Kansas Crimson

Joke’s on you Chuck! cuz I woke up before my alarm went off today.

Its not that i disagree. If i wasnt married with kids id probably be in the mountains living as close to a self sustaining life as possible, working only to help myself and family. Ive been drawn to that for most of my life and have worked through what i would need to do so.


But, i get the feeling you post this stuff for whatever reason, but with no effort to make any changes for yourself. Youre bound and determined to havw the powers of the government or whatever bent to help you instead of just helping yourself.

Thanks for the good response.

Fwiw I don’t expect the gummint or anyone but myself to improve my situation. If I may say so respectfully, I don’t think many people really do. That seems less like a valid observation and more like mich’s freeloader hyperbole.

If anything, it’s commentary on income inequality. I don’t think it’s fair that many Merican workers can be putting in 40+ hours a week, often at multiple jobs, and still be living in poverty while many of the “job creators” hoard the wealth and material spoils (and have the audacity to say the workers aren’t worth more...oh really, boss? How successful do ya think your little capitalist hustle be without any workers?)

I guess that’s where I come from with it - this childhood Christian ideal that everyone should be provided for. Remember in kindergarten when they teach us about sharing? And not being brats about hogging all the crayons to yourself?

But that’s not how capitalism works. Inequality and poverty and hunger are not flaws of capitalism, they’re features.

But yeah, I’m grateful to not have anyone financially depend on on me but me. I’ve actually been able to save up over the years. In fact, the change I hope to make in my life, is starting my own bidness soon.

I’m just so burned out on busting my ass while my employer gets the lion’s share as he “works from home” (or the golf course, or the ski slopes, or whatever the fuck he does all day, cuz I honestly don’t know.)

And speaking of freeloaders, bear in mind my employer is the dude who hires accountants and lawyers to exploit every last loophole and exemption and credit, so as to pay as little in taxes while also getting as much in gummint handouts as possible. Dude pays a lower effective rate than me, takes home far more $$$, and yet he just fucking golfs all day while take it on the chin from yall tourists on his behalf (and yet, I’m the one labeled as the freeloader who wants the gummint to take care of me?!)

And I certainly see the irony of my end game being starting my own bidness. I’m not even that different from him!

But fwiw rather than start a bidness so I can pay other people to make me money while I golf, I’d like to start a bidness I can take pride in and enjoy doing and be personally involved in, so I can just work til I drop dead. No point in retiring if you enjoy what your doing, right?

On an effective level, I think that’s the real difference between a small bidness and big bidness - is the job creator still willing to do any of the work? Or take pride in the products and services offered to customers? If there’s a mess to clean up, do they roll up their sleeves and clean it?

Or do they hire someone else to clean it for them? Are they even involved enough to know there’s a mess to clean? Or do they just call from the clubhouse before they start the back 9 to bark at their managers about margins and shit?

If I got big enough to have employees, I’d take pride in treating them well. I’d want them to feel valued, not fungible. Heck, if they work hard full time, maybe I’ll even pay them a livable wage!

But fwiw starting a bidness is still really only my second choice as far as life path. It’s just so...square! My first choice is going all into the wild, driving my truck out in the desert and burning my money and Alexander Supertramping it as hard and fast as I can.

Who cares if that dude died tragically young? He experienced more life in a couple quick years than most folks do in a whole career of working...so that maybe some day they can afford to tramp it up a little too?

Whoa, that got long winded. BRB the boss is calling...

I guess my general point is, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to retool an economic system so that it reasonably benefits everyone who contributes to it, rather than disproportionately benefitting the few brats who are shameless enough to hog all the crayons.

Have a friend who recently got an employee-friendly job and she would fight to the death for her employer. Space for recreation in the day, good benefits, bonuses, pension. No aggressive management. THey are leaving money on the table for long term prosperity.

I think capitalism works.

We just need to reevaluate how we view success for a large company.

Instead of using which CEO has the biggest yacht as a dick measuring contest or only worrying about profit margins to measure success, things like having a higher base salary, or better, comparing median salaries should become the dick measuring test.

Management should take more pride in increasing salaries, increasing work conditions, increasing jobs, offering better benefits, etc rather than solely trying to reduce costs, or increase profit margins by fucking over employees.

It would require a change in how shareholders view things. But I think it makes more sense long term and for the overall health of most companies. You probably loose some profits in the short term but gain in the longterm if you have happier healthier employees.

Then ousey, that means you shop at costco instead of walmart. And you invest in companies that play that way, even if it means you get a 6% return on investment rather than 12%. And so on.

Thanks for another good response!

And I too think capitalism “works” in many ways. in many ways, it’s also flawed.

But much of what you go on to describe, while perfectly reasonable and should make sense to everyone, is far too prone to being dismissed as “socialism,” and radical socialism at that.

In reality, I think the whole idea of capitalism is the radical one. We’ve just become so conditioned to it (and to vilifying socialism) that it seems normal. Rather than viewing the crayon hoggers as a problematic like we were taught to in kindergarten, we more so celebrate them instead?

Rather than concede that maybe the Waltons have far more money than they could possibly ever need, how many Mericans would prefer to argue that Walmart workers don’t deserve to be paid any more?

The best bet, I think, is getting the boogeyman word of “socialism” out of it. Instead, frame it as some populist appeal: a company’s success should reasonably benefit all the stakeholders involved, not just the shareholders at the top.

And yeah, fwiw I try to support small bidness. I’d rather go pay a premium at a local shop than go to Walmart or order from Amazon just to save a few bucks. Unfortunately though, small bidnesses are drying up.

I don't want the government to regulate it.

I want people to.

Good point again!

But how do we get the people to look out for themselves and value what’s best for themselves and the 99%, rather than valuing the socialist boogeyman instead?

The answer may very well be in the thread title, but even that is quite the naughty word in Merica.

I thought that was because everyone thinks they're one job/deal away from being a millionaire.

Yeah, that’s the common mindset.

And the reason why it may be necessary for the gummint to regulate it. Maybe the people can’t be trusted to? I’m libertarian enough to not want the gummint to do too much, but short of some massive collective change in values and ideology, who else will?

Cuz their either the ones in power who don’t want to concede a thing, or they’re the ones who think they’re gonna soon strike it rich themselves.

It’s a cynical, self-centered, winner-take-all mindset for sure. But hey baby, that’s Merica!

Here’s a story you guys might like here rather than the tourists thread:

The past few weeks we’ve actually been able to accommodate yall’s early checkin requests. Would you believe it?!?!

The big change, of course, was that the owner finally caved to the manager’s sustained pleas to just adequately staff the housekeeping department, even though that meant - EEEEEK! - offering more competitive wages to attract more staff.

It took months of guest complaints, both of denied early checkin requests, and more so of the fact that units often weren’t even ready by the scheduled check in time (oh boy).

The owner did it not cuz he affirmatively wanted to take pride in his bidness, but more reactively just cuz the bad online reviews were piling up and hurting bidness.

It was absurd. We’d have these manager’s meetings about how we could attract and retain employees, with all these hypotheticals and sales pitches and emphasis on job perks and shit, but for the longest time it was taboo to just suggest offering better pay.

way too many tl;dr

buncha f. scott fitzgeralds up in here

Yeah, my bad, tldr for sure

If I can offer you the cliff notes, it’s this:

Phd is a radical socialist.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:47 pm Good point again!

But how do we get the people to look out for themselves and value what’s best for themselves and the 99%, rather than valuing the socialist boogeyman instead?

The answer may very well be in the thread title, but even that is quite the naughty word in Merica.

Paradigm shift.

We need to stop excusing shitty behavior as being "a business decision" and saying, "it's about the bottom line." We need to value quality over brand name. Etc, etc.

radical, and un-Merican too.

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:49 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:47 pm Good point again!

But how do we get the people to look out for themselves and value what’s best for themselves and the 99%, rather than valuing the socialist boogeyman instead?

The answer may very well be in the thread title, but even that is quite the naughty word in Merica.

Paradigm shift.

We need to stop excusing shitty behavior as being "a business decision" and saying, "it's about the bottom line." We need to value quality over brand name. Etc, etc.

So, heavy usage of "cancel culture"?

Mjl wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:43 pm

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:49 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:47 pm Good point again!

But how do we get the people to look out for themselves and value what’s best for themselves and the 99%, rather than valuing the socialist boogeyman instead?

The answer may very well be in the thread title, but even that is quite the naughty word in Merica.

Paradigm shift.

We need to stop excusing shitty behavior as being "a business decision" and saying, "it's about the bottom line." We need to value quality over brand name. Etc, etc.

So, heavy usage of "cancel culture"?

No. I hat cancel culture, it's gross.

I'm thinking parents teach their kids to value things above money. And teachers and coaches etc emphasize character and principle over earning a buck.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:52 pm radical, and un-Merican too.

I am rad.