Economy still sucks, unemployment is still high, yet the rich just keep getting richer.

[futuredivot 0]

You're so cute when you try to wiggle out of a statement by changing the parameters.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[billvon 2,434]

>and it takes more work to become a petroleum engineer than to become
>a waitress.

Exactly. And more money, and more time. It's not just "who works harder." It's that plus their history up to that point, plus the place they live, plus their aptitudes, plus a whole lot of luck.

[quade 3]

Quote

You're so cute when you try to wiggle out of a statement by changing the parameters.

No wiggling. No retreat. No changing of parameters.

It is possible what I'm saying is too subtle for you to understand, but that's your fault, not mine.

It still seems to have you and Rushmc confused. Others have agreed with me though.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

Who works harder for their money; the $5000 a night prostitute or the $100 a trick one?

Who worked harder in the past to get where they are?

The fact is, it would be impossible to tell. One may have won the genetic lottery and is even predisposed to the work in question. The other may be forced by unfortunate circumstance, doesn't enjoy it at all and is only doing a half-assed job at it. The RATE/unit of work however, doesn't tell you anything about how hard their previous work history has been.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sbkapx4GPc

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[futuredivot 0]

Quote

Quote

You're so cute when you try to wiggle out of a statement by changing the parameters.

No wiggling. No retreat. No changing of parameters.

It is possible what I'm saying is too subtle for you to understand, but that's your fault, not mine.

It still seems to have you and Rushmc confused. Others have agreed with me though.

Nope, if you're not wiggling-then you really need to work on communication skills.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

>and it takes more work to become a petroleum engineer than to become
>a waitress.

Exactly. And more money, and more time. It's not just "who works harder." It's that plus their history up to that point, plus the place they live, plus their aptitudes, plus a whole lot of luck.

It seems you want to just try to argue for the sake of arguing.

As a blanket statement, because very few actually hold up, "The harder you work the more money you get" is not true.

For the rational mind, it is easy to see that putting in more hours either benefits the financial situation of most people, or benefits the individuals future, if done correctly.

As a "most people" person myself, if I put more time in to a project, it is usually that I am trying to save costs by self performing the work, or I simply like doing the work.

So, the more effort and time and work I personaly put into a project does earn me more money.

So, in MOST cases, the statement is correct.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[quade 3]

Quote

As a blanket statement, because very few actually hold up, "The harder you work the more money you get" is not true.

Because that's NOT what we're saying.

At this point it's almost like an Abbott and Costello routine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sShMA85pv8M

You think you know what we're saying, but your understanding of it is wildly different than what is actually being said.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[dmcoco84 4]

Quote

Can somebody explain to me why it's in the interest of the average American to even consider extending the tax cuts to the wealthy?

Quade.... care for a common sense answer?

No one should be taxed as high as they are taxed... if government was responsible, the amount of tax dollars necessary to support federal, state and local governments would easily be cut in half.

The problem is not with the rich, it is with those spending money that is not theirs. Human nature... people tend not to care about things or take care of things that they don't have to work for.

If everyone were taxed appropriately, AND THE POOR WERE NOT GIVEN FREE MONEY, we wouldn't be having this idiotic argument. As well as individuals like Jon Huntsman would have 10X the amount of money to support charities, and his cancer hospital that is 100% free. Instead, those "evil rich people" like Mr. Huntsman, WHO GREW UP POOR, are raped of their money that they could use to create jobs, support charity and make the world a better place... instead of idiot politicians wasting that money... and the majority of the time its on things that are not even constitutional.

Did you know that Jon Huntsman took out loans for millions, and put up the majority of his personal wealth to garentee those loans to ensure his commitments to charities because he didn't have the cash that he had pledged to them. Yup, so evil... what a horrible rich person!

This whole Bush tax cuts argument is complete bull shit. Taxes are too high... and government is wasteful.

Saul Alinskey... "Criticize, marginalize, and demonize," the Rich. Are there bad rich people, yup, there are bad middle class and bad poor people too. And we are all taxed to heavily. Well... not the poor, at the moment... technically.


If not for the amount I am taxed, I would most definitely be more than happy to give more of my money to charity. Instead, i mostly just give my time... like Habitat for Humanity. Something that I did for quite a while... and I hope to start once again after I finish school.

P.S. I only read the initial thread. And I will only be reading comments after my post. So if someone already voiced this... +1.

P.S.S. I'm waiting for an answer in Lucky's poll thread. What is your definition?

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

No, but she will make more than a lazy one.

The answer to the question depends entirely on the job. Many jobs do pay more for working harder, many do not. But, in the end, the pay is pretty much whatever somebody is willing to put out for getting the job done.

A Denny's waitress works harder and makes a fraction of what an upscale watress would earn. There is no definite repeatable correlation between how hard a person works and their pay.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

No, but she will make more than a lazy one.

The answer to the question depends entirely on the job. Many jobs do pay more for working harder, many do not. But, in the end, the pay is pretty much whatever somebody is willing to put out for getting the job done.

Who works harder for their money; the $5000 a night prostitute or the $100 a trick one?

Couldn't tell you. I never had a $5000/night prostitute . But it's a pretty sure bet both are getting the maximum the market will pay for their services.

Good example: A hot looking ho charges a $1k a trick due to her natural looks, an ugly one charges $100 a trick. A lot of it has to do with the ability to market oneself, but that isn't a component of hard work, that's a component of intelligence.

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

Can somebody explain to me why it's in the interest of the average American to even consider extending the tax cuts to the wealthy?

Quade.... care for a common sense answer?

I'd love to hear one. Generally speaking what makes the most "common sense" to me though is when you have bills due at the first of the month, you pay them.

If there's more than one person in your home, generally speaking all the money goes into a joint checking account and the person that earned the most does end up paying the most percentage wise.

Let's say you have a kid in school, but he doesn't work. You probably don't starve him just because he's not putting money in the bank.

However, once the kid gets a job, you might start having him pay "rent" to help contribute to the bills. Ok, it's not as much as the breadwinner of the house pays in. It's not an equal share, but it's something. The person making the most money is still going to end up paying the most because he's the only one with enough money to make the whole thing work in the kind of house everybody wants to live in.

Grandma lives with you. She may putter around the house, but really can't work anymore. Nor should she have to. She did, after all put in work raising you. I doubt you're going to deny her a trip to the doctor or meals just because she isn't working now.

Quote

No one should be taxed as high as they are taxed... if government was responsible, the amount of tax dollars necessary to support federal, state and local governments would easily be cut in half.

I think you've wildly overestimated what could possibly be cut.

Either that or you are perhaps the smartest man in the US and should immediately lay out your plan to the Republican Party, because I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggesting cuts that deep and they really, REALLY need an actual plan rather than just saying they have one.

I'm curious, how would you do it?

Here, use this article for reference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget

What are you seeing that we could cut 50%?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[dmcoco84 4]

Sigh... you make me sick dude. Seriously!

How about this... after you give me a definition of progressivism, and you explain why you have the tread on me rattlesnake under your name... a question you continue to avoid... I'll be glad to answer your question.

Though I will be posting about the "religion of America," first.

[quade 3]

Quote

. . . and you explain why you have the tread on me rattlesnake under your name... a question you continue to avoid...

I'm sorry, had you previously asked that question and I didn't answer it? Sorry if that's the case. No, I've NEVER avoided the question. NEVER.

I happen to have the rattlesnake from the Gadsden Flag as my avatar here for a completely different reason than the Tea Party. I've used it as such for about six years now -- WELL before the Tea Party was ever thought of.

When I first started using it, most people thought it was either;
1) A generic rattlesnake you'd get for a tattoo.
2) Me trying to look like a badass.
3) Me identifying too much with the Death Eaters from Harry Potter.

However, only one or two individuals on the entire web site ever connected it to the Gadsden Flag.

For the record, I was looking for a character name for a game. I kind of liked the idea of it being somebody from the Revolutionary War. The fact Gadsden also had a cool looking symbol was, in my mind a bonus, so I decided to use it generically on the web several places, this being one of them.

It DISGUSTS ME, that the Tea Party has co-opted the Gadsden Flag. He had NOTHING to do with their cause.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

A Denny's waitress works harder and makes a fraction of what an upscale watress would earn.

Not at any Denny's I've been to.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Because that's NOT what we're saying.

At this point it's almost like an Abbott and Costello routine.

...

You think you know what we're saying, but your understanding of it is wildly different than what is actually being said.

Indeed, since you squirm like a pig in mud, and refuse to clarify. So I'll simplify - you're wrong. Effort has reward. Being lazy (iow, lack of effort) does not.

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

A Denny's waitress works harder and makes a fraction of what an upscale watress would earn.

Not at any Denny's I've been to.

Go to Joes Stone Crab in Miami Beach and see what a waiter/waitress makes there.

Go to a high end strip club and see waht the waitresses make.

The "value of the work" is not what we are talking about. It is what you have spun this into.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

No, but she will make more than a lazy one.

The answer to the question depends entirely on the job. Many jobs do pay more for working harder, many do not. But, in the end, the pay is pretty much whatever somebody is willing to put out for getting the job done.

Who works harder for their money; the $5000 a night prostitute or the $100 a trick one?

Who worked harder in the past to get where they are?

Who knows? I sure don't.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Sigh... you make me sick dude. Seriously!

How about this... after you give me a definition of progressivism, and you explain why you have the tread on me rattlesnake under your name... a question you continue to avoid... I'll be glad to answer your question.

Though I will be posting about the "religion of America," first.

Now there's a sunstantive issue; let's ditch this question and focus on what's really important.

Hey, here's another one: show me a major federal tax cut that has turned into benefit for the economy. IOW's, maj fed tax cut, now the debt is lower or at least the deficit substantially lowers, unemp drops, etc, w/o other major indexes raising. Just a general question, show me a maj fed tax cut where we can then say, 'That's the good it did w/o creating havoc elsewhere.'

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

A Denny's waitress works harder and makes a fraction of what an upscale watress would earn.

Not at any Denny's I've been to.

But your work-for-pay relationship fails, even if they work as hard as the upscale waitress, the latter gets way more, so there is no direct relationship between the two.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Because that's NOT what we're saying.

At this point it's almost like an Abbott and Costello routine.

...

You think you know what we're saying, but your understanding of it is wildly different than what is actually being said.

Indeed, since you squirm like a pig in mud, and refuse to clarify. So I'll simplify - you're wrong. Effort has reward. Being lazy (iow, lack of effort) does not.

Look at all the rich kids that fuck shit up and get richer as they do, GWB is a great example. :ettuce pickers really can't get more by working harder, very minimal.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

A Denny's waitress works harder and makes a fraction of what an upscale watress would earn.

Not at any Denny's I've been to.

Go to Joes Stone Crab in Miami Beach and see what a waiter/waitress makes there.

Go to a high end strip club and see waht the waitresses make.

The "value of the work" is not what we are talking about. It is what you have spun this into.

Genius, you created the twist of inputting titty dancer clubs to a crab restaurant, I was trying to only have 1 independent variable, you wanted more making it no longer scentific.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

No, but she will make more than a lazy one.

The answer to the question depends entirely on the job. Many jobs do pay more for working harder, many do not. But, in the end, the pay is pretty much whatever somebody is willing to put out for getting the job done.

Who works harder for their money; the $5000 a night prostitute or the $100 a trick one?

Who worked harder in the past to get where they are?

Who knows? I sure don't.

Is it harder to be an outcall girl than a street-walker? Not sure there is such a great question, I imagine circumstance that got them there is the difference and ability to organize a call center, etc. That's why a lot of streetwalkers turned to Craigslist, now that that has been done with, they are probably back on the streets.

You guys are confusing hard work with organization, some just don't have the intellect to do the latter, that isn't a matter of hard work.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

and it takes more work to become a petroleum engineer than to become a waitress

Very, very good point

Well done!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

No, but she will make more than a lazy one.

The answer to the question depends entirely on the job. Many jobs do pay more for working harder, many do not. But, in the end, the pay is pretty much whatever somebody is willing to put out for getting the job done.

A Denny's waitress works harder and makes a fraction of what an upscale watress would earn. There is no definite repeatable correlation between how hard a person works and their pay.

If you truely believe this, then I understand your employment problems

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Tell a good waitress that

She'll agree. Even excellent waitresses don't make $250K a year.

No, but she will make more than a lazy one.

The answer to the question depends entirely on the job. Many jobs do pay more for working harder, many do not. But, in the end, the pay is pretty much whatever somebody is willing to put out for getting the job done.

A Denny's waitress works harder and makes a fraction of what an upscale watress would earn. There is no definite repeatable correlation between how hard a person works and their pay.

If you truely believe this, then I understand your employment problems

Ah, I see, more understanding me than addressing the point; you're so predictable. BTW, I don't have employment probs, not sure where you drempt that up. Perhaps you can enlighten us.