wage cap

People cheer and applaud whenever the government (I’m referring to Westminster) go back on a policy. For example, today the 55p per minute charge for calls to the Universal Credit helpline were to be made into free phone. This is an improvement, yes. But it’s minimal, what difference does it make in the big picture? Nothing. Universal Credit is still there, it is still harmful. Yet I’ve seen people claim that this is proof that Jeremy Corbyn is the Prime Minister.

When the reactionary DUP announced they would not support a cap on wages, the same reaction. Some claiming it was “A victory for the many, not the few”. It is not. This continuous idea that by making things slightly better, and I do mean slightly, is not helpful. The idea that minimum demands are acceptable is a poor one, especially when such minimum demands are so small. Yes, you can argue it shows that the government is being pressured. I suppose so, but not enough. Austere continues. Tax loopholes continue to be open. The messy and unorganised “No Deal” Brexit is going unresolved. Malcolm X was right in his analogy regarding the knife. That knife has been drove inside us 6 inches, and yet some celebrate that it’s some achievement when it’s pulled out to 5 inches.

Keep up pressure, keep up demands. Do not settle for minimum demands. If minimum demands are to be made, they must not be minimal. Demand as much as you can, demand an end to austerity. An end to poverty. An end to homelessness. A favourable government may even implement some reforms, which is welcome, but only a radical socialist system can deliver. By doing so, you can simultaneously highlight the impossibilities that exist under capitalism, as well as possibly gaining some concessions.

To quote the great socialist writer, and revolutionary, James Connolly

“Our demands most moderate, we only want the Earth!”

Wage caps aren’t communist nonsense, but might even be a good idea.

When you hear the word wage cap what do you think? That evil socialist Jeremy Corbyn probably comes to mind. Or maybe even, god forbid, surely not… Communism? But there are many reasons why capping people’s earnings could in fact be a good idea.

Firstly, there’s a misconception, most likely fashioned by the ‘political right’, that a wage cap is a communist policy, a misconception created to associate caps with radical and extremist ideas. The reality is that wage caps aren’t even a socialist policy, a political theory that aims to create a classless society, not simply raise wages.

Secondly, the implementation of a wage cap doesn’t have to be radical cuts to people’s hard earned pay, lowering the living standard of the hard workers and ensuring everyone lives equally in a strict state where no one can progress. The goal is quite the opposite, to increase the overall average wage and promote progression alongside equality. This is achieved by ensuring that in a specific company the highest earner can only get paid a certain amount more than the lowest earner, not that there is a limit to an individual’s pay. this would ensure a rise in lower wages if companies want to boost the earnings of top CEO’s.  

Keep reading

can we just appreciate everyone’s faces in the chelsea interview?? word for word, this woman literally said “do you guys feel responsibility when that conversation [the gender wage gap] comes up? that you have to defend other women? you’re only trying to make your own fuckin pay check, like now you have to defend women??” and they just

they all look disappointed and disgusted on many levels

dgafcoffee replied to your post “I firmly believe that not only should we raise the minimum wage, but…”

Minimum skills deserve minimum pay. If you think flipping burgers is the same as running an entire corporation you are a fucking idiot.

Oh hey, someone with no reading comprehension and hates poor people. What a great and utterly unique view you have. Glad to see you using critical thinking skills rather than taking the time to acknowledge a few basic things that I was pointing out such as:

1.) Minimum wage should be a livable wage because that’s what it was originally set up to be, and if you are giving up your time to work for someone, you should be properly compensated well enough to be able to survive off of those wages. 

2.) (Didn’t point it out per say but important to note.) Properly paying your employees a wage that makes it so they don’t have to rely on foodstamps or govt assistance helps our economy because it means more money flowing. It also means that workers will be happier, less stressed fincancially, able to spend more time with family and loved ones, and tend to have better health– which means that society will be happier and healthier. Which results in less crime. 

3.) The wage cap is too high. While I’m not saying that CEOs and their lowest ranking employees should make the same amount, these high earning people do not deserve to “earn” thousands per hour. If the most skilled doctors are not worth that much, and if the most skilled scientists are not worth that much, why would a CEO, athlete, or other highly paid person be worth that much? Especially given when you calculate things out, the CEO of say… Disney, “earns” $44.9 Million a year. When you caculate that down to seconds regardless of how many hours he is actually working, he “earns” about $1.43 per second regardless of what he is actually doing. When you calculate for hours, again… regardless of any work, it calculates out to $5125.57 an hour, again, regardless of whether they are doing any actual work

4.) CEOs often “earn” their money by exploiting labor by paying them as low as possible. They will cut costs in machinery and products as much as they possibly can as well. They will also inflate prices if they choose to see fit. 

5.) Having employees is a business expense. If you can not afford to pay your employees properly then you are a failing business. Tax payers should not be the ones footing the bill so that the wealthy can become wealthier and hoard their money elsewhere to avoid paying taxes. 

What I’m asking is to make the bridge shorter when it comes to the wage gap to promote a healthier and happier society, one hopefully without poverty and people starving to death or dying because they don’t want to fall further into debt. 

Every Minimum Wage Argument DEBUNKED

“Just get a job, and stop being lazy”

since 2000 90% of the jobs being created have been part-time jobs. last month over 22,000 people applied to walmart, and only 600 got a job. And to be considered unemployed you have to be actively looking for a job. so 7% of americans are actively looking for a job. People are trying, there just aren’t any jobs out there.

“just get an education”

over 280,000 americans with four year degrees are working minimum wage jobs. over 30,000 americans with 6 year degrees are working minimum wage jobs. 50% of college graduates end up unemployed. the average college graduate has about 30,000 dollars in debt. So why yes, education can be great for some, it’s defiantly not a solution for all.

“If we raise minimum wage Inflation will just go up, and everyone will still be poor”

Between 1950-1970 when the average real wage of this country was $9.06 the inflation rate was only 2,3%! that was one of our highest real wage time periods, combined with one of our lowest inflation rate. Secondly labor is only a part of cost, so things would not increase proportionally. More likely, if wages doubled, prices would increase by like 5-30%. And to use two examples, If mcdonlads doubled every employees wages to MAINTAIN THE SAME PROFIT as they are now, the big mac would only increase by 42 cents. If Wal-mart doubled it’s wage to MAINTAIN THE SAME PROFIT, the average cost to the consumer would only increase by 12.43 cents A YEAR! So yes prices would go up, but wages would go up a lot higher. Also with more money in the economy more people will be bale to spend and buy more. this means more inventory and product will be moved, which means business could make more money. “Raising the minimum wage is a great way to boost consumer demand because every additional dollar that goes into the hands of a low-income worker is very likely to be spent, thus spurring business sales and economic growth.” (David Bolotsky is founder and CEO of UncommonGoods) so everyone wins!

“people are just lazy”

Most of the people i know have to work 2-3 minimum wage jobs just get to by. that’s 60-70 hours a week! that’s not lazy. also productivity has gone up while wages have not!“raise minimum wage will hurt the economy”

as i’ve stated above it’ll actually help the economy. the center for economic policy and research did a report about why raising minimum wage doesn’t effect unemployment. it is also illustrated by this graph, that shows as minimum wage goes down, unemployment goes up.Then some other good reasons to raise it. One, it’ll decrease the deficit. Less people will have to be on welfare and food stamps.“It’s a perverse incentive program. A corner business or giant retailer like Costco that pays a starting wage of $11.50 an hour gets no government subsidy while a store across the street paying the federal minimum wage of $7.25 is actually getting a government handout because it pays a substandard wage. This does not make economic sense.”( David Bolotsky) Two, people will be able to feed their family. Three, it helps the wage cap and makes it possible for every american can achieve the american dream. So basically there is no question we should raise the minimum wage. or at least put in a mandatory incentive program, such as after 6 months you get a two dollars raise. and in another 6 months you’ll get another 2 dollars raise.

[TRANS] Luhan Weibo Chat

Q: Lu-ge, did you eat lamb paomo for lunch today?
Luhan: Didn’t eat it yet~ T_T

Q: Have you been preparing for a new album? Looking forward to it!
Luhan: I’m preparing, a new single will be released in September :D

Keep reading

eyesofsuns  asked:

I read your list of "basic reasons" and honestly non of them are one sided. All of these things are applicable to both sexes. And as far as the employment/pay gap between a man and a woman, much of that has to do with child bearing. On average a woman leaves the work force for 6 years after child birth. The father (assuming he's still present) is still able to work, therefor any employer is going to take the safe bet. I'm all for equality, but gender rolls weren't just written by some dude once.

Lets break this down then. I’ll discuss why these statements I made are specific to women.

Because all the worst insults to a man are ones that compare him to a woman.

I’ve never heard of women being compared to men as a prevalent insult. On the contrary it is seen as negative if you are a feminine man, if you act like a girl (throw like a girl/run like a girl, etc), to be called a girl and because phrases like son of  bitch are so prevalent. Bitch is used to insult women but there isn’t a male centric equivalent. Slut is used to attack women for enjoying sex.

Because women are shamed for having sex, but men are not.

Men are celebrated for having sex. Women are shamed.

Because when a man with a feminine name added a Mr. to his resume he got much more job interviews.

I have a source on this one

And as far as the employment/pay gap between a man and a woman, much of that has to do with child bearing. On average a woman leaves the work force for 6 years after child birth.

I have a counter to this from the United States Department of Labour’s official website:

MYTH: Women are responsible for the pay gap because they seek out flexible jobs or choose to work fewer hours. Putting family above work is why women earn less.

REALITY: Putting aside whether it’s right to ask women (or men) to sacrifice financially in order to work and have a family, those kinds of choices aren’t enough to explain away the gender pay gap. The gender gap in pay exists for women working full time. Taking time off for children also doesn’t explain gaps at the start of a career. And although researchers have addressed various ways that work hours or schedule might or might not explain some portion of the wage gap, there may be a “motherhood penalty.” This is based on nothing more than the expectation that mothers will work less. Researchers have found that merely the status of being a mother can lead to perceptions of lowered competence and commitment and lower salary offers.

Much more wage gap myths busted at the link above too.

Because women have to attach pepper spray and weapons to their key chains to feel safe going out at night.

I as a man, have never in my life felt so threatened and so unsafe at night that I attached pepper spray or weapons to myself. I have never felt I was in danger of being assaulted or sexually assaulted when going out at night. NEVER. EVER.

Because women are not represented equally in society; not in politics and not in science.

I do not see how this can be argued with what so ever. It is 100% the truth.

Case in point evidence here WORLDWIDE from STEM fields:

  • Just 30% of the world’s researchers are women, but there are some interesting exceptions. In Bolivia, women account for 63% of researchers, compared to France, which has a rate of 26%, and Ethiopia, which has a rate of 8%.
  • Women researchers tend to work in the academic and government sectors, while men dominate the private sector.
  • Women researchers remain the minority in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. In the Republic of Korea, for example, only 17% of researchers are women, and these women account for just 9% of those working in the fields of engineering and technology.

Because women are being told what they can and cannot do with their own bodies or denied care or contraceptives.

This is also not for debate. Women are denied access to abortions, shamed for being pregnant and denied contraceptive coverage. Please explain to me how men are oppressed in the same way.

IMF policies blamed for Ebola spread in West Africa

Spending cuts imposed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) may have contributed to the rapid spread of Ebola in three West African states, UK-based researchers say.

It had led to “under-funded, insufficiently staffed, and poorly prepared health systems” in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea, they said.

The IMF denied the allegation.

The deadliest Ebola outbreak ever has so far killed more than 7,300 people, mostly in the three states.

“A major reason why the Ebola outbreak spread so rapidly was the weakness of healthcare systems in the region, and it would be unfortunate if underlying causes were overlooked,” said Cambridge University sociologist and lead study author Alexander Kentikelenis.

Policies requiring that government spending be slashed were “extremely strict, absorbing funds that could be directed to meeting pressing health challenges”, the study said.

Mr Kentikelenis told the BBC’s Newsday programme that caps on wage bills meant countries could not hire heath staff and pay them adequately.

The IMF’s emphasis on decentralised healthcare systems had also made it difficult to mobilise a co-ordinated response to health emergencies such as the Ebola outbreak, he said.

Study co-author Lawrence King said Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone had met the IMF’s directives in 2013, just before the Ebola outbreak.

However, they all “failed to raise their social spending despite pressing health needs”, he said.

The IMF said in a statement that health spending in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone had, in fact, increased in the 2010-2013 period.

It was “completely untrue” that IMF policies had caused Ebola to spread, a spokesman is quoted by AFP news agency as saying

“Such claims are based on a misunderstanding, and, in some cases, a misrepresentation, of IMF policies,” he said.

The three poor West African states are heavily dependent on donor funding.

Conflict in Liberia and Sierra Leone in the 1990s also contributed to the destruction of their health systems.

Of course the IMF denied it. Such is the way of these devils.