Richest 1 percent will own more than rest combined by 2016: report

[Dad2three]

"Income tax rates don't matter because rates don't pay for the government."

NEITHER HAS THE GOP THE LAST 30+ YEARS. NOTE THE DEBT CREATED TO HIDE THE COST OF GOV'T AS THE 'JOB CREATORS' TAX RATES HAVE DROPPED? LOL



The problem is that we entertain republicans at all. They are consistently wrong and yet we ALWAYS respond to them as if they have credibility.

Thank you for admitting my point ruined your whole screed this post.

Your point? Oh right, Reagan cut Gov't revenues with his tax cuts for the rich (even though he increased taxes 11 times mainly on the middle class) and Dubya took over 25% OFF of the revenue's Clinton's good fiscal policies (20%+ of GDP) got US too, down to less than 15% of GDP. POINT? LOL

And?

YOU stated tax rates don't matter? Apparently they do!!! lol

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory


The conclusion?

Lowering the tax rates on the wealthy and top earners in America do not appear to have any impact on the nation’s economic growth.

This paragraph from the report says it all—

“The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution.”

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory-GOP Suppresses Study - Forbes




In 1980 the top 1% earned 8.5% of total income. In 2007 they earned 23%.

In 1980 the bottom 90% earned 68% of total income. In 2007 they earned 53%.

Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data Tax Foundation

Lol "studies"

STUDY. And ALL you have is the usual right wing noise nothing of value or the ability to refute it. Weird

 

[zeke]

You post stuff without even knowing or caring what it means.

No marty, that ain't the way it happens. D23 posts information. YOU choose to ignore it. YOU are the one that don't know what the information means. You are willfully ignorant. Why?

 

[ClosedCaption]

From this thread I can tell Oligarchies are good..No one seems to really know why tho

^ from that post I can see that ClosedMinded likes to pretend that we have an "oligarchy" in America.

Silly stuff.

Pretty silly except I havent heard of any reasons why less people having more of the wealth is a bad thing

I haven't heard any reason for why fewer people having more wealth is a bad thing either.

And none of that has anything to do with "oligarchy."

Sorry I was under the impression that money is power

Money is not power,

Oh really? Well, there goes the neighborhood

although it has much to do with power in lots of situations.

Wait, its not but it is?

That being the case, nothing you have said has ANY bearing on your claim that we live in an oligarchy.

I am afraid I must inform you that words still have meaning.

I am afraid you just disagreed with me then agreed with me to disagree again.

 

[Papageorgio]

The richest 80 individuals in the world had the same wealth as the poorest 50 percent of the entire population, some 3.5 billion people, Oxfam said. This was an even bigger concentration at the top than a year ago, when half the world's wealth was in the hands of 85 of the ultra rich.

Richest 1 percent will own more than rest combined by 2016 report Al Jazeera America

Rich getting richer Wealth increasingly concentrated in hands of few Oxfam says CTV News

At the same time, one in nine people don't have enough to eat and more than a billion people live on less than $1.25 a day, Oxfam said, ticking off statistics that paint a grim picture for all but the world's richest.

The charity is calling for a crackdown on tax avoidance by corporations and rich people, as well as increased investment in health and education and equal pay legislation.

-----------------------------------

Republicans think inherited wealth is earned and everyone has an equal opportunity. They see this as a "job well done".

The top twenty richest and 15 of them are Democrats, why don't they surrender their wealth? Many in Hollywood are among the richest, why don't they surrender their wealth?
Gates, Buffett, three of the Walton family, all one percenters, yet they don't surrender their wealth.

Before blaming the Republicans, why not focus on the hypocrites of the Democratic Party who actually have the wealth.

This is why I haven't bought the BS of the Democratic Party being the party of the poor or middle class. They are just as, if not more involved in the concentrating the wealth for the rich.

Two years the Democrats had tons of power, yet did nothing to disperse the wealth, in fact they created ACA that actually took more from the middle class.

 

[Dad2three]

The richest 80 individuals in the world had the same wealth as the poorest 50 percent of the entire population, some 3.5 billion people, Oxfam said. This was an even bigger concentration at the top than a year ago, when half the world's wealth was in the hands of 85 of the ultra rich.

Richest 1 percent will own more than rest combined by 2016 report Al Jazeera America

Rich getting richer Wealth increasingly concentrated in hands of few Oxfam says CTV News

At the same time, one in nine people don't have enough to eat and more than a billion people live on less than $1.25 a day, Oxfam said, ticking off statistics that paint a grim picture for all but the world's richest.

The charity is calling for a crackdown on tax avoidance by corporations and rich people, as well as increased investment in health and education and equal pay legislation.

-----------------------------------

Republicans think inherited wealth is earned and everyone has an equal opportunity. They see this as a "job well done".

The top twenty richest and 15 of them are Democrats, why don't they surrender their wealth? Many in Hollywood are among the richest, why don't they surrender their wealth?
Gates, Buffett, three of the Walton family, all one percenters, yet they don't surrender their wealth.

Before blaming the Republicans, why not focus on the hypocrites of the Democratic Party who actually have the wealth.

This is why I haven't bought the BS of the Democratic Party being the party of the poor or middle class. They are just as, if not more involved in the concentrating the wealth for the rich.

Two years the Democrats had tons of power, yet did nothing to disperse the wealth, in fact they created ACA that actually took more from the middle class.

"The top twenty richest and 15 of them are Democrats, why don't they surrender their wealth? Many in Hollywood are among the richest, why don't they surrender their wealth?
Gates, Buffett, three of the Walton family, all one percenters, yet they don't surrender their wealth."



Roll Call’s 50 Richest Members of Congress for 2014


The 50 Richest won’t set new standards for diversity. All are white. Women comprise 18 percent. There were 20 Democrats and 30 Republicans.

Roll Call s 50 Richest Members of Congress



... Of the 50 richest families, 28 mainly donate to Republicans and only seven contribute mainly to Democrats. Not all families stay on the same side of the political spectrum — 15 support candidates from both parties. The Walton family has traditionally donated to Republicans

Are America s Richest Families Republicans or Democrats - Forbes


YOU 'THINK' DEMS/LIBERALS WANT THEM TO 'SURRENDER THEIR WEALTH'??? LOL

HOW ABOUT JUST LESS INEQUALITY LIKE THE US HAD BEFORE REAGAN'S TRICKLE DOWN BS?

 

[Dad2three]

The richest 80 individuals in the world had the same wealth as the poorest 50 percent of the entire population, some 3.5 billion people, Oxfam said. This was an even bigger concentration at the top than a year ago, when half the world's wealth was in the hands of 85 of the ultra rich.

Richest 1 percent will own more than rest combined by 2016 report Al Jazeera America

Rich getting richer Wealth increasingly concentrated in hands of few Oxfam says CTV News

At the same time, one in nine people don't have enough to eat and more than a billion people live on less than $1.25 a day, Oxfam said, ticking off statistics that paint a grim picture for all but the world's richest.

The charity is calling for a crackdown on tax avoidance by corporations and rich people, as well as increased investment in health and education and equal pay legislation.

-----------------------------------

Republicans think inherited wealth is earned and everyone has an equal opportunity. They see this as a "job well done".

The top twenty richest and 15 of them are Democrats, why don't they surrender their wealth? Many in Hollywood are among the richest, why don't they surrender their wealth?
Gates, Buffett, three of the Walton family, all one percenters, yet they don't surrender their wealth.

Before blaming the Republicans, why not focus on the hypocrites of the Democratic Party who actually have the wealth.

This is why I haven't bought the BS of the Democratic Party being the party of the poor or middle class. They are just as, if not more involved in the concentrating the wealth for the rich.

Two years the Democrats had tons of power, yet did nothing to disperse the wealth, in fact they created ACA that actually took more from the middle class.

"Two years the Democrats had tons of power, yet did nothing to disperse the wealth,"


Yeah, AS the worlds economy was in danger of dumping off the cliff, thanks mainly to Dubya/GOP 'job creator' policies?



One of the standard Republican talking points is that the Democrats had a filibuster-proof, super majority for two years between 2008 and 2010. This talking point is usually trotted out when liberals complain that the Republicans filibustered virtually every piece of legislation proposed by Obama or the Democrats during Obama’s presidency. The implication is that Democrats had ample opportunity to pass legislation and that the reason they didn’t pass more legislation doesn’t have anything to do with the Republicans.

It is also used to counter any argument that Republican legislation, (passed during the six years of total Republican control,) has anything to do with today’s problems. They claim that the Democrats had a super majority for two years and passed all kinds of legislation, (over Republican objection and filibuster,) that completely undid all Republican policies and legislation, and this absolves them from today’s problems.

The Truth is that the Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 60 working days during that period, insufficient time to undo even a small portion of the legislation passed during six years of Republican control. Here are the details:


Democrats only had a veto proof majority for 24 working days Fact Left

 

[Dad2three]

The richest 80 individuals in the world had the same wealth as the poorest 50 percent of the entire population, some 3.5 billion people, Oxfam said. This was an even bigger concentration at the top than a year ago, when half the world's wealth was in the hands of 85 of the ultra rich.

Richest 1 percent will own more than rest combined by 2016 report Al Jazeera America

Rich getting richer Wealth increasingly concentrated in hands of few Oxfam says CTV News

At the same time, one in nine people don't have enough to eat and more than a billion people live on less than $1.25 a day, Oxfam said, ticking off statistics that paint a grim picture for all but the world's richest.

The charity is calling for a crackdown on tax avoidance by corporations and rich people, as well as increased investment in health and education and equal pay legislation.

-----------------------------------

Republicans think inherited wealth is earned and everyone has an equal opportunity. They see this as a "job well done".

The top twenty richest and 15 of them are Democrats, why don't they surrender their wealth? Many in Hollywood are among the richest, why don't they surrender their wealth?
Gates, Buffett, three of the Walton family, all one percenters, yet they don't surrender their wealth.

Before blaming the Republicans, why not focus on the hypocrites of the Democratic Party who actually have the wealth.

This is why I haven't bought the BS of the Democratic Party being the party of the poor or middle class. They are just as, if not more involved in the concentrating the wealth for the rich.

Two years the Democrats had tons of power, yet did nothing to disperse the wealth, in fact they created ACA that actually took more from the middle class.

Here are the political affiliations of America’s 50 richest families, ranked according to wealth:

1. Walton – Republican

2. Koch – Republican

3. Mars – Republican

4. Cargill-MacMillan – Republican

5. Johnson (Fidelity) – Republican

6. Hearst – Republican

7. Cox – Democrat

Are America s Richest Families Republicans or Democrats - Forbes

 

[Papageorgio]

The richest 80 individuals in the world had the same wealth as the poorest 50 percent of the entire population, some 3.5 billion people, Oxfam said. This was an even bigger concentration at the top than a year ago, when half the world's wealth was in the hands of 85 of the ultra rich.

Richest 1 percent will own more than rest combined by 2016 report Al Jazeera America

Rich getting richer Wealth increasingly concentrated in hands of few Oxfam says CTV News

At the same time, one in nine people don't have enough to eat and more than a billion people live on less than $1.25 a day, Oxfam said, ticking off statistics that paint a grim picture for all but the world's richest.

The charity is calling for a crackdown on tax avoidance by corporations and rich people, as well as increased investment in health and education and equal pay legislation.

-----------------------------------

Republicans think inherited wealth is earned and everyone has an equal opportunity. They see this as a "job well done".

The top twenty richest and 15 of them are Democrats, why don't they surrender their wealth? Many in Hollywood are among the richest, why don't they surrender their wealth?
Gates, Buffett, three of the Walton family, all one percenters, yet they don't surrender their wealth.

Before blaming the Republicans, why not focus on the hypocrites of the Democratic Party who actually have the wealth.

This is why I haven't bought the BS of the Democratic Party being the party of the poor or middle class. They are just as, if not more involved in the concentrating the wealth for the rich.

Two years the Democrats had tons of power, yet did nothing to disperse the wealth, in fact they created ACA that actually took more from the middle class.

"The top twenty richest and 15 of them are Democrats, why don't they surrender their wealth? Many in Hollywood are among the richest, why don't they surrender their wealth?
Gates, Buffett, three of the Walton family, all one percenters, yet they don't surrender their wealth."



Roll Call’s 50 Richest Members of Congress for 2014


The 50 Richest won’t set new standards for diversity. All are white. Women comprise 18 percent. There were 20 Democrats and 30 Republicans.

Roll Call s 50 Richest Members of Congress



... Of the 50 richest families, 28 mainly donate to Republicans and only seven contribute mainly to Democrats. Not all families stay on the same side of the political spectrum — 15 support candidates from both parties. The Walton family has traditionally donated to Republicans

Are America s Richest Families Republicans or Democrats - Forbes


YOU 'THINK' DEMS/LIBERALS WANT THEM TO 'SURRENDER THEIR WEALTH'??? LOL

HOW ABOUT JUST LESS INEQUALITY LIKE THE US HAD BEFORE REAGAN'S TRICKLE DOWN BS?

The point is, it isn't a party issue, both are owned by the 1%, for anyone to blame one party or the other is simply naive.

The thinking and similarity of how the rich think transcends party affiliation. Most of the rich are more concerned about the deficit, however the 99% are more concerned with the economy. Rich don't care what they earn, they care about what they keep.

The rich put on even ground with everyone else, would become rich again. It is a mindset, that most don't get or understand.

 

[martybegan]

You post stuff without even knowing or caring what it means.

No marty, that ain't the way it happens. D23 posts information. YOU choose to ignore it. YOU are the one that don't know what the information means. You are willfully ignorant. Why?

He posts useless factoids that are not relevant to the general conversation. Its the standard greedy class warfare crap you idiots always spout.

That added to the fact that he hasn't had an original thought in his past 2000 posts shows that he is a fucking wanker.

 

[Dad2three]

The richest 80 individuals in the world had the same wealth as the poorest 50 percent of the entire population, some 3.5 billion people, Oxfam said. This was an even bigger concentration at the top than a year ago, when half the world's wealth was in the hands of 85 of the ultra rich.

Richest 1 percent will own more than rest combined by 2016 report Al Jazeera America

Rich getting richer Wealth increasingly concentrated in hands of few Oxfam says CTV News

At the same time, one in nine people don't have enough to eat and more than a billion people live on less than $1.25 a day, Oxfam said, ticking off statistics that paint a grim picture for all but the world's richest.

The charity is calling for a crackdown on tax avoidance by corporations and rich people, as well as increased investment in health and education and equal pay legislation.

-----------------------------------

Republicans think inherited wealth is earned and everyone has an equal opportunity. They see this as a "job well done".

The top twenty richest and 15 of them are Democrats, why don't they surrender their wealth? Many in Hollywood are among the richest, why don't they surrender their wealth?
Gates, Buffett, three of the Walton family, all one percenters, yet they don't surrender their wealth.

Before blaming the Republicans, why not focus on the hypocrites of the Democratic Party who actually have the wealth.

This is why I haven't bought the BS of the Democratic Party being the party of the poor or middle class. They are just as, if not more involved in the concentrating the wealth for the rich.

Two years the Democrats had tons of power, yet did nothing to disperse the wealth, in fact they created ACA that actually took more from the middle class.

"The top twenty richest and 15 of them are Democrats, why don't they surrender their wealth? Many in Hollywood are among the richest, why don't they surrender their wealth?
Gates, Buffett, three of the Walton family, all one percenters, yet they don't surrender their wealth."



Roll Call’s 50 Richest Members of Congress for 2014


The 50 Richest won’t set new standards for diversity. All are white. Women comprise 18 percent. There were 20 Democrats and 30 Republicans.

Roll Call s 50 Richest Members of Congress



... Of the 50 richest families, 28 mainly donate to Republicans and only seven contribute mainly to Democrats. Not all families stay on the same side of the political spectrum — 15 support candidates from both parties. The Walton family has traditionally donated to Republicans

Are America s Richest Families Republicans or Democrats - Forbes


YOU 'THINK' DEMS/LIBERALS WANT THEM TO 'SURRENDER THEIR WEALTH'??? LOL

HOW ABOUT JUST LESS INEQUALITY LIKE THE US HAD BEFORE REAGAN'S TRICKLE DOWN BS?

The point is, it isn't a party issue, both are owned by the 1%, for anyone to blame one party or the other is simply naive.

The thinking and similarity of how the rich think transcends party affiliation. Most of the rich are more concerned about the deficit, however the 99% are more concerned with the economy. Rich don't care what they earn, they care about what they keep.

The rich put on even ground with everyone else, would become rich again. It is a mindset, that most don't get or understand.

The conservative who originally posited it apparently disagrees with you???

"The thinking and similarity of how the rich think transcends party affiliation. Most of the rich are more concerned about the deficit"


LMAOROG

REALLY? REALLY? lol

NOTE THE EFFECTIVE TAX RATES HAVE A DIRECT CORRELATION TO US DEBT INCREASING THE PAST 34 YEARS???

 

[Dad2three]

You post stuff without even knowing or caring what it means.

No marty, that ain't the way it happens. D23 posts information. YOU choose to ignore it. YOU are the one that don't know what the information means. You are willfully ignorant. Why?

He posts useless factoids that are not relevant to the general conversation. Its the standard greedy class warfare crap you idiots always spout.

That added to the fact that he hasn't had an original thought in his past 2000 posts shows that he is a fucking wanker.

And you continually use ad homs and bad opinions.


Don't worry, I'm sure SOMEDAY, conservatives will be on the correct side of history, though I can't think of when that might be!

 

[Papageorgio]

The richest 80 individuals in the world had the same wealth as the poorest 50 percent of the entire population, some 3.5 billion people, Oxfam said. This was an even bigger concentration at the top than a year ago, when half the world's wealth was in the hands of 85 of the ultra rich.

Richest 1 percent will own more than rest combined by 2016 report Al Jazeera America

Rich getting richer Wealth increasingly concentrated in hands of few Oxfam says CTV News

At the same time, one in nine people don't have enough to eat and more than a billion people live on less than $1.25 a day, Oxfam said, ticking off statistics that paint a grim picture for all but the world's richest.

The charity is calling for a crackdown on tax avoidance by corporations and rich people, as well as increased investment in health and education and equal pay legislation.

-----------------------------------

Republicans think inherited wealth is earned and everyone has an equal opportunity. They see this as a "job well done".

The top twenty richest and 15 of them are Democrats, why don't they surrender their wealth? Many in Hollywood are among the richest, why don't they surrender their wealth?
Gates, Buffett, three of the Walton family, all one percenters, yet they don't surrender their wealth.

Before blaming the Republicans, why not focus on the hypocrites of the Democratic Party who actually have the wealth.

This is why I haven't bought the BS of the Democratic Party being the party of the poor or middle class. They are just as, if not more involved in the concentrating the wealth for the rich.

Two years the Democrats had tons of power, yet did nothing to disperse the wealth, in fact they created ACA that actually took more from the middle class.

"The top twenty richest and 15 of them are Democrats, why don't they surrender their wealth? Many in Hollywood are among the richest, why don't they surrender their wealth?
Gates, Buffett, three of the Walton family, all one percenters, yet they don't surrender their wealth."



Roll Call’s 50 Richest Members of Congress for 2014


The 50 Richest won’t set new standards for diversity. All are white. Women comprise 18 percent. There were 20 Democrats and 30 Republicans.

Roll Call s 50 Richest Members of Congress



... Of the 50 richest families, 28 mainly donate to Republicans and only seven contribute mainly to Democrats. Not all families stay on the same side of the political spectrum — 15 support candidates from both parties. The Walton family has traditionally donated to Republicans

Are America s Richest Families Republicans or Democrats - Forbes


YOU 'THINK' DEMS/LIBERALS WANT THEM TO 'SURRENDER THEIR WEALTH'??? LOL

HOW ABOUT JUST LESS INEQUALITY LIKE THE US HAD BEFORE REAGAN'S TRICKLE DOWN BS?

The point is, it isn't a party issue, both are owned by the 1%, for anyone to blame one party or the other is simply naive.

The thinking and similarity of how the rich think transcends party affiliation. Most of the rich are more concerned about the deficit, however the 99% are more concerned with the economy. Rich don't care what they earn, they care about what they keep.

The rich put on even ground with everyone else, would become rich again. It is a mindset, that most don't get or understand.

The conservative who originally posited it apparently disagrees with you???

"The thinking and similarity of how the rich think transcends party affiliation. Most of the rich are more concerned about the deficit"


LMAOROG

REALLY? REALLY? lol

NOTE THE EFFECTIVE TAX RATES HAVE A DIRECT CORRELATION TO US DEBT INCREASING THE PAST 34 YEARS???

Not sure why you think your posts need to be in caps, it must be a small dick issue. The no tea please guy seems to think all of his post need to be in bold. I see both of you as just needy and wanting attention. Have a good one.

 

[Flash]

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

I am sorry that is blatantly wrong. That may be the opinion of some idiot but he is wrong.

Nobody is poorer because somebody else is richer. In fact just the opposite is true. Wealth creates more wealth.

By the way shithead. The combined Federal, State and Local cost of government is over 40% of the GNP. That sucks and is the reason working people have a hard time. When I worked as an engineer and my wife a school teacher most years all the money that she made went to pay our taxes. No wonder families cannot get ahead. The cost of government is usually the largest single household expense of every American family, regardless of income.

The problem in this country is not the rich people, it is the friggin bloated out of control government at all levels.

The sooner you communists understand that the better off the country will be.

.

 

[zeke]

That added to the fact that he hasn't had an original thought in his past 2000 posts shows that he is a fucking wanker.

What are you marty? You have not refuted ONE post I have seen D23 make. NOT ONE.
And for a man of your supposed intelligence and understanding of complex economic issues, that should have been a piece of cake. But no. Not once have you shown what was wrong in the information posted. Why is that?

Instead all you right wingers do is cry the blues cause D23 is kicking your all's asses again.
PROVE HIM WRONG. How hard could that be for the mental giants you all think you are?
Is it because what D23 has posted in fact and you have nothing to counter these facts with. Other than calling him a wanker? LMAO. You should call him a spanker. That's what he does to you all; spanks you.

Nice job again D23.

 

[zeke]

Not sure why you think your posts need to be in caps, it must be a small dick issue.

See marty, here is another one of your kind. He's not worried about proving the information wrong. He's worried about D23's dick size.

How is that addressing the points made in D23's posts?

 

[Dad2three]

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

I am sorry that is blatantly wrong. That may be the opinion of some idiot but he is wrong.

Nobody is poorer because somebody else is richer. In fact just the opposite is true. Wealth creates more wealth.

By the way shithead. The combined Federal, State and Local cost of government is over 40% of the GNP. That sucks and is the reason working people have a hard time. When I worked as an engineer and my wife a school teacher most years all the money that she made went to pay our taxes. No wonder families cannot get ahead. The cost of government is usually the largest single household expense of every American family, regardless of income.

The problem in this country is not the rich people, it is the friggin bloated out of control government at all levels.

The sooner you communists understand that the better off the country will be.

.

Sure, cut out the actual INTENT of the posit and link, lol




Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game


There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. Profit equals income minus expenses. No more, no less. Subtract the right side of the equation from the left side and the answer is always zero. Hence the term, “zero-sum.”

So, to the extent a corporation can keep from sharing the wealth with workers—the ones who created the wealth to begin with—investors and executives get a bigger slice of the income pie and become richer.
The Zero-sum Nature of economics

 

[the_human_being]

The real problem is we have too many working full time living on poverty wages. They work 40 hours per week and still qualify for gov't assistance. I support them getting that assistance too as one can't feed themselves making $7.25 an hour, nor can they afford a car, place to live, etc. And there are some who criticize them. If they all had college degrees we wouldn't need low wage workers. Those jobs (not really jobs but they call them that) could be left unfilled.

Here's an idea: Don't work for minimum wage.

Right. No one is holding a gun on anyone and forcing them to work for minimum wages. If you're gonna work 40 hours a week anyways, why not make $30.00 per hour? It's the same amount of time.

I doubt someone making minimum wage has $30/hr anytime soon. But those people do have it within their power to not settle for a job paying only minimum wage.

Actually there are a lot of folks in the $30.00 per hour bracket. A lot of folks in the aircraft industry, in the construction trades, and in the services industry make good money without a college education. Many places have trades apprenticeship programs that can lead to a $30.00 per hour job after four years.

 

[Dad2three]

The real problem is we have too many working full time living on poverty wages. They work 40 hours per week and still qualify for gov't assistance. I support them getting that assistance too as one can't feed themselves making $7.25 an hour, nor can they afford a car, place to live, etc. And there are some who criticize them. If they all had college degrees we wouldn't need low wage workers. Those jobs (not really jobs but they call them that) could be left unfilled.

Here's an idea: Don't work for minimum wage.

Right. No one is holding a gun on anyone and forcing them to work for minimum wages. If you're gonna work 40 hours a week anyways, why not make $30.00 per hour? It's the same amount of time.

I doubt someone making minimum wage has $30/hr anytime soon. But those people do have it within their power to not settle for a job paying only minimum wage.

Actually there are a lot of folks in the $30.00 per hour bracket. A lot of folks in the aircraft industry, in the construction trades, and in the services industry make good money without a college education. Many places have trades apprenticeship programs that can lead to a $30.00 per hour job after four years.

Trades are stuck at 30+ year stagnate wages. $30 an hour after 4 years? Oh UNION jobs!

 

[the_human_being]

Let me see if I have this straight, Flash. You condemn me for living on tax free income, while I vote for democrats who want to raise taxes on my income?

Voting for Democrats makes you worthy of condemnation. They are the scum of America.

Taxing the wealthy in order to raise entitlements or make new entitlement programs somehow is a boon to the middle class? Indeed? Since when does an entitlement raise the standard of living for the middle class? All it does is raise up more voters for the Democrats who are now dependent upon the entitlement programs. Obama's legacy is that his programs have grown the dependency class and has shrunk the middle class. What raises a grou[p of people up and keeps them up is good well paying jobs, not government entitlement programs.

 

[the_human_being]

The real problem is we have too many working full time living on poverty wages. They work 40 hours per week and still qualify for gov't assistance. I support them getting that assistance too as one can't feed themselves making $7.25 an hour, nor can they afford a car, place to live, etc. And there are some who criticize them. If they all had college degrees we wouldn't need low wage workers. Those jobs (not really jobs but they call them that) could be left unfilled.

Here's an idea: Don't work for minimum wage.

Right. No one is holding a gun on anyone and forcing them to work for minimum wages. If you're gonna work 40 hours a week anyways, why not make $30.00 per hour? It's the same amount of time.

I doubt someone making minimum wage has $30/hr anytime soon. But those people do have it within their power to not settle for a job paying only minimum wage.

Actually there are a lot of folks in the $30.00 per hour bracket. A lot of folks in the aircraft industry, in the construction trades, and in the services industry make good money without a college education. Many places have trades apprenticeship programs that can lead to a $30.00 per hour job after four years.

Trades are stuck at 30+ year stagnate wages. $30 an hour after 4 years? Oh UNION jobs!

No, not union jobs. I don't know where you live but $30.00 an hour is the norm in the aircraft industry. Many electricians, pipefitters, brick masoons, etc., make $30.00 per hour.