The republican solution to poverty doesn’t make any sense

[Harpy Eagle]

Even if every poor person worked hard and went to school to get better pay, who would do all those entry level jobs that are the backbone of the economy? Now of course you might be dense and say “teenagers”, but there are many entry jobs kids cannot do and even they could, there wouldn’t be nearly enough of them working during the school year.

So what’s the solution to poverty, republicans?

Entry level jobs are for people just entering the workforce, thus the name. More than 200,000 people in the US enter the workforce each month for the first time, that is who is supposed to take the entry level jobs. Those in them now would, ideally, work hard and move up to make room for the next batch.

In the past 6 year I finished my bachelors and masters and my wife got her nursing degree. The result of doing that is that our family income has more than tripled in the last 4 years. Working hard and going to college can and does pay off.

Yet, are you happy?

Happier than a pig in shit!

My wife is living out her lifelong dream that she put on hold to follow me around the world while I was in the Corps. I work a job with a great salary and the most flexible hours I have ever had. I get to work from home a couple days a week and can start my day anywhere from 6 to 9. I took this past Friday off to fly to Florida to help my daughter buy a newer car. Had a great whirlwind trip to see her and meet the boyfriend and got her a great deal on a car.

Summer has arrived and I am getting to golf, either a round or a bucket of balls at the range, a couple times a week now.

Life is good in the Gator household.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There is always going to be poverty and poor people that is the reality of the world we live in and it's not something politicans and government can fix. LBJ declared war on poverty in 1964 and despite the huge amount of money spent on anti-poverty programs over the years the impact has been minimal. I don't have a solution to the problem and after 50 plus years no politican Democrat or Republican has come up with one either.

LBJ's real war wasn't on poverty, it was on the black male head of household. He made good on his pledge to "have them ******* voting Democrat for the next 200 years" by replacing the black father with a government check. He was one of the most evil Progressive scumbags right up there with Stalin, Mao, Hitler and FDR

 

[deanrd]

Entry level jobs means you get food stamps.

 

[deanrd]

There is always going to be poverty and poor people that is the reality of the world we live in and it's not something politicans and government can fix. LBJ declared war on poverty in 1964 and despite the huge amount of money spent on anti-poverty programs over the years the impact has been minimal. I don't have a solution to the problem and after 50 plus years no politican Democrat or Republican has come up with one either.

LBJ's real war wasn't on poverty, it was on the black male head of household. He made good on his pledge to "have them ******* voting Democrat for the next 200 years" by replacing the black father with a government check. He was one of the most evil Progressive scumbags right up there with Stalin, Mao, Hitler and FDR

Leave it to you, a racist, to make it about race. But it did give you a chance to mention your heroes:
Stalin, Mao and Hitler. Don't know why you threw FDR in there. FDR saved America from your heroes. But don't worry, Trump is doing everything he can to make Putin America's real leader. For you, that should be comforting.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Even if every poor person worked hard and went to school to get better pay, who would do all those entry level jobs that are the backbone of the economy? Now of course you might be dense and say “teenagers”, but there are many entry jobs kids cannot do and even they could, there wouldn’t be nearly enough of them working during the school year.

So what’s the solution to help alleviate poverty, republicans?

Define "poverty"?

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

It can’t be eliminated but it can be improved.

AS LONG AS .....you use someone ELSE'S money to do the improving.....and get their "favor" while at it.........but never at YOUR expense.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There is always going to be poverty and poor people that is the reality of the world we live in and it's not something politicans and government can fix. LBJ declared war on poverty in 1964 and despite the huge amount of money spent on anti-poverty programs over the years the impact has been minimal. I don't have a solution to the problem and after 50 plus years no politican Democrat or Republican has come up with one either.

LBJ's real war wasn't on poverty, it was on the black male head of household. He made good on his pledge to "have them ******* voting Democrat for the next 200 years" by replacing the black father with a government check. He was one of the most evil Progressive scumbags right up there with Stalin, Mao, Hitler and FDR

Leave it to you, a racist, to make it about race. But it did give you a chance to mention your heroes:
Stalin, Mao and Hitler. Don't know why you threw FDR in there. FDR saved America from your heroes. But don't worry, Trump is doing everything he can to make Putin America's real leader. For you, that should be comforting.

LBJ made it about race

 

[Andylusion]

Even if every poor person worked hard and went to school to get better pay, who would do all those entry level jobs that are the backbone of the economy? Now of course you might be dense and say “teenagers”, but there are many entry jobs kids cannot do and even they could, there wouldn’t be nearly enough of them working during the school year.

So what’s the solution to help alleviate poverty, republicans?

Your question seems to be contradictory.

If you want to alleviate poverty...... then supposedly you WANT to have FEWER people working those low wage jobs.

Right? Isn't that the whole point?

You are saying who is going to do these low wage jobs, if everyone get's better jobs. Well fewer people are going to do those jobs. That's the goal. The whole goal is to have fewer people doing low-wage jobs, so that more are doing high-wage jobs. Thus fewer people are in poverty.

That's the whole point.

I'm confused by the question. The implication is that you WANT people to be working Low-Wage jobs, and then ask how do we get people out of poverty.

You can't. There is no way to have people who produce low-value work, to end up wealthy. The solution is that they need to do high-value work. That involves then, logically, not doing low-value work.

 

[gallantwarrior]

There is always going to be poverty and poor people that is the reality of the world we live in and it's not something politicans and government can fix. LBJ declared war on poverty in 1964 and despite the huge amount of money spent on anti-poverty programs over the years the impact has been minimal. I don't have a solution to the problem and after 50 plus years no politican Democrat or Republican has come up with one either.

There will always be poverty, but our poverty rate is much higher than other developed nations. The income disparity is the widest in the world.

Again, define poverty?

 

[Andylusion]

Even if every poor person worked hard and went to school to get better pay, who would do all those entry level jobs that are the backbone of the economy? Now of course you might be dense and say “teenagers”, but there are many entry jobs kids cannot do and even they could, there wouldn’t be nearly enough of them working during the school year.

So what’s the solution to poverty, republicans?

Your post don't make much sense..you do know some people enjoy low level jobs right? If we get rid of 50 million illegals those jobs would pay higher wages...


If we be more stricter with our welfare programs people would take jobs when the UE is low like today.

No one enjoys the pay obviously.

Interesting comment, if they didn't enjoy the pay how come they don't unionize ?

Because they’d get fired out of retaliation for trying. Duh.

That's not true though. I know people who openly said they loved their low wage job. Me personally, I didn't understand that. That's why I quit, and get a higher paying job.

People make choices to be where they are. It really is that simple. There are people who choose.... who make the literal choice, to work low-wage jobs. And I don't think we should try and fix their lives. A: because we can't. B: because its not our job to fix other people's lives. C: because doing so won't work.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Republican Jesus doesn't care, he just doesn't want anyone taking figs from his basket. He likes figs and hates the freeloader masses that are always looking for a handout of loaves and fishes.

Says the Democrat who lives off of freeloading and says he cares....but what he really means is that if caring means HE has to sacrifice....fuggedaboudit !!

It's the age old Leftist way....use others money to "care" for those who can get you what you want....then piss on them!

 

[gallantwarrior]

It would be refreshing if conservatives were honest for a change and admit they couldn’t care less about the poor.

Many conservatives care for the poor, but resent that government would rob them of their ability to contribute as they see fit. Only guv'mint knows best how to administer to the poor...

 

[Andylusion]

The Republican ‘solution’ to most everything doesn’t make any sense.

And Republicans have no desire to end poverty; conservative economic dogma maintains that one is poor as a consequence of his own failings, poor decisions, and an inability to compete and be successful in a capitalist system – in essence Social Darwinism.

For conservatives the poor have only themselves to blame and deserve neither assistance nor a ‘solution.’

And yet every single time it's tried across the entire world, it works. China is proof that Capitalism works. India is proof Capitalism works.

And the left-wing government socialist approach has failed every single time. North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and of course the USSR. All hell-holes of misery and suffering, brought on by the same ideology that Democrats routinely support.

 

[Anathema]

Even if every poor person worked hard and went to school to get better pay, who would do all those entry level jobs that are the backbone of the economy? Now of course you might be dense and say “teenagers”, but there are many entry jobs kids cannot do and even they could, there wouldn’t be nearly enough of them working during the school year.

So what’s the solution to help alleviate poverty, republicans?

Very simple... Death.

We don't kill them ourselves. That would cost money. We let starvation and the elements do that. Those who can't find a way to make enough income to survive, die. Don't you folks on the Left just LOVE Darwinism?

 

[Billy000]

Even if every poor person worked hard and went to school to get better pay, who would do all those entry level jobs that are the backbone of the economy? Now of course you might be dense and say “teenagers”, but there are many entry jobs kids cannot do and even they could, there wouldn’t be nearly enough of them working during the school year.

So what’s the solution to help alleviate poverty, republicans?

Your question seems to be contradictory.

If you want to alleviate poverty...... then supposedly you WANT to have FEWER people working those low wage jobs.

Right? Isn't that the whole point?

You are saying who is going to do these low wage jobs, if everyone get's better jobs. Well fewer people are going to do those jobs. That's the goal. The whole goal is to have fewer people doing low-wage jobs, so that more are doing high-wage jobs. Thus fewer people are in poverty.

That's the whole point.

I'm confused by the question. The implication is that you WANT people to be working Low-Wage jobs, and then ask how do we get people out of poverty.

You can't. There is no way to have people who produce low-value work, to end up wealthy. The solution is that they need to do high-value work. That involves then, logically, not doing low-value work.

Well, see that doesn’t make any sense, because while it’d be best for more people to seek higher wage pay, you would still need enough people left behind in those jobs. What I’m suggesting is paying the low wage jobs more because those jobs are widespread and mostly filled with adults. My point is that it is stupid to assume most or all those people could leave those jobs behind without there being a massive amount of vacant positions.

Also, many skilled labor jobs are still behind on the cost of living standards nationwide.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Happier than a pig in shit!

My wife is living out her lifelong dream that she put on hold to follow me around the world while I was in the Corps. I work a job with a great salary and the most flexible hours I have ever had. I get to work from home a couple days a week and can start my day anywhere from 6 to 9. I took this past Friday off to fly to Florida to help my daughter buy a newer car. Had a great whirlwind trip to see her and meet the boyfriend and got her a great deal on a car.

Summer has arrived and I am getting to golf, either a round or a bucket of balls at the range, a couple times a week now.

Life is good in the Gator household.

Danger Wil Robinson!
That is NOT a life conducive of adhering to Progressive, Socialist or Democrat ideals....(you'd have to be a 1%er Democrat for that)

 

[Andylusion]

Even if every poor person worked hard and went to school to get better pay, who would do all those entry level jobs that are the backbone of the economy? Now of course you might be dense and say “teenagers”, but there are many entry jobs kids cannot do and even they could, there wouldn’t be nearly enough of them working during the school year.

So what’s the solution to help alleviate poverty, republicans?

Very simple... Death.

We don't kill them ourselves. That would cost money. We let starvation and the elements do that. Those who can't find a way to make enough income to survive, die. Don't you folks on the Left just LOVE Darwinism?

Says those who support murdering babies, assisted suicide, and an ideology that has murdered hundreds of millions world wide.

Hypocrites to the core. That's the left-wing. Our system has result in prosperity across the world.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Says those who support murdering babies, assisted suicide, and an ideology that has murdered hundreds of millions world wide.

Hypocrites to the core. That's the left-wing. Our system has result in prosperity across the world.

Correct!

The USA is the ONLY nation on Earth where Democrats and Socialists BIGGEST BITCH is that they still drive a 2017 BMW SUV instead of a 2018.....well second biggest....the first being a white Christian Male Straight President.
.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Even if every poor person worked hard and went to school to get better pay, who would do all those entry level jobs that are the backbone of the economy? Now of course you might be dense and say “teenagers”, but there are many entry jobs kids cannot do and even they could, there wouldn’t be nearly enough of them working during the school year.

So what’s the solution to help alleviate poverty, republicans?

Your question seems to be contradictory.

If you want to alleviate poverty...... then supposedly you WANT to have FEWER people working those low wage jobs.

Right? Isn't that the whole point?

You are saying who is going to do these low wage jobs, if everyone get's better jobs. Well fewer people are going to do those jobs. That's the goal. The whole goal is to have fewer people doing low-wage jobs, so that more are doing high-wage jobs. Thus fewer people are in poverty.

That's the whole point.

I'm confused by the question. The implication is that you WANT people to be working Low-Wage jobs, and then ask how do we get people out of poverty.

You can't. There is no way to have people who produce low-value work, to end up wealthy. The solution is that they need to do high-value work. That involves then, logically, not doing low-value work.

Well, see that doesn’t make any sense, because while it’d be best for more people to seek higher wage pay, you would still need enough people left behind in those jobs. What I’m suggesting is paying the low wage jobs more because those jobs are widespread and mostly filled with adults. My point is that it is stupid to assume most or all those people could leave those jobs behind without there being a massive amount of vacant positions.

Also, many skilled labor jobs are still behind on the cost of living standards nationwide.

Billy, it's about time you post something well thought out and not trolling

 

[Andylusion]

Even if every poor person worked hard and went to school to get better pay, who would do all those entry level jobs that are the backbone of the economy? Now of course you might be dense and say “teenagers”, but there are many entry jobs kids cannot do and even they could, there wouldn’t be nearly enough of them working during the school year.

So what’s the solution to help alleviate poverty, republicans?

Your question seems to be contradictory.

If you want to alleviate poverty...... then supposedly you WANT to have FEWER people working those low wage jobs.

Right? Isn't that the whole point?

You are saying who is going to do these low wage jobs, if everyone get's better jobs. Well fewer people are going to do those jobs. That's the goal. The whole goal is to have fewer people doing low-wage jobs, so that more are doing high-wage jobs. Thus fewer people are in poverty.

That's the whole point.

I'm confused by the question. The implication is that you WANT people to be working Low-Wage jobs, and then ask how do we get people out of poverty.

You can't. There is no way to have people who produce low-value work, to end up wealthy. The solution is that they need to do high-value work. That involves then, logically, not doing low-value work.

Well, see that doesn’t make any sense, because while it’d be best for more people to seek higher wage pay, you would still need enough people left behind in those jobs. What I’m suggesting is paying the low wage jobs more because those jobs are widespread and mostly filled with adults. My point is that it is stupid to assume most or all those people could leave those jobs behind without there being a massive amount of vacant positions.

Also, many skilled labor jobs are still behind on the cost of living standards nationwide.

We tried your plan. That was 2007-2009. We raised the minimum wage by 38%. The result was mass layoffs, that resulted in the economy crashing.

Same thing happened in Greece. They had a minimum wage that was tied to inflation, and the result was unemployment that hit almost 30%.

You have a car I assume. I also assume your car needs an oil change. If the government said that oil change workers need a minimum of $100 an hour, and you want to the shop, and they said your oil change was going to be $75, what would you do?

I can tell you what I would do... I would go buy the oil at the part store for $10, and change my oil myself. So would a ton of people.

Result? The oil change employees end up unemployed (unless they work for Lexus or some luxury brand where people are used to that).

You can make the minimum wage, whatever you want. The real minimum wage, is always ZERO. The employer can't pay the employee, more than the customer is willing to pay.

Over in Denmark, the cost of a big mac meal, was $17. Why? Because the wages they pay in Denmark for a burger flipper is $16/hour. As a result, very few people (relative to the US) go to McDonald's. It's so expensive. People just eat at home. There are very few McDonald's in Denmark, because the food is so expensive.

And by the way, when you just increase the wages, there are economic effects. When wages go up, the cost of living goes up. Again, in Denmark where wages are relatively high, so is everything else.

The cost of a 900 sq.ft apartment in Denmark is $2,400/month. Here in Columbus, Ohio, you can get a 1300/sq.ft 2 bed, 1.5 bath, for $875 a month.

Why do you think that is? There's a simple economic reason. Supply and demand. When you increase wages drastically, those people with those wages, start demanding more. Demand goes up, and the price goes up.

This is why minimum wage laws, never work. You could make the minimum wage $100/hour, and everyone making $100/hour would end up poor. Because the price of everything would adjust to the new normal demand. Resulting in the people making minimum wage at $100, would still be the poorest people in the economy.