not only that the high payment could be considered "Hazard pay" due to the very fact garbage harbors some of the most vile diseases not only that improperly disposed needles could stick someone and they could contract HIV as an example
The more risk, the more hazardous, the higher pay usually.
It's always funny when people on the other side unravel the mystery of why certain jobs pay higher than others despite requiring the same or similar skill set. But yes, I believe I've covered that under "injury and disease risk".
Bullshit. First off they don't have to pay you what your worth, and again, I highly doubt that a walmart employee is worth 12.50 an hour for front end. It would be significantly more. Also you have a gun to your head because if you don't have money, you don't eat, you don't have a home.
Umm, excuse me sir. WHAT METRIC? Did you just pull it out of your ass?
By "centralized communism" I'll assume you're talking about the USSR here. Yes, they had a centralized economy, and the inflexibilities of it led to their eventual downfall. However, you have to consider their conditions and why they originally had a centrally planned economy. This was a country that went from a rural agrarian society to a world superpower in less than a century. Also, "centralization" is not exclusive to communism. If you really wanted to, you could have centralized versions of other economic systems like capitalism. Statism, "centralization", etc. are all separate from economic systems. They are modifiers, not inherent.
yeah... and anarchist communists exist.
Corruption is, and always has been, a huge problem in communist and post-communist societies. Communist administrations are objectively some of the most corrupt, by any metric, for the reasons listed above and more.
I am familiar with how the U.S.S.R. grew to be a superpower in such a short time frame - by way of annexation and exploitation of its immediate neighbours, including Poland, my home. It's also fairly easy to feed a growing population if you systematically murder large swathes of it, as was the case in Ukraine.
...person?
And a communist? That's an oxymoron.You're right - they're worth less. Amazon has even made huge strides in operating stores with *no* front of house staff, only warehouse workers, which too can be replaced by machinery in many cases. Their contribution is just not that valuable, and there's an ample amount of people looking for jobs in retail. If you feel unsatisfied with your wage, there are 10 other people with the same skill set available. The pandemic is a special circumstance because the government is actively disincentivising returning to work, so there's a bit of a labour crunch. For now.
Exactly the owner wants more money and the worker wants more money.
You do realize that capitalist country's are also corrupt. That's not exactly exclusive to communism.
You wanted a metric, I gave you a metric. If you think that Cuba, North Korea and China don't have a corruption problem then we can stop the conversation right here - you're from another planet. That kind of claim is ridiculous, ask any Chinese immigrant how things work back at home.
I'm not saying that, that those countries are not corrupt, they definitely are.
as for the metric, you claimed it as objective. I'd argue it's subjective given the skewed backing. If exon and other companies were not involved, my stance on this would be different.
Define the term "corruption". For the record, Transparency International's ranking is a widely-quoted resource in terms of measuring the levels of corruption globally - if it's good enough for the media, it's good enough for me.
It is a widely-used, mainstream, accepted source, and an objective metric. Even Wikipedia considers it accurate. Your opinion in this case isn't really a major concern to me, you not liking a mainstream source is immaterial. If you have an objection, provide evidence that disproves my statement. I already backed up mine with numbers, you just don't like the numbers.
Strong correlation, according to science. Go argue with scientists, not me.
So... your going to assume the media is perfectly fine? That's... odd. Also further more, i already explained why it isn't good enough. It's a conflict of interest. A capitalist media is just as much going to be focused on keeping the interest of capitalism.
Which... one side was bolshevik in favor of communism... and the other was in favor of capitalism (amongst a few different government systems)
Yeah and? I'm not faulting the USSR collapse on the United States. That isn't what I'm getting at.
I've answered the question of index validity above. University researchers have no conflict of interests here, the entire index is commissioned. It's also extensively peer-reviewed and strongly correlates with other corruption indicators. It is a reliable source, whether you like it or not.
You said that the U.S. invaded the U.S.S.R. - that's not accurate. It was an allied effort. The U.S. was primarily interested in protecting the Trans-siberian railway from sabotage by insurgents. Those were not large-scale "regime change" operations. You're trying to slip in an "Iraq War-style" invasion where there wasn't one.
You actually might be from another planet. Here's the definition of the word "corruption", so we can talk about the same thing without hippie dippie hyperbolic terminology.
Almost nobody in America is paid even half of the value that their work generates for the company. That's how corporations continue to post record profits year over year, they're eating into employees' wages by lobbying to keep them stagnant. $7.25 an hour was a poverty wage in most parts of the country ten years ago, let alone today.
Are there any real communist countries left? We already talked about China adopting capitalism, and how America fucked with every country that democratically elected a socialist or communist leader in the last century or so. The only conclusion a critical mind can reach is that the US government doesn't want us seeing what it looks like when they operate without interference. Some people might start catching on to the fact that a trickle-up economy is a total scam.
Odds are you aren't gonna find any employees for less than $15 an hour these days regardless, as evidenced by the fast food worker "shortage." Why bother working forty hours a week if it's still not enough to buy the necessities and you're just gonna end up on food stamps anyway? The "market" failed us as Americans before, during, and after the pandemic. By flexing our labor muscles we can bend it to our will.
To each their own I suppose. Anecdotally I've seen dozens of fast food places short on staff, and no openings for garbage men in my area. Safety-wise it doesn't sound much worse than when I worked at Lowe's, so a good pair of thick work gloves will take care of you. And as I said before, I think the pace of the work is a lot more attractive. Any fast food/retail job will have you doing ten things at once while also dealing with (often disgruntled) customers. In waste disposal you've got one guy driving and one guy that throws shit in the back of the truck. Very singular in its focus.
Only 2% of all Americans earn minimum wage, out of that subset around 50% are under-25's with no experience, teens or part-timers working on the side as they study. Regarding how much they should be earning, in many cases they are overpaid, not underpaid, for their contribution.
I've never seen a Reverse No True Scotsman before. Normally you guys say that real communism hasn't been tried yet, now you're telling me that it was tried, but doesn't exist anymore. I'm confused.
That sounds like the market self-correcting. If you can't find workers at a certain level of remuneration, you raise the level of renumeration until you do, or look for alternatives. Sounds like you just accidentally discovered supply and demand, and then complained about it.
Anecdotally. A quick Google search indicates that there are plenty of openings, should any of you decide on a career change.
I'm not talking strictly about minimum wage, I'm saying nearly everybody is underpaid relative to the value they're generating for the company. Save for the few people on top who do no work at all, anyway.
Which means you're a part of the problem because you believe taxpayers should have to subsidize corporate wages to an even greater extent than they already are.
It's a little bit of both. Communism has undeniably existed in certain forms throughout history, though never in the form I would've preferred. And being tried out for a month before a military coup is staged by the CIA is just about as good as never having been tried at all.
The market did not self-correct, fast food workers walked out on the job en masse and forced it to correct with external pressure. At least in some places. In others they're still stuck with a worker shortage because boomers refuse to budge on the slave wages.
If by that you mean strategy games, then yeah I dabble. Was way more into RTS during Blizzard's prime though.
