Reply With Quote
The rule of law is revolutionary.
From 30,000 feet the dots might not be distinguishable.
The rule of law is revolutionary.
I'm not clairvoyant, here's what you said:
We are arguing about labor conditions in the USA. We work ~40% of the year for the US/State/local governments in the form of taxation. I'm arguing that we are being exploited, and providing an explanation of why (our tax money is spent not on us, but on other endeavors).
If you agree that your tax money is being squandered on bull and stolen instead of being spent on us, then you agree that we are being exploited.
Beyond radical. Crazy.The rule of law is revolutionary.
Since we're apparantly just posting random crap now..............I assume you pay taxes.
Taxes are supposed to be spent back on the people, on infrastructure. Schools, roads, police, stuff like that. Things that everyone uses and everyone benefits from.
Turns out that's not what your money is doing.
Here are some pallets of $100 bills. $12 billion of them were shipped to Iraq and disappeared.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1
Notice how all the school districts have to take out loans?
NISD is taking out $500,000,000 loans every three years:
http://bond.nisd.net/
That's because they're sending pallets of your money overseas, and schools here need extra money just to function.
These bonds are loaned by massive banks. Now you are taxed more, and the banks now take a portion of your taxes as profit for themselves.
Banks provide a useful, essential service to humanity, but I don't think many people would argue that banks are important enough to account for 41% of all corporate profit in the USA.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...iet-coup/7364/
They did though, and took 41% of all US corporate profit for a couple of years, until a crash. We know how that ended.
With the government printing up money and giving it to them.
And what did your loan buy you?
http://www.window.state.tx.us/comptr...and/wws0512ed/
Don't "give a " about any of that though. Get back to work.
So an argument on the internet ended?
Wow.
mmmmm....pancakes.
If anyone reads this thread and understands the points I'm making, let me know! I think the schools here might not be working...
I think you are trying to force an ergo where it won't fit.
Disagreeing on how tax money is spent does not equal exploitation. You can make a case, perhaps, in certain instances. But to blithely attribute it to any disagreement on tax spending is ridiculous, at best.
Yes, money is being misspent, very notably on education and war. I agree.
Your point?
My personal contentedness, or making reference to it, is false consciousness or some pious crap like that?
Is it necessarily a sign of a pure soul to be discontented? Or of a corrupt one to feel contentment from time to time?
You've hit on the core of the argument.
I would argue that the way the US taxes are spent are quite exploitative, because they are not spent back on the people. I tried to supply data to back this up, but no one seems to understand any of it. How curious.
Thats fair, but doesnt work for me as the employer.
Since I do not run two shifts, the full-time employees I hire are expected to work the hours the shop is open.
If they cannot fulfill the demands of the job then I can easily find someone who will.
But all of this is laid out up front before they ever take the job. My semi-orientation involves going over the job description, the needed productivity benchmarks and the crushing hours. I make it crystal- ing-clear up front before they ever agree to the job that they will work a lot and if their schedule does not allow for the hours then do not waste my time or yours with your employment here.
I also make it clear how hard the work is and let them know up front that there is no shame in coming after being hired and saying "You know, this job isnt for me. Its hard-ass work/The hours are too long/I need a job that allows more time with my family/whatever". I will completely understand and keep them in mind in the future should they change their mind (if theyre a good employee).
I am fully aware that this job isnt for everyone. Again, some people want to do only whats necessary to exist in this life and thats completely fine. If that means working a job that barely hits 40 hours but pays the bills, I would say most people are content with that. There is nothing wrong with that mindset, its just a mindset I do not share or envy. Nor will that outlook coincide with employment here.
There are other employers out there, they do have jobs available, apply there. The work will most definitely be easier, the hours will be less demanding and you might even be able to pay your bills on the salary as an unskilled laborer.
What I offer is a crash-course in manufacturing to the Nth degree that pays more than you probably need, pays for slightly-less-than-outstanding health insurance at a minimum employee contribution (~$25 a week) and a matching 401k program. Oh yeah, youll also be able to take the skills you previously did not have to basically anywhere in the country with great references.
To the minimally educated, I offer a possible career that pays you to learn. Are you going to make $100k+? Probably not unless you usurp my established management hierarchy, but you can make damn near it.
All with no education to speak of, no previous experience and no applicable industry skills.
The job isnt for everyone and our low-level turnover is certainly higher than the mid and high level work, but most of my crew has been with the company for 10+ years.
America@!!!
Empire is wasteful and expensive. Schools suck.
Other posters have acknowledged as much, yet you suggest they lack understanding for agreeing. How curious.
Also, your data was a bit of a ragbag, though it is fairly convincing evidence that government spending on things you don't like (or that don't work) in fact exists.
What of those that actually agree with the spending? Are they too being exploited?
The data you supplied was inconclusive outside of saying, look, we spend money on stuff. The banking tangent was very tenuously connected to your argument. I can see a bit of your reasoning there.
The educational data itself is quite flawed. I don't want to completely shoot the wheels off this thread, so we'll save that for another.
(1st beer)
*hates WH now*
It appeared that plenty of people lacked understanding:
Since we're apparantly just posting random crap now..............
I apologize that my data post was sort of rambling and not well organized, but I don't have much time left before I have to leave. I'll post later.
Small company!
fwiw, I like the way you said it better.
Thanks for the data post. I look forward to your clarification.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
