Raise Request.. working for a corporation. . A was wondering ii? iill Etta be 'iial. tital/ gill ht: ask you Ear m raise? Fm Rick. As much as rd like Kindly see toonhole toon cartoon comic webcomic gag raise corporation wages Money Business greed
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (110)
[ 110 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#7 - optimussum
Reply +310 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
**optimussum rolls 77**
#84 to #7 - anon id: 5ecc3bdd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Why do you people care so much about numbers?
Why do you people care so much about numbers?
User avatar #90 to #84 - goodatlosing
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Cause they're ******* neato.


Go ahead, just make the ******* pun.
#93 to #90 - mrpotatofudge
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
User avatar #94 to #93 - goodatlosing
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
That's different. Okay.
#8 to #7 - optimussum
Reply +196 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
#9 to #8 - optimussum
Reply +196 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
#10 to #9 - optimussum
Reply +203 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
User avatar #11 to #10 - GuthirexLeader
Reply +67 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Its miracles and people like this that make me come to this site
#12 to #11 - miracles
Reply +98 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
User avatar #20 to #12 - ohhh
Reply +28 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Your'e what i do every night.
#23 to #20 - miracles
Reply +28 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Oh~
Oh~
User avatar #2 - odinshomeboy
Reply +99 123456789123345869
(02/07/2014) [-]
That's a nice way of saying you aren't worth more money.
#13 - infinitereaper
Reply +37 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
I think it's important that poeple remember this:   
(for the most part) the rich don't give a **** about you   
I repeat. The rich don't give a **** about you   
   
Honestly. Most wealthy poeple just don't give a ****. Corporations often more so.    
The minimum wage of today is pretty ****** when compared to 75 or so years ago. I think the most modest estimates it at $10.00 adjusted for inflation though many argue as high as $15 or more. "BUT THAT'S STUPID!" "JOBS WILL BE CUT"   
   
Well yeah. Probably. See, lots of big businesses and corporations are greedy *************. They couldn't stand loosing a few hundred million off of their billion dollar profit margins. And the stock holders? Would they stand for that?    
   
See. The economy is ****. Because people can't afford to shop in the malls they work in. What lots of idiots seem to forget is that > if people have more money the economy grows > if the economy grows businesses thrive more > which means that in the long run greedy bitch ass businesses will make balance out any loses with growth and potentially larger profit margins.   
   
But no. Lets suck the lower middle class dry. Lets create a world of 3rd class citizens. You guys watch that reality TV show "The Kids of Beverly Hills" or some ****.   
   
Do you really think that more than half of these haven't lost touch with reality? And live in la la land? Money, money, money. It's all about ******* money. Sickening. But that's the kind of world we live. I studied economics, geopolitics, and monetary for enough years to know that. Every corruption, every misdeed, every ******* pillar of our human society and future and progress... all comes down to one thing   
   
money   
   
See I don't hate the rich, because they're are two types of people:   
Those who profit   
and those who plunder
I think it's important that poeple remember this:
(for the most part) the rich don't give a **** about you
I repeat. The rich don't give a **** about you

Honestly. Most wealthy poeple just don't give a ****. Corporations often more so.
The minimum wage of today is pretty ****** when compared to 75 or so years ago. I think the most modest estimates it at $10.00 adjusted for inflation though many argue as high as $15 or more. "BUT THAT'S STUPID!" "JOBS WILL BE CUT"

Well yeah. Probably. See, lots of big businesses and corporations are greedy *************. They couldn't stand loosing a few hundred million off of their billion dollar profit margins. And the stock holders? Would they stand for that?

See. The economy is ****. Because people can't afford to shop in the malls they work in. What lots of idiots seem to forget is that > if people have more money the economy grows > if the economy grows businesses thrive more > which means that in the long run greedy bitch ass businesses will make balance out any loses with growth and potentially larger profit margins.

But no. Lets suck the lower middle class dry. Lets create a world of 3rd class citizens. You guys watch that reality TV show "The Kids of Beverly Hills" or some ****.

Do you really think that more than half of these haven't lost touch with reality? And live in la la land? Money, money, money. It's all about ******* money. Sickening. But that's the kind of world we live. I studied economics, geopolitics, and monetary for enough years to know that. Every corruption, every misdeed, every ******* pillar of our human society and future and progress... all comes down to one thing

money

See I don't hate the rich, because they're are two types of people:
Those who profit
and those who plunder
User avatar #24 to #13 - tkfourtwoone
Reply -6 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
"The minimum wage of today is pretty ****** when compared to 75 or so years ago"

First brain fart. The standard of living has greatly increased since then, rendering your "argument" completely moot.

"What lots of idiots seem to forget is that > if people have more money the economy grows"

Second brain fart. The economy might grow, but it would be a fake & inflated economy. Look at Reagan's measures in the 80s, creating consumerism, which is a large part to blame for the economy crisis of today

"Because people can't afford to shop in the malls they work in"

Third brainfart. Strike three, you're out. Seriously, you have proven yourself to be completely economically inept, please refrain from spouting out such huge levels of ********!

And you know why?! Because IF YOU WORK IN A DAMN LAMBORGHINI FACTORY THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU MUST BE ABLE TO BUY A LAMBORGHINI!

Do you think that the Chinese that built your Apple products earn enough to actually buy a genuine Apple product?! No, they settle for their Chinese knock-offs, which ironically are made in the same factory as the genuine ones.
#28 to #24 - anon id: 76363a23
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Just make a tv show with this guy being a dick towards everyone by explaining how noone gives a **** about them.
Name it: The demotivator
#91 to #24 - officialjg
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
...lol
...lol
User avatar #95 to #91 - tkfourtwoone
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Love how this site thumbs down anyone with a bit of logic, without bothering to bring any arguments whatsoever

Autistic, cancer-ridden little *****...
#96 to #95 - officialjg
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
...lol
...lol
User avatar #97 to #96 - tkfourtwoone
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
...QED

keep spamming "lol". What next, "asl pls"?!
#98 to #97 - officialjg
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
...lol
...lol
User avatar #100 to #98 - tkfourtwoone
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Found the 12-year old!
#101 to #100 - officialjg
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
...LOL
...LOL
#15 to #13 - articulate
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Sounds like it would just cause inflation. The economy fluctuates. Just let it do its thing.
Sounds like it would just cause inflation. The economy fluctuates. Just let it do its thing.
User avatar #16 to #15 - infinitereaper
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
You want to talk inflation? How about the deficit the 15 trillion + in debt? The federal reserve?
You know what **** it. I'm not sure why I try to talk about this on FJ I should know better by now.
#17 to #16 - articulate
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
You're just mad because you're stupid. I understand, but try to understand. Even if the federal reserve burnt to the ground and we raised the minimum wage to 20 rubles and hour we would still end up harming more economies than we help save. Your plan wouldn't help at all, just give up.
You're just mad because you're stupid. I understand, but try to understand. Even if the federal reserve burnt to the ground and we raised the minimum wage to 20 rubles and hour we would still end up harming more economies than we help save. Your plan wouldn't help at all, just give up.
User avatar #18 to #17 - infinitereaper
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
That wasn't "my plan" nor the point, bu-
No you're right poor people should just buy more money.
#19 to #18 - articulate
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Now you've got it!
Now you've got it!
User avatar #14 to #13 - nought
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
cool
#50 to #13 - cabbagemayhem
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Ok, so you know it's not their job to negotiate for you and automatically give you a generous wage. You have to negotiate for a high wage. Everyone knows Capitalism has a few caveats, but it's the best damn system since bartering. Are you just ranting, or do you have a solution? If so, what is it?
#58 to #50 - infinitereaper
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
The future of humanity aught to not rest on the shiniest of two turds. So to speak.
There is so much to be said about this subject, more than I could possibly say here, but I will say this: education is important. Years ago I would have never understood: "The dictatorship of one talented man is much more beneficial to humanity than a democracy of the ignorant masses." but I understand now. Nothing will change until people are actually informed about their own countries and the nature of the global economy and the home front.

See. To me. Nothing is more important than the truth. and likewise, I believe ignorance is the most destructive force in the universe. It can, and will, end worlds, and civilizations. After all, in a world of lies, really, what is the truth?

That jazz aside, things are ****** up. Like real ****** up. So many things need to be fixed. We're moving so close to that vision of dystopia in long since past. So like I said, there is so much to say about this.
#105 to #58 - turds
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
If it were to rest on that, it would probably be me, not to toot my own horn but I'm pretty shiny.
User avatar #106 to #105 - infinitereaper
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
ha ha ha

what a ****** username
User avatar #62 to #58 - cabbagemayhem
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
You can get flak for speculating on a dystopian future in public like this, but I hear what you're saying. That's why the solution is for everyone to become a true follower of Jesus Christ!
User avatar #102 to #62 - infinitereaper
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
hail Arceus
User avatar #110 to #102 - cabbagemayhem
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/09/2014) [-]
See? There's you're problem.
#26 to #13 - yarr
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Man, you're a professional at writing like a dick.
Man, you're a professional at writing like a dick.
User avatar #42 to #26 - infinitereaper
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
thanks
User avatar #86 to #13 - lamarisagoodname
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
well said
User avatar #34 to #13 - achimp
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
So these greedy, EVVIIIILLL money grubbing corporations wouldn't just adjust prices to account for hte minimum wage to save their profit margins.

Yeah, real genius you are figuring out that the driving force behind capitalism and the economy is human greed. Only a few centuries behind Adam smith, you are.
User avatar #41 to #34 - infinitereaper
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Excuse me for caring about the state of the global economy and next 100 years. As those of us who move farther away from the current generation and into the next we become the parents who leave the world as we made it to the children that will come after us.

The real issue is that people simply don't understand the severity of the issue. After all, authority figures must be infallible. It's the nativity in belief of goodwill that allows corruption to take such complete root.

It's all about money! It always is! Freedom, life, health, food! All of it! Money! And those who have more of it, are above everyone else. That's the way the world works. And it's sickening. Because it's not just about making a profit to some people, to many it's about leaching as much as they can and taking as much as they can no matter the costs to others.
User avatar #21 to #13 - olmesy
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Did you really need to study economics to figure out that people like having lots of money?

Also, it doesn't do your argument much of a favour to be talking as if you're better than these people
User avatar #45 to #21 - infinitereaper
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Does no one remember 2008? The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act? Everything happens for a reason. See. When you speak about the truth it's not about whether people like it or not. It's about the truth. Nothing could be more important. Even in society that loves vindication. It's my own opinion, but it's based on several years of research and study, and just general common sense.

Things are rough yes? But no one talks about why
It's just a cluster **** its just "that's the way things are"
"Everything is fine"
"Its just the natural cycle"
And people wonder why nothing ever changes.
#22 - chaossniper
Reply +25 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
please tell me i am not the only one who see this
#27 to #22 - godofcorndog
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Would you kindly..?
Would you kindly..?
User avatar #59 to #22 - samxdaxman
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
A man chooses, a slave obeys.
User avatar #1 - johncaveson **User deleted account**
Reply +24 123456789123345869
(02/07/2014) [-]
Am I the only one thinking that the door must be about 2 meters off the floor?
#29 - madcoww
Reply +18 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
>Raise minimum wage
>Marginal employees who are not worth the new amount are laid off
>Consumers are denied that service (ableit small) that employee once provided
>Unemployment goes up
>Raising supply is usually accompanied by lower prices and greater demand
>This is not so since it is illegal for a worker to sell their labor for less than min wage
>Since more people are unemployed, demand for social programs go up.
>Social programs are either paid for by taxes or borrowing, which must be repaid by taxes
>Taxes discourage production because reward to risk ratio goes down
>Less new jobs are created
>Government creates make-work jobs that seek to provide employment rather than use resources to their fullest
>People see capitalism as a failed system and begin demanding for communism and fascism

The US is not a free market capitalistic country. It is a mixed economy where the capitalist portions are slowly not being able to continue to afford the socialist portions.
User avatar #31 to #29 - thatguyontheright
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
So what would be the best coarse of action, Mr. Economics Professor from Cambridge?

"There is one rule for the industrialist and that is: Make the best quality of goods possible at the lowest cost possible, paying the highest wages possible" Henry Ford.

"It is not the employer who pays the wages. Employers only handle the money. It is the customer who pays the wages." Henry Ford.
#32 to #31 - madcoww
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
The reason that employers must pay their employees higher wages is because they are scared they will lose them to other employers (why let a good employee work for another company at $20/hour when he can work creating wealth for you at $21/hour). Minimum wage laws destroy jobs. Less jobs leads to more competition for jobs (and less competition for labor). Therefore, employees are less able to bargain their wages since there are many people who would work for less.

The answer is a free market minarchy where the government protects individuals from fraud and force through the courts, police, and military.
User avatar #33 to #32 - thatguyontheright
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
So getting rid of minimum wage would fix things? I don't think so. Wages are not the only thing that affect prices of products, in fact wages have a small impact on price. If they did, nobody would make any more than $7.25 an hour. Any money "lost" to a company in wages is quickly made back when consumers buy their products.

While a substantial jump from $7.25 to $14 is not very good....$7.25 to $10 will have a negligible effect on employment prospects over time. Not to mention it would lift 4 million people out of poverty, increase the standard of living for those people, get those people off of food stamps and supplemental income programs like welfare.

BUT, Minimum wage should not be across the board for all industries. Fast food workers really do not need an increase in wages...but people in manufacturing do.
#35 to #33 - madcoww
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
What makes manufacturing so special? Consider Walmart. Walmart is able to charge the prices they do in part because they pay as low wages as they do. In a free market, businesses do not get money by raising prices since people will simply buy from another supplier. They get money by charging the least amount possible and being more efficient than their competitors to be able to afford the loss. It is unlikely Walmart will take the money for the increase in wages from their profits since they have already lowered their profits as much as possible in order to dominate their market. Instead, they will need to do one or both of the following: increase prices or cut costs by reducing labor. Consider the Walmart greeter. Once upon a time, it was worth the money to Walmart to have someone standing by the door welcoming people in and handling the initial step of returns. When it was no longer cost beneficial to pay them, the position was destroyed. If Walmart makes up for the higher wages by charging more for products, everyone's cost of living will go up since it will cost more to shop at Walmart (and assuming Target will have to raise their prices since the same laws apply to them).

In short, minimum wage laws destroy jobs, increase the cost of living, and makes it harder for employees to bargain their pay. The only people they help are the people whose work is actually worth the increase, but their wages increase should be done through bargaining, not government intervention.
#46 to #35 - anon id: 9e0db0c5
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Yes, because 19th century England (The Purest form of capitalism the world has ever seen) was such a ******* joy to live in. Oh, god damn those poor people who demand livable working conditions and basic human treatment. Try reading Oliver Twist or an form of literature from that time period and you'll have a pretty good picture of life without minimum wage or basic government intervention.

TL;DR Minimum wage = good
You = Retarded armchair economist
#54 to #46 - madcoww
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
In a free market, workers are free to choose their best alternative.  Yes, there were terrible conditions for some laborers working in industrial areas during the British industrial revolution, so why didn't they simply leave the cities to become farm laborers?  The answer is that there were no other jobs.  Why?  Because of the population explosion that was the direct result of the industrial revolution: cost of living went down which allowed parents to afford to give better products to their children.  So, yes, the industrial revolution forced people into terrible jobs, but without the industrial revolution, they would have never survived to work those menial jobs.  So as long as you believe that a hard life is better than no life at all, the industrial revolution did raise the standard of living even initially.
In a free market, workers are free to choose their best alternative. Yes, there were terrible conditions for some laborers working in industrial areas during the British industrial revolution, so why didn't they simply leave the cities to become farm laborers? The answer is that there were no other jobs. Why? Because of the population explosion that was the direct result of the industrial revolution: cost of living went down which allowed parents to afford to give better products to their children. So, yes, the industrial revolution forced people into terrible jobs, but without the industrial revolution, they would have never survived to work those menial jobs. So as long as you believe that a hard life is better than no life at all, the industrial revolution did raise the standard of living even initially.
#99 to #54 - anon id: 9e0db0c5
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Yea, your 'capitalism' sounds a lot like another system of production. That one worked out great too. Just so you know people don't like be demeaned and marginalized, hell, there have been entire revolutions because of mistreatment of workers.
#71 to #54 - anon id: bf935d8a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
The guy is a troll that doesn't know two ***** about economy, there is no other possible way he can not be a troll. I for one have a little faith in humanity and I don't believe anyone can be retarded as madcoww is trying to sound like.
User avatar #60 to #35 - thatguyontheright
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
So what should wages be? $1 an hour? 50 cents? We gotta be competitive to China, so it has to be a nickel an hour.

Besides, Wal-mart kills jobs. They undercut small business competition and force them out of business over time.
User avatar #83 to #60 - noblexfenrir
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
You do realize that if employers were able to pay any wage they desired, other forms of the market that produce goods the lower/middle class buy, would have to conform their prices to those wage ranges right?

How is enforcing a larger minimum wage going to help for small businesses in any way? Generally larger companies like a high FORCED minimum wage, because while they take a hit in one area, they get it back by monopolizing over the smaller businesses that can't afford to pay that much or who don't even start up because of the increased initial costs for employees.
User avatar #51 to #29 - nigeltheoutlaw
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Capitalism is a failed system, that's why it is viewed as such. People argue that it's just because we're regulating it too much, but true free market capitalism just leads to monopolies and The Jungle era working conditions, while regulating it to **** scares the greedy people in control who hire less and hoard their wealth more, causing large unemployment.
#55 to #51 - madcoww
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Not true, regulation leads to special interests and monopolies. An uncoerced monopoly is nearly impossible in a free market, and it can only be obtained and preserved by being viciously efficient and providing the best products at the lowest prices. There is nothing so vulnerable as a large inefficient business that is force to compete with small efficient ones.

If a company can be granted price fixing for their product, smaller companies cannot undersell them by being more efficient.

Let's say you want to corner the market on paper. You sell your paper at a loss to put all the other companies out of business. Once they are out of business, you raise your prices above the market value in order to recuperate your losses. This profit radio encourages more companies to sprout up to compete. You must undersell them as well in order to put them out of business before you can once again raise prices. This continues until you go bankrupt.
User avatar #87 to #55 - failtolawl
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Yea, looks good on paper doesn't it, buddy? Ever heard of a little conglomeration called OPEC? Guess what, they can set their own prices because everybody benefits so much more than if they were competing.

Regulation prevents monopolies in the US ever since J.P. Morgan. The second you unregulate the market, WAL-MART will buy off or outdo Target and have their prices so far lower than smaller businesses based on contracts with distribution companies, that bulk prices will be significantly cheaper (and continually because as the only buyer, they can set what prices they purchase from the distributers). Once they gain that grip on those producers, they can raise their prices, only having to deal with the .00001 percent of the market they don't control.
User avatar #104 to #55 - nigeltheoutlaw
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Look at England in the 1800s; that is the purest, freest capitalism the world has ever seen, and it was complete and utter **** for everyone but the very top. **** wages, **** employment, no worker safety, no healthcare, little food, disgusting environment, the list goes on. Advocating for that shows that you haven't read enough history. And there were still monopolies, go figure. You're speaking of theory, but the reality doesn't match it at all.

With a lack of regulation nothing stops the monopoly from hostile takeovers or intimidation of any small competitors, as it's easy for them to swallow up such a small start up. Not only that, but the larger a company is the less expensive it is for them to procure resources or create a product (look at Walmart - they regularly undersell all smaller businesses because they buy in bulk and underpay workers), and smaller businesses can't hope to compete and still turn a profit.
User avatar #66 to #55 - thatguyontheright
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
So regulations against monopolies creates monopolies?
User avatar #61 to #29 - cabbagemayhem
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Behold, the solution. Any self-respecting Republican knows raising the minimum wage creates inefficiency in the market, but if we eliminated the minimum wage altogether, what happens besides outsourcing and unemployment going down?
>More unskilled businesses can now afford to hire
>More unskilled businesses open, such as manufacturing
>All unskilled citizens find work
>All citizens find work, even if at a lower wage
>Citizens now work and have less time and incentive to acquire a skilled trade
>Supply of technical workers decreases, and technical wages go up
>Fewer technical businesses open due to increased costs
>Economy shifts from technical to labor backbone
>We become like China

Basically, raising the minimum wage has the primary effect of making unskilled jobs less sustainable, and forces the economy toward higher skilled trades. So, what you want is a minimum wage that very slowly increases between the pressures of market efficiency and the desire to have a skilled craft backbone. You heard it on FunnyJunk first. Any questions?
#72 to #29 - anon id: bf935d8a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Raise minimum wage   
employees have more money   
Employes spend that money on businesses   
Businesses hire more to keep up with increased demands   
More people hired, more money, more growth.   
   
Of course, there is no way in hell that the economy is that simple nor with that retard madcow wrote.
Raise minimum wage
employees have more money
Employes spend that money on businesses
Businesses hire more to keep up with increased demands
More people hired, more money, more growth.

Of course, there is no way in hell that the economy is that simple nor with that retard madcow wrote.
#77 to #29 - anon id: 4c6f777b
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
random internet neckbeard becomes master of economics by rambling about the government, details at eleven
User avatar #40 to #29 - tonyxx
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
BREAKING NEWS: Minimum wage is not a problem so simple the ramifications can be written in one funnyjunk post! Should We Raise the Minimum Wage?
#63 to #40 - anon id: c068d636
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
John Green is a communist and should be shot like John Lennon
#57 to #40 - madcoww
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
The free market is a better tool for workers to bargain their prices than government intervention. The free market automatically adjusts for the market value of labor. The best the government can do is know what this value is before it stabilizes to it, which is nearly impossible to know. So, at best, a minimum wage can anticipate an organic pay wage. But such calculations are impossible even to the best economist. What's more, they are ever fluctuating. So, a minimum wage might raise a wage to the market value, but what about when the market value drops below the minimum wage? That's when companies cut back and people go unemployed and everyone else can no longer as easily negotiate their pay.
#89 to #57 - tonyxx
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
The problem with your theory is, these are anything but conditions for a floating wage to be feasible. Massive unemployment means everybody wants a job, infact with the prices of housing, ******** private medical, education, and silly things like food and clothing means you'll need two jobs, and with these two jobs it'll still be quite problematic to afford luxuries that jumpstart the economy, if they do buy something, it will be the cheapest thing they can buy, because you have to stretch your budget as far as it will go. You know who makes the cheapest products? China, not America. Do you see how that looks?
User avatar #69 to #57 - thatguyontheright
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
In our system, wages will not go up unless you kiss alot of ass. Even if we get rid of minimum wage and stamp on the rights of the American Worker, even skilled labor will be paid little to nothing to increase the profit margin.
User avatar #64 to #29 - Shiny
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
We have literally hundreds of laws that exist for no reason other than to specially benefit companies, and yet it's our handful of social policies that are weighing down the economy?

The entire reason we have social programs is so we don't have to **** with economic policy to keep poor kids from getting strangled to death by the poverty line. Lowering minimum wage would be far more disastrous than raising it, even if the latter is still a bad idea.
User avatar #70 to #64 - thatguyontheright
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
That's because it helps the little guy not the big guy. That's why it's bad. I can't wait for madcow to start saying that having to pay employees kills jobs. Imagine, unemployment would be zero if we didn't have to pay people.
User avatar #74 to #70 - Shiny
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Well, he is right in that increasing minimum wage can damage small business, but that is why we have welfare to begin with. There really is no evidence that social programs have any noticeable economic impact, which is a very good thing.
User avatar #76 to #74 - thatguyontheright
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
One would argue that taxes that are taken to pay for such programs kill jobs.
User avatar #79 to #76 - Shiny
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
They can...but only if the tax system is unequal by burden, which it is by far in America.
User avatar #81 to #79 - thatguyontheright
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
I dunno, the rich are paying less taxes now than they did 15 years ago, and the only people who don't pay taxes are the ones who aren't employed.
User avatar #82 to #81 - Shiny
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
They pay less taxes because of tax loopholes, leaving the middle class to carry most of the burden.
User avatar #44 - scoobi
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
>trip
>fall
>grab as much money as you can
>run
#30 - mytwocents
+8 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#36 to #30 - implication
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Stop being so un-progressive, goyim
#48 - saltyfries
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Don't take me serious on this, considering the ********* in the comments, but after reading each other's side on the issue, I'm still unfortunately siding with the guys that think rich people are assholes. I remember reading somewhere that a lot of rich people have the personality make up and sometimes the brain make up of schizophrenics and serial killers, sort of explaining why they can be greedy, not an excuse or anything just a possible reason. As for the comic however, there is a point to this, some businesses are making millions to billions of dollars and pretty much refuse to put even a little of it back. I'm not saying pay the workers more (unless they deserve it), I'm saying they should make their company as awesome as possible, like Google, or Costco. Google's home office in San Fran is amazing! Working there I bet feels better than home! Costo's CEO only takes home $500k the minimum wage of CEO's, not because he can't make money, just the opposite, he's one of the few people to pour money back into his business, allowing a lot his workers to be paid between $12-$21 an hour without raising in store prices or cutting back! I'm not saying the government should intervene and start telling these CEO's what to do, I'm saying rich people should encourage their fellow brethren to follow Costco's model or other successful company models that have people's respect instead of hatred, again this is just wishful thinking on my part, like I said don't take me seriously.

tl;dr I wish companies on their own could do more for their businesses whether that's a wage increase, updating their place of business, and take home the minimum wage for CEO's because it's still a lot of money.
#92 to #48 - icefall
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Not truly arguing agaisnt or in favor, but I just want correct some stuff. Your opinion is valid, just not the best reasons.

First, the thing about rich being "serial killers", is not completely true. Yes, many people in high positions that have a lot of power tend to be psychopaths, but this is not the same as serial killers, much less schizophrenics. It is speculated that the high density of psychopaths is in part due to the fact that people in power position often have to take actions that may hurt some people in order to benefit others. Psychopaths by definition are people that lack or have low empathy, so moral choices become easier to take. Whether they are "greedy" and "assholes" is debatable, as calling someone who can't be emphatic genetically an asshole is like calling a disabled man slow.

Second, not all companies are the same. Something important you learn in management is that all businesses are different. What works for one company might not necessarily work for others. Some companies need structure and standards, others need freedom to increase creativity, so asking every company to be like Google is not the best answer.

Third, the example of Costco's CEO is an example of a truly selfless man. See, CEO's of big companies are not the "owners" since they are people appointed by some board or stock owners. In a sense he is just another employee (a really well paid one) that has more executive power (as the name suggests). He is a man that simply gives money to co-workers. Would employees that earn less be willing to do the same thing? Ask yourself, would you be willing to big up part of the salary to your co-workers? To ask a rich person to give away their personal earnings is just asking them to give away their money.
User avatar #108 to #92 - saltyfries
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/09/2014) [-]
btw, as far as the serial killers and schizophrenics, that wasn't literal, they just have similar make ups to those kinds of people (the rich people), it was something I learned from Abnormal Psychology in college, which quite disturbed me. But you're right, a lot of rich people do lack empathy.
#112 to #108 - icefall
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/09/2014) [-]
The only thing that they have in common is the lack in empathy.

Like I told you, it kind of makes sense that people in power positions have lower empathy than average people. A president for example, has to make really tough decisions that have deep moral repercussions, such as going to war or not. I think lacking a bit of empathy is a characteristic they need to not lose their minds, not necesarrily a bad trait.
User avatar #107 to #92 - saltyfries
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/09/2014) [-]
to the latter statement, hell yeah I would, If I was a billionaire owner/CEO of a big company I too would do the same thing to make my company as good as possible whether it's adding tons of jobs or paying my employees better than other companies. To me the biggest difference between a good and bad company is truly how they treat their employees, happy employees make a happy company. The best evidence here is my mom, she used to work for Prevea Health, a clinic company, and they are horrible to their employees, barely paying them even if they have a college education, she was fired for simply talking too loud, there was no other reason, she didn't do anything wrong, I"m serious! She's now with Humana Insurance and it's completely opposite, she's not only paid more as a college graduate (a full $10k more per year), but she gets raises, bonuses, anything good you can think of they do for her, it's amazing! Also we now get good insurance coverage !

My point is, if businesses want to get better they have to treat employees better, like how businesses try to turn around after Undercover Boss (I love that show)
#111 to #107 - icefall
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/09/2014) [-]
It is not as simple as saying companies that treat employees better or worse determine their success. Like I said, some companies that care little about their employees may have a reason of why that happens, most likely due to the internal structure and hierarchy of a large company. However, to my knowledge, most companies that are considered large have a good employee treatment and programs. (Like, you don't need to be a genius to know that people work better when they are happy, corporations have known this for years)

Also, the example of your mother is only relevant for small-size to medium-sized companies, which are very different to large corporations and multinational corporations. Let me remind also, that CEO's get paid depending on how large the company they manage is, so that CEO was probably not as rich as the stereotypical "big boss".

Lastly, even though you didn't say it, I want to tell you that CEO's are NOT overpayed. Here's why: An average worker can only have small impact on a company at large. That's why they are paid less, how much can a retail worker actually earn for the company? Say the dude misplaces an item on a shelf, how much does that mistake cost to Wal-mart? Now imagine a CEO. He takes the wrong decision of putting a new shop at X-suburbs, but the revenue is not enough to satisfy the costs. This guy probably lost millions of dollars for the company. The impact of an individual on a company makes of for their salary.
#37 - swedishassassin
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
"Hurr rich peepol have all the monee and dont spend it hurr"

Congrats. You have listened to that 1% ********. The only reason it is "1%" is because it will qualify the business owner's business as a financial asset, since they technically own everything in that business; turning my dad's income from about $80,000 personal to $1,200,000 "total income" because he owns his small business.

But no, I'm sure those business owners are just sitting on money for no good God damn reason other than to be evil. Let's rip apart their stable and functional income or better yet give their business to The People's Republic of Hipsters and hang those business owners, and then putting art students up as the new company owners.
#38 to #37 - pixy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
I always get so annoyed at comics like this because of how inaccurate they are.  Thank you for the clarification and for stating so.  I never actually considered the assets being included before..but it makes sense and I should have.
I always get so annoyed at comics like this because of how inaccurate they are. Thank you for the clarification and for stating so. I never actually considered the assets being included before..but it makes sense and I should have.
User avatar #39 to #38 - swedishassassin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
No probs. It shocked me too when my dad showed that to me; going from a middle class income to significantly rich with only the factor of counting the business as personal income.
User avatar #47 to #37 - jackmanagan
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
nicely put. most of these political cartoons are masturbatory aids for those anonymous guys.
User avatar #53 to #37 - nigeltheoutlaw
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
Yeah, and those record profits are totally not a result of them cutting corners and hiring as few employees as possible in order to save every sheckle they can (the purpose of capitalism, in case you forgot). It must be the fault of us dumb peons calling them out on it.
User avatar #80 to #53 - noblexfenrir
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
The purpose of capitalism isn't to save every penny you can, atleast generally, and it's definitely not the mission statement of a business. The mission for a business is to make every penny MAKE you more money. Hence it's better to hire the maximum number of employees you can THAT WILL MAKE YOU A PROFIT. Not hiring simply to save that 1 persons income won't do you a damn thing and is a bad business model, not hiring someone because you have to pay them 7 dollars and they would only produce 5 dollars for you is a smart business decision.

Generally speaking, cutting corners and what not produces quick returns and ends up hurting a business in the long run. Especially if you are selling an inferior product/service as a result.
User avatar #103 to #80 - nigeltheoutlaw
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/08/2014) [-]
In the long term that is very true. However, corporations, and their share holders are interested in short term profits that are as high as possible rather than long term profits that are more modest, but increasing and stable. I agree fully with what you're saying, but a quick glance at the business climate will tell you that most major employers have no interest in acting in that way. It's all about now, rather than thinking ahead.
[ 110 comments ]
Leave a comment