So you want better paying jobs?

[danielpalos]

for putting people on ignore.

capitalism just eliminated 40% of the entire planet's poverty!!

so what dear;.

so what?? well, actually, eliminating 40% of the world's poverty is considered a very very good thing.

dear, the Best form of Socialism in the World even provides steak and lobster for the least wealthy.

so what?? well, actually, eliminating 40% of the world's poverty as China did by switching to capitalism is considered a very very good thing.

let me know when the Chinese can buy steak and lobster with their EBT cards.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

let me know when the Chinese can buy steak and lobster with their EBT cards.

dear total idiot, they will never be able to buy steak. And????????????????????????

 

[danielpalos]

let me know when the Chinese can buy steak and lobster with their EBT cards.

dear total idiot, they will never be able to buy steak. And????????????????????????

dear, you admit our form of Socialism is the Best in the World; thank you.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

dear, you admit our form of Socialism is the Best in the World; thank you.

dear, they teach in econ 101 that all economies are mixed between capitalism and socialism, that ours is mixed more toward capitalism and that we have the highest standard of living in human history. And????? Do you ever get out of kindergarten??

 

[danielpalos]

dear, you admit our form of Socialism is the Best in the World; thank you.

dear, they teach in econ 101 that all economies are mixed between capitalism and socialism, that ours is mixed more toward capitalism and that we have the highest standard of living in human history. And????? Do you ever get out of kindergarten??

socialism starts with a social Contract, and ours is the Best in the World.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

dear, you admit our form of Socialism is the Best in the World; thank you.

dear, they teach in econ 101 that all economies are mixed between capitalism and socialism, that ours is mixed more toward capitalism and that we have the highest standard of living in human history. And????? Do you ever get out of kindergarten??

socialism starts with a social Contract, and ours is the Best in the World.

and????????????????

 

[danielpalos]

dear, you admit our form of Socialism is the Best in the World; thank you.

dear, they teach in econ 101 that all economies are mixed between capitalism and socialism, that ours is mixed more toward capitalism and that we have the highest standard of living in human history. And????? Do you ever get out of kindergarten??

socialism starts with a social Contract, and ours is the Best in the World.

and????????????????

who care what less developed mixed-market economies do, if they cannot provide steak and lobster to the least wealthy on their EBT cards.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

if they cannot provide steak and lobster to the least wealthy on their EBT cards.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

 

[Boss]

An interesting socioeconomic psychological question was pondered once: What if someone offered you $1 million on the condition you would never work again? I think we can imagine quite a few people would jump at such an offer. But what about someone like Bill Gates or Donald Trump? Or even someone like Peyton Manning? These people might make a million bucks while taking a dump. They would laugh at such an offer.

Now... How many would take the offer, blow the million bucks, then plead for someone to take care of them because... hey, they made the promise they'd never work again?

I bring this up to raise a point about the "class warfare" system, where we are all confined to these artificial "groups" ...the workers... the working poor... the middle class.. the poor... Whenever we buy into this crap, it causes us to create these stupid policies to "help" them by lessening their motivation to achieve more. We make it easier for them to remain in their class, in their group, in their confinement. Instead of motivating them and inspiring them, we tell them they can't escape the inevitable consequences of class.

The poorest child born to the poorest family in America today, has the opportunity to become the richest person in America within the next 30 years. Where else on this planet has that EVER been possible?

 

[danielpalos]

if they cannot provide steak and lobster to the least wealthy on their EBT cards.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

Dear, a slippery slope is just a fallacy when dealing with Individual Liberty.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

The Right is simply, too lousy to be Good Socialists, to demand any Thing more.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

if they cannot provide steak and lobster to the least wealthy on their EBT cards.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

Dear, a slippery slope is just a fallacy when dealing with Individual Liberty.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

The Right is simply, too lousy to be Good Socialists, to demand any Thing more.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

 

[danielpalos]

if they cannot provide steak and lobster to the least wealthy on their EBT cards.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

Dear, a slippery slope is just a fallacy when dealing with Individual Liberty.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

The Right is simply, too lousy to be Good Socialists, to demand any Thing more.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

did you miss this dear?

Dear, a slippery slope is just a fallacy when dealing with Individual Liberty.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

The Right is simply, too lousy to be Good Socialists, to demand any Thing more.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

if they cannot provide steak and lobster to the least wealthy on their EBT cards.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

Dear, a slippery slope is just a fallacy when dealing with Individual Liberty.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

The Right is simply, too lousy to be Good Socialists, to demand any Thing more.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

did you miss this dear?

Dear, a slippery slope is just a fallacy when dealing with Individual Liberty.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

The Right is simply, too lousy to be Good Socialists, to demand any Thing more.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

 

[danielpalos]

if they cannot provide steak and lobster to the least wealthy on their EBT cards.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

Dear, a slippery slope is just a fallacy when dealing with Individual Liberty.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

The Right is simply, too lousy to be Good Socialists, to demand any Thing more.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

did you miss this dear?

Dear, a slippery slope is just a fallacy when dealing with Individual Liberty.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

The Right is simply, too lousy to be Good Socialists, to demand any Thing more.

dear retard liberal, conservatarians don't want to provide steak and lobster through food stamps for fear of moral hazard.

dear, you really are just soo special.

Dear, a slippery slope is just a fallacy when dealing with Individual Liberty.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

We keep hearing about this "widening gap between rich and poor" which has been the nucleus of an ongoing argument for higher wages, living wages, increasing the minimum wage, more taxation on "the wealthy" or whatever. They come armed with graphs and charts... the statistics to show you the middle class is in decline... the wealthy continue to amass great fortunes while the poor struggle to survive. Our hearts bleed as we're lectured on how we need more government regulations, more agencies and programs, more forced wage hikes and mandates, more restrictions and regulations heaped on big business in order to force them to pay up!

The problem is, we're hearing this from morons who don't understand how free market capitalism works. Oh, not all of them are illiterate morons, some have read books by European socialist propagandists and think they have everything all figured out. They don't seem to understand socialism doesn't work in practice like it works on paper. Every significant sized Socialist nation has failed and most of them have failed hideously. The ideas of people like Marx and Mao are responsible for ten's of millions of deaths. It is clearly a failed ideology by every standard.

Let's first dispatch a few myths and misconceptions. Wealthy people tend to gain wealth faster than poor people because they have a propensity for wealth acquisition... it's how they became wealthy for the most part. So it is perfectly natural in a free market capitalist system for the wealthiest to gain wealth faster than everyone else. It's like having a marathon race where there are runners who are seasoned veteran marathoners, runners who are couch potatoes, and some who run for the fun of it.... Now, in an actual race, who would you expect to lead and eventually win? The couch potato? Of course not... the seasoned vets are constantly going to gain more ground than the couch potatoes... that's perfectly natural and expected. The solution to the problem is not to hobble the veterans so they don't run as fast... the better idea would be to motivate the couch potatoes... train them up... make them better able to compete... turn them into veteran runners.

So this is where the idea of increasing their wages comes... but it's not as simple as merely passing some legislation that corporations MUST pay people $X per hour... that does not work in free market capitalism. What happens is, everything is on a sliding scale, so people make more but things cost more... so very shortly, we are back to square one. So come on Boss... get to the point... how do we increase the rate of pay for the average American in the average job without disrupting free market capitalism or causing inflation?

In order to increase pay you have to increase the demand for labor. In order to do that, you have to create new jobs. Not just new service sector, minimum wage, government or part-time jobs... but real, good paying, legitimate jobs. The way to do that is to encourage expansion of business... this requires taking several steps... lower taxes on corporations... or eliminate corporate tax altogether. Offer tax incentives for repatriated wealth... we have over $20 trillion in US wealth abroad... not doing us a bit of good. Let's bring it home and put it to work creating new business and new jobs. Finally, our trade deals need to account for the disparity in cost of labor. We can't compete with countries who pay their workers $1 a day and a bowl of rice... unless that's the standard we want to live with ourselves. Our trade policies have to take this into consideration and we have to apply tougher tariffs on import goods so our American companies can again compete domestically.

For example, let's use a computer keyboard... If you go to the store today to buy one, you will likely pay around $20 for a standard keyboard which is probably made in Indonesia. Now... An American company, with American workers and paying American taxes, can't buy the materials and assemble said keyboard for $20, much less sell it for that and make a profit. A similar American-made keyboard would be probably $40 or more. So if you have the choice to buy the same keyboard for $20 or $40... which would you likely purchase? Most people aren't going to care about where it's made, money is the deciding factor. However... IF you applied a tariff on Indonesian keyboards of say, $10 each... then the price of the Indonesian keyboard is $30 and the US company has the opportunity to compete... they cut some corners use some competitive ingenuity and manage to whittle their price down to $35... now you have a choice between a cheaply-made Indonesian keyboard for $30 or one that is built to last by Americans for $35. Some will still pick the cheaper keyboard but some will go with the quality.

Now my example is a little exaggerated, we'd never apply a 50% tariff on something... but the point is making imports more expensive so that American companies can compete again. When we change this dynamic, jobs will begin to generate as a result.. more jobs = more demand for labor = higher wages.

simple, today's jobs pay better than 100 years ago because of new inventions that make work more efficient and productive. Thus, the Republican supply of new inventions creates better paying jobs and the Democratic interference with new inventions creates lower paying jobs.

 

[Boss]

simple, today's jobs pay better than 100 years ago because of new inventions that make work more efficient and productive. Thus, the Republican supply of new inventions creates better paying jobs and the Democratic interference with new inventions creates lower paying jobs.

I don't agree that new inventions make work more efficient and productive and this creates better paying jobs. Technology is a raging hormonal bitch sometimes when it comes to better paying jobs, or even jobs.

Gannett used technology to cut 80% of it's production work force and at the same time, increased production by 20%. Because of digital technology, they were able to consolidate pagination of their newspapers in Indianapolis as opposed to paying pagination departments in 30 cities. They shut down about half their presses and the other half became satellite hubs. Some papers were contracted out to other printers.

Chances are, if you get a local Gannett paper, it wasn't paginated or printed in your city.

Democrats think the way you create jobs is to have a Jobs Bill.

You see... that magically fixes everything... a bill. And it doesn't even matter what's in it... Nancy gets more excited about it when she doesn't know and gets to open it on Christmas morning.

 

[danielpalos]

We keep hearing about this "widening gap between rich and poor" which has been the nucleus of an ongoing argument for higher wages, living wages, increasing the minimum wage, more taxation on "the wealthy" or whatever. They come armed with graphs and charts... the statistics to show you the middle class is in decline... the wealthy continue to amass great fortunes while the poor struggle to survive. Our hearts bleed as we're lectured on how we need more government regulations, more agencies and programs, more forced wage hikes and mandates, more restrictions and regulations heaped on big business in order to force them to pay up!

The problem is, we're hearing this from morons who don't understand how free market capitalism works. Oh, not all of them are illiterate morons, some have read books by European socialist propagandists and think they have everything all figured out. They don't seem to understand socialism doesn't work in practice like it works on paper. Every significant sized Socialist nation has failed and most of them have failed hideously. The ideas of people like Marx and Mao are responsible for ten's of millions of deaths. It is clearly a failed ideology by every standard.

Let's first dispatch a few myths and misconceptions. Wealthy people tend to gain wealth faster than poor people because they have a propensity for wealth acquisition... it's how they became wealthy for the most part. So it is perfectly natural in a free market capitalist system for the wealthiest to gain wealth faster than everyone else. It's like having a marathon race where there are runners who are seasoned veteran marathoners, runners who are couch potatoes, and some who run for the fun of it.... Now, in an actual race, who would you expect to lead and eventually win? The couch potato? Of course not... the seasoned vets are constantly going to gain more ground than the couch potatoes... that's perfectly natural and expected. The solution to the problem is not to hobble the veterans so they don't run as fast... the better idea would be to motivate the couch potatoes... train them up... make them better able to compete... turn them into veteran runners.

So this is where the idea of increasing their wages comes... but it's not as simple as merely passing some legislation that corporations MUST pay people $X per hour... that does not work in free market capitalism. What happens is, everything is on a sliding scale, so people make more but things cost more... so very shortly, we are back to square one. So come on Boss... get to the point... how do we increase the rate of pay for the average American in the average job without disrupting free market capitalism or causing inflation?

In order to increase pay you have to increase the demand for labor. In order to do that, you have to create new jobs. Not just new service sector, minimum wage, government or part-time jobs... but real, good paying, legitimate jobs. The way to do that is to encourage expansion of business... this requires taking several steps... lower taxes on corporations... or eliminate corporate tax altogether. Offer tax incentives for repatriated wealth... we have over $20 trillion in US wealth abroad... not doing us a bit of good. Let's bring it home and put it to work creating new business and new jobs. Finally, our trade deals need to account for the disparity in cost of labor. We can't compete with countries who pay their workers $1 a day and a bowl of rice... unless that's the standard we want to live with ourselves. Our trade policies have to take this into consideration and we have to apply tougher tariffs on import goods so our American companies can again compete domestically.

For example, let's use a computer keyboard... If you go to the store today to buy one, you will likely pay around $20 for a standard keyboard which is probably made in Indonesia. Now... An American company, with American workers and paying American taxes, can't buy the materials and assemble said keyboard for $20, much less sell it for that and make a profit. A similar American-made keyboard would be probably $40 or more. So if you have the choice to buy the same keyboard for $20 or $40... which would you likely purchase? Most people aren't going to care about where it's made, money is the deciding factor. However... IF you applied a tariff on Indonesian keyboards of say, $10 each... then the price of the Indonesian keyboard is $30 and the US company has the opportunity to compete... they cut some corners use some competitive ingenuity and manage to whittle their price down to $35... now you have a choice between a cheaply-made Indonesian keyboard for $30 or one that is built to last by Americans for $35. Some will still pick the cheaper keyboard but some will go with the quality.

Now my example is a little exaggerated, we'd never apply a 50% tariff on something... but the point is making imports more expensive so that American companies can compete again. When we change this dynamic, jobs will begin to generate as a result.. more jobs = more demand for labor = higher wages.

simple, today's jobs pay better than 100 years ago because of new inventions that make work more efficient and productive. Thus, the Republican supply of new inventions creates better paying jobs and the Democratic interference with new inventions creates lower paying jobs.

dear, i think you have it backwards. Republicans like to deny and disparage Individual Liberty, and Education in favor of their shillery.

 

[danielpalos]

Reserving labor at the rock bottom cost of a form of minimum wage could solve this social dilemma on an at-will basis.

To much Individual Liberty for the Right?

 

[Boss]

Reserving labor at the rock bottom cost of a form of minimum wage could solve this social dilemma on an at-will basis.

To much Individual Liberty for the Right?

We already reserve labor at the rock bottom cost of an actual minimum wage. We've been doing it for 82 years and it hasn't solved any social dilemma on any basis.

 

[danielpalos]

Reserving labor at the rock bottom cost of a form of minimum wage could solve this social dilemma on an at-will basis.

To much Individual Liberty for the Right?

We already reserve labor at the rock bottom cost of an actual minimum wage. We've been doing it for 82 years and it hasn't solved any social dilemma on any basis.

No, you haven't.

Reserving labor means subsidizing labor on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, at the rock bottom cost of a form of minimum wage; thus, labor no longer has to care about tax breaks for capitalists or capital games capitalists play, with other peoples jobs-through structural forms of unemployment.

It would also solve for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment as well as simple poverty.