Fuck this village
Fuck this village
56 comments
-
She should be grateful! The protocol is to let her and her child starve, for the crime of contributing more humans to society.
That's what you get for not being a Libertarian sociopath!
-
Oh, and we need to get the birth rate up!
-
-
Childhood Memories Unlocked.
When I was in China, my mother had to find my grandmother (her mother) to babysit me when she was doing migrant work in GuangZhou (she did not have a HuKou in GuangZhou, so its basically a second-class citizen). So I'm assuming my grandmother weren't available for some reason, so my mother took me to her work. It was some sales job that was mostly commission based, the actuall monthly income was low. And also, unlike in the west, the pay was monthly, not bi-weekly or weekly. And forget about unions, they don't exist.
And not the mention, the fine she had to pay for violating the One Child Policy (I was the second child)
-
Very tangential, but isn't the biweekly to weekly pay and american thing? My western country pays monthly too.
-
-
This is not a depiction of a village, this is what happens when the village no longer exists and everyone has to live in isolation from any social safety nets. Or to put it another way, Neoliberalism.
-
Nah, in a village you’d see kids at work with parents sometimes too. Usually you’d have some kind of daycare situation, but sometimes that’s not an option.
I can totally see a village shop where the owner is there with a baby, and the kid kinda grows up in the shop.
The difference is that they’d own the shop tho…
-
We aren't talking about rasing a kid in a literal village within a Neoliberal society. "It takes a village" is an idiom about how the entire community should help to properly raise a child.
The saying emphasizes that a child’s upbringing is a communal effort involving many different people and groups, from parents to teachers to neighbors and grandparents.
The whole idea underscores the belief that the collective involvement of a community is essential in achieving a certain goal or completing a task, like raising a kid.
Essentially, it’s a friendly reminder that asking for help with hard things is okay because many hands make light work.
-
That seemed to be in the past, at least the distant past, the way things worked.
A smith took his son to his "office." The kid watched. Then the kid got older, and curious. The father imparted his wisdom onto his child, and eventually, the son took over for his old man.
Hence, a family line in one business.
Or to look at another way, why people still carry the surname of Smith, Miller, Baker, etc.
-
-
The implication is she was how old when she got pregnant? Yikes. Can we talk about the $.00 Chocolate chip cookie
-
Combo pricing thing
-
-
Fuck you Mcdonalds, pay a living wage. There’s always money in the CEO budget.
-
Y'all. CEO pay ain't the fucking problem.
McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinski made $19,200,000 in compensation last year. (That includes bonuses and stock.)
Divide that out among McDonald's 200,000 employees, ya got a whopping $96 per year raise. Or, a $.05 hourly raise.
Just imagine the fucking outrage if Kempczinski came out and said, "I'm taking $0 pay this year and giving it back to the workers that make it happen! You all get a nickel raise!" LOL, y'all would shit live kittens.
I get it. People see this fucker dragging in more money, in a single year, than they'll make in their whole life and say, "I want a piece of that!" Again, your piece as a McDonalds employee isn't 100 bucks a year. You're not seeing the scale here. McDonalds brought in $30,000,000,000 in revenue last year. CEO pay is .064% of that. (Somebody check my math. Worked my ass off today. Great day! But I'm tired boss.)
I can do this all day long with publicly available numbers. Save your ire for the real problems with capitalism. Screaming about CEO pay is ignorant at best, childish at worst.
-
Now might be a good time to clarify that the problem with CEO pay is not the direct cost of the compensation itself. The problem is the perverse incentive structure of market manipulation and tax engineering where the CEO can increase their bonus by destroying value. This is a negative sum game - what the employees and customers lose is many times greater than what the C-Suite and shareholders gain.
-
Maybe not THE problem but sure as hell part of the problem. Don’t forget, salary is only 1/3 of their offer. They get more……and more. Sounds like more can be the reinvestment to employees salary. Horizontal business, not vertical.
-
Soooo, we shouldn't stop at just the CEO, but all the C-suits and investors then. Got it.
-
Okay, I'm confused. I think your point is that CEO compensation isn't enough to make a significant difference in pay, but you seem to be completely ignoring the fact that there is no way that dude works hundreds+ times harder than the person in the picture, and that the culture that allows that to happen is not healthy. As far as I can tell, no one is going around saying "the only thing that needs to change is how much we pay CEOs."
-
Leaving aside, for the moment, that side benefits make the total much higher, that you think it's about just the CEO proves both that you don't understand the conversation and inherently accept the lie that they're worth that much pay in the first place.
-
-
-
This is so fucking depressing.
-
You don't understand. The baby needs to pull her mom up by her bootstraps.
-
Lazy ass baby
-
-
-
Solution? Have the kid working there too. The children yearn for the fries.
-
While I'm certain the restaurant's health standards are lax enough to permit it, children are peerless disease vectors. If a child is working there, you're gambling with your health.
-
The children. Yearn. For the Fries.
-
-
-
As a former child, I agree.
-
-
iT tAkEs A ViLlAgE
so where is the village? wtf
-
I feel like the person is failing to see beyond the scope of immediate surroundings. They're seeing the manager as the village in this case. The manager being about as good as they're in a position to be (because let's face it, a McDonald's shift manager isn't exactly the 1% and has only probably been there a few months longer and can't tell them to just go home and they'll get paid regardless) looks a lot like "support" if you don't look around for the missing friends, family, community daycares, social programs or charities.
An actual community would see you being supported to be with your child when they weren't being otherwise cared for. Like a year of parental leave from the government, guaranteed job to come back to, and daycare for when you get back.
If it never occurred to you to look for those things, the closest person in authority you can see not being as bad as they could be can look an awful lot like a favor.
-
Maybe if we paid people living wages they could actually afford childcare. Shit is expensive.
-
-
-
Well look, if Musk can do it, it must be good, right?
-
What are these comments? This isn't good at all.
That kid not being in daycare is costing the economy probably 1k a month in child care fees. Not to mention the worker is probably being less efficient.
Imagine if you worked really hard to open some McDonald's branches and the workers all started to bring their kids in. Workers these days have no sense of respect.
-
Yes, will someone please think of the shareholders?
-
You're in Orphan Crushing Machine. The sarcasm here is thick! Don't sweat it, this is a place for dark humor while we cope with the disaster that is our world.
-
The sarcasm here is thick!
It's thickest in the comment above yours 😅
-
-
wOrKeRs ThEsE dAyS
ok boomer
-
I suspect that is sarcasm.
-
-
-
This village needs to be sacked and burned to the fucking ground.
-
I'm pretty sure this is rage bait. What fucking McDonald's worker wears a hi-vis vest?
-
The village needs to learn about birth control. Fuck around and find out.
-
Where is her husband?
-
He's back there fixing the ice cream machine.
-
56 comments