Meme & Quote Thread
- Thread starter sturg33
- Start date
Oklahomahawk
Boras' Client
And child protective services to the door in 3, 2, 1...
sturg33
I
Yeah... totally the same thing
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
That doesn't really make your case when these company employ thousands upon thousands of employees. Using Chipotle, they pay their employees on average about 9 dolalrs an hour. They employ 55000 employees, if you make the CEO's pay 0 dollars an hour, it still doesn't come to 15 an hour.
I work for a small business, they cannot afford a 15 cdollar an hour minimum wage. They'll have to stretch the **** out of labor and jack the **** up on products (not factoring in the likely increase for them to purchase goods as those places will also have to jack up wages) and assuming that people still come in the same droves, there's virtually little gain.
What will happen from a pretty much common sense standpoint is small businesses like this one will take a massive hit. They need employees to handle their business so they can't just run on their own profits to pay the owners. Businesses like Walmart, McDonalds, etc. who have massive cash reserves can take the temporary hit while their competition is weeded out.
Oklahomahawk
Boras' Client
Agree, but it does at least (to me anyway) torpedo the notion that mega million dollar companies can't afford to pay their people a living wage. That's BS of the highest order IMO. It's just an excuse to screw their people. Now does every employee of any of the these companies deserve $15/hour? Of course not, but some do and if they can afford to pay their CEOs, CFOs, etc., 8 figures they can afford to pay their better people enough to live on. Start out at $8-$10/hour, weed out the chaff and start paying their good people a living wage. And I certainly agree about your situation Zeet, I"ve always said the small mom/pop places can't afford these sorts of things, but the big ones can and should. And if you want my opinion (shut up!!!) on the worse offender of all, it would be the US military, that gets over 1/2 of the entire budget every year but how many of the people on the ground in the hot zones have families back home that qualify for food stamps. Of all the abominations (no not a play on the current president's name) in this country, I would rate this one an easy #1. They risk their lives to give us the chance to BS on discussion forums like this one, so start paying and treating them like it!!
57Brave
Well-known member
What you just said was HRC stance in the primary debates. She thought it should be indexed to local standards.
but stop and think for a minute, how many of those 55000 Chipolte workers work at below $15 per hour ?
It is not like everyone of those 55000 are getting a $7.50 an hour increase
I saw HRC's point more pragmatic than Sanders - but to Sanders point, when you buy a car you never offer what you are willing to pay. Do you ?
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Of course you see Hillary as being more pragmatic than Bernie. But you're such a Bernie SUpporter. Lulz.
57Brave
Well-known member
I am for indexed to inflation minimum wage that reads approx $21 / hour.
Sanders and Clinton are both too incrementalist for my tastes.
Trump and Johnson want MW eliminated and Dr Stein is still waffling on vaccines . While the world moves on.
The optics of someone making $4,000 per hour telling someone making $7.50 saying it would wreck the economy to raise them up
Hearing the Occupy language of make the 1% pay their share in Clintons speech pretty good bet there will be changes.
Also guessing it will be at sate and local levels.
This interesting report from Mother Jones
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/07/seattle-minimum-wage-experiment-mixed-results-so-far
sturg33
I
Do you think people should be paid based on the value they bring the employer? Or based on how much the employer can afford to pay them?
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
1. LMAO. Sanders wants to boost minimum wage to 15 an hour. Hillary said 12. NOw it's 15 because she's trying not to lose Bernie voters, but that's a lost cause. 21 an hour, you must be smoking crack.
2. Trump doesn't want to eliminate minimum wage. He said that he would support raising it to 10 an hour.
3. Seriously with Stein and the vaccinations? Do you get your same political reporting from Gawker media? What she said is "vaccines have been absolutely critical in ridding us of the scourge of many diseases — smallpox, polio, etc. So vaccines are an invaluable medication," Stein said. "Like any medication, they also should be — what shall we say — approved by a regulatory board that people can trust. And I think right now, that is the problem. That people do not trust a Food and Drug Administration, or even the CDC for that matter, where corporate influence and the pharmaceutical industry has a lot of influence." Basically saying the issue at hand with the anti-vaxers is that no one trusts the current regulatory industries, and I don't think that's a stupid statement.
4. One person is making 4,000 an hour. Ok lets look at Walmart, if their profits were 100% split evenly among their employees, each employee would make 57K a year. That's with no discrimination between the lowly cashier, and the person responsible for all 2.1 million employees. Second that you factor in those things, you see that scale and realize that your 21 dollar an hour is virtually impossible.
5. Wait, did you say that the Occupy crowd wants 1% of Hillary's speech pay? Oh wait no you didn't. Because there's no way that corrupt Hillary would give a **** about the Occupy crowd. Here's a woman who in 2013 made 8.6M giving just speeches, those speeches were made to places liek Goldman Sachs and Fidelity Investments. You know the Wall Street types that Occupy protests against.
6. When Mother Jones says something is a mixed bag that they support, there's a decent chance that it's not going great.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
57Brave
Well-known member
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
To the meme, I would say there's a big difference between Stein--who appears to be wanting to build a movement--and Nader who was pretty much a mercurial Green regardless of his beliefs. I appreciate much of what Nader has done in his life, but at this point, he's just a constant complainer. Still, I think Greens should seriously consider the ultimate effect of their votes (like we all should), but as long as they believe they are voting for something as opposed to against something, they shouldn't be unduly chastised.
57Brave
Well-known member
I believe it wise to bear in mind the historical consequences of voting for niche candidates in Presidential general elections.