REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

This CEO Wants To Pay ‘Mentally Retarded’ People $2 Per Hour

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Sunday, February 2, 2014 16:08
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 5645
PAGE 2 of 2

Friday, January 31, 2014 4:29 PM

BYTEMITE


The powers that be can be petty. They are also proud.

Really, it's to our advantage.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 5:16 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


I'm a big supporter of minimum wages and conditions. Of course I would be, I live in a socialist country, don't I rappy. Or according to another poster here who once said I lived in a right wingers paradise.

Who knows. I know that our wages and conditions are better than US for your average Joe, but that business groups are always pressuring governments to hack away at them...in the name of the economy, which has been one of the best performers in the world in recent years.

Of course hardline business types want to pay the least they can get away with. Gina Rinehart, mining magnate moaned on that Australian mining companies couldn't compete with African ones because in Africa they pay workers $1 per hour. That's a corporate wetdream. Elvis Christ is right. It's better for them when there is a large, desperate population to exploit. Whether people can live on the wage is a pointless argument, because people who hold those views simply don't care. For them, it's a dog eat dog world in which the individual must claw their way kicking and screaming over the top of the great unwashed. Ethics, morality, concern for community, the future, the environment play NO PART in it all. That's why they shovel millions into climate change denial, why their media mouth pieces say the same things. They know damn well climate change exists, they just don't want any action to get in the way of them making the biggest, fattest profit they can now. They don't care what happens in 50 years time, because chances are they'll be dead, and it doesn't concern them.

And that, my friends, is why unions came into existence in the first place. Without collective action, industrialists, businesses, corporations demonstrate throughout history that crap working conditions and wages are acceptable means for making profit.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 5:23 PM

STORYMARK







"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 5:47 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Quote:
So let me ask you to describe a person whose work would be worth $2.00 an hour.


Apparently,

1) Someone who doesn't know any better and the business is okay cheating them.
2) Someone who could be arrested or deported if they complain.

There are no people who are legitimately worth only two dollars an hour in this economy, because that's barely enough to eat fast food for every meal with no cash left over, and definitely not enough to rent a place to sleep. To meet basic standards of living, as I said previously, they would have to work five other jobs at that rate.

In short, they do not exist, because no one, not even the "mentally retarded" with enough wherewithal to WANT to work, would accept those terms of employment. This is simple Supply and Demand.

Loaded question with a flawed basis to begin with.


Sort'a the point. It was a good old "have you quit beating your wife?" question.

Guy should have pointed that out, but he tried to give an answer.




"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 6:09 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Let's see if Geezer can answer the question: "Who would you pay $2 an hour as an employer?"


If Elvischrist is supposed to be working but is trolling this thread instead, he'd be worth about $2.00.

And I note you're changing the question from "would be worth" to "would pay".

I'd pay folks at least the minimum wage, and as much more as they were worth as an employee. Wouldn't you?


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 7:50 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.




RUSH LIMBAUGH is a BLUE PILL ADDICT!
As evidence of "rape mentality"
Tuesday, July 30, 2013 8:11 PM
MAL4PREZ
And just remember, according to Rappy, the term befitting a women who wants the insurance she pays for to cover medications affecting her reproductive organs is whore

Wednesday, July 31, 2013 4:23 PM
little rappy
The term applies


And this is Geezer being non-partisan ... HAHAHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...
Dem Super Pac slams Obamacare because it really sucks and will cause herpes
Geezer
So some Democrats are running on pointing out that the Healthcare.gov rollout was an unmitigated disaster.

I feel so vindicated.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 8:08 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
I only said what others were thinking.
That was your first mistake. Others WEREN'T thinking it. Only you, rappy, only you. Yanno, I would think that you would be just a little gentler on the mentally deficient, seeing as you seem to have a lot in common with them.




Seriously Francis, you do need to lighten up.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 8:14 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:

Sort'a the point. It was a good old "have you quit beating your wife?" question.

Guy should have pointed that out, but he tried to give an answer.


And there we have it. Typical red blooded American Teabagger male, promoting spousal abuse. #waronwomen

What a disgrace.



Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 8:32 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.



RUSH LIMBAUGH is a BLUE PILL ADDICT!
As evidence of "rape mentality"
Tuesday, July 30, 2013 8:11 PM
MAL4PREZ
And just remember, according to Rappy, the term befitting a women who wants the insurance she pays for to cover medications affecting her reproductive organs is whore

Wednesday, July 31, 2013 4:23 PM
little rappy
The term applies


And this is Geezer being non-partisan ... HAHAHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...
Dem Super Pac slams Obamacare because it really sucks and will cause herpes
Geezer
So some Democrats are running on pointing out that the Healthcare.gov rollout was an unmitigated disaster.

I feel so vindicated.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 8:56 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


So, every time you see the phrase ABANDON SHIP! it's where Geezer literally abandoned an argument after being proven wrong, or reverted to strawman arguments, personal attacks, or changed the subject, or some combination - because he had no answer. That is literally every single one of his posts in this thread.


Looking at this, I can't see where Mr. Schiff thinks exploiting the mentally handicapped is a fine idea.

I'll agree that using a mentally handicapped person as an example of someone who not only couldn't do a particular job, but couldn't be trained to do it is insensitive, but nowhere does he say they should be hired at $2.00 an hour.

So we got the usual spin going on here.

Rebuttal: Bee asks him to describe a person whose work would be worth $2.00 an hour. Schiff says “You know somebody who might be? What’s the politically correct word for ‘mentally retarded?’”
ABANDON SHIP! strawman:
So everyone is the same height and weight. Has the same ability to learn or function. Has the same amount of motivation, honesty, ability to communicate. Everyone can hit a major league fastball or run a 4 second forty. After all, we're all equal. Right?

"All men are created equal" means have equal rights under the law, as pretty much anyone who actually studies, instead of trolls, knows.

Read the whole sentence, and maybe you'll understand.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

rebuttal: Equal protection under the law also applies to nondiscriminatory employment and fair wage practices. Hence "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
ABANDON SHIP! changing the topic
If you can do the job - or even if you can do the job with accommodations.

You might be able to hire a blind person as a book editor, for example, if you could provide braille or verbal transcripts. However, someone not mentally able to understand the story, or understand the rules of grammar and punctuation, would not be suitable.

If someone was so mentally handicapped that they could not perform any task suitably, would you hire them?
ABANDON SHIP! changing the topic, strawman, personal attack
"describe a person whose work would be worth..." is the same as "...thinks that exploiting the mentally handicapped as a source of cheap labor is a fine idea" to you?

Really need to work on that reading comprehension.
ABANDON SHIP! strawman
Here's the world for you, then.

Quote:
Because of Amendments to the Constitution, every American is fully equal, meaning that no one is smarter, better-looking, stronger, or faster than anyone else. The Handicapper General and a team of agents ensure that the laws of equality are enforced. The government forces citizens to wear "handicaps" (a mask if they are too handsome or beautiful, earphones with deafening radio signals to make intelligent people unable to concentrate and form thoughts, and heavy weights to slow down those who are too strong or fast).
ABANDON SHIP!
We're not? Seems to me that's exactly what someone would mean when describing someone who could not hold a job worth $2.00 an hour...Really think you're getting pretty far afield from what Mr. Schiff meant.

If someone asked you to describe a worker who would be worth $2.00 an hour, what would you say?

The fact that you misconstrue his, or my, idea that some folks are not functional enough to function in the workplace to a blanket condemnation of folks who are differently abled just shows me that the spin in Niki's post is working.
ABANDON SHIP! personal ATTACK

Ahh. Niki the mind reader again.

So let me ask you to describe a person whose work would be worth $2.00 an hour.
ABANDON SHIP!
Looking at this, I can't see where Mr. Schiff thinks exploiting the mentally handicapped is a fine idea.

I'll agree that using a mentally handicapped person as an example of someone who not only couldn't do a particular job, but couldn't be trained to do it is insensitive, but nowhere does he say they should be hired at $2.00 an hour.

So we got the usual spin going on here.

Bee asks him to describe a person whose work would be worth $2.00 an hour. Schiff says “You know somebody who might be? What’s the politically correct word for ‘mentally retarded?’”
ABANDON SHIP!
So everyone is the same height and weight. Has the same ability to learn or function. Has the same amount of motivation, honesty, ability to communicate. Everyone can hit a major league fastball or run a 4 second forty. After all, we're all equal. Right?

"All men are created equal" means have equal rights under the law, as pretty much anyone who actually studies, instead of trolls, knows.

Read the whole sentence, and maybe you'll understand.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

Equal protection under the law also applies to nondiscriminatory employment and fair wage practices. Hence "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
ABANDON SHIP!
If you can do the job - or even if you can do the job with accommodations.

You might be able to hire a blind person as a book editor, for example, if you could provide braille or verbal transcripts. However, someone not mentally able to understand the story, or understand the rules of grammar and punctuation, would not be suitable.

If someone was so mentally handicapped that they could not perform any task suitably, would you hire them?
"describe a person whose work would be worth..." is the same as "...thinks that exploiting the mentally handicapped as a source of cheap labor is a fine idea" to you?

Really need to work on that reading comprehension.
ABANDON SHIP!
Here's the world for you, then.

Quote:
Because of Amendments to the Constitution, every American is fully equal, meaning that no one is smarter, better-looking, stronger, or faster than anyone else. The Handicapper General and a team of agents ensure that the laws of equality are enforced. The government forces citizens to wear "handicaps" (a mask if they are too handsome or beautiful, earphones with deafening radio signals to make intelligent people unable to concentrate and form thoughts, and heavy weights to slow down those who are too strong or fast).
ABANDON SHIP!
We're not? Seems to me that's exactly what someone would mean when describing someone who could not hold a job worth $2.00 an hour...Really think you're getting pretty far afield from what Mr. Schiff meant.

If someone asked you to describe a worker who would be worth $2.00 an hour, what would you say?

The fact that you misconstrue his, or my, idea that some folks are not functional enough to function in the workplace to a blanket condemnation of folks who are differently abled just shows me that the spin in Niki's post is working.
ABANDON SHIP!

Ahh. Niki the mind reader again.

So let me ask you to describe a person whose work would be worth $2.00 an hour.
ABANDON SHIP!
Looking at this, I can't see where Mr. Schiff thinks exploiting the mentally handicapped is a fine idea.

I'll agree that using a mentally handicapped person as an example of someone who not only couldn't do a particular job, but couldn't be trained to do it is insensitive, but nowhere does he say they should be hired at $2.00 an hour.

So we got the usual spin going on here.

Bee asks him to describe a person whose work would be worth $2.00 an hour. Schiff says “You know somebody who might be? What’s the politically correct word for ‘mentally retarded?’”
ABANDON SHIP!
So everyone is the same height and weight. Has the same ability to learn or function. Has the same amount of motivation, honesty, ability to communicate. Everyone can hit a major league fastball or run a 4 second forty. After all, we're all equal. Right?

"All men are created equal" means have equal rights under the law, as pretty much anyone who actually studies, instead of trolls, knows.

Read the whole sentence, and maybe you'll understand.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

Equal protection under the law also applies to nondiscriminatory employment and fair wage practices. Hence "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
ABANDON SHIP!
If you can do the job - or even if you can do the job with accommodations.

You might be able to hire a blind person as a book editor, for example, if you could provide braille or verbal transcripts. However, someone not mentally able to understand the story, or understand the rules of grammar and punctuation, would not be suitable.

If someone was so mentally handicapped that they could not perform any task suitably, would you hire them?
"describe a person whose work would be worth..." is the same as "...thinks that exploiting the mentally handicapped as a source of cheap labor is a fine idea" to you?

Really need to work on that reading comprehension.
ABANDON SHIP!
Here's the world for you, then.

Quote:
Because of Amendments to the Constitution, every American is fully equal, meaning that no one is smarter, better-looking, stronger, or faster than anyone else. The Handicapper General and a team of agents ensure that the laws of equality are enforced. The government forces citizens to wear "handicaps" (a mask if they are too handsome or beautiful, earphones with deafening radio signals to make intelligent people unable to concentrate and form thoughts, and heavy weights to slow down those who are too strong or fast).
ABANDON SHIP!
We're not? Seems to me that's exactly what someone would mean when describing someone who could not hold a job worth $2.00 an hour...Really think you're getting pretty far afield from what Mr. Schiff meant.

If someone asked you to describe a worker who would be worth $2.00 an hour, what would you say?

The fact that you misconstrue his, or my, idea that some folks are not functional enough to function in the workplace to a blanket condemnation of folks who are differently abled just shows me that the spin in Niki's post is working.
ABANDON SHIP!

Ahh. Niki the mind reader again.

So let me ask you to describe a person whose work would be worth $2.00 an hour.
ABANDON SHIP!

Sort'a the point. It was a good old "have you quit beating your wife?" question.

Guy should have pointed that out, but he tried to give an answer.
ABANDON SHIP!

If Elvischrist is supposed to be working but is trolling this thread instead, he'd be worth about $2.00.

And I note you're changing the question from "would be worth" to "would pay".

I'd pay folks at least the minimum wage, and as much more as they were worth as an employee. Wouldn't you?
ABANDON SHIP!


Now back to our regularly scheduled program:


RUSH LIMBAUGH is a BLUE PILL ADDICT!
As evidence of "rape mentality"
Tuesday, July 30, 2013 8:11 PM
MAL4PREZ
And just remember, according to Rappy, the term befitting a women who wants the insurance she pays for to cover medications affecting her reproductive organs is whore

Wednesday, July 31, 2013 4:23 PM
little rappy
The term applies


And this is Geezer being non-partisan ... HAHAHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...
Dem Super Pac slams Obamacare because it really sucks and will cause herpes
Geezer
So some Democrats are running on pointing out that the Healthcare.gov rollout was an unmitigated disaster.

I feel so vindicated.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 9:11 PM

ELVISCHRIST


Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Let's see if Geezer can answer the question: "Who would you pay $2 an hour as an employer?"


If Elvischrist is supposed to be working but is trolling this thread instead, he'd be worth about $2.00.




How much are you getting paid, troll?


Why would you assume I'm supposed to be working? Maybe I'm on vacation. Maybe I'm a millionaire who dabbles in the market. Maybe I'm Clint Eastwood.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 9:40 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


"I'd pay folks at least the minimum wage, and as much more as they were worth as an employee."

And that's the way it should be, thank you. That's what the man should have said, and if he hadn't been so focused on rationalizing his "no minimum wage" position, he should have responded: "There is no one I would pay $2.00 an hour; either a person can do a job and receive proper wages, or they shouldn't be hired", or something to that effect.

Kiki, I don't know where you were going with all that, and why repeat it so many times? I lost count of how many repetition, it just seemed weird.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 10:01 PM

BYTEMITE


Oh man. If I got paid for trolling on this board instead of doing anything constructive I'd be RICH.

Metaphorically.

Or something. I get paid in satisfaction I guess.

I'm living the dream, the shitty unrealistic dream, what else do you all want from me.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 10:10 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


By the way, we ALREADY DO THIS. Because of a loophole in the Minimum Wage Law, there are people being paid pennies an hour to work...Goodwill is an example, where they pay as little as 22 cents an hour. ( http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/06/24/2201101/goodwill-pays-cent
s-per-hour/)

The loophole:
Quote:
The Act also permits the employment of certain individuals at wage rates below the statutory minimum wage under certificates issued by the Department of Labor:

• Student learners (vocational education students);

• Full time students in retail or service establishments, agriculture, or institutions of higher education; and

• Individuals whose earning or productive capacities for the work to be performed are impaired by physical or mental disabilities, including those related to age or injury. http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/minwage.htm


So they've already got a way around the minimum wage for some people; if people like Schiff got their way, nobody would have any protection and they could pay as little as they like to ANYONE. Which of course is exactly what he and his kind want.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 31, 2014 10:12 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Niki

I took the time to read every single one of Geezer's posts. And every single one, without exception, is a logical fallacy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies Some I specifically labeled. And just so as to avoid being accused of selective quoting, I quoted all his posts in full.

That's all.

Just proving a point - every single one of Geezer's posts is worthless and contributes nothing to the discussion, and Geezer is a troll.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 2:20 AM

ELVISCHRIST


Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Oh man. If I got paid for trolling on this board instead of doing anything constructive I'd be RICH.

Metaphorically.

Or something. I get paid in satisfaction I guess.

I'm living the dream, the shitty unrealistic dream, what else do you all want from me.




So far I've been unable to find a gig that pays me to chug vodka and make snarky internet comments.


Doesn't mean I'm giving up on the dream, though.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 3:04 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:
Originally posted by ElvisChrist:
So far I've been unable to find a gig that pays me to chug vodka and make snarky internet comments.

Doesn't mean I'm giving up on the dream, though.

Have you considered the field of Contract Security ?

<-- On break, between rounds, and it's rum, but still...

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 3:06 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


As I scrolled thru this thread, I came across this little gem...
Quote:
Bee asked HIM. Note this wasn't a position Schiff was promoting, on his own. He gives an honest, on the spot answer to the question, as HE saw it. I do think you're missing the significance of that, by focusing far too much on his answer.
Wow, because this was his honest on-the-spot response, his actual opinion on the topic, we should cut him a break because he didn't have enough time to make it more politically correct? We're focusing too much on his answer?

Hmmm. If we shouldn't be focusing on his answer, what SHOULD we be focusing on?

Should we be focusing on what Schiff "should have" said, if he were just a bit more mentally agile and rhetorically savvy?

Seems like it is a politician's job to be, yanno, politically correct. Sorry to say that Schiff doesn't seem to have the chops to deflect an "unfair" question, or the smarts to NOT step into a pile of doo-doo. No wonder rappy feels so sympatico! But if Schiff thinks that people are only "worth" their job performance, then it seems that Schiff himself is overpaid, because he's a politician who can't be politic.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 9:03 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
That is a huge theme with opponents of a minimum wage hike. They want to plant the idea in everyone’s head that doubling the minimum wage will result in doubling of prices of popular products. That claim is completely false. Take McDonalds. In Australia, where the minimum wage is $17.05, or almost $15 in U.S. currency, a Big Mac costs $4.94. That’s about $4.32 in American dollars. In the U.S., a Big Mac costs $4.20.


Per the Australian government, the national minimum wage for full-time workers is $16.37 AU ($14.30 U.S.).

http://www.fairwork.gov.au/pay/national-minimum-wage/pages/default.asp
x

Doing a little checking, that minimum wage is for people 21 and older.

Minimum wages for younger folks are much lower.

For the food service industry (which has it's own rate charts depending on State), they start at $7.19 AU (around $6.27 U.S.) for under 16, and go to $16.19 AU ($14.14 U.S.) for twenty year olds.

If you look at McDonalds in Australia, they hire kids a young as 14, and their employment site seems mostly focused on teens.

https://apply.mcdonalds.com.au/public/index.cfm?action=showPublicConte
nt&assetCategoryId=2465

So the Daily Show's figures seem a bit, shall we say, spun.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 9:40 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:

So the Daily Show's figures seem a bit, shall we say, spun.






Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 12:19 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


The Bill of Rights in the National Archives

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


RUSH LIMBAUGH is a BLUE PILL ADDICT!
As evidence of "rape mentality"
Tuesday, July 30, 2013 8:11 PM
MAL4PREZ
And just remember, according to Rappy, the term befitting a women who wants the insurance she pays for to cover medications affecting her reproductive organs is whore

Wednesday, July 31, 2013 4:23 PM
little rappy
The term applies


And this is Geezer being non-partisan ... HAHAHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...
Dem Super Pac slams Obamacare because it really sucks and will cause herpes
Geezer
So some Democrats are running on pointing out that the Healthcare.gov rollout was an unmitigated disaster

I feel so vindicated.

"Just glad that some Democrats are acknowledging the bad job done in developing Healthcare.com." "it'll be interesting to see if these same Democrats acknowledge" "these Democrats seem to understand what the real Obama Kool-Ade drinkers still won't address" " it's about Democrats using criticism of the rollout in their campaign ads".


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 12:30 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


GEEZER, all you've shown is that Australia has the same libertarian screw-'em-to-the-max attitude that Schiff does. But you have not defended or explained the concept that a person's "worth" should be determined by the labor market, if that is indeed your opinion. So, in the interest of fair discussion, why don't you explain YOUR opinion here, since you tend to accuse people of "misunderstanding" and "misrepresenting" you.

So, speak up, man! The floor is yours!



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 2:57 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


First, the minimum wage in Australia changes frequently, and the currency exchange between the Australia dollar and USD changes constantly. In July of 2012, Fox claimed:
Quote:
A few weeks ago, the Australian government raised minimum wage to A$15 an hour (about $15.30 USD). ( http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/blog/2012/07/13/australian-m
inimum-wage-myth)

I don't know where they got "a few weeks ago", since the new minimum wage was implemented in July of 2010 ( http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704025304575283933
964515188). I don't know where the $17.05 figure came from, but googling "Australian minimum wage 14.50" in numerous articles, the $16.37 AU figure you quoted was listed as equivalent to $14.50 USD; rounding that up to $15 (as numerous other articles have, see below: "the-magical-world-where-mcdonalds-pays-15-an-hour-its-australia") isn't that big a deal.

By the way, it's going up again:
Quote:
On July 24, the country's Fair Work Commission approved a new labor agreement between the company and its employees guaranteeing them up to a 15 percent pay increase by 2017. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/the-magical-world-
where-mcdonalds-pays-15-an-hour-its-australia/278313/

Then there's your implication that workers at McDonalds in Australia are mostly young, so getting less than minimum wage. In America:
Quote:
The average age of a fast-food worker is almost 30 right now, but that’s because of the recession; in 2000, it was 22. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-18/mcdonald-s-jobs-are-drive-thr
u-not-dead-end.html


Couple that with this:


( http://www.valuingolderworkers.gov.au/industry/accomodation.asp)

I couldn't find any more recent data, but this shows " The average age (mean) of the Accommodations & Restaurants industry is 34.1 years" in Australia as of 2001, and that 85.7% of those workers were over the age of 19. If you can find anything more recent regarding fast-food workers in Australia, that would be great; but given this, your APPARENT assumption that McDonalds is using a large number of workers earning less than minimum wage is just that, an assumption, and nothing more.

Not only that, but the link you provided shows clearly that, while 14-year-old workers are legal in SOME places in Australia, not in all, and even where they are, there are numerous caveats:
Quote:
NSW, NT, SA, TAS - The minimum age of employment outside school hours is 14 years of age for casual and part time employees.

• Your parent or guardian provides written consent for you to start work

• You must be able to demonstrate during the interview that you have the ability to handle difficult situations and the skill to fulfil the required positions.

VIC - the minimum age of employment is 15 years of age.

QLD - employees who are under 16 years of age and have not yet finished Year 10, to provide parental consent to commence work. Employees under 16 may only work 12 hours during a school week (38 hours a week during school holidays), with each shift being a maximum of 4 hours Monday to Friday and 8 hours Saturday and Sunday. All hours of work must be between 6am and 10pm.

WA - the minimum age of employment is 15 years of age. Employees who are under 15 years of age need to provide parental consent to commence work and may only work between 6am and 10pm if the work is outside of school hours. Legislation also requires compulsory attendance at school for children up to the year they turn 17. Employees under 17 years of age may not work during school.

ACT - recommended minimum age for full time employment in ACT is school leaving age (ie. 15 years of age). It is possible to be employed below this age for a maximum of 10 hours per week.

When you consider that those in Australia over the age of 18 make a legal minimum wage of USD 9.79, while our minimum wage is still USD 7.25, I think the point is pretty clear.

Given all the above, I don't think the Daily Show segment was "spun" as much as you are trying to indicate. I think their point was quite valid; our minimum wage SUCKS, and having a higher minimum wage hasn't destroyed Australia.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 4:42 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


This is just another data point on the same mindset expressed by Schiff:




This wealthy mogul thinks that rising income inequality is fantastic.
Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:16 AM PST

Millionaire investor and star of Shark Tank Kevin O’Leary believes income inequality serves a purpose. In fact, he believes income inequality is fantastic.

The following exchange occurred on his Canadian show the Lang & O’Leary Exchange:


Amanda Lang: The wealth, that’s according to Oxfam, of world’s 85 richest people is equal to the three and a half billion poorest people.

Kevin O’Leary: It’s fantastic. And this is a great thing because it inspires everybody. They get the motivation to look up to the one percent and say I want to become one of those people. I am going to fight hard to get up to the top. This is fantastic news and of course I applaud it. What can be wrong with this?”

Stunned Amanda Lang: Really?

Kevin O’Leary: Yes really.


There should be context to every dialogue. That snippet seems to give the impression that Kevin O’Leary is an unfeeling and callous person. When taken into context with the rest of the interchange something becomes more obvious.

Follow me below the fold for that context.

Amanda Lang asks if O’Leary believes some poor kid wakes up in Africa thinking about being the next Bill Gates. He replies that income inequality creates the motivation that everybody needs. Lang made the most important statement that simply flew over his head. She asserts that one cannot pull up their socks if they don’t have any.

O’Leary immediately plays the redistribution card. “Don’t tell me that you want to redistribute wealth again,” O’Leary said. “That’s never going to happen, okay?” He further says the stat on income inequality is “a celebratory stat,” O’Leary said. “I am very excited about it. I am wonderful to see it happen.”

A few days ago I wrote this blog post titled “Most Of The Rich Are Undeserving Of Their Wealth & Income.” It received some pushback from a few people. O’Leary’s sentiment is currently codified in an ideology that prevents the poor in the aggregate, access to success.

The ideology that says “I did it and therefore you can too” is flawed in the context of opportunity. O’Leary's dismissal of Lang’s statement about the poor person not having a sock to pull up in the first place is where those that think like O’Leary fail. There are exceptions where some, because of sheer luck and brawn, are able to supersede their environment and condition. However in the aggregate one’s station is static and one’s upward mobility is very low. Increasing income inequality makes this worse.

The following snippet from the referenced Oxfam report should be heeded.

Given the scale of rising wealth concentrations, opportunity capture and unequal political representation are a serious and worrying trend. For instance:

Almost half of the world’s wealth is now owned by just one percent of the population.
The wealth of the one percent richest people in the world amounts to $110 trillion. That’s 65 times the total wealth of the bottom half of the world’s population.
The bottom half of the world’s population owns the same as the richest 85 people in the world.
Seven out of ten people live in countries where economic inequality has increased in the last 30 years.
The richest one percent increased their share of income in 24 out of 26 countries for which we have data between 1980 and 2012.
In the US, the wealthiest one percent captured 95 percent of post financial crisis growth since 2009,while the bottom 90 percent became poorer.

This massive concentration of economic resources in the hands of fewer people presents a significant threat to inclusive political and economic systems. Instead of moving forward together, people are increasingly separated by economic and political power, inevitably heightening social tensions and increasing the risk of societal breakdown.

O’Leary’s joy in increasing levels of income inequality is at best ignorant. He fails to understand that all forms of capitalism are at risk. The increasing instability that will increasingly come about with exploding income inequality is unstoppable by him or any army. He disregards it at the peril of his own wealth and the world’s current order.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 6:52 PM

ELVISCHRIST


Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
That is a huge theme with opponents of a minimum wage hike. They want to plant the idea in everyone’s head that doubling the minimum wage will result in doubling of prices of popular products. That claim is completely false. Take McDonalds. In Australia, where the minimum wage is $17.05, or almost $15 in U.S. currency, a Big Mac costs $4.94. That’s about $4.32 in American dollars. In the U.S., a Big Mac costs $4.20.


Per the Australian government, the national minimum wage for full-time workers is $16.37 AU ($14.30 U.S.).

http://www.fairwork.gov.au/pay/national-minimum-wage/pages/default.asp
x

Doing a little checking, that minimum wage is for people 21 and older.

Minimum wages for younger folks are much lower.

For the food service industry (which has it's own rate charts depending on State), they start at $7.19 AU (around $6.27 U.S.) for under 16, and go to $16.19 AU ($14.14 U.S.) for twenty year olds.

If you look at McDonalds in Australia, they hire kids a young as 14, and their employment site seems mostly focused on teens.

https://apply.mcdonalds.com.au/public/index.cfm?action=showPublicConte
nt&assetCategoryId=2465

So the Daily Show's figures seem a bit, shall we say, spun.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."



You seem to be completely willing to accept McDonald's figures, though.


After all, why would any corporation ever try to spin anything, right?



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:57 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
That is a huge theme with opponents of a minimum wage hike. They want to plant the idea in everyone’s head that doubling the minimum wage will result in doubling of prices of popular products. That claim is completely false. Take McDonalds. In Australia, where the minimum wage is $17.05, or almost $15 in U.S. currency, a Big Mac costs $4.94. That’s about $4.32 in American dollars. In the U.S., a Big Mac costs $4.20.


Per the Australian government, the national minimum wage for full-time workers is $16.37 AU ($14.30 U.S.).

http://www.fairwork.gov.au/pay/national-minimum-wage/pages/default.asp
x

Doing a little checking, that minimum wage is for people 21 and older.

Minimum wages for younger folks are much lower.

For the food service industry (which has it's own rate charts depending on State), they start at $7.19 AU (around $6.27 U.S.) for under 16, and go to $16.19 AU ($14.14 U.S.) for twenty year olds.

If you look at McDonalds in Australia, they hire kids a young as 14, and their employment site seems mostly focused on teens.

https://apply.mcdonalds.com.au/public/index.cfm?action=showPublicConte
nt&assetCategoryId=2465

So the Daily Show's figures seem a bit, shall we say, spun.



you are right. Different wages apply to young people. And yes, McDonalds hire mainly young people.

My last McDOnalds experince was on New years day travelling back from the wilds, only place we could find easily to grab a drink. The place was in chaos. The managers were 18 I swear and not able to cope. 45 minute wait. The food was shite and cold. Should have tipped it down the loo and saved my body the effort.

It's why McDOnalds is so rubbish. It had been so long since I stepped foot in one, I'd forgotten how truly awful the food is - oversalted, overprocessed, shite. Last time ever.

As for KFC, I'd starve than step into one of those outlets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 9:01 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Magons, as an aside; around here, we have called KFC "Dirty Bird" for decades. There is luckily only one in town, and the smell of rancid fat as we drive by is enough to guarantee we've NEVER eaten there.

I won't even get started on McDonalds...!


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 9:04 PM

REAVERFAN


A good policy is to avoid restaurants that inundate you with advertising.

Going vegan helps, too.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 1, 2014 9:04 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


When KFC first came to Australia, my big bro got a job there. Needless to say, that was the beginning of the end for me.

I don't think McDonalds hire 14 year olds, but I might be wrong. I'd say most are staffed by workers between the ages of 17 and 21.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 2, 2014 12:13 AM

ELVISCHRIST




He fried for your sins.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 2, 2014 9:44 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter: I'd say most are staffed by workers between the ages of 17 and 21.


Hold up. I thought those places were FULL of 40 something year olds with bachelor degrees. But you're claiming mostly teens and younger adults ?

Huh.


I wonder how many MORE teens / younger adults they'd have working for them were it not for laws against AGE discrimination. How many older folks do they hire, to fill govt approved quotas, just to keep from being sued.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 2, 2014 11:04 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.



The Bill of Rights in the National Archives

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


RUSH LIMBAUGH is a BLUE PILL ADDICT!
As evidence of "rape mentality"
Tuesday, July 30, 2013 8:11 PM
MAL4PREZ
And just remember, according to Rappy, the term befitting a women who wants the insurance she pays for to cover medications affecting her reproductive organs is whore

Wednesday, July 31, 2013 4:23 PM
little rappy
The term applies

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 2, 2014 3:54 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
GEEZER, all you've shown is that Australia has the same libertarian screw-'em-to-the-max attitude that Schiff does.


So the fact that the Daily Show figures were bogus doesn't bother you?

Quote:
But you have not defended or explained the concept that a person's "worth" should be determined by the labor market, if that is indeed your opinion.


Why ask? Everyone here seems to think they already know my opinion. Niki goes on about what she thinks I think and believe endlessly.


Quote:
So, in the interest of fair discussion, why don't you explain YOUR opinion here, since you tend to accuse people of "misunderstanding" and "misrepresenting" you.

So, speak up, man! The floor is yours!


Not that I expect a fair response, but okay.

First, let me ask if you agree that the Daily Show interview was pretty much an ambush, with leading questions and planned responses, like having a 38-year-old college graduate who works at McDonalds on hand and then asking a question about whether 38-year-old college grads work at McDonalds?

Honest answer, please.



As to a person's worth, there's many ways to define that: as a friend, as a companion, as a lover, as a member of a family, as a member of the community, by their actions towards and for other people, as to how they do what they do to earn a living, and on and on.

In all these situations, there are folks who by their actions are considered worthwhile at various levels by the folks who interact with them. Others are not so worthwhile.

As I noted above, if I were hiring folks I'd pay at least minimum wage, up to what I thought they were worth based on whether their efforts were worthwhile for my business and the folks who worked there. Someone not holding up their end would get a chance to step up, but if they didn't they'd be gone. Folks who did well would move up when positions were available.

How about you?





"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 2, 2014 3:55 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:
Originally posted by ElvisChrist:
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
That is a huge theme with opponents of a minimum wage hike. They want to plant the idea in everyone’s head that doubling the minimum wage will result in doubling of prices of popular products. That claim is completely false. Take McDonalds. In Australia, where the minimum wage is $17.05, or almost $15 in U.S. currency, a Big Mac costs $4.94. That’s about $4.32 in American dollars. In the U.S., a Big Mac costs $4.20.


Per the Australian government, the national minimum wage for full-time workers is $16.37 AU ($14.30 U.S.).

http://www.fairwork.gov.au/pay/national-minimum-wage/pages/default.asp
x

Doing a little checking, that minimum wage is for people 21 and older.

Minimum wages for younger folks are much lower.

For the food service industry (which has it's own rate charts depending on State), they start at $7.19 AU (around $6.27 U.S.) for under 16, and go to $16.19 AU ($14.14 U.S.) for twenty year olds.

If you look at McDonalds in Australia, they hire kids a young as 14, and their employment site seems mostly focused on teens.

https://apply.mcdonalds.com.au/public/index.cfm?action=showPublicConte
nt&assetCategoryId=2465

So the Daily Show's figures seem a bit, shall we say, spun.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."



You seem to be completely willing to accept McDonald's figures, though.


After all, why would any corporation ever try to spin anything, right?


So what McDonalds figures did I cite?




"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 2, 2014 4:05 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Then there's your implication that workers at McDonalds in Australia are mostly young, so getting less than minimum wage.


Yes. And if, as Magons says, most folks who work there are younger, then the cost to the store is not as high as claimed by saying all their workers make a $17.00AU wage.

Quote:
I couldn't find any more recent data, but this shows " The average age (mean) of the Accommodations & Restaurants industry is 34.1 years" in Australia as of 2001, and that 85.7% of those workers were over the age of 19.


And that's pretty much the entire hospitality industry.


Quote:
If you can find anything more recent regarding fast-food workers in Australia, that would be great; but given this, your APPARENT assumption that McDonalds is using a large number of workers earning less than minimum wage is just that, an assumption, and nothing more.


See Magons comments.

Quote:
Not only that, but the link you provided shows clearly that, while 14-year-old workers are legal in SOME places in Australia, not in all, and even where they are, there are numerous caveats:
Quote:
NSW, NT, SA, TAS - The minimum age of employment outside school hours is 14 years of age for casual and part time employees.


Nitpick much?

Wish you'd spend as much time fact-checking the stuff you post here.




"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 2, 2014 4:08 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
you are right. Different wages apply to young people. And yes, McDonalds hire mainly young people.

My last McDOnalds experince was on New years day travelling back from the wilds, only place we could find easily to grab a drink. The place was in chaos. The managers were 18 I swear and not able to cope. 45 minute wait. The food was shite and cold. Should have tipped it down the loo and saved my body the effort.

It's why McDOnalds is so rubbish. It had been so long since I stepped foot in one, I'd forgotten how truly awful the food is - oversalted, overprocessed, shite. Last time ever.

As for KFC, I'd starve than step into one of those outlets.


Thank you.

Not a big McDucks fan myself, unless there's no where else, but they do seem to be popular.

Do they have Popeye's chicken in Oz? seems better than The Colonel to me.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, April 25, 2024 09:01 - 6302 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, April 25, 2024 08:24 - 2304 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, April 25, 2024 08:02 - 3560 posts
Scientific American Claims It Is "Misinformation" That There Are Just Two Sexes
Thu, April 25, 2024 01:50 - 8 posts
Case against Sidney Powell, 2020 case lawyer, is dismissed
Wed, April 24, 2024 19:58 - 12 posts
Grifter Donald Trump Has Been Indicted And Yes Arrested; Four Times Now And Counting. Hey Jack, I Was Right
Wed, April 24, 2024 09:04 - 804 posts
Slate: I Changed My Mind About Kids and Phones. I Hope Everyone Else Does, Too.
Tue, April 23, 2024 19:38 - 2 posts
No Thread On Topic, More Than 17 Days After Hamas Terrorists Invade, Slaughter Innocent Israelis?
Tue, April 23, 2024 19:19 - 26 posts
Pardon Me? Michael Avenatti Flips, Willing To Testify On Trump's Behalf
Tue, April 23, 2024 19:01 - 9 posts
FACTS
Mon, April 22, 2024 20:10 - 552 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Mon, April 22, 2024 17:47 - 1010 posts
I agree with everything you said, but don't tell anyone I said that
Mon, April 22, 2024 16:15 - 16 posts
 VIEW MORE TOPICS 

FFF.NET SOCIAL