Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Everyone should be paid based two things:
1. Paid what their job is worth
At the same time, however, all workers should be -
2. Paid a living wage.
That means enough to cover the rent, the bills, and to put food on the table. You can be poor, but you are still surviving.
In this thread it's been repeatedly explained why that's not a good idea.
Yet you still cling to it.
Why?
I don't care why you think it isn't a good idea. Its about time y'all took care of your workers!
Should all jobs be required to pay at least a living wage?
Assume a living wage for the area, not a national one-size-fits-all standard.
Why or why not?
Should all jobs be required to pay at least a living wage?
Assume a living wage for the area, not a national one-size-fits-all standard.
Why or why not?
Should all USMB posters be required to post something intelligent?
Seems like that would reduce the free market space of posts.
WHOA, NOW RED ALERT, YOU JUST WENT FULL STALINIST COMMIE. Or rather you are holding the position that there is a subclass of Americans which dont deserve the opportunity to save for the future. retirement, a business of their own, a home: you say they deserve nothing. The word you are looking for to apply to this class of people is slave and that emotion is hatred, and as such, you hate Americans.
How do you get that from me asking what about the opportunities for those who don't need that much money?
WHOA, NOW RED ALERT, YOU JUST WENT FULL STALINIST COMMIE. Or rather you are holding the position that there is a subclass of Americans which dont deserve the opportunity to save for the future. retirement, a business of their own, a home: you say they deserve nothing. The word you are looking for to apply to this class of people is slave and that emotion is hatred, and as such, you hate Americans.
How do you get that from me asking what about the opportunities for those who don't need that much money?
Ok, by what metric do you dictate to Americans that they are this class of sub-person that doesnt deserve enough to make ends meet?
Ok, by what metric do you dictate to Americans that they are this class of sub-person that doesnt deserve enough to make ends meet?
Republicans built the national debt, idiot. Everytime we had a red president, they ramped the deficit up, everytime there was a blue president, deficit reduction was their agenda and they succeeded at it. The deficit was nothing which bush came in and was 1.4t when he left- if you think obama can just turn off a 1.4t budgetary shortfall by flicking his wrist, you are a colossal idiot; and if you have a problem with a democrat being left a 1.4t mess, then you would have a problem with the republicans making that mess if you wernt a hypocrate. Republicans built the debt as part of their strategy to destroy America: .
You prove again and again how stupid and clueless you are.
Total debt at the end of 2008 was $10T. Now it is 17.5T. Who was president during that time? Who ran Congress for most of that time? What steps did Obama take to rein in spending? This is pretty simple, except if you're a partisan fucktard like you.
US Federal Debt by Year 2008_2017 - Charts Tables History
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time
it was 10.5t, now its 16.5t. bush is the one who left the country in shambles. Its not a spending problem, retard, the economy imploded, so revenues are gutted. Thats on top of the trickle down nonsense not paying out.
agreed but there again rent for what ? bills for what and what food ??Everyone should be paid based two things:
1. Paid what their job is worth
At the same time, however, all workers should be -
2. Paid a living wage.
That means enough to cover the rent, the bills, and to put food on the table. You can be poor, but you are still surviving.
I noticed you were responding to oldstyle. He has again said that there was no such thing as Trickle Down Economics. Which is, in a way, sort of true. There was a named theory, but it never worked. But the big lie is when Oldstyle tells you that it was a theory invented by critics of supply side economics. It was NOT. It was a theory developed by republicans to help sell supply side economics. From what most believe, first used in a speech by David Stockman, Reagan's budget director."If you're going to say we have a spending problem, articulate what precisely we are spending too much on. attacking ss/m.aid/m.care cost republicans the election, tanf has a work component so attacking welfare doesnt work anymore, and the military is a sacred cow to republicans so that pretty much eliminates everything." ReallyMeow
Making the point that unless we reform entitlements we as a nation will become insolvent may have cost Republicans the last election, ReallyMeow but that's only because there are so many totally clueless people like yourself who think we can continue on the way we are. The fact that the Left accused everyone who called on us to do the fiscally sane thing and fix entitlements, of trying to "gut" Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and got away with it doesn't make it so.
Once again you've let your political beliefs trump common sense and simple math.
The notion that you need me to explain to you HOW it is the our Federal Government is wasting money tells me you're not being serious about a serious issue. The inefficiency of Washington is staggering to be quite honest with you. We blow money on things that are so ridiculous that it boggles the mind when we're already so far in debt. The waste is so rampant and ingrained into the government culture that my solution would be automatic across the board cuts to all departments...and yes, that would include the military. Politicians always have an excuse why their pet project or department shouldn't face the budget ax. It's obvious they don't have the backbone to make the cuts that are needed so I would take that decision right out of their hands. If Barack Obama were REALLY a leader and REALLY cared about fixing the deficit he'd hold everyone in governments feet to the fire and force them to clean up their act. That won't happen though because Barry likes big government...the bigger the better. Instead of shrinking the deficit he's increasing it dramatically.
My point exactly, you cant name ONE. Do you think everyone forgot how republicans spent us into this hole in the first place? You're not fooling anyone.
Then why from the start of Reagan to 08 did we have historical growth?
b/c a republican unleashed the free market.
Not really
Republicans built the national debt, idiot. Everytime we had a red president, they ramped the deficit up, everytime there was a blue president, deficit reduction was their agenda and they succeeded at it. The deficit was nothing which bush came in and was 1.4t when he left- if you think obama can just turn off a 1.4t budgetary shortfall by flicking his wrist, you are a colossal idiot; and if you have a problem with a democrat being left a 1.4t mess, then you would have a problem with the republicans making that mess if you wernt a hypocrate. Republicans built the debt as part of their strategy to destroy America: .
You prove again and again how stupid and clueless you are.
Total debt at the end of 2008 was $10T. Now it is 17.5T. Who was president during that time? Who ran Congress for most of that time? What steps did Obama take to rein in spending? This is pretty simple, except if you're a partisan fucktard like you.
US Federal Debt by Year 2008_2017 - Charts Tables History
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time
it was 10.5t, now its 16.5t. bush is the one who left the country in shambles. Its not a spending problem, retard, the economy imploded, so revenues are gutted. Thats on top of the trickle down nonsense not paying out.
Should all jobs be required to pay at least a living wage?
Assume a living wage for the area, not a national one-size-fits-all standard.
Why or why not?
Should all USMB posters be required to post something intelligent?
Seems like that would reduce the free market space of posts.
Is that a dig against me?
Just curious.
Should all USMB posters be required to post something intelligent?
Seems like that would reduce the free market space of posts.
Is that a dig against me?
Just curious.
Not at all. It is only a dig against an irrational concept. You are probably a friendly person whos' company I would enjoy if we ever met.
You assume a lot of movement within income segments. It is in fact not that great. But, forget the 2%. What percent of the income growth over the past years do you think the upper 1% received. Take a look at the study below, taken from government numbers, and you will see that the upper 1% got 93%, while the remaining 99% shared the remaining 7%.how could we with a liberal communist president who voted to the left of Bernie Sanders??
S&P 500 hit 1500 today.
The wealthiest 2% of Americans have had no problem increasing wealth in the last four years, corporations are showing increased profits
For some reason, it is not trickling down with higher wages
That's not true. PLENTY of the wealthiest 2% aren't even wealthy anymore due to the last four years. The studies cited that show otherwise make the assumption that income and wealth brackets are static and they are not. SOME corporations are showing increased profits. MOST are not.
Ok, by what metric do you dictate to Americans that they are this class of sub-person that doesnt deserve enough to make ends meet?How do you get that from me asking what about the opportunities for those who don't need that much money?
I never said that there were people that didn't deserve enough to make ends meet. I asked what about the opportunities for those who don't need that much money? Low level starter jobs by teenagers, college students, people working part time second jobs, people looking to change careers, retirees looking for extra money without much responsibility, etc.
Should those jobs that provide low marginal value to companies just disappear?
economics does, and spare me the "its too complicated for me to understand, so it has no answer" argument.too stupid!! who decides what it means to make ends meet?? In America many of the poor own their own homes!!!Ok, by what metric do you dictate to Americans that they are this class of sub-person that doesnt deserve enough to make ends meet?
Attention, Retard: Bush has not been president for 4 years. Who added $6T in 4 years, with more to come?
Revenues are not gutted.'
In 2007 revenue was an all time high of $2.57T. Now it is $2.45T. So why is the deficit higher now by much more than that?
WH: Federal Revenue Hit All-Time High of $2.57T?In 2007 Under Bush | CNS News
(deficit 400 billion)Receipts for fiscal year 2007 were $2.4 trillion. The President's actual budget for 2007 totals $2.8 trillion.
The Obama administration's February 2012 budget request contained $2.902 trillion in receipts and $3.803 trillion in outlays, for a deficit of $901 billion.
$407 billion (estimated)
$1.413 trillion (actual)[
oddly specific years, ok Im game
2013 United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2007 United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(deficit 400 billion)
The Obama administration's February 2012 budget request contained $2.902 trillion in receipts and $3.803 trillion in outlays, for a deficit of $901 billion.
Now what happened in between?
2009 United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
$407 billion (estimated)
$1.413 trillion (actual)[
nuff said.
Which would explain why it has started to decline. And is projected to decline every year for the next 10.oddly specific years, ok Im game
2013 United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2007 United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(deficit 400 billion)
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/42905The Obama administration's February 2012 budget request contained $2.902 trillion in receipts and $3.803 trillion in outlays, for a deficit of $901 billion.
Now what happened in between?
2009 United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
$407 billion (estimated)
$1.413 trillion (actual)[
nuff said.
You are looking at budget requests, not actual spending. Fail. You cannot get past the increase in total debt from 2007 to today.
We owe more today than we ever did under Bush. Who controlled Congress for most of that time? Who submitted spending bills for most of that time?
Obama owns this deficit. He has done nothing to cut it. Nothing.
I am sure you think I missed the actual number because you are a dumb ass.We are $6T in debt more now than we were 4 years ago. We continue to add that to that total. I am sure you missed that because you are a dumbass.
I never said that there were people that didn't deserve enough to make ends meet. I asked what about the opportunities for those who don't need that much money? Low level starter jobs by teenagers, college students, people working part time second jobs, people looking to change careers, retirees looking for extra money without much responsibility, etc.
Should those jobs that provide low marginal value to companies just disappear?
I am sure you think I missed the actual number because you are a dumb ass.We are $6T in debt more now than we were 4 years ago. We continue to add that to that total. I am sure you missed that because you are a dumbass.
Your numbers are actual numbers. If you look at the national debt based on real inflation adjusted numbers, then the number has increased from $14.4T to $15.8T. And about 85% of the $14.4T was from Republican administrations.
