Open Your Pockets, Seattle...

[prole]

How about we stick with jobs with decent wages and benefits? I'm for them. Are you?

[tomtom]

How about we stick with jobs with decent wages and benefits? I'm for them. Are you?

 

NO!

[JayB]

How about we stick with jobs with decent wages and benefits? I'm for them. Are you?

 

If a given skillset won't generate a return sufficient to generate any profits (Help: Total Comp/Hour = $20. Labor value added/hour = $10. Operating loss from labor/hour = $10), how do you propose to fund the said benefits and wages. In reality. Here. Now. Not after the Lefto-Rapture arrives and the ghost of Marx smites the capitalists while all of the devout socialists smile smugly from their emission/cruelty/racism/sexism/classism/speciesism/lookism free sustaino-collectives.

[olyclimber]

There is a simple solution Jay! Reallocation of resources by the Man. What other solution is there? Do tell!

[tvashtarkatena]

OK, so let me get this straight. You've got a boat the holds three and a river to cross. There's a priest, a Boy Scout, a governor, and a 22 year old acting student....

[prole]

how do you propose to fund the said benefits and wages. In reality. Here. Now.

 

Reallocation of resources by the Man.

 

For a start, I'd suggest some reforms on this front. It's simply ludicrous to imagine that such arrangements truly reflect the "value-added" by these men even as the ships they're supposedly piloting are running aground.

 

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

how do you propose to fund the said benefits and wages. In reality. Here. Now.

 

Reallocation of resources by the Man.

 

For a start, I'd suggest some reforms on this front. It's simply ludicrous to imagine that such arrangements truly reflect the "value-added" by these men even as the ships they're supposedly piloting are running aground.

 

 

In other words, you would impose, by the power of the state, restrictions on the maximum benefits an employee can receive at a private corporation? You'd make a fine totalitarian.

[tvashtarkatena]

how do you propose to fund the said benefits and wages. In reality. Here. Now.

 

Reallocate military spending. Then try to figure out what your going to do with the rest of the money.

 

Next question.

 

[prole]

how do you propose to fund the said benefits and wages. In reality. Here. Now.

 

Reallocation of resources by the Man.

 

For a start, I'd suggest some reforms on this front. It's simply ludicrous to imagine that such arrangements truly reflect the "value-added" by these men even as the ships they're supposedly piloting are running aground.

 

 

In other words, you would impose, by the power of the state, restrictions on the maximum benefits an employee can receive at a private corporation? You'd make a fine totalitarian.

 

Jay plays the tune, Kojak and Fairweather provide the muscle/comic relief.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

What's really funny is that all three are woefully out of touch with the direction their party is moving; towards 'effective' government and 'efficient' taxation, not less government and lower taxes. The GOP is having to do this because, as Sexy already stated quite accurately, the public demands it.

 

It's like three guys still padding around in Earthshoes as the rest of the world politely turns away and moves on.

Edited March 13, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[JayB]

how do you propose to fund the said benefits and wages. In reality. Here. Now.

 

Reallocate military spending. Then try to figure out what your going to do with the rest of the money.

 

Next question.

 

Note the "reality," "here," and "Now" caveats above.

[JayB]

What's really funny is that all three are woefully out of touch with the direction their party is moving; towards 'effective' government and 'efficient' taxation, not less government and lower taxes. The GOP is having to do this because, as Sexy already stated quite accurately, the public demands it.

 

It's like three guys still padding around in Earthshoes as the rest of the world politely turns away and moves on.

 

Nothing enhances efficiency and effectiveness like paying more than necessary to generate a given public good or service.

 

Why automate toll booths when you can staff them at $66K per year plus future pension and healtchare liabilities?

[olyclimber]

Well then you have to support the automated toll booth industry! I think its probably cheaper just to pay that toll booth attendant

[JayB]

I'd actually be happy if you had to stop at booths and pay a few bucks to have a state employee in a booth guess your age and weight, since this would eliminate the illusion that they are being paid to perform a function that is either useful or necessary.

 

 

[olyclimber]

I would be in favor of automated toll booths that deals with cheaters/non-payers/counterfeiters by sending ROBOSAURUS after them on non-payment. While this might fall into the "unrealistic" category, keep in mind that ROBOSAURUS was recently for sale and should come pretty cheap.

[grtmtnchic]

How about we stick with jobs with decent wages and benefits? I'm for them. Are you?

 

If a given skillset won't generate a return sufficient to generate any profits (Help: Total Comp/Hour = $20. Labor value added/hour = $10. Operating loss from labor/hour = $10), how do you propose to fund the said benefits and wages. In reality. Here. Now.

 

Yes, see, this is a lanuage I understand. I worked in a public elementary school for a year and the inefficiency drove me insane and forced me to move to higher ed. I kept thinking that if only we could have the students be generating a product(s) AS part of the learning process, the schools could actually afford good teaching supplies/aids/experiences and - hate to say it - more competent teachers! Everyone would benefit. Except for the slacker teachers who would have to find jobs better suited to them.

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Yes, see, this is a lanuage I understand. I worked in a public elementary school for a year and the inefficiency drove me insane and forced me to move to higher ed. I kept thinking that if only we could have the students be generating a product(s) AS part of the learning process, the schools could actually afford good teaching supplies/aids/experiences and - hate to say it - more competent teachers! Everyone would benefit. Except for the slacker teachers who would have to find jobs better suited to them.

 

Like a toll booth attendant? That'd be a perfect job for Prole as well.

[JayB]

How about we stick with jobs with decent wages and benefits? I'm for them. Are you?

 

If a given skillset won't generate a return sufficient to generate any profits (Help: Total Comp/Hour = $20. Labor value added/hour = $10. Operating loss from labor/hour = $10), how do you propose to fund the said benefits and wages. In reality. Here. Now.

 

Yes, see, this is a lanuage I understand. I worked in a public elementary school for a year and the inefficiency drove me insane and forced me to move to higher ed. I kept thinking that if only we could have the students be generating a product(s) AS part of the learning process, the schools could actually afford good teaching supplies/aids/experiences and - hate to say it - more competent teachers! Everyone would benefit. Except for the slacker teachers who would have to find jobs better suited to them.

 

I was actually just talking about private sector workers here, but...

 

Maybe we should consider outsourcing primary and secondary education to the Finn's...

[KaskadskyjKozak]

How about we stick with jobs with decent wages and benefits? I'm for them. Are you?

 

If a given skillset won't generate a return sufficient to generate any profits (Help: Total Comp/Hour = $20. Labor value added/hour = $10. Operating loss from labor/hour = $10), how do you propose to fund the said benefits and wages. In reality. Here. Now.

 

Yes, see, this is a lanuage I understand. I worked in a public elementary school for a year and the inefficiency drove me insane and forced me to move to higher ed. I kept thinking that if only we could have the students be generating a product(s) AS part of the learning process, the schools could actually afford good teaching supplies/aids/experiences and - hate to say it - more competent teachers! Everyone would benefit. Except for the slacker teachers who would have to find jobs better suited to them.

 

I was actually just talking about private sector workers here, but...

 

Maybe we should consider outsourcing primary and secondary education to the Finn's...

 

No, the answer (as always) is to raise taxes and spend more!

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

the Poles spend 1/4 as much and get equivalent scores. f-k yeah!

[grtmtnchic]

It's not all the education system's fault. A lot of my students' parents spent their daytime hours either drunk or at the casinos, so you know there's not a lot of positive reinforcement at home. But this isn't a thread about our culture, so I'll leave it at that.

 

All I really wanna say is a little hard work never hurt anyone!

 

 

[tomtom]

the Poles spend 1/4 as much and get equivalent scores. f-k yeah!

 

Ya. We can outsource our primary education to CrazyPolishTeacher.com and save $billions$.

[Fairweather]

 

Jay plays the tune, Kojak and Fairweather provide the muscle/comic relief.

 

 

I'm still waiting for an honest answer to the question I posed yesterday:

 

Why should state and local employees enjoy any greater degree of job security or special protection from economic downturn than those in the private sector who pay their salaries?

 

Any thoughts, Prole? Or just more recitation from the little red book?

[olyclimber]

this is not an answer or argument to your question Fairweather, but I have had several opportunities to take a "state job" that would promised "job security" or "good benefits"....but always at a lower rate than what the private sector had to offer. I have always taken the "risk" associated with the private sector jobs, because I enjoy the faster pace and higher pay associated.

 

its really more of an observation: in my experience state jobs afford more job security, but lower pay. some people seem to like that sort of job, and gravitate to the slower paced but perhaps more "guaranteed" state positions.

 

this is not an argument for or against either, nor do i know if it has anything to do with what prole and you were discussing.

[prole]

Why should state and local employees enjoy any greater degree of job security or special protection from economic downturn than those in the private sector who pay their salaries?

 

I don't think they should! In fact, if you have a problem with it, I would recommend you work on (re)organizing private sector workers for greater job security, better wages, and benefits. It'd be rather more productive than beating up on unionized workers and crying like a child whose ice cream cone went plop and now wants someone elses.