Examples?
What's the most extreme position on the Right you've seen that's as outrageous as the most extreme position on the Left you disagree with?
Olive Branch
- Thread starter countryroads89
- Start date
Examples?
What's the most extreme position on the Right you've seen that's as outrageous as the most extreme position on the Left you disagree with?
I prefer to reciprocate the "name calling" with irreverent ridicule and humor. It offers a far wider array of expressions with which to retaliate, and it's difficult to keep calling someone names who's devastatingly mocking the ignorance of your impudence & lack of creativity disguised as anger or sheer jealously.
so a 15 dollar an hour minimum wage is extreme?
telling a person how they need to live their lives isn't?
Well let me ask you this...if a 15 dollar an hour "minimum wage" is something we should strive for as a nation, should we also set a "maximum wage"? A logical argument would emphatically claim "yes" can you make one? Do you agree in a "maximum wage" for wage earners?
Why not?
Let's expand the discussion. Why is 15.00/hr more feasible than 18.00? If 18.00 is too much, why is only 15.00 enough? If we want to set what the least amount a worker is paid should be, why aren't we setting the maximum amount?
Most importantly, who sets that amount, and what is it based on? For example, 15.00/hour in Southern California means you're living in poverty. In Montana, you can probably qualify for a 125,000 home. So is 15.00/hr a national or regional standard?
Explain?
What are the two most extreme positions from the Left vs the Right "telling a person how to live" that are your examples in support your original statement?
You said this:
wvjeff said:
not all Democrats think the same way.....I don't believe in alot of the crazy shit I see from the left and the right.....
I asked for examples from each side. Can you offer any?
The issues for lgbt
as far as what the right thinks is the most extreme thing on the left, you would have to answer that.
I can easily answer that. Tell me what the position is on the Right YOU deem most to be against people who are LGBT? What is the opposing position from the Left you most disagree with regarding them?
Again, I'm simply following your statement
wvjeff said:
not all Democrats think the same way.....I don't believe in alot of the crazy shit I see from the left and the right.....
What's the "crazy" position on the Left regarding LGBT folks that you disagree with, and what's the ancillary position on the Right regarding those folks you most vehemently oppose?
Explain?
Courts had to rule on the marriage issue....GOP fought tooth and nail. Transgenders not allowed in the military although the Generals said not a big issue. Actively letting businesses, schools etc.....discriminate against them. Plenty more....their morals need to stay out of the public opinion.
You haven't...I'm trying to follow the protocol of the OP. Inviting civil discussion with you in that Spirit. Let's discuss the efficacy of the "minimum wage" and it's practicality as opposed to setting a "maximum wage"?
OK...fair enough. So you obviously disagree with the Right on those positions regarding those folks correct?
What do you oppose them on? (what are the Left's most extreme positions when it comes to those folks?) You said you don't like the extreme position on BOTH sides, but you haven't specified what the Left's extreme position is when it comes to LGBT folks?
What is it?
Yes it is. Here's why...
Minimum wage jobs are essentially entry level jobs that require no real level of expertise. They aren't designed to be careers, they are created to provide both the worker and the consumer benefits. The consumer benefits because it keeps the costs of the products sold at a competitive level. The workers benefit because they get job experience and a little cash to boot.
Raising the minimum wage hurts both the consumer and the worker. The consumer has to pay more for the good/service because the costs are going to be passed on to him. So, that burger and fries you currently get for 9 bucks now will cost you 12.
It hurts the worker because the owner of the company will simply not be able to hire as many workers for those jobs. So, you go from having 15 workers down to 8, leaving 7 previously employable young people now jobless.
Additionally, it reduces competition. If everyone is forced to pay the same flat rate, one cannot simply say, "Hey, I think I'll go over the McDonald's because they give weekends off or have a flexible schedule". You can't, because there is no room for you over there now. On top of that, businesses will be forced to go under because they cannot afford to offset the cost and remain competitive. Incentives to come into that business will be reduced or dropped.
I could go on but that's a pretty good gist of what the problems are if raising the minimum wage to 15 bucks. It simply becomes the new norm and everyone, from the consumer to the producer, suffer as a result.
Fair enough. Define "Marriage"? Use as many examples as you can factually find support for.
Regarding the gay marriage thing...
There are two ways of regarding marriage - the legal definition and the religious one. Conservatives tend to follow the latter but in the eyes of the law, the only one that matters is the legal one.
What marriage is essentially is contract law. Two people agree to give up their individual identities to share one "name". They share all the assets as well as the debts. Each partner has to sign away their individuality before that marriage is legitimized in the eyes of the law. It is basically the same as if you and I go into business together as partners.
The religious view is a marriage between a man and a woman. What the religious right worried about was a discrimination lawsuit because the minister would not perform the religious ceremony for a gay couple. It would become a 1st Amendment versus a 14th Amendment argument in the eyes of the court. We saw the prelude to this with the Hobby Lobby case. After that precedent, even though it was about birth control, health care, and religion, it made the religious right feel a little less threatened. Thus why this argument doesn't really play anymore.
Are you specifying "all" Marriages, or simply those between same Sex partners? Courts have not ruled against Marriage per se, but I will agree there have been challenges to the traditional understanding of Marriage as it's defined by Religious parameters.
Courts by Law cannot change Religious doctrine, they also have not refused to recognize monogamous commitments between two people of either the opposite Sex or same sex. They have been asked to define those unions, and some are set aside as "Civil" unions specifically to both recognize
& separate them from the standard as defined in the Bible as a union between a Man and a Woman.
So I'd suggest your argument isn't with the Courts per se, since as I've indicated they have not ruled against same Sex Unions. Your argument is with how Marriage is defined in the Bible. If you oppose that, then your argument is with the author of the Holy Scriptures, not me or the Courts.
So what's the extreme position on the Right about Marriage between LGBT folks you oppose the most compared to a similar extreme position about them on that issue from the Left?
Look I'm not trying to be a contrarian...I'm simply trying to follow your argument and asking you to put some substance behind it?
Can you?
Trying to do the Cliff's version...you're right but easier to take it step by step rather than all at once.
You can keep your olive branch, shove it and all the Lib pricks up your anal cavity....nuff said.
Try this @wvjeff if you're having difficulty constructing a logical argument in favor of the "minimum wage"....
Let's say I need my grass cut, and a local 16 year old kid is willing to do the job for me. I agree to pay him 15.00, and he agrees to cut it for me at that price.
Now let's say I hire a landscape company to do the same job, and they send a teenager out to cut my grass who they've hired at the minimum wage of 15.00/hr.
OK, it takes my local teenager 3 hours to cut my grass, and he walks away happy with the 15.00 he just earned. The landscape teen also takes roughly the same amount of time to cut my grass and I am handed a bill for 45.00.
Should I have paid the local teenager 45.00, or not hired the landscape teen?
Think about it.
Hey @wvjeff ...I'm out. It's clear you either don't want to have a civil dialogue on the issues YOU brought up or you're just not capable of defending what you said. Either way I'm gone. Got a good book I'm gonna tackle tonight.
Synopsis
"This is not a traditional memoir, or an advice book, but rather a playbook based on adventures in my life," McConaughey, 50, said in a statement about "Greenlights," which comes out Oct. 20. "Adventures that have been significant, enlightening, and funny, sometimes because they were meant to be but mostly because they didn't try to be."
According to Crown, which announced the book Wednesday, the actor known for films "Dallas Buyers Club" and "Magic Mike" will draw upon a diary he has kept for 35 years.
"He found not only stories, questions, truths, and affirmations, but also a reliable theme," Crown announced. "From growing up as an adventurous kid in a tough-love Texas home of rule breakers, to revelatory journeys to Australia, Peru, and Mali, to his early days in Hollywood and meteoric rise to fame, McConaughey shares how his life experiences have instilled in him the importance of competent values, the power of new experiences, and, as he puts it, 'either changing your reality or changing how you see it.'"
Synopsis
"This is not a traditional memoir, or an advice book, but rather a playbook based on adventures in my life," McConaughey, 50, said in a statement about "Greenlights," which comes out Oct. 20. "Adventures that have been significant, enlightening, and funny, sometimes because they were meant to be but mostly because they didn't try to be."
According to Crown, which announced the book Wednesday, the actor known for films "Dallas Buyers Club" and "Magic Mike" will draw upon a diary he has kept for 35 years.
"He found not only stories, questions, truths, and affirmations, but also a reliable theme," Crown announced. "From growing up as an adventurous kid in a tough-love Texas home of rule breakers, to revelatory journeys to Australia, Peru, and Mali, to his early days in Hollywood and meteoric rise to fame, McConaughey shares how his life experiences have instilled in him the importance of competent values, the power of new experiences, and, as he puts it, 'either changing your reality or changing how you see it.'"
So your first point is valid, but the rest aren’t in my experience. We have a $14-$15/hr now. I did raise my rates to offset the expense.
Although you saying people will need to be laid off wasn’t true. My customers paid more and my employees made poor, and were much happier and more productive because of it.
Competition didn’t come into play at all. Some offset the cost by increasing rates. My rates went up by $X and so did theirs. Net zero. Those that didn’t increase rates took the low road. Their employees weren’t as productive. Their service was devalued and those that increased rates and provided a better service actually did better.
Only one example, but the point stands.
Do you pay all of your entry level employees what they're worth or what the market dictates?
I’m not in the business of determining what someone is worth. So, I’m not sure what you’re getting at.
I pay above what the market dictates. My entry level positions are above minimum wage. I pay more now than I did prior to the raising of the minimum wage. My strategy is to pay well above what anyone else pays, which leads to a better and happier employee and therefore allows me to provide a better service than my competitors.
If you're a responsible hiring manager you'd better damn well know what your employees are worth relative to the work you need them to do or you'll loose your shirt. You answered my question as to how you pay them? Minimum wages do nothing to help you hire competent workers because as you said, you pay above market scale to attract better employees. Federal minimum wages set arbitrarily regardless of employee competence or market conditions are two more solid reasons to avoid them.
As a hiring manager, you need both the flexibility as well as business acumen to pay no more than what your employees are worth to attain your bottom line efficiency and profitability, and to compensate them based on your particular market demands and business requirements. Government can not and should not "dictate" those independent business decisions to you or anyone else responsible for running a free market enterprise.
One size fits all minimum wage laws are well intended, but are not practical and your example is just one of many reasons why they simply do not work.
Appreciate the response.
(Hey you and I are doing better than some of these other bloggers adhering to the new "civil discourse" rules outlined in that infamous "olive branch" thread the other day wouldn't 'ya say?)
That post lasted exactly one day before we read this from country....
Today at 7:31 PM @countryroads89 wrote:
And you claim to be a follower of Christ?
hahahahahaha.
You’re a piece of shit.
That aged well huh @WVUALLEN ? 😏
I don’t agree with what you wrote, and in my example it did work. Both the employee has been paid more, which led to a better service on my part.If you're a responsible hiring manager you'd better damn well know what your employees are worth relative to the work you need them to do or you'll loose your shirt. You answered my question as to how you pay them? Minimum wages do nothing to help you hire competent workers because as you said, you pay above market scale to attract better employees. Federal minimum wages set arbitrarily regardless of employee competence or market conditions are two more solid reasons to avoid them.
As a hiring manager, you need both the flexibility as well as business acumen to pay no more than what your employees are worth to attain your bottom line efficiency and profitability, and to compensate them based on your particular market demands and business requirements. Government can not and should not "dictate" those independent business decisions to you or anyone else responsible for running a free market enterprise.
One size fits all minimum wage laws are well intended, but are not practical and your example is just one of many reasons why they simply do not work.
Appreciate the response.
(Hey you and I are doing better than some of these other bloggers adhering to the new "civil discourse" rules outlined in that infamous "olive branch" thread the other day wouldn't 'ya say?)
Regarding the tone, call it a New Years resolution or whatever, but I’m keeping it civil. I’d be a hypocrite if I didn’t. Need to practice what I teach my own kids.
I don't see what you disagree with...no business operating profitably can afford to pay their employees more than they're worth as it relates to the company's bottom line. Federal minimum wage laws are not based on individual market conditions or business plans, they are arbitrary and do not account for variables inherent in any free market economy.
As for your respectful tone it is all I ever strive for whomever I'm blogging with. I never initiate the name calling or a disrespectful tone. Never. I only return what I'm offered, and even then I try to keep it above the level of personal insults & nastiness. I prefer irreverent humor...works much better is far more effective.
You are teaching your kids well as the example you want them to follow. Respect and being respectful always is appreciated if not always understood. God Bless You.
I don’t like the word worth. That is also a subjective term. Different businesses operate differently. Some race to the bottom to compete on price and some charge more (sometimes pay their employees more) and compete on the level of service or other justifications for a higher price.
There is no one way to run a business or one strategy on how to figure out how much to pay your employees. So their worth to one company may be different than their worth to another. And if you pay your employees more than they’re “worth” if managed properly you can get more out of them.
and you are one of the biggest offenders....clean out your own closet before you tell others to clean theirs
All good points, and certainly with merit. However in business as you no doubt are well aware, the bottom line is what dictates your overall business strategy and ultimate success. With labor being one of your largest fixed costs (you must have labor unless you work alone) you have to value the costs those folks mean to your bottom line and final profitability. Ideally you can pay them more because they help you produce a good product that grows your market, which apparently you already do.
My point is those variables you pointed out as legitimate as they are, cannot be arbitrarily set by Federal minimum wage standards. Not all employees produce the same, have the same skills, or offer the same work effort. You reward those who are more productive, creative, and skilled, while they help you improve your product or service to expand your customer base and make more profits with which to pay them even better.
Minimum wages at best set a floor on some of those attributes, but in no way can they ever be flexible enough to be determinative on your overall bottom line, or pay your better workers what they are "worth" to your overall success.
Last edited:
