide the same for your "supply side economics has destroyed the US economy" and "no legitimate economist even still consider it worth debating". Or are those, again, just derision used as argument on the left such as you "supply side stupidity" comment. Perhaps, you should, as Lucy says, get real, argue with something to back up what you say other than "all your friends believe the same thing" and don't expect derision to fly as reason. http://www.newyorker.com/online/2007/10/29/071029on_onlineonly_surowiecki?currentPage=1 http://www.itep.org/debunkinglaffer/ http://sharepoint.mvla.net/teachers/RobertF/Micro%20Economics%20AP/Documents/THE%20RISE%20OF%20SUPPLY%20SIDE%20ECONOMICS.pdf You are also welcome to search academic economics journals where the subject is no longer even written about at all. Supply side economics is thoroughly disproven. <long winded handwave deleted in the interest of good taste> You already tried this. Trying again but using more words doesn't change anything. The New Yorker is not a biased source. Closing your eyes, clicking your heals together three times and wishing to go home only works for Dorothy. But then what do I expect when I ask you to think. Silly me I guess.

HunterCA -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 8:15:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover I have a VERY simple solution... Salary Ratio Caps... In 1965 the average CEO-to-employee salary ratio was 20:1 In 2012 the average CEO-to-employee salary ratio was 273:1 Walmart is a favorite of mine to pick on, as I despise their means of practice and the way they can knock out small competition simply by use of their size. In 2012 the CEO-to-employee salary ratio of Walmart was MORE than 1000:1 (I rounded down to make the math easier, it was actually 1034:1) In 2012 the mean pay/hour of a Walmart employee was $8.81 That means that every hour the CEO of Walmart is making over $8810!! The vast majority of his employees don't even make that in a MONTH! That means he makes about $352,400 a WEEK Which is $1,409,600 a MONTH And finally $16,915,200 A YEAR!!! Seriously...I can be a very extravagant person when I want to be, but what the hell does he need all that money for EVERY YEAR?!? If we cap the ratio at 1965 values, that means for every hour the CEO would make $176.20. Over a 40 hour week that's $7048...a WEEK! (Still more than the vast majority of his employees make in a month) $28,192 a MONTH (more than his average employee currently makes in a year) $338,304 a YEAR!!! Let's assume that's not enough for him (which it obviously isn't). Lets raise his employee's pay to 20$ and hour. Working within the 1965 salary cap the CEO would now make $400 an hour. $16,000 in a 40 hour week. $64,000 a MONTH!!! $768,000 a YEAR!!! His employees make more than enough to have a liveable wage. He makes more than enough for all of his expensive toys. There is more than enough money left over in company profit to be able to provide healthcare, dental, and vision coverage (for those who don't know, these are typically separate in the US) and STILL be able to pay the company's fair share in taxes! Just curious, do you feel we should put a cap on all types of jobs or just CEOs? Actors and singers make a shit load of cash, how much do you think they should be able to take home? I want to express, in admiration for my roomie, that I have a very strong work ethic (sure, in my down time or when I have a few spare minutes at my desk I jump on here to write contrived diatribes to vent some frustrations for people who typically aren't going to appreciate my position or simply tell me I'm not working hard enough or that somehow this is all my fault and not a direct result of economic collapse...) but my roomie's is even stronger. I get 5 hours of sleep (if i'm lucky), roomie gets 4. I put in 10 hours at the office, roomie puts in 16. Granted roomie doesn't do quite as many side projects...but still... There are people that I know (quite a few that I actually work with) who do the bare minimum, slack like hell, are actually TERRIBLE at their jobs and don't know the first thing about the work they do who make exponentially more than I do and who move up the chain faster... Anyone who still believes that simply working harder and doing better than the person next to you will move you on is, in my humble opinion, a fool. What happened to you is tragic. I lost a company that I worked 25 years to make and had to lay staff off at Christmas time. I had to sell my house to move to where I could find work. And you know what, that happened to you and me because Carter and Clinton screwed with the economy to implement a socialist wish list that created a housing bubble that burst. Obama is doing the same thing now to the stock market with 85 billion dollars a month. All of which just shows that social justice doesn't work, never worked and will never work. So, are you now all in to artificially raise a wage for social justice or have you finally figured out that when the government fucks with the economy YOU will end up paying for it in the long run?

wnyThroatLover -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 8:25:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover I want to express, in admiration for my roomie, that I have a very strong work ethic (sure, in my down time or when I have a few spare minutes at my desk I jump on here to write contrived diatribes to vent some frustrations for people who typically aren't going to appreciate my position or simply tell me I'm not working hard enough or that somehow this is all my fault and not a direct result of economic collapse...) but my roomie's is even stronger. I get 5 hours of sleep (if i'm lucky), roomie gets 4. I put in 10 hours at the office, roomie puts in 16. Granted roomie doesn't do quite as many side projects...but still... There are people that I know (quite a few that I actually work with) who do the bare minimum, slack like hell, are actually TERRIBLE at their jobs and don't know the first thing about the work they do who make exponentially more than I do and who move up the chain faster... Anyone who still believes that simply working harder and doing better than the person next to you will move you on is, in my humble opinion, a fool. What happened to you is tragic. I lost a company that I worked 25 years to make and had to lay staff off at Christmas time. I had to sell my house to move to where I could find work. And you know what, that happened to you and me because Carter and Clinton screwed with the economy to implement a socialist wish list that created a housing bubble that burst. Obama is doing the same thing now to the stock market with 85 billion dollars a month. All of which just shows that social justice doesn't work, never worked and will never work. So, are you now all in to artificially raise a wage for social justice or have you finally figured out that when the government fucks with the economy YOU will end up paying for it in the long run? You are a republican, or worse, a tea-partier...aren't you?

tj444 -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 8:27:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Well, no, they do it to American companies too, I used to work for Lindy Little Joe Fishing, and they would increasingly put the brunt of any policies they made on us, and we ended up paying for it. They were absolute pricks, but still they buy so much even at the skinny margins and the constant eating away of those margins (we helped pay for their central shipping database with a fee, for example) that you are caught in a deadly embrace, and have to keep doing it. I seem to recall a poster here who had walmart calling and wouldn't sell to them, if I recall correctly, cuz they wanted to set the price too low at the store level (& I guess a lower purchase price too).. so it guess its on one hand, a situation where no one can take advantage of American producers/manufacturers without their permission(?).. and here in the US there is a safety net (I make no claim its a good/great one) for American workers but my impression is its a considerably better safety net here than over there.. Apparently, Walmart is what is a leading example of how business should be done in America.. so even if its not a Walmart taking advantage, it could be a Walmart wannabe corp instead.. sorta funny how they can make something so cut-throat sound so "respectable".. http://www.usanfranonline.com/wal-mart-successful-supply-chain-management/

HunterCA -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 8:53:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover What happened to you is tragic. I lost a company that I worked 25 years to make and had to lay staff off at Christmas time. I had to sell my house to move to where I could find work. And you know what, that happened to you and me because Carter and Clinton screwed with the economy to implement a socialist wish list that created a housing bubble that burst. Obama is doing the same thing now to the stock market with 85 billion dollars a month. All of which just shows that social justice doesn't work, never worked and will never work. So, are you now all in to artificially raise a wage for social justice or have you finally figured out that when the government fucks with the economy YOU will end up paying for it in the long run? You are a republican, or worse, a tea-partier...aren't you? You know, one of the most useful and important things I ever learned in college was when a professor said, "Important information can be useful to you regardless of whether or not it's entertaining or comes from a source you agree with." Look at domken, he'll only uses sources who agree with his political beliefs so he'll never be more than a useful idiot Kool aide drinker. Is that your aspiration in life? Do you need to know my political beliefs before you can consider my points? You do seem to judge people by how much they agree with you. Will you close your mind like domken if I am one of those "worse" nutsackers?

mnottertail -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 8:59:41 AM)
Foolishness. There is no government, was no government, and will be no government that does not fuck with the economy anywhere or at anytime on this earth. Fundamentally, that is what governments do and why they are created.

wnyThroatLover -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 9:17:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover What happened to you is tragic. I lost a company that I worked 25 years to make and had to lay staff off at Christmas time. I had to sell my house to move to where I could find work. And you know what, that happened to you and me because Carter and Clinton screwed with the economy to implement a socialist wish list that created a housing bubble that burst. Obama is doing the same thing now to the stock market with 85 billion dollars a month. All of which just shows that social justice doesn't work, never worked and will never work. So, are you now all in to artificially raise a wage for social justice or have you finally figured out that when the government fucks with the economy YOU will end up paying for it in the long run? You are a republican, or worse, a tea-partier...aren't you? You know, one of the most useful and important things I ever learned in college was when a professor said, "Important information can be useful to you regardless of whether or not it's entertaining or comes from a source you agree with." Look at domken, he'll only uses sources who agree with his political beliefs so he'll never be more than a useful idiot Kool aide drinker. Is that your aspiration in life? Do you need to know my political beliefs before you can consider my points? You do seem to judge people by how much they agree with you. Will you close your mind like domken if I am one of those "worse" nutsackers? (I would like to point out that after my post about the amount of work I do it does appear by my number of posts today that I am a major slacker...I am, in fact, home sick for the first time in almost 10 years...I wouldn't be here if my supervisor would have let me stay at the office...) Absolutely not. I am willing to discuss any topic with one of any division of society. I have come to the understanding that the majority of those who sway towards certain sides of the spectrum don't recognize what their own has done in regards to what has spoiled the American Dream, and this goes for both sides of the aisle. I do, however, refuse to attempt to converse with those who can lay the blame on specific PEOPLE rather than specific POLICIES, not to mention those who leave out major parts of the problem... IE, Carter and Clinton nullified some policies that kept companies regulated and saved us all from predatory practices, sure... There were also many other issues that aided in leading us to this: Deregulation of financial industries Changes in tax levels over time that swing heavily in favor of the wealthy who can absolutely afford to pay more yet just want to be greedy Nonsense wars Our massive and unnecessary military budget The overuse and privatization of the prison system The buying of political candidates and directed influence of their subsequent policies through over-powerful lobbying groups and super pacs So many people leave these out of the discussion because they want to continue to believe that their party of choice can do no wrong and any involvement their party had in such events immediately negates the argument and I will not be a part of it. I am not a republican, I am not a democrat and I find it foolish to align oneself in such a permanent way with any one party. I consider myself an independent with ideals that lean in both directions, I just find, lately, that the republicans and tea-partiers present policies that contain very little logic, research, knowledge, and provide for very specific audiences and they aren't the audiences that need new policies in their favor.

HunterCA -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 10:09:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover (I would like to point out that after my post about the amount of work I do it does appear by my number of posts today that I am a major slacker...I am, in fact, home sick for the first time in almost 10 years...I wouldn't be here if my supervisor would have let me stay at the office...) Absolutely not. I am willing to discuss any topic with one of any division of society. I have come to the understanding that the majority of those who sway towards certain sides of the spectrum don't recognize what their own has done in regards to what has spoiled the American Dream, and this goes for both sides of the aisle. I do, however, refuse to attempt to converse with those who can lay the blame on specific PEOPLE rather than specific POLICIES, not to mention those who leave out major parts of the problem... IE, Carter and Clinton nullified some policies that kept companies regulated and saved us all from predatory practices, sure... There were also many other issues that aided in leading us to this: Deregulation of financial industries Changes in tax levels over time that swing heavily in favor of the wealthy who can absolutely afford to pay more yet just want to be greedy Nonsense wars Our massive and unnecessary military budget The overuse and privatization of the prison system The buying of political candidates and directed influence of their subsequent policies through over-powerful lobbying groups and super pacs So many people leave these out of the discussion because they want to continue to believe that their party of choice can do no wrong and any involvement their party had in such events immediately negates the argument and I will not be a part of it. I am not a republican, I am not a democrat and I find it foolish to align oneself in such a permanent way with any one party. I consider myself an independent with ideals that lean in both directions, I just find, lately, that the republicans and tea-partiers present policies that contain very little logic, research, knowledge, and provide for very specific audiences and they aren't the audiences that need new policies in their favor. Fair enough. But let me ask you, all but one of your examples above are directly from the liberal play book. I agree that you should never trust any politician because they'll all screw you in the end and that buying politicians is too easy in our society. But, let me ask you where you get your conservative information because I don't see any above. It's all, just as you say, one sides. So, perhaps you can list for me a few tea party policies from their perspective and then tell me what you think about them?

sloguy02246 -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 10:10:00 AM)
quote: Anyone who still believes that simply working harder and doing better than the person next to you will move you on is, in my humble opinion, a fool. Amen. Amen. Amen. This totally erroneous belief that if a person works as hard as they can, nothing but good fortune will befall them is ridiculous. Today, working as hard as you can only guarantees your employer will enjoy greater productivity from you. There is no guarantee that it will benefit your career. As one of the political pundits on TV recently said, people who work the hardest aren't the ones actually running our corporations and government. If that were true, our nation would be run by guys running lawn mowers and leaf blowers.

HunterCA -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 10:19:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover What happened to you is tragic. I lost a company that I worked 25 years to make and had to lay staff off at Christmas time. I had to sell my house to move to where I could find work. And you know what, that happened to you and me because Carter and Clinton screwed with the economy to implement a socialist wish list that created a housing bubble that burst. Obama is doing the same thing now to the stock market with 85 billion dollars a month. All of which just shows that social justice doesn't work, never worked and will never work. So, are you now all in to artificially raise a wage for social justice or have you finally figured out that when the government fucks with the economy YOU will end up paying for it in the long run? You are a republican, or worse, a tea-partier...aren't you? IE, Carter and Clinton nullified some policies that kept companies regulated and saved us all from predatory practices, sure... There were also many other issues that aided in leading us to this: Deregulation of financial industries I am not a republican, I am not a democrat and I find it foolish to align oneself in such a permanent way with any one party. I consider myself an independent with ideals that lean in both directions, I just find, lately, that the republicans and tea-partiers present policies that contain very little logic, research, knowledge, and provide for very specific audiences and they aren't the audiences that need new policies in their favor. Carter passed the Community Reinvestment Act. Clinton had his justice department threaten all banks if they didnt make at least 40 percent of their loans in accordance with it the Federal Government would sue them. Thus the subprime market was born and it wasn't from deregulation of financial institutions, it was social policy implementation from the left.

mnottertail -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 10:38:18 AM)
Uh..........no. AMTPA SMMEA TRA Geo H. W. Bush was President when the first sub-primes came out. FHEFSSA 1992 Financial Services Modernization Act November 1999. Right into Ws Blueprint for the American Dream. Jeeze..................all pretty much nutsackers doing the damage.

wnyThroatLover -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 12:03:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover (I would like to point out that after my post about the amount of work I do it does appear by my number of posts today that I am a major slacker...I am, in fact, home sick for the first time in almost 10 years...I wouldn't be here if my supervisor would have let me stay at the office...) Absolutely not. I am willing to discuss any topic with one of any division of society. I have come to the understanding that the majority of those who sway towards certain sides of the spectrum don't recognize what their own has done in regards to what has spoiled the American Dream, and this goes for both sides of the aisle. I do, however, refuse to attempt to converse with those who can lay the blame on specific PEOPLE rather than specific POLICIES, not to mention those who leave out major parts of the problem... IE, Carter and Clinton nullified some policies that kept companies regulated and saved us all from predatory practices, sure... There were also many other issues that aided in leading us to this: Deregulation of financial industries Changes in tax levels over time that swing heavily in favor of the wealthy who can absolutely afford to pay more yet just want to be greedy Nonsense wars Our massive and unnecessary military budget The overuse and privatization of the prison system The buying of political candidates and directed influence of their subsequent policies through over-powerful lobbying groups and super pacs So many people leave these out of the discussion because they want to continue to believe that their party of choice can do no wrong and any involvement their party had in such events immediately negates the argument and I will not be a part of it. I am not a republican, I am not a democrat and I find it foolish to align oneself in such a permanent way with any one party. I consider myself an independent with ideals that lean in both directions, I just find, lately, that the republicans and tea-partiers present policies that contain very little logic, research, knowledge, and provide for very specific audiences and they aren't the audiences that need new policies in their favor. Fair enough. But let me ask you, all but one of your examples above are directly from the liberal play book. I agree that you should never trust any politician because they'll all screw you in the end and that buying politicians is too easy in our society. But, let me ask you where you get your conservative information because I don't see any above. It's all, just as you say, one sides. So, perhaps you can list for me a few tea party policies from their perspective and then tell me what you think about them? See inbox

thishereboi -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 12:52:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: wnyThroatLover I know my numbers weren't quite exact. I did a little rounding (down) with a couple of the figures to make the math a little easier to follow... Granted Walmart made insane profits, can you honestly tell me that he did over 1000x the work of the individuals in the stores? I can't believe that to be true. Not to mention, the biggest point of what I was trying to say there was simply this: What in the hell could these CEO's possibly need (Insert ridiculous number of millions here) a year for?!? Does anyone really need 4 houses and 10 jets and 30 cars, especially when there are people around who bust their asses and can barely afford their small apartment and 1 or 2 (if it's a couple) cars and can barely pay their bills or buy food. If I made 16 million in one year, I could easily retire and live VERY comfortably for the remainder of my days, and I'm sure any of you could as well! There is this show called "Hoarders" where people fill their homes with things they are never going to do anything with. These people are doing the same thing with money. How hard to the top CEO's work? How hard did Sam Walton work? How hard does an accountant work? As far as what a CEO "needs" millions for? Doesn't matter. It's not up to you, me, or anyone else. Maybe that CEO is setting his/her kids up so they don't have to work as hard as he/she did. Maybe that CEO is setting up a foundation to help the less fortunate. Well if the concern if truly how much more the CEO is making I guess we will have to start hating these guys too. According to the chart several are worse than walmart including target. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mcdonalds-starbucks-ceos-more-9-110100507.html

EdBowie -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 1:09:24 PM)
Except that, the more a BOD gives CEOs, the more they are subsidized by taxpayer's money... quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie A big part of the problem is that in general, the CEOs are too often an abysmal failure before being traded off to the next 'team' to artificially inflate some more numbers. Look at the 'geniuses' that took turns running JC Penney, Allstate, Sears, and finally K-Mart. Or, read Warren Bennis 'Why Leaders Can't Lead'. None of that really matters, though. The question I have, in regards to the meat of your post, is: when are Boards of Directors going to come to and figure out that CEO's don't have to be paid the big bucks? I'm amazed at the shitty job many CEO's have done, and what golden parachutes they have been given, even when they are being given them to get rid of the bad CEO's. It's amazing. But, in the end, that's up to the Board. That's not up to you. That's not up to me. Unless someone here is on a Board of Directors for some company, it's not up to any of us. At some point in time, a Board will wise up and see the light.

DomKen -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 1:23:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA I've just provided you a source to validate my comments. Please provide the same for your "supply side economics has destroyed the US economy" and "no legitimate economist even still consider it worth debating". Or are those, again, just derision used as argument on the left such as you "supply side stupidity" comment. Perhaps, you should, as Lucy says, get real, argue with something to back up what you say other than "all your friends believe the same thing" and don't expect derision to fly as reason. http://www.newyorker.com/online/2007/10/29/071029on_onlineonly_surowiecki?currentPage=1 http://www.itep.org/debunkinglaffer/ http://sharepoint.mvla.net/teachers/RobertF/Micro%20Economics%20AP/Documents/THE%20RISE%20OF%20SUPPLY%20SIDE%20ECONOMICS.pdf You are also welcome to search academic economics journals where the subject is no longer even written about at all. Supply side economics is thoroughly disproven. <long winded handwave deleted in the interest of good taste> You already tried this. Trying again but using more words doesn't change anything. The New Yorker is not a biased source. Closing your eyes, clicking your heals together three times and wishing to go home only works for Dorothy. But then what do I expect when I ask you to think. Silly me I guess. You asked for sources. I gave you mainstream sources and you tried to handwave them away as biased. Why should I bother trying to reason with you? You live inside the right wing bubble and nothing remotely resembling reality can penetrate.

deathtothepixies -> RE: Minimum wage in america (12/10/2013 3:55:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA Soviet idealology propaganda is just emotional support for liberals who see the world they envisioned falling apart and have learned to hate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gpjk_MaCGM you really don't have a fucking clue how right wing you are do you?

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125