Jump to content
superds77

McDonald’s surrenders as $15 hourly minimum wage gains steam

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, drvoke said:

 

I'm not laughing. That you are speaks to your lack of a moral compass.

 

 

Related image

 

A mining industrialists mansion during the Gilded Age.

In Nighthawk's world, 'exploitation' doesn't exist. It is not even a real word. Everyone gets what they deserve.

 

 

Image result for little girl child labor

 

Did these little girls deserve to be sent to the mines? For whose benefit? Not there's.

 

Nighthawk will provide some links. Provide some theoretical/ideological nonsense. 

 

But we all know right from wrong. Nothing could be more wrong than this. This very real 'exploitation'. This is nothing less than evil.  And those who advocate it are evil.

 

 

 

 

 

oh , so you're providing proof of what happened during the gilded age?

 

really?

 

Oh my, Dr Voke, in all seriousness, you are so misinformed.

 

Child labor did happen, why? because capitalism and the industrial revolution was in its infancy stage, nobody knew the rules, before the gilded age , most people worked on a farm and before that they work for landlords 14 hours a day 7 days a week 52 weeks a year for the master in the outdoors under brutal conditions

 

When the factories , mining and other industries came along it was new, it was either the kids worked or they starved.

 

It wasn't until a hundred years later before people realized that kids shouldn't be working like adults and people advocated for child labor laws from all over the world and us transitioning to the middle class stage.

 

You cant say that exploiting young children was the fault of industrialists , that was the way life was, if you weren't rich as most weren't , you have a huge family with mouths to feed your choices were, work for a factory or mines, or starve to death or worse prostitution or begging 

 

China is going through that now, Singapore and Korea went through that in the 1960's and next frontier is africa ( sub sahara) and central asia, child labor is an option as they dont want to starve to death or send the kids to prostitution or begging 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chairmanOFTB said:

 

oh , so you're providing proof of what happened during the gilded age?

 

really?

 

Oh my, Dr Voke, in all seriousness, you are so misinformed.

 

Child labor did happen, why? because capitalism and the industrial revolution was in its infancy stage, nobody knew the rules, before the gilded age , most people worked on a farm and before that they work for landlords 14 hours a day 7 days a week 52 weeks a year for the master in the outdoors under brutal conditions

 

When the factories , mining and other industries came along it was new, it was either the kids worked or they starved.

 

It wasn't until a hundred years later before people realized that kids shouldn't be working like adults and people advocated for child labor laws from all over the world and us transitioning to the middle class stage.

 

You cant say that exploiting young children was the fault of industrialists , that was the way life was, if you weren't rich as most weren't , you have a huge family with mouths to feed your choices were, work for a factory or mines, or starve to death or worse prostitution or begging 

 

China is going through that now, Singapore and Korea went through that in the 1960's and next frontier is africa ( sub sahara) and central asia, child labor is an option as they dont want to starve to death or send the kids to prostitution or begging 

 

 

 

I'm calling complete BS on this. Those rich industrialists knew what was happening in their mines. Did they care? NO. Did they improve conditions? NO, only when compelled. You never stated what you think of his mansion. What do you think? Oh, and child labor laws were finally made permanent during FDR's New Deal. (Another GOP-demonized bit of legislation that created the middle class)  Coming up: more BS economic revisionist history that never happened, and economic theory that never helps the common man. You two keep peddling your lies. We have tangible results on our side. Thank you and f*ck you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/3/2019 at 3:02 PM, Debs said:

If your business plan relies on making taxpayers subsidize you by allowing you to pay wages that cannot support your workers your business plan is CRAP. 

So true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wal-Mart would tell you how to get government benefits while working for Wal-Mart full time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, drvoke said:

I'm calling complete BS on this. Those rich industrialists knew what was happening in their mines. Did they care? NO. Did they improve conditions? NO, only when compelled.

 

you call B.S all you want , facts are facts

when were child labor laws enacted DrVoke?

some industrialist did care, those folks dont get enough press, look up George Westinghouse , JJ.Hill, Even ole anti semite Henry Ford as an example, so to say that all rich industrialist didn't care is disingenuous 

 

9 hours ago, drvoke said:

Oh, and child labor laws were finally made permanent during FDR's New Deal. (Another GOP-demonized bit of legislation that created the middle class)  Coming up: more BS economic revisionist history that never happened, and economic theory that never helps the common man.

 

Yes Federal Laws by FDR did happen but the facts are Child labor was the norm in America as immigrants were flocking to America in droves, child labor started in the victorian era in England and when America was born it flourished.

 

in 1905 child labor committees sprung up like the Kardashians on social media, they forced the states to enact laws the exception southern states which forced the democrat control congress to enact federal child labor laws  in 1916 which was struck down in 1918 by the Supreme court as "unconstitutional" 

 

The Great Depression changed a lot of congress and SCOTUS mind as FDR figured out its better to have Adults working and paying taxes vs cheap child labor, and technology also played a major part as new machines was introduced , the tasks that were performed by children were replaced by new technology.

 

But the New deal did not 100% eliminate child labor especially for illegals ( agriculture in the south  and the Garment industry in New York)

 

So to say FDR was the hero and the reason for the elimination of Child labor is a joke that states have been doing that for decades before the feds got involved and by the way african americans and children of illegals and new immigrants surely didn't feel that way

 

9 hours ago, drvoke said:

You two keep peddling your lies. We have tangible results on our side. Thank you and f*ck you

 

Try reading non partisan books on history for once and maybe and I mean maybe you might figure out some things call "empirical evidence" doesn't lie

Marxist, leftists, socialists, communists lies through their teeth, assuming those are their real teeth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, drvoke said:

 

I'm not laughing. That you are speaks to your lack of a moral compass.

I am laughing at your abject stupidity and lack of self-awareness of your hypocrisy, dumbass.

 

19 hours ago, drvoke said:

 

 

Related image

 

A mining industrialists mansion during the Gilded Age.

What the hell does that have to do with the price of tea in China, moron?  Is this what passes for debate in your liberal fantasies?  Just post a random photo of a mansion and pretend you have made some sort of a point?

 

19 hours ago, drvoke said:

In Nighthawk's world, 'exploitation' doesn't exist. It is not even a real word.

Of course exploitation exists, numbskull.  I even gave you several ways that employers could potentially exploit their workers- such as by using force, committing fraud, or breaching contracts.  These things are and should be totally illegal.  Preventing these kind of things is one of the very few legitimate functions of governments, dimwit.  If you can provide evidence of employers doing these things, then let's see it and I will join you in calling for the government to put a stop to it.

 

And when I and other posters asked you the very simple question of how these evil employers today are supposedly "exploiting" their workers outside of these areas, you cowardly dodged the question like a sniveling little pussy.

 

 

19 hours ago, drvoke said:

Everyone gets what they deserve.

 

 

Image result for little girl child labor

 

Did these little girls deserve to be sent to the mines? For whose benefit? Not there's.

 

Nighthawk will provide some links. Provide some theoretical/ideological nonsense. 

So, despite it supposedly being "nonsense", you were completely unable to refute any of it any way whatsoever, outside of just posting a dumb photo of some mansion?

 

19 hours ago, drvoke said:

 

But we all know right from wrong. Nothing could be more wrong than this. This very real 'exploitation'. This is nothing less than evil.  And those who advocate it are evil.

Of course children having to work in mines is horrible, imbecile.  But unlike you idiot libs, those of us that actually have functioning brains know that the best solution to this problem is very simple- free market capitalism.  Period.  The links I provided above explained this very clearly.  What, were you just too damn illiterate to comprehend the information?  Or do you just refuse to believe anything unless it is fed to you by your beloved liberal masters?

 

The fact is, the seemingly easy solution that you idiot libs advocate of simply having the government ban children from being allowed to do these jobs does nothing to solve the underlying problem of their poverty and instead actually makes things WORSE for them.

 

Let's assume for a moment that your precious government did not wait until the problem was largely solved before passing their useless and counterproductive bans.  What do you think all those children that worked in the mines and factories would have done instead if that moronic ban had been in place?

 

A.  They would have spent their time happily laughing and frolicking in the meadows all day, without a care in the world!

 

or

 

B.  They would have had to resort to even less desirable alternatives than working for the evil mine and factory owners, such as becoming "vagabonds, beggars, tramps, robbers, or prostitutes, or risk starving to death.

 

Do you say A or B?  If you are unsure of the answer, feel free to look at my links above and educate yourself for a change.  Let's see if you will answer this time or if you will cowardly dodge simple questions like you usually do.

 

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

McDonalds will raise prices, lay off, convert to part time, and automate more. The reaction could be one of these examples or a combination of them. Dems do not understand simple economics. The workers laid off or automated out of a job will get $0 per hour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, johndnorth said:

McDonalds will raise prices, lay off, convert to part time, and automate more. The reaction could be one of these examples or a combination of them. Dems do not understand simple economics. The workers laid off or automated out of a job will get $0 per hour. 

 

Then they will be subsidized by the state. In other words, YOU.  You are the ones paying these outrageous CEO salaries. Get a clue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, drvoke said:

 

Then they will be subsidized by the state. In other words, YOU. 

Yes, if people are unemployed because of a moronic MW law and have to resort to living only off of welfare, then they will indeed be being subsidized by the state, i.e. taxpayers.  No fucking duh, captain obvious.

 

Quote

You are the ones paying these outrageous CEO salaries.

If I voluntarily choose to buy a product or service from a corporation, that corporation is not using force or committing fraud, and that corporation has not been granted any special privileges by your precious government in some form of crony capitalism, then why would I give a shit if the CEO makes an outrageous salary?  That should be between him/her and the owners of the corporation.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2019 at 11:57 PM, chairmanOFTB said:

 

You cant say that exploiting young children was the fault of industrialists , that was the way life was, if you weren't rich as most weren't , you have a huge family with mouths to feed your choices were, work for a factory or mines, or starve to death or worse prostitution or begging 

 

China is going through that now, Singapore and Korea went through that in the 1960's and next frontier is africa ( sub sahara) and central asia, child labor is an option as they dont want to starve to death or send the kids to prostitution or begging 

 

 

 

Justifying evil by pointing to precedent evil. Nice. You and Nighthawk should get a room.

 

 

 

Image result for unrestrained capitalism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, drvoke said:

Justifying evil by pointing to precedent evil. Nice. You and Nighthawk should get a room.

 

who is justifying evil, explaining reality is justifying ?

 

yikes

 

Let me ask you a question, I dont how old you are so it might make sense

 

Did you drive as a teen or in your freshman year college?

 

Did you drink?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chairmanOFTB said:

 

who is justifying evil, explaining reality is justifying ?

 

yikes

 

Let me ask you a question, I dont how old you are so it might make sense

 

Did you drive as a teen or in your freshman year college?

 

Did you drink?

 

 

 

 

LOL.  So now you not only understand economics better than Louis Brandeis (yes, that Brandeis) but now you want to play Sigmund sawed-off f*ckin' Freud. Is this some sort of circumcised Jewish envy or what? You two nitwits would be hilarious if you weren't so morally depraved.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, drvoke said:

 

 

LOL.  So now you not only understand economics better than Louis Brandeis (yes, that Brandeis) but now you want to play Sigmund sawed-off f*ckin' Freud. Is this some sort of circumcised Jewish envy or what? You two nitwits would be hilarious if you weren't so morally depraved.

 

 

 

thanks for the speech, you want to try and answer my question and you will see the point I'm trying to make

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, chairmanOFTB said:

 

thanks for the speech, you want to try and answer my question and you will see the point I'm trying to make

 

 

 

Okay, I'll play. Yes to both. (don't try my patience)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chairmanOFTB said:

 

who is justifying evil, explaining reality is justifying ?

 

yikes

One thing I have observed from these idiot libs is that when they are getting their asses handed to them in a debate against a conservative, they will often resort to changing the subject by using a fallback claim that their conservative opponent is some kind of heartless bastard that thoroughly enjoys and advocates for poor children to be tortured and starved to death, or something similarly absurd.  They will never actually present any evidence or logical arguments to back up this claim, mind you- they will simply proclaim it as if it is a given fact.  By pretending that they have the moral high ground, they think it somehow eliminates the need to actually refute any opposing arguments or prove their case.  In their warped view, it is basically- "I claim I am good and you are evil, thus I automatically win the debate without having to actually prove anything."

 

I have seen dozens of them go down this path, right before they cowardly run away...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, drvoke said:

 

Okay, I'll play. Yes to both. (don't try my patience)

 

Don't try your patience.. too funny

 

maybe you should start paying attention.

 

Now, why did I asked you Lad, because today people are encourage strongly not to drink and drive today

especially our youth whether its a  junior and senior in high school up to a junior in college 

 

back then we drank and drive , so why did  we do that back then and we don't now?

Reason, because we know better, we didn't know better then or some chose to ignore it as we did what most of our parents did.

 

Same thing with Child labor back then, Capitalism was new because of the industrial age most folks just went with the flow and children working there was because families were poor and there wasn't much of a choice, as immoral as you make it out to be, the reality was most families were poor and the options available to them,  working or starving

 

get it now?

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Nighthawk said:

One thing I have observed from these idiot libs is that when they are getting their asses handed to them in a debate against a conservative, they will often resort to changing the subject by using a fallback claim that their conservative opponent is some kind of heartless bastard that thoroughly enjoys and advocates for poor children to be tortured and starved to death, or something similarly absurd.  They will never actually present any evidence or logical arguments to back up this claim, mind you- they will simply proclaim it as if it is a given fact.  By pretending that they have the moral high ground, they think it somehow eliminates the need to actually refute any opposing arguments or prove their case.  In their warped view, it is basically- "I claim I am good and you are evil, thus I automatically win the debate without having to actually prove anything."

 

I have seen dozens of them go down this path, right before they cowardly run away...

 

I see it all the time on here from most of the leftists who are economically illiterate or has a poor understanding about history

 

I have yet to see one of them explain to me why 15 dollars an hour for a minimum wage is a good thing?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, chairmanOFTB said:

 

I see it all the time on here from most of the leftists who are economically illiterate or has a poor understanding about history

 

I have yet to see one of them explain to me why 15 dollars an hour for a minimum wage is a good thing?

That is because they simply cannot give a rational explanation to such a moronic policy.  They only advocate it because 1. it is what their beloved liberal masters told them to do while they were getting brainwashed and 2. it makes them have warm fuzzy feelings in that they foolishly think they are helping some poor workers at the expense of some evil capitalist pig.  The fact that what they "feel" will happen with moronic MW laws and what actually happens are completely different things is apparently irrelevant.

 

What I continually find bizarre is the way that no amount of logic, reason, or evidence can ever make these idiot libs ever change their beliefs from what their masters have taught them.  I know that if there was some liberal that held a position with which I initially disagreed, but neither I or any other conservative could ever come remotely close to ever proving that poster wrong, while they continually bumped their threads to deafening silence, I would at the very least start to question my stance on that issue.  I certainly would not be making any further posts in favor of my initial position until I had done further research and I could actually defend it.  If after doing further research I still could not defend it, then I would most likely change my mind.  But I bet that every single one of the idiot libs that I have utterly demolished and sent running for the hills still believe wholeheartedly in their moronic positions despite their complete inability to refute any arguments against them.  I find this behavior absolutely baffling.  I can only surmise that they blindly worship their liberal masters so strongly, that their psyche simply can't bear the thought that they may be lying to them in order to increase their power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, chairmanOFTB said:

 

Don't try your patience.. too funny

 

maybe you should start paying attention.

 

Now, why did I asked you Lad, because today people are encourage strongly not to drink and drive today

especially our youth whether its a  junior and senior in high school up to a junior in college 

 

back then we drank and drive , so why did  we do that back then and we don't now?

Reason, because we know better, we didn't know better then or some chose to ignore it as we did what most of our parents did.

 

Same thing with Child labor back then, Capitalism was new because of the industrial age most folks just went with the flow and children working there was because families were poor and there wasn't much of a choice, as immoral as you make it out to be, the reality was most families were poor and the options available to them,  working or starving

 

get it now?

 

 

 

 

 

Frankly, no, I don't get it. Namely because it is a bankrupt moral position. This whole 'back then it was accepted' nonsense. Mark Twain fought the world over against people like you. Yes, YOU.  Apologists for exploitation. I know evil when I see it, and I know horsesh*t when I hear it. Put down the shovel already. Save it for your fellow rednecks. They eat it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Nighthawk said:

That is because they simply cannot give a rational explanation to such a moronic policy.  They only advocate it because 1. it is what their beloved liberal masters told them to do while they were getting brainwashed and 2. it makes them have warm fuzzy feelings in that they foolishly think they are helping some poor workers at the expense of some evil capitalist pig.  The fact that what they "feel" will happen with moronic MW laws and what actually happens are completely different things is apparently irrelevant.

 

What I continually find bizarre is the way that no amount of logic, reason, or evidence can ever make these idiot libs ever change their beliefs from what their masters have taught them.  I know that if there was some liberal that held a position with which I initially disagreed, but neither I or any other conservative could ever come remotely close to ever proving that poster wrong, while they continually bumped their threads to deafening silence, I would at the very least start to question my stance on that issue.  I certainly would not be making any further posts in favor of my initial position until I had done further research and I could actually defend it.  If after doing further research I still could not defend it, then I would most likely change my mind.  But I bet that every single one of the idiot libs that I have utterly demolished and sent running for the hills still believe wholeheartedly in their moronic positions despite their complete inability to refute any arguments against them.  I find this behavior absolutely baffling.  I can only surmise that they blindly worship their liberal masters so strongly, that their psyche simply can't bear the thought that they may be lying to them in order to increase their power.

 

yeppers, its all about "feelings" vs simple logic.

 

They feel its the best thing to raise the minimum wage because life will be simpler, easier  for those when they earn more in their make belief world.

 

3 minutes ago, drvoke said:

Frankly, no, I don't get it. Namely because it is a bankrupt moral position. This whole 'back then it was accepted' nonsense.

 

of course you dont, as you dont understand basic history, you feel that children of yesteryear were  aggrieved , but you dont factor in reality , and youre a bunch of hypocrites, are you sure that the bananas  you bought at the grocery store was picked by workers earning a living wage, what about the fruits and veggies you buy?


What the tablet, smart phone, cell you have , you think it was constructed by a person earning a middle class american salary?

 

 

7 minutes ago, drvoke said:

Mark Twain fought the world over against people like you. Yes, YOU. 

 

well good for Mark Twain

 

7 minutes ago, drvoke said:

Apologists for exploitation. I know evil when I see it, and I know horsesh*t when I hear it. Put down the shovel already. Save it for your fellow rednecks. They eat it up.

 

oh spare me your Micheal Moore 5th grade civic rhetoric, its as boring as listening to Obama talk about "how you can keep your own doctor"

 

Exploiting my ass, youre the one who is cruel, you rather see the kids starve to death in the 1800's vs earning what they can to help their families, talking about Cruel, you want to see them go to school and earn a education in the 1800's oh wait, it was for the rich folks who can afford to send their kids, so what would you have done Voke, let the kids starve to death?


Cruel bastard.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
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.   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.


×
×
  • Create New...