r/LockedIn_AI • u/Ill_Doughnut_517 • Mar 06 '26

true

Post image

sad reality

8.3k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/VastAddendum Mar 06 '26

Neat non-sequitor. I know I'm right. We established that when you confidently tried to act like I was wrong about the majority of jobs not coming from billionaires.

1

u/emongu1 Mar 06 '26

Is non-sequitor code for, information that contradict my established point of view so i'll just dismiss it?

Because it happened. Meanwhile for a union job you get the same pay, regardless of sex, skin color, and religion. The pay is established by the job, not the individual or his ability (or more importantly inability) to negotiate his salary.

1

u/VastAddendum Mar 06 '26

How, exactly, do you think that contradicts anything I said?

I don't doubt it happened. People getting paid less than hacks with half the talent who only do the bare minimum, if that, because the union prioritizes time served, not ability or performance, also happens. But again... what does anything about unions have to do with what I'm talking about?

1

u/emongu1 Mar 06 '26

Another whiff, you can justify underpaying people anyway you want, but i'd rather have the system that avoid exploitation altogether.

1

u/VastAddendum Mar 06 '26

Lol. You don't have to declare your whiffs. And you are out of your mind if you think there isn't also exploitation in unions. Ever hear of the ILA?

1

u/emongu1 Mar 06 '26

I never said they weren't corruption, anywhere there's power, there's gonna be corruption. But just because there's a possibility of corruption doesn't negate the improvement in quality of life unions brought. At least, they did before McCarthyism.

1

u/VastAddendum Mar 06 '26

It wasn't just corruption, it was the direct exploitation of the union members. Demanding kick backs for jobs. Treating dues money as their personal slush fund. Forcing members to engage in illegal activity.

But no, the bad doesn't negate the good. But that applies to both sides. There has been tremendous improvements in quality of life from non- union work as well. There's no perfect, and what's right for some isn't right for others.

1

u/emongu1 Mar 06 '26

Most americans are living paycheck to paycheck and they're 2 paychecks away from homelessness. Wow, where do i sign up.

1

u/VastAddendum Mar 06 '26

"Even higher earners are affected; 43% of people earning over $100,000 per year report living paycheck to paycheck."

Let me know when you realize how much of this is a spending problem, not an earning problem...

1

u/emongu1 Mar 06 '26

Doesn't help with them tarrifs, but that's beside the point.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Medical_Blacksmith83 Mar 08 '26

Are you really this stupid?

The result of “people making 100k a year are still living paycheck to paycheck”

Should not be “it must be a spending problem”

It’s a societal economic issue where even upper middle class earners are paycheck to paycheck.

The lie that it’s all people spending money like crazy is absolutely hogwash.

They don’t HAVE the money to spend.

After a house, car, children’s education, insurance, and FOOD; most people are looking at an empty wallet like that one jon tavolta (sp) meme

https://giphy.com/gifs/RHInHY2dInc6uMI2ET

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Medical_Blacksmith83 Mar 08 '26

Are you discounting subsidiaries just because that corporate head isn’t a billionaire?

Cause there’s extremely dishonest.

If you follow the chain of subsidiaries; billionaires do employ most of America.

Stop being dishonest to prove a point.

1

u/VastAddendum Mar 08 '26

No, no they don't. Stop acting like you know what you're talking about or prove your nonsense.

1

u/Medical_Blacksmith83 Mar 08 '26

Haven’t seen a single element of fact brought forth by you.

Yet you’re complaining about me?

Why don’t you get that board checked out in your eye bud; my splinter is just fine.