What's new

CEO raises minimum wage to $70000, takes $70000 wage himself until profits are met.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 848
  • Start date Start date
I would never disagree with any of this. I had hoped that my points strongly implied that what you've wrote here is entirely consistent with my position.

One runs into problems any time he/she tries to justify regulations on strictly economic terms... because that is the language of business, and thus calls forth all the tendencies toward mass-production and accumulation which the business community embodies. But non-economic arguments for regulation are met with a deaf ear (look at what has happened to Aboriginal Australian land in our lifetimes): they're either seen as wildly "liberal" (in a complete blasphemy of the term) or written of as mere noise (again, look at Australian politics). So, we're forced to use economic terms.

Usually when I seem imbalanced in these conversations it's because I've weakly dismissed the noneconomic terms in order to just get to the calculations with the neoliberals (PKM, for example). The imbalance you've pointed out here is just due to a lack of verbiage from me at this point... it isn't really there.

Good to see you, btw.

I agree, and saying blind side was inaccurate and lazy on my part. Getting to the meat of things, I want the economic argument to center on trade-offs that work for both parties. If we're going to spend the money then let's make it easy and effective. We're too stupid to make the easy choices that give everyone what they want.


LOLOL, this is a very selective measure on how to appraise the health of a nation-- care to elaborate as to why you chose this to be your criteria? Why not choose life expectancy, infant mortality, disease rates (whether acute, chronic, etc.)?

Sure. Infant mortality rates are highly culturallylinked. The US gets a bump from our Latin immigrants and a drag from our African descendants.
Disease rates are linked to culture and climate. Americans are fat and lazy but we don't have much of a harmful climate. Neither does Europe for that matter. Life expectancy is also culturally linked.





The US/Big Pharmaceutical engine that spends most pharmaceutical dollars re-developing drugs that already exist so they can cash in on the latest treatable 'disease' (that might not even exist for that matter)-- or providing 'cutting-edge' treatment that ends up bankrupting 30% of the amount of people who file for bankruptcy on an annual basis. Gosh, I haven't the slightest clue as to how any of this could be a bad thing.

Plucking on heart strings while avoiding the economic issues of drug development. We bitch and moan in this country about the skyrocketing cost of healthcare but you'll be hard pressed to find many who are grateful that they'll live comfortable lives in old age because of it, or who appreciate the economic growth the health industry has provided and thus fuels welfare programs, retirement payments, etc. In fact, US liberals are so damn stupid that they've tried to curtail the growth of the health industry, the fastest growing sector of the US for a decade plus.
 
Sure. Infant mortality rates are highly culturallylinked. The US gets a bump from our Latin immigrants and a drag from our African descendants.

Umm, what? Infant Mortality rates between White non-Hispanic & Hispanic Americans are approximately equal. So you're wrong there (which makes sense as to why, again, there hasn't been any justification behind your claims)

m6205qsf.gif


Now I'm curious as to what precisely in Black culture is causing parents to have children with higher infant mortality? You keep chalking things up to 'culture', which is incredibly vague.

Disease rates are linked to culture and climate. Americans are fat and lazy but we don't have much of a harmful climate. Neither does Europe for that matter. Life expectancy is also culturally linked.

Nothing intrinsic to American biology makes them lazy. Lazy people exist all over the world in equal proportions. However, lazy behaviour is exploited in different ways from nation to nation, depending on environments, societies, government, and culture. Life expectancy is culturally-linked, of course-- but it is NOT culturally explained, which your post is implying. America ranks among last in almost any meaningful nation-wide health measure (among developed nations), and to chalk it up to 'culture' is incredibly narrow-minded, and solves zero solutions of a rather big problem. But sure, keep on keepin on brother.







Plucking on heart strings while avoiding the economic issues of drug development.

More like pointing out basic facts.

We bitch and moan in this country about the skyrocketing cost of healthcare but you'll be hard pressed to find many who are grateful that they'll live comfortable lives in old age because of it, or who appreciate the economic growth the health industry has provided and thus fuels welfare programs, retirement payments, etc.

America bitches and moans about healthcare because they spend more money on it than any other nation in the world, yet they're the only developed nation in the world who doesn't have free health-care for all citizens. I'd be bitching and moaning front and centre.

In fact, US liberals are so damn stupid that they've tried to curtail the growth of the health industry, the fastest growing sector of the US for a decade plus.

Who gives a **** about the growth of an industry if a minority is reaping the rewards while the majority is left in the dust?
 
Umm, what? Infant Mortality rates between White non-Hispanic & Hispanic Americans are approximately equal. So you're wrong there (which makes sense as to why, again, there hasn't been any justification behind your claims)

m6205qsf.gif


Now I'm curious as to what precisely in Black culture is causing parents to have children with higher infant mortality? You keep chalking things up to 'culture', which is incredibly vague.



Nothing intrinsic to American biology makes them lazy. Lazy people exist all over the world in equal proportions. However, lazy behaviour is exploited in different ways from nation to nation, depending on environments, societies, government, and culture. Life expectancy is culturally-linked, of course-- but it is NOT culturally explained, which your post is implying. America ranks among last in almost any meaningful nation-wide health measure (among developed nations), and to chalk it up to 'culture' is incredibly narrow-minded, and solves zero solutions of a rather big problem. But sure, keep on keepin on brother.









More like pointing out basic facts.



America bitches and moans about healthcare because they spend more money on it than any other nation in the world, yet they're the only developed nation in the world who doesn't have free health-care for all citizens. I'd be bitching and moaning front and centre.



Who gives a **** about the growth of an industry if a minority is reaping the rewards while the majority is left in the dust?

Garbage.

Your hard on for me is amusing. Do more research and get back at me when you've lost your boner.
 
More qualified applicants will apply for the jobs and the current type of employee that works there now, instead of having a $40k job, will be out of a job.

Why would the employer fire employees only to have to train new ones? Makes no sense.
 
Yep. I think this guy in the video views it this way as well. He cited a study that said around $70,000 a year alleviates a lot of the other stresses of life. He must see it in a light of better paid employees are better motivated.

It's the concept of "self interest rightly understood." A concept heralded by Alexis du Tocqueville. As an individual who believes 100% in capitalism, it's this concept that allows me to mitigate the greed of man.

For those interested in reading more about this:

https://www.brtom.org/sjc/sjc4.html
 
Last edited:
@Dalamon

In answer to your question in your rep, yes.

I'm sure I could make it just fine on $150,000 per year and be happy. However, there is a difference between finding happiness and finding peace in financial security, knowing your kids will get an education without the burden of student loans, finding a joy in having the ability to help others in their pursuits.

It's funny, as I was first making a lot of money, I loaded up on luxury cars, Rolex watches by the dozens, and a closet full of the best of everything. Now I drive a truck, only wear my wedding ring, and wear shorts and t-shirts. And I don't really need anything at all. A fairly simple life and nothing to prove.

So I don't need more money to be happy, but I would probably have a little less joy if I couldn't help make other's lives a little more promising.
 
@Dalamon

In answer to your question in your rep, yes.

I'm sure I could make it just fine on $150,000 per year and be happy. However, there is a difference between finding happiness and finding peace in financial security, knowing your kids will get an education without the burden of student loans, finding a joy in having the ability to help others in their pursuits.

It's funny, as I was first making a lot of money, I loaded up on luxury cars, Rolex watches by the dozens, and a closet full of the best of everything. Now I drive a truck, only wear my wedding ring, and wear shorts and t-shirts. And I don't really need anything at all. A fairly simple life and nothing to prove.

So I don't need more money to be happy, but I would probably have a little less joy if I couldn't help make other's lives a little more promising.

Great answer, sir.
 
@Dalamon

In answer to your question in your rep, yes.

I'm sure I could make it just fine on $150,000 per year and be happy. However, there is a difference between finding happiness and finding peace in financial security, knowing your kids will get an education without the burden of student loans, finding a joy in having the ability to help others in their pursuits.

I forget how expensive school is down there. Here if a parent makes that much they can pay for their kids' school with ease.

I do understand the helping others thing too. And I feel it. I feel similarly-- I may not be able to do it financially over the course of my life, but ill try to do it somehow.

It's funny, as I was first making a lot of money, I loaded up on luxury cars, Rolex watches by the dozens, and a closet full of the best of everything. Now I drive a truck, only wear my wedding ring, and wear shorts and t-shirts. And I don't really need anything at all. A fairly simple life and nothing to prove.

Ya I still like cars and clothing. Still gotta complete my metamorphosis.

So I don't need more money to be happy, but I would probably have a little less joy if I couldn't help make other's lives a little more promising.[/QUOTE]




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
@Dalamon

In answer to your question in your rep, yes.

I'm sure I could make it just fine on $150,000 per year and be happy. However, there is a difference between finding happiness and finding peace in financial security, knowing your kids will get an education without the burden of student loans, finding a joy in having the ability to help others in their pursuits.

It's funny, as I was first making a lot of money, I loaded up on luxury cars, Rolex watches by the dozens, and a closet full of the best of everything. Now I drive a truck, only wear my wedding ring, and wear shorts and t-shirts. And I don't really need anything at all. A fairly simple life and nothing to prove.

So I don't need more money to be happy, but I would probably have a little less joy if I couldn't help make other's lives a little more promising.

If only there was a working social model provided by a society that could provide this for every child, not just the children of those who've made it. After all, why should a child have to pay for their parents mistakes?

Perhaps we'd need a robust organizational system that has the tools to make this available....
 
Back
Top