(10-28-2013 02:55 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:34 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:13 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:11 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:08 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  I haven't suggested capping CEO pay... I don't support that. I didn't come here to present a solution, I came here to highlight a problem and start a discussion.

We are having a discussion aren't we?

I think what we've observed here is that there is really no problem at all. Hence, no need for a "solution".

Cool. We done here?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_ineq...es#Effects

Food for thought. CEO pay is just an example of income inequality.

Really? A wiki page? No doubt written by some petrulli smelling occupy idiot.

However, let's go with your "article". Did you even read this thing? Lol. A veritable love fest of labor unions and occupy stupid street protests.

Scholarly work there, they even throw in a Krugman reference for good measure. hahaha


So CEO pay isn't the problem, huh?
Oh, and if you're moving the target once again, might I suggest you either change your thread title? Or perhaps you need to start another one to highlight the next straw man.

Wikipedia serves as a good summary, and everything is referenced. You're basically just brushing off that income inequality could be an issue, just because occupy is mentioned in the page. Of course it's going to be mentioned.

wikipedia can be edited by flat out anybody. it's not a good reference for anything. period.

(10-28-2013 07:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 01:16 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 12:25 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 12:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 12:14 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Indeed. You are still most certainly welcome to say whatever you would like.

Anger me? Uhhhh, no. Except perhaps at the legislative buffoons that would allow such a structure or an Executive branch either incapable or unwilling to prosecute in the instances of such easily identifiable fraud and abuse...

Jon Corzine, I'm looking at YOU!

Prosecute? You'd have to break a law.

Underpaying people and having the government subsidize their dinner table will make a man millions.

That's greed. That's what massive CEO pay rewards.

Is "rip off" not akin to breaking a law in your book? It is in mine, least it was.

Who's underpaid? Go find another job elsewhere, people been doing that since the creation of man.

Greed is good. Keeps a person young and hungry. Kinda like starvation on the other end I guess. I'd prefer greed.

At least he'll spend that money. You know, spread the wealth the old fashioned way- buy a yacht.

That doesn't solve the problem. If every Wal Mart employee quit and went looking for a job, 5% of them would find a job, and it would likely be just as sh!tty. Wal Mart doesn't care if they should treat employees better, they're all replaceable.

There job would be $hitty because they didn't bother to get and education or learn a trade that qualified them to do any job that isn't 4hitty. It's their own fault!

When you have no skills or minimal skills you are 100% replaceable. That's why it's important to gain skills and eduction that makes you necessary and sought after.

Yes, this is absolutely important. The education system sucks for many people, so it's totally their own fault.

(10-28-2013 07:31 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:55 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:34 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:13 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:11 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  We are having a discussion aren't we?

I think what we've observed here is that there is really no problem at all. Hence, no need for a "solution".

Cool. We done here?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_ineq...es#Effects

Food for thought. CEO pay is just an example of income inequality.

Really? A wiki page? No doubt written by some petrulli smelling occupy idiot.

However, let's go with your "article". Did you even read this thing? Lol. A veritable love fest of labor unions and occupy stupid street protests.

Scholarly work there, they even throw in a Krugman reference for good measure. hahaha


So CEO pay isn't the problem, huh?
Oh, and if you're moving the target once again, might I suggest you either change your thread title? Or perhaps you need to start another one to highlight the next straw man.

Wikipedia serves as a good summary, and everything is referenced. You're basically just brushing off that income inequality could be an issue, just because occupy is mentioned in the page. Of course it's going to be mentioned.

wikipedia can be edited by flat out anybody. it's not a good reference for anything. period.

So, the references at the bottom of the page are BS, right? Have you ever tried to edit a Wikipedia page without solid references? That sh!t gets removed within 5 minutes.

(10-28-2013 04:45 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 04:33 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The reason Wal Mart makes so much money is because they are huge. They are huge so they can negotiate more favorable terms for products than others and offer the lowest price while still making a profit. They are the quintessential company making a fraction of a cent on massive volume... and people buy from them because they have the cheapest prices.

QFT.

Wal Mart simply tells you what you will charge for your product. Here is a link to an interesting article about lawnmowers and Wal Mart, and one company that didn't play the Wal Mart game.

No business has to sell to Walmart. They chose to.

(10-28-2013 07:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 01:16 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  That doesn't solve the problem. If every Wal Mart employee quit and went looking for a job, 5% of them would find a job, and it would likely be just as sh!tty. Wal Mart doesn't care if they should treat employees better, they're all replaceable.

There job would be $hitty because they didn't bother to get and education or learn a trade that qualified them to do any job that isn't 4hitty. It's their own fault!
When you have no skills or minimal skills you are 100% replaceable. That's why it's important to gain skills and eduction that makes you necessary and sought after.

Exactly.

And exactly why is it Wal-Mart's responsibility to pay, say, $16/hour to someone who has no skills worth more than half that?

(10-28-2013 04:29 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 03:05 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 03:01 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:56 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Why is it theft and nothing short of immoral?

Allowing the state to essentially pay your workers is stealing from the state. Paying people who work for you so little that they must 'beg' for money from the state to survive is immoral.

This.

The same people who criticize people on welfare seem to have no problem with a corporation paying their workers less than a livable salary and suggesting the workers sign up for handouts to make up the difference.

stocking shelves and operating a cash register don't deserve a livable wage. Sorry. Life is hard. Those people are paid what they're worth. So are you, me and everyone else.

What happens when you are on the other side of the equation and have no options? It's not so simple and that attitude has alienated millions of Americans from the Republican Party, which, believe it or not, was not founded on the ideals of greed and rampant abuse. Believe it or not, the party was founded on the idea that an honest day's work deserves an honest day's pay.

The Republican Party has always believed in personal responsibility and self-reliance and still does..

If you have no options employment wise…IT'S YOUR FAULT.
Every single American has access to a a free education through 12th grade. You can then chose to go to trade school, college, the military, etc. to learn marketable skills. If you have no options it's because YOU WERE LAZY.

BTW I got an education and over the course of my working career have continued to pursue new skills to make myself valuable and up to date with my skill set to position myself to never have to be on the other side of the equation. Could I get laid off someday? Sure anyone can. Might I have to take a step back and agree to a lesser paying position. Sure it could happen. Would I be faced with my only prospects being Walmart or McDonalds? No.

(10-28-2013 07:32 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 01:16 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 12:25 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 12:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Prosecute? You'd have to break a law.

Underpaying people and having the government subsidize their dinner table will make a man millions.

That's greed. That's what massive CEO pay rewards.

Is "rip off" not akin to breaking a law in your book? It is in mine, least it was.

Who's underpaid? Go find another job elsewhere, people been doing that since the creation of man.

Greed is good. Keeps a person young and hungry. Kinda like starvation on the other end I guess. I'd prefer greed.

At least he'll spend that money. You know, spread the wealth the old fashioned way- buy a yacht.

That doesn't solve the problem. If every Wal Mart employee quit and went looking for a job, 5% of them would find a job, and it would likely be just as sh!tty. Wal Mart doesn't care if they should treat employees better, they're all replaceable.

There job would be $hitty because they didn't bother to get and education or learn a trade that qualified them to do any job that isn't 4hitty. It's their own fault!

When you have no skills or minimal skills you are 100% replaceable. That's why it's important to gain skills and eduction that makes you necessary and sought after.

Yes, this is absolutely important. The education system sucks for many people, so it's totally their own fault.

(10-28-2013 07:31 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:55 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:34 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:13 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_ineq...es#Effects

Food for thought. CEO pay is just an example of income inequality.

Really? A wiki page? No doubt written by some petrulli smelling occupy idiot.

However, let's go with your "article". Did you even read this thing? Lol. A veritable love fest of labor unions and occupy stupid street protests.

Scholarly work there, they even throw in a Krugman reference for good measure. hahaha


So CEO pay isn't the problem, huh?
Oh, and if you're moving the target once again, might I suggest you either change your thread title? Or perhaps you need to start another one to highlight the next straw man.

Wikipedia serves as a good summary, and everything is referenced. You're basically just brushing off that income inequality could be an issue, just because occupy is mentioned in the page. Of course it's going to be mentioned.

wikipedia can be edited by flat out anybody. it's not a good reference for anything. period.

So, the references at the bottom of the page are BS, right? Have you ever tried to edit a Wikipedia page without solid references? That sh!t gets removed within 5 minutes.

You do not have to provide solid references. And yes I have edited Wikipedia pages for an organization that I am affiliated with.

(10-28-2013 07:40 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 04:29 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 03:05 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 03:01 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:56 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Allowing the state to essentially pay your workers is stealing from the state. Paying people who work for you so little that they must 'beg' for money from the state to survive is immoral.

This.

The same people who criticize people on welfare seem to have no problem with a corporation paying their workers less than a livable salary and suggesting the workers sign up for handouts to make up the difference.

stocking shelves and operating a cash register don't deserve a livable wage. Sorry. Life is hard. Those people are paid what they're worth. So are you, me and everyone else.

What happens when you are on the other side of the equation and have no options? It's not so simple and that attitude has alienated millions of Americans from the Republican Party, which, believe it or not, was not founded on the ideals of greed and rampant abuse. Believe it or not, the party was founded on the idea that an honest day's work deserves an honest day's pay.

The Republican Party has always believed in personal responsibility and self-reliance and still does..

If you have no options employment wise…IT'S YOUR FAULT.
Every single American has access to a a free education through 12th grade. You can then chose to go to trade school, college, the military, etc. to learn marketable skills. If you have no options it's because YOU WERE LAZY.

BTW I got an education and over the course of my working career have continued to pursue new skills to make myself valuable and up to date with my skill set to position myself to never have to be on the other side of the equation. Could I get laid off someday? Sure anyone can. Might I have to take a step back and agree to a lesser paying position. Sure it could happen. Would I be faced with my only prospects being Walmart or McDonalds? No.

That's the problem. People don't get good free education everywhere.

(10-28-2013 04:29 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  What happens when you are on the other side of the equation and have no options? It's not so simple and that attitude has alienated millions of Americans from the Republican Party, which, believe it or not, was not founded on the ideals of greed and rampant abuse. Believe it or not, the party was founded on the idea that an honest day's work deserves an honest day's pay.

What options does Wal-Mart have?

The person making $8/hour is there because $8/hour is an honest day's pay for what that worker can do. He/she lacks the skills to do an honest day's work worth more than that. Is Wal-Mart supposed to pay people what those people are worth, or is it somehow supposed to pay them vastly more than they are worth, in order that some artificially imposed "honest day's pay" standard can be met?

This is what is wrong with the left. The left does not think through the implications of their pet policies on the suppliers/providers of the world.

(10-28-2013 07:45 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:40 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 04:29 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 03:05 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 03:01 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  This.

The same people who criticize people on welfare seem to have no problem with a corporation paying their workers less than a livable salary and suggesting the workers sign up for handouts to make up the difference.

stocking shelves and operating a cash register don't deserve a livable wage. Sorry. Life is hard. Those people are paid what they're worth. So are you, me and everyone else.

What happens when you are on the other side of the equation and have no options? It's not so simple and that attitude has alienated millions of Americans from the Republican Party, which, believe it or not, was not founded on the ideals of greed and rampant abuse. Believe it or not, the party was founded on the idea that an honest day's work deserves an honest day's pay.

The Republican Party has always believed in personal responsibility and self-reliance and still does..

If you have no options employment wise…IT'S YOUR FAULT.
Every single American has access to a a free education through 12th grade. You can then chose to go to trade school, college, the military, etc. to learn marketable skills. If you have no options it's because YOU WERE LAZY.

BTW I got an education and over the course of my working career have continued to pursue new skills to make myself valuable and up to date with my skill set to position myself to never have to be on the other side of the equation. Could I get laid off someday? Sure anyone can. Might I have to take a step back and agree to a lesser paying position. Sure it could happen. Would I be faced with my only prospects being Walmart or McDonalds? No.

That's the problem. People don't get good free education everywhere.

People do make it out of bad school districts and on to college, trade school or the military...because they are motivated. No matter how bad your school is the library is available for supplemental reading for those motivated. Everyone has the option to join the military at 19 unless they have a medical issue.

A wise man can learn from a fool. A fool cannot learn from a wise man.

(10-28-2013 07:55 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:45 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:40 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 04:29 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 03:05 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  stocking shelves and operating a cash register don't deserve a livable wage. Sorry. Life is hard. Those people are paid what they're worth. So are you, me and everyone else.

What happens when you are on the other side of the equation and have no options? It's not so simple and that attitude has alienated millions of Americans from the Republican Party, which, believe it or not, was not founded on the ideals of greed and rampant abuse. Believe it or not, the party was founded on the idea that an honest day's work deserves an honest day's pay.

The Republican Party has always believed in personal responsibility and self-reliance and still does..

If you have no options employment wise…IT'S YOUR FAULT.
Every single American has access to a a free education through 12th grade. You can then chose to go to trade school, college, the military, etc. to learn marketable skills. If you have no options it's because YOU WERE LAZY.

BTW I got an education and over the course of my working career have continued to pursue new skills to make myself valuable and up to date with my skill set to position myself to never have to be on the other side of the equation. Could I get laid off someday? Sure anyone can. Might I have to take a step back and agree to a lesser paying position. Sure it could happen. Would I be faced with my only prospects being Walmart or McDonalds? No.

That's the problem. People don't get good free education everywhere.

People do make it out of bad school districts and on to college, trade school or the military...because they are motivated. No matter how bad your school is the library is available for supplemental reading for those motivated. Everyone has the option to join the military at 19 unless they have a medical issue.

Is that really a way to live... fighting your way out of a bad situation? If 1 in 50 make it out of an inner city school, and 30 out of 50 make it out of an affluent one, how fair is that? You can't twist that into equal opportunity.

(10-28-2013 07:30 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:25 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 10:23 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 10:19 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:49 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The greater point is that at a point pay for a leader is no longer proportional to their value in the mechanism that is the company.

To add to some frustration, the market rate is set by the very same people getting paid; its an interesting, if not unjust, system.

Why does it matter? The average American doesn't care. I would agree there is a huge disparity but they're in a position that commands more value. People often confuse hard work with value. Now, that being said they're likely not all worth what they're being paid but for people to argue that wealth needs to be spread around makes my blood boil. How about people make themselves more valuable of a commodity in the labor force as opposed to demanding more for their undesirable or less valuable skill set.

Positive Rep me and I'll vote for Obama in 2016

The issue isn't wether or not they command more value but how much more.

I make more than my secretary because I have more responsibility. I also make more because I'm the one with the skill set.

The issue is different with corporate officer pay. Sure, they have more responsibility. However, are they the heart and soul of the company as a lawyer is in a practice or a doctor or a business owner? I'd say they are a cog in a machine to a greater degree and as such don't actually command a salary several thousand times higher than their secretary.

well then work your a$$ off to be one of the corporate officers then. you have the same opportunity, know?

Same opportunity if you're competing against people of the same SES.

I guarantee you if put in your 100 hour weeks, live at the office, and lead a pretty miserable life without family and work-life balance, you will some day be that officer. You need to decide first if it is worth it. Me? I'd rather make my $65k, work my 40-50 hours and have my nights and weekends with my family. I don't envy anyone making so much momey because I see how they live and prioritize. I also dont feel I deserve it. Not the life for me.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

(10-28-2013 08:07 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:30 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:25 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 10:23 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 10:19 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  Why does it matter? The average American doesn't care. I would agree there is a huge disparity but they're in a position that commands more value. People often confuse hard work with value. Now, that being said they're likely not all worth what they're being paid but for people to argue that wealth needs to be spread around makes my blood boil. How about people make themselves more valuable of a commodity in the labor force as opposed to demanding more for their undesirable or less valuable skill set.

Positive Rep me and I'll vote for Obama in 2016

The issue isn't wether or not they command more value but how much more.

I make more than my secretary because I have more responsibility. I also make more because I'm the one with the skill set.

The issue is different with corporate officer pay. Sure, they have more responsibility. However, are they the heart and soul of the company as a lawyer is in a practice or a doctor or a business owner? I'd say they are a cog in a machine to a greater degree and as such don't actually command a salary several thousand times higher than their secretary.

well then work your a$$ off to be one of the corporate officers then. you have the same opportunity, know?

Same opportunity if you're competing against people of the same SES.

I guarantee you if put in your 100 hour weeks, live at the office, and lead a pretty miserable life without family and work-life balance, you will some day be that officer. You need to decide first if it is worth it. Me? I'd rather make my $65k, work my 40-50 hours and have my nights and weekends with my family. I don't envy anyone making so much momey because I see how they live and prioritize. I also dont feel I deserve it. Not the life for me.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

We're not talking about people who make decent money. We're talking about people who make 15k a year at minimum wage. They weren't necessarily blessed with the same education that some of us got.

(10-28-2013 08:09 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:07 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:30 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:25 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 10:23 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The issue isn't wether or not they command more value but how much more.

I make more than my secretary because I have more responsibility. I also make more because I'm the one with the skill set.

The issue is different with corporate officer pay. Sure, they have more responsibility. However, are they the heart and soul of the company as a lawyer is in a practice or a doctor or a business owner? I'd say they are a cog in a machine to a greater degree and as such don't actually command a salary several thousand times higher than their secretary.

well then work your a$$ off to be one of the corporate officers then. you have the same opportunity, know?

Same opportunity if you're competing against people of the same SES.

I guarantee you if put in your 100 hour weeks, live at the office, and lead a pretty miserable life without family and work-life balance, you will some day be that officer. You need to decide first if it is worth it. Me? I'd rather make my $65k, work my 40-50 hours and have my nights and weekends with my family. I don't envy anyone making so much momey because I see how they live and prioritize. I also dont feel I deserve it. Not the life for me.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

We're not talking about people who make decent money. We're talking about people who make 15k a year at minimum wage. They weren't necessarily blessed with the same education that some of us got.

So? Neither was my friend the elevator repair guy.

He learned a trade and went to work everyday, starting exactly one weekend after High School was over. Barely 18. Now? Brings home somewhere around a hundred and a half or more, has a lovely wife, 3 kids and a nice house in the burbs.

Oh, and a cat. Can't forget the cat.

As is clearly illustrated here every day- this formal "higher" education stuff can be vastly overrated.

(10-28-2013 08:09 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:07 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:30 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:25 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 10:23 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The issue isn't wether or not they command more value but how much more.

I make more than my secretary because I have more responsibility. I also make more because I'm the one with the skill set.

The issue is different with corporate officer pay. Sure, they have more responsibility. However, are they the heart and soul of the company as a lawyer is in a practice or a doctor or a business owner? I'd say they are a cog in a machine to a greater degree and as such don't actually command a salary several thousand times higher than their secretary.

well then work your a$$ off to be one of the corporate officers then. you have the same opportunity, know?

Same opportunity if you're competing against people of the same SES.

I guarantee you if put in your 100 hour weeks, live at the office, and lead a pretty miserable life without family and work-life balance, you will some day be that officer. You need to decide first if it is worth it. Me? I'd rather make my $65k, work my 40-50 hours and have my nights and weekends with my family. I don't envy anyone making so much momey because I see how they live and prioritize. I also dont feel I deserve it. Not the life for me.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

We're not talking about people who make decent money. We're talking about people who make 15k a year at minimum wage. They weren't necessarily blessed with the same education that some of us got.

True, but some people just aren't cut out to sit behind a desk and crunch numbers and answer email. FWIW, I have zero problems supplementing someone's $15k income with food stamps and a welfare check. It is the chronically idle I take issue with.

Some people are stuck in bad schools and have much higher barriers to climb. I get that too and don't know the answer to alleviate what has been a social problem for a long time.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

(10-28-2013 07:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 04:29 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  What happens when you are on the other side of the equation and have no options? It's not so simple and that attitude has alienated millions of Americans from the Republican Party, which, believe it or not, was not founded on the ideals of greed and rampant abuse. Believe it or not, the party was founded on the idea that an honest day's work deserves an honest day's pay.

What options does Wal-Mart have?

The person making $8/hour is there because $8/hour is an honest day's pay for what that worker can do. He/she lacks the skills to do an honest day's work worth more than that. Is Wal-Mart supposed to pay people what those people are worth, or is it somehow supposed to pay them vastly more than they are worth, in order that some artificially imposed "honest day's pay" standard can be met?

This is what is wrong with the left. The left does not think through the implications of their pet policies on the suppliers/providers of the world.

Interestingly enough Henry Ford himself would most likely agree with me.

The goal should be to pay the employees as much as you can.

"Wages must enable to worker and his family to have access to a truly human standard of living... It is the dignity of the person which constitutes the criterion for judging work, not the other way around." Pope John Paul II

(10-28-2013 08:15 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:09 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:07 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:30 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:25 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  well then work your a$$ off to be one of the corporate officers then. you have the same opportunity, know?

Same opportunity if you're competing against people of the same SES.

I guarantee you if put in your 100 hour weeks, live at the office, and lead a pretty miserable life without family and work-life balance, you will some day be that officer. You need to decide first if it is worth it. Me? I'd rather make my $65k, work my 40-50 hours and have my nights and weekends with my family. I don't envy anyone making so much momey because I see how they live and prioritize. I also dont feel I deserve it. Not the life for me.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

We're not talking about people who make decent money. We're talking about people who make 15k a year at minimum wage. They weren't necessarily blessed with the same education that some of us got.

So? Neither was my friend the elevator repair guy.

He learned a trade and went to work everyday, starting exactly one weekend after High School was over. Barely 18. Now? Brings home somewhere around a hundred and a half or more, has a lovely wife, 3 kids and a nice house in the burbs.

Oh, and a cat. Can't forget the cat.

As is clearly illustrated here every day- this formal "higher" education stuff can be vastly overrated.

If you finish high school (even at a bad high school), you will have a high school diploma. With a high school diploma you can go to community college or join the military. If you are even reasonably motivated at community college or in the military, you will have a marketable skill set.

Everyone (rich, poor, urban, rural) has those opportunities. Arguing otherwise is a lie.

You are making excuses for people who don't value education, don't work hard at it and make poor life decisions.

(10-28-2013 08:15 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:09 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:07 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:30 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:25 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  well then work your a$$ off to be one of the corporate officers then. you have the same opportunity, know?

Same opportunity if you're competing against people of the same SES.

I guarantee you if put in your 100 hour weeks, live at the office, and lead a pretty miserable life without family and work-life balance, you will some day be that officer. You need to decide first if it is worth it. Me? I'd rather make my $65k, work my 40-50 hours and have my nights and weekends with my family. I don't envy anyone making so much momey because I see how they live and prioritize. I also dont feel I deserve it. Not the life for me.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

We're not talking about people who make decent money. We're talking about people who make 15k a year at minimum wage. They weren't necessarily blessed with the same education that some of us got.

So? Neither was my friend the elevator repair guy.

He learned a trade and went to work everyday, starting exactly one weekend after High School was over. Barely 18. Now? Brings home somewhere around a hundred and a half or more, has a lovely wife, 3 kids and a nice house in the burbs.

Oh, and a cat. Can't forget the cat.

As is clearly illustrated here every day- this formal "higher" education stuff can be vastly overrated.

That's cool and all, but for every success story, there are dozens of people who go nowhere.

(10-28-2013 08:23 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:15 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:09 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:07 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:30 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Same opportunity if you're competing against people of the same SES.

I guarantee you if put in your 100 hour weeks, live at the office, and lead a pretty miserable life without family and work-life balance, you will some day be that officer. You need to decide first if it is worth it. Me? I'd rather make my $65k, work my 40-50 hours and have my nights and weekends with my family. I don't envy anyone making so much momey because I see how they live and prioritize. I also dont feel I deserve it. Not the life for me.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

We're not talking about people who make decent money. We're talking about people who make 15k a year at minimum wage. They weren't necessarily blessed with the same education that some of us got.

So? Neither was my friend the elevator repair guy.

He learned a trade and went to work everyday, starting exactly one weekend after High School was over. Barely 18. Now? Brings home somewhere around a hundred and a half or more, has a lovely wife, 3 kids and a nice house in the burbs.

Oh, and a cat. Can't forget the cat.

As is clearly illustrated here every day- this formal "higher" education stuff can be vastly overrated.

If you finish high school (even at a bad high school), you will have a high school diploma. With a high school diploma you can go to community college or join the military. If you are even reasonably motivated at community college or in the military, you will have a marketable skill set.

Everyone (rich, poor, urban, rural) has those opportunities. Arguing otherwise is a lie.

You are making excuses for people who don't value education, don't work hard at it and make poor life decisions.

How many inner city children are finishing high school?

(10-28-2013 08:24 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:15 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:09 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:07 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:30 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Same opportunity if you're competing against people of the same SES.

I guarantee you if put in your 100 hour weeks, live at the office, and lead a pretty miserable life without family and work-life balance, you will some day be that officer. You need to decide first if it is worth it. Me? I'd rather make my $65k, work my 40-50 hours and have my nights and weekends with my family. I don't envy anyone making so much momey because I see how they live and prioritize. I also dont feel I deserve it. Not the life for me.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

We're not talking about people who make decent money. We're talking about people who make 15k a year at minimum wage. They weren't necessarily blessed with the same education that some of us got.

So? Neither was my friend the elevator repair guy.

He learned a trade and went to work everyday, starting exactly one weekend after High School was over. Barely 18. Now? Brings home somewhere around a hundred and a half or more, has a lovely wife, 3 kids and a nice house in the burbs.

Oh, and a cat. Can't forget the cat.

As is clearly illustrated here every day- this formal "higher" education stuff can be vastly overrated.

That's cool and all, but for every success story, there are dozens of people who go nowhere.

(10-28-2013 08:23 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:15 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:09 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 08:07 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  I guarantee you if put in your 100 hour weeks, live at the office, and lead a pretty miserable life without family and work-life balance, you will some day be that officer. You need to decide first if it is worth it. Me? I'd rather make my $65k, work my 40-50 hours and have my nights and weekends with my family. I don't envy anyone making so much momey because I see how they live and prioritize. I also dont feel I deserve it. Not the life for me.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

We're not talking about people who make decent money. We're talking about people who make 15k a year at minimum wage. They weren't necessarily blessed with the same education that some of us got.

So? Neither was my friend the elevator repair guy.

He learned a trade and went to work everyday, starting exactly one weekend after High School was over. Barely 18. Now? Brings home somewhere around a hundred and a half or more, has a lovely wife, 3 kids and a nice house in the burbs.

Oh, and a cat. Can't forget the cat.

As is clearly illustrated here every day- this formal "higher" education stuff can be vastly overrated.

If you finish high school (even at a bad high school), you will have a high school diploma. With a high school diploma you can go to community college or join the military. If you are even reasonably motivated at community college or in the military, you will have a marketable skill set.

Everyone (rich, poor, urban, rural) has those opportunities. Arguing otherwise is a lie.

You are making excuses for people who don't value education, don't work hard at it and make poor life decisions.

How many inner city children are finishing high school?

You won't make that happen by throwing more money at inner city schools. You won't - if the motivation isn't there - money won't matter.

Schools most often can't fix a sh!tty home life - some, but not most.

(10-28-2013 08:22 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 07:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 04:29 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  What happens when you are on the other side of the equation and have no options? It's not so simple and that attitude has alienated millions of Americans from the Republican Party, which, believe it or not, was not founded on the ideals of greed and rampant abuse. Believe it or not, the party was founded on the idea that an honest day's work deserves an honest day's pay.

What options does Wal-Mart have?

The person making $8/hour is there because $8/hour is an honest day's pay for what that worker can do. He/she lacks the skills to do an honest day's work worth more than that. Is Wal-Mart supposed to pay people what those people are worth, or is it somehow supposed to pay them vastly more than they are worth, in order that some artificially imposed "honest day's pay" standard can be met?

This is what is wrong with the left. The left does not think through the implications of their pet policies on the suppliers/providers of the world.

Interestingly enough Henry Ford himself would most likely agree with me.

The goal should be to pay the employees as much as you can.

Henry Ford would've laughed at "pay employees as much as you can." Henry Ford paid what he did to keep employees from leaving and to reduce absenteeism because turnover was bad. To run a production line people had to have your assembly line workers actually show up. The pay increase had nothing to do with benevolence or so that they could buy his cars. That's a myth embraced by the left.

In Ford's plants to get the sum total of $5 a day you had to abide by very strict rules (show up on time, work all day, and not miss work). a portion of a worker's $5 a day was only earned if they followed the rules. If tey didn't comply with the rules they didn't get the bonus.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/tim...100016570/