The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Easy lesson in life

FuryOfFirestorm said:
Then the little girl fires the Chinese boy and hires a 2 year old Indian girl to do double the work for 5 cents, thereby increasing profits. Her daddy rewards her hard work with a $50 bonus, a bike, and access to the executive washroom at Chuck E Cheese. The Indian girl gets her pay and hours cut, while the Chinese boy gets deported by INS.
Click to expand...

You have the republican mantra down 100%! ..|

The Wealthy Entitled Class deserve more profits. The republican party they've bought is making sure of that. After all, they're the job creators.....
 
CowboyBob said:
You have the republican mantra down 100%! ..|

The Wealthy Entitled Class deserve more profits. The republican party they've bought is making sure of that. After all, they're the job creators.....
Click to expand...

The crazy thing is that they could be, but they've mostly shown they're not interested.

Let's say I have a billion dollars. If I put that in a trust earning just 5%, I get $50mn/yr. Using just that interest/investment income, I could create two thousand jobs paying $25k/yr, and not lose money regardless of whether those jobs were productive. If the were productive, I could get richer... and provide more jobs.

But they don't do that -- they sit on their wealth.
 
Kulindahr said:
The crazy thing is that they could be, but they've mostly shown they're not interested.

Let's say I have a billion dollars. If I put that in a trust earning just 5%, I get $50mn/yr. Using just that interest/investment income, I could create two thousand jobs paying $25k/yr, and not lose money regardless of whether those jobs were productive. If the were productive, I could get richer... and provide more jobs.

But they don't do that -- they sit on their wealth.
Click to expand...

Or worse, they tear down companies and eliminate jobs to increase their already bloated wallets.

It's not enough for a company to make $50 billion a year, so they shut down a few factories and eliminate thousands of jobs just to increase profits by $50 million. Got to keep those shareholders happy!
 
FuryOfFirestorm said:
Or worse, they tear down companies and eliminate jobs to increase their already bloated wallets.

It's not enough for a company to make $50 billion a year, so they shut down a few factories and eliminate thousands of jobs just to increase profits by $50 million. Got to keep those shareholders happy!
Click to expand...

Don't forget suck off the taxpayers, as Romney and crew did.
 
Kulindahr said:
The crazy thing is that they could be, but they've mostly shown they're not interested.

Let's say I have a billion dollars. If I put that in a trust earning just 5%, I get $50mn/yr. Using just that interest/investment income, I could create two thousand jobs paying $25k/yr, and not lose money regardless of whether those jobs were productive. If the were productive, I could get richer... and provide more jobs.

But they don't do that -- they sit on their wealth.
Click to expand...

But when they hire they in the cross hairs of some of the most powerful enemies in the world: the US government, the Democrat party, the labor bosses, the trial lawyers. They, like you are anti-corporation, anti- employer, ant- profit. Dems love the golden eggs but they hate that goose. It is much more rational to send the jobs to India or some country where they actually want jobs and do not hate employers.
 
Benvolio said:
But when they hire they in the cross hairs of some of the most powerful enemies in the world: the US government, the Democrat party, the labor bosses, the trial lawyers. They, like you are anti-corporation, anti- employer, ant- profit. Dems love the golden eggs but they hate that goose. It is much more rational to send the jobs to India or some country where they actually want jobs and do not hate employers.
Click to expand...

Nice demonstration of how to make stuff up.
 
Benvolio said:
But when they hire they in the cross hairs of some of the most powerful enemies in the world: the US government, the Democrat party, the labor bosses, the trial lawyers. They, like you are anti-corporation, anti- employer, ant- profit. Dems love the golden eggs but they hate that goose. It is much more rational to send the jobs to India or some country where they actually want jobs and do not hate employers.
Click to expand...

Corporations don't hire people overseas because they give a fuck about them- they do it because they can get someone to do the same job as an American for less than minimum wage and zero benefits.

But keep on trotting out the same tired "WHY DO YOU HATE CAPITALISM? YOU'RE JUST JELLY THAT THEY MAKE MORE MONEY!"

Making a profit is good. Making a profit by not paying your employees a livable wage is not. If your company is making $100 billion annually, you can afford to pay your workers enough money so they can live in something other than a cardboard box.
 
FuryOfFirestorm said:
Corporations don't hire people overseas because they give a fuck about them- they do it because they can get someone to do the same job as an American for less than minimum wage and zero benefits.

But keep on trotting out the same tired "WHY DO YOU HATE CAPITALISM? YOU'RE JUST JELLY THAT THEY MAKE MORE MONEY!"

Making a profit is good. Making a profit by not paying your employees a livable wage is not. If your company is making $100 billion annually, you can afford to pay your workers enough money so they can live in something other than a cardboard box.
Click to expand...

Yes -- it's the difference between being a symbiote and a parasite.
 
Kulindahr said:
Yes -- it's the difference between being a symbiote and a parasite.
Click to expand...

Remind me to explain the huge financial and legal burdens which are imposed upon enployers, which far exceed the wages.
 
Benvolio said:
Remind me to explain the huge financial and legal burdens which are imposed upon enployers, which far exceed the wages.
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean like CEOs, who make millions of dollars a year sitting in a cushy office while an employee works 60+ hours a week lifting 100 pound loads and can barely feed their kids?

Or like the CEOs that bailed on Enron with huge bonuses and golden parachutes while the guys at the bottom got left with no job, no pension and no severance?

Yeah, those guys have it tough all over. If they weren't required to pay their employees minimum wage, they could have gotten SOLID gold toilet seats instead of just gold PLATED ones. Boo hoo.
 
So has that stupid little girl taken the time yet to get a better grasp of the situation of the homeless in the USA?
 
The OP likes to start baiting threads. His last one was deleted.
 
A baiting thread, of course, is one started by a non-liberal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top