Following Wal-Mart, McDonald's in trouble for advise for poor workers.
- Thread starter Rhomega Beta
- Start date
- Status
Minimum wage would need to rise to six figures/year if you want people to have 3 kids and not suffer, and the economy won't support that. I'm not against taxing the rich more either, but not so that people can be irresponsible and have 3 kids without care. Tax the rich and raise these kids in well maintained government facilities and schools.
Mandated livable wages results in higher unemployment, how are you going to solve that?
How about instead of using the taxes to raise these kids in well maintained gov. facilities, you use those taxes to help the families that need help.
You shouldn't be able to bring as many people as you want to this world without any consequences. Otherwise people will just have 20 kids since the government's taking care of them. There has to be some sort of deterrent against being irresponsible with having kids.
Not in a civilized society. Which is something you will have to accept.
In the same way we're solving the problem these companies have created by paying people as little as they can. Have the gov. help them.
Is this what actually happened when minimum wage was instituted/raised? Has it happened in states that raised the minimum wage recently?
RoninChaos
Member
I think the people advocating for Walmart and McDonalds to continue paying low wages don't seem to understand the relationship between the people who work for walmart, and those on government assistance. And that's scary. If the people who were so adamant about cutting the size of the government understood the corelation they would be for demanding companies like walmart and McDonalds pay a living wage. They would be for raising the minimum wage so less people would be dependent on the government to make ends meet. They would be FOR things like Obama care providing contraceptives so we don't have as many children being born into poverty. They would be for infrastructure improvements and job programs to get people back into the economy and contributing towards the growth of the nation.
But that would make sense.
Instead, most are content with treating the poor as the lesser. The attitude is "Fuck them! They don't work hard enough!", "They're drug addicts!" or whatever excuse is used to treat our fellow man as less-than. It's really disgusting.
But that would make sense.
Instead, most are content with treating the poor as the lesser. The attitude is "Fuck them! They don't work hard enough!", "They're drug addicts!" or whatever excuse is used to treat our fellow man as less-than. It's really disgusting.
Says who? A civilized society is responsible for controlling its population. An uncivilized society is where many kids are born to the same mother, just like how it is with animals so that some will survive.
How old are you? Are you honestly saying China with it's One Child Laws is the only civilized society on the planet?
What kind of civilized society controls its people, as opposed to help them when they need help?
What kind of civilized society punishes its responsible members financially to help the irresponsible ones? What is the incentive for being responsible in such a society? Your civil society is going to end up like the movie Idiocracy in the future.
My solution was to help the parents through taxes, yours was to raise these kids in well maintained government facilities and schools, also through taxes.
Either way, both cost money and ''punish its responsible members financially''.
So, are you arguing for eugenics now? Because that's essentially the only way to stop ''the irresponsible ones'' from punishing others.
He came in poligaf a while ago insisting that the only reason that cost of living is 40% higher in Norway is because the people make a living wage. First off, if that was true, I don't see the problem with it, and second off, comparing the cost of living between the US and Norway without taking into account anything else is completely fucking ridiculous.
I don't think the dude hates poor people so much as he is an extreme case of "Fuck you, I've got mine".
How do you feel about the mortgage bubble? You probably blame the people taking out the loans and not the people who were pushing them on them irresponsibly.
I bet you're super mad your hard earned tax dollars went to helping some dumb poor person who bought a house they couldn't afford right? Not the bank CEO who got to switch jobs and still make millions from the bailout?
So now poor people are irresponsible and idiots. Funny I thought all the data showed that povery leads to poverty leads to poverty.
CHEEZMO
Obsidian fan
Yes but only one vindictively punishes the poor.
postcognition
Member
Even if you are mentally prepared for college it's not easy to get into a better situation if you have a minimum wage job and few resources. Barely scraping together enough to live and having poor prospects is exhausting. Just saving enough money to pay for college application fees and initial expenses can be exceedingly difficult. It's hard to get a better job if you can't afford any time off, and if anything goes wrong it can literally wipe out everything you saved through years of working very hard and spending very little.
I don't aim to stop the irresponsible ones from punishing others, I aim for the punishment to be shared equally. So the irresponsible ones don't get to know or raise more kids then they can afford, but they're free to give birth and have their genes represented in the overall gene pool. Their "punishment" is not being able to see their kids, while the responsible ones are burdened with the taxes to fund the facilities that will raise those kids with the same financial, educational, and health advantages as a kid in an average middle class family. The kids get a shot at social mobility, and irresponsible parents don't get away with anything.
Not at all, both are to be blame and punished. In an ideal world, the guy buying the house loses the house, the bank CEO goes to jail. Punishment for everyone.
Holy shit. You really hate poor people don't you?
Do you think a child would rather grow up with his parents in a lower class environment, or in a government facility?
Basically, do you know who you're actually punishing with this?
Government facility where they're fed, clothed, educated, and taken care of, of course instead of barely seeing their parents because they work 16 hours/week.
Responsible people are welcome to adopt kids, and everyone is welcome to spend time with kids as big brothers/sisters, etc.
God Dayumm
Banned
Can't the government print infinite money? Why don't they eliminate poverty with that and stop taxing everyone else?
That belief explain a lot. Having grown up in a lower class enviroment, I can tell you that you're wrong.
There's no substitute for a parent that loves you.
RoninChaos
Member
I'm glad I missed that conversation.
I think otherwise, but if you say so, then all the kids of those irresponsible people should be distributed amongst responsible people who want to adopt. I wonder if there would be an excess of kids, or excess of responsible parents in that scenario.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Dude, there are already an excess of kids in the adoption system. Right now. There are not enough parents who want to adopt as is, let alone if you inject a bunch more kids.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
I don't think it's the job of McDonalds to redistribute wealth. That's what we have government for. And government doesn't set wages, the labour market does.
Those 'guides' if you can call them that, are indeed offensive though.
Those 'guides' if you can call them that, are indeed offensive though.
Excess of kids, or excess of non-white kids?
Serious question.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I'll try and find the numbers but no matter what they are isn't this comment here specifically undermining your argument? Poverty disproportionately affects minorities, more non-white kids in the system definitely won't be met by a sudden massive increase in parents willing to adopt
Why does that matter?
Either way, you're going to end up with an excess of kids. Even more than now.
Having worked on HR/Benefits solutions like Wellness Guides, Financial Advice products, and other things that companies buy/contract into to provide these services to their employees, I recognized this as more than likely being a wellness program of sorts coming from a 3rd party provider and not actually McDonalds themselves. Although McDs would have to approve the content created for them.
This comes from a program run by nuturhealth. And from what I read this morning when looking up info about it - a lot of the offensive quotes were taken out of context. The stress reduction tips come from a health/welness section, the stuff about stretching meals and portion control come from a section dealing with weight loss and nutrition, not Financial Advice for their workforce. Although it was certainly presented by these lowpayisnotOK.com folks as being from such.
The budget guide that was in the news over the summer from McDonalds was also from one of these third party programs, this time from VISA.
This comes from a program run by nuturhealth. And from what I read this morning when looking up info about it - a lot of the offensive quotes were taken out of context. The stress reduction tips come from a health/welness section, the stuff about stretching meals and portion control come from a section dealing with weight loss and nutrition, not Financial Advice for their workforce. Although it was certainly presented by these lowpayisnotOK.com folks as being from such.
The budget guide that was in the news over the summer from McDonalds was also from one of these third party programs, this time from VISA.
Moral Panic
Member
Who pays for that procedure? And who pays for it to be reversed when she makes enough money again? And who pays for the procedure to be redone when she loses that job?
You don't care about saving money, only about hurting people who are already poor.
What a weird belief system that you would rather redistribute people's children before redistributing people's money.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
All hail the mighty economy, tremble in fear before anything that someone suggests might cause it displeasure
That is one fucked up ideal you have. Reminds me of a sci-fi plot about a controlling government in the future.
True, but I think those excess kids will be better off in government facilities than their current situation, and you think otherwise.
It's redistributing both. Money goes to taking care of the kids, and also poor people while teaching responsibility and preventing an idiocracy type future. Just because you have money should not mean you're the only one to sacrifice. All people who have money must be evil and gotten there by fucking everyone over right? They can't be people who sacrificed and put off having kids to reach their goals, while other irresponsible folk have fucked away to oblivion, right? It's all Mr. Burns type billionaires that get punished by taxes and not the middle/upper-middle class, right?
Anyone who disagrees with this post should take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask themselves who they have become.
I'm being fucking serious.
Baraka in the White House
2-Terms of Kombat
I work for one of the most profitable companies that ever existed. Our Christmas bonus is a $25 Kroger card.
So what makes you think they would be better off in government facilities?
You keep equating taking children from poor people to taking money from rich people.
Do you see nothing wrong with that?.
When I worked there in high school, we were not only closed on Thanksgiving, but there was a free employee breakfast where all the managers came in and cooked for the employees and their families. Now I stop by one and see a big sign saying they're open 24 hours on Thanksgiving.
You are a psychopath.
This is exceedingly disturbing.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
People get Christmas bonuses? That's news to me, I wouldn't mind some McDonald's coupons lol.
edit: What in the fuck, I wish I didn't have to read that
edit: What in the fuck, I wish I didn't have to read that
That doesn't make it right! You're talking about redistributing human beings. Like they're property. Like they're objects. Like their value is monetary. That's not a slippery slope, sir, that is a sheer cliff.
User 100115
Banned
I can't believe that 'poors shouldn't breed and if they do their kids need to be taken away' is a better argument than 'pay a living wage'.
And I love how people are ignoring the fact that to become a 'skilled worker' in the US you have to drop a shit ton of money into higher education.
But nope, poors are just lazy and irresponsible, fuck them.
And I love how people are ignoring the fact that to become a 'skilled worker' in the US you have to drop a shit ton of money into higher education.
But nope, poors are just lazy and irresponsible, fuck them.
Fisticuffs
Member
How are people getting brainwashed into thinking this way?
The worst part is even when you've paid for that education you don't have "experience" so you're still fucked.
- Status