·Theme
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Time to on government assistance
Time to on government assistanceFollow
Science is what makes God cry, right?
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
Jophiel wrote:
Well, yes. It doesn't start with a variant of "Let's pretend".
Um... Actually, that's exactly what the process of designing a test for an hypothesis consists of. Einstein might say something like "let's pretend (although he'd use the word imagine, just as I did), that you're on an elevator accelerating upwards/downwards/sideways/etc" and then use those modeled cases to derive tests. It's how you do science.
Quote:
This explains a lot about your typical conservative's grasp of science though...
There's some massive irony right there. I get that liberals love to just redefine things to suit their needs, but this is a bit ridiculous. So now science doesn't actually involve deriving tests for your hypotheses? Interesting!
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
The difference between you and Einstein is that he didn't stop at the hypothesis.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
gbaji wrote:
Um... Actually, that's exactly what the process of designing a test for an hypothesis consists of. Einstein might say something like "let's pretend (although he'd use the word imagine, just as I did), that you're on an elevator accelerating upwards/downwards/sideways/etc" and then use those modeled cases to derive tests. It's how you do science.
You're adorable.
Quote:
So now science doesn't actually involve deriving tests for your hypotheses?
Well, it certainly doesn't stop at saying "let's pretend!" which is your way of doing "science".
"Let's make up a scenario and then I'll make up the numbers and then I'll insist that these numbers I made up in this scenario I made up prove I'm right. Science!"
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
gbaji I stop reading at this:
Anyone who prices their product like this is going to go broke quickly. Profit comes not from your cost of labor, but by multiplying the cost of materials by a factor of how much you want in profit. I will charge differently for something I will sell retail then what I will charge wholesale. I work out the price by taking this amount and adding my labor, overhead and any other costs I accrue in getting the piece of jewelry to the customer.
Lets break down the retail price I charge for a piece of jewelry.
5(cost of materials) + (hourly rate x hours work) + packaging + shipping + overhead = retail price
Overhead is calculated by adding up such things as rent, electric, fuel, wear on tools etc and then figuring out how much it cost me each day to run the business.
So a piece of jewelry that only cost me $35 dollars in material is going to cost over $175 plus (hours x $10) plus overhead and all the rest of my costs in making it.
If I spent $150 on materials I expect to spend over 3 days working on making a very well made piece of jewelry that will sell for well over $1000.
Quote:
If it costs me $100 to buy the materials for a birdhouse, and I can sell the assembled product to you for $150, then my profit is $50. You learned this in school, right? What this means is that all gains from labor are profit. Always. What I added to the cost to buy the materials for the birdhouse was my time/labor. I get that some of you want profit to be some kind of dirty word only applied to evil rich people, but the reality is that every time you collect a paycheck you are receiving profits off your labor.
Anyone who prices their product like this is going to go broke quickly. Profit comes not from your cost of labor, but by multiplying the cost of materials by a factor of how much you want in profit. I will charge differently for something I will sell retail then what I will charge wholesale. I work out the price by taking this amount and adding my labor, overhead and any other costs I accrue in getting the piece of jewelry to the customer.
Lets break down the retail price I charge for a piece of jewelry.
5(cost of materials) + (hourly rate x hours work) + packaging + shipping + overhead = retail price
Overhead is calculated by adding up such things as rent, electric, fuel, wear on tools etc and then figuring out how much it cost me each day to run the business.
So a piece of jewelry that only cost me $35 dollars in material is going to cost over $175 plus (hours x $10) plus overhead and all the rest of my costs in making it.
If I spent $150 on materials I expect to spend over 3 days working on making a very well made piece of jewelry that will sell for well over $1000.
In the place of a Dark Lord you would have a Queen! Not dark but beautiful and terrible as the Morn! Treacherous as the Seas! Stronger than the foundations of the Earth! All shall love me and despair! -ElneClare
This Post is written in Elnese, If it was an actual Post, it would make sense.
This Post is written in Elnese, If it was an actual Post, it would make sense.
lolgaxe wrote:
The difference between you and Einstein is that he didn't stop at the hypothesis.
Einstein was a theoretical physicist. The real difference between the two is that Einstein was a genius and gbaji is a ******.
ElneClare wrote:
gbaji I stop reading at this:
Anyone who prices their product like this is going to go broke quickly. Profit comes not from your cost of labor, but by multiplying the cost of materials by a factor of how much you want in profit. I will charge differently for something I will sell retail then what I will charge wholesale. I work out the price by taking this amount and adding my labor, overhead and any other costs I accrue in getting the piece of jewelry to the customer.
Lets break down the retail price I charge for a piece of jewelry.
5(cost of materials) + (hourly rate x hours work) + packaging + shipping + overhead = retail price
Overhead is calculated by adding up such things as rent, electric, fuel, wear on tools etc and then figuring out how much it cost me each day to run the business.
So a piece of jewelry that only cost me $35 dollars in material is going to cost over $175 plus (hours x $10) plus overhead and all the rest of my costs in making it.
If I spent $150 on materials I expect to spend over 3 days working on making a very well made piece of jewelry that will sell for well over $1000.
Quote:
If it costs me $100 to buy the materials for a birdhouse, and I can sell the assembled product to you for $150, then my profit is $50. You learned this in school, right? What this means is that all gains from labor are profit. Always. What I added to the cost to buy the materials for the birdhouse was my time/labor. I get that some of you want profit to be some kind of dirty word only applied to evil rich people, but the reality is that every time you collect a paycheck you are receiving profits off your labor.
Anyone who prices their product like this is going to go broke quickly. Profit comes not from your cost of labor, but by multiplying the cost of materials by a factor of how much you want in profit. I will charge differently for something I will sell retail then what I will charge wholesale. I work out the price by taking this amount and adding my labor, overhead and any other costs I accrue in getting the piece of jewelry to the customer.
Lets break down the retail price I charge for a piece of jewelry.
5(cost of materials) + (hourly rate x hours work) + packaging + shipping + overhead = retail price
Overhead is calculated by adding up such things as rent, electric, fuel, wear on tools etc and then figuring out how much it cost me each day to run the business.
So a piece of jewelry that only cost me $35 dollars in material is going to cost over $175 plus (hours x $10) plus overhead and all the rest of my costs in making it.
If I spent $150 on materials I expect to spend over 3 days working on making a very well made piece of jewelry that will sell for well over $1000.
Is the jewelry market doing that well?
Just as Planned.
Timelordwho wrote:
Is the jewelry market doing that well?
Dirty hippies are easy to take advantage of?
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Quote:
If it costs me $100 to buy the materials for a birdhouse, and I can sell the assembled product to you for $150, then my profit is $50. You learned this in school, right? What this means is that all gains from labor are profit. Always. What I added to the cost to buy the materials for the birdhouse was my time/labor. I get that some of you want profit to be some kind of dirty word only applied to evil rich people, but the reality is that every time you collect a paycheck you are receiving profits off your labor.
This is incorrect.
If you assume that your labor is completely without monetary value you can call that extra 50 bucks profit. If not, you need to consider how much your trade is worth. You don't randomly sell a birdhouse for 50 dollars more than you paid for materials. That fifty dollars is calculated by you. Maybe by how long the bird house took to make, or maybe you had to go into a bug-infested swamp for materials and so have to account for the time and effort you put into treating and living with bug bites. Or maybe you have to place value on your labor on how big and heavy the tree was that you had to cut down to size to make your bird house, knowing that the number of large trees you'll be able to take down is limited. Next you translate that value into an exchange medium - money. You could make a deal that you'll make the birdhouse for the cost of materials plus a casserole. That would mean your labor for building a bird house is worth a casserole.
We must place monetary value on human labor to make capitalism work. If we don't we have basically considered the human being as a machine, or perhaps a slave - you pick. This is where you have such a disconnect with reality, with economics and with the human species.
There would only be profit if you are getting more for the birdhouse than what you paid in time and labor.
...and this is precisely where many corporations are getting 'profits' for their shareholders, they're underpaying their workers.
What school did you go to?
Edited, Aug 11th 2014 3:02pm by Elinda
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
gbaji wrote:
. They might *also* value other things you do, but we can only quantitatively measure those associated with earnings.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not saying that there's no value to parents spending time with their children. I am saying that there's a massive value to children being raised by parent(s) who earn a living. Thus, in yet another (somewhat indirect) way, we see how earnings contribute to society.
gbaji wrote:
You're arguing the exception, while ignoring the rule. When comparing people (legally) earning their money, we can generally say that the contribution each provides to society is relative to their respective earnings. Everything else remaining the same, this is a pretty decent rule of thumb.
gbaji wrote:
Family values starts with providing for one's own family first though. And that kinda starts with earning a salary, right? Hell. Earning enough so that your spouse can remain a stay at home mom/dad is even better, right? But you're able to do that because you earn more. It all starts with making the things you do more valuable to other people.
gbaji wrote:
This is in contrast to the Left's approach of ignoring what one actually does for others and just reward people for showing up. And while that sounds all nice and charitable, over time it results in more and more cost for less and less "contribution". And along the way we actually end out discouraging the very charity and contribution we may have started out thinking we were trying to reward.
Edited, Aug 11th 2014 9:38am by someproteinguy
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
Quote:
We must place monetary value on human labor to make capitalism work. If we don't we have basically considered the human being as a machine, or perhaps a slave - you pick.
Under capitalism, slave labour and machine runtime both have monetary value. When sold, the price of these commodities is fixed in exactly the same way as that of a free person's labour - supply and demand. Capitalists will pay as little as possible for any of these things. Slave labour might be cheaper or more expensive than the labour of a free person, but the assignation of value itself does not distinguish them in any way. The distinction between the two, under capitalism, is that a free person sells their own labour, whereas a slave's labour is sold or consumed by their master.
Capitalism does result (or 'require') in the assignation of an exchange value to labour, but there is nothing in this valuation that humanises the labourer or differentiates them from a machine.
Quote:
Or maybe you have to place value on your labor on how big and heavy the tree was that you had to cut down to size to make your bird house, knowing that the number of large trees you'll be able to take down is limited. Next you translate that value into an exchange medium - money. You could make a deal that you'll make the birdhouse for the cost of materials plus a casserole. That would mean your labor for building a bird house is worth a casserole.
Labour's true value is determined solely by the labourer? That's not an economic theory that gbaji would have ran into in school or much of anywhere else. And, if you'll forgive me, 'businesses pay people less than they think they're worth' packs a good deal less rhetorical force than 'businesses pay people less than they're worth'.
Kavekk wrote:
Labour's true value is determined solely by the labourer? That's not an economic theory that gbaji would have ran into in school or much of anywhere else. And, if you'll forgive me, 'businesses pay people less than they think they're worth' packs a good deal less rhetorical force than 'businesses pay people less than they're worth'.
But, if at the end of the day the burger joint is making a substantial profit off selling their burgers then something is out of balance. Either the wages have been valued to low or the burgers have been priced too high. But, the burgers are selling, so, it's gotta be the former.
That's all I'm saying.
Edited, Aug 11th 2014 10:02pm by Elinda
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Elinda wrote:
But, if at the end of the day the burger joint is making a substantial profit off selling their burgers then something is out of balance. Either the wages have been valued to low or the burgers have been priced too high. But, the burgers are selling, so, it's gotta be the former.
Because they totally care what we think, obviously.
Edited, Aug 11th 2014 1:21pm by someproteinguy
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
someproteinguy wrote:
Elinda wrote:
But, if at the end of the day the burger joint is making a substantial profit off selling their burgers then something is out of balance. Either the wages have been valued to low or the burgers have been priced too high. But, the burgers are selling, so, it's gotta be the former.
Because they totally care what we think, obviously.
Edited, Aug 11th 2014 1:21pm by someproteinguy
Because Housespouses don't work for money you need to come up with a conversion factor. I think we've failed in that we like to compare them to 'baby-sitters' - five bucks and hour, eh. I think we also value our day-care providers and child-hood educators way low.
Though this has traditionally been women's work. With men moving into the family-keeping careers we should see their monetary value increase.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
With men moving into the family-keeping careers we should see their monetary value increase.
Totally. I'm worth ten of you broads, I tell the moms at the park that every day.
Totally. I'm worth ten of you broads, I tell the moms at the park that every day.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
It's not just baby sitting, it's also cooking and cleaning. That's three minimum wage jobs being juggled at any given time.
Or, if it's just baby sitting, it's at minimum wage for the entire hours of the week (168) and house spouses should be valued at about 1200 bucks a week.
Or, if it's just baby sitting, it's at minimum wage for the entire hours of the week (168) and house spouses should be valued at about 1200 bucks a week.
Elinda wrote:
I think we also value our day-care providers and child-hood educators way low.
If we didn't, no one could afford to use them in order to go to work. Which would sort of defeat the purpose.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Someone needs to invent a baby that comes pre-programmed with basic life function abilities.
It's 2014 and our babies still poo in diapers. What's with that?
It's 2014 and our babies still poo in diapers. What's with that?
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Catwho wrote:
It's not just baby sitting, it's also cooking and cleaning. That's three minimum wage jobs being juggled at any given time.
Or, if it's just baby sitting, it's at minimum wage for the entire hours of the week (168) and house spouses should be valued at about 1200 bucks a week.
Or, if it's just baby sitting, it's at minimum wage for the entire hours of the week (168) and house spouses should be valued at about 1200 bucks a week.
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
Elinda wrote:
It's 2014 and our babies still poo in diapers. What's with that?
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
What we really need is a diet that creates dry sweet-scented poo.
I found the oddest pile of refuse in my yard last night - on the edge next to the woods. It was big. So at least a medium sized animal. It had lots of berry seeds. Can't figure out what kind of beasty left it there.
I found the oddest pile of refuse in my yard last night - on the edge next to the woods. It was big. So at least a medium sized animal. It had lots of berry seeds. Can't figure out what kind of beasty left it there.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
I bet it was that frog you let free. Created a monster! 
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
someproteinguy wrote:
I bet it was that frog you let free. Created a monster!
The Pooping Frog Monster. Sure to be a boss mob in some rpg.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Elinda wrote:
I found the oddest pile of refuse in my yard last night - on the edge next to the woods. It was big. So at least a medium sized animal. It had lots of berry seeds. Can't figure out what kind of beasty left it there.
/nonchalant whistling
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
It is perfectly normal for Elinda to be rummaging around turds at night.
Just as Planned.
Recent Visitors: 397
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (397)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Time to on government assistance
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC