Tell me . . .

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It's a big problem when people who work full time (no matter the job) and still cannot rise above the official poverty guidelines. That is scary.

The job does matter. If you're trying to make a career out of flipping burgers or sacking groceries you got no one to blame but yourself.

 

[ChrisL]

Let's examine this scenario. Now, you've taken away free healthcare, free birth control and other social service supports. A young person gets pregnant (because we all KNOW the young are impulsive and risk takers - the "nothing bad will ever happen to ME scenario). So they can't have an abortion because you've also made that illegal due to your religious beliefs or whatnot. Hmm. So, basically people are certainly no longer "free" or pursuing their own ideas of happiness.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Do you know why welfare can sometimes pay better than work? Yikes, now that should scare you.

I know exactly why.

Democrats (like Republicans) want to expand their voting base. The two major voting bases for Democrats are victims and government dependents.

Welfare was expanded under DumBama to create more government dependents. In fact, he doubled the food stamp roll with just one signature.

Commie Care? Another one. It was never designed to make sure every American had healthcare, it was designed to create more government dependents, because government dependents and victims usually vote Democrat. With pride, the White House announced that we now have 14 million more government dependents because of Commie Care.

When it comes to Democrat politics, you have to be weary of the man behind the curtain. Democrats really have no problem with Americans having guns. What they do have a problem with is Americans being able to defend themselves. They wish to take our guns away so we join the long list of victims. After all, if we cannot defend ourselves owning firearms, then we too will be victims in need of bigger government.

 

[Hiryuu]

They don't make as much in other countries, I'm sure. There are plenty of companies who do choose to stay in America. There are definitely benefits to doing business here because they stay around for some reason. Also, people in other countries kind of prove my point. One reason why it might be beneficial to a corporation to move to another country is because of lack of employee rights and regulations. Sweat shops so to speak where they actually DO work children all hours of the day and night. That is what happens in a corporatocracy. If it benefits the corporation . . .

It's a global market, they don't have to have their headquarters here to sell stuff here. Not to mention there are trillions of dollars in profits held overseas by domestic corporations that won't be repatriated into this country because of our high corporate tax rates. I mean you may buy into the idea that corporations are moving production overseas for cheap labor, but that isn't what I was talking about. I am talking about moving their corporate headquarters to places like Ireland that have a 15% corporate tax rate, and selling the same goods, made in the same places where they sell them now.

To Romney's benefit, he had a plan to repatriate several trillion dollars in corporate profits overseas. He wanted to give corporations a small tax break if they brought that money home during a five day period. Of course he really couldn't use that as a campaign platform when he was trying to get elected, even though it would have dumped a huge amount of revenues into our government coffers in one fatal swoop. Nit-wits that really don't understand how corporations and global markets work, would have made a big deal out of rich people getting a tax break, and never understand they are shooting themselves in the foot every chance they get.

 

[Rustic]

It's a big problem when people who work full time (no matter the job) and still cannot rise above the official poverty guidelines. That is scary.

Many people in urban areas think an entry-level job should be and pay like career... Someone should tell them the truth.

It should be more than what you get on welfare though.

No, not really an entry-level job is just that an entry-level job... temporary.
And only a stupid employer would not look At it as such.

 

[leftwinger]

How about we turn one closed prison into a safe place where people who can't make it go. From there buses can take residents to jobs and they can stay until they can afford to buy a car and pay rent. 3 squares a day. Free clinic.

But no more food stamps to go buy cool aid or give $60 in foodstamps for $30 cash.

You'd have to be desparate to go to that place but all you need to do is swallow your pride and you can get free money.

And real strict rules if you want to stay at the prison. Strip search. But if you want to feed your kids and live in your car you can.

Now ur hitin' da pipe? Who is gonna patrol it? Break up fights? Heat, cool it? Drive bus? What if driver is attacked? Can he shoot to kill? how far? door to door? how long of shower? Who cleans up? Insurance, dope, food?

You mean another shelter? Fine. Make it work this time......

 

[ChrisL]

So . . . some of you want to force people through unwanted pregnancies (pregnancy healthcare is EXPENSIVE), and then after the babe is born, you want to say "tough shit." Well, I'm sorry, but it really doesn't get much more COLD than that. People need to examine their ideologies and look at the bigger picture. This is NOT an ideal world. There are always going to be poor people because of whatever circumstances. When we have shortages at our LOCAL food banks and we always have, then you know you cannot rely on charitable contributions.

Even if the couple gives a child up for adoption, that child is going to be receiving some type of social services supports for some time before it's adoption.

 

[ChrisL]

It's a big problem when people who work full time (no matter the job) and still cannot rise above the official poverty guidelines. That is scary.

Many people in urban areas think an entry-level job should be and pay like career... Someone should tell them the truth.

It should be more than what you get on welfare though.

No, not really an entry-level job is just that an entry-level job... temporary.
And only a stupid employer would not look At it as such.

Well, as I'm sure you are aware, there is a population of people who live in America who will never have more than a high school education. This is REALITY.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's a big problem when people who work full time (no matter the job) and still cannot rise above the official poverty guidelines. That is scary.

There is a difference between "cannot" and "will not."

If you truly run into anybody that "cannot" then send them my way. Our industry needs over 60,000 new workers that they can't find. They are so desperate that they are bringing in foreigners to do the jobs Americans are too lazy to do. Many of the jobs are good paying, allows you the freedom to live anywhere in the country you wish, and guarantees that you will never have to be out of work for the rest of your life.

So let them know we are waiting for them.

 

[Rustic]

Let's examine this scenario. Now, you've taken away free healthcare, free birth control and other social service supports. A young person gets pregnant (because we all KNOW the young are impulsive and risk takers - the "nothing bad will ever happen to ME scenario). So they can't have an abortion because you've also made that illegal due to your religious beliefs or whatnot. Hmm. So, basically people are certainly no longer "free" or pursuing their own ideas of happiness.

Just because someone young they don't have to be dumb... That rhymes

 

[Rustic]

It's a big problem when people who work full time (no matter the job) and still cannot rise above the official poverty guidelines. That is scary.

Many people in urban areas think an entry-level job should be and pay like career... Someone should tell them the truth.

It should be more than what you get on welfare though.

No, not really an entry-level job is just that an entry-level job... temporary.
And only a stupid employer would not look At it as such.

Well, as I'm sure you are aware, there is a population of people who live in America who will never have more than a high school education. This is REALITY.

It may be a reality, but it's no excuse.
Socialism is always feeling sorry for itself...

 

[ChrisL]

Let's examine this scenario. Now, you've taken away free healthcare, free birth control and other social service supports. A young person gets pregnant (because we all KNOW the young are impulsive and risk takers - the "nothing bad will ever happen to ME scenario). So they can't have an abortion because you've also made that illegal due to your religious beliefs or whatnot. Hmm. So, basically people are certainly no longer "free" or pursuing their own ideas of happiness.

Just because someone young they don't have to be dumb... That rhymes

Again, this is the real world. This is not la-la fantasy land. We are talking about human beings who are FAR from perfect. NONE of us is perfect. People make mistakes in real life all the time, sometimes even ones that cost them their lives. We are all in this together, and I can see no good reason why anyone would OBJECT to their tax dollars helping out other people. Should there be some stipulations? Perhaps yes, reasonable and logical stipulations.

 

[ChrisL]

It's a big problem when people who work full time (no matter the job) and still cannot rise above the official poverty guidelines. That is scary.

Many people in urban areas think an entry-level job should be and pay like career... Someone should tell them the truth.

It should be more than what you get on welfare though.

No, not really an entry-level job is just that an entry-level job... temporary.
And only a stupid employer would not look At it as such.

Well, as I'm sure you are aware, there is a population of people who live in America who will never have more than a high school education. This is REALITY.

It may be a reality, but it's no excuse.
Socialism is always feeling sorry for itself...

It is not socialism. You are going to pay taxes either way! Why do you object to the measly amount that goes to help out your fellow citizens who are less well off than yourself???

 

[sealybobo]

Now now, no need to try to make this personal because you are getting flustered. How could you function at work with such a demeanor? You are probably an old retired man, am I right? You are from another generation and you are completely out of touch with what is happening TODAY in America and in the job market.

I am 46 years old and own my own bussiness, no thanks to socialism...

You know the middle class that buys your products because they have money in their pockets? Thank us liberals. My buddy owns a small business. He talks to other small business owners and in Michigan, during the bush years, people weren't spending money like they did in the 90s. The big 3 going to Mexico screwed a lot of small business' here.

Luckily trump and hillary both want to tariff corporations

The 90s were just a bubble that the foolish bought into.

If we didn't send all those jobs overseas it wouldn't have been so bad.

The problem is those companies have no choice they were taxed too much to survive here due to an overbearing federal government

Bullshit. GE pays no taxes. Stop the right wing talking points. If they weren't allowed to leave corporate profits and CEO pay just wouldn't be as high.

Higher wages and taxes mean lower profits true. But saying they had no choice is stupid. We were dumb to give them a choice. We gave them a choice. Ship jobs to where labor costs and taxes are low and ship their shit back? Are we stupid? If you want to sell your stuff here you have to make it here. It's just that simple.

But the way you frame your argument is totally disingenuous and flawed.

A. They had no choice? Bullshit. But of course a corporation is going to choose the cheapest option. They only care about one thing. And you want them to run the country?

B. They weren't taxed too much to survive. Who was? Give some examples.

Many union companies went bankrupt renigged on pensions and moved overseas on purpose

 

[Rustic]

Let's examine this scenario. Now, you've taken away free healthcare, free birth control and other social service supports. A young person gets pregnant (because we all KNOW the young are impulsive and risk takers - the "nothing bad will ever happen to ME scenario). So they can't have an abortion because you've also made that illegal due to your religious beliefs or whatnot. Hmm. So, basically people are certainly no longer "free" or pursuing their own ideas of happiness.

Just because someone young they don't have to be dumb... That rhymes

Again, this is the real world. This is not la-la fantasy land. We are talking about human beings who are FAR from perfect. NONE of us is perfect. People make mistakes in real life all the time, sometimes even ones that cost them their lives. We are all in this together, and I can see no good reason why anyone would OBJECT to their tax dollars helping out other people. Should there be some stipulations? Perhaps yes, reasonable and logical stipulations.

Being stupid is not an excuse, they fuck up and they move on.
The problem is relying on the federal government as a fair and just distribution mechanism is idiotic...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They don't make as much in other countries, I'm sure. There are plenty of companies who do choose to stay in America. There are definitely benefits to doing business here because they stay around for some reason. Also, people in other countries kind of prove my point. One reason why it might be beneficial to a corporation to move to another country is because of lack of employee rights and regulations. Sweat shops so to speak where they actually DO work children all hours of the day and night. That is what happens in a corporatocracy. If it benefits the corporation . . .

It's a global market, they don't have to have their headquarters here to sell stuff here. Not to mention there are trillions of dollars in profits held overseas by domestic corporations that won't be repatriated into this country because of our high corporate tax rates. I mean you may buy into the idea that corporations are moving production overseas for cheap labor, but that isn't what I was talking about. I am talking about moving their corporate headquarters to places like Ireland that have a 15% corporate tax rate, and selling the same goods, made in the same places where they sell them now.

To Romney's benefit, he had a plan to repatriate several trillion dollars in corporate profits overseas. He wanted to give corporations a small tax break if they brought that money home during a five day period. Of course he really couldn't use that as a campaign platform when he was trying to get elected, even though it would have dumped a huge amount of revenues into our government coffers in one fatal swoop. Nit-wits that really don't understand how corporations and global markets work, would have made a big deal out of rich people getting a tax break, and never understand they are shooting themselves in the foot every chance they get.

You are slightly wrong here. Romney did make that as one of his platforms and it was on his internet site.

HIs claim was that corporations made money in one place, and transferred it to another place but not the US because of our taxation policies. He believed that if we could get that money over the border tax free, it could create a lot of jobs here. I'm sure as a business man, he was absolutely correct even though I was never a Romney fan.

 

[OKTexas]

It is what is deemed necessary to help your fellow human beings and your fellow countrymen and women, mostly women and children.

I may deem it necessary that you buy me a Cadillac, but I ain't gonna hold my breath waiting for it.

They only need the basics. I don't advocate giving them cars either. The people of my country shouldn't have to suffer. We are certainly wealthy enough where we can give some measly crumbs to the poor.

Good to know you care about the Constitution about as much as maobama and the hildabitch. You may as well vote for her, she's into unconstitutional acts as well.

I don't feel that paying taxes violates my constitutional rights. It's the right thing to do as a citizen of my country.

I agree, what's unconstitutional is how they are spending tax dollars.

 

[Rustic]

Many people in urban areas think an entry-level job should be and pay like career... Someone should tell them the truth.

It should be more than what you get on welfare though.

No, not really an entry-level job is just that an entry-level job... temporary.
And only a stupid employer would not look At it as such.

Well, as I'm sure you are aware, there is a population of people who live in America who will never have more than a high school education. This is REALITY.

It may be a reality, but it's no excuse.
Socialism is always feeling sorry for itself...

It is not socialism. You are going to pay taxes either way! Why do you object to the measly amount that goes to help out your fellow citizens who are less well off than yourself???

Is that a forced choice?
Sorry, I never could count on the government…

 

[SmokeALib]

It is what is deemed necessary to help your fellow human beings and your fellow countrymen and women, mostly women and children.

I may deem it necessary that you buy me a Cadillac, but I ain't gonna hold my breath waiting for it.

They only need the basics. I don't advocate giving them cars either. The people of my country shouldn't have to suffer. We are certainly wealthy enough where we can give some measly crumbs to the poor.

Good to know you care about the Constitution about as much as maobama and the hildabitch. You may as well vote for her, she's into unconstitutional acts as well.

I don't feel that paying taxes violates my constitutional rights. It's the right thing to do as a citizen of my country.

How do you pay them? Do you work for one of those big bad corporations?

That's what I thought.

 

[ChrisL]

Let's examine this scenario. Now, you've taken away free healthcare, free birth control and other social service supports. A young person gets pregnant (because we all KNOW the young are impulsive and risk takers - the "nothing bad will ever happen to ME scenario). So they can't have an abortion because you've also made that illegal due to your religious beliefs or whatnot. Hmm. So, basically people are certainly no longer "free" or pursuing their own ideas of happiness.

Just because someone young they don't have to be dumb... That rhymes

Again, this is the real world. This is not la-la fantasy land. We are talking about human beings who are FAR from perfect. NONE of us is perfect. People make mistakes in real life all the time, sometimes even ones that cost them their lives. We are all in this together, and I can see no good reason why anyone would OBJECT to their tax dollars helping out other people. Should there be some stipulations? Perhaps yes, reasonable and logical stipulations.

Being stupid is not an excuse, they fuck up and they move on.
The problem is relying on the federal government as a fair and just distribution mechanism is idiotic...

No, some mistakes are life changing events. If some of you conservatives had your way, there would be TWICE as many poor people because you would allow people no opportunities at all to better themselves. Some of you don't want to make education more in reach, you don't want to pay into social services programs, and you want to force women to go through pregnancies that perhaps they cannot afford or don't want, and then what happens to all those little babies? Some of you really need to think things through because your approaches are completely unrealistic. We would have children and families and individuals dying inthe streets if you had your way. That is NOT the America that I want to see!