Bernie Ya'll :snoop:

[Booker T Garvey]

the idea is that more people making a living wage would go to your aunt's salons

how many people making 8 or 9$ can go to a salon regularly

that's a theory

but there's also the possibility that if people have more money in their pockets, they could go to somebody better. more "upscale" or whatever.
i mean that's just a realistic possibility for not only my aunt but for all small business owners.

one thing is for certain, that 15 dollars an hour has to be paid
people don't HAVE to do business with you

 

[MrSinnister]

with all due respect....this is some right wing rush limbaugh shyt.

i thought bernie was for the little guy...you're essentially giving the "gotta break some eggs" theory to me.

so some people will have to close their businesses and lose their jobs for the greater good? wow.

How is any of that Right Wing?

What usually happens after a wage increase:

1. You get the punishment staff purges. Companies go overboard, so there's a lot of people who are now left that are needed for overtime. They fear they're the next ones on the chopping block so they work as long as they can, earning overtime bank on the new wage number.

2. The people left burn out, and more staff is needed. The overtime people start pumping their money into the economy, now feeling at a safe place. That new money hits the economy like an atom bomb. New small businesses replace the ones that let themselves go and reap rewards.

3. Companies start hiring either part-time or full time workers to now take on the new demand. These people eventually become full time as the system is flushed with money.

4. Everyone in the new paradigm is now eating and wondered why the fukk didn't this happen sooner.

It would be preferable for companies to simply transfer more people to part time initially, as a wait and see approach to minimize the cost of training new employees, while maximizing their current experience. Humans don't think like that though.

Nothing I've said is anything close to right wing. Small businesses need to be flexible or move to the side and wait for others to take their place. The main problem with small businesses is they put on too much debt and don't plan far enough. Wage hikes are inevitable, and so are the windfalls.

Sorry if it seems personal, but smaller nations have done this and were better off for it.

 

[MrSinnister]

Right Wingers would simply leave us capped at the 3-5 dollar range, replace people like cogs, then wonder why welfare programs are getting so big, and cut them (benefits and unemployment) anyway, calling people lazy, because companies don't have the money to hire new workers and just rotate the cheapest they can find. That's your "breaking eggs for the greater good" bullshyt.

Hint: It never works.

 

[Booker T Garvey]

Right Wingers would simply leave us capped at the 3-5 dollar range, replace people like cogs, then wonder why welfare programs are getting so big, and cut them (benefits and unemployment) anyway, calling people lazy, because companies don't have the money to hire new workers and just rotate the cheapest they can find. That's your "breaking eggs for the greater good" bullshyt.

Hint: It never works.

no, what i meant was "right wing" was the argument that small businesses just may have to shut down
and people will need to hit the unemployment line for this so called "plan" to work...

there's nothing socialistic about that plan putting people out of work and crushing their entrepreneurial dreams

 

[MrSinnister]

no, what i meant was "right wing" was the argument that small businesses just may have to shut down
and people will need to hit the unemployment line for this so called "plan" to work...

there's nothing socialistic about that plan putting people out of work and crushing their entrepreneurial dreams

I didn't say I was socialist. I'm a capitalist that fights for the little guy. We can't let the groups that hires the fewest people dictate decisions on progress and growth. Change is not painless, and this isn't Chutes and Ladders. I'd rather have a strong economy of contributing people, that protect the ones with the fewest contribution to that economy, although I do value it. We should be way higher than 15 minimum anyway, considering how much money is being circulated at the top. I just don't want too big of a shock for small businesses to handle.

If they can't handle this, then they weren't really viable businesses. They weren't really eating.

 

[Booker T Garvey]

I didn't say I was socialist. I'm a capitalist that fights for the little guy. We can't let the groups that hires the fewest people dictate decisions on progress and growth. Change is not painless, and this isn't Chutes and Ladders. I'd rather have a strong economy of contributing people, that protect the ones with the fewest contribution to that economy, although I do value it. We should be way higher than 15 minimum anyway, considering how much money is being circulated at the top. I just don't want too big of a shock for small businesses to handle.

If they can't handle this, then they weren't really viable businesses. They weren't really eating.

we're saying the same thing just wording it differently

i'm not disagreeing with the economic rationale behind what the 15 dollar min wage increase will do

but arguing that there will be casualties in order to get the trains back on the track is some bullshyt.

that's not a jab at you or your beliefs, it's a jab at arguing for 15 dollar minimum wage

 

[MrSinnister]

we're saying the same thing just wording it differently

i'm not disagreeing with the economic rationale behind what the 15 dollar min wage increase will do

but arguing that there will be casualties in order to get the trains back on the track is some bullshyt.

that's not a jab at you or your beliefs, it's a jab at arguing for 15 dollar minimum wage

Nah, you're good. Just saying that it's horrible to have to use slash and burn in the forests too. Weak trees die to fertilize the new ones, while also providing space. It's actually both socialist and capitalist, providing the most chances of opportunity to the most number of people, while maximizing profit potential to those that are left.

It's pretty regressive to take the needs of the few to kill legislation with such far ranging positive effects. There's no real reason NOT to be at 15 right now. Pope shouldn't have to kill themselves to have an comfortable existence. It's just that the rich want a lot of things we all use, like highways, and theme parks, to thenselves.

 

[soulfuljah]

I didn't say I was socialist. I'm a capitalist that fights for the little guy. We can't let the groups that hires the fewest people dictate decisions on progress and growth. Change is not painless, and this isn't Chutes and Ladders. I'd rather have a strong economy of contributing people, that protect the ones with the fewest contribution to that economy, although I do value it. We should be way higher than 15 minimum anyway, considering how much money is being circulated at the top. I just don't want too big of a shock for small businesses to handle.

If they can't handle this, then they weren't really viable businesses. They weren't really eating.

So you are saying that you don't want too big of a shock for small business while at the same time saying if they can't handle an increase, they aren't eating.

Using a simplistic example, if a business has 100 workers making $10 an hour and the wage went up to $15, then their operating expenses went up $500 per hour, $20k a week, over $1 million per year. Again, I know this is a very basic scenario, but looking at this simplistic scenario, operating cost went up 50%.

 

[MrSinnister]

I did say to cut workers or reduce the hours to part time too, didn't I. Don't take a face in the picture and try to analyze that as the whole portrait. Of you have two workers and cut their time in half, you keep the experience yet cut your costs by half.

You have to be able to adapt. People can't spoon feed, or wait for you, in progress and business. Also, a small business is far less that 100 workers.

 

[soulfuljah]

I did say to cut workers or reduce the hours to part time too, didn't I. Don't take a face in the picture and try to analyze that as the whole portrait. Of you have two workers and cut their time in half, you keep the experience yet cut your costs by half.

You have to be able to adapt. People can't spoon feed, or wait for you, in progress and business. Also, a small business is far less that 100 workers.

Not in that post...

And I understand the concept of adapting to change but I agree with what you said; change is not painless. There will be losses if the revenue can't match the rise in cost, either in hours or jobs. Some people miss that.

And small business is not far less than 100 workers. Depending on the industry, it is either calculated by number of employees (up to 500) or average annual receipts of so many million dollars, at least in order to be seen as a small business to the SBA.

 

[MrSinnister]

Not in that post...

And I understand the concept of adapting to change but I agree with what you said; change is not painless. There will be losses if the revenue can't match the rise in cost, either in hours or jobs. Some people miss that.

And small business is not far less than 100 workers. Depending on the industry, it is either calculated by number of employees (up to 500) or average annual receipts of so many million dollars, at least in order to be seen as a small business to the SBA.

Yeah, SBA has a far warped sense of what a small business is. They likely wouldn't have more than 50 employees from anecdotal evidence. It's kinda of good that more businesses would qualify for loans and grants, but it's still a waste, when they should be able to fend for themselves by then.

You should be pretty flexible to have 100 employees. Your business should be something in manufacturing. You're also right about my cuts not being in that post. I'm just saying it's insane, although the argument will be used by the Republicans, to let small business concerns trump an actual living wage.

I don't hear shyt about rising rent being tied to wage growth, for the very less than fortunate. New York is having a homeless exposing right now, and many cities are soon to follow. We need something done now, and gotta stop looking at the short term concerns of a few people.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Lying-ass OP exposing himself yet AGAIN.


Booker T Garvey in April 2016:

"Look, Bernie must be a loser because both Clinton and Obama both hating on him, and they couldn't possibly be orchestrating anything against Bernie!"

why are bill clinton and obama comparing bernie supporters to the tea party though -

and these two can't stand each other so you can't argue this is a part of some orchestrated smear "plan"

Bill Clinton Says Bernie Sanders Supporters Are Like The Left-Wing Tea Party, Warns Not To "Reward" Them

Obama warns Dems against 'Tea Party mentality'

Booker T Garvey in October 2016:

"Bernie was kicking their asses until the whole Democratic Party orchestrated his defeat!"

he's not a democrat but he was whooping democrat ass and taking their votes

clinton and the DNC wasn't having it, so they cheated. and you can try and spin it however you want, but this was cheating

again - not sure how anybody can be proud that their candidate pretty much cheated their way into the white house.

so now it's official:

1) Clinton's campaign had an unfair advantage against Bernie Sanders....

anybody cheering this bytch's presidency is a whole got damned idiot.

you've yet to address the unfair advantage the clinton campaign had over sanders'

i mean read the article: the DNC was FWD'ng bernie sanders' political strategies to hillary clinton's campaign

earlier you boasted that sanders was losing by 70, 80 points, but you're skipping over the fact that the clinton campaign had his playbook!

He's aiming for the EXACT same shyt. During the primary he's claiming that Bernie is horrible and everyone hates him and the Clintons/Obamas would never orchestrate anything, and then in the general he'll switch it up and claim that Bernie was the powerhouse and the DNC is just a corrupt machine that orchestrates everything to get their preferred candidate in.

 

[Geek Nasty]

Get mad at credit agencies and their guidelines not the lenders.

Also we tried the "give anybody and everybody" a loan concept.....remember?

This conservatives-propagated myth is a racist hoax. Poor home owners didn't cause the housing crisis because there isn't that much money relatively in the low end of the housing market. The crisis was caused by high end housing speculation and flippers.

conservatives just loved blaming it on poor black peoole who couldnt pay their bills.

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

okay so real life scenario:

my aunt owns 2 beauty salons, she's not wealthy but she's also doing well for herself and so are her shops

she told everybody on facebook that she can't afford to pay her employees 15 dollars an hour. she just can't.
she's not anti-anybody, she was just stating a fact about her business.

so minimum wage goes up to 15 dollars an hour? she's just SOL? we just tell her to get a job flipping burgers.

Yes.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

How is any of that Right Wing?

What usually happens after a wage increase:

1. You get the punishment staff purges. Companies go overboard, so there's a lot of people who are now left that are needed for overtime. They fear they're the next ones on the chopping block so they work as long as they can, earning overtime bank on the new wage number.

2. The people left burn out, and more staff is needed. The overtime people start pumping their money into the economy, now feeling at a safe place. That new money hits the economy like an atom bomb. New small businesses replace the ones that let themselves go and reap rewards.

3. Companies start hiring either part-time or full time workers to now take on the new demand. These people eventually become full time as the system is flushed with money.

4. Everyone in the new paradigm is now eating and wondered why the fukk didn't this happen sooner.

It would be preferable for companies to simply transfer more people to part time initially, as a wait and see approach to minimize the cost of training new employees, while maximizing their current experience. Humans don't think like that though.

Nothing I've said is anything close to right wing. Small businesses need to be flexible or move to the side and wait for others to take their place. The main problem with small businesses is they put on too much debt and don't plan far enough. Wage hikes are inevitable, and so are the windfalls.

Sorry if it seems personal, but smaller nations have done this and were better off for it.

Now we've had 3 years and the receipts are in for Seattle. They have more jobs than before, the economy is growing even faster, the poorest workers now have much more money in their pockets than before and report higher personal satisfaction. Most small businesses are happy with the situation, some did close (small businesses are always closing with or without new wages, of course), but most survived or even expanded.

Even time there's a survey you find that MOST small businessmen prefer a higher minimum wage, in part because it gives them a strategic advantage over big businesses that try to undercut them by paying a huge bare-bottoms workforce. Small businesses already have to pay higher to attract the best help anyway, higher minimum wages reduce the degree to which big business can undercut them on costs.