Jump to content

How would you feel


complex

Recommended Posts

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • 2 weeks later...
If the U.S. was ran the same as france. How would that be to people?

 

I doubt I could put up with the constant surrendering, I've been taught not to drop my rifle... but I do like a little lady garden but I don't approve of farmng in the pit region... but I am in favor of a national month's vacation and they're pretty easy going on weed smokers.. but I doubt I could put up with snooty waiters...

 

If we went socialist I'd like to see some Scandinavian style, Norway, Sweden... that stuff... hot chicks, free flowing booze, national healthcare, slick furniture, reindeer... I could bear a 42% income tax if we could all have those things...

 

But I also need, hot chicks, boats, fishing, beaches, weed, my FEW rational French friends...

 

I'm torn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McCarthyism and the Red Scare made it so the yanks are too small minded to do things that make sense.

 

Socialist policies are the only way to change the class structure and keep the poor alive.

If it wasn't for the free-ish health care, and the government pension system for disabled people here in Canada I'd probably be doomed to a shitty service job for life. I come from a lower class family, my mother who was a high school teacher was in a car accident and can no longer work, and my father died without life insurance.

If it wasn't for the social programs here in this country I would have never had the opportunities I have today (university being one). I can change my social condition solely because of social programs. Sounds kinda like the American dream eh?

 

If you look at the pro's and con's of social programs you'll soon find that there are only pros. And all you need to do to have these programs is to tax the rich at a much higher level and lower the taxes on the lower classes.

 

Remember if the lower classes had the means of production, they wouldn't be the lower class.

 

Socialism also leaves all kinds of room for individualism, those lies that were proliferated to you guys as kids about the dangers of giving to your fellow man aren't true.

 

The difference between socialism and capitalism, is the money you spend eventually goes back in your pocket and along the way it helps your fellow citizens, where as in a capitalist system your cash goes someone who doesn't need it and it doesn't help anyone.

 

Look at Venezuela, some factory workers there own the companies they work at. They work together as a whole to manufacture, market and sell their product. And together they share the profits. Its the same as working for the "man" but instead you have a higher share in your company, and you take home a higher more fairly balanced pay check.

 

Remember the reason why people live together to begin with is because we have better chances to survive as a group. There was no place for individuals in 10,000 b.c. and the only thing that has changed is the date. The reality is that we are pack animals, we hunt, we sleep, we fuck, we eat together. So why is it that there is a shift to individualism these days. If you ask me its to divide and conquer, the powers that be, the big corporations, the lobby groups see liberal thinking as a weapon against their power. If they can program the people to believe that the government helping them is a bad thing, then the government can loose the money through shady contracts and failed ventures to keep it for themselves.

 

You can't trust people, its a known fact. So you need a fail-safe against people with power so they don't abuse you, and a socialist government that genuinely works for the people does that.

 

The real goal should be a middle ground. Take what works and chuck the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've just generalised one of the most educated populations as a people that have zero critical thought. I'm not sure that's accurate.[/color]

 

Socialist policies are the only way to change the class structure and keep the poor alive.

If it wasn't for the free-ish health care, and the government pension system for disabled people here in Canada I'd probably be doomed to a shitty service job for life. I come from a lower class family, my mother who was a high school teacher was in a car accident and can no longer work, and my father died without life insurance.

If it wasn't for the social programs here in this country I would have never had the opportunities I have today (university being one). I can change my social condition solely because of social programs. Sounds kinda like the American dream eh?

 

If you look at the pro's and con's of social programs you'll soon find that there are only pros. And all you need to do to have these programs is to tax the rich at a much higher level and lower the taxes on the lower classes. So where's the incentive to get rich? Better to stay middle class, forego the effort to get rich and be protected against being poor. Where do I sign up?

 

Remember if the lower classes had the means of production, they wouldn't be the lower class.

 

Socialism also leaves all kinds of room for individualism, those lies that were proliferated to you guys as kids about the dangers of giving to your fellow man aren't true.

 

The difference between socialism and capitalism, is the money you spend eventually goes back in your pocket and along the way it helps your fellow citizens, where as in a capitalist system your cash goes someone who doesn't need it and it doesn't help anyone. Rich people don't spend more money in the economy creating opportunity to others? Do they just keep their money in the bank and only spend as much as the poor folk? Rich people either pay more due to sliding scale taxation or they pay more in goods and services taxation system which should then be diverted to public spending and communal benefit.

 

Look at Venezuela, some factory workers there own the companies they work at. They work together as a whole to manufacture, market and sell their product. And together they share the profits. Its the same as working for the "man" but instead you have a higher share in your company, and you take home a higher more fairly balanced pay check. Look at Venezuela, massive social schisms, regional diplomatic confrontation and an economy that is dependent on strategic resources.

 

Remember the reason why people live together to begin with is because we have better chances to survive as a group. Within the basic clan and tribal structures there was always competition for and domination of resources . Sure we survived as a group through an element of mutual support (which usually drew the line at defense/security and reproduction) but we still competed with each other for life sustaining resources..., sounds kind of like a modern day democratic market system, eh? There was no place for individuals in 10,000 b.c. and the only thing that has changed is the date I think you need to check yourself on this one. Sure it was harder for the individual but within social structures there was, as far as we know, competition for resources. Other than some insects like ants and bees and the bonobos, show me somewhere else in nature, which is what you're using as a benchmark here, that there wasn't competition for resources even within local and social structures. The reality is that we are pack animals, we hunt, we sleep, we fuck, we eat together but we compete for the "lion's share" of that food. So why is it that there is a shift to individualism these days. How is a capitalist society individualistic? WE still pay taxes, we still have charity and volunteerism and we still have many social behaviours that are about mutuality. The individualism that you speak of is raw anarchy, whcih we definitely do not have in places other than Somalia and Hlmand province! If you ask me its to divide and conquer, the powers that be, the big corporations, the lobby groups see liberal thinking as a weapon against their power Well actually, market liberalism is what they want. If they can program the people to believe that the government helping them is a bad thing, then the government can loose the money through shady contracts and failed ventures to keep it for themselves.

 

You can't trust people, its a known fact. So you need a fail-safe against people with power so they don't abuse you, and a socialist government that genuinely works for the people does that. Hang on, a socialist system does not protect you from government abuse in any way whatsoever. My evidence is North Korea, and South America for the last 50 years, to name a short few!

 

The real goal should be a middle ground. Take what works and chuck the rest.

 

The US is not a raw liberal market place/capitalist society anyway, I don't think it exists anywhere TBH. As long as you have state schools, state electricity, state water, disability benefits etc. you have elements of socialism. And this in mind I'd say that the US has done pretty fucking well for itself in the last 300 years. They've kicked everyone else's arse in pretty much everything. So, how does Canada compare to that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McCarthyism and the Red Scare made it so the yanks are too small minded to do things that make sense.

 

Socialist policies are the only way to change the class structure and keep the poor alive.

If it wasn't for the free-ish health care, and the government pension system for disabled people here in Canada I'd probably be doomed to a shitty service job for life. I come from a lower class family, my mother who was a high school teacher was in a car accident and can no longer work, and my father died without life insurance.

If it wasn't for the social programs here in this country I would have never had the opportunities I have today (university being one). I can change my social condition solely because of social programs. Sounds kinda like the American dream eh?

 

If you look at the pro's and con's of social programs you'll soon find that there are only pros. And all you need to do to have these programs is to tax the rich at a much higher level and lower the taxes on the lower classes.

 

.

 

The millions of Americans busting their asses daily at their shitty service jobs for the rest of their lives ARE living the american dream. THAT IS IT. You work, you get paid, you feed your family, and pay your bills. Whats so hard about that? If you wanna tax the rich, and give their money to dead beats...THEN NO ONE WOULD WORK HARD TO GET HIGHER PAYING POSITIONS...GOOD BYE DOCTORS...LAWYERS...SCIENTISTS, and other people you'll need at some point in time. I have no problem with the goverment helping people who actually NEED help... but there are too many people with excuses looking for a hand-out. Get a job, there are PLENTY of em out there, they just may not be up to your standards. If you wanna get somewhere, you gotta work for it. No one is gonna give it to you...too many people think diffrently these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get a job, there are PLENTY of em out there...

 

Really!

California's unemployment rate hits record high of 11.9%

 

Los Angeles Business from bizjournals

 

California's unemployment unexpectedly jumped to 11.9 percent and bucked the national trend, according to Friday data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

 

 

The figures show the state lost a net 35,800 jobs last month and so far has lost 760,000 jobs during the past year. California tied Oregon for the fourth-highest unemployment rate in the U.S. It's behind Michigan, Rhode Island and Nevada. June's 11.6 unemployment rate set a post- World War II record.

 

 

From a national perspective, the unemployment-rate figures are a mixed-bag of news. A total 26 states reported unemployment rate increases, 17 states showed decreases and 7 states showed no rate-change.

 

 

Locally, June figures show Los Angeles County's unemployment rate is 11.6 percent. Orange County's unemployment is 9.2 percent.

 

 

The unemployment data does not reflect discouraged workers, because the report does not track that information.

 

 

---------------------------------

 

Care to make a retraction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The unemployment data does not reflect discouraged workers, because the report does not track that information.

 

I am also curious to know if it tracks how many of those people are:

 

1 - Too lazy to get a job. ( Trust me, I work for a union company, there are pleanty. )

 

2 - Won't take jobs due to them thinking they are above those positions. ( i.e. Gas stations, fast food, etc. )

 

3 - Are habitual users of Unemployment

 

This is the data I care about, not really just the base numbers. The fact is, I can drive down the street and see help wanted signs at my local thorntons gas station, a sears home center, walmart, and the dairy queen near my home. I also travel in 4 other states, and have seen the same thing. I know this isnt represenative and every locale, but it does tell me something. I really could care less what data says, polls are wrong, so is alot of data provided by these agencies. Extending unemployment benefits and making gonvernment progams for the poor larger is nothing more then gonvernment crack so to speak. They get you addicted to the gonv. then you have no choice. You either lose the drive to better yourself, or the knowledge of how to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bullshit. I was on unemployment benefits and sickness benefits once. I got a job at the first available opportunity. I'm not saying it doesn't happen but you are speaking in absolutes which is plainly redundant when discussing society.

 

LOL. Boy, a little defensive arent you? Did anything in my post say that I was referring to everyone? Actually it says the contrary. If you dont think that there is a LARGER number of people who are abusing the system out there, you are quite naive. They abuse welfare, workers comp, disability, and yes, unemployment. I would like you to point out in my post where I say that everyone on unemployment is abusing the system. Maybe you should try reading a tad more before you start firing off at the mouth. I dont know if you thought that I was referring to you, thats maybe why you got on the defense so fast, but I dont think anywhere in my post that I made any broad sweeping generalizations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, not at all defensive, I just think you know jack shit on the subject and I used myself as an example. I was in no way offended by what you wrote, I just thought it was bullshit.

 

 

Extending unemployment benefits and making gonvernment progams for the poor larger is nothing more then gonvernment crack so to speak. They get you addicted to the gonv. then you have no choice. You either lose the drive to better yourself, or the knowledge of how to do it.

 

 

Broad sweeping generalisations. Well the above may not precisely be defined as a generalisation but it is sure broad and sweeping! What you have stated above is a belief that people who accept benefits will lose their ability to motivate themselves to earn their own way in society as an addiction. You didn't say "the majority" or even "some people"t, you made an absolute statement in regards to a human nature. And even further on your comment, you have basically said that given a particular stimulus (free money) there will be a generalised involuntary fixed pattern of behaviour that is a constant across the species (abuse of the system resulting in lethargy and loss of knowledge). Funnily enough, that's the exact definition of instinct. That leaves no exception to the rule and room for individual difference. I think that if you follow this line of thought that you may find your statement easily disproved.

 

And for your subsequent comment that I would be naive to believe that the majority of welfare recipients aren't abusing the system, my reply to you would be that I am definitely naive if I form an opinion of a complex matter that is quantifiable without actually doing some research or having professional experience in the field of social welfare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, since you are an obvious expert in the field of welfare and human psycology, I should just stop writing? I will site some common sense examples like I did in my original post ( instead of trying to be a pretentious asshole like some people ).

Unemployment benefits in the state of kentucky are $460.00 per week in my particular field of work. How can you expect people to work when thats more then they make on an average week? I dont need to talk like a supercilius prick to get my point across. Your anger is obvious when you try to dominate someone with large words instead of making common sense arguments. Its an obvious tactic of someone who has no real substance to their point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And for your subsequent comment that I would be naive to believe that the majority of welfare recipients aren't abusing the system, my reply to you would be that I am definitely naive if I form an opinion of a complex matter that is quantifiable without actually doing some research or having professional experience in the field of social welfare.

 

Not in one place did I say that it is a MAJORITY abusing the system, I stated LARGER number. Making the implication that it is a larger number then you assumed in your previous post.

 

You should learn to comprehend English before you use your mighty big words to confuse us simple folk. I dont need a fucking english or grammer lesson, make a fucking point in your statement instead of acting like your better then someone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

And even further on your comment, you have basically said that given a particular stimulus (free money) there will be a generalised involuntary fixed pattern of behaviour that is a constant across the species (abuse of the system resulting in lethargy and loss of knowledge). Funnily enough, that's the exact definition of instinct. That leaves no exception to the rule and room for individual difference. I think that if you follow this line of thought that you may find your statement easily disproved.

 

 

Instinct - Noun - an inborn pattern of activity or tendency to action common to a given biological species.

 

That means you're born with the trait. In my statement I said that it was "like crack". If Im not mistaken you BECOME addicted to crack and are not born with the dependancy unless under special circumstances. So once again your big worded non-substance argument is debunked.

 

Anything else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are all entry level jobs you listed...can you live on the minimum wage where you live? It's impossible here, even if you don't have kids or much overhead.

 

The last time I tried to get on-the-books work- two years ago I held two back-to-back minimum wage jobs for about a year- every two weeks I would have to make choices like "do I eat or pay rent this month?" When I'd ask for more hours I'd get "well, we'll see what we can do in a couple weeks." Come on, now...that's fucking ridiculous.

 

Companies that care more about their bottom line than their employees are doing far more to create a welfare class than the government. Believe that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three separate replies Chappaquiddick! Apologies if I upset you by using words and concepts that only those with an education can understand.

 

Mate, yeah I do have a back ground is psychology and I also have a back ground in social sciences. The point is that you can't go making your mind up about complex and quantifiable issues based on "common sense". The world just doesn't work that way but if you think you are smart enough just to work it out on your "common sense", good luck to you mate.

 

 

Now I'm not going to argue with you about this anymore because you don't seem too bright or seem to understand some basic points. But I will give you a free lesson on what an instinct is.

 

yes, animals are born with instincts. they are an innate characteristic that is generalisable across a certain species. When a particular stimulus, in this case getting free money, or crack cocaine, you stated that all humans will act in a certain way. That pretty much covers the definition, stimulus equals generalisable involuntary behaviour across species.

 

Now the reason why you think you've debunked it is not because you understand the concept of instinct or welfare but that your original statement was silly and wrong. Not all people will get addicted to welfare and lose their drive, etc. That is obviously a completely false supposition because if it were true the numbers of welfare recipients in any given country would only ever rise and fall simply due to deaths. Now, I bet your little pea sized brain that that is not the case.

 

 

Have fun getting all pissy pants about this reply and feeling frustrated that your stunted Kentucky intellect struggles with big words and complex concepts whilst I earn much more than $460 and hour.

 

Goodbye little man.

 

 

 

 

 

 

/yes being childish...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im going to try to be simple so you may comprehend this.

 

Once again you are resorting to personal attacks, which again indicates you have no substance, and lack education or intellect.

 

Instinct has nothing to do with a stimulus response, thus proven by Pavlov, they are two very different concepts. You once again are having trouble comprehending this. I sited the defenition of Instinct from the Websters Dictionary. I will take that definition over any bull you try to say it means.

 

And again you misquote me and make up things, never, at any point, do i say that all people abuse the system, and all people get stuck in the rut of gonvernment intervention. If I did please quote me, because Im quite sure in previous posts I was very clear that it was not even the majority.

 

And for a person with such a impressive educational backround you should work on learning to spell GENERALIZATION correctly. When you attack someones intellect, you better not live in a glass house. Your rantings are uniformed and unitelligable. You resort to simple attacks on my intellect to try to make yourself look better instead of showing any facts to backup any of your statements.

 

Im just curious as to how someone making well over $460.00 per hour, which according to my pea brained kentucky math is:

 

460 x 8 = $3680 per day 3680 x 5 = $18400 per week and 18400 x 52 = $956800 per year

 

What are you doing on a graf forum sounding like someone who just found out what a thesaurus is.

 

Your little insult tactics might work on someone who is 14 years old, but when it comes down to it, your arguments sound like typical rhetoric from someone trying to be somthing they are not.

 

If you would think about what you type, before you do it, you might find that every time you try to quote what I said, you are wrong. Maybe you should try going back to the 4th grade in an American school where they can teach you simple understanding of the english language. All you do is speak in platitudes, and use large words to make morons think you know what your talking about, trust me, your a fuckin idiot.

 

I really hate to have to resort to personal attacks on your stupid ass, but its like talking to a parrot who only has the same dribble to repeat over and over.

 

 

Well have fun with your obviously far superior intelligence, and bumper sticker platitiudes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think the easiest way to end this thread is to say one thing....

 

everything the government subsidizes you always get more of it. in another words if you subsidize unemployment, sickness, etc. you get more of it. this is just the fact of the matter. dont believe it, learn economics.

 

unemployment insurance, like all things the government does usually has a noble goal. however the unintended consequence of this is people will hold out for a much higher paying job than they otherwise would be able to get in the market at a certain time. a neighbor of mine lost a high paying construction job in march. he is in his mid 50's and no one wants to hire him at his old pay rate of 30$ an hour. he can get a job all day long at 18-20$. he told me he will stay on unemployment until it is either run out or he has a job making at least 30$ an hour again. he can make more money not working than working. if this situation happens to a boat load of the population and you have extended unemployment. this is pretty simple to figure out.

 

as for market prices that a few commented on earlier... sure, living on minimum wage is hard for most people. but you can believe that the market wage of various jobs is the result of millions and millions of voluntary transactions in the market place. wages always tend be close to equal to marginal revenue product. if you cant make a certain amount of money you need in a certain field, you must increase your productivity in some way and/or lower your living expenses. which for a lot of people means room mates, cutting out the bar, etc. if a company pays an employee more per hour than he can produce per hour, this is a money losing venture. most companies/people cannot afford to lose money for toooo long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im going to try to be simple so you may comprehend this.

 

Once again you are resorting to personal attacks, which again indicates you have no substance, and lack education or intellect.

 

Instinct has nothing to do with a stimulus response, thus proven by Pavlov Hahahaha, Look up "Classical Conditioning", hahahah!!!! All you've done is found a scientific/psychological hypothesis that involves stimulus and response. What you have found is Classical conditioning where it is possible to PAIR a particular stimulus with a response through CONDITIONING. Their is also another cool little thing called Operant Conditioning. And if you're smart enough you'll even be able to work out that it is the explanation as to why gambling is rather addictive to animals. But, alas, this all has nothing to do with instinct because operant and classical conditioning are all CONDITIONED responses, not involuntary or innate like that of instinct.

 

 

MAte, didn't I just tell you that I have studied psychology??!! Why the fuck are you picking an argument with on a subject that I know about? That's just stupid. You'd be better off arguing about the virtues of having parents that are brother and sister, stick to somehting you actually understand, dude!

 

, they are two very different concepts. You once again are having trouble comprehending this. I sited the defenition of Instinct from the Websters Dictionary. I will take that definition over any bull you try to say it means. YES!!!, THe dictionary's definition is exactly the same as mine!!! Hahaha, can't you read?!

 

And again you misquote me and make up things, never, at any point, do i say that all people abuse the system, and all people get stuck in the rut of gonvernment interventionOh dear, I've been teasing a retarded person all along. That is shameful, I apologise. . If I did please quote me, because Im quite sure in previous posts I was very clear that it was not even the majority.

 

And for a person with such a impressive educational backround you should work on learning to spell GENERALIZATION correctly Mate, the Z in words is an Americanisation. In "old school" English we use S's. That's the way it's done in most Commonwealth countries. Just in case you don't know what the Commonwealth is, it's the vestige of the English empire, old colonies if you will. THe world and its ways do not end at the shores of the United States, my poor stunted friend. . When you attack someones intellect, you better not live in a glass house. Your rantings are uniformed and unitelligable. You resort to simple attacks on my intellect to try to make yourself look better instead of showing any facts to backup any of your statements. Facts? what like

there is a LARGER number of people who are abusing the system out there,
...., you mean one of those "facts"? You may want to go back and have a quick look, dude, because I'm the guy saying that one needs to do a certain amount of research or have experience in a particular field before you form beliefs and you're the guy implying that your common sense is the standard of all that's rational and obvious. I have never even put forward any "facts" in this whole discussion. The only thing that I have stated, with confidence is the definition of instinct, which you so kindly reinforced with your cute little "Webstar's Dictionary" definition.

 

 

 

 

Im just curious as to how someone making well over $460.00 per hour, which according to my pea brained kentucky math is:

 

460 x 8 = $3680 per day 3680 x 5 = $18400 per week and 18400 x 52 = $956800 per year

 

What are you doing on a graf forum sounding like someone who just found out what a thesaurus is. Ah yes, well picked up. I did state my salary incorrectly. I should have said per week, not per hour. For if it was per hour I'd surely buy you an education so I didn't have to waste my time schooling your poor stunted self.

 

Your little insult tactics might work on someone who is 14 years old, but when it comes down to it, your arguments sound like typical rhetoric from someone trying to be somthing they are not. What exactly am I trying to be?

 

If you would think about what you type, before you do it, you might find that every time you try to quote what I said, you are wrong. Maybe you should try going back to the 4th grade in an American school where they can teach you simple understanding of the english language. Oh dear. Oh dear!! I'd ask you to re-read that sentence but I'm sure that you would have noted your fault when writing it, if you were able. So, let me summarise for you "American school...., English language". And just incase you're struggling with that, England is a country. All you do is speak in platitudes , and use large words to make morons think you know what your talking about, trust me, your a fuckin idiot.

 

I really hate to have to resort to personal attacks on your stupid ass, but its like talking to a parrot who only has the same dribble to repeat over and over.

 

 

Well have fun with your obviously far superior intelligence, and bumper sticker platitiudes.

 

What the fuck does platitudes mean!!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

Dude, I really don't care. I would bet both my arms that in real life you are a good bloke, can paint better than me and that youtreat people with sincere respect. I'm just having a stir. Yeah, I do back what I say but that is only because I have a bit of education on the matter. And I mean a bit, literally I did one semester on welfare states and productive society. It actually bored the shit out of me and I hated it. But it did teach me one thing that all my assumptions and beliefs that I thought were common sense were totally wrong. It's really a complex issue with so may angles and facets that no one has the answer to. It's just that some know more than others.

 

I only knew enough to provoke you in to an argument, nothing more. I don't have any answers and I really don't know what works and what's right. I was just taking the piss out of you, mate. I don't think you are stunted, I don't think you are unintelligent. I think you're just another bloke on an internet forum like I am. Don't worry about me mate. I like to come on here and sound as smart as I can, it's all a laugh in the end, really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

platitude |ˈplatiˌt(y)oōd|

noun

a remark or statement, esp. one with a moral content, that has been used too often to be interesting or thoughtful : she began uttering liberal platitudes.

 

 

THere was nothing moral or containing about anything I said!

 

I'm shocked to the core!

 

*Slaps with glove*

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think the easiest way to end this thread is to say one thing....

 

everything the government subsidizes you always get more of it. in another words if you subsidize unemployment, sickness, etc. you get more of it. this is just the fact of the matter. dont believe it, learn economics.

 

unemployment insurance, like all things the government does usually has a noble goal. however the unintended consequence of this is people will hold out for a much higher paying job than they otherwise would be able to get in the market at a certain time. a neighbor of mine lost a high paying construction job in march. he is in his mid 50's and no one wants to hire him at his old pay rate of 30$ an hour. he can get a job all day long at 18-20$. he told me he will stay on unemployment until it is either run out or he has a job making at least 30$ an hour again. he can make more money not working than working. if this situation happens to a boat load of the population and you have extended unemployment. this is pretty simple to figure out.

 

as for market prices that a few commented on earlier... sure, living on minimum wage is hard for most people. but you can believe that the market wage of various jobs is the result of millions and millions of voluntary transactions in the market place. wages always tend be close to equal to marginal revenue product. if you cant make a certain amount of money you need in a certain field, you must increase your productivity in some way and/or lower your living expenses. which for a lot of people means room mates, cutting out the bar, etc. if a company pays an employee more per hour than he can produce per hour, this is a money losing venture. most companies/people cannot afford to lose money for toooo long.

 

 

Interesting perspective but I would like to pose a question to you good sir, GO FUCK YOURSELF!!!

 

 

I flatly refuse to discuss this issue with anyone that actually knows what they are talking about!!! :mad: :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...