Herman Cain: It's Your Fault if You're Unemployed

[Coito ergo sum]

Cain said, “The people who spend more money on new goods. The sales tax only applies to people who buy new goods, not used goods. That’s a big difference that doesn’t come out.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/16/herma ... z1b2hi1FB5

So as long as the poor and middle class just shop at thrift stores and garage sales

Well, if the sales tax applies to automobiles, yachts, and more importantly, business equipment purchases for stuff for use in the day-to-day operations of businesses, then there will be a lot of revenue generated from the wealthy. The more expensive your car, the more tax you pay. Want to buy a boat, pay a hefty tax based on the price of the boat. Want to buy a new computer system for the business - pay a tax.

If they exclude food, gasoline and automobiles that cost under, say $15,000 from the sales tax, then the "poor" will be largely protected from the effects of the sales tax.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Cain said, “The people who spend more money on new goods. The sales tax only applies to people who buy new goods, not used goods. That’s a big difference that doesn’t come out.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/16/herma ... z1b2hi1FB5

So as long as the poor and middle class just shop at thrift stores and garage sales

They could always steal from the rich.

That still might count as taxable income.

So don't declare it. Or use the same loop hole the rich do, "Ill-gotten Gains Exception".

[Coito ergo sum]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Moza2LpI ... re=related[/youtube]

[Seth]

Well, here's the thing about capitalism, if you're in the "not rich" class, nothing keeps you there but your own inadequacies and fears. You can improvise, adapt, overcome and join the "rich" class any time you want.

Seriously, you might as well tell someone in a wheelchair to get up and walk.

If you're an incompetent putz, you're doomed to the lifestyle of incompetent putzes unless you can overcome your incompetence. That's just how it is. Nobody else owes you any other lifestyle, and you certainly have no right to take from others to provide the lifestyle to which you'd like to become accustomed. Might suck to be you, but that's what you get for being an incompetent, selfish, inadequate putz.

So, change your life or resign yourself to it.

Incompetent putz? Is this a personal attack on those who've already stated they have ability issues wrt finding work? Looks like it to me.

Are you an incompetent putz? If the shoe fits, wear it. If not, then it doesn't apply to you. There are a lot of incompetent putzes in the world who rise to their level of incompetence in the business world and spend their lives there because of their own inadequacies.

You really are not opining here from an understanding of living in the real world, Seth. Here's a gratuitous observation from me: Deluded, arrogant cunts don't get this.

There's only one world, and it's filled with people who are suited only to be employees working on factory lines and flipping burgers and digging ditches. All of those occupations are needed and there's nothing wrong with working at a middle-class job, and there's nothing wrong with picking onions or cleaning toilets. But those occupations, while needed, are not skilled labor that is deserving of high wages and benefits. It's menial labor and literally anyone can do it, which means there is a large pool of unskilled laborers who are competing with one another for the jobs. Like any free market, where there is a surplus of the commodity, the price per unit goes down.

If you, as an employee, want to be worth more, you need to make your skill set more scarce and of greater value to an employer, who will then be willing to pay a premium price to have you work for him.

But if your nature, education, training and skills are deficient, then the only way you are deserving of higher wages is if you improve them through hard work.

If you don't want to put the effort into improving your skill set, then you are doomed to the life of an unskilled laborer, and you have no one to blame but yourself. So when such people bitch and complain about not getting paid enough, and when they argue that they should get paid more money and have better benefits even though they are unwilling to do the work required to be worthy of it, that makes them incompetent putzes who are trying to use the force of government to steal what they want from the productive, hard-working people of the country, and that's wrong.

If the shoe fits, wear it.

[Seth]

Workers need a counterweight to rapacious employers.

It's called a union...

From what I gather, US unions have become complete wusses. Not so in Oz...

In the US, the unions have become corrupt, and instead of working with the employer to create an acceptable wage and benefits structure that serves the needs of the workers while being affordable for the employer, they are stealing member's money and are using it to aggregate power to themselves and to fund the political aspirations of leftist candidates like Barack Obama (and pad their own paychecks). If unions would stick to negotiating wages and compensation, like they are supposed to do, they would be much more effective and more well-liked.

But, as long as there is a "buyer's market" in the labor force, employers will naturally hire the best qualified employees at the lowest possible price from among the competing workers, just as they should. This keeps the cost of labor, and therefore the cost of products and services low, which is what consumers want.

[Seth]

Not to mention there are some cheapskates who don't tip no matter what (or will give, for example, $20 on a $19.59 bill and say "keep the change" even for great service.)

And the next time they come in, they get shitty service. Them's the breaks.

And the server is short on gas money, or something else. And you don't know that the guilty parties will be back at all, or that they'll get the same server, and even if they do get the same server she has to carry a grudge and risk a complaint to management about her service. AND other people may note her poor service to the guilty party and get a bad impression of the restaurant as a whole from that.

In other words, you fail again, Seeth.

Not really. Bad or incompetent servers don't last long in the trade because they can't afford to be incompetent, rude or arrogant. Since they depend on tips as a large part of their wage, if they are consistently bad, they are quickly weeded out and replaced with competent, hard working servers. Sure, there are low-tippers and no-tippers, but servers know that they are in the minority, so they serve with a smile and they do their job and play the odds, and things average out in the long run. That's why the system endures.

My girlfriend is a server at a diner, and she takes home about $35,000 a year because she works hard and can serve 12 tables to most of the teen-age first-timer's 3 or 4.

So don't try to teach grandpa to suck eggs, because you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

[Feck]

Seth if you really honestly think that it's a meritocracy then you should ask a proctologist to give you help you remove 'The american dream ' from where it's stuck, not only are you making a lot of noise trying to blow it out but the smell is terrible .

[charlou]

Well, here's the thing about capitalism, if you're in the "not rich" class, nothing keeps you there but your own inadequacies and fears. You can improvise, adapt, overcome and join the "rich" class any time you want.

Seriously, you might as well tell someone in a wheelchair to get up and walk.

If you're an incompetent putz, you're doomed to the lifestyle of incompetent putzes unless you can overcome your incompetence. That's just how it is. Nobody else owes you any other lifestyle, and you certainly have no right to take from others to provide the lifestyle to which you'd like to become accustomed. Might suck to be you, but that's what you get for being an incompetent, selfish, inadequate putz.

So, change your life or resign yourself to it.

Incompetent putz? Is this a personal attack on those who've already stated they have ability issues wrt finding work? Looks like it to me.

Are you an incompetent putz? If the shoe fits, wear it. If not, then it doesn't apply to you. There are a lot of incompetent putzes in the world who rise to their level of incompetence in the business world and spend their lives there because of their own inadequacies.

You really are not opining here from an understanding of living in the real world, Seth. Here's a gratuitous observation from me: Deluded, arrogant cunts don't get this.

There's only one world, and it's filled with people who are suited only to be employees working on factory lines and flipping burgers and digging ditches. All of those occupations are needed and there's nothing wrong with working at a middle-class job, and there's nothing wrong with picking onions or cleaning toilets. But those occupations, while needed, are not skilled labor that is deserving of high wages and benefits. It's menial labor and literally anyone can do it, which means there is a large pool of unskilled laborers who are competing with one another for the jobs. Like any free market, where there is a surplus of the commodity, the price per unit goes down.

If you, as an employee, want to be worth more, you need to make your skill set more scarce and of greater value to an employer, who will then be willing to pay a premium price to have you work for him.

But if your nature, education, training and skills are deficient, then the only way you are deserving of higher wages is if you improve them through hard work.

If you don't want to put the effort into improving your skill set, then you are doomed to the life of an unskilled laborer, and you have no one to blame but yourself. So when such people bitch and complain about not getting paid enough, and when they argue that they should get paid more money and have better benefits even though they are unwilling to do the work required to be worthy of it, that makes them incompetent putzes who are trying to use the force of government to steal what they want from the productive, hard-working people of the country, and that's wrong.

If the shoe fits, wear it.

I'm not cinderella ... you don't get to bring me your fantasy shoe and make me try it on.

Labourers are more productive and harder working than self important cretins in their windowless rooms, whose biggest contribution to the economy is exploiting others.

[Seth]

I think if you put the matter up for a vote in the US, a referendum on tipping, and let those who wait tables and tend bar for tips in my State, Florida, and asked them if they would rather get $7.31 an hour minimum wage, or keep the same system we have now where they get tips, I would bet dollars to donuts that the present system would win by an overwhelming landslide.

Frankly, I've known myriad servers in my life, and they are a highly mobile bunch, and they never would continue working in a place where they can't make far more than minimum wage. They just won't do it - they go to some other, busier restaurant and blow away the minimum wage.

Absolutely they would. In no small part due to the fact that the IRS rules only actually capture about 18 percent of tips, and being a cash business, servers can take home much more in untaxed income than you average factory worker, where the government gets their taxes off the top before the employee ever sees the paycheck.

[MrJonno]

Is anyone thinks customer service skills determine how well a waitress does as opposed to how attractive that person is then they are sadly mistaken.

An attractive but unfriendly waitress will earn far more than any bloke regardless of charm

Anyway arent tips put into a pool and shared equally (including the cooks)?. Most restaurants I've been to do that?

[Coito ergo sum]

Labourers are more productive and harder working than self important cretins in their windowless rooms, whose biggest contribution to the economy is exploiting others.

This sentence is full of question-begging. The reality is, it depends on the person. Many laborers are not particularly hard working or productive, and many non-laborers are quite productive and quite hard working. All you've said here is "hard worker works hard" and "cretinous exploiter exploits."

I would suggest that whether one works "hard" or not is not the point. The point is whether it is worth it to Jane Doe pay Richard Roe $X. If it is, it is. And, Richard Roe may not have to work very hard to make it worth Jane's money. So be it - that just means that Richard's contribution is worth $X to Jane.

There is no inherent or objective "worth" of someone's labor. There is only a worth "to" someone else. Example: Let's say John Smith has an office in which he works. He doesn't entertain clients there, and he doesn't invite people in. All of his business with others is done outside of his office. Therefore, a cleaning person is only worth about $25 a week to him. Otherwise, he'll let the office go and just sort of straighten it up on his own. He doesn't want to waste the money, because the tidiness of his office doesn't mean much. Ramona Jones, however, has the same size office and she has meetings with potential customers in it every day, so she is in need of someone to keep the place much tidier and cleaner - she is willing to pay $50 a week for someone to clean the place. How "hard" a cleaning person works to clean the place up isn't all that much part of the equation for John and Ramona. It's just worth more to Ramona to have a tidy office than it is to John.

An pro athlete makes more than a teacher for similar reasons. An owner of sports team makes a ton of money by having athlete X on his team. A school doesn't make money off of a teacher, and teachers are more plentiful in the market than top-tier pro athletes. Thus, the laws of supply and demand come into play, and we are again seeing an example of "worth"only having meaning in relative terms. Hank Steinbrenner thinks a baseball player may be worth $10,000,000 a year to him. He wouldn't pay a dime for a teacher to work for him because he doesn't provide education services. The Smithfield Area School District will pay more for a physics teacher than baseball coach, because the physics teacher is worth more to them than the baseball coach. It doesn't matter who works harder. It matters what the person paying the money thinks the position is worth.

[Seth]

Seth if you really honestly think that it's a meritocracy then you should ask a proctologist to give you help you remove 'The american dream ' from where it's stuck, not only are you making a lot of noise trying to blow it out but the smell is terrible .

Since this is a communication being held on a digital network that does not include odor transmission, it can only be your own underwear that are stinking your mommy's basement up so badly. I suggest you change them, if you can get out of your lounge chair and make it to the bathroom without breaking your femur.

And even if it's not a perfect meritocracy, neither you nor any of the other leftists have bothered to explain why, exactly, an employer should be compelled to pay more than the market rate for an employee, much less addressed the many and devastating unintended consequences of socialist central government planning and control of an economy that always, without fail, ends up getting even more people killed and keeping even more people bound in generational poverty than capitalism does.

The best you can do...the best any socialist can do...is use Saul Alinsky smears and personal invective as a lame and ignorant (dare I say "stupid) attempt to deflect the debate away from the failings of socialistic central planning and the dependency culture.

Typical ignorant response to a well-reasoned argument by the dependent-class brain-dead left.

[Seth]

Is anyone thinks customer service skills determine how well a waitress does as opposed to how attractive that person is then they are sadly mistaken.

How would you know? I doubt you've ever waited tables or done more than eat Cheetos and drink soda in your mommy's basement.

An attractive but unfriendly waitress will earn far more than any bloke regardless of charm

Like I said, how would you know? Go have another Twinkie.

Anyway arent tips put into a pool and shared equally (including the cooks)?. Most restaurants I've been to do that?

Nope, not in the US, by and large. Nor should they be, because the customer is paying the server. The cooks and bussers get minimum wage (at least) because they don't work for tips. Only the servers work mostly for tips.

But in many restaurants servers are expected to "tip out" the cooks and bussers, usually about 3 or 4 percent of their collected tips. It's also good etiquette to do so, because if you (as a server) don't take care of the bussers and cooks, they can totally fuck your life up by (for example) bussing your tables last and screwing your orders up in subtle ways, like hammering out 10 orders all at the same time so you end up having to serve cold food. It's a very complex dance and the intrapersonal dynamics among the staff are quite important.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The reason Seeth never cites his sources for things like the "18%" above is because he makes this shit up as he goes along. Don't let him.

[charlou]

Really, when Seethe is on a roll I scroll.