Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    20 May '15 13:13
    There's a Target (for those who don't know what that is, think Walmart, only with a red logo) around the corner from where I work that opens at 8 AM. I often go in there right at opening to pick up some food and supplies on my way to work.

    Because I get there right at opening, I often see the daily "huddle" which, I understand, is a daily feature at all Targets. Essentially, they leave one person to man one register in the almost empty store and all of the employees gather in a circle and the manager gives them an update on whatever information needs updating and a little pep talk. From the times that I've seen, she may single out a person or two for recognition on good work, announces some company policy and ends off with a 30 second pep talk on putting their best foot forward, making the customer happy, etc. The whole thing lasts maybe 5 minutes.

    I've always wondered about this. Target workers start at a salary of not much more than minimum wage. I figured that they can't seriously be psyched up to work for a company that pays them less than enough to live on. I always figured that most workers are silently rolling their eyes during the huddle.

    So, yesterday morning, I'm there during the huddle and I surreptitiously stole a few glances at employees' faces. They looks focused and sincere, for the most part. A few smiles, but no obvious disdain.

    Then a thought struck me: Regardless of what a person's job is, the person spends most of his/her waking hours doing it. Regardless of its prestige or lack thereof, people need to identify with and be proud of what they're doing. The pep talk isn't a cynical demand that people do the bidding of a faceless corporate giant for little compensation; it's an appeal for the employees to strengthen their own identity by making their occupation matter - by improving the world in whatever small way they can from their corner.

    The person who rings me up may be making $10/hr, but if she can ring me up in 30 seconds instead of 40, she's contributed in her way, to the efficiency of society. It's not the $10/hr that makes her motivated to do her job a little better, a little faster, a little stronger. It's her desire to matter; to contribute; to affect the world.

    In countries where the social welfare system guarantees you a living wage for sitting on your butt all day if you're unemployed (including, to one extent or another, the US), most people nevertheless choose to work.

    Do people need work for their own self-esteem, aside from whatever compensation they earn?
  2. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    20 May '15 13:38
    Yes
  3. 20 May '15 14:33
    Not everyone is a snob.

    Welcome to the real world where the poor exist.
  4. 20 May '15 14:49
    Originally posted by sh76
    Do people need work for their own self-esteem, aside from whatever compensation they earn?
    Humans are active, social animals. They need something to do. An unemployed person in Norway (for example) has access to goods and services which are vastly superior to that which those Target employees have access to, and they get it for as long as they like. Why don't (a significant number of) people in Norway (for example) just sit at home doing nothing? Because people don't like doing nothing.
  5. 20 May '15 15:03
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Humans are active, social animals. They need something to do. An unemployed person in Norway (for example) has access to goods and services which are vastly superior to that which those Target employees have access to, and they get it for as long as they like. Why don't (a significant number of) people in Norway (for example) just sit at home doing nothing? Because people don't like doing nothing.
    Unemployed in the US can get better goods and services than those who work at Target.
  6. 20 May '15 17:56
    Originally posted by Eladar
    Unemployed in the US can get better goods and services than those who work at Target.
    Which says that in Norway or the US, not working can pay better than working. Is there a perverse incentive to refrain from work, and do what pleases you, whether that's sleeping at home, or cruising museums?
  7. 22 May '15 14:41
    Originally posted by normbenign
    Which says that in Norway or the US, not working can pay better than working. Is there a perverse incentive to refrain from work, and do what pleases you, whether that's sleeping at home, or cruising museums?
    Why did you ignore the basketball courts?
  8. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    22 May '15 15:36 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by sh76
    There's a Target (for those who don't know what that is, think Walmart, only with a red logo) around the corner from where I work that opens at 8 AM. I often go in there right at opening to pick up some food and supplies on my way to work.

    Because I get there right at opening, I often see the daily "huddle" which, I understand, is a daily feature at all Targ ...[text shortened]... k.

    Do people need work for their own self-esteem, aside from whatever compensation they earn?
    The desire to work and feel useful is a basic trait that most people share. It's also true that it's not just about the paycheck. It's about coming home at night feeling one has done something worthwhile with their day. A great deal has been printed about those "lazy welfare scabs" sucking resources off the public, and I'd be happy to get rid it, if.......we got rid of ALL of it. What most people in our fine country turn a blind eye to however is for every $1.00 spent on social welfare programs, $1.90 is spent on corporate welfare programs. This is not money given to companies in exchange for goods and/or services, it's money simply given away because they are big, and don't have to play by the same rules as small business's do. So, let's get these "scabs" off welfare, and let's do away with the hypocritical 6 and 7 figure business exec's that whine about those welfare scabs, while sucking double the amount of $$ the welfare scabs get. Sound like a plan??
  9. 22 May '15 15:58 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by bill718
    The desire to work and feel useful is a basic trait that most people share. It's also true that it's not just about the paycheck. It's about coming home at night feeling one has done something worthwhile with their day. A great deal has been printed about those "lazy welfare scabs" sucking resources off the public, and I'd be happy to get rid it, if.......we ...[text shortened]... lfare scabs, while sucking double the amount of $$ the welfare scabs get. Sound like a plan??
    I have no problem getting rid of all inappropriate spending of taxpayer money. Collecting money in taxes from one person simply to give it to another is immoral.

    If you want to see how the two sides work together just look at his picture:

    http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=JN./qZg9gRdMIuhsQBE8UfsBg&w=300&h=300&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0
  10. 22 May '15 22:40 / 1 edit
    After sitting around drawing Social Security/State retirement for a month, I got bored and I started working for Target, unloading the delivery trucks and stocking shelves from 4 AM to 11 AM 3 or 4 days a week.
    Gotta do something, even when money is no problem. I just don't understand how people can sit around on welfare and do nothing all day.
    Yes the day and evening teams do a huddle at the early part of each shift, to pass info along and let people know what's going on. It's a good idea.
  11. 22 May '15 22:47
    Originally posted by Eladar
    Unemployed in the US can get better goods and services than those who work at Target.
    You are right.
    So sad that they are allowed to do so.
    Likie these unemployed get to do:
    They can vote too, isn't that sick?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=325PJrTv7Es
  12. 23 May '15 09:35
    Originally posted by sh76

    In countries where the social welfare system guarantees you a living wage for sitting on your butt all day if you're unemployed (including, to one extent or another, the US), most people nevertheless choose to work.

    Do people need work for their own self-esteem, aside from whatever compensation they earn?[/b]
    I was moved by your post, not so much because of what you observed but because YOU observed it. An astute observation, well told. (I hope you realize what you have seen) Mostly the unemployed do not choose to be unemployed. Mostly the welfare recipients deserve welfare. It is a small but highlighted minority that tarnish the rest ( in some eyes at least). even the person doing the lowest of jobs( subjectively speaking) should be proud of doing it. It is sad to make people think that their job is unimportant and they should do better.
    The Pep talk is to make people feel valued in lue of paying them a real wage.( as well as practical applications) They talk as though they value you( and a manager "may" value you) but the corporation does not, hence the pay. A person taking 30 seconds to make a call instead of 40 does so usually for their own self worth. We all seek approval in one form or another. But the one to benefit is not her but "other" stakeholders. her satisfaction may be her only reward. the faster one does the faster everyone else is expected to go, but no-one will get paid more. as they get better, more people will get laid of. So who benefits???.
  13. 23 May '15 09:41
    Originally posted by Eladar
    [Collecting money in taxes from one person simply to give it to another is immoral.
    "simply" gives this statement credence. welfare is "not" simply giving. Not collecting taxes to "give" is immoral.
  14. 23 May '15 16:15
    Originally posted by jimmac
    "simply" gives this statement credence. welfare is "not" simply giving. Not collecting taxes to "give" is immoral.
    I guess that depends on your country's Constitution.

    The US Constitution was a document designed for a free country where people are free to give to the poor instead of having the government take the money by force.

    People who want to grow the power of government have abused their position with half truths and lies.
  15. 23 May '15 22:51
    Originally posted by Eladar
    I guess that depends on your country's Constitution.

    The US Constitution was a document designed for a free country where people are free to give to the poor instead of having the government take the money by force.

    People who want to grow the power of government have abused their position with half truths and lies.
    Do you mean, " if the constitution is humanitarian based or not". Being free to give is fine, I doubt any government could remove that " right". The problem, as I see it, is that as the gap between the rich and poor grows, the less people are able to give and the more that the poor need it. One of the main components of becoming " rich" is that you need a society to "take" the money from. When you "take" a disproportionate amount a proportion ( tax) should be returned.
    As this thread highlights, most people want to contribute.( I do mean MOST) . but productivity is denying them the potential to do so, at least in many fields. As I have stated before, productivity is, in and of itself, not bad, but if the benefits are not shared (tax) then that is very bad. To clarify, A business can ONLY be successful in the event that it has a society to grow in therefore there is a logically a debt due back ( if it is profitable enogh) to that, that grew it in the first place.
    I believe that half truths and lies are often perceived as such based on ones own preconceptions. When you " believe" something, anything that contradicts it must be a lie. We do not often enough ( or get tired of doing it) test our own "beliefs".