Question for those pushing a "living wage"

[ClosedCaption]

The poor used to wear rags because that's all they could afford now the "poor" have suits and cell phones so I guess they're really not poor at all.

Proof positive that the "War on Poverty" has indeed been a success!

Huzzah!

Our "poor" are the richest "poor" people in the world.

I think you are supposed to show how the poverty programs have failed not the opposite

 

[ClosedCaption]

And we used to have protections against government becoming like it is. But the dummies decided to forgo the protections for a small measure of security. Put the Senate back the way it was with the states assigning members to represent the state legislatures. Throw out the 16th amendment allowing them access to our paychecks. Throw out the the clause allowing government to take our life, liberty, and property in the 14th amendment. Introduce lifetime term limits. Elect politicians who want to break up monopolies and place the same restrictions on imports as we currently have on products built in the us. Throw out the law that allows lawyers to sue on behalf of the environment and animals that has blocked almost all progress in this country for twenty years.

Electing people who want to break up monopolies wont work as long as those monopolies and invest...er...donate unlimited funds to canidates. Maybe we can elect people who do not value money?

har har har

You can't buy me, so it's a lie to say everyone can be bought. Can you be bought?

Hypothetically no...realistically every man has his price. Maybe we can ask canidates can they be bought and that will help everyone decide har har har

 

[RKMBrown]

Electing people who want to break up monopolies wont work as long as those monopolies and invest...er...donate unlimited funds to canidates. Maybe we can elect people who do not value money?

har har har

You can't buy me, so it's a lie to say everyone can be bought. Can you be bought?

Hypothetically no...realistically every man has his price. Maybe we can ask canidates can they be bought and that will help everyone decide har har har

Or we can prosecute government employee crimes. Theft is theft. Redistributing tax payer funds to friends, family, and political contributors is theft.

 

[ClosedCaption]

You can't buy me, so it's a lie to say everyone can be bought. Can you be bought?

Hypothetically no...realistically every man has his price. Maybe we can ask canidates can they be bought and that will help everyone decide har har har

Or we can prosecute government employee crimes. Theft is theft. Redistributing tax payer funds to friends, family, and political contributors is theft.

Yes but even that wont stop our pols from being bought

 

[rightwinger]

The poor used to wear rags because that's all they could afford now the "poor" have suits and cell phones so I guess they're really not poor at all.

Proof positive that the "War on Poverty" has indeed been a success!

Huzzah!

Our "poor" are the richest "poor" people in the world.

No question our poor people do not suffer enough

Republicans are looking to rectify that situation

 

[Skull Pilot]

Proof positive that the "War on Poverty" has indeed been a success!

Huzzah!

Our "poor" are the richest "poor" people in the world.

No question our poor people do not suffer enough

Republicans are looking to rectify that situation

They really don't suffer at all.

 

[kaz]

I don't blame capitalism, I blame the rich. Our capitalism seems to only help them. They collude and take away the benefits everyone else should get.

So you blame the rich for controlling government, and you want to make government ... wait for it ... more powerful. That's your solution. It's like arming the mafia. Have you ever considered maybe you didn't think this through?

I'm convinced lefties rarely think anything through.

And when they do "think it through," they do it with magic jelly beans. Oh, minimum wage increases? That won't increase employment. Sticking employers with more healthcare costs? That won't cause layoffs. And no amount of empirical data even registers to them much less makes a difference.

 

[kaz]

Proof positive that the "War on Poverty" has indeed been a success!

Huzzah!

Our "poor" are the richest "poor" people in the world.

No question our poor people do not suffer enough

Republicans are looking to rectify that situation

Actually you do it to yourself and blame the Republicans.

 

[kaz]

When did I give a solution? My solutions are small gov.

Nothing I've ever seen you argue indicates you support anything "small" about government. Can you clarify?

Sure. So I'm really not for a minimum wage hike. I really think we need to create a better environment for the worker. I think we need to change around the corporate tax code. What I want is for companies to take care of workers so the government doesn't have to.

Right now we have lots of people getting really rich off corporate welfare. Just look at Walmart. While they pay so little that workers are on welfare, the Waltons are making billions. The government is taking care of their workers. And CEO's is clearly a rigged game. Target CEO gets $61 million when he gets canned? Sorry that is ridiculous.

On the other hand we have a bunch of workers not working because we have too many poor paying jobs. Way too many jobs have been shipped overseas. So between the welfare for the poor and corporate welfare the government keeps growing, just look at our debt. We have obamacare because too few of companies are providing good healthcare. If they don't provide it the government will.

What I would do is have the corporate taxes full of incentives to pay workers well, give good benefits, and hire more workers here. And if you do none of those things then the corporations pays a lot of taxes. But if they pay everyone a living wage then they pay less. If they give workers good health benefits then they pay less. If they give good retirement they pay less. I would let companies pay 0 taxes as long as they are providing good jobs to US workers.

Now if that happened welfare spending would fall and the government would shrink. Fewer people would be dependent on government. More people would be paying taxes. Corporations would be paying lower taxes. Seems like everyone would win to me.

Yes, big government is small government, I understand now...

 

[kaz]

I don't blame capitalism, I blame the rich. Our capitalism seems to only help them. They collude and take away the benefits everyone else should get.

So you blame the rich for controlling government, and you want to make government ... wait for it ... more powerful. That's your solution. It's like arming the mafia. Have you ever considered maybe you didn't think this through?

Have you considered that we have?

Government is the ONLY system that offers citizens hope for control over people with enormous power.

But as you yourself correctly pointed out, now our government is corrupted.

Our government is now captured by vast wealth, it is has become much like infected tonsils

That which was originally meant to protect us from infection is now dangerously infected itself

And so your desire to make it bigger and stronger makes sense how???

 

[kaz]

Electing people who want to break up monopolies wont work as long as those monopolies and invest...er...donate unlimited funds to canidates. Maybe we can elect people who do not value money?

har har har

You mean like

1) Charlie Rangle who writes the tax code and "didn't know" overseas income had to be taxed?
2) Bill Clinton who donated $50 per pair of used underwear
3) Barack & Michelle Obama who gave virtually nothing to charity even though they ... each ... made six figures until Barack started running for political office
4) Hillary Clinton who turn a few thousand into a six figure profit without apparently needing to pay taxes on it
5) Tom Daschle who didn't pay taxes on perks such as a free car and driver
6) Zoe Baird who didn't pay taxes for her live in maid
7) Jefferson who stuffed wads of cash in his freezer
8) Al Gore who took campaign contributions from the Chinese

And who are they supported by?

1) Warren Buffett who says he should pay more taxes and hires an army of accountants to use a tax loophole of being paid in capital gains to avoid them.
2) Bill Gates who advocates a death tax and puts his money in a trust to not pay them.

This may be the problem, you trust people who are not trustworthy...

 

[kaz]

Let me explain it another way.

Guy at job doesnt get paid enough to cover expenses. His employer can kick him more money or he will look for assistance provided by you and I.

Which is what you've trained him to do. What he should do is work harder, invest in his own training and/or find a better job. You sadly don't even consider those possibilities, you jump right to that he'll go for welfare. Do people not have any responsibility for their own lives?

As an employer, I can tell you the #1 issue with low end workers is they don't care. Now I know you're going to come back with they don't care because they are paid so low, but you're wrong, they are paid so low because they don't care. Paying them more gives us zero care, it just gives them a fatter paycheck. Workers who care have no problem making more than minimum wage.

Man is trained to survive. He doesnt need training. If a man is hungry and there is a meal in front of him he's not going to turn it down because YOU think he should. If there is assistance hes not going to wave it away because YOU think its bad. He's hungry and a rumbling belly beats your outrage everytime.

But you can pretend that it's all my fault if you like. Gotta blame someone for your fantasyland bullshit not making sense in reality

That isn't what I blame you for. I blame you for plundering money from one person who earned it to give it to someone else who didn't. Charity is an act which cannot be performed with someone else's money.

 

[Impenitent]

I don't know any Republicans that are opposed to higher wages. Many Republicans are opposed to government mandated wage rates because everyone will suffer to some degree. Workers, whether they be poor or rich, deserve no more than the wages they agree to work for. Many poor people are poor because they have few, if any, marketable skills.

you make no sense; first you say Republicans aren't against higher wages, then you say they are.

Then you say the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills, but dummy, perhaps they have no marketable skills because they are poor!

Break the poverty loop - pay them!

Your reading comprehension skills need work. I am not opposed to higher wages, I am OPPOSED TO GOVERNMENT MANDATED WAGE RATES AT ANY LEVEL.

And no, I did not say the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills, I said MANY of the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills.

Being poor does not prevent anyone from obtaining marketable skills. Like everything else in life, one has to work at getting what one wants.

You break the poverty loop - You pay them.

However, I expect you are one of them.

So, you are against against a mandated pay raise for millions of fellow Americans. Not only that but you 'd be in favor of vacating the current minimum wage law , allowing wages to spiral infinitely downward. Yet you are a friend of labor and supportive of labor, and would not deny them a raise if offered it by their employer.

With friends like you, who needs enemies?

 

[Impenitent]

I don't know any Republicans that are opposed to higher wages. Many Republicans are opposed to government mandated wage rates because everyone will suffer to some degree. Workers, whether they be poor or rich, deserve no more than the wages they agree to work for. Many poor people are poor because they have few, if any, marketable skills.

you make no sense; first you say Republicans aren't against higher wages, then you say they are.

Then you say the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills, but dummy, perhaps they have no marketable skills because they are poor!

Break the poverty loop - pay them!

One would have to be pretty dumb not to understand the difference between liberty and government mandates. Did you get hit on the head a lot as a child?

What you call "liberty" punishes and further impoverishes a large segment of society, yet, conveniently, benefits you.

 

[OKTexas]

you make no sense; first you say Republicans aren't against higher wages, then you say they are.

Then you say the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills, but dummy, perhaps they have no marketable skills because they are poor!

Break the poverty loop - pay them!

Your reading comprehension skills need work. I am not opposed to higher wages, I am OPPOSED TO GOVERNMENT MANDATED WAGE RATES AT ANY LEVEL.

And no, I did not say the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills, I said MANY of the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills.

Being poor does not prevent anyone from obtaining marketable skills. Like everything else in life, one has to work at getting what one wants.

You break the poverty loop - You pay them.

However, I expect you are one of them.

So, you are against against a mandated pay raise for millions of fellow Americans. Not only that but you 'd be in favor of vacating the current minimum wage law , allowing wages to spiral infinitely downward. Yet you are a friend of labor and supportive of labor, and would not deny them a raise if offered it by their employer.

With friends like you, who needs enemies?

So if I can do a job for 5 dollars an hour and that pay would meet my needs, I shouldn't have the ability to negotiate with the employer to get the job?

 

[The T]

you make no sense; first you say Republicans aren't against higher wages, then you say they are.

Then you say the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills, but dummy, perhaps they have no marketable skills because they are poor!

Break the poverty loop - pay them!

Your reading comprehension skills need work. I am not opposed to higher wages, I am OPPOSED TO GOVERNMENT MANDATED WAGE RATES AT ANY LEVEL.

And no, I did not say the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills, I said MANY of the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills.

Being poor does not prevent anyone from obtaining marketable skills. Like everything else in life, one has to work at getting what one wants.

You break the poverty loop - You pay them.

However, I expect you are one of them.

So, you are against against a mandated pay raise for millions of fellow Americans. Not only that but you 'd be in favor of vacating the current minimum wage law , allowing wages to spiral infinitely downward. Yet you are a friend of labor and supportive of labor, and would not deny them a raise if offered it by their employer.

With friends like you, who needs enemies?

WHAT Gives the Federal government, or ANY government the right to force businesses to pay what the government dictates? Can YOU cite that in the Constitution?

NO, you cannot.

 

[alan1]

When did I give a solution? My solutions are small gov.

Nothing I've ever seen you argue indicates you support anything "small" about government. Can you clarify?

Sure. So I'm really not for a minimum wage hike. I really think we need to create a better environment for the worker. I think we need to change around the corporate tax code. What I want is for companies to take care of workers so the government doesn't have to.

You seem to think that either the government or companies need to "take care of" people. That's kind of a weird either/or point of view.
Do you need somebody to take care of you? Like yer a pet? Or a slave? Or is it just other people that need that?

Right now we have lots of people getting really rich off corporate welfare. Just look at Walmart. While they pay so little that workers are on welfare, the Waltons are making billions. The government is taking care of their workers. And CEO's is clearly a rigged game. Target CEO gets $61 million when he gets canned? Sorry that is ridiculous.

On the other hand we have a bunch of workers not working because we have too many poor paying jobs. Way too many jobs have been shipped overseas. So between the welfare for the poor and corporate welfare the government keeps growing, just look at our debt. We have obamacare because too few of companies are providing good healthcare. If they don't provide it the government will.

Name a job that has been packed into a container, loaded onto a boat and shipped overseas.
Name a job that is being performed overseas that YOU WISH your son or daughter had.

What I would do is have the corporate taxes full of incentives to pay workers well, give good benefits, and hire more workers here. And if you do none of those things then the corporations pays a lot of taxes. But if they pay everyone a living wage then they pay less. If they give workers good health benefits then they pay less. If they give good retirement they pay less. I would let companies pay 0 taxes as long as they are providing good jobs to US workers.

Now if that happened welfare spending would fall and the government would shrink. Fewer people would be dependent on government. More people would be paying taxes. Corporations would be paying lower taxes. Seems like everyone would win to me.

Alternatively, you could only buy USA manufactured products. Nobody is stopping you.

 

[MarcATL]

In another thread someone claimed that people have a right to be paid enough to support a family. I'd like to hear input from others on this.



Does a person with a paper route have the right to be paid enough to support a family?

Should a grocery bagger get paid enough to support a family?

What is the lowest level of job where you think the employers should be required to pay their employees enough to support a family? And how large of a family should this job be able to support?

If my brother quit his computer job and went to work as a Wal-Mart stocker, should he be able to expect Wal-Mart to pay him enough to support his six children?

In the 50's a person working at a bagel shop made enough to purchase a home, 2 cars and put 2 children through college on that income.

Something has changed folks and it's not work ethic.



Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[rightwinger]

Our "poor" are the richest "poor" people in the world.

No question our poor people do not suffer enough

Republicans are looking to rectify that situation

They really don't suffer at all.

Don't ya just hate it?

They are poor for a reason. If they don't suffer, everyone will want to be poor

 

[rightwinger]

Your reading comprehension skills need work. I am not opposed to higher wages, I am OPPOSED TO GOVERNMENT MANDATED WAGE RATES AT ANY LEVEL.

And no, I did not say the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills, I said MANY of the poor are poor because they have no marketable skills.

Being poor does not prevent anyone from obtaining marketable skills. Like everything else in life, one has to work at getting what one wants.

You break the poverty loop - You pay them.

However, I expect you are one of them.

So, you are against against a mandated pay raise for millions of fellow Americans. Not only that but you 'd be in favor of vacating the current minimum wage law , allowing wages to spiral infinitely downward. Yet you are a friend of labor and supportive of labor, and would not deny them a raise if offered it by their employer.

With friends like you, who needs enemies?

WHAT Gives the Federal government, or ANY government the right to force businesses to pay what the government dictates? Can YOU cite that in the Constitution?

NO, you cannot.

Government regulates commerce