Fast-Food Workers Strike, Protest For Higher Pay

Rak on Tur'

Active Member
so you expect these people in poverty to " not have sex" they have no money to do anything else, what are they supposed to do sit there and twiddle their thumbs? Are they supposed to afford contraceptives, and if they are able to afford contraceptives, are those 100% fail safe, sister in law got pregnant while on the pill and wearing a condom. friend got pregnant after her old man got his tubes tied, what do you say to them? How would you stop this problem, are you gonna be the sex police?
Your examples do happen, but not on some massive scale. It isn't a bad thing for people to held accountable for their actions.
 

beenthere

New Member
so you expect these people in poverty to " not have sex" they have no money to do anything else, what are they supposed to do sit there and twiddle their thumbs? Are they supposed to afford contraceptives, and if they are able to afford contraceptives, are those 100% fail safe, sister in law got pregnant while on the pill and wearing a condom. friend got pregnant after her old man got his tubes tied, what do you say to them? How would you stop this problem, are you gonna be the sex police?
It seems you and people like you, lack confidence in yourself succeeding.
There should be no law limiting Americans having children, then again, there also should be no law requiring tax payers to pay for those who have them.
 

see4

Well-Known Member
so you expect these people in poverty to " not have sex" they have no money to do anything else, what are they supposed to do sit there and twiddle their thumbs? Are they supposed to afford contraceptives, and if they are able to afford contraceptives, are those 100% fail safe, sister in law got pregnant while on the pill and wearing a condom. friend got pregnant after her old man got his tubes tied, what do you say to them? How would you stop this problem, are you gonna be the sex police?
There are outreach programs all over the place providing free condoms to those who need it, as well as free needles.

But the brutal answer is, yes, if you are so poor that you can barely fend for yourself, you should be extremely mindful of having sex in the fear you might get pregnant. If you are a fertile individual you should consider abstinence. If you do not choose these things, continue to have sex, get pregnant and have children, you should not expect the government to foot the bill for your extremely misguided actions.

That is very different than saying, the government should not take care of woman with a child or two or three that was recently divorced or husband was killed or whatever, and now they are left alone to fend for themselves and their children. In that situation, I would agree that government should provide for her.

But in the circumstance outlined in the video, no, the government should laugh at her, turn her around, and boot her out the door. Brutal, I know. But that's life.
 

see4

Well-Known Member
Why are we basing "a living wage" off of a 40 hour work week anyway?

Who wrote that book?
What do you consider an average work week?

But for the sake of knowledge, a 40 hour work week is a state regulation, and I think at the federal level, hourly employees are required certain rights, such as break times and overtime rates, based on a 40 hour work week.
 

Hazydat620

Well-Known Member
There are outreach programs all over the place providing free condoms to those who need it, as well as free needles.

But the brutal answer is, yes, if you are so poor that you can barely fend for yourself, you should be extremely mindful of having sex in the fear you might get pregnant. If you are a fertile individual you should consider abstinence. If you do not choose these things, continue to have sex, get pregnant and have children, you should not expect the government to foot the bill for your extremely misguided actions.

That is very different than saying, the government should not take care of woman with a child or two or three that was recently divorced or husband was killed or whatever, and now they are left alone to fend for themselves and their children. In that situation, I would agree that government should provide for her.

But in the circumstance outlined in the video, no, the government should laugh at her, turn her around, and boot her out the door. Brutal, I know. But that's life.
but the right tries their hardest to shut down these facilities, for what so they can bitch and moan about the outcome? do you remember what ted cruz was doing in Texas not too long ago? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/26/texas-filibuster-wendy-davis_n_3500422.html. Theres a word for someone who does that, creates problems to complain about them, oh yeah a tea bagger, or something along those lines.
 

see4

Well-Known Member
but the right tries their hardest to shut down these facilities, for what so they can bitch and moan about the outcome? do you remember what ted cruz was doing in Texas not too long ago? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/26/texas-filibuster-wendy-davis_n_3500422.html. Theres a word for someone who does that, creates problems to complain about them, oh yeah a tea bagger, or something along those lines.
yes, I agree with you, there are tons of obstructionists like Ted Cruz, who think its awesome to ruin peoples lives, and as long as it doesn't affect him or his family and friends, he doesn't care.
 

see4

Well-Known Member
I just saw this picture, and I literally blew a snot bubble I laughed so hard.



And for the teagaggers preparing to respond with an explanation as to why this is, remember that you will only be speaking in hypothetical anecdotes and assumptions.
 

spandy

Well-Known Member
What do you consider an average work week?

But for the sake of knowledge, a 40 hour work week is a state regulation, and I think at the federal level, hourly employees are required certain rights, such as break times and overtime rates, based on a 40 hour work week.
How many employers could use an extra 10-20 hours a week out of an employee, but because of the cost of these regulations and over time pay, they instead opt to hire more laborers at a cheaper price?
 

Hazydat620

Well-Known Member
It seems you and people like you, lack confidence in yourself succeeding.
There should be no law limiting Americans having children, then again, there also should be no law requiring tax payers to pay for those who have them.
What makes you think I'm not successfu,l what do you consider successful, is it a monetary value?, Do you think that cause I don't have a Fuck everyone else attitude like you? I made a great wage compared to the people we are talking about in this thread, does that mean I shouldn't acknowledge them and treat them like they don't have a intregal part of everyone's everyday lives. What skills do those 1% that you hold on such high prestige posses? really what work are they doing with their hands?
 

Hazydat620

Well-Known Member
How many employers could use an extra 10-20 hours a week out of an employee, but because of the cost of these regulations and over time pay, they instead opt to hire more laborers at a cheaper price?
You would have been a great plantation owner:clap:
 

beenthere

New Member
How many employers could use an extra 10-20 hours a week out of an employee, but because of the cost of these regulations and over time pay, they instead opt to hire more laborers at a cheaper price?
You brought up a very good point spandy.
I feel the government screws over millions of employees by these stupid 40 hr a week regulations.
I'd agree with limiting mandatory overtime without proper compensation but voluntary overtime should be between the employer and employee.
A couple of years back my guys came to me wanting to set up a split 4/10 work week, when I researched it and found out that the state of California prohibits it in the construction industry without paying overtime, my guys were furious to say the least.
 

heckler73

Well-Known Member
What do you consider an average work week?

But for the sake of knowledge, a 40 hour work week is a state regulation, and I think at the federal level, hourly employees are required certain rights, such as break times and overtime rates, based on a 40 hour work week.
Perhaps he considers Ye' Good Olde 6 day, 72 hour schedule to be more proper?
Please, sir, I want some more

Maybe we should bring back orphanages so these single mothers have a place to deposit their "mistakes" which they cannot care for?

There are 3 ways for this to be settled, and none of the solutions are exclusive:
1) Tax the Rich
2) Starve the Poor
3) Spend Publicly

I believe the Jobs Report is out today. The statistic I would like to see is how median income has changed with the supposedly "best year since 2005" (Bloomberg this morning).
That would be a most telling dynamic...especially if it looked like this:



Then one can say there is a serious problem. But that number is not too easy to find, and if more people are contracting short-term, there may not be a current tax record, so the number can't be properly gleaned from there, either.
I suppose ADC can give some statistical insight. They process enough cheques.
 

Hazydat620

Well-Known Member
You brought up a very good point spandy.
I feel the government screws over millions of employees by these stupid 40 hr a week regulations.
I'd agree with limiting mandatory overtime without proper compensation but voluntary overtime should be between the employer and employee.
A couple of years back my guys came to me wanting to set up a split 4/10 work week, when I researched it and found out that the state of California prohibits it in the construction industry without paying overtime, my guys were furious to say the least.
I don't understand why they would want to split up their 4/10, the point of four tens is the three day weekend.
 

beenthere

New Member
I don't understand why they would want to split up their 4/10, the point of four tens is the three day weekend.
I had between four and five crews back then.
Some wanted other days off than others, as long as they put in 40hrs it wouldn't have mattered to me.
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
You contradict yourself. "Restrained" is tyranny. What you fear happening, fraud and coercion cannot be prevented if they are an integral part of the recipe.

Also the free market isn't necessarily "capitalism" or at least the kind that exists today.
restraint is not tyranny. getting everything you want all the time because youre the birthday boy, is tyranny to everybody else, and turns the child into a monster.

restraint is the heart and soul of the human condition. we plan for the future, and anticipate possible problems, like:

merchant houses attaining so much wealth they can depose kings and popes at a whim and install their own puppets (see the italian city states)
behemoth banks who can squish an entire economy like a bug simply by calling in their markers (see the rothschilds)
corporate megaliths who dominate an entire market and use that power to squeeze out their competitors, pinch their suppliers and ruin smallholders without even working very hard to do it (see walmart)
robber barons who seize control of everything that falls within their grasp and wring every penny out of the people, their employees, and any one else who falls into their Mighty Money Juicing Machine (see the late 19th century)
hordes of fools scrambling fopr an easy buck on leveraged capital investing in foolish bullshit on margin, so any minor hiccup sends the entire financial, capital and market system into freefall (see the great depression)

wise and careful regulation CAN prevent such things, but sadly wisdom is found only among the learned, and the learned are not in politics.

further we were not discussing Current Capitalism which is out of control and needs some restraint, but rather the IDEAL of capitalism. that was a red herring.
 

beenthere

New Member
Perhaps he considers Ye' Good Olde 6 day, 72 hour schedule to be more proper?
Please, sir, I want some more

Maybe we should bring back orphanages so these single mothers have a place to deposit their "mistakes" which they cannot care for?
Can you make a valid point without exaggeration?
What if employees want to work more hours, is it you or the governments business?
 
Top