To those saying flipping burgers or dunking fries deserves 15.00 per hour...

[beagle9]

Conservatives do not want low level workers to enjoy a living wage. Adults holding two or three low level jobs are doing so because, as Conservatives believe, they are somehow not motivated. Not motivated. What a thing to think about someone out there working two or three jobs.

Conservatives do want people to enjoy a livable wage. What we conservatives do not want is making all jobs a livable wage. Conservatives want people to make themselves worth more money--not government making them worth more money. As long as taxpayers subsidize people who don't want to try harder, why would they try harder??

Conservatives believe that labor is a commodity like raw materials or packaging. This labor commodity should be controlled by the owners of the means of production by suppressing wages, for the benefit of the owners and shareholders.

Labor is a commodity, and like all commodities, has a value. Forcing increased payment of labor does not make that labor more valuable, it's still worth the same, only you are paying more for it.

Conservatives believe that organized labor is not only unnecessary but a direct threat to the owners of the means of production. Organized labor would mean corruption, unreasonably high wages, benefits and a greater emphasis on workplace health and safety. Unions should be shunned at all cost, in spite of the historical fact that when labor unions were strong, the middle class was strong. Coincidence? Absolutely not.

Of course not, but that was at a time when consumers supported unions. They don't today, and we are now in a global market. The American consumer is obsessed with "cheap." The cheaper the product, the more that product sells. You can't produce a cheap product with union labor. It just isn't possible.

Conservatives believe that the highest incomes deserve tax breaks while those who can least afford it should be taxed more, as illustrated in the current tax bill slithering through congress today.

The current tax bill provides lower taxation for the lower middle-class, and more taxation for the higher middle-class. As FactCheck noted, middle-class is considered anywhere from above poverty to six figure incomes. In that class, 63% of those people will see a reduction in taxes on the lower end of that scale.

And Conservatives believe that working class Americans should buy into this political ideology even though it offers little to the very voters they are courting.

It adds child credits, it keeps mortgage deductions for all that currently hold them, and those who buy homes in the future with under 500K loans will still receive those deductions. Those who purchase a home more than 500K (yes, those upper-class people) will no longer be able to write them off beyond 500K.

. All explanations of today that we see and hear now, but going back to the Glory days in comparison, just what the Hell happened ????? It used to be that when a product was built, it was built to last, and the price was right. This empowered American's, and it allowed them to save more instead of having to spend more to replace the inferior products in which monopoly corporations are shoving down their throats with barely no options anymore to escape it all.... We as an American people were stronger and more self sustaining when we could purchase a Kenmore washer and dryer that lasted over 20 years like me and the wife had done or like it was with many other products we purchased over the years. Just look at the products you can still find that was built years and years ago in yard sells that still work.

American has been duped, and it hasn't been purdy. Wake up America... 18 wheelers are a great example of the problem, where as inferior products are being built, the price steady going up, and the trucks not holding up now. Even though they cost 20 or 40 times more than what they cost not so long ago it would seem... They are plagued with problems. Ain't that right Ray ?? I have friends that drive, and they got horror stories to tell Ray, and especially about those def systems, heater and air conditioning controls, motors, lift axle systems where apply, front end alignment, stress cracks, and on and on. American's have been duped badly. It's no wonder why the wealth has been concentrated so much at the top. It has all been by design.

The problem with trucks today is the EPA. they had to manufacture trucks with so much pollution crap that it drove costs out of the roof. To try and compensate for the tens of thousands of dollars In pollution crap, they cut down on quality parts. So now these trucks break down all the time.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

. Yeah, and the crazy thing is, is that diesels don't emit the amount of carbons a gasoline vehicle does (no where near the amount).

 

[Humorme]

I'm going to say this once again - rephrased - I know what I said. I don't know what YOU said as you did not reference YOUR post; therefore, I cannot clarify it any better than I did. Furthermore, I'm not motivated to search out 600 + posts.

If it don't apply to you, say so. Then move on. If you want something more, tell what post YOU said something in that I disagreed with.

I don’t know if applied to me since you won’t expound on the answer. You are the one that said it applied to me. I would think if you made the statement you would know what you meant. I guess not.

You kept saying I said it to you and you've been acting like you're offended. Now you're backpedaling. What, exactly did you say?

What did I tell you? WTF, you made a statement about me following some damn talking point, I asked you to clarify and now I’m back peddling? Either define what you meant or don’t, quit trying to blame me for your stupid empty comment. And no, I don’t get offended by people on this board. I have 40,000 plus posts, you don’t get that many on here if you get offended easily. You think way too much of yourself.

Think you're projecting. Now, YOU are the one who accuses me of insulting you. But, I don't know what you said. So, if you can't put your big boy pants on and tell me which post I responded to, what I said is meaningless. Tell me you're not that stupid. Without researching this entire thread for your benefit, I have no idea what my post was in reference to so it cannot be clarified. Now tell me you're not that stupid and drop this OR tell me what it was YOU said that I responded to. Give me a post number or walk away. Otherwise I will start ignoring you. You're being silly.

I didn't say you insulted me, I am asking you one question and since you have stepped around it for so many pages now you can't find it and want me to do the research. You accused me of using left v. right talking points, I have no clue what the heck that even means, I asked you to tell me what talking points I was supposed to be using and now you dance. Sorry, I asked and the post was linked when I very first asked. I already told you, I don't need an answer from you, I already have formed my opinion about how you operate, it is all good.

Like I told the other guy, what you think is your business. You want ME to do the research to find out what YOU said that I determined was possibly a left wing talking point? You're mad because YOU can't figure out that I cannot clarify a point based upon what YOU (when I don't remember what YOU said) and YOU can't even locate your own post??? And now you claim you have me figured out? You are way out there in your own world.

 

[beagle9]

May I share an observation here:

We started out with a discussion about paying people a realistic wage for work performed and have morphed into a debate about capitalism.

At the end of the day, we are ignoring the real reason why taxes are so high. When we allowed misfits to attack the moral foundations upon which this nation was built, we tore down the ethical foundation upon which this Republic rests.

The divorced mother who got rid of the absent father that is little more than a transient pothead is as much a part of this problem as the mega corporation that wants to pay substandard wages to its employees. She relies on the government to give her child a guaranteed standard of living. The parents that allow kids 20, 30, and beyond to stay in the home, rent free and not have responsibilities are equally to blame.

If you want to fix low wages, rather than limit the discussion to capitalism, let's look at the lack of a moral foundation in this country.

. Well to be fair in the observation, wasn't the discussion just a debate about where the minimum wage should be set in respect to the cost of living standard on a state by state basis ? Aren't we talking about just a minimum start up wage, and what that start up wage should be in 2017, and not what it should be based upon using 1960 standards ?? Is there a problem with the state minimum wage standard set in most states now, and why is there a problem ? Did corporate lobbyist get to government officials, and stop them from making the proper adjustments over time ? I mean Mc-d's was helping employees to understand how to apply for government assistance right ? This should have enraged the working class taxpayers that they were actually subsidizing multi-gazillion dollar companies.

 

[Humorme]

May I share an observation here:

We started out with a discussion about paying people a realistic wage for work performed and have morphed into a debate about capitalism.

At the end of the day, we are ignoring the real reason why taxes are so high. When we allowed misfits to attack the moral foundations upon which this nation was built, we tore down the ethical foundation upon which this Republic rests.

The divorced mother who got rid of the absent father that is little more than a transient pothead is as much a part of this problem as the mega corporation that wants to pay substandard wages to its employees. She relies on the government to give her child a guaranteed standard of living. The parents that allow kids 20, 30, and beyond to stay in the home, rent free and not have responsibilities are equally to blame.

If you want to fix low wages, rather than limit the discussion to capitalism, let's look at the lack of a moral foundation in this country.

. Well to be fair in the observation, wasn't the discussion just a debate about where the minimum wage should be set in respect to the cost of living standard on a state by state basis ? Aren't we talking about just a minimum start up wage, and what that start up wage should be in 2017, and not what it should be based upon using 1960 standards ?? Is there a problem with the state minimum wage standard set in most states now, and why is there a problem ? Did corporate lobbyist get to government officials, and stop them from making the proper adjustments over time ? I mean Mc-d's was helping employees to understand how to apply for government assistance right ? This should enraged the working class taxpayers that they were actually subsidizing multi-gazillion dollar companies.

I think the reason that mega-corporations are allowed to pay crap wages and then saddle taxpayers with the amount the poor have to have in order to exist because the left loves government dependency and the right don't understand taxes.

It was the Republicans, under Taft, that came up with the illegally ratified clusterphuck we call the Sixteenth Amendment (the income tax.)

Between one party that needs a tax dependent society and a right wing that does not understand taxes, we can't have much of a conversation when neither side is willing to think outside the box.

 

[Papageorgio]

I don’t know if applied to me since you won’t expound on the answer. You are the one that said it applied to me. I would think if you made the statement you would know what you meant. I guess not.

You kept saying I said it to you and you've been acting like you're offended. Now you're backpedaling. What, exactly did you say?

What did I tell you? WTF, you made a statement about me following some damn talking point, I asked you to clarify and now I’m back peddling? Either define what you meant or don’t, quit trying to blame me for your stupid empty comment. And no, I don’t get offended by people on this board. I have 40,000 plus posts, you don’t get that many on here if you get offended easily. You think way too much of yourself.

Think you're projecting. Now, YOU are the one who accuses me of insulting you. But, I don't know what you said. So, if you can't put your big boy pants on and tell me which post I responded to, what I said is meaningless. Tell me you're not that stupid. Without researching this entire thread for your benefit, I have no idea what my post was in reference to so it cannot be clarified. Now tell me you're not that stupid and drop this OR tell me what it was YOU said that I responded to. Give me a post number or walk away. Otherwise I will start ignoring you. You're being silly.

I didn't say you insulted me, I am asking you one question and since you have stepped around it for so many pages now you can't find it and want me to do the research. You accused me of using left v. right talking points, I have no clue what the heck that even means, I asked you to tell me what talking points I was supposed to be using and now you dance. Sorry, I asked and the post was linked when I very first asked. I already told you, I don't need an answer from you, I already have formed my opinion about how you operate, it is all good.

Like I told the other guy, what you think is your business. You want ME to do the research to find out what YOU said that I determined was possibly a left wing talking point? You're mad because YOU can't figure out that I cannot clarify a point based upon what YOU (when I don't remember what YOU said) and YOU can't even locate your own post??? And now you claim you have me figured out? You are way out there in your own world.

It's all good, I don't really care, I realize you just make crap up and then get pissed when called on it. Thank you.

 

[Crixus]

View attachment 164037

Even McDonald's acknowledges that their business was intended for children.
Holding businesses that are created with the employment of kids & college students responsible for the poor choices people make in life is wrong. If you're in your mid to late 20's or higher & working for minimum wage you have no one to blame but yourself. You're poor choices should not result in a 10.00 Big Mac or 4 dollar fry.

Meh, let the consumer decide. Saw an odd thing here last year or so when Starbucks bumped coffee prices. That store closed down because no one will pay what they want. No one will pay enough for food that really isn’t that good when they can just take a bit more time and buy carry out from a place that makes real food not “fast food”. I don’t do McDonalds anymore because they are all staffed by wet backs and in my experience wet backs keep kitchens wet back clean and I’m not interested in any Hepatitis B.

 

[Papageorgio]

May I share an observation here:

We started out with a discussion about paying people a realistic wage for work performed and have morphed into a debate about capitalism.

At the end of the day, we are ignoring the real reason why taxes are so high. When we allowed misfits to attack the moral foundations upon which this nation was built, we tore down the ethical foundation upon which this Republic rests.

The divorced mother who got rid of the absent father that is little more than a transient pothead is as much a part of this problem as the mega corporation that wants to pay substandard wages to its employees. She relies on the government to give her child a guaranteed standard of living. The parents that allow kids 20, 30, and beyond to stay in the home, rent free and not have responsibilities are equally to blame.

If you want to fix low wages, rather than limit the discussion to capitalism, let's look at the lack of a moral foundation in this country.

. Well to be fair in the observation, wasn't the discussion just a debate about where the minimum wage should be set in respect to the cost of living standard on a state by state basis ? Aren't we talking about just a minimum start up wage, and what that start up wage should be in 2017, and not what it should be based upon using 1960 standards ?? Is there a problem with the state minimum wage standard set in most states now, and why is there a problem ? Did corporate lobbyist get to government officials, and stop them from making the proper adjustments over time ? I mean Mc-d's was helping employees to understand how to apply for government assistance right ? This should have enraged the working class taxpayers that they were actually subsidizing multi-gazillion dollar companies.

Corporate welfare has created a poor working class environment. Not much difference in wages between the minimum wage worker and the guy that sits home and collects the check. What incentive does a worker have to work when at the end of the day he is getting nothing more than if he sat at home.

We need to increase wages but it is tough for me to argue the McD's idea of paying minimum wage when so many will work there for it. The healthcare mandate was another reason I could see not wanting to work. When you work, your health care costs would go up and then we would see the worker paying for healthcare that the guy sitting at home was getting for free.

We need to take care of those willing to work, not sure if only wages are the answer, however we need to change the way we think about low wages.

 

[Humorme]

May I share an observation here:

We started out with a discussion about paying people a realistic wage for work performed and have morphed into a debate about capitalism.

At the end of the day, we are ignoring the real reason why taxes are so high. When we allowed misfits to attack the moral foundations upon which this nation was built, we tore down the ethical foundation upon which this Republic rests.

The divorced mother who got rid of the absent father that is little more than a transient pothead is as much a part of this problem as the mega corporation that wants to pay substandard wages to its employees. She relies on the government to give her child a guaranteed standard of living. The parents that allow kids 20, 30, and beyond to stay in the home, rent free and not have responsibilities are equally to blame.

If you want to fix low wages, rather than limit the discussion to capitalism, let's look at the lack of a moral foundation in this country.

. Well to be fair in the observation, wasn't the discussion just a debate about where the minimum wage should be set in respect to the cost of living standard on a state by state basis ? Aren't we talking about just a minimum start up wage, and what that start up wage should be in 2017, and not what it should be based upon using 1960 standards ?? Is there a problem with the state minimum wage standard set in most states now, and why is there a problem ? Did corporate lobbyist get to government officials, and stop them from making the proper adjustments over time ? I mean Mc-d's was helping employees to understand how to apply for government assistance right ? This should have enraged the working class taxpayers that they were actually subsidizing multi-gazillion dollar companies.

Corporate welfare has created a poor working class environment. Not much difference in wages between the minimum wage worker and the guy that sits home and collects the check. What incentive does a worker have to work when at the end of the day he is getting nothing more than if he sat at home.

We need to increase wages but it is tough for me to argue the McD's idea of paying minimum wage when so many will work there for it. The healthcare mandate was another reason I could see not wanting to work. When you work, your health care costs would go up and then we would see the worker paying for healthcare that the guy sitting at home was getting for free.

We need to take care of those willing to work, not sure if only wages are the answer, however we need to change the way we think about low wages.

Did you have any objection to my idea of incentivizing employers to pay above the poverty level? They would not be required to meet any minimum wage, but if they did pay good wages, they would pay much lower taxes.

I think there may be tax advantages for corporations to encourage their employees to get additional education and training outside the workplace.

 

[Humorme]

You kept saying I said it to you and you've been acting like you're offended. Now you're backpedaling. What, exactly did you say?

What did I tell you? WTF, you made a statement about me following some damn talking point, I asked you to clarify and now I’m back peddling? Either define what you meant or don’t, quit trying to blame me for your stupid empty comment. And no, I don’t get offended by people on this board. I have 40,000 plus posts, you don’t get that many on here if you get offended easily. You think way too much of yourself.

Think you're projecting. Now, YOU are the one who accuses me of insulting you. But, I don't know what you said. So, if you can't put your big boy pants on and tell me which post I responded to, what I said is meaningless. Tell me you're not that stupid. Without researching this entire thread for your benefit, I have no idea what my post was in reference to so it cannot be clarified. Now tell me you're not that stupid and drop this OR tell me what it was YOU said that I responded to. Give me a post number or walk away. Otherwise I will start ignoring you. You're being silly.

I didn't say you insulted me, I am asking you one question and since you have stepped around it for so many pages now you can't find it and want me to do the research. You accused me of using left v. right talking points, I have no clue what the heck that even means, I asked you to tell me what talking points I was supposed to be using and now you dance. Sorry, I asked and the post was linked when I very first asked. I already told you, I don't need an answer from you, I already have formed my opinion about how you operate, it is all good.

Like I told the other guy, what you think is your business. You want ME to do the research to find out what YOU said that I determined was possibly a left wing talking point? You're mad because YOU can't figure out that I cannot clarify a point based upon what YOU (when I don't remember what YOU said) and YOU can't even locate your own post??? And now you claim you have me figured out? You are way out there in your own world.

It's all good, I don't really care, I realize you just make crap up and then get pissed when called on it. Thank you.

Sir, I didn't make anything up. I gave you my opinion based upon what YOU said. I own what I said and you can't deliver on what YOU said.

Expecting me to clarify a position without knowing what I was responding to is pure idiocy. How can you clarify your position with only half the relevant conversation?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Conservatives do not want low level workers to enjoy a living wage. Adults holding two or three low level jobs are doing so because, as Conservatives believe, they are somehow not motivated. Not motivated. What a thing to think about someone out there working two or three jobs.

Conservatives do want people to enjoy a livable wage. What we conservatives do not want is making all jobs a livable wage. Conservatives want people to make themselves worth more money--not government making them worth more money. As long as taxpayers subsidize people who don't want to try harder, why would they try harder??

Conservatives believe that labor is a commodity like raw materials or packaging. This labor commodity should be controlled by the owners of the means of production by suppressing wages, for the benefit of the owners and shareholders.

Labor is a commodity, and like all commodities, has a value. Forcing increased payment of labor does not make that labor more valuable, it's still worth the same, only you are paying more for it.

Conservatives believe that organized labor is not only unnecessary but a direct threat to the owners of the means of production. Organized labor would mean corruption, unreasonably high wages, benefits and a greater emphasis on workplace health and safety. Unions should be shunned at all cost, in spite of the historical fact that when labor unions were strong, the middle class was strong. Coincidence? Absolutely not.

Of course not, but that was at a time when consumers supported unions. They don't today, and we are now in a global market. The American consumer is obsessed with "cheap." The cheaper the product, the more that product sells. You can't produce a cheap product with union labor. It just isn't possible.

Conservatives believe that the highest incomes deserve tax breaks while those who can least afford it should be taxed more, as illustrated in the current tax bill slithering through congress today.

The current tax bill provides lower taxation for the lower middle-class, and more taxation for the higher middle-class. As FactCheck noted, middle-class is considered anywhere from above poverty to six figure incomes. In that class, 63% of those people will see a reduction in taxes on the lower end of that scale.

And Conservatives believe that working class Americans should buy into this political ideology even though it offers little to the very voters they are courting.

It adds child credits, it keeps mortgage deductions for all that currently hold them, and those who buy homes in the future with under 500K loans will still receive those deductions. Those who purchase a home more than 500K (yes, those upper-class people) will no longer be able to write them off beyond 500K.

Have you actually read the tax bills yourself?

Nope, I have a full-time job. So I depend on sources I trust like FactCheck to summarize what it says.

I don't take other people's word for anything. That is what your congresscritters are doing. That is how we get bad laws. I'm like Ron Paul was. If it takes more than five minutes to read the bill, I'm against it.

So in other words you didn’t read it either since it’s over 200 pages long. If that’s the case, why are you commenting on what I said?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Humorme]

Conservatives do not want low level workers to enjoy a living wage. Adults holding two or three low level jobs are doing so because, as Conservatives believe, they are somehow not motivated. Not motivated. What a thing to think about someone out there working two or three jobs.

Conservatives do want people to enjoy a livable wage. What we conservatives do not want is making all jobs a livable wage. Conservatives want people to make themselves worth more money--not government making them worth more money. As long as taxpayers subsidize people who don't want to try harder, why would they try harder??

Conservatives believe that labor is a commodity like raw materials or packaging. This labor commodity should be controlled by the owners of the means of production by suppressing wages, for the benefit of the owners and shareholders.

Labor is a commodity, and like all commodities, has a value. Forcing increased payment of labor does not make that labor more valuable, it's still worth the same, only you are paying more for it.

Conservatives believe that organized labor is not only unnecessary but a direct threat to the owners of the means of production. Organized labor would mean corruption, unreasonably high wages, benefits and a greater emphasis on workplace health and safety. Unions should be shunned at all cost, in spite of the historical fact that when labor unions were strong, the middle class was strong. Coincidence? Absolutely not.

Of course not, but that was at a time when consumers supported unions. They don't today, and we are now in a global market. The American consumer is obsessed with "cheap." The cheaper the product, the more that product sells. You can't produce a cheap product with union labor. It just isn't possible.

Conservatives believe that the highest incomes deserve tax breaks while those who can least afford it should be taxed more, as illustrated in the current tax bill slithering through congress today.

The current tax bill provides lower taxation for the lower middle-class, and more taxation for the higher middle-class. As FactCheck noted, middle-class is considered anywhere from above poverty to six figure incomes. In that class, 63% of those people will see a reduction in taxes on the lower end of that scale.

And Conservatives believe that working class Americans should buy into this political ideology even though it offers little to the very voters they are courting.

It adds child credits, it keeps mortgage deductions for all that currently hold them, and those who buy homes in the future with under 500K loans will still receive those deductions. Those who purchase a home more than 500K (yes, those upper-class people) will no longer be able to write them off beyond 500K.

Have you actually read the tax bills yourself?

Nope, I have a full-time job. So I depend on sources I trust like FactCheck to summarize what it says.

I don't take other people's word for anything. That is what your congresscritters are doing. That is how we get bad laws. I'm like Ron Paul was. If it takes more than five minutes to read the bill, I'm against it.

So in other words you didn’t read it either since it’s over 200 pages long. If that’s the case, why are you commenting on what I said?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I comment on what is posted when it's posted. A day later I'm not likely to be posting about that part of the discussion that is fifty posts back.

 

[Papageorgio]

May I share an observation here:

We started out with a discussion about paying people a realistic wage for work performed and have morphed into a debate about capitalism.

At the end of the day, we are ignoring the real reason why taxes are so high. When we allowed misfits to attack the moral foundations upon which this nation was built, we tore down the ethical foundation upon which this Republic rests.

The divorced mother who got rid of the absent father that is little more than a transient pothead is as much a part of this problem as the mega corporation that wants to pay substandard wages to its employees. She relies on the government to give her child a guaranteed standard of living. The parents that allow kids 20, 30, and beyond to stay in the home, rent free and not have responsibilities are equally to blame.

If you want to fix low wages, rather than limit the discussion to capitalism, let's look at the lack of a moral foundation in this country.

. Well to be fair in the observation, wasn't the discussion just a debate about where the minimum wage should be set in respect to the cost of living standard on a state by state basis ? Aren't we talking about just a minimum start up wage, and what that start up wage should be in 2017, and not what it should be based upon using 1960 standards ?? Is there a problem with the state minimum wage standard set in most states now, and why is there a problem ? Did corporate lobbyist get to government officials, and stop them from making the proper adjustments over time ? I mean Mc-d's was helping employees to understand how to apply for government assistance right ? This should have enraged the working class taxpayers that they were actually subsidizing multi-gazillion dollar companies.

Corporate welfare has created a poor working class environment. Not much difference in wages between the minimum wage worker and the guy that sits home and collects the check. What incentive does a worker have to work when at the end of the day he is getting nothing more than if he sat at home.

We need to increase wages but it is tough for me to argue the McD's idea of paying minimum wage when so many will work there for it. The healthcare mandate was another reason I could see not wanting to work. When you work, your health care costs would go up and then we would see the worker paying for healthcare that the guy sitting at home was getting for free.

We need to take care of those willing to work, not sure if only wages are the answer, however we need to change the way we think about low wages.

Did you have any objection to my idea of incentivizing employers to pay above the poverty level? They would not be required to meet any minimum wage, but if they did pay good wages, they would pay much lower taxes.

I think there may be tax advantages for corporations to encourage their employees to get additional education and training outside the workplace.

What I find with that slant is once the tax incentive goes away, so does the job. I am not in favor of corporate welfare, I am wanting government spending to really be cut back.

 

[Papageorgio]

What did I tell you? WTF, you made a statement about me following some damn talking point, I asked you to clarify and now I’m back peddling? Either define what you meant or don’t, quit trying to blame me for your stupid empty comment. And no, I don’t get offended by people on this board. I have 40,000 plus posts, you don’t get that many on here if you get offended easily. You think way too much of yourself.

Think you're projecting. Now, YOU are the one who accuses me of insulting you. But, I don't know what you said. So, if you can't put your big boy pants on and tell me which post I responded to, what I said is meaningless. Tell me you're not that stupid. Without researching this entire thread for your benefit, I have no idea what my post was in reference to so it cannot be clarified. Now tell me you're not that stupid and drop this OR tell me what it was YOU said that I responded to. Give me a post number or walk away. Otherwise I will start ignoring you. You're being silly.

I didn't say you insulted me, I am asking you one question and since you have stepped around it for so many pages now you can't find it and want me to do the research. You accused me of using left v. right talking points, I have no clue what the heck that even means, I asked you to tell me what talking points I was supposed to be using and now you dance. Sorry, I asked and the post was linked when I very first asked. I already told you, I don't need an answer from you, I already have formed my opinion about how you operate, it is all good.

Like I told the other guy, what you think is your business. You want ME to do the research to find out what YOU said that I determined was possibly a left wing talking point? You're mad because YOU can't figure out that I cannot clarify a point based upon what YOU (when I don't remember what YOU said) and YOU can't even locate your own post??? And now you claim you have me figured out? You are way out there in your own world.

It's all good, I don't really care, I realize you just make crap up and then get pissed when called on it. Thank you.

Sir, I didn't make anything up. I gave you my opinion based upon what YOU said. I own what I said and you can't deliver on what YOU said.

Expecting me to clarify a position without knowing what I was responding to is pure idiocy. How can you clarify your position with only half the relevant conversation?

I delivered it the first time, after that it is on you. That is the way it works in the real world. I'm done with your games, I have learned and I am good with what I learned about you.

 

[Humorme]

May I share an observation here:

We started out with a discussion about paying people a realistic wage for work performed and have morphed into a debate about capitalism.

At the end of the day, we are ignoring the real reason why taxes are so high. When we allowed misfits to attack the moral foundations upon which this nation was built, we tore down the ethical foundation upon which this Republic rests.

The divorced mother who got rid of the absent father that is little more than a transient pothead is as much a part of this problem as the mega corporation that wants to pay substandard wages to its employees. She relies on the government to give her child a guaranteed standard of living. The parents that allow kids 20, 30, and beyond to stay in the home, rent free and not have responsibilities are equally to blame.

If you want to fix low wages, rather than limit the discussion to capitalism, let's look at the lack of a moral foundation in this country.

. Well to be fair in the observation, wasn't the discussion just a debate about where the minimum wage should be set in respect to the cost of living standard on a state by state basis ? Aren't we talking about just a minimum start up wage, and what that start up wage should be in 2017, and not what it should be based upon using 1960 standards ?? Is there a problem with the state minimum wage standard set in most states now, and why is there a problem ? Did corporate lobbyist get to government officials, and stop them from making the proper adjustments over time ? I mean Mc-d's was helping employees to understand how to apply for government assistance right ? This should have enraged the working class taxpayers that they were actually subsidizing multi-gazillion dollar companies.

Corporate welfare has created a poor working class environment. Not much difference in wages between the minimum wage worker and the guy that sits home and collects the check. What incentive does a worker have to work when at the end of the day he is getting nothing more than if he sat at home.

We need to increase wages but it is tough for me to argue the McD's idea of paying minimum wage when so many will work there for it. The healthcare mandate was another reason I could see not wanting to work. When you work, your health care costs would go up and then we would see the worker paying for healthcare that the guy sitting at home was getting for free.

We need to take care of those willing to work, not sure if only wages are the answer, however we need to change the way we think about low wages.

Did you have any objection to my idea of incentivizing employers to pay above the poverty level? They would not be required to meet any minimum wage, but if they did pay good wages, they would pay much lower taxes.

I think there may be tax advantages for corporations to encourage their employees to get additional education and training outside the workplace.

What I find with that slant is once the tax incentive goes away, so does the job. I am not in favor of corporate welfare, I am wanting government spending to really be cut back.

Those incentives would be permanent and included in the tax code.

Here is what is NOT going to happen in our lifetime:

* Dems and the courts are not going to abolish welfare
* The right will never get their heads out of their rectums in understanding taxes
* The American people will never admit that our ethics, as a people, are what is at the root of an entire generation trying to live off the public dole.

I've heard what the right has to say with respect to saving jobs and so forth. In the end it costs more than it purports to save - even by their own admission. The two party solutions that have been touted over my lifetime have not made much of a difference AND the average American is becoming poorer, the middle class shrinking and the wealth is being distributed to the wealthiest Americans.

The left thinks they can fix the problem with major doses of socialism and the right thinks they can fix it with the ultimate POLICE STATE.

 

[Humorme]

Think you're projecting. Now, YOU are the one who accuses me of insulting you. But, I don't know what you said. So, if you can't put your big boy pants on and tell me which post I responded to, what I said is meaningless. Tell me you're not that stupid. Without researching this entire thread for your benefit, I have no idea what my post was in reference to so it cannot be clarified. Now tell me you're not that stupid and drop this OR tell me what it was YOU said that I responded to. Give me a post number or walk away. Otherwise I will start ignoring you. You're being silly.

I didn't say you insulted me, I am asking you one question and since you have stepped around it for so many pages now you can't find it and want me to do the research. You accused me of using left v. right talking points, I have no clue what the heck that even means, I asked you to tell me what talking points I was supposed to be using and now you dance. Sorry, I asked and the post was linked when I very first asked. I already told you, I don't need an answer from you, I already have formed my opinion about how you operate, it is all good.

Like I told the other guy, what you think is your business. You want ME to do the research to find out what YOU said that I determined was possibly a left wing talking point? You're mad because YOU can't figure out that I cannot clarify a point based upon what YOU (when I don't remember what YOU said) and YOU can't even locate your own post??? And now you claim you have me figured out? You are way out there in your own world.

It's all good, I don't really care, I realize you just make crap up and then get pissed when called on it. Thank you.

Sir, I didn't make anything up. I gave you my opinion based upon what YOU said. I own what I said and you can't deliver on what YOU said.

Expecting me to clarify a position without knowing what I was responding to is pure idiocy. How can you clarify your position with only half the relevant conversation?

I delivered it the first time, after that it is on you. That is the way it works in the real world. I'm done with your games, I have learned and I am good with what I learned about you.

It is not my responsibility to keep up with what you say.

You bragged about the number of posts you have on this discussion board. That only tells me you spend way too much time allowing this board to dictate the terms of your life and if you think you can judge people by a few words over the Internet, save the criticism. It's worthless.

Ultimately I will judged by what I've done and not what I've said. Furthermore, it will not be mortal men that have that luxury.

 

[Papageorgio]

I didn't say you insulted me, I am asking you one question and since you have stepped around it for so many pages now you can't find it and want me to do the research. You accused me of using left v. right talking points, I have no clue what the heck that even means, I asked you to tell me what talking points I was supposed to be using and now you dance. Sorry, I asked and the post was linked when I very first asked. I already told you, I don't need an answer from you, I already have formed my opinion about how you operate, it is all good.

Like I told the other guy, what you think is your business. You want ME to do the research to find out what YOU said that I determined was possibly a left wing talking point? You're mad because YOU can't figure out that I cannot clarify a point based upon what YOU (when I don't remember what YOU said) and YOU can't even locate your own post??? And now you claim you have me figured out? You are way out there in your own world.

It's all good, I don't really care, I realize you just make crap up and then get pissed when called on it. Thank you.

Sir, I didn't make anything up. I gave you my opinion based upon what YOU said. I own what I said and you can't deliver on what YOU said.

Expecting me to clarify a position without knowing what I was responding to is pure idiocy. How can you clarify your position with only half the relevant conversation?

I delivered it the first time, after that it is on you. That is the way it works in the real world. I'm done with your games, I have learned and I am good with what I learned about you.

It is not my responsibility to keep up with what you say.

You bragged about the number of posts you have on this discussion board. That only tells me you spend way too much time allowing this board to dictate the terms of your life and if you think you can judge people by a few words over the Internet, save the criticism. It's worthless.

Ultimately I will judged by what I've done and not what I've said. Furthermore, it will not be mortal men that have that luxury.

I didn't judge you, I said I have learned about you. You keep spinning what I say, I wonder why.

 

[Papageorgio]

May I share an observation here:

We started out with a discussion about paying people a realistic wage for work performed and have morphed into a debate about capitalism.

At the end of the day, we are ignoring the real reason why taxes are so high. When we allowed misfits to attack the moral foundations upon which this nation was built, we tore down the ethical foundation upon which this Republic rests.

The divorced mother who got rid of the absent father that is little more than a transient pothead is as much a part of this problem as the mega corporation that wants to pay substandard wages to its employees. She relies on the government to give her child a guaranteed standard of living. The parents that allow kids 20, 30, and beyond to stay in the home, rent free and not have responsibilities are equally to blame.

If you want to fix low wages, rather than limit the discussion to capitalism, let's look at the lack of a moral foundation in this country.

. Well to be fair in the observation, wasn't the discussion just a debate about where the minimum wage should be set in respect to the cost of living standard on a state by state basis ? Aren't we talking about just a minimum start up wage, and what that start up wage should be in 2017, and not what it should be based upon using 1960 standards ?? Is there a problem with the state minimum wage standard set in most states now, and why is there a problem ? Did corporate lobbyist get to government officials, and stop them from making the proper adjustments over time ? I mean Mc-d's was helping employees to understand how to apply for government assistance right ? This should have enraged the working class taxpayers that they were actually subsidizing multi-gazillion dollar companies.

Corporate welfare has created a poor working class environment. Not much difference in wages between the minimum wage worker and the guy that sits home and collects the check. What incentive does a worker have to work when at the end of the day he is getting nothing more than if he sat at home.

We need to increase wages but it is tough for me to argue the McD's idea of paying minimum wage when so many will work there for it. The healthcare mandate was another reason I could see not wanting to work. When you work, your health care costs would go up and then we would see the worker paying for healthcare that the guy sitting at home was getting for free.

We need to take care of those willing to work, not sure if only wages are the answer, however we need to change the way we think about low wages.

Did you have any objection to my idea of incentivizing employers to pay above the poverty level? They would not be required to meet any minimum wage, but if they did pay good wages, they would pay much lower taxes.

I think there may be tax advantages for corporations to encourage their employees to get additional education and training outside the workplace.

What I find with that slant is once the tax incentive goes away, so does the job. I am not in favor of corporate welfare, I am wanting government spending to really be cut back.

Those incentives would be permanent and included in the tax code.

Here is what is NOT going to happen in our lifetime:

* Dems and the courts are not going to abolish welfare
* The right will never get their heads out of their rectums in understanding taxes
* The American people will never admit that our ethics, as a people, are what is at the root of an entire generation trying to live off the public dole.

I've heard what the right has to say with respect to saving jobs and so forth. In the end it costs more than it purports to save - even by their own admission. The two party solutions that have been touted over my lifetime have not made much of a difference AND the average American is becoming poorer, the middle class shrinking and the wealth is being distributed to the wealthiest Americans.

The left thinks they can fix the problem with major doses of socialism and the right thinks they can fix it with the ultimate POLICE STATE.

My issue is when the tax incentives leave, so will the job. It happens a lot in corporate America. There are programs that currently allow a business to hire those fresh out prison and it allows for some nice tax breaks and some programs will even pay part of the employees wages, then when the six month incentive disappears, the person is laid off or fired.

So short term it works, long term it won't.

 

[Papageorgio]

Most ceos have sore shoulders from golfing. They are unable to work hard.

Most losers in life are bitter over how others with more than themselves, live their lives.

 

[Papageorgio]

If you eat at a fast food place, you place a value on the meal. If nobody were there to take your order on nights, week-ends and holidays, you'd suddenly decide how valuable it is to have people there for you when you need them.

You'll pay higher prices at a convenience store to keep from driving an extra mile down the road and paying substantially less, but make a big deal out of paying a little more for a burger so that some child don't end up on welfare, costing you even more????????????????

Getting rid of the counter help and putting in computerized Kiosks GREATLY increased the value of McDonalds to me. Last time I was there, my order was actually right.

Wait til you say hold the pickles, hold the lettuce...

McDogmeat doesn't have lettuce. But the point was I COULD hold the Ketchup, because I am actually competent and can put it in the kiosk.

Good riddance to the illegals at the counter.

I went to a McDs wh the kiosk. Total distaster! Took forever to get my food . It annoyed everyone there.

Bullshit.

No one believes you.

I know, I laugh when I read his BS, I'm thinking, who does he think he is fooling?

The mere fact he claims "everyone" sends up the red flag.

 

[Humorme]

Most ceos have sore shoulders from golfing. They are unable to work hard.

Most losers in life are bitter over how others with more than themselves, live their lives.

You sound like a man with a lot of experience at losing. Of course, you can always judge a man by the company he keeps and that last guy patting you on the back said more than all the negative shit I can post here.