Fast food workers “occupying” Wall Street. #imlovinit
If you can’t fucking survive on fucking $7.25 go to fucking school and get another fucking job. Those people who run the fucking restaurants and shops who fucking give out minimum fucking wage need to make a fucking profit too. Get off your lazy fucking ass and make way for the fucking high school students and college students who fucking need that job that pays $7.25.
Funny thing: the workers who are stuck in minimum wage jobs (many of whom have degrees… and huge amounts of debt racked up getting them, because of the myth that going to school is THE path to a high-paying job) are also the biggest single customer base for these sorts of corporations, and most other ones.
You know the thing that’s really going to imperil corporate profits?
The way they pay their workers.
The news keeps saying things about “consumer confidence” being low. Supposedly, it’s low “confidence” that is depressing sales of big ticket items like homes and cars, and if the current trends continue, it’s taking bites out of things like… eating out. Going to the movies. And other things that drive the minimum wage sectors of the economy.
Funny thing: people have to have money to spend money. Right now, most revenue goes straight into the accounts of the major stakeholders in the company. What does it there? It… accrues. It… adds up. What doesn’t it do? It doesn’t circulate. It doesn’t get spent. It doesn’t do anyone any good.
If you gave everyone working at McDonald’s another dollar an hour out of the profits that are currently just being pocketed, those dollars… well, they’d be spent. Almost immediately. And in the end, they’d probably end up being stuck in some millionaire’s low risk, steady return, not-at-all entrepreneurial portfolio, which is where most money ends up.
But just by the magic passing through more hands before it comes to rest, those same dollars would each be spent several more times. MAGIC, right? Same dollar, getting spent again and again and again. And every time, someone benefits. In effect, every time, everyone benefits.
When money goes to the top, it stops moving. Money that isn’t moving isn’t really money any more. It’s as useless as the high score of a video game.
This is why the places in the world—even just in this country—with the best minimum wage and the best social safety nets also have the lowest unemployment, and why unemployment grows or stays stable the more we “tighten belts”. This is just how the world works. This is how the world has always worked. If conservatives would give up their fairy tale fantasyland logic and join the rest of us in the real world, we could have the economy on its feet in no time.
And you are living in a fantasy land. You are. What jobs? What jobs are these people supposed to get? If they had no job, you would tell them “McDonald’s is always hiring.” and act like that’s an answer. Well, they’re working at McDonald’s. And they had to beat ten applicants to get those jobs, because only in your magical fantasy land does “always hiring” mean “has enough job openings to magically accommodate everybody who applies”. Your logic literally requires magic to work.
What are you doing with your life? What are you doing that is so noble and great an endeavor that you can tell people who bust their backs to do a job you probably couldn’t do and definitely wouldn’t want to that they’re lazy for working for $7.25. Would you take $7.25 an hour to do what they do? No? Then they’re being underpaid. The invisible hand of the free market is apparently taking a vacation.
Let me tell you how things work in the real world. In the real world *everyone has to* make a living wage. Has to. If businesses aren’t paying living wages, then they should inevitably go under since no one could afford to work for them. Fortunately or unfortunately, the economy… like an ecology… is all interconnected. So instead of these businesses suffering alone for what should be a fatal decision on their part, they drag everyone else down with them in a slow death spiral that poisons the whole economy.
See, if these business owners aren’t paying their employees a living wage but they’re not going out of business, then their incompetence or greed (pick one, or both) is being subsidized by everyone else. Their incompetence or greed is being paid for by everyone who pays ABOVE a minimum wage so that their employees can afford to eat out and shop and see movies, and by everybody who pays the taxes that go to the public assistance programs that allow their employees to keep scraping by.
Of course, the employees themselves are bearing the brunt of the death spiral, because they’re trapped between an immovable object—a job that against all real-world logic expects full time employees to accept wages that won’t get them through the week—and an inexorable force—the fact that human beings have basic needs that require more money than they’re getting to meet.
Since we actually do live in the real world, it’s inevitable that a system that is unsustainable will fall apart, and this one will… it will reach a breaking point where we’ll either have to acknowledge the problem and fix it, or… well, it will just break. It would be better to fix it sooner rather than later, especially since there are actual people being literally worked to death while smug jerks like you who don’t understand how the world works and who wouldn’t be able to do what they do lecture them about how their plight is somehow their fault.
by Derek Rosenfeld, Internet Communications Associate, Drug Policy Alliance
Eighty years ago today, the Twenty-first Amendment to the Constitution was ratified and alcohol Prohibition was officially repealed. If you only know one thing about Prohibition, it’s probably the fact that it was a tremendous failure. Making alcohol illegal led to huge increases in organized crime, corruption, and violence. For many of the reasons that led to its repeal, the same arguments can be made for why we need to end the war on drugs.
Not to oversimplify things, but the Eighteenth Amendment (which established national prohibition) made a sizeable portion of the population criminals overnight. Even though the sale and manufacturing of alcohol was criminalized, the majority of the people who drank responsibly wanted to continue to do so. I’m not an economist but I learned that where there is a demand for something, a supply will be filled, whether it is legal or not. So Prohibition didn’t make alcohol disappear, it just allowed famous mobsters like Al Caponeto step in and provide an elaborate, yet dangerous, underground market. See Boardwalk Empire more details.
Like I said, not to oversimplify it, but the mob thrived, crime soared, and gangsters killed anyone and everyone who got in their way. Tens of thousands of people died because of prohibition-related violence and drinking unregulated booze. The big experiment came to an end in 1933 when the Twenty-first Amendment was ratified by 36 of the 48 states. The Twenty-first Amendment was deemed so necessary (and the Eighteenth so ineffective), it is the only Constitutional amendment ever passed to overturn a previous amendment. Hence, Prohibition was a terrible mistake.
Fast forward to today - our society is swimming in drugs. We all have family members who use drugs, whether it’s Prozac or Ritalin or Viagra or painkillers or marijuana or cocaine, etc., and every other commercial on TV is trying to sell us a drug. Yet we still have a failed prohibitionist policy that is responsible for 1.5 million people getting arrested every year for drugs and tens of thousands of people dying because of a drug overdose - more than the number of people who die in car accidents. It’s estimated that more than 100,000 people in Mexico have been killed or have gone missing since they militarized their war on drugs in 2006. And despite it all, millions of people around the world continue to use drugs every day.
It’s costing us way too much money trying to enforce prohibition. One of the main reasons Prohibition was repealed was because it was an unenforceable policy. Today, half of what we spend on law enforcement and the criminal justice system is for drug law enforcement. The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world. And despite all these efforts, drugs are cheaper and purer than ever before. Instead of wasting money on incarceration and a bloated prison industrial complex, we should invest in treatment and rehabilitation, which costs far less than imprisonment and actually attempts to help people. We need to find the best policy that reduces the harms of drug use.
Dr. Carl Hart, a neuroscientist from Columbia University and Board Member of the Drug Policy Alliance, studies drugs and addiction and he says that eighty to ninety percent of people who use drugs don’t have a problem with them. So why are we locking up responsible citizens who happen to use a certain drug? If a person struggles with drug misuse and wants to go to treatment they should have on-demand access. But if somebody occasionally uses drugs and leads a functioning lifestyle and contributes to society and their community, they don’t belong locked in a cage. Even Bill Clinton gets it. In the film, Breaking the Taboo, he said, “If the expected result was that we would eliminate serious drug use in America and eliminate the narco-trafficking networks, it hasn’t worked.”
I look forward to the days when nobody gets arrested simply for using or possessing a drug. It’s the future of drug policy. Some countries are already experimenting with different policies and conversations are happening at the global level calling for alternatives to prohibition. Portugal has a 12-year head start and shows us another world is possible.
It wasn’t long ago when statements made in a pulpit were simply assumed to be true. Now, a child with an iPhone in the pew can find ample evidence contradicting whatever the men of God are saying. That “true story” your pastor is telling? Snopes.com debunked it long ago. Gay marriage is destructive, he says? Thousands of YouTube videos made by gays and lesbians in love — as well as other Christians — can attest otherwise. Evolution is a liberal conspiracy? TalkOrigins.org will show you how to respond to every argument on the Creationist side. Abstinence-only sex education is working? Not according to the new scientific study you just read.
Rush Limbaugh has angered both Catholics and non-Catholics after referring to the Pope’s views on capitalism as “pure Marxism.”
On his radio broadcast on Nov. 27, Limbaugh said the pope “doesn’t know what he’s talking about when it comes to capitalism and socialism,” and that his apostolic exhortation “Evangelii Gaudium” was either written by someone else or “gotten to him.” He added the document was “pure Marxism coming out of the mouth of the pope.”
Sarah Palin also landed in hot water a few weeks ago for saying she was shocked by some of his “liberal” statement, and doesn’t trust what the media is reporting about about him.
“Somebody did get to Pope Francis,” religious scholar Reza Aslan told The Washington Post. “It was Jesus.”
On Palin, he said, “These two paragons of the far right – both of whom regularly invoke the teachings of Jesus to bolster their own political views – have suddenly turned their backs on the man whose actual job description is to speak for Jesus.”
Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good had this to day about Limbaugh:
We are disturbed by Rush Limbaugh’s incendiary comments last Wednesday, November 27th about Pope Francis and are joining together with Catholics and other allies throughout the nation to support the Holy Father. To call the Francis a proponent of “pure marxism” is both mean spirited and naive. Francis’s critique of unrestrained capitalism is in line with the Church’s social teaching. His particular criticism of “trickle down economics” strengthens what Church authorities have said for decades: any economic system which deprives the poor of their dignity has no place within a just society.
Contrary to what Mr. Limbaugh suggests, the Catholic Church isn’t built on money, but on the firm foundation of Jesus Christ.
We call on Mr. Limbaugh to apologize and retract his remarks. We urge other Church organizations and leaders–both ordained and lay–to also condemn Mr. Limbaugh’s comments.
|—||Margaret Talbot on her cancelled policy, her values, and a health-care law for the common good: http://nyr.kr/1cWjMRZ (via newyorker)|
"My body, my choice" only makes sense when someone else’s life isn’t at stake.
Fun fact: If my younger sister was in a car accident and desperately needed a blood transfusion to live, and I was the only person on Earth who could donate blood to save her, and even though donating blood is a relatively easy, safe, and quick procedure no one can force me to give blood. Yes, even to save the life of a fully grown person, it would be ILLEGAL to FORCE me to donate blood if I didn’t want to.
See, we have this concept called “bodily autonomy.” It’s this….cultural notion that a person’s control over their own body is above all important and must not be infringed upon.
Like, we can’t even take LIFE SAVING organs from CORPSES unless the person whose corpse it is gave consent before their death. Even corpses get bodily autonomy.
To tell people that they MUST sacrifice their bodily autonomy for 9 months against their will in an incredibly expensive, invasive, difficult process to save what YOU view as another human life (a debatable claim in the early stages of pregnancy when the VAST majority of abortions are performed) is desperately unethical. You can’t even ask people to sacrifice bodily autonomy to give up organs they aren’t using anymore after they have died.
You’re asking people who can become pregnant to accept less bodily autonomy than we grant to dead bodies.
Perfect response is perfect.
The Old Men Who Send Young Men to War Club
|—||Lao Tzu (via internal-acceptance-movement)|
|—||Nelson Mandela (via maarnayeri)|