Douchebag

https://twitter.com/unusual_wh.../1703031228482380276




"I'm saying I'm sorry, even though I still believe it, 'cos, you know, I didn't think saying we should destroy the world would, like, make people angry'n'stuff. I'm shocked that people are upset, frankly."

Douchebag. Wood chipper, son. Hop in.

"Let them eat cake"

Sociopathy is one of the most effective traits for business success. This asshole seems to be one of them.

Sounds like he (and globalists in general from his own mouth) resent the fact that tradesmen and other workers can no longer be kept in line with whips and chains and starvation.

I don't think he's wrong. have been saying the same thing basically for the last two years. There needs to be a good recession to cool down the market to a more respectable rate. Housing and real estate has been on an unsustainable path.

He is not saying unemployment needs to be at'40-50%'. He's stating unemployment needs to go up 40-50%: meaning, instead of the current rate of 3.8% unemployment, it should be 5.3% to 5.7%. 5% unemployment is still considered full employment.

Being on the Developer side for the last 16 years, COVID really messed up the market. There was already inflation starting due to the excess amount of work in the market. All the Contractors were busy as there was no shortage of work. COVID just made inflation skyrocket with the shutting down of the factories and creating major supply shortages. Then, everybody got used to the spoils of working from home and not being watched by their supervisors. Productivity nosedived. I was guilty of that.

The comment about the employee needs to be fearing the employer is off base. i would say the employee needs to held more accountable for their work, but not fear the company.

He is correct that employers are initiating massive layoffs. I sit here now between jobs as my company cut our division in half recently. Couldn't get jobs to pencil and they could not carry the expensive overhead any longer.

So, yes, we need to have a recession with a higher unemployment rate to cool the down the inflation and make project viable again. Having .gov throw money at the market is only making things worse for all of us.

Yes, it will suck and it will hurt, but I think it is needed to get things in balance again.

quote:

Originally posted by ugeesta:
I don't think he's wrong.

Nor do I.

quote:

The comment about the employee needs to be fearing the employer is off base.

Except that is not what he said.

quote:

We need to remind people that they work for the employer, not the other way around. There's been a systematic change where employees feel the employer is extremely lucky to have them as opposed to the other way around. So, it's a dynamic that has to change.

The employer doesn't owe anyone a job. Employees are lucky to have a job. They need to understand this.

Where's that comet?

Who would do the work, Gustofer, if no one worked? And, that being the case, labor and management owe each other, mutually.

This guy is talking about half the world's labor force being out of work so that they appreciate their betters. If you don't see the problem with that, well...

By the way, if we think we've seen riots, just wait until half the world's labor force is idle and hungry.

This guy's position is indefensible. Oh, I get his point, but, uhh, no.

There is greed on both sides of the fence here.

Last place I worked solicited me, we went around for a month before we came to an agreement on pay. This was pre 2009 recession, auto company bankruptcies, dealerships having franchises terminated by the auto companies, I was in a dealershiat that time.

Once the dealerships started closing suddenly there were many parts countermen out of work.
My new manager one day remarked to the manager above him “Well I’m glad that this is happening. No longer will they tell us how much they want, we will tell them how much we are going to pay. If they want to work they’ll take it and be happy.”

That's easy for him to say. He's already made his money.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

quote:

Originally posted by ugeesta:
I don't think he's wrong.

Nor do I.

quote:

The comment about the employee needs to be fearing the employer is off base.

Except that is not what he said.

quote:

We need to remind people that they work for the employer, not the other way around. There's been a systematic change where employees feel the employer is extremely lucky to have them as opposed to the other way around. So, it's a dynamic that has to change.

The employer doesn't owe anyone a job. Employees are lucky to have a job. They need to understand this.

Okay, I’ll agree. I added a little dramatic effect in my statement…. Agree with your assessment that the employees work for the employer. At will mostly.

Para. Listen again. He does not say unemployment needs to rise to…. He says it needs to rise by…

Lots of illegals running around the country that are gonna get work authorizations that would love to take those jobs and would be ecstatic at half the rate. And they'd be company men and women because they understand what the alternative is.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
The employer doesn't owe anyone a job. Employees are lucky to have a job. They need to understand this.

That observation is not correct across all industries. Not even close in IT. Software engineers, DBAs, QA engineers can tell an employer to fuck themselves (many do) and get away with it. The pendulum will swing back at some point but it's not right now. Same is probably true in health care (I can't really speak to it first hand). Do you think doctors and nurses were lucky to have a job when their employers were firing people over vax mandates? Should they have taken the shot? Same situation in the airline industry. Seems like both industries are in a bit of a pinch staffing wise right now. I know in IT and I'm guessing in some other industries employers are lucky to have qualified and dedicated employees. I think successful employer-employee relationships (at least the ones I've been involved in) are a win-win at times and lose-lose at other times.

In the interest of self preservation The few elites had better not make the rest of us defend ourselves.

I decided to seek out a part time job for travel $$$ and my first application was for a courier job for a health care company. The application was filled out online at about 1 AM and they were calling me by 9 AM. My interview was a day later and lasted about 10 minutes before I was hired. This amazed me as I thought there was going to be
multiple applicants and that I was far down the list due to my age. During orientation, I asked the guy training me why I was hired so quickly. He told me that several people had been hired but soon quit:
Some were hired but did not show up for work.
Two were so stoned they could not do simple tasks.
One would work only "if he had nothing else to do".
One worked for a week and then demanded a 10 dollar an hour raise.
My new employer was thrilled I had what used to be called a "work ethic". So far, its been simple work, with mostly easy days. If I solve a problem on my own, my boss gives me a gift card on the spot.
Gurner is probably a jackass but my guess is that that he is having the same issues with employees that my new company has.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

This guy is talking about half the world's labor force being out of work so that they appreciate their betters. If you don't see the problem with that, well...

I believe that you misunderstood. He did not say that unemployment should rise to 405 - 50%, he said that it should rise by 40% - 50%. That means an increase of half the current rate, so total unemployment would be in the range of 1.5 times the current rate. 1.5 * 4.5% = 6.75%.

That fucker sounds like he is a big fan of feudalism. As long as he is among the landed gentry.

The shoe doesn’t feel so good on the other foot, does it? I would bet the real US workforce has strongly contracted. Causes would be baby boomers retiring, gig job market, entrepreneurship, welfare leeches, wives staying home instead of paying childcare, and incompetent/lazy people. The people left working aren’t going to be thrilled either. The squeezing of taxpayers from every angle doesn’t endear them to stagnant wages.

Current young hires are either awesome, or entitled idiots who think everyone at their job exists to serve them - I’m guessing they get the attitude from being spoiled children/special snowflakes at school.

We’ve learned just to do without rather than try to get the toxic crowd to work.

Frankly, with the demographic collapse everyone’s going to have to.

AI will wipe out a lot of useless office drones but that’s not a very productive crowd.

I have no idea what will happen when a large chunk of the voting base is mentally damaged from heavy adolescent usage of illegal drugs and psychoactive pharmaceuticals.

I’ve tried working with kids trying to leave the toxic crowd, but there’s stuff which is genuinely broken.

They’re mentally impaired, and I think the attitude is a coping mechanism.

Frankly, I think we’re heading toward a long, slow collapse at best, which will remain until the bureaucratic state fails.

India is still stuck with that, though so I’m not sure how long it takes the bureaucratic state to fail.

quote:

Originally posted by Voshterkoff:
The squeezing of taxpayers from every angle doesn’t endear them to stagnant wages.

Five years ago, having a $15 per hour minimum wage was all the rage in liberal run areas.

Over the weekend, I saw an advertisement for a midnight shift convenience store position. That paid almost $22 an hour. In Kentucky where the cost of living was always decent. Five years ago, that position would not have paid half that.

The path that we are on can’t end well. It’s just not sustainable.