A site called "Federalist Papers" citing Zero Hedge?
Minimum wage
- Thread starter ohio
- Start date
I for one welcome our new burger-flippinng robot overlords...
i question their subroutines, how are they supposed to know i want my burger medium rare? are they gonna have R2D2 style arms that pop out with a meat thermometer?
My guess is that he was in the US Military, a separate self-contained and regulated economy unto itself.
this was certainly the case when i was stationed in AL & MS
Pitchforks.com is still available. Invest now!
on the topic of sowing & reaping (get it? "sow"ing?):
http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/08/mcdonalds-replacing-cashiers-with-machines/
r3sp3ct our overlords
#wall-e
http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/08/mcdonalds-replacing-cashiers-with-machines/
r3sp3ct our overlords
#wall-e
Seattle not feeling the $15/hour perks
This is why a max wage or min:max ratio would be better suited.
I wonder if this surprised any of the proponents...
ftfy.I wonder if this surprised any of the proponents who failed Econ 101...
i wonder if part of it is the fact that inflation has outpaced wages for so long that its just sticker shock on the management end of things, them having gotten comfortable with the profit margins that artificially suppressed wage rates have afforded them.
Just out of curiosity - what are these "artifical" wage-suppression mechanisms?
trickle down something or other. possibly splenda.
fact is, wages haven't grown for decades while inflation (cost of goods) has.
Shitty public education, sexism, racism, "selective enforcement", globalization, etc.
Ad a modern and wealthy society why do we want to enable business plans that perpetuate poverty?
The business owner profits but the costs of poverty are simply defered to society as a whole. Your Big Mac is $.40 cheaper but you pay more in taxes because the poor can't.
Deferred costs are something few people think about but it is real and significant. It may be a wash for the upper middle class consumer but a few profit from the misery of many.
You are not thinking big enough, once you answer to shareholders and not your workers or the public, the business's sole purpose is to maximize stock value, not generate a profit, not treat people like human beings, not put out a quality product. Most of this takes a drastic hit.
Yep. But I imagine before society when we were cave men there was dudes that could build a good shelter make a good fire and hunt good, dude was also good at being a leader and had his own tribe. He got lots of bitches. Some dudes got his cast offs and other dudes whated his left over bitches and half eaten bones. But they couldn't because they didn't help at all. They starved and didn't reproduce.
I run a business but if I didn't get anything from it I wouldn't do it. Hundreds would be out of jobs. Side business's would be out too. Everyone plays there part in our society from the hobo to the 1%er. It does suck for the impoverished though. But what are we supposed to do? No one wants to give up the shit they have. Not even the poor to the homeless. That's human. When we are generous we do it for ourselves not for others.
I love chaos and anarchy so I'm cool with that too so let's go back to equality because society is not equality
I run a business but if I didn't get anything from it I wouldn't do it. Hundreds would be out of jobs. Side business's would be out too. Everyone plays there part in our society from the hobo to the 1%er. It does suck for the impoverished though. But what are we supposed to do? No one wants to give up the shit they have. Not even the poor to the homeless. That's human. When we are generous we do it for ourselves not for others.
I love chaos and anarchy so I'm cool with that too so let's go back to equality because society is not equality
A corporations only job is to make profits. Corporations do not exist to make cars, computers or Hot Pockets. Their only goal is to make money, strategies differ but they exist only to make profits as dictated by the open market. I buy stocks because they return my investments not because they are nice to fluffy kittens. Therefore rules and regulations need to be put into place to make sure corporations are nice to fluffy kittens. Corporations that put morals and ideals above profits are called non-profits.
Your analogy is terrible and shows a poor understanding of reality, grammar, and sentence structure. So you are equating poor people with people who do nothing? We should let them starve?
I your answer is yes I have your Utopia. No regulations, only the strong and hardworking survive.
On a more serious note:
So do you employ adult minimum wage workers?
Does your competition employ minimum wage workers?
Last edited:
I employ four imagrant workers. All paid well above minimum wage. Also two workers that out the formans sons. One is on college summer break the other is a fellon and recovering drug addict. Maybe still is one. I have one employee that is American born. I've know most of these guy for twenty years. I'm a property manager and have about 75 heavy indistrial tenats and a few others. Only one is white. I'm also drunk because we have good beer here.
I only saw the part about minimum wage workers before my last post. My grammer is terrible. My spelling is worse. I imagine in Somalia the pirates are the hardest working, and richest in the area, they probably take the biggest risks to feed their families. I don't know that though. It must suck to live there and I'm glad I don't. But seriously why don't you sell all your stuff or only buy the absolute nesecitys to survive and donate all the rest? They are poor people in need right? Can you think of any logical reason you don't do that?
It's an unfortunate conundrum. As a shareholder you want maximum return on investment which often means screwing someone else. As an employee you want to be treated as a person and well compensated. Is there a happy middle ground? I suppose in theory there is, free market principles would strike some sort of balance. In reality, who knows, it's a game most of us are ill equipped to benefit from and will forever remain pawns.
It is true
I like to point out the stark differences between WalMart (Publicly traded) and Winco (employee owned) or maybe even Costco. With Winco and Costco both being "employee owned", the employees are paid well, but they also take pride in the job they do and do it well. People go to work there and stay there for years because the pay and benefits are good and there is a sense of loyalty because of the sense of ownership.
WalMart being beholden to shareholders rather than its employees has the incentive to screw the employees and return record profits to people who do no actual work related to the business.
so the problem is capitalism?
Wouldn't an employee owned yet still "for profit" business be considered capitalist? Or is this that socialism stuff all y'all Bernie folks been screaming about?
you can turn a profit and not have to completely forego business ethics. making profits isn't inherently the same as making a living; the problem with many large corporations is their goals have now been reduced to profit and only continually increasing profit. This represents amassing wealth for the sheer purpose of having more; driven by little other than greed. the fundamental underlying problem with capitalism is the belief that infinite profits can be derived from finite resources.
Human nature is a bitch, aint it?
Its an interesting line. Like sustainable growth vs growth for the sake of growth (because investors want to see growth). Playhaven wanted to grow to impress investors. What we ended up with was 50 salesmen and project managers and had the same 14 engineers we started with. Sales could promise the moon, but 14 jackasses can only do so much.
Why did they fail again? Oh yeah, donglegate.
<edit> It wasn't Alex that was fired, it was Matt. Alex has no ties to anonymous.
Last edited:
nuke it from orbit
It is a very interesting line which is probably why it will be debated by economists/social researchers until humanity runs itself into extinction.Human nature is a bitch, aint it?
Its an interesting line. Like sustainable growth vs growth for the sake of growth (because investors want to see growth). Playhaven wanted to grow to impress investors. What we ended up with was 50 salesmen and project managers and had the same 14 engineers we started with. Sales could promise the moon, but 14 jackasses can only do so much.
Why did they fail again? Oh yeah, donglegate.
If only we had a beer and a campfire this discussion could become muchos intellectually stimulating.
My wife has undergone a major change since we got together. Her previous employer (dentists, both husband and wife) tried to live like doctors and pushed staff to upsell and over treatment plan for fun and profit. She was expected to do $2k worth of work a day to make goal, She bought into the lifestyle and lived WELL beyond her means. While she makes damn good money and her ex made ok money, they lived like dentists while the dentists lived like doctors.
I've been broke for too long (student loans/ex wifes). I've shown her we can live a good life within our means. They say the magic number is $75k/year, right? That company that kicked everyone up to $75k pissed off everyone who was at $74k, because MOAR.
Moar, its the 'merican way.
pretty much. wife and i live within are means, are still paying off student loans and some cc debt. but w/ the stress of our jobs we're having a bit of a dilemma trying to decide if its really worth it. having our first kid put things in a bit of a different perspective.