Fighting Poverty One Idea at a Time

University president takes pay cut to give pay raise to minimum wage workers

The pay raises given to employees will stay in place, and new employees will be hired with higher pay rates.

Demosthenes wrote:
plavonica wrote:

I don't think that this is helping our poverty problem much.

US cities’ crackdown on homeless people is ‘close to ethnic cleansing’

I guess you can't make homelessness itself illegal but you can make everything the homeless do illegal instead, plus some revenue from fines/fees from other people that do such usually innocuous stuff.

I seem to remember seeing an article not that long ago (and as I type this, I'm wondering who is going to post the link to it earlier from this thread) of building owners/designers basically taking steps to make it harder for the homeless to try to seek shelter in alcoves. Stuff like spies in entryways to buildings that are out of the wind and the rain, so that people couldn't lay down there, etc...

Sigh, as someone who would probably be homeless without the support of my family right now, this kind of crap scares the hell out of me and really depresses me. For all this talk of us being a Christian nation as so many people would like to believe, we certainly are pretty bad at the whole mercy for the meek and treating strangers as if they were Christ.

Being Christian doesn't make us decent human beings. It just means we're forgiven for being dicks.

plavonica wrote:

He went from $340k to $250k. As an paper pusher administrator. That reduction will pay for 15 workers at slightly above min wage.

How many others are doing it? I don't have a problem with the president of a univ making a higher salary. I am cynical about admin, but I think it would be great if others followed his example. And the story certainly points to a trend that many criticize. Better yet, let the football coaches be paid salaries in line with every other state employee and let that money go to raising the minimum wage paid to the lowest paid employees.

concentric wrote:
plavonica wrote:

He went from $340k to $250k. As an paper pusher administrator. That reduction will pay for 15 workers at slightly above min wage.

How many others are doing it? I don't have a problem with the president of a univ making a higher salary. I am cynical about admin, but I think it would be great if others followed his example. And the story certainly points to a trend that many criticize. Better yet, let the football coaches be paid salaries in line with every other state employee and let that money go to raising the minimum wage paid to the lowest paid employees.

Maybe we should be looking at other industries as well.

nel e nel wrote:
concentric wrote:
plavonica wrote:

He went from $340k to $250k. As an paper pusher administrator. That reduction will pay for 15 workers at slightly above min wage.

How many others are doing it? I don't have a problem with the president of a univ making a higher salary. I am cynical about admin, but I think it would be great if others followed his example. And the story certainly points to a trend that many criticize. Better yet, let the football coaches be paid salaries in line with every other state employee and let that money go to raising the minimum wage paid to the lowest paid employees.

Maybe we should be looking at other industries as well.

Most definitely.

concentric wrote:
nel e nel wrote:
concentric wrote:
plavonica wrote:

He went from $340k to $250k. As an paper pusher administrator. That reduction will pay for 15 workers at slightly above min wage.

How many others are doing it? I don't have a problem with the president of a univ making a higher salary. I am cynical about admin, but I think it would be great if others followed his example. And the story certainly points to a trend that many criticize. Better yet, let the football coaches be paid salaries in line with every other state employee and let that money go to raising the minimum wage paid to the lowest paid employees.

Maybe we should be looking at other industries as well.

Most definitely.

While I agree, I'd say there's a pretty big difference between a state university employee (even if he's the head of the university) versus a couple of actors. The actors of the Big Bang theory do not choose the pay rates for everyone else on show. How much are Chuck Lorre and his band of executive producers/the studio heads making per episode?

The Sydney Morning Herald quotes Deadline as saying that BBT will make between $1B and $2B in profits over it's lifetime...

On further thought, maybe entertainment industry pay doesn't reflect what I mean. This is more what I am thinking: Top CEO Pay Ratios

I'm currently reading Liquidated: An Ethnography of Wall Street. She has very sharp analyses of how Wall Street culture and practice has influenced corporate goals and behavior over the past generation. Here's part of the jacket blurb:

Her ethnographic analysis of those workplaces is filled with the voices of stressed first-year associates, overworked and alienated analysts, undergraduates eager to be hired, and seasoned managing directors. Recruited from elite universities as “the best and the brightest,” investment bankers are socialized into a world of high risk and high reward. They are paid handsomely, with the understanding that they may be let go at any time. Their workplace culture and networks of privilege create the perception that job insecurity builds character, and employee liquidity results in smart, efficient business.

I'm no expert in this area, but I think the book's really good. It's also received a lot of good reviews.

Robear wrote:

The Sydney Morning Herald quotes Deadline as saying that BBT will make between $1B and $2B in profits over it's lifetime...

That... doesn't largely change my point. The question becomes, what are WB and CBS doing with that money? How much are their executives (their heads of the university if you will) making versus the support staff on set/in the offices?

The support staff and actors are all union, so it's likely that they are not hurting.

Paleocon wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:
plavonica wrote:

I don't think that this is helping our poverty problem much.

US cities’ crackdown on homeless people is ‘close to ethnic cleansing’

I guess you can't make homelessness itself illegal but you can make everything the homeless do illegal instead, plus some revenue from fines/fees from other people that do such usually innocuous stuff.

I seem to remember seeing an article not that long ago (and as I type this, I'm wondering who is going to post the link to it earlier from this thread) of building owners/designers basically taking steps to make it harder for the homeless to try to seek shelter in alcoves. Stuff like spies in entryways to buildings that are out of the wind and the rain, so that people couldn't lay down there, etc...

Sigh, as someone who would probably be homeless without the support of my family right now, this kind of crap scares the hell out of me and really depresses me. For all this talk of us being a Christian nation as so many people would like to believe, we certainly are pretty bad at the whole mercy for the meek and treating strangers as if they were Christ.

Being Christian doesn't make us decent human beings. It just means we're forgiven for being dicks.

Hopefully it also means we are working toward being compassionate, humble, loving, and kind etc., but that depends on our willingness to take Christ's teaching seriously.

Demosthenes wrote:
concentric wrote:
nel e nel wrote:
concentric wrote:
plavonica wrote:

He went from $340k to $250k. As an paper pusher administrator. That reduction will pay for 15 workers at slightly above min wage.

How many others are doing it? I don't have a problem with the president of a univ making a higher salary. I am cynical about admin, but I think it would be great if others followed his example. And the story certainly points to a trend that many criticize. Better yet, let the football coaches be paid salaries in line with every other state employee and let that money go to raising the minimum wage paid to the lowest paid employees.

Maybe we should be looking at other industries as well.

Most definitely.

While I agree, I'd say there's a pretty big difference between a state university employee (even if he's the head of the university) versus a couple of actors. The actors of the Big Bang theory do not choose the pay rates for everyone else on show. How much are Chuck Lorre and his band of executive producers/the studio heads making per episode?

While true, I also think this kind of crap just fuels this culture of 'f*ck all y'all, I got mines' that is a big part of wealth inequality.

Robear wrote:

The support staff and actors are all union, so it's likely that they are not hurting.

It's also likely they didn't get a 200% pay raise along with the actors either.

Nomad wrote:

Hopefully it also means we are working toward being compassionate, humble, loving, and kind etc., but that depends on our willingness to take Christ's teaching seriously.

Do we really need Christ's teachings to be compassionate, humble, loving, kind and so forth? Is that otherwise missing from people?

Nomad wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:
plavonica wrote:

I don't think that this is helping our poverty problem much.

US cities’ crackdown on homeless people is ‘close to ethnic cleansing’

I guess you can't make homelessness itself illegal but you can make everything the homeless do illegal instead, plus some revenue from fines/fees from other people that do such usually innocuous stuff.

I seem to remember seeing an article not that long ago (and as I type this, I'm wondering who is going to post the link to it earlier from this thread) of building owners/designers basically taking steps to make it harder for the homeless to try to seek shelter in alcoves. Stuff like spies in entryways to buildings that are out of the wind and the rain, so that people couldn't lay down there, etc...

Sigh, as someone who would probably be homeless without the support of my family right now, this kind of crap scares the hell out of me and really depresses me. For all this talk of us being a Christian nation as so many people would like to believe, we certainly are pretty bad at the whole mercy for the meek and treating strangers as if they were Christ.

Being Christian doesn't make us decent human beings. It just means we're forgiven for being dicks.

Hopefully it also means we are working toward being compassionate, humble, loving, and kind etc., but that depends on our willingness to take Christ's teaching seriously.

Good luck with that. Haven't seen much of that, myself.

Paleocon wrote:
Nomad wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:
plavonica wrote:

I don't think that this is helping our poverty problem much.

US cities’ crackdown on homeless people is ‘close to ethnic cleansing’

I guess you can't make homelessness itself illegal but you can make everything the homeless do illegal instead, plus some revenue from fines/fees from other people that do such usually innocuous stuff.

I seem to remember seeing an article not that long ago (and as I type this, I'm wondering who is going to post the link to it earlier from this thread) of building owners/designers basically taking steps to make it harder for the homeless to try to seek shelter in alcoves. Stuff like spies in entryways to buildings that are out of the wind and the rain, so that people couldn't lay down there, etc...

Sigh, as someone who would probably be homeless without the support of my family right now, this kind of crap scares the hell out of me and really depresses me. For all this talk of us being a Christian nation as so many people would like to believe, we certainly are pretty bad at the whole mercy for the meek and treating strangers as if they were Christ.

Being Christian doesn't make us decent human beings. It just means we're forgiven for being dicks.

Hopefully it also means we are working toward being compassionate, humble, loving, and kind etc., but that depends on our willingness to take Christ's teaching seriously.

Good luck with that. Haven't seen much of that, myself.


Here you go
.

article wrote:

The news Brantly contracted Ebola has prompted many to ask why would he put himself at risk.

The answer might be difficult for some to understand, his former college and medical school professor wrote in an op-ed published this week in The Indianapolis Star.

"Simply put, he would say that he had been called to care for the patients in Liberia," Richard Gunderman wrote in the newspaper.

None of it has been surprising to Smith, who first met Brantly five years ago at church.

"When he first started coming to our church, he and his wife made it clear ... they were committed to medical missions," he said.

Robear wrote:

Do we really need Christ's teachings to be compassionate, humble, loving, kind and so forth? Is that otherwise missing from people?

Read what I wrote again, and let me know if you feel that is what I'm communicating.

Nomad wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
Nomad wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:
plavonica wrote:

I don't think that this is helping our poverty problem much.

US cities’ crackdown on homeless people is ‘close to ethnic cleansing’

I guess you can't make homelessness itself illegal but you can make everything the homeless do illegal instead, plus some revenue from fines/fees from other people that do such usually innocuous stuff.

I seem to remember seeing an article not that long ago (and as I type this, I'm wondering who is going to post the link to it earlier from this thread) of building owners/designers basically taking steps to make it harder for the homeless to try to seek shelter in alcoves. Stuff like spies in entryways to buildings that are out of the wind and the rain, so that people couldn't lay down there, etc...

Sigh, as someone who would probably be homeless without the support of my family right now, this kind of crap scares the hell out of me and really depresses me. For all this talk of us being a Christian nation as so many people would like to believe, we certainly are pretty bad at the whole mercy for the meek and treating strangers as if they were Christ.

Being Christian doesn't make us decent human beings. It just means we're forgiven for being dicks.

Hopefully it also means we are working toward being compassionate, humble, loving, and kind etc., but that depends on our willingness to take Christ's teaching seriously.

Good luck with that. Haven't seen much of that, myself.


Here you go
.

article wrote:

The news Brantly contracted Ebola has prompted many to ask why would he put himself at risk.

The answer might be difficult for some to understand, his former college and medical school professor wrote in an op-ed published this week in The Indianapolis Star.

"Simply put, he would say that he had been called to care for the patients in Liberia," Richard Gunderman wrote in the newspaper.

None of it has been surprising to Smith, who first met Brantly five years ago at church.

"When he first started coming to our church, he and his wife made it clear ... they were committed to medical missions," he said.

Robear wrote:

Do we really need Christ's teachings to be compassionate, humble, loving, kind and so forth? Is that otherwise missing from people?

Read what I wrote again, and let me know if you feel that is what I'm communicating.

Mostly, what I am seeing is good, churchgoing Southern folks around me joking about why we can't hire some Russian to shoot down the ebola plane with a Buk missile.

Paleocon wrote:
Nomad wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
Nomad wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:
plavonica wrote:

I don't think that this is helping our poverty problem much.

US cities’ crackdown on homeless people is ‘close to ethnic cleansing’

I guess you can't make homelessness itself illegal but you can make everything the homeless do illegal instead, plus some revenue from fines/fees from other people that do such usually innocuous stuff.

I seem to remember seeing an article not that long ago (and as I type this, I'm wondering who is going to post the link to it earlier from this thread) of building owners/designers basically taking steps to make it harder for the homeless to try to seek shelter in alcoves. Stuff like spies in entryways to buildings that are out of the wind and the rain, so that people couldn't lay down there, etc...

Sigh, as someone who would probably be homeless without the support of my family right now, this kind of crap scares the hell out of me and really depresses me. For all this talk of us being a Christian nation as so many people would like to believe, we certainly are pretty bad at the whole mercy for the meek and treating strangers as if they were Christ.

Being Christian doesn't make us decent human beings. It just means we're forgiven for being dicks.

Hopefully it also means we are working toward being compassionate, humble, loving, and kind etc., but that depends on our willingness to take Christ's teaching seriously.

Good luck with that. Haven't seen much of that, myself.


Here you go
.

article wrote:

The news Brantly contracted Ebola has prompted many to ask why would he put himself at risk.

The answer might be difficult for some to understand, his former college and medical school professor wrote in an op-ed published this week in The Indianapolis Star.

"Simply put, he would say that he had been called to care for the patients in Liberia," Richard Gunderman wrote in the newspaper.

None of it has been surprising to Smith, who first met Brantly five years ago at church.

"When he first started coming to our church, he and his wife made it clear ... they were committed to medical missions," he said.

Robear wrote:

Do we really need Christ's teachings to be compassionate, humble, loving, kind and so forth? Is that otherwise missing from people?

Read what I wrote again, and let me know if you feel that is what I'm communicating.

Mostly, what I am seeing is good, churchgoing Southern folks around me joking about why we can't hire some Russian to shoot down the ebola plane with a Buk missile.

Yikes.

Here is another one for you then.

Nancy Writebol, one of the other Americans infected with the Ebola virus

The trip will be the latest of many journeys for Writebol, whose other missionary ventures include Ecuador and 14 years ministering to orphans and vulnerable children in Africa.

Since August 2013, the Writebols have been in Monrovia, Liberia, with the Serving in Mission group, which worked with Samaritan's Purse.

Nancy guided missionaries and teams and worked with nurses at ELWA hospital, where her husband is the technical services manager, according to the Christian group's website. Nancy was diagnosed with Ebola on July 25.

Those who know Nancy best say that she's motivated not by any quest for personal glory or thirst for adventure, but because she and her husband feel compelled to act because of their faith.

As husband David explained from Africa via Skype to members of Cavalry Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, at a recent vigil for Nancy: "We have been blessed because of what Christ has done for us, (by giving) us eternal life and salvation.

"What else could we do (but help)?"

The fact the Writebols left the comforts of America to live in an area rife with poverty, instability and disease, the fact they put their lives at risk to assist those suffering everyday, isn't surprising to those who know them.

I see what you're giving us, Nomad, but a larger part of me is left wondering, would these mission trips have continued on to at least do the good works if they couldn't proselytize to the communities they're helping? When it comes to mission trips, I recognize they do good works, but I can't help but wonder if they would if they couldn't try to convert the heathens.

Demosthenes wrote:

I see what you're giving us, Nomad, but a larger part of me is left wondering, would these mission trips have continued on to at least do the good works if they couldn't proselytize to the communities they're helping? When it comes to mission trips, I recognize they do good works, but I can't help but wonder if they would if they couldn't try to convert the heathens.

I get what you are saying. If someone sincerely believes (irrespective of evidence) that they are getting richly rewarded in the afterlife for actions in the present, what makes their acts of charity that different from someone who does it for filthy lucre?

That said, I am generally okay with folks doing good things because of relatively benign delusions and think that that sort of magical thinking is fairly harmless. What is problematic, however, is that the very same delusions that are often used as justification for charitable behavior are just as often used to justify all manner of virulent bigotry, callous inhumanity, and self aggrandizing sociopathy.

A bit of a derail, but in the whole fighting poverty thing, it is somewhat related. If you haven't seen this, you must btw.

http://www.intelligencesquared.com/e...

I don't see it as surprising that Christian missionaries would be motivated by their faith to help out. Nor am I surprised that many people *not* motivated by faith are helping out as well. In fact, MSF has the lead in fighting ebola, and it's explicitly non-religious.

Compassion is a *human* virtue.

I'm mostly just remembering friends in high school who were talking about their mission trips and they had so much fun getting to travel, be in a country with a lower drinking age, be with their friends, and help those poor people who don't know God's love. Literally, God's love cam last after traveling, getting drunk, hanging with friends... and even then, you were condescending about the people who you were so glad to help.

Compassion is a *human* virtue.

What country are you living in? This is America, where it's all about getting your own slice of the pie, man!

I did also read about some missions that were cancelled because the sponsoring groups did not want to expose their doctors to ebola. I don't think that's a failing for religious belief. I think the issue of whether you're a "good person" is independent of whether you're religious or not. I look at the articles lauding Christians for going there, and I think, what about the others who went?

Robear wrote:

I did also read about some missions that were cancelled because the sponsoring groups did not want to expose their doctors to ebola. I don't think that's a failing for religious belief. I think the issue of whether you're a "good person" is independent of whether you're religious or not. I look at the articles lauding Christians for going there, and I think, what about the others who went?

Certainly failing at martyrdom, though.

And maybe kinda a lack of faith...

Mark 16:17-18 wrote:

And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Well, it specifies drink, it's ok to be scared of deadly things that you ingest in some other way.

Nomad wrote:
Robear wrote:

Do we really need Christ's teachings to be compassionate, humble, loving, kind and so forth? Is that otherwise missing from people?

Read what I wrote again, and let me know if you feel that is what I'm communicating.

You didn't answer Robear's question, but I will.

No.

(It's possible that you're actually taking the position that Christ is necessary for redemption, but not for being a compassionate, humble, loving, kind human being - in which case we agree here on everything except redemption).

Demosthenes wrote:

I see what you're giving us, Nomad, but a larger part of me is left wondering, would these mission trips have continued on to at least do the good works if they couldn't proselytize to the communities they're helping? When it comes to mission trips, I recognize they do good works, but I can't help but wonder if they would if they couldn't try to convert the heathens.

To us, "proselytizing" is helping. Three of the four gospels record Jesus saying this:

Matthew 16:26
And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul? Is anything worth more than your soul?

Mark 8:26
And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul?

Luke 9:25
And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but are yourself lost or destroyed?

Jesus also makes it very clear that helping people with physical needs is a critical part of the deal in Matthew 25:31-46.

Dimmerswitch wrote:
Nomad wrote:
Robear wrote:

Do we really need Christ's teachings to be compassionate, humble, loving, kind and so forth? Is that otherwise missing from people?

Read what I wrote again, and let me know if you feel that is what I'm communicating.

You didn't answer Robear's question, but I will.

No.

(It's possible that you're actually taking the position that Christ is necessary for redemption, but not for being a compassionate, humble, loving, kind human being - in which case we agree here on everything except redemption).

I didn't answer it because I felt that my initial statement was clear.

Paleocon wrote:

Being Christian doesn't make us decent human beings. It just means we're forgiven for being dicks.

Nomad wrote:

Hopefully it also means we are working toward being compassionate, humble, loving, and kind etc., but that depends on our willingness to take Christ's teaching seriously.

My post was in response to Paleocon's crude but sometimes accurate summary of what a Christian is. The we and our are referring to Christians, not every person.

Who cares if they wouldn't do it if they weren't Christian? Everyone has their motives.