A Look at the Senate Democrats' JOBS & INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR AMERICA’S WORKERS

[danielpalos]

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage could help Labor pay for infrastructure and create more consumer demand.

All a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage will do is eliminate about a hundred thousand "entry level" jobs and start an instant tidal wave of wage increase demands from everyone who's no longer working for minimum wage! At the end of the day...you haven't done anything except cause inflation and lots of it!

so what; low wage jobs are useless since they don't pay enough or pay generate enough tax revenue, anyway. don't try to avoid it, right wingers.

Sigh...for about the millionth time...minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be jobs you raise a family on or keep to retirement! They are ENTRY LEVEL JOBS! You do them until you've learned job skills to qualify for a better paying job. When you take away entry level jobs by raising the minimum wage you prevent young people and people without job skills from getting a start in the jobs market. It's idiotic and it hurts the very people that you purport to support!

means nothing; social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

And, Labor will be able to consume more, and pay more in consumption taxes.

Let me see if I can explain this SLOWLY for you, Daniel! Raising minimum wage would mean that ALL wages would also have to be raised to compensate those people who have job skills already and obviously aren't going to work for the same as someone who was just hired with no job skills. Supervisors are going to demand more. Managers are going to demand more. So now that you've increased labor costs for businesses what is their response going to be? THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE THEIR PRICES!!! So what have you really gained? The answer to that is...very little!

An upward pressure on wages. We want to lose, low wage jobs.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage could help Labor pay for infrastructure and create more consumer demand.

All a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage will do is eliminate about a hundred thousand "entry level" jobs and start an instant tidal wave of wage increase demands from everyone who's no longer working for minimum wage! At the end of the day...you haven't done anything except cause inflation and lots of it!

so what; low wage jobs are useless since they don't pay enough or pay generate enough tax revenue, anyway. don't try to avoid it, right wingers.

Sigh...for about the millionth time...minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be jobs you raise a family on or keep to retirement! They are ENTRY LEVEL JOBS! You do them until you've learned job skills to qualify for a better paying job. When you take away entry level jobs by raising the minimum wage you prevent young people and people without job skills from getting a start in the jobs market. It's idiotic and it hurts the very people that you purport to support!

means nothing; social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

And, Labor will be able to consume more, and pay more in consumption taxes.

I have no idea what any of that meant, Daniel...do you?

It means he's been hitting the weed pretty hard.

 

[Oldstyle]

All a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage will do is eliminate about a hundred thousand "entry level" jobs and start an instant tidal wave of wage increase demands from everyone who's no longer working for minimum wage! At the end of the day...you haven't done anything except cause inflation and lots of it!

so what; low wage jobs are useless since they don't pay enough or pay generate enough tax revenue, anyway. don't try to avoid it, right wingers.

Sigh...for about the millionth time...minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be jobs you raise a family on or keep to retirement! They are ENTRY LEVEL JOBS! You do them until you've learned job skills to qualify for a better paying job. When you take away entry level jobs by raising the minimum wage you prevent young people and people without job skills from getting a start in the jobs market. It's idiotic and it hurts the very people that you purport to support!

means nothing; social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

And, Labor will be able to consume more, and pay more in consumption taxes.

I have no idea what any of that meant, Daniel...do you?

Yes, I do. It is also why I don't take the right wing seriously about economics, or Constitutional law.

Economic principles don't change because you're a liberal or a conservative, Daniel. Huge increases in the minimum wage would have a ripple affect on overall wages and then on the cost of goods and services. That isn't a conservative view...it's simple reality.

 

[Oldstyle]

All a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage will do is eliminate about a hundred thousand "entry level" jobs and start an instant tidal wave of wage increase demands from everyone who's no longer working for minimum wage! At the end of the day...you haven't done anything except cause inflation and lots of it!

so what; low wage jobs are useless since they don't pay enough or pay generate enough tax revenue, anyway. don't try to avoid it, right wingers.

Sigh...for about the millionth time...minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be jobs you raise a family on or keep to retirement! They are ENTRY LEVEL JOBS! You do them until you've learned job skills to qualify for a better paying job. When you take away entry level jobs by raising the minimum wage you prevent young people and people without job skills from getting a start in the jobs market. It's idiotic and it hurts the very people that you purport to support!

means nothing; social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

And, Labor will be able to consume more, and pay more in consumption taxes.

Let me see if I can explain this SLOWLY for you, Daniel! Raising minimum wage would mean that ALL wages would also have to be raised to compensate those people who have job skills already and obviously aren't going to work for the same as someone who was just hired with no job skills. Supervisors are going to demand more. Managers are going to demand more. So now that you've increased labor costs for businesses what is their response going to be? THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE THEIR PRICES!!! So what have you really gained? The answer to that is...very little!

An upward pressure on wages. We want to lose, low wage jobs.

Why would you want to lose entry level jobs? Do you not grasp the importance of HAVING jobs where young people can learn about good work habits? Do you not understand that when you lose low wage jobs...you also lose any incentive for employers to hire those without job skills?

 

[Slade3200]

You still haven't answered the question why with the economy in serious trouble and millions out of work in the Private Sector..you progressives went after healthcare reform and Cap & Trade legislation...two things that would cause jobs not to be created!

That's taking advantage of a crisis to pass parts of a liberal agenda that you've wanted for decades...while you ignore the suffering of millions!

Jobs were created and unemployment has been decreasing for 8 years now down to historic lows, so the track we’ve been on has been pretty good. They went for healthcare because healthcare was in serious need of reform. Prices were sky rocketing, people were being taken advantage of by insurance agencies, and sick people weren’t getting coverage. The ACA wasn’t meant to creat jobs it was meant to help sick people. It was poorly executed and there were also broken promises so I give it a C.

A "C"? You give a "C" to legislation that was designed by it's creators to fail? Legislation that was so flawed that Democratic leaders had to bribe fellow Democrats to get them to sign on? What would you have to do to get a D or an F?

According to your BS talking points then yes it would be an F, but those just aren’t true and most people know it. Why then couldn’t a Republican majority congress repeal it ? Something so horribly bad should be an easy repeal. You’re not being honest

The GOP has 52 seats in the Senate...you need 60 votes to repeal legislation once it's been passed. Easy repeal? How so?

That bill was under reconciliation and only need 50 votes to repeal. As you said, the republicans had 52 seats. You do the math tonto

 

[danielpalos]

so what; low wage jobs are useless since they don't pay enough or pay generate enough tax revenue, anyway. don't try to avoid it, right wingers.

Sigh...for about the millionth time...minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be jobs you raise a family on or keep to retirement! They are ENTRY LEVEL JOBS! You do them until you've learned job skills to qualify for a better paying job. When you take away entry level jobs by raising the minimum wage you prevent young people and people without job skills from getting a start in the jobs market. It's idiotic and it hurts the very people that you purport to support!

means nothing; social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

And, Labor will be able to consume more, and pay more in consumption taxes.

I have no idea what any of that meant, Daniel...do you?

Yes, I do. It is also why I don't take the right wing seriously about economics, or Constitutional law.

Economic principles don't change because you're a liberal or a conservative, Daniel. Huge increases in the minimum wage would have a ripple affect on overall wages and then on the cost of goods and services. That isn't a conservative view...it's simple reality.

That is what the right wing alleged, about the restaurants.

Less than five percent inflation, is what the right wing is complaining about.

 

[danielpalos]

so what; low wage jobs are useless since they don't pay enough or pay generate enough tax revenue, anyway. don't try to avoid it, right wingers.

Sigh...for about the millionth time...minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be jobs you raise a family on or keep to retirement! They are ENTRY LEVEL JOBS! You do them until you've learned job skills to qualify for a better paying job. When you take away entry level jobs by raising the minimum wage you prevent young people and people without job skills from getting a start in the jobs market. It's idiotic and it hurts the very people that you purport to support!

means nothing; social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

And, Labor will be able to consume more, and pay more in consumption taxes.

Let me see if I can explain this SLOWLY for you, Daniel! Raising minimum wage would mean that ALL wages would also have to be raised to compensate those people who have job skills already and obviously aren't going to work for the same as someone who was just hired with no job skills. Supervisors are going to demand more. Managers are going to demand more. So now that you've increased labor costs for businesses what is their response going to be? THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE THEIR PRICES!!! So what have you really gained? The answer to that is...very little!

An upward pressure on wages. We want to lose, low wage jobs.

Why would you want to lose entry level jobs? Do you not grasp the importance of HAVING jobs where young people can learn about good work habits? Do you not understand that when you lose low wage jobs...you also lose any incentive for employers to hire those without job skills?

You beg the question. The new minimum wage will be fifteen dollars an hour. We don't care if we lose, low wage jobs. It is a simple test. If capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost, why should Labor care if those capitalists, fail. It is an Individual Problem not an Institutional problem.

 

[Oldstyle]

Sigh...for about the millionth time...minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be jobs you raise a family on or keep to retirement! They are ENTRY LEVEL JOBS! You do them until you've learned job skills to qualify for a better paying job. When you take away entry level jobs by raising the minimum wage you prevent young people and people without job skills from getting a start in the jobs market. It's idiotic and it hurts the very people that you purport to support!

means nothing; social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

And, Labor will be able to consume more, and pay more in consumption taxes.

I have no idea what any of that meant, Daniel...do you?

Yes, I do. It is also why I don't take the right wing seriously about economics, or Constitutional law.

Economic principles don't change because you're a liberal or a conservative, Daniel. Huge increases in the minimum wage would have a ripple affect on overall wages and then on the cost of goods and services. That isn't a conservative view...it's simple reality.

That is what the right wing alleged, about the restaurants.

Less than five percent inflation, is what the right wing is complaining about.

Have you been in fast food restaurants lately, Daniel? Notice all of the self serve "kiosks"? Been to a Wal Mart? Notice all of the self serve check out "kiosks"? That's the Private Sector responding to just the threat of a higher minimum wage! Every single one of those automated stations means the loss of another entry level job. So what are you on the left doing to replace the jobs that your proposed policies are killing? Quite frankly...you don't seem to care! Which says volumes about liberals in general these days.

 

[Oldstyle]

Sigh...for about the millionth time...minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be jobs you raise a family on or keep to retirement! They are ENTRY LEVEL JOBS! You do them until you've learned job skills to qualify for a better paying job. When you take away entry level jobs by raising the minimum wage you prevent young people and people without job skills from getting a start in the jobs market. It's idiotic and it hurts the very people that you purport to support!

means nothing; social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

And, Labor will be able to consume more, and pay more in consumption taxes.

Let me see if I can explain this SLOWLY for you, Daniel! Raising minimum wage would mean that ALL wages would also have to be raised to compensate those people who have job skills already and obviously aren't going to work for the same as someone who was just hired with no job skills. Supervisors are going to demand more. Managers are going to demand more. So now that you've increased labor costs for businesses what is their response going to be? THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE THEIR PRICES!!! So what have you really gained? The answer to that is...very little!

An upward pressure on wages. We want to lose, low wage jobs.

Why would you want to lose entry level jobs? Do you not grasp the importance of HAVING jobs where young people can learn about good work habits? Do you not understand that when you lose low wage jobs...you also lose any incentive for employers to hire those without job skills?

You beg the question. The new minimum wage will be fifteen dollars an hour. We don't care if we lose, low wage jobs. It is a simple test. If capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost, why should Labor care if those capitalists, fail. It is an Individual Problem not an Institutional problem.

A test? You want people to lose their jobs as part of a "test"? You want businesses to fail? Why? So you can claim a nonexistent "victory" for unions that care more about their leaders than they do about workers? How do you make a better product at a lower cost as a US business when people like you force you to pay far more than your overseas competition for labor? Explain that to me, Daniel!

 

[danielpalos]

means nothing; social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

And, Labor will be able to consume more, and pay more in consumption taxes.

I have no idea what any of that meant, Daniel...do you?

Yes, I do. It is also why I don't take the right wing seriously about economics, or Constitutional law.

Economic principles don't change because you're a liberal or a conservative, Daniel. Huge increases in the minimum wage would have a ripple affect on overall wages and then on the cost of goods and services. That isn't a conservative view...it's simple reality.

That is what the right wing alleged, about the restaurants.

Less than five percent inflation, is what the right wing is complaining about.

Have you been in fast food restaurants lately, Daniel? Notice all of the self serve "kiosks"? Been to a Wal Mart? Notice all of the self serve check out "kiosks"? That's the Private Sector responding to just the threat of a higher minimum wage! Every single one of those automated stations means the loss of another entry level job. So what are you on the left doing to replace the jobs that your proposed policies are killing? Quite frankly...you don't seem to care! Which says volumes about liberals in general these days.

We don't care if we lose low wage jobs. Those jobs are subsidized, anyway, if they pay less than fourteen dollars an hour.

 

[Oldstyle]

You still haven't answered the question why with the economy in serious trouble and millions out of work in the Private Sector..you progressives went after healthcare reform and Cap & Trade legislation...two things that would cause jobs not to be created!

That's taking advantage of a crisis to pass parts of a liberal agenda that you've wanted for decades...while you ignore the suffering of millions!

Jobs were created and unemployment has been decreasing for 8 years now down to historic lows, so the track we’ve been on has been pretty good. They went for healthcare because healthcare was in serious need of reform. Prices were sky rocketing, people were being taken advantage of by insurance agencies, and sick people weren’t getting coverage. The ACA wasn’t meant to creat jobs it was meant to help sick people. It was poorly executed and there were also broken promises so I give it a C.

A "C"? You give a "C" to legislation that was designed by it's creators to fail? Legislation that was so flawed that Democratic leaders had to bribe fellow Democrats to get them to sign on? What would you have to do to get a D or an F?

According to your BS talking points then yes it would be an F, but those just aren’t true and most people know it. Why then couldn’t a Republican majority congress repeal it ? Something so horribly bad should be an easy repeal. You’re not being honest

The GOP has 52 seats in the Senate...you need 60 votes to repeal legislation once it's been passed. Easy repeal? How so?

That bill was under reconciliation and only need 50 votes to repeal. As you said, the republicans had 52 seats. You do the math tonto

You don't understand how our government works obviously, Lone Ranger! Under the budget procedure known as reconciliation, they're limited to what they can keep in and what they can leave out. The rule only allows Republicans to touch Obamacare's budget-related provisions, not its regulations. The bill would repeal all of Obamacare's subsidies, taxes, and penalties for those who don't buy insurance, but keeps in place Obamacare's rules about what insurers must cover. Easy repeal? Not at all.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Sigh...for about the millionth time...minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be jobs you raise a family on or keep to retirement! They are ENTRY LEVEL JOBS! You do them until you've learned job skills to qualify for a better paying job. When you take away entry level jobs by raising the minimum wage you prevent young people and people without job skills from getting a start in the jobs market. It's idiotic and it hurts the very people that you purport to support!

means nothing; social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

And, Labor will be able to consume more, and pay more in consumption taxes.

Let me see if I can explain this SLOWLY for you, Daniel! Raising minimum wage would mean that ALL wages would also have to be raised to compensate those people who have job skills already and obviously aren't going to work for the same as someone who was just hired with no job skills. Supervisors are going to demand more. Managers are going to demand more. So now that you've increased labor costs for businesses what is their response going to be? THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE THEIR PRICES!!! So what have you really gained? The answer to that is...very little!

An upward pressure on wages. We want to lose, low wage jobs.

Why would you want to lose entry level jobs? Do you not grasp the importance of HAVING jobs where young people can learn about good work habits? Do you not understand that when you lose low wage jobs...you also lose any incentive for employers to hire those without job skills?

You beg the question. The new minimum wage will be fifteen dollars an hour. We don't care if we lose, low wage jobs. It is a simple test. If capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost, why should Labor care if those capitalists, fail. It is an Individual Problem not an Institutional problem.

The new minimum wage will be fifteen dollars an hour.

No it won't.

We don't care if we lose, low wage jobs.

Of course not. Dems don't care about low wage / low skill workers.

 

[Oldstyle]

I have no idea what any of that meant, Daniel...do you?

Yes, I do. It is also why I don't take the right wing seriously about economics, or Constitutional law.

Economic principles don't change because you're a liberal or a conservative, Daniel. Huge increases in the minimum wage would have a ripple affect on overall wages and then on the cost of goods and services. That isn't a conservative view...it's simple reality.

That is what the right wing alleged, about the restaurants.

Less than five percent inflation, is what the right wing is complaining about.

Have you been in fast food restaurants lately, Daniel? Notice all of the self serve "kiosks"? Been to a Wal Mart? Notice all of the self serve check out "kiosks"? That's the Private Sector responding to just the threat of a higher minimum wage! Every single one of those automated stations means the loss of another entry level job. So what are you on the left doing to replace the jobs that your proposed policies are killing? Quite frankly...you don't seem to care! Which says volumes about liberals in general these days.

We don't care if we lose low wage jobs. Those jobs are subsidized, anyway, if they pay less than fourteen dollars an hour.

Who is "we"? Are you speaking for the people that have those jobs? They care. They care a lot. The question is why you don't care, Daniel? Why do liberals not care about young people and those without job skills getting started in the workplace? What are you going to replace those jobs with?

 

[whitehall]

"It's not a tax hike unless you compare it to the tax cuts". How's that for carefully worded political nonsense? If you put lipstick on a pig it's not a pig anymore. Where were democrats for the eight stagnant Hussein years? "Cash for Clunkers", don't make me laugh.

 

[danielpalos]

means nothing; social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour by comparison.

And, Labor will be able to consume more, and pay more in consumption taxes.

Let me see if I can explain this SLOWLY for you, Daniel! Raising minimum wage would mean that ALL wages would also have to be raised to compensate those people who have job skills already and obviously aren't going to work for the same as someone who was just hired with no job skills. Supervisors are going to demand more. Managers are going to demand more. So now that you've increased labor costs for businesses what is their response going to be? THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE THEIR PRICES!!! So what have you really gained? The answer to that is...very little!

An upward pressure on wages. We want to lose, low wage jobs.

Why would you want to lose entry level jobs? Do you not grasp the importance of HAVING jobs where young people can learn about good work habits? Do you not understand that when you lose low wage jobs...you also lose any incentive for employers to hire those without job skills?

You beg the question. The new minimum wage will be fifteen dollars an hour. We don't care if we lose, low wage jobs. It is a simple test. If capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost, why should Labor care if those capitalists, fail. It is an Individual Problem not an Institutional problem.

The new minimum wage will be fifteen dollars an hour.

No it won't.

We don't care if we lose, low wage jobs.

Of course not. Dems don't care about low wage / low skill workers.

sure we do; we simply don't need to subsidize Capitalists with socialism, since they allege to "hate socialism".

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, I do. It is also why I don't take the right wing seriously about economics, or Constitutional law.

Economic principles don't change because you're a liberal or a conservative, Daniel. Huge increases in the minimum wage would have a ripple affect on overall wages and then on the cost of goods and services. That isn't a conservative view...it's simple reality.

That is what the right wing alleged, about the restaurants.

Less than five percent inflation, is what the right wing is complaining about.

Have you been in fast food restaurants lately, Daniel? Notice all of the self serve "kiosks"? Been to a Wal Mart? Notice all of the self serve check out "kiosks"? That's the Private Sector responding to just the threat of a higher minimum wage! Every single one of those automated stations means the loss of another entry level job. So what are you on the left doing to replace the jobs that your proposed policies are killing? Quite frankly...you don't seem to care! Which says volumes about liberals in general these days.

We don't care if we lose low wage jobs. Those jobs are subsidized, anyway, if they pay less than fourteen dollars an hour.

Who is "we"? Are you speaking for the people that have those jobs? They care. They care a lot. The question is why you don't care, Daniel? Why do liberals not care about young people and those without job skills getting started in the workplace? What are you going to replace those jobs with?

The right wing doesn't care. The minimum wage should be fifteen an hour.

 

[Slade3200]

Jobs were created and unemployment has been decreasing for 8 years now down to historic lows, so the track we’ve been on has been pretty good. They went for healthcare because healthcare was in serious need of reform. Prices were sky rocketing, people were being taken advantage of by insurance agencies, and sick people weren’t getting coverage. The ACA wasn’t meant to creat jobs it was meant to help sick people. It was poorly executed and there were also broken promises so I give it a C.

A "C"? You give a "C" to legislation that was designed by it's creators to fail? Legislation that was so flawed that Democratic leaders had to bribe fellow Democrats to get them to sign on? What would you have to do to get a D or an F?

According to your BS talking points then yes it would be an F, but those just aren’t true and most people know it. Why then couldn’t a Republican majority congress repeal it ? Something so horribly bad should be an easy repeal. You’re not being honest

The GOP has 52 seats in the Senate...you need 60 votes to repeal legislation once it's been passed. Easy repeal? How so?

That bill was under reconciliation and only need 50 votes to repeal. As you said, the republicans had 52 seats. You do the math tonto

You don't understand how our government works obviously, Lone Ranger! Under the budget procedure known as reconciliation, they're limited to what they can keep in and what they can leave out. The rule only allows Republicans to touch Obamacare's budget-related provisions, not its regulations. The bill would repeal all of Obamacare's subsidies, taxes, and penalties for those who don't buy insurance, but keeps in place Obamacare's rules about what insurers must cover. Easy repeal? Not at all.

It’s pretty straight forward, they only needed 50 votes to repeal or defund Obama care if you like the sound of that better. It would then be their responsibility to replace it with a functional system that would work better. The replacement would take change the rules that you mentioned. Obviously they have been running as political critics without the aptitude to find a real solution that would work better than a “made to fail, expensive, job killing, healthcare time bomb” as you all like to describe it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Let me see if I can explain this SLOWLY for you, Daniel! Raising minimum wage would mean that ALL wages would also have to be raised to compensate those people who have job skills already and obviously aren't going to work for the same as someone who was just hired with no job skills. Supervisors are going to demand more. Managers are going to demand more. So now that you've increased labor costs for businesses what is their response going to be? THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE THEIR PRICES!!! So what have you really gained? The answer to that is...very little!

An upward pressure on wages. We want to lose, low wage jobs.

Why would you want to lose entry level jobs? Do you not grasp the importance of HAVING jobs where young people can learn about good work habits? Do you not understand that when you lose low wage jobs...you also lose any incentive for employers to hire those without job skills?

You beg the question. The new minimum wage will be fifteen dollars an hour. We don't care if we lose, low wage jobs. It is a simple test. If capitalists can Only make it on cheap labor instead of better products at lower cost, why should Labor care if those capitalists, fail. It is an Individual Problem not an Institutional problem.

The new minimum wage will be fifteen dollars an hour.

No it won't.

We don't care if we lose, low wage jobs.

Of course not. Dems don't care about low wage / low skill workers.

sure we do; we simply don't need to subsidize Capitalists with socialism, since they allege to "hate socialism".

No you don't.
If you did, you wouldn't push policies that harm them.

 

[Oldstyle]

A "C"? You give a "C" to legislation that was designed by it's creators to fail? Legislation that was so flawed that Democratic leaders had to bribe fellow Democrats to get them to sign on? What would you have to do to get a D or an F?

According to your BS talking points then yes it would be an F, but those just aren’t true and most people know it. Why then couldn’t a Republican majority congress repeal it ? Something so horribly bad should be an easy repeal. You’re not being honest

The GOP has 52 seats in the Senate...you need 60 votes to repeal legislation once it's been passed. Easy repeal? How so?

That bill was under reconciliation and only need 50 votes to repeal. As you said, the republicans had 52 seats. You do the math tonto

You don't understand how our government works obviously, Lone Ranger! Under the budget procedure known as reconciliation, they're limited to what they can keep in and what they can leave out. The rule only allows Republicans to touch Obamacare's budget-related provisions, not its regulations. The bill would repeal all of Obamacare's subsidies, taxes, and penalties for those who don't buy insurance, but keeps in place Obamacare's rules about what insurers must cover. Easy repeal? Not at all.

It’s pretty straight forward, they only needed 50 votes to repeal or defund Obama care if you like the sound of that better. It would then be their responsibility to replace it with a functional system that would work better. The replacement would take change the rules that you mentioned. Obviously they have been running as political critics without the aptitude to find a real solution that would work better than a “made to fail, expensive, job killing, healthcare time bomb” as you all like to describe it.

You obviously haven't been paying attention, Slade because they HAVE used reconciliation to repeal ACA subsidies, taxes and penalties. As for replacing it with something that works better? That wouldn't be hard since the ACA was designed by liberals to fail in the first place. What's going to be hard is giving people huge subsidies, letting them still sign up for insurance even though they have pre-existing conditions while not bankrupting the US! You liberals GAVE people goodies without paying for them. You broke it...YOU FIX IT!

 

[Oldstyle]

Economic principles don't change because you're a liberal or a conservative, Daniel. Huge increases in the minimum wage would have a ripple affect on overall wages and then on the cost of goods and services. That isn't a conservative view...it's simple reality.

That is what the right wing alleged, about the restaurants.

Less than five percent inflation, is what the right wing is complaining about.

Have you been in fast food restaurants lately, Daniel? Notice all of the self serve "kiosks"? Been to a Wal Mart? Notice all of the self serve check out "kiosks"? That's the Private Sector responding to just the threat of a higher minimum wage! Every single one of those automated stations means the loss of another entry level job. So what are you on the left doing to replace the jobs that your proposed policies are killing? Quite frankly...you don't seem to care! Which says volumes about liberals in general these days.

We don't care if we lose low wage jobs. Those jobs are subsidized, anyway, if they pay less than fourteen dollars an hour.

Who is "we"? Are you speaking for the people that have those jobs? They care. They care a lot. The question is why you don't care, Daniel? Why do liberals not care about young people and those without job skills getting started in the workplace? What are you going to replace those jobs with?

The right wing doesn't care. The minimum wage should be fifteen an hour.

Why $15 an hour? Why not $20? Hell, go to $30! According to your naive take on economics that should provide "Labor" with all kinds of spendable income! What was your major in college? Did you even take a class in economics? It sure doesn't appear that way.