“Honestly this bickering about the taxes would simply go away if the income disparity went away. Pay us more, we don't need the social programs as much. Pay us more, we could spend more. Just pay us more. It's so simple.”
xpt2wndj on Nov 29, 2011 at 10:22:00
“Where does the money come from to pay you more?? And why do you deserve more has production improved? Your group calls business greedy when they raise prices what do you call labor when they demand more??? A union
Zabbadu start a business and then you can be paid as much as you want less what the government steals in the form of taxes and regulations. But alas you are either not smart enough to run a business or you are too lazy, which is it??”
slocomgp on Nov 29, 2011 at 10:12:26
“Jobs for those not getting paid wouldn't hurt either.”
Bigspot on Nov 29, 2011 at 10:10:58
“Just pay us.
The root of the problem. Pay you for what? If you want paid, a job may be in order.
The income disparity is going up because too many zero's are being figured into the equation. Raise your zero, don't take mine.
Its like schoolwork trying and failing is better than doing nothing and getting a -0-.”
The Notorious PDF on Nov 29, 2011 at 10:06:08
“Exactly. These self-loathing 99%ers who support the plutocrats are something else.”
“"It is amazing how therapeutic a little creature can be."
It's true. Those of us who are fortunate enough to spend our lives in the company of such wonderful, giving animals know how true that statement is. My partner and I can barely handle leaving ours alone as long as we do everyday and can't wait to get home to them after work. They light up our lives in a way that is truly magical.”
“The economy needs lots of goods to be bought and sold all the time.
Right now, we have a large majority of the population who are unemployed, and another large percentage who are holding onto their money in case their employers decide to favor their upper executives and issue layoffs (while rewarding those executives with obscene bonuses, etc), and a very small percentage of people who are insanely paid who have no need to purchase the massive numbers of products that need to be bought and sold in order to keep the economy moving.
My favorite example is the mattress. Each person needs only one, max, right? A millionaire or billionaire needs only one, just like a middle- or lower- salary earner. The only ones currently able to purchase a mattress are the higher earners. But they only need one. However, there are millions of people who need one mattress each who cannot afford to buy one. Now, add all the other big ticket items that need to be bought and sold in order to keep the economy moving.
I know it's crazy, but it seems to me that one of the answers to this is to pay the bottom earners more (keep in mind I am not advocating paying the execs nothing .. just less) so that those millions of people can purchase the goods and keep the economy moving.”
“Hey Gomer, will you and your corporate cronies be happy when corporations be happy when the citizens of this country are so poor that no one can purchase those goods your corporate buddies are producing? Will that just pleas the piss out of you and your cronies? 'cause that's the way this country is heading : only the rich will be able to purchase anything. And they don't seem to be buying anything but luxury items. You and your cronies must just be giggling your way to your jets as you fly above us.
“Loved this article!
I, too, am afflicted and sometimes mocked. Not for being red/ginger, mind you.
My hair has gone from a nice sort of auburn brown to a flesh color, as it slowly disappeared from my head.
Thank goodness it still grows just about every other place on my body. (Yes, there is endured mockery for that, too, thank you back hair, ear hair, finger and toe hair).
I have always found solace in the amount of time and money saved because I get to shave my own head instead of having to make awkward conversation at the barber/salon. And washing my head is so easy and cheap! Plus, I no longer have to dry my hair either.
Nowadays, I look down on the haired people as "less than".
I pity the souls who are enslaved by the dead cells that dangle from their head. They spend so much time caring for it. It's sad, really.
Aardvaark on Aug 12, 2011 at 15:51:17
“Ahh, yes, male pattern baldness. We end up with more hair on our bodies even though our head is bald or balding.”
“It's always the way it happens. And for the life of me, I don't understand why. The ones who make the most, who therefore would make the largest impact on the bottom-line remain while the ones who earn the least and (AND!!) who do everything that makes the executives all their money (meaning : make sure the products work, provide customer support, etc) lose out.
It boggles my common sense mind.
Executives who just sit behind a desk. go on golfing trips with other executives (filing their hundred-dollar expense reports, etc etc fricking etc) continue to rake in the dough.
I don't get this country at all. AT ALL!”
Brandon26pdx on Jul 22, 2011 at 19:28:43
“It's the nature of power structures. The King does nothing but call the shots...he's the King.”
ktchvl on Jul 22, 2011 at 15:35:57
“As the article says, those at the top have connections. They stick together. Scroo everyone else.”
“Hey banks : be responsible for yourselves and your customers! We put our money in your hands for a paltry return in the form of interest. Then you invest it at your risk, which ends up being our risk. Where else does such lousy customer service continue to exist?
“"So it stands to reason that a massive assault against our system of public education has been a priority of modern conservatism during this era of incomprehensible austerity.
For Republicans, education and intellectualism is the enemy of their wafer-thin bumper-sticker marketing strategy, and so denying people an affordable education has become a matter of survival for the Republican Party. An uninformed voter can be manipulated by sloganeering and trickery. A smarter voter is more likely to see through shallow appeals to fear and transparently deceptive marketing schemes."
I've been saying this for years! It's nice to be validated.
Just keep 'em dumb is the republican way.”
zardinuk on Jul 6, 2011 at 15:41:35
“Hmmm, maybe it will help you if I tell you how I see things (conservative here). I don't trust public education anymore. It's daycare for all of society and I can't do anything to improve it at all, it's been unionized, politicized, all that. So, what are my options? I can't afford private school, my wife has her masters degree in elementary education and she will be staying home doing at-home learning. The internet, I think, is going to revolutionize education and I want to be on the cutting edge. I think it'd be great if I could get a voucher and choose the private school that best fit my wants, but the democrats and the teachers union seem to be the greatest obstacle. Do you have kids? Can you relate to this?”
pat47 on Jul 6, 2011 at 15:26:33
“"An uninformed voter can be manipulated by sloganeering and trickery."
I agree. "Hope. Change you can believe in" is a prime example.”
“I have so many things to say about this it's difficult to know where to begin.
I'll start with this : it's too difficult to calculate the median pay of non-executive pay? Get real! Excel can do that for you! I'm sure their payroll provider can do it. Hell, I'm sure a fifth grader can do it. Is the complaint that it's too difficult for execs to calculate the number? That I might be able to believe. How about delegate the task to one of those non-execs. I'm sure they could even do it.
The problem is that all those free market lovers have price-fixed the middle class' pay, while allowing the market to define the executives' pay. Ever gone in to ask for a raise and you're told "well, you are making what the market says people in your position make. Sorry."
Until the price-fixing stops, this will continue forever.”
dgrube5 on Jun 27, 2011 at 16:10:36
“Ummm...how can I put this? Prior to the unions, workers controlled what they made. The unions created "Pay-scales"....check it out. A union worker cannot, by contract negotiated by their union, negotiate a higher rate of pay for themselves....even if their output is twice as high as their co-worker.
Place blame where it belongs.”
MikeRubin2 on Jun 27, 2011 at 15:25:38
“Don't let these corporatists fool you. In my adult life, I've worked for three Fortune 1000's (one of them a Fortune 100 with one of the highest exec-to-staff pay multiples in world history). Each one of those companies benchmarked both its rank-and-file and executive compensation relative to the industry. (It was mostly because they want to compensate execs at 75th percentile, while being sure not to compensate rank-and-file at not over 50th percentile.) All of that salary and burdened-cost data IS sitting there right now, ready to be used in a simple math calc just as you suggested.
And speaking of price-fixing for labor, have you seen that the execs of some Silicon Valley household name corporations currently are under investigation for cartelizing labor consumption by agreeing not to solicit one another's employees? Next time a Bagger jerk tells you that we don't need unions because everyone should go out and sell him or herself at the market rate and, if he or she has something to offer, there will be an employer willing to pay the asking price, respond "ummmm, no."”