NAACP issues travel advisory for Florida...

[The Hammer]

Don't try to argue that employers can't judge
performance. It ain't perfect, but it's doable.

My argument wasn't whether or not performance can be judged by an employer, and more in line with whether or not you specifically can judge whether a person is worth what they are being paid; if it isn't for you directly.

 

[The Hammer]

If people can't survive on their take home pay,
then you should be consistent, & call them
"tax slaves" too.
I've found that it's quite objective to determine
what an employee is worth. I paid more to the
ones who were more valuable, eg, maintenance
workers, office manager.
Don't try to argue that employers can't judge
performance. It ain't perfect, but it's doable.

Wage slave/tax slave aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[Revoltingest]

But I'm not sure where I'm corrupting language.

Re-defining "slavery" to include low paid
workers who are owned by no one.

As for dangerous. Like you said to me once before, what harm is there in airing opinions here? It doesn't matter or change anything realistically.

Hey, call my views ignorant & dangerous, &
I'll share my criticism that your advocacy for
dysfunctional regulation of business is dangerous
because it threatens to harm the economy &
the poor.

And at least I didn't call you "disingenuous".
If you want to call someone a liar by artfully using
rule-friendly language, you should first ensure that
you're right, & not just misunderstanding my
meaning. Then you'd avoid being judged harshly.

 

[Revoltingest]

My argument wasn't whether or not performance can be judged by an employer, and more in line with whether or not you specifically can judge whether a person is worth what they are being paid; if it isn't for you directly.

As a business owner, the responsibility to judge
how much an individual was worth fell to me.
This was during hiring & their entire history
with me, eg, raises, firing.
This worked. There's no reasonable alternative.

In your business, how did you set compensation
for employees?

 

[Revoltingest]

Wage slave/tax slave aren't mutually exclusive.

Fans of big government don't use "tax slave".
If they did, they'd have to face the reductio
ad absurdum conclusion that taxation is
slavery, which would make "wage slavery"
sound ridiculous even to them.

I bristle at liberals who diminish the evil
of actual slavery by applying it to employees
who don't earn as much as they need / want.
Some people just aren't useful as workers.
If you want to give them enuf money to
survive, that burden should fall on taxpayers,
spreading the burden among the many
instead of the few.
Besides, being forced to pay someone more
than they're worth would simply mean never
hiring them in the first place. The ranks of
the unemployed would blossom.

 

[The Hammer]

Re-defining "slavery" to include low paid
workers who are owned by no one.

If you (a business, not Revolt specifically) arent paying someone enough to make ends meet; is that not: Slavery is the practice of forced labor and restricted liberty.

Our societal freedoms are based around the ability to be economically free, so how does that fit here?

 

[The Hammer]

Fans of big government don't use "tax slave".
If they did, they'd have to face the reductio
ad absurdum conclusion that taxation is
slavery, which would make "wage slavery"
sound ridiculous even to them.

I bristle at liberals who diminish the evil
of actual slavery by applying it to employees
who don't earn as much as they need / want.
Some people just aren't useful as workers.
If you want to give them enuf money to
survive, that burden should fall on taxpayers,
spreading the burden among the many
instead of the few.
Besides, being forced to pay someone more
than they're worth would simply mean never
hiring them in the first place. The ranks of
the unemployed would blossom.

Taxes are a societal necessity (it's what pays for civilization), but paying someone dirt wages are not a necessity.

I could "choose" not to work, but where does that leave me? Not with much of a choice.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you (a business, not Revolt specifically) arent paying someone enough to make ends meet; is that not: Slavery is the practice of forced labor and restricted liberty.

I don't force them to work for me.
They have the liberty to quit...or to improve their productivity.
Regarding that last one, I trained some ambitious employees
to become valuable that they had to find better opportunities.
I dislike turnover, but I like seeing people become successes.
One started his own construction company, & still worked for
me, but as a contractor...charging me much more because
he was worth it.

Our societal freedoms are based around the ability to be economically free, so how does that fit here?

The UBI would enable people to do well
even in low paying jobs.
Telling business to pay people based upon
need instead of productivity would mean that
some people would be denied employment.

 

[The Hammer]

The UBI would enable people to do well
even in low paying jobs.
Telling business to pay people based upon
need instead of productivity would mean that
some people would be denied employment.

UBI is a band aid on a laceration. Useful, but not long term.

If a business can't pay na employee based on the needs of the local cost of living (COLA), then they don't deserve to continue as a business imo.

 

[Revoltingest]

UBI is a band aid on a laceration. Useful, but not long term.

It's the optimum solution (IMO).
- It benefits everyone.
- The burden is widely spread, ie, to all taxpayers.
- It allow low value workers to get jobs, with no loss of government largesse.
- It's bureaucratically simple to administer.
- It lessens regulation of business, which lowers costs.

If a business can't pay na employee based on the needs of the local cost of living (COLA), then they don't deserve to continue as a business imo.

Your approach would eliminate both businesses
and employees. It seems that your focus isn't
so much on helping the poor, as punishing
businesses who don't operate as charities
for low productivity workers.

How did you set wages of employees in your
business?

 

[Nakosis]

UBI is a band aid on a laceration. Useful, but not long term.

If a business can't pay na employee based on the needs of the local cost of living (COLA), then they don't deserve to continue as a business imo.

What happens when automation is cheaper?

There is becoming less and less need for low skilled workers.

 

[The Hammer]

How did you set wages of employees in your
business?

I've been ignoring this question because your using it as a "gotcha."

 

[The Hammer]

What happens when automation is cheaper?

There is becoming less and less need for low skilled workers.

This is why I said UBI is a band aid. There needs to be the creation of other avenues of work for the "low skilled" (I hate this term). Who repairs the automation, for instance.

Edit: we've been crying about the death of the worker since at least pre-industrial times, probably earlier.

 

[Revoltingest]

I've been ignoring this question because your using it as a "gotcha."

Point made.
Those who've never played the game
shouldn't be making the rules.

 

[Kfox]

What's actually insulting is to disingenuously attempt to minimize the wanton abuses of capitalists over the centuries and dismiss the sufferings of countless billions worldwide, while claiming that it's moral because "at least they weren't slaves" and they had the choice to walk away at any time. My point is, technically speaking, slaves had the same choice -

But realistically speaking, slaves did not have the same choice

unless they were physically chained or walled in, which was hardly the case. But was it really that much of a choice? You tell me.

If you are working for an abusive employer, the fact that there are other employers around or you can try to live without employment at all means you have options. The slave never had options.

 

[The Hammer]

Point made.
Those who've never played the game
shouldn't be making the rules.

Point attempted, not made.


It doesn't take a knowledge of business, to know how one should operate.

Can't afford your employees, then go under. Don't like it? Get out of business ownership...

 

[Shadow Wolf]

He proposed extreme economic measures.
I heard Marx's quote in his theme.
It is what it is.

Just because you haven't read philosophers. The "I. Kant" part made it perfectly clear where the post was coming from, and it wasn't anywhere close to Marx. Not unless you want to call all philosophers who promote moral obligations and social obligations as Marxists, including John Stewart Mill amd John Rawls despite the fact those two we're commies.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Point attempted, not made.


It doesn't take a knowledge of business, to know how one should operate.

Can't afford your employees, then go under. Don't like it? Get out of business ownership...

You also don't have to have any business owning experience to know America sets the bar in the Western world for stinginess and a lack of pay and benefits as other nations do just fine paying their employees a livable wage.

 

[Revoltingest]

Just because you haven't read philosophers. The "I. Kant" part made it perfectly clear where the post was coming from, and it wasn't anywhere close to Marx. Not unless you want to call all philosophers who promote moral obligations and social obligations as Marxists, including John Stewart Mill amd John Rawls despite the fact those two we're commies.

Marx isn't the only one with marxist ideas.
But whence they come doesn't matter.
They're bad ideas.

 

[Revoltingest]

You also don't have to have any business owning experience to know America sets the bar in the Western world for stinginess and a lack of pay and benefits as other nations do just fine paying their employees a livable wage.

Never having run a business allows one to
live in a fantasy land wherein whatever goofy
notion one believes will succeed spectacularly,
eg, pay each worker what they need because
productivity can't be measured.
Starting a business with such notions would
be quickly cured by reality...hopefully before
bankruptcy.