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.
Those customers don't "provide" for anyone. They get something in return. It's an exchange, not a charity situation. You rely on them. They rely on you.
That man should either get another job, get a better job, or go live under a bridge.
What they exchange though does provide you with what you need though.I am not going to comment about the last comment you made because I have answered that not everyone can find another better job but you seem to be ignoring it.
There are only x amount of jobs that provide that though so not everyone can be in those jobs.
And the more the leftists restrict, fine, and otherwise punish businesses, the fewer those jobs will be.
Quote:
You seem to fault people for not finding better jobs
You may be setting some kind of record, for the number of times you can be wrong in a short time.
Back to the subject: If this guy can barely support himself, or pay for health care, then why on earth is he deciding to take on the additional obligation of a family?
It is, after all, his responsibility. No one else's. And his choice.
Except for the economies of the people you took all that money from. They are well and truly screwed.
But leftists never worry about that.
What people would those be, pray tell? What people did the 768 Billion for the bailout come from? That's the money that should have gone to the people. 1k/mo x 4mo = 4K per U.S. household. I would have said 10K. There are 115 Million registered U.S. households. I don't know if thats a billion or a trillion but the Dow Jones was 14,000 two years ago. It is now around 10,000. That represents about 2 Trillion investor dollars sucked back into the pockets of the rich. Get it. We need it. They won't be screwed, that is money they were playing with. They have even more in the Cayman's and Costa Rica. Took the money from... sadly, I know you're serious.
lots of anti labor posts on CDF. what is hard for me to understand is they are working class people. when somebody gets a pay cut, they cheer. skilled labor is hated by americans and unskilled they wont do-- hire illegals to do it for them. working class people want gardeners and house keepers. bizarre.
Funny, I remember when I was a kid walking with another person my age who was running a paper route. He did this every morning before school. I remember plenty of kids who had jobs mowing lawns, shoveling snow from sidewalks on a consistent basis, etc.
I guess according to you, my reality did not happen. It was a figment of my imagination that teenagers actually once had part time jobs after school or during summer. <shrug> OK, keep revising history...
No, its not your imagination, teenagers ONCE did hold these jobs.
I know in my old neighborhood, circa prior to 1990, the paper was delivered by a kid on a bicycle. Now, that same paper is delivered by adults, and it requires a valid drivers license and possession of a vehicle.
Just go in to Walmart, take a look at the cashiers. There are almost none who are under the age of 30. Same with McDonalds. Its more common to see a 40 year old saying "Do you want fries with that?" then the stereotypical "malt shop soda jerk kid" of the past.
Teenagers these days are simply unemployed. The jobs they held in yesteryear are going to the lower rungs of the adult population now, and this will continue, until those jobs start going to people with bachelors degrees, and so on and so forth.
Maybe not cash in the specific sense, but there has to be motivation for the company to do well. The board appointees should be paid for their contribution to the company just like the laborer. This is why, as you pointed out earlier, stock options are a popular form of compensation among upper management. If you have a high degree of responsibility for the performance of the company, then a corresponding degree of ownership of said company is meant to ensure that the two parties have mutual interests at stake.
All employees would be invested in the company. They would directly benefit from every drop of sweat they dropped.
More people then jobs=someone is forced in to crap jobs, regardless of their qualifications.
As a country, and as a people, we are only going to bleed more jobs. Low cost labor will take more and more of our jobs, and robots will eventually take those, and as many of our jobs left here as possible.
Then why does even the most altruistic non-profits always complain about not having more money?
They need money because they are trying to operate a non profit in a capitalist society. Unfortunatley, even if a doctor volunteers their time, as many do, nobody is giving them free medicine, free travel, free food, free shelter, free supplies, free hospitals, free tools, free accounting, free tax preparation, free business licenses, etc.
The confused socialists would love to be able to establish some link between your own need for the basics of life (food, shelter etc.), and someone else, so that you can pretend you're not responsible for fulfilling those needs.
I agree, everyone should be responsible for filling their own needs. I just dont think someone else should have control over your ability to do so. Thats my problem.
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.
