Stupid World

[bogan]

Of course they do. They spend virtually everything they get back into the economy allowing the customers of customers of customers of customers to provide income for people in a supply chain that ends up in some weird corner at your place whether you like it or not. It's not rocket science dude, just basic economics.

Wish? You said vote. Anyhoo... praps the "productive sector" should pay a wage making it worthwhile for the lazy to get off their arse and contribute in a manner that you would consider conducive to productivity? Obviously that's rhetorical, coz the govt got you guys covered - Living Wage > Adult Minimum Wage > Starting-Out Minimum Wage > Training Minimum Wage.

The concept of 'net income' is pretty basic economics too, perhaps you should apply it.

[mashman]

The concept of 'net income' is pretty basic economics too, perhaps you should apply it.

Are you saying that the "pay a wage making it worthwhile" has nothing to do with net income?

[bogan]

Are you saying that the "pay a wage making it worthwhile" has nothing to do with net income?

No, I'm saying net income would include taxes taken to give lazy fuckers money, as well as the money the lazy fuckers pay you with that money; so there is clearly no net return on the work input.

The wage making it worthwhile is of course, a relative one.

[Ocean1]

Are you saying that the "pay a wage making it worthwhile" has nothing to do with net income?

Here's the thing, dude: it's the guy buying the employees services that gets to decide what those services are worth. If you don't think that's right then a) tough shit, and b) I have a hammer here you should pay $375000.00 for.

Oh, and lazy cunts contributing their dole "earnings" to the greater good? I'm pretty sure not paying them in the first place produces better results.

[mashman]

No, I'm saying net income would include taxes taken to give lazy fuckers money, as well as the money the lazy fuckers pay you with that money; so there is clearly no net return on the work input.

The wage making it worthwhile is of course, a relative one.

Why didn't you say that in the first place instead of assuming that it hasn't been taken into consid............. yeah, it has been a while. NOW I remember where I Am.

Here's the thing, dude: it's the guy buying the employees services that gets to decide what those services are worth. If you don't think that's right then a) tough shit, and b) I have a hammer here you should pay $375000.00 for.

Oh, and lazy cunts contributing their dole "earnings" to the greater good? I'm pretty sure not paying them in the first place produces better results.

Yeah I know. The same people that pay so so much that employees have to wear the stigma of being a negative net tax contributor. If you don't think that's right then a) tough shit, and b) I have a hammer here you can have for free, coz I'm not a cunt.

I'm pretty sure that people are given that money to stop them from finding other creative ways of getting what they want, ways that aren't exactly business friendly practice. So yeah, nah... I doubt the results would be anywhere near as business friendly as they currently are.

[mashman]

A smarter society would have harvested it.

[pritch]

Heres a quick poll , Question ; What do you think of the current crop of MPs ?

Saw a discussion this morning about the standard of British MPs. The consensus (if anything on the 'Net can ever be described as such) was that the current British Parliament is of the lowest standard in living memory. There is still nobody in either party who understands the first thing about what brexit will involve. They are still continually surprised by things they should have known. The extent of their ignorance is astounding; even if, like me, you don't actually expect much from politicians.

If you then look across the Atlantic the situation is even worse. The Republicans are motivated entirely by their own narrow self interest. The Democrats have learned nothing from their recent and ongoing defeats, and the whole thing is lead by some white supremacists and a guy who seemingly spends all day watching his favourite TV programmes between rounds of golf.

God forbid that we have an international crisis of some sort.

[pritch]

They contribute fuck all to anyone's income, including their own.

The fastest way to boost an economy is to increase welfare payments. The bennies need to spend all their income, so any increase goes into the economy with immediate effect. Giving the top 10% a tax reduction on the other hand just means most of the cash goes to various tax shelters and has no appreciable effect on the economy.

'Right thinking people' may not like that but it is true.

[Akzle]

Here's the thing, dude: it's the guy buying the employees services that gets to decide what those services are worth. If you don't think that's right then a) tough shit, and b) I have a hammer here you should pay $375000.00 for.

Oh, and lazy cunts contributing their dole "earnings" to the greater good? I'm pretty sure not paying them in the first place produces better results.

yeah right so uhh. how is "the world" going to pay back "the debt" which is three times m0ar than it has??

don't worry i'll wait.

[Ocean1]

Yeah I know. The same people that pay so so much that employees have to wear the stigma of being a negative net tax contributor. If you don't think that's right then a) tough shit, and b) I have a hammer here you can have for free, coz I'm not a cunt.

I'm pretty sure that people are given that money to stop them from finding other creative ways of getting what they want, ways that aren't exactly business friendly practice. So yeah, nah... I doubt the results would be anywhere near as business friendly as they currently are.

That's easy fixed. Stop using taxpayers money for paying them to do fuck all. And I already have a hammer, I'm selling it and according to you I get to set the price. Pay up.

We pay them for doing fuck all so they don't steal it anyway? Tell me, dude, how many of them receive both types of stolen goods in any given year? Court records will tell you.

[Brian d marge]

yeah right so uhh. how is "the world" going to pay back "the debt" which is three times m0ar than it has??

don't worry i'll wait.

Big boom boom

Sent from my BGO-DL09 using Tapatalk

[bogan]

Why didn't you say that in the first place instead of assuming that it hasn't been taken into consid.............

It clearly had not been as your post said they contributed by spending the money back into the economy; taking net income into account means they contribute nothing, a direct contradiction of what you wrote. But I spose now it's time for you to put the responsibility of misunderstanding solely on the reader again? I think there is a picture for that somewhere...

[bogan]

The fastest way to boost an economy is to increase welfare payments. The bennies need to spend all their income, so any increase goes into the economy with immediate effect. Giving the top 10% a tax reduction on the other hand just means most of the cash goes to various tax shelters and has no appreciable effect on the economy.

'Right thinking people' may not like that but it is true.

Seems like a short term gain though. Bennies buying stuff from the people who gave them the money through tax is essentially (in an economic sense) the same as just setting a portion of your production on fire, not real efficient. Perhaps just burn the bennies instead, and knock off an hour early

[mashman]

That's easy fixed. Stop using taxpayers money for paying them to do fuck all. And I already have a hammer, I'm selling it and according to you I get to set the price. Pay up.

We pay them for doing fuck all so they don't steal it anyway? Tell me, dude, how many of them receive both types of stolen goods in any given year? Court records will tell you.

Why would I buy a hammer given that I'm willing to give another one away from free? You can indeed set the price, coz, as a customer, if I walked into a store and took what I wanted for free, coz that's the way I roll, the person who doesn't set the price, according to you, will have me thrown in jail for not paying the price they had set.

Does that include tax evasion... which obviously has many more proponents.

It clearly had not been as your post said they contributed by spending the money back into the economy; taking net income into account means they contribute nothing, a direct contradiction of what you wrote. But I spose now it's time for you to put the responsibility of misunderstanding solely on the reader again? I think there is a picture for that somewhere...

Yet they contribute more than if they had saved the money and spent none of it, or indeed spent it all on black market goods.

[Ocean1]

The fastest way to boost an economy is to increase welfare payments. The bennies need to spend all their income, so any increase goes into the economy with immediate effect. Giving the top 10% a tax reduction on the other hand just means most of the cash goes to various tax shelters and has no appreciable effect on the economy.

'Right thinking people' may not like that but it is true.

Probably correct. Briefly. Although the owners of that money would probably rather spend it their way. And I'm not sure boosting KFC and Macas bottom line is really helping the economy much.