Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thread


JohnnyU

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, squistion said:

Isn’t it amazing what a free market can do.

Actually, the bottom line is that the workers are paid a lot more, have more benefits and the burgers are only .35 higher. 

Another Fun Fact:

In-N-Out (the best burger chain west of the Mississippi IMO) has an average hourly wage of about $14-$17/hour and a double double combo is around the same as a Big Mac combo.

https://twitter.com/tagsavage/status/1353523982234832897 (photo of In-N-Out hiring sign and menu)

 

Boycott Micky D's and put them out of business then.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, squistion said:

Isn’t it amazing what a free market can do.

Actually, the bottom line is that the workers are paid a lot more, have more benefits and the burgers are only .35 higher. 

Another Fun Fact:

In-N-Out (the best burger chain west of the Mississippi IMO) has an average hourly wage of about $14-$17/hour and a double double combo is around the same as a Big Mac combo.

https://twitter.com/tagsavage/status/1353523982234832897 (photo of In-N-Out hiring sign and menu)

 

Free market means that the best Fast Food employees should go apply to work at In and Out.   Leave the below average ones to McDonalds, Taco Bell and Arbys.

Costco pays around 20 an hour, Sams Club pays around 10-12 an hour.   If I am a good employee at Sams I am applying at Costco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Summer Wheat said:

Free market means that the best Fast Food employees should go apply to work at In and Out.   Leave the below average ones to McDonalds, Taco Bell and Arbys.

Costco pays around 20 an hour, Sams Club pays around 10-12 an hour.   If I am a good employee at Sams I am applying at Costco.

What if I'm a bad employee?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, squistion said:

Isn’t it amazing what a free market can do.

Actually, the bottom line is that the workers are paid a lot more, have more benefits and the burgers are only .35 higher. 

Another Fun Fact:

In-N-Out (the best burger chain west of the Mississippi IMO) has an average hourly wage of about $14-$17/hour and a double double combo is around the same as a Big Mac combo.

https://twitter.com/tagsavage/status/1353523982234832897 (photo of In-N-Out hiring sign and menu)

 

A free market doesn't include a wage floor, actually, and I can't believe nobody has seen fit to correct you on this. A free market includes the supply of labor freely hired and moving without a floor attached to their condition of employment.

That you see an intervention into the market as beneficial while touting the price of a free market cheeseburger in a similar free market means you're not grasping the concept of prices and inputs here.

Edited by rockaction
  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

What if I'm a bad employee?

Then you're not worth as much so you're probably in the appropriate place.  Which points to another problem with Denmark's system.  Their wages are negotiated with a union so everyone at McDonald's gets paid the same regardless of whether they are a good or bad employee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, John123 said:

Then you're not worth as much so you're probably in the appropriate place.  Which points to another problem with Denmark's system.  Their wages are negotiated with a union so everyone at McDonald's gets paid the same regardless of whether they are a good or bad employee. 

I don't think that it's a "problem" that their bad employees have to be paid a decent wage.  Being a bad employee at McDonald's shouldn't consign you to a life of misery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, John123 said:

Then you're not worth as much so you're probably in the appropriate place.  Which points to another problem with Denmark's system.  Their wages are negotiated with a union so everyone at McDonald's gets paid the same regardless of whether they are a good or bad employee. 

come on, don't let facts get in the way of a good rant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I don't think that it's a "problem" that their bad employees have to be paid a decent wage.  Being a bad employee at McDonald's shouldn't consign you to a life of misery.

Maybe get some motivation to become a good employee?  McDonald's or any other employer shouldn't be forced to keep bad employees.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I laugh when people use big chains as the benchmark for a livable wage.  How about the small independent who has 3-4 employees?   These are the businesses affected more than some regional or national chain.

Edited by FairWarning
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Then what?  Should they just be homeless and starve to death?

Well hopefully they realize being a bad employee is a bad thing and whatever they do in life requires a certain basic level of competency for it to succeed. And their next job they do work harder/smarter/better.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

What should happen to the bad employees then?

You can answer that.  If you owned a company or managed a business and had a couple of bad employees what would you do?

Edited by Summer Wheat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hot Diggity Dog said:

Well hopefully they realize being a bad employee is a bad thing and whatever they do in life requires a certain basic level of competency for it to succeed. And their next job they do work harder/smarter/better.  

What if they never become a good employee?  Then we're all good with homelessness and starvation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hot Diggity Dog said:

Well hopefully they realize being a bad employee is a bad thing and whatever they do in life requires a certain basic level of competency for it to succeed. And their next job they do work harder/smarter/better.  

These people don’t care.  Right now these people are waiting for their tax return, their $1400 stimulus, and the unemployment they the extra $400.  They are not looking for anything until the money is cut off.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Summer Wheat said:

You can answer that.  If you owned a company or manages a business and had a couple of bad employees what would you do?

I'm talking about public policies of our government, not the personnel decisions of individual business owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

What if they never become a good employee?  Then we're all good with homelessness and starvation?

What if you’re a good employee and making the same as a bad employee because it’s government mandated?

Edited by FairWarning
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I'm talking about public policies of our government, not the personnel decisions of individual business owners.

It does come back to the individual business though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I'm talking about public policies of our government, not the personnel decisions of individual business owners.

Lol If I value your work and replaceability at $10 but the government says $15 because you need to pay the cable bill,  I guess the government knows how to run my business better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

What if they never become a good employee?  Then we're all good with homelessness and starvation?

The term should not be a bad employee but an employee who cares or does not care.

There can be so called "bad" employees that are really trying to improve and do the right things. That are on time, put in the effort to learn and grow but are struggling at first.  Those types almost always turn into good employees and are keepers as they care are striving to improve themselves.

Then there are employees that are chronically late, high absenteeism, non caring about shoddy performance, no desire to improve.   Those are actually bad employees and then you need to cut bait for the betterment of the rest of the crew. Then hopefully that will be a wake up call for them.

 

Edited by Summer Wheat
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

Why not?

My judgment of your worth as a person isn't tied very closely to your ability to flip burgers.  I think merely being a human should entitle you to certain basic needs in life.  There is sufficient wealth in the United States for that to happen for every person in the United States.  We've just decided that if you managed to start a successful business you are worth billions of dollars but if you are bad at flipping burgers you deserve a life of poverty and squalor. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Summer Wheat said:

Then there are employees that are chronically late, high absenteeism, non caring about shoddy performance, no desire to improve.   Those are actually bad employees and then you need to cut bait for the betterment of the rest of the crew. Then hopefully that will be a wake up call for them.

What about when they don't heed the wake up call?  Just suffer endlessly? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Summer Wheat said:

??  don`t understand.

Sorry, maybe I should lay out my views more plainly.:

1) I think the United States needs to greatly improve its social safety net, either through a UBI and Medicare-for -All or through expansion of the types of programs we already have.  I think that, assuming we have the ability to do so, the government should assure that every person can at the very least have shelter and food and education and healthcare.  I view this as a moral issue.

2) To the extent that politicians are unwilling to expand the social safety net to provide that sort of life for all its citizens, we should raise the minimum wage so at least all of the employed people in the U.S. can afford those basic necessities.  We still would have to deal with the unemployed people, but at least those people aren't in the situation where they are both working AND unable to afford basic necessities.  If I'm gonna be poor at least I can have some extra free time. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

What if they never become a good employee?  Then we're all good with homelessness and starvation?

So, what do you want to do with them?  Oh, and who is to pay for what you want to do?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, FairWarning said:

Lol If I value your work and replaceability at $10 but the government says $15 because you need to pay the cable bill,  I guess the government knows how to run my business better.

UBI and get rid of minimum wage laws.  Everyone wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:
14 minutes ago, Hov34 said:

So, what do you want to do with them?  Oh, and who is to pay for what you want to do?

 

I don't think I've been very secretive about my desire that we tax wealthy people more and use that money to help poor people.

I'm ok with this.  But good luck...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

My judgment of your worth as a person isn't tied very closely to your ability to flip burgers.  I think merely being a human should entitle you to certain basic needs in life.  There is sufficient wealth in the United States for that to happen for every person in the United States.  We've just decided that if you managed to start a successful business you are worth billions of dollars but if you are bad at flipping burgers you deserve a life of poverty and squalor. 

Lol at poverty and squalor.  Americans in general need a lesson both of conditions in the world today and in the past.  A person making $30,000 in America lives better and has more then 90% of people in the world.  If you look at human history your in the top 1 percent easily.  That we don't, as a society,  get on our knees and thank whatever God you pray to that you have been blessed to live on this time and place is really unappreciative.  The system of government, the personal ideals, the societal values that got us here should be praised and duplicated if we want to keep it.  We aren't just lucky that we are a large country with access to raw materials.  If that were true China and Russia should be close to us but aren't  in terms of per captia income to this day.  

And people don't just "manage" to become billionaires.   They are usually hyper examples of hard work and intelligent behavior and some skill.   They are the reason we have so much wealth for you to want to spread around.  One of the core values of that wealth generation is an expectation of competency in the product or service provided.  No one will buy a car that doesn't run or a burger that consistently taste terrible unless forced to.  If we take that expectation of competency away we are headed down a path of true poverty ourselves.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hot Diggity Dog said:

Lol at poverty and squalor.  Americans in general need a lesson both of conditions in the world today and in the past.  A person making $30,000 in America lives better and has more then 90% of people in the world.  If you look at human history your in the top 1 percent easily.  That we don't, as a society,  get on our knees and thank whatever God you pray to that you have been blessed to live on this time and place is really unappreciative.  The system of government, the personal ideals, the societal values that got us here should be praised and duplicated if we want to keep it.  We aren't just lucky that we are a large country with access to raw materials.  If that were true China and Russia should be close to us but aren't  in terms of per captia income to this day.  

And people don't just "manage" to become billionaires.   They are usually hyper examples of hard work and intelligent behavior and some skill.   They are the reason we have so much wealth for you to want to spread around.  One of the core values of that wealth generation is an expectation of competency in the product or service provided.  No one will buy a car that doesn't run or a burger that consistently taste terrible unless forced to.  If we take that expectation of competency away we are headed down a path of true poverty ourselves.

$30K = $15/hour

If that's your threshold, then it seems you are in favor of a $15/hour minimum wage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Exactly.

Exactly exactly.   And trust me I know what poverty is in America.   Neither of my parents graduated from high school.  My entire childhood good years meant we were in the lower middle income bracket.  I never lived in squalor.   l have a huge family, fathers side had 10 kids, moms side 6.  Of my 16 aunts and uncles maybe 4 were considered middle class income.  4 different ones destroyed themselves and their families with alcohol and being or marrying criminals.  The rest were lower middle income families or less.  My first cousin my age, early 50s died this week, him and his brother have a spent a good part of their lives in Federal prison.  They did everything from drug running and gun smuggling.   When my grandfather died I got two small ceramic figurines that had been my grandmother's and i found an excuse to give my parents several hundred dollars to bury my grandfather so they didn't go into debt themselves because most of my Aunts and Uncles had zero to give for it and my Grandfather had the clothes on his back when he died.  Myself I have been married and had two kids under the age of 4 and made $28,000 and $32,000 in back to back years. 

 

You can believe  it or not, and i know millions of Americans live the same life i did every day.   Trust me I know.  But i wouldn't think of spinning the wheel of fate again and take a chance i would ever be born somewhere else in place or time.  My life has been, materially, a blessing.   I have never lived in squalor.  I have eaten a lot of mac and cheese, a lot of ramen, a lot of sausage, and homegrown vegetables but i have never been hungry.  

Get out of the bubble we live in in America.  We fight over covid 19 vaccinations and how "slow" it is when polio is still a thing in parts of the world.   My goodness take a step back and marvel at how well and how much we have.  Clearly we have different definitions of the words poverty and squalor if you think some vast percetage of Americans live in it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rich Conway said:

$30K = $15/hour

If that's your threshold, then it seems you are in favor of a $15/hour minimum wage?

Possibly, if you use my standard though $20,000 a year still puts you in a high percentage of income world wide.  I do believe in a minimum wage, the level is a bit more of a gray area.  I  get UBI, and the value it may have.   A day may come when automation displaces vast amounts of people from jobs they currently have.   I dont have answers to all the questions that go with that problem but my experiences in the world i don't think handing out money and material things for "free" is going to be a wise policy because the effect it will have on people, at least not without some other change in human thought processes. 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/4/2021 at 11:33 AM, IvanKaramazov said:

Eh, let's not go overboard here.  If we censured every member of congress who exaggerated a personal anecdote we would do nothing but sit around censuring people all day.  This is one of those times where it's better just to laugh a little, make a note, and move on.

True - her story is similar in tone and exaggeration to Hillary's recounting of sniper fire in Bosnia. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hot Diggity Dog said:

Exactly exactly.   And trust me I know what poverty is in America. 

Thanks for your post. I don't like to address personal anecdotes because of course I don't know your family's situation like you do.  I guess I would just make a few points in response:

1) I don't think that a "vast percentage" of Americans live in poverty and squalor, but I do think that there are a lot of Americans that have very difficult lives that could be made significantly better by redistributing wealth, income and opportunity from the wealthy to the poor.

2) I think that the fact that current Americans have more purchasing power than they used to, and more than citizens of many other countries, does not mean we should say "that's enough for them."  I think we can do a lot better.  The citizens of America as a whole have far more resources to invest than do a lot of other countries.  In some countries, there is no realistic way to alleviate these problems in the short term.  That isn't true of America, we're not like those countries.

3) And I often think that looking purely at economic numbers can obscure the amount of suffering that current Americans feel compared even to people in other countries that may lack material wealth.  Those numbers often don't capture a lot of the things that make us happy as people but are systematically stripped away from poor people in the United States -- dignity, autonomy, leisure time, community, etc.  Just because the American poor have big screen TVs doesn't mean that their lives are necessarily better than someone in another place that has fewer material possessions.  

4) Without commenting specifically on anyone in your family, I think that people with limited opportunities are more likely to suffer from alcoholism and other substance abuse/mental health issues.  They are also more likely to engage in criminal behavior.  They're more likely to spend time in prison.  They're more likely to die young.  While none of these things are entirely preventable, we can do a lot of things to mitigate them if we're willing to use this country's great wealth to address them.  But that would require a level of sacrifice from wealthy people that we are unwilling to impose on them.  I think that's a shame. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Thanks for your post. I don't like to address personal anecdotes because of course I don't know your family's situation like you do.  I guess I would just make a few points in response:

1) I don't think that a "vast percentage" of Americans live in poverty and squalor, but I do think that there are a lot of Americans that have very difficult lives that could be made significantly better by redistributing wealth, income and opportunity from the wealthy to the poor.

2) I think that the fact that current Americans have more purchasing power than they used to, and more than citizens of many other countries, does not mean we should say "that's enough for them."  I think we can do a lot better.  The citizens of America as a whole have far more resources to invest than do a lot of other countries.  In some countries, there is no realistic way to alleviate these problems in the short term.  That isn't true of America, we're not like those countries.

3) And I often think that looking purely at economic numbers can obscure the amount of suffering that current Americans feel compared even to people in other countries that may lack material wealth.  Those numbers often don't capture a lot of the things that make us happy as people but are systematically stripped away from poor people in the United States -- dignity, autonomy, leisure time, community, etc.  Just because the American poor have big screen TVs doesn't mean that their lives are necessarily better than someone in another place that has fewer material possessions.  

4) Without commenting specifically on anyone in your family, I think that people with limited opportunities are more likely to suffer from alcoholism and other substance abuse/mental health issues.  They are also more likely to engage in criminal behavior.  They're more likely to spend time in prison.  They're more likely to die young.  While none of these things are entirely preventable, we can do a lot of things to mitigate them if we're willing to use this country's great wealth to address them.  But that would require a level of sacrifice from wealthy people that we are unwilling to impose on them.  I think that's a shame. 

To your points

1.  My verbage is bad,  my way thinking say 20% would be vast, 20% of 350 million is 60 million plus people, a vast number by my thinking but yes it is not vast  in the sense of a majority of people in America. But still a large number that is not inconsequential. 

2.  My objection is to the assertion that Americans live below the poverty line live in "poverty and squalor ".  And if someone has a lot more wealth than you do they are lucky/greedy/evil/undeserving of it.  To me these are tropes meant to fire political passions to be used to agendas like our thread's name sake AOC.  I think it is a different discussion to ask if someone should be worth, let's say 100 billion dollars.  Maybe maybe not, but the country that produced the billionaire also provides so much material goods and convenience to its poorest citizens people from other countries risk everything to become those poorest citizens.   It is an accomplishment we do not appreciate enough. 

3.  We just have very different perspectives of what dignity is I guess.  To me you rob people of their dignity and autonomy when you give them things.  I would much rather be the person that knows how to fish than the person that is given a fish everyday.  Even if the person next to me catches ten fish a day i still know i can feed myself.  That gives me dignity and autonomy.   My dignity and autonomy is stolen from me if I have to depend on the government to give me my fish.  In that case i am a child again. 

For some reason this reminds me of the Eddie Murphy bit in Raw where he is talking about his father at the BBQ at his house.   Beyond the jokes there is a basic value Eddies dad is conveying in the bit, this is my house and however humble it maybe if you disrespect it or mock me in it , you will be shown the door.  To me that is dignity and autonomy.  I will respect you in your house because I recognize the hard work you put into getting it, no matter how humble, and I expect the same back.  

As far as leisure time that would have to be proven to me by a study.   

As far as communities I am not sure exactly what you mean, gentrification perhaps?  

4. Yes more could always be done.  Yes there is a debate to be had about how much one person should be worth.  BUT things aren't as simple as throwing money at people.  Raising the minimum wage to $15 isn't going to change the world and you just might end up where you started in 5 years due to loss of jobs and inflation.   And people seem to tap dance around it but part of whatever plan to improve the plight of the poor is changing some of their attitudes and behavoirs.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Hot Diggity Dog said:

2.  My objection is to the assertion that Americans live below the poverty line live in "poverty and squalor ".  And if someone has a lot more wealth than you do they are lucky/greedy/evil/undeserving of it.  To me these are tropes meant to fire political passions to be used to agendas like our thread's name sake AOC. 

I'll concede that "squalor" might not be an apt description of most American poor (and if you look back in the conversation I was using it more as an argumentative device than a description of the state of people's lives today).  So I'm happy to withdraw that word and just say that American poor are "suffering."  I don't think that should be too controversial.

But I won't concede anything about the second sentence.  I truly believe that that luck is by far the most important factor in determining financial status.  I'm not trying to fire political passions, I am stating my honest opinion.  I do not think that some people "deserve" to live like kings while others have such hardship.   

8 hours ago, Hot Diggity Dog said:

3.  We just have very different perspectives of what dignity is I guess.  To me you rob people of their dignity and autonomy when you give them things.  I would much rather be the person that knows how to fish than the person that is given a fish everyday.  Even if the person next to me catches ten fish a day i still know i can feed myself.  That gives me dignity and autonomy.   My dignity and autonomy is stolen from me if I have to depend on the government to give me my fish.  In that case i am a child again. 

Yup, we're complete opposites on this.  I honestly have a hard time seeing how someone can look at the way we treat lower-income workers and say they're being treated "with dignity."  Did you read the reports of how employees at meat processing plants were treated at the start of Covid?  At least according to some accounts, their lives were treated as completely expendable, managers were literally forcing sick people to come to work in poorly ventilated facilities and then gambling on which employees would get sick.  Lately I've been reading a bunch of articles about what it's like to work in an Amazon warehouse because of the union fight happening in Alabama.  They literally track the location of every single worker in the warehouse every second of the day and keep statistics about exactly how much time an employee is "off task" every day.  Every time an employee goes to the bathroom or has a casual conversation with a co-worker it's tracked by the data and is used in work evaluations.  And it's not like these sacrifices are made for giant paychecks -- working in a meat processing plant or an Amazon warehouse doesn't pay for much.  This is not a dignified way to live in my opinion.   The employees lack any power to effectuate change.  In my judgment it is much more dignified when people do not have to degrade themselves every single day just so they can feed their kids. 

8 hours ago, Hot Diggity Dog said:

  4. Yes more could always be done.  Yes there is a debate to be had about how much one person should be worth.  BUT things aren't as simple as throwing money at people.  Raising the minimum wage to $15 isn't going to change the world and you just might end up where you started in 5 years due to loss of jobs and inflation.   And people seem to tap dance around it but part of whatever plan to improve the plight of the poor is changing some of their attitudes and behavoirs.  

People respond to their environments.  In my view the "attitudes and behaviors" of poor people are largely the result of the situations that they've been placed in.  In my view the best way to change the plight of the poor is to make them not be poor.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/5/2021 at 6:30 AM, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I'll concede that "squalor" might not be an apt description of most American poor (and if you look back in the conversation I was using it more as an argumentative device than a description of the state of people's lives today).  So I'm happy to withdraw that word and just say that American poor are "suffering."  I don't think that should be too controversial.

But I won't concede anything about the second sentence.  I truly believe that that luck is by far the most important factor in determining financial status.  I'm not trying to fire political passions, I am stating my honest opinion.  I do not think that some people "deserve" to live like kings while others have such hardship.   

Yup, we're complete opposites on this.  I honestly have a hard time seeing how someone can look at the way we treat lower-income workers and say they're being treated "with dignity."  Did you read the reports of how employees at meat processing plants were treated at the start of Covid?  At least according to some accounts, their lives were treated as completely expendable, managers were literally forcing sick people to come to work in poorly ventilated facilities and then gambling on which employees would get sick.  Lately I've been reading a bunch of articles about what it's like to work in an Amazon warehouse because of the union fight happening in Alabama.  They literally track the location of every single worker in the warehouse every second of the day and keep statistics about exactly how much time an employee is "off task" every day.  Every time an employee goes to the bathroom or has a casual conversation with a co-worker it's tracked by the data and is used in work evaluations.  And it's not like these sacrifices are made for giant paychecks -- working in a meat processing plant or an Amazon warehouse doesn't pay for much.  This is not a dignified way to live in my opinion.   The employees lack any power to effectuate change.  In my judgment it is much more dignified when people do not have to degrade themselves every single day just so they can feed their kids. 

People respond to their environments.  In my view the "attitudes and behaviors" of poor people are largely the result of the situations that they've been placed in.  In my view the best way to change the plight of the poor is to make them not be poor.  

Having read your posts in the Is Capitalism Good or Bad? thread i have a good idea now why you consider it luck to be wealthy.  I  would disagree but it is probably better to pursue it there if we want to.  

In regards to worker dignity and the examples you brought up.  The meat packing plant i remember and it sounds like a criminal situation.  I don't know what the resolution was to that situation' whether that be lawsuit or criminal action.  In my opinion that is very much a people problem, being cruel and sadistic to your fellow human being isn't exclusive to an employer / employee relationship. 

For Amazon, if you have ever worked in a warehouse setting I can understand it from an employers point of view.  And no  I don't think that is undignified situation.   Do you get upset when stores have cameras to make sure people don't steal?  Any type of electrictronic surveillance?  Photo enforcement of traffic laws? In any case If you don't like it don't go to work for Amazon.   there are plenty of 17 dollar an hour jobs out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

After tweeting more than 24 times the last 2 years AOC has been stangely silent on Bidens border crisis and people who are locked in pens.  Can we now admit that many of the people in congress and senate on both sides are pretty much hypocrites.  Everything now is about politcal gain or loss.

Surge: A sudden powerful forward movement, especially by a crowd or natural force.

AOC:   This is not a surge. These are children, and we are not being invaded,” she said on Tuesday. “Which, by the way, is a white supremacist philosophy. The idea that if another is coming in the population, that this is an invasion of who we are.”

Never mind the fact that the term “surge” is a factual way to describe the flood of migrants currently seeking access to the United States. The word simply means that there is a very high volume of people heading to the border. It has nothing to do with white supremacy, nativism, the military, or whatever else Ocasio-Cortez is trying to tie it to.

But at least she’s decided to weigh in on the border crisis. During the Trump administration, she tweeted about the border’s “cages,” “concentration camps,” and “internment camps” more than two dozen times. She posted pictures of herself crying in front of one of these facilities. She, along with many of her Democratic colleagues, used Trump’s “children in cages” to slam his administration’s immigration policy repeatedly. But now, she can’t even be bothered to refer to the border crisis as a surge.

What changed?

The conditions for Guatemalan children haven't. Biden’s migrant detention facilities are up, running and overcrowded . Pictures from inside the centers show thousands of children huddled on concrete floors with access to few resources. Border officials expect more mass detentions to continue over the next few months as they work to get control of the influx.

So, why isn’t Ocasio-Cortez  tweeting or up arms about this like she was during the Trump administration? Because this is politics, and Ocasio-Cortez is more than willing to play by Washington's rules.

Edited by Summer Wheat
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Summer Wheat said:

After tweeting more than 24 times the last 2 years AOC has been stangely silent on Bidens border crisis and people who are locked in pens.  Can we now admit that many of the people in congress and senate on both sides are pretty much hypocrites.  Everything now is about politcal gain or loss.

Surge: A sudden powerful forward movement, especially by a crowd or natural force.

AOC:   This is not a surge. These are children, and we are not being invaded,” she said on Tuesday. “Which, by the way, is a white supremacist philosophy. The idea that if another is coming in the population, that this is an invasion of who we are.”

Never mind the fact that the term “surge” is a factual way to describe the flood of migrants currently seeking access to the United States. The word simply means that there is a very high volume of people heading to the border. It has nothing to do with white supremacy, nativism, the military, or whatever else Ocasio-Cortez is trying to tie it to.

But at least she’s decided to weigh in on the border crisis. During the Trump administration, she tweeted about the border’s “cages,” “concentration camps,” and “internment camps” more than two dozen times. She posted pictures of herself crying in front of one of these facilities. She, along with many of her Democratic colleagues, used Trump’s “children in cages” to slam his administration’s immigration policy repeatedly. But now, she can’t even be bothered to refer to the border crisis as a surge.

What changed? The conditions for Guatemalan children haven't. Biden’s migrant detention facilities are up, running and overcrowded . Pictures from inside the centers show thousands of children huddled on concrete floors with access to few resources. Border officials expect more mass detentions to continue over the next few months as they work to get control of the influx.

So, why isn’t Ocasio-Cortez  tweeting or up arms about this like she was during the Trump administration? Because this is politics, and Ocasio-Cortez is more than willing to play by Washington's rules.

in other news...water is indeed wet! 

I joke but in reality I blame us, the general public who buy into and blindly defend these types of hypocrisy on both sides. If we could actually wake up and stop fighting each other, we would realize that the dude next to you is not the enemy and we can focus our attention toward Washington and getting them in line. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, glvsav37 said:

in other news...water is indeed wet! 

I joke but in reality I blame us, the general public who buy into and blindly defend these types of hypocrisy on both sides. If we could actually wake up and stop fighting each other, we would realize that the dude next to you is not the enemy and we can focus our attention toward Washington and getting them in line. 

But they are our LEADERS!!  LEADERS I tell you!!  We need them to LEAD US!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
  • Create New...