Economy (Update)Bernie Sanders Staff Demand $15 Minimum Wage, Some Quit Over Low Wages

WTF are you babbling about? I’ve worked nothing but salary jobs the past 20 years of my life. I had to report my hours every pay period.

And you self report your hours, and they pay you for it?

How many ***100 hour*** weeks you self report?
 
And you self report your hours, and they pay you for it?

How many ***100 hour*** weeks you self report?

Maybe because the person I’m reporting to has professional interactions with me on an almost daily basis and it would be easily spotted if I was reporting fraudulent hours? Most managers, directors, and bean counters know roughly how many hours and how many people projects take to complete. Fraud like that doesn’t fly for too long before it’s detected.
 
Maybe because the person I’m reporting to has professional interactions with me on an almost daily basis and it would be easily spotted if I was reporting fraudulent hours? Most managers, directors, and bean counters know roughly how many hours and how many people projects take to complete. Fraud like that doesn’t fly for too long before it’s detected.

Which is the point here. A national campaign occurs nationally.

No one is there to verify what is being done.

Hence it being a straight salaried job, not dependent on hours worked.
 
Which is the point here. A national campaign occurs nationally.

No one is there to verify what is being done.

Hence it being a straight salaried job, not dependent on hours worked.

How do you know nobody is verifying productivity vs reported hours?
 
I will admit that as long as you will admit that we only have better results in a cute care.

Medical systems like Canada or the UK, have better overall health care results because they didnt create a profit generating system that pays only to provide acute care, and pays nothing for providing preventative care.
Sure, but acute care is all we're ever talking about. You have to be a bit creative to arrive at "better results" for universal healthcare. I mean it isn't 5 year cancer survival or disease irradication, you're picking though life expectancy that is only skewed by drug ODs and auto accidents and probably infant mortality where under a certain birth weigh doesn't even counted as ever being alive. I can tell you this because I had a dad whose life was extended by 2 years because of cancer treatment here and I have a friend whose dad is getting pretty near the end of his life extension(multiple myeloma, btw). I wouldn't rather my dad or friend's dad have that disease in any other country.

Like I said in another thread, I'm not even opposed to universal healthcare, but let's be realistic that life expectancy isn't tied to it and taxes, as well as quality of care, is going to suffer because of it.
 
How do you know nobody is verifying productivity vs reported hours?

How would you?

You are literally running campaign operations throughout the country.

If you have 2 people in the same area, you are wasting limited resources.
 
How would you?

You are literally running campaign operations throughout the country.

If you have 2 people in the same area, you are wasting limited resources.

So you think he’s just sending people out to hang flyers on doorknobs with no oversight?
 
Sure, but acute care is all we're ever talking about. You have to be a bit creative to arrive at "better results" for universal healthcare. I mean it isn't 5 year cancer survival or disease irradication, you're picking though life expectancy that is only skewed by drug ODs and auto accidents and probably infant mortality where under a certain birth weigh doesn't even counted as ever being alive. I can tell you this because I had a dad whose life was extended by 2 years because of cancer treatment here and I have a friend whose dad is getting pretty near the end of his life extension(multiple myeloma, btw). I wouldn't rather my dad or friend's dad have that disease in any other country.

Are you seriously trying to argue that preventive care is not only better for health outcomes, but also far cheaper?

Go ask a fat person the last time their doctor told them they need to stop being fat in the US, and then ask someone in a Universal Health care system the same question.

It doesn't pay to tell people to stop being fat in the US, it gets you a complaint.

In a Universal healthcare country, they don't give a shit if you complain because they are actually judged by the health of their patient and not by how many tests they ordered, or patient complaints about being called fat.
 
''Debunking'' with an irrelevant argument. You are arguing with a straight face that the huge tax cuts in favor of the rich, curbing of social programs and the browbeating of collective bargaining under Reagan didn't fundamentally change shit for the top earners? lol, what was even the point of Reaganomics and trickle down then? Meanwhile in the real world they did have a big effect:

''in 1981 the top 0.1% of the income distribution received 1.8% of total income, by 1982 2.5%, and by 1983 2.7%. So by 1983 the share of income of these 80,000 households doubled compared to 1977. Henceforth the floodgates were open and remained open: by 1988 their share reached 5.4% and by 2000 7.3% From 1.3% to 7.3% of national income is a game changer of immense historic proportions.''

Labor's share of GDP went down and Inequality started soaring with the trickle down bs as well.

LY7RRWj.png
That isn't from a static amount.
Are you seriously trying to argue that preventive care is not only better for health outcomes, but also far cheaper?

Go ask a fat person the last time their doctor told them they need to stop being fat in the US, and then ask someone in a Universal Health care system the same question.

It doesn't pay to tell people to stop being fat in the US, it gets you a complaint.

In a Universal healthcare country, they don't give a shit if you complain because they are actually judged by the health of their patient and not by how many tests they ordered, or patient complaints about being called fat.
No, who said that? The only people who didn't know obesity comes with 10 other heath concerns are feminists arguing about what attractive. There are 0 fat men who though their obesity was perfectly healthy and no amount Dr's visits are going to change their mind. All that really means is universal healthcare would be astronomically more expensive here than anywhere else.
 
''Debunking'' with an irrelevant argument. You are arguing with a straight face that the huge tax cuts in favor of the rich, curbing of social programs and the browbeating of collective bargaining under Reagan didn't fundamentally change shit for the top earners? lol, what was even the point of Reaganomics and trickle down then? Meanwhile in the real world they did have a big effect:

''in 1981 the top 0.1% of the income distribution received 1.8% of total income, by 1982 2.5%, and by 1983 2.7%. So by 1983 the share of income of these 80,000 households doubled compared to 1977. Henceforth the floodgates were open and remained open: by 1988 their share reached 5.4% and by 2000 7.3% From 1.3% to 7.3% of national income is a game changer of immense historic proportions.''

Labor's share of GDP went down and Inequality started soaring with the trickle down bs as well.

LY7RRWj.png
<{vega}><{vega}><{vega}>



Point me in the direction of the place that's had impressive growth going disproportionately to the lower classes. I'll wait.
 
That isn't from a static amount.

No, who said that? The only people who didn't know obesity comes with 10 other heath concerns are feminists arguing about what attractive. There are 0 fat men who though their obesity was perfectly healthy and no amount Dr's visits are going to change their mind. All that really means is universal healthcare would be astronomically more expensive here than anywhere else.

It's one thing to know it.

It is another for a medical expert to explain to you what your near future will look like in vivid detail, if you don't change.

It won't solve obesity, but you might be surprised how many people that would motivate to do what they already know they should be doing.

This is one example in advising people about health decisions, which we straight up don't do here.

I smoke man. I'm shocked I don't get a lecture Everytime I go to the doctors office.

I know I should quit. I plan on quiting. A doctor climbing up on his soap box, could be just the push I need.
 
It's one thing to know it.

It is another for a medical expert to explain to you what your near future will look like in vivid detail, if you don't change.

It won't solve obesity, but you might be surprised how many people that would motivate to do what they already know they should be doing.

This is one example in advising people about health decisions, which we straight up don't do here.

I smoke man. I'm shocked I don't get a lecture Everytime I go to the doctors office.

I know I should quit. I plan on quiting. A doctor climbing up on his soap box, could be just the push I need.
As a non medical professional and former smoker, get the 4mg nicorette lozenges for about 2 weeks and then go to 2mg for 2 weeks and then quit that. You'll never have withdrawal headaches and you'll be done in a few weeks.
 
As a non medical professional and former smoker, get the 4mg nicorette lozenges for about 2 weeks and then go to 2mg for 2 weeks and then quit that. You'll never have withdrawal headaches and you'll be done in a few weeks.

Always said I would quit when I was 35. Quit for 2 weeks, and then used being fucked with at work as an excuse to start again. Haven't tried again since. Been 3 years. I just got to take the leap again, and not give myself any excuses.
 
Back
Top