Whole Foods' Co-Founder John Mackey: "Why Intellectuals Hate Capitalism"
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
Excuse me for having to
- drive home from my job
- buy groceries
- make dinner
- get setup to workout in my home gym.
What were you doing this whole time, twiddling your thumbs waiting for me to respond? This is real life, not debate school.
I'm not responding to you until you answer my questions.
That would make sense if you hadn't replied to this exact thread between then and now.
Grotesque levels of income inequality are bad because they empower the few at grotesque levels over the many. Income inequality is bad because it leads to alienation and further stratifies society.
I'm in college.
Whats the point of a minimum wage if you're just going to keep saying these people aren't living comfortably?
Scholarly assertions don't mean anything when it comes to how the law is enforced and how businesses treat it.
You'll never escape the fact that businesses will not pay unskilled, replaceable labor more than they can get away with.
Only 2% of workers make MW.
You don't even know what efficiency means besides hoping no one will press you to elucidate an umbrella term instead of using it as some cognitive kill switch to make your argument sound more eloquent than it is.
Two literal questions:
1. So how much will you tolerate within any system
2. which society is presently treating it the best compared to how we are treating it?
Last edited:
Whats the point of a minimum wage if you're just going to keep saying these people aren't living comfortably?
Scholarly assertions don't mean anything when it comes to how the law is enforced and how businesses treat it.
You'll never escape the fact that businesses will not pay unskilled, replaceable labor more than they can get away with.
Only 2% of workers make MW.
You don't even know what efficiency means besides hoping no one will press you to elucidate an umbrella term instead of using it as some cognitive kill switch to make your argument sound more eloquent than it is.
Two literal questions:
1. So how much will you tolerate within any system
2. which society is presently treating it the best compared to how we are treating it?
Considering in this discussion I'm advocating for a $10 minimum wage, and just stated that isn't enough to really live comfortably off of in any setting but by yourself or with a non dependent in a small town/rural area, I don't see your point. Would you prefer they be living more uncomfortably?
So an Ivy League law school would have no idea about how a law functions? Got it.
I understand that. I am not arguing that at all. The argument is that we should very modestly raise what they can get away with.
That's true. Many however work right above the minimum wage because they've worked at their low level job long enough to get paid 8.0 instead of 7.25.
You don't like scholarly works so I'll give you a Wikipedia link this time
Overall Labor Effectiveness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Eh in a U.S. capitalist society I would say anywhere in the range of US 1950s-1970s would be a good range.
I'd need to do more research on the subject but without looking I'd guess one or two of the Scandinavian countries
Last edited:
I'm saying that MW, by your admission just now, is not meant to be a living wage.
Quoting a contextless philosophical stance (which is merely an argument, not a policy decision or research paper) for the sake of exercise (which is what law-schools pump out) doesn't legitimize the idea anymore than saying a well-argued stance on saying chocolate is better than vanilla.
please use the quote function...i get lost with what you're replying to...just highlight and click the little "+" sign in the WYSIWYG toolbar
and yes, I just said this
OK? And?
This isn't resolving any issues besides bringing up other talking points. Whats your goal here?
I merely said that just because efficiency increased doesn't mean workers automatically get more. It'd be nice though...
This is again flawed for reasons stated here:
http://www.thecoli.com/goto/post?id=14439856#post-14439856
You mean countries like Finland/Norway with 5 million people? which equates to Philly/Dallas/Houston/ATL/SF/Boston/DC/Miami?
Or Sweden? Equating to NYC/Chicago/LA?
The USA has the 4rd largest country in the world by land size the 3rd largest population...shyt ain't just gonna level out like that across the board fam
I'm saying that MW, by your admission just now, is not meant to be a living wage.
Quoting a contextless philosophical stance (which is merely an argument, not a policy decision or research paper) for the sake of exercise (which is what law-schools pump out) doesn't legitimize the idea anymore than saying a well-argued stance on saying chocolate is better than vanilla.
please use the quote function...i get lost with what you're replying to...just highlight and click the little "+" sign in the WYSIWYG toolbar
and yes, I just said this
OK? And?
This isn't resolving any issues besides bringing up other talking points. Whats your goal here?
I merely said that just because efficiency increased doesn't mean workers automatically get more. It'd be nice though...
This is again flawed for reasons stated here:
http://www.thecoli.com/goto/post?id=14439856#post-14439856
You mean countries like Finland/Norway with 5 million people? which equates to Philly/Dallas/Houston/ATL/SF/Boston/DC/Miami?
Or Sweden? Equating to NYC/Chicago/LA?
The USA has the 4rd largest country in the world by land size the 3rd largest population...shyt ain't just gonna level out like that across the board fam
It's not at the moment but it was intended to be.
Find a dissenting opinion from a reasonable source then.
You'll live
You said efficiency was just a weasel word to thicken my argument. I pointed out that the quality of American labor as defined by those linked standards has increased but the pay has not.
I agree with that post in general. Higher taxes on the wealthy would sure go a long way towards paying for those job training programs and increased federal education subsidies no? I don't think raising minimum wage is a magic bullet in this scenario at all.
No country is comparable to the U.S. In size, population, geography, or demographics. You didn't ask me to layout a blueprint for America. Nor could I.
JahFocus CS
Get It How You Get It
Do u have any ideas of your own?
And I think its a bit dishonest to talk about how productive workers are, without acknowledging how much of that productivity boost was enabled by equipment paid for and invented by people who are NOT the workers using themWould a fast food worker be as productive with one of those old mechanical typewriter registers that go "ding" whenever the drawer opens? How much have workers invested in the tools that enable us to be more productive?
Collectivists love to speak in binary deterministic terms in which things can only change by one way. Workers can never better their station. Workers are workers, capitalists are capitalists and there is no movement or codependency between groups. Incentives, profit, capital are evil unless they are wholly given to workers (which begs the question of what business and commerce look like, if they even exist, in the collectivist's fantasy). Any accumulated wealth is evil. Etc. etc. Its no wonder collectivism has proved so successful in practice
Capitalism, like any pure economic theory, is rife with problems, which is the problem with collectivism. You guys dont look at problems and think of how to solve them. You see the world and try and logjam Marxism into every facet whether or not his theories even make sense in the context of what's going on. Get your head out of the books and enter the real world.
I have plenty ideas "of my own." Everything you're saying is completely original and has never been thought or said by anyone, ever? You don't read things that influence your ideas?
OK breh. OK. Everyone give a hand to @GinaThatAintNoDamnPuppy! for accomplishing such an amazing feat!Equipment invented by whom? Oh, that's right... other members of the working class
Everything you see in the world has been created by labor! By a worker!
I am not logjamming anything bud. Class analysis is never out of place in a class society.
My head is in the books, but also in the real world. They aren't mutually exclusive despite what anti-intellectuals of your ilk want to posit. As a working class person, I am cognizant of how my labor is exploited. How the majority of the fruits of my labor go to benefit my boss(es) (and the state), not me. And I'm not even in a low-end job, I'm in a "skilled," salaried position (so-called "middle class" or "upper middle class"). That doesn't change the relation between labor and capital.
No, it wasn't
Why would I do that?
I'm interested in using sources to create my OWN stance on things. Think Tanks won't save you Use this quote function
Why would pay increase with efficiency? Efficiency is BECAUSE of the tools, not the workers themselves
Ah, the forever nebulous "job training"
I mean...I'd support another New Deal...but... you gotta be more specific
Federal education subsides? What? You mean...just grants? more loans?
What?
You're coming to your senses
My point is to indicate that for a country our size, our social safety net is unique, imperfect, but unique.
No, it wasn't
Why would I do that?
Use this quote function
Why would pay increase with efficiency? Efficiency is BECAUSE of the tools, not the workers themselves
Ah, the forever nebulous "job training"
I mean...I'd support another New Deal...but... you gotta be more specific
Federal education subsides? What? You mean...just grants? more loans?
What?
You're coming to your senses
My point is to indicate that for a country our size, our social safety net is unique, imperfect, but unique.
FDR(paraphrased) when minimum wage was first proposed in 1933- "No company that doesn't pay living wages should employ in America"
Never said it should, you're the one who claimed workers weren't doing any better than before so raising the minimum wage was dumb. I pointed out that was wrong, like most of your arguments.
For real? Come on now; you're just arguing to argue. Those are the exact words and positions of the post you linked in agreement with. Do you not know what a subsidy is? Yes, grants, more funding. Or are you know anti federal funding for public universities because it makes people lazy or some other bullshyt?
I never said raising the minimum wage was an effective way to combat inequality.
And no one ever disagreed with you. You asked me for countries that handle their inequality well, not ones who could handle ours well.
FDR's word isn't law.
Your efficiency argument isn't supported by the claims you assert. How can you say MW should go up if efficiency goes up? Why?
Theres tons of grands.
Theres tons of loans.
If you want more, you're going to need to specify what else you think people need besides "more"
Now the lying commences
So why do you always reference other systems?
FDR's word isn't law.
Your efficiency argument isn't supported by the claims you assert. How can you say MW should go up if efficiency goes up? Why?
Theres tons of grands.
Theres tons of loans.
If you want more, you're going to need to specify what else you think people need besides "more"
Now the lying commences
So why do you always reference other systems?
No he was just the driving force behind the law so obviously that wasn't its intent.
If a worker is doing better work he shouldn't be paid more? That's your stance here?
I do not want more loans. Grants would be good, just increasing the funding of public universities on a state and federal level would be better. You know about the crazy cost of college correct? This isn't even a part of our discussion. I agree with a solution in a post you link to show me I'm "wrong" and somehow suddenly that's a dumb solution that needs to be more specific.
Where did I say that raising the minimum wage was the way to solve income inequality? Please show me.
Maybe because you asled me specifically to do so?
I wondered how someone could be the WOAT in damn near half the forums of the site, now I know.
