Obama: "Profits have to be shared by workers" ... Idiodic Statements for $500 please!

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by gncnew
 

My point, which I clearly failed to make, was that he merely said this was something to consider. It's not going to be a mandate. He's intelligent enough to know this. Methinks people either don't understand his language or just want to pick on everything this man says, or maybe both. And it's getting really tedious.


I've got no specific agenda against him - well other than he's done nothing I voted him into office for (read: empty promises).

The problem is - this statement isn't made as a "just something we should think of" kind of talk. It's made - like most "suggestions" from the POTUS - as a guide to what will be required should beneficial changes be made.

He's essentially explaining the bargain that is being negotiated here.




posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by gncnew
So let's be clear: You worked for British Airways, and they actually took their top performers and gave them crappy jobs and paid them less than sub-par performers....

And those top performers stayed why? No seriously - I think you're just using the "I got bad pay and crap assignments because my boss hated me" excuse that so many non-performers use all the time.

You CANNOT mandate what a "fair" wage is ... and you CANNOT mandate what a salary "cap" is. If I want to make more than everyone else in my field, I will work harder and smarter than all of them... but if there is a cap on it... why should I? What if I reach that cap - but I could still do a better job? What is my motivation to improve the efficiency or innovation of my position?


Sorry you seemed to have misunderstood me, i mean't sharing profits with employees. How could you be against 20% of profits being shared between all employees sharing the wealth around? I said nothing about a salary cap, just no employee being payed more than 200% more than any other employee. Hard work will always be rewarded, what im against is the fat cat directors taking hugh profits out of companys while employees and customers get ripped off.
edit on 7-2-2011 by lilsmurf because: spelling, grammer you name it



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
i can't stand Obama...but he is just speaking common sense here. At least, that is how i am taking it in the small bit i have seen from the speech. It seems that he is just reminding business leaders that if they improve employee buy in, they will exponentially improve productivity and gross profit margins.

It is common sense. If he tries to pass a law about it, then i will protest. But for him to give his input at a chamber speech is a far cry from trying to write a law.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by gncnew
 


I hate the word privelage. Once that word is used on anything it can be taken away easily. I am for FDRs second bill of rights. All people have the right to life and earn a living. We need money to live. I like this idea. I think this greedy corparations should give people better pay, better benefits.
It is not fair that some top CEO makes $1 million dollars AND gets a bonus of $100k!
We all have a right to life. simple.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by gncnew
 


I don't know what Obama is trying to say with the statement, but what I Do know is that our prestigious chamber of commerce have now eyes on foreign investors, they are all for free trade and killing the US production in favor of foreign one and that they are laundering money from foreign nations doantions for campaign money.

Specially money for Republican candidates.



And another thought: the reason the production industry is leaving the US right now is because we can no longer do it at a competitive rate. We have regulated away the ability to manufacture items at cost effective levels.

American's won't pay $50-$60k per vehicle. But we want to produce them in the United States. But American vehicles produced in the U.S. have DOUBLE the manufacturing costs of those produced over seas...

So we have a dilemma. Either we find a way to reduce the manufacturing costs to make the cars affordable to the buyers, or we force the consumer to pay more.

We've tried to do both: We moved the manufacturing overseas to reduce costs, and we've created a bank scheme to finance the cars to make them more affordable.

But now we want the jobs back... but we don't want to lower the costs....

You get the idea.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
i can't stand Obama...but he is just speaking common sense here. At least, that is how i am taking it in the small bit i have seen from the speech. It seems that he is just reminding business leaders that if they improve employee buy in, they will exponentially improve productivity and gross profit margins.

It is common sense. If he tries to pass a law about it, then i will protest. But for him to give his input at a chamber speech is a far cry from trying to write a law.


Fair point, but I addressed this earlier... usually "suggestions" from the POTUS are not really optional.

Nice Avatar btw!



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by gncnew

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow
That is all well and good, but looking at population growth compared to the pace in which manufacturing is being deconstructed and shipped away, everyone is going to have to learn Chinese, get an MBA, become a cop, a doctor or a nurse. Not that those professions are bad, but the job market is unarguably crap right now and those jobs are not coming back. This "get a job and work your way up" paradigm is dying fast and will be replaced with "grow your own food or starve" at the rate things are declining. Of course, I have a feeling the government will be happy to step in and place the last few shackles around our arms and legs.


Look, as a high school kid coming out and picking a major in college - if you're still expecting the car factory job mom and dad had to be what gets you through you're being stupid.

People need to look at what jobs WILL be available and move themselves towards them. Just because you don't want to, or because you were too short sighted to take these steps does NOT mean we need to regulate companies to essentially subsidize your choice with artificially higher wages.

Like I said - the idea that corporations will take tax breaks and just sit on a pile of money and laugh manically is ludicrous. They'll re-invest that money into something they think will produce more profits.

Guess what - that's where you need to be - where they think there will be more profits. Not trying to squeeze out a couple more drops of juice from the same old turnip.



Yeah, I listed some of the jobs available. It sounds like while you are seeing the need to move on, you feel we should keep the model we have in this controlled decline. The interest of a company has never been its employees and to keep that model will result in a similar situation down the line regardless of the profession one chooses. It is like replacing a broken gadget with another that is prone to break...it will only stave off an inevitable collapse of control...which is what it is all about.
edit on 7-2-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: spelling



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by dreamseeker
reply to post by gncnew
 


I hate the word privelage. Once that word is used on anything it can be taken away easily. I am for FDRs second bill of rights. All people have the right to life and earn a living. We need money to live. I like this idea. I think this greedy corparations should give people better pay, better benefits.
It is not fair that some top CEO makes $1 million dollars AND gets a bonus of $100k!
We all have a right to life. simple.


You have a right to make a living - but not a right to make the living you want. No company should be forced to hire you, just as you should not be forced to buy anything.

You have free choice to spend your money as you see fit - so why should a corporation (which is actually made up for lots of "little people") be forced to spend their money in a different manner?

Here's news for you: If you want to make the $1 million dollars and get a bonus of $100k - then go get a MBA from a prestigious school, and work 60-70 hour work weeks. Oh - and take on the responsibility of billion dollar decisions that will effect the lives of thousands.

Everyone wants the money - only a few are willing to work for it. Those few are the people who make the millions.

We have no issue with Sports stars making millions even though their trainers make a fraction of that. We have no problem with Hollywood stars making millions even though the light crew makes a fraction of that.

Take a look at the average week of a CEO - and tell me you want that job. Then if you still say yes - tell me you're willing to go into $100k+ debt to get your MBA from Harvard. If you still say yes, then tell me you're willing to give up the opportunity to have any social life, real friends, a healthy family....

Now you're on their level. Somebody has to do it. The ridiculous pay is the only incentive... it sure ain't the job.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow
...

Yeah, I listed some of the jobs available. It sounds like while you are seeing the need to move on, you feel we should keep the model we have in this controlled decline. The interest of a company has never been its employees and to keep that model will result in a similar situation down the line regardless of the profession one chooses. It is like replacing a broken gadget with another that is prone to break...it will only stave off an inevitable collapse of control...which is what it is all about.
edit on 7-2-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: spelling


But that's just it. The only companies operating in this mold are now on the government tit. Google is a great example. They're busting at the seams with applications - they're a new and cutting edge industry that is VERY profitable.

But we still got car door handle makers complaining about fair wages at the factory.... WTF?



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by gncnew
 



Every time you get a paycheck they're "sharing" their profits with you. And here's a hint:


Lol. Idiodic. Fits just fine with the logic. Here's a hint for you: Without the employees the employers wouldn't have anything to share and vice versa. So logically speaking, the profits should be shared in a fair manner ie. pay according to work. Though sadly that is nearly never the case as the one on top wants to showboat being on top ie. more money. It's simple really.


Any company that produces a product (of ANY kind) will expand their production base

That is such a generic statement it hurts my head.


They will give raises to the people that increase the effecience and hence the profit margin of that production.


In a fair manner? No right? Because nobody knows what fair is so everybody just does as they please. Do you know how revolutions begin?



There is only ONE case where this is not true: Unionized Labor. In these specific cases where Labor Unions get to determine workers' pay

Why do I get the feeling you do not like this? Are you one of those folks that got completely brainwashed into a static state of mind?


- those evil corporate fat cats are not allowed to individually reward people for harder work and better productivity.


Oh right...

Also, I like how you insinuate that those fat cats are not at all evil and I also like how you imply that they would reward people for their productivity - which is out of touch with reality, because for instance, take a look at Apple or Nike. Do they increase the wages accordingly to their employees across the globe? No. They actually go to other places on the globe to AVOID fair wages.


A job is not a right - it's a privilege.

A generic statement again, woopty doo, you're on a roll! Hate to brake it to you though, sport, as every person who wants to work, and is capable, should be able to work. i.e. right to work.


And you can only expect to enjoy that privilege so long as you make more money than you cost your bosses.


You sound like a sweatshop manager educated in whipping people. Bosses? As far as I am aware humans do not have bosses but employers. Dogs have bosses, cats have bosses, slaves have bosses...so why don't you say what you want to say and get it over with? You want SLAVES not EMPLOYEES. (too bad you were born 200 years late)


Before you rant into your socialistic diatribe: When you get a raise at work ... do you immediately go out and pay your waitresses more money on a tip? etc etc...


I like how you make ignorant statements and try and pass them off as wisdom, but, as you will, here is the answer to YOUR rant:

You wouldn't have to tip her more, were the wage of the waitress balanced towards the money she brings in for her employer. Guess what? Nobody would need to worry about the nonsensical crap you just put up there, trying to pass it off as wisdom, if people were to stop and think.

Interesting to see minds like yours at work. Trying so very hard to make reality fit to your textbook. Insane...

reply to post by macman
 



No, it makes perfect sense.
This is Union speak/language.

To Socialism we march.


that's just jibberish for: "I don't want to share". Sorry but it is. The whole socialism/capitalism debate is based on GREED. Good job biting!

Good on Obama.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by gncnew
 

Suggestions from the POTUS or suggestions from an American and a student of history maybe. In my view, he's allowed within certain conversations to postulate or even suggest, to give people some food for thought, just like anyone else is.

What I drew from this statement is that there has been 1.) a huge move away from the mindset of treating people who work to make a company a success with above and beyond performance by rewarding them with bonuses or profit sharing and silly things like raises and 2.) a huge move toward ridiculously large the bonuses for those at the top who achieve and measure their success by not only piggybacking off the hard work of others but also by using funky accounting that shows inflated and temporary profit margins brought about by those ever-shrinking paychecks and cuts to profit-sharing to the slaves and cuts to workforces and not by anything they themselves really do.

Is he wrong? And just out of curiosity, what did you elect him to do?



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by gncnew

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by gncnew
 


I don't know what Obama is trying to say with the statement, but what I Do know is that our prestigious chamber of commerce have now eyes on foreign investors, they are all for free trade and killing the US production in favor of foreign one and that they are laundering money from foreign nations doantions for campaign money.

Specially money for Republican candidates.



And another thought: the reason the production industry is leaving the US right now is because we can no longer do it at a competitive rate. We have regulated away the ability to manufacture items at cost effective levels.

American's won't pay $50-$60k per vehicle. But we want to produce them in the United States. But American vehicles produced in the U.S. have DOUBLE the manufacturing costs of those produced over seas...

So we have a dilemma. Either we find a way to reduce the manufacturing costs to make the cars affordable to the buyers, or we force the consumer to pay more.

We've tried to do both: We moved the manufacturing overseas to reduce costs, and we've created a bank scheme to finance the cars to make them more affordable.

But now we want the jobs back... but we don't want to lower the costs....

You get the idea.


No.. I think you have it wrong here. It's not Govt. regulations that make US auto-making expensive and it's not that foreign manufacturures can make them cheaper either.

First off... the UAW has a monopoly on auto-workers. The UAW has no competition so it can basically hold the Auto-makers hostage for labor. While in other countries, there may be several Auto-workers unions that compete for contracts with the auto-makers, which in turn keeps wages reasonable. You also have to remember that Detroit is still paying pensions for retired auto-workers as well, which gets passed along to the auto-buyer.

Second... foreign auto-companies form cartels in their home markets and agree to raise prices in those home markets to offset the costs of manufacture which enables them to sell to US markets w/out the significant costs of manufacture included. US auto makers don't have that option and must include the costs in the sale of the vehicle.

Third... The import/export playing field is not level and everyone knows it.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by gncnew
 


I basically believe all people should be able to make enough money to live and have some to save aside. It is not fair for one person to make $1 million while another person is living on the streets. Some homeless do work.
You have to admit we have alot of inequalities in our current system.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by gncnew

Here's news for you: If you want to make the $1 million dollars and get a bonus of $100k - then go get a MBA from a prestigious school, and work 60-70 hour work weeks. Oh - and take on the responsibility of billion dollar decisions that will effect the lives of thousands.

Everyone wants the money - only a few are willing to work for it. Those few are the people who make the millions.



Now I see the logic in what you're saying, but I think you're ignoring the reality - which is that there are PLENTY of people who are willing to work for it. Thousands of single women DO work 60-70 work weeks at multiple jobs just to scrape by enough to feed their children. Do you think if they had a chance to get an MBA at a prestigious school that they wouldn't jump on it? You're living in fantasy land if you think that poor people are just being lazy. They are working incredibly hard, and have the drive to work multiple jobs just to get enough money to live, but they simply do not have the resources to go to Harvard!! 98% of the people who earn MBA's and work at the tops of those companies already started out in a high enough pay bracket (ie, their parents were middle class or rich) that they had the resources to go earn that degree - the single mom with children did not start off in a place to get that. She likely started off poor, was working when she was 16 to help HER mom out, and then she tried to get with a boy to make things easier but he ran off on her.

Or did you forget that people like her exist? In mass quantities?

Therefore, single mom gets screwed by the CEO who thinks, "Well, if she really wanted my job, she'd just work harder." Get real. We don't all start at the starting line in life - a lot of us start very far behind it.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by lilsmurf
Obama is talking sense.

Profits should be shared between all workers. Normally the hardest workers will get the least amount of pay, while doing the #test jobs, while the directors of the companys get massively inflated wages and bonuses for just being in a position of power. The directors will normally (not always) come from privileged backgrounds and would have had a head start in life. The reason there is such a massive gap in America between the rich and the poor is because of ignorance like the OPs. This is not Socialism, it is just capping Capitalism something that should have been done many, many years ago.


While I will agree that the 10% of us workers that are hard workers actually do about 90% of the work, I will also disagree that we should change into a socialist economy because "It don't feel good right now."

I have learned that busting my freakin' tail, regardless of how much money I have been offered, has granted me many other privileges and rewards that are way more important than the paper money crap.

Because I am always willing to work and do a perfect job, people, even those who are less interested in working, are willing to help out.

It is a lead by example situation - not a force it into legislation situation. You do that, and you become a child.

We should be adults and take responsibility for ourselves and worry about ourselves and not point the finger and wag it, thereby only proving that we still require parental supervision.

Having a child as president really sucks. I'd rather bust my tail for no pay than to see the government lose the last piece of freedom hanging on a thread.

How is it that you are so blind?

Do you not realize that everything you do in life is a vote? People say, "If you didn't want Obama, you shoulda voted the other way!"

Bull. They advertise to us based upon statistics. They have numbers that define our reactions.

If people do not take personal responsibility, then they will set up a form of government that will.

If you work for a corporation that has beliefs that are against what you believe, your vote is a contradiction.
If you walk a certain way, that is your vote. If you speak a certain way, that is your vote. If you believe or don't believe, that is your vote. Your actions are your votes.

What our government is right now is a democracy... the worst form of government in a world full of technology designed to make us work less and think less! So, therefore, because everything we do as people is a vote for what we believe in life, whatever the numbers say is popular is what will be advertised to us! That is what we will get!

So remember, it is not just the fault of the "elite" that we are where we are... it is all because we are weak-minded and weak-willed and spoiled. And I don't care what drugs that put in our foods and drink or what brain-washing or manipulation you believe is happening. Who cares?

Take personal responsibility for everything to do with you and those around you and You Will Succeed.
Ignore those who would do it for you. Ignore those who would not tell you to do it yourself! Ignore those who, despite the fact that they may actually feel they are trying to help, claim they only want to help.

Unless you need the help, don't accept it. DO IT YOURSELF. If you really are in dire need, then you will greatly appreciate the help that you do receive... because you know you did all that you could.

And the spoiled here, you need to lower your standards for what you expect of other people and increase your standards for what you yourself can do. Scrub the toilet because not just someone has got to do it -- YOU have got to do it. Unless you crap in a lake?

Pay attention when you wash your dishes. Turn off the stupid Television. Stare at the wall in thought. Play crazy mind games with your son and daughter. Talk to God whether you believe or not! Because there is ALWAYS someone more powerful than you. And yet, at the same time, there is no one who can make you do something you do not will yourself.

And don't be greedy. Your stupid obsession with getting the next best gadgets when you don't even make enough money to pay rent... What manner of retardation is that? It is NOT a mental condition - it is a lack of personal responsibility. And then you expect the state and the federal government to give you aid?! What?

You want a socialist economy because you know that those who work hard for their physical and mental challenge and fitness will take care of you and more will be expected of them than you. And then you believe in your heart, "I can get away with doing the 'brainy' jobs and they can do all the monotonaus and physically challenging jobs that are beneath me... yes, I deserve this because I have an IQ of 150. They would have nothing better to do anyway!"

You should be slapped upside your head for your incredibly unintelligent thoughts and feelings though you brandish the ability to put a puzzle together. Because your ability and your willingness to see the truth are two different things.

THESE are the reasons why the economy is headed the direction it is. It is all connected - and if you don't want to be living in the United Socialist Republic of North America, I suggest you get over your supposed mental illnesses and addictions and pay close attention and feel that nagging hero of truth inside of you and let it Degrade you and berate you and TEAR YOU DOWN until you break down and realize it is time to take control of yourself and do something worthwhile.

Cleaning floors IS worth while, you jerks. Because you get to walk on those clean floors while holding your child's hand and then they fall and guess what? They aren't that dirty because the floors are cleaned. BE appreciative.

Who changes the light bulbs? Who lays the brick? Who mixes the mud? Who put the roof on your house?

Oh, but you worked so hard at your job to earn that money. So they worked for you.

Fine... how much do you appreciate it for real. Have you ever tried doing it yourself? Or are you in debt in making other people do your work for you?

Wait.......

Isn't that what the USA has been doing that has led to this problem?

Forget about liberal and conservative. Two sides of the same stupid coin. Be a frigging human being and use that brain to do something smart and use that heart to do something good. We may be obligated to serve corporations in many ways, but by God they don't have their power without the people - so our personal responsibility actually will roll UPHILL and knock them off the other side of their frigging mountain!



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by dreamseeker
reply to post by gncnew
 


I basically believe all people should be able to make enough money to live and have some to save aside. It is not fair for one person to make $1 million while another person is living on the streets. Some homeless do work.
You have to admit we have alot of inequalities in our current system.


The only difference between the rich and the homeless is that the rich person is more in debt and has more foolish worries like, "IF I do this, people will think THAT of me."

Whereas the homeless person is free in that aspect. They learn that it doesn't matter what people think. If they take personal responsibility, they take that wisdom to the next level in their lives. If they do not, they end up staying where they are at and getting sick.

The next level in their lives doesn't necessarily mean becoming more socially acceptable (house, car, job), but it could be whatever their calling is...

What I do know is that we all have our adventures and our places in life and there is a Higher Power that sees the beauty of every situation... and also witnesses how we take all things in life for granted because we take LIFE itself for granted.

Only the very physically unhealthy, in my opinion, should be so easily forgiven for seeing physical life as an inconvenience - and yet, even then, many who are in constant suffering will actually appreciate life MORE!

If you have dreams such as traveling to a particular place in the world or accomplishing a feat, then develop a long term goal (and there are many methods other than by money) in order to accomplish that. But do not forget that each of our lives is an adventure unto itself and if we are more or less physically healthy without much pain, we are capable of making what our current lives are now, regardless of our circumstances, an excellent adventure.

Take not your life and the life around you for granted. Your own obsessive impulses decide how much you clean, how much you watch TV instead of playing with your child while they touch things they aren't supposed to and pick fights with eachother or whine because they're bored. Actually that last line is for me because I'm typing while my son is running around the room going, "brbrbrbrrrr! I like brrr! A la Brr. Waaah!"



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zamini
reply to post by gncnew
 

bla bla bla...

Sorry I paraphrased your quote, but what I put is about as useful. Just saying "This is idiotic" and "generic statement" do not really qualify as quid pro quo, debate, or even a statement of any kinds.

Here is the reality - you want more money? Work harder. You find your current employer wont pay you want you THINK you deserve? Move to a different employer. You can't find one that will? Start your own business.

That's the beauty of the evil system here that you so mindlessly attack. But then again - I find most liberal minded socialists are scared of actual work - hence they infest academia.

"those that can't... teach".



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by gncnew
 

Suggestions from the POTUS or suggestions from an American and a student of history maybe. In my view, he's allowed within certain conversations to postulate or even suggest, to give people some food for thought, just like anyone else is.

[...]

Is he wrong? And just out of curiosity, what did you elect him to do?

I don't disagree with his position giving him the privilege of pushing his opinion on others because he was elected to that position of authority by the people - for the people.

That's why I say we can't now turn back and say "it was only a suggestion". It's much more than that.

Lastly, I voted for him to bring transparency to Washington, and to end the practice of Lobbyist running the legislation of our Congress. I voted for him because he promised to bring change to the way we do government.

Where has that happened? The only transparency is coming from Wikileaks (which I'm not a fan of btw) and the only difference is which lobbyist now have the ears.

He's pushed a clearly political power agenda and has done nothing for the good of the Republic. I could have gotten this out of McCain or Hillary. We had this out of Bush.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blarneystoner

No.. I think you have it wrong here. It's not Govt. regulations that make US auto-making expensive and it's not that foreign manufacturures can make them cheaper either.

First off... the UAW has a monopoly on auto-workers. The UAW has no competition so it can basically hold the Auto-makers hostage for labor. While in other countries, there may be several Auto-workers unions that compete for contracts with the auto-makers, which in turn keeps wages reasonable. You also have to remember that Detroit is still paying pensions for retired auto-workers as well, which gets passed along to the auto-buyer.

Second... foreign auto-companies form cartels in their home markets and agree to raise prices in those home markets to offset the costs of manufacture which enables them to sell to US markets w/out the significant costs of manufacture included. US auto makers don't have that option and must include the costs in the sale of the vehicle.

Third... The import/export playing field is not level and everyone knows it.



You and I are saying the same thing. The government regulations are what have given the UAW the vice grip on the workers (funny how the UAW has a cartel - but it's legal...). It's also the reason our import/export balance is so out of whack. China et al have created artificially high prices for American goods coming into their country but we consistently refuse to return the favor.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by dreamseeker
reply to post by gncnew
 


I basically believe all people should be able to make enough money to live and have some to save aside. It is not fair for one person to make $1 million while another person is living on the streets. Some homeless do work.
You have to admit we have alot of inequalities in our current system.


Did your parents ever tell you "life isn't fair"?

Almost EVERYONE in America makes enough money to live and have some to save aside. They just don't have enough to do that an live in a four bedroom home, have a flat screen tv, two cars, go out to eat 3 times a week, wear new cloths....

Come on now - seriously think about it. If the homeless guys refuses to work more than 6 hours a week - how are we supposed to make it "equal" for the guy willing to work 60+ hours in a week?





new topics
top topics
 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join