At what point will Americans stop buying stuff?

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Two regions and multiple levels?

Are you high?

I live in a state with 8 counties and many towns. It's called 'Reality'. You should try it sometime.

You don’t have a response. You’re another phony.

 

[Richard-H]

It's not hard to figure out. Learn something that makes you worth a living wage.

You people on the left act like this low wage thing is something new. It's been this way for generations. My first full-time job was minimum wage. My second full-time job was minimum wage. My third full-time job was minimum wage. I lived with my parents because there was no possible way for me to support myself with those jobs. I couldn't move out until 1980 when I turned 20 years old.

You people on the left portray this situation as if it started 10 or 15 years ago when it's been going on forever. The difference is we turned into a bunch of wimps. Instead of crying that non-skilled work should be overpaid, we went out and found better paying jobs.

Nonsense. The ratio of the cost-of-living to minimum wage has increase exponentially in the past 40 years. Besides, this is not just a unskilled labor problem. It's a problem that wages and salaries, at all levels, have stagnated for the past 40 years, while the cost of living has constantly risen.

Back in the 1950s & 1960s one person with a bachelor's degree in ANY field could own a home and support himself, his wife and any number of children at a very good standard of living. Nowadays, it takes 2 people with at least bachelor's degrees plus a whole lot of experience and additional training to own a home, support at most 3 children and live a middle-class existence. It used to be that people married and started families either right after High School or right after College. Nowadays people can't afford to get married until they're in their late twenties or early thirties. Meanwhile worker's real productivity - which is what produces wealth - has grown exponentially. All of the wealth is being trickled up to the wealthiest 1% (more like a like a geyser than a trickle).

The result is we've become a pagan/abortion based economy. People like to fall in love, get married and have children, but in our economy the vast majority can't afford it until they're well into middle age. People in their late teens and twenties have to settle for erotic sexual relationships rather than love relationship. We over glorify sex to the young in order to promote this. Abortion is a economic necessity - despite the fact that people have extremely powerful maternal & paternal instincts.

 

[initforme]

I don't know anybody on the right that ever said half.

• There are over 59 million Americans that receive welfare during an average month
• SNAP is the biggest welfare program in the US
• Children, the disabled and elderly constitute the majority of public benefit recipients.
• More women than men are dependent on food stamps

20+ Important Welfare Statistics for 2024 | Fortunly

Poverty is a growing issue in the US, and our welfare statistics are meant to shine some light upon the financial hardships that people face.

fortunly.com

So unions are bad and those jobs then do not pay enough to live on. So do t complain nobody will do them. We can't expect workers to take those jobs when they can find a lot higher paying ones.it seems you think someone needs to be doing those jobs.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Nonsense. The ratio of the cost-of-living to minimum wage has increase exponentially in the past 40 years. Besides, this is not just a unskilled labor problem. It's a problem that wages and salaries, at all levels, have stagnated for the past 40 years, while the cost of living has constantly risen.

Back in the 1950s & 1960s one person with a bachelor's degree in ANY field could own a home and support himself, his wife and any number of children at a very good standard of living. Nowadays, it takes 2 people with at least bachelor's degrees plus a whole lot of experience and additional training to own a home, support at most 3 children and live a middle-class existence. It used to be that people married and started families either right after High School or right after College. Nowadays people can't afford to get married until they're in their late twenties or early thirties. Meanwhile worker's real productivity - which is what produces wealth - has grown exponentially. All of the wealth is being trickled up to the wealthiest 1% (more like a like a geyser than a trickle).

The result is we've become a pagan/abortion based economy. People like to fall in love, get married and have children, but in our economy the vast majority can't afford it until they're well into middle age. People in their late teens and twenties have to settle for erotic sexual relationships rather than love relationship. We over glorify sex to the young in order to promote this. Abortion is a economic necessity - despite the fact that people have extremely powerful maternal & paternal instincts.

Women in college have been complaining for a long time of men who don't want to get into commitments like marriage for legal reasons and the associated costs. The CDC estimated that to raise a child to the age of 18 today, that price is $237,000 per middle-class child. If you want the standard 2 child family, you better have a half-mil in the next 20 years to raise that family.

This is one of the issues that was responsible for my nephews divorce. Her biological time clock was ticking and he wanted to wait until they had their college loans paid off. He had a good paying job and hers not so much, but they were both working. It's not that they didn't have the money, but where that money was going to be directed. So don't blame employers for not paying more money, blame the liberal colleges for putting these people into such massive debt.

If I had a say-so, I would make a law that nobody is allowed to attend college until the age of 21. Like my nephews ex, a lot of 18 year olds have no idea what they want to be. The college she went to conned her into taking up advertising. That's right, advertising. She ended up working at a bank processing loans. If kids worked for three or four years, lived at home and saved their money, not only would they avoid accumulating massive college debt that will control them beyond the age of 30, but once in the workforce for a few years, they will be more mature and have a better understanding which direction to go in life.

 

[Richard-H]

​

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Share​ ​ ​ Tweet​ ​ ​ Forward​

​

​ On May 24, 2022, Salvador Ramos fatally shot nineteen students and two teachers and wounded seventeen others at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. Earlier that day, the perpetrator shot his grandmother in the face, severely wounding her. It appears Salvador is likely another mass murderer who used pot. He said he hated his mother and grandmother who restricted his marijuana use.

​ For over 5 years AALM has been warning about the connection between marijuana use and mass murder. This warning was given to US Attorney General Merrick Garland in March. Our letter received no response. Please refer to exhibit 5 for a list of mass murderers who where also marijuana users.

​ In the wake of recent mass shootings and mass murder events, AALM demands toxicology reports of shooters be released to the public. Marijuana use and psychotic violence go hand-in-hand.

​ More Sources: In 2007 the prestigious medical journal Lancet recanted its previous benign view of marijuana, citing studies showing “an increase in the risk of psychosis of about 40 percent.” A seminal long-term study of 50,465 Swedish army conscripts found those who had tried marijuana by age 18 had 2.4 times the risk of being diagnosed with schizophrenia in the following 15 years than those who had never used the drug. Heavy users were 6.7 times more likely to be admitted to a hospital for schizophrenia. Another study, of 1,037 people in New Zealand, found those who used cannabis at ages 15 and 18 had higher rates of psychotic symptoms at age 26 than non-users. A 2011 study in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) of 2,000 teenagers found those who smoked marijuana were twice as likely to develop psychosis as those who didn’t. Another BMJ study estimated that “13 percent of cases of schizophrenia could be averted if all cannabis use were prevented.” In 2014, people who had cannabis use disorder made up about 1.5 percent of Americans. But they accounted for eleven percent of all the psychosis cases in emergency rooms—90,000 cases, 250 a day, triple the number in 2006. The National Academy of Medicine found in 2017 that “cannabis use is likely to increase the risk of developing schizophrenia and other psychoses; the higher the use, the greater the risk.” Also, that “regular cannabis use is likely to increase the risk for developing a social anxiety disorder.” A Study showed cases in which marijuana led to unnecessary violence, health risks, and, in many cases, both. In a Secret Service study (pg 13) over half of the attackers had a history of illicit drug use and/or substance abuse. This abuse, which included alcohol and marijuana, was evidenced by such factors as the attacker receiving treatment for the abuse, suffer legal consequences, or having significant problems in their personal lives stemming from the abuse. Marijuana and Psychosis AALM calls on public officials to release the toxicology reports on all mass murderers. Below is a shortlist of some of the well-known murderers who were pot users. Most often toxicology reports are not made public. Perpetrators’ marijuana use is often discovered via interviews with acquaintances, military records, or some other secondary source.

​ ​ Darrel Brooks, The Waukesha Wisconsin driving rampager was a user of marijuana with domestic abuse and multiple episodes of violence in his past. He had more recently been caught with meth which is a natural progression from marijuana. On his twitter profile he describes himself as a stoner and avid user of pot.

​ ​ Ian David Long Killed 13 people on November 7, 2018, in Thousand Oaks, California, United States, at the Borderline Bar and Grill, a country-western bar frequented by college students. Toxicology later revealed he had marijuana in his system

​ ​ Nikolas Cruz On February 14, 2018, opened fire with a semi-automatic rifle at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, killing 17 people and injuring 17 others. He blamed his marijuana use for his actions.

​ ​ Manchester terrorist Salmon Abedi blew himself up and killed 22 in the United Kingdom on 22 May 2017. Abedi was a pot-smoking university dropout.

​ ​ A toxicology report on Devin Patrick Kelley, who shot and killed 26 at a church in Texas, revealed marijuana. November 5, 2017

​ ​ Diagnosed with cannabis-induced psychosis, Satoshi Uematsu killed 19 handicapped people in Japan and injured many others. July 26, 2016

​ ​ Nice terrorist Mohammed Bouhlel smoked very strong weed in high school, and had his first psychotic break at 19. July 14, 2016

​ ​ Omar Mir Seddique Mateen was an American mass murderer and domestic terrorist who murdered 49 people and wounded 53 others in a mass shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, on June 12, 2016, before he was killed in a shootout with the local police. He was an avid pot user.

​ ​ Robert Dear, Planned Parenthood shooter, November 27, 2015. He was described as a "marijuana newcomer" by neighbors brought to Colorado by the promise of legal weed.

​ ​ Noah Harpham, was in mania when he shot three people in Colorado Springs. He had marijuana metabolites in his urine at the time of his death in 2015.

​ ​ Eddie Routh, veteran with PTSD, smoked pot the morning before he killed Chris Kyle Chad Littlefield. February 2, 2013

​ ​ James Holmes, Aurora shooter used to smoked weed behind his apartment constantly. 2012

​ ​ Jared Loughner killed six and injured many in Tucson, AZ, 2011. He was a habitual pot user.

​ ​ Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh killed 168 in 1996. He experimented with marijuana and meth.

​ "Senseless violence and mass murders are in the news and in the minds of Americans once again. Mental health problems

You've posted bogus 'findings' by groups that are predetermined to prove that marijuana causes violent behavior. Did they ask how many of these murders have ever smoked cigarettes? How many drank alcohol? How many held right-wing extremist political views?

Saying that violently criminal people have smoked marijuana does not prove that marijuana smoking caused their criminal behavior. There are hundreds of millions of people smoke marijuana on a regular basis and have never committed a violent crime.

I've known upwards of a hundred people who've smoked marijuana regularly. They are the most peaceful people in the world. Most of them don't even own guns - and the ones that did were all right-wing nut cases.

You've mixed up cause and effect. The cause is right-wing extremist political views, the effect is a disregard for the law and hated for people.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

I'm not that familiar with the effect of interest rates, but I do know that there is a constant class war of the wealthy against the workers. Currently the wealthy are far too empowered and will do whatever it takes to drive workers into poverty. Perhaps a massive interest rate hike would help.

Back in the 60s & 70s we had a huge middle class, and a large amount of wealthy people. The wealth gap wasn't that great. Ultimately, closing the wealth gap isn't a war to end wealth - just the opposite - it will create many, many more wealthy people., but less ridiculously wealthy people.

This is actually a really good post, the greatest difference between the 60's - 70's and now is our own party.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So unions are bad and those jobs then do not pay enough to live on. So do t complain nobody will do them. We can't expect workers to take those jobs when they can find a lot higher paying ones.it seems you think someone needs to be doing those jobs.

My stance is only that every American has a choice in life. You can work those lower paying jobs, or learn how to do something and make more. Those lower paying jobs were always there. As I pointed out, they were around when I was a kid, and I worked those jobs. But I didn't expect an employer to pay me a living wage to empty garbage cans. I had to do something that paid much better. When I left those lower paying positions, my employers simply found somebody to take my place, and the cycle continued as it does today.

Lower paying jobs are for kids and perhaps bored retirees just looking for something to kill time. If you stick with some of those jobs and learn different processes of the company, you may eventually find yourself making better money. If its a dead end job, you either continue making less than satisfactory money or do like I did and leave for better opportunities.

 

[Richard-H]

Women in college have been complaining for a long time of men who don't want to get into commitments like marriage for legal reasons and the associated costs. The CDC estimated that to raise a child to the age of 18 today, that price is $237,000 per middle-class child. If you want the standard 2 child family, you better have a half-mil in the next 20 years to raise that family.

This is one of the issues that was responsible for my nephews divorce. Her biological time clock was ticking and he wanted to wait until they had their college loans paid off. He had a good paying job and hers not so much, but they were both working. It's not that they didn't have the money, but where that money was going to be directed. So don't blame employers for not paying more money, blame the liberal colleges for putting these people into such massive debt.

If I had a say-so, I would make a law that nobody is allowed to attend college until the age of 21. Like my nephews ex, a lot of 18 year olds have no idea what they want to be. The college she went to conned her into taking up advertising. That's right, advertising. She ended up working at a bank processing loans. If kids worked for three or four years, lived at home and saved their money, not only would they avoid accumulating massive college debt that will control them beyond the age of 30, but once in the workforce for a few years, they will be more mature and have a better understanding which direction to go in life.

I couldn't agree more that people shouldn't go to college until they've worked for a few years. But they should get paid well enough that they can get married and start a family. In Germany people have to work as technicians for a number of years and then get a recommendation before they can go to engineering school.

Debt from college loans is another major issue that stifles people's lives. The Democrats (especially Sanders), have been trying to change that. The Republicans won't.

It's nonsense to blame 'Liberal Colleges'. Colleges are for-profit institutions. Regardless of their curriculum, they're as far right as they can be when determining tuition costs and every other way they can squeeze their students. Student loans and financial aid just serve to facilitate outrageous college costs.

If employers paid workers a fair wage people wouldn't be desperate to go to college and colleges would have to drop their costs.

BTW - The women I knew in college all wanted to f*k like rabbits and had absolutely no interest in serious relationships.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You've posted bogus 'findings' by groups that are predetermined to prove that marijuana causes violent behavior. Did they ask how many of these murders have ever smoked cigarettes? How many drank alcohol? How many held right-wing extremist political views?

Saying that violently criminal people have smoked marijuana does not prove that marijuana smoking caused their criminal behavior. There are hundreds of millions of people smoke marijuana on a regular basis and have never committed a violent crime.

I've known upwards of a hundred people who've smoked marijuana regularly. They are the most peaceful people in the world. Most of them don't even own guns - and the ones that did were all right-wing nut cases.

You've mixed up cause and effect. The cause is right-wing extremist political views, the effect is a disregard for the law and hated for people.

Pot (like alcohol) has different effects on different people. Some people do get violent on pot. When I smoked it, all I wanted to do is lay around and listen to records. The other kids liked to throw around footballs or wrestle.

If you have emotional problems, pot is the worst thing to use. I had a best friend like that. He had mental issues and pot just made it ten times worse. It enhanced his paranoia and he believed everybody was conspiring against him.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I couldn't agree more that people shouldn't go to college until they've worked for a few years. But they should get paid well enough that they can get married and start a family. In Germany people have to work as technicians for a number of years and then get a recommendation before they can go to engineering school.

Debt from college loans is another major issue that stifles people's lives. The Democrats (especially Sanders), have been trying to change that. The Republicans won't.

It's nonsense to blame 'Liberal Colleges'. Colleges are for-profit institutions. Regardless of their curriculum, they're as far right as they can be when determining tuition costs and every other way they can squeeze their students. Student loans and financial aid just serve to facilitate outrageous college costs.

If employers paid workers a fair wage people wouldn't be desperate to go to college and colleges would have to drop their costs.

BTW - The women I knew in college all wanted to f*k like rabbits and had absolutely no interest in serious relationships.

When you say that people like Sander's wanted to change that, you mean have other people pay for their college.

Okay, so I work my blue-collar job and my tax dollars go to educate a lawyer or doctor. Then when I need their services, they charge me $300.00 an hour. I fail to see the equity in that.

College is an investment and taxpayers should not be funding investments. You are correct, colleges can charge what they want due to supply and demand. So the solution is for taxpayers to create more demand????

So what's wrong with trade school? Certainly much cheaper than college and you get into the workforce at a much earlier age. Yes, physical labor is involved in many cases, but so what? You're making a livable wage and not in debt until the age of 35.

 

[Richard-H]

My stance is only that every American has a choice in life. You can work those lower paying jobs, or learn how to do something and make more. Those lower paying jobs were always there. As I pointed out, they were around when I was a kid, and I worked those jobs. But I didn't expect an employer to pay me a living wage to empty garbage cans. I had to do something that paid much better. When I left those lower paying positions, my employers simply found somebody to take my place, and the cycle continued as it does today.

Lower paying jobs are for kids and perhaps bored retirees just looking for something to kill time. If you stick with some of those jobs and learn different processes of the company, you may eventually find yourself making better money. If its a dead end job, you either continue making less than satisfactory money or do like I did and leave for better opportunities.

Perhaps you should have offered your boss's customers a lower rate for emptying their garbage cans.

The value of emptying garbage cans (which is hard work) is the price that the customer was willing to pay to your boss, yet he probably only paid you ~10% of that price. YOU were providing the customers with the service that they needed, while your boss was a useless middle-man fat cat who was ripping you off.

Low paying jobs are often people doing extremely valuable service while some useless fat cat gets all the money. Just because anybody COULD do the work doesn't matter, it's the people that DO THE WORK that matter and they deserve to be paid on par with the value of their labor.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Perhaps you should have offered your boss's customers a lower rate for emptying their garbage cans.

The value of emptying garbage cans (which is hard work) is the price that the customer was willing to pay to your boss, yet he probably only paid you ~10% of that price. YOU were providing the customers with the service that they needed, while your boss was a useless middle-man fat cat who was ripping you off.

Low paying jobs are often people doing extremely valuable service while some useless fat cat gets all the money. Just because anybody COULD do the work doesn't matter, it's the people that DO THE WORK that matter and they deserve to be paid on par with the value of their labor.

Let me try to explain this in a way you understand. Your transmission on your car or truck needs to be rebuilt. You take it to a few places. Do you choose the highest price mechanic? How about if you need a major plumbing job done? What about your lawn care company? No, you choose the cheapest outfit provided they do the same quality of work that the others do. It's what most everybody does.

Businesses do the exact same as you and I. They get people to work for them for the cheapest price. Could they share their profit and overpay workers? Sure they can, just like you, as an engineer that makes good money, can overpay the people that work for you. But it defies logic.

So unless you can tell me your practice on hiring people to work for you is pay the highest price, never buy foreign made goods, then you are a hypocrite, because you are doing the exact same thing as employers do.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

You've posted bogus 'findings' by groups that are predetermined to prove that marijuana causes violent behavior. Did they ask how many of these murders have ever smoked cigarettes? How many drank alcohol? How many held right-wing extremist political views?

Saying that violently criminal people have smoked marijuana does not prove that marijuana smoking caused their criminal behavior. There are hundreds of millions of people smoke marijuana on a regular basis and have never committed a violent crime.

I've known upwards of a hundred people who've smoked marijuana regularly. They are the most peaceful people in the world. Most of them don't even own guns - and the ones that did were all right-wing nut cases.

You've mixed up cause and effect. The cause is right-wing extremist political views, the effect is a disregard for the law and hated for people.

And 85-90% of smokers don’t develop lung cancer.
You’re in denial. Pot causes psychosis, psychosis leads to violence. Every one of these mass murderers are potheads.
Doesn’t mean every pothead develops psychosis. But the threat is very real and documented. Discounting that is creepy.

 

[Richard-H]

Let me try to explain this in a way you understand. Your transmission on your car or truck needs to be rebuilt. You take it to a few places. Do you choose the highest price mechanic? How about if you need a major plumbing job done? What about your lawn care company? No, you choose the cheapest outfit provided they do the same quality of work that the others do. It's what most everybody does.

Businesses do the exact same as you and I. They get people to work for them for the cheapest price. Could they share their profit and overpay workers? Sure they can, just like you, as an engineer that makes good money, can overpay the people that work for you. But it defies logic.

So unless you can tell me your practice on hiring people to work for you is pay the highest price, never buy foreign made goods, then you are a hypocrite, because you are doing the exact same thing as employers do.

What people do and what people should be allowed to do are two very different things. That's civilization.

That's why we have tariffs and all sorts of regulations. That's why wages should be regulated.

I worked in the Chemical industry. Before Love Canal and all the regulations that started in the 1970s, chemical companies were happily poisoning people by the thousands. It was believed that any chemical company that voluntarily took public & employee safety into account wouldn't be competitive, and any executive that did would be fired.

After Love Canal the Chemical Industry whined that they couldn't compete, but they did. They innovated. Most people in the industry liked being regulated. It gave them the ability to refuse to things that might harm the public. The companies that insured them also forced public & employee safety. America has a robust and very profitable chemical industry.

So saying that just because everybody is a shithead and that's the way things are, doesn't cut it. Yes, most people will be as much of a shithead as they can get away with, which is why the civilized people of the world have to use government to stop people from being shitheads whether they like it or not.

 

[theHawk]

Mass confusion impedes Fed attempts to prevent recession

Officials are gearing up for another supersized interest rate hike that's likely to send the economy and markets through convulsion, without a clear line of sight at their target, heightening the risk that they'll do either too much or too little.

www.politico.com

Economic growth is projected by some analysts to have been negative in the second quarter of the year, but hiring is strong and the jobless rate sits near historic lows. Consumers say they’re unhappy about the economy but are still spending even amid the aggressive price spikes. Supply chains are improving, but manufacturing output is slowing. And Covid cases are skyrocketing again even as America fully reopens for business.

People are still reluctantly accepting job offers, but perhaps they are just spending their "extra" income to offset inflation, and even making the feds' interest rate hikes ineffective.

At what point?

When Democrats breaks our economy and the middle class. All of their policies are designed to eliminate the middle class and put everyone into poverty with a few elites ruling them.

 

[Richard-H]

And 85-90% of smokers don’t develop lung cancer.
You’re in denial. Pot causes psychosis, psychosis leads to violence. Every one of these mass murderers are potheads.
Doesn’t mean every pothead develops psychosis. But the threat is very real and documented. Discounting that is creepy.

The percentage of people that get lung cancer from smoking is way higher than the percentage of people that are mass murderers and who have smoked pot.
Comparing the 2 is idiotic.

Just because some psychotic people have smoked pot does not mean that pot causes psychosis.

The latest polls show that just about half of all Americans have tried pot, and a very large number smoke habitually.

Nearly Half of U.S. Adults Have Tried Marijuana

The percentage of Americans who have tried marijuana has increased to a new high of 49%, as younger generations have been more likely than older generations to have tried it.

news.gallup.com

If it were true that pot causes people to become psychotic murders, then there would be mass murders in every town in the U.S. everyday.

Statistically, it would be easier to prove that men who don't shave regularly are highly likely to become psychotic murderers.

You have predetermined bias on this subject, with no experience or knowledge at all. Anyone that has experience smoking pot, or knowing people who smoke pot would laugh at your assertions.

I've known NYPD officers that told me that they wish everyone in NYC would smoke pot - because it makes people peaceful and docile which is what every police officer wants.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What people do and what people should be allowed to do are two very different things. That's civilization.

That's why we have tariffs and all sorts of regulations. That's why wages should be regulated.

I worked in the Chemical industry. Before Love Canal and all the regulations that started in the 1970s, chemical companies were happily poisoning people by the thousands. It was believed that any chemical company that voluntarily took public & employee safety into account wouldn't be competitive, and any executive that did would be fired.

After Love Canal the Chemical Industry whined that they couldn't compete, but they did. They innovated. Most people in the industry liked being regulated. It gave them the ability to refuse to things that might harm the public. The companies that insured them also forced public & employee safety. America has a robust and very profitable chemical industry.

So saying that just because everybody is a shithead and that's the way things are, doesn't cut it. Yes, most people will be as much of a shithead as they can get away with, which is why the civilized people of the world have to use government to stop people from being shitheads whether they like it or not.

You are citing two different subjects: wage control and safety control, two totally different things. If we allowed government to determine wages then we are Socialists and no real American wants that. Nobody owes you or I a job and nobody owes you or I a wage we demand. Saying government should control wages is like saying government should control the prices of used cars in this country.

If you want to make X amount of money, it's up to you to make yourself worth that kind of money in the first place--not your employer.

 

[initforme]

If another 5 million people quit their jobs at this time that would help the economy immensely.

 

[Richard-H]

You are citing two different subjects: wage control and safety control, two totally different things. If we allowed government to determine wages then we are Socialists and no real American wants that. Nobody owes you or I a job and nobody owes you or I a wage we demand. Saying government should control wages is like saying government should control the prices of used cars in this country.

If you want to make X amount of money, it's up to you to make yourself worth that kind of money in the first place--not your employer.

The government has been somewhat controlling wages for many years. There's no qualitative difference between the government regulating safety and regulating worker/employer relationships - including wages & benefits.

The problem is that workers ARE worth higher wages - unions have proven that. What you argue for is the ability of employers to cheat workers out of money that they've earned just by taking advantage of workers desperation.

You should really watch the third story in 'The Ballad of Buster Scruggs'. It really shows how an advantaged person takes advantage of a disadvantaged person, and typifies employer/employee relationships.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The government has been somewhat controlling wages for many years. There's no qualitative difference between the government regulating safety and regulating worker/employer relationships - including wages & benefits.

The problem is that workers ARE worth higher wages - unions have proven that. What you argue for is the ability of employers to cheat workers out of money that they've earned just by taking advantage of workers desperation.

You should really watch the third story in 'The Ballad of Buster Scruggs'. It really shows how an advantaged person takes advantage of a disadvantaged person, and typifies employer/employee relationships.

All the unions did was force employers to overpay workers. That doesn't mean squat. The only involvement government had in wages is the minimum wage which is also pretty stupid when you think of it; a dog and pony show to try and buy votes.

Cheating a worker is telling the worker you will pay them $15.00 an hour, and when you start working for them, pay you only $14.00 an hour. That's cheating because you were under the agreement of making $15.00 an hour. But when a person accepts a job for $10.00 an hour, and he or she is paid $10.00 an hour, nobody is cheated because you both lived up to your end of the agreement.

Now, I'm sure you want to respond by saying "but nobody will pay this guy more than $10.00 an hour so he has no choice but to take the job!" That would be wrong because this person does have a choice. Learn a trade or get into a career where you are worth more money.