Is the republican ideology driven by a lack of empathy?

[bripat9643]

Fools always laugh at what they don't understand.

You're up there with political chic, hell, you believe people who support SS are thugs. LOL.

Of course they're thugs. They support using force to extract money from their fellow citizens. That's pretty much the definition of a thug.

So you want a tax less society with no safety net? Brilliant!

Yes, I want a society based on voluntary exchange, not looting and plunder.

LOL. It's an ancap!

A what?

 

[David_42]

You're up there with political chic, hell, you believe people who support SS are thugs. LOL.

Of course they're thugs. They support using force to extract money from their fellow citizens. That's pretty much the definition of a thug.

So you want a tax less society with no safety net? Brilliant!

Yes, I want a society based on voluntary exchange, not looting and plunder.

LOL. It's an ancap!

A what?

Anarcho capitalist.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

That was the claim by the democrats when they instituted such programs. They declared "war on poverty".

Raising the wages would simply increase prices on products which would hurt the poor the most.

No it doesn't bother me because you do not know of which you speak. Stop believing leftist talking points and think for yourself.

The poor by and large do not pay any federal income tax.

Knowledge is power. Read a book or two.

"It's interesting you tell me to "read a book or two" when I give you FACTS about income gains only going to the top 1% of earners. Enough of this "liberal talking points bullshit". It's true whether you want to accept it or not. You people entertain this fantasy that the private sector will boost wages on its own and that will never happen. Wages have remained flat in the middle and poor class for decades while the middle class continues to shrink. Again I am talking FACTS. I know you people struggle with associating facts with your Redneck bullshit ideology, but at some point you will have to accept them.

The negative impact on the market would depend on how high you raised the min wage and over what timeline. History has shown us that the previous raises did not hurt the market. 600 economists signed a letter to congress in support of raising to minimum wage to 10.10 per hour. Any price increase would be offset by a huge boost to consumer spending by bigger paychecks. That will help keep prices low AND create jobs.

Facts? You call spouting nonsense facts? I have income gains every year and I'm not a one percenter. So that in itself shows that your FACT is BULLSHIT.

The government does not create wealth. The government would not get a penny if not for private sector. You got things all fucked up dude. Tell me what product does the government produce?

Link to those 600 economist.

Minimum wage hikes hurt more than help, study says

Over 600 Economists Sign Letter In Support of $10.10 Minimum Wage: Economist Statement on the Federal Minimum Wage

7 of these guys are Nobel Prize winners

"July will mark five years since the federal minimum wage was last raised. We urge you to act now and enact a three-step raise of 95 cents a year for three years—which would mean a minimum wage of $10.10 by 2016—and then index it to protect against inflation. Senator Tom Harkin and Representative George Miller have introduced legislation to accomplish this. The increase to $10.10 would mean that minimum-wage workers who work full time, full year would see a raise from their current salary of roughly $15,000 to roughly $21,000. These proposals also usefully raise the tipped minimum wage to 70% of the regular minimum.

This policy would directly provide higher wages for close to 17 million workers by 2016. Furthermore, another 11 million workers whose wages are just above the new minimum would likely see a wage increase through “spillover” effects, as employers adjust their internal wage ladders. The vast majority of employees who would benefit are adults in working families, disproportionately women, who work at least 20 hours a week and depend on these earnings to make ends meet. At a time when persistent high unemployment is putting enormous downward pressure on wages, such a minimum-wage increase would provide a much-needed boost to the earnings of low-wage workers.

In recent years there have been important developments in the academic literature on the effect of increases in the minimum wage on employment, with the weight of evidence now showing that increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum-wage workers, even during times of weakness in the labor market. Research suggests that a minimum-wage increase could have a small stimulative effect on the economy as low-wage workers spend their additional earnings, raising demand and job growth, and providing some help on the jobs front."

The government creates capital indirectly by boosting consumer spending

They are stupid economist then.

For example, if Des Moines, Iowa, had a minimum wage of $10.10, that would only equal a $4.12 per hour rate when measured by the real costs of working and living in New York City. On the other hand, it would take $24.77 to equal the Des Moines rate.

This illustrates the reality that even if there was consensus on the need for minimum wage, the argument would move to what is a “fair hourly rate” from city to city. No federal law will ever be supported that does the “right and fair thing” by mandating a worker to receive $14.67 in Los Angeles and only a cost-adjusted $10.10 in Des Moines.

Yes obviously 10.10 isn't enough but it would still lift 18 million people out of poverty. We can raise it higher years later. In the mean time, the boost to consumer spending would boost the economy.

I hate to break it to you, but Nobel prize winning economists are smarter than you.

No it wouldn't. 10.10 an hour would still place families under the poverty line.

Nobel prizes don't mean anything. Obama got one for just being black.

 

[Claudette]

So if Republicans want to limit abortion on demand they are meddling with women's rights but they only think about themselves? If they want everyone to get a tax break they only think for themselves? Yes we know liberals are very generous with other people's money, but that isn't compassion because it takes from people who earned it.

Do you even think any of this through?

LOL@ Think and Billy in the same sentence

LOL God doesn't he come up with some lamo threads??

He's almost as bad as Shittingbull.