Koko78 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 https://finance.yahoo.com/news/not-fast-u-restaurant-workers-seek-ban-surprise-100505711--finance.html Well, if you're going to pay little-trained monkeys $15 an hour to ask if you want fries with that burger, you might as well go all-in and lock their schedules in two weeks ahead of time. Nothing says profits like forcing companies to keep employees on-site and on the clock when the customer traffic doesn't justify that much staff on a given day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 https://finance.yahoo.com/news/not-fast-u-restaurant-workers-seek-ban-surprise-100505711--finance.html Well, if you're going to pay little-trained monkeys $15 an hour to ask if you want fries with that burger, you might as well go all-in and lock their schedules in two weeks ahead of time. Nothing says profits like forcing companies to keep employees on-site and on the clock when the customer traffic doesn't justify that much staff on a given day. I don't think it'll come to that. They'll just automate the !@#$ out of those restaurants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 (edited) You honestly believe that the rating agencies would have assigned different ratings if they were regulated? Hint, a big reason for the real estate run up were regulations and NGOs. The ratings agencies were catastrophically wrong during the crisis, at least half of those mortgaged-backed debts that they rated as AAA were truly Junk. One of the big problems with the ratings agencies is the system in placed is riddled with conflicts of interest. We've talked about this ad nauseum over the past decade but these ratings agencies are compensated by the companies that they are rating, and during this time greed was one of the major players that led the individual investor, homeowners, Banks, ratings agencies you name it to make such poor decisions. Deep down I think many people knew that the risks were severely understated, but everyone was making money. And if they weren't going to play along someone else would and very few people/companies had the fortitude to withstand the temptation of those big $$$$. I certainly believe that regulations and US housing policy contributed to the crisis, but let's be real here this was something that was in the making for a number of years and there were many guilty parties including Wall Street Edited July 17, 2017 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 It already does. It's called FINRA. But for some reason the Obama administration got the oblivious DOL involved and it has really !@#$ed things up. True dat, WRT securities trading. That area and its players are highly regulated. The ratings agencies were catastrophically wrong during the crisis, at least half of those mortgaged-backed debts that they rated as AAA were truly Junk. One of the big problems with the ratings agencies is the system in placed is riddled with conflicts of interest. We've talked about this ad nauseum over the past decade but these ratings agencies are compensated by the companies that they are rating, and during this time greed was one of the major players that led the individual investor, homeowners, Banks, ratings agencies you name it to make such poor decisions. Deep down I think many people knew that the risks were severely understated, but everyone was making money. And if they weren't going to play along someone else would and very few people/companies had the fortitude to withstand the temptation of those big $$$$. I certainly believe that regulations and US housing policy contributed to the crisis, but let's be real here this was something that was in the making for a number of years and there were many guilty parties including Wall Street Yes. The FannieMae, FreddyMac "backed" derivatives were an inappropriate creation that was little more than a Ponzi scheme. They never were backed by the full faith and credit of the US government, yet they were sold as though they were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Yes. The FannieMae, FreddyMac "backed" derivatives were an inappropriate creation that was little more than a Ponzi scheme. They never were backed by the full faith and credit of the US government, yet they were sold as though they were. More to the point: there was a constant weakening of standards for Fannie and Freddie intended to promote home ownership. It was less "Ponzi scheme" than it was "misuse of Fannie and Freddie by Congress for social engineering purposes." Notably, GNMA didn't experience the same erosion of standards, and didn't suffer accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 The ratings agencies were catastrophically wrong during the crisis, at least half of those mortgaged-backed debts that they rated as AAA were truly Junk. One of the big problems with the ratings agencies is the system in placed is riddled with conflicts of interest. We've talked about this ad nauseum over the past decade but these ratings agencies are compensated by the companies that they are rating, and during this time greed was one of the major players that led the individual investor, homeowners, Banks, ratings agencies you name it to make such poor decisions. Deep down I think many people knew that the risks were severely understated, but everyone was making money. And if they weren't going to play along someone else would and very few people/companies had the fortitude to withstand the temptation of those big $$$$. I certainly believe that regulations and US housing policy contributed to the crisis, but let's be real here this was something that was in the making for a number of years and there were many guilty parties including Wall Street The regulators and GSEs never took full responsibility for their roles in the run up. If any private sector company committed a fraction of the financial fraud that was uncovered at Freddie & Fannie, people would be in jail. The regulators turned a blind eye to the malfeasance in the mortgage markets because the biggest abuses were at the local & state levels and that's what was padding the state budgets. It's too easy to blame the big originating banks and the rating agencies, because there's about a dozen of companies that you can point a finger to, instead of corralling the thousands of other players who had a bigger role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 The regulators and GSEs never took full responsibility for their roles in the run up. If any private sector company committed a fraction of the financial fraud that was uncovered at Freddie & Fannie, people would be in jail. The regulators turned a blind eye to the malfeasance in the mortgage markets because the biggest abuses were at the local & state levels and that's what was padding the state budgets. It's too easy to blame the big originating banks and the rating agencies, because there's about a dozen of companies that you can point a finger to, instead of corralling the thousands of other players who had a bigger role. I don't disagree with that, my point was that the whole debacle didn't come from one or two sources like many people like to make it out to be, this was truly a perfect storm of events that occurred, a cocktail of corrosive forces led to this downturn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Of course the industry is capable of self policing. The real question is what do you want the financial sector to do in an economy? Do you want it to be a utility taking deposits and making loans, or do you want it to be the engine behind real economic growth? Read Dimon's diatribe from last week to get a better clue. Let's just chuckle at the irony of Jamie Dimon calling for further deregulation of the banking industry...the same Jamie Dimon who if I'm not greatly mistaken begged the government (along with Blankfein) to intervene and put a temporary ban on shorts immediately following the crash. It already does. It's called FINRA. But for some reason the Obama administration got the oblivious DOL involved and it has really !@#$ed things up. Right. FINRA, the new NASD, which was chaired by Bernie Madoff. But hey, blame Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Let's just chuckle at the irony of Jamie Dimon calling for further deregulation of the banking industry...the same Jamie Dimon who if I'm not greatly mistaken begged the government (along with Blankfein) to intervene and put a temporary ban on shorts immediately following the crash. They had a valid reason to worry about naked short sellers at the time, along with mark to market accounting and access to the discount window. Of course you run away from the question of what you want the financial sector to do in a vibrant and growing economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Be taxed more heavily? Hey - they've got money... let's get it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Back on topic. Robots Are Replacing Workers Where You Shop Wal-Mart and other large retailers, under pressure from Amazon, turn to technology to do workers’ rote tasks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Back on topic. Fear not, all those blue vests can probably repair the robots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Back on topic. We've had machines dispensing cash for decades now. It never occurred to anyone that machines will eventually be receiving and counting cash as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 We've had machines dispensing cash for decades now. It never occurred to anyone that machines will eventually be receiving and counting cash as well? The real shock will be when the robots start doing middle-management jobs. That's coming soon(ish) too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 The real shock will be when the robots start doing middle-management jobs. That's coming soon(ish) too. At least that will cut down on martini lunches and sexual harassment in the work place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 At least that will cut down on martini lunches and sexual harassment in the work place. Uhh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Uhh... Right? Hasn't anyone watched Westworld? Robot fondling is going to be mandatory IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Uhh... Right? Hasn't anyone watched Westworld? Robot fondling is going to be mandatory IMO. Well played, you guys. Well played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 We've had machines dispensing cash for decades now. It never occurred to anyone that machines will eventually be receiving and counting cash as well? I won't be able to ogle the tellers boobs in the future ? Wtf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Well played, you guys. Well played. Agreed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Uhh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Uhh... love this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Right. FINRA, the new NASD, which was chaired by Bernie Madoff. But hey, blame Obama. Who's blaming Obama? I'm just getting in line and pointing out you have no idea what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Who's blaming Obama? I'm just getting in line and pointing out you have no idea what you're talking about. LOL. You believe the SEC is an effective regulatory body, and I'm the one who doesn't know what I'm talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 LOL. You believe the SEC is an effective regulatory body, and I'm the one who doesn't know what I'm talking about. The SEC? I thought we were talking about FINRA? Not only do you not know what you're talking about you seem very confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 He thinks the SEC is a college athletic conference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Driverless cars will be the big job killer. 90 percent less accidents means no more repair shops, insurance, paid drivers, Less emergency rooms etc. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Driverless cars will be the big job killer. 90 percent less accidents means no more repair shops, insurance, paid drivers, Less emergency rooms etc. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk This guy gets it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 Black Teens Are Fired When the Minimum Wage Rises: Two labor economists report that when the minimum wage increases, Black teens suffer disproportionate dismissals. It is no surprise that Black teens, 16- to 19-years old, are disproportionately unemployed. At the Great Recession’s bottom, African-American teens had an unemployment rate of nearly 50 percent while the rate for all teens was 27.1 percent. In the weak post-Recession, many teens compete for jobs against down-sized adults with college degrees. And economists William Even from Miami University and David Macpherson from Trinity University report that when a state, or the federal government, increases the minimum wage, Black teens are more likely to be laid off. The duo analyzed 600,000 data points, which the Employment Policies Institute says included “a robust sample of minority young adults unprecedented in previous studies on the minimum wage.” The report focused on 16-to 24-year-old males without a high school diploma and found that for each 10 percent increase in the federal or state minimum wage employment for young Black males decreased 6.5 percent. By contrast, after the same wage boost, employment for white and Hispanic males fell respectively just 2.5 percent and 1.2 percent. WHY DOES #FIGHTFORFIFTEEN HATE BLACK PEOPLE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 Black Teens Are Fired When the Minimum Wage Rises: Two labor economists report that when the minimum wage increases, Black teens suffer disproportionate dismissals. It is no surprise that Black teens, 16- to 19-years old, are disproportionately unemployed. At the Great Recession’s bottom, African-American teens had an unemployment rate of nearly 50 percent while the rate for all teens was 27.1 percent. In the weak post-Recession, many teens compete for jobs against down-sized adults with college degrees. And economists William Even from Miami University and David Macpherson from Trinity University report that when a state, or the federal government, increases the minimum wage, Black teens are more likely to be laid off. The duo analyzed 600,000 data points, which the Employment Policies Institute says included “a robust sample of minority young adults unprecedented in previous studies on the minimum wage.” The report focused on 16-to 24-year-old males without a high school diploma and found that for each 10 percent increase in the federal or state minimum wage employment for young Black males decreased 6.5 percent. By contrast, after the same wage boost, employment for white and Hispanic males fell respectively just 2.5 percent and 1.2 percent. WHY DOES #FIGHTFORFIFTEEN HATE BLACK PEOPLE? No no no, it's #BlackJobsMatter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 So much vile for people who want a decent wage. Isn't that the American way? Earn all you can while you can? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 So much vile for people who want a decent wage. Isn't that the American way? Earn all you can while you can? Absolutely. However shouldn't it be up to the people to make sure they are capable of earning a decent wage and not the job of the government to hand it to them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 So much vile for people who want a decent wage. Isn't that the American way? Earn all you can while you can? If that's your take, then you truly don't understand the other side of the argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 If that's your take, then you truly don't understand the other side of the argument. Amen. I hope for his sake he was just trolling. If he can't see that the minimum wage issue hurts the very people that it purports to help, but it does give libs a chance to feel better, and that's important... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 (edited) Absolutely. However shouldn't it be up to the people to make sure they are capable of earning a decent wage and not the job of the government to hand it to them? What government job pays less than $15 an hour? If that's your take, then you truly don't understand the other side of the argument. Does it matter that I do or not? Every job I have had I always strived to get the highest pay I could. I guarantee you do the same thing. If me wanting a higher wage makes me a liberal so be it. As I said. I guarantee that you strive for higher pay which makes you a liberal too Edited August 6, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 Does it matter that I do or not? Every job I have had I always strived to get the highest pay I could. I guarantee you do the same thing. If me wanting a higher wage a liberal so be it. As I said. I guarantee that you strive for higher pay which makes you a liberal too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinreaper Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 What government job pays less than $15 an hour? Does it matter that I do or not? Every job I have had I always strived to get the highest pay I could. I guarantee you do the same thing. If me wanting a higher wage makes me a liberal so be it. As I said. I guarantee that you strive for higher pay which makes you a liberal too I'm sure that we all strive to make more money and if you could do it by your job performance you would. Instead you feel that you need to get the government to order that wage increase for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 (edited) Does it matter that I do or not? Every job I have had I always strived to get the highest pay I could. I guarantee you do the same thing. If me wanting a higher wage a liberal so be it. As I said. I guarantee that you strive for higher pay which makes you a liberal too That's not even that close of a miss. Amazing that we have this influx of "former" republicans echo don't understand basic economic theories. Edited August 6, 2017 by GG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 What government job pays less than $15 an hour? Does it matter that I do or not? Every job I have had I always strived to get the highest pay I could. I guarantee you do the same thing. If me wanting a higher wage makes me a liberal so be it. As I said. I guarantee that you strive for higher pay which makes you a liberal too Did you strive to have the government legislate you a raise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 6, 2017 Share Posted August 6, 2017 That's not even that close of a miss. Amazing that we have this influx of "former" republicans echo don't understand basic economic theories. True and truer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts