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.
Were you the poster I was talking to yesterday who I said wasn't being realistic? What you just laid out will never happen. Let's deal with what we have now: divert the $100b for illegals to the elderly. It's a start.
How is diverting $100 billion to the elderly realistic?
How in the HELL is taxpayer-funded vocational education realistic?
They won't have to if we quit using their money for free to prop up the stock market. They were told to be responsible and save. To put your money away and you will be able to supplement your income on interest on the savings. Wall Street then screwed them over by paying nothing on their savings so they could boost the markets to make sure they can afford their second homes.
Raise the interest rates, minimum wage and everyone at the bottom of the scale will do a bit better.
Using WHOSE money to prop up the stock market? I am talking about elderly on modest fixed incomes - which is most. Don't tell me you think old people are all rich with second homes?
The minimum wage laws as currently written in the US are a sad, embarrassing sham and charade. Econ 101 tells us that price controls always have negative unintended consequence.
Sweden has no minimum wage. Most workers are unionized, and thus have professional negotiators in their corner to get them a decent wage rate.
If we have to have a minimum wage, the way to do it would be via subsidies as with agricultural price supports. But no one ever suggests this, because it would require tax revenue that would likely come out of the pockets of existing bureaucracy.
Anyone who supports min. wage increase without reform of the structure is either ignorant of econ 101 or is a grifter. In other words supporters are comprised of fraudsters and useful idiots, and no one else.
My point is.....half of all elderly are living cut to the bone as it is. They are living in rundown apartments, often not having enough for adequate food, and look twice at every nickel before they spend it. They will take two buses and walk six blocks rather than spend $6 on a cab. How much more should they cut?
(PLenty of the people in my grandmother's building were poor immigrants - who came in LEGALLY 60 years earlier - and were living hand to mouth. I just don't get why liberals care so much more about illegal aliens than elderly citizens who have paid their dues.)
That is more than a little presumptuous to state by virtue of age these citizens have "paid their dues". I don't believe it's a stretch to find a great many of them never did any financial retirement planning. Some may have devoted funds to a lifestyle above their means, some may have had their pensions reduced or ripped off by employers and maybe some are already collecting greater benefits than their wage contributions during their work life.
There are sadly a lot of reasons seniors might be eating cat food, but "entitlements" to immigrants would be pretty low on the list.
You're obviously done with reading comprehension because I said NO SUCH THING!
My sincere apologies. The liberal defenses are coming so fast and furious that I mixed you up with HeyJude - who is another "compassionate liberal who cares about people." It was HE who said the "damn seniors should eat cat food, and be grateful for it."
So, since I realize you don't have a disgusting attitude toward elderly, I will answer your question: I would rather see money go to national defense than spend any on people who are here illegally.
Those aren't elderly - the people in their mid 50s and 60s. I am talking about the real elderly - those 80 and up - who will suffer from a big wage hike for unskilled people.
I'm not disputing people 80 years old no longer work, that's silliness. Changing the narrative when your original idea was shown to be illogical? Retired people at any age get bored, plenty are looking to get out of the house for a few hours a day and stay active and when you raise the MW TO $15 an hour you'll entice them back into the workforce to work part time which is what most fast food jobs are. You were provided a reference, there are plenty more. Who you gonna hire, an adult with a lifetime work history, or a kid that tells you he can't work Friday night because they have something else the want to do? Bottom line, your conclusion is skewed.
-Wants wealth redistribution and taxpayer-funded vocational programs.
The cognitive dissonance is blinding.
Cognitive dissonance if he were libertarian. At least we have defense, it's the closest thing to socialism that people that want it are going to get. If people want it, join the military.
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.
