Minimum wage, living wage, child labor, white blue collar suburbs, black blue collar ghettos

[danielpalos]

The government is not responsible to give you a 'living wage". More socialist speak.

why not?

Because we are a capitalist nation, and our form of government isn't socialist.

Yes, it is. The power to provide for the general welfare is general.

 

[danielpalos]

why any taxes at all, right wingers? they slow venture capital growth.

Taxes pay for govt service. It shoudl only be basic govt service like its SUPPOSED to be.. but alas. We have bedwetters that cant wipe their own ass.

we have a Constitution, why not follow it.

That was my argument, dumbass.

my argument is better.

You are like a mentally retarded 11 year old. Good gawd almighty

see; i told you, my arguments are better.

 

[BS Filter]

The government is not responsible to give you a 'living wage". More socialist speak.

why not?

You must first state why they are, and the Constitutional mandate for them to be so.

Congress has the Power to Tax to solve the problems of our republic.

Congress doesn't solve problems in our republic. When is congress going to solve the problem of illegal immigration?

 

[danielpalos]

Then start a business, learn a trade and become a free agent, or find an employer who pays more.

IOW, quit yer bitchin', get up off your ass and do something.

not moral enough to care about natural rights, right winger?

What "natural right" are you talking about?

equal protection of the law, and individual liberty.

But you don't believe in individual liberty. You believe in being a subject.

i learned how to argue, and i don't catch red herrings.

 

[BS Filter]

The government is not responsible to give you a 'living wage". More socialist speak.

why not?

Because we are a capitalist nation, and our form of government isn't socialist.

Yes, it is. The power to provide for the general welfare is general.

Never mind. I thought I was talking to a rational mind. My mistake.

 

[Oddball]

Then start a business, learn a trade and become a free agent, or find an employer who pays more.

IOW, quit yer bitchin', get up off your ass and do something.

Do you ever do anything other than troll off topic?

Seeing that my very relevant point flew right over your unprepossessing head: the key is flexibility.

If jobs like manufacturing are dying out, then it behooves the individual to take note of this and find employment in another sector of the economy, no matter what the political and bureaucratic fools of The State do.

Sitting around and observing that politicians and bureaucrats are inflexible and stuck in old models of operation is navel gazing on the obvious.

 

[TNHarley]

Taxes pay for govt service. It shoudl only be basic govt service like its SUPPOSED to be.. but alas. We have bedwetters that cant wipe their own ass.

we have a Constitution, why not follow it.

That was my argument, dumbass.

my argument is better.

You are like a mentally retarded 11 year old. Good gawd almighty

see; i told you, my arguments are better.

You dont understand what you are arguing for, or against.
Your arguments are everywhere. You contradict yourself.
Like, you could have a debate with yourself and manage to win and lose. It blows my fucking mind.

 

[danielpalos]

The government is not responsible to give you a 'living wage". More socialist speak.

why not?

Because we are a capitalist nation, and our form of government isn't socialist.

Yes, it is. The power to provide for the general welfare is general.

Never mind. I thought I was talking to a rational mind. My mistake.

yes; you have nothing but fallacy and just Proved it.

 

[BS Filter]

Then start a business, learn a trade and become a free agent, or find an employer who pays more.

IOW, quit yer bitchin', get up off your ass and do something.

not moral enough to care about natural rights, right winger?

What "natural right" are you talking about?

equal protection of the law, and individual liberty.

But you don't believe in individual liberty. You believe in being a subject.

i learned how to argue, and i don't catch red herrings.

No, you learned how to speak in double talk.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The only people that shoudl control an employees pay is he and his employer.
Its none of our fucking business what they make. If they think its worth it to make 7.25 then fuck em. Not like there isnt plenty of jobs out there.
Some people dont care about them and their families, so why should i?

why any taxes at all, right wingers? they slow venture capital growth.

Article 1, Section 8.

The power to provide for the general welfare is General, not major, specific or common.

The United States Constitution contains two references to "the General Welfare", one occurring in the Preamble and the other in the Taxing and Spending Clause. The U.S. Supreme Court has held the mention of the clause in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution "has never been regarded as the source of any substantive power conferred on the Government of the United States or on any of its Departments."

The Supreme Court held the understanding of the General Welfare Clause contained in the Taxing and Spending Clause adheres to the construction given it by Associate Justice Joseph Story in his 1833 Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. Justice Story concluded that the General Welfare Clause is not a grant of general legislative power, but a qualification on the taxing power which includes within it a federal power to spend federal revenues on matters of general interest to the federal government. The Court described Justice Story's view as the "Hamiltonian position", as Alexander Hamilton had elaborated his view of the taxing and spending powers in his 1791 Report on Manufactures. Story, however, attributes the position's initial appearance to Thomas Jefferson, in his Opinion on the Bank of the United States.

These clauses in the U.S. Constitution are an atypical use of a general welfare clause, and are not considered grants of a general legislative power to the federal government.

 

[danielpalos]

we have a Constitution, why not follow it.

That was my argument, dumbass.

my argument is better.

You are like a mentally retarded 11 year old. Good gawd almighty

see; i told you, my arguments are better.

You dont understand what you are arguing for, or against.
Your arguments are everywhere. You contradict yourself.
Like, you could have a debate with yourself and manage to win and lose. It blows my fucking mind.

we have a Constitution, why not follow it.

 

[BS Filter]

The government is not responsible to give you a 'living wage". More socialist speak.

why not?

Because we are a capitalist nation, and our form of government isn't socialist.

Yes, it is. The power to provide for the general welfare is general.

Never mind. I thought I was talking to a rational mind. My mistake.

yes; you have nothing but fallacy and just Proved it.

The only think you're proving is you're an idiot.

 

[BS Filter]

That was my argument, dumbass.

my argument is better.

You are like a mentally retarded 11 year old. Good gawd almighty

see; i told you, my arguments are better.

You dont understand what you are arguing for, or against.
Your arguments are everywhere. You contradict yourself.
Like, you could have a debate with yourself and manage to win and lose. It blows my fucking mind.

we have a Constitution, why not follow it.

What was the original intent of the "general welfare" claus?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

The reason people are poor is because they are bad with money.

lol. Tax cut economics are Worthless.

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

??? What does that have to do with poor people? I agree we need to cut expenses. Specifically entitlements.

How would you balance the budget?

 

[danielpalos]

not moral enough to care about natural rights, right winger?

What "natural right" are you talking about?

equal protection of the law, and individual liberty.

But you don't believe in individual liberty. You believe in being a subject.

i learned how to argue, and i don't catch red herrings.

No, you learned how to speak in double talk.

The ministry of Truth, told you to say that.

 

[danielpalos]

The only people that shoudl control an employees pay is he and his employer.
Its none of our fucking business what they make. If they think its worth it to make 7.25 then fuck em. Not like there isnt plenty of jobs out there.
Some people dont care about them and their families, so why should i?

why any taxes at all, right wingers? they slow venture capital growth.

Article 1, Section 8.

The power to provide for the general welfare is General, not major, specific or common.

The United States Constitution contains two references to "the General Welfare", one occurring in the Preamble and the other in the Taxing and Spending Clause. The U.S. Supreme Court has held the mention of the clause in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution "has never been regarded as the source of any substantive power conferred on the Government of the United States or on any of its Departments."

The Supreme Court held the understanding of the General Welfare Clause contained in the Taxing and Spending Clause adheres to the construction given it by Associate Justice Joseph Story in his 1833 Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. Justice Story concluded that the General Welfare Clause is not a grant of general legislative power, but a qualification on the taxing power which includes within it a federal power to spend federal revenues on matters of general interest to the federal government. The Court described Justice Story's view as the "Hamiltonian position", as Alexander Hamilton had elaborated his view of the taxing and spending powers in his 1791 Report on Manufactures. Story, however, attributes the position's initial appearance to Thomas Jefferson, in his Opinion on the Bank of the United States.

These clauses in the U.S. Constitution are an atypical use of a general welfare clause, and are not considered grants of a general legislative power to the federal government.

Judicial activism?

Congress has the Power to Tax, to solve the problems of our Republic.

 

[BS Filter]

What "natural right" are you talking about?

equal protection of the law, and individual liberty.

But you don't believe in individual liberty. You believe in being a subject.

i learned how to argue, and i don't catch red herrings.

No, you learned how to speak in double talk.

The ministry of Truth, told you to say that.

No, my educated experienced intellect told me to say that. If you had your way, our government would have a "ministry of truth", and everyone would be told what they could say and believe and what they couldn't.

 

[WillowTree]

First and foremost, Democrats and Republicans, conservatives and liberals, all tend to be wrong on a significant portion of the debate when it comes to these topics. This thread is not about raising the minimum wage. This is about having a realistic picture of the American employment market. What jobs are out there, what are they paying, who is available to fill them.

But one thing in particular that really baffles me is the absolute stupidity that many on the right use with arguments about how low wage jobs are supposed to be stepping stones, "first jobs", and all that nonsense. And it's very telling how many on the right think that suburban, white, unskilled workers on a GM assembly line during the golden years that made America great were doing jobs that warranted a lifelong career at a decent wage; yet unskilled urban black and Latino workers working in a warehouse are lazy, useless leeches who shouldn't be doing that job for very long and deserve nothing better than the ghetto wages that will make America great again.

The question becomes "What should happen with all these low wage jobs that aren't supposed to be filled but for a short time by people working their first job?" Do people really believe that there are such few of these jobs that they can be filled by teenage kids and college students home on break?

The data is from a few years ago, but we all know that wages have been largely the same for the past few years. Any change would be negligible for the point here. But it turns out that about 42% of Americans make less than $15 an hour.

The 16 - 20 age group makes up only 7.3% of the workforce. Nowhere near enough to fill the total positions that pay less than $15 an hour. So it is a complete falsehood to say that these are jobs that these positions are only stepping stones and should only be first jobs for teenagers and new high school grads.

The jobs available in America are dictated by those goods and services the American public has a demand to buy. The modern American working class must fill those jobs the American consumer's buying demands. Warehouse employees at Amazon, fast food workers, retail, restaurant servers and cooks, so and and so forth. This is the modern day American working class. Stubbornly insisting that the only well paying working class jobs should be in a coal mine, or a GM factory assembly line, is nothing more than interjecting an unfounded idealism into the natural market.

You know what baffles me? That you dummies insist on letting millions of uneducated low wage earners illegal aliens enter the country which drives the cost of your labor down. How stupid can you be?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Then start a business, learn a trade and become a free agent, or find an employer who pays more.

IOW, quit yer bitchin', get up off your ass and do something.

 

[danielpalos]

my argument is better.

You are like a mentally retarded 11 year old. Good gawd almighty

see; i told you, my arguments are better.

You dont understand what you are arguing for, or against.
Your arguments are everywhere. You contradict yourself.
Like, you could have a debate with yourself and manage to win and lose. It blows my fucking mind.

we have a Constitution, why not follow it.

What was the original intent of the "general welfare" claus?

To solve the problems of our Republic.