Senator Elizabeth Warren introduces '$10 a day' child care legislation

[progressive hunter]

Yeah, that was my point, retard. The law forces you to have a child.

And yes, no one can give birth if they are not pregnant. Did you figure this out by yourself or did someone help you?

law doesnt force anything,, it restricts murder,,

mother nature forces birth,, but only if youre prego,,

 

[Marener]

I.m counting everyone you stupid fuck,, its your links that ignore under 25 and over 54,,,

are you saying those people cant work and are useless??

Yes, it excludes under 25 and over 54 for a very good reason which I've explained several times. It seems you're not very good at understanding logic.

I'm not saying they can't work, but we are excluding them because below 25 there's a lot of students and above 55 there's a lot of retired people which muddies the data.

 

[progressive hunter]

Yes, it excludes under 25 and over 54 for a very good reason which I've explained several times. It seems you're not very good at understanding logic.

I'm not saying they can't work, but we are excluding them because below 25 there's a lot of students and above 55 there's a lot of retired people which muddies the data.

and it has nothing to do with my claim or the problem you claimed,,

 

[Marener]

funny I dont feel beat,,

and as was proven using your numbers we have an excess of 20-30 million workers,, which confirms my claim,,

You didn't prove anything. First you claimed there were 20 million SSDI, a number which you totally made up.

You continue to ignore that there are millions of students, stay at home parents and retired people that you consider to be available workers, but they're not.

 

[Marener]

and it has nothing to do with my claim or the problem you claimed,,

It has everything to do with it. Your claim is that we don't have a labor shortage. We do. There's not that many people who can work and don't. That's why the prime age labor participation is so high.

 

[progressive hunter]

You didn't prove anything. First you claimed there were 20 million SSDI, a number which you totally made up.

You continue to ignore that there are millions of students, stay at home parents and retired people that you consider to be available workers, but they're not.

no I did not claim that first or at all,,

go back and read it again,,

all of those other people are available to work if need be which is my claim,,

 

[progressive hunter]

It has everything to do with it. Your claim is that we don't have a labor shortage. We do. There's not that many people who can work and don't. That's why the prime age labor participation is so high.

who are you to tell me what has to do with my claim??

I have been very clear and specific and you keep moving the goal post or citing irrelevant numbers,,

 

[Billiejeens]

Don't you think that paying $50 a week for child care rather than $50 per day will help families deal with that inflation problem????

Wouldn't zero be better?

 

[progressive hunter]

Wouldn't zero be better?

hey call that slavery,,

 

[Billiejeens]

thats makes you a useless idiot not an american patriot,,

No, it does not.

 

[Billiejeens]

hey call that slavery,,

But to her point, Zero would be better.

 

[Marener]

no I did not claim that first or at all,,

go back and read it again,,

all of those other people are available to work if need be which is my claim,,

What does "available to work if need be" even mean?

Students don't need to work. They need to go to school. Stay at home parents don't need to work, they need to take care of their family. Retired people don't need to work, they planned ahead and are living off savings.

You failed to account for these people.

 

[progressive hunter]

No, it does not.

yes it does,,

 

[progressive hunter]

What does "available to work if need be" even mean?

Students don't need to work. They need to go to school. Stay at home parents don't need to work, they need to take care of their family. Retired people don't need to work, they planned ahead and are living off savings.

You failed to account for these people.

there you go moving the goal posts again,,

it means you can work if its needed,, more so if youre being paid and not working

 

[Marener]

who are you to tell me what has to do with my claim??

I have been very clear and specific and you keep moving the goal post or citing irrelevant numbers,,

I'm the one to tell you since you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

You started this conversation by claiming there's 260 million working age Americans which included people in their 90s. You made a joke out of yourself from the get go.

You refused to be clear or specific about where you were getting your data for "working age Americans" and hid the fact that you were including senior citizens and teenagers.

 

[Marener]

there you go moving the goal posts again,,

it means you can work if its needed,, more so if youre being paid and not working

You can work if needed by whom exactly? The person or the country?
Because the country need workers but these people (retirees, students, family caretakers) don't need work and that's not necessarily going to change, nor should it.

 

[progressive hunter]

I'm the one to tell you since you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

You started this conversation by claiming there's 260 million working age Americans which included people in their 90s. You made a joke out of yourself from the get go.

You refused to be clear or specific about where you were getting your data for "working age Americans" and hid the fact that you were including senior citizens and teenagers.

are you saying older people are not capable of working or dont?? I sure hope not,,

remember the 65 yr age was based on life expectancy and since then its gone way up,,

to me working age is any age where you can work and provide a service to others,, I started at 5 and that business genre has turned into a billion dollar a yr business, more so since the government regulated out the kids that use to do it,,

either way I gave you your government numbers and its still within my claim of tens of millions still able but not in the work force,,

 

[progressive hunter]

j

You can work if needed by whom exactly? The person or the country?
Because the country need workers but these people (retirees, students, family caretakers) don't need work and that's not necessarily going to change, nor should it.

jobs unfilled,,

 

[Marener]

are you saying older people are not capable of working or dont?? I sure hope not,,

remember the 65 yr age was based on life expectancy and since then its gone way up,,

to me working age is any age where you can work and provide a service to others,, I started at 5 and that business genre has turned into a billion dollar a yr business, more so since the government regulated out the kids that use to do it,,

either way I gave you your government numbers and its still within my claim of tens of millions still able but not in the work force,,

Many of them are not capable of working, that's a fact. Moreover, they're done working. They've earned their retirement.

If the Republican party wants to claim we don't have a labor shortage because we have millions of senior citizens who should be working, then go for it. But it's a stupid argument.

 

[Marener]

j
jobs unfilled,,

The jobs exist, but the people don't need them. You're not going to change that. They need to go to school. They need to take care of their families. They saved enough money they don't need a job.

You can't point at these people and claim that they should be working because you have no control over them.

We have a labor shortage because we don't have enough people who want a job. That's a fact.

Now, see that get worse when the population starts shrinking.