Meet the table busser who's worked at the same pancake house for 54 years, and still makes minimum w
- Thread starter dherd
- Start date
Article states he makes $14/hr including tips. Not bad for washing dishes. He chose to stay there for 56 years. He said himself he didn’t want the headache of more responsibility.
Now do I think after 50+ years he should be making more absolutely but claiming he makes min wage is false
Now do I think after 50+ years he should be making more absolutely but claiming he makes min wage is false
After around 30 years I'd have figured out that I wasn't going to make more than minimum wage and found another job. I'm just quick catching on I guess.
So this guy is the posterchild for Socialism? Otheo do same job for 54 years. Othea is a victim of a capitalistic society. Othea didn't seek advancement or different job. Othea = reason we need to elect Democratic Socialists. Othea is why we need bigger government. By stealing and confiscating more money from priveledged people, running those dollars through an inflated government that keeps over 80% of each dollar, then giving Othea some "scraps", we can become a greater America. Now that is a dream! What a great theory. Has this ever worked anywhere in the world? (this is the part where the liberals can't accept basic economic facts) .......
This is the perfect example of why socialism will never work. People, by nature, have highly diverse goals and aspirations. Some people are more than willing to fight the pressure and stress and work long hours to be successful. Others just want to do the minimum to pay rent and be able to eat.
This is why the world should focus on equality of opportunity and pay no attention to equality of outcome.
This is why the world should focus on equality of opportunity and pay no attention to equality of outcome.
Back when America was "great" - the wealthy were taxed up to 70%. CEOs didn't earn hundreds-of-millions-of dollars. In fact, since 1950, CEO to worker pay ratio is up 1000%. Also, unions provided pensions and healthcare...in the 50s, 35% of the workforce was unionized....today it's 6.5%. And who's to blame for union demise is not my point....the point is there are no pensions for today's workforce.
To make matters worse, republican politicians refer to Social Security as a "entitlement"....even Sasse, who I believe has some sense. In a way he's right. After a lifetime of working sending money to DC that was supposed to be returned for retirement....you're damned right folks believe they're entitled to it.
And we've seen the data about how much of the country's wealth is owned by the top 1% - Wealth has been transferred from the lower and middle class to the wealthy at an alarming rate since the time America was Great....when we had incredible programs for infrastructure.
Now, we want to argue about providing some poor schlep attempting to get through life a living minimum wage, while, at the same time, stating we need more tax cuts for the rich. That's more stupid, more unsustainable than socialism.
To make matters worse, republican politicians refer to Social Security as a "entitlement"....even Sasse, who I believe has some sense. In a way he's right. After a lifetime of working sending money to DC that was supposed to be returned for retirement....you're damned right folks believe they're entitled to it.
And we've seen the data about how much of the country's wealth is owned by the top 1% - Wealth has been transferred from the lower and middle class to the wealthy at an alarming rate since the time America was Great....when we had incredible programs for infrastructure.
Now, we want to argue about providing some poor schlep attempting to get through life a living minimum wage, while, at the same time, stating we need more tax cuts for the rich. That's more stupid, more unsustainable than socialism.
Last edited:
Both Banker and Chevy makes good points. The answer as usual doesn’t lie on the extremes, but somewhere in the middle. Unfortunately, we’ve reached this time in history where only “ its noisiest authorities” (excuse my Dickens reference) are all that’s being heard. All the noise is coming from the extremes of viewpoints from unflinching holders of ideology that view any entertainment of rational thinking as a concession. To believe this man is a victim of a society completely bereft of opportunity for betterment should he had pursued it is dishonest. But to believe the constructs of society doesn’t discriminate in favor of those born into wealth and opportunity is dishonest as well. So I find myself nodding approval of both Banker and Chevy as I read this thread.
Since Pullman is all Trump all the time, I’ll bring it back to that. He is not the cause of this polarity in ideology that lands both sides out on the extremes, but he’s certainly a symptom of it. The socialist need to realize that opportunity is built on the backs of capitalism and the far right need to realize that within the structure of capitalism are unequal opportunity that can’t all be explained away by believing that everyone can be successful if only they worked harder. Both schools of thought are intellectually dishonest.
But both sides will disagree. It doesn’t fit lockstep in their unflinching held positions.
Since Pullman is all Trump all the time, I’ll bring it back to that. He is not the cause of this polarity in ideology that lands both sides out on the extremes, but he’s certainly a symptom of it. The socialist need to realize that opportunity is built on the backs of capitalism and the far right need to realize that within the structure of capitalism are unequal opportunity that can’t all be explained away by believing that everyone can be successful if only they worked harder. Both schools of thought are intellectually dishonest.
But both sides will disagree. It doesn’t fit lockstep in their unflinching held positions.
“Socialism,” as Democrats see it, isn’t possible without the wealth that capitalism creates. There is no money to be redistributed in socialist countries. Democrats want it both ways. They want the wealth that capitalism creates so they can make rich people villains and simultaneously take their money and give it to other people. Well...in true socialist countries, there are very few, if any, rich people to rob.
The only “transfer” of wealth is when the government takes it from one person and redistributes it to others. It is not a transfer when certain people earn more money than others. In order to buy into that premise, you must believe that Warren Buffet’s money once belonged to someone else and that simply isn’t true.
As far as pensions are concerned, I happen to work for a company that provides one. We are non-union and it’s completely funded and my company believes strongly in offering it as a benefit of working there. But it’s also expensive. Not every company can afford to offer one, and when unions demand it (especially public unions), it’s a recipe for economic disaster.
Last edited:
Does he really have no ambition? He bought a house. He raised a family. He has enough money to retire. That's a hell of a lot more than the usual no-ambition crowd.
Sounds like he found his place in this world.
Sounds like he found his place in this world.
I would actually consider this man "successful".
