Conquer Club

Rise of Minimum wage?

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby PLAYER57832 on Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:25 am

thegreekdog wrote:b
By the way. Juan, Player - you guys should probably look into this union thing. You could double your salaries!
[/quote]
Unions require large groups of people able to organize against a single large entity to be truly effective. Most low-wage workers are spread out in various jobs with various employers. A very large percetage are in food service , childcare and retail sales, but you can find them all over.

Also, you seem to underestimate what it took to even get unions and to effectively fight those in power.
Low wages are Machiavelli-like, just enough to keep people from going to those lengths, but not enough to keep the system from harming society. Add in the fact that a good many are here illegally or on shakey grounds for other reasons that prevent them from fighting and you have a bunch of people trapped.

But, the real issue here is that most people in this low-wage arena actually ARE making more, just not by themselves. In may case, my husband makes better wages, but many people survive by getting tax payer paid government handouts. You want to stop handouts, make companies pay a legitimate wage. THAT is the real issue. I don't believe it truly will result in more people moving into welfare and unemployment other htan in the short term (less than 2 years), BUT even if it did, then having an honest wage base will allow us to focus on real issue, rather than back-handed supports supports for what should be private companies. I may not like someone being on welfare, but at least we know they are on welfare. Today, it all gets muffled. Figures showing people getting support don't identify whether they are also working or not. Statistics on wages and employment don't readily identify if the workers are making ends meet by working multiple jobs, spousal support, family support or government support or a combination.


Also, because so many people being helped are actually working, its harder or impossible mandate that they get education, work on public service needs or any other real demand. If I am going to pay for someone's food and rent (and I AM), then I want them to at least contribute something to the community unless they are really and truly not able. (and even then, I would rather fix the "not able" part than simply keep them on the dole).


OH, one thing.. illegal workers are not eligible for government aid, BUT they do often depend on local societal help that otherwise would go to other causes. Plus, in many cases they have kids who are citizens and therefore who ARE eligible for assistance.... but who would not require assistance if their parents were able to do better. In that regard, it really doesn' t matter if the assistance is private or public. I just refer more to the public help because so many opposed to the raise in minimum wage are also low tax proponents.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:33 am

Juan_Bottom wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:You want to pretend that people have no inherent value, that all that matters is the business ability to make money. Giving people no value is pretty much a definition of evil. You can paint it up with all the stats and figures you like, but yes, that is a pretty basic point. If people have no value, then there is no value in anything at all.

Seconded.

BigBallinStalin wrote:Yeah. Don't forget her hated "conservatives" who want lower taxes and who control people's minds with their ideas and stuff. But if they're "liberals" who want bigger government, then that's fine. Or maybe not, she can be fickle at times. If they bankroll her favored programs, then she'll flop on her belly for them and wiggle whichever way they say to.


Honestly this is probably the dumbest thing that I've ever read on this site by someone who is actually respected by the fora users.
You just attacked a woman for forming her opinions on an issue by issue basis. I'm so sorry for you because she considers points and counter points before she takes a stand.
Duh.
Seriously, this is a really stupid personal attack.


That's nice JB. If you wish to make a more informed criticism, you should understand the context (including the page after where player further fails to make sense).

We can distort my above post into a personal attack, but that position is for people who find simple explanations cheaper than critical thinking. After someone has been thoroughly explained that their Ideology and position is counter-productive and stupid (respectively), and after that someone refuses to critically evaluate his/her own position, then they don't deserve to be taken seriously. Good luck.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:39 am

Lootifer wrote:Its not just money at play here. Power is just as, if not more so, alluring than cold hard cash.

Meaning that politicians only listen to people with power; sure that usually co-incides with people who have a lot of money, but not exclusively.


Which may explain why such small donations to politicians can be so influential on their decision-making. It seems similar to the bets that NFL players take on getting the first interception or fumble. These guys make millions, they bet a few hundred, but after the game, cash swaps hands and bragging rights ensue. Maybe politicians behave in a similar manner. It's about that feeling of power/superiority.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:40 am

PLAYER57832 wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:Oh bull. The government is us. The "government" is those people WE elect, so they absolutely care about what the majority of people want. Unless it's something I don't agree with; then the government is run by evil corporations.


Fixed.


Yeah. Don't forget her hated "conservatives" who want lower taxes and who control people's minds with their ideas and stuff. But if they're "liberals" who want bigger government, then that's fine. Or maybe not, she can be fickle at times. If they bankroll her favored programs, then she'll flop on her belly for them and wiggle whichever way they say to.

Like I said, when you have to be dishonest to refute what I am saying, you have already lost.
Too bad you won't admit it.

In case anyone who has not followed the dialogue pops in -- I am neither for bigger government, nor lesser government. I am for effective and appropriate government. Similarly, claiming to be for "lower taxes" when you are really about foisting your business costs onto the rest of society is extremely dishonest. When you claim that a business can legitimately hire someone for less than it takes them to eat, have a decent apartment or home, clothing, then yes, you are either declaring that work and people have no value and can just starve or you are expecting others to pick up those costs.


Player, I've already addressed your position in the privatization thread, where you were full of fail and stubbornly insisted on being full of fail. That's why I'll make the above posts--because you have failed to demonstrate that I should take you seriously.

Masking your lack of critical self-evaluation under your banner of "UR DISHONEST!!" won't do you any favors. The path to human flourishing is difficult, but I strongly encourage you to put away your banners and continue your steps to flourishing. Good luck.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby PLAYER57832 on Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:11 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:Oh bull. The government is us. The "government" is those people WE elect, so they absolutely care about what the majority of people want. Unless it's something I don't agree with; then the government is run by evil corporations.


Fixed.


Yeah. Don't forget her hated "conservatives" who want lower taxes and who control people's minds with their ideas and stuff. But if they're "liberals" who want bigger government, then that's fine. Or maybe not, she can be fickle at times. If they bankroll her favored programs, then she'll flop on her belly for them and wiggle whichever way they say to.

Like I said, when you have to be dishonest to refute what I am saying, you have already lost.
Too bad you won't admit it.

In case anyone who has not followed the dialogue pops in -- I am neither for bigger government, nor lesser government. I am for effective and appropriate government. Similarly, claiming to be for "lower taxes" when you are really about foisting your business costs onto the rest of society is extremely dishonest. When you claim that a business can legitimately hire someone for less than it takes them to eat, have a decent apartment or home, clothing, then yes, you are either declaring that work and people have no value and can just starve or you are expecting others to pick up those costs.


Player, I've already addressed your position in the privatization thread, where you were full of fail and stubbornly insisted on being full of fail. That's why I'll make the above posts--because you have failed to demonstrate that I should take you seriously.

Masking your lack of critical self-evaluation under your banner of "UR DISHONEST!!" won't do you any favors. The path to human flourishing is difficult, but I strongly encourage you to put away your banners and continue your steps to flourishing. Good luck.

The trouble is, you did not really "counter" what I said. You disagree, fine. That doesn't mean I am "full of fail" or failing to demonstrate sense.

Your tactic of instantly attacking not just me, but anyone who seriously disagrees is pretty telling.

Your arguments fail because you start with the assumption that all you have learned aboout economics is actually predictive and real. It is, but only when viewed within a very, very narrow context and only short term. You have no problem simply ignoring things that are not manipulable by humans. I have a very, very big problem with ignoring things that will change, but not necessarily the way humans need or want. You can pretend all you like that you can just ignore the impact of limited oil because some "techological fix" is out there. You can pretend all you like that corporations cannot possible be responsible for testing products more fully before selling them because they will go out of business and, in your mind the damage will be controlled. Both of those assumptions are invalid when you look at the real data. Admitting that, however, would probably require you to admit a lot of other very uncomfortable facts.


BigBallinStalin wrote: Masking your lack of critical self-evaluation under your banner of "UR DISHONEST!!" won't do you any favors. The path to human flourishing is difficult, but I strongly encourage you to put away your banners and continue your steps to flourishing. Good luck.

That is a mirror, not a window, you are looking in.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Rise of Minimum wage?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:52 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
Your arguments fail because you start with the assumption that all you have learned aboout economics is actually predictive and real. It is, but only when viewed within a very, very narrow context and only short term. You have no problem simply ignoring things that are not manipulable by humans. I have a very, very big problem with ignoring things that will change, but not necessarily the way humans need or want. You can pretend all you like that you can just ignore the impact of limited oil because some "techological fix" is out there. You can pretend all you like that corporations cannot possible be responsible for testing products more fully before selling them because they will go out of business and, in your mind the damage will be controlled.


Obviously, you don't really bother reading my posts when I'm being entirely neutral to your ignorance. Otherwise, you wouldn't claim that I support such stances, nor could your claims be reasonable implications of my stances. Since this is the case, then I don't have to take you seriously, and all criticism on your stupidity is valid and sound.


PLAYER57832 wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote: Masking your lack of critical self-evaluation under your banner of "UR DISHONEST!!" won't do you any favors. The path to human flourishing is difficult, but I strongly encourage you to put away your banners and continue your steps to flourishing. Good luck.

That is a mirror, not a window, you are looking in.


WHOA! HUGE DEFENSE THERE!! The tables still haven't turned, but please stop banging your knife and fork on the nice, wooden surface. It doesn't help.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Previous

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users