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.
People already do all those things. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. But the larger point is that there are still low-wage jobs being filled by low-wage workers, and that taxpayers are still being forced to bail out corporate executives and stockholders by picking up through income support programs a sizable chunk of labor costs that should have been paid within the private sector.
Why is that even necessary, though? Have a low income? Live with roommates to split living expenses, don't have children, don't waste money on tobacco, alcohol, pricey electronics, pricey clothing, etc.
There is absolutely no reason why low-income earners should be subsidized. Why can't they live within their means via the above suggestions? It CAN be done.
Why can't they just get another job? I've worked 4 jobs at a time because I don't expect anyone to pay my way through life. Why can't others do that?
I also worked multiple jobs to make ends meet when I was younger. I have no problem with helping working people. What concerns me is seeing people younger than me, more able bodied, and healthier than I am not working and expecting others to provide for them.
well, several people I know work 15 hours a day, 6 days a week, they work on average 2-4 minimum wage jobs. This way, they can afford a simple one bedroom apartment and a somewhat decent living. It is doable.
People already do all those things. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. But the larger point is that there are still low-wage jobs being filled by low-wage workers, and that taxpayers are still being forced to bail out corporate executives and stockholders by picking up through income support programs a sizable chunk of labor costs that should have been paid within the private sector.
McJobs should be for the acne teen years, not held by prime of life adults. These jobs should be held months, not years.
I think the word you're looking for is 'discover' but if you were making a point about intelligence prevailing then maybe you made a case but not the one you thought
When people argue about low wages and a $15 minimum wage, the typical response is the low wage employee should just go back to school and learn a trade so they can earn more. Great idea but the low wage menial job still needs to be done by someone, so the newly trained worker will just be replaced by someone else.
Maybe 30% of full time jobs pay less than $15 an hour. Someone has got to do the low pay work, SO: Should the government pay welfare to the people who support a family on low income?
No. Work or starve.
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 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.
