|
forbidden lesbian posted:Kill all of humanity, let Fixed to represent the need for a  .
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 05:27 |
|
|
ratbert90 posted:It's just even more blatant than lying about global warming though! You don't even have to look at a graph to know it's a bunch of lovely lies right? Like, you could just think: Wasn't the minimum wage raised a few times before and the economy didn't collapse and my village wasn't burned; so raising the minimum wage now probably wouldn't cause those things. This is a big problem. People around me at work; even the older ones; are not really aware that minimum wage increases are something that had to happen to get the wage where it is today. And those that are aware believe we are lucky that the last one didn't cause more trouble.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:48
|
|
|
reignofevil posted:This is a big problem. People around me at work; even the older ones; are not really aware that minimum wage increases are something that had to happen to get the wage where it is today. And those that are aware believe we are lucky that the last one didn't cause more trouble. And probably a good many of them think the minimum wage is perfectly generous as-is because they made $7,000 or something in their first year of work because the human brain has a huge blind spot for compounding functions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
reignofevil posted:This is a big problem. People around me at work; even the older ones; are not really aware that minimum wage increases are something that had to happen to get the wage where it is today. And those that are aware believe we are lucky that the last one didn't cause more trouble. That's probably true. I have met a few people that couldn't answer me when I asked them "What about the last few minimum wage hikes?" I have also linked people to numerous studies including one from loving PRINCETON that shows minimum wage hikes don't hurt the economy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:57
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:How can Republicans with a straight face keep trying to shill the myth that raising the minimum wage will make people lose jobs? When in reality every single loving time the minimum wage has been raised, that hasn't been true at all and in fact almost every single loving time the minimum wage has been raised, it's been GOOD for the loving economy? The econ 101 explanation is that it decreases employment at the margins. If I have a job opening that will give me $10 an hour, I would be willing to hire someone to fill that position at any wage rate less than $10 an hour. Minimum wage cuts into these potential jobs, and decreases the number of legally available positions to be filled. Of course in this example, I currently have employees who give me much more than $10 an hour, and these employees won't necessarily be fired if minimum wage rises. They will have more income to spend, and if they spend that money at my business, it will increase my business's income and by extension, the number of potential marginal employees I can hire. This analysis requires more than econ 101, but like hell the Republicans are going to put that much effort into decreasing inequality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:57
|
|
|
Whiskey Sours posted:The econ 101 explanation is that it decreases employment at the margins. If I have a job opening that will give me $10 an hour, I would be willing to hire someone to fill that position at any wage rate less than $10 an hour. Minimum wage cuts into these potential jobs, and decreases the number of legally available positions to be filled. That also implies the same thinking that the cost of goods are directly tied into the cost of the employee. Humans are terrible at thinking critically. You want me to double the cost of employees? DOUBLE THE COST OF THE BIGMAC!* *Ignores the cost of employees is only 10% of total business expenditures and the bigmac already makes a 35%+ profit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:01
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:It's just even more blatant than lying about global warming though! You don't even have to look at a graph to know it's a bunch of lovely lies right? Like, you could just think: Wasn't the minimum wage raised a few times before and the economy didn't collapse and my village wasn't burned; so raising the minimum wage now probably wouldn't cause those things. You misunderstand, they do think. It's just that they only think about things from the frame of reference of privileged job creators. That forced wage increase is a monstrous theft of their money which they certainly never benefited from. Why if they can bootstrap their way to wealth from the humble beginnings of a son of ivy league graduates with enough disposable income to finance a luxurious entry into adulthood, then anyone can do it. Remember Mitt and Anne Romney knew what it was like to be poor, having sold off bits of Mitt's birthday stock to finance their college living arrangements. Hell Neil Cavuto famously bitched about how back in his day 16 year olds got $2 an hour and were happy, which when adjusted for inflation is greater than the current minimum wage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:That also implies the same thinking that the cost of goods are directly tied into the cost of the employee. Humans are terrible at thinking critically. I'm not disagreeing with the general point but it should be noted that labor as a percentage of costs isn't the full story since some percentage of the labor cost of the suppliers is tied up in the things they sell to McDonald's. I'm just pointing this out because acting like only one business' workers is affected by a minimum wage increase gives people an argument of "well McDonald's has to pay more for materials if the truck loaders and lettuce pickers get paid more money too so your point is moot, checkmate liberals  ".
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:06
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Remember Mitt and Anne Romney knew what it was like to be poor, having sold off bits of Mitt's birthday stock to finance their college living arrangements. Hell Neil Cavuto famously bitched about how back in his day 16 year olds got $2 an hour and were happy, which when adjusted for inflation is greater than the current minimum wage. "I was lucky to make 100 dollars a week working full time." "Wow, you could pay for a semester of college with one week's pay? That's amazing, you guys really had it easy."
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:13
|
|
|
I think this is where my dad started turning politically, when he realized that, during the wondrous Bush era he'd supported, I was unable to make enough money working in the restaurant industry full-time to pay for a public college. He paid his tuition to the same school working in a junk yard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
IIRC in 2008 McCain had a few "has no idea how much the proles make" moments. My favorite was the debate at the small liberal arts college where he strongly implied that a large number of the faculty would be affected by Obama's plan to raise taxes on people making over $250,000/yr. I think he also thought farm workers got paid $100/hr.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:I think this is where my dad started turning politically, when he realized that, during the wondrous Bush era he'd supported, I was unable to make enough money working in the restaurant industry full-time to pay for a public college. He paid his tuition to the same school working in a junk yard. Education costs have dramatically outpaced minimum wage levels over the past 30 years: quote:In 1979, a four-year private college required 1,112 hours of work at the minimum wage. By 2010, the cost in minimum-wage hours had increased so much that it was no longer possible to pay for a full year of a private four-year college — 3,201 hours — by working full-year, full-time (2,080 hours) at the minimum wage. Got a minimum wage job? Maybe you should've went to college. Couldn't afford college on minimum wage? I don't know, maybe sell a kidney? You can't sell a kidney? Thanks OBAMACARE.  Dr.Zeppelin posted:IIRC in 2008 McCain had a few "has no idea how much the proles make" moments. My favorite was the debate at the small liberal arts college where he strongly implied that a large number of the faculty would be affected by Obama's plan to raise taxes on people making over $250,000/yr. I think he also thought farm workers got paid $100/hr. Mitt Romney betting Rick Perry 10 loving grand was pretty telling. Good call, offer a bet worth half what some people make in an entire year as though it were 5 bucks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:45
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:Mitt Romney betting Rick Perry 10 loving grand was pretty telling. Good call, offer a bet worth half what some people make in an entire year as though it were 5 bucks. I could see a middle-class person making a ten thousand dollar bet in a "I'm so convinced I'm right that I'm willing to stake my life savings on it" kind of way and maybe Mitt thought that saying that would come off more like a strong conviction and less like "10 grand means nothing to me". Not that I think that's particularly likely but I'm pretty sure his camp was aware of his reputation for not really having any convictions at all and so it's at least possible that he was just (badly) coached to make it sound like he believed in something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
Dr.Zeppelin posted:I could see a middle-class person making a ten thousand dollar bet in a "I'm so convinced I'm right that I'm willing to stake my life savings on it" kind of way and maybe Mitt thought that saying that would come off more like a strong conviction and less like "10 grand means nothing to me". Not that I think that's particularly likely but I'm pretty sure his camp was aware of his reputation for not really having any convictions at all and so it's at least possible that he was just (badly) coached to make it sound like he believed in something. Maybe, but every time that's ever happened to me in real life it's been "I'll bet you a million loving dollars" because the point is to make it extraordinarily absurd.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
Heh, I literally made a 10 grand bet on Obama beating Romney on inTrade.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:Maybe, but every time that's ever happened to me in real life it's been "I'll bet you a million loving dollars" because the point is to make it extraordinarily absurd. The point is that Mitt Romney shouldn't be making bets, because 1) they highlight how much of a rich, out-of-touch plutocrat he is, and 2) He's Mormon, and betting is highly frowned upon in Mormon culture. Mitt was the LDS golden boy (except for us few Mormon progressives) and so he got away with it, but for any other Mormon presidential candidates, that kind of bet would raise a few eyebrows, at least. Huntsman probably would have been dinged a bit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:I don't understand it because I pay my employees like 30 bucks an hour to do work that's easy as poo poo and it doesn't impact me that much. I could definitely pay people 15 an hour and they would be making great money, but why the gently caress would I want to treat my employees like expendable trash? Saying that raising the minimum wage will hurt businesses is such a crock of poo poo. It's pure loving greed. period. You hiring?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:
Hey now I'll have you know some of my best friends own NASCAR teams! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Heh, I literally made a 10 grand bet on Obama beating Romney on inTrade. Didn't Arkane make something like a hundred grand betting on the election? Anyway lots of rich people have no idea what middle class is or what its like not being Mega-rich. These people often think a person making several hundred thousand yearly is middle class. Not to mention we should probably be more concerned with our working/lower class then those in the middle since the former out number everyone. Edit: Also McCain's best out of touch moment was not being able to remember how many houses he owned.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
Earth posted:You hiring? I would move states to work for you. Do you drug test?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
Earth posted:You hiring? I don't have need for a ton of people right now because I already have around 30 people on call depending on where I need work done, (my "territory" stretches from Winchester VA to DC and down to Charlottesville, and DC all the way south to Newport News) and I also don't want to derail the topic with employment-chat. That being said I might have need of more people in the future. I'll make it known when that happens. /derail edit: who the gently caress wants to pay to have people tested for drugs? Either you can do your job or you can't, and it's pretty easy to tell which it is after a few hours. It's a waste of money and time. It also makes people feel like criminals. It's stupid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 06:45
|
|
|
Guys I'm pretty sure Terra Firmas got a Meth empire. You need good muscle? I may not look it but I can break bones really well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 06:50
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Guys I'm pretty sure Terra Firmas got a Meth empire. If only. I also want to let people know that I'm not trying to go "I'm a business OWNER i'm IMPORTANT" or anything. I just feel like not enough people who run their own show do enough to speak for those of us who aren't trying to actively screw over the people that work for us. There's a lot of "eat the rich" going on in here. I don't take full credit for my success because I have a lot of things going in my favor, but it's a little troubling to think that someone in my position can't have a liberal perspective and must be eaten along with the rest of the rich. I'm not rich yet though so I think I'm safe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 07:13
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:I'm not rich yet Then you won't be. So why worry about rich people as if you had something in common with them?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 07:49
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:Mitt Romney betting Rick Perry 10 loving grand was pretty telling. Good call, offer a bet worth half what some people make in an entire year as though it were 5 bucks. It was either in Liar's Poker or FIASCO by Frank Partnoy, but the author recorded that a Wall Street trader betting five or ten thousand was just an ordinary prop bet, as they bet many times that amount every day on whether interest rates would move by .02% or not. But when a trader bets $10, you know it's serious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 08:16
|
|
|
Hedera Helix posted:So, the rich are doing away with the convenient fiction of their wealth coming from hard work, as opposed to being inherited. It was only a matter of time before they fully embraced aristocracy, but it's finally happened. If you read Capital in the 21st Century, this is basically the consequence of allocating so much in the hands of so few. We won't see very many (if any) new rich since all the capital is so concentrated. All we will see are old money families. Basically, it is patrimonial capitalism. With the studies that confirm the US is indeed an oligarchy, we're back in the Victorian Age. So, what's next is things like this grow more and more common. It's going to get worse long before it get better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 08:19
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Then you won't be. So why worry about rich people as if you had something in common with them? I don't worry about having anything in common with them, but I am doing exceptionally well for being one year out. I'll leave it at that so as not to start a derail.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 08:29
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:If only.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 08:50
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:I'm not rich yet though so I think I'm safe. You are rich. Not wanting to draw attention to it is a good reflex to have but protesting to much draws more attention than just acknowledging it and moving on. Nobody except the tippy top feels unusually wealthy because our communities are groups of economically homogenous structures so everyone around you is always living about as large as you are ... Sometimes on wildly different incomes but If you aren't the tippy top there is alway a more expensive neighborhood to look up to. Although I'll chime in on how having more than enough money doesn't make you a corrupt, regressive, selfish, rear end in a top hat. A big part of it is how you were raised. Not letting kids know the family is rich or flat out telling them there will be no inheritance because its all going to charity when dad dies is way better than "one day, this will all be yours" parenting. The former cultivates a work ethic while the latter cultivates an entitled, aristocratic, world view. You can't respect the work of others when you perceive your own value to be based on who you are rather than what you have done. Which is a huge problem for the born rich and a much lesser problem for the self-made( you can, after all, respect your own work and still not respect anyone else's so the self-made aren't immune. )
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 09:04
|
|
|
more friedman units posted:The first part of that sentence should be seen as a major problem, not an endorsement of the status quo. This is aristocracy with a thin veneer. I'm not sure the fact that it's easier to convince a few wealthy individuals to contribute to a global health budget than to persuade Congress to allocate more than $100 million to the WHO is a sign of aristocracy. I agree with the general frustration about the increasing concentration of wealth in this country (world) but the answer is not to insist that anything a rich person does is inherently corrupt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 11:20
|
|
|
So this is one of the more infuriating articles I've read in a while. And the sad thing is that its about a piece of policy that is actually an improvement from the past.quote:Tribal police chief Michael Valenzuela drove through darkened desert streets, turned into a Circle K convenience store and pointed to the spot beyond the reservation line where his officers used to take the non-Indian men who battered Indian women. quote:Urbina wanted to show Cantor that, as one tribal official put it, “Indians were not still living in teepees” and could dispense justice as fairly as any other court in America. quote:The prospect of exposing non-Native Americans to this system upset many Republicans in Congress. Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) said the legislation made “56 million acres of U.S. soil that happen to be called Indian Country . . . Constitution-free zones where due process and equal protection rights as interpreted and enforced in U.S. courts — do not exist.” quote:A member of the Rosebud Sioux tribe, Stoof remembers reading in law school about the 1978 O liphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe case in which the Supreme Court held that Indian tribes had no legal authority to prosecute non-Indians who committed crimes on reservations. http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...ry.html?hpid=z1 Still can't believe that sexual assault isn't covered yet, and the Alaska exemption on its face seems undefensible, but at least some progress is good, right? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 12:49
|
|
|
And keep in mind that right now only three of some 500 federally recognized tribes are doing the pilot program, for the rest it's status quo. I'd have to dig it up again, but I posted an interview with Senator Begich of Alaska in the midterm thread where he goes into some more detail about the Alaska Native exemption. Spoiler, states rights and a lovely attorney general. Edit: Alaska Natives have always been considered separate from American Indians (I don't know much about native Hawaiians sorry); there's only one reservation in Alaska and the majority of the land belongs to native corporations thanks to Nixon and the ANCSA. Also, in case your morning wasn't ruined enough already, one in three native women will be raped in her lifetime, and somewhere north of 70%, conservatively, of the rapists ar white men from off rez. Mecca-Benghazi fucked around with this message at 13:08 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 12:54
|
|
|
Axetrain posted:Didn't Arkane make something like a hundred grand betting on the election? After being away from the forums for a while after the election, he claimed he made something lie 200K betting on stuff like Romney getting the nomination and Obama winning the general election or something. I have a bit of a hard time believing it because if it were truly those kind of bets he would probably have had to risk a lot more than that to make that much and it would be crazy to do rather than just investing it in a more conventional way, in my opinion, a lot of risk in case things turned sideways due to unexpected events.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 14:24
|
|
|
Very unlikely. He'd have had to put down six figures on inTrade Obama/Romney nomination & general election trades given the odds were pretty even for most of election season. And there's no way he could have bet that much earlier in the season when the odds were skewed - volume was extremely thin. And judging by his posts on BFC stock picks, he's a relatively smalltime investor so I can't picture him putting the majority of his financial wealth on speculative bets especially since there was so much counterparty risk with inTrade.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:So this is one of the more infuriating articles I've read in a while. And the sad thing is that its about a piece of policy that is actually an improvement from the past. I can't believe that they aren't already allowed to prosecute people. The "but white peoe might not be treated fairly by the tribal justice system" defense is jaw dropping. I also find it darkly amusing that the same justification for not allowing US troops to be subjected to foreign laws is being used for Americans who beat their wives on reservations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
SavageBastard posted:I can't believe that they aren't already allowed to prosecute people. The "but white peoe might not be treated fairly by the tribal justice system" defense is jaw dropping. I also find it darkly amusing that the same justification for not allowing US troops to be subjected to foreign laws is being used for Americans who beat their wives on reservations. It's funny that it's brought up the way the GOP has done it, because there's literally this fear that being tried in another country is literal hell. Because US justice is so even handed and not at all stilted against minority perps or victims.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
The Board of Trustees at the College of Charleston went off the list of candidates recommended by the search committee and appointed Lt. Gov. Glenn McConnell president. Who's that? You may ask  Oh look, he's with smiling black people! Surely this guy will be good on diversi--- quote:http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/01/us-usa-south-carolina-college-idUSBREA301UA20140401  Not racist, guys, just in my confederate memorabilia store selling products by a segregationist who was intentionally boycotted. http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2014/04/03/glenn-mcconnell-began-selling-segregationists-products-in-wake-of-boycott/
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
Glenn McConnell posted:"If you criticize me for loving history, that's a criticism I'll have to bear," he said in a phone interview on Tuesday. "To know where you're going, you have to know where you've been." "Now, where's my hood and lynchin' rope...?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
quote:Students at the College of Charleston have held up signs reading "This is 2014, not 1814" during protests against their new president, known as a Civil War re-enactor and for his fight to keep the Confederate flag flying at the State House.  1864, guys, why wouldn't you say 1864. Nice round 150 years, doesn't make you look stupid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 05:27 |
|
|
Defenestration posted:
Not proud of the fact I correctly guessed it was Maurice's BBQ that photo was taken at.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 16:16
|
|