First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next  Last
Post Reply Should a person's general welfare be guaranteed and unconditional?
10831 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
13 / F / California
Offline
Posted 7/1/16

Ryulightorb wrote:


VZ68 wrote:

PLZ GIEV ALL STUFFZ KTHXBY

Really though, get off your lazy ass and get a job. These kids think having a smartphone is also a "basic necessity" anymore.


It really is if you want to stay in communication for a job.

Also the whole get off your lazy ass part is becoming rather funny as i know people who have been actively applying for jobs for 2 years and been with multiple job finding centers in my town and they have not got a job yet due to our towns employment problem.

sometimes not even the proactive people can find a job :)


20663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 7/1/16

VZ68 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


VZ68 wrote:

PLZ GIEV ALL STUFFZ KTHXBY

Really though, get off your lazy ass and get a job. These kids think having a smartphone is also a "basic necessity" anymore.


It really is if you want to stay in communication for a job.

Also the whole get off your lazy ass part is becoming rather funny as i know people who have been actively applying for jobs for 2 years and been with multiple job finding centers in my town and they have not got a job yet due to our towns employment problem.

sometimes not even the proactive people can find a job :)




Yes because you are going to keep your home line which costs more in the long run AND doesn't function when you are not at home.

My family ditched home phones for mobiles a while ago
10831 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
13 / F / California
Offline
Posted 7/1/16

Ryulightorb wrote:


VZ68 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


VZ68 wrote:

PLZ GIEV ALL STUFFZ KTHXBY

Really though, get off your lazy ass and get a job. These kids think having a smartphone is also a "basic necessity" anymore.


It really is if you want to stay in communication for a job.

Also the whole get off your lazy ass part is becoming rather funny as i know people who have been actively applying for jobs for 2 years and been with multiple job finding centers in my town and they have not got a job yet due to our towns employment problem.

sometimes not even the proactive people can find a job :)




Yes because you are going to keep your home line which costs more in the long run AND doesn't function when you are not at home.

My family ditched home phones for mobiles a while ago :)


If you are poor, home phones are rather cheap, unlike a smartphone's full rate. But hey, I mean someone without a job REALLY needs a smartphone don't they?
20663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 7/1/16

VZ68 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


VZ68 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


VZ68 wrote:

PLZ GIEV ALL STUFFZ KTHXBY

Really though, get off your lazy ass and get a job. These kids think having a smartphone is also a "basic necessity" anymore.


It really is if you want to stay in communication for a job.

Also the whole get off your lazy ass part is becoming rather funny as i know people who have been actively applying for jobs for 2 years and been with multiple job finding centers in my town and they have not got a job yet due to our towns employment problem.

sometimes not even the proactive people can find a job :)




Yes because you are going to keep your home line which costs more in the long run AND doesn't function when you are not at home.

My family ditched home phones for mobiles a while ago :)


If you are poor, home phones are rather cheap, unlike a smartphone's full rate. But hey, I mean someone without a job REALLY needs a smartphone don't they?


Home phones are really not cheap where i live a smartphones full rate would be easier to get.

Even if you don't need a job you should always have a phone on you for emergencies.

10831 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
13 / F / California
Offline
Posted 7/1/16

Ryulightorb wrote:
Home phones are really not cheap where i live a smartphones full rate would be easier to get.

Even if you don't need a job you should always have a phone on you for emergencies.



GIEV GIEV GIEV GIEV!



This is why you don't feed wildlife boys and girls.
10568 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 7/1/16
https://www.telstra.com.au/home-phone/plans-rates Between $25 and $85 dollars, in AUD I'd think. $63.75 per month USD.
https://www.telstra.com.au/coverage-networks/mobile-satellite Up to $185 AUD per month, plus usage charges.
17175 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 7/1/16
As technology improves, job shift and we need less people to do those minuscule tasks, but I don't think it necessarily means we need less people working overall. I think technology advancement is often another source of job creation. Unless of course technology becomes so advance that we all live in metal pods and communicate telepathically. Until then, it's within our interest for every member in a society to work, improve and contribute something, if we don't want to fall behind....

I really don't like this question because it kind of assumes that most people live from the public system by choice rather than the lack of opportunity.
Banned
17503 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / B.C, Canada
Offline
Posted 7/1/16

PrinceJudar wrote:


Not by unskilled labor. That's my point. We are losing use for these people. We can't ship everyone to college trying to make everyone a skilled worker--that's one of our issues now.

You can't split a good engineer into 5 shitty engineers. It doesn't work like that. Doesn't even make sense. Split education too? I mean, how does that even work?



Why make people work for the sake of working?

If we needed them for that, that's one thing--but we really don't. That's like hiring people just to watch people order food from a machine.


Hey the armed forces can always use a few good people, nearly three quarters of various battalions and companies in Canada alone are fighting at half strength or less in some cases .

That aside let's face it a lot of people on this planet aren't really worth the expense of keeping around. They have neither the will nor capabilities to ever contribute meaningfully to society at large, And there is nothing wrong with a meritocracy.

After all why reward laziness with life. Just because the unskilled job market is shrinking doesn't absolve anyone of anything. Learn a more advanced trade, create works of art, you know something that proves your worth. It doesn't always takes a PhD in astrophysics to prove you worth. But at the same time I think it a lacking opinion that people should be fed and housed simply because we have no need of ditch diggers and people shovelling shit.

There is always something that needs doing, if you don't know how to do learn from those that do.
39137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / San Francisco Bay...
Offline
Posted 7/1/16
A smart phone isn't a good example at all.

First, they aren't that expensive. A second-hand smart phone is the down payment plus $30 per month for a single device. Now, the alternative is having a "dumb phone" (not having a cell phone is simply out of the question in this economy), is about $10 per month. $20 extra per month plus whatever the initial phone costs isn't really that expensive. Useful site: https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Search?minutes=300&sms=500&data=500

Second, a cell phone is absolutely essential in today's economy. If your car breaks down, for example, you are expected to call your office and let them know you will be late. This can only be done with a cell phone.

Third, you are expected to have a constant internet connection, usually for email. Strictly speaking, this can be done by frequently checking email on a computer since this isn't as location sensitive as calling out of work is. As such, this is very much a tertiary issue as, unlike owning a cell phone, there is a work-around here. And the more pertinent email is, the more likely a company is to give you an employee cell phone for work use only (usually to monitor time spent doing work).

Lastly, cheap smart phone data plans are cheaper than Internet. If someone uses internet only for work, a smart phone isn't a luxury as its cheaper than a utility it replaces. I only know of one family that did do this, but it's theoretically possible.

Overall, smart phones do have utility through the third bullet point and aren't prohibitively expensive compared to the next-best-alternative (a "dumb" cell phone) to the point I find them a very weak example of people conflating need with luxury. Yes, they are on the borderline of luxury in the sense that usually (not always) you can use a "dumb phone" and a computer+internet to work-around the need for a cell phone, but if the pinnacle example is an extra $20 expense per month, I'm not convinced that there's a significant point to be made.
10831 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
13 / F / California
Offline
Posted 7/1/16

Zoraprime wrote:

A smart phone isn't a good example at all.

First, they aren't that expensive. A second-hand smart phone is the down payment plus $30 per month for a single device. Now, the alternative is having a "dumb phone" (not having a cell phone is simply out of the question in this economy), is about $10 per month. $20 extra per month plus whatever the initial phone costs isn't really that expensive. Useful site: https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Search?minutes=300&sms=500&data=500

Second, a cell phone is absolutely essential in today's economy. If your car breaks down, for example, you are expected to call your office and let them know you will be late. This can only be done with a cell phone.

Third, you are expected to have a constant internet connection, usually for email. Strictly speaking, this can be done by frequently checking email on a computer since this isn't as location sensitive as calling out of work is. As such, this is very much a tertiary issue as, unlike owning a cell phone, there is a work-around here. And the more pertinent email is, the more likely a company is to give you an employee cell phone for work use only (usually to monitor time spent doing work).

Lastly, cheap smart phone data plans are cheaper than Internet. If someone uses internet only for work, a smart phone isn't a luxury as its cheaper than a utility it replaces. I only know of one family that did do this, but it's theoretically possible.

Overall, smart phones do have utility through the third bullet point and aren't prohibitively expensive compared to the next-best-alternative (a "dumb" cell phone) to the point I find them a very weak example of people conflating need with luxury. Yes, they are on the borderline of luxury in the sense that usually (not always) you can use a "dumb phone" and a computer+internet to work-around the need for a cell phone, but if the pinnacle example is an extra $20 expense per month, I'm not convinced that there's a significant point to be made.


You don't have a job, you aren't looking for a job, you don't need a smartphone.
30236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
It doesn't matter.
Offline
Posted 7/1/16 , edited 7/1/16
You can live without money and you can also live of gov benefits because they have a duty to you, not the other way around.
But a lot of what makes my life nice has been deliberately put in hard to reach places by greedy people.
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 7/1/16 , edited 7/1/16

Ranwolf wrote:
Hey the armed forces can always use a few good people, nearly three quarters of various battalions and companies in Canada alone are fighting at half strength or less in some cases .

That aside let's face it a lot of people on this planet aren't really worth the expense of keeping around. They have neither the will nor capabilities to ever contribute meaningfully to society at large, And there is nothing wrong with a meritocracy.

After all why reward laziness with life. Just because the unskilled job market is shrinking doesn't absolve anyone of anything. Learn a more advanced trade, create works of art, you know something that proves your worth. It doesn't always takes a PhD in astrophysics to prove you worth. But at the same time I think it a lacking opinion that people should be fed and housed simply because we have no need of ditch diggers and people shovelling shit.

There is always something that needs doing, if you don't know how to do learn from those that do.

People can make something out of their lives. Not saying they can't. Basic food and shelter isn't much of anything. Luxury can be earned, but life, ideally, is an opportunity.

Everyone can do something, but that something cannot always compete with other people, machines and automation. Not everyone will be willingly paid--increasingly so. They will be increasingly paid through pointless jobs or education.

Frankly, the useless education is a hella' more expensive, but hey, let's keep going that route.

I do not follow the logic on this topic. It is not worth enacting 'justice' upon those undeserving by squandering the opportunity and lives of others caught in the crossfire. Crossfire being the negligence, folly or maliciousness of other people--perhaps a relentless struggle with Lady Luck.

Life's a bitch. People will find getting their shit together hard enough without having to worry about the next meal or a roof over their heads. In a time where we could provide that with ease, we're satisfied with stripping that because of...feelings? Not because we need them to work, but because fuck those lazy assholes.

I'm successful. I don't have to worry about any of this shit. The arguments just aren't good.

Posted 7/1/16

PrinceJudar wrote:


Ranwolf wrote:
Hey the armed forces can always use a few good people, nearly three quarters of various battalions and companies in Canada alone are fighting at half strength or less in some cases .

That aside let's face it a lot of people on this planet aren't really worth the expense of keeping around. They have neither the will nor capabilities to ever contribute meaningfully to society at large, And there is nothing wrong with a meritocracy.

After all why reward laziness with life. Just because the unskilled job market is shrinking doesn't absolve anyone of anything. Learn a more advanced trade, create works of art, you know something that proves your worth. It doesn't always takes a PhD in astrophysics to prove you worth. But at the same time I think it a lacking opinion that people should be fed and housed simply because we have no need of ditch diggers and people shovelling shit.

There is always something that needs doing, if you don't know how to do learn from those that do.

People can make something out of their lives. Not saying they can't. Basic food and shelter isn't much of anything. Luxury can be earned, but life, ideally, is an opportunity.

Everyone can do something, but that something cannot always compete with other people, machines and automation. Not everyone will be willingly paid--increasingly so. They will be increasingly paid through pointless jobs or education.

Frankly, the useless education is a hella' more expensive, but hey, let's keep going that route.

I do not follow the logic on this topic. It is not worth enacting 'justice' upon those undeserving by squandering the opportunity and lives of others caught in the crossfire. Crossfire being the negligence, folly or maliciousness of other people--perhaps a relentless struggle with Lady Luck.

Life's a bitch. People will find getting their shit together hard enough without having to worry about the next meal or a roof over their heads. In a time where we could provide that with ease, we're satisfied with stripping that because of...feelings? Not because we need them to work, but because fuck those lazy assholes.

I'm successful. I don't have to worry about any of this shit. The arguments just aren't good.


I agree with her/him.
20663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 7/1/16

VZ68 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:
Home phones are really not cheap where i live a smartphones full rate would be easier to get.

Even if you don't need a job you should always have a phone on you for emergencies.



GIEV GIEV GIEV GIEV!



This is why you don't feed wildlife boys and girls.



English? you're sounding like a terrible failed troll mate atleast give some good reasoning why you would pay more for a home phone when its cheaper to have a mobile phone.
20663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 7/1/16

VZ68 wrote:


Zoraprime wrote:

A smart phone isn't a good example at all.

First, they aren't that expensive. A second-hand smart phone is the down payment plus $30 per month for a single device. Now, the alternative is having a "dumb phone" (not having a cell phone is simply out of the question in this economy), is about $10 per month. $20 extra per month plus whatever the initial phone costs isn't really that expensive. Useful site: https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Search?minutes=300&sms=500&data=500

Second, a cell phone is absolutely essential in today's economy. If your car breaks down, for example, you are expected to call your office and let them know you will be late. This can only be done with a cell phone.

Third, you are expected to have a constant internet connection, usually for email. Strictly speaking, this can be done by frequently checking email on a computer since this isn't as location sensitive as calling out of work is. As such, this is very much a tertiary issue as, unlike owning a cell phone, there is a work-around here. And the more pertinent email is, the more likely a company is to give you an employee cell phone for work use only (usually to monitor time spent doing work).

Lastly, cheap smart phone data plans are cheaper than Internet. If someone uses internet only for work, a smart phone isn't a luxury as its cheaper than a utility it replaces. I only know of one family that did do this, but it's theoretically possible.

Overall, smart phones do have utility through the third bullet point and aren't prohibitively expensive compared to the next-best-alternative (a "dumb" cell phone) to the point I find them a very weak example of people conflating need with luxury. Yes, they are on the borderline of luxury in the sense that usually (not always) you can use a "dumb phone" and a computer+internet to work-around the need for a cell phone, but if the pinnacle example is an extra $20 expense per month, I'm not convinced that there's a significant point to be made.


You don't have a job, you aren't looking for a job, you don't need a smartphone.


Simplistic and foolish and stupid reply.

You need a phone in life a house or a homephone.

A Mobile is cheaper and essential even if you don't have a job.

I study and i NEED my smartphone for many reasons.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.