Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 77

Thread: What Will Rightists Do When There Are No Poor People Left To Work?

  1. Top | #11
    Veteran Member TV and credit cards's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    muh-dahy-nuh
    Posts
    2,633
    Archived
    174
    Total Posts
    2,807
    Rep Power
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Don2 (Don1 Revised) View Post
    I know rightists LOVE licking billionaire balls and DEMAND no minimum wage so everyone can work like near slaves, including child labor.

    But, what happens when all citizens get free healthcare, free college, and become so qualified they can all be smart managers or small business owners?

    Who will do the landscaping for the billionaires or the grunt work or work at their Walmarts?


    What reactive policies will the "geniuses" on the right demand after that?
    If we were free to pursue work we found desirable, education to the extent of our abilities, free of the worry of lost healthcare, we would not become "so qualified". Those who derive more satisfaction from sore muscles at the end of the workday as opposed to a sore ass and eyes would be happy to do that landscaping.

    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Maybe they could pay their employees in Walmart Dollars so they can only shop in Walmart stores, but....that's already been done in the past.
    They just need to be creative about it. Make the Employee Marty Cash Card desirable with little downside to the company. Not discounts that will forever be a loss to the company but items and services that are only available to users of the Marty Cash Card. So, while there may, for a time be a smaller pool of Cash Card users, the desire created in those who can not avail themselves of these items and services will pressure them to sign up for Amazon Prime, I mean the Marty Cash Card.
    Dwight

  2. Top | #12
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,992
    Archived
    17,741
    Total Posts
    26,733
    Rep Power
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by TV and credit cards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Don2 (Don1 Revised) View Post
    I know rightists LOVE licking billionaire balls and DEMAND no minimum wage so everyone can work like near slaves, including child labor.

    But, what happens when all citizens get free healthcare, free college, and become so qualified they can all be smart managers or small business owners?

    Who will do the landscaping for the billionaires or the grunt work or work at their Walmarts?


    What reactive policies will the "geniuses" on the right demand after that?
    If we were free to pursue work we found desirable, education to the extent of our abilities, free of the worry of lost healthcare, we would not become "so qualified". Those who derive more satisfaction from sore muscles at the end of the workday as opposed to a sore ass and eyes would be happy to do that landscaping.
    I used to do landscaping as a summer job among other jobs while in college. I didn't mind it. I also at one point was washing dishes, doing stock at a clothing store, and enlisted in the Army. All while in college. What I can say about all of these things is the best jobs were either union jobs like the city landscaping job or the brainy jobs I got a few years later where I got a lot of respect for my mind. The worst jobs were ones where managers or owners had freedom to treat me like shit.

    So being formerly in the position of landscaping, not riding a mower ever by the way, I meant no disrespect to the people who choose to do it. My point was more about the wage differences. The situation we are in now is that rightists already support removal of worker "rights" like a minimum wage. There's even support for child labor. Quite often the business models themselves are piss poor. They can only achieve success with low wage workers. This is not a question of supply and demand where worker wages and benefits would increase. It's more a hypothetical about forced labor and oppression. How far will rightists go?

    Of course everyone is also free to answer as they see fit.

  3. Top | #13
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    3,786
    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Don2 (Don1 Revised) View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TV and credit cards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Don2 (Don1 Revised) View Post
    I know rightists LOVE licking billionaire balls and DEMAND no minimum wage so everyone can work like near slaves, including child labor.

    But, what happens when all citizens get free healthcare, free college, and become so qualified they can all be smart managers or small business owners?

    Who will do the landscaping for the billionaires or the grunt work or work at their Walmarts?


    What reactive policies will the "geniuses" on the right demand after that?
    If we were free to pursue work we found desirable, education to the extent of our abilities, free of the worry of lost healthcare, we would not become "so qualified". Those who derive more satisfaction from sore muscles at the end of the workday as opposed to a sore ass and eyes would be happy to do that landscaping.
    I used to do landscaping as a summer job among other jobs while in college. I didn't mind it. I also at one point was washing dishes, doing stock at a clothing store, and enlisted in the Army. All while in college. What I can say about all of these things is the best jobs were either union jobs like the city landscaping job or the brainy jobs I got a few years later where I got a lot of respect for my mind. The worst jobs were ones where managers or owners had freedom to treat me like shit.

    So being formerly in the position of landscaping, not riding a mower ever by the way, I meant no disrespect to the people who choose to do it. My point was more about the wage differences. The situation we are in now is that rightists already support removal of worker "rights" like a minimum wage. There's even support for child labor. Quite often the business models themselves are piss poor. They can only achieve success with low wage workers. This is not a question of supply and demand where worker wages and benefits would increase. It's more a hypothetical about forced labor and oppression. How far will rightists go?

    Of course everyone is also free to answer as they see fit.
    We have similar backgrounds. I started off in landscaping, then moving irrigation pipe, washing dishes, bussing tables, waiter, Air Force, staff accountant, controller, CFO, owner, bankrupt, owner, seller, commercial lender, CFO, owner. Whew. I miss my entry level jobs where I had no responsibility and could sleep easily at night! Having said that, yes, wages weren't great then!

  4. Top | #14
    Contributor DBT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
    Posts
    9,535
    Archived
    17,906
    Total Posts
    27,441
    Rep Power
    72
    Working full time, wages should be more than adequate to meet the basic needs (including a few luxuries) of an employee, at worst. There is far too wide a gap between the highest and lowest incomes.

  5. Top | #15
    Loony Running The Asylum ZiprHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Do you like my pretty crown?
    Posts
    16,637
    Archived
    3,034
    Total Posts
    19,671
    Rep Power
    90
    Business people who think providing living wages is wrong are placing their desire for a money-generating machine above the right of the employee to actually live.
    When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

  6. Top | #16
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    26,027
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    122,779
    Rep Power
    98
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Working full time, wages should be more than adequate to meet the basic needs (including a few luxuries) of an employee, at worst. There is far too wide a gap between the highest and lowest incomes.
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post
    Business people who think providing living wages is wrong are placing their desire for a money-generating machine above the right of the employee to actually live.
    You're both basically saying that the worker has no responsibility to provide value for what they're paid. Business as welfare--yet another off-the-books welfare scheme.

  7. Top | #17
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,992
    Archived
    17,741
    Total Posts
    26,733
    Rep Power
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Working full time, wages should be more than adequate to meet the basic needs (including a few luxuries) of an employee, at worst. There is far too wide a gap between the highest and lowest incomes.
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post
    Business people who think providing living wages is wrong are placing their desire for a money-generating machine above the right of the employee to actually live.
    You're both basically saying that the worker has no responsibility to provide value for what they're paid. Business as welfare--yet another off-the-books welfare scheme.
    What will rightist do if job positions like that where you are taken advantage of, cannot be filled...forced labor...or forced removal of government policies?

  8. Top | #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    n/a
    Posts
    561
    Rep Power
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DBT View Post
    Working full time, wages should be more than adequate to meet the basic needs (including a few luxuries) of an employee, at worst. There is far too wide a gap between the highest and lowest incomes.
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post
    Business people who think providing living wages is wrong are placing their desire for a money-generating machine above the right of the employee to actually live.
    You're both basically saying that the worker has no responsibility to provide value for what they're paid. Business as welfare--yet another off-the-books welfare scheme.
    Neither of their statements can be read that way, basically or other wise.

    You talk about where value is added and generated, but offer little insight into how that process actually happens. In reality, it is complicated and there is no meritocracy to measure it. Realistically, what defines pay is less about any objective or clear measure of productivity in a great many cases, but rather negotiating power. The lowest paid employees often have the least negotiating power, but this doesn't mean their value isn't essential to operations.

    For anyone to say they would pay full-time employees less than living-wage is to say they simply don't want to pay the cost of having workers--they don't want to pay the cost of doing business. It's as silly as saying you don't want to pay your suppliers, or you don't want to pay your utility costs, or other relevant operational costs. It's saying, "I'm either an incompetent jackass who can't cover the cost of doing business, or I'm just an exploitive prick who knows many of the lowest tier of workers are desperate and have minimal negotiating power."
    Last edited by krypton iodine sulfur; 01-06-2020 at 09:47 PM.

  9. Top | #19
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    26,027
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    122,779
    Rep Power
    98
    Quote Originally Posted by krypton iodine sulfur View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post



    You're both basically saying that the worker has no responsibility to provide value for what they're paid. Business as welfare--yet another off-the-books welfare scheme.
    Neither of their statements can be read that way, basically or other wise.

    You talk about where value is added and generated, but offer little insight into how that process actually happens. In reality, it is complicated and there is no meritocracy to measure it. Realistically, what defines pay is less about any objective or clear measure of productivity in a great many cases, but rather negotiating power. The lowest paid employees often have the least negotiating power, but this doesn't mean their value isn't essential to operations.

    For anyone to say they would pay full-time employees less than living-wage is to say they simply don't want to pay the cost of having workers--they don't want to pay the cost of doing business. It's as silly as saying you don't want to pay your suppliers, or you don't want to pay your utility costs, or other relevant operational costs. It's saying, "I'm either an incompetent jackass who can't cover the cost of doing business, or I'm just an exploitive prick who knows many of the lowest tier of workers are desperate and have minimal negotiating power."
    You're making the standard leftist mistake of thinking you can create good jobs by getting rid of bad jobs. In reality you create unemployment.

  10. Top | #20
    Veteran Member Deepak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,995
    Archived
    861
    Total Posts
    2,856
    Rep Power
    48
    Can't be unemployed if you die from preventable disease. It's a self-titrating process

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •