The future of the Forex industry - page 176
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Are you reading my posts through a line? I wrote that the minimum should be raised by either a marginal coefficient or a progressive tax.
Why and why?
What's the point? - To raise by reducing the income of the richer?
Can you explain clearly?
The right thing to do would be to trade money for responsibility. I give you money above the market - you are the one who intelligently manages all the problems in your job yourself. This is both capitalistic and social, exactly as much as you are willing to take on all the headaches.
Right... That's why the managers make more money than the engineers, who cannot understand it...
If a man works, he must not be poor.
Categorically incorrect judgement.
Demonstrates the depth of your misunderstanding of economics.
He must not just work, but work efficiently (in the broad market sense) not to be poor!
Realise what poverty is.
Poverty is being at the tail end of the distribution.
There will always be poor, no matter what level of development the country has reached.
Is that supposed to be clear?
So to not be poor (= not to be at the tail end) you have to be more efficient than others.
Have I made myself clear?
... The minimum should be raised by either a marginal coefficient or a progressive tax.
Why do you think that the minimum should be raised?
What is the reason for doing so?
Do people deserve this promotion?What about slackers and slackers?
Don't you realise that they are the cause of their own downfall?
And there are countless states in-between between the slackers and the really working ones, isn't it obvious?
As well as degrees of success.
Isn't it logical that the successful and valuable get more and the losers/babes get less?
The minimum wage prevents them from starving to death - that's enough - no more is needed.
They should be responsible for their own financial well-being from here on out.
Ahaha... Typical STILL NOTHING to do! 😀😁😂 typical socialist...
You'll end up with an isolated economy that will degrade or have serious problems.
Isn't it obvious?
Capital and business really don't like restrictions.
When you increase the burden on business - it just starts working less in that territory.
Proven more than once.
There are no fools.
No help for the lazy and slackers. The minimum wage should be such that a person would be interested in working, not in receiving unemployment benefits.
So? Are all capitalists in Sweden running away? Or is the Swedish economy still alive and well?
Doesn't it make sense that the successful and valuable get more and the losers/babes get less?
Again a platitude. Who can argue with that?
I work in a factory from morning till night, and all I have is money for vodka. My wife takes the rest... and I don't know where she goes...
I pray the Lord to send down the Holy Grail. So that I can cut my cash while I'm sitting at the monitor in my pants.
Do people deserve this promotion?
People do.
I work in a factory from morning till night, and all I have is money for vodka.
That's why my face got bigger than the photo on the pass they took at the entrance.
I work in a factory from morning till night, and all I have is money for vodka.
Alexander_K2:
The wretched way of the Doctor, apparently now, lying drunk as a skunk.
You must mean you! I've just understood you correctly.)
I work in a factory from morning till night, and all I have is money for vodka. My wife takes the rest... and I don't know where she goes...
I pray the Lord to send down the Holy Grail. So I can cut my cash while sitting at the monitor in my panties.
I've got to shake Renate.) I wish he'd give us a better hint. At least in person.