another question for liberals?

Question

Hypothetical question. Pretty simple, yes or no, but if you want to add an explanation, go ahead.

2 part question:

Mike and Joe are both ditch diggers.

Mike makes it to work on time every day, and leaves at quitting time everyday. Mike works really hard, and takes pride in his work.

Joe usually strolls in a little late. He does as little work as he can. He's usually pretty lazy, always looking for a reason to stop digging. He watches the clock constantly, and usually leaves a few minutes early.

Question 1: Do Mike and Joe both deserve the same pay rate?

Question 2: If Mike has worked for the company 5 years, and Joe has worked for the company 6 years, who should get the promotion?

EDIT:::

the reason I made this question to liberals, is because most are socialists.

In a socialized society, both would get the same pay rate.

EDIT:::

the reason I made this question to liberals, is because most are socialists.

In a socialized society, both would get the same pay rate, and they are all for forcing promotions to people who don't deserve it based on factors like the one I listed.

Answer 1

Question 1 - They both deserve the both STARTING pay rate, but when reconsideration comes in at a later time, then perhaps not. Of course you cannot cut Joe's rate - that's a policy violation.

Question 2 - Mike of course. Promotions should be related to job performance, not seniority - not to mention a year isn't much on him.

Additional comment: Where's the person who comes in ten minutes early, goes the extra mile when the boss asks, gives up five minutes of lunch, and leaves 3 minutes late at minimum wrapping things up for the next day's preparation, maybe up to 15 - in other words, the one who spends the whole day digging ditches, and uses the extra time to put away things, to make sure there are no safety hazard violations, or just to generally be helpful. Since that's the kind of supervisor that people want - or, even just one notch higher, that's who SHOULD get the promotion. Exceptional, not just MEETING standards. This is a country founded on excellence.

Answer 2

The person who asked this question is really close minded. First of all, Mike and Joe's starting pay should be the same....say, seven dollars an hour. Suppose Joe does a better job than Mike. When raise or promotion time comes up, Joe should get a higher raise than Mike. I think every year, every worker should receive a raise to compensate for the rising inflation. I am a liberal. I believe everyone should receive a livable wage, but at the same time, I think that those who work to achieve more should receive more.

Answer 3

I really look forward to answering questions from you.

1. Joe, most likely would not keep his job for 5 years. Tardiness and sloth usually end up in a pink slip before too long.

2. If Mike and Joe have the same start date, which you have said they do not, will most likely start out with the same pay rate. Over time I would imagine that they would both get the cost of living increase, but Mike would probably end up with a nickel or two more.

3. Neither will end up with the promotion. They will bring in someone from outside with managerial skills and Mike and Joe will never get out of ditch digging because neither of them has a high school diploma and have to dig ditches for a living.

4. Socialists and liberals do not necessarily go hand in hand. That is an assumption. The old saying about Democrats and Republicans are, “Democrats want their hands in your business, and Republicans want you hand in your lives." To bad though, Mike is killed four weeks later in an infection that could be treated by a simple medical procedure, but he cannot afford insurance. Go Joe!

Answer 4

ROFL let me see...does Mike vote republican?
Does Joe vote Democrat? Is this a red or blue state? Big Big question is Joe an undocumented worker (ROFL) and is Mike a white, US citizen?
ANSWER:
If Joe is a Democrat we should give him a state sponsored raise every few years so that the Democrats can claim they are working for him (minimum wage). If the owner of the company is a hard working person who is a Republican then we know that he is a greedy slug who should pay more taxes so that Joe can afford nice things he has not earned through hard work. Last but not least If Mike is a white male US citizen and Joe is an illegal who broke US law and not supposed to be here in the first place then Joe not only deserves a raise, he deserves a free education and health care for himself and his family. Mike and the owner of his company should pay higher taxes so that the Democrat's can tell Joe that they are working for him. Mike should be ashamed of himself and so should the owner of his company. How can we be a tolerant society if we do not reward law breakers and slackers. If Mike and the owner of his company is rewarded for hard work, how could that be fair?

Hilary in 08 LMAO

Answer 5

If Joe has worked at the company for 6 years and is as bad an employee as you say, then *he* should definitely get the promotion. A company run in that manner will always reward shortcuts, mismanagement, and laziness and allow the worst to rise to the top. Then, when something genuinely goes wrong, the top brass can point at Joe's record and say they're "taking responsibility for the problem" and offer him up to the public as a sacrificial lamb while leaving the higher-ups still in power and not changing a single thing about the way things are run.

For further examples of this bleeding-heart, liberal moonbat behavior see: Enron, Adephia, or the Bush administration.

Answer 6

Neither deserves a raise or promotion.
When you sign up for the job at a certain wage, that's the deal, no more, no less. If you want to be ditch digger foreman, apply for a ditch digger foreman's job. Being a good ditch digger may have little to do, if anything, about the next job above it. It's conceivable that since Joe is constantly looking at the clock as a ditch digger, he'll be constantly looking at the clock as a ditch digger foreman and try to push for more production out of his subordinates.

I've worked with many a men who totally sucked at being an Indian and should have been fired, but they ended up making great chiefs once they got into the new position.

Answer 7

This is a good question.This was asked to all liberals regardless of background I assume, so here it goes.Mike and Joe deserve the same pay rate.In that context, if Mike and Joe are the only two guys digging that ditch, then they gauge each other.If Joe could give a ****, then Mike could give a ****. If the job gets done, then somebody else is making the big bucks.You don't make money working for the man.That's where the immigrants come in!!!!

Answer 8

What does this question have to do with being liberal? It sounds to me like you should be directing it towards communists.
Anyways, no they do not deserve the same pay, and Mike should get the promotion. But you should also take the time to consider that there is always a grey area.

Answer 9

Sure they do just ask Karl Marx. Joe is just upset because he is oppressed by the rich and feels that because of the oppression he endured in his early years he has earned a little extra time to him self. As for the promotion well if he was able to get away with this for 6 years and not get fired by his capitalist pig employer than he is obviously a smart man and should receive the promotion.. . .

Oh I better stop I might fall on the floor laughing and hurt something I may want latter.

Answer 10

Obviously their supervisor would need to make the decision, but no, they do not deserve same rate. Sure, they should start at the same, but when evaluation and raise time roll around, Joe should get the short end of the stick. The same goes for promotions. Always evaluate the workers, possibly secretly and with interviews, and determine decisions based on that.