“Redistribute the wealth”

[Billy000]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

How about workers work to learn skills that afford them more worth to employers?

For what should they be given $15 per hour? Flipping a fry tray five times an hour?

If you work 40 hours a week at a wage that matches your skills, why should an employer pay you more?

If you cannot live on $10 per hour, isn't it your responsibility to improve your worth?

 

[Billy000]

How about workers work to learn skills that afford them more worth to employers?

For what should they be given $15 per hour? Flipping a fry tray five times an hour?

If you work 40 hours a week at a wage that matches your skills, why should an employer pay you more?

If you cannot live on $10 per hour, isn't it your responsibility to improve your worth?

Okay, let’s pretend every low wage worker did this, who would be left behind to work those low wage jobs that are the backbone of the American work force? You might conveniently say teenagers, but the demand of jobs would greatly outnumber them and they would only work seasonally.

Matches your skill? So you think the only thing fast food workers do is dunk French fires? Have you ever been to a fast good restaurant? The workers have multiple roles to fill and it is non stop productivity until they leave. On top of that, they deal with the biggest asshole customers on the planet. Who decides what a wage is worth if the business owner makes every effort to minimize labor cost for the sake of profit?

And no, I don’t work fast food but I used to.

 

[Missourian]

Trump is trying to get good paying jobs back in the U.S. ... manufacturing jobs where they will be happy to train you, and pay a good wage. But you fight him tooth and nail.

Used to be, you got a job at the mill, or the fabrication shop, or the forge, or the factory...you learned a skill...they paid you well, because another mill, fab shop, forge or factory wanted your skills.

Now, American money builds mills, fab shops, forges and factories in Asia. You get what's left. Flipping burgers, making coffee, standing at the self checkout to check id's for beer, movies and starting fluid.

I've told this story before...a company hired all my trucks, and 10 trucks from another company, to move an entire prefabricated power plant from a ship docked in Muskegon, MI Harbor to the union jobsite 16 miles away. An ENTIRE power plant! Twenty trucks moving three loads each per day took three weeks to unload the whole thing.

It was cheaper to manufacture it in Tiawan, erect it in Taiwan, dissasemble it, ship it halfway around the world and assemble it again here.

You think the steel was cheaper? The transportation? U.S. Steel in Gary Indiana was 75 miles away. They were saving millions in labor costs...millions in taxes...millions in adhering to OSHA regulations, insurance and workmans compensation. THAT is why we need tariffs...to level that playing field, and make it as costly to manufacture there as it is here.

If we don't, the cycle continues...the companies that stay here can't compete with companies that move to Asia...or Mexico.

That's what happened to Detroit. I used to run parts from Mexico to GM Detroit...one of their "just-in-time" delivery routes. If the truck was late...it was $100,000 an hour fine...because the production line would shut down. Those parts used to be made in Detroit...they were moved to Mexico to save labor, safety, insurance, and environmental costs.

When the jobs left...so did the people that could afford to go.

 

[dblack]

Trump is trying to get good paying jobs back in the U.S. ... manufacturing jobs where they will be happy to train you, and pay a good wage. But you fight him tooth and nail.

Gawd, yes. I don't wanna work for Trump.

 

[Missourian]

Trump is trying to get good paying jobs back in the U.S. ... manufacturing jobs where they will be happy to train you, and pay a good wage. But you fight him tooth and nail.

Gawd, yes. I don't wanna work for Trump.

Gary Johnson may have an opening on his foreign affairs staff.

 

[night_son]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

What you are advocating for here is stealing money someone else, a fellow American, earned through their own enterprise, entrepreneurship and/or just plain old hard work. Tell me, at what income level should the government begin stealing wages and giving that cash to poorer Americans? What about a man who through service to country earned funding for six years of higher education. With that education he got a job with the federal government earning over $150, 000 per year. Now, this man was neither born wealthy nor particularly privileged in any way. He worked very hard for many years to earn everything he has. He also has debt, is putting two of his family members through college, and is saving for retirement. How can you justify stealing from this man to feed another man who neither served his nation nor earned an advanced degree? A man who refuses to put forth enough personal effort to better his station in life. Completely un-American.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

Ok , how do you do that?


Obama raised the gap with the feds, him and Janet made wall street rich and left main Street behind, the minimum wage doesn't do a damn thing to raise the boats ahead of it, in fact it does the opposite in regards to purchasing power.


So what does the left propose.. legistrate morality? ( It will never work)

Have a two or three tier minimum wage? ( I read they are against that)


Cap CEO wages? ( Bill tried that and it back fired on him)


What can you do with out destroying ingenuity, taking risks, drive to succeed etc...etc...?

 

[Wyatt earp]

How about workers work to learn skills that afford them more worth to employers?

For what should they be given $15 per hour? Flipping a fry tray five times an hour?

If you work 40 hours a week at a wage that matches your skills, why should an employer pay you more?

If you cannot live on $10 per hour, isn't it your responsibility to improve your worth?

Okay, let’s pretend every low wage worker did this, who would be left behind to work those low wage jobs that are the backbone of the American work force? You might conveniently say teenagers, but the demand of jobs would greatly outnumber them and they would only work seasonally.

Matches your skill? So you think the only thing fast food workers do is dunk French fires? Have you ever been to a fast good restaurant? The workers have multiple roles to fill and it is non stop productivity until they leave. On top of that, they deal with the biggest asshole customers on the planet. Who decides what a wage is worth if the business owner makes every effort to minimize labor cost for the sake of profit?

And no, I don’t work fast food but I used to.

In theory those wages should climb through the roof, look at what happened to some McDonald's and Walmarts in South Dakota when they Couldn't find anyone and they were starting people off at $17 an hour.


.

 

[Norman]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

So no progressive has ever suggested that radical redistribution of wealth... except for you right in the next paragraph. Just call it "narrowing the gap", instead of wealth redistribution and BOOM!

Yes, we know you are a Marxist, who actually believes the poor are poor because the rich are rich. A crazy belief... You are in the top of the top as an American, I say we redistribute this wealth and relocate you to the true socialist utopia where these policies are in place.

 

[Billy000]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

So no progressive has ever suggested that radical redistribution of wealth... except for you right in the next paragraph. Just call it "narrowing the gap", instead of wealth redistribution and BOOM!

Yes, we know you are a Marxist, who actually believes the poor are poor because the rich are rich. A crazy belief...

You are such an idiot. The top 3 wealthiest people in this country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers. In your dumbass mind that doesn’t matter and any attempt at closing that gap is automatically the elimination of the wealthy class. Is your simple mind not capable of the slightest bit of nuanced critical thinking?

 

[Norman]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

So no progressive has ever suggested that radical redistribution of wealth... except for you right in the next paragraph. Just call it "narrowing the gap", instead of wealth redistribution and BOOM!

Yes, we know you are a Marxist, who actually believes the poor are poor because the rich are rich. A crazy belief...

You are such an idiot. The top 3 wealthiest people in this country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers. In your dumbass mind that doesn’t matter and any attempt at closing that gap is automatically the elimination of the wealthy class. Is your simple mind not capable of the slightest bit of nuanced critical thinking?

Well of course they do, most of the "workers" do not even have a job and don't own a damn thing besides their student debt.

I am sure that the statistic is the usual progressive lie anyway.

In Venezuela the wealthiest person owns the damn workers, maybe it's time to move there. Clearly you hate America.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

So no progressive has ever suggested that radical redistribution of wealth... except for you right in the next paragraph. Just call it "narrowing the gap", instead of wealth redistribution and BOOM!

Yes, we know you are a Marxist, who actually believes the poor are poor because the rich are rich. A crazy belief...

You are such an idiot. The top 3 wealthiest people in this country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers. In your dumbass mind that doesn’t matter and any attempt at closing that gap is automatically the elimination of the wealthy class. Is your simple mind not capable of the slightest bit of nuanced critical thinking?

And the wealthest person in the world is probably Putin, so there you go pick your poison ...


Either rich private citizens or rich politicians ...



BTW look how Nancy pelosi, Bill and hillary got rich, public servants becoming millionaires ( got to love insider trading by Nancy)




.

 

[Billy000]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

So no progressive has ever suggested that radical redistribution of wealth... except for you right in the next paragraph. Just call it "narrowing the gap", instead of wealth redistribution and BOOM!

Yes, we know you are a Marxist, who actually believes the poor are poor because the rich are rich. A crazy belief...

You are such an idiot. The top 3 wealthiest people in this country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers. In your dumbass mind that doesn’t matter and any attempt at closing that gap is automatically the elimination of the wealthy class. Is your simple mind not capable of the slightest bit of nuanced critical thinking?

Well of course they do, most of the "workers" do not even have a job and don't own a damn thing besides their student debt.

I am sure that the statistic is the usual progressive lie anyway.

In Venezuela the wealthiest person owns the damn workers, maybe it's time to move there. Clearly you hate America.

Let me see if I’m following your “logic” here. Most of this half of workers aren’t workers and are actually just unemployed with student debt? Do you realize how stupid you sound right now?

 

[Norman]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

So no progressive has ever suggested that radical redistribution of wealth... except for you right in the next paragraph. Just call it "narrowing the gap", instead of wealth redistribution and BOOM!

Yes, we know you are a Marxist, who actually believes the poor are poor because the rich are rich. A crazy belief...

You are such an idiot. The top 3 wealthiest people in this country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers. In your dumbass mind that doesn’t matter and any attempt at closing that gap is automatically the elimination of the wealthy class. Is your simple mind not capable of the slightest bit of nuanced critical thinking?

Well of course they do, most of the "workers" do not even have a job and don't own a damn thing besides their student debt.

I am sure that the statistic is the usual progressive lie anyway.

In Venezuela the wealthiest person owns the damn workers, maybe it's time to move there. Clearly you hate America.

Let me see if I’m following your “logic” here. Most of this half of workers aren’t workers and are actually just unemployed with student debt? Do you realize how stupid you sound right now?

It's not my logic, it's just logic. And it's abundantly clear you can't do it, which is probably one reason why you are so worthless.

Now is the time to paste where-ever you got the information from so I can tell you exactly what they mean by a "worker". It's ambiguous and communists such as yourself use it to mean an employee.

 

[percysunshine]

Next to sex, theft is the most rationalized activity in human history.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

So no progressive has ever suggested that radical redistribution of wealth... except for you right in the next paragraph. Just call it "narrowing the gap", instead of wealth redistribution and BOOM!

Yes, we know you are a Marxist, who actually believes the poor are poor because the rich are rich. A crazy belief...

You are such an idiot. The top 3 wealthiest people in this country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers. In your dumbass mind that doesn’t matter and any attempt at closing that gap is automatically the elimination of the wealthy class. Is your simple mind not capable of the slightest bit of nuanced critical thinking?

Well of course they do, most of the "workers" do not even have a job and don't own a damn thing besides their student debt.

I am sure that the statistic is the usual progressive lie anyway.

In Venezuela the wealthiest person owns the damn workers, maybe it's time to move there. Clearly you hate America.

Let me see if I’m following your “logic” here. Most of this half of workers aren’t workers and are actually just unemployed with student debt? Do you realize how stupid you sound right now?

Back to your topic their has to be a way to do it and the only way I can figure it out is to cap the CEO at something like ...they can only make say 20 times more than their lowest employees...( It was a liberal idea floating around the west coast a few years ago) I wrote a topic on it here and my fellow cons hated it.


I can't find my exact thread but I posted it a few times


Minimum Wage Increase: They Never Talks About the SALES






Online
bear513Diamond Member
↑
↑
↑
↑
Own many. I've never heard of a hunting trip requiring thousands of rounds.
so you are saying you have only one round for each gun you own.., i doubt you own even one gun, can you prove you"own many" ?
Click to expand...
↑
↑
↑
↑
[

On what moral authority do decide for other people what their work is worth?
↑
And it still didn't work. Otherwise, there would be no demand from statutory minimum wage proponents for increasing the statutory minimum.
The minimum wage has fallen for 45 years, genius.
Click to expand...
So? What's your point, genius?
Click to expand...
Was the minimum wage too high in 1968? Was it ruining the economy?
Click to expand...
back then how many Japanese cars were in the U.S. 1000?
Click to expand...
So your argument against raising the minimum wage is that our nation is simply in a long term decline,

the consequences of which must in great measure fall upon poor and low income workers in America?
Click to expand...






No, I posted this before my first two thoughts are :
1. A two tier MW one for adults and one for kids
2. No CEO or Business owner can say make more then say 20 or 30 Times more then the company's lowest paid worker. It helps small company's compete and brings competition to the giants.

Not every ones goal is money

 

[frigidweirdo]

I’ve never understood what that phrase really means. There is never an explanation on how to do it.

Republicans of course automatically assume the extreme which is that the wealth would be radically distributed among the entire population which would eliminate the wealthy class of America and thus end capitalism as we know it. However, no prominent progressive has EVER suggested this. The issue on the left is the rising inequality between the middle class and wealthy class. We aren’t suggesting some naive, theoretical utopia where everyone lives off the same wealth regardless of their contribution to society and lives happily ever after. Republicans just assume that’s what lefties mean when we talk about wealth inequality because it makes for a convenient argument. It makes dismissing the leftwing ideology easy.

Of course, what lefties actually want to do is simply narrow the gap so that anyone working 40 hours a week doesn’t have to live in poverty. That’s it. That’s all lefties care about. In this current economy, that is impossible for 10s of millions of people. Why is that impossible? Because the top 3 richest people in the country own more wealth than the bottom 50% of workers.

Again, I’ll admit I don’t know how it should be done, but it needs to be done. Radical change is necessary. The last time someone could comfortably live off $10 per hour was in the 1960’s.

I'm not an advocate of redistributing the wealth according to socialist values, or selfish values.

I'm an advocate of something akin to redistributing the wealth by increasing opportunities for those that will take them,

Firstly, businesses that are small should have an easier ride.

Fuck this shit with large multinationals playing the system to pay no tax. Large companies should already have an advantage because they're large.

In a perfect world individuals would be the mainstay of business. But small businesses are becoming less and less as a percentage of income made and numbers of people being employed.

At present there's redistribution of the wealth, but going in the wrong direction, because govt is controlled by the wrong people.

 

[fncceo]

Wages don't depend on skill, education, productivity, ethnicity, or benefit to the public weal.

We often bemoan the fact that teachers, nurse, prostitutes, or whatever work we feel requires skill and benefits society are being underpaid in relations to what we believe their worth... but we're wrong.

Wages are dependent on one thing, and one thing only, what someone is willing to pay you to do what it is they need to be done.

You might think your time and efforts are worth a lot more than you're currently being paid, but ... unless someone is willing to pay what you think you're worth ... you're wrong.

 

[fncceo]

Fuck this shit with large multinationals playing the system to pay no tax.

The people making those rules are the ones for which you and I vote year in and year out. Any company, large or small, would be idiots for not playing the game according to the rules which the voters themselves have approved.

How many championship football teams refuse to use the forward pass because they think it's not fair to the other teams?