How do people survive on minimum wage?

[thanatos144]

You know you have won in debating a liberal cause then they always bring up slavery.....It is their dishonest way of trying to make conservatives look racists ...Even though it was the democrat party they wanted to keep slaves.....

 

[dblack]

You know you have won in debating a liberal cause then they always bring up slavery.....It is their dishonest way of trying to make conservatives look racists ...Even though it was the democrat party they wanted to keep slaves.....

Try to follow along, than...

 

[thanatos144]

You know you have won in debating a liberal cause then they always bring up slavery.....It is their dishonest way of trying to make conservatives look racists ...Even though it was the democrat party they wanted to keep slaves.....

Try to follow along, than...

Sure the moment you make a adult post.

 

[newpolitics]

You know you have won in debating a liberal cause then they always bring up slavery.....It is their dishonest way of trying to make conservatives look racists ...Even though it was the democrat party they wanted to keep slaves.....

nice red herring

 

[P@triot]

Nice ad hominem attack: because a liberal might have an iphone (as if no conservatives do), their arguments are invalid. That is a logical fallacy. Who cares if a liberal has an iphone. That means he or she can't have an opinion, according to you? It's so funny how conservatives admire the rich so much, yet in this instance, it is the opposite. If a liberal shows a sigh of wealth, it is considered a point against them. It's so ridiculous!

Actually, many conservatives do, but they are not the one screaming about wealth redistribution, are they? How can you people sit there wallowing in wealth while crying about wealth? Conservatives say straight up - I should get to keep what I earn and do with it as I see fit, whether that is giving to charity or buying myself toys from Apple.

I do admire the rich - I don't admire the greedy liberal asshole who hoards their own wealth while screaming about the "wealth disparity" and the "evil rich" people. You people don't even see how sick, twisted, and despicable your hypocrisy is. Barack Obama goes around the nation talking about Socialism, "being your brother's keeper", and making a "shared sacrifice". Yet he is a multi-multi-millionaire with an aunt who is not only in this country illegaly, but is also living off of welfare completley (housing, food, etc.). How does this sick fuck talk about each of us helping strangers, when this sick fuck has millions and won't help his own aunt! Why doesn't he take her off government to save the tax payers and pay for her way with his millions? Because he is a hypocrite liberal!

Bottom line, you know damn well I'm right, you know I nailed it, which is why you have no defense other than to say "ad hominem" and then point out that conservatives have iPhones, as if that were relevant to the glaring example I made about liberal hypocrisy, when it is conservatives that promote and support being able to keep what you earn.

If wealth distribution is a problem, then who cares who is saying it. It's only a matter of who is willing to recognize it. Those who do, are called liberals and socialists. It is completely absurd. How do you know I am wallowing in wealth? I don't have any money at all. The conservative notion of getting what you earn is not a virtue, so stop talking about it like it is. it is an opinion. You people don't know how sick and twisted your hypocrisy is. You talk about fiscal conservatism when Bush spent more than most presidents in history. You complain about Barack but he has spent far less than Bush. You twist facts to conform to your own conservative narrative, and ignore reality to push through your own bias. it's fucking delusional. Everyone sees it but you, and when people try and tell you, you point the finger to avoid introspection. it's childish.

I'm not even sure what you're argument is. You dance all around, spitting vitriolic comments towards liberals in general, which is completely absurd. I don't pretend to think all conservatives are the same, or as bad as others. Neocons are fucking morons, but I know there are genuinely good people that are conservatives. It just so happens that the state of the conservative party today is completely fucked, being controlled by private interests that want to control us, and then it is conservatives that stick up for them. The visual is scary.

It is annoying to listen to vitriolic conservatives talk about liberals as if they are any better. You are not. You are definitely worse, in that you are delusional to the reality plaguing this country. That you can actually sit there and blame liberals is so utterly laughable, and demonstrates your own delusional thinking. You didn't hit any nails on the head. You dropped the hammer.

See, the problem is, you guys live a lie. In 8 years in office, George Bush added $4 trillion to the debt. In only 3 years, Barack Obama has added $6 trillion. That is a fact that can be independently verified. You have zero facts correct, so no wonder you look so stupid when you post.

History has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that liberal belief in redistribution of wealth is a spectacular failure. It has a 100% failure rate world wide and yet here you dummies sit calling for something proven to fail.

Finally, to answer your question about liberal wealth - I know on some level what you have because here you sit behind an expensive computer connected to expensive Internet connection crying about the less fortunate. If you gave a damn about any of those people, you would be helping them instead of spending money on frivolous items such as these. It clearly illustrates what a selfish, greedy, hypocrite you are (just like every liberal I know). Stop demanding Communism, get off your lazy ass, and help people in need yourself.

You're just pissed I expose the greedy hypocrite liberal for what they really are...

 

[P@triot]

If you are her friend, then YOU should provide shelter for her if "not for her mother". But then again, rather than do something themselves, it's easier for liberals to sit on their fat asses and scream for the government to STEAL from others and give to those who deserve nothing.

How many friends have you had stay at your house rent free?

None - because my friends are big boys and big girls who provide for themselves. But that being said, ALL of them are welcome to stay at my house free if they fall on hard times, stupid... And they all know it too. In fact, I had a friend whose wife lost her job last November. The first thing I did was offer to pay a bunch of his bills (he wouldn't accept because unlike the greedy parasite liberal, he believes in personal responsibility and providing for himself).

 

[Douger]

The will of rugged individualism NOT taught so much any longer.[/QUOTE]

Rugged individualism isn't an option when people have chosen to live like rat's in a concrete jungle.......unless you're a gangster.

 

[P@triot]

Wages have nothing to do with your "needs". It's what you contribute. If you want to make more money become worth more money.

Come on Katz, that would mean that liberals were responsible for their own wages, and you know they don't take responsibility for anything. It's always someone else's fault. After all, it's easier to bitch & take than it is to work & earn.

 

[P@triot]

Stress on the Middle Class is due to:

1. The slow rate of growth in their investments; E.g 401(K) accounts.
2. The depreciation of their property.
3. The cost of health insurance.

The govenment that we have today is essentially the same government that we had 20 years ago. During this period, it has been under the control of both parties, and their policies.

I am convinced that unless ANOTHER party controls the government, there will be no lessening of Stress in the Middle Class through government policy.

I am further convinced that there is little chance for a third party to form.

Therefore, future individuals within the middle class will:

1. Rely less on 401 (k) investments (if you got it, spend it)
2. Not invest in property (rent, or live with relatives)
3. Spend as little as possible on health insurance, e.g. adopt low risk activities and maintain their own health and simply succumb to illnesses without medical care, e.g. euthanasia.

A lack luster market due to government policy (meddling).
A depressed real estate market due to government policy (meddling).
Terribly inflated healthcare costs due largely to government policy (meddling.)

Repeat: the stresses on the American middle class are due largely to government policy (meddling) into things that should have been left to the free market system. And that includes the minimum wage.

Yes.

Government meddling has bee going on for the past 20 years.

It will continue for the next 20.

Individuals within the middle class will need to adapt their behaviours: I have listed some of their alternatives.

Or, of course, they could continue to believe that government will stop meddling.

Well, there is a third option - elect representatives that will end the meddling. That's what the Tea Party has done, which is why the parasite class is so outraged by them.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is no way to defend the George W. Bush administration allowing the national debt to increase by $4 trillion. Because there are people like the Tea Party minded citizens, it was the utter disgust with new entitlements and irresponsible spending that caused the GOP to lose their majority in 2006. It was the same disgust that caused enough of the conservative base to reject John McCain so that Barack Obama could be elected.

But at least the Bush administration did do some things right, and implemented an economic policy that was generating treasury revenues that were bringing the deficit down sharply in the last four years. Even in 2008 when the housing bubble burst, had it not been for the TARP bail out that was over and above budget, the deficit would have been the lowest of any of President Bush's eight years.

In contrast, President Obama has pushed for not a single policy that would reduce the deficit, but rather has generated trillion plus dollar deficits every year for his entire term and has implemented policies that will continue those as far as the eye can see.

The minimum wage is the least of our problems right now, but those who have no ambition and who think the world owes them a living of course want a higher minimum wage that is not tied to any form of productivity. And that is how we are in this mess and why somebody like Barack Obama is so wrong for freedom loving people. When you want other people to provide you with what you are not willing to work for to provide for yourself, you have trillion dollar deficits. And you bankrupt your country. A minimum wage unrelated to productivity only contributes to that because it is nothing other than redistribution of wealth.

In no country in the world has 'spreading the wealth' unrelated to productivity produced anything but a lower standard of living and/or resulted in spreading misery.

 

[thanatos144]

There is no way to defend the George W. Bush administration allowing the national debt to increase by $4 trillion. Because there are people like the Tea Party minded citizens, it was the utter disgust with new entitlements and irresponsible spending that caused the GOP to lose their majority in 2006. It was the same disgust that caused enough of the conservative base to reject John McCain so that Barack Obama could be elected.

But at least the Bush administration did do some things right, and implemented an economic policy that was generating treasury revenues that were bringing the deficit down sharply in the last four years. Even in 2008 when the housing bubble burst, had it not been for the TARP bail out that was over and above budget, the deficit would have been the lowest of any of President Bush's eight years.

In contrast, President Obama has pushed for not a single policy that would reduce the deficit, but rather has generated trillion plus dollar deficits every year for his entire term and has implemented policies that will continue those as far as the eye can see.

The minimum wage is the least of our problems right now, but those who have no ambition and who think the world owes them a living of course want a higher minimum wage that is not tied to any form of productivity. And that is how we are in this mess and why somebody like Barack Obama is so wrong for freedom loving people. When you want other people to provide you with what you are not willing to work for to provide for yourself, you have trillion dollar deficits. And you bankrupt your country. A minimum wage unrelated to productivity only contributes to that because it is nothing other than redistribution of wealth.

In no country in the world has 'spreading the wealth' unrelated to productivity produced anything but a lower standard of living and/or resulted in spreading misery.

You are a sick evil racist homophobe who just wants people to starve in the streets!!!!!!










/sarcasm

 

[Big Black Dog]

How do people survive on minimum wage?

By living within their means.

 

[koshergrl]

And working their asses off.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is no way to defend the George W. Bush administration allowing the national debt to increase by $4 trillion. Because there are people like the Tea Party minded citizens, it was the utter disgust with new entitlements and irresponsible spending that caused the GOP to lose their majority in 2006. It was the same disgust that caused enough of the conservative base to reject John McCain so that Barack Obama could be elected.

But at least the Bush administration did do some things right, and implemented an economic policy that was generating treasury revenues that were bringing the deficit down sharply in the last four years. Even in 2008 when the housing bubble burst, had it not been for the TARP bail out that was over and above budget, the deficit would have been the lowest of any of President Bush's eight years.

In contrast, President Obama has pushed for not a single policy that would reduce the deficit, but rather has generated trillion plus dollar deficits every year for his entire term and has implemented policies that will continue those as far as the eye can see.

The minimum wage is the least of our problems right now, but those who have no ambition and who think the world owes them a living of course want a higher minimum wage that is not tied to any form of productivity. And that is how we are in this mess and why somebody like Barack Obama is so wrong for freedom loving people. When you want other people to provide you with what you are not willing to work for to provide for yourself, you have trillion dollar deficits. And you bankrupt your country. A minimum wage unrelated to productivity only contributes to that because it is nothing other than redistribution of wealth.

In no country in the world has 'spreading the wealth' unrelated to productivity produced anything but a lower standard of living and/or resulted in spreading misery.

You are a sick evil racist homophobe who just wants people to starve in the streets!!!!!!


/sarcasm

You left out sexist and greedy and. . .let's see. . . oh yes, selfish!!

But yeah, I suppose to the leftists I am evil because I think nobody should have a right to somebody else's property that was lawfully and ethically acquired. I am 100% supportive of charity and think a noble and moral society does not withhold it from those who are truly helpless. But there is nothing noble or moral about a society that presumes it can take what you have for whatever purpose it wants.

 

[kaz]

And working their asses off.

And the ones who do that don't earn minimum wage for long. As an employer, I can tell you most minimum wage workers are not worth minimum wage. They are unreliable for showing up, the quality of their work, taking care of customers. If you pay them more, you get the same worker who's more expensive. The ones who care get raises. The rest are continual churn. Government doesn't get them higher wages, government gets them fired when the minimum wage goes up. But that's only if you believe facts and data and things like that.

 

[The T]

And working their asses off.

And the ones who do that don't earn minimum wage for long. As an employer, I can tell you most minimum wage workers are not worth minimum wage. They are unreliable for showing up, the quality of their work, taking care of customers. If you pay them more, you get the same worker who's more expensive. The ones who care get raises. The rest are continual churn. Government doesn't get them higher wages, government gets them fired when the minimum wage goes up. But that's only if you believe facts and data and things like that.

Agreed. You never reward failure.

 

[Cecilie1200]

.

Truly sad to see how so many people have allowed themselves to become absolutely convinced that there is no hope, that they are permanently stuck in a low-paying job, and that a bunch of professional politicians and the federal bureaucracy are their only hope to escape their situation. Terrible. For a country so obsessed by contrived "self esteem", we have so little faith in ourselves.

.

That's why our country is so obsessed with contrived self-esteem: because so many people are convinced that it's impossible to acquire the real thing.

 

[barry1960]

And working their asses off.

And the ones who do that don't earn minimum wage for long. As an employer, I can tell you most minimum wage workers are not worth minimum wage. They are unreliable for showing up, the quality of their work, taking care of customers. If you pay them more, you get the same worker who's more expensive. The ones who care get raises. The rest are continual churn. Government doesn't get them higher wages, government gets them fired when the minimum wage goes up. But that's only if you believe facts and data and things like that.

I see the exact opposite. Those who earn minimum wage lack the skills. experience or opportunity to compete for higher earning jobs. The jobs they do are usually involve hard work, no benefits and little prestige. The jobs that are for minimum wage involve hard work and close supervision to make sure they continuously work hard.

I believe that minimum wage should be increased for the following reasons:

1) A raise for minimum earners would allow them to spend more money.
2) A raise in minimum wage may allow some to escape poverty.
3) A raise in minimum wage will decrease the gap between rich and poor in this country.
4) For an employer, it is a cost-benefit analysis as to whether an employee is needed. While raising the minimum wage modestly may cause employers not to hire some, employers will still need to hire employees.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You didn't ask for reduction of government. You asked for reduction of government control. There is a difference between those two things. Slavery, who was eligible to vote, and prohibition were all things given to the federal government to control.

However, having said that. I also believe that if we have the will, the people can also force government to begin rewinding and backing down and reducing its size on all but its constitutionally mandated responsibilities. And it may take repealing an amendment or two or voting in a new one or two to accomplish that.

So, you're saying that by ending slavery, the government reduced its control? Over what?

If anything, ending slavery enhanced government control over millions of individuals whose lives were previously controlled by individual masters.

Ending prohibition is an example of government reducing its control over what? Again, the result was INCREASED GOVERNMENT CONTROL, e.g. ATF, alcohol licenses, taxes, etc.

Finally, how did allowing women to vote decrease government control over anything? Did the price of tea in china have something to do with it?

Do you have a single, clear example of government EVER doing ANYTHING to reduce the control they have?

Sigh. Yes, by ending slavery the government reduced the ability of any part of government to enforce the ownership of any person by another person. It did not replace that control with a different kind of control over anybody. At least at that time.

Women's suffrage ended the power of the government to forbid women the vote. It did not replace that control with a different kind of control related to women.

Ending prohibition was the federal government giving up any say over who would and would not be allowed to drink. It did not replace that power with anything else at that time.

The fact that government continues to seize control and continues to be ever more reaching and ever more authoritarian in more and more of our lives does not negate that the will of the people prevailed in those three examples. And that should give us inspiration to assert our will more often and more forcibly to rein in a rogue, out-of-control government that definitely needs its wings and a lot of other parts clipped.

You are debating with the person who has given up his freedom( in his own mind) to government control. So much so that he's gotten used to it. Now he depends on it.

 

[thereisnospoon]

There is no way to defend the George W. Bush administration allowing the national debt to increase by $4 trillion. Because there are people like the Tea Party minded citizens, it was the utter disgust with new entitlements and irresponsible spending that caused the GOP to lose their majority in 2006. It was the same disgust that caused enough of the conservative base to reject John McCain so that Barack Obama could be elected.

But at least the Bush administration did do some things right, and implemented an economic policy that was generating treasury revenues that were bringing the deficit down sharply in the last four years. Even in 2008 when the housing bubble burst, had it not been for the TARP bail out that was over and above budget, the deficit would have been the lowest of any of President Bush's eight years.

In contrast, President Obama has pushed for not a single policy that would reduce the deficit, but rather has generated trillion plus dollar deficits every year for his entire term and has implemented policies that will continue those as far as the eye can see.

The minimum wage is the least of our problems right now, but those who have no ambition and who think the world owes them a living of course want a higher minimum wage that is not tied to any form of productivity. And that is how we are in this mess and why somebody like Barack Obama is so wrong for freedom loving people. When you want other people to provide you with what you are not willing to work for to provide for yourself, you have trillion dollar deficits. And you bankrupt your country. A minimum wage unrelated to productivity only contributes to that because it is nothing other than redistribution of wealth.

In no country in the world has 'spreading the wealth' unrelated to productivity produced anything but a lower standard of living and/or resulted in spreading misery.

Obama is part of the mindset where those who believe that all economic growth originates with government. That the country( government) can tax and spend itself into prosperity.