11-14-2013 07:34 PM
749 ... 1415161718 ...
tools
  1. llamabreath's Avatar
    ... but man you just came off as racist, bigoted, and incredibly prejudiced.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
    Far from the truth.

    Sent via a pay phone at the gas station.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 01:53 PM
  2. craZDude's Avatar
    Roads are nice too... but completely different subject than mandating wages and regulating service and prices and having high corporate tax rates...
    Ah, I'm glad that you totally ignored most of my argument and chose to instead focus on one small part that wasn't really important to the main idea. That is a logical fallacy, please address my actual argument next time.
    10-16-2013 01:54 PM
  3. pappy53's Avatar
    It's either kick the can or kick the people who can't get medical insurance due to a pre-existing condition down the road or kick the sick child that can't get anymore medical treatment because she has topped out with the insurance company down the road..
    So you think that it is fair to force citizens to buy health insurance, or pay a penalty? What happened to free choice? I'm sure that there is a better way.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 01:54 PM
  4. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    Why should they increase wages? Are those jobs suddenly worth more? The employee is doing the exact same work in the exact same time. Nothing has changed other that the business has become successful.

    Now if a business wants to avoid spending time and money on training ppl then they should pay them more to stay. If they want loyal workers, they should add profit based bonus and raise incentives(like my company does). But that is not up for someone else to mandate.
    Because it was previously said that if companies made more money wages would increase. I pointed out that it isn't true, and you just posted and supported that. So thanks.


    BTW, does anybody else find it weird that the Verge is posting more non-tech news now? If I want that news I don't want it from the Verge. Sorry, got side-tracked on that one.
    10-16-2013 01:54 PM
  5. craZDude's Avatar
    Because it was previously said that if companies made more money wages would increase. I pointed out that it isn't true, and you just posted and supported that. So thanks.


    BTW, does anybody else find it weird that the Verge is posting more non-tech news now? If I want that news I don't want it from the Verge. Sorry, got side-tracked on that one.
    Thank you Kevin, you always bring clarity to conversations, and your responses are always well thought out. I really appreciate that.

    As for the verge, I have noticed that, but haven't necessarily minded because most of the news I get is tech news, so it's nice to have the really important world events (often the ones that do affect tech indirectly) also be posted by them.
    10-16-2013 01:56 PM
  6. llamabreath's Avatar
    BTW, does anybody else find it weird that the Verge is posting more non-tech news now? If I want that news I don't want it from the Verge. Sorry, got side-tracked on that one.
    I was wondering about that too.



    Sent via a pay phone at the gas station.
    10-16-2013 01:57 PM
  7. NoYankees44's Avatar
    You are ignoring the crucial effects of what happens with that money that the government receives. Like I said, the government funds many crucial organizations, without which, the large companies would have trouble finding skilled labor. I would say that part of providing a hospitable environment for business growth is providing a happy, healthy, and skilled work force. The government is what does that, with schools, research grants, roads, food stamps, etc. , not the private sector. You can't simply say the government is a drain on society because it costs money to run. That would be like saying paying the people who work for companies is a drain on society because then there is less money for the companies.
    So what your saying is companies never spend money on training or healthcare or provide employees with wages for food... right no companies ever do that. Its all the government.

    I mean my company is not paying me to be in training all week learning skills for my job. Thats the government job. Why would my company do it? O that's right, its because they are investing in me to further their profits. And they are also paying a portion of my healthcare because they do not care if i am healthy enough to work...
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 02:01 PM
  8. pappy53's Avatar
    It's either kick the can or kick the people who can't get medical insurance due to a pre-existing condition down the road or kick the sick child that can't get anymore medical treatment because she has topped out with the insurance company down the road..
    So you think that it is fair to force citizens to buy health insurance, or pay a penalty? What happened to free choice? I'm sure that there is a better way.



    The more money the government has, the more they are able to redistribute wealth through government programs.
    Obama is trying to split this nation into 2 segments. The rich, and then the entitlement-driven poor. No middle class, as he does nothing to help them, but he promised to help. This also helps the Democratic party to buy votes for a long time. The next thing will be allowing illegals to vote.
    gollum18, cdmjlt369 and mrsmumbles like this.
    10-16-2013 02:01 PM
  9. NoYankees44's Avatar
    Because it was previously said that if companies made more money wages would increase. I pointed out that it isn't true, and you just posted and supported that. So thanks.


    BTW, does anybody else find it weird that the Verge is posting more non-tech news now? If I want that news I don't want it from the Verge. Sorry, got side-tracked on that one.
    I actually never said that. I said a company can grow and thus provide more jobs and more higher paying jobs. Of course if a company has invested time into a person to learn a valuable skill, they should pay them enough not to leave so they dont have to pay to teach someone else. But if a company refuses to pay people what they are worth, then those workers should leave for a company that will pay them their value.

    A minimum wage job is a minimum wage job. If nothing makes that job more valuable, then the workers should continue to make minimum wage. No matter how successful or unsuccessful the company is.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 02:06 PM
  10. craZDude's Avatar
    So what your saying is companies never spend money on training or healthcare or provide employees with wages for food... right no companies ever do that. Its all the government.

    I mean my company is not paying me to be in training all week learning skills for my job. Thats the government job. Why would my company do it? O that's right, its because they are investing in me to further their profits. And they are also paying a portion of my healthcare because they do not care if i am healthy enough to work...
    I'm not saying companies don't put any money into training, but our society and economy would seriously fall apart fast if there were no government. Let's take education as an example. The government provides a lot of funding for public universities (and on the local level, secondary schools). Many people couldn't afford a college degree without public institutions, which would lead to an overall less skilled and knowledgeable work force. Public universities are a good thing, unless you are afraid of a well educated population.
    10-16-2013 02:09 PM
  11. palandri's Avatar
    So you think that it is fair to force citizens to buy health insurance, or pay a penalty? What happened to free choice? I'm sure that there is a better way.
    I think it should be a deduction on your payroll check, just like medicare is. There's a big philosophical difference between you and me. I am a blue collar, working class, union electrician. I am a left wing Democrat. Publicly owned vs Privately owned doesn't scare me or throw me in a frenzy. I think "we" rather than "me".
    10-16-2013 02:24 PM
  12. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    I actually never said that. I said a company can grow and thus provide more jobs and more higher paying jobs. Of course if a company has invested time into a person to learn a valuable skill, they should pay them enough not to leave so they dont have to pay to teach someone else. But if a company refuses to pay people what they are worth, then those workers should leave for a company that will pay them their value.

    A minimum wage job is a minimum wage job. If nothing makes that job more valuable, then the workers should continue to make minimum wage. No matter how successful or unsuccessful the company is.
    You said:

    "Yes a consequence of this is the owners of said companies will make a lot of money as well, but that is not at the expense of its workers. It is actually to their benefit. Then said owners with want to invest more in the company so that they can make even more money. Which will in turn make more money for the workers."


    Does that last line not imply that the current workers will make more money? Or did you mean "which in turn will allow the company to hire more workers"? There is a difference in the wording, and it's important. The way you said it implies that a company that makes more money will increase wages, while the way I think you meant it (after reading it again, and then again) means they will just hire more people. How does hiring those other people help the workers that are currently making minimum wage?

    And I totally get what you're saying about a minimum wage job being worth minimum wage pay, but that wasn't the crux of the discussion at all. The crux of the discussion is getting people out of poverty. How does a company hiring for more minimum wage positions help anyone get out of poverty? If your solution is "they need to increase their skill set" then how do you propose they do that? With money they don't have? Or a company like Wal-Mart (or many others, don't wanna sound like I'm singling them out) sending them to training?

    We don't just need MORE jobs (though that's a start), we need higher paying jobs, and we need ways to get people the training needed for those jobs. But none of that will happen with the government shut down, because WE CAN'T GET PASSED THE SAME STUFF THAT HAPPENS EVERY 3 MONTHS. That, and rehashing legislation that's already been upheld.
    palandri likes this.
    10-16-2013 02:26 PM
  13. NoYankees44's Avatar
    I'm not saying companies don't put any money into training, but our society and economy would seriously fall apart fast if there were no government. Let's take education as an example. The government provides a lot of funding for public universities (and on the local level, secondary schools). Many people couldn't afford a college degree without public institutions, which would lead to an overall less skilled and knowledgeable work force. Public universities are a good thing, unless you are afraid of a well educated population.
    The economy would not spontaneously combust if the government disappeared. Would it be crazy for a while. O yeah. But that is because of all the changes that would rapidly follow. The economy would survive as long as there is wealth to be made(which there always will be). The sun would come up and everyone would move on.

    Public universities are a good thing, but one of the greatest lies of our generation is that a college degree is necessary for a good high paying job. Trade jobs are huge and in high demand. If you can become a competent machinist or welder, you will make alot of money as long as you are willing to work and constantly increase your skill set. And i am saying all this as i hold a college degree that is required for my work. Also getting a degree in a worthless field is a complete waste of time, but that should go without saying...
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 02:35 PM
  14. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    The president and his supporters have a what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine attitude.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 02:37 PM
  15. pappy53's Avatar
    I think it should be a deduction on your payroll check, just like medicare is. There's a big philosophical difference between you and me. I am a blue collar, working class, union electrician. I am a left wing Democrat. Publicly owned vs Privately owned doesn't scare me or throw me in a frenzy. I think "we" rather than "me".
    According to every poll, the majority of "we" don't want Obamacare. Where is "majority rules"? It being passed without a single Republican vote should signal a problem.
    And no, it shouldn't be a payroll deduction. Socialized healthcare is a travesty. The government couldn't couldn't even run the automobile trade-in program. What makes you think that this will be any different? People can't even sign up on the website, for pete's sake! A website that they had 3 years to get right, and spent $400,000,000 on (with a budget of $94,000,000, BTW).
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 02:38 PM
  16. palandri's Avatar
    According to every poll, the majority of "we" don't want Obamacare. Where is "majority rules"? It being passed without a single Republican vote should signal a problem.
    And no, it shouldn't be a payroll deduction. Socialized healthcare is a travesty. The government couldn't couldn't even run the automobile trade-in program. What makes you think that this will be any different? People can't even sign up on the website, for pete's sake! A website that they had 3 years to get right, and spent $400,000,000 on (with a budget of $94,000,000, BTW).
    If that's the way you feel, then go join Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann via Stop Obamacare Now!
    10-16-2013 02:46 PM
  17. craZDude's Avatar
    The economy would not spontaneously combust if the government disappeared. Would it be crazy for a while. O yeah. But that is because of all the changes that would rapidly follow. The economy would survive as long as there is wealth to be made(which there always will be). The sun would come up and everyone would move on.

    Public universities are a good thing, but one of the greatest lies of our generation is that a college degree is necessary for a good high paying job. Trade jobs are huge and in high demand. If you can become a competent machinist or welder, you will make alot of money as long as you are willing to work and constantly increase your skill set. And i am saying all this as i hold a college degree that is required for my work. Also getting a degree in a worthless field is a complete waste of time, but that should go without saying...
    Historically, governments have always been around when there was a successful society, and I'm talking thousands of years of history here. What makes you so sure our current society could withstand losing its government?

    I never said colleges were the only way people could get a high paying job. But that also wasn't my point. A more educated population can make more informed and better decisions when it comes to voting or policy making. This would then hopefully reflect back to help create a more successful economy. Just because it isn't necessary to be educated to work doesn't mean that is a waste of time for most people.

    Seriously? A complete waste of time? Because no one who was, say, a Classics major has ever made a difference. Just because the field you are studying isn't directly applicable doesn't mean that it is a waste. Historians aren't a waste because they can teach us about the past, and help society from making mistakes it's made before. Dance majors help develop human expression and art. Please, give me an example of a major that is useless.
    10-16-2013 02:47 PM
  18. msndrstood's Avatar
    I think it should be a deduction on your payroll check, just like medicare is. There's a big philosophical difference between you and me. I am a blue collar, working class, union electrician. I am a left wing Democrat. Publicly owned vs Privately owned doesn't scare me or throw me in a frenzy. I think "we" rather than "me".
    I knew we saw eye to eye on a lot of things for a reason. Thanks from a blue collar union carpenter's wife.

    Sent via The Big, Bad, Beautiful Note 3
    palandri likes this.
    10-16-2013 02:47 PM
  19. llamabreath's Avatar
    A website that they had 3 years to get right, and spent $400,000,000 on (with a budget of $94,000,000, BTW).
    I told them I could design that site for millions less, smh.



    Signatures, shmignatures...
    Aquila and mrsmumbles like this.
    10-16-2013 02:49 PM
  20. pappy53's Avatar
    If that's the way you feel, then go join Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann via Stop Obamacare Now!
    What part of "the majority doesn't want it" is so hard for people to understand? I do realize that it is a law, although passed in a very shady manner, but fact remains that is is wanted by the minority of the population, not the majority.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 02:52 PM
  21. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    The economy would not spontaneously combust if the government disappeared. Would it be crazy for a while. O yeah. But that is because of all the changes that would rapidly follow. The economy would survive as long as there is wealth to be made(which there always will be). The sun would come up and everyone would move on.

    Public universities are a good thing, but one of the greatest lies of our generation is that a college degree is necessary for a good high paying job. Trade jobs are huge and in high demand. If you can become a competent machinist or welder, you will make alot of money as long as you are willing to work and constantly increase your skill set. And i am saying all this as i hold a college degree that is required for my work. Also getting a degree in a worthless field is a complete waste of time, but that should go without saying...
    I agree on the college degree thing, as trade jobs and skilled labor are highly sought after and do pay well, but does require training (who's going to pay for it). So the argument is the same, really.

    This may be a poor example, but in the movie Out of Time the "wealth" definitely funneled to the top, with those on the bottom being squeezed for everything with little left to live on. The corporations that ran things constantly increased the cost of goods while maintaining the same level of wages. So yes, a movie reference isn't always the greatest, but it gives a visual for the point I'm trying to make.

    There are plenty of real world examples of wealth being collected at the top with not a whole lot going to everyone else. Many of the revolts/uprisings that have happened in Africa can be attributed to this. Food and aid being kept by those in power and not being given to those it was intended for.

    The president and his supporters have a what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine attitude.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    Everybody does, actually.

    According to every poll, the majority of "we" don't want Obamacare. Where is "majority rules"? It being passed without a single Republican vote should signal a problem.
    And no, it shouldn't be a payroll deduction. Socialized healthcare is a travesty. The government couldn't couldn't even run the automobile trade-in program. What makes you think that this will be any different? People can't even sign up on the website, for pete's sake! A website that they had 3 years to get right, and spent $400,000,000 on (with a budget of $94,000,000, BTW).
    It's been established already in this thread that a country isn't ran based on polls, nor should politicians make decisions based on them. The election already happened. That was America making it's choice. Next election, if we didn't like the way it went, we'll choose differently. The President should do what he thinks is best, while Congress should do what best represents their constituents. Party lines suck and are not a good way to conduct business. Being Republican or Democrat should never automatically determine how you vote for a particular bill or piece of legislation, but that's what's happening right now. Something needs to stop the going in circles mentality.
    palandri and Fairclough like this.
    10-16-2013 02:53 PM
  22. msndrstood's Avatar
    What part of "the majority doesn't want it" is so hard for people to understand? I do realize that it is a law, although passed in a very shady manner, but fact remains that is is wanted by the minority of the population, not the majority.
    From Forbes. An acceptable conservative site...

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapoth...ing-obamacare/

    It seems people want it to work.

    Sent via The Big, Bad, Beautiful Note 3
    palandri, Fairclough and craZDude like this.
    10-16-2013 02:58 PM
  23. palandri's Avatar
    What part of "the majority doesn't want it" is so hard for people to understand? I do realize that it is a law, although passed in a very shady manner, but fact remains that is is wanted by the minority of the population, not the majority.
    To you it was passed in a shady manner, to me it wasn't passed in a shady manner. I truly believe that the right wing has put out so much misinformation about the ACA that people are now afraid it. Death panels, blue end of life pills, pulling the plug on Granny because she's not worth saving...etc...

    Like I said, go join Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann via Stop Obamacare Now!
    msndrstood likes this.
    10-16-2013 03:02 PM
  24. pappy53's Avatar
    From Forbes. An acceptable conservative site...

    New Poll: Only One-Third Of Americans Support Repealing, Defunding Or Delaying Obamacare - Forbes

    It seems people want it to work.

    Sent via The Big, Bad, Beautiful Note 3
    Of course they want it to work. It's a law now. But they still don't want it.
    And the poll was 42% Democrats.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 03:05 PM
  25. msndrstood's Avatar
    Of course they want it to work. It's a law now. But they still don't want it.
    That makes no sense.

    Sent via The Big, Bad, Beautiful Note 3
    palandri likes this.
    10-16-2013 03:06 PM
749 ... 1415161718 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Changing battery's better to shutdown the S4?
    By Nuno Mota in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-02-2013, 12:15 PM
  2. 4.3 random shutdown
    By talsi_st in forum Google / Samsung Galaxy Nexus
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-21-2013, 12:45 AM
  3. samsung s4 shutdown "help"
    By Shatha816 in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-27-2013, 07:46 AM
  4. Government Notifications & the Skyrocket
    By SpringCTIL in forum Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-23-2013, 05:50 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD