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

[BS Filter]

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.

Tha'ts a pretty broad statement. The original intent sure wasn't to provide everyone with a guaranteed income because if it was then it would have been provided from day one.

Congress has the Power to Tax, to solve the problems of our Republic. Stop whining about problems, right wingers.

I haver heard any of our founding fathers or great leaders we have had through the years say that congress is supposed to solve the problems of our Republic. I hear socialists say it.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

You know, this thread sucks. Almost every single reply has been entirely off topic, with a few tangents mixed in, while you all masturbate over your own brain dead talking points.

You know the only thing dumber than the shit danielpalos says? Arguing with the shit danielpalos says.

Apparently facts and data are too complicated for you morons to handle. Anything that vaguely approaches information is instantly recognized by your propaganda soaked minds as a potential threat to your ability to preserve your own nothink and doublethink. Left, right, Democrat, Republican. Morons, all of you.

 

[danielpalos]

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.

What problems has congress solved?

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

Exactly......none. You and others want congress to do things they aren't supposed to do. You just admittrd congresss can't do a good job, yet you want congress to do run people's lives.

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

 

[danielpalos]

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.

Tha'ts a pretty broad statement. The original intent sure wasn't to provide everyone with a guaranteed income because if it was then it would have been provided from day one.

Congress has the Power to Tax, to solve the problems of our Republic. Stop whining about problems, right wingers.

I haver heard any of our founding fathers or great leaders we have had through the years say that congress is supposed to solve the problems of our Republic. I hear socialists say it.

The power to tax is a social Power.

 

[danielpalos]

You know, this thread sucks. Almost every single reply has been entirely off topic, with a few tangents mixed in, while you all masturbate over your own brain dead talking points.

You know the only thing dumber than the shit danielpalos says? Arguing with the shit danielpos says.

Apparently facts and data are too complicated for you morons to handle. Anything that vaguely approaches information is instantly recognized by your propaganda soaked minds as a potential threat to your ability to preserve your own nothink and doublethink. Left, right, Democrat, Republican. Morons, all of you.

if only,

we could find nice girls to help us practice and get, really really good.

 

[BS Filter]

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.

What problems has congress solved?

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

Exactly......none. You and others want congress to do things they aren't supposed to do. You just admittrd congresss can't do a good job, yet you want congress to do run people's lives.

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

Nope. You should learn what the job of congress is and then learn the Constitution and what the "general welfare" claus is all about.

 

[BS Filter]

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

To solve the problems of our Republic.

Tha'ts a pretty broad statement. The original intent sure wasn't to provide everyone with a guaranteed income because if it was then it would have been provided from day one.

Congress has the Power to Tax, to solve the problems of our Republic. Stop whining about problems, right wingers.

I haver heard any of our founding fathers or great leaders we have had through the years say that congress is supposed to solve the problems of our Republic. I hear socialists say it.

The power to tax is a social Power.

No, it's a Constitutional duty of congress.

 

[danielpalos]

Judicial activism?

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

What problems has congress solved?

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

Exactly......none. You and others want congress to do things they aren't supposed to do. You just admittrd congresss can't do a good job, yet you want congress to do run people's lives.

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

Nope. You should learn what the job of congress is and then learn the Constitution and what the "general welfare" claus is all about.

after that?

 

[BS Filter]

What problems has congress solved?

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

Exactly......none. You and others want congress to do things they aren't supposed to do. You just admittrd congresss can't do a good job, yet you want congress to do run people's lives.

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

Nope. You should learn what the job of congress is and then learn the Constitution and what the "general welfare" claus is all about.

after that?

Become a productive citizen, get a job.

 

[SmokeALib]

Some people are just too damn lazy, too damn stupid, too damn unmotivated, too damn entitled, to do anything without government rule. These people are called democrats.

 

[danielpalos]

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

Exactly......none. You and others want congress to do things they aren't supposed to do. You just admittrd congresss can't do a good job, yet you want congress to do run people's lives.

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

Nope. You should learn what the job of congress is and then learn the Constitution and what the "general welfare" claus is all about.

after that?

Become a productive citizen, get a job.

sure; just stop whining about the problems of our Republic, right wingers. it really is, that morally simple.

 

[danielpalos]

Some people are just too damn lazy, too damn stupid, too damn unmotivated, too damn entitled, to do anything without government rule. These people are called democrats.

lol. the right wing doesn't care about natural rights, and prove it with their alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror.

 

[Brain357]

You know, this thread sucks. Almost every single reply has been entirely off topic, with a few tangents mixed in, while you all masturbate over your own brain dead talking points.

You know the only thing dumber than the shit danielpalos says? Arguing with the shit danielpalos says.

Apparently facts and data are too complicated for you morons to handle. Anything that vaguely approaches information is instantly recognized by your propaganda soaked minds as a potential threat to your ability to preserve your own nothink and doublethink. Left, right, Democrat, Republican. Morons, all of you.

I was thinking the same thing...

 

[iceberg]

You know, this thread sucks. Almost every single reply has been entirely off topic, with a few tangents mixed in, while you all masturbate over your own brain dead talking points.

You know the only thing dumber than the shit danielpalos says? Arguing with the shit danielpalos says.

Apparently facts and data are too complicated for you morons to handle. Anything that vaguely approaches information is instantly recognized by your propaganda soaked minds as a potential threat to your ability to preserve your own nothink and doublethink. Left, right, Democrat, Republican. Morons, all of you.

most threads you start do cause they're so lopsided in values it's utterly amazing. you're so cute when your own stupidity frustrates you.

 

[Muhammed]

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.

Like the overwhelming majority of Democratic party supporters, you have trouble thinking logically. In fact, your entire post is based on a logical fallacy known as a strawman argument.

You've just been powned. Hope you had fun doing all that typing, jackass.

 

[danielpalos]

if women believed in Equality; they would be clamoring to "break in the new guy for their ClitLicker Pro" program.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

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 could have saved a shitload of time and just typed "I'm mad."

The value of labor is set by the supply of workers v. available jobs (demand). When the supply of workers drops to nearly being even with demand, wages go crazy. When you have at least 11 million low-skilled workers from OTHER countries taking low-skill American jobs, the entire job market, top to bottom, goes down.

Quit bringing in, or allowing to sneak in, immigrants until the market balances itself.

 

[BS Filter]

Exactly......none. You and others want congress to do things they aren't supposed to do. You just admittrd congresss can't do a good job, yet you want congress to do run people's lives.

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

Nope. You should learn what the job of congress is and then learn the Constitution and what the "general welfare" claus is all about.

after that?

Become a productive citizen, get a job.

sure; just stop whining about the problems of our Republic, right wingers. it really is, that morally simple.

Do you support illegal immigrants voting?

 

[danielpalos]

Should we "harass them to do a Good job"?

Nope. You should learn what the job of congress is and then learn the Constitution and what the "general welfare" claus is all about.

after that?

Become a productive citizen, get a job.

sure; just stop whining about the problems of our Republic, right wingers. it really is, that morally simple.

Do you support illegal immigrants voting?

only if they pay taxes. some taxation requires some representation.

the dilemma is the concept of natural rights.

we should solve it with better border policy. we should be making money not losing money on border policy. the right wing alleges, we are for capitalism and not socialism on a national basis, whenever they claim what they do.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

lol. the right wing doesn't care about natural rights, and prove it with their alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror.

This is why I am not "right wing."