Darden Restaurants dropping FT employees for PT, O-Care blamed [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Darden Restaurants dropping FT employees for PT, O-Care blamed


G29Reload
10-10-2012, 11:23
Heard something the other day about this restaurant chain trying to get under limit on number of FT employees in order to avoid sanctions on healthcare related issues in the unaffordable care act. X number or more of FT employees dictates must provide certain kind of insurance or penalty invoked.

So, a bunch of people will have their hours cut to get under the limit, and/or new ones hired will only be PT.

Another way Obamao is destroying jobs. looking for a link now.

here we go:

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2012/10/10/darden-restaurants-looks-to-limit.html

wjv
10-10-2012, 11:54
So people who are not making a whole lot of $$ to begin with, are going to have their hours cut to 29/week so that the company doesn't get hit with the Obama-Tax.

WA State has one of the highest minim wages at $9.04 per hour.

40 hours = $361 (and most restaurant workers put in more than 40)
29 hours = $262
a $99/week cut. . ($5,148) per year

So that means that most of these folks will end up having to get a second job to just stay even. . .

Obama. . Destroying America one job at a time. .

Guss
10-10-2012, 12:00
You can't blame Obama for that - Greedy employers have been using that strategy for many years now to cut not only heath benefits, but other benefits as well. Eventually we'll close the loopholes.

JFrame
10-10-2012, 12:20
Eventually we'll close the loopholes.

Yep -- they say that about gun laws also.


.

aircarver
10-10-2012, 12:24
.... Eventually we'll close the loopholes.

Not if we toss your people out on their collective asses ! ... :supergrin:

.

rppnj
10-10-2012, 12:29
CEO to workers..."If BHO is re-elected, I will have no choice but to fire you all and shut down my company."

http://www.cnbc.com/id/49356069


Can you blame this guy...I don't...please read the WHOLE article before you comment. BTW...we're talking thousands of workers here.

JFrame
10-10-2012, 12:31
CEO to workers..."If BHO is re-elected, I will have no choice but to fire you all and shut down my company."


I guess that would be the ultimate closing of the loophole that Guss is so keen about. :upeyes:


.

countrygun
10-10-2012, 12:38
You can't blame Obama for that - Greedy employers have been using that strategy for many years now to cut not only heath benefits, but other benefits as well. Eventually we'll close the loopholes.

Of course Gussy, the answer lies in even heavier Government regulation of the free market. It's the Fascist way. The Government control of everything.

what a marvelous drone you are

Chesafreak
10-10-2012, 13:03
You can't blame Obama for that - Greedy employers have been using that strategy for many years now to cut not only heath benefits, but other benefits as well. Eventually we'll close the loopholes.

Greedy employers? Closing loopholes? You must have been drinking the Obama coolaid. Employers don't owe the employee a good wage to live on, nor do they owe us benefits. If the employee doesn't have the job skills to gain full-time employment with benefits, thats on them, not the employer. If someone doesn't want to get paid mininum wage for 29 hours a week flipping burgers or stocking shelves, then they need to be doing something about that, like doing better in school or learning a trade or skill. We are paid what we are worth to the employer, who has to maintain a healthy profit or make cuts to do so. We are not a socialist or communist country, although we are moving in that direction.

While some ping on Romney for sending jobs overseas, if I was faced with running a company and making a profit, I would send jobs overseas before I would pay a union forklift driver 92k/year. Yes, $92,000 a year for a union forklift driver. I have 5 years of college and 7 years of experience in I.T. in addition to 20 years in the military and don't make that much. How about greedy unions?

FFR Spyder GT
10-10-2012, 13:20
You can't blame Obama for that - Greedy employers have been using that strategy for many years now to cut not only heath benefits, but other benefits as well. Eventually we'll close the loopholes.

WalMart has always done that.

My stepson works at WM and goes to college and he is consider a PT even though he works 38-40 hours a week.

They only schedule him for 28hrs per week but always have him to work over, come in early or work his day off but "officially" he is considered PT.

Guss
10-10-2012, 13:24
...

WA State has one of the highest minim wages at $9.04 per hour.
.... .
And here's what it gets them:
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/trends/economy/fig101.asp

countrygun
10-10-2012, 13:31
And here's what it gets them:
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/trends/economy/fig101.asp

And what have Unions gotten for Detroit?

DOC44
10-10-2012, 13:36
You can't blame Obama for that - Greedy employers have been using that strategy for many years now to cut not only heath benefits, but other benefits as well. Eventually we'll close the loopholes.


Here is the history of Darden and his business. Opened "The Green Frog" in Waycross GA at age 19 in 1938 and the first Red Lobster in the 60's. The original Green Frog was a great place to eat. Had a seafood platter that was fantastic. At there many times and knew a younger Bill.

THEY DID BUILD THAT BUSINESS.

http://www.darden.com/about/photo_history.asp

Doc44

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 13:36
You can't blame Obama for that - Greedy employers have been using that strategy for many years now to cut not only heath benefits, but other benefits as well. Eventually we'll close the loopholes.


Guss, what makes you feel entitled to someone's money or assets that they sacrificed part of their life to work hard for?

Do you really think punishing the business owner is going to benefit the employees? Only a fool would say yes to this.....

I see you mentioned minimum wage as well. That's another job killer. If the company couldn't justify the wage to begin with, they just cut the job. If the company can justify the cut they're taking from the mandate, they'll cut employees expenses in other areas - IE benefits.

Goaltender66
10-10-2012, 13:36
And here's what it gets them:
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/trends/economy/fig101.asp

Actually, this is probably more appropos:

http://www.ofm.wa.gov/trends/economy/fig105.asp

:)

stevelyn
10-10-2012, 13:37
If I were running a business, I'd be doing everything I could to avoid paying it.

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 13:39
Actually, this is probably more appropos:

http://www.ofm.wa.gov/trends/economy/fig105.asp

:)


GAH! Beat me to it! :rofl::rofl::rofl:


Thanks though. Saved me the time and effort. :rofl:

JFrame
10-10-2012, 13:41
Guss, what makes you feel entitled to someone's money or assets that they sacrificed part of their life to work hard for?

Do you really think punishing the business owner is going to benefit the employees? Only a fool would say yes to this.....

I see you mentioned minimum wage as well. That's another job killer. If the company couldn't justify the wage to begin with, they just cut the job. If the company can justify the cut they're taking from the mandate, they'll cut employees expenses in other areas - IE benefits.


I simply find it hard to imagine the lock-step leftist mindset a person would need to not see the logic of that...

Vizzini's "Inconceivable!" from "The Princess Bride" comes to mind -- but we're seeing living evidence of that thinking here on this forum... http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/facepalm.gif


.

FFR Spyder GT
10-10-2012, 13:43
Greedy employers? Closing loopholes? You must have been drinking the Obama coolaid. Employers don't owe the employee a good wage to live on, nor do they owe us benefits. If the employee doesn't have the job skills to gain full-time employment with benefits, thats on them, not the employer. If someone doesn't want to get paid mininum wage for 29 hours a week flipping burgers or stocking shelves, then they need to be doing something about that, like doing better in school or learning a trade or skill. We are paid what we are worth to the employer, who has to maintain a healthy profit or make cuts to do so. We are not a socialist or communist country, although we are moving in that direction.

While some ping on Romney for sending jobs overseas, if I was faced with running a company and making a profit, I would send jobs overseas before I would pay a union forklift driver 92k/year. Yes, $92,000 a year for a union forklift driver. I have 5 years of college and 7 years of experience in I.T. in addition to 20 years in the military and don't make that much. How about greedy unions?

Chesafreak, since youre upset that a Union forklift driver makes more money than you do you need to be doing something about that, like doing better in school or learning a better trade or skill or getting better at what you do. You are paid what you are worth to the employer, who has to maintain a healthy profit or make cuts to do so, like your job and hiring someone for less money and no benefits that can do the job better.

Oh, BTW, who's the Union forklift driver that makes $92k a year?

Plus, quit whining about how much he makes because his employer must think he's worth that much. :tongueout:

Kablam
10-10-2012, 13:51
Guss, what makes you feel entitled to someone's money or assets that they sacrificed part of their life to work hard for?

Do you really think punishing the business owner is going to benefit the employees? Only a fool would say yes to this.....

I see you mentioned minimum wage as well. That's another job killer. If the company couldn't justify the wage to begin with, they just cut the job. If the company can justify the cut they're taking from the mandate, they'll cut employees expenses in other areas - IE benefits.

It's hard to make that more clear. :thumbsup:

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 13:54
It's hard to make that more clear. :thumbsup:


One more thing to add to everyone in this thread.


You are worth what you can convince your employer to pay you. Not a penny less, or a penny more.

Chesafreak
10-10-2012, 14:00
Chesafreak, since youre upset that a Union forklift driver makes more money than you do you need to be doing something about that, like doing better in school or learning a better trade or skill or getting better at what you do. You are paid what you are worth to the employer, who has to maintain a healthy profit or make cuts to do so, like your job and hiring someone for less money and no benefits that can do the job better.

Oh, BTW, who's the Union forklift driver that makes $92k a year?

Plus, quit whining about how much he makes because his employer must think he's worth that much. :tongueout:

Stick to your day job, your attempt at comedy is pathetic. :yawn:

I'm not whining about what I get paid becuase I think its fair. And FYI, I am studying to gain more I.T. certifications so that I can continue to progress in my career field. I'm simply pointing out that employers don't owe employees anything, and that unions are part of the problem causing lost jobs.

The union forklift driver? Her employer does pay her what she's worth, as in nothing. She lost her job. I was watching a show (think it was 60 Minutes) about the economy and what people are having to do to get by after losing their job. One of the people interviewed was a lady that lost a $92,000 a year job as a union forklift driver. I have met people who made inflated wages and were members of the UAW union, only to lose their job and become hairstylists. Anything inflated must eventually bust or have a correction which is the case with sending jobs overseas to avoid unions or closing plants because you can't sustain a profit with rising costs including union pay scales.

IvanVic
10-10-2012, 14:02
One more thing to add to everyone in this thread.


You are worth what you can convince your employer to pay you. Not a penny less, or a penny more.

Not true, you are paid what the free market, competition driven economy dictates (the way it should be), it has nothing to do with convincing anybody of anything.

countrygun
10-10-2012, 14:10
Not true, you are paid what the free market, competition driven economy dictates (the way it should be), it has nothing to do with convincing anybody of anything.


I have about 35 years of experience that says you are wrong.

There is a continuum of value within the parameters of an economy, but "value" is relative to that. (to put it simply "How many loaves of bread can you buy, with your pay a week) Your position on that continuum is directly related, and should rightly be, is up to how valuable you make yourself to your employer and how many more loaves of bread you enable him to buy. You thereby increase your "value" to him.

Guss
10-10-2012, 14:13
Guss, what makes you feel entitled to someone's money or assets that they sacrificed part of their life to work hard for?

....
Those restaurant laborers work hard, and I want to see them get paid for what they worked so hard and sacrificed for. There is no inherent fairness in the system unless management and labor have equal bargaining power. In the absence of that equal bargaining power, minimum wages are a good substitute.

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 14:14
Not true, you are paid what the free market, competition driven economy dictates (the way it should be), it has nothing to do with convincing anybody of anything.


I've only been in the work force for about a decade, so it's not that much compared to some, however since I've been in IT, in previous companies (not the one I'm with) I could see EVERYONE'S pay.

We had some who definitely could not find a job elsewhere making the same amount they were making with us. They convinced the "man" to pay them that much one way or another.

I'll give you two fine examples.

One - has a son that played football for the CEO's college. Was in the NFL draft/pick whatever that is called and he hired her on for 80k a year being a receptionist, so he could get football tickets.

Two - We had a woman meet up with the director of HR (previous company again) she met him at a bar. She gave him a real good time that night, and he was married. She had a job for over a year making 70k a year.


Both perfect examples of "convincing" your employer to pay you what you're "worth".


Get it now?

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 14:15
I have about 35 years of experience that says you are wrong.

There is a continuum of value within the parameters of an economy, but "value" is relative to that. (to put it simply "How many loaves of bread can you buy, with your pay a week) Your position on that continuum is directly related, and should rightly be, is up to how valuable you make yourself to your employer and how many more loaves of bread you enable him to buy. You thereby increase your "value" to him.


Whoa, countrygun..... Did we just sort of agree on a topic? :dunno::faint: Now that's scary!

Guss
10-10-2012, 14:17
...
I see you mentioned minimum wage as well. That's another job killer...
That's a myth propagated by the restaurant industry. Darden, Outback, and others made that argument when Floridians voted for increasing the minimum wage here. The layoffs didn't happen. It was a lie. It just means that the top dogs don't get to buy a new Mercedes each year, but the minimum wage workers can breathe a little easier.

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 14:24
Those restaurant laborers work hard, and I want to see them get paid for what they worked so hard and sacrificed for. There is no inherent fairness in the system unless management and labor have equal bargaining power. In the absence of that equal bargaining power, minimum wages are a good substitute.


What you want, and how a free society/market works/is supposed to work are two completely different things.

I want a million dollars, but where would that come from?

Those laborers may be hard working, but they have no valuable skill to bring to the table. You need to be more than "hard working" to make any significant amount of money, you need a skill that's in demand. The more in demand your skill is, the more you are able to make demands..... I speak from experience as a CCNA, CCDA, and CCNA voice now.

Chesafreak
10-10-2012, 14:25
Those restaurant laborers work hard, and I want to see them get paid for what they worked so hard and sacrificed for. There is no inherent fairness in the system unless management and labor have equal bargaining power. In the absence of that equal bargaining power, minimum wages are a good substitute.

While a restaurant worker may (or may not) work hard, even if they work much harder than a CPA, computer programmer, electrician, etc., they get paid what they are worth for their skills. What does sacrifice have to do with it? We aren't talking about the military here.

While bargaining power may have helped union employees get higher income, what good does it do them when their plant closes and their job goes overseas because they make $50+ dollars an hour as a laborer on an assembly line, or $92,000 a year operating a forklift?

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 14:27
That's a myth propagated by the restaurant industry. Darden, Outback, and others made that argument when Floridians voted for increasing the minimum wage here. The layoffs didn't happen. It was a lie. It just means that the top dogs don't get to buy a new Mercedes each year, but the minimum wage workers can breathe a little easier.


A myth? O really?

You are aware that you do not have someone to wipe your windshield, clean your car, and fill it up with gas, at the gas station due to minimum wage laws? They wouldn't pay these guys much, but the reason why they agreed to work the job so cheap is because in their spare time they would be apprentices to the mechanics at these service stations, therefore bettering themselves and their career.

That's one example on how minimum wage killed jobs, and closed the door in one way to someone who has drive to be make themselves more successful and acquiring a skill that leads to such.

Guss
10-10-2012, 14:27
...
While bargaining power may have helped union employees get higher income, what good does it do them when their plant closes and their job goes overseas because they make $50+ dollars an hour as a laborer on an assembly line, or $92,000 a year operating a forklift?
Multiple problems are going on. H. Ross Perot warned what would happen if we dropped our trade tariffs. That problem needs to be addressed as well.

Guss
10-10-2012, 14:29
...
What does sacrifice have to do with it?
...
If you ever had to sweat your tail off working two jobs because one minimum wage job wasn't enough, you would know.

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 14:31
Multiple problems are going on. H. Ross Perot warned what would happen if we dropped our trade tariffs. That problem needs to be addressed as well.


Why trade tariffs? What do you have against getting a cheaper, more efficient product?

You have to ask yourself why that product is cheaper than what can be produced here, since after all, a lot of these imports aren't near us geographically. So they have to factor in logistics as well.

OH ME! ME! *Raises hand* I can answer that for you Guss!!!!!!


OK GOOD! YOU PICKED ME!


So why they can produce a cheaper and possibly more efficient product than something domestically, a lot of times, is because of that little thing called minimum wage we just discussed. :cool: The added cost has to be passed on to somewhere. Be it the employee, or the customer. If it's the customer, it makes it harder for the company, when they're facing competition. This is why people like you advocate trade tariffs.

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 14:33
If you ever had to sweat your tail off working two jobs because one minimum wage job wasn't enough, you would know.


Yes. I have Guss. I worked 2 jobs AND went to school to get my certification on. Instead of crying and saying the man was holding me down, I brain stormed ideas on how to acquire a skill that was in demand, so I wouldn't have to work this hard later on in my life.

I'm almost 24 years old, and I'm already seeing the results. I will continue to brainstorm ideas on how to make more money (just like any successful or potentially successful person will do) and apply it.

It is immoral to sick a gov't on someone for being more successful.

Guss
10-10-2012, 14:37
...
You are aware that you do not have someone to wipe your windshield, clean your car, and fill it up with gas, at the gas station due to minimum wage laws? They wouldn't pay these guys much, but the reason why they agreed to work the job so cheap is because in their spare time they would be apprentices to the mechanics at these service stations, therefore bettering themselves and their career.

That's one example on how minimum wage killed jobs, and closed the door in one way to someone who has drive to be make themselves more successful and acquiring a skill that leads to such.
Wrong! Gas stations used to use good service as a competitive matter. Due to their oligopoly nature, they were able to figure out that if they all dropped the service together, they could pocket the extra money and keep things simple. There were also laws in some states that, for safety reasons, required an attendant to pump gas. After those states got to see that there was no problem in the states with self-help, they dropped those laws.

I see no shortage of mechanics in my area. Where's the problem?

Chesafreak
10-10-2012, 14:37
If you ever had to sweat your tail off working two jobs because one minimum wage job wasn't enough, you would know.

Oh, I have had my share of sacrifices, although without the minimum wages. I joined the Navy in order to leave a minimum wage restaurant job at a Shoney's. If 20 years in the Navy isn't enough for you, for three years straight I was getting up for work at 4:30 AM to go into my Navy job, going from there to full time college four nights a week, going home and getting 4.5 hours of sleep a night, AND working part time repairing computers on the side to make ends meet. I had no time for my kids or watching football since I had to either work or do homework on the weekends. I assure you that I have had my fair share of working harder than most minimum wage earners think is possible as well as the sacrifices.

I never cried that the man was holding me back.

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 14:39
Wrong! Gas stations used to use good service as a competitive matter. Due to their oligopoly nature, they were able to figure out that if they all dropped the service together, they could pocket the extra money and keep things simple. There were also laws in some states that, for safety reasons, required an attendant to pump gas. After those states got to see that there was no problem in the states with self-help, they dropped those laws.

I see no shortage of mechanics in my area. Where's the problem?


You don't see shortages with your eyes. You feel it in your wallet. Supply and demand.

Minimum wage got rid of a great apprenticeship program where service station hands had a great opportunity to learn off mechanics, all due to minimum wage and the service station not being able to justify their job any longer.

It's sad you're going this far to try and justify why it's ok to sick a gov't on someone else for being more successful.

Are you in the camp/mentality of the business owner didn't build that, somebody else did? :dunno:

countrygun
10-10-2012, 14:47
Whoa, countrygun..... Did we just sort of agree on a topic? :dunno::faint: Now that's scary!


Some things are so basic most rational Americans can agree on them.:supergrin::wavey:

IvanVic
10-10-2012, 14:49
I've only been in the work force for about a decade, so it's not that much compared to some, however since I've been in IT, in previous companies (not the one I'm with) I could see EVERYONE'S pay.

We had some who definitely could not find a job elsewhere making the same amount they were making with us. They convinced the "man" to pay them that much one way or another.

I'll give you two fine examples.

One - has a son that played football for the CEO's college. Was in the NFL draft/pick whatever that is called and he hired her on for 80k a year being a receptionist, so he could get football tickets.

Two - We had a woman meet up with the director of HR (previous company again) she met him at a bar. She gave him a real good time that night, and he was married. She had a job for over a year making 70k a year.


Both perfect examples of "convincing" your employer to pay you what you're "worth".


Get it now?

There are exceptions to every rule, however, looked at in its entirety, every field will have an average pay that balances out. While it may make for an interesting anecdotal tidbit in casual conversation to point out that you know a receptionist that makes 80K, it is not indicative of the average salary paid in the field, nor is it representative of what the free market demands in that field. An average receptionist can "convince" all they want, they aren't going to receive an 80k salary when the field is examined as a whole.

Guss
10-10-2012, 14:53
Why trade tariffs? What do you have against getting a cheaper, more efficient product?

You have to ask yourself why that product is cheaper than what can be produced here, since after all, a lot of these imports aren't near us geographically. So they have to factor in logistics as well.

...

So why they can produce a cheaper and possibly more efficient product than something domestically, a lot of times, is because of that little thing called minimum wage we just discussed...
As a matter of fact, I can answer that question for you. But first, let me call attention to the fact that yours is the Race-To-The-Bottom argument. Maybe you aspire to giving your children and grandchildren the lifestyle of the Chinese, but I want something better for them.

Yes, the Chinese have cheaper labor. If we make a wiser choice, we can see that a country's wealth and prosperity is a ratio of its resources to its people. Many, if not most, of the countries of the world have ruined that ratio through overpopulation - too many people per resources. The elimination of tariffs means that we have lost control of what is ours as a country. We sold out to the international corporations and set our laws to what they wanted. Look back to the way our country grew and prospered in its early days - import tariffs. Look back to the 1950's when a man, without his wife working, could afford a home and raise a family - import tariffs. But we were tempted by the initial cheapness of a change and forgot about the long-term consequences. Now we pay the price.

Chesafreak
10-10-2012, 15:08
There are exceptions to every rule, however, looked at in its entirety, every field will have an average pay that balances out. While it may make for an interesting anecdotal tidbit in casual conversation to point out that you know a receptionist that makes 80K, it is not indicative of the average salary paid in the field, nor is it representative of what the free market demands in that field. An average receptionist can "convince" all they want, they aren't going to receive an 80k salary when the field is examined as a whole.

If a receptionist can convince you that they are worth 80k/yr salary, then they certainly aren't "average".

How about a prospective employee that interviews and has the same skill levels as another prospect yet they get hired with a higher salary than average because of their people skills during the interview? Still think its not possible to convince someone they you are worth more than the average? Whether through looks, sex, social skills, knowledge, or productivity, people can convince an employer that they are worth more than average.

When I interviewed for my current job, after the second interview I was told that I would have to come back for a third interview with the Director of Administration. I flat out told them that as much as I want the job, I already had a job offer and a plane ticket to leave for LG Electronics headquarters to start work the following week and explained why I wanted to stay here and work for them instead. I also said I wouldn't take the job for what they were offering and asked for 5k more. I got the job on the spot. A year later and they created a new position for me with even higher pay after I demonstrated that I could do the job of an engineer that they typically had to bring in a consultant to handle.

IvanVic
10-10-2012, 15:21
If a receptionist can convince you that they are worth 80k/yr salary, then they certainly aren't "average".


That is correct, and that is the point I was making. The larger point is that it wouldn't matter how "convincing" they were, most employers are not going to pay their receptionist that kind of money, either because they can't afford to, or someone else just as qualified would do an equally good job for a much lower wage. Hence, why the average salary for a receptionist is much lower than 80k. The free market has dictated this.


Still think its not possible to convince someone they you are worth more than the average?

I have never said that it's not possible, I said that the free market cannot, and will not, sustain an entire workforce of receptionist making 80k a year.


I also said I wouldn't take the job for what they were offering and asked for 5k more. I got the job on the spot. A year later and they created a new position for me with even higher pay after I demonstrated that I could do the job of an engineer that they typically had to bring in a consultant to handle.

Congrats, you took a chance and it paid off, but it doesn't change anything I have stated above.

Chesafreak
10-10-2012, 15:28
That is correct, and that is the point I was making. The larger point is that it wouldn't matter how "convincing" they were, most employers are not going to pay their receptionist that kind of money, either because they can't afford to, or someone else just as qualified would do an equally good job for a much lower wage. Hence, why the average salary for a receptionist is much lower than 80k. The free market has dictated this.



I have never said that it's not possible, I said that the free market cannot, and will not, sustain an entire workforce of receptionist making 80k a year.



Congrats, you took a chance and it paid off, but it doesn't change anything I have stated above.


You started talking about "average" and "entire workforce" when the original argument was that its not possible to convince an employer to pay you more than the average market pay. Anyone who can do that is not average.

Not true, you are paid what the free market, competition driven economy dictates (the way it should be), it has nothing to do with convincing anybody of anything.

countrygun
10-10-2012, 15:45
As a matter of fact, I can answer that question for you. But first, let me call attention to the fact that yours is the Race-To-The-Bottom argument. Maybe you aspire to giving your children and grandchildren the lifestyle of the Chinese, but I want something better for them.

Yes, the Chinese have cheaper labor. If we make a wiser choice, we can see that a country's wealth and prosperity is a ratio of its resources to its people. Many, if not most, of the countries of the world have ruined that ratio through overpopulation - too many people per resources. The elimination of tariffs means that we have lost control of what is ours as a country. We sold out to the international corporations and set our laws to what they wanted. Look back to the way our country grew and prospered in its early days - import tariffs. Look back to the 1950's when a man, without his wife working, could afford a home and raise a family - import tariffs. But we were tempted by the initial cheapness of a change and forgot about the long-term consequences. Now we pay the price.

That is the most confused jumble of economic ideas I have heard in a long time and comes down, as near as I can clear the mud off of it to "the Government should mandate the level of living and control the free market"

If workers in another Country can make a coffee cup to be sold, at a profit for everyone involved, to Americans for $2 what benefit is it to demand the cup be made in America at a cost of $10? The plumber, the dentis, whomever, has to get paid more for their work to buy a coffee cup, so their services cost more, so the guy making the coffe cup has to get paid more to afford their services, and 'round and round it goes. If we say "we don't want people in this Country to try and get by on what they make producing $2 coffee cups, they must be paid more" then we had better be prepared to get our cups elsewhere.

There has to be a bottom rung on the ladder, if we don't want that rung occupied by Americans then we had better have it occupied by the bottom rung of other Countries.

rgregoryb
10-10-2012, 15:54
Those restaurant laborers work hard, and I want to see them get paid for what they worked so hard and sacrificed for. There is no inherent fairness in the system unless management and labor have equal bargaining power. In the absence of that equal bargaining power, minimum wages are a good substitute.

there you go, LIFE ISN'T FAIR!

why equal share? the worker invested nothing nor did they take a risk...

Guss
10-10-2012, 16:06
That is the most confused jumble of economic ideas I have heard in a long time and comes down, as near as I can clear the mud off of it to "the Government should mandate the level of living and control the free market"

If workers in another Country can make a coffee cup to be sold, at a profit for everyone involved, to Americans for $2 what benefit is it to demand the cup be made in America at a cost of $10? The plumber, the dentis, whomever, has to get paid more for their work to buy a coffee cup, so their services cost more, so the guy making the coffe cup has to get paid more to afford their services, and 'round and round it goes. If we say "we don't want people in this Country to try and get by on what they make producing $2 coffee cups, they must be paid more" then we had better be prepared to get our cups elsewhere.

There has to be a bottom rung on the ladder, if we don't want that rung occupied by Americans then we had better have it occupied by the bottom rung of other Countries.
If a country has a natural advantage (coffee doesn't grow as well here), then the tariff is adjusted accordingly, since we are not really stealing any jobs from Americans.

As to rungs on the ladder, those one the top rung want to eliminate all the other rungs to their own benefit. Even those on the bottom rung deserve a living wage.

Guss
10-10-2012, 16:07
there you go, LIFE ISN'T FAIR!

why equal share? the worker invested nothing nor did they take a risk...
There is nothing in the raw system that bespeaks fairness. It is simply the way things happen to be under the capitalist system. If any element of fairness is to be brought in, it must be done by humans, not a mindless system.

Jon_R
10-10-2012, 16:09
If you ever had to sweat your tail off working two jobs because one minimum wage job wasn't enough, you would know.

Problem is people get emotional instead of logical and they confuse effort and value. The guy digging a ditch is putting a lot more effort into their 8 hours than I am but I provide more value to my employer and they compensate me for that value I bring them. It is just easier to find another guy to dig a ditch. It is easier to replace me then it is to find a guy that can win the triple crown in baseball so he makes more than I do. etc... Make yourself as valuable as you can be. I can not win the triple crown so it is not on my list of goals to become more valuable.

In the end the restaurant is doing it because they can. They are telling the employees they are going to cut the money they bring home and are willing to accept that some many or all of them will leave and the restaurant can and will replace them. If Darden did not think they could and carry on they would not do it.

Ruble Noon
10-10-2012, 16:18
You can't blame Obama for that - Greedy employers have been using that strategy for many years now to cut not only heath benefits, but other benefits as well. Eventually we'll close the loopholes.

True, the whole democrat party shares that responsibility. Look at it this way, employers are just passing on what the democrat party has delivered to them.

countrygun
10-10-2012, 16:18
There is nothing in the raw system that bespeaks fairness. It is simply the way things happen to be under the capitalist system. If any element of fairness is to be brought in, it must be done by humans, not a mindless system.


Boo-hoo, capitalism isn't fair:crying:

Neither is the fact that you have the right to "The pursuit of happiness"

but those mean old Founders didn't promise the happiness.

Every system is unfair to SOMEONE, but in our system you have the freedom to change whether it's you or not.

Ruble Noon
10-10-2012, 16:19
There is nothing in the raw system that bespeaks fairness. It is simply the way things happen to be under the capitalist system. If any element of fairness is to be brought in, it must be done by humans, not a mindless system.

Communism would be much fairer right? :whistling:

Guss
10-10-2012, 16:48
Communism would be much fairer right? :whistling:
I don't know. We've never seen a democratic communism.

IvanVic
10-10-2012, 16:49
You started talking about "average" and "entire workforce" when the original argument was that its not possible to convince an employer to pay you more than the average market pay. Anyone who can do that is not average.

I never disagreed with that argument, but that is not the sentence I quoted when I began this. His exact words were:


One more thing to add to everyone in this thread.


You are worth what you can convince your employer to pay you. Not a penny less, or a penny more.

His blanket statement is simply not true, and there's no way around it. The only correct blanket statement would be "you are worth what the free market dictates your salary is worth." Exceptions to the rule are part of the free market, as are those who fall closer to the average.

Guss
10-10-2012, 16:53
...
Every system is unfair to SOMEONE, but in our system you have the freedom to change whether it's you or not.
If you've got the capital, you've got the advantage to change a lot and build an uneven playing field.

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 16:57
Some things are so basic most rational Americans can agree on them.:supergrin::wavey:

Haha indeed. :supergrin::wavey:

There are exceptions to every rule, however, looked at in its entirety, every field will have an average pay that balances out. While it may make for an interesting anecdotal tidbit in casual conversation to point out that you know a receptionist that makes 80K, it is not indicative of the average salary paid in the field, nor is it representative of what the free market demands in that field. An average receptionist can "convince" all they want, they aren't going to receive an 80k salary when the field is examined as a whole.


It doesn't matter, you are worth what you convince the employer to pay you. Regardless if the market says so or not. Now if that's the free market saying what his skill is worth and him finding a job paying that much, or the cases I pointed out, that's how much you're worth at that time. Period.

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 17:00
I never disagreed with that argument, but that is not the sentence I quoted when I began this. His exact words were:




His blanket statement is simply not true, and there's no way around it. The only correct blanket statement would be "you are worth what the free market dictates your salary is worth." Exceptions to the rule are part of the free market, as are those who fall closer to the average.


Some get paid below their "market" value, some get paid more. Again, it's how well you sell yourself, not just your skill you have.

So I'll say it again.

You are only worth what you've convinced your employer to pay you.

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 17:05
If you've got the capital, you've got the advantage to change a lot and build an uneven playing field.


Sorry, but most poor people make poor choices. That's why they're poor, not because they started out with nothing. :rofl: That's the most absurd thing I've heard all month from GT by you saying otherwise.

I started out with nothing, and my networth has grown greatly. I achieved this by underconsuming, while sacrificing some of my teenage years into acquiring a valuable skill, then turning that extra money and buying other things that give me return on my investment. IE a house, high dividend stock, etc. etc.

countrygun
10-10-2012, 17:06
If you've got the capital, you've got the advantage to change a lot and build an uneven playing field.

How did you get the capital?

You have the same opportunity to get the capital and build your own playing field.

Chesafreak
10-10-2012, 17:10
If you are working a minimum wage job, you earned that. The owner earned what he has. Not every business owner was born with a silver spoon and most have made sacrifices of their own to get to where they are financially.

Nobody owes you anything. You are where you're at because of choices that you made from the time you attended high school up until today. Life isn't fair, boo hoo. Tell someone with terminal cancer that life isn't fair because you have to work two minimum wage jobs. You built the foundation that your life rests on. If you aren't happy with what you have, what are you going to do to change that? Stop acting like somebody owes you more and consider yourself lucky that you weren't born in China, or worse.

Every time I think I have it bad, I remind myself that I'm above ground and free to change my life, and that I wouldn't have a job if it weren't for problems to solve and needs to fulfill.

countrygun
10-10-2012, 17:13
Sorry, but most poor people make poor choices. That's why they're poor, not because they started out with nothing. :rofl: That's the most absurd thing I've heard all month from GT by you saying otherwise.

I started out with nothing, and my networth has grown greatly. I achieved this by underconsuming, while sacrificing some of my teenage years into acquiring a valuable skill, then turning that extra money and buying other things that give me return on my investment. IE a house, high dividend stock, etc. etc.

Hmmm. you and I are more alike than I thought

kenpoprofessor
10-10-2012, 17:17
If you are working a minimum wage job, you earned that. The owner earned what he has. Not every business owner was born with a silver spoon and most have made sacrifices of their own to get to where they are financially.

Nobody owes you anything. You are where you're at because of choices that you made from the time you attended high school up until today. Life isn't fair, boo hoo. Tell someone with terminal cancer that life isn't fair because you have to work two minimum wage jobs. You built the foundation that your life rests on. If you aren't happy with what you have, what are you going to do to change that? Stop acting like somebody owes you more and consider yourself lucky that you weren't born in China, or worse.

Every time I think I have it bad, I remind myself that I'm above ground and free to change my life, and that I wouldn't have a job if it weren't for problems to solve and needs to fulfill.

The owner of the business I'm current employed by started out at the bottom, learned a trade, employed that trade, and started his own business. It's gotten him a lot of perks, and many more headaches. He's been at the bottom, and now at the top, and makes quite a chunk of change these days.

It's not the path for me, I tried my own business, and I suck at being a business man because you have to compromise too much. I'm not willing to do that.

I work my skills for the highest bidder, and best attributes the company has. And yes, I had to convince some I was worth much more than they wanted to pay me, then I proved I was worth every penny and more.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 17:19
Hmmm. you and I are more alike than I thought


I'm for keeping the gov't out of the private individual's life, in probably 99% of issues. So yes, when it comes to economics, if you're for little gov't intervention, then we will probably be agreeing.

countrygun
10-10-2012, 17:22
I'm for keeping the gov't out of the private individual's life, in probably 99% of issues. So yes, when it comes to economics, if you're for little gov't intervention, then we will probably be agreeing.

I retired at 50 pretty darned well set up and I did it without one bit of Government help and I didn't borrow money to do it. You can probably guess how I feel about GVT meddling in business and the subtle socialism being foisted off as "fairness".

Chesafreak
10-10-2012, 17:31
The owner of the business I'm current employed by started out at the bottom, learned a trade, employed that trade, and started his own business. It's gotten him a lot of perks, and many more headaches. He's been at the bottom, and now at the top, and makes quite a chunk of change these days.

It's not the path for me, I tried my own business, and I suck at being a business man because you have to compromise too much. I'm not willing to do that.


I also tried starting my own business once. I didn't stop because of lack of results, I quit it and got a regular job because I wasn't willing to sacrifice my family life to live the life of an entrepreneur in the IT field. Most highly successful business owners had to sacrifice a lot to get there, including their families if they had one.

I wish I could remember the name of the book, but when I was deciding between starting another business or staying put as an employee, I read a book that outlined what the richest of the rich have to do and sacrifice to be successful. Thats what helped me to make the choice to remain an employee. Most of us don't have what it takes to get there, but some delude themselves into thinking that they deserve that.

IndyGunFreak
10-10-2012, 17:32
Not if we toss your people out on their collective asses ! ... :supergrin:

.

a big :agree:

Romney/Ryan 2012!

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 17:34
I retired at 50 pretty darned well set up and I did it without one bit of Government help and I didn't borrow money to do it. You can probably guess how I feel about GVT meddling in business and the subtle socialism being foisted off as "fairness".


Yep. 99% of the time when you have the gov't do something, all it leaves is a bunch of red tape, bureaucracy, and corruption. Much more efficient to leave choices up to individuals, and as long as their actions are not carrying a victim, let them experience their own personal consequences (both good and bad consequences) from their actions.

I'm sure you, as well as I have lost money due personal mistakes, and we didn't need the gov't to step into our lives and tell us "NO!" :supergrin: We learned from our mistakes, and will continue to do so until the day we die.

People shouldn't be punished from other's mistakes is the bottom line, and it seems Guss has a hard time understanding that.

FFR Spyder GT
10-10-2012, 17:50
Stick to your day job, your attempt at comedy is pathetic. :yawn:

I'm not whining about what I get paid becuase I think its fair. And FYI, I am studying to gain more I.T. certifications so that I can continue to progress in my career field. I'm simply pointing out that employers don't owe employees anything, and that unions are part of the problem causing lost jobs.

The union forklift driver? Her employer does pay her what she's worth, as in nothing. She lost her job. I was watching a show (think it was 60 Minutes) about the economy and what people are having to do to get by after losing their job. One of the people interviewed was a lady that lost a $92,000 a year job as a union forklift driver. I have met people who made inflated wages and were members of the UAW union, only to lose their job and become hairstylists. Anything inflated must eventually bust or have a correction which is the case with sending jobs overseas to avoid unions or closing plants because you can't sustain a profit with rising costs including union pay scales.

Simple math..........

$92,000.00/2,080hrs = $44.23/hour.

Gee, do you really think someone would pay a fork lift driver $44.23/hr?

I don't.

I talked to a Union fork lift driver today and he said he made $18.xx/hr.

Something doesn't add up with your story.

Ruble Noon
10-10-2012, 17:52
I retired at 50 pretty darned well set up and I did it without one bit of Government help and I didn't borrow money to do it. You can probably guess how I feel about GVT meddling in business and the subtle socialism being foisted off as "fairness".

Public or private sector?

Chesafreak
10-10-2012, 17:53
Simple math..........

$92,000.00/2,080hrs = $44.23/hour.

Gee, do you really think someone would pay a fork lift driver $44.23/hr?

I don't.

I talked to a Union fork lift driver today and he said he made $18.xx/hr.

Something doesn't add up with your story.

I don't really care if you believe it, I saw it on TV. If it's a lie, then that lady lied the whole world. Besides, you only talked to 1 forklift driver. I'm sure that there are many more out there who get paid more or less. Obviously, her inflated pay was the reason why she no longer has a job

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

countrygun
10-10-2012, 18:15
Public or private sector?

I got out of Law Enforcement when I was 24 and never took public sector dime after that

Guss
10-10-2012, 18:31
How did you get the capital?

You have the same opportunity to get the capital and build your own playing field.
Unfortunately I didn't choose George Romney as my father.

Guss
10-10-2012, 18:35
Sorry, but most poor people make poor choices. That's why they're poor, not because they started out with nothing. ...
I know most people make poor choices. That's why we have a Social Security program to make sure they save for their old age.

countrygun
10-10-2012, 18:41
Unfortunately I didn't choose George Romney as my father.


Well then you have to start up like I did.

this is really what it comes down to for you isn't it?

You are jealous and butt-hurt. Somebody else was born better off than you. That is the whole core of your gripe.

Envy

Well WAAAAAHHHHHH:crying:

Now go away

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 19:00
I know most people make poor choices. That's why we have a Social Security program to make sure they save for their old age.


Social Security is unsustainable, largely because those who contribute, take more than they give. It's a socialist scheme that takes from more successful, and gives to the irresponsible, for a vote.

if you're irresponsible, you should accept the consequences for your actions, and not steal from others asking the gov't to help you.

MAC702
10-10-2012, 19:15
You can't blame Obama for that - Greedy employers have been using that strategy for many years now to cut not only heath benefits, but other benefits as well. Eventually we'll close the loopholes.

What?! These people that are providing jobs out of their own business are going to USE the laws that are being made that FORCE them to do things for their employees that the government says employees are too stupid to do for themselves?

If the mandates did not exist, the business wouldn't care who was full-time, part-time, etc. They'd only care that their employees are happy and working productively. Bad practices would balance out, as long as no mobs got involved.

Only after the government told employers HOW to pay employees did this even become an issue.

Guss
10-10-2012, 20:03
Well then you have to start up like I did.

this is really what it comes down to for you isn't it?

You are jealous and butt-hurt. Somebody else was born better off than you. That is the whole core of your gripe.

Envy

Well WAAAAAHHHHHH:crying:

Now go away
"Go away!" seems to be the stock Republican answer to problems these days.

What I am or am not is no where near as important as minimum wage. Can you think of a civilized country that doesn't have a minimum wage?

JFrame
10-10-2012, 20:17
"Go away!" seems to be the stock Republican answer to problems these days.

What I am or am not is no where near as important as minimum wage. Can you think of a civilized country that doesn't have a minimum wage?

"Civilized country" seems to be a term, like "fairness," that is essentially meaningless in the context that is typically used by progressives.


.

countrygun
10-10-2012, 20:28
"Go away!" seems to be the stock Republican answer to problems these days.

What I am or am not is no where near as important as minimum wage. Can you think of a civilized country that doesn't have a minimum wage?

Greece has one.

How is that working out?

Shall we go through Europes problematic places and see there?

Of course, you have your bet hedged because you just decalre a Country that doesn't as "uncivillized".

By the way, you failed to make a point.

OctoberRust
10-10-2012, 20:31
"Go away!" seems to be the stock Republican answer to problems these days.

What I am or am not is no where near as important as minimum wage. Can you think of a civilized country that doesn't have a minimum wage?


So Guss, what's your plan on making Social Security actually sustainable? You do understand how much money goes in SS, and how much comes out, right?

How do you propose we balance this? I know you won't advocate cuts, since that'd be "holding those poor people down". Do you suggest we tax the wealthy more? IE - killing the goose that lays the golden egg?

Hef
10-10-2012, 20:34
You can't blame Obama for that - Greedy employers have been using that strategy for many years now to cut not only heath benefits, but other benefits as well. Eventually we'll close the loopholes.

People who disagree with where the line is drawn like to cry about "loopholes".

Brucev
10-10-2012, 20:35
You can't blame Obama for that - Greedy employers have been using that strategy for many years now to cut not only heath benefits, but other benefits as well. Eventually we'll close the loopholes.

Bingo! Saw it in the shipyard back in 1979-1982. But of course everyone wants to pretend that such stuff only began with the nationalization of healthcare by the squatter.

Loopholes? Yep. Close them? Only if those who own and operate the legislatures want them closed.

Hef
10-10-2012, 20:40
If I were running a business, I'd be doing everything I could to avoid paying it.

My partner and I have been discussing how to do just that. One way or another, we aren't going to provide health insurance. If we could afford it our employees would already have it.

Guss
10-10-2012, 23:07
So Guss, what's your plan on making Social Security actually sustainable?..
We only need a little bump in deduction rates to get us over the hump.

OctoberRust
10-11-2012, 07:03
We only need a little bump in deduction rates to get us over the hump.


A little bump? You're kidding right? You know how much SS eats in deficits right? SS is insolvent.

If the gov't wasn't controlling this, you know who ever created it would be sent straight to jail for creating a ponzi scheme right? But since it's the gov't it's ok.

Goaltender66
10-11-2012, 07:12
A little bump? You're kidding right? You know how much SS eats in deficits right? SS is insolvent.

If the gov't wasn't controlling this, you know who ever created it would be sent straight to jail for creating a ponzi scheme right? But since it's the gov't it's ok.

Pretty much. I'm still rubbing my eyes at the "little bump," as if that's all that's needed.

Here's the issue. You have a kajillion people set to collect benefits within the next 10 years. The only thing that's sitting in the fund right now are a bunch of notes saying "IOU a lot of money XXXOOO The Feds" The labor participation rate has been shrinking (can't collect FICA if someone isn't working) and there aren't enough young workers to pony up and cover the mass Baby Boomer 20 year vacation that is modern retirement without a hell of a lot more than a "little bump."

But that's only the first side of the problem.

The second is that even if you want to drive FICA deductions up, that is money those workers will expect to recover when they hit retirement age. Meaning...those taxes can't come down unless there is an exponential increase in the labor force. Of course, if there is an exponential increase (for instance, the Baby Boom) then the subsequent generation has to pony up more to pay for that second mass.

The reality is that Social Security, just like a Ponzi scheme, relies on an ever-expanding pool of rubes to join the system. However, we don't have an ever-expanding pool. The system is fundamentally flawed and any realistic long-term solution has to be centered around ending it.

JFrame
10-11-2012, 08:17
We only need a little bump in deduction rates to get us over the hump.

Obama: "...bumps in the road..."

"Bump" seems to be the new progressive word of choice to try and marginalize any circumstance on which they can get creamed.


.

rppnj
10-11-2012, 15:18
I can't tell you how many times I've heard the same thing over and over from people who never saved a dime in their lives and never even funded a 401k or IRA (even ones that provided matching funds). Now they complain, "how is someone supposed to live on just social security?" Well, wake up people...social security was never meant to be the welfare program for retirees that it is now. It was only meant to be a small supplement for retirees. The bulk of retirees' money was to come from their own savings and/or investments. If they didn't save/invest, then "too bad" that's not my fault...I lived within my means and did save and invest for my retirement. So, how am I being rewarded for doing the right thing? Our socialist president wants to take the money that I worked so hard for for more than 40 years and redistribute it to the 'losers' who did not. Free cell phones, anyone!

Hef
10-11-2012, 20:39
We only need a little bump in deduction rates to get us over the hump.

You must be kin to Joe Biden.

Guss
10-11-2012, 21:21
You must be kin to Joe Biden.
You can call him "Winner Joe".

Hef
10-12-2012, 06:41
You can call him "Winner Joe".

Why? Has something changed recently? For as far back as I can remember Joe Biden has been the court jester of Congress, putting his foot in mouth so often that now no public speaking engagement is done until Joe has tossed out a whopper for everyone to chuckle at.

Goaltender66
10-12-2012, 06:57
You can call him "Winner Joe".

Actually, I call him "Doofus Interruptus."

JFrame
10-12-2012, 08:14
Actually, I call him "Doofus Interruptus."


You are kind and generous...


.

OctoberRust
10-12-2012, 08:50
You can call him "Winner Joe".


I know it's tempting to roll back to insulting others on this thread, when you can't answer my question.


But, I'll ask you again.


Do you know that SS is insolvent? So you know how much goes into SS and how much goes out?

Do you know what a ponzi scheme is?

FFR Spyder GT
10-12-2012, 09:30
Isn't the Darden chains the same ones that banned a Veteran's group from displaying a USA Flag at a banquet?

countrygun
10-12-2012, 10:29
You can call him "Winner Joe".


I'll bet you on that. HmmmmLet see, I'll even spot you the left media bias and we can use the CNN poll and the MSNBC poll.

Chesafreak
10-12-2012, 11:15
Isn't the Darden chains the same ones that banned a Veteran's group from displaying a USA Flag at a banquet?


While that did happen, it wasn't corporate policy that refused the flags, it was a mistaken employee of that one restaurant. I checked Snopes.com and it says that while the event did happen, the Darden chain execs said that there is no such corporate policy and that the employees of THAT restaurant were mistaken. The management also took responsibility for what happend and issued a telephone and in-person apology to the Kiwanis chapter. I wouldn't blame the whole Darden chain for the action of one misinformed employee, but it was good to see that they took responsibility for it and gave aplogies.

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/olivegarden.asp

countrygun
10-12-2012, 11:18
While that did happen, it wasn't corporate policy that refused the flags, it was a mistaken employee of that one restaurant. I checked Snopes.com and it says that while the event did happen, the Darden chain execs said that there is no such corporate policy and that the employees of THAT restaurant were mistaken. The management also took responsibility for what happend and issued a telephone and in-person apology to the Kiwanis chapter. I wouldn't blame the whole Darden chain for the action of one misinformed employee, but it was good to see that they took responsibility for it and gave aplogies.

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/olivegarden.asp

Spyder didn't have the facts correct???

Let me show you my shocked face

G29Reload
10-12-2012, 11:25
There is no inherent fairness in the system unless management and labor have equal bargaining power.

We always have equal bargaining power.

You pay me what I want or what I'm worth or I leave for someone who will.

Employer can't find someone to work for what is being offered, they have to sweeten the deal or they don't get any work done.

Your feet aren't nailed to the floor and no one owes you a job.

Guss
10-12-2012, 12:35
...


Do you know that SS is insolvent? So you know how much goes into SS and how much goes out?
...
It's not. Check their FAQ page.

Guss
10-12-2012, 12:36
We always have equal bargaining power.
...
False.
There will always be those who take advantage of the poor and desperate. That's why we have minimum wage laws to make sure people have a minimum standard of living.

FFR Spyder GT
10-12-2012, 12:59
Spyder didn't have the facts correct???

Let me show you my shocked face

countrygun,

I remember getting several e-mails from different Veteran's groups to boycott Darden chains because they would NOT allow the American Flag to be displayed.

You didn't get those e-mails?

Oh, that's right, to have joined the military you would have to move out of your Mom's basement.

Spyder

P.S. At the time this happened Darden had a CORPORATE WIDE ban on banners of any type. This included the American Flag. Darden changed their policy and used the one employee as a scapegoat.

countrygun
10-12-2012, 13:03
countrygun,

I remember getting several e-mails from different Veteran's groups to boycott Darden chains because they would NOT allow the American Flag to be displayed.

You didn't get those e-mails?

Oh, that's right, to have joined the military you would have to move out of your Mom's basement.

Spyder

P.S. At the time this happened Darden had a CORPORATE WIDE ban on banners of any type. This included the American Flag. Darden changed their policy and used the one employee as a scapegoat.


If you look close you will find the corporation "banned banners", a single employee applied it to the flag.

Goaltender66
10-12-2012, 13:04
So let's see...

Chesafreak posts a link to five different sources.

Spyder cites a spam email.

Yeah, I'm feeling the gravitas in that rebuttal to Ches. :upeyes:

























:rofl:

countrygun
10-12-2012, 13:16
So let's see...

Chesafreak posts a link to five different sources.

Spyder cites a spam email.

Yeah, I'm feeling the gravitas in that rebuttal to Ches. :upeyes:

:rofl:

The poll says + - 4.5%

:rofl:

kirgi08
10-12-2012, 13:40
Actually, I call him "Doofus Interruptus."

Why,he never stops.'08.