70% of Food Stamps/Medicaid recipients work full time, new study GAO And more results

[kamuimac]

And fucking finally - everyone cannot be a manager or a business owner. Someone has to do the basic, dirty work too, someone has to stock the shelves, clean streets, lay bricks, etc. All you are arguing about is why should the basic workforce (without which none of the big corpos would ever exist at all) be paid a livable wage.
At least try to ponder about it.

statements like this show that you have never in your life worked in any type of leadership position .

its kinda sad when people who have no clue what they are talking about spread bs views.

you have also logical flaw in your reasoning - if everyone can be a boss - then technically people who "do thoe basic dirty work " can be their own bosses too - its so easy according to you - yet they choose not to for some strange reason .

- - - Updated - - -

True, but quite a lot of places, it is cheaper than water... Which, when you consider the by far highest percentage of Coca Cola, is water, it boggles the mind.

where ? i have yet to see a single place when 1,5 litre of bottled mineral water is more expensive then 1,5 litre of coca cola. Havent seen it in a single EU/Asian country i have been to

i ll give you example of where i live - cheapest bottled mineral water costs like 40 eurocents - good quality mineral water costs 80 cents - 1 euro - cheapest 1,5L coca cola costs 1,5-2 euro . and there is tap water which costs negligible amount and could be filtered

[Howel]

where ? i have yet to see a single place when 1,5 litre of cheap bottled mineral water is cheaper then 1,5 litre of coca cola. Havent seen it in a single EU/Asian country i have been too

Mexico springs to mind to as one that was quite famous for having ridiculously low soda prices.

[kamuimac]

Mexico springs to mind to as one that was quite famous for having ridiculously low soda prices.

quick google search tells me that its completly not true. considering bottled water/cola in shop

im not speaking about restaurant prices

[Howel]

quick google search tells me that its completly not true. considering bottled water/cola in shop

im not speaking about restaurant prices

They added taxes, because it was too cheap

[JohnBrown1917]

I think most of this stems from people being intellectually dishonest with themselves.

You will always have a bottom rung of society and no amount of legislation will correct that. If you raise wages rent and necessities will raise at a near equal pace as the availability of resources remain unchanged.

People always talk about taxing the rich as though it was some bizzare magical bullet while always excluding themselves from any negatives such a drastic change would have.

You can get rid of it in a anarcho-communist society.

It just comes off as naive and hallow to me. A worker sells his labor he alone decides what he will charge for it not a corporation.

A corperation is in a position of power due to the worker needing the money to not starve/become homeless.

[Saltysquidoon]

It just comes off as naive and hallow to me. A worker sells his labor he alone decides what he will charge for it not a corporation.

This is blatantly false on its face, not only does the law of contract recognize that unequal bargaining positions exist (and somehow I suspect you're no big fan of unions) but even neoliberal capitalists understand the concept of supply and demand and the economies of scale.

technicaly for some people buying a lot less food - espcially unhealthy snacks and soda drinks could be seen as huge benefit for health.

Please, donate your body to the closest woodchipper.

you have also logical flaw in your reasoning - if everyone can be a boss - then technically people who "do thoe basic dirty work " can be their own bosses too - its so easy according to you - yet they choose not to for some strange reason.

If not for the rest of your posts being near entirely dissociated from reality I would suggest you were trolling.

Every hierarchical society essentially requires tiers to exist and function. You wouldn't get to jerk yourself off to 'being your own boss' if there was no one to employ because everyone was their own boss.

[kamuimac]

This is blatantly false on its face, not only does the law of contract recognize that unequal bargaining positions exist (and somehow I suspect you're no big fan of unions) but even neoliberal capitalists understand the concept of supply and demand and the economies of scale.


Please, donate your body to the closest woodchipper.


If not for the rest of your posts being near entirely dissociated from reality I would suggest you were trolling.

Every hierarchical society essentially requires tiers to exist and function. You wouldn't get to jerk yourself off to 'being your own boss' if there was no one to employ because everyone was their own boss.

a) he is factually corret - you are factually incorrect.

any person going to work is effectively selling his most viable resource - time - as an eployee you are effectively selling for examply 40 hours a week for X amount of money of your employers

if you dont have any skills - you time is valued very low and therefore you are paid as low as possible

now if you had skills you could go tell anyone interviewing you "well go f.... yourself im gonna sell my time to someone else" - but because a lot of people dont have any skills they accept any terms that are given to them . they are effectively admiting how low value their time has.

b) i wonder what argument you have against what i written besides insult ? as we have extreme epidemy of obesity caused by people consuming to much calories daily in whole western/northern hemisphere - and US is one of proud leaders in this department.

one of easiest ways to fight it would be to make unhealthy food much more expensive - lets say put in extremly aggresive -100- 200 % tax on snacks , soda drinks etc

this would ensure that people who still want to devour them would do so but people would think 5 times before buying unhealthy food.

c) here another flaw showing your lack of knowledge regarding management - more and more companies go away from strickly hierarchical/pyramid structure to more horizontal ones - ofc there are people at the top there always have to be - but whole structures are much more flattened nowadays .

i also find it ironical that you are effectively denying your own words - saying that society needs hierachy to function properly - yet you claimed that anyone can be at the top managing it.

[Felya]

any person going to work is effectively selling his most viable resource - time - as an eployee you are effectively selling for examply 40 hours a week for X amount of money of your employers

if you dont have any skills - you time is valued very low and therefore you are paid as low as possible

now if you had skills you could go tell anyone interviewing you "well go f.... yourself im gonna sell my time to someone else" - but because a lot of people dont have any skills they accept any terms that are given to them . they are effectively admiting how low value their time has.

If you are very skilled at mining coal, what happens when renewable energy hits the market?

one of easiest ways to fight it would be to make unhealthy food much more expensive - lets say put in extremly aggresive -100- 200 % tax on snacks , soda drinks etc

Talking about candy in context of obesity, is just pejorative nonsense, assuming fat people gorge sweets.

That’s not the kid food causing obesity. It contributes, but it’s not the man cause. The main cause is lack of time and the nutritional garbage that is fast food. It shouldn’t be surprising that as pay stagnation created the need for a dual income household, removing a family member that would prepare healthy meals, would result in increased obesity.

Now... what happens when you increase prices on fast food? Are you forcing people that already have no time to cook, to find the time or simply make their financial situation even more dire?

this would ensure that people who still want to devour them would do so but people would think 5 times before buying unhealthy food.

This is because you think that obese people are pigs, instead of working class people fighting to feed their families, while having no time.

here another flaw showing your lack of knowledge regarding management - more and more companies go away from strickly hierarchical/pyramid structure to more horizontal ones - ofc there are people at the top there always have to be - but whole structures are much more flattened nowadays .

Give me an example... We don’t have expanding unions, to make this a thing. How exactly is a common worker, on a horizontal plain with even a lead or manager? Do you mean outside of US? Because this doesn’t make sense in US...

also find it ironical that you are effectively denying your own words - saying that society needs hierachy to function properly - yet you claimed that anyone can be at the top managing it.

Thats not a contradiction...

[kamuimac]

If you are very skilled at mining coal, what happens when renewable energy hits the market?



Talking about candy in context of obesity, is just pejorative nonsense, assuming fat people gorge sweets.

That’s not the kid food causing obesity. It contributes, but it’s not the man cause. The main cause is lack of time and the nutritional garbage that is fast food. It shouldn’t be surprising that as pay stagnation created the need for a dual income household, removing a family member that would prepare healthy meals, would result in increased obesity.

Now... what happens when you increase prices on fast food? Are you forcing people that already have no time to cook, to find the time or simply make their financial situation even more dire?



This is because you think that obese people are pigs, instead of working class people fighting to feed their families, while having no time.



Give me an example... We don’t have expanding unions, to make this a thing. How exactly is a common worker, on a horizontal plain with even a lead or manager? Do you mean outside of US? Because this doesn’t make sense in US...



Thats not a contradiction...

thats a very good example lets work a bit on it.

lets say that deadline for coal mining would be 2040 (as such things never happen overnight) - this gives people 20 years for preparation .

first step would be to stop technical school teaching future miners - then lets say 5 years later all mines would be forced to stop hiring new people. then next 5 year later local / counry couvernment should start programms offering other kinds of education for such miners - lets say give oportunity for coal miners to learn how to mine other resources that your country have - and move to where they are mined - or to completly switch their proffesion / retire

its is more then possible to do in countries which have good tax systems.

we live in very dynamic world - one shouldnt expect to work in the same enviroment till retirement anymore - people should in fact learn whole lives - even simple not very well educated people like miners.



"people dont have time to prepare food" - you must be joking here - preparing food doesnt really take that long - people are just lazy and refuse to spend even 30 minutes a day on cooking.

i never called people pigs - i say that people eat like pigs - devouring 4-5k calories a day when they need in fact 2-2,5k . maaaaybe 3k if they have heavily physcial labour .


you want example ? more and more IT companies work this way - and in other sectors too . it would take too long - pls read some .pdf on this topic here im to lazy to explain it

[Saltysquidoon]

*nonsense*

A) No he's wrong and you aren't even making the same argument as him.
The vast vast majority of the workforce do not decide what their labour is worth for a few reasons:
1. A business can survive without 100% of potential positions full far longer then the average worker can afford not to be employed (given corporations don't need to eat);
2. Supply and demand (which is what I said and what you're effectively arguing), there are more workers then there are positions available,e ergo if most people don't take what they can get they get nothing; and;
3. Even skilled experienced people still have an effective cap on what they can write on that blank cheque because of both 1 and 2 above and a whole host of other contextual reasons.

B) It wasn't a personal insult it was just a 'suggestion for the health of society'. The idea that it's a good thing people from low socioeconomic backgrounds aren't paid enough afford food because obesity exists is ghoulish.
First of all, every single poor person on earth isn't fat and every single rich person isn't thin. Secondly, there is no correlation between socioeconomic status and fast food consumption and finally, it would appear attempts to regulate the sale of unhealthy foods don't necessarily impact community health.

C)
1. I was talking about society
2. What you just wrote is a blatant (I suspect knowing, but I'm not sure if you actually drinking the kool-aid or just offering it) lie. If it wasn't a lie CEO to worker compensation wouldn't look like this.

[Felya]

lets say that deadline for coal mining would be 2040 (as such things never happen overnight) - this gives people 20 years for preparation

Prepare for what? To make math simpler, let’s say you start your career at 25 and retire at 65. What are you preparing for, for half of your career?

first step would be to stop technical school teaching future miners

What technical schools are teaching coal miners? Your assertion fails at the very start...

its is more then possible to do in countries which have good tax systems.

That depends on how many people agreeing, would constitute “good”.

we live in very dynamic world - one shouldnt expect to work in the same enviroment till retirement anymore - people should in fact learn whole lives - even simple not very well educated people like miners.

When does the working class have the time? You act as if people have infinite time and 0 responsibility. Your assertions would only be reasonable, if everyone was a trust fund baby.

"people dont have time to prepare food" - you must be joking here - preparing food doesnt really take that long - people are just lazy and refuse to spend even 30 minutes a day on cooking.

You just have no clue what it means to be the working class. You think people live on junk food, can just go to school and cooking for your family takes 30 minutes. Sorry... that’s not the real world...

i never called people pigs - i say that people eat like pigs

This distinction is your whole argument in a nutshell.

you want example ? more and more IT companies work this way - and in other sectors too . it would take too long - pls read some .pdf on this topic here im to lazy to explain it

That’s not an example... you just said “IT companies”... I’ve been in IT for over 20 years... Give me an example of this structure... maybe a name of a document, instead of its extension? WTF?

- - - Updated - - -

What you just wrote is a blatant (I suspect knowing, but I'm not sure if you actually drinking the kool-aid or just offering it) lie. If it wasn't a lie CEO to worker compensation wouldn't look like this.

Just think what it means to tell someone to go read a “PDF”...

[kamuimac]

Prepare for what? To make math simpler, let’s say you start your career at 25 and retire at 65. What are you preparing for, for half of your career?



What technical schools are teaching coal miners? Your assertion fails at the very start...



That depends on how many people agreeing, would constitute “good”.



When does the working class have the time? You act as if people have infinite time and 0 responsibility. Your assertions would only be reasonable, if everyone was a trust fund baby.



You just have no clue what it means to be the working class. You think people live on junk food, can just go to school and cooking for your family takes 30 minutes. Sorry... that’s not the real world...



This distinction is your whole argument in a nutshell.



That’s not an example... you just said “IT companies”... I’ve been in IT for over 20 years... Give me an example of this structure... maybe a name of a document, instead of its extension? WTF?

- - - Updated - - -



Just think what it means to tell someone to go read a “PDF”...

excuses exacuses excuses.

life of working class is soooo hard. buhu

life is hard in general - so instead complaining - do something about it - change you life instead waiting for someone else to change it for you .

[JohnBrown1917]

excuses exacuses excuses.

life of working class is soooo hard. buhu

life is hard in general - so instead complaining - do something about it - change you life instead waiting for someone else to change it for you .

By enacting political change? Sounds good.

[unfilteredJW]

excuses exacuses excuses.

life of working class is soooo hard. buhu

life is hard in general - so instead complaining - do something about it - change you life instead waiting for someone else to change it for you .

Thanks for really nailing down you aren’t adult enough to join the discussion.

[Krakan]

Question, if companies decided that everyone should only make $0.50 an hour would prices for everything go down? Remind yourself that even though wages have been mostly stagnant things still go up in price and wages are not keeping up with it. When gas prices go up you'll see the excuse "well it costs more to get that stuff here" but when gas prices go down does the cost of those goods? No, they don't.

If I have to pay an extra 15 cents for a burger just so the person making it doesn't have to work three jobs I think I'll find a way to live with that.

Yes prices would go down but your failing to understand the key dynamic here. It is laborer who sets the worth of their labor not the company. You reversed the relationship.

Wages haven't increased because the value of unskilled labor hasn't increased in value.

- - - Updated - - -

You can get rid of it in a anarcho-communist society.


A corperation is in a position of power due to the worker needing the money to not starve/become homeless.

Can you point me to a successful anarcho communist society of more then 10,000 people with comparable living conditions?

Yes making everyone poor and starving lowers wealth inequality but I wouldn't push for it.

[Twdft]

It is laborer who sets the worth of their labor not the company. You reversed the relationship.

Wages haven't increased because the value of unskilled labor hasn't increased in value.

Dude what?

The only reason shit jobs are paid shit is because many people have no choice but to take them. Employers are in a position of power that does not allow laborers to set their worth.

Let's assume for a minute (and please don't immediately block with the usual "who's gonna pay for it" nonsense), assume for a minute Universal Basic Income exists. UBI meaning basic needs like shelter and food covered.

Now imagine if everyone could look at a shit job and be able to decline doing it. I guarantee you that wages will raise to a point where people will again do these jobs, because they want a bit more than their basic needs covered.

[Saltysquidoon]

It's much more simple than that.

Yes prices would go down but your failing to understand the key dynamic here. It is laborer who sets the worth of their labor not the company. You reversed the relationship.

Wages haven't increased because the value of unskilled labor hasn't increased in value.

These phrases are contradictory, it is impossible for someone arguing in good faith to simultaneously believe both.
If the value labour is set by the labourer (lol), how can it follow that the value of labour hasn't risen? That would imply some sort of outside, say for example market force actually controls the price of labour which would make the first steatmen.

Also, artificially delineating between 'skilled' and 'unskilled' wage growth is worst-case using weasel words to sidestep data that shows you are incorrect and worst case a dog-whistle.

[Krakan]

Dude what?

The only reason shit jobs are paid shit is because many people have no choice but to take them. Employers are in a position of power that does not allow laborers to set their worth.

Let's assume for a minute (and please don't immediately block with the usual "who's gonna pay for it" nonsense), assume for a minute Universal Basic Income exists. UBI meaning basic needs like shelter and food covered.

Now imagine if everyone could look at a shit job and be able to decline doing it. I guarantee you that wages will raise to a point where people will again do these jobs, because they want a bit more than their basic needs covered.

I mean yes in this bizzare world of unlimited wealth and resources this could work.

We however dont live in a perfect world see Venezuela for how that goes down.

- - - Updated - - -

It's much more simple than that.

These phrases are contradictory, it is impossible for someone arguing in good faith to simultaneously believe both.
If the value labour is set by the labourer (lol), how can it follow that the value of labour hasn't risen? That would imply some sort of outside, say for example market force actually controls the price of labour which would make the first steatmen.

Also, artificially delineating between 'skilled' and 'unskilled' wage growth is worst-case using weasel words to sidestep data that shows you are incorrect and worst case a dog-whistle.

I mean it clearly is the case I set my own wage and argue for it. If my employer doesn't want to pay it I simply go work for one that will. This is how every employment situation works. You decide your worth not the company.

[Howel]

I mean yes in this bizzare world of unlimited wealth and resources this could work.

We however dont live in a perfect world see Venezuela for how that goes down.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean it clearly is the case I set my own wage and argue for it. If my employer doesn't want to pay it I simply go work for one that will. This is how every employment situation works. You decide your worth not the company.

I can't help but to not note on the funny irony here, that you first proclaim a bizarre world of unlimited wealth; but then go on to act as if there is this bizarre world of unlimited companies that you can go to and ask for whatever salary you deem worthy. That's not how the relationship between employers and employees work, which even you acknowledge previously, by the notion that there is a limited worth on labour, one post prior.

[Gaaz]

Yes making everyone poor and starving lowers wealth inequality but I wouldn't push for it.

I am just curious as to why all of the arguments come down to "making everyone poor"? I thought that US had an excellent example when it actually was the other way around. I mean during 60s and 70s, if I remember correctly, your average CEO to base employee wage difference was about x50. And the country was not only the most prosperous of all, but had incredible economic and social development dynamics. There was even a saying that a working man could take care of his family, have a house and a car. To think that right now someone working in a retail store could earn enough to completely support a family of 4 people, have enough to have his own house and with change to spare, that is a kind of a stretch.
Right now the CEO to basic labor difference is what? x500? More? It was x 500 more than a decade ago, so I guess it is much larger now. This wage gap is not something a society needs.
Interesting to see that the golden age of US history, along with progressive taxation (which was close to 80% on $10 000 000+ earnings), are demonized now, calling everyone who advocates for closing wage gaps and inequalities a "commie" or some such. Before long, all of us will be living in a pure Darwinist society with that approach. Problem is, there should always be victims to eat in a Darwinist society. Once the breaks are loose, the stone will keep on rolling faster and faster, until another victim slows it down with his body. Then the cycle of acceleration continues. Just a simple example from recent history - Martin Shkreli. After raising prices on a couple of his newly acquired drugs 5-20 times, people started to die from lack of treatment. Yet no one really cared. Next step for him - increase prices by 56 times on a vital, life or death type drug. Basically overnight from $13 something to $750. Only then people started to act. The main problem in this scenario is that the reaction was only due to such a rapid and visible change. Had he done that more gradually, it might have been seen as normal. After all, we do see it as normal that the gap grew more than 10 times over just 50 years or so.