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.

(Gawker)   Part-time is the new full-time   (gawker.com) divider line 114
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

4230 clicks; posted to Business » on 15 Jul 2013 at 1:52 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



114 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-07-15 12:46:18 PM
Business have been hiring part timers to keep from having to pay full time benefits for decades.

www.strangecosmos.com
 
2013-07-15 12:54:49 PM
But rich people get their tax cuts, right? Because that's what's really important here.
 
2013-07-15 12:59:17 PM
Obvious tag shakes head as it heads to its 3rd job today
 
2013-07-15 01:43:36 PM
up is down and black is white...


/only shades of gray
 
2013-07-15 01:55:19 PM
Damn it feels good to have a career
 
2013-07-15 01:57:21 PM
The best part is that the restaurant owners also expect you to have full availability and will not offer a set schedule so that from week to week you have no idea what your hours will be, but missing a single shift means being fired.

So good luck getting a second part-time shiat job to make ends meet, because neither will offer you enough to live on but both expect to lay full claim to any of your time as they see fit.

America!
 
2013-07-15 01:57:27 PM
I take all articles that have profanity in the first sentence seriously.
 
2013-07-15 01:58:10 PM
Is it time to up gratuities to 30% to pay for waiters healthcare?
 
2013-07-15 02:01:03 PM
So when does the government start calculating benefit recipients as full-time-equivalents (35 hour weeks worked) for the purpose of fining employers?  Employers turning full-time jobs into part time ones should get their comeuppance.
 
2013-07-15 02:02:21 PM
Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.
 
2013-07-15 02:07:00 PM

Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.


How about health insurance that is actual insurance?  Nobody files a car insurance claim to get the oil changed.  The same should be for medical.
 
2013-07-15 02:07:59 PM

Lexx: So when does the government start calculating benefit recipients as full-time-equivalents (35 hour weeks worked) for the purpose of fining employers?  Employers turning full-time jobs into part time ones should get their comeuppance.


TFA says 30 hours a week is full-time for Healthcare under Obamacare. So, employers will just knock down employee's hours to 25 hours a week. They save 5 whole hours of pay AND skip playing into healthcare.

Not an Ayn Rand fan by any stretch of the imagination, but it seems to me that the people most in favor of her economic philosophy overlook the tiny little line about 'not sacrificing yourself for others, nor sacrificing others for yourself' bit when they put it into practice.
 
2013-07-15 02:09:31 PM

vpb: Business have been hiring part timers to keep from having to pay full time benefits for decades.

[www.strangecosmos.com image 450x385]


Indeed, the new game in town is to hire temps instead.
 
2013-07-15 02:10:01 PM
FTA:

50 employees working 30 hours or more a week= mandatory insurance by employers

Even if that is correct, for a lot of companies it's cheaper to simply pay the penalties.
 
2013-07-15 02:11:02 PM

bbfreak: vpb: Business have been hiring part timers to keep from having to pay full time benefits for decades.

[www.strangecosmos.com image 450x385]

Indeed, the new game in town is to hire temps instead.


Rush Limbaugh called that one years ago.  It is obvious to anybody with any sense of cynacism that it was going to happen that way.
 
2013-07-15 02:11:11 PM

RoyFokker'sGhost: Lexx: So when does the government start calculating benefit recipients as full-time-equivalents (35 hour weeks worked) for the purpose of fining employers?  Employers turning full-time jobs into part time ones should get their comeuppance.

TFA says 30 hours a week is full-time for Healthcare under Obamacare. So, employers will just knock down employee's hours to 25 hours a week. They save 5 whole hours of pay AND skip playing into healthcare.

Not an Ayn Rand fan by any stretch of the imagination, but it seems to me that the people most in favor of her economic philosophy overlook the tiny little line about 'not sacrificing yourself for others, nor sacrificing others for yourself' bit when they put it into practice.


I'm saying that the government should start counting full-time  equivalents,not full-time-employees.  For example, 100 employees at 30 hours a week should count the same as 200 employees at 15 hours a week, for the purposes of health-care contributions.
 
2013-07-15 02:11:27 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.

How about health insurance that is actual insurance?  Nobody files a car insurance claim to get the oil changed.  The same should be for medical.


I was aiming for a relatively minor update, not a systematic overhaul.
 
2013-07-15 02:15:29 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.

How about health insurance that is actual insurance?  Nobody files a car insurance claim to get the oil changed.  The same should be for medical.


The problem there being the human "oil changes" can prevent medical costs that make a new car look cheap.
 
2013-07-15 02:16:47 PM

Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.


And the employers would respond by laying off as many slaves employees as necessary to get under the threshold set by that regulation. So the guy who's got 70 employees working 20 hours a week won't have to give them even the most cursory of benefits beyond minimum wage, and we're back to square one where bosses are doing everything in their power to give their employees as little as possible.
 
2013-07-15 02:19:02 PM

Mateorocks: FTA:

50 employees working 30 hours or more a week= mandatory insurance by employers

Even if that is correct, for a lot of companies it's cheaper to simply pay the penalties.


si0.twimg.com
 
2013-07-15 02:20:46 PM

12349876: Smeggy Smurf: Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.

How about health insurance that is actual insurance?  Nobody files a car insurance claim to get the oil changed.  The same should be for medical.

The problem there being the human "oil changes" can prevent medical costs that make a new car look cheap.


medical insurance is like a combo of insurance and a service plan.

I have a service plan on my car that covers routine maitenance for 4 years (like oil changes). I also have car insurance, that covers me if its stolen, hit with things, etc.

I have medical insurance that covers routine maitenance (yearly checkups) plus insurance than covers if I get sick (appendicitis).

If anything, the medical insurance makes more sense.
 
2013-07-15 02:21:36 PM

King Something: Mateorocks: FTA:

50 employees working 30 hours or more a week= mandatory insurance by employers

Even if that is correct, for a lot of companies it's cheaper to simply pay the penalties.

[si0.twimg.com image 500x500]


Not sure why that image isn't showing up for me, since it looked just fine in the preview. Anyway, here's a link to it just in case I'm not the only one with that problem.
 
2013-07-15 02:25:23 PM
I like how our society is actively encouraging poor people to rise up and chop the heads off rich assholes. It's like nobody ever heard of the French revolution before.
 
2013-07-15 02:28:00 PM
And Twinkees are smaller because no more high costs of unionized labor to make them and thats makes more profit or something.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/07/15/twinkies-rele a se-smaller/2517709/
 
2013-07-15 02:28:02 PM

Weaver95: I like how our society is actively encouraging poor people to rise up and chop the heads off rich assholes. It's like nobody ever heard of the French revolution before.


No, no, Weaver. You can be paid by the rich asshole to shoot the poor people. Jobs!
 
2013-07-15 02:30:31 PM
Sometimes I wish I could just slap people and say, "WHAT DID YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN!?"

Full-time employees are *very* marginally more efficient than part-timers....you have fewer staff to train, fewer staff to manage, less turn-over, less 'new guys'.  12 people working 40 hours is, generally, better than 16 people working 30.  Which is why we ended up with full-time jobs being the norm.

But when you're flipping burgers, seating customers, sweeping the floor - there just isn't *that* much of a difference.

Now, introduce some law that introduces HUGE incentives to avoid having too many 'full-timers' - where full-time is '30 hours or more'.  What do you think is going to happen?  Free markets attempt to maximize efficiency - and paying lots of extra fees and taxes for *tiny* improvement in your staff....well, that's not efficient.  So - of course, companies are going to shift towards employing lots of 25-29 hour per week staff.

And I can't fathom why anyone, much less our intelligent, educated, economic leaders who pass these laws and designed this health care system couldn't see this coming from 100,000 miles away.

Imagine if the government put a tax on Hard-drives bigger than 500gigs.  Immediately, any drive over 500gigs came with a $300 'probably a pirate' fee.  What would you do?  Would you buy a new 1TB drive and pay an additional $300 - or would you buy two 500gig drives for a fraction of the cost?  Or invest in a NAS for your home storage needs?  Or pay a few dollars for cloud storage?  Any sane person would consider the additional cost in their purchasing decisions.

In a more positive light - it will mean more jobs.  So, if you are so inclined, you can spin it into a positive.  You can talk about how we're adding Health Care (YAY!) and decreasing unemployment (YAY!) ...but really, this was exactly what everyone should have known and expected would happen.  What pisses me off is I have friends who were REALLY supporting 'Obama's Health Care Bill' who, apparently, knew absolutely nothing about it.  And now that they are hearing details of it's implementation that they don't like; they're raging *at the companies* who are acting exactly like any rational being would.

These same people will do everything in their power to minimize their tax burden.  They deduct their student loan interest (and cry for loan forgiveness).  They jump through hoops for 1st time home-buyer freebies.  They claim tax-credits for getting energy efficient crap.

But when a COMPANY complies with tax law - the company is evil!  How dare they!

// My friends are retarded
 
2013-07-15 02:36:10 PM

King Something: Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.

And the employers would respond by laying off as many slaves employees as necessary to get under the threshold set by that regulation. So the guy who's got 70 employees working 20 hours a week won't have to give them even the most cursory of benefits beyond minimum wage, and we're back to square one where bosses are doing everything in their power to give their employees as little as possible.


If they could do the same business by laying off employees, I'm pretty sure most of these places already would. The employers will have to decide if losing profit is worth ducking the fines, which is a much harder calculation for them to do than they currently have to make.
 
2013-07-15 02:38:25 PM

Fark_Guy_Rob: But when a COMPANY complies with tax law - the company is evil! How dare they!


The companies are screwing people over. It matters not the reason, they're the ones screwing people over, they get the hate. If they'd actually give a shiat about employees, treat them like humans instead of chattel or replaceable cogs, we wouldn't even be having this discussion in the first place.
 
2013-07-15 02:38:53 PM
Had the obvious tag already put in too many hours this week?
 
2013-07-15 02:42:32 PM
You know... I want to biatch about the Job Creators (TM) because they have a very heavy hand in this trend but....

.... another BIG part of the problem here is us. As long as consumers continue to demand nothing from their consumption but the maximum quantity of product at the minimum possible price this is going to continue to happen. Wal Mart doesn't only pay shiat wages to a skeleton staff to maximize profits and shareholder benefits, it also does that to keep costs as low as possible so it can sell products at the lowest price it possibly can.

Yea, fat cats screwing people over on their basic healthcare just so they can buy another ivory butt scratcher is part of the problem, but as long as we live in a society where the rest of us demand that prices constantly fall we also hold a considerable chunk of the blame for the plight of the "service class".
 
2013-07-15 02:42:57 PM
Some business owners treat employees like assets rather than liabilities.

Those are the people you want to work for.
 
2013-07-15 02:44:02 PM

Fark_Guy_Rob: And I can't fathom why anyone, much less our intelligent, educated, economic leaders who pass these laws and designed this health care system couldn't see this coming from 100,000 miles away.


Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!!
 
2013-07-15 02:48:35 PM

Lexx: RoyFokker'sGhost: Lexx: So when does the government start calculating benefit recipients as full-time-equivalents (35 hour weeks worked) for the purpose of fining employers?  Employers turning full-time jobs into part time ones should get their comeuppance.

TFA says 30 hours a week is full-time for Healthcare under Obamacare. So, employers will just knock down employee's hours to 25 hours a week. They save 5 whole hours of pay AND skip playing into healthcare.

Not an Ayn Rand fan by any stretch of the imagination, but it seems to me that the people most in favor of her economic philosophy overlook the tiny little line about 'not sacrificing yourself for others, nor sacrificing others for yourself' bit when they put it into practice.

I'm saying that the government should start counting full-time  equivalents,not full-time-employees.  For example, 100 employees at 30 hours a week should count the same as 200 employees at 15 hours a week, for the purposes of health-care contributions.


So which employees get healthcare and which get nothing?
 
2013-07-15 02:50:32 PM

skozlaw: .... another BIG part of the problem here is us. As long as consumers continue to demand nothing from their consumption but the maximum quantity of product at the minimum possible price this is going to continue to happen. Wal Mart doesn't only pay shiat wages to a skeleton staff to maximize profits and shareholder benefits, it also does that to keep costs as low as possible so it can sell products at the lowest price it possibly can.


I disagree that those two things are related. Costco doesn't pay shiat wages, but it somehow manages to offer maximum quantity at minimum price.
No, it's still the corporate culture that values shareholders above all else. It's ultimately unsustainable when the company values non-producers more than actual employees. The company, the employee, and the consumer should all come before the shareholder, because without any one of those three things, the shareholder has nothing.
 
2013-07-15 02:51:56 PM
Fark_Guy_Rob:  I have friends who were REALLY supporting 'Obama's Health Care Bill' who....

I guess your friends did not just assume that businesses will find every mathematical equation to beat a societal expectation. Luckily this fix is easy though unlikely to be repaired. Like another poster said above...

- Remove the stupid X People at Y Hours equation.
- Make the threshold TOTAL FTE equivalent hours. Then the business can not rig its employment pool. If they hire or utilize (temp contracts) XXX Hours of Employee time, they have to contribute.

Universal Health Insurance makes sense on so many levels.

Now to just make it work in a land where Corporations are People and People (like Monsanto) can write laws that say they can't be sued.
 
2013-07-15 02:53:11 PM

Lost Thought 00: King Something: Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.

And the employers would respond by laying off as many slaves employees as necessary to get under the threshold set by that regulation. So the guy who's got 70 employees working 20 hours a week won't have to give them even the most cursory of benefits beyond minimum wage, and we're back to square one where bosses are doing everything in their power to give their employees as little as possible.

If they could do the same business by laying off employees, I'm pretty sure most of these places already would. The employers will have to decide if losing profit is worth ducking the fines, which is a much harder calculation for them to do than they currently have to make.


They'd make that calculation easier by deciding whether or not the slight loss in profit from sacking a handful of workers is worth the money saved by not being required to spend a dime on the remaining workers' health care, or if the slight loss in profit from sacking a handful of workers is worth denying the remaining workers health care just to spite them.

Given the corporate culture in America of "Quarterly Profits Uber Alles", it would probably take about 5 seconds or less for the employer to decide that taking a slight hit in productivity is worth the trouble since they can just tell the stockholders that they've successfully undertaken a cost-cutting measure and any money lost from layoffs is more than offset by the increase in stock prices.

/or they'll simply act out of spite
 
2013-07-15 02:53:53 PM

skozlaw: .... another BIG part of the problem here is us. As long as consumers continue to demand nothing from their consumption but the maximum quantity of product at the minimum possible price this is going to continue to happen. Wal Mart doesn't only pay shiat wages to a skeleton staff to maximize profits and shareholder benefits, it also does that to keep costs as low as possible so it can sell products at the lowest price it possibly can.


I was in a WalMart a few months back, and as usual there were long lines and many dormant registers. Some guy starts beaking off at a $12/hour supervisor who happened to be passing. Guy says something along the lines of "we have rights, you should open more tills", etc. Supervisor just stood there trying to appease the guy who just kept repeating about rights and stuff. After about 45 seconds of this, I butted in with "this is a consequence of our desire to pay the absolute minimum for our goods". He responds to me with something about "rights" again, and I replied back "Yes, you do have rights. You have the right to leave your cart there, and go up to the nearest IGA. You'll be paying 30% more, but you'll be able to get to a cashier in under three minutes."

An angry look from the guy before he turned away, a few smiling nods from other customers (who were probably annoyed with this guy), and a bewildered look from the supervisor.
 
2013-07-15 02:54:36 PM
This is a good thing. We should be transitioning to a part time labor economy. Automation relieves the demand for human labor. This in turn either creates high unemployment or shorter work weeks. I for one would rather see a world with everyone working 30 hours than with 3/4 of the people working 40 and 1/4 not working at all. What we need to do is to change our paradigms and stop seeing 30 hour weeks as "part time." Why not call 40 hour weeks overtime instead? Give people mandated benefits at 30 hours and time and a half for everything over that. What unemployment problem? It would drop to 2% overnight.
 
2013-07-15 02:58:28 PM

Tommy Moo: This is a good thing. We should be transitioning to a part time labor economy. Automation relieves the demand for human labor. This in turn either creates high unemployment or shorter work weeks. I for one would rather see a world with everyone working 30 hours than with 3/4 of the people working 40 and 1/4 not working at all. What we need to do is to change our paradigms and stop seeing 30 hour weeks as "part time." Why not call 40 hour weeks overtime instead? Give people mandated benefits at 30 hours and time and a half for everything over that. What unemployment problem? It would drop to 2% overnight.


Because you're lazy and deserve to be poor if you're not working 80 hours a week.
 
2013-07-15 02:59:12 PM

12349876: Smeggy Smurf: Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.

How about health insurance that is actual insurance?  Nobody files a car insurance claim to get the oil changed.  The same should be for medical.

The problem there being the human "oil changes" can prevent medical costs that make a new car look cheap.


You can afford them if your premiums aren't insanely high.  $300+ a month for a healthy mid 30's woman because she has to be covered for pregnancy even though she's fixed is farking insane.
 
2013-07-15 03:02:05 PM
 
2013-07-15 03:03:59 PM

Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.


Or, just get rid of the employer mandate altogether. Much simpler!
 
2013-07-15 03:06:08 PM

Tommy Moo: This is a good thing. We should be transitioning to a part time labor economy. Automation relieves the demand for human labor. This in turn either creates high unemployment or shorter work weeks. I for one would rather see a world with everyone working 30 hours than with 3/4 of the people working 40 and 1/4 not working at all. What we need to do is to change our paradigms and stop seeing 30 hour weeks as "part time." Why not call 40 hour weeks overtime instead? Give people mandated benefits at 30 hours and time and a half for everything over that. What unemployment problem? It would drop to 2% overnight.


The French tried this. It did not work.

King Something: Given the corporate culture in America of "Quarterly Profits Uber Alles", it would probably take about 5 seconds or less for the employer to decide that taking a slight hit in productivity is worth the trouble since they can just tell the stockholders that they've successfully undertaken a cost-cutting measure and any money lost from layoffs is more than offset by the increase in stock prices.

/or they'll simply act out of spite


Business do not act out of spite, unless it is profitable. You are correct that in the short term they may make that decision. However, they would be unable to expand or grow their business without subjecting themselves to the tax. This is a sufficient motivator that I believe most of them will suck it up and pay the tax when they are ready to expand their business
 
2013-07-15 03:11:23 PM
Serves them right; they should have done something more with their lives instead of depending on others.
People need to be taught that there are consequences.
 
2013-07-15 03:18:37 PM

Weaver95: I like how our society is actively encouraging poor people to rise up and chop the heads off rich assholes. It's like nobody ever heard of the French revolution before.


I like how people actually compare France in 1789 to the US today. It's humorous to me.

Keep eating your Cheetos and posting on the Internet. I'm sure the day of rising is coming and they'll need the brave support of the People's Revolutionary Keyboardists Brigade.
 
2013-07-15 03:20:17 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: Fark_Guy_Rob: But when a COMPANY complies with tax law - the company is evil! How dare they!

The companies are screwing people over. It matters not the reason, they're the ones screwing people over, they get the hate. If they'd actually give a shiat about employees, treat them like humans instead of chattel or replaceable cogs, we wouldn't even be having this discussion in the first place.


Then abolish all taxes and laws and let people act like 'human beings'.

But, in our society, we have laws.  And we're expected to follow them.  The laws are supposed to be made by experts.  They are supposed to make sense.

We have laws regarding taxes to prevent people from taking advantage of the system.  Following the system, by definition, isn't taking advantage.  And while we could talk about 'loopholes' - this isn't a loophole.  This is plain-as-day obvious consequence of the law.
 
2013-07-15 03:21:20 PM

Lost Thought 00: Tommy Moo: This is a good thing. We should be transitioning to a part time labor economy. Automation relieves the demand for human labor. This in turn either creates high unemployment or shorter work weeks. I for one would rather see a world with everyone working 30 hours than with 3/4 of the people working 40 and 1/4 not working at all. What we need to do is to change our paradigms and stop seeing 30 hour weeks as "part time." Why not call 40 hour weeks overtime instead? Give people mandated benefits at 30 hours and time and a half for everything over that. What unemployment problem? It would drop to 2% overnight.

The French tried this. It did not work.


http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=usa+unemployment+percent+vs+fra nc e+unemployment+percent

Yep.

This last little recession just put us up to about the same point where France has been for the last 2 decades.

/Or heck, if you ignore the last few years (Why has Germany been recovering for the last 7 years even through the recession?  That just seems odd), Germany.   http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=usa+unemployment+percent+vs+germ a ny+unemployment+percent
//Or on par with Sweden, that awesome, awesome place:  http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=usa+unemployment+percent+vs+swed e n+unemployment+percent (And how did they get down to 2% way back in the day?)
///And then if we go to states that didn't benefit from the Euro, Greece or Spain would really like to have a word.
////And I freely admit that this is way too short of data points to be useful, but before the recession, the US was about 4% better than Europe.
 
2013-07-15 03:24:25 PM
I would love to only work part time but health insurance is what keeps me tied to full time work, which I am extremely grateful to have in this economy.
 
2013-07-15 03:25:22 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-07-15 03:27:22 PM
I'm not bothered by this.
 
2013-07-15 03:30:15 PM

Katie98_KT: 12349876: Smeggy Smurf: Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.

How about health insurance that is actual insurance?  Nobody files a car insurance claim to get the oil changed.  The same should be for medical.

The problem there being the human "oil changes" can prevent medical costs that make a new car look cheap.

medical insurance is like a combo of insurance and a service plan.

I have a service plan on my car that covers routine maitenance for 4 years (like oil changes). I also have car insurance, that covers me if its stolen, hit with things, etc.

I have medical insurance that covers routine maitenance (yearly checkups) plus insurance than covers if I get sick (appendicitis).

If anything, the medical insurance makes more sense.


Sure, but what happens if someone steals your kidney and drives off in your car?
 
2013-07-15 03:30:55 PM

Weaver95: I like how our society is actively encouraging poor people to rise up and chop the heads off rich assholes. It's like nobody ever heard of the French revolution before.


Every time I read one of these threads, I wind up hating capitalism. Which is sad, because I don't want to get rid of capitalism, only make it more equitable to those who have less than me. But the people in these threads who defend capitalism are such assholes, they make socialism look like a carnival in comparison.
 
2013-07-15 03:33:33 PM

ltdanman44:


Man, you really love that idiotic comment.
 
2013-07-15 03:34:47 PM

JolobinSmokin: I'm not bothered by this.


because you got yours? Fark everyone else?
 
2013-07-15 03:35:25 PM

graeth: Serves them right; they should have done something more with their lives instead of depending on others.
People need to be taught that there are consequences.


Graeth doesn't have a job!
 
2013-07-15 03:40:22 PM
Things that should be run by the government:

Health care.
Education.
Pensions.
Prisons.

Nope, sorry, private companies have proven over and over that they aren't able to do this without screwing the customers. Maybe banking should be added to the list.
 
2013-07-15 03:43:19 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Damn it feels good to have a career


Hold onto that feeling. I had a career, too, until Chase laid me off after 12 years of outstanding performance (no, really, I was in the top 10% and even earned their version of the employee of the quarter) because I lived in the wrong state. Three years later, I can't get a job at Petco because I'm overqualified but I don't have the connections here to get back into data analysis. I'm back in school to become a pharmacist.
 
2013-07-15 03:45:52 PM
Lost Thought 00:

The French tried this. It did not work.

actually, it did work somewhat. meyerkev's chart proves it.

see that 33% decline in the unemployment rate starting just before 2000, and didn't tick up again until 2003, despite the global economic slowdown in 2000? in 1998, France lowered the work week to 5 hours from 40.
 
2013-07-15 03:47:44 PM

Uncle Tractor: Things that should be run by the government:

Health care.
Education.
Pensions.
Prisons.

Nope, sorry, private companies have proven over and over that they aren't able to do this without screwing the customers. Maybe banking should be added to the list.


I'm okay with banking being a private enterprise. I think banks should separate from investment brokerages, like they were under Glass-Steagall.
 
2013-07-15 03:48:40 PM

bbfreak: JolobinSmokin: I'm not bothered by this.

because you got yours? Fark everyone else?


no, I just have a high bother thresh hold.

/I do have mine tho
//lib
///hope others get some too
 
2013-07-15 03:49:24 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: ltdanman44:

Man, you really love that idiotic comment.


And I love idiotically typing comment instead of comic.
 
2013-07-15 03:50:54 PM
I guess Temp agencies are going to need to staff up because of all the increased demand for their services.
 
2013-07-15 03:53:01 PM

Smeggy Smurf: 12349876: Smeggy Smurf: Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.

How about health insurance that is actual insurance?  Nobody files a car insurance claim to get the oil changed.  The same should be for medical.

The problem there being the human "oil changes" can prevent medical costs that make a new car look cheap.

You can afford them if your premiums aren't insanely high.  $300+ a month for a healthy mid 30's woman because she has to be covered for pregnancy even though she's fixed is farking insane.


My former workplace offered 'modest' healthcare. It cost $743 a month for a single person, $1300 for two covered people and $1800 for three plus. The kicker was that my gross pay was only $1800 a month.

In addition to the unaffordable health care, they offered no training for a specialized, knowledge-based and stressful occupation. Officially, we had a 30 minute unpaid lunch, but unofficially at least 10 minutes was carved out of it for various reasons - lunch was offered at a fixed time (11:06 - 11:36) but clients didn't know that. The people who could tell them that information (and thus deflect or delay them while we had our lunches) willfully didn't so that the clients weren't inconvenienced.

My former workplace also wondered why there was such a high turn-over rate.
 
2013-07-15 03:56:01 PM

JolobinSmokin: bbfreak: JolobinSmokin: I'm not bothered by this.

because you got yours? Fark everyone else?

no, I just have a high bother thresh hold.

/I do have mine tho
//lib
///hope others get some too


So you are one of the jackholes who doesn't care until something directly affects their life? You know those "salt of the earth types" who will claim the volcano isn't erupting until his feet burn off?
 
2013-07-15 03:57:13 PM

Smeggy Smurf: bbfreak: vpb: Business have been hiring part timers to keep from having to pay full time benefits for decades.

[www.strangecosmos.com image 450x385]

Indeed, the new game in town is to hire temps instead.

Rush Limbaugh called that one years ago.  It is obvious to anybody with any sense of cynacism that it was going to happen that way.


Nothing new there, either.  A lot of companies have been using temps since the 1980's.
 
2013-07-15 03:58:12 PM

Bung_Howdy: up is down and black is white...


And short is long?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KThlYHfIVa8
 
2013-07-15 03:58:21 PM

Kittypie070: graeth: Serves them right; they should have done something more with their lives instead of depending on others.
People need to be taught that there are consequences.

Graeth doesn't have a job!


I lol'ed. Almost all over my desk in my office.
I miss being able to laugh at poor people who had chosen poorly. Then the government came in to kick natural selection in the balls.
 
2013-07-15 04:00:43 PM
this is what france WANTED to do......  make a 30 hour work week
 
2013-07-15 04:03:42 PM
What kills me is the outrage when businesses respond rationally to the incentives put before them. It's like shoving people over a cliff and being pissed off that gravity did what it normally does instead of what you hoped for.
 
2013-07-15 04:08:50 PM

Mateorocks: FTA:

50 employees working 30 hours or more a week= mandatory insurance by employers

Even if that is correct, for a lot of companies it's cheaper to simply pay the penalties.


And therein lies the problem. Until penalties are a >1 multiplier of the cost, no one's ever going to obey these. It's like the banks that settled the overdraft penalty rearranging to maximize fees for a fraction of what they made. AND they earned interest on that money.
 
2013-07-15 04:13:08 PM

nmemkha: JolobinSmokin: bbfreak: JolobinSmokin: I'm not bothered by this.

because you got yours? Fark everyone else?

no, I just have a high bother thresh hold.

/I do have mine tho
//lib
///hope others get some too

So you are one of the jackholes who doesn't care until something directly affects their life? You know those "salt of the earth types" who will claim the volcano isn't erupting until his feet burn off?


Nope, I'll be happy when ppl have universal healthcare and better wages and work quality.  I live in Oklahoma so these ppl with part time work who would be getting Medicaid but aren't because of republican jesus I know many of them.  I'll keep voting to get these part time workers benefits, but being from OKlahoma gives me a higher bother threshold, since ppl are constantly being farked over in this state and keep voting to be farked over.  This makes me not as bothered as some.

/but thanks for being a prejudiced dickhole
 
2013-07-15 04:16:12 PM

Another Government Employee: Smeggy Smurf: bbfreak: vpb: Business have been hiring part timers to keep from having to pay full time benefits for decades.

[www.strangecosmos.com image 450x385]

Indeed, the new game in town is to hire temps instead.

Rush Limbaugh called that one years ago.  It is obvious to anybody with any sense of cynacism that it was going to happen that way.

Nothing new there, either.  A lot of companies have been using temps since the 1980's.


Fifteen years ago, people in my profession were about 80% employed and 20% independent contractors/temps. Over this time, those numbers have gradually reversed, and a large part of the reason is increased employer health care costs.

Whaddya gonna do?
 
2013-07-15 04:52:45 PM
Law of Unintended Consequences, but I guess this is what happens when you suckered in to the "we have to do something" crowd of legislators and then have someone else write your legislation and then publicly cry out that, "You won't know what's in it until we pass it."

Turns out none of those dumb shiats knew what was in it or they would have seen this coming a mile away. This is what happens when your gov't lets stooges from various industries write your laws and them pimp it out without taking the time to examine it so that can say they "Did something." This is no different than the current  1200 page immigration bill. How many of the people that voted for it have read it? I bet i could count that number on one hand.
 
2013-07-15 04:59:38 PM

Fark_Guy_Rob: Then abolish all taxes and laws and let people act like 'human beings'.


In other words: you got nuthin'.

If companies act like assholes, they get the hate. It doesn't matter what the law is. Just because screwing people over is legal doesn't mean they're above reproach.
 
2013-07-15 05:09:14 PM

Mike Chewbacca: Smeggy Smurf: Damn it feels good to have a career

Hold onto that feeling. I had a career, too, until Chase laid me off after 12 years of outstanding performance (no, really, I was in the top 10% and even earned their version of the employee of the quarter) because I lived in the wrong state. Three years later, I can't get a job at Petco because I'm overqualified but I don't have the connections here to get back into data analysis. I'm back in school to become a pharmacist.


What state?  Willing to relocate?  Still interested in data analysis?
 
2013-07-15 05:13:32 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Damn it feels good to have a career


Until you're expendable. You're a fool if you think you're not.
 
2013-07-15 05:23:16 PM
A better idea is for restaurants to hire you as an intern so you can work for free. Colleges with English Departments should combine forces with fast food and restaurant companies to use summer internships for college students.
 
2013-07-15 05:29:48 PM

Weaver95: I like how our society is actively encouraging poor people to rise up and chop the heads off rich assholes. It's like nobody ever heard of the French revolution before.


Revolution will never happen until people have nothing left to lose. We're still a LONG ways away from that. When I can no longer feed my family, I may be forced to turn to violence. Until then, I'll biatch about it on the internet, maybe take part in a meaningless protest, and then go vote for the guy who is a member of whichever of the two corporate owned political parties I have arbitrarily chosen to support.

The French peasants had literally nothing. The overwhelming majority of Americans have, at the very least, a roof over their heads, clothes on their backs and food in their bellies. It's really hard to build momentum for the overthrow of the government in a country where the largest threat to public health is obesity.
 
2013-07-15 05:35:04 PM

JolobinSmokin: nmemkha: JolobinSmokin: bbfreak: JolobinSmokin: I'm not bothered by this.

because you got yours? Fark everyone else?

no, I just have a high bother thresh hold.

/I do have mine tho
//lib
///hope others get some too

So you are one of the jackholes who doesn't care until something directly affects their life? You know those "salt of the earth types" who will claim the volcano isn't erupting until his feet burn off?

Nope, I'll be happy when ppl have universal healthcare and better wages and work quality.  I live in Oklahoma so these ppl with part time work who would be getting Medicaid but aren't because of republican jesus I know many of them.  I'll keep voting to get these part time workers benefits, but being from OKlahoma gives me a higher bother threshold, since ppl are constantly being farked over in this state and keep voting to be farked over.  This makes me not as bothered as some.

/but thanks for being a prejudiced dickhole


Yes, I am prejudiced toward "not MY problem" assholes.

Sorry its a flaw.
 
2013-07-15 05:48:08 PM

nmemkha: JolobinSmokin: nmemkha: JolobinSmokin: bbfreak: JolobinSmokin: I'm not bothered by this.

because you got yours? Fark everyone else?

no, I just have a high bother thresh hold.

/I do have mine tho
//lib
///hope others get some too

So you are one of the jackholes who doesn't care until something directly affects their life? You know those "salt of the earth types" who will claim the volcano isn't erupting until his feet burn off?

Nope, I'll be happy when ppl have universal healthcare and better wages and work quality.  I live in Oklahoma so these ppl with part time work who would be getting Medicaid but aren't because of republican jesus I know many of them.  I'll keep voting to get these part time workers benefits, but being from OKlahoma gives me a higher bother threshold, since ppl are constantly being farked over in this state and keep voting to be farked over.  This makes me not as bothered as some.

/but thanks for being a prejudiced dickhole

Yes, I am prejudiced toward "not MY problem" assholes.

Sorry its a flaw.


Who is this not my problem asshole your talking too?
 
2013-07-15 05:50:11 PM

graeth: Kittypie070: graeth: Serves them right; they should have done something more with their lives instead of depending on others.
People need to be taught that there are consequences.

Graeth doesn't have a job!

I lol'ed. Almost all over my desk in my office.
I miss being able to laugh at poor people who had chosen poorly. Then the government came in to kick natural selection in the balls.


Awright, so I was a bit off.

How about this?

What? Nope, not me. I never smile if I can help it. When someone smiles at me, all I see is a chimpanzee begging for its life. I never need to worry about those chimps in HR, or performance reviews while I'm pissing away the boss' time on Fark. I don't depend on a boss. Dependency is a vile weakness that should be punished.

I don't even depend on my job being here tomorrow.

Bananas.
 
2013-07-15 06:07:10 PM

JolobinSmokin: nmemkha: JolobinSmokin: nmemkha: JolobinSmokin: bbfreak: JolobinSmokin: I'm not bothered by this.

because you got yours? Fark everyone else?

no, I just have a high bother thresh hold.

/I do have mine tho
//lib
///hope others get some too

So you are one of the jackholes who doesn't care until something directly affects their life? You know those "salt of the earth types" who will claim the volcano isn't erupting until his feet burn off?

Nope, I'll be happy when ppl have universal healthcare and better wages and work quality.  I live in Oklahoma so these ppl with part time work who would be getting Medicaid but aren't because of republican jesus I know many of them.  I'll keep voting to get these part time workers benefits, but being from OKlahoma gives me a higher bother threshold, since ppl are constantly being farked over in this state and keep voting to be farked over.  This makes me not as bothered as some.

/but thanks for being a prejudiced dickhole

Yes, I am prejudiced toward "not MY problem" assholes.

Sorry its a flaw.

Who is this not my problem asshole your talking too?


A hint: he's also in denial about it.
 
2013-07-15 06:17:01 PM

nmemkha: JolobinSmokin: nmemkha: JolobinSmokin: nmemkha: JolobinSmokin: bbfreak: JolobinSmokin: I'm not bothered by this.

because you got yours? Fark everyone else?

no, I just have a high bother thresh hold.

/I do have mine tho
//lib
///hope others get some too

So you are one of the jackholes who doesn't care until something directly affects their life? You know those "salt of the earth types" who will claim the volcano isn't erupting until his feet burn off?

Nope, I'll be happy when ppl have universal healthcare and better wages and work quality.  I live in Oklahoma so these ppl with part time work who would be getting Medicaid but aren't because of republican jesus I know many of them.  I'll keep voting to get these part time workers benefits, but being from OKlahoma gives me a higher bother threshold, since ppl are constantly being farked over in this state and keep voting to be farked over.  This makes me not as bothered as some.

/but thanks for being a prejudiced dickhole

Yes, I am prejudiced toward "not MY problem" assholes.

Sorry its a flaw.

Who is this not my problem asshole your talking too?

A hint: he's also in denial about it.


Dude leave Tom cruise alone.
 
2013-07-15 08:13:00 PM

Tommy Moo: This is a good thing. We should be transitioning to a part time labor economy. Automation relieves the demand for human labor. This in turn either creates high unemployment or shorter work weeks. I for one would rather see a world with everyone working 30 hours than with 3/4 of the people working 40 and 1/4 not working at all. What we need to do is to change our paradigms and stop seeing 30 hour weeks as "part time." Why not call 40 hour weeks overtime instead? Give people mandated benefits at 30 hours and time and a half for everything over that. What unemployment problem? It would drop to 2% overnight.



If part-time work paid enough to get by on (and still came with adequate health insurance), more people would do it.  I know I would.
 
2013-07-15 10:39:35 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.

Or, just get rid of the employer mandate altogether. Much simpler!


Single payer, or getting employers out of the picture altogether would be waaaaay better.  My company really only should be on the hook for workers comp if I get hurt on or because of the job.  I think it's ludicrous that buying your health insurance on the individual market is done with post-tax income, as opposed to when it's employer provided it's pre-tax.  farking stupid, and it's been that way for 50 years.
 
2013-07-15 10:48:06 PM

Bung_Howdy: up is down and black Hispanic is white...


/only shades of gray


Sorry had to do it
 
2013-07-15 10:59:45 PM

vpb: Business have been hiring part timers to keep from having to pay full time benefits for decades.

[www.strangecosmos.com image 450x385]


Well, as long as we can defend Obama from perceived slights, that's OK then.
 
2013-07-15 11:04:50 PM

sendtodave: Well, as long as we can defend Obama from perceived slights, that's OK then.


It's really hard not to sound like a rabid Obama fanatic when the right-wing tries to connect every last negative effect of everything that's ever happened back to Obama's direct action or inaction. Proving them wrong invariably sounds like defending Obama.
 
2013-07-15 11:15:41 PM

Tommy Moo: This is a good thing. We should be transitioning to a part time labor economy. Automation relieves the demand for human labor. This in turn either creates high unemployment or shorter work weeks. I for one would rather see a world with everyone working 30 hours than with 3/4 of the people working 40 and 1/4 not working at all. What we need to do is to change our paradigms and stop seeing 30 hour weeks as "part time." Why not call 40 hour weeks overtime instead? Give people mandated benefits at 30 hours and time and a half for everything over that. What unemployment problem? It would drop to 2% overnight.


Shorter work weeks were always a goal in the past.  Why did people expect that there would be no pay cuts?

Increased efficiency does NOT increase wages.  It does the opposite.  Though it does bring down the cost of goods.

Increased efficiency is a race to the bottom for everyone but the owners.
 
2013-07-15 11:16:30 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: sendtodave: Well, as long as we can defend Obama from perceived slights, that's OK then.

It's really hard not to sound like a rabid Obama fanatic when the right-wing tries to connect every last negative effect of everything that's ever happened back to Obama's direct action or inaction. Proving them wrong invariably sounds like defending Obama.


You can just ignore them, you know.
 
2013-07-15 11:20:16 PM
http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/rauch/worktime/

Always thought this was interesting.

An average worker needs to work a mere 11 hours per week to produce as much as one working 40 hours per week in 1950...

The average worker would therefore need to work only 23 hours per week to produce as much as one working as recently as 1975...

And, if the productivity measures have any meaning, the average worker could have a 29-hour workweek if he were satisfied with producing as much as a 40-hour worker as recently as 1990.
 
2013-07-15 11:22:11 PM

sendtodave: You can just ignore them, you know.


What's stopping you?
 
2013-07-15 11:31:57 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: sendtodave: You can just ignore them, you know.

What's stopping you?


Boredom, mostly.
 
2013-07-15 11:34:09 PM

sendtodave: Boredom, mostly.


Here, we can agree.
 
2013-07-16 12:38:55 AM
the only true solution is to ban health insurance altogether and require full transparent pricing of medical services.

/never mix socialism with captialism, you get the worst of both worlds
 
2013-07-16 12:41:15 AM

Smeggy Smurf: 12349876: Smeggy Smurf: Lost Thought 00: Simple fix for the law - Mandated health care requirement based off total employee hours worked, regardless of how many hours any individual employee works. So whether you have 50 employees working 30 hours a week or 75 employees working 20 per week, you still have to cough up health care contributions.

How about health insurance that is actual insurance?  Nobody files a car insurance claim to get the oil changed.  The same should be for medical.

The problem there being the human "oil changes" can prevent medical costs that make a new car look cheap.

You can afford them if your premiums aren't insanely high.  $300+ a month for a healthy mid 30's woman because she has to be covered for pregnancy even though she's fixed is farking insane.


Maybe if you're only talking checkups it could work.  But if you're talking allergy medication and cholesterol medication and diabetes medication and colonoscopies and mammograms no way are you going to be able to in our current system.  And there will always be dumbasses and who have a ridiculously low breaking point for checkup vs. no checkup and those people will be hitting YOUR pocketbook in the end.
 
2013-07-16 12:48:05 AM

mr lawson: /never mix socialism with captialism, you get the worst of both worlds


But neither pure socialism nor pure capitalism works either. What do?
 
2013-07-16 01:22:45 AM

Sergeant Grumbles: mr lawson: /never mix socialism with captialism, you get the worst of both worlds

But neither pure socialism nor pure capitalism works either. What do?


Well, there is indeed some cool sh*t in both.

So you take only the cool sh*t from one and blend in the cool sh*t from the other.

Trouble is, you gotta get the correct definition of "sh*t".
 
2013-07-16 01:32:13 AM
Employers also are also considering workarounds. Mark Lettelleir, chief executive of M.B.A. Inc., a human-resources firm in St. Petersburg, Fla., is helping several different area restaurants manage their staff so they can share employees. The test program, which is expected to begin in the fourth quarter, will involve about 500 employees of both chain and local restaurants looking to retain their full-time employees without counting them as such.

A smart lawyer could make the case that the employers of these workers are not the individual restaurants but the partnership formed to share them, which should still be required to treat them as full-time employees.
 
2013-07-16 06:00:58 AM

Cornelius Dribble: A smart lawyer could make the case that the employers of these workers are not the individual restaurants but the partnership formed to share them, which should still be required to treat them as full-time employees.


The counter-argument being that the only thing they share in common is one person managing both their scheduling needs, and are otherwise independent organizations. If the restaurant is clever, they'll outsource the scheduling as well, thus eliminating the so-called "partnership" before it's even formed.
 
2013-07-16 08:04:29 AM

Kittypie070: graeth: Kittypie070: graeth: Serves them right; they should have done something more with their lives instead of depending on others.
People need to be taught that there are consequences.

Graeth doesn't have a job!

I lol'ed. Almost all over my desk in my office.
I miss being able to laugh at poor people who had chosen poorly. Then the government came in to kick natural selection in the balls.

Awright, so I was a bit off.

How about this?

What? Nope, not me. I never smile if I can help it. When someone smiles at me, all I see is a chimpanzee begging for its life. I never need to worry about those chimps in HR, or performance reviews while I'm pissing away the boss' time on Fark. I don't depend on a boss. Dependency is a vile weakness that should be punished.

I don't even depend on my job being here tomorrow.

Bananas.


*funnied*
 
2013-07-16 10:06:26 AM

Kittypie070: graeth: Kittypie070: graeth:

Awright, so I was a bit off.

How about this?

What? Nope, not me. I never smile if I can help it. When someone smiles at me, all I see is a chimpanzee begging for its life. I never need to worry about those chimps in HR, or performance reviews while I'm pissing away the boss' time on Fark. I don't depend on a boss. Dependency is a vile weakness that should be punished.

I don't even depend on my job being here tomorrow.

Bananas.


Or maybe its not my bosses' time, perhaps it is my own. Perhaps I work for project completion rather than just putting in my 'forty a week' and clocking out even if its beyond what my contract stated; perhaps I have something called a 'work ethic' that seems to have almost disappeared in this day in age. Perhaps I don't worry about my job prospects because when put myself through school I chose a career path that was useful to the world/society/etc instead of wasting my time in the pursuit of obscure English rules, or women's studies or psychology or some other Arts degree/field--so I could count on getting a job anytime, anywhere, anywhen as long as civilization hasn't collapsed (prepping for that is free time). I'm not against helping people--who put forth an effort.


As for smiling: http://youtu.be/mNrXMOSkBas
Also, someone seems to really have a grudge against chimps.....whats the matter? Chimp got yo' baby?
 
2013-07-16 11:01:17 AM

graeth: Or maybe its not my bosses' time, perhaps it is my own. Perhaps I work for project completion rather than just putting in my 'forty a week' and clocking out even if its beyond what my contract stated; perhaps I have something called a 'work ethic' that seems to have almost disappeared in this day in age. Perhaps I don't worry about my job prospects because when put myself through school I chose a career path that was useful to the world/society/etc instead of wasting my time in the pursuit of obscure English rules, or women's studies or psychology or some other Arts degree/field--so I could count on getting a job anytime, anywhere, anywhen as long as civilization hasn't collapsed (prepping for that is free time). I'm not against helping people--who put forth an effort.


I'm sorry you've never had to struggle or suffer for a single thing in your entire life. It's made you a shallow, hateful person who is unable to relate to others.
 
2013-07-16 11:34:07 AM

verbaltoxin: Uncle Tractor: Things that should be run by the government:

Health care.
Education.
Pensions.
Prisons.

Nope, sorry, private companies have proven over and over that they aren't able to do this without screwing the customers. Maybe banking should be added to the list.

I'm okay with banking being a private enterprise. I think banks should separate from investment brokerages, like they were under Glass-Steagall.


I'm shortymac and I wholeheartedly approve this message.
 
2013-07-16 11:53:49 AM
Sergeant Grumbles:

I'm sorry you've never had to struggle or suffer for a single thing in your entire life. It's made you a shallow, hateful person who is unable to relate to others.

I can relate to others just fine; other productive people.

Ignoring the argument of 'what gives you the right to say you are even remotely qualified to say what is a burden'--what would you consider a powerful enough force to valiantly 'struggle' against or 'suffer'?
Racism? Sexism?
 
2013-07-16 12:45:38 PM

graeth: I can relate to others just fine; other productive people.


Doubtful, if you're constantly judging others in such a way.

graeth: Ignoring the argument of 'what gives you the right to say you are even remotely qualified to say what is a burden'--what would you consider a powerful enough force to valiantly 'struggle' against or 'suffer'?
Racism? Sexism?


If you have to ask, it means you don't know. "Working hard at my job" is not the kind of thing that qualifies, nor is it as if people will disagree you should work hard at your job. It's just something you tell yourself you've struggled with to hold over the people you consider unproductive. What's even more telling is that you hold up a 40+ hour work week in a thread whose topic is about employers reducing employee hours.
 
2013-07-16 02:00:47 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: graeth: I can relate to others just fine; other productive people.

Doubtful, if you're constantly judging others in such a way.


As you say of me, you do to I.

graeth: Ignoring the argument of 'what gives you the right to say you are even remotely qualified to say what is a burden'--what would you consider a powerful enough force to valiantly 'struggle' against or 'suffer'?
Racism? Sexism?

If you have to ask, it means you don't know. "Working hard at my job" is not the kind of thing that qualifies, nor is it as if people will disagree you should work hard at your job. It's just something you tell yourself you've struggled with to hold over the people you consider unproductive. What's even more telling is that you hold up a 40+ hour work week in a thread whose topic is about employers reducing employee hours.


Pretty weak if your only argument is 'if you don't know, then you don't know--and I'm not going to tell you even though it looks like I don't know either'.

Did I 'suffer' in Somalia or Sudan? No, but that's not even relevant to the topic at hand--the use of 'suffer' is hardly an apt term in this argument. As for struggling, most of the population does it. Choices are everywhere and a fair amount of people in the US seem to forget that there are consequences to their choices and just want to reap benefits; regardless of class. Insanely rich skirting the laws are just as bad as the poor wanting someone else to float them.

And I'm 'holding up a 40+ hour work week' to show that the positions still exist; and that is very relevant to the topic. People should leave their part time jobs if it doesn't hold any incentive for them, rather than just whining about it and wanting someone else to swoop in and fix their lives or forcing others to support them. There are always better jobs out there. So what if you're not qualified for them? Get qualified. Anything with worth should require effort.
 
2013-07-16 02:32:29 PM

graeth: Pretty weak if your only argument is 'if you don't know, then you don't know--and I'm not going to tell you even though it looks like I don't know either'.

Did I 'suffer' in Somalia or Sudan? No, but that's not even relevant to the topic at hand--the use of 'suffer' is hardly an apt term in this argument. As for struggling, most of the population does it. Choices are everywhere and a fair amount of people in the US seem to forget that there are consequences to their choices and just want to reap benefits; regardless of class. Insanely rich skirting the laws are just as bad as the poor wanting someone else to float them.

And I'm 'holding up a 40+ hour work week' to show that the positions still exist; and that is very relevant to the topic. People should leave their part time jobs if it doesn't hold any incentive for them, rather than just whining about it and wanting someone else to swoop in and fix their lives or forcing others to support them. There are always better jobs out there. So what if you're not qualified for them? Get qualified. Anything with worth should require effort.


Again, showing the complete lack of  any kind of struggle you yourself went through. You've never had to make hard choices. You've never been hungry. Not truly.
You act as though giving it your best effort will always leave you better off. It doesn't. Sometimes it just leaves you tired. Sometimes it ruins you. And having tasted such bitter defeat, some people would rather work a crappy job for a meager meal than risk again for better and end up starved.
 
2013-07-16 04:37:34 PM
Sergeant Grumbles:
Again, showing the complete lack of  any kind of struggle you yourself went through. You've never had to make hard choices. You've never been hungry. Not truly.
You act as though giving it your best effort will always leave you better off. It doesn't. Sometimes it just leaves you tired. Sometimes it ruins you. And having tasted such bitter defeat, some people would rather work a crappy job for a meager meal than risk again for better and end up starved.


And again you make boundless statements. What would you classify as a 'hard decision'. Pay rent or utilities instead of eating? Been there. Or hungry in the sense of 3 weeks without food. Never been there,  though I'm sure you haven't either.

Its okay to be tired, its okay to give up; just people need to stop expecting others to take pity on them and bail them out when they've made poor choices.
 
2013-07-16 04:47:48 PM

graeth: Sergeant Grumbles:
Again, showing the complete lack of  any kind of struggle you yourself went through. You've never had to make hard choices. You've never been hungry. Not truly.
You act as though giving it your best effort will always leave you better off. It doesn't. Sometimes it just leaves you tired. Sometimes it ruins you. And having tasted such bitter defeat, some people would rather work a crappy job for a meager meal than risk again for better and end up starved.

And again you make boundless statements. What would you classify as a 'hard decision'. Pay rent or utilities instead of eating? Been there. Or hungry in the sense of 3 weeks without food. Never been there,  though I'm sure you haven't either.

Its okay to be tired, its okay to give up; just people need to stop expecting others to take pity on them and bail them out when they've made poor choices.


Yes, poor choices like being born poor. Or being born into a society where you need to go to college or you'll never be able to earn a proper living for yourself, of if your job got outsourced, the poor choice of choosing a field that got outsourced. Things like that?
 
2013-07-16 05:19:17 PM

graeth: Pay rent or utilities instead of eating? Been there.


If you had been brought that low, with no other options, you'd have more sympathy, or you're so selfish and self-righteous that your opinion doesn't count for anything. You either understand what it was like and wouldn't wish that on anyone or you're a Craig T. Nelson ignorant of all the help and breaks you received. It's not a boundless statement, it really is that simple. You either understand, or you don't. You've repeatedly demonstrated your ignorance.

graeth: just people need to stop expecting others to take pity on them and bail them out when they've made poor choices.


What people need is for assholes to stop shiatting on them for every little thing, even those beyond their control, and holding it over their heads their entire lives as if there was even some benefit to doing so.
 
2013-07-16 05:38:35 PM

Uncle Tractor: Things that should be run by the government:

Health care.
Education.
Pensions.
Prisons.

Nope, sorry, private companies have proven over and over that they aren't able to do this without screwing the customers. Maybe banking should be added to the list.


Interstate
Mass Transit
Post Office.

Some things SHOULD be controlled by the Gov. because they are societal services, even if business can do it cheaper.
Some things SHOULD NOT rely on corporations who are profit driven to manage activities that need to serve those without money.

Non-Profits and Gov. can also do good business.
USPS can use some trimming but it is amazing that a letter can move across a country the size of near all of Europe in 2 days for less than the cost of a candy bar.
 
2013-07-16 06:04:54 PM

skozlaw: You know... I want to biatch about the Job Creators (TM) because they have a very heavy hand in this trend but....

.... another BIG part of the problem here is us. As long as consumers continue to demand nothing from their consumption but the maximum quantity of product at the minimum possible price this is going to continue to happen. Wal Mart doesn't only pay shiat wages to a skeleton staff to maximize profits and shareholder benefits, it also does that to keep costs as low as possible so it can sell products at the lowest price it possibly can.

Yea, fat cats screwing people over on their basic healthcare just so they can buy another ivory butt scratcher is part of the problem, but as long as we live in a society where the rest of us demand that prices constantly fall we also hold a considerable chunk of the blame for the plight of the "service class".


This. Like the guy talking about businesses acting rationally, rational actions are purely subjective. The only thing stopping us from turning the economy into something that works for everyone as opposed to the people the already had money or sheer luck is collective inaction and denial. Status quo is just fine, and few people care enough to think that their company is integrally connected to the workers and local community.

The amount of little things that add up over 40 years is amazing. People scratch their heads all day long wondering why are we in this mess, when it's so painfully obvious that globalization uprooting assets and business that support your local economic ecosystem is such a raw and unjust deal to consumers and workers.

I used to think it was inherent in capitalism to work this way, but it's really not. You can have both good and bad results with anarchy, monarchy, theocracy, fascism, communism, or capitalism. We are a social being and our actions have consequences that we can't just keep to ourselves. When, collectively, we forget that our duty should be the betterment of society instead of using our economies for nothing but consumptive masturbation you will end up failing. Governments and economies are social constructs, and will not work for the good of society when people stop working with them.

Ohhh, people...
 
2013-07-16 10:21:45 PM

Mike Chewbacca: Smeggy Smurf: Damn it feels good to have a career

Hold onto that feeling. I had a career, too, until Chase laid me off after 12 years of outstanding performance (no, really, I was in the top 10% and even earned their version of the employee of the quarter) because I lived in the wrong state. Three years later, I can't get a job at Petco because I'm overqualified but I don't have the connections here to get back into data analysis. I'm back in school to become a pharmacist.


When he gets laid off it will be Obama's fault.
 
Displayed 114 of 114 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report