Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Lets face it.......those who go with the DUMS frequently are the miserable amongst us. People who have made fucked up personal decisions leading them to a shitty lot in life. So they have to blame somebody for their misery. Never did get that? I couldn't give a crap what rich people make. Most work their balls off.........I harbor no ill will. Trying to make the rest of the world miserable because you are is ghey.
States should be able to handle the rest.Why not work with averages?Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway.You're treading down that same road. I told you then and I'll tell you now. If a company, or a group of companies in an area, can afford to pay higher wages, they can do so without going out of business. Ford could do it because he could afford to do it. Seattle is wealthy and can accept higher prices to pay higher wages. Try setting the MW to $15/hr in poorer areas and you would see higher failure rates. Only in a leftist's fantasy world can you simply dictate higher wages with no consequences.
In fact, this is the best way to set a higher MW. Let different areas decide for themselves where to set it.
Also different in different areas.
Because averages don't meet real life needs. Let's say that we decide to set a national MW at a level sufficient for one person to live comfortably. In rural Alabama, we discover that amount is $10/hr while in downtown Manhattan it is $50/hr. We take the average and set it at $30/hr. What happens? In Alabama, jobs are lost and people laid off. In Manhattan, people still can't live on MW. That's why.
social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. why not "boost the bottom" and let States help those at the top of that quintile.States should be able to handle the rest.Why not work with averages?Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway.
Also different in different areas.
Because averages don't meet real life needs. Let's say that we decide to set a national MW at a level sufficient for one person to live comfortably. In rural Alabama, we discover that amount is $10/hr while in downtown Manhattan it is $50/hr. We take the average and set it at $30/hr. What happens? In Alabama, jobs are lost and people laid off. In Manhattan, people still can't live on MW. That's why.
Better to let localities, cities, and states set a MW that works best for them. Then no one needs to make the difference for anyone.
There is no unemployment under Capitalism, only underpayment.You're treading down that same road. I told you then and I'll tell you now. If a company, or a group of companies in an area, can afford to pay higher wages, they can do so without going out of business. Ford could do it because he could afford to do it. Seattle is wealthy and can accept higher prices to pay higher wages. Try setting the MW to $15/hr in poorer areas and you would see higher failure rates. Only in a leftist's fantasy world can you simply dictate higher wages with no consequences.
In fact, this is the best way to set a higher MW. Let different areas decide for themselves where to set it.The only downside I see is taking on $1.5 trillion in debt to fund that tax cutThat's because a tax cut doesn't increase a company's expenses dramatically. There's no massive downside to doing it.
That qualifies as massive
Thats funny though because that's 1.5 trillion over 10 years...and that's unacceptable according to the radical libs. O doing QE to 6 trillion to wall street was all good in the hood.
QE was hugely successful in restoring the economy without inflation or devaluation of the dollar
It devalued the dollar. Inflation rates should have risen so that money could have been recovered and taken out of the economy. Of course it was successful to wall street. They grew by 8000 points because of QE. Your business would grow too if someone was handing you 40 billion a month.
The value of the dollar increased compared to other currencies
QE inserted much needed investment into our economy
It worked
social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. why not "boost the bottom" and let States help those at the top of that quintile.States should be able to handle the rest.Why not work with averages?Also different in different areas.
Because averages don't meet real life needs. Let's say that we decide to set a national MW at a level sufficient for one person to live comfortably. In rural Alabama, we discover that amount is $10/hr while in downtown Manhattan it is $50/hr. We take the average and set it at $30/hr. What happens? In Alabama, jobs are lost and people laid off. In Manhattan, people still can't live on MW. That's why.
Better to let localities, cities, and states set a MW that works best for them. Then no one needs to make the difference for anyone.
Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. It is more rational to pay better than that social safety net.social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. why not "boost the bottom" and let States help those at the top of that quintile.States should be able to handle the rest.Why not work with averages?
Because averages don't meet real life needs. Let's say that we decide to set a national MW at a level sufficient for one person to live comfortably. In rural Alabama, we discover that amount is $10/hr while in downtown Manhattan it is $50/hr. We take the average and set it at $30/hr. What happens? In Alabama, jobs are lost and people laid off. In Manhattan, people still can't live on MW. That's why.
Better to let localities, cities, and states set a MW that works best for them. Then no one needs to make the difference for anyone.
Okay, we'll set the MW to the lowest cost area of the nation and let the wealthier areas cover the gap for the rest.
Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. It is more rational to pay better than that social safety net.social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. why not "boost the bottom" and let States help those at the top of that quintile.States should be able to handle the rest.Because averages don't meet real life needs. Let's say that we decide to set a national MW at a level sufficient for one person to live comfortably. In rural Alabama, we discover that amount is $10/hr while in downtown Manhattan it is $50/hr. We take the average and set it at $30/hr. What happens? In Alabama, jobs are lost and people laid off. In Manhattan, people still can't live on MW. That's why.
Better to let localities, cities, and states set a MW that works best for them. Then no one needs to make the difference for anyone.
Okay, we'll set the MW to the lowest cost area of the nation and let the wealthier areas cover the gap for the rest.
Bear in mind, most Liberals here are poor...they wouldn’t dare want to acknowledge that they themselves are the cause of their situation.
Its not the responsibility of the govt to offer trinkets.
It is a responsibility of Government to provide for the General Welfare of We the People
It doesn't say "fund" the general welfare.
We the People will decide how to provide that General Welfare
If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one....
James Madison
Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.
Thomas Jefferson
I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution that grants Congress the right, of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents.
James Madison
The powers of Congress are well established over 200+ years of legislation
If they are currently overstepping their powers, you, as a citizen have a right to challenge
I'm sure you can find some libertarian buddies to support you
There is no unemployment under Capitalism, only underpayment.The only downside I see is taking on $1.5 trillion in debt to fund that tax cut
That qualifies as massive
Thats funny though because that's 1.5 trillion over 10 years...and that's unacceptable according to the radical libs. O doing QE to 6 trillion to wall street was all good in the hood.
QE was hugely successful in restoring the economy without inflation or devaluation of the dollar
It devalued the dollar. Inflation rates should have risen so that money could have been recovered and taken out of the economy. Of course it was successful to wall street. They grew by 8000 points because of QE. Your business would grow too if someone was handing you 40 billion a month.
The value of the dollar increased compared to other currencies
QE inserted much needed investment into our economy
It worked
It didn't work. Housing, bonds, and stock are on a massive bubble.
You talk the talk but don't walk the walkIt is a responsibility of Government to provide for the General Welfare of We the People
It doesn't say "fund" the general welfare.
We the People will decide how to provide that General Welfare
If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one....
James Madison
Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.
Thomas Jefferson
I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution that grants Congress the right, of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents.
James Madison
The powers of Congress are well established over 200+ years of legislation
If they are currently overstepping their powers, you, as a citizen have a right to challenge
I'm sure you can find some libertarian buddies to support you
It's not libertarian buddies it's the hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not over a million) it takes to make such a challenge.
It is another form of minimum wage. I believe I could find a place to stay, with fourteen dollars an hour as income on a regular basis. We could eliminate homelessness, overnight.Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. It is more rational to pay better than that social safety net.social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. why not "boost the bottom" and let States help those at the top of that quintile.States should be able to handle the rest.
Better to let localities, cities, and states set a MW that works best for them. Then no one needs to make the difference for anyone.
Okay, we'll set the MW to the lowest cost area of the nation and let the wealthier areas cover the gap for the rest.
Again, that's on average, which means that it's not tailored to the locality. Do you really think $14/hr is sufficient to live on in New York city? Be real. Far better to let NYC set whatever level it wants to supply, and rural Alabama set theirs.
It is another form of minimum wage. I believe I could find a place to stay, with fourteen dollars an hour as income on a regular basis.Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. It is more rational to pay better than that social safety net.social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. why not "boost the bottom" and let States help those at the top of that quintile.Better to let localities, cities, and states set a MW that works best for them. Then no one needs to make the difference for anyone.
Okay, we'll set the MW to the lowest cost area of the nation and let the wealthier areas cover the gap for the rest.
Again, that's on average, which means that it's not tailored to the locality. Do you really think $14/hr is sufficient to live on in New York city? Be real. Far better to let NYC set whatever level it wants to supply, and rural Alabama set theirs.
The right wing is worse. The law is, employment at the will of either party, not just the employer.Lets face it.......those who go with the DUMS frequently are the miserable amongst us. People who have made fucked up personal decisions leading them to a shitty lot in life. So they have to blame somebody for their misery. Never did get that? I couldn't give a crap what rich people make. Most work their balls off.........I harbor no ill will. Trying to make the rest of the world miserable because you are is ghey.
Libs like to pretend that all poor people are either handicapped or suffer from mental disorders. They refuse to admit that people are poor due to low iQ and poor decision making. Bear in mind, most Liberals here are poor...they wouldn’t dare want to acknowledge that they themselves are the cause of their situation.
It is another form of minimum wage. I believe I could find a place to stay, with fourteen dollars an hour as income on a regular basis. We could eliminate homelessness, overnight.Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. It is more rational to pay better than that social safety net.social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. why not "boost the bottom" and let States help those at the top of that quintile.Better to let localities, cities, and states set a MW that works best for them. Then no one needs to make the difference for anyone.
Okay, we'll set the MW to the lowest cost area of the nation and let the wealthier areas cover the gap for the rest.
Again, that's on average, which means that it's not tailored to the locality. Do you really think $14/hr is sufficient to live on in New York city? Be real. Far better to let NYC set whatever level it wants to supply, and rural Alabama set theirs.
It is another form of minimum wage. I believe I could find a place to stay, with fourteen dollars an hour as income on a regular basis.Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. It is more rational to pay better than that social safety net.social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. why not "boost the bottom" and let States help those at the top of that quintile.
Okay, we'll set the MW to the lowest cost area of the nation and let the wealthier areas cover the gap for the rest.
Again, that's on average, which means that it's not tailored to the locality. Do you really think $14/hr is sufficient to live on in New York city? Be real. Far better to let NYC set whatever level it wants to supply, and rural Alabama set theirs.The right wing is worse. The law is, employment at the will of either party, not just the employer.Lets face it.......those who go with the DUMS frequently are the miserable amongst us. People who have made fucked up personal decisions leading them to a shitty lot in life. So they have to blame somebody for their misery. Never did get that? I couldn't give a crap what rich people make. Most work their balls off.........I harbor no ill will. Trying to make the rest of the world miserable because you are is ghey.
Libs like to pretend that all poor people are either handicapped or suffer from mental disorders. They refuse to admit that people are poor due to low iQ and poor decision making. Bear in mind, most Liberals here are poor...they wouldn’t dare want to acknowledge that they themselves are the cause of their situation.
Why could an individual not find a place to live in New York, with the equivalent to a salary of twenty-eight thousand dollars a year? It makes me believe, you are merely special pleading a point you don't have.It is another form of minimum wage. I believe I could find a place to stay, with fourteen dollars an hour as income on a regular basis. We could eliminate homelessness, overnight.Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. It is more rational to pay better than that social safety net.social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. why not "boost the bottom" and let States help those at the top of that quintile.
Okay, we'll set the MW to the lowest cost area of the nation and let the wealthier areas cover the gap for the rest.
Again, that's on average, which means that it's not tailored to the locality. Do you really think $14/hr is sufficient to live on in New York city? Be real. Far better to let NYC set whatever level it wants to supply, and rural Alabama set theirs.
You're ignoring reality. You could not survive in NYC on $14/hr. That is a national average, which means it's too high for some places and too low for others.
Employment is at-will. I would be naturally unemployed and should qualify for unemployment compensation.It is another form of minimum wage. I believe I could find a place to stay, with fourteen dollars an hour as income on a regular basis.Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. It is more rational to pay better than that social safety net.Okay, we'll set the MW to the lowest cost area of the nation and let the wealthier areas cover the gap for the rest.
Again, that's on average, which means that it's not tailored to the locality. Do you really think $14/hr is sufficient to live on in New York city? Be real. Far better to let NYC set whatever level it wants to supply, and rural Alabama set theirs.The right wing is worse. The law is, employment at the will of either party, not just the employer.Lets face it.......those who go with the DUMS frequently are the miserable amongst us. People who have made fucked up personal decisions leading them to a shitty lot in life. So they have to blame somebody for their misery. Never did get that? I couldn't give a crap what rich people make. Most work their balls off.........I harbor no ill will. Trying to make the rest of the world miserable because you are is ghey.
Libs like to pretend that all poor people are either handicapped or suffer from mental disorders. They refuse to admit that people are poor due to low iQ and poor decision making. Bear in mind, most Liberals here are poor...they wouldn’t dare want to acknowledge that they themselves are the cause of their situation.
Not the way you're misinterpreting it. The employer is under no obligation to hire you, even if you were to apply.
Where in New York?Why could an individual not find a place to live in New York, with the equivalent to a salary of twenty-eight thousand dollars a year? It makes me believe, you are merely special pleading a point you don't have.It is another form of minimum wage. I believe I could find a place to stay, with fourteen dollars an hour as income on a regular basis. We could eliminate homelessness, overnight.Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. It is more rational to pay better than that social safety net.Okay, we'll set the MW to the lowest cost area of the nation and let the wealthier areas cover the gap for the rest.
Again, that's on average, which means that it's not tailored to the locality. Do you really think $14/hr is sufficient to live on in New York city? Be real. Far better to let NYC set whatever level it wants to supply, and rural Alabama set theirs.
You're ignoring reality. You could not survive in NYC on $14/hr. That is a national average, which means it's too high for some places and too low for others.
the most market friendly place with that amount of income. it would be up to the individuals to, self-select, their living arrangements.Where in New York?Why could an individual not find a place to live in New York, with the equivalent to a salary of twenty-eight thousand dollars a year? It makes me believe, you are merely special pleading a point you don't have.It is another form of minimum wage. I believe I could find a place to stay, with fourteen dollars an hour as income on a regular basis. We could eliminate homelessness, overnight.Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. It is more rational to pay better than that social safety net.
Again, that's on average, which means that it's not tailored to the locality. Do you really think $14/hr is sufficient to live on in New York city? Be real. Far better to let NYC set whatever level it wants to supply, and rural Alabama set theirs.
You're ignoring reality. You could not survive in NYC on $14/hr. That is a national average, which means it's too high for some places and too low for others.
Special pleading?Where in New York?Why could an individual not find a place to live in New York, with the equivalent to a salary of twenty-eight thousand dollars a year? It makes me believe, you are merely special pleading a point you don't have.It is another form of minimum wage. I believe I could find a place to stay, with fourteen dollars an hour as income on a regular basis. We could eliminate homelessness, overnight.Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway. It is more rational to pay better than that social safety net.
Again, that's on average, which means that it's not tailored to the locality. Do you really think $14/hr is sufficient to live on in New York city? Be real. Far better to let NYC set whatever level it wants to supply, and rural Alabama set theirs.
You're ignoring reality. You could not survive in NYC on $14/hr. That is a national average, which means it's too high for some places and too low for others.
