Democrats continue to wage their war on working

[bedowin62]

No. it's not, because they don't. And whatever taxes are taken are just part of the system we have. I am ok with paying taxes that go toward things like infrastructure and making sure that first responders have the tools the need to keep my city safe.

Dumb ass.

we have a federal fuel tax for infrastructure..................dumbass
and it is the responsiblity of your city and state to make sure first responders have the tools they need........................dumbass

Yeah, the federal fuel tax takes care of infrastructure. Sure, pal.

And where do you think the city gets money to pay for fire and police protection? Thin air?

You're a ******* idiot.

FROM city and state taxes you mindless dolt


lmao!

poor angry loser

 

[bedowin62]

Issue Brief: Federal Funding for US Transit and Roadway Infrastructure



www.eesi.org/node/3373*



The United States' surface transportation infrastructure is funded through a ... Federal fuel taxes on gasoline and diesel make up about 90 percent of revenue for ...

 

[bedowin62]

obama never said he wanted to destroy the economy; and he didnt. the rich and corporations are doing just fine.

it's everybody else that is suffering; and has had their hopes and dreams for a better life hindered by his ineptitude

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sorry folks - but nobody is this stupid. Nobody. Obama has cost the U.S. economy millions of jobs. Any normal person who wanted to create jobs would reverse course.

It's painfully obvious that Obama and the Democrats are implementing the "Cloward-Piven" strategy. They need people dependent on government. It places the population on the government plantation and ensures their power as master.

CBO: Wage hike to cost 500K jobs | TheHill

What the CBO really said:

As with any such estimates, however, the actual losses could be smaller or larger; in CBO’s assessment, there is about a two-thirds chance that the effect would be in the range between a very slight reduction in employment and a reduction in employment of 1.0 million workers.

Somewhere in the range of very slight to a million. lol, that sounds like the weather forecast I heard awhile back where they predicted we'd get 1 to 12 inches of snow.

The Effects of a Minimum-Wage Increase on Employment and Family Income - CBO

key word leftard: reduction

your messiah is claiming to have created jobs; you morons are all over these boards claiming economic agenda is better

what a loser

CBO vs. the 1400:

1,400 Real World Minimum Wage Increases Show No Impact on Employment

1,400 Real World Minimum Wage Increases Show No Impact on Employment | The Fiscal Times

 

[Brain357]

clinton signed republican legislation restricting welfare into law; obama undid all that and expanded welfare. but that cant have anything to do with clintons better budgets or obama's record spending right?

lol

when will you idiots stop deflecting obama's failures with rants about bush and fond memories of clinton?

obama isnt clinton; and bush is long gone crybaby left-wing nutjobs

When will you admit repubs have no record of small gov?

 

[RandomVariable]

More like CEO's making millions don't want to fork over a tiny slice of the pie to insure their employees are insured so they blame Obama and the democrats...same old shit different day.

Hard to believe that there are people as stupid as you.

How do you find your way home each night?

Do you have a nurse that holds your hand?






1.More than 6.7 million more Americans have been plunged into poverty since Obama became President.

2.Real household income is down 5%

3. Consumer prices are up 10.2%

4. Total federal debt is up 58%

5. Gasoline prices are up 82%

6. Food stamp recipients up 49%

7. Debt held by the public is up 89%

8. As of last year, 46,496,000 persons lived in households with income below the official poverty line, an increase of nearly 6.7 million since 2008 and 249,000 since 2011. The total poverty rate remained unchanged in 2012 at 15 percent of the total U.S. population. So for the second straight year, the poverty rate was 1.8 points higher than it was in 2008.
Obama?s Numbers, October Update

9... in today’s recovery — the slowest in the modern era going back to 1947 — private capital investment has lagged badly. ... so has the jobs situation, with 92 million dropping out of the workforce altogether. A labor-participation rate of 62.8% and an employment-to-population rate of 58% are historic lows indicative of the anemic jobs recovery. Big Business Swings Behind a Mantra of Growth - The New York Sun

10. Tavis Smiley: 'Black People Will Have Lost Ground in Every Single Economic Indicator' Under Obama
Tavis Smiley: 'Black People Will Have Lost Ground in Every Single Economic Indicator' Under Obama | NewsBusters

11. . ".... the... [dollar] has today a value of barely a 1,250th of an ounce of gold, a staggering plunge from an 853rd of an ounce on the day Mr. Obama took office...." Fiat Wages - The New York Sun


12. "CBO says deficits slated to shrink in coming years, but will soar again if spending or tax changes are not made

Federal deficits have soared between 2009 and 2012, bring the total long-term debt to a level equal to 73 percent of the nation’s GDP. “Between 2009 and 2012, the federal government recorded the largest budget deficits relative to the size of the economy since 1946, causing federal debt to soar.”
http://bizbeatblog.dallasnews.com/2...if-spending-or-tax-changes-are-not-made.html/


13. "Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
. ...the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey ....indicate that the real (inflation-adjusted) median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession.
Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession | The Weekly Standard

This is completely off topic, my next post won't be, but all this "since Obama took office" somehow of leaves off some of the stats.

Veterans taking advantage of government education benefits has more than doubled since 2000.
From Boots to Books: Stories of Service and Transition | SIPA Multi-Platform Storytelling Fall 2013

 

[bedowin62]

clinton signed republican legislation restricting welfare into law; obama undid all that and expanded welfare. but that cant have anything to do with clintons better budgets or obama's record spending right?

lol

when will you idiots stop deflecting obama's failures with rants about bush and fond memories of clinton?

obama isnt clinton; and bush is long gone crybaby left-wing nutjobs

When will you admit repubs have no record of small gov?

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!1

well cant i just cry "obstruction"?


lol anyway; isnt it all relative when you consider Dems in congress under repub presidents making sure gov got bigger; and dems under a dem President making it BIGGER than it was under Republicans?

i already proved government is bigger now than it was under Bush


ok your turn

 

[RandomVariable]

Ohhh! So you're saying the guy who works 16 hours per day and has all of the stress of the entire company on his shoulders should dip into his own salary to make sure the unskilled worker makes $10 an hour. Yeah, that makes perfect sense...

If the "people who know better want better", why don't they go do better for themselves? Why don't they start their own company and then they can "sit in their big comphy chair" and make $9.4 million per year? You know, since it's so easy and all.

By the way, in your infinite liberal wisdom, you fail to realize that this is the same ignorant argument you people have made the last 20 times you raised the minimum wage. You're apparently incapable of realizing the ripple effect raising the minimum wage has on the economy. Since that cost of labor is going up, the cost of the products and services created by that labor will go up to cover the cost of that labor. And guess what? That means those people will be no further ahead than they are now. And we'll be right back here again listening to you people whine about "living wages".

The fact that minimum wage has been raised 20 times in my lifetime is a clear indication of how clueless liberals are. The fact that you think a CEO should dip into his own salary to cover the increase shows how immature you and and unqualified to even be discussing this.

First your assumption that the CEO is the only person in the company working 16 hours a day, or that they even do, is self-serving more than it is accurate. There are plenty of people working third shift in the cooler at Wal-Mart or the fryer at KFC with maybe a break or two for the entire shift who work plenty hard for their pay.

A "shift" = 8 hours genius. And no, I don't think the CEO is the only person working 16 hour days. So are other high paid executives. But the minimum wage worker is not. Furthermore, they do not have the pressure and responsibilities of those executives. The fact that you believe a cashier deserves the same salary as an executive is simply amazing.



No, I don't. I look at it as an American who doesn't want to see the U.S. collapse under astoundingly ignorant liberal utopianism. I look at it as a human with common sense who realizes when you mimic Cuba's failed policies you will end up with Cuba's failed economy.



So much so that you share exactly 0% of your salary, you share your home with exactly 0 homeless people, and you provide 0 good paying jobs to those in need.

You're not a "humanist" until it's someone else's money. Then you suddenly become very generous.

The beauty of America is that you're completely free to address anything that troubles you. Too many homeless people? You are free to shelter them. Nobody will pay you a "living wage"? You are free to start your own business and sell your labor for the price you deem. And yet none of you liberals ever do that. Instead, you demand that other people do what you are not willing to do.



I agree with you 100%. Which is why the founders didn't include anything about healthcare, welfare, or housing. Because it wasn't about greed, money, or material items. It was about human dignity. It was about freedom. Sadly, the ungrateful and greedy left on this country has forgotten that and now they only care about how much government cash gets stuffed into their pockets.



Gasp! Turn a profit? Nooooo.....!



Wrong. Completely and totally wrong. Indisputably wrong. You've clearly never studied history. Our founders built a government in which the individual and their rights would be the dominate force in this country. The government (especially at the federal level) would be extremely weak and limited. You should really try reading some history if you're going to pretend to be an authority on it.



Now you're just rambling like a desperate man. What "inhumane acts" can occur considering capitalism is the freedom to decide for yourself what your labor is worth? A minimum wage worker is not forced to work any "inhumane" job. If they work one, it is by their own choice.



Uh....what?



So you're admitting that you're not a very good person? Because I've yet to see you provide even one good paying job.

You seem to favor the capitalist to the humanitarian.

No - I favor the capitalist over the angry, jealous, envious, communist prick like you.

Living in America must really suck for you. If it makes you feel any better the feeling is mutual. We do not force laws upon you because we want to. We force laws upon you because you do not have the common decency not to **** people every chance you get.

Nope - living in America is great. Having to share it with angry, ignorant Dumbocrats like you is what sucks. Everything you ignorant people advocate for has been done in Cuba - yet none of you ever leave the U.S. to go experience your utopian ideology first hand. Gee... I wonder why that is?

Ohhh! So you're saying the guy who works 16 hours per day and has all of the stress of the entire company on his shoulders should dip into his own salary to make sure the unskilled worker makes $10 an hour. Yeah, that makes perfect sense...

If the "people who know better want better", why don't they go do better for themselves? Why don't they start their own company and then they can "sit in their big comphy chair" and make $9.4 million per year? You know, since it's so easy and all.

By the way, in your infinite liberal wisdom, you fail to realize that this is the same ignorant argument you people have made the last 20 times you raised the minimum wage. You're apparently incapable of realizing the ripple effect raising the minimum wage has on the economy. Since that cost of labor is going up, the cost of the products and services created by that labor will go up to cover the cost of that labor. And guess what? That means those people will be no further ahead than they are now. And we'll be right back here again listening to you people whine about "living wages".

The fact that minimum wage has been raised 20 times in my lifetime is a clear indication of how clueless liberals are. The fact that you think a CEO should dip into his own salary to cover the increase shows how immature you and and unqualified to even be discussing this.

First your assumption that the CEO is the only person in the company working 16 hours a day, or that they even do, is self-serving more than it is accurate. There are plenty of people working third shift in the cooler at Wal-Mart or the fryer at KFC with maybe a break or two for the entire shift who work plenty hard for their pay.

A "shift" = 8 hours genius. And no, I don't think the CEO is the only person working 16 hour days. So are other high paid executives. But the minimum wage worker is not. Furthermore, they do not have the pressure and responsibilities of those executives. The fact that you believe a cashier deserves the same salary as an executive is simply amazing.



No, I don't. I look at it as an American who doesn't want to see the U.S. collapse under astoundingly ignorant liberal utopianism. I look at it as a human with common sense who realizes when you mimic Cuba's failed policies you will end up with Cuba's failed economy.



So much so that you share exactly 0% of your salary, you share your home with exactly 0 homeless people, and you provide 0 good paying jobs to those in need.

You're not a "humanist" until it's someone else's money. Then you suddenly become very generous.

The beauty of America is that you're completely free to address anything that troubles you. Too many homeless people? You are free to shelter them. Nobody will pay you a "living wage"? You are free to start your own business and sell your labor for the price you deem. And yet none of you liberals ever do that. Instead, you demand that other people do what you are not willing to do.



I agree with you 100%. Which is why the founders didn't include anything about healthcare, welfare, or housing. Because it wasn't about greed, money, or material items. It was about human dignity. It was about freedom. Sadly, the ungrateful and greedy left on this country has forgotten that and now they only care about how much government cash gets stuffed into their pockets.



Gasp! Turn a profit? Nooooo.....!



Wrong. Completely and totally wrong. Indisputably wrong. You've clearly never studied history. Our founders built a government in which the individual and their rights would be the dominate force in this country. The government (especially at the federal level) would be extremely weak and limited. You should really try reading some history if you're going to pretend to be an authority on it.



Now you're just rambling like a desperate man. What "inhumane acts" can occur considering capitalism is the freedom to decide for yourself what your labor is worth? A minimum wage worker is not forced to work any "inhumane" job. If they work one, it is by their own choice.



Uh....what?



So you're admitting that you're not a very good person? Because I've yet to see you provide even one good paying job.

You seem to favor the capitalist to the humanitarian.

No - I favor the capitalist over the angry, jealous, envious, communist prick like you.

Living in America must really suck for you. If it makes you feel any better the feeling is mutual. We do not force laws upon you because we want to. We force laws upon you because you do not have the common decency not to **** people every chance you get.

Nope - living in America is great. Having to share it with angry, ignorant Dumbocrats like you is what sucks. Everything you ignorant people advocate for has been done in Cuba - yet none of you ever leave the U.S. to go experience your utopian ideology first hand. Gee... I wonder why that is?

Your absolutes reflects the think of a simpleton.
* “shift” = 8 hours - only when it comes to pay. There are plenty of people who put in 10 hour days who get paid for only 8 of those.
* all CEOs work 16 hour days – there are plenty making extremely large salaries who don't even show up the the 8 hour “shift”
* that I believe that cashiers deserve the same salary as an executive – I am not saying that, no one here I know of is saying that, why would you claim that? Do you not know that no one is saying that or do you make the claim knowing that no one is saying that but you think it bolsters your argument. Is so how many other statements are similar? Rather than bolstering your argument you should worry more about maintaining your credibility.

The argument that one can not speak of the greater good until one places themselves among the most unfortunate of their lot is perhaps a reason you think I should be quiet but I, quite obviously, believe otherwise.

This country founded on the concept of unregulated freedom? So why create a government at all?

You seem to lack the understand of what a government is in the first place. This is the United States of America. Rather than a king, the King of England for example, we have democracy. This government draws a line around soil and water which marks the domain of this country. All citizens and the businesses of this country are subjects of this government, not the other way around. As much as one would like to shout freedom and rights those freedoms and rights are granted by the government. If one does not like how this government runs one can case a vote, or pay lobbyists. The corporation is not some self-evolved entity from a capitalist truth. It is a construct created by the U.S. government for the benefit of its citizens. The parameters of a corporation were specified with assumptions with how they would behave. I don't think it was foreseen that these corporations would pollute the water, the land, and the air, that they would abuse their workers with harsh and dangerous condition such as working with asbestos long after it was proven to cause cancer, that they would launch image campaigns claiming cigarettes did not have adverse affects, that they would calculate how many people would burn up in cars relative to how much they would have to pay in legal claims, generate “proof” that air pollution does not adversely affect the health of the planet. These corporations have abused the power they have been given and now they need to be reined in, possibility be restructured all together. The corporations are crying that they are free from government oversight, that somehow they are not subject to the laws of this land, that they are above the law. Well as long as they decide to reside inside this line they are the subject of the United States of America and they will do as we say.

 

[Brain357]

clinton signed republican legislation restricting welfare into law; obama undid all that and expanded welfare. but that cant have anything to do with clintons better budgets or obama's record spending right?

lol

when will you idiots stop deflecting obama's failures with rants about bush and fond memories of clinton?

obama isnt clinton; and bush is long gone crybaby left-wing nutjobs

When will you admit repubs have no record of small gov?

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!1

well cant i just cry "obstruction"?


lol anyway; isnt it all relative when you consider Dems in congress under repub presidents making sure gov got bigger; and dems under a dem President making it BIGGER than it was under Republicans?

i already proved government is bigger now than it was under Bush


ok your turn

I think both parties do a lot to grow gov. The Dems are just more honest about it. Repubs are just all talk and excuses.

 

[J.E.D]

we have a federal fuel tax for infrastructure..................dumbass
and it is the responsiblity of your city and state to make sure first responders have the tools they need........................dumbass

Yeah, the federal fuel tax takes care of infrastructure. Sure, pal.

And where do you think the city gets money to pay for fire and police protection? Thin air?

You're a ******* idiot.

FROM city and state taxes you mindless dolt


lmao!

poor angry loser

Right. From city and state taxes. No shit. Then why did you tell me that it is the city's responsiblity to ensure that first responders have the tools they need as a response to my point about my taxes paying for necessities like fire and police protection?

Are you this dumb in real life or just on the interwebz?

Just call me a leftard and be on your way.

 

[P@triot]

So the Democrats' grand scheme is to destroy the economy on their watch, which of course they'd be blamed for, and then, somehow, the ensuing takeover of the government by the Republicans will be of some great benefit to all the Democrats who will then be out of a job?

Genius!!!!!!

Not exactly. First of all, most of the people on your side could care less if the economy is destroyed or not. They only care about the government gravy train which ensures them that they don't have to work.

As for the rest, well, they are too stupid to realize it's Obama and the Dumbocrats who collapsed the world economy. They buy into the left-wing propaganda that it is "Bush's fault" (even 5 years, $7 trillion, and 48,000 regulations later that were going to "fix" the problem according to Obama).

Your trolling is getting boring.

The single biggest net job loss in any sector since Obama became president has been in GOVERNMENT JOBS,

and that is exactly what conservatives have wanted.

Now this is an interesting take on the Obama failed policies. Many liberals are going with the absurd narrative that he's "created millions of jobs".

You're at least acknowledging all of the lost jobs under Obama but are attempting to pain it in a positive light. Interesting.

 

[P@triot]

Your absolutes reflects the think of a simpleton.
* “shift” = 8 hours - only when it comes to pay. There are plenty of people who put in 10 hour days who get paid for only 8 of those.

Actually, no. It is illegal for an hourly employee to work 10 hours but only get paid for 8. Only salary employees can do that. And since we are talking about minimum wage here, you can't claim that you thought we were talking about salary employees.

So you are either lying or completely uninformed about the very labor laws which you are screaming for change. You might want to be informed about an issue before screaming for change...

* all CEOs work 16 hour days – there are plenty making extremely large salaries who don't even show up the the 8 hour “shift”.

I didn't say all CEO's work 16 hour days but many do. Some even more.

* that I believe that cashiers deserve the same salary as an executive – I am not saying that, no one here I know of is saying that, why would you claim that?.

Because all you've said is that CEO's are useless and minimum wage workers do all of the work.

The argument that one can not speak of the greater good until one places themselves among the most unfortunate of their lot is perhaps a reason you think I should be quiet but I, quite obviously, believe otherwise..

False narrative. I never said you had to place yourself among them. I said your a flat out (despicable) liar when you call yourself a "humanitarian". You don't do shit for anyone else when it comes to your material items. But when it comes to someone else's, you can't wait to give their stuff away in the name of "humanity".

You could care less about the plight of those less fortunate than you and your actions prove that. What you care about is punishing and stealing from those who have been more fortunate than you.

This country founded on the concept of unregulated freedom? So why create a government at all?

Because the founders weren't anarchists...

To go deeper, I'm amazed that you're asking "why create government at all". Our founders spelled that out clearly. I guess you missed that day in school as well.

You seem to lack the understand of what a government is in the first place. This is the United States of America. Rather than a king, the King of England for example, we have democracy. This government draws a line around soil and water which marks the domain of this country. All citizens and the businesses of this country are subjects of this government, not the other way around.

That is an astounding display of ignorance. If the government is not subjects of the people, how is it we elect them and we pay their salaries?

The whole point of America was to free people from being "subjects". How you missed that in school is unbelievable.

As much as one would like to shout freedom and rights those freedoms and rights are granted by the government.

Again, this is unbelievable. Rights were implemented by the people. It is the government job to protect and defend those rights.

If one does not like how this government runs one can case a vote, or pay lobbyists. The corporation is not some self-evolved entity from a capitalist truth. It is a construct created by the U.S. government for the benefit of its citizens.

The U.S. government created corporations for the benefits of citizens? Really? Really? No, really?

The parameters of a corporation were specified with assumptions with how they would behave. I don't think it was foreseen that these corporations would pollute the water, the land, and the air, that they would abuse their workers with harsh and dangerous condition such as working with asbestos long after it was proven to cause cancer, that they would launch image campaigns claiming cigarettes did not have adverse affects, that they would calculate how many people would burn up in cars relative to how much they would have to pay in legal claims, generate “proof” that air pollution does not adversely affect the health of the planet.

And our founders never imagined that an evil like liberals would rise up and corrupt our government far beyond anything you just mentioned here. They never imagined that the federal government would:

• Give black people syphilis while lying to them that they were actually receiving "free healthcare" (Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment)
  
  
• Molest small children in an attempt to create split-personalities which could be manipulated to create super-assassins with plausible deniability of their missions (MK Ultra)
  
  
• Create LSD (MK Ultra)
  
  
• Stage false "attacks" as justification to wage war (Gulf of Tonkin & Operation Northwoods).

These corporations have abused the power they have been given and now they need to be reined in, possibility be restructured all together. The corporations are crying that they are free from government oversight, that somehow they are not subject to the laws of this land, that they are above the law. Well as long as they decide to reside inside this line they are the subject of the United States of America and they will do as we say.

Nobody has cried they are free from anything. Stop the baby mama drama you drama queen. The issue is the failed Dumbocrat policy of constantly raising minimum wage. It's going to cost working people 500,000 jobs and your only response is the very immature "well the CEO should cover the cost".

 

[P@triot]

There is no adjective that covers it because you're full of shit.

Nobody takes 50 - 60% of my labor and gives it to someone else. What are you even talking about?

poor angry leftard; it is certainly possible that a combined load of federal, state and otehr taxes take more than 50% of what you earned

why dont you just go hang yourself poor angry left-wing nutjob?

No. it's not, because they don't. And whatever taxes are taken are just part of the system we have. I am ok with paying taxes that go toward things like infrastructure and making sure that first responders have the tools the need to keep my city safe.

Dumb ass.

Your salary is taxed at the federal level. Then it is taxed again at the state level. Then it is taxed again at the local level. Then it is taxed again in the form of property tax. Then it is taxed again in the form of a gas tax. Then it is taxed again in the form of sales tax. Then it is taxed again on your cell phone bill. Then it is taxed again on your cable bill. Then it is taxed again on your electric bill. Then it is taxed again on your gas bill. Then it is taxed again on your water bill.

The problem with liberals is that they prefer the liberal propaganda "comfort food" over harsh realities. So Jed here pays 50% - 60% of his salary in taxes and doesn't even know it. His same salary is taxed 20 different times per month and he's completely unaware.

And that explains why he supports it...

 

[J.E.D]

So Jed here pays 50% - 60% of his salary in taxes and doesn't even know it. His same salary is taxed 20 different times per month and he's completely unaware.

20 different times? Try again. I pay income tax, state tax, property tax, gas tax and sales tax.

Income tax is about 15%, state tax is so minimal I can't even figure it, property tax - I rent, but I do pay excise tax on my car @ $50 - $60 per year, gas tax - a mere few dollars per week, sales tax - 6.25%

That doesn't add up to 50%


You. are. an. idiot.

 

[P@triot]

So Jed here pays 50% - 60% of his salary in taxes and doesn't even know it. His same salary is taxed 20 different times per month and he's completely unaware.

20 different times? Try again. I pay income tax, state tax, property tax, gas tax and sales tax.

Income tax is about 15%, state tax is so minimal I can't even figure it, property tax - I rent, but I do pay excise tax on my car @ $50 - $60 per year, gas tax - a mere few dollars per week, sales tax - 6.25%

That doesn't add up to 50%

You. are. an. idiot.

I'm not the one who didn't even realize I was paying sales tax, gas tax, and taxes on all utilities (including cell phone, cable, etc.).

You actually believed that you only paid income tax. There is only one idiot here junior, and it sure as hell isn't me. I actually had to tell you about your own taxes.

 

[RandomVariable]

Actually, no. It is illegal for an hourly employee to work 10 hours but only get paid for 8. Only salary employees can do that. And since we are talking about minimum wage here, you can't claim that you thought we were talking about salary employees.

You ever walk into a store a few minutes before closing and see the clerk counting out the change and totaling up the cigarette count. Did you ever say to yourself, “They aren't even closed yet why are they not focusing on the customer?” You probably did. The reason the clerk does that is because they get paid up until the store closes. After that they are on their own time. That does not mean the drawer does not have to be closed out and the store ready for the shift in the morning, it just means they are off the clock. That is true for workers in all kinds of shift jobs. A majority of people in America are aware of this. A minority are not. Democracy is a most amazing thing in that it works on the principle of self-interest, enlightened self-interest perhaps. The majority will vote in such a way that the country stays in balance between the customer, you, and the store clerk, me. (for example) You state that minimum wage workers should just go out and start a company. You do not realize that is not an option for some. The majority of Americas do realize this. That is why when a majority of Americans feel that increasing funding to food stamps is a good thing the government should increase the funding for food stamps. Now you are in the minority but you are rich and powerful so you decide to corrupt the democracy and decide to produce propaganda to convince people who would otherwise think food stamps are most important to them that their God, guns, and way of life are in jeopardy. And taken away by the very same people who are trying to increase funding to food stamps, who are also socialists (definition irrelevant). Why do people vote against their self-interests? Because they are voting for what they have been told is the greater good. The founding fathers foresaw this. They knew that throughout history the wealthy and powerful would slowly eat away at the foundations of a democracy. They created checks and balances so that if one branch became too powerful, or got corrupted, the other two branches would bring it back in check so that the democracy would be preserved. Currently the wealthy are claiming the mantel of capitalism as their right to power. They are no more capitalists as Democrats are socialists. What they are are relatively small group of individuals trying to corrupt government to the point of no return. Just how far they have gotten or just how far we have passed that point of no return will only be known in the history books of tomorrow. There is one thing for sure, all labels aside, the direction this country is going is exactly the end the founding fathers sought to prevent. Congratulations Rottweiler, you are the Anti-Founding Father.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Anyone sitting in their big comphy chair making $9.4 million a year who would layoff people because he has to pay some $10 an hour is a jerk. Oh wait, they already are. I am sure they appreciate you sticking up for them though. You know, Rottweiler, your world could be a whole lot better if you weren't getting screwed. All you are doing it complaining about people who don't like getting screwed. I am glad you're happy with it. The people who know better want better. You just aren't one of those. You know what a Tory is?

Ohhh! So you're saying the guy who works 16 hours per day and has all of the stress of the entire company on his shoulders should dip into his own salary to make sure the unskilled worker makes $10 an hour. Yeah, that makes perfect sense...

If the "people who know better want better", why don't they go do better for themselves? Why don't they start their own company and then they can "sit in their big comphy chair" and make $9.4 million per year? You know, since it's so easy and all.

By the way, in your infinite liberal wisdom, you fail to realize that this is the same ignorant argument you people have made the last 20 times you raised the minimum wage. You're apparently incapable of realizing the ripple effect raising the minimum wage has on the economy. Since that cost of labor is going up, the cost of the products and services created by that labor will go up to cover the cost of that labor. And guess what? That means those people will be no further ahead than they are now. And we'll be right back here again listening to you people whine about "living wages".

The fact that minimum wage has been raised 20 times in my lifetime is a clear indication of how clueless liberals are. The fact that you think a CEO should dip into his own salary to cover the increase shows how immature you and and unqualified to even be discussing this.

First your assumption that the CEO is the only person in the company working 16 hours a day, or that they even do, is self-serving more than it is accurate. There are plenty of people working third shift in the cooler at Wal-Mart or the fryer at KFC with maybe a break or two for the entire shift who work plenty hard for their pay. You look at the the subject from the point of view of a capitalist. I look at it from the point of view of a humanist. This country was not founded on the principles of capitalism. It was based on the principle of human dignity. It was not because they did not understand the principles of capitalism. They understood that capitalism in its raw form has a very single-minded goal, maximize profit for the one(s) at the top. They created a government which would be the dominate force in the country. The force was not capitalism, it was democracy. Democracy will look out for the welfare of the majority of the people. The realities of capitalism was not lost on the founding father who were wise and well-read. They know capitalist were capable of the most inhumane acts in the name of profit. Democracy has no inherent grievance against capitalism but it does have a low tolerance for crimes against humanity. Also the minimum wage employee should start a business of their own presumable they would have to pay their employees minimum wage also so they could compete with their previous employers. Some employers pay all their employees a living wage but they still have to try and price their product with those who pay minimum wage. Maybe those employers have a smaller salary not only because they pay their employees more but because the competition pays their employees less. Perhaps the employer is not as good of a capitalist, just a better person. You seem to favor the capitalist to the humanitarian. Living in America must really suck for you. If it makes you feel any better the feeling is mutual. We do not force laws upon you because we want to. We force laws upon you because you do not have the common decency not to **** people every chance you get.

Wow. Have you ever read the Declaration of Independence? Does your logic circuit turn off when you read the Bill of Rights? This country was not founded on having a dominant government to make sure that capitalists weren't ******* people over. The country was founded as a backlash against governmental tyrany, specifically that of King George. When you look at the Declaration, it's basically a list of fucked up shit that was being done to the colonies by the crown and thus the justification for telling England to get fucked. Nothing in there about business owners not paying their laborers enough. The entire list is about being taxed too much, overburdened with senseless regulations, forced to quarter the British trooops who were enforcing said taxes and regulations. The -whole- thing is basically a rant about how the government was overbearing and the colonies were finally opting out. The founders weren't backlashing against capitalism, they were backlashing against power.

Look at the rest of the founding documents, the vast majority of them are specifically spelling out what the government is and isn't allowed to do. If the founders were trying to create a collectivist nation that defended the proletariat against the rich with a strong central government, why did they spend all their time in the beginning complaining about and then regulating the power of government? I'm not sure what corner of your ass these assumptions are being pulled from, but I've seen very little to support any of it.

Also, the founders weren't all about "democracy". They were about individualism. Freedom of religion, pursuit of happiness, founding documents that were aimed primarily at clearly defining and regulating the power of the government. . . the whole thing speaks to each person being able to pursue the values of their own conscience. This humanist argument you make is the opposite. Freedom of religion allows me to practice my own morals, yet you feel that your morals give you the right to override someone else's and tell them how they should run their business. You go ahead and pursue the values of your humanist religion, and I'll go ahead and pursue the values of my mind-your-own-fuckin-business religion. Thanks, 1st Amendment!

Anyway, back to this democracy thing. . . do you know that it's not even a Federal law that our presidents are popularly elected? Or our federal senators? States get to sort that shit out on their own. At the federal level, the only positions meant to necessarily be popularly elected are congressional ones. The guys who actually write the new laws are answerable directly to the people, because everyone should have a say in the direction of their life, but given the electoral college and, of course, the obvious disdain for an oppressive government that spawned the American revolution in the first place, it seems pretty obvious that pure majority rule was never what was intended. In my opinion, this is rightfully so. The majority should not have carte blanche to oppress the minority, in my opinion. Then again, I look at this from the point of view of an individualist, while you're obviously a populist, so maybe proletarian tyranny is right up your alley.

Another thing. . . democracy has an inherently low tolerance for crimes against humanity? Lmfao, that's silly shit. Democracy is simply the absolute rule of the largest mob. How many times does history have to produce blood thirsty mobs for you to see the potential for majority-based crimes against humanity? During the French Revolution, for instance, the peoples' mob tortured and murdered anybody with money who they could get their hands on to gain vengeance for their oppression. Men, women, children, anybody. Are you telling me every single person of wealth was guilty of being an oppressor, or can we conclude that democracy doesn't automatically denote peace and humanism?

And this wellfare of the majority of the people shit. . . omg. That's my favorite part of your argument. What's goin on with you lefties these days with all this greatest good morality? Rather than letting people sink or swim according to their own efforts and capacity, we'll use the power of society to control who gets fucked over and who benefits under the justification that it's the only way to ensure that more people are getting off than getting raped. I say **** off, quit trying to be God, and mind your own fuckin business. I've never asked for your help, I refuse to let you demand my dedication to keeping the overall societal numbers optimal, even at my own peril.

 

[f252863]

So the Democrats' grand scheme is to destroy the economy on their watch, which of course they'd be blamed for,

and then, somehow, the ensuing takeover of the government by the Republicans will be of some great benefit to all the Democrats who will then be out of a job?

Genius!!!!!!

Socialism is rarely blamed for its failures, look at history, it is replete with examples of socialist government being overthrown to be replaced by...more socialism.

 

[P@triot]

Actually, no. It is illegal for an hourly employee to work 10 hours but only get paid for 8. Only salary employees can do that. And since we are talking about minimum wage here, you can't claim that you thought we were talking about salary employees.

You ever walk into a store a few minutes before closing and see the clerk counting out the change and totaling up the cigarette count. Did you ever say to yourself, “They aren't even closed yet why are they not focusing on the customer?” You probably did. The reason the clerk does that is because they get paid up until the store closes. After that they are on their own time. That does not mean the drawer does not have to be closed out and the store ready for the shift in the morning, it just means they are off the clock. That is true for workers in all kinds of shift jobs.

It is illegal for an hourly employee to work 10 hours and only get paid for an 8 hour shift junior. Period. Store Clerk or otherwise.

Your ignorance of U.S. history and labor laws is astounding.

 

[RandomVariable]

Constitution of the United States - A History

Strongly militating against any serious attempt to establish monarchy was the enmity so prevalent in the revolutionary period toward royalty and the privileged classes. Some state constitutions had even prohibited titles of nobility. In the same year as the Philadelphia convention, Royall Tyler, a revolutionary war veteran, in his play The Contract, gave his own jaundiced view of the upper classes:

Exult each patriot heart! this night is shewn
A piece, which we may fairly call our own;
Where the proud titles of "My Lord!" "Your Grace!"
To humble Mr. and plain Sir give place.​