Jeb Bush: People Need to Work Longer Hours...

[Hawk]

You do realize that the annoying qualities you're calling me out for are the exact same ones you're using against me, right?

No, I don't, but find it intriguing that this is your perception of my position.

I know, I know Hawk. I'm a (scary propaganda label) because one of my beliefs doesn't coincide with the right wingers handbook. I also know that once someone is labeled a (scary propaganda label), it makes it real easy to discredit everything they say thereafter regardless of how much it may make sense. The whole labeling thing is so ridiculous. I have many, many beliefs and they aren't all covered under one label. Take that amateur hour labeling garbage elsewhere.

Why are leftists so afraid of 'labels'? It must have something to do with amalgamation.

I gave my thoughts on the subjects and I expressed my disagreements on some others. I answered as many questions as I could from you guys and when I asked questions you guys ignored them or regurgitated them in the form of "What does it feel like to be skull ****ed by big business?"...which was obviously never asked. I asked you a serious question about why you think the government are assholes because I actually wanted to know why you think that way. I asked sturg why he thought small business was over regulated and he never answered either. I thought both questions could have led to solid discussions but both were skirted.

We elect these people into office to discuss these issues and figure them out for us. It's their full time job to figure this **** out. It's what they get paid for. None of us are qualified to really figure any of this out. We don't have the time to figure out the pros and cons to every single issue and then formulate the correct solution that is fair to everyone. If you want my opinion on a simple fix it would be to make lobbying illegal. Get the money out of politics so the decision makers make decisions on what's best for the people and not a select few. Is that the final solution? No, but it gets the ball rolling in the right direction. Now if you have a reason why you think that's a stupid idea, I'd love to hear it.

First off, what 'qualifies' an individual to contribute to a political system? I'd argue that the only qualification is being a citizen of said system. The notion that you need to be educated/trained in a specific manner flies in the face of many of our founding principles, and also goes against virtually everything you've said in this thread RE: empowering elites.

As I've said before, my chief issue with your view is not the view itself but rather the methodology you seem willing to accept to implement it. It's drastic and it's irrational and it defeats the entire purpose of democratic governance. Let's take your suggestion of making lobbying 'illegal' as an example. I guess I'd start by asking you if you realize that not all lobbying is 'play for play' -- that a blanket ban would effectively block one of the most useful tools we have, as a populace, of impacting legislative decisions. Yes, there are obviously major exceptions and an infinite number of examples where groups have exploited the system, but you've got to reach harder to understand the balance and why it isn't just as simple as saying, "No lobbying." The negative repercussions would widely outweigh the positives you are seeking to achieve.

Baby steps. The way American politics are designed to work is beautiful. Nobody has too much power, and there isn't a single situation where that power can't be stripped away.

It also isn't always just about one issue. You criticized me for indicating a support of Jeb Bush because you think his family is evil and that he's going to further enable big businesses and suppress the working class. And that's probably a fair assessment -- on some levels. But it also doesn't account for his positions on social issues (which you might not agree with, but need to [at least] respect) and how I might value his position to change the Supreme Court to align closer to a certain mindset, or his stance on immigration, or healthcare, or foreign intervention, etc et al.

There is never going to be a perfect candidate. But acting as though you are above it all? That your views are so unique/radical/amazing that they trump millions and millions of other voices? That's just trivializing.

 

[Hawk]

Lighten up Hawk, I get the gist of what he saying and he is mostly right, what is much, too much? Why a multi-billion company axe 460 IT a nd computer programmers to have their shareholders receive an extra 28 dollars a month. Those individuals are saddle with 60 to 100k debt for schools, house and car and now some working at Best Buy and then another job, just for a lousy 28 dollars, which the Costa Ricans and Indians and Pakistanis and the Indonesians are making in a week.

Big business is tearing the fabric of what our nation was built upon and now we are exploiting those to make even more money than they can spend in a 1000 lifetimes. Maybe they are into Selfless the movie, hoping a serum for immortality or clones because Hell is surely awaiting them unless they give massive amounts to charity. We only know/knew a few has done it. But the middle men took a chunk out of that.

When I have friends I worked with asking for money because they went from 50k a year to 18k a year is disheartening because it is really hard to get into IT nowadays. You go against cheaper offshore or Indians with their Visa's and they will undercut you in salary.

You see, some people gets defeated and they don't want to try anymore and I understand because when I moved up here, there were no jobs for me, struck out on 12 of them until I finally got one. I never gave up. I had a goal and stuck to it. Businesses are making those obstacles tougher to overcome though and that is what scares me.

And what I've been saying, since the beginning of this thread, is that you can't adapt a philosphy of "earn, earn, earn" and then arbitrarily and ambiguously say, "But not too much." That's cynically working at cross-purposes and not even really addressing any problem at all. It's one thing to fess up and admit that you think there needs to be some sort of capping system, but it's another to randomly direct all of your ire at big business, just because.

 

[DirkPiggler]

If you want good cashiers, fast food employees, call center employees, etc. you better pay them. If you've ever worked in the service industry, you'd realize that a lot of people are ****ty people. Nothing you do will satisfy them. Someone with a gift at dealing with ****ty people should be compensated. If you pay people small amount of money to do a ****ty job, you're gonna get ****ty results. There's a reason that most companies ditched outsourcing customer service.

This is true to a point, but you can't just take the same crappy workers, double their pay, and expect them to magically become model employees. A good worker at $10 per hour will be equally good at $20 per hour, $40 per hour, etc. All the additional salary does to help your company is make it more difficult for another firm to steal that good employee. Likewise, a turd making $10 per hour will still be a turd if you give him $100 per hour. That's a lesson I've had to learn the hard way in 21 years in small business. You can't fix bad employees by throwing more money at them. You can, however, draw from a wider labor pool with a higher wage, thus making it more likely that you will find good workers.

 

[ESP47]

So earlier you said I was exaggerating your claims of what getting rid of minimum wage would do... and here you just said we will have sweat shops. OK then

Exactly. It's not like they're going to have sweat shops overnight but things will slowly start moving in that direction.

Seems like in every post there is a massive gap in what I'm saying and what you think I'm saying.

 

[thethe]

Because you eventually lose good talent if you won't compensate.

AGAIN, if every business is conspiring to get us to sweat shops, why aren't we ALL working for minimum wage today?

Because there is business regulation, that you want removed, that prevents conspiring.

 

[sturg33]

Exactly. It's not like they're going to have sweat shops overnight but things will slowly start moving in that direction.

Seems like in every post there is a massive gap in what I'm saying and what you think I'm saying.

You're literally saying that we will move in the direction of sweat shops.

 

[sturg33]

Because there is business regulation, that you want removed, that prevents conspiring.

Or because PWC will lose a good employee if they don't compensate them well enough

 

[thethe]

Or because PWC will lose a good employee if they don't compensate them well enough

My leaving has much more to do than compensation. I've actually left for a position where the total compensation package is slightly less. Its all about what I want out of life and the different opportunities to advance my career.

But again, if you remove the regulation that exists to prevent monopolies and price fixing then we are just oging to go back to an older time when businesses were sucking the life out of the public at a far greater rate than they are now.

Also, as an FYI, the majority of people that start working for a public accounting firm leave for private. We resume build and move from one place ot another to get promotions and more compensation down the road. I never wanted to be an auditor for my whole life. I want to at some point go be a CFO for a small to mid size company if my heart it into it.

 

[sturg33]

My leaving has much more to do than compensation. I've actually left for a position where the total compensation package is slightly less. Its all about what I want out of life and the different opportunities to advance my career.

But again, if you remove the regulation that exists to prevent monopolies and price fixing then we are just oging to go back to an older time when businesses were sucking the life out of the public at a far greater rate than they are now.

Also, as an FYI, the majority of people that start working for a public accounting firm leave for private. We resume build and move from one place ot another to get promotions and more compensation down the road. I never wanted to be an auditor for my whole life. I want to at some point go be a CFO for a small to mid size company if my heart it into it.

OK... trying to keep up here.

The wage gap is the worst it's ever been and it's because of the companies robbing us all blind.

But if we remove the regulations in place, we'll go back in time where we were robbed even worse, but the wage gap wasn't as bad

??

 

[sturg33]

And I still can't quite figure out why companies don't only hire women, since they could save 23% on labor costs!

 

[thethe]

OK... trying to keep up here.

The wage gap is the worst it's ever been and it's because of the companies robbing us all blind.

But if we remove the regulations in place, we'll go back in time where we were robbed even worse, but the wage gap wasn't as bad

??

Yes, because with automation businesses have become more efficient and the profits have never been higher. Therefore, that leads to more profits to those that have the largest ownership interests in these companies.

 

[sturg33]

Yes, because with automation businesses have become more efficient and the profits have never been higher. Therefore, that leads to more profits to those that have the largest ownership interests in these companies.

Should we cap profits?

 

[thethe]

And I still can't quite figure out why companies don't only hire women, since they could save 23% on labor costs!

Not sure which places pay women less. Thats now how it works at PwC.

 

[ESP47]

No, I don't, but find it intriguing that this is your perception of my position.

Why are leftists so afraid of 'labels'? It must have something to do with amalgamation.

First off, what 'qualifies' an individual to contribute to a political system? I'd argue that the only qualification is being a citizen of said system. The notion that you need to be educated/trained in a specific manner flies in the face of many of our founding principles, and also goes against virtually everything you've said in this thread RE: empowering elites.

As I've said before, my chief issue with your view is not the view itself but rather the methodology you seem willing to accept to implement it. It's drastic and it's irrational and it defeats the entire purpose of democratic governance. Let's take your suggestion of making lobbying 'illegal' as an example. I guess I'd start by asking you if you realize that not all lobbying is 'play for play' -- that a blanket ban would effectively block one of the most useful tools we have, as a populace, of impacting legislative decisions. Yes, there are obviously major exceptions and an infinite number of examples where groups have exploited the system, but you've got to reach harder to understand the balance and why it isn't just as simple as saying, "No lobbying." The negative repercussions would widely outweigh the positives you are seeking to achieve.

Baby steps. The way American politics are designed to work is beautiful. Nobody has too much power, and there isn't a single situation where that power can't be stripped away.

It also isn't always just about one issue. You criticized me for indicating a support of Jeb Bush because you think his family is evil and that he's going to further enable big businesses and suppress the working class. And that's probably a fair assessment -- on some levels. But it also doesn't account for his positions on social issues (which you might not agree with, but need to [at least] respect) and how I might value his position to change the Supreme Court to align closer to a certain mindset, or his stance on immigration, or healthcare, or foreign intervention, etc et al.

There is never going to be a perfect candidate. But acting as though you are above it all? That your views are so unique/radical/amazing that they trump millions and millions of other voices? That's just trivializing.

Since when am I a leftist? Again, the labeling thing. Trying to pin me down with negative connotations to discredit what I'm saying. You're a smart guy, come with something better than that amateur hour BS.

It's difficult to take you seriously when you imply that politicians being educated goes against everything I've said in this thread. Empowering elites....since when are politicians elites? They are elected by us to represent us. The only thing that puts them in the elite category is when they get bribed millions of dollars to align themselves with and represent the good of corporations over the people.

Tell me why banning lobbying would be a bad thing? All you said there is that the negative repercussions would outweigh the positives but that seems ass backwards to me. Seems like for every pro, there's about 10 cons to it. I'm all for hearing how the positives outweigh the bad even though there's an "infinite number of examples where groups have exploited the system".

My views make me somewhat unique for many reasons. Not aligning myself with a political party or label. Not just going with the lesser of the two evils. Not just buying into the BS propaganda from the news and politicians. Not being extreme one way or another. If a father and son are both heinous war criminals, I really don't care what the brothers positions are on anything in this world because blood runs deeper than water and the negative ramifications of electing someone like that highly outweigh the positives. Burn me once, shame on you. Burn me twice, shame on me. Burn me three times and wtf is the matter with you?

 

[sturg33]

Not sure which places pay women less. Thats now how it works at PwC.

Well 57 frequently reminds us (as does our President) that women get 77 cents on the dollar to men.

I know that is hilariously flawed and out of context stat... but then the same folks complain that companies are so greedy that they will turn us into sweat shops to save every dime possible.

So I'm just having trouble keeping up with the inconsistencies

 

[thethe]

Should we cap profits?

I'm not going to pretend to know the answers here.

I'm just very concerned at the widening wealth gap and its implications on the future.

I do not believe that businesses should be able to outsource these jobs without paying a penalty. Where these funds go and who determines how they are used is an impossible question.

I do not believe that we should just stand by and continue to deal with countries that artificially deflate their currency which leads to tremendous trade deficits.

Of course, in a complicated global econcomy these things will never be remedied but I think we are close to reaching a boiling point whereby the population will not stand for this. You can only take and push so much. Maybe this is why the government is arming themselves. Conspiring with the wealthy to prevent rebellion!!!!

 

[sturg33]

I'm not going to pretend to know the answers here. The answer is no, unless you're a Bernie Sanders voter. Imagine if you're a business owner and I told you you're only allowed to make x%. How ridiculous. I took you for smarter than this

I'm just very concerned at the widening wealth gap and its implications on the future. How many times does this have to be explained? The QE from the FED reserve is probably 98% responsible for this. All that money goes straight to the banks. And the smart and wealthy people use that money to make more money. It's not their fault.

I do not believe that businesses should be able to outsource these jobs without paying a penalty. Where these funds go and who determines how they are used is an impossible question. If you care about free market at all this is ridiculous

I do not believe that we should just stand by and continue to deal with countries that artificially deflate their currency which leads to tremendous trade deficits. You want to cap the wage gap? Stop printing free money to the banks. Stop fractional reserve banking. Have your money tied to something (gold). Minimum wage has nothing to do with it

Of course, in a complicated global econcomy these things will never be remedied but I think we are close to reaching a boiling point whereby the population will not stand for this. You can only take and push so much. Maybe this is why the government is arming themselves. Conspiring with the wealthy to prevent rebellion!!!! You could be right. You see those riots in Baltimore and it makes you wonder. Crazy that Baltimore is a liberal city that full embraces liberal ideas - and yet they are in horrible shape

Seems you've done a 180 recently. I've heard you say that poor people need to make themselves better. But it seems you want companies to coddle to us workers and not try to better themselves. Just odd coming from you

 

[ESP47]

Should we cap profits?

You keep going back to this point about why we aren't all making minimum wage now. Skilled workers have leverage because they bring a skill that not every person out there has. Unskilled workers bring labor and their time. If you have skills, you have the leverage to negotiate. If you don't have skills, you have no leverage and no base to negotiate a higher wage. You can't just blanket the entire system under one rule.

Cap profits by keeping jobs in this country while not allowing offshore tax evasion. Legislation that puts corporations in a position to shape up or ship out is one way you can cap profits. Instead of putting through some communistic rules that put a hard cap on profits, you cap them through the fair payment and treatment of American workers.

 

[sturg33]

You keep going back to this point about why we aren't all making minimum wage now. Skilled workers have leverage because they bring a skill that not every person out there has. Unskilled workers bring labor and their time. If you have skills, you have the leverage to negotiate. If you don't have skills, you have no leverage and no base to negotiate a higher wage. You can't just blanket the entire system under one rule.

Cap profits by keeping jobs in this country while not allowing offshore tax evasion. Legislation that puts corporations in a position to shape up or ship out is one way you can cap profits. Instead of putting through some communistic rules that put a hard cap on profits, you cap them through the fair payment and treatment of American workers.

Seems like we're starting the same argument as 8 pages ago... but how about we stop tax evasions by making our tax rates more competitive with the rest of the world.

Oh wait - that would just help those greedy CEOs!!!

I'd much rather that money be in the hands of the efficient, non-wasteful federal government.

 

[thethe]

Seems you've done a 180 recently. I've heard you say that poor people need to make themselves better. But it seems you want companies to coddle to us workers and not try to better themselves. Just odd coming from you

I do believe that people can make themselves better. But my strongest core belief is that we live under a Plutocracy. This is not just the US but the whole world and that we are all rats in a maze.

I think we can all make a good life for ourselves but I think that is becoming harder and harder and when you have someone who may or may not be a member of this Plutocracy telling us we need to work harder and longer hours its a bit irksome.