Inspired by Wal Mart thread

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Stunt: Everybody is entitled to 30 years of retirement, didnt you hear?

Maybe if minimum wage was $100/hr we could all be rich and retire at the age of 40...

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Whatever wage a person voluntarily agrees to accept in return for their labor. For some people, that's a hell of a lot of money. For others, it's not much at all (and obviously, you are horrified both by the small amounts that some people agree to accept and the large amounts that others insist on having).

That simplistic rendition of the situation belies your unpragmatic idealism.

Let me illustrate the obtuseness of your concepts with a thought experiment: imagine two individuals--Pat the banker and Chris the cashier. Pat has a job that pays 150K a year and has excellent benefits. He decides to "accept" another job because it pays 151K. Chris is unemployed, through no fault of his own (yes, it is hard for you to imagine, yet it is possible), and looks for anything he can find. He decides to "accept" a minimum wage job without any benefits, because he needs food.

Are both people "accepting" a job? Yes, but for different, relevant reasons. You want to ignore those reasons and oversimplify everything, but in the real world those reasons are important.

Such gross assumptions you make. I was unemployed through no fault of mine own just a year ago. I did not then go own to accept a minimum wage job without any benefits. How could that have been?

I'm not ignoring or oversimplifying anything. I'm using logic, with means I don't try to translate isolated anecdotal situations as justification for a personal political ideology which advocates the use of force and harm (i.e. the ends justifiy the means) as your philosophy does.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Genx87
Stunt: Everybody is entitled to 30 years of retirement, didnt you hear?

Screw that. 30 years is too little. I want to be entitled to mandatory retirement, fully funded at a high standard of living, at age 35!

<-- is 35

I agree and lets get the govt to enact this law and make rich people like 1EZduzit pay for it. He has a million bucks, he can afford it!

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Whatever wage a person voluntarily agrees to accept in return for their labor. For some people, that's a hell of a lot of money. For others, it's not much at all (and obviously, you are horrified both by the small amounts that some people agree to accept and the large amounts that others insist on having).

That simplistic rendition of the situation belies your unpragmatic idealism.

Let me illustrate the obtuseness of your concepts with a thought experiment: imagine two individuals--Pat the banker and Chris the cashier. Pat has a job that pays 150K a year and has excellent benefits. He decides to "accept" another job because it pays 151K. Chris is unemployed, through no fault of his own (yes, it is hard for you to imagine, yet it is possible), and looks for anything he can find. He decides to "accept" a minimum wage job without any benefits, because he needs food.

Are both people "accepting" a job? Yes, but for different, relevant reasons. You want to ignore those reasons and oversimplify everything, but in the real world those reasons are important.

Pat probably invested in education, was hard working and deserving of the lifestyle he created for himself. I want to know why Chris has no skills to get a job better than minimum wage and why he was unemployed. It is very rare to see a person unemployed who doesn't deserve it through some fault of their own. I know it's a hard fact of life and bleeding hearts can't accept it, but it's true.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Genx87
Stunt: Everybody is entitled to 30 years of retirement, didnt you hear?

Screw that. 30 years is too little. I want to be entitled to mandatory retirement, fully funded at a high standard of living, at age 35!

<-- is 35

I agree and lets get the govt to enact this law and make rich people like 1EZduzit pay for it. He has a million bucks, he can afford it!

I judge wealth by how much land a person owns, and as he is admittedly a large landowner, and thus one of the evil rich, I think he should be forced to sell his land in order to fund this glorious ideal.

edit: After all, why should any one person be allowed to own more land than what they need to live on, when so many other people obviously don't have enough?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I've tried to define it, but according to you I can't. Maybe if you answered my question that would help.

Why don't you define what you think it takes to deserve enough of a wage to prevent starvation, the need for goveerment assitance or to deserve health care?

Do you think a company would allow their employees (people who interact with customers, invested training and hiring costs in) to just starve to death?

Even if the person starved to death, do you think that's the company's fault? Gimme a break!

What about retirement and health care?

Why is the person retired if they cannot afford to not work?

You evil person you! Why do you hate poor people?

The real question is, why did that person squander their retirement savings before they wished to retire? And why should another person, who sacrificed in order save for their retirement, be forced to pay for that person who didn't sacrifice? Because that's what really we're talking about here.
Same goes with health care. Why should the person who pays for the health care (and everyone does, whether their employer pays for it or not) be forced to pay for the health care of someone who makes the decision to spend that money on other things?

This is how the real world really works. You can't get something for nothing. Some people just don't get it. But they have no problem forcing other people to give something for their nothing (as the actual generous people give voluntarily without demanding that other people be forced to do the same).

I really don't see how you can critisize people who even though they worked full time were always at the poverty level and could save little if any money, as "squandering" their retirement. And i don't know one employer who give an employee the option of recieving cash rather then health care.

Keep making things up to fit your argument though.

LOL, you talk yourself around in circles. We are talking about fully employed people, how is that something for nothing?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
This is how the real world really works. You can't get something for nothing. Some people just don't get it. But they have no problem forcing other people to give something for their nothing (as the actual generous people give voluntarily without demanding that other people be forced to do the same).

I really don't see how you can critisize people who even though they worked full time were always at the poverty level and could save little if any money, as "squandering" their retirement. And i don't know one employer who give an employee the option of recieving cash rather then health care.

Keep making things up to fit your argument though.

LOL, you talk yourself around in circles. We are talking about fully employed people, how is that something for nothing?[/quote]
I was quite clear that the "something for nothing's" are the talk-alot-do-little crowd like yourself who wants other people to fund their idealistic vision of a perfect world.

It also (again, quite clearly) included the delusion that some people (like yourself, obviously) have who think they aren't actually paying for benefits that they don't receive in cash, like health care.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Whatever wage a person voluntarily agrees to accept in return for their labor. For some people, that's a hell of a lot of money. For others, it's not much at all (and obviously, you are horrified both by the small amounts that some people agree to accept and the large amounts that others insist on having).

That simplistic rendition of the situation belies your unpragmatic idealism.

Let me illustrate the obtuseness of your concepts with a thought experiment: imagine two individuals--Pat the banker and Chris the cashier. Pat has a job that pays 150K a year and has excellent benefits. He decides to "accept" another job because it pays 151K. Chris is unemployed, through no fault of his own (yes, it is hard for you to imagine, yet it is possible), and looks for anything he can find. He decides to "accept" a minimum wage job without any benefits, because he needs food.

Are both people "accepting" a job? Yes, but for different, relevant reasons. You want to ignore those reasons and oversimplify everything, but in the real world those reasons are important.

Shite happens yes, but is Chris going to somehow stay at a min wage job the rest of his life? If he does, that is through his own decision making process. If Chris is qualified for a bank teller position, he should be able to find a position of equal stature over the course of time.

Your fault is believing Chris since he was stuck taking a short term low end position to make ends meet cant possibly get himself out of the rut without the help of the govt. Govt is never the answer, I cant see many things the govt does right. It used to be able to fight wars, but now it even cant do that anymore.

Public schools- Mess
Medicare - Mess
SS - Mess
Welfare - Mess
Disaster Recovery - Mess
Trasportation - Mess

Yet somehow we are to believe the Govt will help chris out under your ideals?

Laughable.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Genx87
Stunt: Everybody is entitled to 30 years of retirement, didnt you hear?

Screw that. 30 years is too little. I want to be entitled to mandatory retirement, fully funded at a high standard of living, at age 35!

<-- is 35

I agree and lets get the govt to enact this law and make rich people like 1EZduzit pay for it. He has a million bucks, he can afford it!

I judge wealth by how much land a person owns, and as he is admittedly a large landowner, and thus one of the evil rich, I think he should be forced to sell his land in order to fund this glorious ideal.

edit: After all, why should any one person be allowed to own more land than what they need to live on, when so many other people obviously don't have enough?

Show me where I said people should be given anything? You can't. I said people who were full time empolyed.

You still haven't defined what it takes fro an employee to deserve a wage above the poverty level, health care, and a decent retirement program.

I laughing at you laughing at me. :laugh:

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Genx87
Stunt: Everybody is entitled to 30 years of retirement, didnt you hear?

Screw that. 30 years is too little. I want to be entitled to mandatory retirement, fully funded at a high standard of living, at age 35!

<-- is 35

I agree and lets get the govt to enact this law and make rich people like 1EZduzit pay for it. He has a million bucks, he can afford it!

I judge wealth by how much land a person owns, and as he is admittedly a large landowner, and thus one of the evil rich, I think he should be forced to sell his land in order to fund this glorious ideal.

edit: After all, why should any one person be allowed to own more land than what they need to live on, when so many other people obviously don't have enough?

Show me where I said people should be given anything? You can't. I said people who were full time empolyed.

You still haven't defined what it takes fro an employee to deserve a wage above the poverty level, health care, and a decent retirement program.

I laughing at you laughing at me. :laugh:

I smell a strong scent of Straw in this post.

 

[Stunt]

You smell straw? I smell something much more rank than that.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I've tried to define it, but according to you I can't. Maybe if you answered my question that would help.

Why don't you define what you think it takes to deserve enough of a wage to prevent starvation, the need for goveerment assitance or to deserve health care?

Do you think a company would allow their employees (people who interact with customers, invested training and hiring costs in) to just starve to death?

Even if the person starved to death, do you think that's the company's fault? Gimme a break!

What about retirement and health care?

Why is the person retired if they cannot afford to not work?

Who said they were retired? Not me, I said if they are working they deserve some type of workable retirement plan.

It seems to me you people are only concerned with your needs. What will give you the best health care, the highest salary, the earlies retirement. That's human nature and I don't have a problem with people wanting that. I want the same things.

I do have a problem with robbing Peter to pay Paul to get these things. Full time employed people deserve to make above the poverty level, they deserve decent health care and retirement. Not only do they deserve it, they are earning it through their labor.

You can skirt the issue all you like. Someday God will ask you why you let these things happen and you will have to give him an answer. I hope you have a better answer then I've heard out of any of you so far.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Stunt
You smell straw? I smell something much more rank than that.

What you smell is the result of your circle jerk. :laugh:

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I've tried to define it, but according to you I can't. Maybe if you answered my question that would help.

Why don't you define what you think it takes to deserve enough of a wage to prevent starvation, the need for goveerment assitance or to deserve health care?

Do you think a company would allow their employees (people who interact with customers, invested training and hiring costs in) to just starve to death?

Even if the person starved to death, do you think that's the company's fault? Gimme a break!

What about retirement and health care?

Why is the person retired if they cannot afford to not work?

Who said they were retired? Not me, I said if they are working they deserve some type of workable retirement plan.

It seems to me you people are only concerned with your needs. What will give you the best health care, the highest salary, the earlies retirement. That's human nature and I don't have a problem with people wanting that. I want the same things.

I do have a problem with robbing Peter to pay Paul to get these things. Full time employed people deserve to make above the poverty level, they deserve decent health care and retirement. Not only do they deserve it, they are earning it through their labor.

You can skirt the issue all you like. Someday god will ask you why you let these things happen and you will have to give him an answer. i hope yopu have a good one.

If they were working...their retirement plan is saving their money. If I want to retire, it's only logical that I start saving money to do so.

I am not skirting the issue, you are not giving reasonable solutions to problems. You think because healthcare is expensive, people should get paid more. I ask why healthcare is expensive. I reform, you react.

When you answer to God what will you say? "Well I argued with those guys on ATPN!" :roll: Using God in your arguments is icing on the cake summarizing a bunch of incohesive and illogical rants by 1EZduzit.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Stunt
You smell straw? I smell something much more rank than that.

What you smell is the result of your circle jerk. :laugh:

I don't think God approves of that comment.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Just like anyone who owns a horse should feed it, right?

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Never look a gift horse in the mouth.

What this world needs is less "Dollars and Cents" and more "Horse Sense".

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I've tried to define it, but according to you I can't. Maybe if you answered my question that would help.

Why don't you define what you think it takes to deserve enough of a wage to prevent starvation, the need for goveerment assitance or to deserve health care?

Do you think a company would allow their employees (people who interact with customers, invested training and hiring costs in) to just starve to death?

Even if the person starved to death, do you think that's the company's fault? Gimme a break!

What about retirement and health care?

Why is the person retired if they cannot afford to not work?

Who said they were retired? Not me, I said if they are working they deserve some type of workable retirement plan.

It seems to me you people are only concerned with your needs. What will give you the best health care, the highest salary, the earlies retirement. That's human nature and I don't have a problem with people wanting that. I want the same things.

I do have a problem with robbing Peter to pay Paul to get these things. Full time employed people deserve to make above the poverty level, they deserve decent health care and retirement. Not only do they deserve it, they are earning it through their labor.

You can skirt the issue all you like. Someday God will ask you why you let these things happen and you will have to give him an answer. I hope you have a better answer then I've heard out of any of you so far.

Just because someone works full time does not mean that they deserver a damn thing. And yes, you are talking about something for nothing. Since when does having a full time job enititle someone to healthcare and retirement? Healthcare and retirement is part of your compensation for the work you are doing for your employer, if they do not offer that then maybe you should find another place to work.

 

[Staples]

Well it is 5.15 in Texas. I think making it higher like $7 is fine. $7.50 is a stretch.

Sure there are those who argue that the minimum wage should be scrapped but I believe that average non-skilled wages are based on minimum wage so I say there should be one.

For instance, minimum wage is $5.15 an hour here. The majority of unskilled labor jobs pay $5.20-$5.50. Gee, what a coincidence.

The minimum wage should stay and be raised to at least $6.50.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Staples
Well it is 5.15 in Texas. I think making it higher like $7 is fine. $7.50 is a stretch.

Sure there are those who argue that the minimum wage should be scrapped but I believe that average non-skilled wages are based on minimum wage so I say there should be one.

For instance, minimum wage is $5.15 an hour here. The majority of unskilled labor jobs pay $5.20-$5.50. Gee, what a coincidence.

The minimum wage should stay and be raised to at least $6.50.

I would disagree,lookking around most entry level obs dont start at minimum wage. THey start a dollar or 2 more aboive that. The market has regulated what the minimum wage is, since the goverment has not.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Staples
Well it is 5.15 in Texas. I think making it higher like $7 is fine. $7.50 is a stretch.

Sure there are those who argue that the minimum wage should be scrapped but I believe that average non-skilled wages are based on minimum wage so I say there should be one.

For instance, minimum wage is $5.15 an hour here. The majority of unskilled labor jobs pay $5.20-$5.50. Gee, what a coincidence.

The minimum wage should stay and be raised to at least $6.50.

I would disagree,lookking around most entry level obs dont start at minimum wage. THey start a dollar or 2 more aboive that. The market has regulated what the minimum wage is, since the goverment has not.

Is that the same market that pays CEO's $50 million /year and gives them $400 million dollar retirement packages, or golden parachutes so that when they screw things up they still come out smelling like a rose?

Sorry, but that "market" is obviously skewed.

 

[fitzov]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Staples
Well it is 5.15 in Texas. I think making it higher like $7 is fine. $7.50 is a stretch.

Sure there are those who argue that the minimum wage should be scrapped but I believe that average non-skilled wages are based on minimum wage so I say there should be one.

For instance, minimum wage is $5.15 an hour here. The majority of unskilled labor jobs pay $5.20-$5.50. Gee, what a coincidence.

The minimum wage should stay and be raised to at least $6.50.

I would disagree,lookking around most entry level obs dont start at minimum wage. THey start a dollar or 2 more aboive that. The market has regulated what the minimum wage is, since the goverment has not.

Is that the same market that pays CEO's $50 million /year and gives them $400 million dollar retirement packages, or golden parachutes so that when they screw things up they still come out smelling like a rose?

Sorry, but that "market" is obviously skewed.

Yeah. The whole idea of a market that makes its own decisions is ridiculous. People make decisions, not markets.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Staples
Well it is 5.15 in Texas. I think making it higher like $7 is fine. $7.50 is a stretch.

Sure there are those who argue that the minimum wage should be scrapped but I believe that average non-skilled wages are based on minimum wage so I say there should be one.

For instance, minimum wage is $5.15 an hour here. The majority of unskilled labor jobs pay $5.20-$5.50. Gee, what a coincidence.

The minimum wage should stay and be raised to at least $6.50.

I would disagree,lookking around most entry level obs dont start at minimum wage. THey start a dollar or 2 more aboive that. The market has regulated what the minimum wage is, since the goverment has not.

Is that the same market that pays CEO's $50 million /year and gives them $400 million dollar retirement packages, or golden parachutes so that when they screw things up they still come out smelling like a rose?

Sorry, but that "market" is obviously skewed.

Yeah. The whole idea of a market that makes its own decisions is ridiculous. People make decisions, not markets.

What drives the market? The people making decisions.

CEO's commanding a company that employs thousands of people and creates billions in wealth being paid several million a year is not over kill. You want overkill? Paying Katie Couric 15 million a year to read a teleprompter. But do I think she doesnt deserve it? Nope, the market dictates she is worth 15 million for doing her job.

 

[fitzov]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Staples
Well it is 5.15 in Texas. I think making it higher like $7 is fine. $7.50 is a stretch.

Sure there are those who argue that the minimum wage should be scrapped but I believe that average non-skilled wages are based on minimum wage so I say there should be one.

For instance, minimum wage is $5.15 an hour here. The majority of unskilled labor jobs pay $5.20-$5.50. Gee, what a coincidence.

The minimum wage should stay and be raised to at least $6.50.

I would disagree,lookking around most entry level obs dont start at minimum wage. THey start a dollar or 2 more aboive that. The market has regulated what the minimum wage is, since the goverment has not.

Is that the same market that pays CEO's $50 million /year and gives them $400 million dollar retirement packages, or golden parachutes so that when they screw things up they still come out smelling like a rose?

Sorry, but that "market" is obviously skewed.

Yeah. The whole idea of a market that makes its own decisions is ridiculous. People make decisions, not markets.

What drives the market? The people making decisions.

yes

CEO's commanding a company that employs thousands of people and creates billions in wealth being paid several million a year is not over kill. You want overkill? Paying Katie Couric 15 million a year to read a teleprompter. But do I think she doesnt deserve it? Nope, the market dictates she is worth 15 million for doing her job.

no, some corporate dumbass dictated that

 

[acole1]

What is so bad about being in "poverty?"


Ok, now that I have your attention...
It all comes down to what each individual person thinks the standard of living should be. If you think X should be everyone?s standard of living, then of course you are going to think they should be paid whatever will elevate them to the level of X, and the same goes for the person who thinks the standard of living should be Y.

Isn't $5.15 an hour better than not being able to get a job at all?

My first job, at 15, in a grocery store, paid $5.15 an hour. A year later I got another job at Target pushing carts for $7.00 an hour. What skills did I have? Absolutely none! All I had was a willingness to work hard. Even so, I decided that I didn't want to earn $7.00 an hour for the rest of my life, so I did something about it, and right now I am going to school to gain skills that will increase my value so I can get a job when I graduate and easily earn more than $7.00/hr!

I still insist those who are at "poverty level" would not be there if they would work hard. These people need low paying jobs, not high paying ones. Giving them more money for their unskilled labor only discourages them from increase their skills and value, which is directly related.

Do you know how easy it is to get money for educational purposes when you are at the poverty level! The government will pay your way through school for you. They make it as easy as possible for you to increase your value so you can make more money in the end. All it takes is some hard work.

 

[pkme2]

IMO, I believe in whatever the market will bear, principle.

I work for myself nowadays. Semi-retired repairing computers. If you're rich, I charge more and if you like most of us, I charge a very reasonable fee. I'll give you free diagnostics on your "broke" computer and free recommendations, and then let you decide if it's worth fixing.

Since I work out of my home, most of the time I don't charge very much. I think, I work under scale. To me, it's the challenge but I need to keep my brain working before it stagnates.

Word of mouth is the best advertisement and if you do good work, it will come. Whatever you charge, make sure you have a little pride in doing a good job.