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)   "A job's about a lot more than a paycheck. It's about your dignity, it's about your place in the community, it's about who you are. That's what a job is about. You can't do that unless you get a fair wage"   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 313
    More: Hero, Biden, hand outs  
•       •       •

2000 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Sep 2014 at 11:12 AM (2 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-09-02 08:49:52 AM
Ol' Joe is talking crazy again.

Everyone knows that workers are just resources to be exploited, and easily replaceable at a corporation's whim.
 
2014-09-02 09:08:48 AM
This canard that workers are being treated fairly is nonsense.

I have binders full of workers and I can assure you they're as happy as ants at a picnic.
 
2014-09-02 09:53:26 AM
But I thought the workers controlled the means of production.
 
2014-09-02 09:56:43 AM

vudukungfu: But I thought the workers controlled the means of production.


Santa's a commie!
 
2014-09-02 10:13:55 AM
We did give you a chance. Remember that C you got on a trigonometry test in 10th grade? The one that meant you never would get into Harvard? That was your chance. How many chances do you want? If we keep giving you extra chances, we won't have any chances to give to other people. Is that fair? Of course not. So quit whining and resume digging.
 
2014-09-02 11:14:46 AM

rumpelstiltskin: We did give you a chance. Remember that C you got on a trigonometry test in 10th grade? The one that meant you never would get into Harvard? That was your chance. How many chances do you want? If we keep giving you extra chances, we won't have any chances to give to other people. Is that fair? Of course not. So quit whining and resume digging.


There's no reason digging shouldn't pay a living wage.
 
2014-09-02 11:15:19 AM

vudukungfu: But I thought the workers controlled the means of production.


No. It was in fact, Wolverhampton Wanderers who beat Leicester 3-1.
 
2014-09-02 11:15:59 AM
Must be that "dignity of work" stuff you keep hearing about from the GOP right up until you try to enact some measures ensuring that working people can keep a bit of dignity.
 
2014-09-02 11:17:52 AM
Hmm-- I first thought this was the story about Eric Cantor's new job.
 
2014-09-02 11:18:40 AM
You can't get a fair wage unless you negotiate an employment contract completely absent of coercion. That means no minimum wage, no mandatory time and a half for overtime, no guaranteed vacation or sick leave, no workplace safety laws, and certainly no negotiating with a group of people to get good conditions for all.
 
2014-09-02 11:19:08 AM
Considering the employer and employee decide their own rate of pay via voluntary agreement, that would be by definition fair.

If it wasn't fair, they wouldn't agree.
 
2014-09-02 11:19:17 AM
the dignity of twerk
 
2014-09-02 11:21:16 AM
For us to live any other way was nuts. Uh, to us, those goody-good people who worked shiatty jobs for bum paychecks and took the subway to work every day, and worried about their bills, were dead. I mean they were suckers. They had no balls. If we wanted something we just took it. If anyone complained twice they got hit so bad, believe me, they never complained again
 
2014-09-02 11:22:57 AM
Let's just come up with a definition of "fair" that EVERYONE can agree on, and put this whole discussion to bed.  Easy!
 
2014-09-02 11:24:52 AM

GoldSpider: Let's just come up with a definition of "fair" that EVERYONE can agree on, and put this whole discussion to bed.  Easy!


That sounds fair.
 
2014-09-02 11:25:49 AM

qorkfiend: GoldSpider: Let's just come up with a definition of "fair" that EVERYONE can agree on, and put this whole discussion to bed.  Easy!

That sounds fair.


no it doesn't
 
2014-09-02 11:29:27 AM

qorkfiend: That sounds fair.


www.nido.org
 
2014-09-02 11:29:41 AM
Forget you I've got mine.
 
2014-09-02 11:33:37 AM

MugzyBrown: Considering the employer and employee decide their own rate of pay via voluntary agreement, that would be by definition fair.

If it wasn't fair, they wouldn't agree.


Yeah, right. And the poor guy would just shrug and say "We couldn't agree on a wage, so I guess Imma gonna starve."
Poverty is a hell of a lever. It doesn't matter how unfair the offer is, the poor guy is going to take it. I get that "both sides are better off", because the laborer gets to eat, and the employer gets $5 of marginal production for 20 cents. Everyone involved in the transaction is overjoyed by the outcome. Some of us just have an aversion to exploitation, and would rather live in a society where there's a limit to how big an asshole you can be.
 
2014-09-02 11:33:59 AM

GoldSpider: Let's just come up with a definition of "fair" that EVERYONE can agree on, and put this whole discussion to bed.  Easy!


My notion of fairness starts with putting some of the revenue associated with increased productivity into the pockets of the workers responsible for that increased productivity, instead of putting every penny of it into dividends. The shareholders have done quite well over the past 30 years, seeing their ROI skyrocket thanks to the sweat of the working men and women whom they treat as disposable. The workers themselves, on the other hand - not so much.
 
2014-09-02 11:34:17 AM
I have started to really wonder what things would look like if we all had jobs that based our pay on performance rather than just hours. Seems like the average person only works at maybe 25-50% of their maximum.
 
2014-09-02 11:36:18 AM

MugzyBrown: Considering the employer and employee decide their own rate of pay via voluntary agreement, that would be by definition fair.

If it wasn't fair, they wouldn't agree.


Wrong. Employer has vastly more leverage and thus can gain a more favorable agreement. It's literally the whole reason unions exist.
 
2014-09-02 11:36:33 AM

MugzyBrown: Considering the employer and employee decide their own rate of pay via voluntary agreement, that would be by definition fair.

If it wasn't fair, they wouldn't agree.


I marked this a funny because it made me laugh.
 
2014-09-02 11:37:32 AM

shanrick: For us to live any other way was nuts. Uh, to us, those goody-good people who worked shiatty jobs for bum paychecks and took the subway to work every day, and worried about their bills, were dead. I mean they were suckers. They had no balls. If we wanted something we just took it. If anyone complained twice they got hit so bad, believe me, they never complained again


You convinced me. is there a cab stand I can apply at?
 
2014-09-02 11:38:33 AM

rumpelstiltskin: MugzyBrown: Considering the employer and employee decide their own rate of pay via voluntary agreement, that would be by definition fair.

If it wasn't fair, they wouldn't agree.

Yeah, right. And the poor guy would just shrug and say "We couldn't agree on a wage, so I guess Imma gonna starve."
Poverty is a hell of a lever. It doesn't matter how unfair the offer is, the poor guy is going to take it. I get that "both sides are better off", because the laborer gets to eat, and the employer gets $5 of marginal production for 20 cents. Everyone involved in the transaction is overjoyed by the outcome. Some of us just have an aversion to exploitation, and would rather live in a society where there's a limit to how big an asshole you can be.


The funny thing is that there are so many people who worship the "free market" but have no idea what conditions characterize an efficient market. Systemically unequal bargaining position is a recipe for market failure.
 
2014-09-02 11:38:46 AM
Isn't it your fault for working in a position that pays so little? Sounds like someone needs to learn how to get promoted. Dumb people...
 
2014-09-02 11:39:22 AM
Well, THIS thread is certainly full of derpers who don't have any knowledge of history
 
2014-09-02 11:39:38 AM

macross87: Isn't it your fault for working in a position that pays so little? Sounds like someone needs to learn how to get promoted. Dumb people...


Yeah. Let's just promote everyone. Great solution.
 
2014-09-02 11:39:50 AM

macross87: Isn't it your fault for working in a position that pays so little? Sounds like someone needs to learn how to get promoted. Dumb people...


Yeah, that's a realistic approach. "Just learn how to get promoted! Then everyone will get promotions and all problems will be solved!"
 
2014-09-02 11:40:23 AM
He's totally right, and I agree.

The only issue I take with his statement is the importance of the job and the role of a job in a person's life. A person should have a job to fund his or her needs and activities, but the job shouldn't be something one hholds because of status or because the job itself defines you. The minute I stopped treating a job as something that reflected my worth as an individual and started treating it as a simple business transaction that let me do stuff I enjoy on my own, I started enjoying my life a great deal more, and stopped dealing with stress and/or constant worry on how to advance and continue to get better jobs.

It's *just a job*. It's not your entire life.
 
2014-09-02 11:41:25 AM

cameroncrazy1984: MugzyBrown: Considering the employer and employee decide their own rate of pay via voluntary agreement, that would be by definition fair.

If it wasn't fair, they wouldn't agree.

Wrong. Employer has vastly more leverage and thus can gain a more favorable agreement. It's literally the whole reason unions exist.


You're telling me an entity that doesn't need to sleep, breathe, eat and is essentially immortal with a total valuation of billions of dollars and a fleet of lawyers can haggle better than a person who is literally one week away from living on a street and starving?  That it is in a better position and can, "should", and will exploit that position to its utmost because it employs people to do so?
 
2014-09-02 11:41:25 AM

macross87: Isn't it your fault for working in a position that pays so little? Sounds like someone needs to learn how to get promoted. Dumb people...


How does the CEO of a company get promoted?
 
2014-09-02 11:42:07 AM
 
2014-09-02 11:43:10 AM

BMulligan: GoldSpider: Let's just come up with a definition of "fair" that EVERYONE can agree on, and put this whole discussion to bed.  Easy!

My notion of fairness starts with putting some of the revenue associated with increased productivity into the pockets of the workers responsible for that increased productivity, instead of putting every penny of it into dividends. The shareholders have done quite well over the past 30 years, seeing their ROI skyrocket thanks to the sweat of the working men and women whom they treat as disposable. The workers themselves, on the other hand - not so much.


Yup, if you want capitalism to thrive you need to invest in capital.  As much as business leaders don't want to admit it, that include employees.  Unfortunately we've somehow let the accountants win out and put employees on the liability ledger and not the capital ledger.

Zero sum, run to the bottom economics of not paying people for their work eventually means the large consumer group that is buying good and services, making up 85% of GDP, no longer can contribute.  Which forces more companies to cut costs and make terrible long term, game theory single choice bad decisions.  Which means less purchasing power to the groups that do the most.

It's a poison pill cascade built into the nature of capitalism, and we're eating it like candy atm. The end game is political and economic ruin.
 
2014-09-02 11:45:04 AM

Serious Black: macross87: Isn't it your fault for working in a position that pays so little? Sounds like someone needs to learn how to get promoted. Dumb people...

How does the CEO of a company get promoted?


Become a crappy CEO at a bigger company.
 
2014-09-02 11:47:18 AM
I agree to a certain extent.. the problem is that there are by necessity going to be fewer and fewer jobs to go around as time goes on.  The main reason is entrenchment... the government and businesses do not like to change unless it is in their benefit... and the headaches that they have to go through on the HR side of things makes automation of existing jobs more appealing.

Within the next 20 years or so, I see lots of riots in our future.
 
2014-09-02 11:47:57 AM

qorkfiend: macross87: Isn't it your fault for working in a position that pays so little? Sounds like someone needs to learn how to get promoted. Dumb people...

Yeah, that's a realistic approach. "Just learn how to get promoted! Then everyone will get promotions and all problems will be solved!"


It's a little like grade inflation. They should just start everybody out as Senior VPs so they can be paid enough to live on.
 
2014-09-02 11:48:02 AM

Kit Fister: He's totally right, and I agree.

The only issue I take with his statement is the importance of the job and the role of a job in a person's life. A person should have a job to fund his or her needs and activities, but the job shouldn't be something one hholds because of status or because the job itself defines you. The minute I stopped treating a job as something that reflected my worth as an individual and started treating it as a simple business transaction that let me do stuff I enjoy on my own, I started enjoying my life a great deal more, and stopped dealing with stress and/or constant worry on how to advance and continue to get better jobs.

It's *just a job*. It's not your entire life.


The phrase "dignity of work" was created by think tank conservatives to be a buzzword.  It sounds nice, but its true purpose is to undermine unemployment benefits and strengthen the idea that to not work is to be a worthless human being.

It's dumb and the view that it espouses I find corrosive: It doesn't matter  what you do, what matters is that you exhaust yourself.  It doesn't matter  how much you make, what matters is your toil.  What doesn't matter is your  quality of life what matters is that you make someone else some money.

If I could get by without having to work another day in my life I'd be happy and wouldn't care about this pointless dignity.  But then I'd basically be a 1%er and live off of capital gains.  You never hear about their "dignity of work"
 
2014-09-02 11:49:01 AM

MugzyBrown: Considering the employer and employee decide their own rate of pay via voluntary agreement, that would be by definition fair.

If it wasn't fair, they wouldn't agree.


HAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHHHaaaaaa...

THAT was funny.
 
2014-09-02 11:49:48 AM
But none of those factors are related.  How you are with your communitee is dependant upon how fat your paycheck is.  Taking dignity in what you have accomplished should not be removed because you feel your reward for the work is unjustly diminished.
 
2014-09-02 11:51:08 AM

Saiga410: But none of those factors are related.  How you are with your communitee is dependant upon how fat your paycheck is.  Taking dignity in what you have accomplished should not be removed because you feel your reward for the work is unjustly diminished.


Yes, I bet that if you were paid 50% as much for the same amount of work you'd take the same amount of dignity out of it.
 
2014-09-02 11:51:21 AM

Esc7: ou're telling me an entity that doesn't need to sleep, breathe, eat and is essentially immortal with a total valuation of billions of dollars and a fleet of lawyers can haggle better than a person who is literally one week away from living on a street and starving?  That it is in a better position and can, "should", and will exploit that position to its utmost because it employs people to do so?


Because every employer hiring minimum wage workers is some huge mega corporation?

cameroncrazy1984: Wrong. Employer has vastly more leverage and thus can gain a more favorable agreement. It's literally the whole reason unions exist.


If I'm in the market for a 'minimum wage' worker, I'm competing with every other business who is also looking for the same worker.

Ironically, the more you raise the minimum wage, the more leverage you give to the employer because now the guy who's skills are really only worth $7/hr to me has to compete at a level of $14/hr against more qualified workers.


And back to  Esc7's point, the more the competitive balance tilts to Megacorp vs Small business.
 
2014-09-02 11:51:32 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Wrong. Employer has vastly more leverage and thus can gain a more favorable agreement. It's literally the whole reason unions exist.


And employers naturally collude through trade and industry associations, inter-company movement, etc.. I never understood why staunch free market purists soil their panties at the thought of labour leveraging the same freedoms as employers.
 
2014-09-02 11:52:43 AM
franklinroosevelt.com

"In my Inaugural I laid down the simple proposition that nobody is going to starve in this country. It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By "business" I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level-I mean the wages of decent living."
 
2014-09-02 11:53:18 AM

MugzyBrown: Considering the employer and employee decide their own rate of pay via voluntary agreement, that would be by definition fair.

If it wasn't fair, they wouldn't agree.


I can't tell if you're showing the true spirit of Objectivisim or if you've just left your fly undone.

silencedmajority.blogs.com
 
2014-09-02 11:53:35 AM

dwrash: I agree to a certain extent.. the problem is that there are by necessity going to be fewer and fewer jobs to go around as time goes on.  The main reason is entrenchment... the government and businesses do not like to change unless it is in their benefit... and the headaches that they have to go through on the HR side of things makes automation of existing jobs more appealing.

Within the next 20 years or so, I see lots of riots in our future.


The future of work is obvious.  Automation will hit nearly every sector and technology continues to improve.  Most jobs can be done better with less errors by an algorithm and a robot.  Even jobs that are currently poor choices for automation will be automated if it is cheaper.

We need to build a society that benefit, not fall apart, from machines doing our labor.  Because it is going to happen.  And the benefits of increased efficiency and production could mean an even better standard of living than today, but only if we devise a way to prevent all the benefits from simply going to the top.
 
2014-09-02 11:54:01 AM
And I agree with Esc7, it's just a job. If it wasn't for the money I wouldn't do the work just to have a sense of dignity. There is no dignity in poverty, therefore I work for money.
 
2014-09-02 11:54:03 AM
No one should be required to work more than 40 hours to be able to pay for basic necessity for their family. Simple as that.

$8/hour will get you $16K a year. Not barely enough to do that. End of the story.

What's the difference between slave labor and having to work 80/hours a week just to care for your family?
 
2014-09-02 11:54:13 AM

MugzyBrown: If I'm in the market for a 'minimum wage' worker, I'm competing with every other business who is also looking for the same worker.


And? This is different than the current system in what way?

MugzyBrown: Ironically, the more you raise the minimum wage, the more leverage you give to the employer because now the guy who's skills are really only worth $7/hr to me has to compete at a level of $14/hr against more qualified workers.


In what way do you believe that gives more leverage to the employer?
 
2014-09-02 11:54:36 AM

qorkfiend: Saiga410: But none of those factors are related.  How you are with your communitee is dependant upon how fat your paycheck is.  Taking dignity in what you have accomplished should not be removed because you feel your reward for the work is unjustly diminished.

Yes, I bet that if you were paid 50% as much for the same amount of work you'd take the same amount of dignity out of it.


It probably depends upon the epicness of the job.  "You see that scanner there son.  I scanned the living heck out of all the foodstuffs to cross my path." said no one.  "You see that skyscraper over there.  While I was only a bucket boy, I helped rivet the steel" probably said by a goodish feew.
 
Displayed 50 of 313 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report