webdiplomacy.net

BREAKING NEWS ALERT

As we all know, factories draw a huge crowd of spectators daily. They come to watch the factory workers produce.

Recently, it has come to light that child laborers receive less pay than adult men laborers, even though they do the same work. Shocked and disgusted, many fans demand that children's factory owners start paying their employees the same rates as men's factories.

We turn to world renown economist, Sir Brian "brianbomb" Manly, for comment.

"It's quite simple really. Current pay inequality exists for a natural reason. Fans want to see factory workers produce. Factories make money from high production values and, more importantly, the tickets they sell to fans who come to watch the spectacle."

"Children simply cannot match the production levels of grown Men. Consequently, hardly any children's factories even bother installing a giant window for spectators because, quite frankly, it would be boring compared to the thrill of watching Men at work."

"My advice to child laborers who want to make the big bucks? Try out at the Men's factory. Then they will see that they are simply outclassed and could never keep up. Heck, back in '98 they actually performed an exhibition match between the top two child laborers and the 100,000th top Men's producer. The children were out produced, 2 to 1!"

"It's quite conclusive: there is only one thing child laborers can do: Grow up!"

Thank you, Sir Manly for shedding light on this topic. It seems that there actually is no cause for moral outrage, since the current pay inequality truly is justified and natural.

Next up, we begin a new 7-part docu-series: Is it okay to own Male Babysitters?

Did you use ChatGPT?

Look, 1842, Mines Act, no more mining, right? Kids choice award best game 2020? Minecraft. WE YEARN FOR THE MINES.

Im not sure if the satire is to promote the idea that my argument was ridiculous but to give a better example.

I often hear people complain how its so sad that our society pays athletes more than teachers. Indeed, this is sad. In order for teachers to make the same amount of money as athletes we would have to first reprioritize as a society what we want to waste or spend our money on. If teachers had Jersey sales, and endorsement deals, and advertisers, and their classrooms were televised on national TV, and people tuned in to watch a teacher show students how to do long division; and this was actually something people wanted to spend money on. Then I do imagine teachers would make massive salaries, would be wealthy beyond measure and that argument would be rendered irrelevant.

So, that being said, WNBA players are not making a large salary because the WNBA itself is not making a ton of money in the first place. Im sure they are doing fine, but salaries are based on alot of markers. And in this case, they lack the markers to generate revenue to pay athletes massive salaries. Luckily, because of the way things work, many of the players like Caitlin are making lucrative salaries through other channels as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYOg8EON29Y

this is great by the way if you are interested

brainbomb wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:28 pm

Im not sure if the satire is to promote the idea that my argument was ridiculous but to give a better example.

I often hear people complain how its so sad that our society pays athletes more than teachers. Indeed, this is sad. In order for teachers to make the same amount of money as athletes we would have to first reprioritize as a society what we want to waste or spend our money on. If teachers had Jersey sales, and endorsement deals, and advertisers, and their classrooms were televised on national TV, and people tuned in to watch a teacher show students how to do long division; and this was actually something people wanted to spend money on. Then I do imagine teachers would make massive salaries, would be wealthy beyond measure and that argument would be rendered irrelevant.

So, that being said, WNBA players are not making a large salary because the WNBA itself is not making a ton of money in the first place. Im sure they are doing fine, but salaries are based on alot of markers. And in this case, they lack the markers to generate revenue to pay athletes massive salaries. Luckily, because of the way things work, many of the players like Caitlin are making lucrative salaries through other channels as well.

Na, your argument was fine, I was just having fun. This was mostly inspired by a comment on your post.

I'm going to write a long serious post in your thread, when I have the time. But WNBA is a funny example because unlike some other sports, it actually makes sense that it would be less popular to watch. Women hardly dunk, and I watch Basketball to see players dunk so hard they shatter the backboard, tear off the rim, etc.

Diplomacy&Warfare wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 11:19 am

Did you use ChatGPT?

No. :D

I just realized that people have finally given up on any chance teachers will ever make a fair living wage, and have turned their anger toward female basketball players not making as much as male basketball players.

70-80 k a year for a WNBA player is actually really great pay compared to teachers wages lol

brainbomb wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:28 pm

I often hear people complain how its so sad that our society pays athletes more than teachers. Indeed, this is sad. In order for teachers to make the same amount of money as athletes we would have to first reprioritize as a society what we want to waste or spend our money on. If teachers had Jersey sales, and endorsement deals, and advertisers, and their classrooms were televised on national TV, and people tuned in to watch a teacher show students how to do long division; and this was actually something people wanted to spend money on. Then I do imagine teachers would make massive salaries, would be wealthy beyond measure and that argument would be rendered irrelevant.

Have you considered socialism?

brainbomb wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:28 pm

I often hear people complain how its so sad that our society pays athletes more than teachers. Indeed, this is sad

It would be sad if it was true, but it isn't. Most professional athletes get less than teachers, and have piss poor career progression to boot

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 6:42 pm

brainbomb wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:28 pm

I often hear people complain how its so sad that our society pays athletes more than teachers. Indeed, this is sad. In order for teachers to make the same amount of money as athletes we would have to first reprioritize as a society what we want to waste or spend our money on. If teachers had Jersey sales, and endorsement deals, and advertisers, and their classrooms were televised on national TV, and people tuned in to watch a teacher show students how to do long division; and this was actually something people wanted to spend money on. Then I do imagine teachers would make massive salaries, would be wealthy beyond measure and that argument would be rendered irrelevant.

Have you considered socialism?

Aren't teachers already paid in a socialist manner (i.e., with a non-market wage determined indirectly by voters)?

so I know this is joke thread, but on the subject of teacher salaries, I'm curious to hear your opinion on this question:
who most deserves a 1 million (could've been some other number, 1 mil is just arbitrary and big) dollar bonus: a teacher or dwayne johnson (it was some celebrity, iirc it was dwayne, but whatever)?

The video's creator, in the comments, said it was dwayne, since dwayne built up his brand and thus deserves the money more. There may also have been other options, like a scientist or smth (), but i don't remember at all. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this? I can see where the creator came from, and it is logical (dwayne has put in a massive effort to get to where he is), but I feel like need wise a teacher would definitely benefit more. so kind of a question of 'deserving' vs need. thoughts?

Esquire Bertissimmo wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 9:43 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 6:42 pm

brainbomb wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:28 pm

I often hear people complain how its so sad that our society pays athletes more than teachers. Indeed, this is sad. In order for teachers to make the same amount of money as athletes we would have to first reprioritize as a society what we want to waste or spend our money on. If teachers had Jersey sales, and endorsement deals, and advertisers, and their classrooms were televised on national TV, and people tuned in to watch a teacher show students how to do long division; and this was actually something people wanted to spend money on. Then I do imagine teachers would make massive salaries, would be wealthy beyond measure and that argument would be rendered irrelevant.

Have you considered socialism?

Aren't teachers already paid in a socialist manner (i.e., with a non-market wage determined indirectly by voters)?

Socialism isn't the solution. The problems revolve around where the money is coming from and who controls it:
The money for paying teachers is coming from (at least for public schools) taxes. The money for taxes is coming not from rich people who have engineered loopholes, but from poor and middle-class people.
The money for paying athletes is coming from the teams. The money for that comes from (at least partially) TV companies, who are getting their money from showing ads to people.

So, apparently the money that companies are getting from showing ads to people is more than the money those people pay in taxes.

Solutions:
Social reform so people aren't willing to watch an hour of ads in order to watch the occasional bit of sports.
Social reform so people don't pay attention to ads, so ads aren't so effective and therefore aren't valued so high.
Tax reform so the money being paid to teachers is coming not from poor and middle-class citizens, but from the wealthy corporations who are showing us ads. An "Ad tax" could be a thing.
Corporate reform so the companies buying ad slots don't use ads so much.

The first one is impossible because people are addicted to watching sports.
I genuinely don't see a problem with the second one.
The third one runs into the problem that [Redacted because this is not the Politics sub-thread]
The fourth one is impossible because let's be honest, the corporations can't be trusted to do anything reasonable.

Disclaimer: I have no idea what I'm talking about.

If vanity industry has deep pockets because people try to fill their empty lives with sports and stuff, the solution isn't a reform, but giving them an alternative:

HO, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.
2 Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness.
3 Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David.
(Isaiah 55)

Diplomacy&Warfare wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 10:34 pm

Social reform so people don't pay attention to ads, so ads aren't so effective and therefore aren't valued so high.

Of your four suggested solutions, this appears to be the one you consider the most viable.

Could you explain how this "reform" would be put into practice?

learnedSloth wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 11:15 pm

If vanity industry has deep pockets because people try to fill their empty lives with sports and stuff, the solution isn't a reform, but giving them an alternative:

HO, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.
2 Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness.
3 Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David.
(Isaiah 55)

Solution: Run a Hunger Games during the Superbowl

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 6:42 pm

brainbomb wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:28 pm

I often hear people complain how its so sad that our society pays athletes more than teachers. Indeed, this is sad. In order for teachers to make the same amount of money as athletes we would have to first reprioritize as a society what we want to waste or spend our money on. If teachers had Jersey sales, and endorsement deals, and advertisers, and their classrooms were televised on national TV, and people tuned in to watch a teacher show students how to do long division; and this was actually something people wanted to spend money on. Then I do imagine teachers would make massive salaries, would be wealthy beyond measure and that argument would be rendered irrelevant.

Have you considered socialism?

Right, and all live like they do in the glorious sh!t hole countries of Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Haiti, .....

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 11:35 pm

Diplomacy&Warfare wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 10:34 pm

Social reform so people don't pay attention to ads, so ads aren't so effective and therefore aren't valued so high.

Of your four suggested solutions, this appears to be the one you consider the most viable.

Could you explain how this "reform" would be put into practice?

It would go somewhere along the lines of everyone entering their sports bets and going to grab more pizza from the kitchen during that ads, rather than during the game.

Of course, nobody's going to do this because social constructs support the status quo. However, I would at least argue that this one is less impossible than the other ideas.

BrianBaru wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 23, 2024 12:16 am

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 6:42 pm

brainbomb wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:28 pm

I often hear people complain how its so sad that our society pays athletes more than teachers. Indeed, this is sad. In order for teachers to make the same amount of money as athletes we would have to first reprioritize as a society what we want to waste or spend our money on. If teachers had Jersey sales, and endorsement deals, and advertisers, and their classrooms were televised on national TV, and people tuned in to watch a teacher show students how to do long division; and this was actually something people wanted to spend money on. Then I do imagine teachers would make massive salaries, would be wealthy beyond measure and that argument would be rendered irrelevant.

Have you considered socialism?

Right, and all live like they do in the glorious sh!t hole countries of Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Haiti, .....

You are clearly a very ignorant little man, as exemplified by those odd examples.

Haiti is in a prolonged crisis, but is not a socialist country. The last properly elected President in Haiti was from the Haitian Tèt Kale Party, which is described as a "conservative liberalist" party with a centre-right platform.

Zimbabwe's Zanu-PF government is a "big tent" party with some socialist tendencies, but the crisis facing Zimbabwe is due to decades of corruption and a lack of stable democracy, not due to a specific economic system.

In any case, if you want to just randomly choose examples, there are plenty of capitalist shitholes, you know? I could randomly throw out Equatorial Guinea or The Philippines or whatever, but I'm not as lazy as you.