MiddleClassCentrist

This is actually one of my topics that I get annoyed with. I'll become a feminist when they argue for true equality: - paying the same on insurance. - hiring males in professions where men are under represented. - expect to pay for their own dinner - boycott clubs that give free cover to women - argue that funding for male and female health concerns be equalized. Why might they be paid less? - They take more time off work - Women are less likely to ask for a raise - Women require maternity leave, especially if they want to do it right and breastfeed their children. Men don't have breasts, so they aren't a valid replacement for the natural way. Maternity leave takes time away from building a career but, gives a mother INVALUABLE time with her child... That is a good trade off in my opinion. I wish I was staying home with my kids... but mine (the little one at least) is still being breastfed. I'm not sure about the statistics, I looked into them when I first saw them during my time in University. The man hating feminists lost me when they started arguing that a husband harmlessly convincing his wife into sex was sexual assault because she did it but didn't really want to. That goes both ways one time or another. Wife wants it, husband is drained. Husband wants it, wife is drained. Don't take me as trying to minimize the occurrence of violent acts against women. I do not approve or condone them. But, based on what the feminists were telling me, their statistics seemed embellished. I could make the occurrence of violent attacks look more prevalent too, if I including shoving between friends as a violent attack. One thing you will get me on board for, is to remove all gender based toys for children. Just try to find a frickin' pink mechanical toy at Toy's R' Us. I'd advocate to require all toys to have equal representation in marketing them... A boy playing with dolls, a girl playing with the toy tool bench etc.

Politicians are still stuck in the dark ages and don't understand anything modern. Their policies and opinions on any of this stuff is just hilarious, and sad at the same time.

The reason Romney has any chance.

My whole post was meant to be tongue in cheek. Sorry it did not translate over in text.

Pretty much. Can appreciate the irony that arises from these disputes. On a radio talk show, a guy was criticizing manufacturing jobs for their high pay, low skill field. Turns out he was a business teacher, anyone would rebutt by saying he gets paid too much because he gets summers off and because he supposedly only works during school hours. The teacher could turn around and call a project manager over paid because they have an entire week to create a single presentation, while the teacher has to run several presentations a day and control 20-30 kids. Everyone's job, that the person making the observation is not currently employed doing, is obviously just too easy. Public sector wages are too high because they don't have as high of a risk of losing their job. They should be paid well but, take a cut for their low risk situation. The average private sector wage should be slightly lower than the average public sector wage because there is a lot more potential reward in the private sector than there is in the public sector (end wages in private sector are higher). Everyone makes too much! Let's lower everyone's pay(Except mine, of course).

Simple. It's hard to feel bad for someone who already makes more than you. That and everyone thinks that everyone else's job is easier, thus worth less pay, than it actually is.

It's almost like, evolutionary speaking, our race perpetuates God by killing off more who do not believe. I wonder if it is because they are happy but lack purpose... I'll have to read into this more. I guess a problem with analysing the reason is that to truly know the answer, you'd have to ask someone who did it.

People at the bottom (young people) who did not have time to benefit the pyramid scheme of a system created by the baby boomer's Once you are in for a certain number of years, you pretty much have to steal money or touch someone inappropriately to lose your job.

Not many are going to be sympathetic to the union or any union coming up. Who else do we have bargaining this year? Teachers and Nurses? I know quite a few teachers. No one will shed a tear for them. 94k/year top salary? 86k/year for nursing? Guaranteed jobs for life? The higher than average wage + the pretty much lifetime guarantee is what seals it. Banking unused sick days can be good, if a replacement MUST be called in when an employee is sick. It actually saves money. But only if a supply/temp has to cover and be paid in addition the worker's salary(IE, Paying out sick day and coverage). Encourages people to take fewer days.

You know the US has a higher corporate tax rate than us, right? Or are you just being purposefully obtuse as usual?

I do agree, the blame falls on consumers to some degree. But it isn't like we can just stop buying light bulbs or other essentials. They are inelastic, if one breaks we need to replace it. When the standard bulb is only 1000hours after 100 years with no improvement, something is shady. If there is corporate collusion to keep the products weaker, they are also part of the blame. In theory, yes. In reality, not so much. Most people wouldn't even know where to look in Electronics to figure out if it was doing something because it was programmed to. If it is set to go a little haywire 4 years after purchase, most people would likely just buy another one and think nothing of it. How can someone make a good judgement when the don't know what is happening? A company would just just market themselves as better and be done with it, or a company would start selling a better product and then be bought out by a bigger company that would return to it's old ways to keep the money flowing. There are a lot of ways to make a company look like it is doing what customers want. Just look at the Telecom industry. People are using less text messages. What are the Telco's solution? Offer a better plan for low text usage? NO! Eliminiate the low end text plan to force people to pay for more texting they don't use. Change isn't something that businesses like. Change means additional costs. Preventing change saves money lost on innovation.

It's actually a 55 minute documentary in 4 parts. Documenting how corporations have purposefully made consumer products worse, or put timer chips like the printer to make them fail after a certain number of prints. I pity anyone who buys Apple junk. They are the worst, my wife's iBook can't access the internet anymore because it needs to download a new browser, to download the new browser she needs a new version of OSX, she needs a new computer for the new version of OSX. but... my 11 year old windows machine still can! This is especially concerning in the electronic age where only the chip designer would know that there is a counter that says when X date is reached, start malfunctioning. That is our version of capitalism. It's also how most people still have jobs in our mass manufacturing era. It can't continue, we'll need to shift to a new economy because of our finite resources on earth. Your loss. Thread drift anyways.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=endUcoHsCVY

The irony, Wild Bill, is that you have it wrong. Western capitalism thrives on making consumer products just good enough that you feel ok about them but, timed to break or become obsolete quickly. The Lightbulb is a shining example. Basic lightbulbs are marketed at 1000hours. Almost 100 years ago they were marketed with 1500-2000 hours. Why is this? Western capitalism is efficient and needs to keep selling. If they innovated and made a really good lightbulb, people would need less lightbulbs. Lightbulbs are cheap to make so they need to rely on selling a lot of them... solution, make it break easier! iPods don't have a replaceable battery, why? My car's stabilizer links, an annoying by not a safety issue, are a known problem in my model of car since it was first designed, why haven't they fixed them in 10 years? Printers just stop printing with an error code after a certain number of prints, why? (this one is answered in the Documentary: The Light Bulb Conspiracy) Western Capitalism works by making things work just long enough to break by the time you can afford a new one. Western capitalism makes a good product, and then redesigns it to break a little easier. This isn't so that everyone can keep a job... this is so that profits can continuously be made. Eastern economies were inefficient. Designers were rewarded for making products last because it was more difficult to generate material to replace it. That's why Germany was known for it's high quality machines.

I like how you couldn't even leave the politicking out of this thread. Says a lot about you.

It represents Harper fairly well. Crush unions. Let the top earners flourish. Kill the middle class.

Well, something to think about: Fertile mothers are linked to a higher chance of bearing homosexual children. (read: natural population control)

Irrational cutting of program to fund tax cuts and irrational programs on their agenda is the conservative mantra. Of course they seem mean spirited. If they were running a surplus, they'd cut taxes so in the next down turn they'd HAVE to cut extra program funds to continue funding their special agenda (*cough*, Harper, *cough*). Rob Ford is another prime example, create a budget hole by cutting taxes, fill it with social programs... especially programs that help poor people. Dalton is the reverse... Spend irrationally in good times, continue into bad times... eventually come to the realization that the "hey day" is over. Cut programs like crazy. I hope you can see the difference. I want to make it clear, neither are good.

Absolutely, my wording was off.

Is that a joke? How is that working out for Somalia, Congo and other near lawless places where everyone is entirely "Free"? This statement contradicts your first statements. The way this is worded #1. Especially if corporations are abolished, with owners and investors are held accountable for their company.

OK... So the rich should pay more because they exponentially benefit from public infrastructure to make money. Gotcha.

When the close to centre government tells you that cuts need to happen, people listen. Why? Because the Conservatives are always doom and gloom spending cuts, tax cuts regardless of the weather. If Tim Hudak said it, he'd be like broken record. Now if Andrea Horvath said it, severe panic would break out.

.

I know you are just a forum troll with little to add in any discussion. But, these are SKILLED people with college background and required training. These aren't jobs that high school drop outs can do. They can't find enough people in Indiana to do the jobs for $18/hour. General Electric pays the same position on average $30/hour. Read up on it a little and stop proving that you are nothing more than an internet troll to be ignored

The Harper Government can step in and has stepped in very recently into these disputes (Air Canada). But a Conservative government taken the side of the average canadian? is that a joke? It will and always will continue to only step in to assist corporations. That is what our current brand of conservatives do.