CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Edmonton Oilers
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 5242
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:09 pm
 


OnTheIce wrote:
Just because their wage doesn't increase with inflation, doesn't make it a decrease.

Ummm... yeah it does. That's just the most basic of economics. The number might not actually go down, but in effect it does as purchasing power decreases.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 10717
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:31 pm
 


Unsound wrote:
OnTheIce wrote:
Just because their wage doesn't increase with inflation, doesn't make it a decrease.

Ummm... yeah it does. That's just the most basic of economics. The number might not actually go down, but in effect it does as purchasing power decreases.


But to sell a lack of wage increase as a "wage decrease" is disingenuous.

Call it a decrease in purchasing power or not 'keeping up with inflation' but then the union and it's workers will be reminded that this is the reality for a large amount of the working population and they're not immune.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2108
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:46 pm
 


OnTheIce wrote:
To be fair, you don't know what's going on at management level and if there's been any cuts or not.

I wouldn't call trying to negotiate a fair deal based on the current economic climate in our Province a 'tearing down'. It's negotiating with reality in mind and looking to work with a bunch of people who are likely the highest paid in their field.

The LCBO needs to be privatized.


The LCBO is an example, but I'm talking a generality.

---

Why does the LCBO need to be privatized? The "Beer Store" is private and it's not much different.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2108
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:50 pm
 


OnTheIce wrote:
Call it a decrease in purchasing power or not 'keeping up with inflation' but then the union and it's workers will be reminded that this is the reality for a large amount of the working population and they're not immune.


So, everybody has to feel the pain? Why don't we focus instead on everybody getting a better break vs. inflation?

Your comments always seem to be driving towards the lowest common denominator, like people shouldn't be able to aspire to more.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 10717
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:10 pm
 


Jonny_C wrote:
OnTheIce wrote:
Call it a decrease in purchasing power or not 'keeping up with inflation' but then the union and it's workers will be reminded that this is the reality for a large amount of the working population and they're not immune.


So, everybody has to feel the pain? Why don't we focus instead on everybody getting a better break vs. inflation?

Your comments always seem to be driving towards the lowest common denominator, like people shouldn't be able to aspire to more.


In regards to your comments about people aspiring to be more, it's quite the opposite, actually.

Aspiring to be more has little to do with the amount on your paycheck. You're not any more of a person or any better because you got a 2% raise this year. IMO, we don't want people aspiring to be working in low-skill jobs as a career. We want them to be starter or transition jobs and have it so people aspire to do more with themselves.

We want our kids to grow up saying "I want to be a doctor, nurse, police man, etc". We don't want our kids saying "I wanna pack bags at the liquor store".

When governments are in trouble financially, everyone should feel the pain that's employed by that government. LCBO workers aren't immune and shouldn't push forward without regard for the financial state of the Province. Be realistic, be fair...pushing ahead with a raise demand when your employer is running into the hole financially isn't the most realistic request.

If you were in the private sector and you went to your boss looking for a raise all while the company is drowning in debt with some departments doing better than others, you'd be laughed out of the office. Demands for a pay increase have to take into consideration everything besides your own personal needs.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20864
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:13 pm
 


I don't want my kid to want to be a doctor... I wouldn't wish anyone that kind of miserable university debt!


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2108
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:51 pm
 


OnTheIce wrote:
Aspiring to be more has little to do with the amount on your paycheck. You're not any more of a person or any better because you got a 2% raise this year. IMO, we don't want people aspiring to be working in low-skill jobs as a career. We want them to be starter or transition jobs and have it so people aspire to do more with themselves.


Your idealism does you credit, I guess.

But the size of your paycheque has a lot to do with aspiring. Aspiring to living a little more comfortably, or scraping by with a little more breathing room.

Not everyone can aspire to "moving up", no matter the ideal of the corporate boss who started in the stockroom.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 10717
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 9:39 am
 


Jonny_C wrote:
But the size of your paycheque has a lot to do with aspiring. Aspiring to living a little more comfortably, or scraping by with a little more breathing room.

Not everyone can aspire to "moving up", no matter the ideal of the corporate boss who started in the stockroom.


Perhaps it does to you, but it doesn't to me and I don't want my children to think like this either.

I'd rather follow the path to attain my goals rather than just take the path that pays me the most at that current time.

Everyone should aspire to move up. The ones that don't are the ones that frequently find themselves looking for work or end up in dead-end jobs bitching about their pay.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2108
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:19 am
 


It's good to aspire to better things, don't get me wrong. I did so in gaining and maintaining my career, and it's what I wish for my kids and grandkids.

But there are all kinds of good reasons why some people can't or don't want to aspire to a whole lot more than what they've got - whether age, situation, capability, whatever - and as long as they're good, reliable workers and their employer is making decent profits, they deserve a fair shake.

Your idea and mine of a fair shake probably differ, but so be it.

The proverbial garbage man or janitor is to me at least as deserving of respect as a stock broker or a lawyer.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 12434
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:26 am
 


Jonny_C wrote:
Why does the LCBO need to be privatized?

Because selling liquor isn't the purpose of government.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 42402
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:37 am
 


yet most legalization proponents seem to think the government should be selling pot


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2108
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:40 am
 


Lemmy wrote:
Jonny_C wrote:
Why does the LCBO need to be privatized?

Because selling liquor isn't the purpose of government.


True, but in Ontario the government-run LCBO has been around for a LONG time, and it makes money, so I can't see a pressing need to change it. Privatizing it isn't going to make booze any cheaper.

De-monopolization of beer sales so outlets other than the private corporation Beer Store can sell it, now that's something I could get behind.

{spelling edit}


Last edited by Jonny_C on Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:50 am, edited 2 times in total.

Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 12434
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:42 am
 


ShepherdsDog wrote:
yet most legalization proponents seem to think the government should be selling pot

Not me, and I'm not sure it's "most". I would suggest most pot users just want to be free to grow and possess their pot. We don't want the government involved at all. Pot should be treated exactly the same as tomatoes.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2108
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:52 am
 


Lemmy wrote:
Not me, and I'm not sure it's "most". I would suggest most pot users just want to be free to grow and possess their pot. We don't want the government involved at all. Pot should be treated exactly the same as tomatoes.


Well sure they do. :D

But you don't have to be a pot user to be a proponent of legalization. That's where SD's "most" might come in.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 42402
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:54 am
 


ummmm.... I wasn't aware that consuming any amount of tomatoes could impair your ability to safely operate a motor vehicle, unlike pot. Really could care less if someone grew a half dozen plants in their garden for personal use....just like I could care less if someone was making their own beer or wine


Last edited by ShepherdsDog on Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.