U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 12-08-2013, 11:13 AM
 
577 posts, read 356,648 times
Reputation: 390

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
And that is ?
All I hear is up the min wage and turn it into a "living wage" which meant $40-50K these days.
BS..

Raising the min wage to $15/hour (which is the max I've seen called for) raising a full time workers income to $28,800 approx. from $13,920 (approx) for a year @ $7.20/hour ..

$28,800 is certainly not living "good" but it's above the poverty line which I believe is around $14K for one person.

about 1/2 of what you CLAIM we want the minimum wage to pay people.

we would simply like people that work full time to be able to have the dignity of not living below the poverty line.


way to exagerate.....
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-08-2013, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Calgary, AB
3,401 posts, read 1,838,723 times
Reputation: 1072
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlenextyear View Post
Ironic, considering children are the greatest leeches of them all. I say we kick them out at 5 and let them figure out how to survive and contribute to The Great Market Economy.
Oh, we don't need to let them figure it out for themselves. Why not show them how to run the drill presses and sewing machines and how to tell the difference between a carrot and a weed?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2013, 11:22 AM
 
7,206 posts, read 5,288,161 times
Reputation: 7862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proud2beAMom View Post
BS..

Raising the min wage to $15/hour (which is the max I've seen called for) raising a full time workers income to $28,800 approx. from $13,920 (approx) for a year @ $7.20/hour ..

$28,800 is certainly not living "good" but it's above the poverty line which I believe is around $14K for one person.

about 1/2 of what you CLAIM we want the minimum wage to pay people.

we would simply like people that work full time to be able to have the dignity of not living below the poverty line.


way to exagerate.....
But why tell the truth when the exaggeration sounds so much more outrageous?

The simple fact is that they don't care if people are working 40+ hours/week and unable to pay the bills and put food on the table. They don't care that government has to step in a subsidize giant corporations.

It's a convoluted bit of trickle down welfare - giant corporations pay their workers too little to live, so they get government assistance. That helps keep prices at the store low, which these anti-government, anti-welfare, free market cheerleaders then go shop at. In effect, they're having their purchases subsidized by the government.

Perhaps these rugged individualist anti-welfare, anti-living wage types could explain to me why they think I should help pay for their trip to the drive thru or why I should help pay for the TV they just bought at Wal Mart.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2013, 11:26 AM
 
Location: Calgary, AB
3,401 posts, read 1,838,723 times
Reputation: 1072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zelva View Post
EQUALITY (of outcome) and LIBERTY are mutually exclusive. You can't have one without upsetting the other.

(Our coins don't say "Equality" - they say LIBERTY )
They also say "E Pluribus Unum", do they not? "From many, one".
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2013, 11:27 AM
 
1,825 posts, read 1,166,866 times
Reputation: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by edspace View Post
Income disparity: it all started about one-zillion B.C. when caveman Zarg gathered more apples than caveman Og. Now, it so happened that Chief Obamarg thought it was unfair and insisted Zarg give some apples to Og so everything would be equal. In fact, he went so far as to say, "You didn't gather those," even though it was quite obvious he did. However, Zarg (I know, I know... the world’s first fascist) raised his club (in spite of club-control) and chased Obamarg out of town… well actually, out of cave, and then took his apples home. Now, before you judge Zarg too harshly, consider this. Had Obamarg implemented his policy, no one in Dinosaur Valley would have gathered any apples the next day, thinking that they would all get free handouts in the name of equality. The result would have been no apples for anyone (well, at least that’s equal) and everyone would have starved to death and the human race would have gone extinct. Hardly a great society. But instead, everyone worked harder to gather, knowing that if they didn't, sad but true, they'd die and become saber-tooth tiger fodder. Ergo, you're alive today because of Zarg's rebellion.

Now in spite of this, some guy named Lenin tried it again anyway a Zillion years later. The result was a despotic government with no freedom and low standards of living. It fact, the standards were soooo low that people risked life and limb (and often died) trying to escape such a ‘paradise’ by crossing an ‘Iron Curtain.’ And after about 70 years of this regime, the leaders of this wonderful ‘share-and-share-alike’ civilization said “Fvck it! We’ll go capitalistic again. This commie shyt ain’t working.” And so they finally tore down that wall! Now you’d think by now that humanity would have learned its lesson. Guess again!

All you have to do is open up a second grade math book. It’s quite obvious, ‘you get nothing FROM nothing!’

The End

G’nite, kiddies!
Income inequality to an extent is normal when it gets too high it leads to people like Lenin getting power. Part of why Mao and the Chinese communists were so successful winning in the rural areas of China can be described as follows. "you are trying to feed a family of 4 on 3/4 an acre and starving to death. Join us and we will break up the landlord class' holdings and you will have 3 acres and not starve." This kind of logic got them millions of determined followers ready to fight to the death to keep their families from starving.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2013, 11:33 AM
 
1,825 posts, read 1,166,866 times
Reputation: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
And that is ?
All I hear is up the min wage and turn it into a "living wage" which meant $40-50K these days.
Not really. If you calculate it out using math. Say you have a minmum wage of $15, assuming someone worked 50 hours a week for 50 weeks out of the year they would have annual income pretax of 37,500. I don't know of anyone advocating that $40-50K is what the living wage would be.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2013, 11:42 AM
 
Location: Calgary, AB
3,401 posts, read 1,838,723 times
Reputation: 1072
Quote:
Originally Posted by DetailSymbolizes View Post
The left don't want equality of opportunity, they want equality of outcome. Which, of course, is impossible. But the only way to attempt to make it happen is for government to initiate physical force against it's own citizens in one form or another. But then the left believes that the end justifies the means, and so anything goes....
What garbage is this? All I would like is for the same honest day's work earning the same honest day's pay it did fifty years ago. Why should more work be worth less money to everyone but a select few? If fixing this means returning to the tax structure of fifty years ago, fine. To be honest I don't know how to stop the race to the bottom. Maybe it will be by the sword, but I hope not.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2013, 12:00 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia Area
1,696 posts, read 1,021,134 times
Reputation: 1337
Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
But why tell the truth when the exaggeration sounds so much more outrageous?

The simple fact is that they don't care if people are working 40+ hours/week and unable to pay the bills and put food on the table. They don't care that government has to step in a subsidize giant corporations.

It's a convoluted bit of trickle down welfare - giant corporations pay their workers too little to live, so they get government assistance. That helps keep prices at the store low, which these anti-government, anti-welfare, free market cheerleaders then go shop at. In effect, they're having their purchases subsidized by the government.

Perhaps these rugged individualist anti-welfare, anti-living wage types could explain to me why they think I should help pay for their trip to the drive thru or why I should help pay for the TV they just bought at Wal Mart.
Awesome points and SO TRUE. These people don't understand that one way or another everyone is being subsidized by the government. 85 Billion a month by the Fed to keep the stock market soaring and the banks solvent, which in turn helps millions keep their 401K fat, their pensions solvent and their jobs available to go to.

But they're totally self sufficient and get help from no one! In reality everyday they're the recipients of way more largesse than they can ever hope to pay back or pay for thanks to the fact that "the powers that be" are not ready for the system to collapse. Yet.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2013, 12:08 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia Area
1,696 posts, read 1,021,134 times
Reputation: 1337
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Evolution and Darwinism would not be evil, there is no evil, nor good in the physical world. Only laws that the physical world obeys. The weaker die out.

In today's liberal world, the weaker are paid to lay around and breed and we're seeing rising rates of poverty as a result. At some point as the so-called poor overwhelm the system, then what?

How is encouraging the weakest, least capable to have the most births beneficial? How long can you expect such a system to last? When the welfare class outnumbers the working class? When the poor and incapable are 75% of the births? 90%? Their birth rates are much higher now than the birth rates of the productive class.
You seem to be under the naÔve notion that these people would lie down orderly and quietly and just die, "reducing the surface population". But that's not the way it would go down. Remember the L.A. riots? Now multiply by a factor of 200. Many of the downtrodden and lazy are heavily armed and not among the most civilized people this society has produced. And that's saying a lot in 2013.

But if you like fire, death and large pockets of anarchy around the biggest cities and cultural centers of the U.S. then your "plan" would work just fine.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top