mnealtx 0 #51 July 25, 2009 QuoteBefore you were saying that it is done purely on self-interest, and now you have changed your hypothesis within a few posts on an online forum? You must not have been so prepared after all.Quote And YOU surmised that everyone would make the purchase to "help out the provider" - after all, they could have just STOLEN whatever it was. NOW you're saying that even ONE person proves your point - what was that about 'being prepared'?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chasteh 0 #52 July 25, 2009 >Ask the same 10 people why they gave their server a tip, and you'll get the 9 matches. Interesting response now that you have edited your post. So, your saying they gave the tip to the server because they wanted the product/service? You have that one backwards. They got the service before the tip. Many people NEVER tip their servers, and many who do don't tip them in an "ethical" way, whatever that is. What reasons do we have available? To compensate them for services that were provided. Sounds like your tipping to contribute to the service they provided and who provided it - them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chasteh 0 #53 July 25, 2009 >And YOU surmised that everyone would make the purchase to "help out the provider" - after all, they could have just STOLEN whatever it was Backin yourself into a corner again? Show me. >NOW you're saying that even ONE person proves your point - what was that about 'being prepared'? Yep. It shows how their "wealth" is at the very least not entirely made of their own efforts. "they went out and made their own" was the comment. There is quite a bit of ammo negating that here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #54 July 25, 2009 Quote>Ask the same 10 people why they gave their server a tip, and you'll get the 9 matches. Interesting response now that you have edited your post. So, your saying they gave the tip to the server because they wanted the product/service? You have that one backwards. They got the service before the tip. Many people NEVER tip their servers, and many who do don't tip them in an "ethical" way, whatever that is. What reasons do we have available? To compensate them for services that were provided. Sounds like your tipping to contribute to the service they provided and who provided it - them. I edited my post to better reflect reality - there WILL be a subset of people that will buy a specific product solely to support the company that produces it (Apple, anyone?). Tipping is the best example I could think of to support YOUR hypothesis - people paying to directly benefit a supplier of a service. I choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #55 July 25, 2009 QuoteI choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is. Why do you listen to Miley Cyrus rather than the Jonas Brothers? Or do you just listen to the music and don't care which of them is singing it? (Or insert music groups appropriate to your own situation . . . I don't actually know what you, Mike, listen to.)quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chasteh 0 #56 July 25, 2009 >I edited my post to better reflect reality Well, actually, that much is still left to be debated. Do 9/10 people pay for things strictly because they want them? We've established that they want the product. Now we need to see if that is why they paid for that product. Your response says that they paid for it because they wanted it. However, that still doesn't explain why they paid for it, just that they wanted it - because they could have just stolen the product. My response is, that they paid for the product to compensate for the services, not to avoid a law against theft. edit: And if they paid for the product to compensate for the services, then they did actually contribute to the seller's wealth, thus making it the case that they did not "do it on their own." >Tipping is the best example I could think of to support YOUR hypothesis Thanks? I didn't see that you were finding an example to support my hypothesis. >I choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is. Ok. And you don't have to pay the waiter, either. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #57 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteI choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is. Why do you listen to Miley Cyrus rather than the Jonas Brothers? Or do you just listen to the music and don't care which of them is singing it? (Or insert music groups appropriate to your own situation . . . I don't actually know what you listen to.) I choose singers I like, not their backup bands - which supports my restaurant/staff example. The reverse would be, oh, going to see whoever was singing with Little Feat as their band. I think a better analogy (for the 'benefit a provider' theory) may be something like a farmer's market or roadside veggie stand vs. a supermarket. While it can still be argued both ways (healthier vs. keeping the small farms alive), it still seems a better fit than a personal service like waiting a table or performing in a band. Your thoughts?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #58 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuote>They made the purchase because they wanted the product - that's it. And they could have stolen it instead. Why the difference? Because of laws? See the earlier post. It sure wasn't to 'benefit the provider'. If they wanted to do that, they'd make a donation. And you know this how? I can look through all my software, separate the stuff I bought from the stuff I pirated, and see a clear pattern. The pirated software is from developers that have business practices that I generally don't like or are applications that I loathe using. Everything else is paid for or free. I've even donated to the developers of some of the free stuff. I can get the vast majority of software for free if I want to. If I pay for it (and mostly I do), it is to benefit the provider.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #59 July 25, 2009 QuoteMy response is, that they paid for the product to compensate for the services, not to avoid a law against theft. Fine - so ask 10 people coming out of Walmart why they paid for their purchases rather than stealing them - I still bet 9/10 say it's because they didn't want to get arrested for shoplifting rather than to benefit Walmart. Quote>I choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is. Ok. And you don't have to pay the waiter, either. Correct - however, I ate at Red Lobster because I wanted seafood for dinner, not because I think it's the greatest company in the world.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #60 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote>They made the purchase because they wanted the product - that's it. And they could have stolen it instead. Why the difference? Because of laws? See the earlier post. It sure wasn't to 'benefit the provider'. If they wanted to do that, they'd make a donation. And you know this how? I can look through all my software, separate the stuff I bought from the stuff I pirated, and see a clear pattern. The pirated software is from developers that have business practices that I generally don't like or are applications that I loathe using. Everything else is paid for or free. I've even donated to the developers of some of the free stuff. I can get the vast majority of software for free if I want to. If I pay for it (and mostly I do), it is to benefit the provider. Good for you - not everyone is so casual about breaking the law.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #61 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteThat should be fairly obvious by their bank account. So, from what I hear, you're a good video guy. So, you probably get more requests to shoot video than someone who sucks. So, you make more money at it than the 50 jump dz rat with the 3rd hand gear. Lets give half of the money you make to him. Never mind that he doesn't take the time to work on his flying, video, or editing skills. Forget that he spends his money on things besides jumps and good equipment. You have more so you must owe him. It's not like you did anything extra to become good. It has nothing to do with your desire or work. It's only because of the guy off the interstate that pumped the gas for the truck that delivered your camera. You haven't earned and don't deserve anything. Do you? Do you really not see the huge problems with that analogy?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #62 July 25, 2009 Quote(Or insert music groups appropriate to your own situation . . . I don't actually know what you, Mike, listen to.) He previously mentioned that he listens to some rapper named Shaggy.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #63 July 25, 2009 QuoteGood for you - not everyone is so casual about breaking the law. What can I say? I'm a rebel. Once I even drove a couple mph over the posted speed limit. I've been known to jaywalk, too. More seriously, there are many, many software users like me. The same goes for music listeners. If they feel the provider is deserving, they pay.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #64 July 25, 2009 Quote Quote Quote That should be fairly obvious by their bank account. So, from what I hear, you're a good video guy. So, you probably get more requests to shoot video than someone who sucks. So, you make more money at it than the 50 jump dz rat with the 3rd hand gear. Lets give half of the money you make to him. Never mind that he doesn't take the time to work on his flying, video, or editing skills. Forget that he spends his money on things besides jumps and good equipment. You have more so you must owe him. It's not like you did anything extra to become good. It has nothing to do with your desire or work. It's only because of the guy off the interstate that pumped the gas for the truck that delivered your camera. You haven't earned and don't deserve anything. Do you? Do you really not see the huge problems with that analogy? I don't and I find it damn funny too. All increasing minimum wage does is increase inflation. However the inflation increase is greater so although you have more money, you have less buying power. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #65 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteDo you really not see the huge problems with that analogy? I don't and I find it damn funny too. Of an experienced videographer and a fifty jump newbie, who uses more DZ resources (e.g. electricity, space for personal video station, etc.) Would it not be reasonable to expect the experienced videographer to pay a larger share of per jump overhead costs to the DZ, even though there is no rule that explicitly forbids the fifty jump newbie from plugging in his battery chargers and computers or taking up counter/desk space with his own camera gear? Furthermore, no one is suggesting that the rich pay money directly to poor individuals, as the (bad) analogy suggests. QuoteAll increasing minimum wage does is increase inflation. However the inflation increase is greater so although you have more money, you have less buying power. If you've been paying attention, you know that we are discussing adjusting minimum wage to account for inflation, not raising minimum wage as measured in real/constant dollars.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #66 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteI choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is. Why do you listen to Miley Cyrus rather than the Jonas Brothers? Or do you just listen to the music and don't care which of them is singing it? (Or insert music groups appropriate to your own situation . . . I don't actually know what you listen to.) I choose singers I like, not their backup bands - which supports my restaurant/staff example. The reverse would be, oh, going to see whoever was singing with Little Feat as their band. I think a better analogy (for the 'benefit a provider' theory) may be something like a farmer's market or roadside veggie stand vs. a supermarket. While it can still be argued both ways (healthier vs. keeping the small farms alive), it still seems a better fit than a personal service like waiting a table or performing in a band. Your thoughts? In my analogy, the "stars" are the millionaires (because they usually are) and the sidemen are simply high level employees. The minimum wage worker is the guy that works in the record store. I can almost guarantee you that you are, in fact, listening to specific artists rather than generic ones. You almost certainly have your favorites and a song by them is definitely "worth" more in your mind than if, for instance, I sang it. My guess is you also have specific movie stars you're going to see or not see in the movies too. Same with book authors. Hell, if you're a big enough redneck (and I'm not saying you, Mike, are but just using this as an example) you MAY have had a knock down drag out bar fight over Ford vs Chevy or Coors vs Bud. Glock vs S&W?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #67 July 25, 2009 Quote Mandatory minimum wage laws increase costs and result in more inflation and unemployment. economic drivel stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #68 July 25, 2009 In related news . . . http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE56N48E20090724quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chasteh 0 #69 July 25, 2009 Actually, wal-marts "security" is told to tell the person to stop, and if they get out of reach and refuse to cooperate to just let them go - this is an effort to reduce the likelihood of wal-mart developing a negative public image. >I still bet 9/10 say it's because they didn't want to get arrested for shoplifting rather than to benefit Walmart. In other words, they would rather shoplift than pay for the items?I thought that when mnealtx accuses people of being theives, he is referring to only a minority of persons. Or do you mean to say that most people would steal the items if they could? >Correct - however, I ate at Red Lobster because I wanted seafood for dinner, not because I think it's the greatest company in the world. Uh huh. And why did you pay for the service as opposed to just walking out? You are capable of doing this also. Did you tip your server? Why? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TomAiello 26 #70 July 25, 2009 Quote And of those, what percentage do you think have never benefitted from government infrastructure to create that wealth? Hey, I know. Let's teach those guys a lesson. We'll stop providing that government support they leech off, and they stop paying taxes. They take out more than they put it, so the system would be better off without them, right? Ha! We'll show them! -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TomAiello 26 #71 July 25, 2009 Quote I can look through all my software, separate the stuff I bought from the stuff I pirated, and see a clear pattern. The pirated software is from developers that have business practices that I generally don't like or are applications that I loathe using. Everything else is paid for or free. I've even donated to the developers of some of the free stuff. Wouldn't it be great if we all had the kind of freedom to choose, in everything? If you didn't like the business practices of, say, the national healthcare system, you could just opt out, and not pay for it? Or, what if you didn't like the practices of your local public schools? Wouldn't it be cool if you could just decide to use a private school instead, and get your money back from the public school?-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chasteh 0 #72 July 25, 2009 Just how much "money back" would you be getting? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chasteh 0 #73 July 25, 2009 Quote Hey, I know. Let's teach those guys a lesson. We'll stop providing that government support they leech off, and they stop paying taxes. They take out more than they put it, so the system would be better off without them, right? Ha! We'll show them! Is he saying that we should seize taxation and all government services? That is more aligned with a Libertarians thesis, BTW, than his. He is negating the notion that millionaires earn their wealth by themselves. Sort of like how that bridge you jump off all the time was provided by someone else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites champu 1 #74 July 25, 2009 QuoteIn my analogy, the "stars" are the millionaires (because they usually are) and the sidemen are simply high level employees. The minimum wage worker is the guy that works in the record store. Thinking that rich people need to be thankful for the hoi polloi that buy (with what ever degree of necessity or gratitude you want to attach to the purchase) whatever it is the rich person is peddling has absolutely nothing to do with raising the minimum wage of the guy that said good morning to them as they walked in the store. People pay for things in a store because that's one of the "rules" of the "game" that we're all playing. Getting busted for shop lifting is also a possibility in the "game." Getting a minimum wage job at a company where someone, perhaps far away, is getting rich is yet another. QuoteI disagree. The super rich owe society/government/"the little people" more because the super rich are benefitting more. That should be fairly obvious by their bank account. I'm not stating this in regards to taxes but just in general. I've already said that I'm completely fine with rich people paying more in taxes (which keep the "game" going) because they benefit more from it... I've even said I'm okay with the idea of minimum wages... All I'm asking is that if you want to raise the minimum wage you re-examine the whole picture of unskilled labor. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #75 July 25, 2009 QuoteWouldn't it be great if we all had the kind of freedom to choose, in everything? We do. If you don't like the laws of this country, you are free to relocate to one of your choosing, if they'll accept you (referring to immigration laws of other countries, not commenting on your character in any way).Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 3 of 11 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
chasteh 0 #52 July 25, 2009 >Ask the same 10 people why they gave their server a tip, and you'll get the 9 matches. Interesting response now that you have edited your post. So, your saying they gave the tip to the server because they wanted the product/service? You have that one backwards. They got the service before the tip. Many people NEVER tip their servers, and many who do don't tip them in an "ethical" way, whatever that is. What reasons do we have available? To compensate them for services that were provided. Sounds like your tipping to contribute to the service they provided and who provided it - them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chasteh 0 #53 July 25, 2009 >And YOU surmised that everyone would make the purchase to "help out the provider" - after all, they could have just STOLEN whatever it was Backin yourself into a corner again? Show me. >NOW you're saying that even ONE person proves your point - what was that about 'being prepared'? Yep. It shows how their "wealth" is at the very least not entirely made of their own efforts. "they went out and made their own" was the comment. There is quite a bit of ammo negating that here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #54 July 25, 2009 Quote>Ask the same 10 people why they gave their server a tip, and you'll get the 9 matches. Interesting response now that you have edited your post. So, your saying they gave the tip to the server because they wanted the product/service? You have that one backwards. They got the service before the tip. Many people NEVER tip their servers, and many who do don't tip them in an "ethical" way, whatever that is. What reasons do we have available? To compensate them for services that were provided. Sounds like your tipping to contribute to the service they provided and who provided it - them. I edited my post to better reflect reality - there WILL be a subset of people that will buy a specific product solely to support the company that produces it (Apple, anyone?). Tipping is the best example I could think of to support YOUR hypothesis - people paying to directly benefit a supplier of a service. I choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #55 July 25, 2009 QuoteI choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is. Why do you listen to Miley Cyrus rather than the Jonas Brothers? Or do you just listen to the music and don't care which of them is singing it? (Or insert music groups appropriate to your own situation . . . I don't actually know what you, Mike, listen to.)quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chasteh 0 #56 July 25, 2009 >I edited my post to better reflect reality Well, actually, that much is still left to be debated. Do 9/10 people pay for things strictly because they want them? We've established that they want the product. Now we need to see if that is why they paid for that product. Your response says that they paid for it because they wanted it. However, that still doesn't explain why they paid for it, just that they wanted it - because they could have just stolen the product. My response is, that they paid for the product to compensate for the services, not to avoid a law against theft. edit: And if they paid for the product to compensate for the services, then they did actually contribute to the seller's wealth, thus making it the case that they did not "do it on their own." >Tipping is the best example I could think of to support YOUR hypothesis Thanks? I didn't see that you were finding an example to support my hypothesis. >I choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is. Ok. And you don't have to pay the waiter, either. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #57 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteI choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is. Why do you listen to Miley Cyrus rather than the Jonas Brothers? Or do you just listen to the music and don't care which of them is singing it? (Or insert music groups appropriate to your own situation . . . I don't actually know what you listen to.) I choose singers I like, not their backup bands - which supports my restaurant/staff example. The reverse would be, oh, going to see whoever was singing with Little Feat as their band. I think a better analogy (for the 'benefit a provider' theory) may be something like a farmer's market or roadside veggie stand vs. a supermarket. While it can still be argued both ways (healthier vs. keeping the small farms alive), it still seems a better fit than a personal service like waiting a table or performing in a band. Your thoughts?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #58 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuote>They made the purchase because they wanted the product - that's it. And they could have stolen it instead. Why the difference? Because of laws? See the earlier post. It sure wasn't to 'benefit the provider'. If they wanted to do that, they'd make a donation. And you know this how? I can look through all my software, separate the stuff I bought from the stuff I pirated, and see a clear pattern. The pirated software is from developers that have business practices that I generally don't like or are applications that I loathe using. Everything else is paid for or free. I've even donated to the developers of some of the free stuff. I can get the vast majority of software for free if I want to. If I pay for it (and mostly I do), it is to benefit the provider.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #59 July 25, 2009 QuoteMy response is, that they paid for the product to compensate for the services, not to avoid a law against theft. Fine - so ask 10 people coming out of Walmart why they paid for their purchases rather than stealing them - I still bet 9/10 say it's because they didn't want to get arrested for shoplifting rather than to benefit Walmart. Quote>I choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is. Ok. And you don't have to pay the waiter, either. Correct - however, I ate at Red Lobster because I wanted seafood for dinner, not because I think it's the greatest company in the world.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #60 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote>They made the purchase because they wanted the product - that's it. And they could have stolen it instead. Why the difference? Because of laws? See the earlier post. It sure wasn't to 'benefit the provider'. If they wanted to do that, they'd make a donation. And you know this how? I can look through all my software, separate the stuff I bought from the stuff I pirated, and see a clear pattern. The pirated software is from developers that have business practices that I generally don't like or are applications that I loathe using. Everything else is paid for or free. I've even donated to the developers of some of the free stuff. I can get the vast majority of software for free if I want to. If I pay for it (and mostly I do), it is to benefit the provider. Good for you - not everyone is so casual about breaking the law.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #61 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteThat should be fairly obvious by their bank account. So, from what I hear, you're a good video guy. So, you probably get more requests to shoot video than someone who sucks. So, you make more money at it than the 50 jump dz rat with the 3rd hand gear. Lets give half of the money you make to him. Never mind that he doesn't take the time to work on his flying, video, or editing skills. Forget that he spends his money on things besides jumps and good equipment. You have more so you must owe him. It's not like you did anything extra to become good. It has nothing to do with your desire or work. It's only because of the guy off the interstate that pumped the gas for the truck that delivered your camera. You haven't earned and don't deserve anything. Do you? Do you really not see the huge problems with that analogy?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #62 July 25, 2009 Quote(Or insert music groups appropriate to your own situation . . . I don't actually know what you, Mike, listen to.) He previously mentioned that he listens to some rapper named Shaggy.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #63 July 25, 2009 QuoteGood for you - not everyone is so casual about breaking the law. What can I say? I'm a rebel. Once I even drove a couple mph over the posted speed limit. I've been known to jaywalk, too. More seriously, there are many, many software users like me. The same goes for music listeners. If they feel the provider is deserving, they pay.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #64 July 25, 2009 Quote Quote Quote That should be fairly obvious by their bank account. So, from what I hear, you're a good video guy. So, you probably get more requests to shoot video than someone who sucks. So, you make more money at it than the 50 jump dz rat with the 3rd hand gear. Lets give half of the money you make to him. Never mind that he doesn't take the time to work on his flying, video, or editing skills. Forget that he spends his money on things besides jumps and good equipment. You have more so you must owe him. It's not like you did anything extra to become good. It has nothing to do with your desire or work. It's only because of the guy off the interstate that pumped the gas for the truck that delivered your camera. You haven't earned and don't deserve anything. Do you? Do you really not see the huge problems with that analogy? I don't and I find it damn funny too. All increasing minimum wage does is increase inflation. However the inflation increase is greater so although you have more money, you have less buying power. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #65 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteDo you really not see the huge problems with that analogy? I don't and I find it damn funny too. Of an experienced videographer and a fifty jump newbie, who uses more DZ resources (e.g. electricity, space for personal video station, etc.) Would it not be reasonable to expect the experienced videographer to pay a larger share of per jump overhead costs to the DZ, even though there is no rule that explicitly forbids the fifty jump newbie from plugging in his battery chargers and computers or taking up counter/desk space with his own camera gear? Furthermore, no one is suggesting that the rich pay money directly to poor individuals, as the (bad) analogy suggests. QuoteAll increasing minimum wage does is increase inflation. However the inflation increase is greater so although you have more money, you have less buying power. If you've been paying attention, you know that we are discussing adjusting minimum wage to account for inflation, not raising minimum wage as measured in real/constant dollars.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #66 July 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteI choose a restaurant based on what I want to eat that night, not who the wait staff is. Why do you listen to Miley Cyrus rather than the Jonas Brothers? Or do you just listen to the music and don't care which of them is singing it? (Or insert music groups appropriate to your own situation . . . I don't actually know what you listen to.) I choose singers I like, not their backup bands - which supports my restaurant/staff example. The reverse would be, oh, going to see whoever was singing with Little Feat as their band. I think a better analogy (for the 'benefit a provider' theory) may be something like a farmer's market or roadside veggie stand vs. a supermarket. While it can still be argued both ways (healthier vs. keeping the small farms alive), it still seems a better fit than a personal service like waiting a table or performing in a band. Your thoughts? In my analogy, the "stars" are the millionaires (because they usually are) and the sidemen are simply high level employees. The minimum wage worker is the guy that works in the record store. I can almost guarantee you that you are, in fact, listening to specific artists rather than generic ones. You almost certainly have your favorites and a song by them is definitely "worth" more in your mind than if, for instance, I sang it. My guess is you also have specific movie stars you're going to see or not see in the movies too. Same with book authors. Hell, if you're a big enough redneck (and I'm not saying you, Mike, are but just using this as an example) you MAY have had a knock down drag out bar fight over Ford vs Chevy or Coors vs Bud. Glock vs S&W?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #67 July 25, 2009 Quote Mandatory minimum wage laws increase costs and result in more inflation and unemployment. economic drivel stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #68 July 25, 2009 In related news . . . http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE56N48E20090724quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chasteh 0 #69 July 25, 2009 Actually, wal-marts "security" is told to tell the person to stop, and if they get out of reach and refuse to cooperate to just let them go - this is an effort to reduce the likelihood of wal-mart developing a negative public image. >I still bet 9/10 say it's because they didn't want to get arrested for shoplifting rather than to benefit Walmart. In other words, they would rather shoplift than pay for the items?I thought that when mnealtx accuses people of being theives, he is referring to only a minority of persons. Or do you mean to say that most people would steal the items if they could? >Correct - however, I ate at Red Lobster because I wanted seafood for dinner, not because I think it's the greatest company in the world. Uh huh. And why did you pay for the service as opposed to just walking out? You are capable of doing this also. Did you tip your server? Why? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #70 July 25, 2009 Quote And of those, what percentage do you think have never benefitted from government infrastructure to create that wealth? Hey, I know. Let's teach those guys a lesson. We'll stop providing that government support they leech off, and they stop paying taxes. They take out more than they put it, so the system would be better off without them, right? Ha! We'll show them! -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #71 July 25, 2009 Quote I can look through all my software, separate the stuff I bought from the stuff I pirated, and see a clear pattern. The pirated software is from developers that have business practices that I generally don't like or are applications that I loathe using. Everything else is paid for or free. I've even donated to the developers of some of the free stuff. Wouldn't it be great if we all had the kind of freedom to choose, in everything? If you didn't like the business practices of, say, the national healthcare system, you could just opt out, and not pay for it? Or, what if you didn't like the practices of your local public schools? Wouldn't it be cool if you could just decide to use a private school instead, and get your money back from the public school?-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chasteh 0 #72 July 25, 2009 Just how much "money back" would you be getting? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chasteh 0 #73 July 25, 2009 Quote Hey, I know. Let's teach those guys a lesson. We'll stop providing that government support they leech off, and they stop paying taxes. They take out more than they put it, so the system would be better off without them, right? Ha! We'll show them! Is he saying that we should seize taxation and all government services? That is more aligned with a Libertarians thesis, BTW, than his. He is negating the notion that millionaires earn their wealth by themselves. Sort of like how that bridge you jump off all the time was provided by someone else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #74 July 25, 2009 QuoteIn my analogy, the "stars" are the millionaires (because they usually are) and the sidemen are simply high level employees. The minimum wage worker is the guy that works in the record store. Thinking that rich people need to be thankful for the hoi polloi that buy (with what ever degree of necessity or gratitude you want to attach to the purchase) whatever it is the rich person is peddling has absolutely nothing to do with raising the minimum wage of the guy that said good morning to them as they walked in the store. People pay for things in a store because that's one of the "rules" of the "game" that we're all playing. Getting busted for shop lifting is also a possibility in the "game." Getting a minimum wage job at a company where someone, perhaps far away, is getting rich is yet another. QuoteI disagree. The super rich owe society/government/"the little people" more because the super rich are benefitting more. That should be fairly obvious by their bank account. I'm not stating this in regards to taxes but just in general. I've already said that I'm completely fine with rich people paying more in taxes (which keep the "game" going) because they benefit more from it... I've even said I'm okay with the idea of minimum wages... All I'm asking is that if you want to raise the minimum wage you re-examine the whole picture of unskilled labor. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #75 July 25, 2009 QuoteWouldn't it be great if we all had the kind of freedom to choose, in everything? We do. If you don't like the laws of this country, you are free to relocate to one of your choosing, if they'll accept you (referring to immigration laws of other countries, not commenting on your character in any way).Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
