Zorkorist
Diamond Member
- Apr 17, 2007
- 6,861
- 3
- 76
halik
Lifer
- Oct 10, 2000
- 25,696
- 1
- 81
I've never heard of SF being anywhere near top places to dine, refs? New York and New Orleans usually come to mind...
Usually in USA top 2 will be New York and Chicago. But SF will make most lists for top 5.
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/food-for-men/best-restaurant-cities-122210
Yea Napa isn't really SF imo. 1+ hour away. But French Laundry has won best restaurant in the world, very expensive and apparently sells out for the year in ~5 minutes.
irishScott
Lifer
- Oct 10, 2006
- 21,562
- 3
- 0
Fallacy? My point was simple. San Fran, at it's current unemployment level (which is above the national metropolitan average) should not be doing anything to encourage further unemployment. This decision does this IMO.
I further commented on how many Californian cities have the worst unemployment in the country, with no more point than "that's interesting." But being the proud fanatic you are you probably saw an implied jab at Democrats where there was none. Supposed I should have expected this, you historically are that predictable.
You also provided a very obvious fallacy of apples to oranges when you pointed out the completely irrelevant fact that those areas happen to be Right-leaning. I pointed out said fact was irrelevant, as many right-leaning areas also have the lowest unemployment in the nation. Now you say I'm trolling.
And just to be absolutely clear, my point in this post is that you're utterly full of shit.
Last edited:
5150Joker
Diamond Member
LMAO I'd bet 100% more in some cases based on their post history. Although California needs a major government overhaul, the democrats and environmentalists have ruined the state and hurt small businesses badly. My family has small businesses out in California and the insane amount of environmental and other regulations have literally cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars. Many people we know simply could not cope and went bankrupt. As much as I dislike Republican religious leanings and international policy, their fiscal ideology makes much more sense than what Democrats have in mind. The Bay Area is living in its own little fantasy land that doesn't reflect the realities of the rest of the state.
Last edited:
The ironic part about all these regulations and mandates is that in the end they create the business "monopolies" that the left feels are "unfair" and stifling. When you raise barriers of entry so as to adversely prohibit new businesses from forming you are essentially ensuring that only extremely wealthy and/or established entities dominate in the market place. Since they are the only ones who have the ability to cope with and institute all the hoops and hurdles needed to achieve success in the market place they end becoming the self fulfilling prophecy that dictates that the "free market is a failure". Of which this "prophecy" totally ignores the role of government itself in its meddling in the market place that ends up determining winners and losers at the determent and skewing of the market place itself.
halik
Lifer
- Oct 10, 2000
- 25,696
- 1
- 81
Napa no doubt and I'm sure SF has a ton of great food, but I haven't heard it being put on the same level as NYC.
Originally Posted by dmcowen674 
At $10hr he is doing $6hr better than someone working for Federal $7 min wage.
How's that?
Two jobs at $7hr he is making $14hr.
Two jobs at $10hr he is making $20 for a net difference of $6hr
No wonder you Republicans are so screwed up, you all fail basic math.
At $10hr he is doing $6hr better than someone working for Federal $7 min wage.
How's that?
Two jobs at $7hr he is making $14hr.
Two jobs at $10hr he is making $20 for a net difference of $6hr
No wonder you Republicans are so screwed up, you all fail basic math.
When you raise the pay of the workers, you create additional spending that LOWERS the barrier of entry. You righties have no idea how to create a wealthy society.
That's why you create places with dirt and a lot of people grunting in the dirt for slave wages and call it economic success while lefty areas are the economic leaders.
All this 'government interference' is mostly positive rules making the society better off that you are like a little kid paranoid about the monster under the bed. Ideologue.
Under Republicans, wealth is shifted away from workers to the rich, while the workers work harder for less, and Republicans call that success, because they serve the rich.
Republicans have less growth, worse stock markets, higher unemployment, more poverty, fewer social services like healthcare, higher concentration of wealth, less opportunity...
Because those are part of shifting wealth to the top, their policy.
Last edited:
Doppel
Lifer
- Feb 5, 2011
- 13,306
- 3
- 0
lololol, no wonder you can't keep a fvcking job. At $10/hour you're doing $3/hour better than somebody at $7/hour, PERIOD. It doesn't matter how many hours you work, whether 10 hours/week, 20, or 80. Are you really this stupid in real life?!Originally Posted by dmcowen674
At $10hr he is doing $6hr better than someone working for Federal $7 min wage.
How's that?
Two jobs at $7hr he is making $14hr.
Two jobs at $10hr he is making $20 for a net difference of $6hr
No wonder you Republicans are so screwed up, you all fail basic math.
If what you meant to say is that a guy working two jobs at $7/hour is the same as one at $14 and two jobs at $10 is the same as one at $20, for a net difference of $6, then get the hell off your narcotics and say it clearly like a lucid adult.
Last edited:
AyashiKaibutsu
Diamond Member
- Jan 24, 2004
- 9,306
- 4
- 81
Originally Posted by dmcowen674
At $10hr he is doing $6hr better than someone working for Federal $7 min wage.
How's that?
Two jobs at $7hr he is making $14hr.
Two jobs at $10hr he is making $20 for a net difference of $6hr
No wonder you Republicans are so screwed up, you all fail basic math.
Uh, he's not working both jobs at the same time...
Holy shit - seriously??!! You don't just get to add hourly wages from both jobs together together to find out your net hourly wage.Edit 1: Now - I really hope someone points out something I am missing because I feel like I HAVE to be missing something and that no one could really fail this badly at math. I have re-read the posts like 6 times looking for something that would explain this thought process...
Edit 2:I mean maybe if we are talking about the net difference made after he worked for 1 hour at each job? But it wouldn't make much sense as it would involve an arbitrairily picked time frame...
Edit:3 But then he says
which isn't true so I don't know what the fuck is going on....
Last edited:
Yes, it is the third-world nations that don't effectively make use of their natural resources, while first-world nations are large consumers of fossil fuels. Glad we finally agree on something. :whiste:
Originally Posted by dmcowen674
At $10hr he is doing $6hr better than someone working for Federal $7 min wage.
How's that?
Two jobs at $7hr he is making $14hr.
Two jobs at $10hr he is making $20 for a net difference of $6hr
No wonder you Republicans are so screwed up, you all fail basic math.
YES!!!!!!
You slide in mere weeks before the deadline for quote of the year!
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
In Dave's world; you only have to show up for one job; but get paid by the other job also.
Now - I really hope someone points out something I am missing because I feel like I HAVE to be missing something and that no one could really fail this badly at math. I have re-read the posts like 6 times looking for something that would explain this thought process...
Therefore work 8 hours and get paid for 16 hours of work.
Simple
Employers do not care if you show or not; they have plenty of money to pay for no-shows or people that work for their competition.:whiste:
Edit 1: Now - I really hope someone points out something I am missing because I feel like I HAVE to be missing something and that no one could really fail this badly at math. I have re-read the posts like 6 times looking for something that would explain this thought process...
Edit 2:I mean maybe if we are talking about the net difference made after he worked for 1 hour at each job? But it wouldn't make much sense as it would involve an arbitrairily picked time frame...
Edit:3 But then he says which isn't true so I don't know what the fuck is going on....
$7 an hour at 2 hours an hour. $10 an hour at 2 hours an hour. It requires a time turner from the Harry Potter book series or a DeLorean, not sure which dmcowen is using.
Yes, of course you know best. Now please tell me what the optimum minimum wage is?
BoberFett
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 37,562
- 9
- 81
BoberFett
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 37,562
- 9
- 81
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter