U.S. Paychecks Grow at Record-Slow Pace

Padawanbater2 · Aug 4, 2015

@ttystikk .. see what I mean?

bu$hleaguer said:
-yes. They will buy what they can afford to buy. Give poor people more money and they will buy more shit they don't need, that's been made overseas. That doesn't help our economy, that doesn't help shit. They're moochers, and with more money they will continue to be moochers, but they'll have a new flat screen tv.

They can't afford to buy anything other than rent and food, that's the problem. How will the overwhelming majority of the economy that doesn't sell rent or food function if there are no customers to buy their products because they don't have enough money? How will those businesses stay open?

bu$hleaguer said:
-yes I think it's fair because they're the ones who pull the strings. They created their companies, have been successful, and are disgustingly rich due to it. Do I blame them? What, for being successful? Hell, no. They're not doing anything illegal, they're playing by the rules. There will be unfair shit forever, not everything is perfect, and it never will be either. Do you feel bad paying the dude who cleans your house or mows your lawn? Mcd's and walmart provide a service (even if it eventually is diarrhea) and people pay them for it.

Corporate interests have manipulated the rules to make it legal, otherwise it wouldn't be. What you're saying is if you and I were playing checkers and I told you all my pieces get to move like kings automatically while yours don't, "that's fair".. You also didn't answer the second part of that question; why should you or I make up the difference in social safety net programs for corporations that don't pay their employees enough to survive? I have nothing to do with these corporations, why should I have to subsidize their employees with my tax dollars?

bu$hleaguer said:
-I think that you should just keep your head down and work, not worry about how much your boss makes. If you're deemed to be a badass, they'll break you off a piece. If not, well, go find another job where you're appreciated for your hard work. No one owes anyone shit.

You're telling me if you were my employee making $7.25/hour and I was making double that, $14.50/hour, then 5 years later you're making $8.00/hour and I'm making $2,500/hour, you'd be OK with that?

Don't bother with the "I'd go find another job" argument because that's how it is across the board, the vast majority of jobs do this because they can simply get away with it because people like you support it

bu$hleaguer · Aug 4, 2015

Padawanbater2 said:
@ttystikk .. see what I mean?

They can't afford to buy anything other than rent and food, that's the problem. How will the overwhelming majority of the economy that doesn't sell rent or food function if there are no customers to buy their products because they don't have enough money? How will those businesses stay open?

Corporate interests have manipulated the rules to make it legal, otherwise it wouldn't be. What you're saying is if you and I were playing checkers and I told you all my pieces get to move like kings automatically while yours don't, "that's fair".. You also didn't answer the second part of that question; why should you or I make up the difference in social safety net programs for corporations that don't pay their employees enough to survive? I have nothing to do with these corporations, why should I have to subsidize their employees with my tax dollars?

You're telling me if you were my employee making $7.25/hour and I was making double that, $14.50/hour, then 5 years later you're making $8.00/hour and I'm making $2,500/hour, you'd be OK with that?

Don't bother with the "I'd go find another job" argument because that's how it is across the board, the vast majority of jobs do this because they can simply get away with it because people like you support it

Those that can buy their products will continue to do so, and the businesses will have to adjust their marketing or product to survive. That's capitalism. You don't change shit just so businesses don't go out of business, that's the risk of creating your own business- there's no safety net, there's inherent risk involved, or everyone would do it.

The checkers thing is bullshit, because the huge nasty corporations started their businesses in the same world as everyone else, they just double jumped and became a king and most people only single jumped. The rules were the same for you and me, we could have done the same thing as them. Just because someone else has a million dollars doesn't mean you should have a million dollars because it "isn't fair." The truth hurts.

Fuck no I wouldn't be ok with that, but you as the employer who's business it is took all the risk. You started the business, which could have failed. You put in gobs of cash hoping you had a good idea. You took out loans perhaps, had investors, needed attorneys, permits, whatever the fuck.... An asston of crap you prob had to do. I just mopped floors. Sure I'd be pissed, but what the fuck, no one had me chained to that job- I'd get the fuck out and find something better.

? Not sure I understand the last part. "Get away with it?" You mean make money?get away with what? Hiring employees to make a product that is desired and sellable for $? What world do you fucking live in anyway dude. The last I heard, if you want shit, you work for it. If you can't get the shit you want then you find a situation that gets you that shit.

Padawanbater2 · Aug 4, 2015

bu$hleaguer said:
Those that can buy their products will continue to do so, and the businesses will have to adjust their marketing or product to survive. That's capitalism. You don't change shit just so businesses don't go out of business, that's the risk of creating your own business- there's no safety net, there's inherent risk involved, or everyone would do it.

If we "don't change shit" to ensure businesses don't fail, why do we lower the corporate and capital gains taxes? That's the entire idea behind supply side economics, lower the tax rates so businesses have more money to spend on employees and more to funnel back into their business. If "we don't change shit", why have the rates decreased since the 1970's? The fact is it's one of the federal government's responsibilities, the same as national defense, to ensure a healthy economy for its citizens, when said citizens don't make enough money, they can't buy goods/services, when they can't buy goods/services, businesses suffer and the economy strains (recession/depression)

bu$hleaguer said:
The checkers thing is bullshit, because the huge nasty corporations started their businesses in the same world as everyone else, they just double jumped and became a king and most people only single jumped. The rules were the same for you and me, we could have done the same thing as them. Just because someone else has a million dollars doesn't mean you should have a million dollars because it "isn't fair." The truth hurts.

You're completely wrong, most of these corporations began decades before either of us were born in a much different economic climate than today. If you think a McDonald's or Walmart could be created today, you're incredibly naive and hugely mistaken. Certain corporations have a complete monopoly of the market, take Comcast or Time Warner for example, and coincidentally they tend to have the worst customer service because there's no other legitimate competition. This is one of the many ways they've manipulated the market in their favor by bribing politicians and enacting their own legislation, and in Comcast's case, literally their own legislation, they wrote the fuckin' bill passed through congress

So are you comfortable with foreign shareholders and investors purchasing American politicians to enact their own legislation? Again, all 100% legal, right out in the open

bu$hleaguer said:
Fuck no I wouldn't be ok with that, but you as the employer who's business it is took all the risk. You started the business, which could have failed. You put in gobs of cash hoping you had a good idea. You took out loans perhaps, had investors, needed attorneys, permits, whatever the fuck.... An asston of crap you prob had to do. I just mopped floors. Sure I'd be pissed, but what the fuck, no one had me chained to that job- I'd get the fuck out and find something better.

Are you familiar with the concept of 'business ethics'? How bout a 'retention bonus'? This is a moral question with two camps, people like me don't believe there's anything inherently wrong with making obscene amounts of money, what's wrong is making obscene amounts of money while paying your employees slave wages which require them to utilize government assistance funded by tax paying citizens just to survive. People like you apparently believe it's OK to make obscene amounts of money while paying your employees said slave wages. Am I correct in thinking you reside in that second camp?

Nobody is asking for a million dollars, nobody is asking for equal pay. People are asking to be paid what they're actually worth so they don't have to sign up for food stamps or avoid seeing a doctor when they're sick because they can't afford it. Paying people a living wage will eliminate the necessity for 46 million Americans to be on SNAP and will decrease the poverty rate to single digits

bu$hleaguer said:
? Not sure I understand the last part. "Get away with it?" You mean make money?get away with what? Hiring employees to make a product that is desired and sellable for $? What world do you fucking live in anyway dude. The last I heard, if you want shit, you work for it. If you can't get the shit you want then you find a situation that gets you that shit.

Get away with making 325 x's the avg. employee's wage while pushing their workers into poverty and social safety net programs funded by taxpayers

nitro harley · Aug 4, 2015

Padawanbater2 said:
Your entire political philosophy, if you could even call it that, stems from emotion and fear and lacks all logic and reason

I lack logic? I have created five above average jobs for people and they are not bitching about low pay like you are. I guess it is more logical to have friends on a web site that want bunches of black men raping fat white women so you can give them likes and support for there logic. Do you see where that logic boot comes around and kicks you in the ass?

ttystikk · Aug 4, 2015

bu$hleaguer said:
Those that can buy their products will continue to do so, and the businesses will have to adjust their marketing or product to survive. That's capitalism. You don't change shit just so businesses don't go out of business, that's the risk of creating your own business- there's no safety net, there's inherent risk involved, or everyone would do it.

The checkers thing is bullshit, because the huge nasty corporations started their businesses in the same world as everyone else, they just double jumped and became a king and most people only single jumped. The rules were the same for you and me, we could have done the same thing as them. Just because someone else has a million dollars doesn't mean you should have a million dollars because it "isn't fair." The truth hurts.

Fuck no I wouldn't be ok with that, but you as the employer who's business it is took all the risk. You started the business, which could have failed. You put in gobs of cash hoping you had a good idea. You took out loans perhaps, had investors, needed attorneys, permits, whatever the fuck.... An asston of crap you prob had to do. I just mopped floors. Sure I'd be pissed, but what the fuck, no one had me chained to that job- I'd get the fuck out and find something better.

? Not sure I understand the last part. "Get away with it?" You mean make money?get away with what? Hiring employees to make a product that is desired and sellable for $? What world do you fucking live in anyway dude. The last I heard, if you want shit, you work for it. If you can't get the shit you want then you find a situation that gets you that shit.

Ouch. You really make my brain hurt. Have you ever actually taken an economics class?

bu$hleaguer · Aug 4, 2015

ttystikk said:
Ouch. You really make my brain hurt. Have you ever actually taken an economics class?

Hell no I haven't taken an economics class. Did I say I had?

ttystikk · Aug 4, 2015

Padawanbater2 said:
If we "don't change shit" to ensure businesses don't fail, why do we lower the corporate and capital gains taxes? That's the entire idea behind supply side economics, lower the tax rates so businesses have more money to spend on employees and more to funnel back into their business. If "we don't change shit", why have the rates decreased since the 1970's? The fact is it's one of the federal government's responsibilities, the same as national defense, to ensure a healthy economy for its citizens, when said citizens don't make enough money, they can't buy goods/services, when they can't buy goods/services, businesses suffer and the economy strains (recession/depression)

You're completely wrong, most of these corporations began decades before either of us were born in a much different economic climate than today. If you think a McDonald's or Walmart could be created today, you're incredibly naive and hugely mistaken. Certain corporations have a complete monopoly of the market, take Comcast or Time Warner for example, and coincidentally they tend to have the worst customer service because there's no other legitimate competition. This is one of the many ways they've manipulated the market in their favor by bribing politicians and enacting their own legislation, and in Comcast's case, literally their own legislation, they wrote the fuckin' bill passed through congress

So are you comfortable with foreign shareholders and investors purchasing American politicians to enact their own legislation? Again, all 100% legal, right out in the open

Are you familiar with the concept of 'business ethics'? How bout a 'retention bonus'? This is a moral question with two camps, people like me don't believe there's anything inherently wrong with making obscene amounts of money, what's wrong is making obscene amounts of money while paying your employees slave wages which require them to utilize government assistance funded by tax paying citizens just to survive. People like you apparently believe it's OK to make obscene amounts of money while paying your employees said slave wages. Am I correct in thinking you reside in that second camp?

Nobody is asking for a million dollars, nobody is asking for equal pay. People are asking to be paid what they're actually worth so they don't have to sign up for food stamps or avoid seeing a doctor when they're sick because they can't afford it. Paying people a living wage will eliminate the necessity for 46 million Americans to be on SNAP and will decrease the poverty rate to single digits

Get away with making 325 x's the avg. employee's wage while pushing their workers into poverty and social safety net programs funded by taxpayers

Some will just never learn. Cast the pearls and see who's interested. The rest... let them go.

bu$hleaguer · Aug 4, 2015

Padawanbater2 said:
Nobody is asking for a million dollars, nobody is asking for equal pay. People are asking to be paid what they're actually worth so they don't have to sign up for food stamps or avoid seeing a doctor when they're sick because they can't afford it. Paying people a living wage will eliminate the necessity for 46 million Americans to be on SNAP and will decrease the poverty rate to single digits

Get away with making 325 x's the avg. employee's wage while pushing their workers into poverty and social safety net programs funded by taxpayers

What they're actually worth... Ok. So putting ketchup on a bun is worth $15 an hour? Lol, you're a lunatic. Why is that job worth that to you, because they have expenses they can't afford and the owner of their company makes 2.2 billion a year?
We both know they aren't worth $15 an hour.
Lol

My problem is that you're making a sweeping decision that owners of businesses need to pay $15 an hour. You are making the assumption that because they own a business, they are making a huge profit. You are assuming that business owners reside in the upper class. What about the guy who works to put food on his table? What about the guy who's put everything he had into a business and struggles to take care of his family still? Not every business owner is a tycoon and can afford to just give more away because asshole mr Koch and mr walmart are bad to their employees.

Padawanbater2 · Aug 4, 2015

bu$hleaguer said:
What they're actually worth... Ok. So putting ketchup on a bun is worth $15 an hour? Lol, you're a lunatic. Why is that job worth that to you, because they have expenses they can't afford and the owner of their company makes 2.2 billion a year?
We both know they aren't worth $15 an hour.
Lol

If a job isn't important enough to pay a living wage, it's not important enough to exist

bu$hleaguer said:
My problem is that you're making a sweeping decision that owners of businesses need to pay $15 an hour. You are making the assumption that because they own a business, they are making a huge profit. You are assuming that business owners reside in the upper class. What about the guy who works to put food on his table? What about the guy who's put everything he had into a business and struggles to take care of his family still? Not every business owner is a tycoon and can afford to just give more away because asshole mr Koch and mr walmart are bad to their employees.

So subsidize small businesses making less than X% to keep them afloat if they can't afford the increase in labor - problem solved

Wouldn't you rather subsidize the workers labor at the small business than the workers income at the big one? Not only will it be less than paying for all the social safety net programs, it'll be ethical

UncleBuck · Aug 4, 2015

nitro harley said:
I lack logic? I have created five above average jobs for people and they are not bitching about low pay like you are. I guess it is more logical to have friends on a web site that want bunches of black men raping fat white women so you can give them likes and support for there logic. Do you see where that logic boot comes around and kicks you in the ass?

you cried as you typed that. i could tell.

bu$hleaguer · Aug 4, 2015

Padawanbater2 said:
If a job isn't important enough to pay a living wage, it's not important enough to exist

So subsidize small businesses making less than X% to keep them afloat if they can't afford the increase in labor - problem solved

Wouldn't you rather subsidize the workers labor at the small business than the workers income at the big one? Not only will it be less than paying for all the social safety net programs, it'll be ethical

There's tons of jobs that won't ever pay a living wage because they're not worth it.

Agree,100%. Subsidize them. I like that. Good idea- we can agree on that- then I feel like the middle class actually is seeing some upside as well.

Red1966 · Aug 4, 2015

Padawanbater2 said:
Your entire political philosophy, if you could even call it that, stems from emotion and fear and lacks all logic and reason

Your entire political philosophy, if you could even call it that, stems from emotion and fear and lacks all logic and reason

Red1966 · Aug 4, 2015

Padawanbater2 said:
How is it my opinion? Wages roughly matched productivity from 1950-1970, then all of a sudden wages dramatically stagnate, all of that is a fact, you can see it with your own eyes. CEO wages increase from 25 x's average worker to over 325 x's, so it's pretty clear where the money that would have gone to increasing workers wages actually went, right to the top. That's also not debatable.

If we increase the minimum wage to a living wage ($15.00/hour), the price of goods will slightly increase but it won't match the increase in wages. While doing this we bring millions of people out of poverty and ensure kids receive quality education and medical care.

If you can still hold the same opinion after reading any of that, the idea someone would oppose this measure is simply un American. If you'd rather keep the $.17 increase in cost for a bigmac or $.01 increase for a box of mac and cheese instead of ensuring people don't go hungry or homeless, then you're probably one of the people that this would actually help, because $.17 isn't shit, I could find that in my couch right now

Wow, you can actually double your income by cleaning that pile of pizza boxes and sticky tissues off the couch?

Red1966 · Aug 4, 2015

Padawanbater2 said:
You're not hearing me, you're hearing what you want to hear

-Do you understand how a consumer economy works? How do you suppose people will be able to buy anything if they can't afford it? If people can't afford anything other than basics, how will businesses be able to sell anything or hire people? Having a poor population is bad for everyone, including you.

-Do you think it's fair for multinational corporations like Walmart and McDonald's to pay their employees such low wages they require government assistance? Who do you think pays for that? You and me, the taxpayers at the tune of $6.2 billion a year for Walmart alone. Why shouldn't Walmart pay that?

-Why do you think it's fair avg. CEO pay increased from 25 x's the avg. worker in 1969 to over 325 x's the avg. worker in 2015 while avg. worker pay saw a grand total of a 6% increase during that time with consistent rates of productivity?

Can you answer those 3 questions, please?

That was seven questions

Red1966 · Aug 4, 2015

Padawanbater2 said:
@ttystikk .. see what I mean?

They can't afford to buy anything other than rent and food, that's the problem. How will the overwhelming majority of the economy that doesn't sell rent or food function if there are no customers to buy their products because they don't have enough money? How will those businesses stay open?

Corporate interests have manipulated the rules to make it legal, otherwise it wouldn't be. What you're saying is if you and I were playing checkers and I told you all my pieces get to move like kings automatically while yours don't, "that's fair".. You also didn't answer the second part of that question; why should you or I make up the difference in social safety net programs for corporations that don't pay their employees enough to survive? I have nothing to do with these corporations, why should I have to subsidize their employees with my tax dollars?

You're telling me if you were my employee making $7.25/hour and I was making double that, $14.50/hour, then 5 years later you're making $8.00/hour and I'm making $2,500/hour, you'd be OK with that?

Don't bother with the "I'd go find another job" argument because that's how it is across the board, the vast majority of jobs do this because they can simply get away with it because people like you support it

So, now you think you shouldn't have to subsidize the poor. I agree. Let'em starve.

Padawanbater2 · Aug 4, 2015

Red1966 said:
So, now you think you shouldn't have to subsidize the poor. I agree. Let'em starve.

Big difference between your position and mine; you want to keep the current wages and eliminate the social safety net programs (classy), I want to raise the wages so people don't need the social safety net programs. It has nothing to do with me not wanting to pay to support people who don't have the means to support themselves. I don't want to pay to support multinational corporations who rake in record breaking profits who are too greedy to pay decent wages to the people who make and sell their products.

The options are either raise the wage to a living wage across the board or get used to increases in social safety net programs. You pay for it through taxes or they pay for it through profits.

On a side note, I believe republicans oppose raising wages so they can continue to blame the economic situation on poor people and illegal immigration rather than the failed economic policy we've had in place for 40+ years, greedy corporations and corruption in politics

UncleBuck · Aug 4, 2015

Red1966 said:
So, now you think you shouldn't have to subsidize the poor. I agree. Let'em starve.

why not light them on fire?

woooops, forgot that i wasn't allowed to talk to you. my bad.

Red1966 · Aug 5, 2015

Padawanbater2 said:
Big difference between your position and mine; you want to keep the current wages and eliminate the social safety net programs (classy), I want to raise the wages so people don't need the social safety net programs. It has nothing to do with me not wanting to pay to support people who don't have the means to support themselves. I don't want to pay to support multinational corporations who rake in record breaking profits who are too greedy to pay decent wages to the people who make and sell their products.

The options are either raise the wage to a living wage across the board or get used to increases in social safety net programs. You pay for it through taxes or they pay for it through profits.

On a side note, I believe republicans oppose raising wages so they can continue to blame the economic situation on poor people and illegal immigration rather than the failed economic policy we've had in place for 40+ years, greedy corporations and corruption in politics

Let's be honest here. You want a bigger minimum wage because you work for the minimum. Let's not pretend you give a shit about anyone else. Your sense of entitlement is your only principal. What you can't see is that part time minimum wage job you have isn't going to be there when you get your wish.

UncleBuck · Aug 5, 2015

Red1966 said:
Let's be honest here. You want a bigger minimum wage because you work for the minimum. Let's not pretend you give a shit about anyone else. Your sense of entitlement is your only principal. What you can't see is that part time minimum wage job you have isn't going to be there when you get your wish.

principal?

i think you meant principle.

woooops, sorry. i forgot that i'm not allowed to speak to you. my bad.

abandonconflict · Aug 5, 2015

U.S. Paychecks Grow at Record-Slow Pace

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member