Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Equal pay: everyone should receive equal pay

Posted 8 years ago on Dec. 3, 2011, 10:24 a.m. EST by FriendlyObserverA (610)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Regardless of trade or profession everyone should receive equal pay. To do otherwise could be considered Discrimination.

All jobs are important and should be paid equally.

The CEO and janitor should make equal pay.

522 Comments

522 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 6 points by Kickinthenuts (212) 8 years ago

Eh, there will be no CEOs if the pay is equal to a janitor. There will be no business owners if their pay is equal to their employees. There will be no school superintendents or principals if their pay is equal to the teachers. The patients would be running the asylum.

[-] 1 points by Nanook (172) 8 years ago

The example you picked, CEO vs. janitor, is actually a confusing one because it raises so many complications. Here's an easier one: janitor vs. janitor.

What causes the concept of equal compensation for all to fall apart is that it fails to address: A.) human nature, and B.) the complexity of labor needs.

In the case of two janitors doing the same job in the same place, under conditions where there aren't enough janitors to meet the need, what MOTIVATES them to work hard? This is what destroyed all the experiments with socialism.

Or, take the case of two companies in the same geography. One is a long way out in the country, requires night shift work, and involves hazardous chemical clean up. The second is downtown, marble floors and great cafeteria, day time, with a library to hide in and gym. Why would anyone take the first job instead of the second?

As for the CEO job, I'd take that in a heartbeat, assign all my work to other people, and spend my afternoons out sailing ( with "customers" of course :-) (that's what I meant by complications). On second thought, I'll pass on the CEO spot and just take the sailing instructors job.

There is a lot more about human nature and motivation at http://A3society.org on the 7 Deadly Sins tab ( and no, these 7 Deadly Sins don't have anything to do with religion. )

[-] 0 points by utahdebater (-72) 8 years ago

Ya, cuz that's all CEO's do. Are you f'ing kidding me? With this level of intelligence I'm not surprised everyone views OW as a joke.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I could find a hundred people that would become CEO. With equal pay good people will rise to the top.

[-] 0 points by Kickinthenuts (212) 8 years ago

You might find some who have no idea what they are getting into initially. Once they realize the demands and risks of performing the function of a CEO. Within days he/she will want the janitors job if the the pay is equal. Good luck with that one.

[-] 0 points by theaveng (602) 8 years ago

I don't know what "equal pay" this dope has in mind, but I suspect it would mean I'd have to take a paycut from my current $60/hour engineering wage.

Needless to say - that's bullshit. I worked 5 years to earn two college degrees, and I'm performing a job that is stressful. If I had to take a cut to, say, a truck driver's salary of $20/hour I would no longer continue being an engineer.

It isn't worth the effort of 5 years education, or the headaches of designing products with tight schedules, to work for a mere $20 per hour. In other words FriendlyObserver: Shove your idea up your shit-filled ass

.

[-] 1 points by EndGluttony (507) 8 years ago

That college degree still left you dumb enough to take this post seriously.

[-] 0 points by theaveng (602) 8 years ago

Yeah silly me to think a person might be a Communist who wants equal pay for everyone. What the hell was I thinking? Communists don't exist in the real world.

(That was sarcasm by the way.)

[-] 1 points by EndGluttony (507) 8 years ago

You read that and thought it was real? Only if you're an idiot or have such a skewed view of the world that you think people really believe what that guy wrote. You've been duped by Fox News and the like into thinking "liberals" are some kind of spectral monster akin to a werewolf or vampire. YOU FUCKING IDIOT.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

if we raised everyones pay all the way to the highest level of pay .. that would be equal pay ..

5 years of training in the new system would all be paid for at equal pay .. and the stress of tight schedules will have relaxed due to the fact everyone is now working and contributing .. and not just you..

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 8 years ago

@ FOA : Whether or not you are an 'agent provocateur' or not ... your post was certainly meant to provoke .. and 'boy' Did It !!!

Good Work as it's become an interesting Troll Flushing Exercise !!

BTW, I self-identify as 'Socialist' and I don't even agree with you, lol !

pax et lux ...

[-] 1 points by SGSling (104) 8 years ago

If you raised everybody to the highest level of pay it would just devalue currency. It doesn't matter if the national salary is 1000000$/hour. If you can make that picking up garbage, why bother going to school and learning a trade?

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Think about what you just said

[-] 1 points by SGSling (104) 8 years ago

I did. I don't think you did when reading it.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I am starting to doubt American honor

[-] 1 points by SGSling (104) 8 years ago

Well if you have a point to make then make it. Don't just try to say I am not thinking and act cryptic.

[-] 0 points by Kickinthenuts (212) 8 years ago

You understand his scenario perfectly. Doesn't matter what what your education, experience, responsibility, or skills. Everybody is paid the same. Think he's actually a lurked who tries to stir up trouble. He like a guy named turak in some other posts. Just posts things to get a reaction....

[-] -1 points by theaveng (602) 8 years ago

So basically he's a stupid twit.

I wish I could just say, "Well he's only one guy," but I've seen a lot of these posts coming out of the Occupy movement. And the Democrat Party. And moveon.org and ACORN and Tides Foundation. Why do they think they are entitled to set MY value as a laborer, or limit me to low $20/hour wages like everyone else???

[+] -5 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

but you have no evidence to support your conclusion.

here is an example.

equal pay vs not equal pay.

a principal of non equal pay , on a higher pay level will not want to give up his position .. even if he knows he is doing poorly and no one likes his performance .. but in an equal pay society he would step aside and let someone else give it a try .. and with this the best suited candidate will arrive.

[-] 3 points by Kickinthenuts (212) 8 years ago

Eh, yes I have evidence. Having lived corporate life and owned my own business, no one will perform the additional responsibilities without additional compensation. Try it. Go ask your employer for more responsibilities and tell them you want no additional compensation. Your employer will gladly accept your proposition. See how long you are happy. Good luck!

[-] -2 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

in a world of equal pay there will be no employers" .. that is the old way .. equal pay will only work in a socialist style world ..

[-] 2 points by Kickinthenuts (212) 8 years ago

Ah, well there you go, "a socialist style world". Worked pretty well in eastern Europe huh. Produced a lot of drunks and lazy people. BTW, the employer becomes the government. Think it through before you say it. I know your mother told you to let your brain engage before your mouth. Take her advice.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

the evidence is all around us as to how well capitalism works .. or should I say "never did work." Clearly you do not see that greed has no consideration for overall concern of anyone but its recipient. at least with a socialist style system we will share the wealth of the community evenly .. it won't be piled up in some sociopaths basement. .. btw which is really of not the true concern .. this is not a vendetta against all the people who caused this suffering .. it is instead a view of a brighter future that eliminates suffering.. a future where yes even the greedy will find a place in it where their gifts to the world will have a greater use than they do now .

[-] 0 points by Kickinthenuts (212) 8 years ago

Where does the money come from in your scenario?

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

In my scenario. Money is more like a credit earned. And there is no limit to how many credits one can earn. It is simply a number. If you work 5 hrs you will receive 5 hour credits. The only limit is how many hours you work. And this is the same for everyone. Credits are given for every hour of training or actual work and it is all credited according to time. Time is equal for everyone. An hour coin is universal world wide. Every nation uses the hour clock. An hour coin represents an hours of time worked. This gives the hour coin intrinsic value. It is not based on gold but rather on time. Now think of the possibilities. Our labor force will be completely unleashed to achieve greatest potential. Now the tricky part is how the credit expires. Basically when orchards are made the credit expires. A rudimentary example. An automobile takes 2500 hours to build. When you purchase the automobile , 2500 credits will be removed from your account and it goes nowhere it is simply erased. The people who built the car were already paid with the hour coin credit system. It's difficult to articulate this. Because there are many questions to answer. Try to understand the difference between the limits we have today. And how an hour coin system would remove these limits. Everyone would have opportunity. Because we would now have a money system of unlimited budget.

[-] 1 points by forOWS (161) 8 years ago

I have posted a similar idea only using points on a card with a magnetic strip. Not a credit card. This card would be used to swipe in and out of your work. This is how you would earn your points for the work you do. Say I'm getting paid 10.00 dollars an hour and I just worked an 8 hour day. So I just earned my 80 points by using my point card to swipe in to work and swipe out at the end of my day. And the same card would be used to make your purchases. The point system would be based on the current cash system. So if I am earning a monthly salary of 3200 dollars then I would have earned 3200 points. And it is not a doubling here. I have posted this and people say it is an "absurd" idea. It is not anymore absurd than when CEOs of large successful companies pay themselves 400 million a year. I think that the people who react this way are afraid that they will lose their "cash money". Not true. Any "money" they already have in their banks is equal to points. Say some greedy old guy has 650,000 in cash in the bank. No one is going to take that away. He not only has his cash but he has his points equal to the amount of cash he has in the bank. People react in fear and don't try to understand or see any other way. They are completely ignorant and close-minded. I seriously believe that if we let the money-changers of this world bring us to another total economic collapse that most PEOPLE WILL NOT accept being forced out of their homes, their jobs and made to stand in bread lines. A point system of pay would let people keep going to work and make a living and keep what they have worked hard for. Cash money, contrary to what the super-capitalists believe and want us to believe, is not god.

[-] 0 points by utahdebater (-72) 8 years ago

You sound a lot like Karl Marx right now. Your society would only exist in a perfect world where the human factor did not exist. different levels of work deserve different levels of pay. If I design a computer that changes the world I want higher compensation for that than a janitor who cleans my bathroom.

[-] 0 points by Kickinthenuts (212) 8 years ago

What do you buy the automobile with?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Are you jerking my chain ?

[-] 0 points by Kickinthenuts (212) 8 years ago

No, I'm simply trying to understand your example; and, your idea.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Keep trying

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by Kickinthenuts (212) 8 years ago

Now we are getting somewhere. Your silly little idea has caused someone to call you out on it. Clearly your silly little idea has no merit and that is what really disturbs you. Post again when you have something real.

[-] 1 points by Pottsandahalf (141) 8 years ago

Dude why are you still arguing? Everything that you said has made no sense!

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 8 years ago

Principal is responsible for more than the teachers. Who's to choose the best candidate?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

kiggscrossdresser .. I just realized something with the last comment you wrote .. you aint welcome here .. so beat it..

[-] 0 points by kingscrossection (1203) 8 years ago

Oh thats wonderful. Last thing I'll say is that if no one gets compensation then no one wants to do anything extra.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 8 years ago

I've suggested that it would be truly interesting to construct living models of the various forms of government of which people claim no actual models exist, or ever existed.

It is interesting to see the left coast group find out how true democracy fails for the same exact reasons common sense, logic and history states it will.

Doing so, would be better to observe than reality TV, while likely proving a very useful learning tool.

It would also give several groups something useful to do during the cold months.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

proving something will faill .. there is a lot of that going around .. it is much more difficult to prove something will work ..

democracy like many ideas works best when mixed together like does concrete .. many alloys are stronger when combined ..

my point being democracy has its purpose and should not be thrown off the table

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 8 years ago

Well make you your mind, do you want to prove democracy or socialism?

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

socialism with democracy .. I want the people involved and in control all the way

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 8 years ago

Any and all, or do you purpose any prerequisites or standards?

For instance, does Sarah Palin's Downs Syndrome child have a say?

Do the Three Stooges?

Otis the Town Drunk?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

democracy is a prerequisite.. someone with downsyndrome .. would have the same basic needs as anyone else .. they will receive equal pay ..what they will do is another thing.. any suggestions ?

[-] -1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 8 years ago

Democracy has never worked anywhere.

The intelligent and capable minority become anchored by the opposite majority.

Yet still manage to cleverly devise schemes to extract wealth without working.

You see, originally, our nation had a prerequisites to participate in the people's government of a democratic replublic. It's long since gone to the wayside resulting in elected servants who ignore masses of their constituents because they, in many cases rightfully so, regard them as dolts and/or inepts.

Seriously, stupid enough to buy into their bs and vote them in office!

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

Look into pluralism

[-] 0 points by Supplysider (53) from Richboro, PA 8 years ago

As an engineer, I have skills that many others don't and demand a higher pay in exchange, if given the option for equal pay, what if too many of us decide to do something else besides what is needed? Will I be forced to be an engineer or will someone with lesser skills be given my duties since I am no longer willing to do them for equal pay, and what happens when someone dies because of the lowered quality? Better put a little more thought into this one.

and if the people choose capitalism, then what? Oh wait, we already have. Find a nice European socialist country to occupy.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I truly understand your argument.. you feel because you are well trained and have worked hard to gain what you have , there for you deserve more..

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 8 years ago

The answer is simple. They will force you to do the job.

[-] 0 points by Supplysider (53) from Richboro, PA 8 years ago

Yup, most likely. I would much prefer to work in my garden and I can tell you, after OWS has confiscated more money from the 1%, I know that I would be their next target, at which point I will simply quit working and live off the land that I have and no longer pay to support anyone but my family.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 8 years ago

You will have to pay tax on that land.

[-] 1 points by MichaelB (128) 8 years ago

You have no evidence to show your system would even work. As for stepping aside if you weren't good at your job, that doesn't really follow, there are a lot of people that are poor at their job that stay with it because they don't realize they aren't good or they are too proud to give it up. Socializing pay seems like the ultimate in "dumbing down" the system. You want something different you have to prove it would work first.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

yes but in a society if someone is not up to performance for a specific task that person should be replaced .. agree?

so this would be one more necessary function .. along with equal pay

[-] 1 points by MichaelB (128) 8 years ago

I couldn't start to agree with bits and pieces of a system I don't know any details about. Governments have a very poor record of planning an economy. Socialism hasn't worked anywhere ever. People are different and always want more then what they have, they'll want to do that by working more and getting more from their labor.

[-] -2 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

a person with an imagination .. automatically sees the glass half full .. they look at the positive .. for the positive ..

on a cold day if I handed you a match .. would you be greatful you can now start a fire and keep warm , or would you throw the match down and say it doesn't work .. ?

[-] 3 points by TLydon007 (1278) 8 years ago

Horrible idea.

I know of nobody at any Occupy that either advocates this or supports it in any way.

[-] 3 points by Censored (138) 8 years ago

Investing in school, working hard, and trying hard to find a way to add value is way too much of a hassle. Could I just get paid what everyone else does without bothering with that stuff? That'd be great.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

well if you don't try hard you will fall to the bottom and get the " undesired work" but of course at equal pay

[-] 1 points by MichaelB (128) 8 years ago

So there is work people don't want to do in your system? Somehow you make them do it for the same pay as punishment? What happens if they decide to mess it up, do they still get paid?

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

As an intelligent kind individual I would never force anyone to do something I would not do ... they will have a choice .. and under any circumstance .. we the intelligent race will make all jobs function reasonably well .. apply more people in difficult situations .. this is all quite further along in the studies .. but none the less important..

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 8 years ago

I want a job as a rocket surgeon, is that a job you can do? Or would do?

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I can not .. but I will not force you .. it will be your choice .. perhaps I would have a look at it from a distance with interest .. but that would probably be all .. and I would admire to hear your results

[-] 1 points by MichaelB (128) 8 years ago

In the end it doesn't matter, nothing is likely to change in the near future, too many people are content with things as they are. Too many people in the country have jobs, are spending, maybe they are even content. Your plan dooms the half making more than average to a pay cut, and tells everyone there would be no chance of advancing or reward for achievement.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

michaelb , ..in the end it does matter ..

[-] 1 points by Censored (138) 8 years ago

I'd like a desk job or one walking around a park where no one hassles me, I have short hours and no stress. Yeah, and one where people love me.

I swear, we've produced a generation of 20-somethings so poorly educated, so detached from reality, so enmeshed in entitlement that this thread is actually taken seriously. Geesh, we're in trouble.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

why is it that the educated people on this site have a hard time with new ideas?

If it's not written down in some book somewhere than it doesn't work . is that your theory?

[-] 2 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

FOA: "I am going to jump off this cliff and fly like a bird."

Me: "Ummm, I wouldn't recommend that. You will simply crash to bits on the rocks below."

FOA: "Why is it that you have a hard time with new ideas?"

Me: "Well, it is because I have a basic understanding of gravity, and of the effect of blunt forces on human tissue. Also, I have a rudimentary knowledge of history; look down there, you can see many other broken bodies on those rocks."

FOA: "Geronimooooo...."

[-] 1 points by Censored (138) 8 years ago

It isn't the newness, because they aren't new. It's the crackpot-ness. We've always had people that want prosperity via having government take it from someone else. We'd also had the collectivists too with the hippies in California during the 60s. Hard work is, well, hard work. It's appealing to some to find a short-cut around having talent, investing in yourself, finding something of value to do, and then applying yourself.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 8 years ago

that actually makes sense. your idea, in theory, might make people work hard not for money, but for the admiration of their peers, which would be the new currency. but you have to factor in that some people work hard and hold to their convictions despite people's lack of respect. i believe Kochs don't give two shits about what the critics think. that is how his daddy got to where they are. i believe capitalism works when the majority believe in the rule of law, but fails when uncertainty plagues US.

[-] -2 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

capitalism , as discussed in other posts , is a monarchy system .. that needs to be ridden of. your idea of working for admiration .. is a possibility , but the incentive I pointed out in previous comment was the incentive to achieve the job you would like to have .

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 8 years ago

but for people to get the job they would like to have takes time, money, commitment and service. most people would rather just start a family, and I an't knocking them i just don't believe they should get paid the same as the latter.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

yes .. but what isn't mentioned is this : the equal wage will also apply to training. So all training will be paid an equal wage . this will eliminate the burden of expense we see today which has impeded progress.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 8 years ago

that is a good point, and to make sure i'm understanding properly, you are saying that the equal wage would be at a living standard compatible with the price of living. if it takes a single mother working three jobs to supply her children subsidence then what she brings home for the three jobs would be how much she makes at one. and then it would go up as education, service, commitment and loyalty go up.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

the equal wage will be an hourly rate same for everyone regardless of profession or duty .. if for example a woman works ten hours , she receives ten hours pay .. if a man works ten hours he receives ten hours pay .. if he works four hours than he receives four hours pay .. if he sits at home all day than he receives nothing .. how he decides to spend his pay is his choice .. education and training will be paid at the same hourly pay as wages .. choose your own career but in the end all careers pay the same hourly wage .. this creates the equal balance of living for everyone and everyone has equal opportunity .. the decision remains with them .. how many hours per day they work as to their financial gain .. but the choice of their career is where their happiness will come from ..

[-] 3 points by JenLynn (692) 8 years ago

So what! Life never has been fair. We can't have everything we want so we have priorities, some things become more valuable then others. The discrimination starts with us making choices. As long as people believe some things are worth more then others, then some jobs will be worth more then others. Pay everyone the same and everyone will work with the same effort, that is next to no effort at all.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 8 years ago

My AMC Pacer is worth the same as your Ferrari. Seriously!

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 8 years ago

No car yet, someday, but it'll be something that is reliable and lasts. I'm too careless to care about anything much more then does it go vroom vroom when you turn the key.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 8 years ago

I've heard about people that didn't own vehicles. It's almost an abstract concept to me as I grew up in a different time, and likely place, than you.

I stopped counting cars after thousands of them. Same for 2 wheeled rides.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

can you prove your theory.. a room full of people all day long doing nothing will become irritable and impatient .. give them something to do and they feel better .. for you to think everyone will sit down and do nothing all day long I find very hard to fathom

[-] 1 points by commonsense6676 (16) 8 years ago

go check the Indian reservation in Arizona. seriously! they have all the time in the world only about 99% doing anything extra. really I'm not kidding I spent two months down there its really sad. you may be that way with time on your hands but most people play not work. they have to be taught to work.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

there are other reasons for their behaviour .. psychological reasons .. you would not understand.. if a fair society were developed of equality .. i believe you would see a change in their behaviour... even some of the vagabonds on the street are their because the system is just to iverwhelminly unfair .. but a fair equal system would encourage effort from them too.

[-] 1 points by commonsense6676 (16) 8 years ago

there are alot of stories in america of people working there way up from the street through hard work. thats pretty fair! no other country really offers that... this country is about as fair as they get with equal rights. the difference is you have the right to work hard and make a living. can't do that in india, the still have sects that do not allow a person to even exceed beyond their poverty just because they were born in it.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

thanks for the comment.

here we have students who drop out of a free education system .. why? .. they find the future looks hopeless.

[-] 1 points by commonsense6676 (16) 8 years ago

I don't get free education. I pay for it out of my own pocket. I know I will have a job when I get out because my field is in demand. I have seen people get out of college and have no job because that field dropped off the side of the earth. its unfortunate that, that happens. I think if we had less government, and taxes there would be more jobs. but I'm not an economist either...

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

sounds like india would not be a place I would like to be born into .. what of strangers that move there .. what class do they fall under ?

[-] 1 points by commonsense6676 (16) 8 years ago

you should watch some videos of it on youtube. I'm not sure about strangers, I don't know anyone who moved there, just a few from there.

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 8 years ago

I've gone into stores where they think I'm not going to buy and the sales people seem pretty good at doing nothing. Seriously though, I didn't mean people would just vegetate all day at work, they simply wouldn't put much effort in. Places that pay on commission get more out of their employees. These employees don't all earn the same, more effort means better pay.

Why put in the effort to do something more difficult if your reward is going to be the same as everyone else? It's basic in most animals, when effort gets you a reward you put in more effort. You're making all rewards equal and not requiring any effort. I'll get my pay no matter what I do or how hard I work at it. It's a system designed to give you mediocrity at best. I guess it would give you equality though, everyone would end up being equally unhappy with it.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I think part of the problem why people today do not achieve .. or why students drop out is because of the unfair pay rates.

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 8 years ago

You say something like that and the first half of your sentence doesn't fit with the second. If achievement is rewarded people will try to achieve. No reward, no effort. I see it in pass-fail courses, no real effort, you know 99% or 70% you get the same grade, why study hard?

Good grades, good major (one that meets an employer's needs) give you a chance for a good job. The pay is the reward you're after in this case. Doctors go to college, medical school, have to continue taking courses to keep their license all their professional life. Lives depend on their skill and knowledge. The guy that holds the go slow sign at a construction site could be replaced by a bucket of sand. No way are they of equal value. To pay them the same you might just as well tell everyone with an education they are useless.

The kids I've known that dropped out would be prefect for your plan, they never wanted to really do anything at all. No effort in school, some ended up repeating a year then they left when they started to feel weird around younger kids in class failing again because they still never did anything.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

ahh but achievment will be rewarded ..

in a world where we actually do have equal pay .. there will be no private enterprise , or employers .. it's socialism honey .. a collective system.

and those who get good grades get good jobs .. well maybe there is no incentive for you .. or maybe little johny doesn't enjoy school and would rather hold a stop sign [which is a hard job out there all day .. would you want to do that or continue in school , your choice? ] but I think we will still find incentives even at equal pay.. the big incentive when you see the whole picture is a world away from the one we have today .. where there is greed and coruptin and 2 billion living on less than 2 dollars per day .. most people would have trouble sleeping at night if that was suddenly outside their front door .. I know I could never live in one of those poverty stricken places .. with the open trenches and tin one room .. whatever they are .. could you ? well thats reality honey .. every one wants to look at reality .. there it is . equal pay would change all that .. and you are complaining about ..what?

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 8 years ago

It has never worked. It requires people not to be what they are. We are competitive and have a strong sense of self worth. This alone can cause your idea to fail.

Just as an example you refer to me as "honey". Is it just a slip, or is it an attempt to make me and my ideas feel inferior? Doesn't matter, either way you believe we're different. You can't have all outcomes be the same when you have so many different people. In your society I wouldn't be valuable, because I'd oppose it. My actions would lead the state to do something different with me.

Socialism can only have the appearance of success where you have a military or police group willing to enforce central control, once you relax that people go back to normal.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Let's try from the begining.

Imagine I offer you this: I will pay an equal hourly wage for everyone . And I will pay this equal wage for all education and work. You may choose any career you wish and I will pay you anequal hourly wage for all your training.. and when you complete your training I will pay you the same equal hourly wage regardless of what profession/career you choose.

What are your thoughts on this , ..honey ?

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 8 years ago

Now you are established as a patronizing asshole. So on top of that you are a filthy marxist promoting the most murderous system in history. Why not just come out of the closet and admit you are a dirtbag Red wanting to hand this country over to an even worse tyranny ?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

you have such a way with words.. are you a novelist ? the prose flows great .. bang bang dead on

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 8 years ago

You really can't operate on a conversational level, can you? Never mind, you've already admitted I'm right on the mark.

This is getting too easy......

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

glad to hear that .. peace brother

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

what if things were the opposite , what if the whole world was using the equal pay system and you come along and say .. you want more ? everyone receives an equal hourly pay , but you want more than the next person ? where does this end ? who do we dicide is worth more than others ? on merit on performance on natural ability .. soon everything would be " uneven " you would have more but .. "sally" would have less .. it would create an unfair system of inequality .. some would have it all and others nothing ... your idea is totally unbalanced and unfair .. creates poverty and chaos .. and eventually .. WAR ..

What if I told you with this equal pay aspect of a much larger idea .. we could develop a world system where we remove all poverty .. completly unleash the entire workforce .. provide opportunity for everyone.. and best allow mankinds full potential to thrive and flourish ! but we need equal pay to get there to accomplish such a system .. of total equality where everyone lives harmonious and develops each individual life to its best without interference .

would you than consider equal pay as a viable alternative?

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 8 years ago

First this isn't the "what if" world you made up. What we get paid comes from someone that decides what something is worth to him. An employer wants something done and offers a wage for that work. If he can't get anyone he can try to offer more. Some jobs are going to be harder then others and are worth more because of that.

If I risk more, know more, work harder, then I want the value of what I think is in my effort. If someone else works less or coasts and gets the same it tells me any effort is useless. Your society tells people it isn't necessary to put in any effort, that society is going to fail. Worst class I took in college the prof told us at the end of the semester that we'd all get an A. Everyone that worked felt like a fool. If he had told us at the beginning no one would have worked, but it hurts to know there were many that got the reward for no effort, it made the grade meaningless.

This new system you mention requires throwing out everything we know and trying something new and untested. Governments have a very poor record of organizing an economy. I'd have to see it work on a national scale first and I wouldn't want to be the one experimented on.

Socialism failed in the old USSR, China has a bigger economic inequality between rich and poor then the US does. Socialist countries end up slipping in bits of capitalism and private ownership to make things work better.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

there again .. this could be because you do not know the whole complete system.. you are only focusing on equal pay as a negative .

to add to this equal pay , as many are concerned with who will work less and who will work harder .. isn't fair to those. But consider there is more to this .. for example .. even with equal pay there will be challenges .. and with pay for all training this builds the skills we need in socirty with ne expense to the individual .. eliminating the barriers of freedom of growth as we now have .. sure in the new system there will be highly skilled and highly trained individuals .. but they will be there by choice and will have been paid for for all their effort of training .. so example someone may recieve a low score over anothers high score .. the individual with the high score will receive the position .. the incentive here becomes one career outcome.. there is need of all positions .. not just highly skilled .. but all positions require equal time .. to perform and will be paid equal pay for equal time

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 8 years ago

You're in effect showing me a black box and telling me it will solve all our problems if I just buy it. Make that system of your work somewhere then come back and show us the results. Being in a minority doesn't make you wrong, but it does shift a certain burden of proof on you when you want everything changed. You can't force so convince. Show us where it works, don't just promise it will.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Christopher Columbus had a difficult time crossing the ocean with threats of mutiny .. I often admire his patience with his crew !

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

Interesting example. Christopher Columbus paid his master seamen 2000 marvedis per month, able seamen 1000 marvedis per month, ordinary seamen 666 marvedis per month. If he had tried a equal-pay system I suspect his masters and able seamen would have put him overboard.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 8 years ago

You need to read some history.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

read history ? .. I plan to make history !

[-] 3 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

the doctor has to train for how long? the janitor has to train for how long? the man who hauls explosives in his truck over ice roads is risking his life rather than being a janitor? who would do dangerous jobs or complicated jobs when they could just be a janitor need no education take no risk and get the same reward?

[Deleted]

[-] 2 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

ok I chose flag man on road crew and I won't be coming to work today I like Vodka too much, have fun with the traffic in the road project today with me drunk and at home.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

dude get a grip on reality, you avoid answering the hard questions, and resort to attacks? I don't drink, at all for the record

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

but you are not playing, you do not answer even the first question, you not playing ok

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

teach me O great one

[-] 2 points by FirstLight (21) 8 years ago

Somebody needs to go read about the Russian revolution and all that followed in the aftermath through present day. Power and greed always triumph; we humans simply have not evolved far beyond prehistoric man and not likely to do so for eons to come.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

power and greed do not always triumph as you so boldly put it .. and we "humans" have crossed many of thresh hold to reach where we are at today ..and we are not about to give up now .. so look out power look out greed .. here we come !

[-] 2 points by tomcat68 (298) 8 years ago

fair enough, I'm down with it :)

and as it goes, the Janitor will ALSO have to work 6 months for FREE when the company is loosing money, as the owner does.

oh yea, you may also have to break out your own credit card to help keep the business running while it is in the red. take out a loan or two.

are we in?

(I know I know, I'm a Troll for considering anything that isn't bright and shiney, or for bringing someone down from a high)

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

ask the janitor..I believe the ceo of gm was making millions.. surely 6 months would be a breeze

[-] 1 points by tomcat68 (298) 8 years ago

good point, I'm sure those janitors would be more than happy :)

and if All businesses were as potentially profitable as GM once was it would be great.

I think again the Majority would suffer, then we could have the 1% janitors of GM and the like, and the 99% janitors of the taco bell franchise or larrys auto repair.

they could have their own janitor movement.

I don't think using GM is fair without reaching to the other end of the spectrum. since it WILL also apply to those people, the 99%

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

the reality is .. there will be no private enterprise in an equal pay environment. private enterprise has failed .. this is what happens when greed has control

[-] 1 points by tomcat68 (298) 8 years ago

what about the half of Americans who know it is the Cancer of this nation that has destroyed this nation? how do we make conservatives see there is no surviving the Cancer of the Democrat Liberal disease.

I'm jobless. when it comes to surviving I'll live in a communist society much like what todays' democrats want, but whatever it takes to feed my kids I will do.

it may be too late for the American dream, but if Freedom does have a breath of life left or a slight chance of hope, it will only survive if this nation can go 20 years without putting another criminal in the white house in congress and the senate.

seriously, look at the modern day democrat leader,

"We are for the Poor!" meaning "We WANT people to be poor, so we can control them".

the Democrat Bible is ~ How to Serve Man ~

make sure you understand what that means, before you end up ON their table, as the main course, for dinner

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

there is hope for a new dream , a better dream .. not something the capitalist baits you with .. but a dream of real prosperity, real freedom , and real joy.. do you think you are now free ? while working for a monarch you are not free .. would you feel better if you became the monarch and had people working for you .. that's all the american dream really is .. becoming a Monarch.

[-] 1 points by tomcat68 (298) 8 years ago

mnnnn, not my dream no. I suppose if I were rich I might hire people who needed work, providing I had work for them.

and capitalism and profit and like words are not dirty words for my generation though I DO understand the Liberals holding office today have convinced many they are, in their strive for total power, one way or another.

for me there is nothing Wrong with Capitalism and Everything wrong with Capitolisim.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

well .. you have been fed the lie .. it's really not your fault and no one blames you for being a product of your times .. but given time you will adjust and be happy ..

something interesting I just heard on the news ... most people would say they do not like traffic circles .. but once they try them they tend to like them ..

as you will like the new world .. don't be worried .. there is no pain.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 8 years ago

Private enterprise has failed? So let us replace it with?

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

private enterprise main concern is bottom line .. profits.. and with that many have suffered in its wake , including the environment. you were given a chance and your track record is deplorable .. up to and including present conditions .. so never you mind what we replace it with .. but I assure you whatever it is you won't like .. have a good evening

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 8 years ago

And free enterprise will be replaced with? I notice you have no real answer.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

it will not be replaced , it will be removed.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 8 years ago

So your system is nothing more than anarchy?

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

no , your system is anarchy .. mine is brilliant

[-] 2 points by fightingapathy (2) from Madison, WI 8 years ago

With that system, where's the motivation to work any harder than anyone else? Either in a "harder" job or just to do your job better than someone else does it? Money is an effective incentive for working hard, and if you remove it, either it needs to be replaced or the system will collapse.

[-] -3 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

equal pay is only one aspect ..

incentive could come from many areas .. but one important incentive will be .. the harder one works the more choices of jobs he will have . for example going to school studying hard and one could enjoy becoming an engineer .. to drop out of school well there goes your science degree .. now your jobs are limited to manual labour .. so this is one small example of incentive .. others will be each profession requires a limited amount .. so to maintain your position you may have to provide enough effort to achieve top performance .. otherwise .. you will demoted to a lesser position ..

equal pay merely provides an equl standard of living .. where every man can afford to enjoy the friuts of life .. even the construction worker working arduous labor will be paid equal to the engineer ... for each at the end of the day will have put in their days work and neither could do the others job more efficiently ..

[-] 1 points by Sonotows (-16) 8 years ago

You are such a freak. Get out of your mother's basement, pull your pants back up, and get the fuck back to work. What the he'll is wrong with all of you spoiled, stupid OWS idiots? If you haven't noticed, your movement has lost it's relevancy. Nobody gives a crap what you think or come up with in your horribly naive, infantile hollow skulls. Get a fucking life.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

wow .. I am impressed .. okay you can breath now ... is the movement really over ? I should go outside more .. but it's getting cold .. and mom makes good breakfast !

[-] 2 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Equal Sex For All !

The current system is grossly unfair to ugly people, and it's not their fault.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 8 years ago

hay, i have found that to be true, maybe your idea is right on.

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Yea, me too, sadly.

[-] 2 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

Everyone should have equal opportunity - for education, health care, retirement security, etc.

Labor and services should be taxed at a lower rate than investment income, because taxing them at a higher rate devalues labor and services. Tax policy should prohibit - not encourage - aristocracy and the accumulation of vast amounts of wealth.

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

why do you get the POWER to tax? how much tax did American Indians pay 500 years ago?

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

Bad metaphor.

Native American society was communal, all shared in the work, all shared in the bounty or the shortage - no one was left to starve. The concept of tax was alien, as was the concept of taking more than one needed. Those who took more than they needed were considered mentally ill.

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

and if they were leading the country and we had to live like they did where would money fit in? perhaps they had the right way of life to begin with, with no money.

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

When money has no value - coming soon to a theater near you - we may get a chance to try this out. That will be the true test of OWS - when the system fails, can the movement step up to create a new society?

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

I think it would be best if we could begin that process now, rather than waiting for the inevitable collapse. Even if only on paper, once it is fully designed and debated it can be implemented by popular vote without blood spilled, the beauty of the existing system, it can be rebuilt from the ground up by popular vote. We could add a 4th branch of government that was staffed completely by "we the people" and would have voting oversight over every new bill

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

The longer they keep propping up the failed system, the harder the fall is going to be when it all comes down.

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

should we not work on a replacement now? looking ahead...

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

That is essentially what OWS is, community organization.

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

and started by a community organizer?

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 8 years ago

Nope. Their system will simply become even more violent and oppressive than the present system.

[-] 2 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

"All jobs are important and should be paid equally. "

Does that include self-employment jobs, or would everyone have to be a wage slave? If self-employment is allowed, I will work three jobs as a self-employed fisherman, beer taster and strip club safety inspector. I will let you know where you can send my checks.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

It's an idea of achieving fairness. If it has merit we will build a balancing system

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

What is a "balancing system"?

[-] 1 points by LeandroCSD (2) 8 years ago

Just think about Karl Marx theory of surplus value. Here's the Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surplus_value

Basically, the only reason why the CEO earns more than the regular worker is because the regular worker earns much less than what his job actually costs. Thats why bank owners have millions and families have nowhere to live nowadays. I definitly defend people should earn different pay, but also that it should be equivalent to their own sweat, not by exploitations of others.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

lets just go with equal pay and call it even

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 8 years ago

You've never run a business or actually had to produce anything with your own hands/devices and then sell it to feed yourself, have you?

Are you even 16 years old?

[-] 1 points by screwtheman (122) 8 years ago

If I can make the same pay at a low stress job like a cashier why would I do something that would keep me under constant stress for the same pay. People are inherently lazy and will always do the least amount for the most gain. We need a structure where the harder and more stressful jobs make more money.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I would forsee a huge falling away of many higher end positions And to see a rise up from the bottom of a different character emerging. The people presently at the top tend to be sociopaths. They have no honor. A new breed of people will gladly step up with honorable intentions.

[-] 1 points by bcvagabonds (11) 8 years ago

To understand this philosophy, we must think of ALL the rewards of doing a specific job - not just the monetary ones. And to be a functional part of such a system, we must 'appreciate' (i.e., "reward" through positive personal energy) everyone's labour efforts (thus increasing the rewards for those providing the labour).

Is it too difficult to understand that if we were thoughtful, moral, caring people, we could socially evolve beyond this archaic social system???

Please don't knock this poster for having the courage to suggest something better for all of us; it may not be the right answer, but at least he's got us thinking and talking. And truly, who here really believes that the current system is the best we can do as humans? Who here thinks we can't do better? That corporations are good stewards of the environment/our health/our politics? That the western world's consumption of resources can remain unchecked for generations to come? That our children's futures are just as bright as our own, despite the thousands of extinct species, diminishing rule of law, and lowered human morality (all inversely correlated to our rate of consumption)?

All you well-educated types here would do well to use those powerful minds you've developed to improve this poster's philosophical viewpoint. Does any critic have something helpful/constructive to ad? Can you develop a solution to one or more of the many problems facing this proposition?

It's funny how so many people can put to rest nearly every concern facing their religion's claimed veracity (Is there a God?) through faith, exclusively. How many faith-based followers are arguing against this guy on the basis that they feel that some lazy jerk is going to ruin it for everyone? Where is your faith in humanity??? I know why you deny it (I read newspapers, too), but I don't understand why you can ignore a scientific journal that "proves" some part of evolution, so as to maintain your faith in creationism, but then give up all faith in your fellow human being solely on the basis that some jerk brutally murdered his kids in Armpit Alaska or beat up an old lady for her food stamps???

[-] 1 points by sato (148) 8 years ago

No. Equal pay is not justified ever.

[-] 1 points by ScrewyL (809) 8 years ago

Everyone should also:

  • Sleep the same number of hours.
  • Exercise the same amount.
  • Wear the same clothes.
  • Eat the same foods.
  • Enjoy the same movies.
  • Drive the same cars.
  • Buy the same gas.
  • Think the same things.
  • Bounce their balls in sync .
[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

LOL

[-] 1 points by bcvagabonds (11) 8 years ago

I am a journeyman cook (3 year apprenticeship) with 15 years experience. I feed the rich expensive meals for $15.00 per hour. I have three children, and can not support a family on this wage. I cook because I love it, and consequently, am very good at it. Essentially, I'm forced to ignore my wage so that i can be happy doing what i love. If we paid everyone equally, we WOULD still have doctors, lawyers (god- forbid - LOL), scientists, and the like because people would be free to do what they love - not what they feel is going to make them rich/powerful - not what they can afford to train in/attend post-secondary for - not what they simply have to do to feed themselves. Imagine the energy we would all feel doing what we love. Imagine how quickly we could cure cancer? Imagine how happy moms and dads would be when they get home to their kids after working their 8 hours "helping" others where they were needed. Imagine the decline in substance abuse, if people loved their occupations and were appreciated by others for doing whatever it is they did (I really like my garbage man, as he deals with the worst part of my job - I have given him food and beer in exchange for my appreciation - these things are important).

Please, do not give in to those who think that the status quo must persist. For me, I've already changed things around me, and now my world feels a little more harmonious. I

Thank-you for reading this post. I welcome your input and good-natured suggestions.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Well it's nice that you can see the positive in equal pay. Not many can.

[-] 1 points by bcvagabonds (11) 8 years ago

It's unfortunate that so many things wrong with this world seems to make sense when you look at them through "the lens of profitability" - meaning that immorality, depravity, greed and narcissistic behaviour can, sadly, make sense when you think of what is financially profitable to the purveyor of said actions.

I've heard it said that, if you subject corporations to the test of what determines "clinically diagnosable sociopathy", they easily fall within that definition. And while it may be a simplistic (unfair???) analysis to subject a human creation to human moral code (assuming sociopathy fails our expectations of morality), it is equally unfair to give corporations dominion over our personal lives, politics, environments, futures, health, etc AND NOT hold it to the highest possible standards. If we are going to treat capitalism as our religion, it should pass at least the minimum standards of humanity (including those tacitly set by the DSM IV).

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Another great point

[-] 1 points by forOWS (161) 8 years ago

Not a good idea. You need monetary incentives to motivate people to go into the professions of medicine, engineering and into skilled labor. However, the unskilled should be paid a living wage not a minimum wage. But the people who turn the screws are the current ugly wave of psychopathic politicians and "businessmen". We need to elect REAL progressives into political office to make the necessary changes. Ultimately for our survival as a nation of good hardworking people which America is. And that goes for the rest of the nations of the world and its good people. They want the same things we do.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Why don't you people with your OWS agenda write your own post and see what response you get .

[-] 1 points by bcvagabonds (11) 8 years ago

Maybe this is a better place for this post, which I made somewhere else.

What if what we charged people for services was based on what the purchaser could afford? For instance, if a well-fed lawyer needs his lawn mowed, why not charge him/her $50.00 per hour? After all, this is still 1/5 or 1/10 of what many of them make on an hourly basis, so why couldn't they pay similar.

Conversely, a single mom/dad might get /her/his lawn work done for $5.00 per hour. Hardly covers the cost of gas in the mower, and granted, why would anyone want to mow the latter's lawn over the former's, but what if we just recognized that there was something bigger than money at stake? For instance, what if we recognized that energy was the true currency of the universe, and that money was simply a prop? Money may be needed, but it's not what keeps things 'rolling'.

Well, this may sound a little simpleminded, and admittedly, foolish. But I am willing to try it... In fact, I've been busy doing just this... I'm trying to start a new service, based on what I call "NSF" pricing; specifically, "no set fee" (ya, I like the play on the term NSF - non-sufficient funds - LOL).

In my case, I am offering a variety of services (everything from a moving truck and labour to cooking to construction). But the fee is determined by what the client can afford. If you can't afford anything, I still try to work with you (obviously, if you can't afford anything, you probably REALLY need some help), but in reciprocation for something other than money.

So far, the response has been slow, but the few people I've dealt with over the last week or so have been very grateful AND generous (in their own rights). People are really surprised by my sincerity and commitment, and I think they, themselves, may even consider "passing it forward" (but that's up to them).

The truth is, I'm making a few bucks (props that, for the immediate future, keep my family warm in this Canadian town) AND I'm making people happy - who, in turn, make me happy. Look at me ma, I'm getting RICH!!!

NOTE: Please don't attack my character when replying to this post. You may not like what I am doing, or what I represent, but that does not give you licence to diminish my energy. . I mean no harm to you, and hope you feel the same to me. I welcome all constructive input.

Lastly, if you don't believe me, check out CL in Nanaimo's moving section. My ad was posted about two weeks ago.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Well the idea if it could be unforced would create a certain equality. For example if everything was priced by percentage of ones income. And for example an automobile was 50 %. And a house was 50%. Than both rich and poor would have the same material things.

Where it may fail ? Is a poor man only working one day per week and a rich man working five days per week. Really would not be fair to say they deserve the same.

But, the idea is a positive thought and heading in the right direction.

I have suggested equal hourly pay for everyone including all training. And than prices whatever they may be have equal chance for everyone to own , providing they apply equal time to earn their wages. The result may be similar to your idea. But eliminates the unfairness of less effort and more effort deserving equal.

[-] 1 points by bcvagabonds (11) 8 years ago

I'm not sure if we can 'pay' (i.e. "prop") each person the same for an hour of work, much as I like the idea. But if we quietly revolt against the rich and unite as middle/lower income earners, the rich will be forced to mow their own lawns, fix their own cars, build their own homes, and the like; seriously re-distribute their wealth; or, go without nice shiny things that work well, don't leak, and flush properly (metaphorically speaking). More importantly, 'we' (the proverbial 99%) will regain some control over our lives (i.e., vis-a-vis the universe's currency - energy), raise human consciousness, elevate our quality of life (NOT the same as standard of living), AND raise our standard of living (if new, shiny, plastic things from Wal-Mart, in some way, contribute to an elevated standard of living).

But let me be clear. Money is just a prop. Our ultimate goal should be focused on exchanging positive energy. I know it sounds hippie-dippie, but I really can't explain it better than that. I just hope you, the reader, can interpret what I am saying without jumping to irrational conclusions and harsh judgements.

I welcome your constructive input (please, no hurtful comments).

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Equal pay provides everyone with equal opportunity.

Why would the richest person in the world be unhappy if everyone was as rich as him ?

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

Under capitalism, wages are determined by supply/demand to determine market value. Did anyone here even mention supply/demand? At all?? Jeesh. Otherwise, you're talking about throwing out capitalism.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Supply and demand is a failed world philosophy. There is a huge demand for jobs .. But there is no supply.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

Failed based on what measure? Or is it just your opinion that capitalism or supply/demand philosophy has failed?

Consumer confidence and spending leads to increased demand for goods and services which will lead to increased employment.

The problem is not supply/demand philosophy. The problem is consumer confidence. Business confidence as well is a problem. Businesses are hording cash rather than investing in things like property, plant and equipment, for example. Which would lead to more jobs. Business uncertainty and low consumer confidence are the problems.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

With millions starving world wide. Seems that equals a huge demand for food. And yet farmers around the globe are living a poor existence. According to the supply and demand philosophy. A high demand makes prices go up. There is a mistake in this philosophy.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

Millions of people do live in a capitalist society. Captilism does not guarentee jobs for all or food for all. Capitalism is not perfect. There is no such thing as perfect.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

But perfection is what we are striving for.

At least take a closer step towards it.

Let's remove hunger and poverty. Surely we can.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

There is always room for improvement. But there is no need to scrap Capitalism or blame supply/demand theory, which works exactly as the theory says it should. Hopefully, with some improved government policies and legislation, consumer confidence will improve.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

An equal wage dies not necessarily scrap the supply and demand theory intact it only helps it work more efficiently.

To slightly improve capitalism would be to place a small cap on sales profit between points of buy and sell. This would also improve the supply and demand theory by reaching the sections of poverty with opportunity and product.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

You just said a few minutes ago that supply and demand is a failed model. Are you changing your mind? Because now you say you would keep it.

Cap on profits? I think thats called taxes. There are already many different tax regulations that encourage and discourage different types of activities.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 8 years ago

thats because http://occupywallst.org/users/FriendlyObserverA/ is here to disrupt, not participate

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Well the idea of supply and demand is to regulate products are being produced. And I am saying food is needed but not enough is being produced. This points out an error.

Cap on profits is not the same as taxes and really has quite the opposite effect on at least one aspect.

If you tax a retailer he will raise his price and the consumer will brunt the burden. But if you cap the retailer he than can not raise his price. And in fact this is good for the consumer.

April , if you are planning on jerking me off again. Please don't.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

Jerking you off? That's harsh Friendly. That's almost un-Friendly. I'm really sorry I have no idea why you feel that way.

Not enough food is being produced. I'm not sure thats true. Lots of food that is produced is wasted. We are a very wasteful society. Grocery stores throw away tons of food due to spoilage and other reasons. There are rules that do not permit them to even donate the slightly old food. When you go to a restaurant and are served an enormously large portion size, do you eat it all? I don't. I have a small stomach. Those large portion sizes actually gross me out. So then I have to get a take out bag to bring 2/3 of it home. Then I forget about it in the back of my refrigerator, and 3 days later, when I find it, I have to throw it away. I should take it to the food pantry for donation on day 1, I know.

So I'm not really sure that we aren't producing enough. I would say we need to improve on logistics, and reducing waste. One of the best ways to improve logistics is local and regional sourcing. Rather than shipping product around cross country. Too time consuming, takes alot of energy, carbon emissions, and all that. I'm getting hungry now, talking about all this food! : )

But back to caps. Is this cap on the sales price of the product? So if I make Product A and determine I can sell it for $10. What is the cap effect?

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 8 years ago

as someone that has worked as a cook from fast food to 4 star for 20 years, i'm here to tell you that you could not be more correct. the service industry not only wastes food but the supply chain by nature of standardized ordering routinely orders to much food. so much that spoilage is at least 10% of the overhead and helps drive the cost of food right thrue the roof.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

Seriously! I knew it. Just through casual observation. Anyone can see the enormous amount of food waste. But it's great that you are on the inside and can confirm this. My cousin used to be a grocery store manager and he told me about the food that they have to throw away. I was appalled and horrified. I try to buy as much fruit and vegetable locally from farmers markets as I can.

I used to work in manufacturing, disposable product, not food. So I'm familiar with logistics and supply chain. The raw material was derived from oil. After 9/11 when oil and gas prices went through the roof (still is through the roof) we worked on rebalancing our sourcing of production geographically. It was an enormous investment in tooling and even moved some equipment around. In order to get product produced closer to the majority end users, just to save on shipping costs.

But I think this same concept (theoretically) could be used for food to improve the supply chain and reduce waste.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 8 years ago

i think this week i'll use my access to the restaurants (because i know all of the managers in the area) to start collecting photos of the waste that covers the floors during rush hours and the systemic heath code violations. a short documentary about how following health code takes so long to do properly that you would be fired for not keeping up with the 5-7 minute average ticket times. can you imagine? 300 people an hour being fed by 3 people and trying to produce healthy food? the owners of these places live in multi-million dollar houses out in destin while the employees have to rely on food stamps and public funded healthcare.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

Rats are icky. Health codes are important. But I understand what you are saying.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

That depends did you buy and sell the product. If you read what I said the cap goes between points of buy and sell. You are obviously jerking me off again. Please go away.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

I'm totally not doing anything to you! I swear! I don't know what you are talking about.

If I am a manufacturer, I have to buy raw material to make stuff to sell as an end product. If I am a retailer, I buy from a wholesaler and resell it. I am a buyer and a seller in both cases. I am sincerely trying to understand. I'm trying to understand by using an example.

I'm sorry if I'm making you mad. I'm truly not doing it on purpose. I was just teasing with the un-Friendly thing. I swear.

[-] 1 points by BlueRose (1437) 8 years ago

I would be happy with wealth not being defined as what comes from the ground that is owned by white males. I want labor to matter, I want this GOP bible code against women inheriting property to end.

[-] 1 points by SGSling (104) 8 years ago

Of course not. Because not all work is the same. Why should somebody who dicks around in general education classes and then just takes a retail job after high school be paid the exact same as a neurosurgeon who spent 20 years training?

[-] 1 points by bettydonnelly (115) 8 years ago

This is a joke right ! Or you must be a plant from Fox News.

[-] 1 points by medievalambient (8) 8 years ago

Absolutely ridiculous. It's like giving every kid in a class an equal grade. Nobody will have any motivation. Who wants to go to school for eight years to become a doctor when they can drop out of high school and work at McDonald's for the same pay? I don't want to live in a world where everyone is the same and no one has anything to strive for financially.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

no it's not an equal grade .. grade will be a determining factor towards ones career in life ..combined with interest and other factors .. a low grade will have less chance of becoming a brain surgeon than someone with the appropriate potential.

[-] 1 points by ScrewyL (809) 8 years ago

Sure, if you twist the meaning of "Discrimination"

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

we may have to twist a few meanings to get across this threshhold !

your help would be welcome.

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

Now you're admitting it's not actually discrimination. Unbelievable. This is how dumbass political rhetoric starts. It's the same bullshit that the Tea Party pulled off with "earmarks".

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

you play your game .. I will play mine ..see who wins .. deal ..

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

Ok, but this is my game. If you can't actually answer something because it doesn't exist and there is a flaw in your plan, you need to own up to it.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

okay but only one question and if I get it right ..I win and you agree to equal pay. agree?

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

Fuckin go for it bro. If you can best me, I'll cut off my dick and have an even lesser chance of having kinds.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

now now lets not be doing anybodily harm

..waiting for your question

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

I thought you were going to ask me the question. I actually don't have anything prepared. I could have you try to disprove something though...

How big is your penis?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

is that your question ?

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

I guess. I honestly thought you were the one that was going to ask the question.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

"Ok, but this is my game. If you can't actually answer something "

do you remember writing this ?

It clearly indicates you have a question .. you fucked up.. buddy .. your question doesn't exist .. now go away and don't bother me no more ..

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

Ok, here's the question...

Why do you have to twist an existing word that has such an emotional charge to it in order to fit your theory instead of using already exiting words that have already been invented for the concept?

[-] 1 points by Monkeyboy69 (150) 8 years ago

Enough with this socialst garbage ..., u are not entitled to equal pay

[-] 1 points by commonsense6676 (16) 8 years ago

I work as a mechanic, and it has taken me 2 years of experience just to get used to fixing cars, and after four years of doing it I still don't have it perfected, and I never will because it is always moving forward. I am also going to college for a four year program as mechanical engineer. if I had to share equal pay with a guy that works at mcdonalds (which I have worked in that industry), I would quit my job and work at mcdonalds. why would I further my knowledge and experience if i will not get paid for it? would you take a four year program in college that requires you to learn 6 levels of math above algebra2 for 7 dollars an hour? verse my degree is willing to give me 25 dollars an hour the first year i graduate and it only increases as time goes forward. dairy queen was my first job, I didn't even need to know 6th grade math to preform that job. I even knew a lady who could not read who did the job. you want me take a pay decrease for my hard labor and pain, when the other guy is not taking the pain of hard work and discipline to learn more? no thank you! the only thing equal pay would accomplish would be the dumbing down of society (which has been proven in history). in fact when a country accepts equal pay they call it the brain drain because the doctors and high paid jobs move to other countries.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

does the realtor who sells your home for 5% profit on a $200 000 home deserve $10 000 ? your arguing about mechanics and kitchen work at equal pay .. being unfair , and yet you live in a society of extreme inequality and say nothing ..

most people would find mechanics a lot more interesting than mcdonalds .. mcdonalds is good for a short time .. but look at the fun you are having in a forever evolving profession of upgrades and education .. would you really give that up to go back to mcdonalds .. even if mcdonalds paid you the same $25 as you now make .. ? and consider all the training will also be paid equally as the labor .. well if thats what you want. another example than .. did you choose mechanics over mcdonalds because of the money ? if so than you have chosen wealth over happiness .. and it is proven that path does not go far.

[-] 1 points by commonsense6676 (16) 8 years ago

do you like math? i doubt it. and mechanics is only interesting for about a year. after that it really sucks because everything is a pain to fix (mcdonalds is easier) because its not perfect. the fact is I would not go to school or do mechanics if I did not have an equal chance to work hard and accomplish my goal of higher pay. knowledge is nice but not worth the work if I m not going to get paid good for it. I don't own a home... I want to work hard so I make more for my family. that does not work with equal pay nor is it healthy attitude to expect equal pay if you are not doing the work.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

It is sad you would be forced to choose a career over money rather than self fulfillment , as equal pay would offer both.

[-] 1 points by commonsense6676 (16) 8 years ago

actually equal pay would stifle my fulfillment. I want to be an engineer. but if I had to make the same as a guy with no college or work ethic it would be a kick in the face to me for working so hard and receiving only the same. there have to leaders and followers. I know guys that would love equal pay because they could make more, work less, and be lazy. working hard is what we need, and there should be rewards for working harder than another person. not docked wages to give to someone who is working less. equal pay is a fantasy that stallin in Russia tried. it failed. Germany is also trying a similar thing, its draining all the education from the country because people can work less and make more money. Germany will fail also if they don't change something. equal pay forces a person to give up a right, so another can steal that right, and use it to their own benefit.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

can you think of any other incentive that would encourage you to do your best other than pay? or what the next guy is doing ..

[-] 1 points by commonsense6676 (16) 8 years ago

only one. God. He encourages me to do better. I do too! I'am not a man drawn to power or prestige like some. but many people in this world are. they are corrupt, you can't get rid of them. you can only fight them. I work because I desire better I think I should be rewarded for that too. not everyone wants to work to be better, but they want to be better. the question is how would you make a person motivated to be better? you can't. no one can. thats up to the person. and there is not an incentive enticing enough to make every person want to be better. but some, and many will strive to be better if they know there is a reward waiting. I get rewards from God for doing good things for others and helping them. but I expect that person that I help to start trying to be better in one way or another. if they don't ever try, then why would i still try to help them? only if God tells me too. that is my only motivation to help another after I have tried and tried again. most people won't even try to help another person. I think there is a saying that you have probably heard that goes along with equal pay. "give a man a fish, and feed him for a day. give a man a fishing pole and feed him for a lifetime". equal pay is giving him the fish.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

there is a parable in the bible that tells a story of a landowner who goes into town to hire men to work in the field .. later he hires more men .. and even later again more men for the field . at the end of the day he pays everyone an equal days pay .. some men grumble they say they were there all day while others were only out in the field a short time ..

what was the meaning of this story?

[-] 1 points by commonsense6676 (16) 8 years ago

I have always seen that parable as a spiritual matter never as an earthly one. many of Christs parables are about spiritual matters. He always used earthly things as examples. also the beginning says it is pertaining to the Kingdom Heaven.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

well than .. you would argue equal pay .. when the kingdom of heaven advocates it ?

[-] 1 points by commonsense6676 (16) 8 years ago

when he talks its not talking about pay of money its talking about getting into heaven."Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, 3 and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me." mathew 18:2-5. and again here is talking about getting into heaven also "10 “Take heed that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that in heaven their angels always see the face of My Father who is in heaven. 11 For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.[a] 12 “What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them goes astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine and go to the mountains to seek the one that is straying? 13 And if he should find it, assuredly, I say to you, he rejoices more over that sheep than over the ninety-nine that did not go astray. 14 Even so it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish. there is a verse in the new testament thats says" some shall make it in by the skin of there teeth". meaning some will work all day and there entire life and make it to heaven, and some will work only a day and make it to heaven. the equality of it is entering heaven.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

and some shall be highly skilled and receive an hours pay ..

and some shall be low skilled and also receive an hours pay..

the reward is not on earth , but in heaven.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

if we can work as an individual to achieve success , why can we not work as a collective to achieve success ?

[-] 1 points by commonsense6676 (16) 8 years ago

the same reason this forum is here and we are debating. we have a different opinion. the goal is to find the middle ground. I would never want a congress with all republican or all democrat.

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

It's easier to find self fulfillment when you have money for spare time activities.

OMG, we actually have to produce when we start working?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

the idea is to provide mankind with a starting point of equality .. where no one can say it is unfair ..he is getting paid more than I am .. that system has been tried numerous times .. all across history and centuries past .. with nothing but strife and wars to show for it.. inequality breeds dysfunction and discontent

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

But we're not entirely equal. We all have completely different skill sets and completely different interests. We should be treated equally under the law but economics is different.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

but that would be discrimination if I pay you more than anyone else .. and it would cause discontent and unrest amongst the workers .. so shut up buck it up ..and get on with your life.

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

It's not discrimination. You're confusing social concept with economics. It's about skills and productivity, not monetary equality.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

discrimination .. if I pay a black man more than a white man that is discrimination . if I pay joe more than bob that is discrimination .. social concepts and economics are all part of society ..and civilization

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

No, you're a troll. If you pay a black man more than a white man simply because he's black, that's discrimination. If you pay him more because he's better at the job, that's not discrimination.

They are all apart of civilization. But social problems and economic problems are largely separate. Abortion and banking aren't in the same arena.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

in a world of equal pay , to pay someone more than any other is discrimination. no matter how hard you work or I work .. an hour is the exact same for you as it is for me .. as is the equal weight of your vote is as equal as mine.

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

But we don't live in that world. And in our world, it's not discrimination so you don't get to call it that.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

but it is discrimination in this world too and that is what we are debating ..

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

Oh, thanks for introducing me to the topic 5 posts in. Circular logic is a sign you're full of shit you know.

It's not discriminatory because it's about what you can produce. It's about how valuable you are to the company, not about race or gender.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Brandon37 (372) 8 years ago

This post cannot be serious.

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

it would be a new world currency .. -the " Hour-Coin "

For every hour worked would be earned an hour coin.. simple as that for all training and labour.

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I would think so ..yes

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

operating a nuclear reactor .. hmmn do you break out a sweat ? probably not .. more white coat atmosphere ..and a lot of nods and humms .. now ballroom dancing .. that can tire you out .. feels good but exhausting ..

the truth is you are the same person in either profession .. how could I possible discriminate your wage ?

[-] 1 points by Joetheplumbed (76) 8 years ago

Well, one could also consider a system where everyone receives the same "basic income" but where some might get more then others up to a certain limit depending on how (un)popular, important or hard the profession is.

Petty damn hard to realize such a system though. And for it to work we would probably need a lot of others changes to society, such as higher economic and work-related transparency, collective ownership of resources and so on.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

perfect, your the first to see past the initial idea .. yes hardly any of the current system would remain .. in a new system of equality.

[-] 1 points by Joetheplumbed (76) 8 years ago

I agree. Our current system would pretty much be incompatible with such an idea, but then again, our current system is pretty incompatible with sustainability and fairness.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

It's hard to imagine how history will look back at these times ..with a looming collapse and the possibilities of something new emerging..will Capitalism be in its final days .. will the light final shine an unveiling truth on its coruption .. will people look back but never "go back" .. will we create peace on earth ?

[-] 1 points by tasmlab (58) from Amesbury, MA 8 years ago

Sounds devine.

If any of the posters here succeed in equal pay or the $100K minimum wage or any other form of egalitarianism, I would very much like a career as an artist or video game player instead of the tedious work I currently do to pay bills.

[-] 1 points by Febs (824) from Plymouth Meeting, PA 8 years ago

This is one of the most unworkable and naive posts I've seen on this board and any other.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

If I paid you for all your education and than allowed you to choose your career , and in that I would pay you the same wage for any career you choose .. and I gave this option to everyone .. does that make it slightly less naive ..and a little more workable in your mind .. at least to see a bit of the vision?

[-] 1 points by Febs (824) from Plymouth Meeting, PA 8 years ago

No it doesn't. People need to strive for more. Take away incentive for gain and you take away incentive to push oneself and to improve. Humans by and in large are like any other animal - they seek maximum comfort for minimal effort.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

well we will include a mechanism which allows one to strive for more

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

What is that mechanism? And who is "we"? In order to operate such a rigidly controlled central economy, you will need a "Big Brother" or some other similar totalitarian leadership.

[-] 1 points by Joetheplumbed (76) 8 years ago

I am still surprised this is not common knowledge yet http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

Some jobs are more important than others, though I'm not sure that most CEOs have really important jobs. For example, if garbage in not collected in most major cities there would be a public health crisis within 3 days. That being the case it would seem to me that garbage collection is a very important job and should be paid accordingly.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

excellent.. this a good example of why "equal pay is the right solution .. because who is really to say which job has more value , when really all jobs are performed by human beings worthy of equal respect.

Equal pay as an end result .. provides an equal life for everyone .. I don't know if you could imagine how peaceful that would be .. especially mixed in with the governments ability to print an unlimited supply of money without collecting a dollar of tax .. wow , there would be peace and no more worry if we will have a job tomorrrow .. now that is hard to imagine the feeling ...? of contentment.. the world would need some challenges ..

[-] 1 points by owstag (508) 8 years ago

You must be a kid.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 8 years ago

Equal pay is impossible. Let's say for example, me an you both make the same amount. Each pay cheque, you go and spend most of it, where as I save mine and live off the bare minimum. In 5 or 10 years, with the money I have, I start a small business. Now I make double the 'equal pay'.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

in a world where we have equal pay there will be no private enterprise .. it creates as you have suggested unfairness of wealth..

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 8 years ago

Private enterprise will never die. People will always buy materials with their own money and sell them at a higher price. Such as art.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Yes , Art ... may be the exception to the rule .. buy and sell ... is history

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 8 years ago

One exception will just go into the next. People innovate.

Paper money is just a receipt. People will trade gold, beer cans, processors, drugs... You're idea of "equal pay" only exists if people use paper currency, but if the Government issues an equal currency and controls the means of production, the currency will lose value and people will move to an underground economy.

The Government would always have to control and regulate prices too. If there was a drought, or frost in Florida killed the orange crop, you would only have two options. Sell the limited supply at the same price, or increase prices. If you sell at the same price, people will horde it and sell it higher in the black economy.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

this is a very important part of the equation .. how do we determine price ?

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 8 years ago

Price will work itself out, based on supply and demand. It's just the unfortunately reality that communism can't possibly work without strict enforcement. The economy needs to be broken down into a hierarchy of needs. Depending on the level of the need, it should be closer to the core. For example; basics, like food and clean water should be provided from local farms, local water supplies should not be wasted, and every building should have a rain-water storage and recycle tank.

Secondary items, like toothbrushes, soaps, even cars, television and computers; should be manufacture within the nation. The parts can be made overseas, if the material required is not available in that nation. Oil, as well, should be brought in from the closest source and refined in America.

And luxury goods; such as a brand new Ferrari, should be imported straight from the source, Italy in this case. Obviously, they would be cheaper to purchase in Europe, but you wouldn't want your Ferrari made in Mexico either.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

all very good except the part of supply and demand working itself out for final price... thats the very idea/reason we are in an economic crisis .. it worked itself out alright .. out through the top of the ceiling and still going higher ..

there must be a CAP on prfits in the current capitalist system to bring things under control ..

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 8 years ago

No,no no noo no...

People don't understand this economic "crisis". Today's capitalism is more about balancing the debt payments than actually profiting. You can see it in everyone's day to day living. Everything goes on the credit card, and we pay the minimum. The Government is doing the same shit we are. Putting everything on the national debt, paying the minimum. Can't pay the bills? Increase the credit limit.

This has everything to do with borrowing more money than is available, and not being able to pay it back. To many European countries changed over to the Euro and spent more on social programs than they were paying back, forcing Germany to pay the difference.

Profiting isn't the issue. Corporations and Banks are hoarding money because it will be inevitable that nations start defaulting on their debts, and they don't want to go under. It's the difference between Ford and GM. GM had high debt load, under the assumption they would always sell enough cars to pay the minimum. Ford was saving money, and could handle the market crash. Corporations are publicly owned, if you save up a few thousand dollars, you can buy shares in any company you want, for the most part. You would basically be lending them money, and they will try to increase the overall value of the company.

Corporations are cutting costs because they don't want to go out of business if the stock markets go down again. It's not the businesses fault, it's the Government bad money management since Bush.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

first, all those debts and credit card loans ... where is the money now ? If there had been a CAP on profits that money would be in circulation , loans would not have been so high ,the debt would not be out of control, and the economy would not be in a crisis

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 8 years ago

People like me and you pissed it all away on television sets, houses we couldn't afford and cars we couldn't afford. We like to mass-consume and the market has developed toward that, providing things we couldn't afford at a price we could. The Government spent their income on healthcare plans, none-profitable wars, and just in general made bad investments. People who get loans, should use that money to increase their wealth, rather than just purchase material possessions.

What would a cap on profits do? Once Walmart reaches it's profit limit, the doors would shut for the rest of the year. Billionaires like Bill Gates don't have a lot of actual cash money in their pockets, he most likely gets a salary from his job. All the money he owns is tied up in shares, he could be broke tomorrow. I'm sure he has diversified his profile a lot since the 90's though.

The TV is very deceiving. Not everyone who appears mega-rich, is really all that rich. A lot of people are bad at managing their money, and that's 90% of the financial crisis. Look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_default#Examples_of_national_bankruptcy

Defaulting on loans isn't anything new. It's been ongoing since the middle ages. We just need to be less wasteful, more resourceful and save more. We want everything now, regardless of the consequences. There are floating islands of trash in the pacific and we have nearly contaminated all of our water supplies. The Corporations aren't doing this on purpose, they are just behaving as we request. Give us more; now. I don't care if I can't afford it, I want it; now.

So where is the money? It's been written off by the banks. Hence why they took such a hit when everyone couldn't afford their house any more. Now the banks have to eat the debt, and sell the house for peanuts, literally making less than nothing.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

What would a cap on profits do?

First the cap is not a set amount but rather a set percentage .. this would give them no reason to shut their doors ..

Sales Profit CAP = lower prices = increased sales = increased jobs = increased tax revenue = problem solved.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 8 years ago
  1. Setting a cap on profits assumes that companies profit off of their products. What about a business like Google, which is entirely paid for by Advertising? Cost of using Google = Zero Cost to maintain Google = Bare Minimum Companies using Google to advertise; hundreds of thousands.

How do you cap a profit on a product that no one pays to use? Like Google, Facebook, Linux? How would you cap profit on foreign companies, like Saudi Oil? They clearly have no interest in following US regulations. Most corporations don't make a lot of money on profit. Generally, they profit from advertising. TV shows make zero profit. They only profit from commercials. They set the prices, but clearly people will be willing to pay an excessive amount for a Superbowl spot. Who can deny them that right?

[-] 1 points by Kickinthenuts (212) 8 years ago

Badconduct, good luck attempting to nudge observer off the profit cap position. He clearly just wants to steal a paycheck from an employer. Maybe he's the janitor he references when he started this thread. Not that being a janitor is a bad thing, though I'd suggest most know they should earn equal pay with the CEO.

[-] 1 points by badconduct (550) 8 years ago

I find Communism is easy to understand, but very difficult to implement. Capitalism is very difficult to understand, but very easy to implement.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

very good questions .

I was considering google in my research ..

The idea is to CAP on anything that is buy and sell. for example a corporation buys shoes from china.. and the allowable markup is capped .. this may have an affect on what they can afford to pay google for advertising .. since their profits have been lowered ..but there again google having minimal expense .. would they be considered to "buy and sell internet space ? if so than the charge for the space provided would be CAPPED .. but that is a questionable area ..

Saudi oil .. yes can charge whatever they want .. but when it comes here the retailers will be capped for profit.

I hope this clears up some .. and provides some understanding ..

[-] 1 points by yoss33 (269) 8 years ago

I disagree. People should be paid more fairly, or have a job to begin with, but i don't think those that do the hard, important work should get the same as something with a relatively easier, less stressful, less demanding job.

Obviously there are too many getting pain exponentially too much for basically fucking people over, meaning (certain) bankers, ceo's, politicians, etc. but i don't think we need to go overboard with it.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

It does sound overboard , and perhaps way to radical for most .. but consider the consequences closely .. the outcome of equal wage you will find provides a fair peaceful world. where everyone has opportunity .. compared to the uneven distribution of wealth and inequalities of life from two wide extremes .. 2 billion people live on less than 2 dollars per day ..

I would have to say that has gone overboard and completely unsatisfactory.

[-] 1 points by MichaelB (128) 8 years ago

This has got to be one of the least thought through ideas I've seen on here. This kind of socialism doesn't work. Never has.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

but the idea has merit and right now for discussion thats all that we are debating .. for being thought through this is a small piece in a rather large system that has been well thought out .. for example not only equal pay for work .. but everyone will be paid equal pay for training ..

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 8 years ago

Troll

[-] 1 points by RedBaaron (54) 8 years ago

Sorry, but this is called communism and never has and never will work, for reasons Kickinthenuts touched on. I do not say this in mean-spiritedly and don't mean to be condescending, but if you take a course on economics it will immediately become apparent why the communistic model is unsustainable.

That said, pure, unregulated Capitalism is also especially vulnerable to boom-and-bust episodes and not sustainable either. The answers lie in the gray areas; people just often crave a more radically left or right answer to what are in reality complicated problems.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

yes the gray areas .. Communism, Capitalism , Socialism .. they all have something valuable to offer ..

Capitalism for example is the furthest from Equality.

Communism was undemocratic ..

Socialism is democratic ..and distributes wealth evenly ..

blend all these together .. and keep the good parts .. throw out the trash .. what works what doesn't .. add a couple innovations .. and we have a new system .. Equal pay .. unleashed work force .. opportunity for everyone .. and unlimited potential.. how could you ask for more !

[-] 1 points by RedBaaron (54) 8 years ago

I could ask that you observe in quiet contemplation a movement which you are attempting to subvert. I don't agree with much of what is said by many of the posters, but I don't try to sully the dialogue by peppering it with inane, tongue-in-cheek criticisms.

Obviously equal pay is a bad idea, and has more or less failed wherever it has been tried. Sure, there may be fringe elements of the movement who are oblivious to that historical lesson, but how many more Fox news junkies are unaware that it was an unregulated free-market system that imploded upon itself and caused the great market crash of 1929 (or the frequent boom-and-bursts of the 19th century)? Obviously, communism is a bad idea; so too is an unregulated Free Market. That's why no nation in the world has a pure free market system today.

Just as we are not wrong in retaining Capitalism while controlling it, so too are OWSers not wrong for wanting to adopt better social safety nets in a time when de-regulation and laissez-faire policies have caused the housing market to implode; untold jobs to be outsourced; and the very institution of representative democracy to become a sham.

I think you should afford them the courtesy of discussing solutions to these problems without derailing the conversation through a series of asinine comments. Even if you would rather see them fail in their efforts.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

"Obviously equal pay is a bad idea ."

you suggest I am being subvert and than you slap me with this !

At least I have the nobility to be up front with my ideas.. which is more than anyone can say about the "movement"

why are you not confronting the negative undermining posters ... the ones like yourself whom stand on the fence and support no one.

[-] 1 points by RedBaaron (54) 8 years ago

Because your comments at the bottom of this page show you are just trying to discredit the movement with your silly oversimplifications and caricaturizations, and that you have no interest in seeing OWS further its aims. If equal pay is a bad idea, and if you are not just playing games, then why does your original post state "the CEO and the janitor should make equal pay?" Seems a bit self-contradictory doesn't it?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I was quoting you .. okay I added the quotations.. happy now ..

equal pay is the way to equality ..

ows has condemned themselves with poisonous deception .. not my doing ..

[-] 1 points by RedBaaron (54) 8 years ago

How have they poisoned themselves? Who do you suppose they are deceiving? By all means, enlighten us all.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

..I should not share this with you ..

Originally ows came out on false pretense .. of inequality and unfairness of the distribution of wealth .. but as time went on a secret agenda emerged .. dealing with lobbying... the movement was built on lies to the public .. to possibly gain "traction" ..and now those lies will poison the movement .. deception at the roots of the movement ..

[-] 1 points by RedBaaron (54) 8 years ago

Really? How much are you being paid to spread this misinformation...?

By the way, I love how your puppet masters saw fit to outsource this business of spreading lies. Telling. Very telling.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

this is merely my own observation .. if you like I can delete the comment

[-] 1 points by RedBaaron (54) 8 years ago

I'd rather you delete your account (Just kidding)...!

In all sincerity: please do elaborate on the "lies" at the heart of the movement you refer to. What are us ignorant spectators missing about the "secret agenda" that is "dealing with lobbying", that is at the "roots of the movement?"

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 8 years ago

A living wage is what OWS should be fighting for, not an equal wage. Maybe in a hundred years from now, society will be able to handle a discussion of equal wages - maybe after a few more evolutionary or revolutionary leaps in social thinking, the idea of a brain surgeon and a plumber earning equal wage could gain traction. But anybody advocating equal wages for today is probably just way ahead of their time. So come back to the present, and let's fight for a living wage, which is the first step that must be taken in that direction anyway.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

thanks for the offer .. and may I invite you to join this discussion in a positive manner

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 8 years ago

Nothing to discuss. I said my piece. I'm a product of my time.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

or a product of your culture.. ? a product of capitalism?

btw ows isn't fighting for anything.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 8 years ago

You're fighting for equal wages. That you use your voice as a weapon doesn't change that. And yes, I'm a product of my environment. I support a living wage, because I don't think this environment and the mood of the people of that environment are ready for equal wages. Black Friday should be proof enough of that alone.

There are only three ways to approach change: Status Quo, Reform, and Transform.

Minimum Wage? how many people would side with you right now on keeping the status quo.

Living Wage? how many people would side with you right now on reforming the wage to close the gap between the top earners and the bottom earners?

Equal Wage? how many want to completely transform the balance of wages and turn it on its head?

When you look at the problem and the solution from the practicality of gaining support to change it. Equal Wages isn't even on the table to discuss, unless you want to keep deluding yourself. Come back to the present environment, understand the people you live among and fight for something achievable.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Equal wage removes the gap. period .. turns nothing on its head .. and minimumwage is no longer required .. trumped you on all three .. any more brilliant comments ?

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 8 years ago

You trumped nothing, you simply failed to take into account how the people figure into your reasoning. Yes, equal wage removes the gap. But how do you put it into practice if you're in a small minority who thinks this is a good idea. By suggesting equal wages, you've turned the conventional thinking of this society on its head. Do you simply not care what anybody else thinks?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

putting equal wage into practice is not the issue at this point .. with the economic crisis about to fall apart .. it is than we will need to put this into place .. right now is simply time to discuss this and understand this .. time to build a contingency plan .. while the ship is sinking .. lets not stand around fighting .. lets build a life boat .. or patch the ship .. or both .. but we must begin preparations

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

okay , I agree this is a huge idea and will not solve the immediate needs .. it is far off into the future looking at something we could aim for .." dry land" .. equal pay .. is just a glimpse of that dry land .. and getting there will require to patch the ship or build lifeboats ... if living wage .. whatever that might be ? considers to be a plan worth developing and one that will successfully right the wrongs .. until further progress can be made .. than by all means go right ahead .. develop your idea ..

I personally would CAP sales profit .. in order to patch the ship and refloat it long enough til we get to that far off piece of dryland

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 8 years ago

living wage - A wage that is high enough to maintain a normal standard of living. normal - The usual, average, or typical state or condition.

I cannot take credit for an idea that is not mine.

The living wage is a concept central to the Catholic social teaching tradition beginning with the foundational document, Rerum Novarum, a papal encyclical by Pope Leo XIII, issued in 1891 to combat the excesses of both laissez-faire capitalism on the one hand and communism on the other. In this letter, Pope Leo affirms the right to private property while insisting on the role of the state to require a living wage. The means of production were considered by the pope to be both private property requiring state protection and a dimension of the common good requiring state regulation.

Pope Leo XIII first described a living wage in terms that as could be generalized for application in nations throughout the world. Rerum Novarum touched off legislative reform movements throughout the world, eliminating child labor, reducing the work week, and establishing minimum wages.[1]

"If a worker receives a wage sufficiently large to enable him to provide comfortably for himself, his wife and his children, he will, if prudent, gladly strive to practice thrift; and the result will be, as nature itself seems to counsel, that after expenditures are deducted there will remain something over and above through which he can come into the possession of a little wealth. We have seen, in fact, that the whole question under consideration cannot be settled effectually unless it is assumed and established as a principle, that the right of private property must be regarded as sacred. Wherefore, the law ought to favor this right and, so far as it can, see that the largest possible number among the masses of the population prefer to own property." (#65)

"Wealthy owners of the means of production and employers must never forget that both divine and human law forbid them to squeeze the poor and wretched for the sake of gain or to profit from the helplessness of others." (#17)

"As regards protection of this world’s good, the first task is to save the wretched workers from the brutality of those who make use of human beings as mere instruments for the unrestrained acquisition of wealth." (#43)

"Care must be taken, therefore, not to lengthen the working day beyond a man’s capacity. How much time there must be for rest depends upon the type of work, the circumstances of time and place and, particularly, the health of the workers." (#43) Rerum Novarum, Pope Leo XIII, 1891 [2]

Living Wage, Wikipedia

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

conditions were a lot harder back in the 1800's

reminds me of Karl Marx .. he also had good intentions of improving the human condition .. someone else I favor .. Napoleon .. he fought for equality .. times were very brutal to give us the life we have today .. and still we willmake another improvement .. this struggle is not over until we have equality.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 8 years ago

well said.

[-] 1 points by owews (7) 8 years ago

Losers of the world unite. Help fight success!

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

I would like to provide an explanation of why this isn't fair by using a trading system.

Joe has land he wants to plant tomatoes on. He gets the seeds by trading a blanket for them. He then tells Mike that if he makes tools for him, he'll give him four baskets of tomatoes. Mike agrees.

Turns out, though, that there's more land to plow and plant than Joe has time to do on his own. So he talks to his neighbors and convinces Sally and Tom to help him. In return, they get all the tomatoes from a certain number of plants. When it's time to harvest, Sally, Tom, and Joe realize there's more tomatoes than they can pick before they turn bad. So they ask Mary and Bob to help them. In return they'll give them three baskets of tomatoes. Mary and Bob agree.

When it's all done, Joe decides it would be nice to have some potatos, but he doesn't know anyone who grows them. Kate and John do, though, so he offers them a basket of tomatoes and potatos if they trade half of his tomatoes with the person they know. They agree, and go off to trade the tomatoes for the potatos.

In the end, everyone did different tasks the others couldn't do. But in the end, they all got food out of it, right? And Joe did do alot of work. He came up with the idea, got Mike to make the tools, convinced the others to help him farm, so it's fair that he gets most of the tomatoes.

The problem with the current system is that it works something like - Joe has the only land in town that can be planted on. He knows he can't plant unless Mike makes the tools, so he give Mike a fair amount of the tomatoes. Then he realizes that he can't plant it all alone, so he gives Sally and Tom a decent amount of tomatoes. When the harvest comes in, though, Joe knows he has all the food and the rest of the town needs to eat. He lets Mary and Bob help him pick, and tells Kate and John to trade for potatos, but refuses to part with more than 1/2 a basket of tomatoes for them. Because there's nowhere else to get food, they agree.

This is the current system, and it isn't fair to Mary, Bob, Kate, and John. They had no land to plant, and don't know how to make tools like Mike. However, they did do their fair share of the work. And to be paid in 1/2 a basket of tomatos that won't last them long is hardly proper compensation.

We need a way to stop this sort of leverage from happening. Equal pay isn't fair to those who did more work than others, or who have skills they've trained in that no one else has. But the underpayment of the other workers isn't fair either. They're working and shouldn't have to fear that they won't have food or a place to live.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

First , the land should not "belong to" joe.. land is everyones as is the earth.

It's interesting to me that , oil underground for millions perhaps billions of years , how some family in the middleeast says it " belongs to them ..

You need to realize that equal pay is "absolute fair" even if someone is smarter or works harder .. we are all human beings . each as individuals. we all need a glass of water in the morning .. wether smart or old or fat or ugly.. .and because we are all different we all bring something different to this world .. the idea is to situate everyone where they are most gifted .. and where they can contribute and function best as an individual.. unless you feel some people do not have a right to life? which I have not heard you say ..

In your example , Joe you feel deserves more because it was his idea , and he made the arrangements .. but honestly no he does not deserve more .. he is simply beringing to the world his gifts , his talents .. one can really not decide which job is more difficult than others .. that is why all jobs will be paid equal. because for sure time is equal for everyone ... an hour for you is an hour for me .. what you do in your hour and what I do with my hour ? this becomes an important issue .. Joe made some arrangements .. mike made some tools .. sally and the rest did some arduous work .. all were involved some way .. to be paid equal on an hourly basis equal pay

this sytem of equal pay is only a piece of the whole system .. but the concept must be realized to be fair for all ..

I was recently thinking perhaps we need to adjust the purpose of mankind to " survival" , ... we have one planet and 7 billion people .. if we take the greed out of it where everyone is tugging on something wanting more more more .. we need a system of equality for everyone .. which in many views will also bring about peace. .. and in my view we can move forward from there .. with a fair system of distribution and equality ...

this current capitalism and communism and socialism .. and all the arguing about this is better and that is better .. we are all just fighting amongst ourselves ... and there is no peace.

the idea of equal pay .. has everyone worried that no one will perform or function to their best of abilities .

so sad for mankind if this be true .. to just slowly cirlcle the bowl ..and down we go. it all falls apart and we all watch it happen . such a scenario , such optimism .

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

"The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said "This is mine," and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody. ”

— Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality, 1754

It was in my second scenario - the one I said was the problem with the society we lived in - that I said Joe claimed the land. In my first one I simply said that Joe had land he wanted to plant. Here's a few things that are a problem though:

Joe did put more days and effort into it. He spent months getting the tools, seeds, getting it planted, harvested, etc. Sally and Tom plowed and harvested and picked. Mike spent long hours making the tools. While Mary and Bob only worked the time they picked. And Kate and John only put in the amount of time to accomplish the trade. If the others spent months more effort, I think they'd be upset if the others had the same amount. So it's sort of...inequality but not. Because more effort should bring more rewards.

To quote again: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..."

But in the admittance of that, greater effort should be provided with greater reward. Because we are all equal, and can bring to society our own gifts. Those who choose to do less should not be rewarded for it. We cannot afford to overlook the darker sides of our own nature, and that there are various ways to give into it. The two worse, in my opinion, being the opposite ends of the spectrum: Profit-over-humanity, and Less-for-more.

However, in our current society, there are many who are taking that effort and not being rewarded. If we can bring atleast a fair wage to everyone. Enough to not worry about housing, and food. To give everyone the same chance to educate themselves - then we'll be that much closer to being a society to be proud of.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Yes , as I have said ... training for a profession will be paid equally as the profession itself .. which will all professions be paid equal .. gardening, carpentry, administration activities, .. in joes case .. well for him to make such decisions he would need granted permision to do so and would be appointed such tasks with equal pay .. on hourly basis .. so if he works on this project twenty five hours ..and the others work ten hours .. than that would be how the pay would be distributed ..

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

But how in such a society would you punish those who did not take an effort? Two people can work the same amount of hours and one can accomplish much more than the other because the other didn't put in as much effort. How is the person who worked harder rewarded for their efforts?

Also, in a sense, hours become the commodity then. This can become dangerous, because working too long can be unhealthy. Plus, if one person works too many hours, it takes those hours away from others. Then, you once again have inequality. Even now, hours in wage jobs - as much as the wage itself - are part of what is making it hard on them to have a decent life.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

that is a very difficult question .. one I was hoping the creative minds ofthis world would help with solving..

I do believe I have a basic idea for this .. as we know there are many jobs .. and everyone has different interests .. so to pursue your interest you may have to apply effort .. to attain the position you seek .. for example .. you would like to be a school teacher .. but a limited number of teachers are needed this symester and they are hiring the best ones . are you on that list ? if not you will have to accept another related field .. perhaps .. ? so to get off the very bottom will require effort .. should be some incentive in that .. even though equal pay is required .. keep in mind everyones list of top and bottome is different .. and yes some jobs are awful to many .. I would like to place special consideration to the awful jobs ..and eleviate all of their burdens .. make the difficult jobs easier .. plainly

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

The creation of new technology in some fields would probably assist in the jobs we all feel are awful. i.e.: That janitorial job we all love to pick on. LOL

The limited job is a crises we face even now. Technology has taken the place of some jobs (Not always for the better, in my opinion) faster than we have created new jobs. There's only a finite number of jobs for those with certain skills. This very surplus leads to advantages being taken of those who gain the jobs, because they could be replaced by others with ease so they become afraid to "buck the system".

That's why I feel that insuring a fair living standard is the first step. That would enable people to see beyond their means, which is all they are currently able to live for. If one no longer has to fear not having food or housing, one has the ability to think on the next step. If some are content with having food and housing, then that - too - is their choice. But I think there's alot of people who would choose to do more, but are held in check by the current system.

You might want to read up on Cooperatives:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative

Though mostly it's been used for businesses, I think it could provide practical ideas for what you are suggesting. Most people read "equal pay for everyone" and think that means that greater effort would not be rewarded and little effort would not be punished. Such a world would be very unfair to the hard workers, and is why so many say your plan is impractical.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

At this point I have not received one ounce of substantial support.. it's not just the hard workers .. whom this may actually benefit.. but also the intellects and economists .. philosophers.. none of them want to let go of capitalism ... at least not yet .. as it sinks further and further ..

I can see you do not have a full understanding either.. the limited job crisis would end.. with a full understanding you would realize .. even though we cannot all train to be janitors .. in the real world there are a variety of necessary skills needed .. and this will need to be prioritized.. the focus is survival of the human race .. and more with this equal wage we could truly reach for the stars ..

yes it is the future ..and getting there from here ? we have unemployed and homeless .. very dire conditions .. world wide ..

fair living standards can easily be created with a temporary sales profit cap .. ..this will provide economic stability and security and health .. until we move forward into an entirely new operating system of total equality and fairness.

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

You are correct to say we are in dire conditions. But as the phrase goes, Rome wasn't built in a day.

I mentioned the limited job crisis because of your suggestion about the teacher. There's a limited number of positions, and so she has to take another job. Now, if that job pays equal to teaching it isn't a crisis for her monetary wise. She'll still have food, housing, etc. But if that's what she loves to do, then it's a crisis for her in a far more personal way. She's not being allowed to do what she loves to do.

This will be a crisis, regardless of what people earn, because currently it's not just money we're short on - it's work. Admittedly, if you count in those working more than one job, some of those jobs could be given to someone else. But I'm pretty certain the numbers I've seen show that it still doesn't equal enough jobs for everyone. Plus, many of these jobs are not what those without work are skilled in. Ironically, there are also job classes that are short on workers - but most of them require special training.

I think living pay would help raise people from poverty, which would enable a more equal chance at education. I think it's a step toward a world where everyone has the chance to a better life.

We seem to have once again reached an impasse. Thank-you for the discussion.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

thank you

I would like to share with you :

I have an idea that will allow the government unlimited ability to print an unlimited amount of currency and never have to collect a single tax to repay it . Now without asking how .. please consider the possibilities .. can we than create enough jobs for everyone around the world .. ?

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

I'm not certain. I want to believe the answer is yes, but I honestly can offer no proof that there is. I do believe, however, that we can do far better than we currently are doing.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I think mans [and womans] natural desire to explore will find new ways, better ways of conducting a civilized society.

I once read a question in a newspaper.

If a space ship was travelling from Earth to a new discovered planet .. and this ship had many people on it .. but the journey would last 200 years. the question was , what political / economical system would they use ?

I found that a question I pondered over .. a few times .

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

I'd wager a guess that it would alter over time. Look at the history of the past two hundred years. Both economic and political systems have vastly changed. I don't think there's any one way to answer that question correctly. It's an array of possibilities.

Two hundred years ago we could never have guessed all that has come to pass. And even though we have lots of people wagering guesses, we will never really know what will exist two hundred years from now. But what we can hope to do is give them a foundation to build a better world with.

"If you are planning for a year, sow rice; if you are planning for a decade, plant trees; if you are planning for a lifetime, educate people. " - Proverb

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

what if you are sinking in a ship that has just hit an iceburg out in the middle of the ocean ..all because the captain wanted to impress the folks back home with the speed of his new ship, and has put the safety of his passengers on low priority ... with such betrayal of trust .. the man in charge made the decision based on greed and lust ..which ended the lives of hundreds of people .. you know the ship I am talking about RIP. how things really hhaven't changed 100 years later .. the people at the helm again have led us down the path of despair

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

An ironic reference, really.

Let's look back at your example. What happens if the captain of the ship didn't make this decision on his own? What if a wealthy man who had a say in his livelihood not only suggested it to him, but put pressure on him to do so? Just rumors? But, then, it was his ship, so he should have told him where he could stick his opinion - shouldn't he? Who do you blame?

My answer: It doesn't matter. The ship is sinking. The blame game won't help anybody. What we have to do now is make the changes that will prevent it from happening again.

[-] 1 points by Cycl3r (3) 8 years ago

Ya think so huh?

[-] 1 points by Gileos (309) 8 years ago

Socialism

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Capitalism

[-] 1 points by Gileos (309) 8 years ago

What the op is talking about is socialism. We have been fighting these assholes forever to keep it out of this country. Whats your point?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

The American revolution was fought to rid the world of monarchy. Capitalism is just another form of monarchy .. and we will rid the world of it .. with socialism. think about this.. an employee when at work is on company property .. just as the old days when peasants were on the kings land .. they could touch nothing of it .. it all belonged to the king .. to the capitalist.. its the identical offspring

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 8 years ago

And everyone should be killed when they all hit 65 so we don't have to waste any money on them. Lets be realistic. If the company collapses the CEO is blamed not the goddamned immigrant

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

I think you've stumbled across an idea that's just as good as the original post... let's withhold health care from the elderly. That way, we save the Social Security/Medi-Care programs and reduce the planet's population.

[-] 2 points by kingscrossection (1203) 8 years ago

That way we can all be a Scrooge and decrease the surplus population

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

EXACTLY ! There's a certain beauty to the symmetry.

By the way, I came up with an even better idea !

See http://occupywallst.org/forum/equal-pay-everyone-should-receive-equal-pay/#comment-462960

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

sure and lets hope you become elderly and still have all your health when it becomes your time to be murdered, you will become, enlightened in your last minutes.... You know the elderly paid into that system their whole lives and it is not a entitlement, it is a program that they paid in to all their lives, like a savings account. That the corrupt gov stole the money and left a IOU note should not be reason to kill those that paid into the system. You focus should be on those that looted the money from the system and gave it to people who did not pay into the system. That is the evil in this picture, those that looted the money, they should be hanging from the neck at the corner light post.

[-] 2 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Sheesh ! I was kidding !

Never mind, I came up with an even better idea !

See http://occupywallst.org/forum/equal-pay-everyone-should-receive-equal-pay/#comment-462960

[-] 1 points by Apercentage (81) 8 years ago

Haha yea right. Jobs dont have equal importance, risk, required ability, and training requirements. A janitor could never do what a CEO does, or what a doctor does, or what a lawyer does

equal pay would tank innovation, and motivation amongst the work force. Its not discrimination, its just what the jobs are worth to the employers.

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

While I agree that this idea won't work, I'm tired of seeing how ignorant people are about some of the lower end jobs as well. The opinion that "anyone can do it."

A janitor doesn't have the training to be a CEO, but let's see the CEO being asked to clean toilets and what he responds. And most accountants and other people who work analytic jobs would flounder if asked to go sell a pair of shoes to somebody. Jobs that require special training - like doctors, and scientists, and engineers, do deserve more because of their work. And someone with the drive to start a company does deserve to have a larger percent of profits. But even these "low end" jobs require certain kind of people. And what they do deserve is pay equal to the cost of living. They shouldn't have to worry about food and housing even though they work long hours for somebody every week.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Agh but you are looking only at a small piece of the idea. Equal pay would remove the nearly 2 billion poverty stricken human beings. Providing everyone with opportunity and happiness. Surely this has value. Also keep in mind there may be other incentives.

[-] 1 points by Apercentage (81) 8 years ago

Removing the 2 billion in poverty? how? we cant reform the whole world. Also what other incentives?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

ahh but you need to open your mind to larger possibilities ..

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

if your mind is too open your brain falls out, ha, but open is good...

[-] 1 points by Fedup15 (30) 8 years ago

It is discrimination to not pay people their worth based on their level of skills, education and performance. To pay everyone the same will cause everyone to give up and do just the bear minimum.

[-] 0 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

you are so right, look at Soviet union for examples. Very good examples. They could not even feed themselves because the farmers would rather get drunk and not plow the field, but still get his food.

[-] 2 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

The old saying in the Soviet Union was "we pretend to work, they pretend to pay us." I have friends in China who survived the cultural revolution and they tell basically the same joke.

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

was it fixable? did it lead to abetter system?

[-] 1 points by Fedup15 (30) 8 years ago

Yes and the govt officials made money under communism if they came under budget.... Which was the goal to under serve the people. So sad....not Russia today!

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

their gret idea did not work because it was not thought thru well enough. OWS need to think thru every decision and look at it from every angle, it needs everyone to be able to do that. We, they need every opinion, or they will be like what is, and no better.

[-] 1 points by JPB950 (2254) 8 years ago

That defense of socialism is often used. It just wasn't done quite right, or wasn't planned out completely, this time we'll do it better. Unfortunately no one's been able to make it work.

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

or ever will without the help of a higher intelligent benevolent being right there to lead and make just laws

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

Actually, as Freud pointed out, their "great idea" did not work because "the psychological premises upon which it is based are an untenable illusion."

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

that will work....

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I totally disagree

[-] 2 points by Fedup15 (30) 8 years ago

So a brilliant women who worked her way through college and acheived a 4.0 GPA and goes to medical school. She is an amazingly gifted surgeon, saving countless lives with her dedication and skills. Then there is a man who works in the hospital gift shop and he, under your vision of plutopia, is paid the same as the women surgeon. I would say she is being discriminated as she has studied far more, has acheived far more in termsof her skill sets and accordingly she should be rewarded for the level of education, skils and risks she takes everyday, versus the gift shop employee. Why would she have worked so hard just to be rewarded the same as the gift shop employee? She could of avoided student loans, hours of studying, 72 hour shifts interning in the emergency room. You are dead wrong.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

You would have to ask her if she would be content. Satisfied as a gift shop employee or something more pursuing and dreamful

[-] 1 points by Fedup15 (30) 8 years ago

That is naive at best. Come back to reality

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

the answers to the problems we face may not be found in reality .. but in a vision .. of a better reality

[-] 1 points by HeavySigh (227) 8 years ago

It's selfish to not pay the gifted surgeon. After I graduate with my Software Engineering degree and my job experience, I DESERVE to make more than the janitor.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

But there is more to this idea ..

What if ? I paid you for all the schooling and you choose whatever career you are best suited for and in the end whatever career you choose I will pay the same wage regardless of the career you choose .. and this would be granted to all citizens .. equal pay for schooling and final career wages .. choose your own destination .. how would you feel about that proposal?

[-] 1 points by HeavySigh (227) 8 years ago

And where are you going to get the money for all of that?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

out of thin air

[-] 1 points by HeavySigh (227) 8 years ago

Exactly

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

unlimited .. but thts the rest of the plan and you aint near ready for it ..

[-] 1 points by HeavySigh (227) 8 years ago

You're an idiot.

[-] 1 points by BrickBuilder (14) from Riverside, CA 8 years ago

Silly

[-] 1 points by pandoras (56) 8 years ago

Why do I have to work hard at school and at work if I'm going to get paid the same anyway? That, my dear, is called communism at best.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Well. It's not about the pay it's about pursuing your dreams with pay indiscrimination.

[-] 1 points by leavethecities (318) 8 years ago

If that was the case I would quit system engineering and become a librarian in a small town. I like the idea. Eventhough I love engineering, reading all day sounds great.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Well than you currently have chosen wealth over happiness

[-] 1 points by Gileos (309) 8 years ago

Wtf is your point why are you trolling?

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

he chose to feed his family rather than be selfish and pursue pleasures of the flesh, and in doing so he chose happiness rather than greed

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

keep a grip on reality

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

dude I lost track of where the box was years ago, my thinking left the box a long time ago and i followed it. I see a picture so big.......he has left the building...

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

why meet? you wasted this opportunity

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

you think you can not learn from others? sure you can learn too

[-] 1 points by leavethecities (318) 8 years ago

I like engineering and i like reading both give me happiness, but if i was going to be super poor i suppose i would just read. my engineering benefits society.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 8 years ago

How about everyone is provided the basics of survival so that they can find the profession they enjoy most without any added pressure? There are multiple benefits that would increase as a result from this.

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

"How about everyone is provided the basics of survival..."

Provided by whom? Big Brother?

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 8 years ago

By the nations of the world sharing resources according to what it can share. By all of the world (or at least all of the country) coming together to share their excessive wealth or by shifting our value market. Just by that alone, or by ceasing the creation and maintenance of our international defense systems and weaponry, we could 'afford' to feed and shelter everyone.

I don't know if you've seen the history channel lately, but there was this show about a group of public officials hand-selected from all parts of the world to come together in a simulation of a highly-likely-to-happen global discussion on what to do about the apocalyptic state of the world. This is projected to happen in 2015. As per usual, at the end of the meeting both China and India refused to 'jump on the bandwagon' to cut down on the damage we are doing to the Earth and to ourselves because their economy would not flourish.

What I'm trying to say is that when it comes down to it, money is just a fleeting thought compared to the state of the world and humanity. I just don't understand how people are still thinking about money when we could be dying relatively soon just from breathing the very air outside our door.

However, I respect your opinion and in no way is this an attack against you.

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

No offense taken at all. But my experience is that "the nations of the world" are all sitting around a poker table, and they are going to look at their cards and make the decisions that are best for them.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 8 years ago

Yes..sadly so. But we can make our own communities. We are intelligent enough to do so and we have the thinkers & doers. We have more than enough history to read up on for references and ideas. These 'leaders' would be nothing at all if they had no one behind them.

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

interesting, everyone gets a small block room in a huge apartment building with a cafeteria that serves free food, to be eaten there only, no take out. If you want better for yourself you could get a real job and move out. But if you graduate high school you should have a room for life and free food, at the gov projects, but at a very low low level, just above being homeless. It would end the homeless problem, without giving cash, and it would feed every hungry mouth efficiently and cheaply. If you wanted to rise above such a low level of living you could move out and be someone. No more welfare payments, no more stamps, no more Dept of welfare, you get place to live in low class clean buildings.

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

"No more welfare payments, no more stamps, no more Dept of welfare, you get place to live in low class clean buildings."

Who is going to clean those buildings? And why would we expect them to be cleaner (or safer) than section 8 housing?

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

who is going to clean? those things can be solved with a open mind easily, this forum should be able to produce 100 ways if we let everyone have a voice.

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

"those things can be solved with a open mind easily"

One problem on lots of these threads is that no one pays attention to the details, and everyone says stuff like "those things can be solved easily." In about 5000 years of recorded human history, those things haven't been solved easily, and there is little reason to believe they will be in the next 1000, human nature being what it is. You really have to consider the details.

[-] 1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

point taken, self clean and gov clean w/steam once a month

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

Why involve the government? Take American Airlines. They were complaining that one of the reasons they went bankrupt was because they spent millions of extra dollars on their employee wages than their competitors did. Well, they can build and buy housing for a fraction of this cost. If someone works for them, they get to live in the company's housing complex. Then their workers only have to worry about bills for electricity and water/sewage rather than housing - which is the largest percentage used of anyone's income.

It probably wouldn't work with a smaller business model, but it would work for the larger ones who seem to raise the most complaints against higher employee wages.

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

"If someone works for them, they get to live in the company's housing complex."

Employer-owned worker housing is not a new idea, and has a long and fascinating history. At one time about 5% of the US population lived in "company towns." Some were better than others.

"which is the largest percentage used of anyone's income."

My single largest outlay is federal income tax - it is greater than my mortgage payment, car payments, and health insurance put together. I think this is true for a lot of people these days.

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

Oh, I know it's not a new idea. But maybe it's something that needs to be started up again. I've heard so many complaints about raising wages, even though there's many people who's wages don't earn them enough for housing. This would be one solution to that.

Well, I was discussing the money we actually get to use ourselves. LOL But I'm not going to argue about the amount taken out in taxes. I was going to say my rent remains larger, but considering I share rental expenses, and taking into consideration my portion of it and not the rental price itself, you're probably correct that it's less than I paid in taxes.

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

"But maybe it's something that needs to be started up again."

It is an interesting idea, but had its pros and cons. I would study the history of it very carefully before making a decision. Remember Santayana.

By the way, some large businesses have company medical clinics that take care of the employees and their families. A similar concept.

"considering I share rental expenses, and taking into consideration my portion of it and not the rental price itself, you're probably correct that it's less than I paid in taxes."

Nothing personal, but I find this comment curious. I know exactly what I pay every year in taxes, and exactly what my housing expenses are. So there is no "probably" involved, I can tell you exactly the ratio of one to the other to two decimal places. Again, I don't mean to be offensive, but doesn't everyone know that stuff in their own finances? I don't understand your use of "probably."

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it",

It's true it has it's pros and cons. For it to work in modern society, there are certain rules that would definitely have to be enforced to ensure that any such housing wouldn't be substandard, and that it was not used in a way to further exploit employees.

Off the top of my head, I'd say no. I myself worked three different companies, and would have to gather up my papers to look them over before I could answer if the taxes cost more than my apartment payments. Also, I share living expenses with my roommate, and if one of us has a good month, they take the larger portion of the housing cost that month. The other compensates by being in charge of the food or smaller bills. So it's never exactly even.

And I'm more aware of my financial situation than a lot of people I know. I'll never forget that during a conversation about finances between me and two other employees at a previous job that one mentioned she had a landlord that would not put through payment checks for two months. The second employee literally asked how she possibly knew what she had to spend then, since it wouldn't show on her bank statement. We were both appalled at the thought he never kept a record of his own expenses. But all he ever did was trust what the bank told him he had, without worrying about what might not have gone through yet.

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

OK, I understand. Personally, every penny that I make or spend goes into Quicken.

[-] 1 points by WorkerAntLyn (254) 8 years ago

I'm an old paper and pen person myself. Have a notebook that I record every purchase, bill, and paycheck on. Where, when, and how much of what goes in, and what goes out. But I don't record my taxes on it.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 8 years ago

Wow, you thought about this in detail. With the amount of creative and extraordinary minds we will be coming up with all kinds of new tactics. I think before we ever get to this point, we'd all have to have some kind of spiritual revolution within ourselves, though. We kinda have to lose the thought of always wanting bigger, better, and more if it is doing this kind of damage.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

interesting and valid point .. the mindset of all of us seems to be developed by the culture we are from .. which means it can changed .. and reaching inside to a point of neutrality and starting fresh is what it may take to understand .. and create new solutions to old unaware problems

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 8 years ago

Yeah, I've think humanity will procrastinate until we're left with no more distractions and none of our comfort. And then we will act together. As long as we find another's pain our own, we'll be able to use our empathy to get to a strong, peaceful place.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Your on the right thought. With equal pay everyone will have the opportunity to provide themselves with the basics

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 8 years ago

I'm not sure where this is from (I'm sure it's from somewhere in the Netherlands) but I heard of an idea where housing is the same price based on groups of class (poor, middle, rich, etc.). I think there's tons of things we can work on and implement which could help us out. And I also believe people who directly positively impact society, such as our janitors and public service, should get a more decent salary. We really need to re-vamp the values we place on things.

[-] 1 points by hyarborough (121) 8 years ago

I'd support that if it ever came up for a vote, but it most likely wouldn't. IMO doing something you enjoy is better than just working for a paycheck. Life is short.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Thank you. Stay tuned

[-] 1 points by JadedGem (895) 8 years ago

NO! The government should tightly control basic services and cap profits or outright take them over to save people billions and trillions of wasted dollars generating profits for companies who have been handed these gravy train industries and allowed to legally rob the people of every single dime of money they get from a wage increase. Wages mean nothing if basic service providers are robbing you ever single month to take billions and trillions out of our economy and funnel it straight into their massive hedge funds! You want to stimulate the economy? Give people a landline, electric power, gasoline, hospitals and prisons that operate as non-profits. If you ever want to reap the rewards and gain increased buying power from a raise this is the only way to insure you will gain buying power from it.

[-] 1 points by Perspective (-243) 8 years ago

Now that's a joke. Why would anyone ever train to do something important if they can sling a mop for the same pay? Your statement is ignorant.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Why would any sling a mop for the same pay if they could sit behind a desk ?

[-] 1 points by Perspective (-243) 8 years ago

Lol the people I know who have desk jobs work more hours for their pay being on salary than I do for mine being on hourly. Salary is just a way to screw you over.Anyway why would you go to all the hassle to study/go to college to get that desk job when you can push a broom and make the same money as the CEO of a huge corporation. There would be no incentive to achieve anything.Our country would crumble.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I think most people would disagree with your statement. If jobs were equal pay everyone would choose a job they enjoy

[-] 1 points by JadedGem (895) 8 years ago

Really who would become a doctor and risk malpractice suits? Who would ever bother with education, period??? We could all be paid to paint pretty pictures. No one agree to empty the potties. Wages are not the problem, billions and trillions in profits being made off basic services that the government should have capped or regulated or outright taken over and provided at costs that are not geared to generate profits is the problem. How can people think wages or some dollar value has meaning? Your buying power has meaning and it has been stripped from you when turned on a light, put gas in your car, made 911 call and ended up in a privately owned hospital...

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by JadedGem (895) 8 years ago

The really wealthy want to invest smart, in protected industries and jobs. By controlling stock in companies that control food, electric, gasoline, communications, they have you by the balls, they determine how many hours you need to work to meet your basic needs. Its about control. Its about gaining control of things that no one should be allowed to control. Basic services being capped and regulated or taken over by the government is needed. Their collective response to a raise in minimum wage repeatedly shows there is a problem and the honor system hasn't kept them in check, fair competition doesn't exist and keep them in check. Dollar amounts are meaningless, your purchasing power is where its at. Minimum wage workers can't feed themselves. Its time to stop the gouging and give people the power the feed themselves and you have to control the price of basic services in order to make that possible. Everyone is so afraid to be called communist but there is not other way to allow real competition in the rest of the real capitalist market. Freedom for some, who can handle it, when lives don't depend on it. The government to step up to protect life, working people can't feed themselves and the oil company is doing great, and the phone company is doing great, Monsanto has their monopoly, hospitals are rolling in, prisoner are fed bad so they'll need to buy extra food. And these profits are not reinvested in new technology, they are just a drain on society.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by JadedGem (895) 8 years ago

Well, they can still waste a lot of money on jacked up salaries, expenses like conventions and all kinda of junk, campaign contributions. And there is a lot of ways to cook books, the gas companies stuff looks legal but extremely wasteful. So a cap may not cover all the legislation needed to cut that fat and save the consumer money. Its a start, but why waste a dollar, much less millions at all? I mean its not the oil companies soldiers over there? A cap is a start, but serious stuff needs to be done. The caps that are in place have done little to give the consumers real value for their dollars.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by JadedGem (895) 8 years ago

Actually there is the most competition in retail and it keeps retail prices lower. I can buy direct from a middle man in china and skip most branded retail products entirely. Controls on the profits made the person who own the oil well are important. I can choose if I want a tablet or not. I can look at wholesale prices online and know retailers are not doing to me what utilities companies are doing to people. I am luck enough to get my electric from a co-op. Cheapest electric in the state. Retailers don't even make enough to buy a politician! Except for Walmart, who would be the target of many consumer movements to get politicians paid off to require the labeling of genetically modified food. My local retailers hire at decent wages, offer full time employment and are not billionaires. I don't begrudge them a living, I have a choice in who I buy from and that creates real honest competition. You are now being really silly. Consumers are passed on the cost of oil companies buying politicians off. So money out of politics will lower a lot of my utility bills as campaign contributions wouldn't be able to be deducted as an expense before the cap.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

ok ..so youur some kind of decption working on this site .. there are many .. had me .. but no longer..I will delete all correspondence with you

[-] 1 points by JadedGem (895) 8 years ago

Well, I don't pick who brings me a landline, picks up my trash, what prison I'd be sent to, what hospital I can get to in an emergency, I can choose between about two dish internet providers with about the same packages and plans, gas companies collude to jack up profits and offer no fair competition that would lower prices at the pump. Monsanto has farmers by the balls when comes to buying seed because Seed Banks closed and they bought every little seed company they could and their product ruins seed that isn't engineered. Every time minimum wage goes up, so do these guys' profit margins, they raise their prices, they report higher and higher profits their stock goes up and up. Its not that they have to pay their workers more, they are gouging, all of them wanting to make it where nothing but the basics can be bought and they get that before you even go to the store. These basic services provide no real innovations, no real competition, its gravy train money. If these things were publicly owned the billions and trillions they make in profits could be put into the real economy. Now that's a stimulus plan! When people get a raise, they might get increased buying power from it, how great would a real raise be???

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

this is an idea I have posted many times ..

sales profit CAP = problem solved

[-] 1 points by JadedGem (895) 8 years ago

We need that so bad to stimulate the economy. If could spend some of the billions the gas company is gouging WOW! You'd see billions hit the market.

[-] 1 points by technoviking (484) 8 years ago

i'll choose a job where i don't do anything.

my friend will start a business and hire me, i will start a business and hire my friend.

then we'll play MW3 everyday

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

How will your friend pay if you produce nothing to sell?

[-] 1 points by technoviking (484) 8 years ago

there will of course be a government agency to ensure that ceo's are not paid too much. that means that the government agency will take all excess earnings of the ceo to distribute to the janitors, mail room clerks, etc.

our earnings will be guaranteed, naturally.

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 8 years ago

That "may" be possible. However then what happens when there are jobs no one wants to do? Why would you be a septic tank cleaner when making coffee at Starbucks pays the same? Another problem is the differences in education/skills required to do a job. You think a doctor should be paid the same as a trash collector? Then the big problem,who decides what everyone makes? You would drive many businesses to close because they have to pay people too much and couldn't be profitable. As I said before,the whole idea is ignorant.(not you,the idea)

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

you may be confusing or misunderestimating this idea ..

it is certainly not ignorant.

equal pay is the most indiscrimatory idea ever conceived ..and it is just a small piece of a much larger puzzle.

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 8 years ago

It's very discriminatory. You would pay a burger flipper the same as a brain surgeon.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 8 years ago

I don't know if I agree with equal pay there (considering the education costs and the importance of results for the brain surgeon), but I have always thought that people in the food industry are astonishingly underpaid. The things we ingest because of the denigration of this workforce...I shudder to think :S

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

an hour of time is equal for everyone. just like the billionaire pays the same price for a gallon of gas as that of a poor man.

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 8 years ago

Time is equal,what your time is worth isn't.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

that is why everyone will be trained , evaluated , and given choices suited to each indivdual .. during evaluation , if a person shows interest and potential for brain surgery they will be welcomed to pursue . its about allocating everyone in such a manner where they can be all they can be .. and usually that is an indivduals greatest satisfaction beyond any monetary wealth .. the examples for this are many ..

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 8 years ago

So you would let the govt decide our lives? I don't think I want to live in what you described. It's a dumb idea and would never work so I'll leave it at that.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

we [ mankind] need to become a collective operating system ..where we all benefit from the gains .. or losses .. moving forward and searching the stars..

[-] 0 points by utahdebater (-72) 8 years ago

How would you enforce this? People need incentive for their work, if I'm gonna make just as much as a garbage man as I do as a doctor I'm gonna be a garbage man because it's easier work and the same amount of pay.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

With equal pay good people will rise to the top. Would you have brain surgery by a doctor who is there for the money , or by a doctor who is their because of his passion? Both being equally skilled of course

[-] 0 points by utahdebater (-72) 8 years ago

Both are equally trained. I would rather have someone who's there for his passion, but even if he IS just there for the money he's not gonna risk that by bringing on the possibility of a malpractice suit, therefore he's going to do the best job he can.

[-] 0 points by Kickinthenuts (212) 8 years ago

How come all my interaction with you on this subject has been delete? What's the matter you don't want someone to really try to understand your statement and ask tough questions?

[-] 0 points by utahdebater (-72) 8 years ago

That's been tried before, it's called communism and it failed. Read Wealth of Nations. Your pay should be equivalent to level of labor you perform.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

A janitor performs equivalent to any CEO.

[-] 0 points by utahdebater (-72) 8 years ago

So you're telling me a janitor at Apple who cleans the bathroom is equivalent to anything Steve Jobs did there?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Yes

[-] 0 points by utahdebater (-72) 8 years ago

Sweet, makes perfect sense. The value of work doesn't depend on how long it takes, it depends on what the value of the end product is. For example, if I find the cure to cancer and it takes me the same amount of time as it takes someone to design a new car, my discovery is much more valuable to mankind than a luxury good.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Cancer- Millions have died. Millions are suffering. Millions have donated to research.

Scientists are working diligently.

And the scum sucking capitalists wants to profit from all this.

Utahdebater you deserve to live forever.

[-] 0 points by utahdebater (-72) 8 years ago

Thank you. That wasn't my point, I was just pointing out that different occupations deserve different pay, I should've used a different analogy.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

It wouldn't matter what analogy you use. Equal pay is the endgame.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

It wouldn't matter what analogy you use. Equal pay is the endgame.

[-] 0 points by utahdebater (-72) 8 years ago

Not a CHANCE. People are only human

[-] 0 points by mediaauditr (-88) 8 years ago

What the fuck are you talking about. Why would you go clean shit out of toilet if you could make the same amount washing cars, or filing papers? Are you being serious with this question? I say you're a troll.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Tinhorn (285) 8 years ago

So the guy who sits at home on his ass all day should recieve the same amount of pay as the person who works 40 to 60 hours a week?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Equal pay will be given for equal time working or training

[-] 0 points by Spankysmojo (849) 8 years ago

All jobs are not important. If they were you would beg a cashier at Walmart to perform your open heart surgery. The concept stems from goodness and you must be a good person to feel that. Nonetheless, it isn't real. And what about self-employed business people? Should they earn the exact same amount of money? I'm sure you know more than one imbalanced set of entrepreneurs.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

we do not need as many heart surgeons as we need cashiers.. will that prevent someone from becoming a heart surgeon?

All training is paid for including training wages .. some would have an interest ..

" create a fair system of equality , and let the chips fall where they may.

Equal pay for everyone is that fair system.

[-] 0 points by Spankysmojo (849) 8 years ago

The chips already fell and now you'd like to pick them up and try letting them fall a different way than they have been falling since the beginning of time. You are trying to be good. I understand. It won't work, your theory that is. It will work that you are good!

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

..and you would like to leave them where they are .. in a big pile of chaotic unfairness and inequality

[-] 0 points by Spankysmojo (849) 8 years ago

Absolutely not. But that doesn't mean that anything will work.

[-] 0 points by Farleymowat (415) 8 years ago

Very funny. Pay is based on difficulty of a job, dangerousness of a job, intellect and reasoning through issues that the janitor has no clue on how to do it. Pay is based on difficulty, can the man produce or not? What about engineers with highly trained in many aspects of production.many people with many skills. Some worker may do a simple task all day and some are motivated to produce more efficienly, thus a higher rate of pay. This 'Everyone gets the same pay for work is anbush idea. Always fails.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Can the CEO do a better job cleaning than the janitor can do ?

[-] 0 points by Farleymowat (415) 8 years ago

Maybe, maybe not. Can a janitor do accounting? Most likely not, and he is not paid to manage books. I am a toolmaker. If a janitor makes the same pay as me, why did I spend money on three years of trade school? If i build the tool wrong, it is very expensive and costly to fix it. If I am too slow at it, I may miss delivery dead lines, costing money, and the potential of a lost customer. Equal pay for all jobs is a ridiculous idea, and doesn't work. I sure as hell don't want a heart surgeon working on me that is viewed as no more valuable than a janitor or secretary.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

the heart surgeon will have to have qualifyinf credentials ..

the 3 years of training will be paid for to you with equal hourly pay.

naybe the janitor can or can not train to be an accountant , but than who will clean the floors ?

all jobs are necessary and therefor equally important.

the idea is to prioritize where we train and place our labor force .. not what we pay them .

[-] 0 points by fuzzyp (302) 8 years ago

Maybe. Can a janitor tell me where the best place is to put a new factory in is? Can the janitor run the fucking place for a profit the way an MBA knows how to?

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by lizikrus (6) 8 years ago

This idea did not work in CCCR. People become lazy and try to cheat the system. Why work hard when the guy who cleans the toilet gets the same amount of money? How can you compare a janitor t say an engineer or a doctor? A doctor has much more responsibility then the cleaning people. Doctor goes to school for ten years and comes out with a big loan. You would value these people's profession as equal? NO thanks.

What every person should have is health coverage and enough money for food and shelter.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

but .. there is more to the plan .. for instance schooling will also be paid for .. and you will choose whatever profession you like ... and if you decide not to educate yourself .. well than your list of jobs available to your level of skill will decrease .. so the incentive to work hard is to achieve the better job .. the one you want .. of course all of this is at equal pay .. but again the incentive is not really pay .. of course it is a little .. because pay is of course needed to survive .. but the profession is all of your own choosing and performance .. and in the nend we all will be paid equalling

[-] 1 points by Coriolanus (272) 8 years ago

Long ago a guy named Harry McClintock wrote a song about this place...

[-] 1 points by lizikrus (6) 8 years ago

Do you give all students an A even if some score 40% on the test while others score 95%? See what happens in a classroom where every student is given the same grade, regardless of their knowledge level...

Only few people in this world love what they do and they would continue even if nobody paid them. The rest of the world is not so passionate about their jobs.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

students will be graded according to their level of ability .. see this is where the ones that work hard will receive the jobs they want . it's the incentive .

[-] 1 points by lizikrus (6) 8 years ago

What about people who cant pass school? Are they destined to shitty jobs forever. Some really intelligent thinkers did not do well in school. (Oh I dont know Einstein took too long to solve problems). Who says and sets up standards for the schools? What requirements would you need?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

well I am glad to see some intelligent questions

[-] 1 points by lizikrus (6) 8 years ago

So what is the incentive to work hard say in the same profession? Why should Larry do more work then say Amy? Even say if education is free, different professions require different amount of effort. Also jobs come with different responsibilities. What incentive for the jobs with extreme pressure and stress would people have?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

can you name 3 positives about equal pay ?

[-] 1 points by lizikrus (6) 8 years ago

NO can you?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

I certainly can, I have a list.. in fact I it's such a beautiful list I can not stop looking at it !

[-] 1 points by lizikrus (6) 8 years ago

yeah ok

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

Talk about a lame short sighted idea.

[-] -1 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

The more of these type posts I see, the more convinced I am they originate from Trolls seeking to confuse OWS folks over the agenda in the hopes they'll just give up and go home disillusioned.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (23059) 8 years ago

Agreed. This person had a similar post recently where he/she looked really innocent and naive, but....I don't think so. I think it's a troll. Jokes on me, though, because I wasted time arguing with him/her which is fine. You never know when you may get through to someone, even a troll.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

beautifulworld, if I remember your one and only comment on another post , " you're on the right track friendlyobserver" . and I thanked you .

[-] -1 points by Supplysider (53) from Richboro, PA 8 years ago

I think the only ones left are us trolls, although I find that term insulting, I much prefer Hobbit.

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

I'm not sure if you're a Hobbit, a Dwarf, or a Troll !

See http://occupywallst.org/forum/occupy-mordor-because-one-ring-should-not-rule-the/

[-] -1 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

we can hope this is a troll.... because if this is what OWS is about I need to remove myself

[-] -2 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

I'm not into conspiracy theories, but you could be right ;-) However, I think there are lots of stupid people in the world. I wouldn't be surprised if our OP asked this question in all sincerity.

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

I'm not sure if I feel better if he is sincere.

By the way, he inspired me with a great new idea that would fix a lot of inequality based on factors people have no control over. If OWS can fix one wrong in the world, this would be high on my list ....

Equal Sex For All !

The current system is grossly unfair to ugly people, and it's not their/my fault.

[-] 0 points by lizikrus (6) 8 years ago

I'm lazy and don't want to work! Its unfair because people who are not lazy achieve more. Now some justice needs to be done about this fact. Gov should pay me monthly checks because its the only fair thing to do!

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Sex isn't really all that much work, but I hear what your sayin' !

[-] 0 points by lizikrus (6) 8 years ago

ops i meant to reply to a different post but if we are talking about sex, gov needs to provide me with men because I dont want to go and talk to anyone new. They migh reject me and that is just unfair justice there.

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Did you see Thrasymaque's male sex robot below ?

If you even further down (and I didn't mean that in a sexual way ;o), we have actually managed to develop a plan for sex equality ! See http://occupywallst.org/forum/equal-pay-everyone-should-receive-equal-pay/#comment-463085

[-] 0 points by lizikrus (6) 8 years ago

LOL and i actually did lol

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

That is coming with new technologies. Before long, you'll be able to gratify yourself with a sophisticated sex robot. However, you don't need that. You're Rico Suave after all!

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

See, that guy probably gets more sex in a week than I get in a year. It may be with men, but still, it's darned unfair ! I can't help the fact that I'm old and ugly !

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

You're right. Even Yoda should get laid. We have to make prostitution legal and thoroughly regulated for sexually transmitted diseases. We need a brothel on each street corner. Regular visits should be included in our work packages just under health care and dentistry. Take that Rico Suave!

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

No, no, no. We don't need brothels ! Every person should be willing to help their fellow man/woman. The notion of 'personal property' is outdated, and nobody should have a right to refuse the needs of the unfortunate !

I think we should each get a card each year that entitles us to 365 valid sex acts. We could even have 730 little punch holes to allow for 'half-acts' like a grope, etc. Upon presentation of said card to a person of interest, we would be entitled to a favor. Of course, this plan would work both ways, so you'd have to do your share as well.

I hope you're ready to do your part for equality !

[-] 0 points by an0n (764) 8 years ago

In Soviet Russa, prostitute pays YOU.

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Damn! No wonder the Soviet system failed !

They couldn't even get the oldest profession in the world right !

[-] 0 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

You guys and your male bonding. Too precious for words.

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Hey, you'd get a card as well !

Wait, you wouldn't happen to be one of the "pretty people" in the 1%, would you ?

[-] 0 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

lol. Shouldn't all citizens be treated equally with this entitlement? I don't really need this like you guys evidently do. But I do hope ya'll get lucky tonight after all this.

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Ha ! So you are a member of the 1%, the "pretty people" elite, eh ?

You're a Troll, and I'd appreciate it of you would stop patronizing us 99% !

[-] 0 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

: (

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Oh no! Don't be unhappy! You're activating my 'damsel-in-distress' reflex. Us old guys still have that, you know. My wife exploits it often !

If it makes you feel better, it's OK if you're only in the 1% when the observer is drunk !

[-] 0 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

I knew that would work. : )
Wait a minute. There's observers??

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

I'm in Indonesia. I'm ready to do my part. Before you implement your plan, I suggest you move here as well. The women here are somewhat skinnier, and even 50 year olds are sexy.

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Yes, I've heard Phuket is phonetically accurate. Same in Indonesia, eh ? Notice, by the way, how I'm speaking your native tongue out of respect !

What will you do when a 50 year old German tourist woman in a skimpy bikini that barely contains her rippling folds of fat approaches you with her card ? The only advice I can give would be from Monty Python... Run Away ! Run Away !

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

Indonesia is nothing like Thailand. But, I like your joke. I hadn't heard it before.

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Ha ! You made a grammatical error ! Yes ! <fist pumps>

Does this mean I can revert to using capital letters when I want to make a POINT ?

Yipee ! I'm FREE of the dreaded restrictions UNFAIRLY foisted upon me by the EVIL Thrasymaque !

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

Where? The but at the beginning of a sentence? I make tons of mistakes when I write in English. It's my second language. Please show me my mistake and provide an adequate correction. I'm here to learn like everybody else. (I don't consider a beginning but as a mistake, but you might be seeing something I'm not.)

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

OK, you're forgiven, and I'll go back to all lower case. ;o(

I would have written, "Indonesia is nothing like Thailand, but I like your joke; I hadn't heard it before." I am not, however, an English major, so perhaps "but" at the start of a sentence is, in fact, OK.

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

Conjunctions at the beginning of sentences are indeed a matter of debate. Some argue this usage is improper, while others argue it provides a freer form of expression by accentuating the conjunction and isolating the second statement. I tend to agree with the latter. Although rare in formal writing, they are quite common in looser forms such as poetry. Note: I do not consider a forum a formal cadre for written expression, but, rather, a boundless writing playground.

Let us examine the following sentences:

  1. I like juicy kiwis, but you like big bananas!
  2. I like juicy kiwis. But, you like big bananas!

    By isolating the two statements in respective sentences, I am able to reserve an exclamation mark for the second statement. This provides for more freedom of expression. I can thus express - I like juicy kiwis - in a matter of fact uncolored tone, while I express - you like big bananas - with a punchy exclamatory note. Interestingly, we can also eliminate the but. However, this would decrease the oppositional nature between the two statements.

  3. I like juicy kiwis. You like big bananas!

Finally, we can add even more stress by isolating the you and adding the word sir.

  • I like juicy kiwis. But, you sir, like big bananas!
[-] 0 points by kingscrossection (1203) 8 years ago

Are you referring to the sex robots or the gay sex?

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

Both. Heck, My wife would likely jump in the sack with that guy even if he was a gay robot !

[-] 0 points by kingscrossection (1203) 8 years ago

In school it seems that the system is trying to make all of the boys little girls. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with homosexuals but that just an observation I've made recently.

[-] 0 points by Rico (3027) 8 years ago

I agree. Note, however, some of my best friends are homosexuals !

[-] 0 points by kingscrossection (1203) 8 years ago

Like I said I have no problem with that. I have a friend that is a homosexual too. Its not a big deal to me at all.

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

Lol! You're awesome!

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by kingscrossection (1203) 8 years ago

This is exactly the thinking that led to participation ribbons. Where is the point to them? Oh wait its to keep the feelings of the little fat children society has created. You're an adult. If you think that you need to be on the same level as a CEO or els your feelings will get hurt you deserve to be younger than I am.

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by kingscrossection (1203) 8 years ago

Because he is responsible for the company and you're responsible for the shit in the toilets.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 8 years ago

then why aren't you the CEO? If you could do it you would be doing it. You only get promoted to your ineptitude up to a certain point and CEO is way past that point.

[-] 0 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

it was "tried" in American Indian culture. Everyone got the needs, food tp protection. There was no money. But there was not equality either. Some brove people had to do dangerous things other did other "special" jobs. All survived, none got rich as the concept was unknown, as money did not exist.

[-] 0 points by warriorjoe7 (232) 8 years ago

For the WIN

[-] 0 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

they might have been "doing it right"?

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

"I think there is great potential in this idea"

That's what I said. Your thought is short sighted.

[Deleted]

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

Read the other comments here to see all the problems with your idea.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

well I can surely understand the bluntness of such an idea would arouse many .. and get many backs up" resistance is natural to all new ideas .. plus most of the comments are from short sighted individuals as is yourself .. so I am being patient with them as with you ...

[-] 0 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

who would do dangerous jobs then? answer to that who would do dirty jobs then? answer to that who would do technical jobs then? answer to that

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

answer me this, who would pour molten steel in a foundry then? My friend has huge burns on his body from hot iron that splashed while he was working. Would you be willing to go there and do that dangerous, dirty and hard job, for average pay? Stand on your head when you answer, so you can answer straight

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by jjuussttmmee (607) 8 years ago

embrace stupidity? no I think for myself. If a idea is no good I will not say it is good, that would be a lie. Yes the king has no clothes on, i see clearly, and say the politically wrong but true things. love ya dude, keep thinking. if this idea is so good then explain it better and answer the hard question asked by many

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

Your idea is not blunt nor bold, it's lame and is nothing new at all. It's utterly unoriginal.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

really .. equal pay .. paid schooling .. job creation for everyone .. no more tax collecting budget system .. unlimited budget .. this is original ? its been done .. where?

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

It has been discussed in theoretical works over and over again throughout the centuries. I never said it had been done. I said it wasn't an original idea. I use precise words, read carefully.

[-] -1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

why was it discussed over and over again ? think now .. clear your mind .. if you can .. calm your self .. if your angry you won't succeed .. ok are you focused .. now think ... think ... why would they discuss this over and over ? why do they keep looking for a cure for terminal illnesses [that was a clue to the first question]

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 8 years ago

"why was it discussed over and over again ?"

Because people who look for utopia are not very well educated. Like you, they repeat the past again and again without even knowing. You're here writing this and you never read about it before. That's lame.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Spankysmojo (849) 8 years ago

Too communist. It won't work. One goes to school for years at a high cost and the other sweats all day at little cost.

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 8 years ago

All products should cost the same! Why do I have to pay more for a car than an iPhone or coffee cup???

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Why does a millionaire pay the same price for gas as someone earning minimum wage?

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 8 years ago

Should a person with zero income get gas for free?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

There is obviously a problem of wealth. And the rules of the game need adjustments.

[-] 1 points by bereal (235) 8 years ago

You are like a child that wants to change the rules of the game when you are losing.

[-] 0 points by Payyourtaxesrichasses (19) from Brooklyn, NY 8 years ago

This is a great Idea. Everyone gets credit once a week on their ID card, and when you buy something the money is not 'transferred' but it is destroyed. Fair is fair.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 8 years ago

This is the type of post that people use to discredit the Occupy movement. In American, you are indeed in the 1% if you honestly think that is best. Maybe even the 0.1%.

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

Your catching on

[-] 1 points by Gileos (309) 8 years ago

I see now your here to discredit the movement, cool!

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 8 years ago

ows has discredited themselves with deception

[-] -1 points by LardbuttsReincarnation (4) 8 years ago

Yes, toilet cleaners should make as much as the President. Probably more than this President at least.

LOL.

This is such a hilarious website.

[Deleted]

[-] -1 points by LardbuttsReincarnation (4) 8 years ago

The President is a toilet cleaner.