Seattle CEO Who set Company Minimum Salary at $70k/yr Struggling

originally posted by: defcon25
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

But you shouldn't have to moonlight. You should, by virtue of being a card carrying member of the collective of "Society", be entitled to "a living wage". Which means full cable and internet, a new car, cell phone with plenty of data, and yearly vacations in the bahamas.

In an ideal society and perfect world this would be the case but unfortunately the reality of society is and always has been UNFAIR.
If we had an EQUAL and FAIR society though I don't think everyone would be able to go for holidays in the Bahamas or live in mansions because the world in some ways has LIMITED resources which SOME feel that they are more entitled to than others because they may be a bit more SELF-SERVING.
The goal in our world should be to make the world a FAIRER world or it is likely that our society will FAIL which usually leads to INEQUALITY,CIVIL UNREST,TYRANNY,WAR etc.etc.

Don't believe the limited resources hype. We are masters of the elements, alchemist we can make and harvest anything we want.

They whoever is in charge of the current paradigm wants you to believe that so they can use it to control you.

a reply to: onequestion

Well for the love of God, make them stop. Or share your secrets that have convinced you. Because any mining operation I hav seen required incredible feats of human labor, which is what drove the scarcity.

I mean, i am aware that we can make lab diamonds....but we don't eat diamonds.

this is not the post you're looking for.....

a reply to: Aazadan
....

There is only one person to blame if a person is slacking on the job, and that's the manager. It's their job to prevent that.

You are mistaken here. There are two people to blame if the worker is slacking---first and foremost, the worker. Only secondarily is the manager to blame.
People with integrity are not slackers but that trait seems to be slipping out of our society.
I've seen the changes in the education system have direct effects on the work ethic simply due to the fact that ambition, creativity, honesty and initiative are ignored while sloth and whining get the "special" awards. After twelve to eighteen years of that, who can blame the poor kids?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

My apologies what I mean is that what you said is false.
Not everyone has to work.

originally posted by: defcon25
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

My apologies what I mean is that what you said is false.
Not everyone has to work.

Of course not everyone has to work. Hell, some folks choose to not participate in anything society has to offer. That is, until we declare them "mentally ill" and force them back into society kicking and screaming.

But the vastly overwhelming majority of people do have to work. Or not, but then they can't complain about not having a pot to piss in. Its pretty simple: if you want the things that society has to offer, you have to trade something for them. If you have cash, great....proceed to trading. Don't have cash? Well, you better get some or there will be no trading.

I could choose not to work. But the things I want to have would not be available to me (like air conditioning).

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I don't understand why you said Nonsensical is believing that without a job you won't be poor if you didn't mean that.
It's not very important but I just thought you really mean't what you said.

originally posted by: defcon25
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I don't understand why you said Nonsensical is believing that without a job you won't be poor if you didn't mean that.
It's not very important but I just thought you really mean't what you said.

Well...if you are sitting on a big old pile of cash, you are obviously in the minority and what I said would not apply to you.

While people may mean what they say...you can obviously find one off exceptions to almost anything. But rather than getting caught up in minutia, perhaps keeping the context of "we are talking about regular people in the 99% here" would help. Unless Gravity Payments, Inc has a bunch of millionaires working for them, and getting pay raises.

I would guess the other option would be the few who choose to not pariticpate (or barely participate) in the average life of an American. Again...a pretty small minority. Unless Gravity Payments, inc is employing 120 survivalists in a compound in the Pacific Northwest, it also has little relevance to the conversation.

a reply to: onequestion

So you believe that we can make Gold,Oil,Coal and many other things I can't be bothered listng.
While many things in this world are re-newable and can be re-harvested I believe that some things are not such as oil.
I personally believe along with many experts that their is only so much oil,coal etc in our earth that when it is completely depleted it is gone and isn't coming back and we will have to look to other planets for these resources.

a reply to: defcon25

For sure.

We could easily invest more into mining asteroids and comets as well as divesting from war into technology and culture.

The way we live on this planet is totally insane.

The human mind is sick it needs healing.

The way we live on this planet is totally insane. The human mind is sick it needs healing.

a reply to: onequestion

Spot on.
Like you say if we invested more in technology instead of Military the problems might be fixable.
Our whole society is corrupt and self-serving and is broken,now is the time to get it fixed before it is too late

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
The check represents the shackles of wage slavery, the pen used to sign the check represents the modern equivalent to the whip, and the boss who does the signing represents the modern slave master...

And yet we live in a time where we never had as much free time. Think of the days where you worked 16 hours per day 7 days a week and even that wasn't enough many times. We could say we are slave to anything, slave to survival, slave to the elements etc.

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: Aazadan
....

There is only one person to blame if a person is slacking on the job, and that's the manager. It's their job to prevent that.

You are mistaken here. There are two people to blame if the worker is slacking---first and foremost, the worker. Only secondarily is the manager to blame.
People with integrity are not slackers but that trait seems to be slipping out of our society.
I've seen the changes in the education system have direct effects on the work ethic simply due to the fact that ambition, creativity, honesty and initiative are ignored while sloth and whining get the "special" awards. After twelve to eighteen years of that, who can blame the poor kids?

I couldn't agree more. We award even the underachievers now a days, because "everyone is special".

Unfortunately that is not how the grown up world works.

I am not for massive wealth disparity, but I was in upper management in retail and some of the kids are simply self-entitled lazy brats.

Quality management can fix that to some degree, but at some point it is the employees responsibility to get the job done without being hounded.

We are all unique, and we can all contribute to society, but this is precisely why Communism is a failure. The self-motivated deserve more incentives than the slackers.

However, in response to the OP, the only reason why this concept would fail is bad management.

If a company is paying a highly competitive wage of 70K everyone is replaceable with a quality employee. The management has no reason to put up with poor performance when paying at the top end of competitive wages.

My mind is a little boggled why this wasn't a success. Even loosing 1 or 2 quality employees should not have been an issue. A competitive wage should allow management to quickly replace those disgruntled employees with others who are more like minded to equality.

I don't believe the CEO failed giving up some of his Salary. It seems like poor management. If that CEO is reading this, I will come and replace your poor management and I promise I will make it a success. bolded just in case he is a fan of ATS.

What I wouldn't do to work with for a company that offered such a competitive wage. I would only have self-motivated A level employees.

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: Aazadan
....

There is only one person to blame if a person is slacking on the job, and that's the manager. It's their job to prevent that.

You are mistaken here. There are two people to blame if the worker is slacking---first and foremost, the worker. Only secondarily is the manager to blame.
People with integrity are not slackers but that trait seems to be slipping out of our society.
I've seen the changes in the education system have direct effects on the work ethic simply due to the fact that ambition, creativity, honesty and initiative are ignored while sloth and whining get the "special" awards. After twelve to eighteen years of that, who can blame the poor kids?

The company is paying for the work. If the employee is not performing to required levels it's on them to go about fixing that. If the company is letting people slack, then that means they are ok with it otherwise they would have taken action.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: defcon25

For sure.

We could easily invest more into mining asteroids and comets as well as divesting from war into technology and culture.

The way we live on this planet is totally insane.

The human mind is sick it needs healing.

Amen, the system is broken and the minds are broken.

Can we just shut the system down and do a reboot?

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: ForteanOrg

By that definition, there is no poverty in America.

Wikipedia about poverty in the US

The most common measure of poverty in the U.S. is the "poverty threshold" set by the U.S. government. This measure recognizes poverty as a lack of those goods and services commonly taken for granted by members of mainstream society.

And Google adds:

In November 2012 the U.S. Census Bureau said more than 16% of the population lived in poverty, including almost 20% of American children, up from 14.3% (approximately 43.6 million) in 2009 and to its highest level since 1993. In 2008, 13.2% (39.8 million) Americans lived in poverty.

Mind you, "having a job" does not help many of these poor souls either, as many jobs pay not enough to allow a decent life.

originally posted by: Isurrender73Can we just shut the system down and do a reboot?

Well, if it isn't running Windows that won't help much

a reply to: onequestion

Actually, you can produce a working model that allows our society to continue for as long as the sun shines, without depletion of anything. And, might I add, with a better quality of life for all.

It's merely the fact that we serve economy instead of economy serving us.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
Anyone can walk onto a union construction site and be a labourer.

I will bet you my wage slave paycheck you, or anyone else, is not just going to saunter on to a union job site and start working.

originally posted by: onequestion
We could easily invest more into mining asteroids and comets as well as divesting from war into technology and culture.

The way we live on this planet is totally insane.

"The way we live on this planet is totally insane, we should do it on asteroids!"

Herp derp.