or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Barack Obama is in!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Barack Obama is in! - Page 4

post #121 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

According to your quote, 2,000,000.

I think that's the number. Do you know what a small percentage of the workforce that is? It's less than 1.5% of the work force. The increase is a maximum of $80 a week after two years, assuming a 40 hour week. To get that increase, you're going to possibly impact the total number of jobs available. Meanmwhile, 98.5% of the job market won't benefit.

But I suspect our disagreement really comes down to philosophy. I think the minimum wage is intended only to support some standard of human dignity in terms of compensation. I don't believe the government should be in the business of guaranteeing anyone a lifestyle.

$5.15 is about $700/month take home. You can easily live on $700 a month. A two income household making minimum wage? Try $1400 a month.

Let's look at that budget for a moment:

Rent $600 (it's efficiency time!)
Car $150 (buy a fucking Kia!)
Food $300 (hell..that's what my budget is!)
Utilities $150 (electric, gas, phone)
Gas $100
Misc. $100 (clothes, supplies, etc).


Now, let's look at someone single.

Rent $300 with a roomate
Car $100 (buy a used Kia!)
Food $150
Utilities $75
Gas $50
Misc $25

So it can be done. No, I don't think we need to mandate another $200 a month so the person in question can afford Comcast Cable, a cell phone and a Blockbuster membership. They can either work more hours, or get a second job. And why shouldn't someone get a second job? Almost any moron in this country can make more than minimum wage anyway.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #122 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I think that's the number. Do you know what a small percentage of the workforce that is? It's less than 1.5% of the work force. The increase is a maximum of $80 a week after two years, assuming a 40 hour week. To get that increase, you're going to possibly impact the total number of jobs available. Meanmwhile, 98.5% of the job market won't benefit.

But I suspect our disagreement really comes down to philosophy. I think the minimum wage is intended only to support some standard of human dignity in terms of compensation. I don't believe the government should be in the business of guaranteeing anyone a lifestyle.

$5.15 is about $700/month take home. You can easily live on $700 a month. A two income household making minimum wage? Try $1400 a month.

Let's look at that budget for a moment:

Rent $600 (it's efficiency time!)
Car $150 (buy a fucking Kia!)
Food $300 (hell..that's what my budget is!)
Utilities $150 (electric, gas, phone)
Gas $100
Misc. $100 (clothes, supplies, etc).


Now, let's look at someone single.

Rent $300 with a roomate
Car $100 (buy a used Kia!)
Food $150
Utilities $75
Gas $50
Misc $25

So it can be done. No, I don't think we need to mandate another $200 a month so the person in question can afford Comcast Cable, a cell phone and a Blockbuster membership. They can either work more hours, or get a second job. And why shouldn't someone get a second job? Almost any moron in this country can make more than minimum wage anyway.

Add kids.
post #123 of 214
Forget kids. I hope the people living on that budget never, ever get sick, go to the dentist, get in a car accident, or accidentally injure themselves.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #124 of 214
Does anyone honestly believe that the utilities/food/rent for one person is just half of that of two?

Anyone?

No, I didn't think so...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #125 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Forget kids. I hope the people living on that budget never, ever get sick, go to the dentist, get in a car accident, or accidentally injure themselves.


Exactly! SDW is about as out of touch as the president he supports.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #126 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Forget kids. I hope the people living on that budget never, ever get sick, go to the dentist, get in a car accident, or accidentally injure themselves.

What kind of loser gets sick, or seeks dental services? We're talking about the real bottom rungs of society, here.
post #127 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

What kind of loser gets sick, or seeks dental services? We're talking about the real bottom rungs of society, here.

You know, on a serious note, I read an article a while back about the relationship between the working poor and their dental problems. Basically, the working poor can't afford dental care or sometimes good diets, and so their teeth go bad. And when their teeth go bad, two things happen: first, they begin to eat different, and less healthy foods and their overall health declines; second, they are less likely to be hired for work that requires interaction with "normal" people. These jobs often pay less than other jobs they might be capable of doing, and so it all goes back to health and teeth declining again. A horrible cycle.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #128 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

You know, on a serious note, I read an article a while back about the relationship between the working poor and their dental problems. Basically, the working poor can't afford dental care or sometimes good diets, and so their teeth go bad. And when their teeth go bad, two things happen: first, they begin to eat different, and less healthy foods and their overall health declines; second, they are less likely to be hired for work that requires interaction with "normal" people. These jobs often pay less than other jobs they might be capable of doing, and so it all goes back to health and teeth declining again. A horrible cycle.


On that note:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17372104/

It's a really sad story. Breakdowns in the system (and I'm sure to an extent with the family as well) led to a kid falling through the cracks and to a tragic death.

Not trying to blame anyone, no system is perfect. Just very sad.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #129 of 214
God, that's awful.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #130 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

Add kids.


Are kids mandatory now? Oh wait...it's really no problem, because WIC will kick in at those income levels. And so will subsidized housing. And food stamps.

One could easlily say...add a second job. Or a better job. But that doesn't fit with your view of the country, now does it?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #131 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Does anyone honestly believe that the utilities/food/rent for one person is just half of that of two?

Anyone?

No, I didn't think so...

Uh, yes I do. Those figures are very reasonable. In fact, the rent is likely inflated. $600 a month for a one bedroom or efficiency is the price where I LIVE...an expensive suburban area. I have a friend who lives in Lancaster in a livable but not-so-great one bedroom. He pays $400.

And once again...who is actually earning the minimum? Why are they earning the minimum. One could do almost anything and earn more. Food service? More. Waiting tables? More. McDonalds? More. Manual labor? More. Construction? Much more. Lanscaping? More. The only jobs that actually pay the minimum to adults are restaurant dishwashing jobs. Even janitors make more in many cases. I'm not saying they live comfortably, but they have a standard that is at least dignified.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #132 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Are kids mandatory now? Oh wait...it's really no problem, because WIC will kick in at those income levels. And so will subsidized housing. And food stamps.

One could easlily say...add a second job. Or a better job. But that doesn't fit with your view of the country, now does it?

Oh I see now you're advocating adding to the welfair ranks? Interesting!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #133 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Uh, yes I do. Those figures are very reasonable. In fact, the rent is likely inflated. $600 a month for a one bedroom or efficiency is the price where I LIVE...an expensive suburban area. I have a friend who lives in Lancaster in a livable but not-so-great one bedroom. He pays $400.

And once again...who is actually earning the minimum? Why are they earning the minimum. One could do almost anything and earn more. Food service? More. Waiting tables? More. McDonalds? More. Manual labor? More. Construction? Much more. Lanscaping? More. The only jobs that actually pay the minimum to adults are restaurant dishwashing jobs. Even janitors make more in many cases. I'm not saying they live comfortably, but they have a standard that is at least dignified.


Most of the people you're talking about have to survive in those jobs a long time before the " more " happens.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #134 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Oh I see now you're advocating adding to the welfair ranks? Interesting!

No, I'm stating the way things are. Now.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #135 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Most of the people you're talking about have to survive in those jobs a long time before the " more " happens.

Huh? Why? I'm talking about starting wages, jimmac.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #136 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Huh? Why? I'm talking about starting wages, jimmac.

Right. In Pennsylvania. Which has a minium wage $2 higher than the rest of country. That's why things are fine there, I guess.
post #137 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

Right. In Pennsylvania. Which has a minium wage $2 higher than the rest of country. That's why things are fine there, I guess.


As in all ways SDW sees the economy. To be fair in Oregon it's higher than the national average also. However we didn't fair as well with employment as Pennsyvania in the last recession. SDW has said it's because we're an out of the way, isolated place.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #138 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Huh? Why? I'm talking about starting wages, jimmac.


I'm talking about survival on said wages SDW. Those " starting wages " stay there in most cases for a long time regardless of the employee's performance.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #139 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

As in all ways SDW sees the economy. To be fair in Oregon it's higher than the national average also. However we didn't fair as well with employment as Pennsyvania in the last recession. SDW has said it's because we're an out of the way, isolated place.

No I didn't. You made that up.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #140 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

Right. In Pennsylvania. Which has a minium wage $2 higher than the rest of country. That's why things are fine there, I guess.

Not true. It was the federal minimum until just recently. In addition, I was talking about costs of living when I referenced the area. I was assuming a federal minimum wage for the purposes of income.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #141 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Not true. It was the federal minimum until just recently. In addition, I was talking about costs of living when I referenced the area. I was assuming a federal minimum wage for the purposes of income.

Right, but as noted, your cost of living assumes perfect access to desirable real estate for an adult with no children on the assumption that that adult will never, ever catch the flu, hurt him or herself, or need to live past 65.
post #142 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

Right, but as noted, your cost of living assumes perfect access to desirable real estate for an adult with no children on the assumption that that adult will never, ever catch the flu, hurt him or herself, or need to live past 65.

Perfect access to desirable real estate? No. It assumes a relatively clean and safe place to live. Also, such a person would contribute to social security and medicare, and would have access to both of those. Of course, that's assuming the person retires. Retirement is not a gurantee either, though in today's America it would seem people feel they "deserve" it. As for sickness, let me ask: Is a maximum of $200 a month raise (after two years) really going to change that? No. It would take a hell of a lot more than that to give on enough of a cushion for that.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #143 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

As for sickness, let me ask: Is a maximum of $200 a month raise (after two years) really going to change that? No. It would take a hell of a lot more than that to give on enough of a cushion for that.

Absolutely. If someone has no money saved up when they're living on the absolute bare minimum to survive, it's clearly not their fault. It's impossible to save up. If you get evicted/sick/whatever evil will inevitably befall a large portion of minimum-wagers regularly, there's nothing they can do about it. They will become (temporarily) homeless. This is a failure of society, and it costs society a hell of a lot, too.

With an extra $200 a month, you better have a rainy day fund. At that point, if you're not saving up, it's clearly your fault.

Would some number of people still not save up? Sure. Is this something I have a problem with? Not at all.
post #144 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

No I didn't. You made that up.


Yes you have. And I rank it right up there with the names you've called me.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #145 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

Absolutely. If someone has no money saved up when they're living on the absolute bare minimum to survive, it's clearly not their fault. It's impossible to save up. If you get evicted/sick/whatever evil will inevitably befall a large portion of minimum-wagers regularly, there's nothing they can do about it. They will become (temporarily) homeless. This is a failure of society, and it costs society a hell of a lot, too.

With an extra $200 a month, you better have a rainy day fund. At that point, if you're not saving up, it's clearly your fault.

Would some number of people still not save up? Sure. Is this something I have a problem with? Not at all.

Again...why can these people not work more hours, or a second job to get that cushion? A 60 hour week would make things better. But wait...we can't have that! It's inhuman! And think of the children..THE CHILDREN!

Why does it need to be mandated by the government? I mean hell...where does it stop? Maybe the minimum wage should be $10 an hour. No, come to think of it, that's only about $1200 a month take home, and one can't be expected to live decently on that. So, maybe it should be $20. Where does it stop?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #146 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Yes you have. And I rank it right up there with the names you've called me.

Uh...that doesn't make sense. You claimed:

Quote:
SDW has said it's because we're an out of the way, isolated place.

I don't think I said that, and I'm not even sure what that means. What I have said is that you tend to focus only on your area, and ignore the rest of the country. You have a narrow view. If things are not great in Oregon, well the economy must not be good nationwide. You also ignore the fact that you live in Oregon...essentially liberal bastion. It colors your views and you don't even know it.

That's what I've said.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #147 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Again...why can these people not work more hours, or a second job to get that cushion? A 60 hour week would make things better. But wait...we can't have that! It's inhuman! And think of the children..THE CHILDREN!

Because that causes unemployment. They do that now. Also, I don't know if you've ever worked two minimum wage jobs, but minimum wage jobs generally give you random hours. Working two jobs is a nightmare.

Also, you're right. Think of the children. The more time working parents can spend with them, the better they'll do in school and the better they'll do for the rest of their lives.

Quote:
Why does it need to be mandated by the government? I mean hell...where does it stop? Maybe the minimum wage should be $10 an hour. No, come to think of it, that's only about $1200 a month take home, and one can't be expected to live decently on that. So, maybe it should be $20. Where does it stop?

I think I made that quite clear. $5.15 was great in 1997. The current House bill, if approved, is great through 2009. Now all we need is a bill within the next three years to gradually increase it with inflation and we're set.

You're trying to create some strawman argument here that I'm asking for luxury items for the poor. That's not the case.

You're also ignoring the fact that a tiny minimum wage increase, which is imperceptible to the public at large, greatly reduces homelessness and crime, which greatly reduces our taxes.
post #148 of 214
Quote:
Because that causes unemployment. They do that now. Also, I don't know if you've ever worked two minimum wage jobs, but minimum wage jobs generally give you random hours. Working two jobs is a nightmare.

Also, you're right. Think of the children. The more time working parents can spend with them, the better they'll do in school and the better they'll do for the rest of their lives.

It causes unemployment? Bullshit. Prove it. And lots of people work two jobs...boo fucking hoo. Welcome to the real world.

Quote:
think I made that quite clear. $5.15 was great in 1997. The current House bill, if approved, is great through 2009. Now all we need is a bill within the next three years to gradually increase it with inflation and we're set.

You're trying to create some strawman argument here that I'm asking for luxury items for the poor. That's not the case.

You're also ignoring the fact that a tiny minimum wage increase, which is imperceptible to the public at large, greatly reduces homelessness and crime, which greatly reduces our taxes.

Man, that must be a huge ASS you have, what with everything you're pulling out of it. Prove that a higer minimum wage reduces homeless and crime.

Secondly, I'm not using a strawman at all. I'm asking a serious question: If the minimum wage is in fact intended to set a standard of living as you claim, what should that standard be? What kind of apartment should one be able to afford? What kind of car? Should they get cable? Internet? Furthermore, who decides this? I know you're not arguing for luxuries. But how exactly do you feel a minimum wage worker should live? Remember, most people earn more than the minimum with zero education. Janitors earn more. McDonald's workers earn more. Wal-Mart, the Great Satan, pays more. How well should a poor shlub live?
And why is it my and your responsibility to make sure he lives that way?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #149 of 214
Who believes government has the right to invade the privacy of its citizens?

Who believes government has the right to make decisions for its citizens?
post #150 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

It causes unemployment? Bullshit. Prove it.

How does this need proving? There's a finite amount of work that needs to be done. If people cut back on hours, that opens up those hours to be available for other people.

Quote:
And lots of people work two jobs...boo fucking hoo. Welcome to the real world.

Yes, lots of struggling people just love the real world. Apparently you aren't one of them, given your little "poor man's budget" up there. You have no concept of what people face in their lives.

Furthermore, since when is "poverty" the real world? We have the highest rates of poverty in the Western world. This isn't an unsolvable solution. We just couldn't be bothered.

Quote:
Man, that must be a huge ASS you have, what with everything you're pulling out of it. Prove that a higer minimum wage reduces homeless and crime.

I've always assumed you were a fairly intelligent person, but are you seriously this ignorant? Or are you just lying to try and make a point?

According Wikipedia, poverty causes:
  • Depression
  • Lack of sanitation
  • Increased vulnerability to natural disasters
  • Extremism
  • Hunger and starvation
  • Human trafficking
  • High crime rate
  • Increased suicides
  • Increased risk of political violence; such as terrorism, war and genocide
  • Homelessness
  • Lack of opportunities for employment
  • Low literacy
  • Social isolation
  • Loss of population due to emigration.
  • Increased discrimination
  • Lower life expectancy
  • Drug abuse

The minimum wage reduces poverty, which thereby reduces crime and homelessness, two rather large drains on our economy. Poor people, now also having more to spend, do so. Trickle-up theory, if you will. Raising the minimum wage is great for the economy, in addition to all the other social nasties on that list that it solves.

Quote:
Secondly, I'm not using a strawman at all. I'm asking a serious question: If the minimum wage is in fact intended to set a standard of living as you claim, what should that standard be? What kind of apartment should one be able to afford? What kind of car? Should they get cable? Internet? Furthermore, who decides this? I know you're not arguing for luxuries. But how exactly do you feel a minimum wage worker should live? Remember, most people earn more than the minimum with zero education. Janitors earn more. McDonald's workers earn more. Wal-Mart, the Great Satan, pays more. How well should a poor shlub live?
And why is it my and your responsibility to make sure he lives that way?

First, I've made it extremely clear now, twice, that the current minimum was perfect in 1997, that the bill that the House has almost unanimously passed is perfect through 2009, and that it should stay at that rate, adjusted for inflation.

The wage needs to cover room, food, clothes, and basic health for one adult and one child, with enough extra to save up in case one of them has an emergency situation.

I don't see why you feel the need to keep bringing this up. Do you feel differently? Should people go around naked, or live in streets to make ends meet? Why do you feel the need to continually recheck to see if I'm asking for more than this?

Finally, stop bring up the fact that most workers do earn more than this. Should we bring up Bill Gates salary, too? They're equally irrelevant. We're talking about minimum wage workers. You can call them "losers" all you want, but there's 2 million of them (according to your statistic), and they can barely afford to live.
post #151 of 214
gregmightdothat:

Do you believe government has the right to invade the privacy of its citizens?

Do you believe government has the right to make decisions for its citizens?
post #152 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

And why is it my and your responsibility to make sure he lives that way?

Because you care about the well being of others?
post #153 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by snarkmeister View Post

gregmightdothat:

Do you believe government has the right to invade the privacy of its citizens?

Do you believe government has the right to make decisions for its citizens?

Define these more clearly.

Most likely no and no, but since you're asking them like this, clearly you're about to go off on some bizarre tangent
post #154 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

Define these more clearly.

Most likely no and no, but since you're asking them like this, clearly you're about to go off on some bizarre tangent

I'll try...

Do you believe government has the right to invade the privacy of its citizens?

Do you believe government has the right to make decisions for its citizens?

Based upon your desire for cover, it sounds like you think these are OK in some cases. Perhaps you should tell us what cases it is okay for the government to invade the privacy of its citizens an/or make decisions for them. Surely this list cannot be too long, and, undoubtedly, you'll have justification for them too. I'll wait. I hope it won't be long.
post #155 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by soulcrusher View Post

Because you care about the well being of others?

I disagree. We ought not worry about this stuff because we care about the well-being of others. We ought to worry about this stuff because it is in our best interests, both as individuals and as as a society, to care about this stuff.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #156 of 214
[QUOTE=SDW2001;1049611]
Utilities $150 (electric, gas, phone)

I'd like to live where you do, if you can get utilities electric, gas and phone for $150 a month.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. Thomas Jefferson
Reply
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. Thomas Jefferson
Reply
post #157 of 214
[QUOTE=ronaldo;1050483]
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Utilities $150 (electric, gas, phone)

I'd like to live where you do, if you can get utilities electric, gas and phone for $150 a month.

That is doable. I take the bus to work, and that's $30 a month. consequently, I only use about $40 a month in gas, $45 for my cell phone (no regular phone) and $15 for electricity (my town does has cheap electricity). That's $130.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #158 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by snarkmeister View Post

I'll try...

Do you believe government has the right to invade the privacy of its citizens?

Do you believe government has the right to make decisions for its citizens?

Based upon your desire for cover, it sounds like you think these are OK in some cases. Perhaps you should tell us what cases it is okay for the government o invade the privacy of its citizens an/or make decisions for them. Sure this list cannot be too long, and, undoubtedly, you'll have justification for them too. I'll wait. I hope it won't be long.

You seem to have mistaken "repeat yourself endlessly" with "define yourself more clearly." The two phrases are, in fact, not at all similar.

But, okay, I'll bite... no, no one, myself included, feels the government should invade any citizen's privacy or make decisions for them.

Let me guess: the minimum wage restricts peoples freedom to decide to work at slave wages, and invades everyone's privacy by publishing statistics on what constitutes poverty.
post #159 of 214
Quote:
How does this need proving? There's a finite amount of work that needs to be done. If people cut back on hours, that opens up those hours to be available for other people.

There is not a finite amount of work. It's fluid. You need to show a direct link. Otherwise, it's just a supposition.

Quote:
Yes, lots of struggling people just love the real world. Apparently you aren't one of them, given your little "poor man's budget" up there. You have no concept of what people face in their lives.

Furthermore, since when is "poverty" the real world? We have the highest rates of poverty in the Western world. This isn't an unsolvable solution. We just couldn't be bothered.

One, I do live in the real world, so thanks for unnecessarily being an ass there. Secondly, I have done budgets for both myself and others...all varying incomes. My point was specifically to throw together a "poor man's budget." I showed that one CAN live on minum wage..even only working 40 hours a week.

Quote:
According Wikipedia, poverty causes.....

The minimum wage reduces poverty, which thereby reduces crime and homelessness, two rather large drains on our economy. Poor people, now also having more to spend, do so. Trickle-up theory, if you will. Raising the minimum wage is great for the economy, in addition to all the other social nasties on that list that it solves.

Uh, no. You made that up too. That's what you THINK happens. You have no evidence whatsoever.

Quote:
The wage needs to cover room, food, clothes, and basic health for one adult and one child, with enough extra to save up in case one of them has an emergency situation.

Why? Where does it say that?

Quote:
I don't see why you feel the need to keep bringing this up. Do you feel differently? Should people go around naked, or live in streets to make ends meet? Why do you feel the need to continually recheck to see if I'm asking for more than this?

Yes, I do feel differently. I don't believe we should gurantee anyone anything. Nothing. The only thing we should do is take care of those that are physically and/or mentally unable to take care of themselves. No one deserves a certain standard of living. That's where we disagree.

Quote:
inally, stop bring up the fact that most workers do earn more than this. Should we bring up Bill Gates salary, too? They're equally irrelevant. We're talking about minimum wage workers. You can call them "losers" all you want, but there's 2 million of them (according to your statistic), and they can barely afford to live.

I won't stop because you won't engage me in the point. You're arguing these minimum wage workers are "stuck" making what they are. I'm saying that is crap for almost anyone who's not mentally disabled. Any person without a High School Diploma or GED can go earn $7-8.00 an hour in today's economy. Shit, janitors at my school who work second shift make up to $17 or more. Starting is $10-12ish. Janitors, greg...janitors! They, as Michael Bolton from Office Space says...clean shit up for a living. But oh wait....since the minimum is going up, they'll want $14 to start and $19-20 years later. That means my school will have to reduce its workforce, causing piles of shit to pile up around the kids. Shit, Greg! Oh, the humanity! Think of the children!
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #160 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

You seem to have mistaken "repeat yourself endlessly" with "define yourself more clearly."

No, it is simply that those questions were about clear as they could be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

The two phrases are, in fact, not at all similar.

Who said they were?

Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat View Post

But, okay, I'll bite... no, no one, myself included, feels the government should invade any citizen's privacy or make decisions for them.

OK. So what makes a voluntary, private employment arrangement special?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Barack Obama is in!