Capitalism - DOES NOT COMPUTE.

FaithLikeARock · Jun 19, 2008

Panzerkampfwagen said:
You're 17 and have no marketable skills, education, or experience, and it appears you have a very thin resume.

Now, why should someone pay you more?

Actually my volunteer experience alone takes up a whole page. My resume is far from thin. It's simply mostly with children whom I would love to work with, but everywhere requires I be 18. For no reason other then "Well all 17-year-olds are immature nobodies who have no experience with children aren't they?" I also have experience in photography and I would adore getting a job at a photography place. But again, 18. I would think it would be smarter to hire people based on what they have to show for it, instead of age.

Panzerkamfwagen · Jun 19, 2008

LOL.

Thread drift.

FaithLikeARock · Jun 19, 2008

Panzerkampfwagen said:
When did I ever say we should abolish the minimum wage?

What is the labor of a 17 year old kid with no skills, no experience, and no education worth?

If I was an employer, I know I wouldn't want to take a risk on hiring someone that had no experience, no skills, and no education?

And just to rub salt in the wound, I've never worked at a minimum wage job.

Do you know how people get experience Panzer? By working, in the field. The only way people do that, is if people hire them into the field.

Panzerkamfwagen · Jun 19, 2008

FaithLikeARock said:
Actually my volunteer experience alone takes up a whole page. My resume is far from thin. It's simply mostly with children whom I would love to work with, but everywhere requires I be 18. For no reason other then "Well all 17-year-olds are immature nobodies who have no experience with children aren't they?" I also have experience in photography and I would adore getting a job at a photography place. But again, 18. I would think it would be smarter to hire people based on what they have to show for it, instead of age.

Or it could be that 17 year olds are not old enough to enter into legally binding contracts.

FaithLikeARock · Jun 19, 2008

Panzerkampfwagen said:
Or it could be that 17 year olds are not old enough to enter into legally binding contracts.

Then why can they work everywhere else?

GuardianShua · Jun 19, 2008

FaithLikeARock said:
Since Republicans don't seem to like the idea of all people getting paid equal thus getting rid of the need for things like welfare, assistance and everything they despise so much, I have a solution.

We pay minimum wage jobs more.

Not only would this make it where those less fortunate who couldn't get a secondary education no longer need to live off government funding, but it's also fair. See people in jobs which pay more typically enjoy their jobs. That's why they studied it. But people in fast food usually are only working there because they have no other choice and don't enjoy it but still work hard anyway. Doesn't this mean that THEY should be paid more for providing service to people when they don't want to?

I'm 17. I work in fast food because it's pretty much the only choice I have as well as retail. And it is worth far more than the $8/hr they pay me. Imagine standing on your feet for up to 10 hours at a time, waiting on customers who will yell and moan and complain about the tiniest things which generally aren't even your fault and then getting a paycheck that will hardly pay for my car insurance let alone my rent. Let's compare this to say, an actress, who spends her day doing something which I PAY to do at school. It's fun, it's what she likes to do. And she's going to get worldwide fame and millions of dollars for it. Let's even look at the CEO. He loves his job and makes a ton of money and because business is his favorite thing enjoys every second and his paycheck will send him and his family on vacation. Now, look at this, all these are fairly corporate businesses. The difference is that first person is either too young to work anywhere else or didn't get a chance to go to school because they already didn't have the money. The other two probably did go to school. Also, the first job is not enjoyable at while the other two are very enjoyable to individual people.

Now since all these companies likely make very close to the same amount of money, why do their employees get such meager pay in the first job, but lots in the second? "Because they're educated!" Yeah, so?

This is the fatal flaw in Capitalism. It wants people to pay their way through college, support their family, work their way up the ladder and then make money either doing their hobby or doing nothing. BUT before they make this money they have to pay for school, living costs and every other necessity. Unless your mommy and daddy will pay for it, it's impossible. It's like telling the cow to make his own milk and then cutting off his utter.

So what's your take?

In order for the rich to get richer, they must live there lives at others expense. That's where secret societies and politicians become helpful for people with money. They are tools for the rich.

Panzerkamfwagen · Jun 19, 2008

FaithLikeARock said:
Do you know how people get experience Panzer? By working, in the field. The only way people do that, is if people hire them into the field.

Then perhaps you should expand your resume.

LonesomeTexan · Jun 19, 2008

MichaelTheeArchAngel said:
In order for the rich to get richer, they must live there lives at others expense. That's where secret societies and politicians become helpful for people with money. They are tools for the rich.

I agree to a certain extent, but this is something both parties are responsible for. needless to say, when I see bureaucrats asking for more of my hard earned dollars (not that I pay taxes anymore, since only a fool would give a dime of their income to the IRS) to subsidize wealthy farmers, irresponsible borrowers, wall street bankers, campaign contributers, special interest groups, buying votes with money that doesn't belong to them, ect... I get a bit suspicious of their motives for increasing taxation on an already heavily burdened country.

When I look back to the founders of this nation and the leadership today, I shudder. The good news is that people a small percentage of the population is finally waking up to the chains that are being put in place the this ever increasing federal bureaucracy. It is my fear however that it is too little, too late. It's like no one gets it, and the people that do get marginalized as being crazy.

Harpuia · Jun 19, 2008

LonesomeTexan said:
I agree to a certain extent, but this is something both parties are responsible for. needless to say, when I see bureaucrats asking for more of my hard earned dollars (not that I pay taxes anymore, since only a fool would give a dime of their income to the IRS) to subsidize wealthy farmers, irresponsible borrowers, wall street bankers, campaign contributers, special interest groups, buying votes with money that doesn't belong to them, ect... I get a bit suspicious of their motives for increasing taxation on an already heavily burdened country.

When I look back to the founders of this nation and the leadership today, I shudder. The good news is that people a small percentage of the population is finally waking up to the chains that are being put in place the this ever increasing federal bureaucracy. It is my fear however that it is too little, too late. It's like no one gets it, and the people that do get marginalized as being crazy.

I've been slowly learning that the reason for that is because people just don't care anymore. Even elections are no longer about the issues and come down to who has the catchiest phrase. Sad, but true.

LonesomeTexan · Jun 19, 2008

Harpuia said:
I've been slowly learning that the reason for that is because people just don't care anymore. Even elections are no longer about the issues and come down to who has the catchiest phrase. Sad, but true.

The people of this nation have been intentionally dumbed down. It's hard to make slaves out of the informed. Am I the only one that sees a major conflict of interest in government run education? We'll never see school choice/voucher program because if the bureaucrats ever let the education system slip into the hands of private individuals, self governing people would be in control of their government instead of it being the other way around.

Zlex · Jun 20, 2008

MichaelTheeArchAngel said:
In order for the rich to get richer, they must live there lives at others expense.

I'm getting 'richer,' but I'm self-employed. Feel free to keep believing what you will.

If it makes you feel better to think that I never have to consider how to exert effort to meet my needs for 'food, heat, meds, or taxes to keep my home' -- as opposed to all of the "hard-working" Americans, well then, enjoy your cold comfort at that myth.

For well over two decades, I've forgone hiring "hard working" Americans, precisly because I didn't want to ride their backs like the parasitic scum folks like you believe me to be.

As a conseqeunce, they've been free to realize the fruits of their own real hard working labors, without me unscrupulously taking advantage of them. I mean, riding their backs by giving them a job.

In bizarro land, that means I have had to just wait patiently for the gov't to send me my weekly check, which I arrange by hiring lobbyists in DC to cajole/bribe politicians into "listening to the likes of me" and squeezing it from hardworking true Americans.

Not.

Truthfully, how is the left wing fantasy treating hard working Americans these days, and when, if ever, do you think they will wise up?

Harpuia · Jun 20, 2008

LonesomeTexan said:
The people of this nation have been intentionally dumbed down. It's hard to make slaves out of the informed. Am I the only one that sees a major conflict of interest in government run education? We'll never see school choice/voucher program because if the bureaucrats ever let the education system slip into the hands of private individuals, self governing people would be in control of their government instead of it being the other way around.

I think in a way, there's being informed, and being "informed". I believe education was conformed to a single stature mainly so you wouldn't have conflict of what one person believed. Basically, even the basics like arithmetic, science, and english would be challenged depending on who teaches it. Without even the basics, you won't be making a very sound decision.

Harpuia · Jun 20, 2008

Zlex said:
I'm getting 'richer,' but I'm self-employed. Feel free to keep believing what you will.

If it makes you feel better to think that I never have to consider how to exert effort to meet my needs for 'food, heat, meds, or taxes to keep my home' -- as opposed to all of the "hard-working" Americans, well then, enjoy your cold comfort at that myth.

For well over two decades, I've forgone hiring "hard working" Americans, precisly because I didn't want to ride their backs like the parasitic scum folks like you believe me to be.

As a conseqeunce, they've been free to realize the fruits of their own real hard working labors, without me unscrupulously taking advantage of them. I mean, riding their backs by giving them a job.

In bizarro land, that means I have had to just wait patiently for the gov't to send me my weekly check, which I arrange by hiring lobbyists in DC to cajole/bribe politicians into "listening to the likes of me" and squeezing it from hardworking true Americans.

Not.

Truthfully, how is the left wing fantasy treating hard working Americans these days, and when, if ever, do you think they will wise up?

I lived with the working class. My parents could afford more, but they lived well below their means.

My parents were fine, but I noticed people around me over the last few years, hard working people struggling just to make ends meet. A person, I think he's about 20, who lives about 1 1/2 blocks from me has told me his wages has gone up from $8.00 to $9.00 an hour in the last 5 years. $1 an hour, and inflation over the last 5 years off all commodities has gone up much more than a mere 11% since then.

I don't know about small businesses. I like to assume most of them are pretty honest. But I do know that the big business CEOs are all about the profit. They're all about getting the money NOW at any cost, even if it would hurt them down the road. I've taken several classes and might take the two final classes I need for an Economics minor (on top of an Engineering/Comp Sci major with Math minor). I've seen the way that people think in those classes. They believe only in profit. Sure, there are a few that have a heart and believe that they should provide good enough wages for the working class to live by as long as they work... but they are so few and far between it's like finding a needle in a haystack.

I'm not promoting socialism. I don't agree with socialism. The utopian idea of everyone just not working and getting a monthly check from the government, and/or providing free everything (including things people might not need) for a super-high tax rate doesn't make sense to me, because we don't know where it will end.

What I DON'T believe in, is a plutocracy. A world where the rich slowly siphon the life away from the poor, increasing the rich/poor gap until we are down to two classes, those that eat and those that don't. This is a similar to Imperial Communism only taken through time, and we should do SOMETHING to make sure such things are never a reality.

GuardianShua · Jun 20, 2008

LonesomeTexan said:
I agree to a certain extent, but this is something both parties are responsible for. needless to say, when I see bureaucrats asking for more of my hard earned dollars (not that I pay taxes anymore, since only a fool would give a dime of their income to the IRS) to subsidize wealthy farmers, irresponsible borrowers, wall street bankers, campaign contributers, special interest groups, buying votes with money that doesn't belong to them, ect... I get a bit suspicious of their motives for increasing taxation on an already heavily burdened country.

When I look back to the founders of this nation and the leadership today, I shudder. The good news is that people a small percentage of the population is finally waking up to the chains that are being put in place the this ever increasing federal bureaucracy. It is my fear however that it is too little, too late. It's like no one gets it, and the people that do get marginalized as being crazy.

Did you know that every single president has been a member of secret society?

GuardianShua · Jun 20, 2008

Zlex said:
I'm getting 'richer,' but I'm self-employed. Feel free to keep believing what you will.

If it makes you feel better to think that I never have to consider how to exert effort to meet my needs for 'food, heat, meds, or taxes to keep my home' -- as opposed to all of the "hard-working" Americans, well then, enjoy your cold comfort at that myth.

For well over two decades, I've forgone hiring "hard working" Americans, precisly because I didn't want to ride their backs like the parasitic scum folks like you believe me to be.

As a conseqeunce, they've been free to realize the fruits of their own real hard working labors, without me unscrupulously taking advantage of them. I mean, riding their backs by giving them a job.

In bizarro land, that means I have had to just wait patiently for the gov't to send me my weekly check, which I arrange by hiring lobbyists in DC to cajole/bribe politicians into "listening to the likes of me" and squeezing it from hardworking true Americans.

Not.

Truthfully, how is the left wing fantasy treating hard working Americans these days, and when, if ever, do you think they will wise up?

Ross Perot was not a member of a secret society. I never said there was no exception to the rule. I'm just referring to the rule, not the exceptions.

LonesomeTexan · Jun 20, 2008

MichaelTheeArchAngel said:
Did you know that every single president has been a member of secret society?

that may very well be true, but at least for the first 120 years of this nation's history, the federal government pretty much left us the hell alone to carry out our business/commerce without interference. the freedom to be left alone and unmolested by your government is one of the greatest of liberties. now it seems like big brother is just around every corner watching your every move.

joebudda · Jun 20, 2008

Harpuia said:
My parents were fine, but I noticed people around me over the last few years, hard working people struggling just to make ends meet. A person, I think he's about 20, who lives about 1 1/2 blocks from me has told me his wages has gone up from $8.00 to $9.00 an hour in the last 5 years. $1 an hour, and inflation over the last 5 years off all commodities has gone up much more than a mere 11% since then.

If he is still working at a job he got when he was 15, maybe it is time to start looking for a better job? Like maybe one that doesn't higher 15 year olds? Because if they higher 15 year olds I would assume the skills needed for the job is next to nil.

Harpuia · Jun 20, 2008

joebudda said:
If he is still working at a job he got when he was 15, maybe it is time to start looking for another job? Like maybe one that doesn't higher 15 year olds? Because if they higher 15 year olds I would assume the skills needed for the job is next to nil.

Yeah, it was at Wal-Mart and he was 16.

But I'd think that even a job like that, you should be given SOME kind of chance to have the basic necessities, not simply run the person over to the ground.

GuardianShua · Jun 20, 2008

LonesomeTexan said:
that may very well be true, but at least for the first 120 years of this nation's history, the federal government pretty much left us the hell alone to carry out our business/commerce without interference. the freedom to be left alone and unmolested by your government is one of the greatest of liberties. now it seems like big brother is just around every corner watching your every move.

Things are always changing. It will without a doubt get worse.

joebudda · Jun 20, 2008

Harpuia said:
Yeah, it was at Wal-Mart and he was 16.

But I'd think that even a job like that, you should be given SOME kind of chance to have the basic necessities, not simply run the person over to the ground.

People get paid according to their skill set. You wouldn't buy something for more then market value, would you? Lets say that you wanted to get a monster energy drink, and there are two stores within walking distance. Store #1 is selling it for $10 and store #2 is selling it for $3, what store will you go to? What if the government decided that you always had to pay $10 for that drink? would you still buy the drink knowing it isn't worth what you are paying?

Your skills are the drink, and the costumer is the "job", why would they pay more then market value for the same "skills"?

It isn't tough to fill a unskilled position.

Capitalism - DOES NOT COMPUTE.

Let the human mind loose.

Es braust unser Panzer im Sturmwind dahin.

Let the human mind loose.

Es braust unser Panzer im Sturmwind dahin.

Let the human mind loose.

Well-Known Member

Es braust unser Panzer im Sturmwind dahin.

Veteran

Oldie... very very oldie...

Veteran

Senior Member

Oldie... very very oldie...

Oldie... very very oldie...

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Newbie

Oldie... very very oldie...

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency