Lockout discussion thread 2.0
View Single Post
11-19-2012, 12:05 PM
Join Date: Jan 2007
Originally Posted by
i was trying to find comparatives, but i edited now. Never said minimum wage = revenue share btw, that's your comprehension.
Only thing i was trying to say is that if your ok with the logic of "well they already make x amount, and if they make y, it's still 100 times better then the average worker, so they should take amount y, if not they are greedy" then poster should be ok to reduce his salary, because he's already living better then worker who makes minimum wage. (assuming his pay is greater then minimum salary, which you can usually assume with unionised workers)
Also, i don't need your wiki's on minimum wage, im majoring in economics, and very well familiar with these terms. not so much with the details of the CBA though, thus i try and stay away from the specifics of the CBA and such.
Yes well, some less informed posters might find it interesting.
And you are correct the argument you are referring to is a generalization.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by vokiel