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.
This thread is based on the usual liberal "false premise" (a.k.a., bald-faced lie). A company only "costs" society money if the premise is that everyone is guaranteed a certain amount of money. In other words, you "start out" with a guaranteed $50,000 income, so if a job pays only $45,000 then society has to "make up the remainder." This is an extension of the "living wage" argument, which failed. Since society hates liberal arguments, they are often forced to disguise them as "conservative" ideas. In this case, they try to say that corporations are causing welfare, since even liberals realize that everyone despises their welfare policies. So they try to shift the blame for their hated and laughable policies to businesses.
Meanwhile, Walmart executives continue to receive huge tax payer subsidized bonuses while paying employees poverty wages. On top of all of this, you have Donald Trump who not only wants to reward Walmart executives through his tax plan, he wants to lower the minimum wage so tax payers will have to give up more. Yet another example of how Republican fiscal policies are not so "conservative" after all.
Per Walmart if you keep your nose clean and are relatively capable you can become part of the management team and make 50-170k
However..if you are low in the gene pool that is no one's fault but you and your parents.. you could be working anywhere and wouldn't excel. When I speak with Walmart employees I sense they are generally happy... sure there are those that want to unionize.. and outside union scumbags that want them unionized...
You aren't forced to work there... especially if you are so gifted you feel you justify a substantially higher wage
Meanwhile, Walmart executives continue to receive huge tax payer subsidized bonuses while paying employees poverty wages. On top of all of this, you have Donald Trump who not only wants to reward Walmart executives through his tax plan, he wants to lower the minimum wage so tax payers will have to give up more. Yet another example of how Republican fiscal policies are not so "conservative" after all.
Government getting "involved" in the economy cost tax payers $6.2bn in public assistance
Yet another example of someone not knowing the cause of the problem.
LOL sorry no....next Give me actual facts please since you posted you knew the real cause
LOL sorry no I just did. Again anyone who doesn't understand the simple fact government caused the housing boom/bust shouldn't be posting. On top of that, there are even disagreements about which government policy caused it.
....next
LOL sorry no....next Give me actual facts please since you posted you knew the real cause
You realize that was the most childish rebuttal ever, right? You just wrote "LOL no" and then a smiley face.
The housing crisis was created directly by government policies. It was secondarily caused by banks and financial institutions reacting to the environment created by those policies. Then, we bailed out the banks, which only a minority of people wanted to do. The left hates corporations, so they didn't like it. The right loves the free market, so they didn't like it. By definition, without government interference the market always takes the proper course.
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.