Never A Dull Moment From This Girl

[Rigby5]

What I can't understand is why these people want to make our country like every other country of their desire instead of just moving to one of those glorious places. The problem is there is only one USA. Once they F this place up by turning into all the others, there is no other USA to move to after we realize our mistake.

And with that, the world's economy goes into free fall and then we have darkness.

Exactly. Look at our economy today and look at Europe. When the housing bubble burst under Bush, it sparked off a world downturn. Well.....the economy is doing great today, and what goes on in Socialist countries has little to no impact on us.

No, the sequence of events was that Bush borrowed trillions in deficit spending, which essentially dried up world wide credit sources, while devaluing the US dollar as the main world currency used for things like world wide oil purchases.
So it did not at all start with the housing bubble, and in fact is was not a housing bubble, but just normal growth in housing.
It was the Bush deficit spending that destroyed an otherwise healthy real estate market, and plummeted the whole world into a recession.

We seemed to do well at the short term while Bush was burying us in debt as well, because deficit spending problems surface years later. Trump is also spending at a deficit. That is not a sustainable strategy, and can only produce very short term growth. It always results in a massive recession if you continue it too long.
The economy is not doing great, and is just barely being propped up with deficit spending.

If we do not balance the budget, cut military spending, and reinvest in infrastructure like steel, consumer electronics, alternative energy, etc., we don't have a chance of surviving, and will become 3rd world.

 

[Pogo]

What I can't understand is why these people want to make our country like every other country of their desire instead of just moving to one of those glorious places. The problem is there is only one USA. Once they F this place up by turning into all the others, there is no other USA to move to after we realize our mistake.

And with that, the world's economy goes into free fall and then we have darkness.

Exactly. Look at our economy today and look at Europe. When the housing bubble burst under Bush, it sparked off a world downturn. Well.....the economy is doing great today, and what goes on in Socialist countries has little to no impact on us.

No, the sequence of events was that Bush borrowed trillions in deficit spending, which essentially dried up world wide credit sources, while devaluing the US dollar as the main world currency used for things like world wide oil purchases.
So it did not at all start with the housing bubble, and in fact is was not a housing bubble, but just normal growth in housing.
It was the Bush deficit spending that destroyed an otherwise healthy real estate market, and plummeted the whole world into a recession.

We seemed to do well at the short term while Bush was burying us in debt as well, because deficit spending problems surface years later. Trump is also spending at a deficit. That is not a sustainable strategy, and can only produce very short term growth. It always results in a massive recession if you continue it too long.
The economy is not doing great, and is just barely being propped up with deficit spending.

If we do not balance the budget, cut military spending, and reinvest in infrastructure like steel, consumer electronics, alternative energy, etc., we don't have a chance of surviving, and will become 3rd world.

Rump says that's OK because he won't be around when the shit hits the fan.

Which is kind of mixed news because at least it tells us he IS leaving at some point.

 

[basquebromance]

Women Need Socialism Like A Fish Needs A Bicycle

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What I can't understand is why these people want to make our country like every other country of their desire instead of just moving to one of those glorious places. The problem is there is only one USA. Once they F this place up by turning into all the others, there is no other USA to move to after we realize our mistake.

And with that, the world's economy goes into free fall and then we have darkness.

Exactly. Look at our economy today and look at Europe. When the housing bubble burst under Bush, it sparked off a world downturn. Well.....the economy is doing great today, and what goes on in Socialist countries has little to no impact on us.

No, the sequence of events was that Bush borrowed trillions in deficit spending, which essentially dried up world wide credit sources, while devaluing the US dollar as the main world currency used for things like world wide oil purchases.
So it did not at all start with the housing bubble, and in fact is was not a housing bubble, but just normal growth in housing.
It was the Bush deficit spending that destroyed an otherwise healthy real estate market, and plummeted the whole world into a recession.

We seemed to do well at the short term while Bush was burying us in debt as well, because deficit spending problems surface years later. Trump is also spending at a deficit. That is not a sustainable strategy, and can only produce very short term growth. It always results in a massive recession if you continue it too long.
The economy is not doing great, and is just barely being propped up with deficit spending.

If we do not balance the budget, cut military spending, and reinvest in infrastructure like steel, consumer electronics, alternative energy, etc., we don't have a chance of surviving, and will become 3rd world.

DumBama spent twice as much as Bush did. Yes, the housing market was a bubble. The feds lowered the standards on borrowing money for a home to get more minority home ownership. That created a bubble because everybody was getting in on the action.

It was not normal growth by any stretch of the imagination. Trust me, I've been a landlord for 25 years and have always lived in multiple-family homes. I've never been in a price war with other landlords before. During the bubble, you couldn't find anybody worthwhile to rent to. We were taking anybody we could find, even people with bad credit and no rental history. I had applicants respond to my ads that I couldn't' even read. It was like getting a response from 8 year olds. Everybody was purchasing homes at the time.

But now we've been in deficit spending for 20 years, and the economy has never been better. Mind you that I would like to see a balanced budget and no deficit spending, but it's not the end of the world if we don't.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It is obvious that capitalism does not work at all.
The most important strategic resources the US needs to depend on are steel, consumer electronics, and alternative energy like photo-voltaic.
But capitalists have sold out the US on all of those, giving China a monopoly over all of them.
So if we ever got into a fight with China, we would be at a serious risk due to the traitorous economic actions of short sighted capitalists.

It should be clear that the US needs socialism to create sufficient US steel production.
We also should tariff Chinese consumer electronics and should have socialize Solyndra.

Capitalism is the greatest system in the world. It's one of the reasons why millions are trying to get into this country.

The people who hate capitalism are those who never involved themselves in it. They go to work every day, spend their money on the newest iPhone, video games, cable television, highest speed internet, cars, and outside of perhaps their home or company provided IRA, made no investments with their money. They never made any sacrifices.

The only problem with capitalism is that it depends on consumers. If a consumer always chooses the cheapest products, then the only way to provide that consumer with such demand is to have products made outside of the US away from the unions and government taxes and regulations.

Alternative energy is more expensive and less reliable. That's why capitalists don't invest in it. Socialism is a system that doesn't reward properly. Capitalism is a system that does. After all, which horse will run faster, the horse that has a carrot dangled in front of him or the horse that is fed carrots all day?

Sorry, but I disagree.
The reason why people want to immigrate into the US is that they want to follow their money.
Colonialism and imperialism means extracting wealth from other countries without earning it.
England was calculated to have taken 173 billion dollars out of India.
The US makes billions off the dictators we spread across South and Central America.
Its just like when ancient Rome was pillaging and plundering, and everyone wanted to go to Rome, the only place that was safe from the Romans.

I know how to play the games with taxes, banks, insurance, etc., and I make more than enough money off capitalism, but that does not change the fact it is totally corrupt, immoral, rigged, and hopelessly inefficient.

Alternative energy does not have to be expensive or unreliable, such as fission, tidal, geothermal, etc. Solar requires being stored for night, but otherwise is the least expensive, virtually free.
Capitalists don't invest in it because it is less profitable, not because it is less practical.
And in the long run, alternative energy is far better for the country.

With socialism you do not need to reward the investor for risk, because there is no risk.
The people pool their own money, in order to make what they really need and want, at costs instead of huge markup profits. For example, health care. We pay over twice what the world does for health care, because we don't pay the doctors directly, but instead pay the insurance companies, who then pay the health corporations, who then pay the doctors. The middlemen do nothing but add layers of cost. Makes no sense.

The horse that will last the longest is not the one you over work and under feed to save money.
You get the most work out of the one you treat the best.
Capitalism is always short sighted, and always puts whole companies out of business.

In the case of steel, consumer electronics, and energy, capitalism may have destroyed the US and given the world over to China.

No, it's just another example of what I'm talking about. Our producers want to create products at a cheaper cost. To do that, they need to import steel.

So what killed steel in this country? For one, environmentalists. Two is the unions.

A close friend of mine passed away a few years ago. His widow told me that with overtime, he was making six figures a year working at the steel plant. My friend had no advanced education or trade. He was just a worker at the plant.

When I was a teen I was a lead guitarist in a rock band. The other guitarist was a few years older than me and he worked at the steel mills. He asked me if I wanted to take a ride with him to the plant to get his check. It was summer and I had nothing better to do.

On the way there we had a discussion about the mills and I asked him what he did exactly? I knew he worked on the trains but didn't know what he did. He told me he was a coal man. Confused, I asked what a coal man did? He said a coal man shovels the coal into the train to make it run. Again confused, I asked if they still had those kinds of trains? He said "No they don't, but the union says there has to be a coal man on the train at all times." In other words, the union forced the mills to pay guys to ride around on trains and do nothing.

Another guy that worked at the mills was a neighbor of my friend. I went to his house and they were talking. He was a welder who just got home after a week away. As it turned out, he got into a fight with his wife, so he headed to the mills and stayed there for a week. Technically, he was an on-call welder. They had a room equipt with a stove, microwave, fridge, beds, television, a home away from home. And of course for every hour he spent there, he got paid overtime.

He told me only once in a great while would they ask him to work, but even then, it only took him a half-hour to weld something and then he'd go back to the welders room. He said he believes his wife manufactures arguments because she loves the money so much.

So of course we now get our steel from China.

You have that all confused.
The reason current unions are not really unions in the real sense of a guild or collective bargaining organization of all the people, is capitalism. With each individual out to get all they can, capitalist unions have sprung up that do not at all represent the will of the people in any collective sense. Current groups called unions are just another capitalist venture, attempting to make a profit off the work of others.
A REAL union has to be done with the popular input, voting, and representation of all the people.
And unions should be subsidized and socialized, not for profit capitalists.
That is the Scandinavian model that works.

The actual reason steel in the US shut down was that the infrastructure was over 100 years old, and a massive investment in modernization was needed. That would also have made the process much cleaner.
And the US companies simply bailed.
China offered them better short term profits, even though it was obvious the long term was a disaster.
Those steel companies should have been prosecuted for treason and their companies confiscated.
Sending steel production to China ensures the defeat of the US eventually.

I agree, it's bad that we have to depend on steel imports. However it was government and unions that brought them down, not reinvestments. You can't expect to have US companies pay people who don't work and provide high wages and benefits and expect them to compete with countries like China. While our government was hounding industries to produce cleaner which is much more expensive, the Chinese are walking around with face masks on. How do you compete with that?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Did she give 90% of what she made last year, and will she give 90% again this coming year, to the IRS?

Let's see those tax returns!

*****CHUCKLE*****

Rule # 2a.
If not for double standards Liberals would have no standards at all.

 

[OnePercenter]

Living Wage Calculator

Add 20% for rent variances.

I'm curious to hear why you think that people who don't have job skills that warrant a higher wage should be given one simply because you think it's a "moral responsibility" of employers to do so?

Why would you think that workers don't have job skills? All of the 450 employees that I have today have job skills. All of the 10's of thousands that I employed in the last 40 years had job skills. Why would you think that workers don't have job skills?

People of character (like me) take into account their moral obligations to their employees because employees make them all of their money.

Are you really claiming to be a wealthy business owner? I love it when you progressives think you can lend credence to your ridiculous claims by pretending to be successful! It's so cute...

I find it amusing and a little sad that you don't have the thought process to answer my post, but instead go to attack mode.

Why would anyone waste their time answering posts from someone who's obviously full of shit? You're the kind of person that pretends to be things they aren't on the internet because their lives are so uninspiring!

I find it amusing and a little sad that you don't have the thought process to answer my post, but instead go to attack mode.

 

[OnePercenter]

It's your argument that is ridiculous.

Most employers/businesses lack morals and ethics which is why we have rules like minimum wage.

No, we had minimum wage when employers were able to take advantage of workers; making them work for a dollar or two a day.

Most places don't even pay minimum wage anymore because they can't find workers for that money. They can't take advantage of the worker today. Minimum wage workers are 3% of our workforce in the US, and most of them make more than minimum wage in a years time if they stay with the employer.

Here is what happens when you have a lack of morals and ethics.

Knight-Swift Agrees to $100 Million Settlement in Misclassification Lawsuit

This has nothing to do with the discussion here.

You wrote: "employers were able to take advantage of workers"

Knight-Swift got caught....

So you bring that up in a minimum or living wage discussion???? Very weak......even for you.

The issue is predatory employers. Knight-Swift got caught.

 

[OnePercenter]

You want a living wage? Adjust your skillset, and make yourself useful.

Leftist don't believe in that. They believe that you should pay a worker more than you can sell your workers labor for.

If your worker makes six widgets an hour in your widget factory, and you can only sell those widgets for two dollars each, you should pay your worker $15.00 an hour to produce $12.00 worth of product, and you'll just have to do with one less yacht.

Your math is screwed-up as usual. It's $100.00 worth of product that the now $8.75/hr worker produces.

It all depends on the product. If the product is created through automation, all the worker does is press buttons. That's hardly worth anything. They may help in some of the packaging processes depending on the device. However it's a low skill talentless job that an employer can get anybody to do.

If nobody pressed the button, the company wouldn't make any money. So the button pusher is key to the success of the company. How much do you pay a key success?

If you think the entry-level, unskilled button pusher is all there is to the company's success, you're a moron beyond even what I previously thought.

If nobody pressed the button, would the company make any money? The answer is NO.

 

[OnePercenter]

How much would your company make if you didn't do your job?

I can answer that. They'd make the same amount, because they'd hire someone else.

Really? I thought you did the work of three people.

Your question was directed at Ray. While I'm sure he's an excellent truck driver, and it's certainly not a job that just anyone can do, there are still a lot of good/excellent truck drivers in the world, and people who could learn to be. So if he wasn't there to do his job, they'd hire someone else to do it.

I'm a fairly special case, because I'm an unusual person. So it would cost my company a lot more to replace me, since they'd likely have to hire more than one person to do it. That being said, I am still replaceable. My basic job skills as listed on my resume are far from uncommon.

If there wasn't anyone to do Ray's job the company would make no money. His job is more important to the financial health of the company than almost anyone else.

You say you are replaceable, but multiple people would have to do the job that you currently perform. So it stands to believe that you should be making as much as those multiple people.

And if wishes were horses, everyone could ride. Talking about an impossible hypothetical like "Well, but what if there was no one in the world capable of or willing to drive trucks for money?" is a waste of everyone's time. Well, MY time, anyway, because unlike you, I have useful things to do. There ARE people to do the job, quite a few people, which is why Ray doesn't get paid as though he's a completely unique, rare, one-of-a-kind person.

You assume because Ray's company needs trucks driven, that's the ONLY job they need done to make money and stay in business. But what the **** would he carry in his truck without the people who work with existing clients and find new ones? How would he know where to go without the scads of people who manage the reams of paperwork (electronic paperwork now) that control and document every load? How would he even have a job without the human resources people who manage the hiring? How would he get paid without the bookkeeping people who manage the payroll and the billing? And while we're on the subject, how would he get paid without the owners of the company who provide the capital for it to exist, and who gathered all of those people together to do the work? Why the hell do you think companies employ and pay all of the people they do if none of them are essential to the existence and functioning of the business, you pinhead?

Isn't a truck driver the key component of the success of a trucking company?

 

[OnePercenter]

How much would your company make if you didn't do your job?

I can answer that. They'd make the same amount, because they'd hire someone else.

Really? I thought you did the work of three people.

Your question was directed at Ray. While I'm sure he's an excellent truck driver, and it's certainly not a job that just anyone can do, there are still a lot of good/excellent truck drivers in the world, and people who could learn to be. So if he wasn't there to do his job, they'd hire someone else to do it.

I'm a fairly special case, because I'm an unusual person. So it would cost my company a lot more to replace me, since they'd likely have to hire more than one person to do it. That being said, I am still replaceable. My basic job skills as listed on my resume are far from uncommon.

If there wasn't anyone to do Ray's job the company would make no money. His job is more important to the financial health of the company than almost anyone else.

You say you are replaceable, but multiple people would have to do the job that you currently perform. So it stands to believe that you should be making as much as those multiple people.

Second half of your post:

You are correct that it would cost them more to replace me at the level at which I perform than it would to keep me. And my employer is aware of it, which is why I get the perks of my position that I do. Doesn't mean I'm not technically replaceable; just that it would be a far less desirable outcome. The company's not going to stop existing and functioning if I die.

And unlike you, I am aware of the other considerations at hand that my employer has to consider. The first is that there are other employees in this company. I am the only person holding my particular job position in my department, but there are lots of others who do the same job for other departments. They get paid less than I do, because they have more people covering the responsibilities, and they accept that . . . to a certain point. If I start getting paid more than the managers do, my coworkers are not going to accept that, and neither would anyone they hired to replace them. And while we're on the subject, the managers aren't going to accept that, either. My manager is pretty unique in that she could see that I was a rare and lucky break for the company and pushed for me to get paid beyond the going rate for my job, but there are limits. And if she were to leave, a replacement manager who wasn't here to see the difference between the job without me and the job with me wouldn't tolerate for a second having a subordinate who got paid more than she did.

There's also me to consider. If I start getting paid far outside of the going rate for my job description, I'm basically trapped at this company. No other company is ever going to pay me that outrageous amount of money, which means any sort of career change would require accepting a massive pay cut. And that's not even to mention the fact that even if I decided to accept that, no employer in the world would look at my past pay history and even consider hiring me, because they would assume that I would never be happy with so much less money, and would leave.

Now, you might say, "Well, if you were making that much money, you would never WANT to leave." To that I say, shit happens. I like my last job very much, but I was forced to leave because it required a ton of telephone work and I lost my hearing and could no longer do it. One or several of my coworkers could leave and be replaced by utterly intolerable people I can't stand to be around every day. The company could decide to relocate my office to another city, or even another country; after all, the owner of the company lives in Israel.

Bottom line is, I could probably demand more money if I really wanted to push it. But it would be shortsighted of me in the extreme, for a lot of reasons. And there's no way they're going to agree to pay me three times the basic going rate for my job title, and it's completely reasonable for them to take that position. After all, if they're going to have to pay for three salaries anyway, there's not much point in having ME around, is there? I kinda lose my special value to them at that point.

It sounds like you work for a predator employer. You work for an Israeli? I feel for you.

 

[OnePercenter]

Why would you think that workers don't have job skills? All of the 450 employees that I have today have job skills. All of the 10's of thousands that I employed in the last 40 years had job skills. Why would you think that workers don't have job skills?

People of character (like me) take into account their moral obligations to their employees because employees make them all of their money.

That's how we know you're a phony. If you actually did own a business and were paying people whatever your "moral obligation" was, and your competitors were paying their employees what they were worth, you would be out of business.

You're writing that employers without character don't pay a living wage to their employees that make them all of their money?

Employers do not give a damn about subjective BS like "living wage". What you need to run your life is YOUR problem. They're your boss, not your mother or your babysitter.

Sack the **** up and act like a man. Or at least an adult.

There you have it; Employers don't give a damn. Thank You!!!!

They give a damn. They just don't give the damn that you arbitrarily think they should because you're too pathetic to take control of and responsibility for your own life.

Companies don't give a damn about anything except their shareholders.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

That's how we know you're a phony. If you actually did own a business and were paying people whatever your "moral obligation" was, and your competitors were paying their employees what they were worth, you would be out of business.

You're writing that employers without character don't pay a living wage to their employees that make them all of their money?

Employers do not give a damn about subjective BS like "living wage". What you need to run your life is YOUR problem. They're your boss, not your mother or your babysitter.

Sack the **** up and act like a man. Or at least an adult.

There you have it; Employers don't give a damn. Thank You!!!!

They give a damn. They just don't give the damn that you arbitrarily think they should because you're too pathetic to take control of and responsibility for your own life.

Companies don't give a damn about anything except their shareholders.

Certainly, shareholders get a bigger share of the damn, as it should be.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I can answer that. They'd make the same amount, because they'd hire someone else.

Really? I thought you did the work of three people.

Your question was directed at Ray. While I'm sure he's an excellent truck driver, and it's certainly not a job that just anyone can do, there are still a lot of good/excellent truck drivers in the world, and people who could learn to be. So if he wasn't there to do his job, they'd hire someone else to do it.

I'm a fairly special case, because I'm an unusual person. So it would cost my company a lot more to replace me, since they'd likely have to hire more than one person to do it. That being said, I am still replaceable. My basic job skills as listed on my resume are far from uncommon.

If there wasn't anyone to do Ray's job the company would make no money. His job is more important to the financial health of the company than almost anyone else.

You say you are replaceable, but multiple people would have to do the job that you currently perform. So it stands to believe that you should be making as much as those multiple people.

And if wishes were horses, everyone could ride. Talking about an impossible hypothetical like "Well, but what if there was no one in the world capable of or willing to drive trucks for money?" is a waste of everyone's time. Well, MY time, anyway, because unlike you, I have useful things to do. There ARE people to do the job, quite a few people, which is why Ray doesn't get paid as though he's a completely unique, rare, one-of-a-kind person.

You assume because Ray's company needs trucks driven, that's the ONLY job they need done to make money and stay in business. But what the **** would he carry in his truck without the people who work with existing clients and find new ones? How would he know where to go without the scads of people who manage the reams of paperwork (electronic paperwork now) that control and document every load? How would he even have a job without the human resources people who manage the hiring? How would he get paid without the bookkeeping people who manage the payroll and the billing? And while we're on the subject, how would he get paid without the owners of the company who provide the capital for it to exist, and who gathered all of those people together to do the work? Why the hell do you think companies employ and pay all of the people they do if none of them are essential to the existence and functioning of the business, you pinhead?

Isn't a truck driver the key component of the success of a trucking company?

All components of a business are key.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Leftist don't believe in that. They believe that you should pay a worker more than you can sell your workers labor for.

If your worker makes six widgets an hour in your widget factory, and you can only sell those widgets for two dollars each, you should pay your worker $15.00 an hour to produce $12.00 worth of product, and you'll just have to do with one less yacht.

Your math is screwed-up as usual. It's $100.00 worth of product that the now $8.75/hr worker produces.

It all depends on the product. If the product is created through automation, all the worker does is press buttons. That's hardly worth anything. They may help in some of the packaging processes depending on the device. However it's a low skill talentless job that an employer can get anybody to do.

If nobody pressed the button, the company wouldn't make any money. So the button pusher is key to the success of the company. How much do you pay a key success?

If you think the entry-level, unskilled button pusher is all there is to the company's success, you're a moron beyond even what I previously thought.

If nobody pressed the button, would the company make any money? The answer is NO.

If nobody pressed the button, the employer would find somebody that would. There are hundreds to choose from.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, we had minimum wage when employers were able to take advantage of workers; making them work for a dollar or two a day.

Most places don't even pay minimum wage anymore because they can't find workers for that money. They can't take advantage of the worker today. Minimum wage workers are 3% of our workforce in the US, and most of them make more than minimum wage in a years time if they stay with the employer.

Here is what happens when you have a lack of morals and ethics.

Knight-Swift Agrees to $100 Million Settlement in Misclassification Lawsuit

This has nothing to do with the discussion here.

You wrote: "employers were able to take advantage of workers"

Knight-Swift got caught....

So you bring that up in a minimum or living wage discussion???? Very weak......even for you.

The issue is predatory employers. Knight-Swift got caught.

No, the issue was minimum wage. You tried to change the issue when you couldn't debate your position any longer.

 

[OnePercenter]

Being a "mid-level administrator for a small business" my bet is that you aren't being paid your worth to the company.

In my very particular case, probably not. When I was hired, I took the place of the three people who were doing my job before me. On the other hand, when they realized that they didn't have to hire anyone to replace those people because I was able to do it all myself, they did give me a raise that puts me at about a dollar an hour short of what my supervisor makes, and which puts me well above what I could command at another company were I to look for another job. And they afford me a level of freedom and autonomy in my work that is virtually unheard-of in office work, not to mention that I have job security normally only found in civil service.

Your supervisor needs a raise in pay.

No, my supervisor, while a very nice woman and quite competent at her job, makes slightly above the going rate for her job in this city.

An employee is an employers best asset. Why would one pay their best asset.....going rate? Answer: CHEAP

Uh, no, it's because only a damned fool like you would pay more for ANY asset than the going rate.

My company does all its work on computers, so we own A LOT of laptops, and we have to buy new ones periodically. If Computer Supply Company A charges us the same amount per computer for ten of them as it would for buying only one, and Computer Supply Company B says, "If you'll buy all ten from us at one time we'll give you a discount", do you honestly think there's some sort of noble, moral superiority to my employer saying, "No! They are too important, and I am going to show how much we value them by paying more than I have to!"?

Like it or not, labor is the same way. If someone is able and willing to do the work for what they offer, then why in the hell would they pay more than that?

If someone is able and willing to do the work for what they offer

Which is why we need a strong minimum wage regulation. Also jail tRump et al for hiring illegals and eliminate the worker and H-1B visa programs.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

In my very particular case, probably not. When I was hired, I took the place of the three people who were doing my job before me. On the other hand, when they realized that they didn't have to hire anyone to replace those people because I was able to do it all myself, they did give me a raise that puts me at about a dollar an hour short of what my supervisor makes, and which puts me well above what I could command at another company were I to look for another job. And they afford me a level of freedom and autonomy in my work that is virtually unheard-of in office work, not to mention that I have job security normally only found in civil service.

Your supervisor needs a raise in pay.

No, my supervisor, while a very nice woman and quite competent at her job, makes slightly above the going rate for her job in this city.

An employee is an employers best asset. Why would one pay their best asset.....going rate? Answer: CHEAP

Uh, no, it's because only a damned fool like you would pay more for ANY asset than the going rate.

My company does all its work on computers, so we own A LOT of laptops, and we have to buy new ones periodically. If Computer Supply Company A charges us the same amount per computer for ten of them as it would for buying only one, and Computer Supply Company B says, "If you'll buy all ten from us at one time we'll give you a discount", do you honestly think there's some sort of noble, moral superiority to my employer saying, "No! They are too important, and I am going to show how much we value them by paying more than I have to!"?

Like it or not, labor is the same way. If someone is able and willing to do the work for what they offer, then why in the hell would they pay more than that?

If someone is able and willing to do the work for what they offer

Which is why we need a strong minimum wage regulation. Also jail tRump et al for hiring illegals and eliminate the worker and H-1B visa programs.

If nobody is willing to do the work for what they offer, then it's up to the employer to attract workers one way or another. It's called Supply and Demand.

 

[OnePercenter]

You're writing that employers without character don't pay a living wage to their employees that make them all of their money?

Yes, that's the way it works. Just because an employer is not paying what an employee would like does not mean they lack character. If whatever pay they are offering is not attracting workers, then they need to increase their offer. If they find people for the wages and benefits offered, then there is no reason to pay any more.

We non-employers do this in our lives. If you get three estimates from lawn care companies to take care of your yard, you choose the lowest bid. If you get three bids to have your transmission rebuilt in your car, you take the lowest price. We all do it, not just businesses.

It must be a full moon!

Employers without character don't pay a living wage.

You NEVER take the lowest bid. If you get three, you take the middle.

Any mechanical rebuild, you ALWAYS take the one with the best warranty, because it WILL break again.

No, I'm talking about all three doing the same quality of work. I don't know what you do, but most Americans pick the cheapest one.

You would never pay $20.00 for a watermelon, would you? Then why would you pay an employee more money than you have to? When did you become the arbiter of character anyway?

People don't open up businesses as a social obligation. People open up businesses to provide products or services for a profit. If you overpay your employees, you will eventually join them in the unemployment line when your competitors put you out of business.

No business in history ever failed because they overpaid their employees.

Possibly because no business in history overpaid its employees.

Then why are there so many tRumpbots against a higher minimum wage?

 

[Flash]

The gift that keeps on giving.

Ocasio-Cortez blasts capitalism as an ‘irredeemable’ system

But yet she demands that the greedy welfare queens be given the wealth that was created under capitalism. You know, for social justice reasons.