The Watering Hole

Politics
273 posts
http://topinfopost.com/2014/06/30/ultra-rich-mans-letter-to-my-fellow-filthy-rich-americans-the-pitchforks-are-coming

I have been making this exact argument for a while:
We rich people have been falsely persuaded by our schooling and the affirmation of society, and have convinced ourselves, that we are the main job creators. It’s simply not true. There can never be enough super-rich Americans to power a great economy. I earn about 1,000 times the median American annually, but I don’t buy thousands of times more stuff. My family purchased three cars over the past few years, not 3,000. I buy a few pairs of pants and a few shirts a year, just like most American men. I bought two pairs of the fancy wool pants I am wearing as I write, what my partner Mike calls my “manager pants.” I guess I could have bought 1,000 pairs. But why would I? Instead, I sock my extra money away in savings, where it doesn’t do the country much good.
Seems to me like this article is a bit one sided. Makes sense, but higher wages forced on companies like Walmart etc will surely also have negative effects. Right? And I'm not so sure putting more money in these uneducated people's hand will do them that much good. I think our schools should be training our children how to handle money. Until then, i'd be in favor of companies making handling money be part of their training. You can give many uneducated people $500,000 and that shit would be gone in a year or 2 and they'd be right back to where they started. Not much will ever take the place of education. Interesting read.



Maybe when that happens and Big Macs go on sale for $14 each to make up for the added cost then fewer people will buy them and opt for healthier food.
There's two things being missed by that guy's article.  One is that having the rich buy 3000 times as much is NOT what creates the jobs, having them invest in companies and provide working capital, especially for small business, is.  The other is that giving the lowest workers a lot more money is also not the answer since (as Hook pointed out), these people really don't know how to manage money and would soon be back in the poor house.  What needs to happen is that the huge wage discrepancies between the lowest paid workers and the highest paid (CEO's, etc.) needs to come back to what it used to be.

Just like a low-wage worker can't really understand how to think big like a CEO, those at the top really don't know how the bottom wage earners think.

I do give him props for making the effort though.

Another thing that wasn't addressed is how a huge percentage of the decline in the middle class since 2008 had to come when the banks, which people are supposed to trust, basically stole so much property and financial assets.  Since it happened to me, I've talked with dozens of others that used to have decent income, jobs (directors, VP's, senior positions, etc.) and retirement assets, that are all starting over.  Banks are not supposed to own any real estate but they ended up owning 1/3 of the houses in the U.S. by the end of their pilfering.  I would have definitely liked to go after THEM with a pitchfork, but I couldn't afford one...
I've never understood why people don't see saving or investing as buying something.

it's not like they lock up your "money" and wait for you to come get it back when you take it to a bank.

"I sock my extra money away in savings, where it doesn’t do the country much good." <-- would be a better argument if it was "I incinerate my extra money, so it doesn’t do the country much good."

but ultra rich douchebags don't do that, do they? no, they buy things! like shares in money market funds, bonds, politicians etc... or they, more likely, hand it off to some manager at a hedge fund to do the buying for them.

the wealth they accumulated isn't removed from the system.

but really, if this guy is so horribly burdened by his wealth, he should shed himself of it. give it away. otherwise, he should just fuck off. I'm sure he thinks he's bought himself some insurance with that article... a little "hey, see, I'm on your side serfs! don't come after me! go for someone else first!". sad that it will likely work. after all, you don't have to be faster than the bear... just faster than the other guy running from the bear.
He should just "fuck off".  ;D ;D That was great.

I happen to be a little sick of people bashing the rich. Yes, they are rich and they live in a completely different world. However, I wish I was one of those fuckers. Rich people are not the enemy people. Taxing them more isn't the answer because our government can't manage money any better than the poor.  

My suggestion, since we're talking about such a small group of people, is that they be given a few choices of what to do with X amount of their money. One, send as many kids to college as the figure X will allow. Or, donate to some research in the medical field or altenative form of energy, or three, fund some projects to fix our goddamn roads.... cause all that money that was suppose to be used to fix roads, remember, vanished, I guess. Or, make up something yourself.

And lets face it, we have a shit load of lazy fucks in the U.S. You want proof, look at all the foreigners working in your part of the world. They didn't take those jobs from Americans.

It would help everyone, getting on a little rant here, sorry, if our government would stay the fuck out of the worlds business as well. If we go back to Iraq, Obama, congress, and the senate, should be put on the front lines.
Hookbender — Jul 08, 2014 I wish I was one of those fuckers.


S'why change will take much more pain, and it will be doled out like a weak paycheck
Jeez. English please.
I guess I'm saying that I don't see the pitchforks
there won't be any pitchforks. the american public lives in a dream world.
The American dream
Fork 'em if they can't take a joke?  :D
CraigBert — Jul 08, 2014Another thing that wasn't addressed is how a huge percentage of the decline in the middle class since 2008 had to come when the banks, which people are supposed to trust, basically stole so much property and financial assets.  Since it happened to me, I've talked with dozens of others that used to have decent income, jobs (directors, VP's, senior positions, etc.) and retirement assets, that are all starting over.  Banks are not supposed to own any real estate but they ended up owning 1/3 of the houses in the U.S. by the end of their pilfering.  I would have definitely liked to go after THEM with a pitchfork, but I couldn't afford one...


How did they steal from you?
probably wasn't technically stealing... you'd need rule of law for that to matter anyway, so, kinda moot.

but, his situation was probably like the real estate version of a margin call, I'd guess.
Hookbender — Jul 08, 2014Seems to me like this article is a bit one sided. Makes sense, but higher wages forced on companies like Walmart etc will surely also have negative effects. Right? And I'm not so sure putting more money in these uneducated people's hand will do them that much good. I think our schools should be training our children how to handle money. Until then, i'd be in favor of companies making handling money be part of their training. You can give many uneducated people $500,000 and that shit would be gone in a year or 2 and they'd be right back to where they started. Not much will ever take the place of education. Interesting read.


So basically, you think that if people made $15 an hour, they wouldn't know what to do with it?  I have a friend who is 40, single, works full time as a butcher, and makes $11 an hour. Her monthly take home pay is around $1400.  She shares a house with three other people, and pays $900 for rent.  She gets federal assistance, without it she would not be able to pay for everything she needs to live.  That a person can be employed full time and not be able to afford to live without federal assistance is the root of the problem.

WalMart is the nation's largest employer, and their employees take home an average of $1000 in federal aid each.  As the article points out, walmart could pay a million workers $10,000 more per year and still make 15 billion in profit per year.  

It strikes me as odd that not one of you thinks that the minimum wage being higher would be a good thing, even with all the arguments made.  We've done it in California, and the article points to the highest job growth areas of Seattle and San Francisco, where the minimum wage is even higher.  

I think that everyone cares too much about the rich keeping their money.  I felt like this guy was an ass when I read the first few paragraphs too.  My instinct was to think, ok, give some of that money away, asshole.  But that's not the point; the point is paying more to the poor and middle class benefits everyone. The rich are richer than ever, fewer people control more wealth than ever, and this is absolutely not sustainable.  Eventually fewer and fewer people will be able to buy the products that keep these companies growing and rolling in dough. The consumer base will be so narrow that these companies will start making 10 or 15 billion less per year anyway, without any benefit to anyone... And eventually they will collapse.  That's how it works. There aren't enough rich people out there to support the system, especially because they don't consume enough.  Sure, they invest in the stock market.  When's the last time that benefited the poor or middle class?  Most people don't even own stock in anything.  Most money made in the stock market goes to the same people who already have money.  

I'd suggest reading the article again without your political filter.  Look at the raw numbers and think about the possibility that some rich people will make less, versus the possibility that everyone will make nothing.  We're looking at a reality that is destined for collapse.
What's the rebuttal to this? Is this not true?

If workers have more money, businesses have more customers. Which makes middle-class consumers, not rich businesspeople like us, the true job creators. Which means a thriving middle class is the source of American prosperity, not a consequence of it. The middle class creates us rich people, not the other way around.
"That a person can be employed full time and not be able to afford to live without federal assistance is the root of the problem."

I disagree, I think that is only a symptom of the problem.

if that person's wage is raised by law and not by value added, then the cost is borne elsewhere. elsewhere, as it turns out, is mostly the same people who's wages were raised as they suffer disproportionately from cost-push inflation.

I do agree that "full time poverty" is an absurd reality of our day, absolutely. but if the minimum wage were the answer, wouldn't it have worked already? the situation has not improved.

it would be better to repeal the payroll tax, while continuing to credit social security "accounts" based on earnings instead. there's no good reason why a minimum wage earner should be paying FICA taxes at all.

on another note, but related:

If you're feeling economically open-minded, or "liberal"... heh, I highly suggest you guys read some Bastiat. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/That_Which_Is_Seen,_and_That_Which_Is_Not_Seen

relevant to this discussion and I think you might get something out of it... if only minor mental exercise.
charger — Jul 09, 2014[quote author=Hookbender link=1404776484/0#1 date=1404786206]Seems to me like this article is a bit one sided. Makes sense, but higher wages forced on companies like Walmart etc will surely also have negative effects. Right? And I'm not so sure putting more money in these uneducated people's hand will do them that much good. I think our schools should be training our children how to handle money. Until then, i'd be in favor of companies making handling money be part of their training. You can give many uneducated people $500,000 and that shit would be gone in a year or 2 and they'd be right back to where they started. Not much will ever take the place of education. Interesting read.


So basically, you think that if people made $15 an hour, they wouldn't know what to do with it?  I have a friend who is 40, single, works full time as a butcher, and makes $11 an hour. Her monthly take home pay is around $1400.  She shares a house with three other people, and pays $900 for rent.  She gets federal assistance, without it she would not be able to pay for everything she needs to live.  That a person can be employed full time and not be able to afford to live without federal assistance is the root of the problem.

WalMart is the nation's largest employer, and their employees take home an average of $1000 in federal aid each.  As the article points out, walmart could pay a million workers $10,000 more per year and still make 15 billion in profit per year.  

It strikes me as odd that not one of you thinks that the minimum wage being higher would be a good thing, even with all the arguments made.  We've done it in California, and the article points to the highest job growth areas of Seattle and San Francisco, where the minimum wage is even higher.  

I think that everyone cares too much about the rich keeping their money.  I felt like this guy was an ass when I read the first few paragraphs too.  My instinct was to think, ok, give some of that money away, asshole.  But that's not the point; the point is paying more to the poor and middle class benefits everyone. The rich are richer than ever, fewer people control more wealth than ever, and this is absolutely not sustainable.  Eventually fewer and fewer people will be able to buy the products that keep these companies growing and rolling in dough. The consumer base will be so narrow that these companies will start making 10 or 15 billion less per year anyway, without any benefit to anyone... And eventually they will collapse.  That's how it works. There aren't enough rich people out there to support the system, especially because they don't consume enough.  Sure, they invest in the stock market.  When's the last time that benefited the poor or middle class?  Most people don't even own stock in anything.  Most money made in the stock market goes to the same people who already have money.  

I'd suggest reading the article again without your political filter.  Look at the raw numbers and think about the possibility that some rich people will make less, versus the possibility that everyone will make nothing.  We're looking at a reality that is destined for collapse.

I'm saying, basically, not in a insulting way, that the person is who they are man. It just won't help much. It will only burden employers with higher payroll, imo. These people made poor decisions to be in the position their in. They, themselves, and their position, is evidence of that. You know, it's odd that people that have no job, and are living solely on funds from government, can afford a pack of cigs or so a day at what, $4 to $8 bucks depending on where you live, isn't it? Poor decision making, lack of education, maybe screwed up horrible family life.... whatever, these people are the victims of, probably their parents. It would seem that we could change the pattern somehow. Anyway, their decision making won't get better because they have more money to mishandle, that was my point. And if your friend has that much trouble living in the area she does, maybe she should relocate, cause she can't afford to live there.... (I'm assuming it's California) She could easily live on that in Alabama, for example.  ;D

Min wage?? Higher? That it needs to be considered is kinda scary to me.

This collapse thing has been discussed for years. I think I accidentally  come across it in an article once a year or so.

All this makes since but their are so many other variables  to consider.

Our government can't and doesn't handle money well. They overspend. They go without budgets for years at a time, and when they do have a budget, they ignore it and just take more from the taxpayers. Notice I said take, not borrow. They took all this money, wasn't it 800 Billion or something to fix roads and bridges, last I read, not even half that money went for the intended purpose. So governments stupidity, the people that are really stupid and unlawful pricks that steal and lie, fuck up and the next thing that happens is the innocent, in this case the taxpayers, have to pay the price, be punished, for the wrong-doers actions. They get taxed more. So if you raise the min wage, the employers get punished for the people who made some poor decisions, or whatever.  So they have to pay people who make poor decisions even more money to make poor decisions in their business. ;D It's just a bandage, in my opinion. These people need a high school education, then college. They need to be given a plan with achievable goals to work their way out of their current situation. Help them that way, thats what I think, which doesn't mean much but hey, just giving my opinion. Throwing money at problems doesn't always work. If you came to me and said a plan is in the working to help these people in the ways i mentioned, but until then, we need to help these folks out, then you get the benefit of the doubt, maybe. But that would be honesty, can't have that in politics can we.  :)


When they all get educated there will be no more low wage jobs!!!  heh heh

Yup, still not seeing any pitchforks yet!  Give it time
Hookbender — Jul 09, 2014

I'm saying, basically, not in a insulting way, that the person is who they are man. It just won't help much. It will only burden employers with higher payroll, imo. These people made poor decisions to be in the position their in. They, themselves, and their position, is evidence of that. You know, it's odd that people that have no job, and are living solely on funds from government, can afford a pack of cigs or so a day at what, $4 to $8 bucks depending on where you live, isn't it? Poor decision making, lack of education, maybe screwed up horrible family life.... whatever, these people are the victims of, probably their parents. It would seem that we could change the pattern somehow. Anyway, their decision making won't get better because they have more money to mishandle, that was my point. And if your friend has that much trouble living in the area she does, maybe she should relocate, cause she can't afford to live there.... (I'm assuming it's California) She could easily live on that in Alabama, for example.  ;D


You play with the team that you have, not the team you wish you had.  I'd love to go back and educate everyone who's 40 and undereducated, and counsel everyone who was raised in a negledctful or abusive home, or raised poor and living from crime to crime.  That would be nice.  But we play with the team we have.

Yeah, maybe she should move out of California because it's expensive. But even if she moves, someone is still going to have to take that $11/hour job.  Those low-wage jobs are out there.  They must get filled.  Even in places where it is expensive to live.  $15/hour doesn't seem unreasonable to me.  I'm not sure what part of the argument people don't get.  You pay more, there is more money to spend, for the people who actually spend all of their money.
Glad you got my point. And I get yours.

I've given you a reason. You ignored it. Here's another one. If we do exactly what you say to do, and the people do exactly what you said they would do, then the cycle starts again from there. It never ends. Throwing education at these problems instead of money, teaching these people how they can work themselves out of poverty, teaching children how to handle money, budgets, fucking MATH, etc, will have a way more sustainable and beneficial result in the long run than giving people more money that are clearly incapable of making consistent decisions with what they have. And to go off the deep end a touch, I'd be in favor of our military taking out gangs here. Get the neighborhoods safe no matter the cost of the dwellings within. It's easier to learn knowing your chances of getting killed on the way home just dropped 90%.
Unless you killed by the military on yer way home...
[quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1404776484/0#18 date=1404945928]When they all get educated there will be no more low wage jobs!!!  heh heh

Yup, still not seeing any pitchforks yet!  Give it time
charger — Jul 10, 2014[quote author=Hookbender link=1404776484/0#17 date=1404945002]

$15/hour doesn't seem unreasonable to me.  I'm not sure what part of the argument people don't get.  You pay more, there is more money to spend, for the people who actually spend all of their money.


Where are most small business owners supposed to get that extra money to give to their employees?  I know of several up here that are barely surviving now and there are basically two ways to recoup that extra money:  Drastically raise prices on whatever they sell or have fewer employees.  If that happens, then the only way to make that extra wage worth it is to go to places that might not raise their prices as much (like WalMart).  Otherwise, it's just a form of inflation.

@Binge - I'll get back to your question from several posts back in a bit, way too busy to post much right now!
Hookbender — Jul 11, 2014Are you suggesting that no matter how educated one is, the same % of people would make the same % of stupid decisions?


Are the stupid desicions working for companies that pay low wages and then buying things that you deem "wrong" for them to buy?

Do you see a raise to a living wage as a gift for people who were "given" jobs in the first place?

Do you see yourself getting a raise as a gift?
BINGEWOOD — Jul 11, 2014[quote author=Hookbender link=1404776484/0#22 date=1405042050]Are you suggesting that no matter how educated one is, the same % of people would make the same % of stupid decisions?


Are the stupid desicions working for companies that pay low wages and then buying things that you deem "wrong" for them to buy?

Do you see a raise to a living wage as a gift for people who were "given" jobs in the first place?

Do you see yourself getting a raise as a gift?


#1- No

#2- I'll need you to clarify this question before I answer. I don't want to guess where your going on this one.

#3- Yes and No.
Not exactly going anywhere but you keep talking like people who do jobs that don't pay well, yet are needed, have made bad decisions.  I have heard people who make this "point" talk about people being "given" jobs as if the employers just feel as though they want have more people around.  Jobs are brought by customers but pay is not always reflected when the company succeeds.  Certain businesses can keep wages low after they "outcompete" most other local business and destroy the work market in an area.  And in Walmart's case, they can accept food stamps from their employees at the company store just as easily as their paychecks.  Old skoo econ...
Do you know anyone that while growing up they wanted to be a janitor, or drive a garbage truck, or be a cashier for walmart? Decisions they made prior to this situation resulted in them taking such a job. If you simply went to the projects and took every adult away from that place and made them work for 8 to 10 hours a day to earn what they get for free, the world would be a better place for it. In my opinion, everyone without jobs would work for the military. Maybe not in a combat situation, but they could do something. I think everyone should do at least 2 years in the military, again, maybe not in a combat situation, but still do the time. Before entering the work force. Americans are spoiled. they KNOW the government will take care of their basic needs for them. They need to know that they have to earn taxpayers money.
HAHAHAHHHAHAHA!!!

WALLLY!!!! WALLLY!!! WALLLY!!!


oh boy
Why is it that every time I think I have an extra dollar, I get a bill for two dollars?  The math never adds up.  You plan for an expense, and it always seems that the projected expense has grown by a little more than one could have projected.

The cost of running a business seems to get larger and larger.  I honestly don't think my customers can absorb the cost of raised prices that cover the county business tax, the city business tax, the self employment tax, the state sales tax, etc. etc.

It's fucked up.  I use to think I had a shot at making money.  I sometimes think now I have a better shot at reaching poverty. ;D

Sorry, I got some tax bills today. :D

On another note, How many of you know someone that these "Poor" decisions have touched your lives?  Do any of you know anyone that took a gun and shot their family, and then themselves?  Or, someone that jumped off of a bridge.  It used to be that you hear something like that and it was always far away from you.

I knew them pretty well, and know they were pretty well educated.  They still lost their jobs by someones "Poor" decisions.  Education didn't save them.

I usually try to stay out of here, but it I feel it.

I guess they call some jobs "thankless" for a reason... sheesh.

it would totally suck if no one picked up the trash or cleaned public toilets.

those people make modern life possible by doing that work - hard, dirty but honest work. and they are regarded as poor decision makers? that's the real spoiled american attitude right there.

and re: earning taxpayers' money - let's start with the biggest welfare queens first, ok? tip: they're on wall street.
Hey, There is always an upside.  

"I'd like to play a new song from new album, "Esteem From a Fortune 500 Ponzi Scheme".  It's called, "I Sold My WIC Cheese To Afford The Bullets". ;D
Hookbender — Jul 11, 2014Do you know anyone that while growing up they wanted to be a janitor, or drive a garbage truck, or be a cashier for walmart? Decisions they made prior to this situation resulted in them taking such a job. If you simply went to the projects and took every adult away from that place and made them work for 8 to 10 hours a day to earn what they get for free, the world would be a better place for it. In my opinion, everyone without jobs would work for the military. Maybe not in a combat situation, but they could do something. I think everyone should do at least 2 years in the military, again, maybe not in a combat situation, but still do the time. Before entering the work force. Americans are spoiled. they KNOW the government will take care of their basic needs for them. They need to know that they have to earn taxpayers money.


It doesn't matter what decisions made people get where they are.  There are simply not high paying jobs for everyone.  Would you be happier if everyone had a college degree, and then your cashier at McDonald's had a BA?  Because there will always be low wage jobs, service jobs, garbage men, janitors, and they will always make up a large portion of our economy.  Why not have those people make a living wage?  I know plenty of people who are highly educated who can't land high paying jobs because high paying jobs are competitive, or those people's skills are a few years out of date, or those people are older and deemed less desirable to hire.  Shit happens.  There are many reasons a person might end up working in a low paying job.  Not the least of which is, we need people to work in those jobs.  

Also, every person can't serve in the military.  There aren't even close to enough spots in it.  There is no way any Congress would ever approve the amount of money and benefits that would cost, nor should they.
DM — Jul 11, 2014Why is it that every time I think I have an extra dollar, I get a bill for two dollars?  The math never adds up.  You plan for an expense, and it always seems that the projected expense has grown by a little more than one could have projected.

The cost of running a business seems to get larger and larger.  I honestly don't think my customers can absorb the cost of raised prices that cover the county business tax, the city business tax, the self employment tax, the state sales tax, etc. etc.

It's fucked up.  I use to think I had a shot at making money.  I sometimes think now I have a better shot at reaching poverty. ;D

Sorry, I got some tax bills today. :D

On another note, How many of you know someone that these "Poor" decisions have touched your lives?  Do any of you know anyone that took a gun and shot their family, and then themselves?  Or, someone that jumped off of a bridge.  It used to be that you hear something like that and it was always far away from you.

I knew them pretty well, and know they were pretty well educated.  They still lost their jobs by someones "Poor" decisions.  Education didn't save them.

I usually try to stay out of here, but it I feel it.



I've seen both sides of this in the last year.  First, a first-grade teacher at my daughter's school, making barely anything... she's a teacher, killed herself.

On the other side, if you've seen the news, you've seen the good decisions rich people make.  That Santa Cruz executive from Google? Who OD'ed on heroin administered by his high-priced call girl, aboard his fucking 50-foot yacht?  A parent of a girl in my other daughter's class.  There's no guarantee that being poor or rich means you make good decisions.
charger — Jul 11, 2014[quote author=Hookbender link=1404776484/25#27 date=1405046737]Do you know anyone that while growing up they wanted to be a janitor, or drive a garbage truck, or be a cashier for walmart? Decisions they made prior to this situation resulted in them taking such a job. If you simply went to the projects and took every adult away from that place and made them work for 8 to 10 hours a day to earn what they get for free, the world would be a better place for it. In my opinion, everyone without jobs would work for the military. Maybe not in a combat situation, but they could do something. I think everyone should do at least 2 years in the military, again, maybe not in a combat situation, but still do the time. Before entering the work force. Americans are spoiled. they KNOW the government will take care of their basic needs for them. They need to know that they have to earn taxpayers money.


It doesn't matter what decisions made people get where they are.  There are simply not high paying jobs for everyone.  Would you be happier if everyone had a college degree, and then your cashier at McDonald's had a BA?  Because there will always be low wage jobs, service jobs, garbage men, janitors, and they will always make up a large portion of our economy.  Why not have those people make a living wage?  I know plenty of people who are highly educated who can't land high paying jobs because high paying jobs are competitive, or those people's skills are a few years out of date, or those people are older and deemed less desirable to hire.  Shit happens.  There are many reasons a person might end up working in a low paying job.  Not the least of which is, we need people to work in those jobs.  

Also, every person can't serve in the military.  There aren't even close to enough spots in it.  There is no way any Congress would ever approve the amount of money and benefits that would cost, nor should they.

It damn sure does make a difference, the decisions people make..... when you make people who worked hard and made good decisions and started a business have to pay for the bad decisions. That's what your doing. It's almost another form of government assistance put squarely on the back of the middle class, small business owner. It's counter productive. And the small increase in salary is a band aid, not a solution to the problem.

I never said their wouldn't be low paying jobs, you can argue that with yourself, but I don't think I'll participate in that part.
charger — Jul 11, 2014[quote author=DM link=1404776484/25#29 date=1405049165]Why is it that every time I think I have an extra dollar, I get a bill for two dollars?  The math never adds up.  You plan for an expense, and it always seems that the projected expense has grown by a little more than one could have projected.

The cost of running a business seems to get larger and larger.  I honestly don't think my customers can absorb the cost of raised prices that cover the county business tax, the city business tax, the self employment tax, the state sales tax, etc. etc.

It's fucked up.  I use to think I had a shot at making money.  I sometimes think now I have a better shot at reaching poverty. ;D

Sorry, I got some tax bills today. :D

On another note, How many of you know someone that these "Poor" decisions have touched your lives?  Do any of you know anyone that took a gun and shot their family, and then themselves?  Or, someone that jumped off of a bridge.  It used to be that you hear something like that and it was always far away from you.

I knew them pretty well, and know they were pretty well educated.  They still lost their jobs by someones "Poor" decisions.  Education didn't save them.

I usually try to stay out of here, but it I feel it.



I've seen both sides of this in the last year.  First, a first-grade teacher at my daughter's school, making barely anything... she's a teacher, killed herself.

On the other side, if you've seen the news, you've seen the good decisions rich people make.  That Santa Cruz executive from Google? Who OD'ed on heroin administered by his high-priced call girl, aboard his fucking 50-foot yacht?  A parent of a girl in my other daughter's class.  There's no guarantee that being poor or rich means you make good decisions.


Never said that either. I'm saying that if your 35 years old, and your working at BK, you probably made bad decisions. Sure, their are other circumstances.

A teacher killed herself because she didn't make much money?

Education probably won't save people from killing themselves, if they have mental problems. Jeez people.
[quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1404776484/25#28 date=1405047537]HAHAHAHHHAHAHA!!!

WALLLY!!!! WALLLY!!! WALLLY!!!


oh boy
It's pretty easy to understand.  I mean, you did blame garbage men and janitors for being unawesome, and having crappy jobs.  You're essentially telling people that they are inferior if they do crappy jobs.  But someone needs to do them.  You seriously don't see a problem with WalMart making 25 billion in profit a year while 80% of their workforce qualifies for food stamps or other welfare?
[quote author=Hookbender link=1404776484/25#36 date=1405113652][quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1404776484/25#28 date=1405047537]HAHAHAHHHAHAHA!!!

WALLLY!!!! WALLLY!!! WALLLY!!!


oh boy
charger — Jul 11, 2014It's pretty easy to understand.  I mean, you did blame garbage men and janitors for being unawesome, and having crappy jobs.  You're essentially telling people that they are inferior if they do crappy jobs.  But someone needs to do them.  You seriously don't see a problem with WalMart making 25 billion in profit a year while 80% of their workforce qualifies for food stamps or other welfare?


I wouldn't use the word blame. I USED the phrase, most of those people made bad decisions to put them in that situation. It's not about blame, it's reality. See, I think that if you work for Walmart, and you make $300 less than you need a month, you might need 2 jobs. I understand what Walmart has done. I appreciate such success. Target too. I worked for grocery stores for years. They hope to make 2% profit per location. And that isn't always the case. It takes a lot of people to run a grocery store, but not a lot of smarts. A grocery store hoping to make 2% profit gets hit with and extra $5 bucks and hour, per person, can make a huge difference. Walmart employs a huge number of people. No one is forcing these people to work for Walmart. So, why don't they quit and get a better job? These types chains, Walmart, Lowes, Target, etc. are constantly looking for good store managers and co mgrs. They like to promote from within. They could even better themselves in their low paying job in time..... if they have the smarts to do it. Very few do, believe it or not. Point is, if you have the drive and brains enough to better yourself, even at Walmart, it's possible. But again, most don't. Hell yes, $5 bucks more an hour would make a difference to the people that would receive it, yes it would. However, it isn't gonna change anything. We need to change the patterns.

We are always gonna have a low paying job, agreed. But hopefully, our goal is to have as many people employed as possible, and as many people self sufficient as possible. We aren't gonna have to many absolutes, and we probably won't ever see the entire population employed, but that's the goal.

It's sad but from my experience working for big chain grocery stores, ole Walmart is partly educating their people in many ways. Seriously.

Nothing wrong with aspiring to have the best out of everyone, as long as the best from a person is being a garbage man. And, it's sad that their are people in horible living conditions that want to do better and have the ability, but just don't know how to do it. Just not able to make even a simple list of goals and understand the importance of reaching them. I bet the leader of some gang or whatever wished like hell he owned a business or whatever and lived like the 1% did, legally. Then he wouldn't have to worry about being killed 24-7. He just didn't have the smarts to do it. So, he's in the 1%, but can't enjoy it.  ;D

Just some thoughts.


[quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1404776484/25#38 date=1405119574][quote author=Hookbender link=1404776484/25#36 date=1405113652][quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1404776484/25#28 date=1405047537]HAHAHAHHHAHAHA!!!

WALLLY!!!! WALLLY!!! WALLLY!!!


oh boy
C'mon man, I'm sure you can think of at least one
So whats your point?
My point?
Yes, your point. Are you trolling? Just being an ass? Do you have something to say? I know you can post in a way that people can understand, I've seen you do it.  :D
Here is one reason I don't have a problem with Walmart posting large profits.

http://www.celebuzz.com/2014-07-12/tracy-morgan-has-sued-walmart-over-fatal-car-accident/

So, you can bank money to fend off shit loads of lawsuits, lagit and not, or you can go out of business when one of these lawsuits stick. What do you want? Slips and falls are a huge, if not the biggest, risk for lawsuit in these type chains. They happen all the time. Not to mention the few times that a shopping cart hits a car and Walmart is help liable. These are just a few potential risks that Walmart faces everyday. Most of these chains are self insured, are they use to be.

Nothing is black and white. I think people should look at the big picture, not just the snap shots you don't like. People see the profit statements and think the company is the enemy. People don't see the huge number of people Walmart employs, or the benefits, like health insurance, that they provide. Again, no one is forced to work at Walmart. No one has to check out groceries at a register all their life and make min wage. If they work hard and learn their job, they can move up in the company and salary.

So until we have all the data to support the notion that Walmart makes to much profits, I'll have to side with Walmart. To make them do a bunch of shit that will effect their business, based on 1 sentence of data, just isn't fair or logical, reasonable, etc.
[quote author=Hookbender link=1404776484/25#40 date=1405144775][quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1404776484/25#38 date=1405119574][quote author=Hookbender link=1404776484/25#36 date=1405113652][quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1404776484/25#28 date=1405047537]HAHAHAHHHAHAHA!!!

WALLLY!!!! WALLLY!!! WALLLY!!!


oh boy
Hookbender — Jul 14, 2014Here is one reason I don't have a problem with Walmart posting large profits.

http://www.celebuzz.com/2014-07-12/tracy-morgan-has-sued-walmart-over-fatal-car-accident/

So, you can bank money to fend off shit loads of lawsuits, lagit and not, or you can go out of business when one of these lawsuits stick. What do you want? Slips and falls are a huge, if not the biggest, risk for lawsuit in these type chains. They happen all the time. Not to mention the few times that a shopping cart hits a car and Walmart is help liable. These are just a few potential risks that Walmart faces everyday. Most of these chains are self insured, are they use to be.

Nothing is black and white. I think people should look at the big picture, not just the snap shots you don't like. People see the profit statements and think the company is the enemy. People don't see the huge number of people Walmart employs, or the benefits, like health insurance, that they provide. Again, no one is forced to work at Walmart. No one has to check out groceries at a register all their life and make min wage. If they work hard and learn their job, they can move up in the company and salary.

So until we have all the data to support the notion that Walmart makes to much profits, I'll have to side with Walmart. To make them do a bunch of shit that will effect their business, based on 1 sentence of data, just isn't fair or logical, reasonable, etc.


What makes you think Walmart provides benefits?  They're notorious for employing people right around 30 hours a week, to prevent having to pay benefits.  If anyone's paying them benefits now, it's thanks to Obama and Obamacare.  And you and I are paying for those benefits.  Because they are subsidized.  Because 80% of Walmart employees have to rely on federal subsidies to survive.  You're totally defending a company whose practices, unless you believe in a massive welfare state, are the largest part of the problem.

Put another way--they make $25 billion a year.  We pay 6.2 billion in benefits to their workers. We therefore may as well be paying $6.2 billion straight to Walmart... so they can make 25 billion instead of 18.8 billion.  Keep cheering.
[quote author=Hookbender link=1404776484/25#40 date=1405144775][quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1404776484/25#38 date=1405119574][quote author=Hookbender link=1404776484/25#36 date=1405113652][quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1404776484/25#28 date=1405047537]HAHAHAHHHAHAHA!!!

WALLLY!!!! WALLLY!!! WALLLY!!!


oh boy
does Walmart paying $8b in income tax alter that $6.2b argument? you're using income before taxes right? why so? (honest question, I'm curious)