America - The Official Thread

[TexRex]

The timing is impeccable

How? The company began testing a touchscreen ordering kiosk in 2003, with the idea for it obviously having been conceived before that. "Fight for $15" didn't begin in earnest until 2014.

 

[ryzno]

How? The company began testing a touchscreen ordering kiosk in 2003, with the idea for it obviously having been conceived before that. "Fight for $15" didn't begin in earnest until 2014.

The timing of the actual implementation and the fight for $15 and the timing of the socialist movement is impeccable.

 

[TexRex]

The timing of the actual implementation and the fight for $15 and the timing of the socialist movement is impeccable.

Bull. Giant corporations don't act on impulse; the fact that there are companies whose sole service on offer is that of market research is a testament to that.

We're done here. I was actually prepared to address other comments you made on the off chance that I got a response to that solicitation, but it was a painful process--certainly not worth the trouble--and I just don't care anymore.

 

[ryzno]

Bull. Giant corporations don't act on impulse; the fact that there are companies whose sole service on offer is that of market research is a testament to that.

We're done here. I was actually prepared to address other comments you made on the off chance that I got a response to that solicitation, but it was a painful process--certainly not worth the trouble--and I just don't care anymore.

I honestly do find the timing impeccable. Hopefully you can find some time later I'm curious what you were going to respond to.

 

[McLaren]

And this also caught my attention, looks like the green movement now has the money and more importantly the leader in aoc , to move ahead and bring green jobs and new wealth to america

The same way we paid for the New Deal, the 2008 bank bailout and extended quantitative easing programs. The same way we paid for World War II and all our current wars. The Federal Reserve can extend credit to power these projects and investments and new public banks can be created to extend credit. There is also space for the government to take an equity stake in projects to get a return on investment. At the end of the day, this is an investment in our economy that should grow our wealth as a nation, so the question isn’t how will we pay for it, but what will we do with our new shared prosperity.

-The level of investment required is massive. Even if every billionaire and company came together and were willing to pour all the resources at their disposal into this investment, the aggregate value of the investments they could make would not be sufficient.
-The speed of investment required will be massive. Even if all the billionaires and companies could make the investments required, they would not be able to pull together a coordinated response in the narrow window of time required to jump-start major new projects and major new economic sectors. Also, private companies are wary of making massive investments in unprovenresearch and technologies; the government, however, has the time horizon tobe able to patiently make investments in new tech and R&D, without necessarily having a commercial outcome or application in mind at the time the investment is made. Major examples of government investments in “new”tech that subsequently spurred a boom in the private section include DARPA-projects, the creation of the internet - and, perhaps most recently, the government’s investment in Tesla.

It doesn't have the money, it just expects the Federal Reserve to pay for it.

It's not a surprise she's shrugging off Pelosi. Pelosi is the same one who told Trump he can't have money for his wall.

Pelosi said that congressional negotiators should be free to reach a "consensus of their own devices" -- but expressed confidence that Democrats won't allow the talks to produce an agreement that provides any funding to construct physical barriers along the border.

"Let them work their will," Pelosi, D-Calif., said. "They know their brief, they know their limitations in terms of financial resources and they have to choose the best way to use the money for the American people so that’s why I have confidence in what they can do."

 

[ryzno]

Bull. Giant corporations don't act on impulse; the fact that there are companies whose sole service on offer is that of market research is a testament to that.

We're done here. I was actually prepared to address other comments you made on the off chance that I got a response to that solicitation, but it was a painful process--certainly not worth the trouble--and I just don't care anymore.

I honestly want to know what you wanted or expected me to say. I hope you don't believe I think it's some huge conspiracy. But I can't deny it's coincidental, you don't look at the timing of things and laugh sometimes?. And I can't figure out how you can deny that the fight for $15 didn't have a hair of something to do with it's implementation. And if I'm correct somewhere around 2000 the minimum wage started going up(coincidental with the 2003 testing no?). I remember starting at $5.25 working my way up to $7.50. You don't know how I felt watching people get an entry pay that took me 2 years to earn. As a kid I learned quickly corporate America is only worried about themselves.
After figuring out they didn't value my 2 years and had no intention of upping my pay to show the difference in my experience and a kid who never worked a day in their life I quit.
I worked almost 10 years in the restaurant industry. They are about quick and good service, at the end of the day they are about the dollar. I watched them try different hours and day off patterns a year before the minimum wage went up. AKA testing, before the minimum wage hike was passed yet everyone knew it would be passed. They had a meeting, let go of some, and cut the hours of everyone else(except managment) guess what? They were the only ones working full-time so they were the only ones getting company benefits.)
My point being just at the wiff of more expenses they started making changes, when the cards aligned bam. Hopefully that'll shine a light on why I find it impeccable, ironic, funny or whatever word I should use.
You might look at me as getting defensive but it's more the fact you question me with links when I tell you what I think from what I've observed. I'm not a book or reading person. The repair instructions to replace the alternator tells you remove this, undo that, remove the 3 bolts but you only see one and they don't tell you where they are. I believe my experience more than something written by someone who has an idea of what they are doing.
Mechanics hate engineers, if you know what I mean.

 

[samurai8juice]

*cough*

View attachment 798119

Wow. A self-service coffee machine. Revolutionary.

Wait, who made the pies? That coffee machine?

 

[TexRex]

Wow. A self-service coffee machine. Revolutionary.

Wait, who made the pies? That coffee machine?

Pie fairy.

 

[the_boy]

I honestly want to know what you wanted or expected me to say. I hope you don't believe I think it's some huge conspiracy. But I can't deny it's coincidental, you don't look at the timing of things and laugh sometimes?. And I can't figure out how you can deny that the fight for $15 didn't have a hair of something to do with it's implementation. And if I'm correct somewhere around 2000 the minimum wage started going up(coincidental with the 2003 testing no?). I remember starting at $5.25 working my way up to $7.50. You don't know how I felt watching people get an entry pay that took me 2 years to earn. As a kid I learned quickly corporate America is only worried about themselves.
After figuring out they didn't value my 2 years and had no intention of upping my pay to show the difference in my experience and a kid who never worked a day in their life I quit.
I worked almost 10 years in the restaurant industry. They are about quick and good service, at the end of the day they are about the dollar. I watched them try different hours and day off patterns a year before the minimum wage went up. AKA testing, before the minimum wage hike was passed yet everyone knew it would be passed. They had a meeting, let go of some, and cut the hours of everyone else(except managment) guess what? They were the only ones working full-time so they were the only ones getting company benefits.)
My point being just at the wiff of more expenses they started making changes, when the cards aligned bam. Hopefully that'll shine a light on why I find it impeccable, ironic, funny or whatever word I should use.
You might look at me as getting defensive but it's more the fact you question me with links when I tell you what I think from what I've observed. I'm not a book or reading person. The repair instructions to replace the alternator tells you remove this, undo that, remove the 3 bolts but you only see one and they don't tell you where they are. I believe my experience more than something written by someone who has an idea of what they are doing.
Mechanics hate engineers, if you know what I mean.

You should feel the same way (even worse) about the owner/s ripping you off (the market has nothing to do with individual feelings)

 

[Chrunch Houston]

I am assuming most of you have read Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez(AOC) New Green Deal. And if not, I hope you will before speaking about it.

If not let me share a little bit.

It starts off with a lot of social guarantees. You know the typical leftist stuff like unions and living wage.

Then it gets to the meat of saving the planet.

"...meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources..."

If anyone here thinks this is possible in the next 10 years, or 50 year, please tell us how. You also have to explain the added power drain from the increased use of electric cars.

"...upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximum energy efficiency..."

Yikes, who is going to pay for this? There are millions of buildings in America. Are homeowners and business owner going to have to pay to green their building? Or are the Billionaires going to pay for it?

My point is that the whole AOC document is ridiculous, and these Democrat fools are endorsing it..

I sure hope the Democrats nominate someone that endorses AOC's plan.

Watching Trump destroy them in the debates will be great!

 

[Dotini]

By the afternoon of Feb. 7, Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., removed the document from her website without explanation but following backlash and even ridicule over the radical plans outlined within it, including a call to "eliminate emissions from cows or air travel" — which would functionally ban the latter — and to provide “economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-case-of-aocs-scrubbed-green-new-deal-details


The Democratic Party is of course enduring an identity crisis. This will be a superfun psycho-melodrama played out over months and years.

Like a beached whale, its bloated body and bones will be scavenged by man and beast alike until it is dead and gone.

 

[TenEightyOne]

By the afternoon of Feb. 7, Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., removed the document from her website without explanation but following backlash and even ridicule over the radical plans outlined within it, including a call to "eliminate emissions from cows or air travel" — which would functionally ban the latter — and to provide “economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work.”

Eliminating the emissions from air travel is a difficult one although offsetting as it exists now is a start. I don't get the backlash over the cow statement - we've known for years that ruminant herds produce insane levels of methane gas and all kinds of technology are in development (feed, venilation aircon) to try to reduce that... but it's hardly fringe and it isn't new news.

Like a beached whale, it's bloated body and bones will be scavenged by man and beast alike until it is dead and gone.

One of your best flights of poetic fancy!

 

[Rallywagon]

I am assuming most of you have read Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez(AOC) New Green Deal. And if not, I hope you will before speaking about it.

If not let me share a little bit.

It starts off with a lot of social guarantees. You know the typical leftist stuff like unions and living wage.

Then it gets to the meat of saving the planet.

"...meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources..."

If anyone here thinks this is possible in the next 10 years, or 50 year, please tell us how. You also have to explain the added power drain from the increased use of electric cars.

"...upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximum energy efficiency..."

Yikes, who is going to pay for this? There are millions of buildings in America. Are homeowners and business owner going to have to pay to green their building? Or are the Billionaires going to pay for it?

My point is that the whole AOC document is ridiculous, and these Democrat fools are endorsing it..

I sure hope the Democrats nominate someone that endorses AOC's plan.

Watching Trump destroy them in the debates will be great!

Ok... so, living wages and unions are leftist ideas.... does that mean poverty wages and removing workers rights and protections are ideals of the right?

 

[Rage Racer]

So... Let's set the world afire?

https://www.businessinsider.com/chi...ffensive-against-russian-chinese-ships-2019-2
Navy chief says the US needs to hit first and get 'muscular' with Russian and Chinese ships

 

[Northstar]

"...upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximum energy efficiency..."

Yikes, who is going to pay for this? There are millions of buildings in America. Are homeowners and business owner going to have to pay to green their building? Or are the Billionaires going to pay for it?

I wonder this as well since "energy efficiency" is a relatively new concept. It's not uncommon for me to see older houses with little to no insulation in the attic. Not to mention some houses just aren't going to be very efficient unless you completely gut it and start over.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I wonder this as well since "energy efficiency" is a relatively new concept. It's not uncommon for me to see older houses with little to no insulation in the attic. Not to mention some houses just aren't going to be very efficient unless you completely gut it and start over.

The idea is that the savings through "weatherization" give per-house benefits of around 33%, benefit the country as a whole, and ease the burden on infrastructure and losses to the economy caused by power shortages - to that end some Federal funding would be made available, I believe the plan was that some of the large energy companies would also contribute to the fund but I haven't got the plan to hand.

EDIT: The funding was called the "Weatherization Programme", not sure when it stopped but the programme was clearly abandoned at some point.

 

[Northstar]

The idea is that the savings through "weatherization" give per-house benefits of around 33%, benefit the country as a whole, and ease the burden on infrastructure and losses to the economy caused by power shortages - to that end some Federal funding would be made available, I believe the plan was that some of the large energy companies would also contribute to the fund but I haven't got the plan to hand.

EDIT: The funding was called the "Weatherization Programme", not sure when it stopped but the programme was clearly abandoned at some point.

It's still going on, only at the local level and limited to low income homes though (my work does quite a bit of work for the program). The problem is 100 year old homes were built to a 100 year old code using 100 year old technology*. Even on newer homes it's not always possible to convert an 80% furnace to an HE one due to it being a townhouse* or them having a finished basement and/or a deck without it being either not up to code or having the associated costs with doing the work voiding any potential savings.

* Some old homes are also considered "historically relevant" at which point any modification to the exterior has to be approved beforehand. There's also the possibility in older homes that the existing venting is lined with asbestos, which is very expensive to remove.
** Townhouses are notorious for HOA's, which can also be a major obstacle.

 

[samurai8juice]

Ok... so, living wages and unions are leftist ideas.... does that mean poverty wages and removing workers rights and protections are ideals of the right?

I mean...yes? Republicans are typically the ones who support right to work and vilify the minimum wage.

 

[Rallywagon]

I mean...yes? Republicans are typically the ones who support right to work and vilify the minimum wage.

Weird how many of the working class support that agenda.

 

[Danoff]

Weird how many of the working class support that agenda.

Define "working class".

I don't know what republicans stand for any more, but Libertarians are against minimum wage and laws which protect unions. Unions are completely fine on their own, laws protecting them are wrong though. Minimum wage laws hurt the poor, specifically, they create pressure to hire fewer people. It's not a magic bullet, it's just a bullet, aimed directly at the people it's supposed to help.

 

[Keef]

Define "working class".

I don't know what republicans stand for any more, but Libertarians are against minimum wage and laws which protect unions. Unions are completely fine on their own, laws protecting them are wrong though. Minimum wage laws hurt the poor, specifically, they create pressure to hire fewer people. It's not a magic bullet, it's just a bullet, aimed directly at the people it's supposed to help.

I'll chalk this up to good timing.

 

[McLaren]

My point is that the whole AOC document is ridiculous, and these Democrat fools are endorsing it..

I sure hope the Democrats nominate someone that endorses AOC's plan.

Watching Trump destroy them in the debates will be great!

I don't think that will happen.

"It will be one of several or maybe many suggestions that we receive. The green dream, or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they're for it, right?"

Pelosi is already questioning it, and that woman is doing whatever she can get the Democratic party in line for 2020. She just had to get the other freshman dingbat Rep. Omar to apologize today for an anti-semitic tweet.

Earlier Monday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders demanded the Minnesota Democrat apologize, which she did just before 3 p.m.

"Legitimate criticism of Israel's policies is protected by the values of free speech and democratic debate that the United States and Israel share," the leaders said in a joint statement. "But Congresswoman Omar's use of anti-Semitic tropes and prejudicial accusations about Israel's supporters is deeply offensive. We condemn these remarks and we call upon Congresswoman Omar to immediately apologize for these hurtful comments."

 

[Rallywagon]

Define "working class".

I don't know what republicans stand for any more, but Libertarians are against minimum wage and laws which protect unions. Unions are completely fine on their own, laws protecting them are wrong though. Minimum wage laws hurt the poor, specifically, they create pressure to hire fewer people. It's not a magic bullet, it's just a bullet, aimed directly at the people it's supposed to help.

None of those were points i made, nor the point i was making.

 

[Imari]

Minimum wage laws hurt the poor, specifically, they create pressure to hire fewer people.

I'd suggest that in a capitalist economy the pressure to hire fewer people exists completely independently of any minimum wage restrictions. The business is trying to make as much money as possible, and paying fewer people is always going to be a way to achieve that even if they're being paid cents per hour.

The only way that the pressure to hire fewer people goes away is if additional people are an unconditional benefit to the business. But considering that even unpaid interns come with training and management costs to a business to the extent that they can be turned away, I'm not sure that wages are really the problem here.

 

[Liquid]

The only way that the pressure to hire fewer people goes away is if additional people are an unconditional benefit to the business.

That reminds me of a scene from an old sitcom I used to watch; a guy was applying for a job in a club.

"I'd like to apply for your vacancy for a barman."
"We're not quite sure whether you're the right man for the job."
"My employment won't cost you a penny."
"Really? Why?"
"Because the Department for Social Security will be paying my wages."
"Great! You start Monday."

I know it's not a flawless analogy but still...

 

[samurai8juice]

I'd suggest that in a capitalist economy the pressure to hire fewer people exists completely independently of any minimum wage restrictions. The business is trying to make as much money as possible, and paying fewer people is always going to be a way to achieve that even if they're being paid cents per hour.

The only way that the pressure to hire fewer people goes away is if additional people are an unconditional benefit to the business. But considering that even unpaid interns come with training and management costs to a business to the extent that they can be turned away, I'm not sure that wages are really the problem here.

So what is the problem?

 

[Imari]

So what is the problem?

Fundamentally it comes back to the idea that people are mostly working to support themselves. If you work for yourself, a large part of the purpose of your work is to earn a living (unless you have the privilege of being independently wealthy, in which case congratulations). If it's a small company, the purpose is for that small group of people to earn a living. Somewhere in the transition to larger companies however it devolves into a pure money making game, where dollars are the score and anything less than continually topping last year's results is unacceptable. Even if there was a perfectly sustainable company capable of providing a living to a substantial number of people.

Personally, I think the idea of profit over people is a really big part of the problem. But that's a cultural phenomenon, not really something that you can legislate away. It's like trying to legislate that people not be :censored:holes. Sure, you can control some of the more :censored:holery behaviour, but if people want to be wangers then they will find a way.

 

[mustafur]

Debt based society has ruined the cost of living, when people borrow money they are buying beyond their real purchase power inflating prices, this goes on untill basically the low end has to be in debt to maintain life.

Add historically low interest rates and you got your self a huge problem.

 

[Danoff]

I'd suggest that in a capitalist economy the pressure to hire fewer people exists completely independently of any minimum wage restrictions.

Sure, absolutely. I think that's unquestionable. People take time and money and get sick and want time off. They're a hassle, if you can avoid them, great. On the other hand, they are the absolute cheapest artificial intelligence machines money can buy (still). You can give a person a job and, especially if the person has a good head on their shoulders, they'll adapt to changing circumstances, get the job done, report problems at an appropriate frequency (filtering out non-problems), and can perform a HUGE variety of manual labor with no additional configuration or R&D and no upfront cost.

People beat AI robots at a lot of things, and as long as they're cheaper, they'll continue to be selected when companies are growing. The more expensive they are, the easier they are to replace with machines.

 

[Imari]

People beat AI robots at a lot of things, and as long as they're cheaper, they'll continue to be selected when companies are growing. The more expensive they are, the easier they are to replace with machines.

I was more talking about companies straight up downsizing and attempting to do the same work with less people. Probably mostly because it's relevant to my job* at the moment and it's giving me the runny :censored:s. People vs. machines to do the same job is a slightly different kettle of fish, the company is still willing to pay in that case but is looking to optimise. The fact that there are now viable non-human methods to achieve the same labour is somewhat frustrating for humans, but kind of inevitable unless you're a Luddite.

The interesting thing is that there's a non-zero wage where it stops being worthwhile for humans to take a job regardless. If you're unemployed and someone offers you a job for three cents an hour, you probably rationally refuse because one, that amount of money makes no material difference to your ability to starve to death, and two, the opportunity cost of having free time to do anything else of value that might turn up is way higher. In a totally free employment market you likely end up with an implicit minimum wage simply because anything below subsistence wages is objectively a poor choice. You're better off scrounging food out of dumpsters than working 120 hours for a handful of peanuts.

*A department of four people downsized to about one and a half, when there was already way more stuff that needed to be done than hours in the day. It's not just my department either, it's the entire company despite the company getting a huge contract and being in an objectively good financial position with staff who are already paid below industry standards. Some companies will literally try and squeeze blood from a stone.