Zone1 What do Dems mean by their promises of “affordability”?

[initforme]

Fewer people with jobs = more people on government charity, and forced to vote for the party that gives them more freebies regardless of how bad their policies are.

And yes, that’s a bd thing.

There are going to be fewer jobs. Ai will be replacing workers. So you can agree that the birth rate continuing to drop is a good thing.

 

[Lisa558]

There are going to be fewer jobs. Ai will be replacing workers. So you can agree that the birth rate continuing to drop is a good thing.

The problem is that the birth rate is continuing to go up among the wrong people: illegal aliens and unmarried women who end up with six kids.

That is a bad thing.

 

[initforme]

The problem is that the birth rate is continuing to go up among the wrong people: illegal aliens and unmarried women who end up with six kids.

That is a bad thing.

Its dropping amongst all groups. Combine that with deportation and hopefully employers begin to struggle to find workers then wages go up. Win win.

 

[Lisa558]

Its dropping amongst all groups. Combine that with deportation and hopefully employers begin to struggle to find workers then wages go up. Win win.

No it’s not. We have welfare people having more than two kids each. The problem is that they raise them to think living off welfare is a perfectly respectable life choice.

We need to reduce welfare to only two groups: 1) those who are mentally or physically disabled, and 2) those with an infant under 6 months. Everyone else get a freakin job.

 

[initforme]

No it’s not. We have welfare people having more than two kids each. The problem is that they raise them to think living off welfare is a perfectly respectable life choice.

We need to reduce welfare to only two groups: 1) those who are mentally or physically disabled, and 2) those with an infant under 6 months. Everyone else get a freakin job.

And dont settle for $15 per hour every one of those emoyers are bad.

 

[Lisa558]

And dont settle for $15 per hour every one of those emoyers are bad.

$10 per hour to put items in grocery bags is more than enough. I could have done that job at age 6.

People who want more money need to bring real value to the table.

 

[JoeB131]

When you move into the "productive class" let us know. You seem to spend your life bitching on an obscure message board.

Well, she's retired. But she'll never say that her social security check and Medicare are "Leeching off the system".

 

[initforme]

$10 per hour to put items in grocery bags is more than enough. I could have done that job at age 6.

People who want more money need to bring real value to the table.

Every human is worth more than $10 per hour. A rookie painter can make $60 per hour.

 

[JoeB131]

The problem is that the birth rate is continuing to go up among the wrong people: illegal aliens and unmarried women who end up with six kids.

That is a bad thing.

Then you invest in education to make those folks the "Right People".

Unless you think those people are "inferior" and they should be "eliminated."

 

[Lisa558]

Every human is worth more than $10 per hour. A rookie painter can make $60 per hour.

Then the guy loading grocery bags should get training as a painter and get a job doing that.

We can do without bag loaders. The cashier can handle it. All she’s doing is scanning bar codes. She can also load the bags.

 

[initforme]

Then the guy loading grocery bags should get training as a painter and get a job doing that.

Yep. We dont need people stocking shelves.

 

[Lisa558]

Yep. We dont need people stocking shelves.

No, that job we do need. People on welfare can get those jobs to meet their 20-hour a week requirement, and bring in $800 a month. Then we can reduce their food stamps since they’ll have some earnings to buy the extra stuff like soda and Fritos.

A win-win.

 

[JoeB131]

No, that job we do need. People on welfare can get those jobs to meet their 20-hour a week requirement, and bring in $800 a month. Then we can reduce their food stamps since they’ll have some earnings to buy the extra stuff like soda and Fritos.

A win-win.

Except the people stocking shelves are already getting food stamps.

Seriously, have you ever been to a Walmart?

Not sure why you are so keen on finding new ways of punishing poor people for being poor.

 

[Mr Natural]

Except the people stocking shelves are already getting food stamps.

Seriously, have you ever been to a Walmart?

Not sure why you are so keen on finding new ways of punishing poor people for being poor.

Because pettiness is a sacrament to her kind.

 

[candycorn]

No, that job we do need. People on welfare can get those jobs to meet their 20-hour a week requirement, and bring in $800 a month. Then we can reduce their food stamps since they’ll have some earnings to buy the extra stuff like soda and Fritos.

A win-win.

Are you producing anything other than carbon dioxide in your "life"?

You seem rather worthless. Stop being a drag on our system.

 

[Lisa558]

Except the people stocking shelves are already getting food stamps.

Seriously, have you ever been to a Walmart?

Not sure why you are so keen on finding new ways of punishing poor people for being poor.

Not sure why you are keen on keeping poor people 100% dependent on government assistance. Right now, the majority of people on welfare do not work at all. We Republicans want to encourage some degree of self-sufficiency by requiring they all work (with some exceptions ).

 

[Lisa558]

Because pettiness is a sacrament to her kind.

^^^ and in rushes the libtard from New Zealand,

 

[JoeB131]

Not sure why you are keen on keeping poor people 100% dependent on government assistance. Right now, the majority of people on welfare do not work at all. We Republicans want to encourage some degree of self-sufficiency by requiring they all work (with some exceptions ).

That "majority" are too young, too old, or too disabled to work.

Republicans want to punish poor people for being poor, because bigots like you get their rocks off when they do it.

Now, I'd have no problem with a workfare program with vocational job training. But that would probably make people even more inclined to like government, and the Republicans can't have that.

They'd rather see the poor beg Walmart for a sub-standard wage with no health benefits, and then whine when these folks get food stamps and medicare.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Sorry you’re so limited. Which is the better direction:

1) Go with the Dems, who want to make sure the single mother with a 7-year old and a 9-year old gets the maximum $850 a month in food stamps, and she doesn’t have to work AT ALL. And they fought to keep it that way.

2) Go with the GOP, who now requires the mother to work 80 hours a week. She gets a job at Target for $15 an hour, and now brings in $1200 a month. Her food stamp allotment drops to $500, but she has an income of $1500 that more than makes up the difference.

Did you mean "Go with the GOP, who now requires the mother to work 40 hours a week..." instead of 80 hours?

 

[Lisa558]

Did you mean "Go with the GOP, who now requires the mother to work 40 hours a week..." instead of 80 hours?

No, it’s 20 hours a week. The 80 hours is the monthly minimum. I’ll correct it, so thank you.

And that’s only if she doesn’t have pre-school children.

P.S. too late - can’t correct it. But good catch.