bakhy

34 ms·

271.
by bakhy 12y ago
first of all, we are looking at it from different sides :) i was talking about the demand for jobs, not workers, and the supply of jobs. perhaps that created some of the misunderstanding. the laptop example also illustrates the difference q
272.
by bakhy 12y ago
"a large fraction of minimum wage workers are teens" -- how large? source? in the end, it does not matter - if they don't need to work, where is the problem? why should we even encourage them to work, to bring down the price
273.
by bakhy 12y ago
gee, i wish you could follow the thread, since the petty detail you are squabbling about bears little if any relevance to the main point ;) and yes, it still can be a company, unless you wish to narrow the definition of the word company. th
274.
by bakhy 12y ago
"If workers are so desperate that they can't not work" - did you really put an "if" there? :D i presume you come from privileged background? "then putting them out of a job by making it illegal to work for low
275.
by bakhy 12y ago
you cannot, in one calculation, use the number of employees in all non-McD owned restaurants plus the number of employees in McD, and the profit of only McD itself. i hope i don't need to explain why that is wrong. as for the number of
276.
by bakhy 12y ago
"when the firm is losing money but still paying salaries, isn't the firm owner the one being exploited?" - no. please consult a dictionary. low-educated workers are abundant, and are thus forced, if they want to make an hones
277.
by bakhy 12y ago
it would be foolish to expect that such a measure can be passed without negatively affecting some businesses. a lot of people, including the electorate of Seattle, and the authors of the here oft cited study, obviously consider that the gai
278.
by bakhy 12y ago
hm, interesting calculation. however, isn't McDonalds a franchise? where did these numbers come from? also, i am not that crazy to think that this would not cause ANY cutbacks. the money does indeed have to come from somewhere. it&#x27
279.
by bakhy 12y ago
the ease with which you compare the minimum programmer wage of $160 and the general minimum wage of $16 is astounding. (not to mention the ease of waving off empirical data, wow!) these things are not exactly equal, some consideration shoul
280.
by bakhy 12y ago
hm, i would not necessarily call redistributing profits to workers "charity". it is merely an alternative model of work organization, which is actually implemented in some organizations around the world.
281.
by bakhy 12y ago
supply and demand have an important quality called elasticity, which is not taken into account in libertarian discourse. unlike a simple commodity market, like coffee for example, where a buyer can say "these prices are too high, i&#x2
282.
by bakhy 12y ago
there is a big space between powerful and powerless, which is the point i am making. in your trolling you are grossly oversimplifying things, i can only presume in order to further some personal goals of yours, but reality is that life in t
283.
by bakhy 12y ago
that's if you insist on painting it black and white. reality is, unfortunately, somewhat complex. anyway, your question is already answered in the post above. you do know what a strike is? furthermore, many workers are theoretically ca
284.
by bakhy 12y ago
because it gives a good cover. workers sometimes get outraged, go on strikes. a good excuse is worth gold.
285.
by bakhy 12y ago
oversimplification. you are implying that employees are the complete source of expenses in running a business. this is, of course, not true. put most simply, if your hypothetical McDonalds (at the numbers before you introduced the arbitrary
286.
by bakhy 12y ago
the word "households" being key. i just noticed that the text you linked clearly states that in those households there need to be 2-3 workers (or one doing 2-3 jobs) for them to rise above the poverty line. if one would try to put
287.
by bakhy 12y ago
in my experience with libertarians so far, they are most disinclined to do any math. i don't see any math here either. there is a study mentioned a lot in the comments here which refutes this argumentation. as for the argumentation - i
288.
by bakhy 12y ago
of course. the day a company, when faced with larger profits, decides "hey, let's give it all to our workers through an increase in pay" is when i'll believe the libertarians ;) the determining factor for the amount some
289.
by bakhy 12y ago
what about that McDonalds story, fabrication? also, for me it is far more improtant to note that, if i may guess, >90% of companies paying most of their workers a minimum wage do not operate on zero profit.
290.
by bakhy 12y ago
so, give up on your pay, in order to maybe get tips and perks. charity > pay ? also, kinda illogical. the tips got reduced when the waiter got a minimum wage, really? that doesn't make any sense.. and the perks for the hotel worker,
291.
by bakhy 12y ago
the most incredible libertarian assumption is that all companies operate in such a way that the smallest hike in pay absolutely must result in cutbacks elsewhere. apparently, no company is making any profit! :D
292.
by bakhy 12y ago
"it'd end up just shifting the costs to higher overall prices, which everyone will bear" -- not true. fact is, everyone bears those costs now, through the tax money going out for those social security programs. minimum wage w
293.
by bakhy 12y ago
you are again projecting some notions of yours into me, than correcting your own projections as if i actually said that. if you would be interested in having a conversation, we might try that. till then, buh-bye.
294.
by bakhy 12y ago
can something this short and poorly argumented really be called a manifesto?.. anyway, sounds like the Chaos Model ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_model ), but with seating arrangements (?)
295.
by bakhy 12y ago
i don't know why you think i failed to grasp that. there are benefits, i agree. i just don't see any such great or important benefits which would justify this almost complete destruction of the notion of privacy. can you give me s
296.
by bakhy 12y ago
IoT is a really unsettling prospect. I was expecting a text dealing with this, but alas, mostly click-bait. the text is superficial ideological bickering which takes IoT for granted. IoT is simply here, it seems. the text deals only with wh
297.
by bakhy 12y ago
<shameless plug> If anyone's interested in a full-featured transactional memory implementation for .NET, have a look: https://github.com/jbakic/Shielded ... It's more or less complete, feature-wise, and
298.
by bakhy 12y ago
hey, let the data speak for itself! ;) seriously, i do take IMDB ratings into account, but i consider them unreliable at best. Inception, when it came out, was the best movie of all time for a while, according to IMDB users. enough said.
299.
by bakhy 12y ago
you are right, but i believe the point was in the triviality of the find. humanities are often in territory which can not be quantified.
300.
by bakhy 12y ago
yes, of course. because it is completely atypical for humanities to have data that either confirms or disproves some hypothesis. that's more of a "hard science" thing ;) humanities simply cannot operate like that. no data can

More ›