James Madison, a framer of our constitution, warned of the dangers of extreme...

I'll gladly answer your ridiculous question. Yes, I. could live on $10 an hour if it were just me. No Wife, no kids, no nothing. When I entered the workforce, I made $.80 per hour. I was 14. When I retired from my SECOND career, I was making $97,000 per year and my Wife was/is making $114,00 per year.

Sit on your ass and wait for IT to come to YOU. You'll spend an eternity waiting. Either make it happen for yourself, or wallow in self-pity. The choice is yours - but don't sit on your ass blaming those who busted their humps 7 days a week building a business for themselves and their families. It's unbecoming.

I am not asking if you could live on 10 an hour when you were 14 numbnuts. I am talking about in today's economy. What about those wage earners that do have kids? Can they?

Again, you are a simpleton if you think ANYONE can get a decent paying job.
 
Tell me do you think it's fair that the minimum wage is not even $10 based on the amount of wealth that is being hoarded? Could you live on $400 a week?

You righty tighties are so out of touch with how the left thinks. My job has nothing to do with this asshole. I am not complaining about me. I am complaining about wages in general. The average age of a low level fast food worker is 29. Is that a good thing or a bad thing considering the record profits corporate America is making?
It isn't YOUR money. Want to command a higher wage? Then work hard, educate yourself, and you'll move up commensurate with your effort.

You people are so dumb. I just said I wasn't talking about my own situation.

I'll ask you T. Can you live on $10 an hour? Kids or not?
It goes for ANYONE. What about that don't YOU understand? Oh, and if you can't afford KIDS? Don't have them until you can.

You still haven't answered my question. Could you live on 10 an hour? Also, yes I agree one shouldn't have kids without having a good job. However, it still happens. Should those kids be punished for their parents mistakes? How about parents who already have kids who get laid off and are forced into a lower wage job. What is your solution for that? Many single parents can't afford to raise their kids despite having a full time job.

Hey guess what? If wages were higher, we would have less people on food stamps.

Wouldn't the 500000 you just cost them their job need Government assistance?
 
It isn't YOUR money. Want to command a higher wage? Then work hard, educate yourself, and you'll move up commensurate with your effort.

It goes for ANYONE. What about that don't YOU understand? Oh, and if you can't afford KIDS? Don't have them until you can.

You still haven't answered my question. Could you live on 10 an hour? Also, yes I agree one shouldn't have kids without having a good job. However, it still happens. Should those kids be punished for their parents mistakes? How about parents who already have kids who get laid off and are forced into a lower wage job. What is your solution for that? Many single parents can't afford to raise their kids despite having a full time job.

Hey guess what? If wages were higher, we would have less people on food stamps.

Wouldn't the 500000 you just cost them their job need Government assistance?

But stimulation of economic demand from a higher wage would CREATE jobs.
 
You still haven't answered my question. Could you live on 10 an hour? Also, yes I agree one shouldn't have kids without having a good job. However, it still happens. Should those kids be punished for their parents mistakes? How about parents who already have kids who get laid off and are forced into a lower wage job. What is your solution for that? Many single parents can't afford to raise their kids despite having a full time job.

Hey guess what? If wages were higher, we would have less people on food stamps.

Wouldn't the 500000 you just cost them their job need Government assistance?

But stimulation of economic demand from a higher wage would CREATE jobs.

That is not what the report says, it specifically says it will cost 500000 jobs and improve conditions for others. It does not claim new jobs will suddenly appear.
 
Tell me do you think it's fair that the minimum wage is not even $10 based on the amount of wealth that is being hoarded? Could you live on $400 a week?

You righty tighties are so out of touch with how the left thinks. My job has nothing to do with this asshole. I am not complaining about me. I am complaining about wages in general. The average age of a low level fast food worker is 29. Is that a good thing or a bad thing considering the record profits corporate America is making?
I could live just fine off of $400 a week. How come you can't? And why are you owed a minimum wage by anyone? But most important of all....why don't you create your own job instead of attaching yourself to someone else's achievements and making demands?

Or are you afraid of what employees might cost you?
 
Jake, you write I am wrong and then do nothing to show that.
/Fail.

The post above perfectly shows your error, which is the normal for your posting.

No, Jake. The post does nothing of the kind. The challenge was whether Madison had written what was attributed to him in the opening post. You failed. The OP failed. Madison never wrote those words.
Will you acknowledge the truth of this or continue to lie?

Yes, TR, it does. The evidence clearly shows that Madison had written material that was similar to, if not the actual, post.

Madison considered concentrated wealth the greatest evil the USA could face.

He was correct, and please acknowledge that you are wrong or will you keep lying, TR?

“We are free today substantially, but the day will come when our Republic will be an impossibility. It will be an impossibility because wealth will be concentrated in the hands of the few. A Republic cannot stand upon bayonets, and when the day comes … we must rely upon the wisdom of the best elements in the country to readjust the laws of the nation to the changed conditions.” — James Madison

National Gazette, January 23, 1792

In every political society, parties are unavoidable. A difference of interests, real or supposed, is the most natural and fruitful source of them. The great object should be to combat the evil: 1. By establishing a political equality among all. 2. By withholding unnecessary opportunities from a few, to increase the inequality of property, by an immoderate, and
especially an unmerited, accumulation of riches. 3. By the silent operation of laws, which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity, and raise extreme indigence towards a state of comfort. 4. By abstaining from measures which operate differently on different interests, and particularly such as favor one interest at the expence of another. 5. By making one party a check on the other, so far as the existence of parties cannot be prevented, nor their views accommodated.

If this is not the language of reason, it is that of republicanism. In all political societies, different interests and parties arise out of the nature of things, and the great art of politicians lies in making them checks and balances to each other. Let us then increase these natural distinctions by favoring an inequality of property; and let us add to them
artificial distinctions, by establishing kings, and nobles, and plebeians.

We shall then have the more checks to oppose to each other: we shall then have the more scales and the more weights to perfect and maintain the equilibrium. This is as little the voice of reason, as it is that of republicanism.

From the expediency, in politics, of making natural parties, mutual checks on each other, to infer the propriety of creating artificial parties, in order to form them into mutual checks, is not less absurd than it would be in ethics, to say, that new vices ought to be promoted, where they would counteract each other, because this use may be made of existing vices.

http://www.constitution.org/jm/17920123_parties.txt
 
I'll gladly answer your ridiculous question. Yes, I. could live on $10 an hour if it were just me. No Wife, no kids, no nothing. When I entered the workforce, I made $.80 per hour. I was 14. When I retired from my SECOND career, I was making $97,000 per year and my Wife was/is making $114,00 per year.

Sit on your ass and wait for IT to come to YOU. You'll spend an eternity waiting. Either make it happen for yourself, or wallow in self-pity. The choice is yours - but don't sit on your ass blaming those who busted their humps 7 days a week building a business for themselves and their families. It's unbecoming.



No you could not live on $400 a week if you were entirely self supporting.

If you think you could be self supporting on $400 a week, amigo, you are seriously out of touch with reality.

I also started working at $.85 an hour back in '64.

I actually know what that kind of dough purchased back then.

Back then you could rent a house for $60 a month, cheap (heated!)apartments could be had for $40 a month.

Its not about numbers, its about what those numbers can buy, sport.


MW has lost more than half its purchasing power since you and I were kids.
 
It's all here.

In black and white. English too.

Section 8

1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

9: To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

13: To provide and maintain a Navy;

14: To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

17: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

What part of that don't you understand? :eusa_whistle:

the real hard question to be asked is WHAT PART do you understand ?? :up:
 
No you could not live on $400 a week if you were entirely self supporting.

If you think you could be self supporting on $400 a week, amigo, you are seriously out of touch with reality.

I also started working at $.85 an hour back in '64.

I actually know what that kind of dough purchased back then.

Back then you could rent a house for $60 a month, cheap (heated!)apartments could be had for $40 a month.

Its not about numbers, its about what those numbers can buy, sport.

MW has lost more than half its purchasing power since you and I were kids.
You couldn't pay off a house and cars and live debt free after all this time? Wages will be low until when and if the economy improves. Artificially raising wages won't work.
 
Wouldn't the 500000 you just cost them their job need Government assistance?

But stimulation of economic demand from a higher wage would CREATE jobs.

That is not what the report says, it specifically says it will cost 500000 jobs and improve conditions for others. It does not claim new jobs will suddenly appear.

I didn't say the report said that. I just know I am right. Are you unaware how capitalism works?
 
Tell me do you think it's fair that the minimum wage is not even $10 based on the amount of wealth that is being hoarded? Could you live on $400 a week?

You righty tighties are so out of touch with how the left thinks. My job has nothing to do with this asshole. I am not complaining about me. I am complaining about wages in general. The average age of a low level fast food worker is 29. Is that a good thing or a bad thing considering the record profits corporate America is making?
I could live just fine off of $400 a week. How come you can't? And why are you owed a minimum wage by anyone? But most important of all....why don't you create your own job instead of attaching yourself to someone else's achievements and making demands?

Or are you afraid of what employees might cost you?

Are you actually suggesting most people can live on 400 a week? This is before taxes mind you. I think you're full of shit anyway. You couldn't especially if you have a kid.

Again it is fallacy to assume anyone can get a decent paying job.
 
Pointing a gun at someones head and say either sign the contract for minimum wage or starve is HARDLY fair...hey we resort to whatever it takes to get what's ours...get used to it.

Whose pointing a gun at your head? If that employer wasn't providing the job, then your options would be zero. Employers don't force you to work. Mother nature does.

Nope. I don't believe 6 members of the Walton Family should be worth more than 40% of the US population. CEO's should NOT be making millions where there are workers of their companies on welfare to feed themselves and their families.

I doubt your figures are correct. However, so what if they are? If those people don't want the job, then they can find a job somewhere else. The Waltons aren't just the CEOs. They're the owners. Their wealth comes from owning the stock in the company. They made the company what it is. Every dollar they have was obtained through voluntary exchange. Who are you to say they aren't entitled to every last one of them?

Pointing a gun at someones head and say either sign the contract for minimum wage or starve is HARDLY fair...hey we resort to whatever it takes to get what's ours...get used to it.

Whose pointing a gun at your head? If that employer wasn't providing the job, then your options would be zero. Employers don't force you to work. Mother nature does.



I doubt your figures are correct. However, so what if they are? If those people don't want the job, then they can find a job somewhere else. The Waltons aren't just the CEOs. They're the owners. Their wealth comes from owning the stock in the company. They made the company what it is. Every dollar they have was obtained through voluntary exchange. Who are you to say they aren't entitled to every last one of them?

Pointing a gun at someones head and say either sign the contract for minimum wage or starve is HARDLY fair...hey we resort to whatever it takes to get what's ours...get used to it.
What are you? One of those numbskulls that believe companies exist just to give people jobs with NO profit motive? Ain't the way the world works or human nature son. YOU are just a THUG.

Nope. I don't believe 6 members of the Walton Family should be worth more than 40% of the US population. CEO's should NOT be making millions where there are workers of their companies on welfare to feed themselves and their families.
It isn't YOUR money. Don't like what you're being paid? Go elsewhere to where it better suits you. Take the wealth envy crap and take a hike.

Well then, get off your ass and go make more money. No one is stopping you.Jesus - all you lefties want something handed to you......try EARNING IT!

Tell me do you think it's fair that the minimum wage is not even $10 based on the amount of wealth that is being hoarded? Could you live on $400 a week?

You righty tighties are so out of touch with how the left thinks. My job has nothing to do with this asshole. I am not complaining about me. I am complaining about wages in general. The average age of a low level fast food worker is 29. Is that a good thing or a bad thing considering the record profits corporate America is making?
It isn't YOUR money. Want to command a higher wage? Then work hard, educate yourself, and you'll move up commensurate with your effort.
We get it. YOU ALL hate the poor and those that are actually busting their ass to make crap for others to get rich off of. I just got this to say. YOU are on the losing end!
 
...wealth inequality.

"The day will come when our Republic will be an impossibility because wealth will be concentrated in the hands of a few. When that day comes, we must rely upon the wisdom of the best elements in the country to readjust the laws of the nation."

- James Madison

FACT: the top 1% of earners own 40% of the nation's wealth. The bottom 80% of earners own 7% of the nation's wealth.

A few things can be taken away from the above information.

The founding fathers wouldn't even have lunch with someone from the rightwing teabaggers or republicans in general for that matter. They obviously believed in government intervention where today's republicans are very much against. Truth be told the framers were the equivalent of modern day liberals.

Republicanism is one giant political lie.

Why do you Hate that J. Forbes Kerry Married into Money?... :dunno:

:)

peace...
 
"We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." ~ James Madison.

:)

peace...
 
"A universal peace, it is to be feared, is in the catalogue of events, which will never exist but in the imaginations of visionary philosophers, or in the breasts of benevolent enthusiasts." - James Madison

:)

peace...
 
"It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage, and such only, as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent both in order of time and degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe." - James Madison

:)

peace...
 
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents..." - James Madison

:)

peace...
 
"A government resting on the minority is an aristocracy, not a Republic, and could not be safe with a numerical and physical force against it, without a standing army, an enslaved press and a disarmed populace." - James Madison

:)

peace...
 

Forum List

Back
Top