Announced His Run for Presidency, Then He Skied Tuckerman's

T.L.

T.L.

Active member
Gary Johnson. Sounds like a pretty good dude right? Never heard of him until today so I used the internets to learn myself some knowledge. The dude is pretty much pro-everything that is awesome and against everything that sucks to put it simply.

Here's a few videos of him telling what he's all about.

http://www.youtube.com/user/OurAmericaUMe#p/c/1285B4BE049C2DFB

Here's an excerpt from his press release talking about Tuckerman's

http://www.slate.com/BLOGS/blogs/weigel/archive/2011/04/15/gary-johnson-to-announce-run-for-president-then-go-skiing.aspx

I really hope this guy gets a shot.
 
Yup pretty much. I think the only thing, imo he 1-ups ron paul on is that johnson is pro choice. But considering abortion; in the grand scheme of things is a non issue, it's not that important to me.
 
I've gotten into arguments with you before after reading posts full of asinine drivel and realized that doing so is stupid because no matter what I say you just don't quit. Like hitting a Bobo doll, no matter how hard I hit you just come right back with another steaming pile of pseudo-intellictual bullshit.
Also there are really no winners in e-arguments so I will just say this and be out:
Really? You think Social Security is underfunded by the World's GDP? I realize that there are serious problems with this programs future and that cuts need to be made, but are you actually retarded enough to believe the shit you spew?
 
like overturning the fair labor and standards act which would take away laws controlling minimum wage and restricting child labor.

These kids look thrilled... no really, look at that one on the left.

child-labor2.jpg


 
Walmart Could Easily Pay Its Workers $12 An Hour

http://www.fastcompany.com/1748811/how-can-walmarts-social-responsibility-goals-include-its-workers

Walmart employees earn 14.5 percent less than other workers in large retail companies. Depressing stuff, but there is any easy enough fix: If Walmart implemented a $12 per hour minimum wage for all employees, it would cost the company $3.2 billion. That is a lot of money, unless you're Walmart, in which case it's just 1% of your overall annual $305 billion in sales. Even if Walmart passed on the entire burden of the wage increase to customers, it would only average out to a cost increase of 46 cents per shopping trip.
 
woozy, you're a fucking moron and a prime example of why ron paul should and will never gain any legitimate chance at the presidency... and thank god. let us know when you wake up in the REAL world you jackass... or when you become a rich, space cowboy.
 
and awesome how you think the second largest restaurant chain in the world cannot afford slight changes in wages... i mean that poor, poor mcdonalds, struggling and trying to keep open... wait a second... didn't they expand to almost every corner of the planet with over 30 stores in NYC alone?! sounds like they could afford a little wage change if they could expand that immensely and also, did you hear about the recent mass hiring they did? ok, i'll stop. you're not worth it.
 
"duuhhh i like kickedded your ass and uhh like stuff in an thread once uhh.. i'm like so cool that i keep track of all this because my real life is so lame and every uhh thinks i'm dumb but huhhh.. they just don't preciate my intelligence uhhhhhhhhhhh... im gonna kick your ass in this thread also!"

 
Even if Walmart passed on the entire burden of the wage increase to customers, it would only average out to a cost increase of 46 cents per shopping trip.
 
McDonalds doesn't want you to eat in. It's not that can't afford to pay a dishwasher, it's that they want you to take their crappy food somewhere else.

If you want to sit down and eat you go to applebees.

Though I'm glad you're thinking of the poor people -- they really need better access to McDonalds food.
 
exactly. even down to the fucking color of the walls is designed to get you in and out as fast as possible. it had NOTHING to do with costs.
 
from the the McDonalds corp:

hapter 3: Reuse

Reuse is a basic strategy for reducing materials use and waste generation. Identifying opportunities for introducing reusables throughout McDonald's system -- distribution, bulk storage and food preparation, as well as customer service -- was a large part of the task force's work. The greatest opportunities in this area are behind the counter, where the majority of McDonald's on-premise waste is generated. As set out in the Action Plan, steps to be implemented or tested in 1991 include: replacing heavy-duty, plastic-lined corrugated boxes with durable, washable containers for delivering meat and poultry to McDonald's suppliers; replacing short-lived wooden shipping pallets with durable pallets in the distribution centers; and replacing single portion packages of cleaning supplies with bulk packaging.

McDonald's will also develop a number of pilot tests to explore the potential benefits of reusables in over-the-counter service. This area, we concluded, poses the most formidable challenges to the large-scale conversion to reusables. As a step toward defining solutions, the task force identified five major challenges to implementing reusables in a quick-service restaurant system. These are: (1) customer expectations; (2) health, sanitation and safety issues; (3) McDonald's operating system; (4) dishware collection, handling, washing and resanitizing; and, (5) cost and data uncertainty.

While any one challenge might be met in isolation from the others, the real challenge for McDonald's is to overcome all of them at once. For example, McDonald's Engineering Department could design high-volume dishwashers suitable to the task, and a shift to reusables for customer service could conceivably produce savings in expenditures on disposable packaging. However, other major issues remain unresolved, such as the capital costs of the system, pilferage, the added labor costs to collect dishware and load and unload the dishwasher, the economic and environmental effects of energy and water used in dishwashing, and the ability of a restaurant crew to operate the equipment in a way that consistently meets sanitation standards.

We agreed that reusable dishware systems from conventional full-service restaurants cannot simply be transposed to McDonald's while maintaining its high-volume, high-speed food service system. The task force also discussed more long-term, theoretical options for reconfiguring McDonald's equipment and operations to incorporate food-service reusables.

Ultimately, full resolution of these issues will depend on incremental testing and R&D activities of the type that are central to McDonald's operations and packaging development.
 
it had a little bit to do with costs. but it's more complicated than some guy not wanting to pay a dishwasher.
 
well yeah that's true, it always has something to do with costs but the base of it was turnover rates... and apparently they did change over the past few years to make it more "friendly" in a horrible attempt to change their public image... haha
 
For example, McDonald's Engineering Department could design high-volume dishwashers suitable to the task, and a shift to reusables for customer service could conceivably produce savings in expenditures on disposable packaging. However, other major issues remain unresolved, such as the capital costs of the system, pilferage, the added labor costs to collect dishware and load and unload the dishwasher, the economic and environmental effects of energy and water used in dishwashing, and the ability of a restaurant crew to operate the equipment in a way that consistently meets sanitation standards.
 
hahahaha THEY DO THAT ALREADY!!!

god this is incredible how fucking dumb you are. talk about missing the sweet spot, you're god damned overshooting into the parking lot.
 
woozy, you'd be a great member if you weren't so condescending. Interesting ideas and a clear knowledge of what you're talking about, but don't look down upon everyone like you're a god amongst ns'ers.
 
nope because that'd be like explaining evolution to a creationist. its more fun to sit back and wait to see what other glorious nuggets of knowledge gold come flying out of that shit pipe of yours.
 
I agree with woozy. pay people what they are worth. Walmart has no problem hiring. If they did, they would have to incentivize their employees more. None of their employees are having their civil liberties taken from them. They all wake up every morning and are willing to go to work for the wages they make. If minimum wage did not exist they would likely make even less money and Walmart would still not have trouble finding employees. Why? Because their employees don't do very much and they aren't very good at what they do. Government needs to keep their hands out of our business.
 
My point was that you're oversimplifying the situation -- paying dishwashers is 1/5th of the answer.

but we can drop it because you're satisfied with being 20% correct.

There are plenty of people who are paid to pump gas. It's called New Jersey.
 
The point was that Walmart is paying below the industry average, it has nothing to do with how their employees don't do very much or aren't very good at what they do.
 
yeah but to be fair, it's law there that they have to do that. but there are places that pump for you and even clean your windshields, where it isn't law, regardless.
 
exactly and to generalize the whole wal-mart work force as terrible workers is on the same level as saying all mexicans are lazy. oh and its funny how the wal-mart 30 min. away from here starts people at 11/HR and yet the ignorance still rolls in that they'll go under if that were to happen at other stores... hahaha
 
"hey guys let's apply the basic laws of economics to complex economic situations! that'd work just dandy!"

just because what he says is true doesn't make it always true for every situation...
 
ok, that is fair. but if people want to continue working for them, i don't see a problem. It has been too easy to get by comfortably in this country. People can find jobs that pay them $8/hr because of minimum wage stipulations. Jobs that dont actually merit $8/hr. They can take this $8/hr and find government housing, government issued food stamps, and government medical care. What is the point at trying to get a college degree, trying to get a good job, trying to be successful in life when it is so much easier to be lazy and take all the hand-outs you can get. Of course nobody envies a person that lives like that, but if you are lazy its not a bad way to live.
 
I'm with woozy on this one, though he may be a riding the high horse just a little bit. That there are institutions required by the government to pay their employees $8 an hour does not mean those employees are worth $8 an hour— or that those same employees should be paid $8 in a state where minimum wage is $6.

I work in a bike shop, I am paid something to the tune of $12-20 an hour depending on how quickly I work (I get paid based on the bikes I build, not on the clock). The money I earn is directly correlated to how quickly and efficiently I do my work. My work is worth that much because if you pulled a bum off the street and told him to do my job, he'd not be able to do it right, and other shop mechanics would have to correct his work when he finished.

On the other hand, if I walked into Wal-mart and asked for a job, I would expect exactly nothing above the bare minimum they're allowed to pay me. And I'd be ecstatic they're paying me more than I'm worth to them as an employee. I'd not be paid for doing a job that not everyone can do, nor would I be paid based on the work that I'd do— instead, I'd be paid for the hours and minutes I spend inside the store. And frankly, those hours and minutes are not worth $8 an hour to Wal-Mart, because I'm a new employee... but I am grateful that they pay me what they do, and would still be grateful for even less because I am perfectly aware that they could take any bum off the street, and he'd be able do the same work as I.

That Wal-Mart pays it's employees "below the industry standard" does not mean it pays them less than they're worth.
 
hey woozy stop enjoying the weekend, provided to you by those crazy libs and unions, and get back to work.
 
you work at bc.com, right? well do you think all those kids who sit on the computer all day doing live help are really worth what they're paid? because i know for a fact that whoever you're chatting with has no fucking clue what you're asking of them and they just BS answers... i mean if you REALLY want to talk about being paid what you're worth and all, then those people who work the warehouse, constantly doing hard labor, deserve twice as much as a kid sitting at a computer listening to dumb asses talking about north face vests. and saying that slightly higher wages will make college obsolete is absolutely retarded. you want to talk about coasting through life? how about you tackle unemployment before taking up minimum wages.
 
hahaha my god... if you want people to argue with you, you should REALLY make sure that you know what they're talking about.
 
"Bob builds chairs for a living. He builds $5 dollars with of chairs in an hour. His employer pays him $4 an hour. P-Face and his moronic liberal friends just look at Bob's wage and say "ZOMG $4 an hour must suck! its his employers fault he is earning so little!" (completely overlooking Bob's productivity). So P-Face decides to pass a minimum wage law of $6 an hour on friday. AWESOME! That will really save Bob right? Bob shows up to work the next monday and makes $6 an hour. But what P-Face forgets is that you cannot legislate Bob to have more productivity, so Bob still produces $5 worth of chairs in an hour. So rather than making his employer $1 an hour his employer loses $1 an hour. How long do you suppose Bob will have his job? Not very long.... Its fucking basic economics."

So if you were bob, you wouldn't increase productivity to maintain your job at your new wage?
 
I guess it really depends on the person, but the question I'm really trying to ask is...

Do low wage employees get payed lower amounts because they have a low productivity? Or is their productivity low because of their lower initial wage?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top