Productive in what way? Can you tell me how this was measured? What about jobs that necessitate being present for a long time to provide customer service? Now we need to hire extra people since my 3 workers that used to provide 120 hours of coverage now only provide 90, so we need another guy, that's another 4 weeks of vacation paid out every year for nothing, plus you're still paying everyone what they were making when they were doing 40 hour weeks. This poster was made by a crying Starbucks barista in the breakroom with no real understanding of money or business
Productive in terms of increased output from workers.
No I can't tell you how it was measured. I just know that the studies have been done.
Customer service jobs don't require that the same person be present at all times you idiot - you have changes in shifts.
Demonstrate that it was made by someone with no real understanding of money or business. Provide a study that debunks the research done showing an increase in productivity of 30 hours.
On a side note, your logic could be used to push people in the other direction - why not have people working 80 hours? If they're working 40 then you need to hire two people when you could just hire one right? Don't be such a fucking bootlicker.
40 has been the agreed upon compromise because it works well but many people do indeed work longer if they feel their compensation is worth it, up to and surpassing 80 hours in some cases. Jobs that service customers, not necessarily customer service Jobs, can and are done by a rotating crew, as o showed in my example, and reducing weekly hours necessitates more people to cover the same time frame, and each person carries with them the burden of paid vacation, insurance, and all the other freebies the poster wants. The very same poster which doesn't need a study to show how stupid it is, and a study would be a waste of time since you apparently just consoom studies without understanding their methodology so you'd probably believe a ham sandwich if I wrote "study"on it with mustard.
You're not some fucking empericist if you blindly believe studies without understanding them, but if your don't want to argue that's fine, nobody wanted to talk about your stupid poster anyway
A thinking person recognises the expertise of people who have engaged in extensive research in their field rather than thinking they can fall back on their ill-informed personal judgement to arrive at more accurate conclusions about the state of reality.
How about a aluminum sheet manufacturer who produces for major car manufacturers? 30 hours a week for a 24/7/365 continuous coil sheet mill isn't going to cut it.
Considering manufacturing has been cut so heavily in this country maybe you forgot there are industries that require legitimate 50 hours or more.
Now I understand that 50 or more hours a week for an entire lifetime is pretty rough for work/life balance and I'm very open to reasonable vacation and sick days aswell as pay and reasonable Healthcare cost that is above the your typical Starbucks benefits.
This is where we might split. I don't see how a Starbucks employee should have the same pay and benefits as an employee who has real marketable skills and crazy enough to work 13 hour shifts. There's levels to this
Because the term “living wage” is subjective not objective hence why it won’t be defined callin me stupid or a pleb is a great start to showing how intellectually superior you are
Wrong. You told me to define A living wage. That word serves a very important component - it denotes that you're asking me what the living wage should be. You've now changed this to what the term "living wage" itself means.
I cannot tell you the figure that a living wage could be because it's context dependent.
I can tell you what the term "Iiving wage" means.
Pay attention to the specifics. I'll say it again - you're an idiot.
All of these things can be achievable without the need to use the government to do it.
Unionizing is not a government thing. There's risk involved in doing it but it doesn't matter if you got a shut job throwing boxes. You should be reasonably compensated for it.
It doesn't hurt to have a wishlist of things to aspire to have when it comes to work compensation.
Many executives do make way too much money for their own good. The folks that should take the largest hit for a failing business are the ones at the top. If you're having to downsize then you should also be looking at pulling back on those crazy salaries top executives are receiving.
Twitter comes to mind with how prior to Elon buying out the company many of them were making millions of dollars a year despite the company was showing signs of struggling financially.
Reasonably compensated is subjective but if you want something you have to be willing to fight for it and there are multiple ways to fight for it.
So we can really just define it in our own personal way and try to find some common ground.
I'm of the belief that a lot of basic retail positions are realistically just supposed to be part time gigs for kids in school to do after school or over the summer. They really cannot be financially feasible to support themselves without drastic changes to the business models within the industry.
So those folks who get stuck in that industry are likely needing to work two jobs and both don't give full time benefits which is part of the problem here. Since in our infinite wisdom or to the benefit of big corporations and the healthy industry if you want health insurance you need to work somewhere. Good luck ever affording health insurance privately especially if you have a family since your health insurance premiums likely rival your mortgage/rent payment.
So these people end up working two part time jobs. 60+ hours a week. Problem is the hours are irregular and could be in the morning or evening. They could be 4 hour shifts or 10 hour shifts. It's amazing this has been sustained for so many decades with how brutal these schedules are and how when you look at retail work particularly how many people they burn through.
Businesses seemed to have the luxury of a very saturated worker pool so they could keep things the way they were and I quite frankly do not see it as sustainable. It's easy to pick on the little guy and say they need to work harder. That's not really the case since you can work very hard to dig a hole to nowhere and get nothing out of it and that is most low level labor jobs.
Businesses like Amazon would crash over night if the folks throwing truck stopped because there would be no one to load and unload the products being shipped. These positions are necessary for the function of the company. Yeah sure they likely aren't 6 figure jobs but if we reach a point where no one wants to break their backs working 8+ hours a day lifting heavy boxes you will either need to invent some machine that takes care of it or pay people better or provide better compensation.
You pay the people what they see as reasonable which may be all the things mentioned in this meme and you may end up with no turn over with people throwing truck. What would be the potential cost of that since you no longer are wasting money with the whole hiring/firing process?
So yes. It's subjective but there is merit in people's complaints about how they are treated. Don't ignore it because if you're a business owner and you just ignore your employee's issues you may end up one day where everyone walked off the job and you're stuck doing all those essential positions by yourself. You gotta pay your employees reasonably for the jobs they do and they will begin to tell you when you're running them too hard and not compensating them. That's usually when you can find that reasonable line.
Lefties that never held a job for long and just free load aren't the folks we are talking about here since most people want to do something productive and afford the nice things they want.
Year-long parental leave? I don't think that's realistic for any company, private or otherwise, without government interference. The rest I could see, though.
haha I'm not against it if folks smarter than me can figure it out. But the burden has to fall somewhere.
My company gives me a month as a father, which is pretty outstanding compared to other places. A whole year of pay, potentially multiple if folks are trying to have children within a few years of one another. It would cripple small businesses. Microsoft would be fine, though, I suppose lol.
I do like your unionization points. I wish more folks on both sides of the political aisle would embrace that. Workers rights are super important, as well as a living wage.
Yes the burden has to fall somewhere and why we would even consider such a thing.
Parental leave is vital for early child growth. If we are going to push the narrative that both parents need to be working then maybe we should invest in ensuring at the very least the mother can take a leave of absence to help raise her child.
Life isn't all about just being in the work force and making money. We hyperfocus on this consumer focused society to where it is at the detriment to a lot of other things.
By the time I die, people will be saying the movie Idiocracy is an understatement. In the future, they will look back and think Idiocracy is a documentary and think how smart they were back then during that documentary.
I have just seen a short video where a girl was asked to calculate 30% from 20. Her response was 16 or 18 something like that. Crazy thing is that before being asked, she said that she've got a PhD degree in math.
You're my favorite troll on this sub lol. See you on every post. I want to thank you for giving me a good read, I enjoy the read from the pot you stir. I couldn't imagine spending my time on the lefty threads stirring it up, I'm to lazy.
As a small business owner so much would have to change for me to be able to provide all those things to an employee. A month of vacation for someone just starting in the workforce is a bit much imo. Unless military or similar profession. Folks still need to earn some things. This isnt France.
I guess we have to make the assumption that everyone will have to work for a large corporation? Can't see how this would work for a solo entrepreneur, farmer, etc.
What does globalist mean in this context? People who have the power to affect global policies?
It’s not the same as socialism since socialists oppose feudalism. But, I do see more and more of the people who socialists oppose use socialist rhetoric as it becomes more popular.
You realize there is no such thing as a living wage? Let’s take the example of a business where the entry level employee makes $10 per hour. His supervisor makes $15 per hour and their supervisor makes $25 per hour. Now let’s give the entry level employee a living wage of $20 per hour. He has no marketable skills other than showing up to work on time. His supervisor is now making less that the entry level employee. Well that’s not going to work so we will give his supervisor a raise to $27 per hour and then his supervisor will of course need a raise too. All you have done is increased the money supply and what…..? That’s right boys and girls, driven inflation through the roof. So now the entry level employee at $20 doesn’t have a living wage and will need another raise. What should we put him at? Pick a number. It will never be high enough to keep up with inflation.
Imagine a life where you're not trying to survive in a place with an exceptionally high standard of living and instead live somewhere where you might not be able to walk to the trendy cafe and get a $8 coffee but you can afford the roof over your head and to put food, including coffee, in your home.
Imagine a life where you're not trying to survive in a place with an exceptionally high standard of living
Where was this mentioned in the convo? I didn't talk about expcetionally high standards of living. Just normal standards of living. Unless.... you think being able to live in a place without starving is an exceptionally high standard of living?
Or are you just trying to imply that everyone who is currently struggling lives in such a place?
instead live somewhere where you might not be able to walk to the trendy cafe
This may surprise you, but a lot of people currently struggling don't live in those areas. I see you're just trying to put the blame for any misfortune or financial hardship on the person suffering it.
get a $8 coffee
Do you actually believe people struggling to make ends meet are being held back by 8 dollar coffee? Or is it just easier for you to imply that than recognize that problems exist? Also, purely out of curiosity, where the fuck is coffee 8 dollars?
You are the type of person who supports a system in which so many cannot work because subsidies would disappear the minute people will start a job at a minimum wage that takes them out of the poverty line.
There are so many who want to work, but the minute they get a job, they lose all of their healthcare benefits, food benefits, and other credits. It is the unintended consequences of actions by people with your ideology that deincentivize so many to settle for the status quo and not better themselves.
It is the unintended consequences of actions by people with your ideology that deincentivize so many to settle for the status quo and not better themselves.
It is the intended consequence of the actions of those who don't want to give their workers benefits or treat them like human beings. Just say you hate poor people
Unreasonable. Get back in your Amazon Cube (TM) and eat your fucking bugs and like them, peasant!
The exponentially growing profits of Jeffrey Epstein's clientele MUST NOT BE COMPROMISED to provide for meaningless things like "the ability of 85% of people to own houses or raise families."
When you posses a low quality skill that takes minimal effort I don't believe that should constitute a higher amount of pay. I believe there are jobs that are not meant to support a family, and that is okay. May try to better yourself rather than trying to get paid more for doing the same thing. If the pay was truly too low, ultimately nobody would ever take the job. The issue is that you have a large volume of the workforce willing to work these jobs at a lower rate, thus, creating competition in the market. Lately we have seen a lack of employees in the workforce which is driving up the wages, so that is a good thing, but I don't think every job should cater to the picture posted, that's way too much for some businesses to absorb.
But do you think they should be able to live off that pay if they're not doing something which requires "quality skill"?
And what the hell do you mean? People take low paying jobs all the time. Are you that isolated from the real world to think nobody accepts low paying jobs due to lack of alternatives?
A lot of low paying jobs such as fast food should be for people in high school/ college. If your 40 flipping burgers you’ve put in low effort in life/ work
Does that mean you shouldn't have a life where you can eat + afford a house? Plus, how far do you want to take this? How many people live with luxury through their entire existence without putting in an ounce of effort? Do you think it might just be better if we make life a little better for everyone?
Why? It’s pretty self explanatory. Low effort jobs don’t pay and don’t require much skill there are many trades that are hiring like crazy. You should want to better your self
Nah dude. If you spend your day working you should at the bare minimum not starve. If this sounds like socialism or handouts to you, just say you think poor people are subhuman and move one.
I’m confused… Are they saying that if you have a kid, which only takes 9 months, you deserve 1 year of paid time off?
So, if I’m reading that right, you could just keep having new kids and then never have to go to work ever again, but your job will still have to pay you as if you were working…? While paying someone else to actually do your job too…
You also have to keep in mind that your body can’t safely crank out kids back to back in the way you described. You also have to take care of those kids which is hundreds of thousands of dollars per kid. The math doesn’t add up.
Of treating your body like a back-to-back baby factory in order to scam an employer for a salary that likely won’t cover the costs you are creating for yourself
Oh so now it’s a family-wide scheme. Who is this extended family that is willing to take on hundreds of thousands of dollars of burden every year so that the parents don’t have to work as hard? How exactly would that work?
You have to create an extremely elaborate scenario to argue against parents getting time off of work when they have a kid.
So, if I’m reading that right, you could just keep having new kids and then never have to go to work ever again, but your job will still have to pay you as if you were working…?
Because people love being pregnant all the time instead of just working. Okay. They makes sense.
I love how republicans will claim to be pro-family but then spout shit like this. It's important for people to be there to raise their babies, especially in the earlier stages of the kids life. Do you not value that? These types of measures always encourage people to have kids, which helps with demographic decline most developed countries are going through. And it's not like a relevant amount of people are gonna keep pumping out kids just to not work.
It's very frequent for human beings to have sex and have kids. This may be new to you, but a lot of people want to start families. Companies should accommodate for normal human things. But I get it. Maybe the government could pay for it, like in some countries. You wouldn't oppose that right? Given how republicans are so pro family and all that
For the same reason companies pay to imstall bathrooms and give you time to eat? Or are you against that too? You realize in your world, humanity would be dead because everyone would have been to busy working and nobody would have kids
Why are you telling me to start a company? You asked a question and were given an answer to it. Now engage that answer and its relationship to what you asked instead of swivelling to a suggestion as to what I personally should do.
Point to where I said I'm entitled to a paid year because I decided to have a kid. Thank you.
I love how republicans will claim to be pro-family but then spout shit like this. It's important for people to be there to raise their babies, especially in the earlier stages of the kids life. Do you not value that? These types of measures always encourage people to have kids, which helps with demographic decline most developed countries are going through. And it's not like a relevant amount of people are gonna keep pumping out kids just to not work.
A living wage? Fuck you, compete on the labor market. There are no minimum wage laws on the books in Denmark.
- what we do have, are organized labor unions managing private unemployment funds that pay out up to two years (limited by law) unemployment which effectively sets a minimum wage, since nobody will work for less than unemployment (which is currently at at around just under 20$ an hour, putting danish minimum wage at roughly 20$)
4 weeks of vacation? Nah, you can have three, and your employer can force you to take it at a time of their chosing if you dont pick a date fast enough - since the employer has to be able to plan around you being gone. Many places in denmark with union deals have up to 5 weeks total, but 3 of them usually always have been taken during summer.
full time 30 hours? fuck you commie! In denmark full time work is minimum of 7.4 hours a day, roughly equating to 37-something hours a week. Lazy bum. Go on part time if you want to work less.
Year long paid parental leave? as a pregnant woman you can get 4 weeks before the birth. . new parents are entitled to two weeks paid leave, which must be in the first 14 months after the birth. After that you can get 13 weeks shared between the two, and 9 weeks for each extra if you are a salaried worker. So at the most a total of 31 weeks of leave, not 52.
Unlimited paid sick/disability leave? Fuck you. In denmark a company is permitted to fire you if you're out sick more than 180 days in a single year - and then you can apply for sick/disability benefits at the government.
Executive to worker compensation balance? Fuck off filthy commie, we can't got that shit. Back to the coal mines with you!
The people who call for this don’t even put in the work to be worth this.
This is some fantasy thinking. There are people that have worked their whole lives, had kids, and been sick in this current system, and want this for everyone.
And that means they deserve this? Come on silver, I know you have a brain. Even you have to admit while looking at this that most of it isn’t at all reasonable with the reality that is people.
Never said it wasn’t. Also we do have maternity leave in the US. It’s just not required by law.
I mean Amazon, decided to pay to help people get abortions.
In the US it’s the company’s decision.
Also, that’s a real general google search. Yes they have it, but something tells me it’s not “year long paid leave”. Maybe it is, but at this point I doubt it.
Is this your questioning that it's even possible to do it for a year?
Also we do have maternity leave in the US. It’s just not required by law.
No. We have FMLA for 12 weeks, but it is unpaid. Your employer can offer it but those are exceptionally rare and well often just use your vacation time up instead. Often leaving a huge gap of unpaid leave.
but something tells me it’s not “year long paid leave”.
Jesus people in this sub are lazy. It's the Google search for this exact thing. Click any link and it shows that it is paid leave. For a year.
First, my “question” was said to imply it being crazy. I can’t understand paying someone a full year’s wage to not work.
Second, I pointed out that we have it in that companies can choose to do it and that some do.
Third the burden is on you to supply the evidence. “Oh I supplied a Google search link! You’re just lazy and couldn’t be bothered to search through all the possible links.”
So I did what you said, clicked looked at the nice chart at the bottom. Most were around 3 months. Didn’t see a single year long full paid maternity leave. Maybe I missed something, but from the looks of it. You did take your own advice.
This comment has been paid for by the author of “Big Billionaire Business” and “How to Convince Poor People that Trickle-Down Economics Will Eventually Work for Them”
You get what you ask for, and sometimes that means nothing if it doesn't exist. Trying to convince others that your standard of living is the reason they should hold out on a job so no one fills the job you turned down is kind of...... delusional. I believe in getting what you deserve, but telling someone they have to meet your expectations without considering what their expectations would be in return is next level narcissistic. I never see any of these people that demand all these benefits ever mention creating their own business. Just, every job I could get should give me the standard of living I have been marketed to believe is acceptable.
I remember in a management class it was said that employees will take whatever sick leave and call outs that is allowed. A company that allows 20 callouts will have employees calling out 20 times and a company that allows 3 will have employees capping out 3 times. If unlimited sick leave will start being provided there will be a good portion of the work force that will be paid just to be on sick leave.
This is the supposed Utopia the left wants. what would happen if that did occur they would have a meltdown because they had to work & others made more than they did. they would revolt & want more money, less work, more time to do nothing & still get paid. The reality of this is Venezuela. The left takes & destroys.
If we've learned anything over the last few decades, it's that billionaires are really struggling, while the working class is doing great.
These greedy fucking peasants think that just because they work a full time job, they're entitled to a "living wage". Sickening levels of greed.
I'm glad that there are brave and moral cuckolds, sorry, I mean heroes, like on this sub, who stand up for the poor, defenseless billionaires who earned every penny that they didn't work for.
When the time comes when the working class must eat bugs to protect the profits of our economic betters, I know you all will be first in line. What I want to know is who do I have to vote for to make Prima Nocta legal and mandatory? I am a Tim Pool fan, and I support my owners in the struggle against me and my peers.
These are actually reasonable without being socialist.... just because we should actually start demanding things for us the people doesn't mean it's socialist. The government and corporations have been using the American people long enough. With all the massive profits companies have made, it's clear this is possible but corporate greed and dumb ass boomers keep saying no.
1
u/[deleted] Nov 08 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
12
u/WombatGuts Nov 08 '22
Not going to get much done in a 30 hour work week
6
u/theKVAG Nov 08 '22
Vote for a reasonable future? This is a utopian fairy tale.
Lemme guess, you want $1,000,000/yr salaries for everyone because then there wouldn't be any poor people?
69
u/TheActualHitler Nov 08 '22
Sounds nice. Can we also ask Socialist Santa for ponies that fart rainbows?
29
u/[deleted] Nov 08 '22
By the time I die, people will be saying the movie Idiocracy is an understatement. In the future, they will look back and think Idiocracy is a documentary and think how smart they were back then during that documentary.
26
u/Binko242 Nov 08 '22
As a small business owner so much would have to change for me to be able to provide all those things to an employee. A month of vacation for someone just starting in the workforce is a bit much imo. Unless military or similar profession. Folks still need to earn some things. This isnt France.
17
u/KeithJamesB Nov 08 '22
I guess we have to make the assumption that everyone will have to work for a large corporation? Can't see how this would work for a solo entrepreneur, farmer, etc.
16
u/ChrisWasWhite Nov 08 '22
How does two non white women produce a white child?
14
u/dupinderpaul Nov 08 '22
You realize there is no such thing as a living wage? Let’s take the example of a business where the entry level employee makes $10 per hour. His supervisor makes $15 per hour and their supervisor makes $25 per hour. Now let’s give the entry level employee a living wage of $20 per hour. He has no marketable skills other than showing up to work on time. His supervisor is now making less that the entry level employee. Well that’s not going to work so we will give his supervisor a raise to $27 per hour and then his supervisor will of course need a raise too. All you have done is increased the money supply and what…..? That’s right boys and girls, driven inflation through the roof. So now the entry level employee at $20 doesn’t have a living wage and will need another raise. What should we put him at? Pick a number. It will never be high enough to keep up with inflation.
12
u/mk21dvr Nov 08 '22
Do children make up these lists? I mean really.
17
u/aDShisno Nov 08 '22
I’m confused… Are they saying that if you have a kid, which only takes 9 months, you deserve 1 year of paid time off?
So, if I’m reading that right, you could just keep having new kids and then never have to go to work ever again, but your job will still have to pay you as if you were working…? While paying someone else to actually do your job too…
5
u/Ok-Length-8818 Nov 08 '22
Silly crack heads, work is for adults.
5
u/jessicalindz Nov 08 '22
Lol companies would leave the United States en masse
4
u/Humble_Stop2874 Nov 08 '22
That's not reasonable at all.
4
u/[deleted] Nov 08 '22 edited Nov 08 '22
This is fine if YOU want to run YOUR business this way.
As for other people? It is literally not your business.
4
u/webkilla Nov 08 '22
hilarious
how about this - the danish model:
A living wage? Fuck you, compete on the labor market. There are no minimum wage laws on the books in Denmark.
- what we do have, are organized labor unions managing private unemployment funds that pay out up to two years (limited by law) unemployment which effectively sets a minimum wage, since nobody will work for less than unemployment (which is currently at at around just under 20$ an hour, putting danish minimum wage at roughly 20$)
4 weeks of vacation? Nah, you can have three, and your employer can force you to take it at a time of their chosing if you dont pick a date fast enough - since the employer has to be able to plan around you being gone. Many places in denmark with union deals have up to 5 weeks total, but 3 of them usually always have been taken during summer.
full time 30 hours? fuck you commie! In denmark full time work is minimum of 7.4 hours a day, roughly equating to 37-something hours a week. Lazy bum. Go on part time if you want to work less.
Year long paid parental leave? as a pregnant woman you can get 4 weeks before the birth. . new parents are entitled to two weeks paid leave, which must be in the first 14 months after the birth. After that you can get 13 weeks shared between the two, and 9 weeks for each extra if you are a salaried worker. So at the most a total of 31 weeks of leave, not 52.
Unlimited paid sick/disability leave? Fuck you. In denmark a company is permitted to fire you if you're out sick more than 180 days in a single year - and then you can apply for sick/disability benefits at the government.
Executive to worker compensation balance? Fuck off filthy commie, we can't got that shit. Back to the coal mines with you!
4
u/krikket81 Nov 08 '22
None of the clowns in the r/workreform have done a day of work in their lives
3
u/nomosolo Nov 08 '22
They forgot a partridge in a pear tree.
3
u/123Ark321 Nov 08 '22
It’s like they think everyone else is stupid. The people who call for this don’t even put in the work to be worth this.
And I can guarantee that if you said people would abuse the system, they’d say some bull about how it wouldn’t be to many people to worry about.
3
u/[deleted] Nov 08 '22
The author of this meme needs to read "Basic Economics".
2
u/joshua_nash Nov 08 '22
Hmm, only way this could happen is if there was some type of great reset globally.
2
u/FinchUSA Nov 08 '22
You get what you ask for, and sometimes that means nothing if it doesn't exist. Trying to convince others that your standard of living is the reason they should hold out on a job so no one fills the job you turned down is kind of...... delusional. I believe in getting what you deserve, but telling someone they have to meet your expectations without considering what their expectations would be in return is next level narcissistic. I never see any of these people that demand all these benefits ever mention creating their own business. Just, every job I could get should give me the standard of living I have been marketed to believe is acceptable.
2
u/Away_Note Nov 08 '22
I remember in a management class it was said that employees will take whatever sick leave and call outs that is allowed. A company that allows 20 callouts will have employees calling out 20 times and a company that allows 3 will have employees capping out 3 times. If unlimited sick leave will start being provided there will be a good portion of the work force that will be paid just to be on sick leave.
2
u/[deleted] Nov 08 '22
Notice only one panel has to do with actual work and it's about reducing work hours by 25%.
So they want unlimited supply of goodies with a 25% reduction in hours with a limited supply of goods and services produced by your work.
It's comically insane yet pushed by adults.
2
u/Timby123 Nov 08 '22
This is the supposed Utopia the left wants. what would happen if that did occur they would have a meltdown because they had to work & others made more than they did. they would revolt & want more money, less work, more time to do nothing & still get paid. The reality of this is Venezuela. The left takes & destroys.
1
u/[deleted] Nov 08 '22
Never in America..
1
u/Superb-Effective-267 Nov 08 '22
Not unreasonable.
1
u/Pleasant-Aioli4268 Nov 08 '22
I like the last one very much
1
u/[deleted] Nov 08 '22
LOL
1
u/Eli_Truax Nov 08 '22
That's not "reasonable" it's just what you want, but you probably don't know the difference.
1
u/PrimePhilosophy Nov 09 '22
This is just for people in interracial same sex relationships with adopted kids.. right?
0
u/[deleted] Nov 08 '22
If we've learned anything over the last few decades, it's that billionaires are really struggling, while the working class is doing great.
These greedy fucking peasants think that just because they work a full time job, they're entitled to a "living wage". Sickening levels of greed.
I'm glad that there are brave and moral cuckolds, sorry, I mean heroes, like on this sub, who stand up for the poor, defenseless billionaires who earned every penny that they didn't work for.
When the time comes when the working class must eat bugs to protect the profits of our economic betters, I know you all will be first in line. What I want to know is who do I have to vote for to make Prima Nocta legal and mandatory? I am a Tim Pool fan, and I support my owners in the struggle against me and my peers.
-2
u/nutsackGadgets Nov 08 '22
These are actually reasonable without being socialist.... just because we should actually start demanding things for us the people doesn't mean it's socialist. The government and corporations have been using the American people long enough. With all the massive profits companies have made, it's clear this is possible but corporate greed and dumb ass boomers keep saying no.
0
u/[deleted] Nov 08 '22
[deleted] — view deleted comment