It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: beezzer
Don't they have fully stocked underground shelters just waiting for the collapse they had such a role in creating?
That means the average McDonald's employee would have to work for 3.86 months straight at an overtime wage -- or 1.5 times her regular hourly pay -- to match what Skinner made in an hour, according to NerdWallet.
originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: beezzer
This isn't as simple as hating the wealthy beezer and you know it.
originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask
It's equally hypocritical to have an exponential increase in executive salaries while the labor force languishes on welfare and prices skyrocket...but then blame labor for the increase.
My own employer of 15 years promised to grandfather in benefits - twice. Each time they reneged. And no one except managers or above is full time. Store square footage and inventory decreased. Product quality declined. But executive pay increased...
It's ridiculous for anyone not to acknowledge that something is inherently broken here.
originally posted by: corvuscorrax
a reply to: onequestion
Meh, we can all assume that beezzer hates the poor based on the posts he makes.
I see assumptions made out of peoples posts ALL the time on this site it's kinda sad really.
originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: beezzer
So thinking that corporations that massively benefit from the system, forcing them to pay a livable wage is hating?
originally posted by: caterpillage
originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
Or maybe the upper management and multimillionaire CEOs can take a smallish pay cut, and let their workers earn a slightly more livable wage.
That's a little bit of a misconception however well intentioned. If you took the ceo's entire salary per year of 8.7 million and made him work for absolutely nothing, then distributed it among the 1.7 million employees it would give them a pay raise of $5.11 a year. Not an hour. Per year. Won't lift them out of poverty.
Based on a 30 hour work week this would give them 1/3 of one cent an hour pay raise.
originally posted by: Stormdancer777
a reply to: roadgravel
It's not that easy, maybe everything must collapse to get this straightened out, I don't know how this can be fixed.