5 ms·

if you loved austrailia so much, move back. you have to take the 'bad' with the good. we built a system that enables people with ideas to chase their dreams a

by autokad 10y ago

if you loved austrailia so much, move back. you have to take the 'bad' with the good. we built a system that enables people with ideas to chase their dreams and succeed. that means companies have the ability to pay people with low skills and experience less than those with. honestly, if you are being treated like a slave, move to another company. if you cant, you don't have skills employers want. get them. during the recession, many companies used their position of power to their advantage. the smarter companies (and now more successful) used the recession as an opportunity to get the best workers. the ironic thing is, to try and force employers to treat everyone like stellar employees would probably result in treating everyone poorly.

Zikes 10y ago
Speaking as a native American, I cannot disagree more. The spirit and very origin of our great nation is to never accept the bad with the good, but to doggedly pursue the very best in everything.
- autokad 10y ago
  one who gives up nothing, loses. That's like saying 'i want to invest in riskless stocks but make huge gains'. you cant be the best at anything if you try and be the best at everything. But really this is a whole other conversation
- mrgoldenbrown 10y ago
  (assuming you mean the United States as "our great nation") Our country was founded on compromise. We baked slavery and misogyny into our Constitution. We have been explicitly accepting bad with good since day 1.
jug5 10y ago
Your excessively close minded "blind patriotism" approach is exactly what is wrong with america. "If you loved austailia so much, move back." It's the same general concept that's pushed on outsiders and people with outside ideas of how to make america better. You are so deeply indoctrinated with your tiny world view that even debating other ideas is too much for you.
quadrangle 10y ago
non-sequitur. The whole topic here is about a Universal Basic Income. You're the only one who said all that nonsense about "force employers to treat everyone like stellar employees" etc. If you want to never learn anything, these sorts of straw-man statements are a good approach. Alternatively, you could actually engage fairly with what people are actually saying.
- marknutter 10y ago
  > It feels like Employers have all the power in America, and therefore all the Employees are basically slaves, and are treated as such. How is it a non-sequitur when it was in direct response to this quote?
  - ConfuciusSay02 10y ago
    Because the implication was that the solution was allowing employees to more easily say no to employers (due to UBI), thus tilting slightly the balance in the direction of workers. A balance that has shifted in favor of employers for the past ~40 odd years or so. No UBI proposal has ever said anything about "treating everyone like stellar employees" - it's an irrelevant point.
    - autokad 10y ago
      UBI is not 'tilting slightly the balance in the direction of workers'. its ripping the balance strait the f off the scale. 'treating everyone like stellar employees' is not irrelevant. we are not in the utopian world where technology has made resources so abundant that everyone can have what they want without working extra hard for it. maybe in 35+ years, but this PRECONDITION is necessary to even begin to think UBI would work. SO when an employer is forced to pay all employees a basic income, they have to start paying uneducated / unskilled / low performing employees more. when revenue has not increased, this means taking pay raises / income / benefits from the other employees. #2 if all of your needs are GUARANTEED you might be surprised to find nobody would be willing to do many jobs.
auntyJemima 10y ago
You sound like some kind of redneck with that "go back to your country" bullshit. Someone is making very good points and that's the best thing you can say.
- alttab 10y ago
  No need to begin name calling because you disagree with his point of view. Next time, try contributing to the debate instead. Follow your own lead.
  - unprepare 10y ago
    theres no debate when someone starts with "go back to your country" the other commentor rightfully pointed out that this is a deflection rather than a counter argument.
    - autokad 10y ago
      no its not. its pointing the the strong point: gee my country was worse, i moved to this other country where my situation is better, but this new country should do everything like my old country because it was so great that I left it in the first place. enabling entrepreneurs is what makes america successful. people like them want all the success while crushing businesses. it dont work like that.
      - unprepare 10y ago
        person a says: i have a unique perspective into a part of this issue, here are my experiences and how they differ in two societys. I prefer society a's method of handling process x. person b: go back to your own country if you hate it so much here! yeah, we are headed for a really productive and intelligent debate here.....
        FooHentai 10y ago
        But the topic of discussion at hand is a contrast of launching a business in the person's home country or their current country. In that context the response makes a relevant point that deserves a considered response (or acknowledgement). The comment was phrased in a way that could be construed as a personal attack and that's not ideal, but it can equally be read as a genuine point if we don't jump to the immediate conclusion that it was a personal attack - The point being: if conditions are more favourable in the home country wouldn't a rational actor move back to their home country and launch there, instead? I don't agree with the OP by the way, but I interpreted the comment first in the way I described, rather than as 'grr if you don't like it go home'.

by autokad 10y ago

Zikes 10y ago

Speaking as a native American, I cannot disagree more. The spirit and very origin of our great nation is to never accept the bad with the good, but to doggedly pursue the very best in everything.

autokad 10y ago
one who gives up nothing, loses. That's like saying 'i want to invest in riskless stocks but make huge gains'. you cant be the best at anything if you try and be the best at everything. But really this is a whole other conversation
mrgoldenbrown 10y ago
(assuming you mean the United States as "our great nation") Our country was founded on compromise. We baked slavery and misogyny into our Constitution. We have been explicitly accepting bad with good since day 1.

jug5 10y ago

Your excessively close minded "blind patriotism" approach is exactly what is wrong with america. "If you loved austailia so much, move back." It's the same general concept that's pushed on outsiders and people with outside ideas of how to make america better. You are so deeply indoctrinated with your tiny world view that even debating other ideas is too much for you.

quadrangle 10y ago

non-sequitur. The whole topic here is about a Universal Basic Income. You're the only one who said all that nonsense about "force employers to treat everyone like stellar employees" etc. If you want to never learn anything, these sorts of straw-man statements are a good approach. Alternatively, you could actually engage fairly with what people are actually saying.

marknutter 10y ago
> It feels like Employers have all the power in America, and therefore all the Employees are basically slaves, and are treated as such. How is it a non-sequitur when it was in direct response to this quote?
- ConfuciusSay02 10y ago
  Because the implication was that the solution was allowing employees to more easily say no to employers (due to UBI), thus tilting slightly the balance in the direction of workers. A balance that has shifted in favor of employers for the past ~40 odd years or so. No UBI proposal has ever said anything about "treating everyone like stellar employees" - it's an irrelevant point.
  - autokad 10y ago
    UBI is not 'tilting slightly the balance in the direction of workers'. its ripping the balance strait the f off the scale. 'treating everyone like stellar employees' is not irrelevant. we are not in the utopian world where technology has made resources so abundant that everyone can have what they want without working extra hard for it. maybe in 35+ years, but this PRECONDITION is necessary to even begin to think UBI would work. SO when an employer is forced to pay all employees a basic income, they have to start paying uneducated / unskilled / low performing employees more. when revenue has not increased, this means taking pay raises / income / benefits from the other employees. #2 if all of your needs are GUARANTEED you might be surprised to find nobody would be willing to do many jobs.

auntyJemima 10y ago

You sound like some kind of redneck with that "go back to your country" bullshit. Someone is making very good points and that's the best thing you can say.

alttab 10y ago
No need to begin name calling because you disagree with his point of view. Next time, try contributing to the debate instead. Follow your own lead.
- unprepare 10y ago
  theres no debate when someone starts with "go back to your country" the other commentor rightfully pointed out that this is a deflection rather than a counter argument.
  - autokad 10y ago
    no its not. its pointing the the strong point: gee my country was worse, i moved to this other country where my situation is better, but this new country should do everything like my old country because it was so great that I left it in the first place. enabling entrepreneurs is what makes america successful. people like them want all the success while crushing businesses. it dont work like that.
    - unprepare 10y ago
      person a says: i have a unique perspective into a part of this issue, here are my experiences and how they differ in two societys. I prefer society a's method of handling process x. person b: go back to your own country if you hate it so much here! yeah, we are headed for a really productive and intelligent debate here.....
      - FooHentai 10y ago
        But the topic of discussion at hand is a contrast of launching a business in the person's home country or their current country. In that context the response makes a relevant point that deserves a considered response (or acknowledgement). The comment was phrased in a way that could be construed as a personal attack and that's not ideal, but it can equally be read as a genuine point if we don't jump to the immediate conclusion that it was a personal attack - The point being: if conditions are more favourable in the home country wouldn't a rational actor move back to their home country and launch there, instead? I don't agree with the OP by the way, but I interpreted the comment first in the way I described, rather than as 'grr if you don't like it go home'.