Republican top priority.....Raise taxes on the poor

[Billy000]

They should be paid it because of the rate of inflation. The last time someone could live comfortably off $10 per hour was the 1960s. 10s of millions make less than 15 per hour. 17 million make less than 10 per hour.

I'm all for paying skilled workers more, but you seem to lack the appreciation of low skilled workers. The average age of a fast food workers is 29. If everyone become more skilled in your perfect world, who would fill these positions?

Also many poor people can't afford the education to learn new skills.

The skills required to do the jobs they do are the same as they were in the 1960s. If inflation went up on them, it also went up on those of us who actually have to have skills to make our higher wages.

Since the skills I have took thousand of hours more to gain, I should make thousands of times more per hours than they do.

Many poor people squandered the opportunities they had when younger to gain those skills. How many people in poverty fail to have even a high school diploma? Don't claim they didn't have a chance when they quit the one they had. People like you want taxpayers to fund what would actually be their second opportunity to learn skills. While they may be able to afford it, they have people like you who think someone else should pay that for them, too. Pay their tuition if you truly think they should get the training. I have MY kids to send to college. It's not my job to provide it or training to someone who had a chance and blew it.

If youre a grown adult you likely got these skills prior to 2008. Since the recession hit there has been a significant increase in low wage jobs and a significant decrease of decent wage jobs. That means MILLIONS of people have NO CHOICE but to accept low wage jobs, They don't have the money to further their education to learn new skills. Again, even if everyone in poverty learned new skill in your perfect world, who would be there to fill the remedial job positons like fast food? Those people are hardly teenagers anymore. The average age, as I said, is 29.

I don't know the stats on people who are in poverty and without a high school diploma, but I will bet you anything they are a small minority.

There are people who have no choice but to accept low wage jobs because they have low level skills. Interesting you say there aren't decent wage jobs yet Obama has claimed to have created so many and lowered the unemployment percentage. Does that mean you are saying he's done nothing but create low wage jobs? You already did.

There will always be jobs like fast food that require low level skills and plenty of low skilled people to fill them. That means they get a low wage. If you expect those of us who have higher level skills to be paid based on skills, then those working in low level skill jobs should be based on the same thing, skills required to do the job.

I have some numbers on poverty related to high school dropouts. It's far from a minority of them making a lower income.

See #6 factor - 11 Facts About Education and Poverty in America DoSomething.org America s largest organization for youth volunteering opportunities with 2 700 000 members and counting

See the second group of percentages under "Higher education leads to higher earning" - NCCP Parents rsquo Low Education Leads to Low Income Despite Full-Time Employment

Poverty and high school dropouts

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

They should be paid it because of the rate of inflation. The last time someone could live comfortably off $10 per hour was the 1960s. 10s of millions make less than 15 per hour. 17 million make less than 10 per hour.

I'm all for paying skilled workers more, but you seem to lack the appreciation of low skilled workers. The average age of a fast food workers is 29. If everyone become more skilled in your perfect world, who would fill these positions?

Also many poor people can't afford the education to learn new skills.

The skills required to do the jobs they do are the same as they were in the 1960s. If inflation went up on them, it also went up on those of us who actually have to have skills to make our higher wages.

Since the skills I have took thousand of hours more to gain, I should make thousands of times more per hours than they do.

Many poor people squandered the opportunities they had when younger to gain those skills. How many people in poverty fail to have even a high school diploma? Don't claim they didn't have a chance when they quit the one they had. People like you want taxpayers to fund what would actually be their second opportunity to learn skills. While they may be able to afford it, they have people like you who think someone else should pay that for them, too. Pay their tuition if you truly think they should get the training. I have MY kids to send to college. It's not my job to provide it or training to someone who had a chance and blew it.

If youre a grown adult you likely got these skills prior to 2008. Since the recession hit there has been a significant increase in low wage jobs and a significant decrease of decent wage jobs. That means MILLIONS of people have NO CHOICE but to accept low wage jobs, They don't have the money to further their education to learn new skills. Again, even if everyone in poverty learned new skill in your perfect world, who would be there to fill the remedial job positons like fast food? Those people are hardly teenagers anymore. The average age, as I said, is 29.

I don't know the stats on people who are in poverty and without a high school diploma, but I will bet you anything they are a small minority.

There are people who have no choice but to accept low wage jobs because they have low level skills. Interesting you say there aren't decent wage jobs yet Obama has claimed to have created so many and lowered the unemployment percentage. Does that mean you are saying he's done nothing but create low wage jobs? You already did.

There will always be jobs like fast food that require low level skills and plenty of low skilled people to fill them. That means they get a low wage. If you expect those of us who have higher level skills to be paid based on skills, then those working in low level skill jobs should be based on the same thing, skills required to do the job.

I have some numbers on poverty related to high school dropouts. It's far from a minority of them making a lower income.

See #6 factor - 11 Facts About Education and Poverty in America DoSomething.org America s largest organization for youth volunteering opportunities with 2 700 000 members and counting

See the second group of percentages under "Higher education leads to higher earning" - NCCP Parents rsquo Low Education Leads to Low Income Despite Full-Time Employment

Poverty and high school dropouts

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

You claimed Obama created 3 million jobs himself. Bullshit. That's why I say people like you would rather lick his asshole than look at what he hasn't done. You give him credit on the same level as the SEALS who killed bin Laden as if he was on the raid.

If the low wage jobs outnumber the higher wage jobs and you give Obama credit for having created those jobs, then he is to blame. You can't give him credit for having done the jobs then blame the employers for them being low wage.

The investment class is doing better because returns on investments provides more than a return on low skills.

How is it fair to force an emloyer to pay a wage higher than the job provides in revenue? Your problem is you think those of us with higher level skills should be paid on our skills but want to pay someone who is the cause of their low skills level based on breathing and a heartbeat. If they want a wage they can live off of, get the skills you think the rest of us should be paid on. If a person with $7.25 skills is getting paid $7.25/hour that is a decent wage based on their skills. That it isn't enough is their problem and often their fault.

It's easy to tell you've never owned a business. Try doing what you say needs to be done voluntarily and tell me how quickly your business ends. You haven't nor likely ever will be in business but you think you're an expert on it. Bleeding heart isn't a business model moron.

Onswipe

I know you cons have trouble with factual information but it is what it is.

Regardless of WHY the investment class is doing so well, why don't you put any blame on them for the low wage job creation?

My logic is based on inflation. If you're dumb enough to believe these people should be borderline slaves then so be it but get out of the way of progress.

 

[Conservative65]

The skills required to do the jobs they do are the same as they were in the 1960s. If inflation went up on them, it also went up on those of us who actually have to have skills to make our higher wages.

Since the skills I have took thousand of hours more to gain, I should make thousands of times more per hours than they do.

Many poor people squandered the opportunities they had when younger to gain those skills. How many people in poverty fail to have even a high school diploma? Don't claim they didn't have a chance when they quit the one they had. People like you want taxpayers to fund what would actually be their second opportunity to learn skills. While they may be able to afford it, they have people like you who think someone else should pay that for them, too. Pay their tuition if you truly think they should get the training. I have MY kids to send to college. It's not my job to provide it or training to someone who had a chance and blew it.

If youre a grown adult you likely got these skills prior to 2008. Since the recession hit there has been a significant increase in low wage jobs and a significant decrease of decent wage jobs. That means MILLIONS of people have NO CHOICE but to accept low wage jobs, They don't have the money to further their education to learn new skills. Again, even if everyone in poverty learned new skill in your perfect world, who would be there to fill the remedial job positons like fast food? Those people are hardly teenagers anymore. The average age, as I said, is 29.

I don't know the stats on people who are in poverty and without a high school diploma, but I will bet you anything they are a small minority.

There are people who have no choice but to accept low wage jobs because they have low level skills. Interesting you say there aren't decent wage jobs yet Obama has claimed to have created so many and lowered the unemployment percentage. Does that mean you are saying he's done nothing but create low wage jobs? You already did.

There will always be jobs like fast food that require low level skills and plenty of low skilled people to fill them. That means they get a low wage. If you expect those of us who have higher level skills to be paid based on skills, then those working in low level skill jobs should be based on the same thing, skills required to do the job.

I have some numbers on poverty related to high school dropouts. It's far from a minority of them making a lower income.

See #6 factor - 11 Facts About Education and Poverty in America DoSomething.org America s largest organization for youth volunteering opportunities with 2 700 000 members and counting

See the second group of percentages under "Higher education leads to higher earning" - NCCP Parents rsquo Low Education Leads to Low Income Despite Full-Time Employment

Poverty and high school dropouts

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

The skills required to do the jobs they do are the same as they were in the 1960s. If inflation went up on them, it also went up on those of us who actually have to have skills to make our higher wages.

Since the skills I have took thousand of hours more to gain, I should make thousands of times more per hours than they do.

Many poor people squandered the opportunities they had when younger to gain those skills. How many people in poverty fail to have even a high school diploma? Don't claim they didn't have a chance when they quit the one they had. People like you want taxpayers to fund what would actually be their second opportunity to learn skills. While they may be able to afford it, they have people like you who think someone else should pay that for them, too. Pay their tuition if you truly think they should get the training. I have MY kids to send to college. It's not my job to provide it or training to someone who had a chance and blew it.

If youre a grown adult you likely got these skills prior to 2008. Since the recession hit there has been a significant increase in low wage jobs and a significant decrease of decent wage jobs. That means MILLIONS of people have NO CHOICE but to accept low wage jobs, They don't have the money to further their education to learn new skills. Again, even if everyone in poverty learned new skill in your perfect world, who would be there to fill the remedial job positons like fast food? Those people are hardly teenagers anymore. The average age, as I said, is 29.

I don't know the stats on people who are in poverty and without a high school diploma, but I will bet you anything they are a small minority.

There are people who have no choice but to accept low wage jobs because they have low level skills. Interesting you say there aren't decent wage jobs yet Obama has claimed to have created so many and lowered the unemployment percentage. Does that mean you are saying he's done nothing but create low wage jobs? You already did.

There will always be jobs like fast food that require low level skills and plenty of low skilled people to fill them. That means they get a low wage. If you expect those of us who have higher level skills to be paid based on skills, then those working in low level skill jobs should be based on the same thing, skills required to do the job.

I have some numbers on poverty related to high school dropouts. It's far from a minority of them making a lower income.

See #6 factor - 11 Facts About Education and Poverty in America DoSomething.org America s largest organization for youth volunteering opportunities with 2 700 000 members and counting

See the second group of percentages under "Higher education leads to higher earning" - NCCP Parents rsquo Low Education Leads to Low Income Despite Full-Time Employment

Poverty and high school dropouts

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

You claimed Obama created 3 million jobs himself. Bullshit. That's why I say people like you would rather lick his asshole than look at what he hasn't done. You give him credit on the same level as the SEALS who killed bin Laden as if he was on the raid.

If the low wage jobs outnumber the higher wage jobs and you give Obama credit for having created those jobs, then he is to blame. You can't give him credit for having done the jobs then blame the employers for them being low wage.

The investment class is doing better because returns on investments provides more than a return on low skills.

How is it fair to force an emloyer to pay a wage higher than the job provides in revenue? Your problem is you think those of us with higher level skills should be paid on our skills but want to pay someone who is the cause of their low skills level based on breathing and a heartbeat. If they want a wage they can live off of, get the skills you think the rest of us should be paid on. If a person with $7.25 skills is getting paid $7.25/hour that is a decent wage based on their skills. That it isn't enough is their problem and often their fault.

It's easy to tell you've never owned a business. Try doing what you say needs to be done voluntarily and tell me how quickly your business ends. You haven't nor likely ever will be in business but you think you're an expert on it. Bleeding heart isn't a business model moron.

Onswipe

I know you cons have trouble with factual information but it is what it is.

Regardless of WHY the investment class is doing so well, why don't you put any blame on them for the low wage job creation?

My logic is based on inflation. If you're dumb enough to believe these people should be borderline slaves then so be it but get out of the way of progress.

You said Obama was directly responsible for 3 million jobs and 10.3 million have been created under him. Give him credit if you want but he gets the responsibility for the aspects of the jobs, too. You can't say he did it then blame somene else when what you say he did isn't what you wanted.

Your logic is based on paying someone because they breath not because of what they offer. If my pay is based on my skills, then the low skilled person's job should be the same even if it's not enough. That gives people like you to prove you hae compassion and use your own money to offset THEIR situation. If you want to force me to do it, I suggest you get off your ass and come personally try to collect what you say should be forced from me.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

So you don't mind raising taxes on the poor as long as it works towards your social engineering goals, right?

Typical. All taxes are equal, but some taxes are more equal than others.

Actually, no I don't

The poor do not have to smoke cigarettes, they do have to eat

That is what Republicans don't understand

Since when is there a sales tax on food?

Republicans are looking to slash funding for food stamps. People have to eat
If the poor have to pay more for cigarettes or beer ....I don't really care

Ah, good old noblesse oblige, how bougie of you.

Yet when republicans want to tie benefits to drug tests, or restrict handouts to certain things, you guys get all "stop treating the poor badly!!!". Interesting hypocrisy here.

I don't have a problem with tying benefits to drug tests as long as they drug test those corporations that are receiving $440 billion
I don't want them blowing that money on drugs and hookers

Like Eric Holder's secret service?

 

[Redfish]

It's not a safety net when it's a lifestyle where they can get more doing nothing than they could earn working based on the skills they offer. What we need to do is cut the net and let you self-proclaimed, good intentioned, do nothing bleeding hearts prove you have compassion by taking in and personally supporting anyone you say doens't have enough.

They aren't my responsibility to support.

It is a safety net where you work full time at some menial job and still require government assistance to survive. And yet, Republicans first order of business is to pull away that safety net

If someone has the skill level to only work a menial job, it's not a safety net. It's someone with skills subsidizing the results of someone else's lack of having any. Something isn't called a safety net when the person using it is where they are of their own doing and lack of marketability. A safety net is when a person slips not when they are where they are because it's the only place they have the ability to be.

All of this safety net garbage can be resolved if we raised the minimum wage to a level people can live off of. $15 an hour would he kept up with today's inflation. If it was raised gradually over a few years the market would have time to respond. A few thousand jobs may be lost initially, but the increase in consumer spending would inevitably create jobs. Very few people would be on food stamps and more could pay taxes. Everybody wins.

should it be $15/hour in NY city and podunk kansas?

raising the MW will cost jobs, and make everything you buy cost more. you have no grasp of basic economics.

It would cost jobs initially no doubt. However jobs would be inevitably created over time from the increase in consumer spending. The price increase would be small and would go down over time from the increase in consumer spending. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the consumer spending benefit.

Ok, think about this. if you make $400 a week and it costs you $400 a week to live are you better off it you make $500 a week and it costs you $500 a week to live?

running more money through your hands does not improve your life.

 

[rightwinger]

Actually, no I don't

The poor do not have to smoke cigarettes, they do have to eat

That is what Republicans don't understand

Since when is there a sales tax on food?

Republicans are looking to slash funding for food stamps. People have to eat
If the poor have to pay more for cigarettes or beer ....I don't really care

Ah, good old noblesse oblige, how bougie of you.

Yet when republicans want to tie benefits to drug tests, or restrict handouts to certain things, you guys get all "stop treating the poor badly!!!". Interesting hypocrisy here.

I don't have a problem with tying benefits to drug tests as long as they drug test those corporations that are receiving $440 billion
I don't want them blowing that money on drugs and hookers

Like Eric Holder's secret service?

Secret Service is Homeland Security

 

[Redfish]

The skills required to do the jobs they do are the same as they were in the 1960s. If inflation went up on them, it also went up on those of us who actually have to have skills to make our higher wages.

Since the skills I have took thousand of hours more to gain, I should make thousands of times more per hours than they do.

Many poor people squandered the opportunities they had when younger to gain those skills. How many people in poverty fail to have even a high school diploma? Don't claim they didn't have a chance when they quit the one they had. People like you want taxpayers to fund what would actually be their second opportunity to learn skills. While they may be able to afford it, they have people like you who think someone else should pay that for them, too. Pay their tuition if you truly think they should get the training. I have MY kids to send to college. It's not my job to provide it or training to someone who had a chance and blew it.

If youre a grown adult you likely got these skills prior to 2008. Since the recession hit there has been a significant increase in low wage jobs and a significant decrease of decent wage jobs. That means MILLIONS of people have NO CHOICE but to accept low wage jobs, They don't have the money to further their education to learn new skills. Again, even if everyone in poverty learned new skill in your perfect world, who would be there to fill the remedial job positons like fast food? Those people are hardly teenagers anymore. The average age, as I said, is 29.

I don't know the stats on people who are in poverty and without a high school diploma, but I will bet you anything they are a small minority.

There are people who have no choice but to accept low wage jobs because they have low level skills. Interesting you say there aren't decent wage jobs yet Obama has claimed to have created so many and lowered the unemployment percentage. Does that mean you are saying he's done nothing but create low wage jobs? You already did.

There will always be jobs like fast food that require low level skills and plenty of low skilled people to fill them. That means they get a low wage. If you expect those of us who have higher level skills to be paid based on skills, then those working in low level skill jobs should be based on the same thing, skills required to do the job.

I have some numbers on poverty related to high school dropouts. It's far from a minority of them making a lower income.

See #6 factor - 11 Facts About Education and Poverty in America DoSomething.org America s largest organization for youth volunteering opportunities with 2 700 000 members and counting

See the second group of percentages under "Higher education leads to higher earning" - NCCP Parents rsquo Low Education Leads to Low Income Despite Full-Time Employment

Poverty and high school dropouts

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

The skills required to do the jobs they do are the same as they were in the 1960s. If inflation went up on them, it also went up on those of us who actually have to have skills to make our higher wages.

Since the skills I have took thousand of hours more to gain, I should make thousands of times more per hours than they do.

Many poor people squandered the opportunities they had when younger to gain those skills. How many people in poverty fail to have even a high school diploma? Don't claim they didn't have a chance when they quit the one they had. People like you want taxpayers to fund what would actually be their second opportunity to learn skills. While they may be able to afford it, they have people like you who think someone else should pay that for them, too. Pay their tuition if you truly think they should get the training. I have MY kids to send to college. It's not my job to provide it or training to someone who had a chance and blew it.

If youre a grown adult you likely got these skills prior to 2008. Since the recession hit there has been a significant increase in low wage jobs and a significant decrease of decent wage jobs. That means MILLIONS of people have NO CHOICE but to accept low wage jobs, They don't have the money to further their education to learn new skills. Again, even if everyone in poverty learned new skill in your perfect world, who would be there to fill the remedial job positons like fast food? Those people are hardly teenagers anymore. The average age, as I said, is 29.

I don't know the stats on people who are in poverty and without a high school diploma, but I will bet you anything they are a small minority.

There are people who have no choice but to accept low wage jobs because they have low level skills. Interesting you say there aren't decent wage jobs yet Obama has claimed to have created so many and lowered the unemployment percentage. Does that mean you are saying he's done nothing but create low wage jobs? You already did.

There will always be jobs like fast food that require low level skills and plenty of low skilled people to fill them. That means they get a low wage. If you expect those of us who have higher level skills to be paid based on skills, then those working in low level skill jobs should be based on the same thing, skills required to do the job.

I have some numbers on poverty related to high school dropouts. It's far from a minority of them making a lower income.

See #6 factor - 11 Facts About Education and Poverty in America DoSomething.org America s largest organization for youth volunteering opportunities with 2 700 000 members and counting

See the second group of percentages under "Higher education leads to higher earning" - NCCP Parents rsquo Low Education Leads to Low Income Despite Full-Time Employment

Poverty and high school dropouts

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

You claimed Obama created 3 million jobs himself. Bullshit. That's why I say people like you would rather lick his asshole than look at what he hasn't done. You give him credit on the same level as the SEALS who killed bin Laden as if he was on the raid.

If the low wage jobs outnumber the higher wage jobs and you give Obama credit for having created those jobs, then he is to blame. You can't give him credit for having done the jobs then blame the employers for them being low wage.

The investment class is doing better because returns on investments provides more than a return on low skills.

How is it fair to force an emloyer to pay a wage higher than the job provides in revenue? Your problem is you think those of us with higher level skills should be paid on our skills but want to pay someone who is the cause of their low skills level based on breathing and a heartbeat. If they want a wage they can live off of, get the skills you think the rest of us should be paid on. If a person with $7.25 skills is getting paid $7.25/hour that is a decent wage based on their skills. That it isn't enough is their problem and often their fault.

It's easy to tell you've never owned a business. Try doing what you say needs to be done voluntarily and tell me how quickly your business ends. You haven't nor likely ever will be in business but you think you're an expert on it. Bleeding heart isn't a business model moron.

Onswipe

I know you cons have trouble with factual information but it is what it is.

Regardless of WHY the investment class is doing so well, why don't you put any blame on them for the low wage job creation?

My logic is based on inflation. If you're dumb enough to believe these people should be borderline slaves then so be it but get out of the way of progress.

1% of the US workforce makes minimum wage. the vast majority of them are part time teens working for pocket money. This is a non-issue that the left has created to further divide the country.

 

[Billy000]

It is a safety net where you work full time at some menial job and still require government assistance to survive. And yet, Republicans first order of business is to pull away that safety net

If someone has the skill level to only work a menial job, it's not a safety net. It's someone with skills subsidizing the results of someone else's lack of having any. Something isn't called a safety net when the person using it is where they are of their own doing and lack of marketability. A safety net is when a person slips not when they are where they are because it's the only place they have the ability to be.

All of this safety net garbage can be resolved if we raised the minimum wage to a level people can live off of. $15 an hour would he kept up with today's inflation. If it was raised gradually over a few years the market would have time to respond. A few thousand jobs may be lost initially, but the increase in consumer spending would inevitably create jobs. Very few people would be on food stamps and more could pay taxes. Everybody wins.

should it be $15/hour in NY city and podunk kansas?

raising the MW will cost jobs, and make everything you buy cost more. you have no grasp of basic economics.

It would cost jobs initially no doubt. However jobs would be inevitably created over time from the increase in consumer spending. The price increase would be small and would go down over time from the increase in consumer spending. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the consumer spending benefit.

Ok, think about this. if you make $400 a week and it costs you $400 a week to live are you better off it you make $500 a week and it costs you $500 a week to live?

running more money through your hands does not improve your life.

You people are so dense. The price increase would be small. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the raise in pay. That's ridiculous. The boost to consumer spending would also keep prices down. This it's hard to figure out.

 

[Billy000]

If youre a grown adult you likely got these skills prior to 2008. Since the recession hit there has been a significant increase in low wage jobs and a significant decrease of decent wage jobs. That means MILLIONS of people have NO CHOICE but to accept low wage jobs, They don't have the money to further their education to learn new skills. Again, even if everyone in poverty learned new skill in your perfect world, who would be there to fill the remedial job positons like fast food? Those people are hardly teenagers anymore. The average age, as I said, is 29.

I don't know the stats on people who are in poverty and without a high school diploma, but I will bet you anything they are a small minority.

There are people who have no choice but to accept low wage jobs because they have low level skills. Interesting you say there aren't decent wage jobs yet Obama has claimed to have created so many and lowered the unemployment percentage. Does that mean you are saying he's done nothing but create low wage jobs? You already did.

There will always be jobs like fast food that require low level skills and plenty of low skilled people to fill them. That means they get a low wage. If you expect those of us who have higher level skills to be paid based on skills, then those working in low level skill jobs should be based on the same thing, skills required to do the job.

I have some numbers on poverty related to high school dropouts. It's far from a minority of them making a lower income.

See #6 factor - 11 Facts About Education and Poverty in America DoSomething.org America s largest organization for youth volunteering opportunities with 2 700 000 members and counting

See the second group of percentages under "Higher education leads to higher earning" - NCCP Parents rsquo Low Education Leads to Low Income Despite Full-Time Employment

Poverty and high school dropouts

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

If youre a grown adult you likely got these skills prior to 2008. Since the recession hit there has been a significant increase in low wage jobs and a significant decrease of decent wage jobs. That means MILLIONS of people have NO CHOICE but to accept low wage jobs, They don't have the money to further their education to learn new skills. Again, even if everyone in poverty learned new skill in your perfect world, who would be there to fill the remedial job positons like fast food? Those people are hardly teenagers anymore. The average age, as I said, is 29.

I don't know the stats on people who are in poverty and without a high school diploma, but I will bet you anything they are a small minority.

There are people who have no choice but to accept low wage jobs because they have low level skills. Interesting you say there aren't decent wage jobs yet Obama has claimed to have created so many and lowered the unemployment percentage. Does that mean you are saying he's done nothing but create low wage jobs? You already did.

There will always be jobs like fast food that require low level skills and plenty of low skilled people to fill them. That means they get a low wage. If you expect those of us who have higher level skills to be paid based on skills, then those working in low level skill jobs should be based on the same thing, skills required to do the job.

I have some numbers on poverty related to high school dropouts. It's far from a minority of them making a lower income.

See #6 factor - 11 Facts About Education and Poverty in America DoSomething.org America s largest organization for youth volunteering opportunities with 2 700 000 members and counting

See the second group of percentages under "Higher education leads to higher earning" - NCCP Parents rsquo Low Education Leads to Low Income Despite Full-Time Employment

Poverty and high school dropouts

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

You claimed Obama created 3 million jobs himself. Bullshit. That's why I say people like you would rather lick his asshole than look at what he hasn't done. You give him credit on the same level as the SEALS who killed bin Laden as if he was on the raid.

If the low wage jobs outnumber the higher wage jobs and you give Obama credit for having created those jobs, then he is to blame. You can't give him credit for having done the jobs then blame the employers for them being low wage.

The investment class is doing better because returns on investments provides more than a return on low skills.

How is it fair to force an emloyer to pay a wage higher than the job provides in revenue? Your problem is you think those of us with higher level skills should be paid on our skills but want to pay someone who is the cause of their low skills level based on breathing and a heartbeat. If they want a wage they can live off of, get the skills you think the rest of us should be paid on. If a person with $7.25 skills is getting paid $7.25/hour that is a decent wage based on their skills. That it isn't enough is their problem and often their fault.

It's easy to tell you've never owned a business. Try doing what you say needs to be done voluntarily and tell me how quickly your business ends. You haven't nor likely ever will be in business but you think you're an expert on it. Bleeding heart isn't a business model moron.

Onswipe

I know you cons have trouble with factual information but it is what it is.

Regardless of WHY the investment class is doing so well, why don't you put any blame on them for the low wage job creation?

My logic is based on inflation. If you're dumb enough to believe these people should be borderline slaves then so be it but get out of the way of progress.

1% of the US workforce makes minimum wage. the vast majority of them are part time teens working for pocket money. This is a non-issue that the left has created to further divide the country.

How many times must I explain this to you? 17 million people make less than 10.10. Obviously that's a problem. Raising it to that would boost the wages for all who are below it. God think.

 

[Redfish]

If someone has the skill level to only work a menial job, it's not a safety net. It's someone with skills subsidizing the results of someone else's lack of having any. Something isn't called a safety net when the person using it is where they are of their own doing and lack of marketability. A safety net is when a person slips not when they are where they are because it's the only place they have the ability to be.

All of this safety net garbage can be resolved if we raised the minimum wage to a level people can live off of. $15 an hour would he kept up with today's inflation. If it was raised gradually over a few years the market would have time to respond. A few thousand jobs may be lost initially, but the increase in consumer spending would inevitably create jobs. Very few people would be on food stamps and more could pay taxes. Everybody wins.

should it be $15/hour in NY city and podunk kansas?

raising the MW will cost jobs, and make everything you buy cost more. you have no grasp of basic economics.

It would cost jobs initially no doubt. However jobs would be inevitably created over time from the increase in consumer spending. The price increase would be small and would go down over time from the increase in consumer spending. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the consumer spending benefit.

Ok, think about this. if you make $400 a week and it costs you $400 a week to live are you better off it you make $500 a week and it costs you $500 a week to live?

running more money through your hands does not improve your life.

You people are so dense. The price increase would be small. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the raise in pay. That's ridiculous. The boost to consumer spending would also keep prices down. This it's hard to figure out.

so you think that giving 1% of the workforce a raise will boost the economy? Really? How much will the part time teens who lose their part time jobs spend? What will it cost the economy to have them roaming the streets instead of working?

you libs never think anything through to its logical conclusion. you are all about feeeeeeeeeeeelings and emoooooooooootion.

 

[Redfish]

There are people who have no choice but to accept low wage jobs because they have low level skills. Interesting you say there aren't decent wage jobs yet Obama has claimed to have created so many and lowered the unemployment percentage. Does that mean you are saying he's done nothing but create low wage jobs? You already did.

There will always be jobs like fast food that require low level skills and plenty of low skilled people to fill them. That means they get a low wage. If you expect those of us who have higher level skills to be paid based on skills, then those working in low level skill jobs should be based on the same thing, skills required to do the job.

I have some numbers on poverty related to high school dropouts. It's far from a minority of them making a lower income.

See #6 factor - 11 Facts About Education and Poverty in America DoSomething.org America s largest organization for youth volunteering opportunities with 2 700 000 members and counting

See the second group of percentages under "Higher education leads to higher earning" - NCCP Parents rsquo Low Education Leads to Low Income Despite Full-Time Employment

Poverty and high school dropouts

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

There are people who have no choice but to accept low wage jobs because they have low level skills. Interesting you say there aren't decent wage jobs yet Obama has claimed to have created so many and lowered the unemployment percentage. Does that mean you are saying he's done nothing but create low wage jobs? You already did.

There will always be jobs like fast food that require low level skills and plenty of low skilled people to fill them. That means they get a low wage. If you expect those of us who have higher level skills to be paid based on skills, then those working in low level skill jobs should be based on the same thing, skills required to do the job.

I have some numbers on poverty related to high school dropouts. It's far from a minority of them making a lower income.

See #6 factor - 11 Facts About Education and Poverty in America DoSomething.org America s largest organization for youth volunteering opportunities with 2 700 000 members and counting

See the second group of percentages under "Higher education leads to higher earning" - NCCP Parents rsquo Low Education Leads to Low Income Despite Full-Time Employment

Poverty and high school dropouts

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

You claimed Obama created 3 million jobs himself. Bullshit. That's why I say people like you would rather lick his asshole than look at what he hasn't done. You give him credit on the same level as the SEALS who killed bin Laden as if he was on the raid.

If the low wage jobs outnumber the higher wage jobs and you give Obama credit for having created those jobs, then he is to blame. You can't give him credit for having done the jobs then blame the employers for them being low wage.

The investment class is doing better because returns on investments provides more than a return on low skills.

How is it fair to force an emloyer to pay a wage higher than the job provides in revenue? Your problem is you think those of us with higher level skills should be paid on our skills but want to pay someone who is the cause of their low skills level based on breathing and a heartbeat. If they want a wage they can live off of, get the skills you think the rest of us should be paid on. If a person with $7.25 skills is getting paid $7.25/hour that is a decent wage based on their skills. That it isn't enough is their problem and often their fault.

It's easy to tell you've never owned a business. Try doing what you say needs to be done voluntarily and tell me how quickly your business ends. You haven't nor likely ever will be in business but you think you're an expert on it. Bleeding heart isn't a business model moron.

Onswipe

I know you cons have trouble with factual information but it is what it is.

Regardless of WHY the investment class is doing so well, why don't you put any blame on them for the low wage job creation?

My logic is based on inflation. If you're dumb enough to believe these people should be borderline slaves then so be it but get out of the way of progress.

1% of the US workforce makes minimum wage. the vast majority of them are part time teens working for pocket money. This is a non-issue that the left has created to further divide the country.

How many times must I explain this to you? 17 million people make less than 10.10. Obviously that's a problem. Raising it to that would boost the wages for all who are below it. God think.

1% of the workforce is NOT 17 million. there are not 17 million americans making minimum wage. its much closer to 3 million and 2.9 million are part time teens.

you are FOS

 

[Billy000]

All of this safety net garbage can be resolved if we raised the minimum wage to a level people can live off of. $15 an hour would he kept up with today's inflation. If it was raised gradually over a few years the market would have time to respond. A few thousand jobs may be lost initially, but the increase in consumer spending would inevitably create jobs. Very few people would be on food stamps and more could pay taxes. Everybody wins.

should it be $15/hour in NY city and podunk kansas?

raising the MW will cost jobs, and make everything you buy cost more. you have no grasp of basic economics.

It would cost jobs initially no doubt. However jobs would be inevitably created over time from the increase in consumer spending. The price increase would be small and would go down over time from the increase in consumer spending. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the consumer spending benefit.

Ok, think about this. if you make $400 a week and it costs you $400 a week to live are you better off it you make $500 a week and it costs you $500 a week to live?

running more money through your hands does not improve your life.

You people are so dense. The price increase would be small. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the raise in pay. That's ridiculous. The boost to consumer spending would also keep prices down. This it's hard to figure out.

so you think that giving 1% of the workforce a raise will boost the economy? Really? How much will the part time teens who lose their part time jobs spend? What will it cost the economy to have them roaming the streets instead of working?

you libs never think anything through to its logical conclusion. you are all about feeeeeeeeeeeelings and emoooooooooootion.

Here's where facts always get you into trouble. The average age of a fast food worker these days is 29. Teens and adults are competing for the same jobs.

 

[Redfish]

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

You claimed Obama created 3 million jobs himself. Bullshit. That's why I say people like you would rather lick his asshole than look at what he hasn't done. You give him credit on the same level as the SEALS who killed bin Laden as if he was on the raid.

If the low wage jobs outnumber the higher wage jobs and you give Obama credit for having created those jobs, then he is to blame. You can't give him credit for having done the jobs then blame the employers for them being low wage.

The investment class is doing better because returns on investments provides more than a return on low skills.

How is it fair to force an emloyer to pay a wage higher than the job provides in revenue? Your problem is you think those of us with higher level skills should be paid on our skills but want to pay someone who is the cause of their low skills level based on breathing and a heartbeat. If they want a wage they can live off of, get the skills you think the rest of us should be paid on. If a person with $7.25 skills is getting paid $7.25/hour that is a decent wage based on their skills. That it isn't enough is their problem and often their fault.

It's easy to tell you've never owned a business. Try doing what you say needs to be done voluntarily and tell me how quickly your business ends. You haven't nor likely ever will be in business but you think you're an expert on it. Bleeding heart isn't a business model moron.

Onswipe

I know you cons have trouble with factual information but it is what it is.

Regardless of WHY the investment class is doing so well, why don't you put any blame on them for the low wage job creation?

My logic is based on inflation. If you're dumb enough to believe these people should be borderline slaves then so be it but get out of the way of progress.

1% of the US workforce makes minimum wage. the vast majority of them are part time teens working for pocket money. This is a non-issue that the left has created to further divide the country.

How many times must I explain this to you? 17 million people make less than 10.10. Obviously that's a problem. Raising it to that would boost the wages for all who are below it. God think.

1% of the workforce is NOT 17 million. there are not 17 million americans making minimum wage. its much closer to 3 million and 2.9 million are part time teens.

you are FOS

let me clarify that-------------1% of the legal american citizen workforce.

 

[Billy000]

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

Lol I love how you cons think liberals are going to defend Obama no matter what. Yes the low wage jobs do outnumber the higher wage jobs under Obama. However that still means the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since the recession hit. 10.3 million jobs in total under Obama have been created and Obama himself is directly responsible for 3 million from his stimulus package. It's interesting you cons blame Obama for the low wage jobs yet won't put any blame on the job creators themselves lol. I will never understand that. The investment class is doing better now more than ever. What we need is more demand side economic policies like the stimulus to create better jobs. Well anyway, enough about him.

Again I am all for paying skilled workers more, but because low wage jobs like fast food are so common, it is only fair to pay these millions of people a decent wage. A wage they can live off of.

31% is a small minority. I will admit it is higher than I thought. I would have guessed 20%.

You claimed Obama created 3 million jobs himself. Bullshit. That's why I say people like you would rather lick his asshole than look at what he hasn't done. You give him credit on the same level as the SEALS who killed bin Laden as if he was on the raid.

If the low wage jobs outnumber the higher wage jobs and you give Obama credit for having created those jobs, then he is to blame. You can't give him credit for having done the jobs then blame the employers for them being low wage.

The investment class is doing better because returns on investments provides more than a return on low skills.

How is it fair to force an emloyer to pay a wage higher than the job provides in revenue? Your problem is you think those of us with higher level skills should be paid on our skills but want to pay someone who is the cause of their low skills level based on breathing and a heartbeat. If they want a wage they can live off of, get the skills you think the rest of us should be paid on. If a person with $7.25 skills is getting paid $7.25/hour that is a decent wage based on their skills. That it isn't enough is their problem and often their fault.

It's easy to tell you've never owned a business. Try doing what you say needs to be done voluntarily and tell me how quickly your business ends. You haven't nor likely ever will be in business but you think you're an expert on it. Bleeding heart isn't a business model moron.

Onswipe

I know you cons have trouble with factual information but it is what it is.

Regardless of WHY the investment class is doing so well, why don't you put any blame on them for the low wage job creation?

My logic is based on inflation. If you're dumb enough to believe these people should be borderline slaves then so be it but get out of the way of progress.

1% of the US workforce makes minimum wage. the vast majority of them are part time teens working for pocket money. This is a non-issue that the left has created to further divide the country.

How many times must I explain this to you? 17 million people make less than 10.10. Obviously that's a problem. Raising it to that would boost the wages for all who are below it. God think.

1% of the workforce is NOT 17 million. there are not 17 million americans making minimum wage. its much closer to 3 million and 2.9 million are part time teens.

you are FOS

Are you really this retarded dude? 17 million people make LESS THAN 10.10 per hour. You do know there are numbers in between 7.25 and 10 right?

 

[Redfish]

should it be $15/hour in NY city and podunk kansas?

raising the MW will cost jobs, and make everything you buy cost more. you have no grasp of basic economics.

It would cost jobs initially no doubt. However jobs would be inevitably created over time from the increase in consumer spending. The price increase would be small and would go down over time from the increase in consumer spending. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the consumer spending benefit.

Ok, think about this. if you make $400 a week and it costs you $400 a week to live are you better off it you make $500 a week and it costs you $500 a week to live?

running more money through your hands does not improve your life.

You people are so dense. The price increase would be small. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the raise in pay. That's ridiculous. The boost to consumer spending would also keep prices down. This it's hard to figure out.

so you think that giving 1% of the workforce a raise will boost the economy? Really? How much will the part time teens who lose their part time jobs spend? What will it cost the economy to have them roaming the streets instead of working?

you libs never think anything through to its logical conclusion. you are all about feeeeeeeeeeeelings and emoooooooooootion.

Here's where facts always get you into trouble. The average age of a fast food worker these days is 29. Teens and adults are competing for the same jobs.

 

[Redfish]

You claimed Obama created 3 million jobs himself. Bullshit. That's why I say people like you would rather lick his asshole than look at what he hasn't done. You give him credit on the same level as the SEALS who killed bin Laden as if he was on the raid.

If the low wage jobs outnumber the higher wage jobs and you give Obama credit for having created those jobs, then he is to blame. You can't give him credit for having done the jobs then blame the employers for them being low wage.

The investment class is doing better because returns on investments provides more than a return on low skills.

How is it fair to force an emloyer to pay a wage higher than the job provides in revenue? Your problem is you think those of us with higher level skills should be paid on our skills but want to pay someone who is the cause of their low skills level based on breathing and a heartbeat. If they want a wage they can live off of, get the skills you think the rest of us should be paid on. If a person with $7.25 skills is getting paid $7.25/hour that is a decent wage based on their skills. That it isn't enough is their problem and often their fault.

It's easy to tell you've never owned a business. Try doing what you say needs to be done voluntarily and tell me how quickly your business ends. You haven't nor likely ever will be in business but you think you're an expert on it. Bleeding heart isn't a business model moron.

Onswipe

I know you cons have trouble with factual information but it is what it is.

Regardless of WHY the investment class is doing so well, why don't you put any blame on them for the low wage job creation?

My logic is based on inflation. If you're dumb enough to believe these people should be borderline slaves then so be it but get out of the way of progress.

1% of the US workforce makes minimum wage. the vast majority of them are part time teens working for pocket money. This is a non-issue that the left has created to further divide the country.

How many times must I explain this to you? 17 million people make less than 10.10. Obviously that's a problem. Raising it to that would boost the wages for all who are below it. God think.

1% of the workforce is NOT 17 million. there are not 17 million americans making minimum wage. its much closer to 3 million and 2.9 million are part time teens.

you are FOS

Are you really this retarded dude? 17 million people make LESS THAN 10.10 per hour. You do know there are numbers in between 7.25 and 10 right?

maybe, but 14 million of them are in this country illegally.

 

[martybegan]

Since when is there a sales tax on food?

Republicans are looking to slash funding for food stamps. People have to eat
If the poor have to pay more for cigarettes or beer ....I don't really care

Ah, good old noblesse oblige, how bougie of you.

Yet when republicans want to tie benefits to drug tests, or restrict handouts to certain things, you guys get all "stop treating the poor badly!!!". Interesting hypocrisy here.

I don't have a problem with tying benefits to drug tests as long as they drug test those corporations that are receiving $440 billion
I don't want them blowing that money on drugs and hookers

Like Eric Holder's secret service?

Secret Service is Homeland Security

should it be $15/hour in NY city and podunk kansas?

raising the MW will cost jobs, and make everything you buy cost more. you have no grasp of basic economics.

It would cost jobs initially no doubt. However jobs would be inevitably created over time from the increase in consumer spending. The price increase would be small and would go down over time from the increase in consumer spending. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the consumer spending benefit.

Ok, think about this. if you make $400 a week and it costs you $400 a week to live are you better off it you make $500 a week and it costs you $500 a week to live?

running more money through your hands does not improve your life.

You people are so dense. The price increase would be small. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the raise in pay. That's ridiculous. The boost to consumer spending would also keep prices down. This it's hard to figure out.

so you think that giving 1% of the workforce a raise will boost the economy? Really? How much will the part time teens who lose their part time jobs spend? What will it cost the economy to have them roaming the streets instead of working?

you libs never think anything through to its logical conclusion. you are all about feeeeeeeeeeeelings and emoooooooooootion.

Here's where facts always get you into trouble. The average age of a fast food worker these days is 29. Teens and adults are competing for the same jobs.

Adults who made poor life choices. Guess what? If you do manage to get a $15 an hour wage for fast food work, those people earning $8 an hour now will get to be unemployed, because you will attract a higher quality of worker, and given a choice an employer will get more value whenever they can.

 

[Redfish]

Republicans are looking to slash funding for food stamps. People have to eat
If the poor have to pay more for cigarettes or beer ....I don't really care

Ah, good old noblesse oblige, how bougie of you.

Yet when republicans want to tie benefits to drug tests, or restrict handouts to certain things, you guys get all "stop treating the poor badly!!!". Interesting hypocrisy here.

I don't have a problem with tying benefits to drug tests as long as they drug test those corporations that are receiving $440 billion
I don't want them blowing that money on drugs and hookers

Like Eric Holder's secret service?

Secret Service is Homeland Security

It would cost jobs initially no doubt. However jobs would be inevitably created over time from the increase in consumer spending. The price increase would be small and would go down over time from the increase in consumer spending. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the consumer spending benefit.

Ok, think about this. if you make $400 a week and it costs you $400 a week to live are you better off it you make $500 a week and it costs you $500 a week to live?

running more money through your hands does not improve your life.

You people are so dense. The price increase would be small. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the raise in pay. That's ridiculous. The boost to consumer spending would also keep prices down. This it's hard to figure out.

so you think that giving 1% of the workforce a raise will boost the economy? Really? How much will the part time teens who lose their part time jobs spend? What will it cost the economy to have them roaming the streets instead of working?

you libs never think anything through to its logical conclusion. you are all about feeeeeeeeeeeelings and emoooooooooootion.

Here's where facts always get you into trouble. The average age of a fast food worker these days is 29. Teens and adults are competing for the same jobs.

Adults who made poor life choices. Guess what? If you do manage to get a $15 an hour wage for fast food work, those people earning $8 an hour now will get to be unemployed, because you will attract a higher quality of worker, and given a choice an employer will get more value whenever they can.

of course, higher wages attract more qualified people and the job can be done with fewer workers. So the bottom feeders that the libs are trying to help will remain on the bottom and more dependent on govt hand outs

 

[JakeStarkey]

Keep the poor because they are poor? What a bunch of butt holes.

 

[Billy000]

It would cost jobs initially no doubt. However jobs would be inevitably created over time from the increase in consumer spending. The price increase would be small and would go down over time from the increase in consumer spending. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the consumer spending benefit.

Ok, think about this. if you make $400 a week and it costs you $400 a week to live are you better off it you make $500 a week and it costs you $500 a week to live?

running more money through your hands does not improve your life.

You people are so dense. The price increase would be small. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the raise in pay. That's ridiculous. The boost to consumer spending would also keep prices down. This it's hard to figure out.

so you think that giving 1% of the workforce a raise will boost the economy? Really? How much will the part time teens who lose their part time jobs spend? What will it cost the economy to have them roaming the streets instead of working?

you libs never think anything through to its logical conclusion. you are all about feeeeeeeeeeeelings and emoooooooooootion.

Here's where facts always get you into trouble. The average age of a fast food worker these days is 29. Teens and adults are competing for the same jobs.

When have you ever provided links? Never. Because I'm more mature than you I will actuallt supply one.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/12/0...tering-fast-food-industry.html?pagewanted=all

 

[JakeStarkey]

Ah, good old noblesse oblige, how bougie of you.

Yet when republicans want to tie benefits to drug tests, or restrict handouts to certain things, you guys get all "stop treating the poor badly!!!". Interesting hypocrisy here.

I don't have a problem with tying benefits to drug tests as long as they drug test those corporations that are receiving $440 billion
I don't want them blowing that money on drugs and hookers

Like Eric Holder's secret service?

Secret Service is Homeland Security

Ok, think about this. if you make $400 a week and it costs you $400 a week to live are you better off it you make $500 a week and it costs you $500 a week to live?

running more money through your hands does not improve your life.

You people are so dense. The price increase would be small. It sure as hell wouldn't offset the raise in pay. That's ridiculous. The boost to consumer spending would also keep prices down. This it's hard to figure out.

so you think that giving 1% of the workforce a raise will boost the economy? Really? How much will the part time teens who lose their part time jobs spend? What will it cost the economy to have them roaming the streets instead of working?

you libs never think anything through to its logical conclusion. you are all about feeeeeeeeeeeelings and emoooooooooootion.

Here's where facts always get you into trouble. The average age of a fast food worker these days is 29. Teens and adults are competing for the same jobs.

Adults who made poor life choices. Guess what? If you do manage to get a $15 an hour wage for fast food work, those people earning $8 an hour now will get to be unemployed, because you will attract a higher quality of worker, and given a choice an employer will get more value whenever they can.

of course, higher wages attract more qualified people and the job can be done with fewer workers. So the bottom feeders that the libs are trying to help will remain on the bottom and more dependent on govt hand outs

Keep paying low wages kiddos and they will remain there.