If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Pittsburgh City Paper)   Gentlemen, the situation is dire: our employees are forced to go to food banks to make ends meet. Therefore, I propose, we open our own food bank   (pghcitypaper.com) divider line 381
    More: Asinine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, food banks, 'Tis the Season, Allegheny County, pantry  
•       •       •

16178 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Dec 2012 at 9:15 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



381 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-12 03:39:45 AM  

Stibium: I'm too drunk to do this debate


Sup? 

/ too high...
 
2012-12-12 03:42:02 AM  

Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet: Silly Jesus: I own a company, and I sell widgets. I get $11 for each widget that I sell. I pay Bob $10 for each widget that he makes, but his family is hungry. What is your solution for the evil business owner?

I can arrange to have those widgets made for $6 each, including the shipping from Bangalore.

Bob can get a job somewhere else.

Yeah, cuz everyone is hiring right now, right?

Bob had a job making $10 a widget: more than 95% of all people make. He was dissatisfied. His employer was dissatisfied. So the job was sent overseas.

Bob will work it out, or else his genes won't cloud our lovely pool.

Struggle against the logic all you like, but you will either adapt to it or starve.

Too bad the same rules don't apply to the employer.

Yeah, but you only vote for those politicians that the employers choose (as advertised on MSNBC and Faux).

Seriously: WTF did you expect to happen? Unicorns and cheesecake?

So you're saying both sides are bad...


No, I'm saying both "sides" are the same thing.

Obama was picked and promoted by Wall Street. Romney was picked and promoted by Lockheed, Exxon, and pals.

Next election, the sponsors may change or flip "sides", but the goal will remain the same: growing the wealth of a few.

Meanwhile you, and everyone you know, will cheer one of their picks, boo the other one, and wonder why you're making less money and why that money buys less stuff.

You can't fix it. You can't fight it.

You'll try anyway, and I suppose that's admirable.
 
2012-12-12 03:50:44 AM  

Abacus9: Giblet:Yeah, but you only vote for those politicians that the employers choose (as advertised on MSNBC and Faux).

Seriously: WTF did you expect to happen? Unicorns and cheesecake?

So you're saying both sides are bad...


i.qkme.me
 
2012-12-12 04:03:00 AM  

Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet:

So you're saying both sides are bad...

No, I'm saying both "sides" are the same thing.

Obama was picked and promoted by Wall Street. Romney was picked and promoted by Lockheed, Exxon, and pals.

Next election, the sponsors may change or flip "sides", but the goal will remain the same: growing the wealth of a few.

Meanwhile you, and everyone you know, will cheer one of their picks, boo the other one, and wonder why you're making less money and why that money buys less stuff.

You can't fix it. You can't fight it.

You'll try anyway, and I suppose that's admirable.


Gotta try something. I see what you're saying, and somewhat agree, but I don't think most of us moderates cheer too much one way or the other. We just want companies to be held as responsible as their employees.
 
2012-12-12 04:03:31 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: UltimaCS: giftedmadness: Only in America do people complain about being given free food.

And France. Having the audacity to scoff at cake. The nerve!

Those Russian surfs were also so uncouth, why couldn't they respect the rights of their...Hmmm how does one phrase this in favor of the people owning all the land.


I wouldn't want to be one of those poor Alphas! They have to work so hard and so much depends upon them! I'm so glad I'm just a Beta!
 
2012-12-12 04:31:46 AM  

Gyrfalcon: tinfoil-hat maggie: UltimaCS: giftedmadness: Only in America do people complain about being given free food.

And France. Having the audacity to scoff at cake. The nerve!

Those Russian surfs were also so uncouth, why couldn't they respect the rights of their...Hmmm how does one phrase this in favor of the people owning all the land.

I wouldn't want to be one of those poor Alphas! They have to work so hard and so much depends upon them! I'm so glad I'm just a Beta!


Oh my, I think I am in love, well i knew it was possible but never believed it would happen but now I see. Well granted distance does separate us and soon it may even be legal to marry in you're state thoughI don't think I could go back to LA so we'll just have to stay star crossed lovers that never were or something like that ; )
 
2012-12-12 04:33:56 AM  

Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet:

So you're saying both sides are bad...

No, I'm saying both "sides" are the same thing.

Obama was picked and promoted by Wall Street. Romney was picked and promoted by Lockheed, Exxon, and pals.

Next election, the sponsors may change or flip "sides", but the goal will remain the same: growing the wealth of a few.

Meanwhile you, and everyone you know, will cheer one of their picks, boo the other one, and wonder why you're making less money and why that money buys less stuff.

You can't fix it. You can't fight it.

You'll try anyway, and I suppose that's admirable.

Gotta try something. I see what you're saying, and somewhat agree, but I don't think most of us moderates cheer too much one way or the other. We just want companies to be held as responsible as their employees.


I'm not sure that I know what you mean by "responsible". The company exists to make money. The employees are there to do the same. There exists, under the best conditions, some mutual loyalty in that relationship. These are hardly the best conditions.

Bush and Obama have done everything they can to make it hard to do business in the US. I understand employer's desire to make as much as they can as fast as they can, because the future looks just as bleak to them as it does to the employees.

I had to let six great people go two years ago. I couldn't afford to pay the $75K/yr that it cost then to give them a paltry $42K/yr.

It's worse now, and will get even worse yet. It will not improve in the next decade.

Those of you who are employees: good luck. You'll need it.
 
2012-12-12 04:40:03 AM  

Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet:

So you're saying both sides are bad...

No, I'm saying both "sides" are the same thing.

Obama was picked and promoted by Wall Street. Romney was picked and promoted by Lockheed, Exxon, and pals.

Next election, the sponsors may change or flip "sides", but the goal will remain the same: growing the wealth of a few.

Meanwhile you, and everyone you know, will cheer one of their picks, boo the other one, and wonder why you're making less money and why that money buys less stuff.

You can't fix it. You can't fight it.

You'll try anyway, and I suppose that's admirable.

Gotta try something. I see what you're saying, and somewhat agree, but I don't think most of us moderates cheer too much one way or the other. We just want companies to be held as responsible as their employees.

I'm not sure that I know what you mean by "responsible". The company exists to make money. The employees are there to do the same. There exists, under the best conditions, some mutual loyalty in that relationship. These are hardly the best conditions.

Bush and Obama have done everything they can to make it hard to do business in the US. I understand employer's desire to make as much as they can as fast as they can, because the future looks just as bleak to them as it does to the employees.

I had to let six great people go two years ago. I couldn't afford to pay the $75K/yr that it cost then to give them a paltry $42K/yr.

It's worse now, and will get even worse yet. It will not improve in the next decade.

Those of you who are employees: good luck. You'll need it.


If it's so hard to to business these days, why are corporate profits at an all time high?
 
2012-12-12 05:02:16 AM  

Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet:

So you're saying both sides are bad...

No, I'm saying both "sides" are the same thing.

Obama was picked and promoted by Wall Street. Romney was picked and promoted by Lockheed, Exxon, and pals.

Next election, the sponsors may change or flip "sides", but the goal will remain the same: growing the wealth of a few.

Meanwhile you, and everyone you know, will cheer one of their picks, boo the other one, and wonder why you're making less money and why that money buys less stuff.

You can't fix it. You can't fight it.

You'll try anyway, and I suppose that's admirable.

Gotta try something. I see what you're saying, and somewhat agree, but I don't think most of us moderates cheer too much one way or the other. We just want companies to be held as responsible as their employees.

I'm not sure that I know what you mean by "responsible". The company exists to make money. The employees are there to do the same. There exists, under the best conditions, some mutual loyalty in that relationship. These are hardly the best conditions.

Bush and Obama have done everything they can to make it hard to do business in the US. I understand employer's desire to make as much as they can as fast as they can, because the future looks just as bleak to them as it does to the employees.

I had to let six great people go two years ago. I couldn't afford to pay the $75K/yr that it cost then to give them a paltry $42K/yr.

It's worse now, and will get even worse yet. It will not improve in the next decade.

Those of you who are employees: good luck. You'll need it.

If it's so hard to to business these days, why are corporate profits at an all time high?


You're looking at the wrong charts. Mega-corps own the government, and therefore rake in all the profits from government contracts, profits related to subsidized products, and insane tax loopholes.

Mega-corps are not the major employers in the US, and never were; small businesses are the major employers.

The small businesses are shutting their doors because your favorite politician d'jour funnels the SB's potential profits to the entitlement programs that help get them elected, and to beefing up police surveillance/armaments/gear in preparation for the inevitable. These politicians don't dare ask the mega-corps to fund aid programs and entitlements.

We're at the Bread and Circuses stage of decline. No society has ever recovered after reaching this stage without a catastrophic collapse.

Cheerful, huh. Happy Wednesday! I gotta go feed some future ham.
 
2012-12-12 05:30:28 AM  

Abacus9: If it's so hard to to business these days, why are corporate profits at an all time high?


Because if you're a sterile, sociopathic leviathan with good lawyers, it isn't very difficult at all. If you have a sole proprietorship and a conscience, it's like pissing up a rope.
 
2012-12-12 06:18:16 AM  
Those ungrateful bastards. Have they ever even tried cake? It's not like I said "Let them eat Brussels sprouts".
 
2012-12-12 06:52:23 AM  

Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet: Abacus9: Giblet:

So you're saying both sides are bad...

No, I'm saying both "sides" are the same thing.

Obama was picked and promoted by Wall Street. Romney was picked and promoted by Lockheed, Exxon, and pals.

Next election, the sponsors may change or flip "sides", but the goal will remain the same: growing the wealth of a few.

Meanwhile you, and everyone you know, will cheer one of their picks, boo the other one, and wonder why you're making less money and why that money buys less stuff.

You can't fix it. You can't fight it.

You'll try anyway, and I suppose that's admirable.

Gotta try something. I see what you're saying, and somewhat agree, but I don't think most of us moderates cheer too much one way or the other. We just want companies to be held as responsible as their employees.

I'm not sure that I know what you mean by "responsible". The company exists to make money. The employees are there to do the same. There exists, under the best conditions, some mutual loyalty in that relationship. These are hardly the best conditions.

Bush and Obama have done everything they can to make it hard to do business in the US. I understand employer's desire to make as much as they can as fast as they can, because the future looks just as bleak to them as it does to the employees.

I had to let six great people go two years ago. I couldn't afford to pay the $75K/yr that it cost then to give them a paltry $42K/yr.

It's worse now, and will get even worse yet. It will not improve in the next decade.

Those of you who are employees: good luck. You'll need it.


Specifically what did Obama do to make it difficult to do business in the US?
 
2012-12-12 07:56:19 AM  

The Jami Turman Fan Club: Lsherm: The Jami Turman Fan Club: Silly Jesus: Holy shiat you people are nit-picky. This thread is the definition of can't see the forest for the trees. The example was broad and cobbled together...it was only meant to represent the idea of not being able to raise pay because it would cut out any profit. People's value, in dollars, is limited by what value, in dollars, they produce.

Is everyone here farking autistic? That's a serious question.

It was an unbelievably dumb question. Here's a better one.

Nurse Jane works in a hospital in Pittsburgh. She brings $300,000 worth of value to the hospital. UPMC knows she can't switch jobs because her mother is very ill and can't be moved or live on her own. Oh, and because UPMC owns all of the hospitals in a 20 mile radius.

Does UPMC have any obligation to pay Nurse Jane enough to eat and keep her heat and electricty on? Or should UPMC pay her the minimum possible, because they know she can't switch jobs?

Do you have any idea how much money nurses make? Choose a different profession for your example. RNs clean the fark up - they make more than engineers in most markets.

How does that make any difference? Jane can't move, and UPMC knows that. UPMC also has a monopoly in the area. Is it OK for UPMC to pay her starvation wages instead of the prevailing wage?


It matters because it's a bogus analogy. Jane can't move, but other nurses can, so UPMC has to pay a market rate for nurses. And RNs don't make starvation wages anywhere. So Jane's not starving regardless of whether she can move or not.
 
2012-12-12 08:16:22 AM  
I bet most of those folks have a smartphone and data plan. Priorities, how do they work?
 
2012-12-12 09:01:35 AM  
Wow, I think we have a leading contender for "Most Clueless Douchebags of 2012".
 
2012-12-12 09:28:36 AM  

BHShaman: I bet most of those folks have a smartphone and data plan. Priorities, how do they work?


Smartphones are cheap, in many cases cheaper than landlines. My nephew got his latest android free with a contract, and it only costs him $35 a month for talk, text and limited data. That's cheaper than my base AT+T landline. The days of mobile phone being strictly a luxury item have been over for a long time.

2012, how does it work?
 
2012-12-12 09:50:36 AM  

Giblet: I had to let six great people go two years ago. I couldn't afford to pay the $75K/yr that it cost then to give them a paltry $42K/yr.


Want to know how I know you've neither hired nor fired another human being?

Bontesla: Specifically what did Obama do to make it difficult to do business in the US?


You're not going to get a coherent answer on that. (See above.)

tinfoil-hat maggie: Giblet: So otherwise "Derp"
Thanks for playing


Perfection. (And I still say you'd make a fine parent.)
 
2012-12-12 09:58:17 AM  
Also, for this idea that companies have to outsource to China or India to be efficient.

Bull.

Keen Footwear bringing production back to the US

Master Lock bringing production to Milwaukee from China

Apple and General Electric returning production lines to the USA

A growing trend in business has been "in-sourcing", taking production back from China to the US to bring manufacturing jobs to America.

The companies interviewed stated several reasons why this is an actual good business move. You see, the lower costs of producing overseas are deceptive, there are all kinds of hidden costs and drawbacks that you don't get with American production lines. Companies saw the lower wages and low/no tariffs and thought it would be a no brainer to build in China, but a decade or more down the line they are seeing why that might not be as much of a universal solution as thought

1. Shipping time and lead time. It takes around 6 weeks for a slow boat from China to bring crap to the Port of Los Angeles. If you need to ramp up production or quickly change a design and get the changes into the marketplace, that's a 6 week (at least) delay, that if your factory is stateside, you don't have. If you have an American factory, you can put things on trucks and have them rolling for stores the moment they are off the lines, without delays on a ship and at port.

2. Quality. Chinese products are known for being, well, total crap. Consumers see "made in China" and their expectations drop like a rock. "Made in the USA" still has market value. It still makes consumers think of quality, and from a marketing standpoint it lets them advertise that they are providing American jobs. In terms of actual quality, that is debateable, but when is the last time you heard about melamine or excessive lead from something built in America?

3. Efficiency. General Electric has found that by putting the design engineers, managers, marketing, and production all under one roof they can make the whole company more efficient. Engineers can visit the assembly line by walking down the hall (not by having to fly across the world). There is zero language or cultural barrier between workers and design and management. If they want to make a tiny change to design or the assembly process to make things more efficient, it can be quickly implemented.

4. IP protection. China is famous for making knock-offs of American designs, they have very little respect for IP. Companies that don't want their products copied illegally are finding that its worth it to be Made in America.
 
2012-12-12 10:19:19 AM  

djkutch: I don't understand why employees shouldn't just be forced to live and work at the job. A little room with a hotplate, if you will. Share a shiater down the hall.


www.streport.com

Ausgezeichnet!
 
2012-12-12 10:20:13 AM  

jaylectricity: Silly Jesus: You should pay me more than I'm worth!

No wage slave has ever been paid even half of what he's worth.


Pfft. You seem to be laboring under the delusion that human life has some sort of intrinsic value. I can assure you that it does not, at least within a Capitalist economy. As the economy falters, and people's desperation grows, the value of human life drops like a rock.
 
2012-12-12 10:22:55 AM  

Giblet: I had to let six great people go two years ago. I couldn't afford to pay the $75K/yr that it cost then to give them a paltry $42K/yr.


42K each, I hope. Surely, great employees aren't worth just $7K apiece, even on a hog farm.
 
2012-12-12 10:23:37 AM  

L.D. Ablo: Let's just bring back indentured servitude.

Sell yourself to a corporation for seven years to get out of your student loans.


"No experience? We'll keep you in our files and let you know if anything comes up."
 
2012-12-12 01:16:53 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH:
Perfection. (And I still say you'd make a fine parent.)


I still think you're crazy : )
 
2012-12-12 03:09:19 PM  
I'm only 100 comments in and too lazy (actually busy at work) to read them all, so apologies to anyone who has already posted anything similar...
 
"Just get another job" - UPMC has damn close to a monopoly on healthcare in the region.  They've bought up everybody.  So there are basically no other healthcare jobs available.  Their near-monopoly allows them to get away with paying the wages they pay, as there's no competition. 
 
When a Blue Cross affiliate dared to buy a local hospital, UPMC said that Blue Cross participants (a huge number of people in the region) would have no more access to UPMC physicians.  Which, again, is basically ALL the physicians.
 
I have various family and friends who have worked for the company and the word that everyone has taken to using to describe them is "evil".  (Let's not get into a philosophical discussion of what is "evil" - the point is that that's how people refer to them.)  Many of these folks - especially in my family - are dyed in the wool Republicans who are anti-union, etc.  If they've worked for or had to do business with UPMC in any way, they DESPISE them. 
 
For instance, a friend who is a doctor says he's evaluated on basically one metric - how much new business he brings in.  That's it.  The guy's a great human and doctor but he's no salesman and so he's getting pummeled.  His family ties to the region keep him there (sick family members, etc) and so he says he'll probably give up medicine.
 
This is a monopolistic corporate behemoth in the guise of a non-profit.  They do not give a damn about their workers, the quality of care of their patients (at least at the management level... the doctors are still doctors and I'm sure they care), or anything besides growth and crushing the competition.
 
2012-12-12 03:33:29 PM  

Lsherm: This reminds me of a complaint one of my coworkers had this year: someone on a conference call spent an hour making fun of everyone else on the call because he thought he had muted his phone. Even worse, since he had the volume for the call turned down, every time they stopped the meeting to ask him to stop being an ass he didn't realize they were talking to him.

Many complaints were sent up the chain and his boss sent out a very apologetic email promising that next time he would make sure he was actually on mute.


Sounds like he has the goods on his boss, or he made up for it under the desk. Or the boss is just particularly spineless and unwilling to fire anyone no matter how unprofessional, which makes him the guy who really needs a firing....
 
2012-12-12 03:39:36 PM  

TomD9938: "I don't need them to pick out my food for me; I need them to pay me better wage so I can pick out my own food," says Poston

That's fair. And if they dont pay you more, go work somewhere that will.

Clearly you're not bieng paid in accordance with your value and it will be your current employers loss when you leave.

/the food bank was a stupid move


The free market doesn't work when there is massive difference in relative power between the participants. That's the whole point of the board game "Monopoly", ironically lost nowadays of course.
 
2012-12-12 05:09:26 PM  

temmerling: I'm only 100 comments in and too lazy (actually busy at work) to read them all, so apologies to anyone who has already posted anything similar...
 
"Just get another job" - UPMC has damn close to a monopoly on healthcare in the region.  They've bought up everybody.  So there are basically no other healthcare jobs available.  Their near-monopoly allows them to get away with paying the wages they pay, as there's no competition. 
 
When a Blue Cross affiliate dared to buy a local hospital, UPMC said that Blue Cross participants (a huge number of people in the region) would have no more access to UPMC physicians.  Which, again, is basically ALL the physicians.
 
I have various family and friends who have worked for the company and the word that everyone has taken to using to describe them is "evil".  (Let's not get into a philosophical discussion of what is "evil" - the point is that that's how people refer to them.)  Many of these folks - especially in my family - are dyed in the wool Republicans who are anti-union, etc.  If they've worked for or had to do business with UPMC in any way, they DESPISE them. 
 
For instance, a friend who is a doctor says he's evaluated on basically one metric - how much new business he brings in.  That's it.  The guy's a great human and doctor but he's no salesman and so he's getting pummeled.  His family ties to the region keep him there (sick family members, etc) and so he says he'll probably give up medicine.
 
This is a monopolistic corporate behemoth in the guise of a non-profit.  They do not give a damn about their workers, the quality of care of their patients (at least at the management level... the doctors are still doctors and I'm sure they care), or anything besides growth and crushing the competition.


So ... we have the best health care in the world, is what you're saying? Sure sounds like it. Hey, it's the free market. It never makes mistakes. Profit is the most important thing.
 
2012-12-12 05:46:28 PM  

FunkOut: There's a lot of business experts in here with nothing to during the night that sit at their computer and argue with other shut-ins.


They also moonlight as climatologists.
 
2012-12-12 07:41:49 PM  

Silverstaff: Also, for this idea that companies have to outsource to China or India to be efficient.


You might want to check out video about Shapeworks about 3D printing, their largest factory is in Queens.

Now when the machine can build most anything it won't be cheaper to send it overseas. You only make what you need, so no need to have runs of 10k units and then store them somewhere.
 
2012-12-12 07:43:28 PM  

temmerling: I'm only 100 comments in and too lazy (actually busy at work) to read them all, so apologies to anyone who has already posted anything similar...
 
"Just get another job" - UPMC has damn close to a monopoly on healthcare in the region.  They've bought up everybody.  So there are basically no other healthcare jobs available.  Their near-monopoly allows them to get away with paying the wages they pay, as there's no competition. 
 
When a Blue Cross affiliate dared to buy a local hospital, UPMC said that Blue Cross participants (a huge number of people in the region) would have no more access to UPMC physicians.  Which, again, is basically ALL the physicians.
 
I have various family and friends who have worked for the company and the word that everyone has taken to using to describe them is "evil".  (Let's not get into a philosophical discussion of what is "evil" - the point is that that's how people refer to them.)  Many of these folks - especially in my family - are dyed in the wool Republicans who are anti-union, etc.  If they've worked for or had to do business with UPMC in any way, they DESPISE them. 
 
For instance, a friend who is a doctor says he's evaluated on basically one metric - how much new business he brings in.  That's it.  The guy's a great human and doctor but he's no salesman and so he's getting pummeled.  His family ties to the region keep him there (sick family members, etc) and so he says he'll probably give up medicine.
 
This is a monopolistic corporate behemoth in the guise of a non-profit.  They do not give a damn about their workers, the quality of care of their patients (at least at the management level... the doctors are still doctors and I'm sure they care), or anything besides growth and crushing the competition.


maybe they should form a union
 
2012-12-12 08:21:09 PM  

Graffito: FunkOut: There's a lot of business experts in here with nothing to during the night that sit at their computer and argue with other shut-ins.

They also moonlight as climatologists.


All conveniently located a few posts above all of the failed educators, critics and dime store know-it-alls.
 
Displayed 31 of 381 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report