tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,559
|
Post by tallguy on Jul 31, 2022 17:06:35 GMT -5
I've always tied it to the Republican war on tax rates, factoring in a few years lag time perhaps. There was far less reason to try and scam everything for oneself when much of it would be lost to taxes. With the huge drop in rates for high-income persons, it became worthwhile for the greedy to scam or steal as much as possible from the lessers of society since they could then keep far more. Who cares about virtue when there are fortunes to be made, ethically or not? We were better off as a society when the top marginal rates were high so profits were spread around instead of going only to the top management. Greed benefits only a relative few. wow. i didn't expect this post from you. i consider you a moderate/conservative in many ways.but this is precisely right. America has been convinced that high tax rates mean higher prices and fewer jobs, but that is absurd. prices and hiring have to do with the cost structure of a business, and the cost structure is PRE-TAX. so what the government SHOULD do is to INCENTIVISE SPENDING on the part of businesses, and you do this by raising taxes. why? because businesses THEN become more focused on spending than on saving (saving is intrinsically anti-growth, because it takes money out of circulation). what America has become is an oligarchy. and yeah, there is a lot i am not saying here. this is a very deep subject. I have always said that I am politically moderate, with many individual positions on each side of the spectrum. I do find it amusing that there are a number of people who apparently consider me quite left. It is true that I post more (and probably more passionately) with regard to my liberal positions, but that is primarily because there is so much more idiocy to argue against coming from the far-right.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,439
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 31, 2022 17:14:54 GMT -5
wow. i didn't expect this post from you. i consider you a moderate/conservative in many ways.but this is precisely right. America has been convinced that high tax rates mean higher prices and fewer jobs, but that is absurd. prices and hiring have to do with the cost structure of a business, and the cost structure is PRE-TAX. so what the government SHOULD do is to INCENTIVISE SPENDING on the part of businesses, and you do this by raising taxes. why? because businesses THEN become more focused on spending than on saving (saving is intrinsically anti-growth, because it takes money out of circulation). what America has become is an oligarchy. and yeah, there is a lot i am not saying here. this is a very deep subject. I have always said that I am politically moderate, with many individual positions on each side of the spectrum. I do find it amusing that there are a number of people who apparently consider me quite left. It is true that I post more (and probably more passionately) with regard to my liberal positions, but that is primarily because there is so much more idiocy to argue against coming from the far-right. oh, i know where you stand. it is approximately the same place i stand. we have a few differences, but in principle we generally agree. i just wasn't expecting such an egalitarian capitalist post. it is rare to see this attitude expressed from the MIDDLE any more. it generally comes from the left with a sort of big red "tax the rich" button on it. but your remarks here are more nuanced than that. it has more to do with the social order, which is a way of talking that i think is largely absent from politics any longer. even Biden doesn't do it, and he could well be expected to. there are long term health benefits to a nation that heeds the idea that all members of a given society are equally valued in terms of getting a "forward share" in economics. in other words, that all peoples should benefit PROPORTIONATELY from the gains that a nation sees. i think this is actually part of what underlies the despair of the white working class. they see and feel the problem, but they are looking to the people that are causing it to solve it. until they can see that, i have little hope that America will right a half century of wrongs.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,559
|
Post by tallguy on Jul 31, 2022 19:50:27 GMT -5
I have always said that I am politically moderate, with many individual positions on each side of the spectrum. I do find it amusing that there are a number of people who apparently consider me quite left. It is true that I post more (and probably more passionately) with regard to my liberal positions, but that is primarily because there is so much more idiocy to argue against coming from the far-right. oh, i know where you stand. it is approximately the same place i stand. we have a few differences, but in principle we generally agree. i just wasn't expecting such an egalitarian capitalist post. it is rare to see this attitude expressed from the MIDDLE any more. it generally comes from the left with a sort of big red "tax the rich" button on it. but your remarks here are more nuanced than that. it has more to do with the social order, which is a way of talking that i think is largely absent from politics any longer. even Biden doesn't do it, and he could well be expected to. there are long term health benefits to a nation that heeds the idea that all members of a given society are equally valued in terms of getting a "forward share" in economics. in other words, that all peoples should benefit PROPORTIONATELY from the gains that a nation sees. i think this is actually part of what underlies the despair of the white working class. they see and feel the problem, but they are looking to the people that are causing it to solve it. until they can see that, i have little hope that America will right a half century of wrongs. Yes, we have discussed before that we agree on most things, so I was not necessarily feeling a need to respond TO you on that score. It was more a "taking off" point to explain myself to those who have perhaps not read me as much. Thank you for recognizing nuance when you see it. I don't often have faith that people do that, but it would make discussions so much more productive if they did.
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 1, 2022 6:08:50 GMT -5
So you couldn't wait to divide up that bonus money to the people on the shop floor right. That all you got? Nothing about company executives taking all the wealth from the success of the business while the people giving their life's blood get nothing. Did you know how that worked in the corporate world? OMG, when Trump gave the big tax cuts to large corporations, they were licking their chops for their bonus. Think it tricked down? And you have the nerve to lay the blame of school shootings on DEMS. Well did your bonus trickled down to the workers. HUH? I received a meager bonus last year 1500 i gave it all away to the floor workers at xmas time.
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,605
|
Post by tbop77 on Aug 1, 2022 6:20:29 GMT -5
That all you got? Nothing about company executives taking all the wealth from the success of the business while the people giving their life's blood get nothing. Did you know how that worked in the corporate world? OMG, when Trump gave the big tax cuts to large corporations, they were licking their chops for their bonus. Think it tricked down? And you have the nerve to lay the blame of school shootings on DEMS. Well did your bonus trickled down to the workers. HUH? I received a meager bonus last year 1500 i gave it all away to the floor workers at xmas time. We've been instructed never to talk about the bonus program, esp with the shop guys. God forbid they find out what is going on. Esp after the meeting the managers had with them stating "bad year, no raises this year" But go ahead and deflect from the point being made, sweetie, I'm used to it.
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 1, 2022 6:23:22 GMT -5
But hey, at least scgal has basically admitted that she uses no logic, reasoning, or scientific points for her opinions on many topics here. She just spouts the same RW talking points that she is told to by Fox news. She is literally not educated enough to discuss these things, so I'm amused anyone still argues with her. She isn't going to change her mind, and she's definitely not going to listen to the experts because they are all "liberals!" Put me on a time out for attacking a poster. I really don't mind.... That's why I don't bother addressing her "points." I thought there might have been an opportunity for discussion previously. I had raised a point on another issue, and she admitted it would be an interesting discussion and wanted to come back to it at a later time. I made the invitation at least two or three times to address it, and was ignored each time. Here too, there have been several points raised that directly rebut or refute what she says and the actual substance of those is not addressed. The basic difference between liberal thinkers and conservative thinkers is this: Liberal thinkers argue based on logic, science, and reason, and are always open to changing their beliefs if the logic, facts, and reason dictate. Conservative thinkers argue based on belief and fear, and will almost never change those beliefs no matter what logic, facts, and reason dictate. They resist new information, because even to address it necessarily means that their previous beliefs may have been in error. That is anathema to those governed by belief. They are generally far too emotionally invested in maintaining the status quo, even if it is in error. It is simple enough to be wrong. Admitting you were wrong is far more difficult. I think liberals argue on feelings, fear. and they twist what they can out of any data and logic to fit their agenda. As conservatives I feel the same as you most on fear of the status quo changing and will twist any data and logic to fit their agenda. As far as the political spectrum I consider myself a libertarian with conservative values. I am open to more enhanced gun purchasing measures. I honestly think the issue is people. Our society is declining and a weapon is not the reason. Corporate gains is not the reason
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 1, 2022 6:31:03 GMT -5
Wrong again I still think it is some sort of mental illness or mental breakdown i just happen to think the factors I listed are contributing factors. I don't have to impun your character you do a fine job by yourself. I'm not ignoring any fact just because a gun is preferably the weapon of choice does not make it the problem. Ignoring that real fact must be beyond your grasp. It has nothing to do with being selfish is it looking at the real issue I'm going to jump back in, and I want to do so with the goal of having a respectful discussion.
At the moment I'm speaking from the perspective of an educator in public schools.
Yes, mental health absolutely must continue to move away from being taboo and toward a fully support portion of our society. However, the access to guns is a huge problem. When someone with a gun invades a school, we have little chance limiting deaths in the same way as we do with non-gun weapons. Yes, it is at least a two-fold problem: supporting all humans in having stable mental health AND limiting access to guns.
Being a person who is responsible for hundreds of children's safety is getting close to unbearable. I really don't understand how anyone can believe we should address the exponential rate of school shootings with only educators being the line of defense. I couldn't agree with you more except I would add limiting guns to children, and mentally unstable people. Not all people. From some of the posts I read you and your husband have been in education for awhile what have you noticed about today's youth compared to say 20 years ago. (hope I didn't offend your age).
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 1, 2022 6:41:57 GMT -5
Well did your bonus trickled down to the workers. HUH? I received a meager bonus last year 1500 i gave it all away to the floor workers at xmas time. We've been instructed never to talk about the bonus program, esp with the shop guys. God forbid they find out what is going on. Esp after the meeting the managers had with them stating "bad year, no raises this year" But go ahead and deflect from the point being made, sweetie, I'm used to it. Oh honey, your the one deflecting. We are told the same thing but I hear who is having a hard time around the holidays and I slip money into their lockers says merry x-mas not signed of course. I have grocery orders sent to their houses during a holiday week. I'm not talking about giving to charity I'm talking about the people that work in my company the ones barely getting by. Thats what I do with bonus money. I don't plan for a trip or buy a new gun I actually try to help. At the same token I have no problem with a ceo getting a 3 million dollar bonus. Thats his position. Someone wants that go become a ceo. So with all that bonus money did you help anyone on the floor? Anyone at all?
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,605
|
Post by tbop77 on Aug 1, 2022 6:50:17 GMT -5
We've been instructed never to talk about the bonus program, esp with the shop guys. God forbid they find out what is going on. Esp after the meeting the managers had with them stating "bad year, no raises this year" But go ahead and deflect from the point being made, sweetie, I'm used to it. Oh honey, your the one deflecting. We are told the same thing but I hear who is having a hard time around the holidays and I slip money into their lockers says merry x-mas not signed of course. I have grocery orders sent to their houses during a holiday week. I'm not talking about giving to charity I'm talking about the people that work in my company the ones barely getting by. Thats what I do with bonus money. I don't plan for a trip or buy a new gun I actually try to help. At the same token I have no problem with a ceo getting a 3 million dollar bonus. Thats his position. Someone wants that go become a ceo. So with all that bonus money did you help anyone on the floor? Anyone at all? No, the question is: do you not see a problem with management receiving all the wealth from the success of the business and the front line workers receiving a big fat $0? And don't worry, I don't expect an answer. Again, I'm used to conservatives not wanting to answer a serious question.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,216
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
Member is Online
|
Post by Opti on Aug 1, 2022 6:57:05 GMT -5
So, all these people who get a gun for protection are stupid. Why get a gun if a piece of wood would be just as good. We can have a militia made up of people wielding sticks. If a well regulated militia is needed, we can let hem have sticks and outlaw guns. Nowhere does the second amendment say you have a right to a gun. The purpose of a gun is to shoot things and cause injury. It has no other use. Everything else you cite has another, legitimate use. You are being disingenuous. Guns kill fat more efficiently and effectively, which is the reason people want them, police use them, and soldiers carry them. When someone kills 20 elementary school children with a stick, then I will admit I am wrong, unlike you, who keeps doubling down with more ridiculous arguments And you still refuse to te us what you are willing to do to prevent people, who you say are the problem from obtaining military grade weapons. You know, the ones that actually killed 20 elementary school children in Texas obviously you didn't get the meaning of a piece of wood as a weapon. I'm not surprised. Again you are wrong with a gun's only purpose is to kill people and again I'm not surprised. Yet again you're wrong I have stated several times what I thought about increasing the time frame of a background check you choose not to accept that. Ridiculous or not you are the one that refuse to acknowledge that a gun can not possibly kill anything. Again not surprised Or maybe you just did a bad job of explaining your position. Pieces of wood have been used to kill much like things that are metal like tire irons. However, they are rarely to my knowledge implicated in mass deaths. A gun's primary purpose is to kill people or animals. That's why they were invented. Just because they can be used for target practice or collected, does not change that.
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 1, 2022 6:59:51 GMT -5
Oh honey, your the one deflecting. We are told the same thing but I hear who is having a hard time around the holidays and I slip money into their lockers says merry x-mas not signed of course. I have grocery orders sent to their houses during a holiday week. I'm not talking about giving to charity I'm talking about the people that work in my company the ones barely getting by. Thats what I do with bonus money. I don't plan for a trip or buy a new gun I actually try to help. At the same token I have no problem with a ceo getting a 3 million dollar bonus. Thats his position. Someone wants that go become a ceo. So with all that bonus money did you help anyone on the floor? Anyone at all? No, the question is: do you not see a problem with management receiving all the wealth from the success of the business and the front line workers receiving a big fat $0? And don't worry, I don't expect an answer. Again, I'm used to conservatives not wanting to answer a serious question. Do I see a problem with bonus structure no. Do I see a problem with CEO salaries no, Do see have a problem with people not being paid what their worth yes. Does that answer your question or we can go more into detail. Are you going to answer mine. Did you help people on your shop floor with your bonus or did you squander it all for your family?
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,605
|
Post by tbop77 on Aug 1, 2022 7:06:58 GMT -5
No, the question is: do you not see a problem with management receiving all the wealth from the success of the business and the front line workers receiving a big fat $0? And don't worry, I don't expect an answer. Again, I'm used to conservatives not wanting to answer a serious question. Do I see a problem with bonus structure no. Do I see a problem with CEO salaries no, Do see have a problem with people not being paid what their worth yes. Does that answer your question or we can go more into detail. Are you going to answer mine. Did you help people on your shop floor with your bonus or did you squander it all for your family? Okay, and I guess the top people taking all the money from the success of the business has nothing to do with the decline of society either. Let's create 2 classes of people. Good to know. And my finances are none of your fucking business. I used it as an example to explain to you how it works.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,559
|
Post by tallguy on Aug 1, 2022 8:17:42 GMT -5
That's why I don't bother addressing her "points." I thought there might have been an opportunity for discussion previously. I had raised a point on another issue, and she admitted it would be an interesting discussion and wanted to come back to it at a later time. I made the invitation at least two or three times to address it, and was ignored each time. Here too, there have been several points raised that directly rebut or refute what she says and the actual substance of those is not addressed. The basic difference between liberal thinkers and conservative thinkers is this: Liberal thinkers argue based on logic, science, and reason, and are always open to changing their beliefs if the logic, facts, and reason dictate. Conservative thinkers argue based on belief and fear, and will almost never change those beliefs no matter what logic, facts, and reason dictate. They resist new information, because even to address it necessarily means that their previous beliefs may have been in error. That is anathema to those governed by belief. They are generally far too emotionally invested in maintaining the status quo, even if it is in error. It is simple enough to be wrong. Admitting you were wrong is far more difficult. I think liberals argue on feelings, fear. and they twist what they can out of any data and logic to fit their agenda. As conservatives I feel the same as you most on fear of the status quo changing and will twist any data and logic to fit their agenda. As far as the political spectrum I consider myself a libertarian with conservative values. I am open to more enhanced gun purchasing measures. I honestly think the issue is people. Our society is declining and a weapon is not the reason. Corporate gains is not the reason You apparently missed this part in an earlier post (#931): Does that help clarify anything? Also as an aside, the term "liberal" is not accurately portrayed by far-right conservatives, whose goal for a long time has been to distort and control the language. It is probably too late to ever return to an accurate definition of liberal in the same way that we will likely never return to an accurate portrayal of "patriotism" or "religious freedom" among others, or to get rid of the nonsensical term "pro-life." Liberal and libertarian, by the way, have the same basic root, so are in fact much closer than you seem to think. Liberalism itself is a philosophy first, and is far more broad than mere politics. Libertarianism is a political movement born out of liberalism, or more specifically Classical Liberalism.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 39,445
|
Post by chiver78 on Aug 1, 2022 8:20:51 GMT -5
I'm just going to leave this here. link
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 1, 2022 9:28:40 GMT -5
Do I see a problem with bonus structure no. Do I see a problem with CEO salaries no, Do see have a problem with people not being paid what their worth yes. Does that answer your question or we can go more into detail. Are you going to answer mine. Did you help people on your shop floor with your bonus or did you squander it all for your family? Okay, and I guess the top people taking all the money from the success of the business has nothing to do with the decline of society either. Let's create 2 classes of people. Good to know. And my finances are none of your fucking business. I used it as an example to explain to you how it works. Your're the one who brought up your bonus and that the people on the floor don't get one. You think it is ok for the people above you to have to take less but you're not willing to share yours. I think you already make the 2 classes of people
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 1, 2022 9:30:59 GMT -5
I think liberals argue on feelings, fear. and they twist what they can out of any data and logic to fit their agenda. As conservatives I feel the same as you most on fear of the status quo changing and will twist any data and logic to fit their agenda. As far as the political spectrum I consider myself a libertarian with conservative values. I am open to more enhanced gun purchasing measures. I honestly think the issue is people. Our society is declining and a weapon is not the reason. Corporate gains is not the reason You apparently missed this part in an earlier post (#931): Does that help clarify anything? Also as an aside, the term "liberal" is not accurately portrayed by far-right conservatives, whose goal for a long time has been to distort and control the language. It is probably too late to ever return to an accurate definition of liberal in the same way that we will likely never return to an accurate portrayal of "patriotism" or "religious freedom" among others, or to get rid of the nonsensical term "pro-life." Liberal and libertarian, by the way, have the same basic root, so are in fact much closer than you seem to think. Liberalism itself is a philosophy first, and is far more broad than mere politics. Libertarianism is a political movement born out of liberalism, or more specifically Classical Liberalism. Holy shit we agree on something
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,605
|
Post by tbop77 on Aug 1, 2022 10:27:35 GMT -5
Okay, and I guess the top people taking all the money from the success of the business has nothing to do with the decline of society either. Let's create 2 classes of people. Good to know. And my finances are none of your fucking business. I used it as an example to explain to you how it works. Your're the one who brought up your bonus and that the people on the floor don't get one. You think it is ok for the people above you to have to take less but you're not willing to share yours. I think you already make the 2 classes of people I brought it up so YOU could know how the real world works. There is plenty to go around. PLENTY. It is just taken by the top. Maybe if they would share the wealth of the company, I wouldn't have to listen to them bitch all day about having to spread the wealth. What part of that do you not understand? Never mind, again, I am used to people like you being obtuse.
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 1, 2022 11:21:59 GMT -5
Your're the one who brought up your bonus and that the people on the floor don't get one. You think it is ok for the people above you to have to take less but you're not willing to share yours. I think you already make the 2 classes of people I brought it up so YOU could know how the real world works. There is plenty to go around. PLENTY. It is just taken by the top. Maybe if they would share the wealth of the company, I wouldn't have to listen to them bitch all day about having to spread the wealth. What part of that do you not understand? Never mind, again, I am used to people like you being obtuse. I know how the real world works. You are right, there is plenty upon plenty, but people act like there is a short supply or it is not fair someone makes 100x more than they do. People need to go out and get theirs want more money work more or work to a position that pays more. It is not rocket science. I know I would not be able to live the lifestyle I want making 15 or 20 an hr so I worked to put myself in a better position for compensation. I never whined that the ceo got 3 million bonus and I only got 1500. Hell I gave all mine awayI also accept that upper mgmt is going to get paid what they get paid. You make your own way. You may attack me by calling me obtuse but atleast I don't bitch about someone else making more than the lowest and keep all mine. I try to help all those with the bonus I get even as meager as it is.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,559
|
Post by tallguy on Aug 1, 2022 11:47:10 GMT -5
I brought it up so YOU could know how the real world works. There is plenty to go around. PLENTY. It is just taken by the top. Maybe if they would share the wealth of the company, I wouldn't have to listen to them bitch all day about having to spread the wealth. What part of that do you not understand? Never mind, again, I am used to people like you being obtuse. I know how the real world works. You are right, there is plenty upon plenty, but people act like there is a short supply or it is not fair someone makes 100x more than they do. People need to go out and get theirs want more money work more or work to a position that pays more. It is not rocket science. I know I would not be able to live the lifestyle I want making 15 or 20 an hr so I worked to put myself in a better position for compensation. I never whined that the ceo got 3 million bonus and I only got 1500. Hell I gave all mine awayI also accept that upper mgmt is going to get paid what they get paid. You make your own way. You may attack me by calling me obtuse but atleast I don't bitch about someone else making more than the lowest and keep all mine. I try to help all those with the bonus I get even as meager as it is. In general people are not going to complain too much if the ratio is only 100:1 between CEO pay and worker pay. The reality is that the actual average ratio is between several and many times that, with many companies sporting a greater than 1000:1 ratio. The real problem is that executive pay has exploded while median worker pay has not even kept up with inflation. What is worse is that those executives pretty much set their own pay levels, given the incestuous relationships between executives and boards of directors. I remain convinced that it was the tremendous drop in marginal tax rates that allowed this to happen, and that American society is far worse as a result. A successful working class and a prosperous middle class are FAR more beneficial to a country and its economy than having a grossly overpaid executive class. The economy is driven by consumer spending. Having many people able to spend grows the economy. Wealth concentration shrinks the economy since so much money is taken out of circulation rather than being spent. I don't even want to get into all of the domino effects such as increased poverty, welfare, health care, child care, and the like.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 39,445
|
Post by chiver78 on Aug 1, 2022 11:54:15 GMT -5
semantics, but she isn't calling you obtuse, she said you're being obtuse. there's a difference, especially when it's deliberate. also, feel free to report posts you feel are attacks. the mod team will address as necessary. this one isn't an attack.
-chiver mod
....as y'all were.
|
|
andi9899
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 6, 2011 10:22:29 GMT -5
Posts: 31,284
|
Post by andi9899 on Aug 1, 2022 12:08:10 GMT -5
That's why I don't bother addressing her "points." I thought there might have been an opportunity for discussion previously. I had raised a point on another issue, and she admitted it would be an interesting discussion and wanted to come back to it at a later time. I made the invitation at least two or three times to address it, and was ignored each time. Here too, there have been several points raised that directly rebut or refute what she says and the actual substance of those is not addressed. The basic difference between liberal thinkers and conservative thinkers is this: Liberal thinkers argue based on logic, science, and reason, and are always open to changing their beliefs if the logic, facts, and reason dictate. Conservative thinkers argue based on belief and fear, and will almost never change those beliefs no matter what logic, facts, and reason dictate. They resist new information, because even to address it necessarily means that their previous beliefs may have been in error. That is anathema to those governed by belief. They are generally far too emotionally invested in maintaining the status quo, even if it is in error. It is simple enough to be wrong. Admitting you were wrong is far more difficult. I think liberals argue on feelings, fear. and they twist what they can out of any data and logic to fit their agenda. As conservatives I feel the same as you most on fear of the status quo changing and will twist any data and logic to fit their agenda. As far as the political spectrum I consider myself a libertarian with conservative values. I am open to more enhanced gun purchasing measures. I honestly think the issue is people. Our society is declining and a weapon is not the reason. Corporate gains is not the reason Ha! That is literally all conservatives do. Fear mongering and twisting themselves into pretzels trying to make something fit their narrative. Anyone different in any way from what they believe are groomers or some other name they choose to pick. Give me a break!
|
|
andi9899
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 6, 2011 10:22:29 GMT -5
Posts: 31,284
|
Post by andi9899 on Aug 1, 2022 12:18:41 GMT -5
I get a bonus quarterly. We all do. It's not anything spectacular, but we get something. Mine is a little higher than some, but I'm in a higher position also. I'm also pretty sure that I'm the highest paid person in my position in the office.
Do I share? No. I worked my ass off to get to where I am. I have spent the last 22 years learning as much as I can and putting in the work diversifying my experience so that I built an impressive resume. Why should I have to share what I make with someone with no drive? Why should they get a piece of my pie that I spent years perfecting? I'm not in management at all so not close to top management but I'm not at the bottom either.
|
|
imawino
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 22:58:16 GMT -5
Posts: 5,370
|
Post by imawino on Aug 1, 2022 13:13:04 GMT -5
We've been instructed never to talk about the bonus program, esp with the shop guys. God forbid they find out what is going on. Esp after the meeting the managers had with them stating "bad year, no raises this year" But go ahead and deflect from the point being made, sweetie, I'm used to it. Oh honey, your the one deflecting. We are told the same thing but I hear who is having a hard time around the holidays and I slip money into their lockers says merry x-mas not signed of course. I have grocery orders sent to their houses during a holiday week. I'm not talking about giving to charity I'm talking about the people that work in my company the ones barely getting by. Thats what I do with bonus money. I don't plan for a trip or buy a new gun I actually try to help. At the same token I have no problem with a ceo getting a 3 million dollar bonus. Thats his position. Someone wants that go become a ceo. So with all that bonus money did you help anyone on the floor? Anyone at all? This post is completely nutso from top to bottom. I can scarcely figure out where to begin. I guess the biggest question is - why are there people working full-time for your company who are barely getting by? And why do you think that's okay?beyond that *Why is your company giving bonuses to anyone if they can't pay all workers even enough to get by on? *Why are you maligning giving to an organized charity (who might be better equipped to assess need or give in more impactful ways) in favor of a plan for slipping a few bucks to an arbitrary few? *Should employees at your company have to rely on complaining in front of the correct person to get a little extra cash to get by on? *Does your CEO and other upper management walk around to hear who is needy so they can also hand out money? Or is this solely the responsibility of other front line workers to subsidize other front line workers? *How do you know who is the most needy? Like what if those struggling the most just don't happen to be complaining about it when you are around? I don't understand the part where you don't plan a trip or buy a new gun....I'm pretty sure you've talked about taking trips and owning guns. Do you believe that if you buy them with regular money as opposed to "bonus" money they count less? Like keeping regular salary is good, and keeping bonus money is bad? So if someone gets paid $10 million but doesn't get a bonus they are less obligated to give money away than someone who gets paid 100k but got a $5k bonus? And just for clarity, someone telling you that their personal finances are none of your business means just that. It doesn't actually give you any info on what they may or may not give to charity, despite what you have chosen to infer.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,439
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 1, 2022 14:00:28 GMT -5
That's why I don't bother addressing her "points." I thought there might have been an opportunity for discussion previously. I had raised a point on another issue, and she admitted it would be an interesting discussion and wanted to come back to it at a later time. I made the invitation at least two or three times to address it, and was ignored each time. Here too, there have been several points raised that directly rebut or refute what she says and the actual substance of those is not addressed. The basic difference between liberal thinkers and conservative thinkers is this: Liberal thinkers argue based on logic, science, and reason, and are always open to changing their beliefs if the logic, facts, and reason dictate. Conservative thinkers argue based on belief and fear, and will almost never change those beliefs no matter what logic, facts, and reason dictate. They resist new information, because even to address it necessarily means that their previous beliefs may have been in error. That is anathema to those governed by belief. They are generally far too emotionally invested in maintaining the status quo, even if it is in error. It is simple enough to be wrong. Admitting you were wrong is far more difficult. I think liberals argue on feelings, fear. and they twist what they can out of any data and logic to fit their agenda. As conservatives I feel the same as you most on fear of the status quo changing and will twist any data and logic to fit their agenda. As far as the political spectrum I consider myself a libertarian with conservative values. I am open to more enhanced gun purchasing measures. I honestly think the issue is people. Our society is declining and a weapon is not the reason. Corporate gains is not the reason why 72 hours, scgal? this is the last time i ask, after which i will assume that you won't answer. as to the fear based politicking, it has been the trend since the 60's. have you seen The Power of Nightmares? i recommend it. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_Nightmaresthis conception of politics has migrated from a neo-con thing into Democratic politics.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,439
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 1, 2022 14:15:14 GMT -5
I brought it up so YOU could know how the real world works. There is plenty to go around. PLENTY. It is just taken by the top. Maybe if they would share the wealth of the company, I wouldn't have to listen to them bitch all day about having to spread the wealth. What part of that do you not understand? Never mind, again, I am used to people like you being obtuse. I know how the real world works. You are right, there is plenty upon plenty, but people act like there is a short supply or it is not fair someone makes 100x more than they do. People need to go out and get theirs want more money work more or work to a position that pays more. It is not rocket science. I know I would not be able to live the lifestyle I want making 15 or 20 an hr so I worked to put myself in a better position for compensation. I never whined that the ceo got 3 million bonus and I only got 1500. Hell I gave all mine away also accept that upper mgmt is going to get paid what they get paid. You make your own way. You may attack me by calling me obtuse but atleast I don't bitch about someone else making more than the lowest and keep all mine. I try to help all those with the bonus I get even as meager as it is. i have a problem with it. but we should start a separate thread on this subject, as it is a somewhat arcane subject. there are a lot of layers to this, about perceived authority and scarcity. but i think the most important thing to remember was already mentioned in this thread: that corporate officers don't actually make money for a business. i will leave that outrageous comment to settle in on the board.
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 2, 2022 6:37:51 GMT -5
Oh honey, your the one deflecting. We are told the same thing but I hear who is having a hard time around the holidays and I slip money into their lockers says merry x-mas not signed of course. I have grocery orders sent to their houses during a holiday week. I'm not talking about giving to charity I'm talking about the people that work in my company the ones barely getting by. Thats what I do with bonus money. I don't plan for a trip or buy a new gun I actually try to help. At the same token I have no problem with a ceo getting a 3 million dollar bonus. Thats his position. Someone wants that go become a ceo. So with all that bonus money did you help anyone on the floor? Anyone at all? This post is completely nutso from top to bottom. I can scarcely figure out where to begin. I guess the biggest question is - why are there people working full-time for your company who are barely getting by? And why do you think that's okay?beyond that *Why is your company giving bonuses to anyone if they can't pay all workers even enough to get by on? *Why are you maligning giving to an organized charity (who might be better equipped to assess need or give in more impactful ways) in favor of a plan for slipping a few bucks to an arbitrary few? *Should employees at your company have to rely on complaining in front of the correct person to get a little extra cash to get by on? *Does your CEO and other upper management walk around to hear who is needy so they can also hand out money? Or is this solely the responsibility of other front line workers to subsidize other front line workers? *How do you know who is the most needy? Like what if those struggling the most just don't happen to be complaining about it when you are around? I don't understand the part where you don't plan a trip or buy a new gun....I'm pretty sure you've talked about taking trips and owning guns. Do you believe that if you buy them with regular money as opposed to "bonus" money they count less? Like keeping regular salary is good, and keeping bonus money is bad? So if someone gets paid $10 million but doesn't get a bonus they are less obligated to give money away than someone who gets paid 100k but got a $5k bonus? And just for clarity, someone telling you that their personal finances are none of your business means just that. It doesn't actually give you any info on what they may or may not give to charity, despite what you have chosen to infer. Nicely written post.. As lengthy as you post is I'll keep mine short "Manufacturing" I'm going to say, most not all manufacturning companies run exactly what you posted. Most people on my floor are around 15-17 and hour probably 25% are single moms it is hard as hell to get by on that. Bigger money is given at the top as it should and so should the bonus. I'm lower mgmt and I make triple what the people on the floor make. And just for clairty I don't give a fuck what someone else makes or what they do. I am calling out the poster that wants to bitch about anothers salary and bonus but don't see it that way for themselves. I personally don't think anyone should give away anything, I do what I do to help people it's what I do. I also don't think the ceo of my company should take less bonus either.
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 2, 2022 6:49:54 GMT -5
I think liberals argue on feelings, fear. and they twist what they can out of any data and logic to fit their agenda. As conservatives I feel the same as you most on fear of the status quo changing and will twist any data and logic to fit their agenda. As far as the political spectrum I consider myself a libertarian with conservative values. I am open to more enhanced gun purchasing measures. I honestly think the issue is people. Our society is declining and a weapon is not the reason. Corporate gains is not the reason Ha! That is literally all conservatives do. Fear mongering and twisting themselves into pretzels trying to make something fit their narrative. Anyone different in any way from what they believe are groomers or some other name they choose to pick. Give me a break! I agree with you conservatives are doing it too. Most politicians on both sides are walking all over the american people for their own personal gain.
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 2, 2022 6:57:02 GMT -5
I get a bonus quarterly. We all do. It's not anything spectacular, but we get something. Mine is a little higher than some, but I'm in a higher position also. I'm also pretty sure that I'm the highest paid person in my position in the office. Do I share? No. I worked my ass off to get to where I am. I have spent the last 22 years learning as much as I can and putting in the work diversifying my experience so that I built an impressive resume. Why should I have to share what I make with someone with no drive? Why should they get a piece of my pie that I spent years perfecting? I'm not in management at all so not close to top management but I'm not at the bottom either. As have I. You would be what most should aspire you work hard, educated and proud of your accomplishments. I'm not saying everyone should give away their bonus. I'm saying if someone is going to bitch about someone at the top getting a large bonus and expect them to take less to spread the wealth, and the one bitching is getting a bonus too then they should put their money where their mouth is and share theirs.
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,605
|
Post by tbop77 on Aug 2, 2022 7:00:17 GMT -5
This post is completely nutso from top to bottom. I can scarcely figure out where to begin. I guess the biggest question is - why are there people working full-time for your company who are barely getting by? And why do you think that's okay?beyond that *Why is your company giving bonuses to anyone if they can't pay all workers even enough to get by on? *Why are you maligning giving to an organized charity (who might be better equipped to assess need or give in more impactful ways) in favor of a plan for slipping a few bucks to an arbitrary few? *Should employees at your company have to rely on complaining in front of the correct person to get a little extra cash to get by on? *Does your CEO and other upper management walk around to hear who is needy so they can also hand out money? Or is this solely the responsibility of other front line workers to subsidize other front line workers? *How do you know who is the most needy? Like what if those struggling the most just don't happen to be complaining about it when you are around? I don't understand the part where you don't plan a trip or buy a new gun....I'm pretty sure you've talked about taking trips and owning guns. Do you believe that if you buy them with regular money as opposed to "bonus" money they count less? Like keeping regular salary is good, and keeping bonus money is bad? So if someone gets paid $10 million but doesn't get a bonus they are less obligated to give money away than someone who gets paid 100k but got a $5k bonus? And just for clarity, someone telling you that their personal finances are none of your business means just that. It doesn't actually give you any info on what they may or may not give to charity, despite what you have chosen to infer. Nicely written post.. As lengthy as you post is I'll keep mine short "Manufacturing" I'm going to say, most not all manufacturning companies run exactly what you posted. Most people on my floor are around 15-17 and hour probably 25% are single moms it is hard as hell to get by on that. Bigger money is given at the top as it should and so should the bonus. I'm lower mgmt and I make triple what the people on the floor make. And just for clairty I don't give a fuck what someone else makes or what they do. I am calling out the poster that wants to bitch about anothers salary and bonus but don't see it that way for themselves. I personally don't think anyone should give away anything, I do what I do to help people it's what I do. I also don't think the ceo of my company should take less bonus either. I never once bitched about my salary or anyone elses. I used it as an example to explain how the corporate world works. I don't consider top management including the front line workers in the success of the business as "giving anything away." I'm sorry that my point seems to elude you.
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by scgal on Aug 2, 2022 7:08:25 GMT -5
I think liberals argue on feelings, fear. and they twist what they can out of any data and logic to fit their agenda. As conservatives I feel the same as you most on fear of the status quo changing and will twist any data and logic to fit their agenda. As far as the political spectrum I consider myself a libertarian with conservative values. I am open to more enhanced gun purchasing measures. I honestly think the issue is people. Our society is declining and a weapon is not the reason. Corporate gains is not the reason why 72 hours, scgal? this is the last time i ask, after which i will assume that you won't answer. as to the fear based politicking, it has been the trend since the 60's. have you seen The Power of Nightmares? i recommend it. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_Nightmaresthis conception of politics has migrated from a neo-con thing into Democratic politics. Ok you keep asking shy 72 hrs. First I should say 3 working days that could take up to 5 day if the purchase was on a saturday. I think that is more than adequate to run a criminal background check on someone. I keep saying it is the people and I will always stand by that. It doesn't matter what the weapon they use it cannot kill anyone until it is used for that purpose no matter how efficient it is for that. The SC already decided that the 2A is for individuals to have the right to bear arms agree or diagree that is it until it is changed. Since that is decided then the people is already being asked to wait 72 hrs that is enough. You mentioned driver license and passports those are not protected rights.
|
|