search results matching tag: dignity

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (73)     Sift Talk (6)     Blogs (4)     Comments (437)   

siftbot (Member Profile)

dag (Member Profile)

If Walmart Paid Its Employees a Living Wage

bareboards2 says...

What pisses me off the most is when Tea Party type folks scream about paying for food stamps, when they themselves are benefiting from suppressed prices at Walmart. You believe in personal accountability? THEN PAY WHAT IT COSTS FOR YOU TO GET YOUR GOODS.

You'll pay either in taxes (for food stamps) or at the register. Personal accountability demands that you pay at the register. Added benefit?

Dignity for the worker.

The Expert (Short Comedy Sketch)

TheFreak says...

And also helping the client to establish their requirements.

This is clearly a client who has a vision but lacks the vocabulary to express their needs accurately. If you're incapable of using your expert knowledge to help your client achieve their vision, within the constraints of what's possible....then you don't just fail at engineering, you fail at life.

Don't forget that, as an expert, much of what you take for granted is a mystery or only vaguely understood by other people. If someone uses incorrect terminology or demonstrates an incomplete understanding of technology, then as a professional, it's your job to help bridge that gap without assaulting their dignity.

ChaosEngine said:

And here we have a lesson in listening closely to the client requirements.

It's absolutely possible to draw a line in the shape of a kitten. No-one said it had to be a straight line

Questions for Statists

enoch says...

im no statist but this video is so childishly naive as to be laughable.

might as well call the free market jesus.

jesus is the way and the light.
follow jesus for salvation.
only jesus can absolve you of your sins.

this is about power.
if the libertarian is willing to acknowledge that the government is bloated and corrupt but unwilling to recognize the abuse of power wrought by corporations...because the corporation is part of the "free market"...they can end their sermon right there.

i am no longer interested.

if a libertarian preaches the importance of individual sovereignty and individual rights but dismisses that they are part of a community in a larger society.
they can proselytize at somebody elses door.

if a libertarian wishes to shower me with the glories of private property and ownership but ignore the importance and basic human dignity of the very workers who produce everything for those private owners.

then i say unto them that they wish to enslave their fellow man and the freedom they seek is for them alone and the rest of humanity be damned all in the name of profit and greed.

they can take their cult of ayn rand and masturbate somewhere else.

UNLESS....
they are willing to admit that:
1.as @VoodooV pointed out,we live in a society and a society is populated by PEOPLE.

2.that people deserve more than just the right to trade freely (which i agree with) but that human dignity and compassion,and yes..the right for life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

3.that the corporation is actually MORE vicious than a government.a corporation is amoral by design! so if we are going to address the abusive powers of government,the abuses of corporations should be recognized as well.

4.the argument that corporations would not exist without governments is a canard.that may have been true in 1910 but no longer.there are corporations that have a higher GDP than most nation states.

5.the argument that governments start wars are only half-truths.can you guess what the other half is? thats right! banks and corporations using their power and influence to oppress third world nations...through the use (or abuse to be more accurate) of this nations military.see:smedley butler.

6.while a non-state would be amazing i am not naive enough to believe it could ever happen in our lifetime.yes many arbitrary borders have been penned by empires but there will always be lines drawn by cultural,religious and ethnicity..lets be honest.

7.while i do not share voodoos optimism in this democratic representative republics current health status (i feel it is broken and dysfunctional),it is a FAR better thing than the authoritarian,totalitarian system that is the american corporation.unless they went all democratic on me and i didnt get the memo.

8.government does have a role in our society,though it should be limited.
defense (not illegal and pre-emptive wars of aggression).
fraud control and law enforcement.
roads,fire,police,education and health,because thats what a society does for each other.
we take care of each other.
you dont like that? move to the mountains..have fun!

9.the corporate charter should be re-written."for the public good" should be re-instated for one thing.
a.i was talking to a libertarian and he used the term "non-aggression" and i really REALLY liked this.so a corporation will be held responsible for any and all:destruction to the ecology (local and abroad),destruction of peoples health,home and property.externalization of any sort will be seen as "aggression" and the CEO and all officers will be held liable to be paid by:dissillusion of company of jail time,they can choose.
b.a corporation is NOT a person and ZERO funds will be drawn from company money to purchase a legislator.they may spend as much money as they wish from their own personal accounts,but ALL contributions shall be made public over a certain amount.
c.any corporation that has been found to pay their workers so little as to put the burden on the tax payer shall be found performing an "aggressive" act against the american people and shall either pay the amount in full or forfeit their company.

dammit.im rambling ...again.
but oh baby am i digging this non-aggression dealio!

can i rewrite the corporate charter?
please please please please.....

*promote the discussion

The Wire creator David Simon on "America as a Horror Show"

radx says...

First things first: I read the article you linked as well as three others by the same author, given that he's teaching at a nearby facility. His article "The Three Types of Austerity" was quite enough to know that I'll never see eye-to-eye with him, or anyone of the same views.

"[Austerity] frees up resources for private investment" is a statement that does not match my perception of reality, given the absolute abundance of (financial) resources within the eurozone. It's a lack of demand for investments that's the problem, not supply. Savings are at record highs, investment is at an all-time low.

So, demand vs supply... we all know that discussion won't be resolved here, ever. It's utterly pointless. Same for the gold standard vs fiat, inflation good or bad, or any related discussion, really.

Instead, I'll try to reply to unrelated statements.

------------

"Do you think The Wire paid for their production assistants' healthcare? Did they make more than the $50/day for their 12 hour days (if they weren't working for free as "interns" for the 'privilege' of 'paying their dues' in 'the industry')?"

I know nothing about the situation on set of The Wire. My assumption is that it involved the regular amount of abuse of labour, including unpaid interns.

------------

"Haha, of course, "liberals" get a pass from other "liberals", but no pass for the Kochtopus (even though the Kochs give way more money to charities than The Wire would even be able to)."

Well, good for them. But I don't see why you drag them in here. You made a set of rhetoric questions aimed at hypocrisy by David Simon. I pointed out my view that any possible hypocrisy is dwarfed by the point he made vis-a-vis guilt/Perkins/watch/whatever.

------------

"Yeah? Like you know (the other) David Simon and can vouch for his "lack of guilt?" And "guilt" about what? Having money? Being successful?"

Feeling guilty about the discussion amongst the establishment regarding, for instance, the minimum wage. He finds it questionable how one can argue against giving a fella at Burger King 10-12 bucks an hour without feeling guilty for it. That's the disconnect we're talking about. When extremely wealthy individuals deny even the crumbs to the folks at the bottom.

Shamelessness was my addition, my interpretation. It was aimed at the demand for tax breaks and subsidies for extremely profitable corporations or extremely wealthy individuals. I would feel ashamed for any demands to my benefit if a) I didn't objectively need them and b) they would come at a detriment to others in worse situations than me.

Since I'm arguing from a different economic perspective than you, a shortfall in tax income (aka tax breaks) to me means either more taxes at another place, probably from weaker entitities who can't afford to buy their own representative, or a cut in essential services. I operate under a very broad definition of human dignity and see it as the first and foremost objective. Food, shelter, health, etc for all -- which might just be a reason why some people refer to me as a "pinko commie".

------------

"Does he? Really? How? And how are you doing more for "society" than that? Who are you and what exactly is your great "contribution" to society?"

He "weakens" society, economically, by suppressing aggregate demand. The more wealth you accumulate, the less of it, as a percentage, translates into demand. For an economy that depends on the circulation of goods and services, a massive and non-temporary accumulation of debt or savings (same coin, different sides) in the hands of single players (be it state, corporation or individual) chokes up the system. Less demand, less investment, less growth.
Accumulation is all fine and dandy if it translates into economic activity, but given the pathetic % of GDP that is being invested, despite mountains of unused cash that are forced into financial shenanigans looking for profit, I'd say it is dead weight and a drag.

But since you apparently share the views of Hollenbeck, all of that was probably hogwash to you.

------------

To answer your question: a human being and my great contribution to society is my charming personality, of course.

And with that, I bid you adieu. I've had long-ass discussions about Snowden/surveillance and other topics that led nowhere and I'm not interested in having one about economic theory, especially not in a second language. The floor is all yours, including the last word.

Trancecoach said:

Who are you and what exactly is your great "contribution" to society?

Bernie Sanders tears into Walmart for corporate welfare

radx says...

If there was no welfare of any sort, people would still have to apply at Walmart. People with stomachs to be filled far outnumber jobs that generate an income. And while the population is increasing, the number of jobs -- in the long run -- is actually decreasing.

It was always clear that automation would greatly reduce the number of jobs in manufacturing and agriculture, first and foremost. Given that the latest burst in technology is represented by Google, Apple, FB and Amazon, I'd say the hope of generating jobs through new areas of technology fell flat on its arse -- those four giants are worth a combined $1T, yet employ only 150k, or half as many as GE.

tl;dr

#people >> #jobs, exacerbated by robots/automation and politically suppressed aggregate demand

--------------------------

As for minimum wage being entry level wage: that's the idea, but given the age structure of fast food workers and the number of them who worked the job for years and years, it is merely theoretical in nature. Many people are stuck in it, others are floating in and out of employment at minimum wage level. Asking for a higher wage becomes a futile exercise as long as there's an army of willing replacements on the market. Some corporations try to minimize turn-over by paying above-average wages (Costco, Aldi), but the vast majority engage in a race to the bottom.

If you ask me, all of us deserve food in our stomachs, a roof over our heads. And health insure, while we're at it. The establishment over here used to call it the "revolution tax", because it allows people to retain some level of dignity and prevents them from chopping everyone's heads off with a guillotine. I prefer a considerably more expansive definition of human dignity, but I'm just one of those dirty socialists, so...

bobknight33 said:

I say that if there was no welfare ( well not as much as there is today) then corporations like Walmart would have to pay more. Otherwise people would not even apply.

For every dollar the government hands out in welfare, the corporations have to give a dollar more to make working for them worthwhile.

Minimum wage is not to be a living wage but an entry level wage where one can better oneself and then one would have standing to ask for a higher wage.

TDS: Minimum wage hike and the Pope denouncing Trickle Down

enoch says...

@Shepppard
ah...my young friend.
come over by the fire,your buddy enoch has some things to speak to you about.
are you comfy?
need a drink? beer? coffee?

then let us begin.

1.why do YOU care what another makes an hour?is it YOUR business?

but i understand the basic gist of your point:unskilled labor.

ok.thats a fair point.
but why is 15$ an hr too high?
what arbitrary scale are you comparing their hourly worth to?
walmart workers?

here is a facts that may give you some perspective:
a.if we take the minimum wage from 1978 and factor in inflation and worker productivity todays minimum should average 22$ an hour (yes...you read that right).
b.the workers in these unskilled jobs are in the high percentages in goverment subsidies.to the tune of 7 BILLION a year.so basically we ALL are subsidizing mcdonalds and walmart to pay their workers like shit.

so are you still against them getting a living wage? when you and i are subsidizing their income. the companies they work for get to pocket those profits,you and i get to help pay for their housing and food stamps.

walmart even helps ttheir employees sign up for food stamps! now isnt that adorable.

dont you think it a better idea that these companies pay their help at least enough where they dont need government susbizies? you know.like actually PAY them and not force us to?

2.if these corporations paid a minimum of 15$ an hr the projected hike in product prices will be......./drum roll.....
...........15 cents per item.........

3.how come it appears to be taboo to point to a CEO of a company who is making billions in bonuses while his/her workers are having to receive food stamps?
when did obscene gluttony and greed become something cool? even praiseworthy? while ridiculing those trying to survive and demanding a little bit of dignity as something to be chastised and cajoled for even having the impertinence to ask for a living wage.

the cognitive dissonance on display is on an epic scale.

who do YOU think you have more in common with?
the dude working at your local burger king?
or jamie dimon?

and dont even get me started on that condescending argument "get an education to get a better job".

i have been seeing many posts of late that reflect the very same flavor of yours @Shepppard and the one thing they all have in common is this judgemental value system that they just pulled out of their ass but in reality was given to them by the very people fucking them,and their children in the ass.

there will come a day when these people will realize they are slaves.
debt slaves.
wage slaves.
and while they were bickering the banksters and the corporate elite cleaned their clock.....
and they didnt notice until it was too late.

those elite fuckers.
they have a small club and you aint in it.
they dont like you.
they will never like you.
me?
im on your side man.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Republican Shutdown Threats

Lawdeedaw says...

You are free to disagree with me, but you cannot disagree while agreeing with me. And make no mistake, we DO agree. If I was unclear, be like @ChaosEngine and ask me to clarify before you respond.

I said two things in my post. One directly and concisely pointed out my view. Universal Healthcare is a must for everyone born or who have come to the states! (This includes Illegal Immigrants, but that is a whole other topic.) It should be everyone's freedom.

The second thing I said in my post was more implied (But it wasn't vague.) I said it wasn't a right, but then went on to explain the difference between "rights" and "freedoms." The conclusion? It should be everyone's freedom. Here is why I feel the way I do:

1a-As you say it is cheaper, and Medicade and Medicare prove that here in the states. No overhead, no profit to be made.

1b-Every human being deserves it as a "freedom." It is just compassionate and human to give it.

2-The second point, as to why it should be a freedom instead of a right is two pointed as well.

2a-It can be willingly given away or two it taken away in extenuating circumstances. "Rights" are imposed, by force if necessary, ironically. Yet a man deserves to be able to end his own life, with dignity, in his own house if he so chooses. But if Healthcare is a "right," as opposed to "freedom," he does not get that choice. He has to enjoy his terminal cancer. A mother's "freedom" to give home remedies to her deathly ill child, also, can be taken away. That is a good thing for the children. Yet honey and alfalfa would be the top cure for sick and dying children in some households if healthcare were a right.

2-There are some classes I don't think deserve Healthcare. To me Julie Schenecker does not. Nor does Kenneth Jackson. He, for example, denied "healthcare" to a woman when he raped her. And just for good measure he then slashed her throat because she was screaming. I know him and he is not insane or someone to be pitied. He just doesn't give a fuck about human dignity or rights. If he were released he would gladly do it again. (I do believe he has the "right" to a fair trial, so a trail should be forced.)

In fact inmates all around the country hurt themselves just to make life difficult for guards, and they know they will be fixed up. They inflict suffering upon others, and then cost money to taxpayers so they can do it again. So no, I don't think the worst of the worst deserve it. (Even though, ironically, they get it far better than those on the streets who try hard to make it.)

So in summary, we agree on the most prolific and most important parts...at least here in Lawdeedaw land...

CreamK said:

Don't know where you live but here in Finland, the whole concept is something you're born with. For most of my adult life i really thought that it is the same for all in the "western" world and once i learned the truth my instinct was "damn that is just wrong". In the 80s, i thought that our concept CAME from USA, not that we should be exporting that concept there. It is the land of the free, ffs. (it came here from Sweden, actually..)

Just the fact that if you get hit by a car or develop cancer, health payments is the least of your worries, just like it should be. Patient can concentrate, stress free, on recovery and you don't need to miss any treatment because you ain't got the money for it. Just the concept that profit should not be a part of health care industry (unless you want to, we got private clinics that are above the universal health care in term of waiting times etc.) that is ingrained to the culture brings comfort and equality. The middle class chooses between the two, the high end goes private and poor get the same quality from general healthcare, there's something very comforting there. Every person i see, i just know that he/she is taken care of. I'm not better or worse than the rest.

In my mind, it's a question of human rights to get the same treatment than the wealthy get. Money should not be a part of that equation. The same principle goes for education, it is a human right to get the same education as the rest will, money should not be a part of that either. We are here because of our culture and wouldn't be able to survive without past generations knowledge. One crucial part of that knowledge is how to treat wounds. Denying that is just sick, demented, plain wrong.

This is how much my life differs from you. I get all the possibilities and it's my freedom to use them or not. And on top of it all, we do it cheaper than you. How is that not implemented everywhere baffles me.. How sick a parent must be to deny his child all the possibilities, how sick you neighbor has to be to deny that from you?

The first 9/11: Salvador Allende's last speech

radx says...

My friends,

Surely this will be the last opportunity for me to address you. The Air Force has bombed the towers of Radio Portales and Radio Corporación.

My words do not have bitterness but disappointment. May they be a moral punishment for those who have betrayed their oath: soldiers of Chile, titular commanders in chief, Admiral Merino, who has designated himself Commander of the Navy, and Mr. Mendoza, the despicable general who only yesterday pledged his fidelity and loyalty to the Government, and who also has appointed himself Chief of the Carabineros [national police].

Given these facts, the only thing left for me is to say to workers: I am not going to resign!

Placed in a historic transition, I will pay for loyalty to the people with my life. And I say to them that I am certain that the seed which we have planted in the good conscience of thousands and thousands of Chileans will not be shriveled forever.

They have strength and will be able to dominate us, but social processes can be arrested neither by crime nor force. History is ours, and people make history.

Workers of my country: I want to thank you for the loyalty that you always had, the confidence that you deposited in a man who was only an interpreter of great yearnings for justice, who gave his word that he would respect the Constitution and the law and did just that. At this definitive moment, the last moment when I can address you, I wish you to take advantage of the lesson: foreign capital, imperialism, together with the reaction, created the climate in which the Armed Forces broke their tradition, the tradition taught by General Schneider and reaffirmed by Commander Araya, victims of the same social sector which will today be in their homes hoping, with foreign assistance, to retake power to continue defending their profits and their privileges.

I address, above all, the modest woman of our land, the campesina who believed in us, the worker who labored more, the mother who knew our concern for children. I address professionals of Chile, patriotic professionals, those who days ago continued working against the sedition sponsored by professional associations, class-based associations that also defended the advantages which a capitalist society grants to a few.

I address the youth, those who sang and gave us their joy and their spirit of struggle. I address the man of Chile, the worker, the farmer, the intellectual, those who will be persecuted, because in our country fascism has been already present for many hours -- in terrorist attacks, blowing up the bridges, cutting the railroad tracks, destroying the oil and gas pipelines, in the face of the silence of those who had the obligation to protect them. They were committed. History will judge them.

Surely Radio Magallanes will be silenced, and the calm metal instrument of my voice will no longer reach you. It does not matter. You will continue hearing it. I will always be next to you. At least my memory will be that of a man of dignity who was loyal to [inaudible] the workers.

The people must defend themselves, but they must not sacrifice themselves. The people must not let themselves be destroyed or riddled with bullets, but they cannot be humiliated either.

Workers of my country, I have faith in Chile and its destiny. Other men will overcome this dark and bitter moment when treason seeks to prevail. Go forward knowing that, sooner rather than later, the great avenues will open again where free men will walk to build a better society.

Long live Chile! Long live the people! Long live the workers!

These are my last words, and I am certain that my sacrifice will not be in vain, I am certain that, at the very least, it will be a moral lesson that will punish felony, cowardice, and treason.

The Absolutely Stunning Dance of the Peacock Spider

Adam vs. the Robot White House Citizen Harrassment Service

aaronfr says...

1. Read the First Amendment and tell me where it is granting you any right:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The operative phrase is a restriction on the power of Congress, not the endowment of a right upon individuals.

Also, the Declaration of Independence backs me up:

"that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"

As does the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

"Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,"

These rights are yours simply because you are human, and they are inalienable - you can't give them away even if you want to.

2. You can not bring a lawsuit in US court for a violation of rights based upon legislation unless you have standing. In effect, you must demonstrate that a law has actually caused you harm in some illegitimate, unfair, or unconstitutional manner. One of the easiest ways to gain standing is to violate the law and suffer the consequences of what you perceive to be an unjust law.

3. The Supreme Court has only recognized a right to privacy from government intrusion not from individual or corporate intrusion. Furthermore, there is no assumption to a right to privacy in a public place. The most logical reason for the need to get a permit to film there is that the Park Service recognizes the economic value of licensing something that is in high demand (filming in front of the White House) and could care less about the privacy of individuals (citizens and non-citizens alike).

arekin said:

First the constitution does grant these rights. No right is "inherent" or else we would not be having this conversation. Second, when a law is put into place that someone feels violates their constitutional rights the correct way to challenge that law is in court, where the law may be struck down as unconstitutional. Lastly when the rights of an individual may impose on the rights of another individual, whose rights win out? In this case it can be argued (and I'm sure has been) that commercial filming impedes on the individuals right to privacy for commercial gain, which is why their is a specific law against it. Adam can argue that we cant prove that he is filming for commercial purposes but if they have cause to suspect that he is they have every right to arrest him. the fact that his film did end on youtube for commercial purposes means they were absolutely right.

Cornel West: Obama has no moral authority

Formula Ford EcoBoost - on Road and Nürburburgring

Yogi says...

Just means you'll get to go through the pearly gates backwards, and on fire. Come on ya big wimp die with dignity!

oohlalasassoon said:

That right-side wheel fairing on that last fast straight was deforming more than I'd like at that speed!

Kitten Freaks Out Over Lizards

Mammaltron says...

Only thing injured there was kitty's dignity. Give it a few years, there'll be a suspicious accident involving the vivarium.

Cats do not forgive or forget.

Flux99 said:

terrible vid. poor kitten, getting so scared, and hurting itself. dumb humans just laugh. shame on them.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists