Lurker > RchHomieQuanChi

I don't see how they aren't in danger at the very least.

At this rate, every other place sells games, and usually at a more affordable price point. Their used games are legitimately more expensive than brand new copies at many other places. That's without even getting into digital copies, where you don't have to worry about something being sold out.

I think they recognize this and are trying to shift their focus towards selling collectibles, but I don't know if it's going to be enough without drastically changing their business model.
---

I have nothing else to say

"What did the suspects look like?"
"Well, they were black and --"
"That's all we need, Johnson! C'mon, let's book 'em!"
---

I have nothing else to say

Some lame Golden Age D-list villain that nobody takes seriously.
---

I have nothing else to say

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/DYoxIDfA35k/maxresdefault.jpg
---

I have nothing else to say

Zikten posted...

SSJGrimReaper posted...

Is it a meme if it's actual facts and logic

technically it's fact I guess. but I wouldn't call it logic. in all the iterations of him, only one is he possibly black. so when people talk about Lex, they usually mean when he is white because the chances of talking about that ONE iteration where he MIGHT be black, is slim.

he's definite white in like 99 versions and in the one cartoon version he is a question mark that many people think is black but can't be proven

But Lex Luthor is a black man
---

I have nothing else to say

Lex Luthor is biblack
---

I have nothing else to say

Cell is a Saiyan
---

I have nothing else to say

teepan95 posted...

I'm brown

What does that make me?

A shit...poster?
---

I have nothing else to say

Ivynn posted...

Superman tryna rearrange Misty Knight's guts
---

I have nothing else to say

NeonOctopus posted...

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Dende is black

Are all namekians black?

Yes
---

I have nothing else to say

https://theunspokendecade.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/punisher-black.png
---

I have nothing else to say

Therefore, Lex Luthor is black
---

I have nothing else to say

Dende is black
---

I have nothing else to say

The one instance of the filler arc being better than the main plot.
---

I have nothing else to say

_PrincessZelda posted...

spanky1 posted...

God damn she's hot.

Thighs aren't thick enough though.

That's basically true of every Chun Li cosplay ever though.

Her's are pretty good.

who the fuck is this
---

I have nothing else to say

https://blogs-images.forbes.com/olliebarder/files/2017/04/ganondorf_zelda_twilight.jpg
---

I have nothing else to say

SuperShake666 posted...

Bardock is the only one canon on that list and that Super Saiyan shit isn't. He's also dead.

Broly is canon now
---

I have nothing else to say

There's only 4 Saiyans left in the universe: Vegeta, Future Trunks, Goku and Goku's family.
---

I have nothing else to say

Knuckles is a black man
---

I have nothing else to say

Knuckles is black
Piccolo is black
---

I have nothing else to say

That Goku is so black
---

I have nothing else to say

KamenRiderBlade posted...

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Goddamnit! Just....just stay away from Hajime, alright?

I will, I won't let the Battle Royale finish.

Alright. Stay on standby though, we might need you for Kuroto.
---

I have nothing else to say

KamenRiderBlade posted...

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Come on, Blade. Don't be an undead.

Too late! My Blood is already Green.

Goddamnit! Just....just stay away from Hajime, alright?
---

I have nothing else to say

Come on, Blade. Don't be an undead.
---

I have nothing else to say

I would also advocate for work being done at home.

I know many jobs already let you do this, but it's far from the norm. For most office work, there's literally no reason for you to come in to do it other than your boss wants to watch over you like an overseer.

My previous office job had me working with Adobe Illustrator helping out with newsletters. I had the license, I could download the files from work and easily do that shit in the comfort of my home, but I had to be stuck in the office for reasons. Alternatively, I was discouraged from working at stuff FROM home, because it's "frowned" upon. What kind of shit is that?
---

I have nothing else to say

kayoticdreamz posted...

you cannot possibly tell me that we cannot conceive of a way to pay based on the type of job and the performance given instead of this universal 8-5 mentality.

I mean, he clearly knows we can, because several jobs already work like this.
---

I have nothing else to say

Also, dude blatantly admits he does nothing all day except browses the internet on his phone, then gets on Americans for being "so much lazier than those damn Germans!"

And then he wants to question MY credibility.
---

I have nothing else to say

CommonJoe posted...

Hes basically complaining because he feels like he has to work soooo hard and gets nothing out of it while simultaneously complaining that the companies paying him for work he isnt even doing.

....what?

Goddamn, no wonder you're homeless. Basic reading comprehension seems to escape you.
---

I have nothing else to say

CommonJoe posted...

And if it isnt obvious, Ive been asking you what you do because your responses tells me you have no fucking real world experience what so god damn ever. Which means you have zero credibility to comment on this subject at all.

Yet you're still having difficulty addressing my arguments in any meaningful way.
---

I have nothing else to say

CommonJoe posted...

How about you respond to the fucking question instead of deflecting?

Oh the irony.

If you weren't so fixated on what I do for a living, maybe you'd be able to construct better arguments.
---

I have nothing else to say

CommonJoe posted...

Meanwhile I respond to everything because I dont cop out of an argument.

You didn't make an argument. You made snarky replies and repeatedly asked where I worked, even though, like 95% of your post, it isn't relevant to anything at all. All you're telling me is that you can't address the points being made and instead need something to distract from how otherwise flimsy your posts are.

Stay on topic, bruh.
---

I have nothing else to say

JfAtS1O3N posted...

Oh......I get it now. That's less time for you to have "free time" after work. That makes sense, but I think ti was phrased poorly. I wouldn't lump that under 18-20 hours of time devoted to work as you stated it, I would like that to 18-20 hours devoted to work/basic human necessities.

It's not under the 18-20 hours of work, but it is part of the 20 hours of free time you don't have during the day so it's important to bring up.
---

I have nothing else to say

JfAtS1O3N posted...

you're still losing 15 minutes of "free time" by your standards so it doesn't really matter. It would still interfere with your day if you had a day off.

Okay, so it's 15 minutes out of your free time, and it's also 15 minutes of your work day.

Don't really get your point because nobody is saying you shouldn't shower. They're simply saying it's time that needs to be accounted for during your work day.
---

I have nothing else to say

JfAtS1O3N posted...

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

JfAtS1O3N posted...

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

JfAtS1O3N posted...

It shouldn't take more than 15 minutes to make and eat some toast, or cereal, eat some fruit, drink some juice or milk. Don't need a gourmet breakfast.

That is nowhere close to a balanced breakfast.

If I don't eat that I just skip breakfast altogether. And I shower at night. So all in all I wake up and am out the door anywhere from 10-15 minutes.

Okay, so you would just add the 15 minutes you'd take to shower to the end of your work day instead....literally nothing changes.

Have you addressed my point that you should be taking a shower regardless? I would hardly count that as being devoted to your work unless you want to be disgusting.

Okay.....the thing is if you have a day off, you can take a shower at any time and it doesn't interfere with your day.
---

I have nothing else to say

JfAtS1O3N posted...

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

JfAtS1O3N posted...

It shouldn't take more than 15 minutes to make and eat some toast, or cereal, eat some fruit, drink some juice or milk. Don't need a gourmet breakfast.

That is nowhere close to a balanced breakfast.

If I don't eat that I just skip breakfast altogether. And I shower at night. So all in all I wake up and am out the door anywhere from 10-15 minutes.

Okay, so you would just add the 15 minutes you'd take to shower to the end of your work day instead....literally nothing changes.
---

I have nothing else to say

JfAtS1O3N posted...

It shouldn't take more than 15 minutes to make and eat some toast, or cereal, eat some fruit, drink some juice or milk. Don't need a gourmet breakfast.

That is nowhere close to a balanced breakfast.
---

I have nothing else to say

CommonJoe posted...

And something else, why is the 40 hour week being parroted around like its the norm? Does part time not exist for you people?

No, it's just not relevant to the conversation, just like a lot of the "points" you've made.
---

I have nothing else to say

JfAtS1O3N posted...

Conflict posted...

JfAtS1O3N posted...

And 1 hour to get ready for work? How long does it take to get dressed, eat some breakfast, take a shower, and brush your teeth?

Uh

Read this one more time

get dressed-5 minutes
eat breakfast-15 minutes
take a shower-10/15 minutes
brush teeth-2 minutes

No way that should take an hour. I know some people take long showers but even then, how much time are we spending in the shower? 45 minutes? And on top of that, getting dress, eating breakfast, taking a shower, and brushing your teeth are all stuff that, as I mentioned, you should be doing regardless of your job.

You do know you have to actually make the breakfast.....right?

I mean, it'd be nice if you have a wife that can make breakfast for you in the morning, but she probably has to go to work too.
---

I have nothing else to say

CommonJoe posted...

So again, whose being unreasonable? Them, or you? If its them, then company = shit, nothing to do with 40 hours (Hint: Theyre not obligated to work you full time btw). If its you, then you need to step back and think about what youre doing and if that work is worth what youre being paid.

This is like beating a dead horse. I'm not even gonna bother responding to this anymore.

CommonJoe posted...

2. Except it fails to acknowledge that there isnt one "job" in the world. Many jobs arent ones you can just "do" in X hours. The entirety of the service industry for instance. Retail. Manufacturing, etc.

Except when did I ever mention that employees shouldn't be allowed to work however many hours it takes for them to get the job done?

My issue is with forcing people to work beyond what is necessary to get the job done and you don't seem to comprehend that.

CommonJoe posted...

ITT: There isnt an obesity problem in the US. Heart disease? What even is that lmao!

What does this have to do with anything.....are you saying people are lazy because they're fat or something? You're not good at constructing these arguments.

CommonJoe posted...

And btw, burden of proof lies with the prosecution. You want to sit there and claim the 40 hour week affects health? You provide some proof fam. Then we'll talk what is or isnt bogus.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/04/sweden-sees-benefits-six-hour-working-day-trial-care-workers
https://codewithoutrules.com/2016/08/18/productive-programmer/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/02/10/heres-what-scientists-say-perfect-work-week/97739498/

CommonJoe posted...

9. Recovery time doesnt make overworking an acceptable way to work and/or run a business.

Okay I'll bite, how is working hard for 20 hours "overworking"?

BTW, I didn't respond to the rest of your post because it was pure shit flinging.
---

I have nothing else to say

For fuck's sake, I can't even tell what you're responding to, CommonJoe. Do you know what quotes are?
---

I have nothing else to say

1337toothbrush posted...

Imagine trying to clean a room. There's a giant pile of shit in the middle of the room (the 40 hour work week) that would make the most difference if you worked at cleaning that. Instead people tell you to be more efficient with the rest of the room (neatly organize around this giant pile of shit to maximize less space). Do people "waste time"? Perhaps. Doesn't mean we're not spending more time at work than is necessary.

We're working the same hours as factory workers from a century ago. This is after a century of the fastest progress in human history. They were able to reduce hours and double pay back then, why not now? How can you not see something wrong with this picture?

Great point.
---

I have nothing else to say

CommonJoe posted...

1. Americans are unhealthy in general. Giving us more time to sit around and do nothing isnt going to make us healthier.

And the problem is your entire argument is based off of sweeping generalizations of the American populace. I asked you the question of how does a country influenced by protestants and their work ethic end up with a culture so lazy (according to you), yet you failed to give me anything resembling a straight answer. You've simply come back with more stereotypes, yet no real evidence.

If youre stressed at 40 hours youre overworking yourself.

Protip: Most Americans are stressed at 40 hours. I guess most are overworking themselves, but how can that be if they're lazy? Your points aren't adding up to me.

3. You get 8-10 hours depending on how much sleep you need. That is plenty of the time, not to mention the additional 40-45 hour weekend.

1 hour to get ready for work
1 hour commute to work
8 hours at work
1 hour at lunch
1 hour commute back home
8-10 hours of sleep

You're looking at 18-20 hours alone per day devoted to work, and that's assuming you don't work overtime. So in a typical 40 hour work week structure, you're actually looking at 100 hours per week devoted to either work, going to work, leaving work or getting the energy for work. That's assuming you have the energy to do anything other than sit and relax the minute you get home. The weekend's pretty great though, though you might end up spending half your Saturday or Sunday trying to catch up on chores and errands you couldn't do throughout the week.

Please watch this video:

2.4 This called overworking, which has nothing to do with how many hours worked. You can be overworked working 20 hours just as much as you can be at 40 or more. This can be just as much the workers fault as the employers.

Except overworking yourself for 20 hours still gives you most of the day throughout the week to do really anything. It doesn't result in the severe burnout that overworking yourself for 40+ hours does because you have ample time to restore your energy. I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

2.5 You realize workers fought for this right? Lmao.

Actually, what had happened was workers were originally working 70-80 hours a week, then Ford realize how stupid this structure was and instead standardized the 40 hour work week, but agreed to pay employees more. Sound familiar?

And btw, if your break is time wasted then youre not really contributing much to your company when you are working, are you?

How does this make any sense?
---

I have nothing else to say

CommonJoe posted...

1. Then you need to reevaluate. Is the problem them demanding the unreasonable, or is the problem you not delivering work equatable to your wage?

If you are an hourly or salaried employee, your wage stays the same regardless of what work you deliver, unless you are a higher up. What are you talking about? Lol

CommonJoe posted...

I mean, you do realize what youre suggesting means people cannot afford to live right? And even more, in other countries like the previous German example, most people choose to work the 40 anyway.

Because you don't seem to understand this:

People cannot afford to live because their pay is capped not by the quality of their work, or their efficiency, but simply the amount of hours they stay in the office for. It is unreasonable to demand that people work ridiculous hours just to live paycheck to paycheck, instead of simply paying employees better.

If German workers want to show up to work for 40 hours a week, then that's on them. The point is that nobody is threatening to fire them if they choose to work under 40 hours, so long as their job gets done.

CommonJoe posted...

And people in these types of jobs work 40+ hours anyway because working more = more money.

Okay and....? We're talking about efficiency. Someone choosing to work longer because they need more pay has nothing to do with efficiency.

CommonJoe posted...

In every other job, however, if youre not being incentivized to exceed the min performance than either your company is shit or that minimum is not being defined.

Even if I didn't have my disagreements with what you're saying, most companies are shit, if you haven't noticed.

And even ignoring that, I'd love to see what these incentives are.

CommonJoe posted...

Huh, just realized youre pretty much defining the minimum as being a middle of the road employee. Not great, not terrible. Just okay. So I do have to wonder your motivations for getting so uppity over 40 hours?

What do you do exactly?

Not sure what kind of answer you're expecting. I see a business transaction between employer and employee that is so laughably one-sided in the employer's favor, yet people still stick up for it because that's what they're used to. I think entrepreneurship is the future, because that's where hard work actually pays off.
---

I have nothing else to say

BlameAnesthesia posted...

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

"I have cancer, so diabetes isn't bad."

But with that line of reasoning all work is bad for our health and we just shouldn't work!

Yeah the 40 hour work week is arbitrary. But if you've ever worked more then that and still had to do meet all your adult responsibilities, the way you adapt forces you to be more judicious and meaningful with your free time.

And then after that, when you have chiller hours, you realize just how much you were wasting doing absolutely nothing of value. It's literal laziness.

If you feel 40 hour work week is "too much", then be more efficient with your time off. Don't spend 6 hours lurking CE. Make a checklist. Run through all your chores as soon as possible. Do something meaningful with the rest of the time. I find that if I take the time and effort to go to the rock climbing gym for 2-3 hours, I find that a lot more fulfilling and rewarding than had I played video games for literally the entire day off. And I like video games.

But this topic isn't about making your time outside of work efficient. It's about the standard 40 hour work week being unnecessary, inefficient, and antiquated.
---

I have nothing else to say

BlameAnesthesia posted...

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Meanwhile, the 40 hour work week is hurting productivity. Workers are becoming unhealthy. They're becoming stressed. They have almost no time to spend with family and friends throughout the week. And even when the week is over, a chunk of their weekend is dedicated towards doing chores that they didn't have the energy or time to do during the week. These are facts. You can work a worker to death for 40 hours a week, then next week they have to take 2 days off because they got sick as a result of poor health and stress. Guess what? You've now lost 16 hours of productivity.

It's funny how relative all of this is. I'm on a trauma ICU clinical rotation right now that is at least 80 hours per week. I still have to do chores and exercise, because those needs don't magically go away. It sucks, and I don't advocate for 80 hour work weeks at all, but I'll survive the month.

But hearing you bitch about 40 hours is kind of laughable. If you can't get your chores done, fit in exercise/cooking, and have time for recreation in a 40 hour work week, you are terribly undisciplined. Either that or you're whining about not being able to play video games for 8 hours a day anymore.

"I have cancer, so diabetes isn't bad."
---

I have nothing else to say

I like how this basically makes Kale pointless.
---

I have nothing else to say

CommonJoe posted...

If theres no incentives being offerred by the employer then they arent actually demanding more work for less pay.

If they fire you for not working harder, then yes....they are. Lol.

CommonJoe posted...

Thats what you apparently dont get. These employers youre taking so much issue with arent asking more of you without giving you a reason. Theyre asking you to make it worth it to pay you whatever your actual wage is.

But here's what you're not understanding, once again. 40-hours a week is not maximizing productivity. Other countries have already proven this. Your pay should be dictated by the work you've done, not the hours you've worked. This is what the whole argument boils down to.

Salespeople, independent contractors, freelancers, entrepreneurs, etc., do not gain x amount of dollars for working y amount of hours. They gain money based off of if the job gets done, or if they make a sale. They are incentivized to push themselves harder through their work because the quicker they get done, the quicker they get to move onto the next thing, whether that be making another sale, taking on a different project, or simply enjoying leisure time. That is the direct reward for their hard work: freedom.

Meanwhile, the 40 hour work week is hurting productivity. Workers are becoming unhealthy. They're becoming stressed. They have almost no time to spend with family and friends throughout the week. And even when the week is over, a chunk of their weekend is dedicated towards doing chores that they didn't have the energy or time to do during the week. These are facts. You can work a worker to death for 40 hours a week, then next week they have to take 2 days off because they got sick as a result of poor health and stress. Guess what? You've now lost 16 hours of productivity.

The alternative is that you have workers keeping themselves sane at work by taking time away from their work while on the clock. That also hurts productivity. The jobs I worked at entitled you to two 15 minute breaks while on the clock. Wouldn't even be necessary if you got to go home early after an honest day's work. The hour long lunches people take also wouldn't even be necessary if they just got to keep that hour and go home.
---

I have nothing else to say

CommonJoe posted...

Also, fun fact, Im a homeless person. Tell me more about how "horrible" your 40 hour week is when dont have your video games to go home too.

And it seems that you have nothing to offer to the conversation but ad hominem, stereotypes and assumptions.

Also, if you're homeless, you'd probably be better off not wasting your time away on a message board and figuring out how to better your situation. Or am I tripping?
---

I have nothing else to say

CommonJoe posted...

If American job culture doesnt care if you work harder or not, it cannot simultaneously demand more work.

What are you even talking about?

What I said is that there is no incentive for the American worker to work harder beyond the fear of being fired (and even if you DO work hard, you can still be laid off and dropped for any reason whatsoever). Your pay is capped regardless of how much work you can get done in an hour, and even if you finished everything you're assigned to do, you still have to sit at the office until your designated time to leave, at which point your boss will either dump more work on your head just to keep you busy, or you're forced to sit there with nothing to do. At the same time, our work culture (a.k.a. the employers) demands that workers work harder, for lesser pay, longer hours and less job security than even past generations, or else you're considered "lazy". The 40-hour week is particularly problematic because multiple countries and even multiple U.S. businesses have shown that more hours does not equate to more productivity.

Those are not contradictory statements. I know you wanted a clever "Gotcha!" moment, but it didn't work this time.
---

I have nothing else to say