|
Cheekio posted:It's been mentioned, but bragging is a different thing entirely. You can communicate your job title to others by bragging about it, or you can not be a dick and just tell people who would benefit from the knowledge you're an XY or Z. It's bullshit that things are set up that way, dehumanizing in the extreme, and like the Vonnegut quote alludes to it is a way of creating a self reinforcing loop of keeping society that way, but for now it is how it is.
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 10:56 |
|
|
Even if they don't see it as bragging there is a lot of workplace discord that can come from it. There is usually not a linear path to proving value and people are usually strong in certain places and weak in others not all of which get valued equally in compensation. All of that goes out the window, obviously, if you're talking about an abusive situation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
Gallup has released a new poll on the ACA. Big news is the impact it is having on the number of uninsured - it is down 3.2 percentage points so far http://www.vox.com/2014/4/7/5589814/more-evidence-obamacare-is-working-gallup-finds-number-of-us Someone go ahead and drop a "it's working!" Gif here
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:36
|
|
|
Sephiroth_IRA posted:So there's no one out there that wants kids/parents to have the ability to choose which public school they attend? That's the main problem I have. All you would have to do is give every kid a subsidy and make it illegal for schools to discriminate based on zip code. If some kids have to travel a little further they should get an extra subsidy for the gas. As far as I know, none of the currently implemented school voucher systems in the US allow kids to choose another public school to attend. The way they've been implemented is that families under a certain income threshold can choose to take their kids out of their local public school and get a voucher to enroll them at a private one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:36
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:No its considered rude on its own merits totally outside of the fact companies discourage it in order to reduce employee bargaining power. This is going to sound LF as gently caress, but this mentality you're displaying here is a very useful tool capitalists can use in order to abuse their knowledge of salary information to screw you out of an honest day's pay for an honest day's work. This entire mentality surrounding money exists solely to pit the lower classes against one another by elevating it to the level of gossip. The reason rich people don't talk about money is because past a certain amount it doesn't really matter, and they start to measure their self worth against their peers in terms of social markers like the number of valuable personal connections. Talking about money for them is a tacit admission that the amount of money you have is an important factor for your lifestyle. They don't talk about money because they don't need to. Their extreme privilege causes them to want to shut down the conversation the same way lots of white people magically have no need to discuss racism. We should be talking about money. Everyone should be talking about money. The more people start to talk about money the more the conversation can shift from taking pot shots at each other to focusing on organizing for at least wages commensurate with the skyrocketing productivity and also wage security for all. There's a reason pride is considered a sin by the Bible. It causes people to make profoundly stupid decisions based on their own inflated sense of themselves. American society has cultivated pride as a means toward trading it in lieu of wages. It's interesting how this taboo you talk about massively benefits capital. I'm sure that's an accident. It's not like capital has significantly controlled media for nearly the entire history of the thing that can be called American society.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
Given the pettiness of Americans, I think any mass move to self-disclose comp would lead to the lower paid tearing down the better paid rather than redirecting their ire towards companies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:44
|
|
|
ErIog posted:This entire mentality surrounding money exists solely to pit the lower classes against one another by elevating it to the level of gossip. The reason rich people don't talk about money is because past a certain amount it doesn't really matter, and they start to measure their self worth against their peers in terms of social markers like the number of valuable personal connections. Talking about money for them is a tacit admission that the amount of money you have is an important factor for your lifestyle. They don't talk about money because they don't need to. Their extreme privilege causes them to want to shut down the conversation the same way lots of white people magically have no need to discuss racism. I'm not sure where you got this from but it has traditionally been uncouth to talk about money amongst the upper class because they were stuck up waspy shitheads who wanted to PRETEND they were so rich they didn't care about money. The reason that CEO salaries have skyrocketed sure as hell isn't because "after a certain point money doesn't matter." Most of the research I've seen points to people WITHOUT money caring less about money as a measure of self worth and being more generous in their day to day dealings with it than richer folk.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Given the pettiness of Americans, I think any mass move to self-disclose comp would lead to the lower paid tearing down the better paid rather than redirecting their ire towards companies. That's an attitude I would expect more from Republicans than Democrats. Public salaries would lead to people searching out the highest paying companies and might put upward pressure on wages if companies had to keep up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Given the pettiness of Americans, I think any mass move to self-disclose comp would lead to the lower paid tearing down the better paid rather than redirecting their ire towards companies. You're right, that's totally not the state of labor and class relations already because
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
Gumbel2Gumbel posted:That's an attitude I would expect more from Republicans than Democrats. Public salaries would lead to people searching out the highest paying companies and might put upward pressure on wages if companies had to keep up. You're crazy if you think there is a partisan divide on this issue. Compensation at my company is fairly messed up right now because of several years of financial hardship and the rapid turnover of 3 HR heads. As a result, I work with many people with the exact same amount of job experience as me who have worked at my company for a much shorter period of time and make more money than I do. It's not a colossal amount more, but it's not insignificant. I won't get a performance raise this year because of budget issues but if I left the company and came back after 3 months I would make more money because I would be compensated based on my experience. And no, I can't simply ask my boss for a raise because compensation is managed by HR. The idea that someone in my situation would gripe based on my personal politics is absurd.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
amanasleep posted:You're right, that's totally not the state of labor and class relations already because Hey you, respect your superiors. He may or may not be a pay grade above you. edit: SavageBastard posted:You're crazy if you think there is a partisan divide on this issue. Compensation at my company is fairly messed up right now because of several years of financial hardship and the rapid turnover of 3 HR heads. As a result, I work with many people with the exact same amount of job experience as me who have worked at my company for a much shorter period of time and make more money than I do. It's not a colossal amount more, but it's not insignificant. I won't get a performance raise this year because of budget issues but if I left the company and came back after 3 months I would make more money because I would be compensated based on my experience. And no, I can't simply ask my boss for a raise because compensation is managed by HR. The idea that someone in my situation would gripe based on my personal politics is absurd. It's your boss's job to go to bat for you in a situation like this. If he's dropping the ball, you can bet you're not the only one getting screwed by a guy who can't protect his employees.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:56
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Gallup has released a new poll on the ACA. Big news is the impact it is having on the number of uninsured - it is down 3.2 percentage points so far It says the surveys were conducted Jan 2 through Mar 31. If those are evenly distributed among the dates then they might actually be underestimating the effects since there was a surge of 3 million + sign ups in the latter half of March and only a fraction of the interviews in that period. The same survey next month might be even better, perhaps significantly so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
SavageBastard posted:I'm not sure where you got this from but it has traditionally been uncouth to talk about money amongst the upper class because they were stuck up waspy shitheads who wanted to PRETEND they were so rich they didn't care about money. The reason that CEO salaries have skyrocketed sure as hell isn't because "after a certain point money doesn't matter." Most of the research I've seen points to people WITHOUT money caring less about money as a measure of self worth and being more generous in their day to day dealings with it than richer folk. I got this from having the super weird opportunity to hang around with a bunch of rich people for a few years. I didn't say that greed doesn't exist. I was saying that the explicit numbers cease to be an interesting conversation when both people shrug their shoulders about being able to pay for every single thing they could ever hope to really need. More money can help people achieve the other things that increase their standing in that social circle, but the number itself is not the thing that matters. The "new money" vs. "old money" divide I think bears this out. If all rich people cared about was the top line number in the bank then they'd be a lot more accepting of the newly rich than they are. ErIog fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Apr 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:06
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Gallup has released a new poll on the ACA. Big news is the impact it is having on the number of uninsured - it is down 3.2 percentage points so far Fox News: Gallup survey suggests sign-ups under ObamaCare not as high as White House says
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:06
|
|
|
SavageBastard posted:You're crazy if you think there is a partisan divide on this issue. Compensation at my company is fairly messed up right now because of several years of financial hardship and the rapid turnover of 3 HR heads. As a result, I work with many people with the exact same amount of job experience as me who have worked at my company for a much shorter period of time and make more money than I do. It's not a colossal amount more, but it's not insignificant. I won't get a performance raise this year because of budget issues but if I left the company and came back after 3 months I would make more money because I would be compensated based on my experience. And no, I can't simply ask my boss for a raise because compensation is managed by HR. The idea that someone in my situation would gripe based on my personal politics is absurd. You are actively interviewing for another job, right? That is the only recourse you have in a situation like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
So they're hiring more people at a higher wage and they don't have the money to make it up to you? That is an answer you're accepting? Someone has the authority to override this and you should find who that person is and talk to them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
Amphion posted:Fox News: Gallup survey suggests sign-ups under ObamaCare not as high as White House says People should read this just for an amazing example in how to lie without ever saying anything untrue. "Gallup suggests sign ups not as high as White House says" The White House says 3 million people gained coverage. Gallup says 3.5 million gained coverage. This is stated plainly in the article. And the headline is correct - it wasn't as high as the White House said, it was HIGHER. At no point does it lie about the numbers, it just spins it so it sounds like the White House overstated the popularity rather than understating it. This is 1984 "chocolate ration won't be reduced from 30 grams" style propaganda. Getting people to follow the line completely at odds with reality without ever lying about what is really happening
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
We should just go full Norway and have everyone's tax returns made public every year. Seeing as corporations are people, theirs can get published too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
I see....quote:The 2010 Citizens United ruling allowed corporations, unions and individuals to spend unlimited amounts of money on elections through super PACs. Last week's McCutcheon decision lets individuals give an unlimited total amount directly to parties and candidates, so long as they stay within limits for individual campaigns.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
Normally I can spin out the reasoning but what the hell is that supposed to mean? Equalize the middle class and the rich overnight? Why because we storm your mansions finally?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Is the idea that the rich would give all their money away to politicians for no return whatsoever? Why do you have such a low opinion of the business acumen of Are Job Creators, Newt? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Normally I can spin out the reasoning but what the hell is that supposed to mean? Equalize the middle class and the rich overnight? Why because we storm your mansions finally? In order to understand Civilization's Rules, you must think like their Definer. He's saying the rich are not currently equal to the middle class because, unlike the middle class, the rich are not able to give as much money as they would like. You see, it's the rich who are suffering here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
Joementum posted:In order to understand Civilization's Rules, you must think like their Definer. He's saying the rich are not currently equal to the middle class because, unlike the middle class, the rich are not able to give as much money as they would like. You see, it's the rich who are worse off here. Ahaha I was baffled because I never considered that he was saying the rich are the ones getting being discriminated against here. But Ok, yeah now I see what he was saying.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
Joementum posted:In order to understand Civilization's Rules, you must think like their Definer. He's saying the rich are not currently equal to the middle class because, unlike the middle class, the rich are not able to give as much money as they would like. You see, it's the rich who are suffering here. Just remember that article that one rich guy wrote where he compared  class warfare to actions taken against the Jews by Nazis running up to the Holocaust every time you're confused, yeah.It's insane.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
Yesterday after the Jeb Bush and Ben Carson interviews in Fox there was a bunch of jockeying amongst the field as the interested parties tried to adjust to what was said there. Jindal's people were blasting out press releases and making calls about how Jindal had pushed his health care ideas out earlier in the week to ensure air time ("why are you talking about other people than our guy talk about our ideas we were here first!") and kept branding Jindal as the "idea man" candidate to define him. That lasted right until a reporter made the point that  was the self branded "idea man" candidate of 2012 and was that the comparison they were looking to make?Jindal's people beat that back and changed tune laughably fast. Guess we won't see Bobby the idea man in 2016
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Joementum posted:In order to understand Civilization's Rules, you must think like their Definer. He's saying the rich are not currently equal to the middle class because, unlike the middle class, the rich are not able to give as much money as they would like. You see, it's the rich who are suffering here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
Joementum posted:In order to understand Civilization's Rules, you must think like their Definer. He's saying the rich are not currently equal to the middle class because, unlike the middle class, the rich are not able to give as much money as they would like. You see, it's the rich who are suffering here. Of course, I see it now. There's nothing to stop minimum wage earners from donating 50, 60, even 100 percent of their income to campaigns! It's a setup I tell you!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
"Yeah we need to raise the amount of money the super rich can give because apparently having both the rich and poor have the same limit is not equal enough." Everything makes more sense if you frame every argument they're making through the lens of the rich being more worthy of living and automatically superior to everyone else. Hell it's what they've been saying forever, really.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
Monkey Fracas posted:"Yeah we need to raise the amount of money the super rich can give because apparently having both the rich and poor have the same limit is not equal enough." Oh please; the rich where already able to donate as much as they wanted, this just makes it even easier for them instead of having to go through the hassle of telling somebody to create a shell corporation for them so they could funnel the money through the shell corporation instead of just busting out a check book.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
Big_Daddy_Fabio posted:And in piss poor news, the Kansas state legislature voted last night to increase school funding as required by the state Supreme Court, but in doing so, they removed teacher tenure, ended due process for teachers, and added a proviso that requires the renegotiation of every teacher's contract by setting their base pay to $0. The cherry on top of this poo poo Sunday is they only managed to pass it by threatening to primary the few moderate Republicans left in the state. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/05/1289986/-Kansas-State-House-in-an-Education-Showdown-on-a-Saturday-night I graduate from college this December, and was thinking about leaving Kansas because of recent changes to the state retirement plan. Now, I'm fairly sure I've got no choice. Wow, every single goddamn teacher should leave Kansas as soon as they can. That's outright horrible, and the people responsible are actively working against education. How can people even wonder why public education might be failing when the evidence is right here, that it's being murdered deliberately by Republicans so their corporate buddies can take over the system?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:Oh please; the rich where already able to donate as much as they wanted, this just makes it even easier for them instead of having to go through the hassle of telling somebody to create a shell corporation for them so they could funnel the money through the shell corporation instead of just busting out a check book. Yeah I know, but I was commenting on the absurdity of publicly arguing for making it even easier.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:Oh please; the rich where already able to donate as much as they wanted, this just makes it even easier for them instead of having to go through the hassle of telling somebody to create a shell corporation for them so they could funnel the money through the shell corporation instead of just busting out a check book. I think the issue is that Rove proved to be a terrible middle man in this process, so they've got to refine the rules even further.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:As far as I know, none of the currently implemented school voucher systems in the US allow kids to choose another public school to attend. The way they've been implemented is that families under a certain income threshold can choose to take their kids out of their local public school and get a voucher to enroll them at a private one. Washington DC does, sort of - it's a district-wide lottery for public and public charter schools, with a right to attend your neighborhood school. Not really a voucher system though, just public school choice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Aren't private schools allowed to basically kick out any
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Spatula City posted:Wow, every single goddamn teacher should leave Kansas as soon as they can. That's outright horrible, and the people responsible are actively working against education. How can people even wonder why public education might be failing when the evidence is right here, that it's being murdered deliberately by Republicans so their corporate buddies can take over the system? That's sorta the plan though; get the experienced (read: we gotta pay them more) teachers to quit so they can put in kids fresh out of college who'll leave after a couple years, and the cycle repeats. North Carolina came up with a similarly hilariously fiendish plot to offer a nominal one time bonus to the top 25% of teachers (IIRC like $1500) in exchange for signing away tenure forever and moving to 4 year contracts. Not surprisingly few teachers are on board with the plan. Parallel Paraplegic posted:Aren't private schools allowed to basically kick out any Generally they just don't accept them in the first place, same with disabled children. Charter schools function the same way, and yet they still don't perform better than public schools. 
Alec Bald Snatch fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Apr 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Parallel Paraplegic posted:Aren't private schools allowed to basically kick out any They can and do kick out for students "behavioral" issues, and most simply refuse to accept special education students by claiming they are unable to provide* reasonable accommodations. *read: unwilling to pay for Ashcans posted:We should just go full Norway and have everyone's tax returns made public every year. Seeing as corporations are people, theirs can get published too. Was going to say that this was Finland, but what do you know, both countries do it. There is no reason not to implement this in the US and it would likely lead to lots of good, but of course it will never even be seriously considered here. AreWeDrunkYet fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Apr 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
In other news, Paul Ryan's new budget proposal has found a new way to quote:The Federal Institute of Museum and Library Services is an independent agency that makes grants to museums and libraries. This is not a core federal responsibility. This function can be funded at the state and local level and augmented significantly by charitable contributions from the private sector. Because gently caress free access to information for anyone regardless of economic background! Those lousy fatcat librarians probably all have refrigerators anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
The best part of Ryan's evil is that Tea Partiers think he's a RINO, compromising, backstabber.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
May be a little late on this, but inconvenient old news is the best news. Rand Paul in ’09: Cheney pushed Iraq war to benefit Halliburton
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 10:56 |
|
|
Radish posted:The best part of Ryan's evil is that Tea Partiers think he's a RINO, compromising, backstabber. Well of course he is! The poor are still alive today aren't they?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:45
|
|