Millennials work the 7 to 5 for minimum wage, followed by a 8 to 12 split shift with a 6 til close on the pot wash, followed by an open shift which violates your legal minimum time between shifts, followed by…
Even though clinical depression has only been medically categorized and developed in the last few decades, the characters who populate our Scriptures were no strangers to it. In the book named for him, Job despairs: “I cannot eat for sighing; my groans pour out like water. What I always feared has happened to me. What I dreaded has come to be. I have no peace, no quietness. I have no rest; instead, only trouble comes …. I will never again experience pleasure … I would rather die of strangulation than go on and on like this. I hate my life” (Job 3:23-26, 7:11, 15-16, NLT).
King David was depressed. In the opening verses of Psalm 13 he writes, “How long, O Lord? Will you forget me forever? How long will you hide your face from me? How long must I wrestle with my thoughts and every day have sorrow in my heart?” And David’s son Solomon wrote, “I hated life, because the work that is done under the sun was grievous to me. All of it is meaningless, a chasing after the wind” (Ecclesiastes 2:17).
We can finally explain this disorder biologically; doctors have come to believe that clinical depression is caused by an imbalance of several chemicals in the brain, namely serotonin, dopamine and norepinephrine. Yet, we still have a tendency to see it as a personal or spiritual disorder. We hear about people with depression and think that they must just be lazy or unmotivated or self-pitying. Even seeing that biblical heroes might have been depressed doesn’t shake our instinct that real Christians just don’t get depressed. We explain those passages away and insist that Christians shouldn’t be depressed, because true joy is found in Jesus.
Unfortunately, the spiritual joy of salvation that comes with knowing Jesus does not always precipitate earthly health or happiness. Christians still get ill, and depression is a sickness—perhaps one of the most insidious ones. Depression inspires a worthlessness that undermines the love and mercy of God. Many Christians who suffer from depression find that their affliction makes it more difficult for them to go to church, pray or engage in acts of charity. The direction of causality here is crucial—depression causes spiritual withdrawal, not the other way around.
Some still say that depression is a result of sin in the depressive person’s life and they may be partially right. Guilt and shame can develop and persist because of secret or unconfessed sins in a person’s life and these perpetual feelings can trigger a depressive episode. This doesn’t mean that “eliminating” sin will cure depression, because sin will always be with us. We are all sinners and we’ll all disobey God’s will at some point—otherwise, what’s the point of grace? As Paul writes in Romans, “For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members” (7:22-23). We are all, as Martin Luther would say, fully justified and yet fully sinners. An emphasis on the sin component of depression is basically blaming the victim.
Here it is helpful to look at depression the way we look at cancer. Some cancers are partially caused by the actions of the victim—they might have smoked cigarettes or suntanned too much. Yet there are many who have never taken even a drag off a smoke and those who use SPF 45 sun block and still get cancer. Carcinogens are all around us, and they are somewhat indiscriminate in their selection of victims. Similarly, sin is all around us. Dr. Fred Lee, a physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and a teaching fellow at Harvard University, put it this way, “The mortality rate of all people—believers and not—is 100 percent, because this is a fallen world. Sin begets disease, too, in the same way it begets death. From that perspective disease is our fault—in the sense that we are a fallen race. However, it is not directly the fault of the individual.”
A much more prevalent sin component of depression is the act of being sinned against. Experiences in our lives deeply scar us—something as simple as a popular kid making fun of our clothes or something as horrific as ongoing physical or sexual abuse. Perpetually being sinned against creates young men and women who believe that they deserve their sad state of fate, that they really aren’t good enough, and that no one, not even God, could possibly love them. Medical studies show that repeated traumatic experiences can permanently lower mood-regulating brain chemicals. This is the legacy of sin that exists in the lives of all of us.
Depression should be treated and can be put into remission through a course of psychoanalysis, cognitive therapy and/or antidepressant medication, supplemented by healthy doses of prayer within a loving Christian community. It is nonsensical to tell a depressed person that if they only read they Bible more or had better quiet times, their depression would surely be lifted. That would be like telling a diabetic that faith alone will regulate her insulin levels. Faith alone gives eternal salvation, but in the meantime, God has given us resources by which to make our temporal existences more palatable. Depression can absolutely be healed by the grace of God, but more often than not, through the tools of His servants, like pharmacists, therapists, pastors and friends.
It’s tempting for a lot of people to say Trump is an anomaly, and in some ways he is. He’s uniquely thin-skinned, especially ignorant, and more vindictive than just about any other prominent politician.
But policy-wise? He’s a basic Republican.
It’s true that he differs on a couple issues with his party, at least rhetorically, but none of them are spurring protests right now. He suggested that the US government should probably negotiate prices with drug companies (which is correct), and has thrown out some wild protectionist ideas, and that’s about it.
Every issue he’s being rightly called a fascist for, every single one, is supported by 95% of elected Republicans.
The Republican Party is going to use Trump’s historic unpopularity to push through historically unpopular plans: repealing Obamacare, privatizing national parks, selling federal lands, cutting social security and Medicare benefits, privatizing schools, attacking sustainable energy, defunding public transportation, strengthening executive power, politicizing federal agencies, controlling women’s bodies, further militarizing police, unreasonable deportations, eliminating state and local wage laws, breaking up unions, the list goes on. And they’ll argue for a “real conservative” in the face of the backlash and the inevitable economic failure they initiated, claiming as they have since Reagan that the last president wasn’t sufficiently conservative enough.
And voters will fall for it, because they so badly want to see themselves, their friends, and their family members as “reasonable Republicans.”
Reasonable Republicans no longer exist, and they haven’t for years.
The Republican Party is Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan and Donald Trump. It’s not the party of Jon Huntsman or Arnold Schwarzenegger. It was never really even the Party of Mitt Romney.
It is radical, it is fascist, and it must be destroyed without sympathy.
In the North, the custom is general of keeping the payment of wages one week behindhand, chaining the miners in this way to their work. And to complete the slavery of these enthralled workers, nearly all the Justices of the Peace in the coal districts are mine owners themselves, or relatives or friends of mine owners, and possess almost unlimited power in these poor, uncivilised regions where there are few newspapers, these few in the service of the ruling class, and but little other agitation. It is almost beyond conception how these poor coal-miners have been plundered and tyrannised over by Justices of the Peace acting as judges in their own cause.
casual reminder: do not come to Florida to work at any of the Disney parks. it is not a dream or a magical experience. they are a terrible, soul-sucking company with horrible ethics and cater only to the customer. they have been caught breaking countless of minimum-wage laws on more than one account, they have the power to fire you without any explanation and exercise this on employees (not actors) who make more than a certain amount (or you’re full time) or those with seniority to “make room” but are really trying to cut expenses that aren’t even at financial risk. they will force you to work late without pay, overtime without pay, and penalize you for paid sick days you’ve called in, and without warning. these are among a handful of the many more testimonials.
All right everyone. I did promise that I was committed to this
self-publishing venture. IN THE WRECKAGE is the first book in my m/m
sci-fi military romance series that is scheduled to be published on
February 24, 2017. Depending on when Amazon puts it up, it may actually drop earlier next week.
Regardless, I am so excited to share this story with you guys and would love it if you would reblog!
A Marine with honor.
After surviving a
horrific chemical attack that turned him into a metahuman, Captain Jamie
Callahan got a second lease on life. For three years he’s been working for the
Metahuman Defense Force and leading Alpha Team—all against the wishes of his
family. The job requires his full dedication, so it’s no surprise Jamie doesn’t
have time for a relationship. An enticing one-night stand with a gorgeous
stranger is all it takes to show Jamie exactly what he’s been missing. When a
mission to take down a terrorist cell brings that same stranger back into his
world, Jamie’s life gets complicated.
A soldier with secrets.
Staff Sergeant Kyle
Brannigan was only looking to relieve some stress after a long mission. He didn’t
know the hot guy he picked up at a bar was the leader of the MDF’s top field
team. When Kyle and his partner get seconded to Alpha Team to help fight a
terrorist threat, he has to balance his desire for Jamie against his duty to
keep his secrets safe. That gets harder and harder to do amidst regulations
both are tempted to break.
Two men trying to survive.
Giving into passion
could cost both their careers. Abiding by the rules will only result in
heartache. An attack on MDF headquarters brings with it a choice Jamie and Kyle
can’t escape—duty, or love?
Please note, In the Wreckage is a steamy m/m sci-fi military romance with a tiny bit of kink and a HFN ending.
Now, onto the story.
Ground level in the Chicago
megacity was a humid, crowded mess on the best of days. When a mafia-backed
terrorist group led by metahumans waged war against law abiding citizens, Chicago
became a shitshow of the worst kind not even the police could handle. Which
meant the best counterattack came not from local authorities, but in the form
of government-backed metahumans.
I got a burger that wasn't exactly how I asked for it once so nobody DESERVES a higher minimum wage
You stupid, ignorant piece of shit.
Let me explain you a thing:
Your precious burger was made wrong for one of two reasons; either the restaurant was understaffed and the few people in it were rushing to get too much work done at once and an honest mistake happened, or some kid who didn't know better or just didn't care made it.
And believe you me, if some idiot kid is screwing up peoples's orders on a regular basis, the restaurant would LOVE to fire them.
But they CAN'T, because they're so goddamned understaffed that they can't afford to lose ANYONE, not even their worst employees.
And why are they understaffed? Because the corporation that owns the restaurant is only willing to pay the minimum wage allowed by law, which is far below a comfortable living wage.
Almost nobody is WILLING to take on a job like that for so little money, so nobody takes the job, so they STAY understaffed all the time and they can't hire anyone to replace the people they desperately want to fire.
If the minimum wage went up, there would be WAY more people willing to take the job. They'd have so many applicants, they could afford to get rid of all but the best employees. Anyone wanting to keep their job would actually have to learn to work hard and try to earn it.
They'd all be competing so hard to do the best job they can, you'd never get bad service or an incorrect burge again.
So get this through your thick fucking skull, you piece of human garbage:
If you expect this job to be DONE RIGHT. and DONE QUICKLY.
Then it is worth $15 an hour.
If you don't agree then you can learn to cook your own damn meals, you inept fucking man-infant.
Unions (also known as trade unions) are groups of workers who have organized to achieve a common goal, whether that’s to improve their working conditions or to have a voice in their workplace or defend their rights as individual workers or members of a group, or to engage in political action.
That last part is why unions are important to contemporary politics.
To begin with, unions are mass organizations of workers - even at a historically low level of “union density” in the U.S, there are 14.5 million union members in the United States - which means that they can try to leverage the votes and activism of their members in shaping the political system. Unions are very very good at doing outreach to large numbers of people, because at the end of the day, doing voter outreach (whether that’s voter registration, issue advocacy, phone-banking, precinct-walking, or GOTV) uses a lot of the same skills and technologies and organizational methods that are involved in organizing workers into unions.
Second, unions are one of the only organized groups in politics that are “of, by, and for” the working class. Historically, unions have been a major “counter-vailing force” that balanced out the influence of the wealthy and big businesses, and the decline of unions is one of the big reasons why our political system has become responsive to the preferences of only the affluent. Moreover, unions historically have not just advocated for the interests of their own membership, but have supported broader social and economic legislation - the minimum wage, overtime laws, health and safety regulations, civil rights legislation, immigration reform, universal health care, Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, you can go down the list of progressive causes and unions have historically been one of the largest and loudest backers of all of these causes. (Huge caveat here: this hasn’t always been the case on a number of issues, and there’s a very complicated history of how the labor movement shifted from being an organization of white men only in the 19th century and well into the 20th century to one of the most diverse organizations in America today.)
Third, and this has to do with the previous two: unions have historically been a major bloc within the Democratic Party since the 1930s (arguably, you could go back as far as the 1910s and the AFL-CIO allying with Wilson over the Clayton Anti-Trust Act, but at that time you had major union federations like the IWW who either didn’t support party politics at all or supported the Socialist Party). As a result, the Republican Party has been actively trying to kill the labor movement since at least 1947, when they passed the Taft-Hartley Act, through to Reagan breaking the PATCO strike in 1981 through to present attempts to pass national “right-to-work” laws. For their part, the Democratic Party historically was the party that passed the Wagner Act that legalized unions and established the National Labor Relations Board to oversee collective bargaining, but has since the 70s been rather tepid over attempts to reform labor law to help unions pull out of their decline, although Democrats have (with mixed results) tended to fight Republican anti-union pushes.
Many years ago, I was working as a telemarketer selling security systems. I worked in a call center, with the hours of 10am-8pm. We were given two 15 minute breaks and one 30 minute break throughout the day, which we were told was unpaid.
Our pay was $290 (minimum wage @ 40 hours) + commission per week, on a draw so that if we didn’t sell enough to make the $290 it would come out of any extra we got in subsequent weeks.
I had a bad feeling about the job because I had never been asked to fill any sort of paperwork out at all. No tax forms, no NDA, nothing. After a few months of working there, they started having us come in some Saturdays and at 9am instead of 10am - but our pay did not increase.
At this point, I started looking up the Fair Wage laws and found that what they were doing was completely illegal. First, the 15 minute breaks must be paid, and also they had failed to ever pay us overtime. I told a couple friends, and eventually got so fed up that I quit the job.
After quitting, my final paycheck was short a full week’s worth of pay, and the manager said “That’s to make up for the draw”.
I filed a complaint with the board of labor immediately, and about a month later I got a frantic call from the manager asking how many hours I had worked there. I told him that it was his responsibility to keep records of what employees had worked there, but thankfully I had kept track of my start/end date, so I just gave him an estimate that came out to be 55 hours/week for the duration.
A friend of mine who still worked for the company said they had been shut down by the government for defrauding their employees, had to pay a huge fine, and we were all getting back pay.
A few months later, I got a check for about $1,500 in the mail. I hated working there, but I felt pretty good about the whole thing after the end. =)
Unpopular opinion: minimum wage laws harm small businesses more than individuals, and key proponents of minimum wage hikes are giant corporations that can afford the hike and are using it to stifle their competition.
you might have a point there. I do agree with some fundamental minimum wage laws as a matter of principle, and they often come from legitimate abuses from the industrial revolution. Even a wage tied to the cost of living might be justifiable. But arbitrary hikes seem punishing to small businesses, and a surefire method to destroy jobs.
I've heard criticisms that the UBI is too socialist a policy to ever work - what do you think about that?
Let’s see the current situation has the government telling people how they can spend money. The UBI gives them money and trusts individuals to know how to best spend their own money. Which sounds more socialist to you?
The current system has huge bureaucracies for Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, Welfare, Public Housing, Food Stamps, Unemployment Insurance at the federal and state levels. The UBI can probably be run with one single small bureaucratic office and powerful computer. Which sounds more socialistic to you?
The current welfare state has disincentives to marriage, to work, to self-reliance and incentives for government dependence, having more children you can afford, and making poor choices. The UBI does none of those things. Which sounds more socialistic to you?
You can guess where this is going but the UBI costs less, will have fewer people permanently unemployed, you can get rid of the all minimum wage laws, you’ll actually see a massive shot in the arm to the private sector, a better educated populace, and a lot fewer people who look to the government as the sole source of their livelihood. Yes lots of people get income from the government but the government’s power over people lives is actually lessened.
alright i’m not a lawyer but it’s time to put this one to bed meevs style.
Despite being a tumblr user, I looked this one up (not exhaustively, but I did check a bunch of states and they all said the exact same thing).
On one hand, it is NOT LEGAL for an employer to make up for their theft losses out of an employee’s paycheck unless the employee agreed to that in writing when they took the job. I’m willing to bet that a lot of bigger hirers include that stipulation in their employee handbooks and they probably get that signature from you.
however, even though it’s not legal, many employers DO deduct theft losses from their employee’s pay. many employees don’t know that they have the right to make sure this isn’t done!
so this is a message to shoplifters for sport as well as employees who have been affected:
shoplifters: just because the law says that employers can’t take this money from the employees, the companies may (and do) make employees agree to waive this right, and the employees may not be able to find work elsewhere. in addition, many of these employees won’t know their rights, and the companies will dock their pay illegally and get away with it. So while your main excuse (that the employees shouldn’t be affected due to the law) is correct, that doesn’t change the reality that the employees ARE affected regardless of the law, and they don’t know to fight back.
think of yourself working a shitty low paying job that you were lucky to get because nowhere is hiring, and they decide to dock your pay. do you want to fight for your rights against your employer, feeling like they’ll fire you if you do, over 20 bucks? no matter how much you need that 20 bucks? stop being an asshole, your stealing DOES damage the employee’s paychecks and saying that it affects big businesses is just an excuse so that you can keep doing what you want.
It’s funny that shoplifters on tumblr talk so much shit about big corporations (i hate them too), but at the same time those shoplifters think that the corporations couldn’t possibly be taking employee’s paycheck money because it’s against the rules. Open your eyes, you don’t think that highly of the corporations you’re talking about! They break the law, a LOT!
If you are very poor, unable to work, stealing necessities, I consider the employees who you may be stealing from to be more well-off and lucky than you so you are not who i’m talking about, as i said i’m talking about these tumblr “shoplifters for sport” who think they’re taking 100 dollars directly out of a billionaire’s private island fund even though they could buy whatever they want with their mom’s credit card.
employees: you have rights! make sure to look at your employee handbook or ask someone higher up in the company who you trust to get the information of whether you agreed to have your pay docked when you took the job (don’t feel bad if you did, I’ve been there before agreeing to things i didnt want to agree to because i had no other job interviews lined up). If your company doesn’t have this type of contract with you, and you had your pay docked, you can get your money back so talk to your boss and tell them you know your rights. You can’t get fired for this! if you DO get fired for this, talk to a lawyer and local news, because you’re gonna be on tv.
CHECK YOUR STATE’S LAWS, just google “<your-state> when can my employer deduct money from my paycheck?”
Let me know if you find that your employer is allowed to do whatever they want in your state, i would be very surprised to learn that. I’m not including sources because you would be like “oh thats only one state, my state is different” so im encouraging you to look it up for yourself
im gonna put a question mark at the end of this so that you can reply what you find about your state, idk if only my followers can reply, but hopefully not so that anyone who sees this can come to the original post page and reply without having to reblog or follow me if that makes sense?
Hi! Thank you so much for your 40's New York references! As someone who doesn't even live in America, it's very helpful! I was wondering if you had any ideas on what jobs Steve and Bucky might have AFTER the war if they made it home ok (Bucky minus one arm) since I'm trying to research possibilities and it's proving difficult. Thank you and I hope you have a lovely day!
Aww, thank you! Let’s see if I can help.
My own personal assumption about what Steve and Bucky might have done after the war is that they would have been snapped up by an intelligence agency. The Howling Commandos seemed to have functioned as an independent unit performing covert intelligence operations and sabotage in hostile territories, which would have made all of them phenomenally valuable after the war as the US government pivoted from dealing with fascism to dealing with Communism. The CIA was founded in 1947 to deal specifically with this threat; I think we could reasonably assume also they could have been folded into the SSR, as it became SHIELD.
Now, if you’re asking what kind of jobs they would have held if they chose to become civilians after the war, let’s start with a quick overview of the GI Bill, which helped to create what we understand as the modern middle class.
Passed into law in 1944, the bill was designed to ease the transition out of wartime for the roughly 11 million or so returning veterans, 73% of which had served overseas. The GI Bill offered the following benefits:
College tuition or vocational training for up to 4 years
Zero interest loan guarantees for a home, farm, or business
Unemployment pay of $20 per week for up to 52 weeks if the veteran couldn’t find a job
Priority for building materials for Veterans Administration Hospitals.
That first bullet point was a big one. When Steve and Bucky were growing up, only an 8th grade education was compulsory; about 6% of the population was college educated before WW2. If you’d like to take a look at a shitload of graphs, you can see the stunning leaps that happen after 1940, when the government paid a whole lot of people to get educated. I’m getting some differing numbers between websites, but at least half of World War II veterans participated in an education or training program through the GI Bill. In 1947, vets accounted for 49% of college admissions.
This was a great thing also because there was rampant homelessness and unemployment waiting for returning veterans - in 1946, about 2 million veterans were unemployed, and at least 1.5 million vets and their families were squatters. Millions also took advantage of the GI Bill’s home loan guaranty. From 1944 to 1952, VA backed nearly 2.4 million home loans for World War II Veterans. Overall, home ownership in the US went from 43.6% in 1940, to 61.9% in 1960, to a large part attributed directly to GI Bill benefits.
So what could their jobs have been, as civilians? Well, I also had a hard time getting a direct answer from the interwebs, but we can extrapolate a few things based on other economic factors at the time. The construction industry was going through a boom period - not only were homes and planned communities being built at a feverish pace, but the national highway system started construction in 1956, and many of our familiar skyscrapers were constructed during the post-war boom. So civil engineer might be a good choice, career-wise.
Food science, also a big thing: due to lots of fucking around with chemicals during the war, we developed new types of fertilizer. We had tons of manufacturing facilities that had been making bullets and guns, so we turned those over into making tractors and other farming machines, phasing out the use of horses, carts and other such tools. Between the population boom and the stunning advances in technology that happened because of WW2, a lot of people were paid to make feeding our citizens a lot more efficient.
The late 40s and 50s also saw the highest rate of Humanities majors that we had all century - the evidence that I’ve read seems to be anecdotal, so I won’t link to it, but a college professor AU is pretty charming. Television also became a huge, huge thing after the war, so a pretty face like Steve Rogers could definitely have become a television personality.
The US Government also put a lot of money into nuclear and energy programs, plunking down research facilities all over the country, but primarily in the south: South Carolina, Tennessee, Mississippi, Florida, etc. Nuclear engineer Bucky, anyone?
If you want to keep them in New York, NYC experienced a huge cultural shift during the post-war period, and created most of ourmodern art canon for the next few decades. Lots of beatniks, lots of social unrest, lots of avant garde artists. Disillusioned, anti-war Greenwich Village painter Steve Rogers? Haha love it. Anyway, you have lots of options, and can even have them opt out of employment and become hobos on the 52-20 plan, which was what unemployed veterans were derisively called.
A history lesson from Hans Bekhart is never really complete without the social justice context, so let me add also that Gabe Jones would have been for the most part shit out of luck trying to get his benefits through the GI Bill. The federal government left the actual carrying out of these benefits to local agencies, who - you guessed it - were hella racist. They outright excluded black people for both educational benefits (Southern universities being segregated at the time, and HBUCs overwhelmed by the number of applicants) and housing (by refusing home loans to black applicants seeking to purchase outside of designated areas, also known as redlining, the effects of which can most certainly still be seen today.) Black veterans were overwhelmingly shunted towards vocational training rather than education, and then further excluded from minimum wage laws at the time (or rather, job categories with high rates of black workers were excluded from having to comply with minimum wage laws, such as domestic workers).
Much of the current wealth disparity in the country between white people and black people can be directly traced to the GI Bill, as home ownership is one of the biggest creators of wealth (as opposed to income, wealth is assets - cash savings, homes, and retirement accounts - minus debts i.e. mortgages and credit card balances). Wealth disparity perpetuates from generation to generation and has an enormous effect on a person’s ability for financial success as they move into adulthood. Money makes money, as they say.
Jim Morita would have done alright, though: Japanese veterans were not excluded from GI Bill benefits, so it was during the post-war period that Japanese-Americans achieved near economic parity with white Americans; turns out that whole model minority weirdness is older than you maybe thought it was.
A Secretary of the EPA that didn’t believe in global warming. Says he wants to gut it and violate the Paris Agreement.
A Labor Secretary that opposes raising the minimum wage, opposes overtime laws, is IN favor for automating as many jobs as possible, along with violating multiple labor laws in his own fast food restaurants. And just to add a cherry he’s behind all the ultra sexist Hardees commercials where women eat burgers in skimpy bikinis.
He’s trying to dismantle the government…. Indirectly through his shocking lack of knowledge and directly through his cabinet appointments.
so one of my paychecks was accidentally withheld and junk for awhile, now im getting it but im…nervous ?? cause they technically owe me more than my paycheck with california wage laws. they have to pay me my daily working wage for every day my paycheck wasnt given to me (up to 30) and idk if they’re going to automatically do it or if i have to fight for it