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.

(Huffington Post)   How much more would a Big Mac cost if McDonald's were to double employees' pay? Take a guess, then click the link   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 763
    More: Interesting, Big Macs, Mcdonald, Jimmy John Liautaud, living wages, University of Kansas, minimum wages, salary  
•       •       •

39533 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jul 2013 at 6:53 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-31 05:39:04 PM

BojanglesPaladin: The single most important lesson I learned is that life doesn't just hand you lemons...


I've always hated the saying 'if life gives you lemons, make lemonade'. I mean, to make lemonade, you don't just need lemons, you need sugar, water, ice, a pitcher, a spoon to stir with, a bunch of little cups to pour it into, and a stand with a sign on it saying 'Lemonade 25 cents'. Life don't hand you none of that! And if I could get all that on my own, I would be able to get the lemons, too- they're not that expensive.

/combustible lemons
//I'm gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down!
 
2013-07-31 06:54:01 PM

GUTSU: RanDomino: Jormungandr
The real question here is "What is a human worth apart from what they can presently contribute?"
cdn.pocket-lint.com
This bad boy, or its descendents are the future of fast food. The death knell for the McJob is tolling. So this whole argument is really moot.
The military is automating too, if burger flipping and gruntwork are out what then? That is the question! Answering the phones goes overseas or hell, automation is hitting there (call the Microsoft activation line: you never talk to a real person) too. What do you do with the grunts when all the grunt work is gone?

Here's a thought: Maybe the grunts aren't useless inherently (I have a hard time with the idea of someone being inherently worthless) education could be the problem, education isn't designed to foster creative thought and educating children in things that require a developed prefrontal cortex doesn't work. Could the answer just be educating adults to tutor children, that might take a couple generations to make significant change, but something must happen because the changes are coming and they will come quickly and they will not be something that can be ignored. Of course doing nothing will lead to legions of desperate people with no prospects. Desperate people do desperate things and none of us want that, except those who want to watch the world burn.

The issue is that the machines are owned by a relatively few capitalists, and so they recieve all the savings from increased efficiency. Automation should not be bad- it just should be owned by the workers or society. If a worker gets replaced by a machine, it should mean that that worker now has more free time, not that they get evicted and the owner gets an extra $30,000 a year to spend on a marginally bigger yacht.

Why should the worker get paid for a job he no longer does? Why does the employer have an obligation to give someone 30k for doing nothing?


Yeah, I thought about doing that job, and now I'm doing nothing too! Where's MY 30K? I've felt the same way about farmers paid for NOT growing crops. I'm not growing 100 acres of sugar cane this summer, and next year I'm not gonna' grow 105 acres.
 
2013-07-31 07:17:55 PM

bunner: tbeatty: So if we cut their salaries to minimum wage, Big Macs could feed the world?  Sign me up for 50 cent big macs and a cure to world hunger.

You ever see Super Size Me?


Michael Moore can afford more than Big Macs.  The interesting thing about countries that actually have poor people is that they don't have fat, poor people.
 
2013-07-31 07:23:25 PM

tbeatty: bunner: tbeatty: So if we cut their salaries to minimum wage, Big Macs could feed the world?  Sign me up for 50 cent big macs and a cure to world hunger.

You ever see Super Size Me?

Michael Moore can afford more than Big Macs.  The interesting thing about countries that actually have poor people is that they don't have fat, poor people.


Not Michael Moore.  Morgan Spurlock.
 
2013-07-31 07:43:56 PM

Fusilier: GUTSU: RanDomino: Jormungandr
The real question here is "What is a human worth apart from what they can presently contribute?"
cdn.pocket-lint.com
This bad boy, or its descendents are the future of fast food. The death knell for the McJob is tolling. So this whole argument is really moot.
The military is automating too, if burger flipping and gruntwork are out what then? That is the question! Answering the phones goes overseas or hell, automation is hitting there (call the Microsoft activation line: you never talk to a real person) too. What do you do with the grunts when all the grunt work is gone?

Here's a thought: Maybe the grunts aren't useless inherently (I have a hard time with the idea of someone being inherently worthless) education could be the problem, education isn't designed to foster creative thought and educating children in things that require a developed prefrontal cortex doesn't work. Could the answer just be educating adults to tutor children, that might take a couple generations to make significant change, but something must happen because the changes are coming and they will come quickly and they will not be something that can be ignored. Of course doing nothing will lead to legions of desperate people with no prospects. Desperate people do desperate things and none of us want that, except those who want to watch the world burn.

The issue is that the machines are owned by a relatively few capitalists, and so they recieve all the savings from increased efficiency. Automation should not be bad- it just should be owned by the workers or society. If a worker gets replaced by a machine, it should mean that that worker now has more free time, not that they get evicted and the owner gets an extra $30,000 a year to spend on a marginally bigger yacht.

Why should the worker get paid for a job he no longer does? Why does the employer have an obligation to give someone 30k for doing nothing?

Yeah, I thought about doing that job, and now I'm doing nothing ...


Farm subsidies are really farked up, especially with corn and corn byproducts. Corn ethanol rots away hoses, gaskets, and even metal. It also takes two gallons of gasoline to produce a single gallon of ethanol, it's utterly retarded.
 
2013-07-31 08:27:21 PM
Arsten
responsible policies regarding business and the economy would be the best step

Learn about the idea of "regulatory capture".


GUTSU
Why should the worker get paid for a job he no longer does? Why does the employer have an obligation to give someone 30k for doing nothing?

If a system leads to obscene wealth for a few and horrifying poverty for most (on a global level; but certainly unfairness, to say the least, domestically), then we need to question every aspect of that system, including its basic premises. For my part, I reject the ideas of quid pro quo and meritocracy. Any system in which a worker being replaced by a machine is widely seen as a bad thing is a completely insane system, anyway.
 
2013-07-31 08:47:34 PM
Behold the future!
 
2013-07-31 08:49:25 PM
a2.dailycal.org
 
2013-07-31 08:56:30 PM

bunner: tbeatty: bunner: tbeatty: So if we cut their salaries to minimum wage, Big Macs could feed the world?  Sign me up for 50 cent big macs and a cure to world hunger.

You ever see Super Size Me?

Michael Moore can afford more than Big Macs.  The interesting thing about countries that actually have poor people is that they don't have fat, poor people.

Not Michael Moore.  Morgan Spurlock.


Have you seen Michael Moore?
 
2013-07-31 10:23:03 PM

Jormungandr: Could the answer just be educating adults to tutor children


Well, that might just turn into the blind leading the blind, right?  I don't want the guy at the grocery store who bags a jar of pickles on top of a loaf of bread teaching my children anything beyond a "scared straight"/"stay in school" capacity.

RanDomino: GUTSU
Why should the worker get paid for a job he no longer does? Why does the employer have an obligation to give someone 30k for doing nothing?

If a system leads to obscene wealth for a few and horrifying poverty for most (on a global level; but certainly unfairness, to say the least, domestically), then we need to question every aspect of that system, including its basic premises. For my part, I reject the ideas of quid pro quo and meritocracy. Any system in which a worker being replaced by a machine is widely seen as a bad thing is a completely insane system, anyway.


That would be a good way to look at it if there was a fixed set of participants in the system.  But, in the case of people who have no skills that can't be automated, the smartest solution is to just remove them from the equation.  Spending everybody else's resources to prop them up just gives them a chance to reproduce and ensure and even bigger burden for future generations.  Ideal solution would be to find a way to reverse that trend.  Go from "obscene wealth for a few and horrifying poverty for most" to just "obscene wealth for everybody".
But you're right, we might need to question some of our basic premises if we were to actually enact that kind of change.
 
2013-07-31 11:11:56 PM
RanDomino: Arsten
responsible policies regarding business and the economy would be the best step

Learn about the idea of "regulatory capture".


I'm aware of regulatory capture. The American government is beholden to it on every level. Even most of the founders and their cohorts used their positions in the original Confederation to improve their financial standing. (Ben Franklin, that pursuer of mature women, got into government to give his printing business government contracts.) This has been where our country came from, and it's where our country will remain if we don't try to stop the politicians from using the public purse to buy themselves into office and then buy themselves into luxurious life styles.

I get that changing 250 years of the way our government has propped up it's own on our backs is probably a lot of discussion and a long way off, but we should start that conversation now. We should not sit and hope that our familiar form of evil will be better than the unknown of changes.

It's also better than hoping that changes we've made repeatedly in the past will somehow work, this time. I've read somewhere that the definition of "insanity" is performing the same action repeatedly and hoping for a different result. I'd have to agree with that axiom.
 
2013-07-31 11:16:11 PM
serial_crusher
That would be a good way to look at it if there was a fixed set of participants in the system. But, in the case of people who have no skills that can't be automated, the smartest solution is to just remove them from the equation. Spending everybody else's resources to prop them up just gives them a chance to reproduce and ensure and even bigger burden for future generations.

that sounds unsettlingly close to "decrease the surplus population"


Arsten
It's also better than hoping that changes we've made repeatedly in the past will somehow work, this time. I've read somewhere that the definition of "insanity" is performing the same action repeatedly and hoping for a different result. I'd have to agree with that axiom.

The thing is, the changes you propose have already been attempted, and regulatory capture was the response.
 
2013-07-31 11:53:16 PM
RanDomino:Arsten
It's also better than hoping that changes we've made repeatedly in the past will somehow work, this time. I've read somewhere that the definition of "insanity" is performing the same action repeatedly and hoping for a different result. I'd have to agree with that axiom.

The thing is, the changes you propose have already been attempted, and regulatory capture was the response.


It's been attempted, but as far as I know, no one has repealed any of the more egregious laws or regulations governing US businesses. Here or there, you can win a minor bit of headway, but usually  not where money is concerned.

When I say " responsible policies regarding business and the economy would be the best step " I do not mean "Create a monolithic government entity who will bend to the whims of the corporations that have high-ranking members appointed to the entity's governing board". I mean "encode a set of common-sense, fair-play laws that all businesses are held accountable against".

I apologize if that wasn't clear. I, personally, would disband most of the monolithic government entities if I were magically crowned  as king for a day. Advisory councils for congress because they can't possibly know everything? Sure. Relinquishing all enforcement  and regulation to a single government entity sucking billions of dollars into a black hole per year? Not so interested.
 
Displayed 13 of 763 comments

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report