Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Reelya]

There are some big gripes with USA's SS, like if you die before turning 65, you get zero back (unlike Australia's Superannuation, in which you can nominate another person as the beneficiary of your personal savings).

Also, the American SS tax is only on the first $110,000 of your income, so poorer people and minorities pay more SS taxes, yet they don't tend to live as long, so wealthier / whiter individuals both pay less into the system, and get more mandatory benefits.

[Max White]

That hits medicare/medicaid, too.

Yea, we are getting hit harder with that one too.
Still, the baby boomers worked hard, wouldn't be right to cut them off now that they are starting to need more medical aid.

[Doomblade187]

There are some big gripes with USA's SS, like if you die before turning 65, you get zero back (unlike Australia's Superannuation, in which you can nominate another person as the beneficiary of your personal savings).

Also, the American SS tax is only on the first $110,000 of your income, so poorer people and minorities pay more SS taxes, yet they don't tend to live as long, so wealthier / whiter individuals both pay less into the system, and get more mandatory benefits.

In addition, it was planned as an individual account system, but turned into just another revenue source- the SS dollars can be used for most anything, I believe, but don't take my word for it.

That hits medicare/medicaid, too.

Yea, we are getting hit harder with that one too.
Still, the baby boomers worked hard, wouldn't be right to cut them off now that they are starting to need more medical aid.

And yeah, that's one of the stopping blocks with medicare reform, though some proposed plans have exempted them from possible change.

[Scoops Novel]

No, they don't want to be prosperous in `our` meaning. Not at all.

Thats also why I am against idea of employing democracy everywhere. I am not very old, but I've been `there` and you never lose a feeling that you speak with people from other galaxy

So...democracy is good, except when the people who want it don't agree with you?

I think you may have misunderstood democracy.

Let's say it's my bad english. I meant some countries is in a no fucking state to embrace it. You know, I living under it, why should I demean it? Democracy is good, I've never said opposite.

Hey! You know, i think that's part of the reason why we don't want continents full of starving people with a grudge against the west! Not counting more ideological standpoints, like encouraging equality in said countries, basic and accurate education, a distinct lack of corrupt dictators; you know, i lived in Africa for several years, and this never occurred to me! It's not as if i have family over there. It would be ludicrous to have a mother working in a corrupt dictatorship running a teacher training college with an eye to the disabled, scraping funds, working day in day out in a continent where they're often killed at birth, and i mean, in some cases you couldn't even blame them! The works of A Modest Proposal fall on truly uncomprehending ears i''m sure.

I thought BRIC was quite the economic powerhouse myself, ambitious and eager, but let's not dwell on the negatives.

[GreatJustice]

There are some big gripes with USA's SS, like if you die before turning 65, you get zero back (unlike Australia's Superannuation, in which you can nominate another person as the beneficiary of your personal savings).

Also, the American SS tax is only on the first $110,000 of your income, so poorer people and minorities pay more SS taxes, yet they don't tend to live as long, so wealthier / whiter individuals both pay less into the system, and get more mandatory benefits.

What?! American Social Security is stupidly designed!? Say it ain't so!

Besides the whole "works best if you're already comically rich" and "functions as a pyramid scheme", there's also the whole issue of what happens to SS money. From the way some describe it, you'd think its invested in a giant trust fund for future generations, but it actually works a bit differently. The long story short, however, is that any "excess" money is considered to be general cash and is put into government programs or used to pay off the debt, as was done especially heavily under Clinton and Reagan. All well and good when the overwhelming majority of the population is working, but as people retire that money vanishes and the politicians gasp and wonder where their money went.

[Andrew425]

I think too many politicians look at minimum wage jobs like professional jobs in which the employees are a net benefit to the company. Many minimum wage jobs have little qualifications and employees can be replaced easily. Giving a raise to a person working at McDonald's doesn't help the company produce more burgers.

So a raise of the minimum wage would be nice. Though it'd be better if the country could make jobs other then service industrys.

[GreatJustice]

I think too many politicians look at minimum wage jobs like professional jobs in which the employees are a net benefit to the company. Many minimum wage jobs have little qualifications and employees can be replaced easily. Giving a raise to a person working at McDonald's doesn't help the company produce more burgers.

So a raise of the minimum wage would be nice. Though it'd be better if the country could make jobs other then service industrys.

If that's the case, then raising the minimum wage is just gonna get them laid off. "Sorry Jim, you're not worth the minimum wage we'd have to pay you, bye!"

[10ebbor10]

I think too many politicians look at minimum wage jobs like professional jobs in which the employees are a net benefit to the company. Many minimum wage jobs have little qualifications and employees can be replaced easily. Giving a raise to a person working at McDonald's doesn't help the company produce more burgers.

So a raise of the minimum wage would be nice. Though it'd be better if the country could make jobs other then service industrys.

If that's the case, then raising the minimum wage is just gonna get them laid off. "Sorry Jim, you're not worth the minimum wage we'd have to pay you, bye!"

Point is, while minimum wage workers are replaceable, most minimum wage jobs aren't.

Someone's got to do these things, after all.

[Pnx]

Not true at all, we've been steadily replacing minimum wage jobs with technology ever since the industrial revolution came along.
There is pretty much no low tier job a human being can do that a robot can't do better, or will do better in the future once technology develops. And even the more thoughtful jobs that robots would struggle to fulfil may become a thing of the past once we get strong AI.

[10ebbor10]

However, for those jobs it's not the price difference that matters (Robot almost always cost way more) but the productivity and quality. It's going to happen anyway, and just keeping the minimum wage low is not a good way to cope with that change.

[Pnx]

Nope, robots are getting cheaper too because of mass production, improvements to technology, yata yata yata.

They take a pretty hefty initial investment, but paying for electricity and maintenance is typically cheaper than paying however many workers they're replacing. We're starting to see the turning point in a lot of new jobs right now actually. With the recession many factories have switched from human labour to automation with robotic arms and such. Warehouses which were basically using exploitative labour with people running around picking up small packages are now starting to be run by robots on buggies, or arms on rails that zip about picking up packages. Plus there's all kinds of other things on their way in that's displacing minimum, and even non-minimum wage workers.

[GreatJustice]

However, for those jobs it's not the price difference that matters (Robot almost always cost way more) but the productivity and quality. It's going to happen anyway, and just keeping the minimum wage low is not a good way to cope with that change.

Okay, so the job can't be replaced, but there are still differences in productivity from one fast food worker to another. You just fire everyone except the very best workers and cut the amount of workers you hire altogether.

[Pnx]

Or you just have a fully automatic kitchen that quickly produces meals for people on demand and take people's money. It can serve customers faster, and you don't have to worry about the cashier pocketing change, or managing shifts or anything. You pretty much just have to make sure it's stocked and nobody robs it.

Something like this for example.

[10ebbor10]

Point is, the replacing is going to happen anyway, and it doesn't really matter if it's now or next year.

So yeah, raising the minimum wage would get some people fired to be replaced by automation (which was going to happen anyway) but it'll help others.

[GreatJustice]

Point is, the replacing is going to happen anyway, and it doesn't really matter if it's now or next year.

So yeah, raising the minimum wage would get some people fired to be replaced by automation (which was going to happen anyway) but it'll help others.

Well okay, but the benefit to a few (a raise of maybe a dollar at best) doesn't outweigh the downsides to everyone else (Get fired, finding work becomes harder)