Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In reality, they are being funded and work for the big corporations, and their main goal right now is to help the mega corporations become even bigger by creating laws and regulations that smaller businesses cannot keep up with, and in turn, end up selling to the bigger corporations.
George Stigler won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1980 for, among other things, showing that governmental laws and regulations are "economic goods" in the same sense as wheat and corn in that they respond to the Laws of Supply and Demand, and that most governmental regulation exists at the request of ("demand") the companies and industries that are being regulated.
I remember one of his examples: TV advertising of cigarettes and other tobacco products. By the late 1960s, pretty much everyone knew cigarette smoking wasn't good for your health, and many (most?) believed it contributed to lung cancer. Congress held hearings regarding TV advertising of cigarettes, and in particular, how such advertising might influence teenagers and pre-teens.
The result was a ban on TV advertising of cigarettes. Richard Nixon signed into law the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act, which banned cigarette ads from airing on television and radio. The ban took effect at midnight on Jan. 2, 1971. That gave cigarette companies a final chance to advertise on TV during the New Year’s Day college football bowl games such as the Rose Bowl.
Most historians view this as a victory for public health advocates - the little guys going up against Big Tobacco. In reality, Big Tobacco had lobbied for the TV Advertising ban for years. Big Tobacco realized that TV Advertising was not particularly effective at recruiting new smokers (expanding the "pie"), but it was quite effective at shifting a smoker's brand allegiance from one brand to another (bigger slice of "the pie"). If any brand cut its TV ad budget, it quickly saw its sales drop. So it became zero-sum: every brand had to advertise on TV, but no brand benefited. The TV Networks benefited.
So, Congress paraded through the usual mix of widows and orphans of life-long smokers and passed the law. But behind the scenes, Big Tobacco lobbied hard to nix TV ads, while the TV Networks fought mightily against a TV advertising ban. Those widows and orphans offering heart-breaking testimony was just for the benefit of do-gooders and voters back home.
The end result: a one-time increase in profits and profitability of Big Tobacco as they reaped the cost savings from the ban on TV ads.
What an arrogant SOB. Maybe in the slum diner where you worked a day or two. It can be a very demanding job with quite a skillset, including multi-tasking like you wouldn't believe, all the while being pleasant and efficient. Most of you desk jockeys wouldn't last a day.
So lower-wage folks don't have the right to a living wage--"don't get to complain"? You are really up there on your high horse, Pip.
I wish people would realize that probably half the population ---including myself---may never be able to slide into a better-paying job, due to inherent lack of necessary abilities. If you don't have the mental capacity, you can't just wish yourself smarter. Someone has to do the janitor and dishwashing jobs. People can't seem to wrap their little minds around this concept.
Yet you folks on high want to deny "us" a living wage. Even in NYC, gasp, there still have to be janitors and such.
In Utah and Texas, to name just two backwater states, the wage for servers is $2.13. Hasn't changed since the 60s. So yeah, those workers rely on tips. Until the tipping system changes overall, that's just how it is. And I agree, it needs to change!
I was all about your post until you called Texas and Utah backwater states.
Whether they are or not is not the point and takes away from your otherwise good post.
It’s either NorCal or Northern California not North California, just saying if you’re into nick picking.
Well, it's nit picking, if you want to get nitpicky. Go look up what a nit is, when you have time.
As for the term, I'm sure those are what the sludge below the Bakersfield line uses for everyone above them, just as the gaseous mass around the bays thinks of them as SoCal or Southern California... and pretty much the rest of the country is only dimly aware there's life above Bakersfield in "California." (Except for the weirdos in Berkeley, wherever that is.)
Being from neither one, I prefer "North California."
Oh bull. If you can't pay your staff a living wage you don't deserve to have any staff (or any business).
No, see, "business" is an entity that is allowed to live no matter what its cost or how much acid corrosion it creates around itself, because economic Darwinism. As long as the owner thrives, all else is just sentimentalism about people who aren't really worth considering, because they weren't smart enough to start a business.
So lower-wage folks don't have the right to a living wage--"don't get to complain"? You are really up there on your high horse, Pip.
They can complain but the market is the market. There are millions of people who can wait tables. Sure there is some spread in "quality" but it's not so far apart that waiters can now demand $85,000 salaries.
If they want "better pay", they simply need to do what needs to be done to get a better job.
Likewise, no one's holding a gun to their head and saying they must be in the restaurant business. If they can find better paying employment, they are free to do so
Exactly.
I don't understand the argument, "I"ve worked at McDonalds for 15 years, and haven't gotten a pay raise and still make $12 an hour."
Really? You couldn't better yourself in over a decade? I worked 3 months at Home Depot in high school and decided at 16 I wasn't going to sell paint and push carts for a living.
They can complain but the market is the market. There are millions of people who can wait tables. Sure there is some spread in "quality" but it's not so far apart that waiters can now demand $85,000 salaries.
If they want "better pay", they simply need to do what needs to be done to get a better job.
Why should any permanent, full-time job pay less than a living wage?
To be fair it's always on the woman to not have kids. Plus birth control isn't 100% effective. But you are right - it's pretty cheap in most cases, cheaper than condoms!
My favorite picture was when they were debating woman's rights/insurance in congress. It was all old men.
On the flip side republicans aren't totally anti abortion they just don't want the federal government funding it. And there have been issues where that funding was in turn used to fund candidates to help them get elected. The founder of Planned Parenthood herself spoke of eugenics which is the selective breeding of humans to better the race.
It's just nature. Women have the choice to close their legs, or find better mates who won't bolt at the thought of having to raise their OWN kids.
Child bearing is a CHOICE. It doesn't happen by accident.
Now, you'll always have the extremely outlier argument of "What if she gets raped?!" Sure, let's fund all RAPE abortions (less than 1% of 1% of all abortions). That never satisfies the "we want free" crowd.
What is a living wage? Have you even defined it? What is your definition of living wage? Give details, not slogans.
As if you've done anything else from beneath your bridge.
It's neither a slogan nor anything that needs a huge amount of specifics.
If a person works a full-time job on a permanent basis, does it pay (in total compensation) enough for them to live on their own within reasonable commute distance? Nothing fancy assumed; just enough that they do not have continuing problems with housing, food, healthcare and transportation costs.
If that's too complicated or shouty for your Darwinian sloganeering, be sure to let me know. Use small words.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
