It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So, this is how a Milennial sees a solution to the "Living Wage" issue....

page: 13
30
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
I like how you keep referring to everyone whose opinion differs from you as "little"...very condescending and immature.

I'm not talking about opinions, I'm talking about people that focus on their own lives only and don't care for the rest of humanity. I think the word "little" is 100% appropriate.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
I think Socialism is a form of legal larceny and criminal behavior on the part of the government, and I thought that you'd get that comparison. Hopefully others did.

I think that refusing socialism in this day in age, with the technologies we have, with the amount of ressources available and with the amount of money hoarded by the super rich is criminal. A government that doesn't do what needs to be done to give opportunities to the whole population is absurd.




posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

While I would love to transcribe a dictionary for you, you have access to that knowledge.

Try. Just try.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   


Here is one quickie average that I looked up [e]Apartment (1 bedroom) in City Centre 1,751.01 A$ [/e] or about 1300 US, that there eats up 8 US bucks an hour hehe


Is that an average cost, or a single example you picked out? If so, is it a high cost or a low cost?

What are the comparisons to US apartments in similar locations?
Does a US 1 bedroom apartment in a city eat up less than $4.00 an hour?

It's worth noting that over here, housing and land in prime locations tend to be extremely expensive.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: theMediator
I'm not talking about opinions, I'm talking about people that focus on their own lives only and don't care for the rest of humanity. I think the word "little" is 100% appropriate.


But you're using your ideological beliefs, biases and generalization upon which to base your opinion of what other people do and do not care about. I abhor the idea of Socialism because of my own values: What I've put into my own schooling and work and family life should dictate my success, not some pre-existing government program that gives me money from someone else's wallet. Hell, I could accept that type of thing with a good conscience...but that's just me, and I don't claim that anyone else holds that exact opinion.

But you have zero idea what I do in my personal life with my own time and money and skills that helps humanity, whether in big ways or small. You can sit there and assume that I do nothing and only think the government can handle that, and that's your prerogative, but keep your uneducated opinion of others and what they do for their fellow human beings to yourself, because you have no idea. None.



I think that refusing socialism in this day in age, with the technologies we have, with the amount of ressources available and with the amount of money hoarded by the super rich is criminal. A government that doesn't do what needs to be done to give opportunities to the whole population is absurd.


Show me how, in America, with our technology and amount of resources available, that our current system inhibits the ability of the population as a whole.

See, we just differ on our opinions--I think that local communities foster or hinder the ability to succeed, and that the willingness to do so starts with how we are raised in the home. I think it is the job (and design) of our government to inhibit their reaches into our lives.

You seem to think that individual success should start with--or have a foundation in--government intervention.

We'll agree to disagree. No harm, no foul in that part of the discussion. Disagree with me all that you want on political ideology, just refrain from asserting moral superiority when you know nothing about me or most, if not any, of the other ATSers on here who disagree with your politics. That's all I ask, because ad hominem attacks have no place in adult discussions.

I'll try to refrain from the same.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
A basic living check is, at least, somewhat more dignified.



I agree but what is a basic living job? I hire people at a level 1 with 4 levels, 3 and 4 are considered career levels where you can be level 3 your whole career and the pay is factored into that. That is why I ask the question of what is a basic living (career job) to you?



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

I do not need to do any such thing. You asked to be informed if the cost of living was higher in Australia or not, I showed that it most certainly higher. Just because you have become inured to this fact does not make it nay less true.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
I can't seem to find it, so I'll assume it was adjusted for the dollar strength differences? That is, something costing $1 in Australia would cost $0.70 in America.


The second link I provided shows a more granular breakdown in both US and Australian dollars for each category so it is an apples to apples comparison.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
We'll agree to disagree.


I agree to our disagrement!



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: forkedtongue

Because there is X amount of success in the world.

Meaning it is not even possible for all those that are hard working and make the right decisions to succeed.


I kind of disagree. What is hard working? You go to college and find that your degree in the labor world is sh@t and so you are done? No, you go a different direction, many times over and over. I didn't start making what I considered a decent wage until I was in my mid 30s, everything before that was just making it month to month. I also didn't start a family until 38 so that helped too. Today I hire younger people all the time over older people, so the old crowd does not have an advantage because of their age. It boils down to what you bring in skills/experience and how well you interview. Young person with skills/experience rocks the interview they are hired.






edit on 30-12-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Look at all the things we have right now. Roads, schools, fire/police, emergency rooms, social security/medicare/medicaid, soup kitchens, assisted-living homes, low income housing, subsidies for just about everything...

Why then do people still bother working?

The answer? Simply existing isn't enough for human beings.

Yes, there are going to be lazy louts who actually sit on the couch day in and day out, but these are going to be a small minority of people.

When people see what is possible with enough money, they too are going to lust after those nice things. You can't have a yacht without money. Why do people go above and beyond average anyway right now?

So this whole notion that people will refuse to work and do anything is beyond absurd. It *seems* like good logic, but you know Communism *seems* like good logic too until put into practice. The same thing applies here. People will always want more and be willing to work for it in practice/reality.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: theMediator
I think people here don't realize that in countries with basic income, EVERYONE gets payed the same basic income ON TOP of their salaries. Even people that make 300 000$ a year still get the same basic income.


That is stupid. So a company hires me at $100,000 per year and they still need to pay 15 per hour on top of that?



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: theMediator
I think people here don't realize that in countries with basic income, EVERYONE gets payed the same basic income ON TOP of their salaries. Even people that make 300 000$ a year still get the same basic income.

That is stupid. So a company hires me at $100,000 per year and they still need to pay 15 per hour on top of that?


Who do you think pays the basic income when someone wouldn't work, the company? Which company? Why would a company pay a basic income to someone that doesn't work for them?

Obviously, the government pays the basic income... all the time, to everyone. That's the idea.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: theMediator
I think that refusing socialism in this day in age, with the technologies we have, with the amount of ressources available and with the amount of money hoarded by the super rich is criminal. A government that doesn't do what needs to be done to give opportunities to the whole population is absurd.


We have a lot of socialize services and will have a lot more, but that will never give you a quality of life, ever. It might keep you off the streets, but that is it. I'm not sure what you are looking for here. Do you want a system that just meets your basic needs (its coming I can tell you and it will not be shinny or pretty) or do you want a quality of life whatever it is set by you? The Government will never be able to do that for you, only you can.

It seems you want protection from the government OK I would not debate that, but you also want private companies to give you a chance and pay you what you think you are worth. That can happen and it can not too, its a tough world out there with a lot of competition. The difference is companies are not responsible to take care of you no matter how hard you can work where the Government is to a point responsible no matter how little you work.

The difference in jobs is not all jobs are career jobs. If you stock shelves at a super market that is not a career job and so it will pay low, and if you make it your career job then that doesn't mean they pay goes up to a living wage.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: theMediator

Who do you think pays the basic income when someone wouldn't work, the company? Which company? Why would a company pay a basic income to someone that doesn't work for them?

Obviously, the government pays the basic income... all the time, to everyone. That's the idea.


Where does the 15 per hour from the government come from? In the US that would be about 6+ trillion dollars per year for 200+ million adults past the age of 18.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
So this whole notion that people will refuse to work and do anything is beyond absurd. It *seems* like good logic, but you know Communism *seems* like good logic too until put into practice. The same thing applies here. People will always want more and be willing to work for it in practice/reality.


I agree to a point but I think the numbers are growing. We see towns were unemployment is extremely high and people get into a surviving but easy mode and just sit there even when their life sucks with only options for them that they are unwilling to do. If I opened a factory there and said I need 500 workers and will pay 50k per year there would be 10,000 saying hell ya. If I said your only chance is to move to a place you never been and work crappy jobs for 10 years as you build your skills/experiences before a career job comes along most of that 10,000 would say hell NO! All this get perpetuated in future generations too as the young look for the easy buck in crime etc. with their only mentoring of parents living a crappy subsistence life.

A real time example is Flint Michigan. Easy work and good money back in the day, but today high crime and high unemployment and most likely an even higher underemployment.


edit on 30-12-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: forkedtongue
a reply to: nullafides


The problem with the mindset you are using right now OP is you ignore the fact that there are not enough decent jobs for everyone to have one.

You also assume falsely that poor folks are lazy or dont work or dont try to better themselves.

It is a game of musical chairs where there are many people and few chairs.

They arent adding chairs, but are adding people.

So there are always more and more people that work and live in poverty because there is just simply not enough decent jobs for the hard working folks that want them.


I disagree with this. The problem is largely that people don't like the colour or comfort of certain chairs (jobs) and they're picky.
There is plenty of work out there. Just because some people can't find a job on their preferred career path doesn't mean a job doesn't exist.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Look at all the things we have right now. Roads, schools, fire/police, emergency rooms, social security/medicare/medicaid, soup kitchens, assisted-living homes, low income housing, subsidies for just about everything...


Right, much of which is funded by local taxes and better controlled than in some massive federal agency was applying one-size-fits-all bureaucracy to it.

The others are necessary on a limited means, but also are wrought with waste/fraud/abuse, which is why all govt programs have a method for reporting such things--they're common, and often easily accomplished without much notice.

This list is not, by any stretch of the imagination, and good argument for federal socialism.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Where does the 15 per hour from the government come from? In the US that would be about 6+ trillion dollars per year for 200+ million adults past the age of 18.


Where did you ever get that idea that I was talking about a 15$ per hour? I really don't understand how you could come down to such a stupid conclusion about something I didn't even talked about and that doesn't even make sense to begin with. You seem to be arguing with a straw man.

You obviously don't know what "Basic Income" means. Please, read it on wikipedia so that instead of writing about something you have no idea, you'll be able to debate on a subject that you would at least know it's definition.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 05:42 PM
link   
I don't disagree with the idea, but it really couldn't work in the US, especially in the south and midwest. You may be able to pull somehing like that off in NYC or LA, but not nationally.



posted on Dec, 30 2015 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: theMediator
Where did you ever get that idea that I was talking about a 15$ per hour? I really don't understand how you could come down to such a stupid conclusion about something I didn't even talked about and that doesn't even make sense to begin with. You seem to be arguing with a straw man.


Most likely mixed the discussion of Australia's minimum wage that is in this thread too, so what is the dollar amount you suggest?




You obviously don't know what "Basic Income" means. Please, read it on wikipedia so that instead of writing about something you have no idea, you'll be able to debate on a subject that you would at least know it's definition.


Yep I'm stupid, no idea, don't know..hmm I think I might need this, THANKS!!



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join