#winning

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

It's the great debate. If labor spends their lives in service of the company I think they damn well deserve more than the shareholder/owner since their lives are worth more than any dollar amount. That's just me. My view comes from the belief that all people deserve respect, dignity, and wellness no matter their ability.

Owners should get the same if their lives are dedicated to the company but I don't think they deserve any more than they need any more than anyone else. They all contribute in their own ways to the same goal. Someone sweeps, someone builds, someone creates, someone organizes... everyone pitches in to the common goal. Everyone benefits. Right now we believe wealth should be disproportionately shared to the few.

---

You realize the laborers agreed to be paid X amount per hour when they took the job right? No one is being forced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

It's the great debate. If labor spends their lives in service of the company I think they damn well deserve more than the shareholder/owner since their lives are worth more than any dollar amount. That's just me. My view comes from the belief that all people deserve respect, dignity, and wellness no matter their ability.

Owners should get the same if their lives are dedicated to the company but I don't think they deserve any more than they need any more than anyone else. They all contribute in their own ways to the same goal. Someone sweeps, someone builds, someone creates, someone organizes... everyone pitches in to the common goal. Everyone benefits. Right now we believe wealth should be disproportionately shared to the few.

---

That’s all great kumbaya commie BS about how you feel, but again you didn’t answer my questions or address my point.

A laborer does put up any capital investment or assume any risk or liability. If they are sharing in the profits, do you find it acceptable they share in the risk as well?

Example: A startup pizza business is not making enough revenue to cover their operating expenses. Would it be ok to you if the owner told the employee “sorry no profits this month so you won’t be paid for your labor.”?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

That’s all great kumbaya commie BS about how you feel, but again you didn’t answer my questions or address my point.

A laborer does put up any capital investment or assume any risk or liability. If they are sharing in the profits, do you find it acceptable they share in the risk as well?

Example: A startup pizza business is not making enough revenue to cover their operating expenses. Would it be ok to you if the owner told the employee “sorry no profits this month so you won’t be paid for your labor.”?

---

If a business is not making money everyone loses. The business closes and no one has jobs. Everyone takes a risk in business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

If a business is not making money everyone loses. The business closes and no one has jobs. Everyone takes a risk in business.

---

The laborer still gets paid for their time, no matter what. Else the owner goes to jail. It’s nowhere near the same level of risk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

If a business is not making money everyone loses. The business closes and no one has jobs. Everyone takes a risk in business.

---

Oh please, Backlash. Businesses don’t exist to be charities... they exist to make money. If they don’t, everyone’s out of a job... that’s called reality, not oppression.

And let’s drop the kumbaya talk about everyone “taking the same risk.” Owners stake their money, time, and often everything they’ve built; employees risk… finding another job. That’s the trade off. If you think the risk is so equal, you’re welcome to put your own money on the line and start a business yourself. Oh wait, I figured out why you've never done this....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

If a business is not making money everyone loses. The business closes and no one has jobs. Everyone takes a risk in business.

---

This is a weasel response. Just pointing that out even though you'll still never get it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

It's the great debate. If labor spends their lives in service of the company I think they damn well deserve more than the shareholder/owner since their lives are worth more than any dollar amount. That's just me. My view comes from the belief that all people deserve respect, dignity, and wellness no matter their ability.

Owners should get the same if their lives are dedicated to the company but I don't think they deserve any more than they need any more than anyone else. They all contribute in their own ways to the same goal. Someone sweeps, someone builds, someone creates, someone organizes... everyone pitches in to the common goal. Everyone benefits. Right now we believe wealth should be disproportionately shared to the few.

---

The gayness in this whole response is incredible.

Is a Doctor who opens their own office as equally invested in it's success as the receptionist? This example is why socialism doesn't work in any sizable country. Why would a doctor spend 12+ years of their life garnering the education and skill to be a doctor and then be paid the same as the receptionist who has entry level skills? Why would an electrician, a plumber, a chef, anyone with any skills beyond entry level?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

The gayness in this whole response is incredible.

Is a Doctor who opens their own office as equally invested in it's success as the receptionist? This example is why socialism doesn't work in any sizable country. Why would a doctor spend 12+ years of their life garnering the education and skill to be a doctor and then be paid the same as the receptionist who has entry level skills? Why would an electrician, a plumber, a chef, anyone with any skills beyond entry level?

---

"We all just need to work together mannnnnnnnn"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

The gayness in this whole response is incredible.

Is a Doctor who opens their own office as equally invested in it's success as the receptionist? This example is why socialism doesn't work in any sizable country. Why would a doctor spend 12+ years of their life garnering the education and skill to be a doctor and then be paid the same as the receptionist who has entry level skills? Why would an electrician, a plumber, a chef, anyone with any skills beyond entry level?

---

When Back was 5 years old he was the worst player on his T-ball team. His mommy told him how proud she was that he “did his best” and that he won because he had fun. Even though he never touched a ball during a game, the coach gave Back a trophy at the end of the season.

Fast forward about 35+ years, and now he is posting on the PC about how entry-level jobs that any dickless monkey can be quickly trained to do in a week should share in the profits the same as an entrepreneur that poured their own time, money, sweat, and innovation to build said company & make it profitable.

Back, the high school senior starting QB gets to date & fuck the prom queen. That’s just how the world works bro.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

When Back was 5 years old he was the worst player on his T-ball team. His mommy told him how proud she was that he “did his best” and that he won because he had fun. Even though he never touched a ball during a game, the coach gave Back a trophy at the end of the season.

Fast forward about 35+ years, and now he is posting on the PC about how entry-level jobs that any dickless monkey can be quickly trained to do in a week should share in the profits the same as an entrepreneur that poured their own time, money, sweat, and innovation to build said company & make it profitable.

Back, the high school senior starting QB gets to date & fuck the prom queen. That’s just how the world works bro.

---

When Al Bundy scored 4 touchdowns in one game, Back was the team's (self proclaimed) waterboy and is still salty that he didn't get to share in Al's glory.