Keith and The Girl Forums - 2081: How to Win Friends & Influence People

Keith and The Girl Forums (https://www.keithandthegirl.com/forums/)

- Show Talk (https://www.keithandthegirl.com/forums/f5/)

- - 2081: How to Win Friends & Influence People (https://www.keithandthegirl.com/forums/f5/2081-how-win-friends-influence-people-18927/)

2081: How to Win Friends & Influence People

With Brian Baldinger – Living with your significant other; David Letterman’s cue card guy vs. his writer; Google Glass banned in movie theaters; feminist t-shirt makers earn $1 an hour; the creator of the game Operation can’t afford a $25,000 operation; man sues subway because the Jared Diet didn’t work; This Week in Football; many high school football seasons cut short due to sexual assault hazing

Guest:
Brian Baldinger
http://static-3.keithandthegirl.net/...er-100x100.jpg

Share this episode: Twitter, Facebook & email

Get the show: on iTunes, on Stitcher and RSS feed

Though I'm guessing that Chemda was probably playing Devil's Advocate on the issue of the feminist T-Shirts, I was kinda shocked to hear her argument.

The bitter irony of this whole T-Shirt thing is that a feminist movement is trying advance their movement by fucking over...well...women.

Arguing that these women are probably getting paid what they would consider to be a good income - by their standards at least...it seems pretty crass to me.

In any case, I'm reading that the whole T-Shirt cause is imploding as I write this.

I don't know if ihollaback is supposed to be a nonprofit but 50% is an awful ratio if so. The is no specific percentage set for a non-profit but industry standard is 10-30% going to admin.
Girl Scouts of America is a non-profit and gives almost 90% back into their programs. FeedingAmerica.com is technically a charity and they give 98% back into their programs.
I get hollaback is not on this scale but still. A lot of people in Non-profits aren't doing it for the money.

Also you might want to check this article out http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6094722
it says what those women make is below the poverty line and those shirts cost $14 to make.

Also, the Fawcett Society (who gets the profit from the shirts) is a UK company focused on bettering women's rights in the UK. Not Mauritius.

Yeah, I was surprised to hear Chemda's argument about the feminist t-shirts, as well. I couldn't help but think that she was probably very quick to throw out some excuses because she likes the cause (i.e. feminism) whereas if they were working for a cause that she didn't care about, she probably wouldn't have been so quick to defend their actions.

By the way, the per capita income in Mauritius is $17,000 (Source: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourcei...+capita+income ). Someone earning $1/hour for work is earning about $2000 / year, assuming they work a 40 hour work week (which they probably aren't). Even if they work 80 hours/week (probably more accurate), they'd still only earn about $4000/year, or about 1/4th the per capita income for Mauritius.

To put that in perspective, the US per capita income is $54,000/year, so earning 1/4th of that would be like earning $13,000/year while working 80 hours a week in the US, or about $3.25 / hour.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamus (Post 833828)

Does it cost the exact same to live everywhere in Australia? In the U.S., the cost for a one bedroom apartment in San Francisco can cost ten times as other other places in the U.S. A one bedroom apartment in SF costs around $3,000 at market value where in other smaller cities the rent is $700 a month at market value.

This is basic economics here.

Regarding textual jobs, they are actually pretty good for women in poorer countries. Why? Because they are often the first careers available to this women that allows them to live independently. Otherwise, they don't have any opportunities to make an independent living or even a job outside the family. Finical independence is a huge step.

Now hearing more of the details about this shirt does make it sound like a bad deal for the women. To be fair, I think Chemda was grasping in order to justify it by the end, but she came around after exhausting arguments.

No it doesn't cost the same to live everywhere in Australia but at least here - for now - we retain the concept of a living wage and we - or at least half of us - aspire to seeing people rise up on the ladder of opportunity. I don't see how any of these women can achieve a better life on a dollar a day??

(Watch Scummy pop his head up here).

Income inequality and rampant, deep seeded poverty are issues that many are trying to address all around the world.

How are third world citizens supposed to rise up out of poverty and achieve a living wage if they are going to continue getting screwed over by first world economies?

This example of the feminist T-shirt debacle is the perfect illustration of our moral and ethical bankruptcy.

You guys got rid of slavery, didn't you...?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean from Australia (Post 833829)

<text was so left wing, it fell off the edge of this post>

(Watch Scummy take a break from working and paying taxes to pop his head up here).

I'll just leave this here: No, the rich don’t pay a ‘fair share’ of tax. They pay all of it

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean from Australia (Post 833829)

How are third world citizens supposed to rise up out of poverty and achieve a living wage if they are going to continue getting screwed over by first world economies?

By waiting for the next Labor government to be elected by the myopic, idealistic left wing cunts, then jumping into boats and illegally migrating to Australia, where they can live off the taxypayers...?

Jokes aside, that whole 3rd world poverty thing is a bummer. Too bad their own rulers are 90% of the problem.

Re: The poll.. Whenever I've encountered this, it's a whole "Seriously? I'll do it?" "Do it!" "you'll pay me X dollars? I'm doing it!" "Do it!"

SO assuming something similar happened that guy needs to pay up. You always confirm a bet at least once and that guy is a douche for not paying up. Someone should bet him to eat shit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamus (Post 833833)

I'm missing something here on your point. You seem to come off objecting to a person getting paid less than what they would get paid say in the U.S. or Australia even if their purchasing power allows for them to live a good life?

An individual earning a dollar a day has any sort of purchasing power?