"Socialist" Pay Structure downs Seattle Company

Started by Star4289 pages

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I guess having kids when you are financially ready goes right out the window. And it's the employers job to support your decision to have kids. Then again that's what abortion is for right?

How about getting a job that can afford you and your kids a good living rather then making it the employers responsibility for your personal decision.

Also you didn't cite your source your percentages.

Exactly. All the irresponsible people will start thinking "It's ok, honey. The government (taxpayers) will provide us with everything we need if we wanna have more babies. Let's keep *****ing like rabbits".

Exactly, it's better to have babies starve and grow up in poverty, than to give one cent to the parents.

"Get a better job" is not an answer to bad wages and an absurdly low minimum wage. If it were possible for most average Americans to get better jobs they would, so in absence of those better jobs why not make the shitty jobs a little less shitty?

The solution to said wages has already been brought up by me. Nobody is saying "get a better job", or at least I'm not reading that part.

Economic growth and jobs growth without proportional growth in wages only leads to worse and worse economic inequality. All the arguments against raising wages and benefits for low level employees tend to revolve around how it might damage the corporations or "make fewer jobs," but how good is a job if it doesn't pay you what you need to live comfortably?

See, "live comfortably" and "basic human needs" aren't the same thing. While it is your right to argue about wages being high enough to live off of, it's a different discussion when you add in the qualifier "comfortably".

I think about this Henry Ford quote when I see debates on wage increases. Henry Ford is the father of American industrialism and one of the greatest figures in the history of capitalism, but his successors seem to have forgotten his words:

"There is one rule for the industrialist and that is: Make the best quality of goods possible at the lowest cost possible, paying the highest wages possible."

You're not going to tell me that any Fortune 500 company can't raise its wages by just a little, if necessary at the expense of the executives' salaries.


You and I must be thinking of a different Henry Ford. The one I've read about treated his employees like garbage.

Exactly, it's better to have babies starve and grow up in poverty, than to give one cent to the parents.

Yup, that is EXACTLY what we're saying. 👆
Edit: Note the sarcasm.

Originally posted by psmith81992
The solution to said wages has already been brought up by me. Nobody is saying "get a better job", or at least I'm not reading that part.

See, "live comfortably" and "basic human needs" aren't the same thing. While it is your right to argue about wages being high enough to live off of, it's a different discussion when you add in the qualifier "comfortably".

You and I must be thinking of a different Henry Ford. The one I've read about treated his employees like garbage.

Yup, that is EXACTLY what we're saying. 👆
Edit: Note the sarcasm.

Are you talking about the mandatory training? Is that what you are talking about when you say solution?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Exactly, it's better to have babies starve and grow up in poverty, than to give one cent to the parents.

When did you start caring about babies.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
When did you start caring about babies.

I care about babies a lot, like with all humans. You probably are referring to me not extending that same care to parasitic human tissue without consciousness...but that's different for many reasons.

Parasitic human tissue? Right....

Originally posted by Omega Vision
"Get a better job" is not an answer to bad wages and an absurdly low minimum wage. If it were possible for most average Americans to get better jobs they would, so in absence of those better jobs why not make the shitty jobs a little less shitty?

Economic growth and jobs growth without proportional growth in wages only leads to worse and worse economic inequality. All the arguments against raising wages and benefits for low level employees tend to revolve around how it might damage the corporations or "make fewer jobs," but how good is a job if it doesn't pay you what you need to live comfortably?

I think about this Henry Ford quote when I see debates on wage increases. Henry Ford is the father of American industrialism and one of the greatest figures in the history of capitalism, but his successors seem to have forgotten his words:

"There is one rule for the industrialist and that is: Make the best quality of goods possible at the lowest cost possible, paying the [b]highest wages possible."

You're not going to tell me that any Fortune 500 company can't raise its wages by just a little, if necessary at the expense of the executives' salaries. [/B]

👆

You don't honestly think the wasp pigs and jew bigwigs are going to part with their hard earned billions, do you?

LOL. It's easy for Bardock to criticize us like he always does because he doesn't even live here. Why should he give a damn that American taxpayers are the ones who have to pay to take care of irresponsible people and their children? He doesn't have to pay for them so he should just keep his mouth shut.

You don't honestly think the wasp pigs and jew bigwigs are going to part with their hard earned billions, do you?

My my, you've revealed yourself to be a whole lot of stupid, haven't you?

Originally posted by Star428
LOL. It's easy for Bardock to criticize us like he always does because he doesn't even live here. Why should he give a damn that American taxpayers are the ones who have to pay to take care of irresponsible people and their children? He doesn't have to pay for them so he should just keep his mouth shut.

It's apparently ok to call babies parasitic human tissue with the option to abort, but then blame employers for not paying 18 year olds enough to support the babies that actually made it from dead beat parents who can't get their life together.

Originally posted by Star428
LOL. It's easy for Bardock to criticize us like he always does because he doesn't even live here. Why should he give a damn that American taxpayers are the ones who have to pay to take care of irresponsible people and their children?

I am for the same system in Germany.

Originally posted by Star428
He doesn't have to pay for them so he should just keep his mouth shut.

And yet he won't

Seems like Bardock isn't advocating a middle ground like I am.

Originally posted by psmith81992
Seems like Bardock isn't advocating a middle ground like I am.

With Socialists there is no middle ground.

Originally posted by psmith81992
Seems like Bardock isn't advocating a middle ground like I am.
What was your middle ground again?

Originally posted by Newjak
What was your middle ground again?

Dude we spent all of yesterday discussing it on previous pages before you and dadumon started having an argument.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Hahahahahah, bout time you poked your butthole in here.

I laughed...the visual I got... 😆 😆

Originally posted by psmith81992
Dude we spent all of yesterday discussing it on previous pages before you and dadumon started having an argument.
Is this the mandatory paid training solution you brought up?

I'm just double checking because I've been accused a number of times of misreading what you guys have been saying.

Originally posted by Newjak
What was your middle ground again?

Claiming amnesia. Classic move

Originally posted by psmith81992
Seems like Bardock isn't advocating a middle ground like I am.

I am for a middle ground between what I view as extremist right wing and extremist left wing implementations. I do think you'd probably view it as too left though.