We need to go back to 90% once you're small island status.
No one needs that much money.
EXCUSE ME?!..The OFFICIAL Bernie Sanders For President 2016 Thread
- Thread starter schuylaar
- Start date
No one needs that much money.
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
You left out the money grabbing local governtment fees in those liberal controlled areas. You can't replace a bedroom window without 15 govt. and psuedo-govt. agencies tacking on an inspector and fees you pay so he can hold down his control freak type of job.
There is a major outflux of Californians into Texas because they are fed up with the stifling regulations, laws, fees, and such. Case in point....I was talking to a USDA agent out of Austin this morning who was surveying me regarding my vineyard ops. Asked her about the biz since vineyards and wineries are popping around me like popcorn. She said there are Californians buying up land in W. Texas where there's a major grape industry there.
Last edited:
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
That's not your call to make.
You have this have-not jealous thing going for any one who's a success and has made something of themselves. I have no problem with billionaires except for guys like Bill Gates who became successful by stealing the intellectual property of others or con their way to riches like the Clintons have.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Bonus Points for a thought provoking statement, but the conclusion I came to might surprise you;
So what? What's wrong with people leaving overcrowded cities for rural areas, most of whom have plenty of extra capacity from years of dwindling populations of their own? Exactly what's wrong with 'mass flight from every urban area in the country'?
Upon further reflection, it seems like an artificially low minimum wage might be a big part of the reason why we have inner city ghettos in the first place!
So, Thanks for that.
Yeah, we understand what it is mr pool man.
Have you ever heard of a Profit Share?
When you ask your boss for one:
GOP Dracula will suck the life out of you
Last edited:
Actually, you're making the claim, so you do need to provide the proof.
However, yes to all..we are living longer lives, no longer subscribe to what's merely told to us by the media as truth and people are smarter in general..I've seen 5 year olds with cell phones..10-12 year olds taking college courses because they've been gaming since before they could speak.
Wavels
Well-Known Member
Smart Phones only enhance technological prowess.
Modern technology has actually made humans dumber about what it means to be human.
Conversation is rapidly becoming a lost practice, camaraderie, and human bonding are falling out of favor, and seem to be unattainable.
Social media assists in rendering human communication and social interactions to snippets of text devoid of nuance and meaning.
Smart phones make people dumber.
We are losing our collective, historical humanity.
This will not end well.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Yeah, such a standard reply. "If you don't like working here then leave." This said to people in many different situations such as rental housing, certain cities, work places and the like. Its a pretty lazy and bone stupid way to look at it. In fact, Walmart has an employee turnover of 44%, so most do move on, if not the first year then within a few years they quit because of poor working conditions AND pay. Walmart is a crappy place to shop. I don't shop there. Eventually their practices will drive them under. Meanwhile their top management will collect bonuses for making the quarterly profit line look good. Then when the business crashes, they will be given a golden parachute. I guess that seems fair to you because "success".
You mentioned fairness and that's what I was responding to, not the low wages at Walmart. I was pointing out that your idea of fairness was coddling a class that does nothing to deserve it. You have said nothing to counter this argument, you just lashed out at a class of people that are just trying to make ends meet. You are exhibiting a short term memory problem coupled with emotional issues typical of those with a conservative bent or dementia. Maybe you should increase you daily vitamin intake. But I think your problem is structural.
Last edited:
They are also doing the work of many others on a productivity level.. ever notices how when employees leave employers try to eliminate the position and spread the extra work around not compensating for extra work which goes to employers pocket..that and the drive to minimize benefit expenditure through part-time staff which is in direct conflict of American Dream..you cannot have it without full time wages benefits package and in return, you get a staff that doesn't give a flying fuck about your business..
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Yep, conservatives don't want facts. Facts have a liberal bias, y'know.
Whoa! I had the same thought the other night.. You can hear people at midnight and beyond hooting and hollering..crazy, almost scary shit going on..I was almost expecting bonfires..loud cars racing..people screaming out of nowhere..gunfire
Not GOP
Well-Known Member
lol. It doesn't help the brick and mortar stores. More people every year are shopping Black Friday online. More "clicks than bricks" this year, and Cyber Monday is on record pace to crack $3 billion today.Whoa! I had the same thought the other night.. You can hear people at midnight and beyond hooting and hollering..crazy, almost scary shit going on..I was almost expecting bonfires..loud cars racing..people screaming out of nowhere..gunfire
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-cyber-monday-numbers-20151130-htmlstory.html
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Why are working class people like aged farmers and pipe fitters so wrapped up in protecting the wealthy of this country? Over the past few decades, its the working class that has seen reduced wages in the jobs they have and reduction in the availability of good paying jobs. Why don't these people look to their own interest and let the wealthy take care of themselves? The rich don't need help, but they willingly accept it.
Regarding wages, conservatives claim that increasing wages to a livable standard will somehow reduce employment. This is another case where facts show a liberal bias. Don't worry conservatives, stick to FOX news and you'll avoid these biased facts.
Personally, I think that its too late for Walmart, but even WalMart has begun to realize that shockingly low wages aren't good for business: http://blogs.wsj.com/atwork/2015/02/19/one-reason-wal-mart-is-raising-pay-turnover/
Meanwhile those same executives that made poor decisions regarding pay and yearly costing the company hundreds of millions in lost profits are rewarded with bonuses for "making the numbers" each quarter. Another example of @Harrekin 's idea of "fairness" due to "success". A different way to look at it is this short term mentality is costing the country real growth of the economy and destroying capital. Vampire squids indeed.
One Reason Wal-Mart Is Raising Pay: Turnover
Announcing its decision to raise wages for its lowest-paid workers, Wal-Mart Stores Inc.’s chief executive quoted company founder Sam Walton, stating that “our people make the difference.”
Other statements by company executives Thursday were more explicit: the retailer has realized that staff turnover was hurting its business, and it is willing to spend $1 billion this year on higher pay and more career opportunities to keep store workers in their jobs.
“You got to ensure that your associates are retained, you have to take into account turnover, and you have to take into account their engagement. It’s part of the puzzle,” U.S. CEO Greg Foran said on a conference call. All of that, he noted, will help the company “lean in and improve the store experience for our customers.”
Put simply, Wal-Mart knows that shopping in its stores can be frustrating when staff can’t answer shoppers’ questions or don’t care enough to make the experience pleasant. A year ago, Gap Inc.GPS -2.83%, raised pay for its hourly workers in part to keep skilled, motivated workers on its retail floors.
A large body of research—some conducted decades ago by current Federal Reserve chairwoman Janet Yellen—suggests that raising wages leads to lower employee turnover and better customer service, which generally correlate with higher sales and lower expenses.
Stemming turnover, in particular, can save companies a lot of money. Turnover is a special scourge of retail and service companies where wages are low and hourly workers are often viewed as disposable and interchangeable. Turnover in retail averaged around 66% for part-time hourly sales associates in 2014, according to the Hay Group, a management consulting firm. For full-timers, who are more likely to be tethered to a company with benefits like health insurance, turnover was 27%.
A 2003 paper by University of California economists who studied the impact of living-wage policies implemented at San Francisco’s airport discovered that turnover dropped by about one-third among airport employers:
Turnover fell by an average of 34% among all surveyed firms and 60% among firms that experienced average wage increases of 10% or more. The greatest reduction in turnover occurred among airport-security screeners, from 94.7% a year in April 2000 to 18.7% fifteen months later, an 80% decrease. Cabin-cleaning firms reported a 44% reduction in turnover, and ramp workers a 25% reduction.
The authors concluded that employers pay about $4,275 in turnover costs every time a worker is replaced, and that SFO’s reductions saved firms roughly $6.6 million each year, offsetting the cost of the pay increase, which totaled about $42.7 million in wages, taxes and benefits.
Using the study’s (admittedly outdated) numbers, if Wal-Mart has 50% turnover among associates and logs a similar 34% decline in quitting among the 500,000 workers who will receive bigger paychecks, the retailer would save more than $350 million. So while the pay raise and related programs will cost $1 billion, Wal-Mart could earn back a big portion of that in lower HR expenses.
Another study, this one from 2005 and focused on low-wage workers whose pay was bumped up after a living-wage ordinance in Los Angeles, found that affected employers had turnover rates of 32%, compared with 49% at companies not bound by the rule. Thanks to lower turnover, the living-wage companies recovered about 16% of the payroll increases they incurred as a result of the rule.
Last edited:
Corso312
Well-Known Member
I think education is a HUGE reason its so hard to break that poverty cycle, Jobs is equally important.. But not minimum wage jobs..careers in a better field. I agree politically with almost everything ya say..just can't agree that Wendy's worker or any mininum wage worker should make the same as a person in NYC.. The gap is massive in comparing cost of living expenses... I think 12$ hour should be the floor in low cost of living areas. I'm more concerned with low domestic production and jobs going overseas. There should be higher paying careers here and companies that choose to outsource should be penalized.
I'd like to see the tax code re written, its ridiculous. Yachts and private jets can't be write offs. Anyone making under 25k should pay 1% tax rate. 25-35k = 3% 36-50k = 5%
51-75k = 7% 76-99k= 9% 100-149k =12% 150-199k =15% 200-399k = 17% 400-999 k= 22% million and above 35% no write offs for anyone.
Corso312
Well-Known Member
Fog dog- I'm against any corporate welfare and letting the elite dodge taxes.. I'm also a realist though.. I'm against giving billions to Israel and pissing away trillions in foreign wars. If I was in charge we would have paid China off by now, And put a big fat tariff on imported goods that should be produced domestically.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Ok I get it:
- When you were paying it, it was more than enough and you've done your bit
- Now that you're not paying it anymore, people should pay MOAR!
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Sorry, I lumped you with the defenders of the rich. It boggles me that @NLXSK1 the pool skimmer, and @Red1966 the cabby and @Uncle Ben the failed farmer in Texas all defend the wealthy over their own cause. The wealthiest are doing the best in US history and yet people that are working hard but losing ground year after year act as though the wealthy need legal protection. I call bullshit on this.
As far as a minimum wage-floor what do you care whether somebody in Mississippi can live comfortably at 15/hr and somebody in NYC will struggle at the same wage? A minimum wage will level the field for workers and their employers. The argument that the cities will empty if this happens is kind of strange. Wouldn't this force wages even higher in the cities? Even so, why would you care about unequal benefits due to this?
Your concerns regarding cheap imports, regressive taxation and education all resonate with me in the same way.