Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."Wages don't go up if people aren't qualified to do a job to the level the employer wants qualifications. A person may get hired but if they don't offer to the level the one hiring wants, they may still get hired but at a lower wage.
The best way to improve your wages is to offer something worth paying. In your mind, especially with the OP, wages should go up for no reason other than those wanting more demanding more.
So you don't know anything about supply and demand obviously. Go learn some economics.
Only in the world of politics could you hire a unqualified, inempt community organizer a position of leadership..
But Brian in the real world of the private sector you can not just hire a burger flipper to opperate a CNC say.just because you can not find anyone else.
And only if his skin is black.
Problem is Brian wants that burger flipper to get what amounts to a 100+ % pay increase and has yet to say what that burger flipper has to do in addition to what he/she is doing now to earn it.
Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
Companies don't look for jobs. Potential employees do. Companies offer jobs.
That doesn't change the point at all. Companies aren't offering jobs or wages would be increasing. See doesn't change it at all.
Companies must be offering jobs and filling them. The Obama administration keeps saying the unemployment rate is going down. To do that, someone has to be getting hired.
Yes. So if people are hired and wages are stagnant that means there aren't jobs offered that aren't being filled.
You contradict yourself. On one hand, you say companies aren't offering job or wages would be increasing. On the other hand, you say the unemployment rate has been going done. If unemployment is going down, companies have to be offering jobs,otherwise, it wouldn't go down. Which one is it. You say jobs aren't being offered yet support the claim that unemployment is going down which is a sign jobs are being offered. It can't be both. Either jobs are not being offered or jobs are being offered.
Jobs are being offered at stagnant wages. Many employed are now underemployed. You really need to study economics
The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."So you don't know anything about supply and demand obviously. Go learn some economics.
Only in the world of politics could you hire a unqualified, inempt community organizer a position of leadership..
But Brian in the real world of the private sector you can not just hire a burger flipper to opperate a CNC say.just because you can not find anyone else.
And only if his skin is black.
Problem is Brian wants that burger flipper to get what amounts to a 100+ % pay increase and has yet to say what that burger flipper has to do in addition to what he/she is doing now to earn it.
Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
But they dont know what CEOs do. So they think "how hard can that be?"
As usual the problem is ignorance.
Ceos actually get paid more for worse performance. That's ok though right?
The Highest-Paid CEOs Are The Worst Performers, New Study Says
That doesn't change the point at all. Companies aren't offering jobs or wages would be increasing. See doesn't change it at all.
Companies must be offering jobs and filling them. The Obama administration keeps saying the unemployment rate is going down. To do that, someone has to be getting hired.
Yes. So if people are hired and wages are stagnant that means there aren't jobs offered that aren't being filled.
You contradict yourself. On one hand, you say companies aren't offering job or wages would be increasing. On the other hand, you say the unemployment rate has been going done. If unemployment is going down, companies have to be offering jobs,otherwise, it wouldn't go down. Which one is it. You say jobs aren't being offered yet support the claim that unemployment is going down which is a sign jobs are being offered. It can't be both. Either jobs are not being offered or jobs are being offered.
Jobs are being offered at stagnant wages. Many employed are now underemployed. You really need to study economics
Lmao...so there is a glut of workers who need those jobs...God damn when you have no workers for menial jobs the wages go up see $17 dollar an hour Wal-Mart and mcdonalds jobs in some places of the Dakota's
Me thinks you are the one who should study economics.
Companies must be offering jobs and filling them. The Obama administration keeps saying the unemployment rate is going down. To do that, someone has to be getting hired.
Yes. So if people are hired and wages are stagnant that means there aren't jobs offered that aren't being filled.
You contradict yourself. On one hand, you say companies aren't offering job or wages would be increasing. On the other hand, you say the unemployment rate has been going done. If unemployment is going down, companies have to be offering jobs,otherwise, it wouldn't go down. Which one is it. You say jobs aren't being offered yet support the claim that unemployment is going down which is a sign jobs are being offered. It can't be both. Either jobs are not being offered or jobs are being offered.
Jobs are being offered at stagnant wages. Many employed are now underemployed. You really need to study economics
Lmao...so there is a glut of workers who need those jobs...God damn when you have no workers for menial jobs the wages go up see $17 dollar an hour Wal-Mart and mcdonalds jobs in some places of the Dakota's
Me thinks you are the one who should study economics.
I can't pretend you came close to an intelligent thought. When you do I'll gladly tell you why you are wrong.
The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."Only in the world of politics could you hire a unqualified, inempt community organizer a position of leadership..
But Brian in the real world of the private sector you can not just hire a burger flipper to opperate a CNC say.just because you can not find anyone else.
And only if his skin is black.
Problem is Brian wants that burger flipper to get what amounts to a 100+ % pay increase and has yet to say what that burger flipper has to do in addition to what he/she is doing now to earn it.
Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
But they dont know what CEOs do. So they think "how hard can that be?"
As usual the problem is ignorance.
The problem is ceos keep giving themselves huge raises for bad performance. While they should be paid more than the average worker, they shouldn't continue to get huge increases while wages are stagnant for everyone else.
The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."So you don't know anything about supply and demand obviously. Go learn some economics.
Only in the world of politics could you hire a unqualified, inempt community organizer a position of leadership..
But Brian in the real world of the private sector you can not just hire a burger flipper to opperate a CNC say.just because you can not find anyone else.
And only if his skin is black.
Problem is Brian wants that burger flipper to get what amounts to a 100+ % pay increase and has yet to say what that burger flipper has to do in addition to what he/she is doing now to earn it.
Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
But they dont know what CEOs do. So they think "how hard can that be?"
As usual the problem is ignorance.
The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."And only if his skin is black.
Problem is Brian wants that burger flipper to get what amounts to a 100+ % pay increase and has yet to say what that burger flipper has to do in addition to what he/she is doing now to earn it.
Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
But they dont know what CEOs do. So they think "how hard can that be?"
As usual the problem is ignorance.
The problem is ceos keep giving themselves huge raises for bad performance. While they should be paid more than the average worker, they shouldn't continue to get huge increases while wages are stagnant for everyone else.
CEO's give themselves raises? Amazing.
The problem with your outlook is that when things go bad for a company, it's the fault of the CEO with no blame placed on those doing the work. However, when things for a company go well, all the credit goes to the workers with none going to the CEO. In other words, bad mean CEO failed but no fault of worker and good is vice versa.
The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."Only in the world of politics could you hire a unqualified, inempt community organizer a position of leadership..
But Brian in the real world of the private sector you can not just hire a burger flipper to opperate a CNC say.just because you can not find anyone else.
And only if his skin is black.
Problem is Brian wants that burger flipper to get what amounts to a 100+ % pay increase and has yet to say what that burger flipper has to do in addition to what he/she is doing now to earn it.
Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
But they dont know what CEOs do. So they think "how hard can that be?"
As usual the problem is ignorance.
If their outlook about a CEO's job being easy was true, anyone could do it. I wonder if he thinks a burger flipper at McDonalds could do the job of a CEO.
Companies don't look for jobs. Potential employees do. Companies offer jobs.
That doesn't change the point at all. Companies aren't offering jobs or wages would be increasing. See doesn't change it at all.
Companies must be offering jobs and filling them. The Obama administration keeps saying the unemployment rate is going down. To do that, someone has to be getting hired.
Yes. So if people are hired and wages are stagnant that means there aren't jobs offered that aren't being filled.
You contradict yourself. On one hand, you say companies aren't offering job or wages would be increasing. On the other hand, you say the unemployment rate has been going done. If unemployment is going down, companies have to be offering jobs,otherwise, it wouldn't go down. Which one is it. You say jobs aren't being offered yet support the claim that unemployment is going down which is a sign jobs are being offered. It can't be both. Either jobs are not being offered or jobs are being offered.
Jobs are being offered at stagnant wages. Many employed are now underemployed. You really need to study economics
They essentially? That means you want to believe they do yet can't prove it.The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
But they dont know what CEOs do. So they think "how hard can that be?"
As usual the problem is ignorance.
The problem is ceos keep giving themselves huge raises for bad performance. While they should be paid more than the average worker, they shouldn't continue to get huge increases while wages are stagnant for everyone else.
CEO's give themselves raises? Amazing.
The problem with your outlook is that when things go bad for a company, it's the fault of the CEO with no blame placed on those doing the work. However, when things for a company go well, all the credit goes to the workers with none going to the CEO. In other words, bad mean CEO failed but no fault of worker and good is vice versa.
Yes they essentially do give themselves raises.
The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."And only if his skin is black.
Problem is Brian wants that burger flipper to get what amounts to a 100+ % pay increase and has yet to say what that burger flipper has to do in addition to what he/she is doing now to earn it.
Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
But they dont know what CEOs do. So they think "how hard can that be?"
As usual the problem is ignorance.
If their outlook about a CEO's job being easy was true, anyone could do it. I wonder if he thinks a burger flipper at McDonalds could do the job of a CEO.
Why is it ok for ceos to keep getting raises for bad performance?
Let's just ask a gut check question here: Who sets wage and compensation levels for CEOs? This isnt a trick question or especially difficult. But if you cant answer it you have no seat at this conversation.The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."Only in the world of politics could you hire a unqualified, inempt community organizer a position of leadership..
But Brian in the real world of the private sector you can not just hire a burger flipper to opperate a CNC say.just because you can not find anyone else.
And only if his skin is black.
Problem is Brian wants that burger flipper to get what amounts to a 100+ % pay increase and has yet to say what that burger flipper has to do in addition to what he/she is doing now to earn it.
Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
But they dont know what CEOs do. So they think "how hard can that be?"
As usual the problem is ignorance.
The problem is ceos keep giving themselves huge raises for bad performance. While they should be paid more than the average worker, they shouldn't continue to get huge increases while wages are stagnant for everyone else.
That doesn't change the point at all. Companies aren't offering jobs or wages would be increasing. See doesn't change it at all.
Companies must be offering jobs and filling them. The Obama administration keeps saying the unemployment rate is going down. To do that, someone has to be getting hired.
Yes. So if people are hired and wages are stagnant that means there aren't jobs offered that aren't being filled.
You contradict yourself. On one hand, you say companies aren't offering job or wages would be increasing. On the other hand, you say the unemployment rate has been going done. If unemployment is going down, companies have to be offering jobs,otherwise, it wouldn't go down. Which one is it. You say jobs aren't being offered yet support the claim that unemployment is going down which is a sign jobs are being offered. It can't be both. Either jobs are not being offered or jobs are being offered.
Jobs are being offered at stagnant wages. Many employed are now underemployed. You really need to study economics
You said above that companies aren't offering jobs or wages would be increasing. Now, you say jobs are being offered but wages are stagnant. That contradicts your first statement that when jobs are offered wages go up. Which one is it? Sounds to me as if you need to study economics. It can't be both but you keep trying to say it is.
Let's just ask a gut check question here: Who sets wage and compensation levels for CEOs? This isnt a trick question or especially difficult. But if you cant answer it you have no seat at this conversation.The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."And only if his skin is black.
Problem is Brian wants that burger flipper to get what amounts to a 100+ % pay increase and has yet to say what that burger flipper has to do in addition to what he/she is doing now to earn it.
Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
But they dont know what CEOs do. So they think "how hard can that be?"
As usual the problem is ignorance.
The problem is ceos keep giving themselves huge raises for bad performance. While they should be paid more than the average worker, they shouldn't continue to get huge increases while wages are stagnant for everyone else.
The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
But they dont know what CEOs do. So they think "how hard can that be?"
As usual the problem is ignorance.
If their outlook about a CEO's job being easy was true, anyone could do it. I wonder if he thinks a burger flipper at McDonalds could do the job of a CEO.
Why is it ok for ceos to keep getting raises for bad performance?
Because those who choose to do so do so with THEIR money and can do whatever the hell they want with it. It's none of your business.
If a company has bad performance, should those minimum wage workers for that company be paid $15/hour?
Why is it only the fault of the CEO if a company has bad performance and only the credit of the workers if the company does well?
Let's just ask a gut check question here: Who sets wage and compensation levels for CEOs? This isnt a trick question or especially difficult. But if you cant answer it you have no seat at this conversation.The issue is that idiots like "Brain" (what a misnomer!) dont understand what CEOs do. They know what Beyonce does. Or some other actor. So they're fine with them getting paid millions of dollars a year. Because they look at them and think "I could never do that."Ceos keep getting more and more increases to do the exact same job. You are ok with that I assume?
They do? How many CEO's do you know well enough to know exactly what they do?
I'm OK with those doing the paying doing it the way they see fit. What I'm not OK with is people like you thinking it's your place to determine how much of someone else's money they should spend on what.
But they dont know what CEOs do. So they think "how hard can that be?"
As usual the problem is ignorance.
The problem is ceos keep giving themselves huge raises for bad performance. While they should be paid more than the average worker, they shouldn't continue to get huge increases while wages are stagnant for everyone else.
According to Brain, CEO's essentially determine their own raises and pay.
Companies must be offering jobs and filling them. The Obama administration keeps saying the unemployment rate is going down. To do that, someone has to be getting hired.
Yes. So if people are hired and wages are stagnant that means there aren't jobs offered that aren't being filled.
You contradict yourself. On one hand, you say companies aren't offering job or wages would be increasing. On the other hand, you say the unemployment rate has been going done. If unemployment is going down, companies have to be offering jobs,otherwise, it wouldn't go down. Which one is it. You say jobs aren't being offered yet support the claim that unemployment is going down which is a sign jobs are being offered. It can't be both. Either jobs are not being offered or jobs are being offered.
Jobs are being offered at stagnant wages. Many employed are now underemployed. You really need to study economics
Lmao...so there is a glut of workers who need those jobs...God damn when you have no workers for menial jobs the wages go up see $17 dollar an hour Wal-Mart and mcdonalds jobs in some places of the Dakota's
Me thinks you are the one who should study economics.
I can't pretend you came close to an intelligent thought. When you do I'll gladly tell you why you are wrong.
Companies must be offering jobs and filling them. The Obama administration keeps saying the unemployment rate is going down. To do that, someone has to be getting hired.
Yes. So if people are hired and wages are stagnant that means there aren't jobs offered that aren't being filled.
You contradict yourself. On one hand, you say companies aren't offering job or wages would be increasing. On the other hand, you say the unemployment rate has been going done. If unemployment is going down, companies have to be offering jobs,otherwise, it wouldn't go down. Which one is it. You say jobs aren't being offered yet support the claim that unemployment is going down which is a sign jobs are being offered. It can't be both. Either jobs are not being offered or jobs are being offered.
Jobs are being offered at stagnant wages. Many employed are now underemployed. You really need to study economics
You said above that companies aren't offering jobs or wages would be increasing. Now, you say jobs are being offered but wages are stagnant. That contradicts your first statement that when jobs are offered wages go up. Which one is it? Sounds to me as if you need to study economics. It can't be both but you keep trying to say it is.
You need to look at the kind of jobs being offered. Like I said many are underemployed. When a Cnc worker takes a job at Walmart he is still employed and unemployment goes down, but he is underemployed.
