How do we stop "the poor" from being so problematic?

[P@triot]

The minimum wage should always be favorably competitive with the alternative cost of social services.

The minimum wage can never be "favorably competitive" because the moment minimum wage rises, the cost of products and services rises to cover those new labor costs.

Don't get frustrated; get educated

 

[danielpalos]

tough shit. The stupid belief that small business owners, who DO work more than forty a week, should pay their unskilled workers more than they earn themselves is the height of fiscal stupidity. You morons who want others to subsidize the stupidity of others should finance that shit yourselves. Adopt an inner city single mom with five kids who can't read or speak like a human and who has never stayed at any job for more than two weeks, and giver her your paycheck when she starts working as a babysitter for other welfare moms so they can attend their required welfare jobs classes. I hope you make a lot of money, because she needs quite a bit, with five kids, to earn above the poverty level.

what stupid douches progressives are.

I work for a large company who could certainly afford to pay everyone a living wage and then some. They just don't have to.

That's exactly correct. Nobody pays more than they have to for labor. Your company doesn't, I don't, you don't. Most of us don't.

And that has proven to keep too many Americans under the line of poverty.

No, the solution to going over the line of poverty is to gain better paying employment, or work enough hours to not be in poverty.

This is getting really repetitive. Education needs to be affordable, healthcare needs to be affordable, pay rates need to rise in proportion to living costs. These things will be better off for society as a whole. It will lower poverty rates and most importantly it will set people up who are born into poverty, to be able to climb out. The middle class will boom again and the wealth gap will gradually shrink.

Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is the problem. It is a natural rate of structural inefficiency in our economy. Even if everyone is required to obtain a doctorate before entering the work force, will not solve that structural problem, in the long run.

And, education is affordable. What can you not learn on YouTube?

 

[P@triot]

Inflation happens; Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages to beat inflation.

No he didn't - he did it so that they could all afford Ford's. He was making money off of them by increasing their salaries and he was receiving free advertising as they drove their vehicles around town.

Don't get frustrated; get educated

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism has a poverty inducing, natural rate of unemployment.

What system doesn't?
.

command economies do not plan to command a natural rate of unemployment. socialism requires a work ethic; capitalism merely requires capital.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Providing for the general welfare isn't in the Constitution.

Neither is funding the general welfare. But you can't tell them that.....

 

[Aries]

The list of reasons is long, and we can choose to punish the entire group because of the laziness of some. Or we can recognize that a society as rich and abundant as ours doesn't have to let people fall through the cracks and suffer, that we're simply better than that.

Actually there is a third option, and that is give help to people who truly need it--not because it's a better option than working or taking responsibility for yourself.

You're not going to find many Americans left or right that don't want to see the needy helped. Our problem is that our government has such weak standard of who gets help that it outrages many of us who are paying that bill.

A personal example: I have a HUD house next door to me. I get up every morning and go to work so I can live in the suburbs. Why is it I'm supporting people that don't work to live right next door to me? I see them out there; the four kids, the three mini-vans........ Do you know what I drive? I drive a 2009 Toyota Camry with 90,000 miles on it. I get 30 MPG on average. I would love to have a mini-van or a 4 wheel drive pickup truck, but I can only afford one vehicle. How is it the lowlifes next door have three gas guzzling vehicles that I'm supporting?

This is not an isolated incident. In fact, it's pretty common. If not HUD people next door, it's the food stamp people at the grocery store. If not the food stamp people at the grocery store, it's talking to people at work who use temp services and can't get them to work overtime because it will interfere with their SNAP's allowance from the government.

It's my opinion that most of our problems are cultural at their foundation, and this issue is certainly an example. We're not going to fix (or even improve) it by looking at it from only one of the sides I mentioned in my original post. When a problem is culturally-based, it's a hell of a lot tougher to address.

We could choose instead to find a proper and effective equilibrium between the two approaches. But that would require far more effort, humility, honesty and cooperation than is currently "allowed" by either "side". In fact, I could posit that the two "sides" are demonstrating their OWN laziness by avoiding that effort.

One more thing: I compare the leadership of the two sides to parenting. Liberals are animated by their maternal side - "here, let me help, let me take care of you" - and conservatives are animated by their paternal side - "come on, pull yourself up by your bootstraps". A child is best raised by two committed parents willing to put in the hard work.
.

Is it really the job of the federal government to do this? I don't think so. I think the job of the federal government is to govern.

Our federal government is not supposed to be surrogate parents. Our founders never intended that nor did they design our government to be that. You want to see cultural change? Don't feed them. You'll see that change you're looking for. If they know that taxpayers won't take care of their babies, they will quit having those babies.

if you're banking on poor people having less babies to save our economy, better make sure poor women have adequate access to healthcare, birth control, plan b, and yes, abortions.

I'm all behind birth control for welfare people. In fact, if it were up to me, it would be a requirement. You don't get one red cent until you are fixed first when you apply for any kind of welfare. If you are a male, same thing. No money until you get a vasectomy.

Well thats rather extreme.. but at least it is clear you understand the importance of having control over ones own body.

 

[danielpalos]

The list of reasons is long, and we can choose to punish the entire group because of the laziness of some. Or we can recognize that a society as rich and abundant as ours doesn't have to let people fall through the cracks and suffer, that we're simply better than that.

Actually there is a third option, and that is give help to people who truly need it--not because it's a better option than working or taking responsibility for yourself.

You're not going to find many Americans left or right that don't want to see the needy helped. Our problem is that our government has such weak standard of who gets help that it outrages many of us who are paying that bill.

A personal example: I have a HUD house next door to me. I get up every morning and go to work so I can live in the suburbs. Why is it I'm supporting people that don't work to live right next door to me? I see them out there; the four kids, the three mini-vans........ Do you know what I drive? I drive a 2009 Toyota Camry with 90,000 miles on it. I get 30 MPG on average. I would love to have a mini-van or a 4 wheel drive pickup truck, but I can only afford one vehicle. How is it the lowlifes next door have three gas guzzling vehicles that I'm supporting?

This is not an isolated incident. In fact, it's pretty common. If not HUD people next door, it's the food stamp people at the grocery store. If not the food stamp people at the grocery store, it's talking to people at work who use temp services and can't get them to work overtime because it will interfere with their SNAP's allowance from the government.

It's my opinion that most of our problems are cultural at their foundation, and this issue is certainly an example. We're not going to fix (or even improve) it by looking at it from only one of the sides I mentioned in my original post. When a problem is culturally-based, it's a hell of a lot tougher to address.

We could choose instead to find a proper and effective equilibrium between the two approaches. But that would require far more effort, humility, honesty and cooperation than is currently "allowed" by either "side". In fact, I could posit that the two "sides" are demonstrating their OWN laziness by avoiding that effort.

One more thing: I compare the leadership of the two sides to parenting. Liberals are animated by their maternal side - "here, let me help, let me take care of you" - and conservatives are animated by their paternal side - "come on, pull yourself up by your bootstraps". A child is best raised by two committed parents willing to put in the hard work.
.

Is it really the job of the federal government to do this? I don't think so. I think the job of the federal government is to govern.

Our federal government is not supposed to be surrogate parents. Our founders never intended that nor did they design our government to be that. You want to see cultural change? Don't feed them. You'll see that change you're looking for. If they know that taxpayers won't take care of their babies, they will quit having those babies.

if you're banking on poor people having less babies to save our economy, better make sure poor women have adequate access to healthcare, birth control, plan b, and yes, abortions.

I'm all behind birth control for welfare people. In fact, if it were up to me, it would be a requirement. You don't get one red cent until you are fixed first when you apply for any kind of welfare. If you are a male, same thing. No money until you get a vasectomy.

how socialist of you.

 

[Aries]

I work for a large company who could certainly afford to pay everyone a living wage and then some. They just don't have to.

That's exactly correct. Nobody pays more than they have to for labor. Your company doesn't, I don't, you don't. Most of us don't.

And that has proven to keep too many Americans under the line of poverty.

No, the solution to going over the line of poverty is to gain better paying employment, or work enough hours to not be in poverty.

This is getting really repetitive. Education needs to be affordable, healthcare needs to be affordable, pay rates need to rise in proportion to living costs. These things will be better off for society as a whole. It will lower poverty rates and most importantly it will set people up who are born into poverty, to be able to climb out. The middle class will boom again and the wealth gap will gradually shrink.

Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is the problem. It is a natural rate of structural inefficiency in our economy. Even if everyone is required to obtain a doctorate before entering the work force, will not solve that structural problem, in the long run.

And, education is affordable. What can you not learn on YouTube?

its not what you cant learn, but what you can't earn- a degree. Youtube videos wont get poor kids jobs.

 

[danielpalos]

Inflation happens; Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages to beat inflation.

No he didn't - he did it so that they could all afford Ford's. He was making money off of them by increasing their salaries and he was receiving free advertising as they drove their vehicles around town.

Don't get frustrated; get educated

doubling autoworker wages; beat inflation.

 

[danielpalos]

The "cost of living" only rises because the left continues to increase minimum wage which causes everyone to raise their prices to cover the new labor costs (which results in the minimal wage worker being no further ahead). It's a vicious cycle of stupidity which could only come from the left.

I'll pay 17 cents more for my big Mac to make sure those workers make a living wage.

This Is How Much A Big Mac Would Cost If The Minimum Wage Was $15

This is left-wing "logic" at its finest here. Your burger is $0.17 more, but also your fries and your drink. Guess what? The gas station owner has to raise his prices as well. Your gas prices go up. It reverberates throughout society to the point where the minimum wage worker is no further ahead. The higher gas prices cause higher food prices, which cause higher everything prices (as people need to cover the cost of their food). If raising the minimum wage solved any problems - it wouldn't have needed to be raised 8x's in my lifetime.

a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, beats that inflation.

 

[danielpalos]

Min wage should be set by municipalities. Not even states can account for the massive COL differences across different cities...

it needs to be cost competitive with the cost of social services, under any form of capitalism.

 

[esthermoon]

What can and or will be done about it politically?
In keeping with current board rhetoric let's not be scared to get real honest here.
Our poor are our worst parents...they create more of their same.
Our poor suck the most government tit.
Our poor commits the most crime.
Our poor does the most drugs.
Our poor drinks and smokes the most.
Our poor have the most children they can't afford.
Our poor litters and vandalizes the most.
Our poor drives uninsured.
Our poor commits the most animal cruelty.
I could go on and on...and no Libby's, let's not deflect and divert to Wall Street criminals, big corporations..blah, blah, blah...Let's get real, let's get serious about our taxpayer draining bottom feeders....Whatta ya say?

I don't believe poor people are worse than rich people.
Some of the most horrible crimes in history were committed by rich people.
Every person is different

 

[Mac1958]

Capitalism has a poverty inducing, natural rate of unemployment.

What system doesn't?.

command economies do not plan to command a natural rate of unemployment. socialism requires a work ethic; capitalism merely requires capital.

That didn't answer my question.

And socialism does not require a work ethic. The fruits of whatever work ethic exists are shared.
.

 

[P@triot]

a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, beats that inflation.

Uh....no it doesn't. A $15 an hour minimum wage results in drastically reduced jobs and drastically reduced hours immediately and results in a $12 burger over time.

Don't get frustrated; get educated

 

[danielpalos]

Congress is delegated the social Power to Tax, in Article 1, Section 8.

Taxes can only be used to run the government (i.e. the 18 enumerated powers delegated to them by the states in the U.S. Constitution).

• Food stamps, Welfare, Medicaid, etc. are not one of those 18 enumerated powers

• Furthermore, what service are these recipients providing to me for my tax dollars? When I pay the military, I get defense. When I pay the courts, I get a justice system. That's how taxes work, snowflake. I'm paying for a service. So what service are welfare recipients providing me for my money?

Don't get frustrated; get educated

Providing for the general Welfare, is specifically enumerated, dear.

 

[P@triot]

Providing for the general Welfare, is specifically enumerated, dear.

No it's not.

Don't get frustrated; get educated

 

[danielpalos]

don't complain; be Patriotic.

There is nothing "patriotic" about communism. Patriotism would be if your selfish and greedy ass paid more to the IRS than required to help pay down the national debt because you care about the United States. That would be true patriotism. But you won't do that because you're selfish and greedy. You're a true hatriot.

You misunderstand the concept, like usual.

Providing for the general welfare is in our Constitution. Providing for the common offense or general warfare is not.

Providing for the general welfare isn't in the Constitution.

This is why nobody should take the right wing seriously about the law, or economics.

U.S. Constitution Online
Quick Links: FAQ Topics Forums Documents Timeline Kids Vermont Constitution Map Citation USConstitution.net
U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 8


Article 1 - The Legislative Branch
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
<<Back | Table of Contents | Next>>

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

 

[danielpalos]

The minimum wage should always be favorably competitive with the alternative cost of social services.

The minimum wage can never be "favorably competitive" because the moment minimum wage rises, the cost of products and services rises to cover those new labor costs.

Don't get frustrated; get educated

lousy reading comprehension or just favor your propaganda and rhetoric over logic and reason?

social services cost around fourteen dollar an hour; it is the reason for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage; for rational choice theory purposes.

 

[P@triot]

its not what you cant learn, but what you can't earn- a degree. Youtube videos wont get poor kids jobs.

A degree isn't necessary - knowledge is. Bill Gates doesn't have a degree. Neither does Mark Zuckerberg. Neither does Michael Dell. Neither did Steve Jobs. The list goes on and on and on.

 

[danielpalos]

Providing for the general welfare isn't in the Constitution.

Neither is funding the general welfare. But you can't tell them that.....

nothing but right wing fantasy, is all the right wing, really has.