Salaried, ExemptFollow

Um... Because quite a lot of the time you don't want or need someone to work full time for you, or for a full year?

You paid them by the task. If you were milking cows, you'd pay them per bucket. The concept of labor as a valuing time is strictly a post labor movement thing. I guess maybe you'd pay a general laborer by the day if he was doing some generic thing? Certainly no one was booking and keeping track of hours in a time where most people didn't own clocks. Just think about how idiotic the logistics would have been.

It's an industrial revolution thing really (at least large scale time based labor forces). Labor movements largely started *after* mass labor (ie: factories). Which is kinda obvious if you stop and think about it.



Yeah. Hence my comment earlier about paying by the day. Same concept though. Day labor has existed for a long time. There are documented examples going back to Egypt. Interestingly enough, the distinction between salary and time based pay was present then as well. The overseers were paid a contract sum for building some specific thing, or providing X goods, etc. The people he hired were generally paid for the time they worked. So no, this is not some new thing that has only existed since the invention of labor unions and overtime pay.

This, and many other false historical assumptions are kinda the hallmark of modern progressive movements. You need to lie to people about the base human condition in order to get them to accept the one you're trying to sell. It's not surprising really. It's just funny to watch you sputter and grasp at straws trying to defend the lies. I never quite know if you are trying hard to defend what you really believe to be true, or if you know it's all BS, but for some silly reason want people to believe it. I mean, c'mon. You can't possibly really think that time based pay only exists as a result of modern labor regulations, can you? Or can you? Hmmm....

Edited, Jan 7th 2015 6:25pm by gbaji

Gods, this is going to end up at the silver mine next door, isn't it?

Yeah, this place was a real party.

Gods, this is going to end up at the silver mine next door, isn't it?

Going to?

https://everquest.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=4&mid=1418851151267557745&h=50&p=2#97

My New Year's resolution is to finally come to terms with the fact that gbaji is a sock troll, and not allow myself to get trolled into responding to him.

It really takes a brilliant, but twisted mind to pull this off.

I suspect Kavekkk. Or Kavekk. Whichever -- one of them is up to no good.

And just to make this point clear (and before you try to repeat this straw man). The term "hourly wage" in the context of this discussion, was clearly in contrast to salary wages. It was, in fact, the entire point we were arguing. So whether or not they were paid by the hour or day, or had accurate clocks is not the issue at all. It's that they were paid for short term periods of work at an agreed upon wage that was dependent on showing up at set times and working at whatever task the employer demanded for that period of time.

This has always existed. Get it?

This:



Becomes this:



Going from whether the wage methodology existed at all prior to overtime laws, to when it "became the standard" is textbook goalpost moving.

Yes. Both of them. Else why lump them together? Think Joph! "They've existed back into early history". Not "one of them, but not the other existed".



Sure. But adding the fact that per-task wages existed well prior to overtime laws in no way affects the fact that hourly wages also existed. Unless you're really going to buy Smash's very lame "but they didn't have clocks!" approach, that is. Can we accept that it's not about the specific time period, but that the time periods are relatively short (a day or less), and you're paid just for the time you are physically on site and working? It's specifically in contrast to contract work and salary work. Which was the whole point of the discussion.



I just tossed that out there as a first and simple reference. I didn't look anything up when I made the comment about it going back to Egypt. I remembered it from one of many conversations with my former roommate, whose area of ancient history expertise included Egypt (mostly Egypt in fact). She was one of the people consulted for the animated film Prince of Egypt. But wiki will have to do for you, since you didn't have an ancient historian to tell you this stuff directly. You're free to go to a local university (they have those in Chicago, right?) and ask someone you think is qualified if you don't believe me. I'm quite confident in the answer.

Edited, Jan 8th 2015 7:22pm by gbaji

I just tossed that out there as a first and simple reference. I didn't look anything up when I made the comment about it going back to Egypt. I remembered it from one of many conversations with my former roommate, whose area of ancient history expertise included Egypt (mostly Egypt in fact). She was one of the people consulted for the animated film Prince of Egypt.

That's it ladies and gentlemen, we have reached PEAK GBAJI. There's no need to read another of his posts.

Goodnight, sweet prince, I bid you adieu. I'll never know the answer to my long asserted theory that you must be a troll because no one could possibly be this stupid, but for the record Nexa believes you to be genuine. Turns out she is more cynical than I am, I guess. This is my last reply to you. Enjoy your life, I hope things go really well and you get everything you would have wanted. I'm fucking out. I toss the Almalique Memorial Shroud upon you, rest in peace.

Edited, Jan 8th 2015 10:31pm by Smasharoo

You'll be back.

I came to this exact same decision in 2008 when he swore up and down that Obama must hate America because he didn't wear a flag pin. In all seriousness, no irony, Gbaji stated explicitly that he could think of no reason why Obama wouldn't wear a flag pin except that he was anti-American. I layed off ever replying to him for a good year, then occasionally got suckered back in, then swore off even reading his posts, but threads got hard to follow. He's still on ignore but I read about 1 out of every 10 of his posts in a thread just to get context.

I don't remember Gbaji following Smash around for a month, calling him "Master" and praising his wisdom. Man, conservatives sure aren't very good at honoring their pledges and commitments, huh?