or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Take all of the guns. All of them.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Take all of the guns. All of them. - Page 45

post #661 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanAlex01 View Post

Like I said, private-run or state-run can be just as efficient or inefficient. Governments who drive state-run services into the ground can be voted out of office, simple as. Somehow I don't think me having data behind my argument sways you.

You've yet to provide any data...and I'm not talking about data like your last chart in answer to a Birdman post that made us all sadly chuckle.

You've also got to pull your head out of your arsehole (again) as you're about to argue (again) with someone that you have no real argument with on the topic of healthcare delivery systems. Looking forward to this (again).
post #662 of 1722

Piobaire, if you're a grown man who actually has no say in this (or any) argument, why do you try so hard to come across like a. you completely disagree with me and b. a dolt?

 

http://op.bna.com/gr.nsf/id/llbe-9kqrdk/$File/Outsourcing%20Report.pdf

 

'A 2009 study on the effects of outsourcing on food service workers in K-12 public schools in New Jersey found that companies such as Aramark, Sodexo and Compass cut workers’ wages by $4-6 per hour following privatization. Many workers completely lost their health insurance benefits. In fact, food service contractors have the highest level of employees, and their children enrolled in New Jersey FamilyCare, the state’s Medicaid program.'

post #663 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanAlex01 View Post

Piobaire, if you're a grown man who actually has no say in this (or any) argument, why do you try so hard to come across like a. you completely disagree with me and b. a dolt?

http://op.bna.com/gr.nsf/id/llbe-9kqrdk/$File/Outsourcing%20Report.pdf


I'm not sure what that sentence means.

Also, you feel one report by a left wing union group about outsourcing is a definitive statement on the topic of public vs. private? Well played, sir, well played!
post #664 of 1722

No Piobaire, you just want me to post information which is wrong, so that it may satisfy whatever right-wing, bullshit angle you want to play. You might con others into thinking you're being valiant, but remember that internet IQ test I took?

 

'In the 2011 outsourcing of nursing assistant positions at a Michigan state-run home that serves veterans, the contractor significantly lowered wages and benefits. Nursing assistants working for the contractor were paid a starting wage of $8.50 per hour with no health and pension benefits. State nursing assistants who worked directly for the public home earned between $15-20 her hour with health and pension benefits. Unfortunately, the low compensation levels resulted in higher turnover among the contractor nursing assistants and, ultimately, lower levels of reliability and quality of care.'

 

Again, this is 'efficiency' for the rich. Economies are run by workers and owners; I think a lot of people think of businesses as some sort of huge human being. Working in the healthcare sector, I can tell you first-hand how common shit like this is.

post #665 of 1722
Geez, I just wish I knew something about running companies in the health care sector...

So SR was right and you're a nurse?
post #666 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanAlex01 View Post
 

 

Good point.

 

 

It's how economies work. It's very simple: You allow businesses to grow (I'm not at all against competition in the marketplace--except for services), you take much more generously from corporations (i.e. the rich) than we are now, and reinvest that back into the country and its workers. For capitalism to work, you have to balance of the two.

 

I understand how a state, which has a monopoly on the lawful use of force, can make people give away their goods or services.  I meant morally or ethically how you can force Peter to provide a good or service to Paul when Paul doesn't want to.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanAlex01 View Post
 

 

Like I said, private-run or state-run can be just as efficient or inefficient. Governments who drive state-run services into the ground can be voted out of office. Somehow I don't think me having data behind my argument will sway you.

 

Said everyone without data ever.

post #667 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanAlex01 View Post
 

No Piobaire, you just want me to post information which is wrong, so that it may satisfy whatever right-wing, bullshit angle you want to play. You might con others into thinking you're being valiant, but remember that internet IQ test I took?

 

'In the 2011 outsourcing of nursing assistant positions at a Michigan state-run home that serves veterans, the contractor significantly lowered wages and benefits. Nursing assistants working for the contractor were paid a starting wage of $8.50 per hour with no health and pension benefits. State nursing assistants who worked directly for the public home earned between $15-20 her hour with health and pension benefits. Unfortunately, the low compensation levels resulted in higher turnover among the contractor nursing assistants and, ultimately, lower levels of reliability and quality of care.'

 

Again, this is 'efficiency' for the rich. Economies are run by workers and owners; I think a lot of people think of businesses as some sort of huge human being. Working in the healthcare sector, I can tell you first-hand how common shit like this is.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Geez, I just wish I knew something about running companies in the health care sector...

So SR was right and you're a nurse?

 

You would think if a business thought turnover was a bad thing, they would do something to combat it.  You might also think that a government contractor isn't exactly an analog to a free-market actor (perhaps because they get long guaranteed contracts, and there is almost certainly cronyism involved in them getting the contracts).

post #668 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

You would think if a business thought turnover was a bad thing, they would do something to combat it.  You might also think that a government contractor isn't exactly an analog to a free-market actor (perhaps because they get long guaranteed contracts, and there is almost certainly cronyism involved in them getting the contracts).

Having turn over in CNAs actually is a bad thing. The paradox of service industries, and health is certainly a service industry, is that your "customer" will spend the most time with the class of employees that tend to contain the stupidest, least educated, least paid, and least invested in your organization employees. I pay at about the 75th percentile and I also have created a corporate culture where people want to stay. The inefficiencies are many from OT and agency/traveler costs to poorer patient outcomes and satisfaction.

What J-arshole is doing though is using a single example, outsourcing services to a government entity, and making a sweeping conclusion. Of course this is non-representative of the conclusions he wants to reach just like the stupid graph on tax rates he produced for HB when HB mentioned the phenomena concerning % of GDP paid in taxes tends to be relatively constant no matter tax rates.
post #669 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post


Having turn over in CNAs actually is a bad thing. The paradox of service industries, and health is certainly a service industry, is that your "customer" will spend the most time with the class of employees that tend to contain the stupidest, least educated, least paid, and least invested in your organization employees. I pay at about the 75th percentile and I also have created a corporate culture where people want to stay. The inefficiencies are many from OT and agency/traveler costs to poorer patient outcomes and satisfaction.

What J-arshole is doing though is using a single example, outsourcing services to a government entity, and making a sweeping conclusion. Of course this is non-representative of the conclusions he wants to reach just like the stupid graph on tax rates he produced for HB when HB mentioned the phenomena concerning % of GDP paid in taxes tends to be relatively constant no matter tax rates.

 

I know turnover is bad.  I'm just saying most businesses/managers/owners know that and make adjustments to reduce turnover because of the problems turnover causes. What I'm saying is either the company in his anecdote (which isn't data) is just run by morons, or, more likely, they're hitting the government contract requirements as cheaply as possible because with a government contract, why do anything more than the minimum?

post #670 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

I know turnover is bad.  I'm just saying most businesses/managers/owners know that and make adjustments to reduce turnover because of the problems turnover causes. What I'm saying is either the company in his anecdote (which isn't data) is just run by morons, or, more likely, they're hitting the government contract requirements as cheaply as possible because with a government contract, why do anything more than the minimum?

Exactly, which is why using this as his data point for sweeping conclusions is so fucking moronic. It fits the narrative though and probably works on other idiots in the choir.
post #671 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanAlex01 View Post

Capitalists constantly try to lower wages, scrap regulations, etc. The 'efficiency' is in them doing whatever it takes to make as much money as possible. If that means we all suffer as a result, how can you can that efficiency, unless what you care about is making more wealth inequality?
...you said in another thread how you're a libertarian. Either, you're serious, or your occupation is being a jester.

Uhhh "capitalists" lower wages and raise wages alike, depending on a whole bunch of factors. If you're bemoaning the shift from a manufacturing-led to a service-led economy...I really cant help you. Perhaps you hate people in third world countries and want them back at subsistence farming?

BTW on the topic of regulations, your Marxist countries were far and away the worst polluters on the entire planet.

And "wealth inequality"? Gimme a break. Some guy mortgages his house and never sees his kids because he's busting his ass, and (if and when) he finally achieves success you're gonna come along and shit on the compounding power of math as it applies to large sums and youre gonna decide what he "deserves"?? Where the fuck were you during the entire tough part?? (probably asleep or coloring with troubled childrenz or w/e but I digress...)

The fact people have different levels of wealth - ooooh even the top1% butbut.gif - is the biggest nonissue of current times. Only confiscatory leftist birdbrains like you have whipped it into a big "issue".

Why dont you take a look at the richest merchants vs the serfs in Britain or France in the year 1550 or some shit. Christ. There's some inequality.

Marxism is so dumb. Less people than ever before are living in poverty now thanks to capitalism and they're off whining about observed "injustices" and somehow championing some nanny state fantasy "solution" where the government runs everything like some Anthony Burgess novel.

PS* I am both a libertarian and a jester. Thank you for noticing.
post #672 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirReveller View Post

 Less people than ever before are living in poverty now thanks to capitalism

This is something that doesn't get talked about enough.  We have halved the number of people living poverty around the world in the last 30 years.  Also, here's an interesting graph that shows how the decedents of the Forbes 400 have fared.  Turns out, despite what the left says, wealth in the United States doesn't just keep getting handed down.  The rich, spoiled kids and grandkids of billionaires blow their inheritance

post #673 of 1722
Yup. The majority of extreme wealth = self-made people. The remainder usually see it dissipated among the spoiled heirs.

You're wasting your time showing facts and figures to JA though. He is a righteous warrior for injustice. He will take from group A and give to group B, according to a noble rationale only he and his enlightened confreres can truly understand. In another life JA was bashing the brains out of some "kulak" because the guy had five cows while the rest of the villagers only had too, er, two.
post #674 of 1722

welp, don't wanna derail the thread but i thought i'd bump a news flash:

 

http://www.npr.org/2015/10/27/451202615/san-franciscos-last-gun-shop-calls-it-quits

 

@ethanm and Big Brother carry the day in the People's Republic of San Francisco!

 

no doubt, gun crimes in SF are now a thing of the past

post #675 of 1722
Quote:
Originally Posted by double00 View Post

welp, don't wanna derail the thread but i thought i'd bump a news flash:

http://www.npr.org/2015/10/27/451202615/san-franciscos-last-gun-shop-calls-it-quits

@ethanm
 and Big Brother carry the day in the People's Republic of San Francisco!

no doubt, gun crimes in SF are now a thing of the past

They'll have to disarm federal agents next. Gun control was a response from several city reps after an agent's stolen gun was used to shoot Kate Steinle.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Take all of the guns. All of them.