Poll of the Day > People that say that stimulus checks/UBI are bad shouldn't receive them

(+) Yeah! (+)

Why is Max Headroom shopping at Walmart?

Inflation only happens because companies are greedy.

The food is reasonably priced, ya mook.

you couldn't just willy nilly implement it while you still had millions of jobs that needed to be filled.

Once those jobs are filled or done by machines, that is a different story, but that is also a different decade cause we are not gonna be there before 2030 at this rate.

Before a UBI, make it so people can live on working a 24 hour work week at even basic/min wage jobs, by supplimenting them up to a base cost of living (in their area).

Problem is similar to what we are seeing right now, if you give most people alot of money, it'll boost inflation and make that money worth less (because everything will cost more). In theory UBI could work, but you would have to be really careful how it was implemented, and it would need to be balanced out with less and less actual jobs, you couldn't just willy nilly implement it while you still had millions of jobs that needed to be filled.

Currently we have a freakton of jobs that are not being filled. Admittingly alot of them suck (lol) but the solution for that is to make the pay for those jobs higher, not just have a UBI that makes people even less likely to do them. Once those jobs are filled or done by machines, that is a different story, but that is also a different decade cause we are not gonna be there before 2030 at this rate.

So something like a government suppliment for workers making less then x amount paid by through taxes from workers making over x amount (and the rich who sell homes, corporations that are currently dodging taxes etc), would make way more sense.

Before a UBI, make it so people can live on working a 24 hour work week at even basic/min wage jobs, by supplimenting them up to a base cost of living (in their area).

Before you say 50% of the nation doesn't need to work, how about making it so 90% of the nation doesn't need to work 40 hours a week. More time to enjoy your life, less stress, people will live longer. Families will have more time together, and people will still have motivation to work, get better jobs, learn skills etc.

A flat out UBI could be really bad and there are many ways to test things out first, and benefit everyone that doesn't take such a drastic step.

Yeah. Because if you gave people enough money to live off of without working, many would just continue to not work

Id be fine if automation never came

I dont think this is even possible Like at all Not anytime soon, at least

sure it's possible. Just stop giving benefits to companies that don't raise the salaries of their employees to a living wage at minimum. The normal people will thank you and vote for you everytime.

Walmart could probably afford to pay $50 per hour.

Before you say 50% of the nation doesn't need to work, how about making it so 90% of the nation doesn't need to work 40 hours a week. More time to enjoy your life, less stress, people will live longer. Families will have more time together, and people will still have motivation to work, get better jobs, learn skills etc.

Sounds nice, but not every company has the extra money to do it. Some companies make enough to pay people, and to keep the company running. Making it so you can pay all your employees not only more money for much less time would probably bankrupt most companies. Many companies already have full time employees working a 40 hours work week. Wolfy wants to cut that by 40%. Some people may have still been struggling on that, while some were ok. But he stills wants to them make about the same amount (or more) for 60% of the work. And because they are only working 60% of the time, that would also mean less people working when they need it. So, they would need to hire more people, paying them the insane wages/salaries, as well While it would be possible for some places, not everywhere can do that. Especially smaller places. Like many local places that hire outside the family

So, youre telling companies to cut their workers time by 40%, while also raising their salary/wage up enough so they are making the same amount or more for 40% less work, and paying more people because if the workers are only working 60% of their normal time, they need more people to cover those empty spaces

Even with UBI (in the testing areas), many people were still working because they only made a little that helped them, rather than enough to live off of. They also couldnt quit because it was a testing phase that would eventually stop...

Also, some people would just end up with two jobs since many are already use to the 40 hour work week (or would rather not be at home for that long), which would probably help with lowering the value of money since some people will be getting a ton

I think a huge part of the issue is that, while it's true smaller companies would be hurt immensely by having to pay more for a minimum wage (and it NEEDS to be taken into consideration), you also have these large, massive, mega-corps that make bonkers money yet treat their workers like complete garbage while paying them minimum wage. It's practically a meme at this point just how terrible amazon treats it's employees for example. Having worked there I quickly realized it was SUCH a garbage place that I'd rather be out on the streets eating sandwiches from the trash than working for them.

This is also a major reason why the anti-work movement exists in the first place. After all, you're working a positively MISERABLE job for minimum wage to barely afford living under the stairs like a modern version of Harry Potter minus the magic while bosses and CEO's own things you could never even dream of (like private boats).

Currently we have a freakton of jobs that are not being filled.

It's funny how everyone knows this, but nobody is questioning how we also somehow have record low unemployment. Strange . . . It's almost like someone's cooking the books or something.

Cooked books always burst into flames.

Yeah. Places like Target, Walmart, Amazon, and then like could afford it. Though, it would make things worse for the customers. Less people working, and probably open for less time. And shelves probably wont be fully stocked. Packages will probably take even longer to arrive. Especially if you cutting everyones hours nearly in half

Either way, I do think that the smaller businesses do need to be taken into consideration

I don't think it's even the wages, it's the treatment. I mean, when you have to deal with screeching customers and managers who won't stick up for you and, instead, will hang you out to dry... Or jobs where you get punished for not being able to stock 30 large-sized products in 10 minutes despite the ****ing drones constantly bringing you nothing but damned small-size storage bays... Yea. No wonder that minimum wage becomes unacceptable. Personally I theorize that if someone actually got a job they ENJOYED doing, the wage wouldn't actually matter all that much. Like, if you got someone who enjoyed woodworking a job building tables, so long as they got paid enough to cover expenses, they wouldn't really care HOW much they got paid. But instead we get a bunch of people stuck in meaningless service jobs where the only incentive to work is that, if they don't, the crippling debt that they're drowning in will only pile up MORE and they're unable to afford to live anymore.

Employees shouldn't have to deal with being understaffed to maximize profits. No more skeleton crews or people having to work multiple positions at once.

It's funny how everyone knows this, but nobody is questioning how we also somehow have record low unemployment. Strange . . . It's almost like someone's cooking the books or something.

30 hours a week * 18 an hour is 540 a week and a bit over $2200 a month.

I can't really work 40 hours anymore even if I could work from home. It just won't work at this point. I shouldn't have to (and I don't have to) but honestly NOBODY should have to work 40 hours unless they want to, at least if UBI even makes ANY sense at all. Right now there are WAY more jobs then people taking them, even if people don't want them or are choosing to be homeless instead of doing them. Therefore, sadly, we shouldn't even reduce the # of hours needed to work to get by, until all those jobs are filled.

I will say you should pay for the jobs people don't want to do, more than the jobs that people DO want. It's not easy working customer service, but it often pays minimum wage or near that. Waiters etc at least get tips and often get paid far more than skilled jobs (especially in my state), but someone working at a grocery store might only be getting 15-18$ an hour right now. They have to wear masks all day, and deal with customers who can often be unreasonable etc. It's often a high stress job that requires you to be on your feet the whole time etc.

Such jobs should pay more, period. Nobody should even need to do jobs like that for 40 hours, just to barely pay the bills, those are jobs that don't need someone to be there for consistency (IE doctors etc where you need someone to work on a project or a patient for long periods of time etc). IT's not going to hurt Safeway if they have a cashier only work 3 days a week and another one on the same schedule work 4 days. The customers will still be served just fine, but instead of someone being exhausted after working 40 hours in a week and being on their feet the whole time, they can work 3 days and still have enough to pay the bills.

There are enough people in this country who can work and do the jobs needed that we shouldn't need to work 40 hours.