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.
And again, my point was that they are entry level jobs, not jobs for a person trying to support a family. Employers pay a wage that is comparable to the output of the employee or job, with some profit built in. If an employee's output is equivalent to $8.00 per hour benefit to the employer, the employer cannot pay them $8.25 an hour and expect to stay in business. An employee being paid $8.00 an hour needs to generate more than $8.00 per hour worth of output. Failure to do so will either cause the company to go out of business or raise their prices. And sometimes, raising their prices can also force them out of business if the customer isn't willing to pay the higher prices.Having a job that means saying, "Would you like fries with that?", was never meant to be the culmination of ones career. It is meant to be a stepping stone on ones way up, an entry level job for somebody newly entering the workforce. You know, like teenagers that aren't raising a baby, but just earning some cash for their first car or to pay for prom dates. That's why being a fry cook doesn't pay a living wage, one is supposed to better themselves, not be a career fry cook or cashier at McDonalds.
I hear a lot of people say this and I can't disagree; wearing a paper hat at McDonalds shouldn't be the highest level of achievement in one's professional career but I think the question at hand is when did it become acceptable in this country for an employer to pay so little knowing full well, in fact probably counting on the fact, that the taxpayers would pick up some of the slack when it comes to employee compensation?
People should try to better themselves and stand on their own, so should corporations.
This thread is a perfect example of liberal hypocrisy. Explain your logic for this one. How is it you deem it acceptable that the federal government can be expected to subsidize the costs of an element of society that sits on their ass an does absolutely nothing. doesn't work, doesn't pay taxes, doesn't contribute to society in any way. but as soon as it goes to pay for a level up who is actually working but not making enough to make ends meet, you all of a sudden have a problem with that?
And again, my point was that they are entry level jobs, not jobs for a person trying to support a family. Employers pay a wage that is comparable to the output of the employee or job, with some profit built in. If an employee's output is equivalent to $8.00 per hour benefit to the employer, the employer cannot pay them $8.25 an hour and expect to stay in business. An employee being paid $8.00 an hour needs to generate more than $8.00 per hour worth of output. Failure to do so will either cause the company to go out of business or raise their prices. And sometimes, raising their prices can also force them out of business if the customer isn't willing to pay the higher prices.Having a job that means saying, "Would you like fries with that?", was never meant to be the culmination of ones career. It is meant to be a stepping stone on ones way up, an entry level job for somebody newly entering the workforce. You know, like teenagers that aren't raising a baby, but just earning some cash for their first car or to pay for prom dates. That's why being a fry cook doesn't pay a living wage, one is supposed to better themselves, not be a career fry cook or cashier at McDonalds.
I hear a lot of people say this and I can't disagree; wearing a paper hat at McDonalds shouldn't be the highest level of achievement in one's professional career but I think the question at hand is when did it become acceptable in this country for an employer to pay so little knowing full well, in fact probably counting on the fact, that the taxpayers would pick up some of the slack when it comes to employee compensation?
People should try to better themselves and stand on their own, so should corporations.
And again, my point was that they are entry level jobs, not jobs for a person trying to support a family. Employers pay a wage that is comparable to the output of the employee or job, with some profit built in. If an employee's output is equivalent to $8.00 per hour benefit to the employer, the employer cannot pay them $8.25 an hour and expect to stay in business. An employee being paid $8.00 an hour needs to generate more than $8.00 per hour worth of output. Failure to do so will either cause the company to go out of business or raise their prices. And sometimes, raising their prices can also force them out of business if the customer isn't willing to pay the higher prices.I hear a lot of people say this and I can't disagree; wearing a paper hat at McDonalds shouldn't be the highest level of achievement in one's professional career but I think the question at hand is when did it become acceptable in this country for an employer to pay so little knowing full well, in fact probably counting on the fact, that the taxpayers would pick up some of the slack when it comes to employee compensation?
People should try to better themselves and stand on their own, so should corporations.
I understand the point you made about McDonalds and low wage entry level jobs and I agree with you on that, no one should expect to get rich or even live comfortably if they're working the register at McDonalds but the point of the OP is that if McDonalds knows that they can have the taxpayers pick up some of the freight for employee benefits then don't you think that distorts wages within the industry? I'm not saying fry cooks should get rich working at MickeyD's but if you're against wages being artificially propped up then shouldn't you also be against those wages being artificially depressed?
And again, my point was that they are entry level jobs, not jobs for a person trying to support a family. Employers pay a wage that is comparable to the output of the employee or job, with some profit built in. If an employee's output is equivalent to $8.00 per hour benefit to the employer, the employer cannot pay them $8.25 an hour and expect to stay in business. An employee being paid $8.00 an hour needs to generate more than $8.00 per hour worth of output. Failure to do so will either cause the company to go out of business or raise their prices. And sometimes, raising their prices can also force them out of business if the customer isn't willing to pay the higher prices.
I understand the point you made about McDonalds and low wage entry level jobs and I agree with you on that, no one should expect to get rich or even live comfortably if they're working the register at McDonalds but the point of the OP is that if McDonalds knows that they can have the taxpayers pick up some of the freight for employee benefits then don't you think that distorts wages within the industry? I'm not saying fry cooks should get rich working at MickeyD's but if you're against wages being artificially propped up then shouldn't you also be against those wages being artificially depressed?
Actually, I am what could be considered a cold-hearted conservative bastard that thinks that the taxpayer supported welfare should be ended. People can either make it or fail on their own. Social safety nets (charity) should be voluntarily handled in ones own community, not forced upon me, you or anybody else by government. The government should not be in charge of deciding charity.
What gives a union member a greater right to work than a non-union member?I see two of the proud and loud members of the echo chamber want to play tag-team. Good for them, I hope warrior doesn't get jealous of Rabbi giving Daveboy attention.
Back then to the facts I posted, not withstanding the two moron's efforts to play a game of semantics:
The Right to Life Movement
The 'Fair Tax'
The Reduction or Elimination of Entitlements (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, the ACA)
The USSC Decision in CU v. FEC
The Effort to Suppress the Vote
The Anti-Union Movement
The Right to Work Movement
The Effort to Deny Workers Collective Bargaining
The Effort to Reduce a Women's Opportunity to Secure Contraceptives
The Effort to Eliminate Minimum Wage Laws, and
The War on Women
The War on Public Education
Think if you can or will how taken collectively the fact that these movements (dispute them if you are able) march our nation further into the abyss of an Oligarchy of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.
I see two of the proud and loud members of the echo chamber want to play tag-team. Good for them, I hope warrior doesn't get jealous of Rabbi giving Daveboy attention.
Back then to the facts I posted, not withstanding the two moron's efforts to play a game of semantics:
The Right to Life Movement
The 'Fair Tax'
The Reduction or Elimination of Entitlements (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, the ACA)
The USSC Decision in CU v. FEC
The Effort to Suppress the Vote
The Anti-Union Movement
The Right to Work Movement
The Effort to Deny Workers Collective Bargaining
The Effort to Reduce a Women's Opportunity to Secure Contraceptives
The Effort to Eliminate Minimum Wage Laws, and
The War on Women
The War on Public Education
Think if you can or will how taken collectively the fact that these movements (dispute them if you are able) march our nation further into the abyss of an Oligarchy of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.
It wasn't McD's that set up the system that props up those with low wages.And again, my point was that they are entry level jobs, not jobs for a person trying to support a family. Employers pay a wage that is comparable to the output of the employee or job, with some profit built in. If an employee's output is equivalent to $8.00 per hour benefit to the employer, the employer cannot pay them $8.25 an hour and expect to stay in business. An employee being paid $8.00 an hour needs to generate more than $8.00 per hour worth of output. Failure to do so will either cause the company to go out of business or raise their prices. And sometimes, raising their prices can also force them out of business if the customer isn't willing to pay the higher prices.I hear a lot of people say this and I can't disagree; wearing a paper hat at McDonalds shouldn't be the highest level of achievement in one's professional career but I think the question at hand is when did it become acceptable in this country for an employer to pay so little knowing full well, in fact probably counting on the fact, that the taxpayers would pick up some of the slack when it comes to employee compensation?
People should try to better themselves and stand on their own, so should corporations.
I understand the point you made about McDonalds and low wage entry level jobs and I agree with you on that, no one should expect to get rich or even live comfortably if they're working the register at McDonalds but the point of the OP is that if McDonalds knows that they can have the taxpayers pick up some of the freight for employee benefits then don't you think that distorts wages within the industry? I'm not saying fry cooks should get rich working at MickeyD's but if you're against wages being artificially propped up then shouldn't you also be against those wages being artificially depressed?
It wasn't McD's that set up the system that props up those with low wages.
It was Congress.
What gives a union member a greater right to work than a non-union member?I see two of the proud and loud members of the echo chamber want to play tag-team. Good for them, I hope warrior doesn't get jealous of Rabbi giving Daveboy attention.
Back then to the facts I posted, not withstanding the two moron's efforts to play a game of semantics:
The Right to Life Movement
The 'Fair Tax'
The Reduction or Elimination of Entitlements (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, the ACA)
The USSC Decision in CU v. FEC
The Effort to Suppress the Vote
The Anti-Union Movement
The Right to Work Movement
The Effort to Deny Workers Collective Bargaining
The Effort to Reduce a Women's Opportunity to Secure Contraceptives
The Effort to Eliminate Minimum Wage Laws, and
The War on Women
The War on Public Education
Think if you can or will how taken collectively the fact that these movements (dispute them if you are able) march our nation further into the abyss of an Oligarchy of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.
I see two of the proud and loud members of the echo chamber want to play tag-team. Good for them, I hope warrior doesn't get jealous of Rabbi giving Daveboy attention.
Back then to the facts I posted, not withstanding the two moron's efforts to play a game of semantics:
The Right to Life Movement
The 'Fair Tax'
The Reduction or Elimination of Entitlements (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, the ACA)
The USSC Decision in CU v. FEC
The Effort to Suppress the Vote
The Anti-Union Movement
The Right to Work Movement
The Effort to Deny Workers Collective Bargaining
The Effort to Reduce a Women's Opportunity to Secure Contraceptives
The Effort to Eliminate Minimum Wage Laws, and
The War on Women
The War on Public Education
Think if you can or will how taken collectively the fact that these movements (dispute them if you are able) march our nation further into the abyss of an Oligarchy of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.
There were no more facts this time than the last time you posted that collection of headlines and slogans.
One fact you fail to address is that poor people are poorer under Obama and rich people are richer. Are those the aims of Obama's programs or merely the results of them?
I see two of the proud and loud members of the echo chamber want to play tag-team. Good for them, I hope warrior doesn't get jealous of Rabbi giving Daveboy attention.
Back then to the facts I posted, not withstanding the two moron's efforts to play a game of semantics:
The Right to Life Movement
The 'Fair Tax'
The Reduction or Elimination of Entitlements (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, the ACA)
The USSC Decision in CU v. FEC
The Effort to Suppress the Vote
The Anti-Union Movement
The Right to Work Movement
The Effort to Deny Workers Collective Bargaining
The Effort to Reduce a Women's Opportunity to Secure Contraceptives
The Effort to Eliminate Minimum Wage Laws, and
The War on Women
The War on Public Education
Think if you can or will how taken collectively the fact that these movements (dispute them if you are able) march our nation further into the abyss of an Oligarchy of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.
There were no more facts this time than the last time you posted that collection of headlines and slogans.
One fact you fail to address is that poor people are poorer under Obama and rich people are richer. Are those the aims of Obama's programs or merely the results of them?
Can you prove a cause and effect relationship wherein Obama's Policies created the gulf between the middle class / working poor and the very wealthy? Why do you ignore the policies of Reagan and G H. W. Bush, Clinton and Bush Jr., Obama's predecessors? Answer: 'cause you're a partisan hack.
You need to explain why Obama's policies like Obamacare raising insurance rates for everyone who doesn't qualify for free money from those earning too much to get it, his desire to raise energy prices, and his wasting taxpayer dollars on failed green energy companies owned by big Dem Party donors is good for America.Translation: I got my azz kicked and have nothing to refute it with.
Thanks for playing.
No Rabbi, I won't play stupid games with you. We both know you're a highly partisan liar and not bright enough to take the fact that these movements - and I left out the war on women and on public education - all lead to a large, poorly trained and educated labor force easily exploited by the Koch Brothers, et al.
They are a means to an end, the end being our nations proud history as a democratic republic and its transformation into a Plutocracy.
Prediction: All I'll get is "Thanks for sharing."
Then why do you believe right-to-work laws are bad?What gives a union member a greater right to work than a non-union member?I see two of the proud and loud members of the echo chamber want to play tag-team. Good for them, I hope warrior doesn't get jealous of Rabbi giving Daveboy attention.
Back then to the facts I posted, not withstanding the two moron's efforts to play a game of semantics:
The Right to Life Movement
The 'Fair Tax'
The Reduction or Elimination of Entitlements (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, the ACA)
The USSC Decision in CU v. FEC
The Effort to Suppress the Vote
The Anti-Union Movement
The Right to Work Movement
The Effort to Deny Workers Collective Bargaining
The Effort to Reduce a Women's Opportunity to Secure Contraceptives
The Effort to Eliminate Minimum Wage Laws, and
The War on Women
The War on Public Education
Think if you can or will how taken collectively the fact that these movements (dispute them if you are able) march our nation further into the abyss of an Oligarchy of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.
Not a thing.
You lefties need to get your story straight. Candycorn on another thread swears up and down Obamacare is working.You need to explain why Obama's policies like Obamacare raising insurance rates for everyone who doesn't qualify for free money from those earning too much to get it, his desire to raise energy prices, and his wasting taxpayer dollars on failed green energy companies owned by big Dem Party donors is good for America.No Rabbi, I won't play stupid games with you. We both know you're a highly partisan liar and not bright enough to take the fact that these movements - and I left out the war on women and on public education - all lead to a large, poorly trained and educated labor force easily exploited by the Koch Brothers, et al.
They are a means to an end, the end being our nations proud history as a democratic republic and its transformation into a Plutocracy.
Prediction: All I'll get is "Thanks for sharing."
1. Obamacare isn't in effect yet, time will tell how it will play out.
2. President Obama desires to raise energy costs? News to me. Better check your opinions with some facts.
3. Green and renewable sources of energy are the future. Only the brainwashed few believe otherwise.
4. Haliburton ring a bell? Why do I think you and others like you are dishonest hypocrites?
"The report noted that some government officials raised the concern of a potential conflict of interest because of Cheney's former position with Halliburton, but that "White House officials said the mission took priority over whatever political fallout might occur" from awarding contracts to KBR. Since winning the latest version of the LOGCAP contract in 2001, the government has ordered work from KBR worth more than $31 billion.
"Government officials have raised many questions about KBR's fulfillment of its contracts, everything from billing for meals it didn't serve to charging inflated prices for gas to excessive administrative costs. Government auditors have noted that KBR refused to turn over electronic data in its native format and stamped documents as proprietary and secret when the documents would normally be considered public records.
"Over the course of several years, the Defense Contract Audit Agency found that $553 million in payments should be disallowed to KBR, according to 2009 testimony by agency director April Stephenson before the bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Full report here:
PolitiFact | Halliburton, KBR, and Iraq war contracting: A history so far
Then why do you believe right-to-work laws are bad?What gives a union member a greater right to work than a non-union member?
Not a thing.
Fewer and fewer people are optimistic.You need to explain why Obama's policies like Obamacare raising insurance rates for everyone who doesn't qualify for free money from those earning too much to get it, his desire to raise energy prices, and his wasting taxpayer dollars on failed green energy companies owned by big Dem Party donors is good for America.No Rabbi, I won't play stupid games with you. We both know you're a highly partisan liar and not bright enough to take the fact that these movements - and I left out the war on women and on public education - all lead to a large, poorly trained and educated labor force easily exploited by the Koch Brothers, et al.
They are a means to an end, the end being our nations proud history as a democratic republic and its transformation into a Plutocracy.
Prediction: All I'll get is "Thanks for sharing."
1. Obamacare isn't in effect yet, time will tell how it will play out.
It's not me who's short on facts, Skippy.2. President Obama desires to raise energy costs? News to me. Better check your opinions with some facts.
And there's none of those people here.3. Green and renewable sources of energy are the future. Only the brainwashed few believe otherwise.
Halliburton, did you say? Funny how you guys seem to ignore a lot of history. But you know that doesn't make it go away, right?4. Haliburton ring a bell? Why do I think you and others like you are dishonest hypocrites?
"The report noted that some government officials raised the concern of a potential conflict of interest because of Cheney's former position with Halliburton, but that "White House officials said the mission took priority over whatever political fallout might occur" from awarding contracts to KBR. Since winning the latest version of the LOGCAP contract in 2001, the government has ordered work from KBR worth more than $31 billion.
"Government officials have raised many questions about KBR's fulfillment of its contracts, everything from billing for meals it didn't serve to charging inflated prices for gas to excessive administrative costs. Government auditors have noted that KBR refused to turn over electronic data in its native format and stamped documents as proprietary and secret when the documents would normally be considered public records.
"Over the course of several years, the Defense Contract Audit Agency found that $553 million in payments should be disallowed to KBR, according to 2009 testimony by agency director April Stephenson before the bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Full report here:
PolitiFact | Halliburton, KBR, and Iraq war contracting: A history so far
Ahhh. So you DO believe right-to-work laws are bad.Then why do you believe right-to-work laws are bad?Not a thing.
Rent Norma Rae and study U.S. History from Reconstruction until the First World War. Then ask me that question.
BTW, I spent a substantial part of may career in battle with Union Business Agents. I understand many of the problems but also many of the benefits.
You lefties need to get your story straight. Candycorn on another thread swears up and down Obamacare is working.You need to explain why Obama's policies like Obamacare raising insurance rates for everyone who doesn't qualify for free money from those earning too much to get it, his desire to raise energy prices, and his wasting taxpayer dollars on failed green energy companies owned by big Dem Party donors is good for America.
Prediction: All I'll get is "Thanks for sharing."
1. Obamacare isn't in effect yet, time will tell how it will play out.
2. President Obama desires to raise energy costs? News to me. Better check your opinions with some facts.
3. Green and renewable sources of energy are the future. Only the brainwashed few believe otherwise.
4. Haliburton ring a bell? Why do I think you and others like you are dishonest hypocrites?
"The report noted that some government officials raised the concern of a potential conflict of interest because of Cheney's former position with Halliburton, but that "White House officials said the mission took priority over whatever political fallout might occur" from awarding contracts to KBR. Since winning the latest version of the LOGCAP contract in 2001, the government has ordered work from KBR worth more than $31 billion.
"Government officials have raised many questions about KBR's fulfillment of its contracts, everything from billing for meals it didn't serve to charging inflated prices for gas to excessive administrative costs. Government auditors have noted that KBR refused to turn over electronic data in its native format and stamped documents as proprietary and secret when the documents would normally be considered public records.
"Over the course of several years, the Defense Contract Audit Agency found that $553 million in payments should be disallowed to KBR, according to 2009 testimony by agency director April Stephenson before the bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Full report here:
PolitiFact | Halliburton, KBR, and Iraq war contracting: A history so far
Obama on raising energy costs:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0_yt3S9e2o]2007 Obama discusses raising energy prices to reduce dependency - YouTube[/ame]
Green energy might be in the future. Sometime. Way way in the future. But we have 200 years' worth of coal and who knows how much oil. We are the largest exporter of oil in the world now.
Low information poster strikes again.
