Why do democrats want more people on foodstamps and welfare

[danielpalos]

It has to do with economics and "growing the size of the pie."

Which you don't do by simply mandating an artificially high wage. If that were possible, we'd just set the MW to $100/hr and be done with poverty altogether.

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour. The left subscribes to rational choice theory whenever possible.

Whenever possible?! You mean whenever convenient.

Social costs also have to be considered. The right wing seems to care about merely lucre.

Without lucre you have nothing with which to pay the demands. The left wing seems to think that they can just mandate a bunch of stuff with no regard for reality.

The democrats actually ran a budget surplus. The republicans financed tax cuts for the rich and put it on the Peoples' dime, coming into an election cycle.

 

[hadit]

I don't know, I don't work in the executive suite. I do know, however, that you cannot maintain over the long term jobs that don't generate enough revenue to cover what they cost. I don't see how that's even controversial. You can't just say, "They can afford it" without looking at all the ramifications.

It has to do with economics and "growing the size of the pie."

Which you don't do by simply mandating an artificially high wage. If that were possible, we'd just set the MW to $100/hr and be done with poverty altogether.

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour. The left subscribes to rational choice theory whenever possible.

Sadly, with you that's not possible. You just keep repeating the same nonsense over and over.

in other words, you got nothing but repeal coming into an election cycle. I recommend, better solutions at lower cost.

No, you recommend a bunch of blargling. Your arguments have all been systematically destroyed many times, yet you seem to think they're still relevant.

 

[hadit]

Which you don't do by simply mandating an artificially high wage. If that were possible, we'd just set the MW to $100/hr and be done with poverty altogether.

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour. The left subscribes to rational choice theory whenever possible.

Whenever possible?! You mean whenever convenient.

Social costs also have to be considered. The right wing seems to care about merely lucre.

Without lucre you have nothing with which to pay the demands. The left wing seems to think that they can just mandate a bunch of stuff with no regard for reality.

The democrats actually ran a budget surplus. The republicans financed tax cuts for the rich and put it on the Peoples' dime, coming into an election cycle.

"The democrats" did no such thing.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

Isn't it better for Americans to have jobs and self respect?

Democratic Party on Welfare & Poverty

I'm always suspicious of organizations that refer to themselves as journalists who also ask for donations.
Nice blog. Or op-ed page.
About OnTheIssues.org

 

[Thinker101]

I don't know, I don't work in the executive suite. I do know, however, that you cannot maintain over the long term jobs that don't generate enough revenue to cover what they cost. I don't see how that's even controversial. You can't just say, "They can afford it" without looking at all the ramifications.

It has to do with economics and "growing the size of the pie."

Which you don't do by simply mandating an artificially high wage. If that were possible, we'd just set the MW to $100/hr and be done with poverty altogether.

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour. The left subscribes to rational choice theory whenever possible.

Whenever possible?! You mean whenever convenient.

Social costs also have to be considered. The right wing seems to care about merely lucre.

Ok, and what social costs need to be considered?

 

[Papageorgio]

The taxpayer feeds, houses and provides healthcare to those who make them a profit.

That is coddling employers at the taxpayers expense
To make it worse.......employers now have to pay half the taxes that they used to pay to support their workers

Then the solution if for taxpayers to no longer pay them. It has nothing to do with what a business pays their workers. There is no obligation that we pay lowlifes who made bad decisions in life or only want to work 20 hours a week.

Let them starve

Good solution......that will fix them for being poor

I'll take up bank robber if given that choice.

Or you could find a better paying job, or start your own business. Interesting that gaining money illegally is your solution.

Should he move to an alleged, Right to Work State and advocate for a legal right to work?

Idiot!

 

[rightwinger]

Then the solution if for taxpayers to no longer pay them. It has nothing to do with what a business pays their workers. There is no obligation that we pay lowlifes who made bad decisions in life or only want to work 20 hours a week.

Let them starve

Good solution......that will fix them for being poor

I'll take up bank robber if given that choice.

Or you could find a better paying job, or start your own business. Interesting that gaining money illegally is your solution.

Should he move to an alleged, Right to Work State and advocate for a legal right to work?

Idiot!

You mean people do not have a right to work in those states?

 

[Papageorgio]

Let them starve

Good solution......that will fix them for being poor

I'll take up bank robber if given that choice.

Or you could find a better paying job, or start your own business. Interesting that gaining money illegally is your solution.

Should he move to an alleged, Right to Work State and advocate for a legal right to work?

Idiot!

You mean people do not have a right to work in those states?

Not sure what that has to do with my comment.

 

[danielpalos]

It has to do with economics and "growing the size of the pie."

Which you don't do by simply mandating an artificially high wage. If that were possible, we'd just set the MW to $100/hr and be done with poverty altogether.

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour. The left subscribes to rational choice theory whenever possible.

Sadly, with you that's not possible. You just keep repeating the same nonsense over and over.

in other words, you got nothing but repeal coming into an election cycle. I recommend, better solutions at lower cost.

No, you recommend a bunch of blargling. Your arguments have all been systematically destroyed many times, yet you seem to think they're still relevant.

in other words, you got nothing but repeal coming into an election cycle. I recommend, better solutions at lower cost.

 

[danielpalos]

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour. The left subscribes to rational choice theory whenever possible.

Whenever possible?! You mean whenever convenient.

Social costs also have to be considered. The right wing seems to care about merely lucre.

Without lucre you have nothing with which to pay the demands. The left wing seems to think that they can just mandate a bunch of stuff with no regard for reality.

The democrats actually ran a budget surplus. The republicans financed tax cuts for the rich and put it on the Peoples' dime, coming into an election cycle.

"The democrats" did no such thing.

Yes, they did. It was a democrat administration not a republican administration.

 

[jillian]

Why do conservatives make shit up and lie all the time ?

Why do you deny what you are and what you believe in?

because your making things up in your little trumptard head does not mean it is reality. in fact, if you made it up in your little head, it isn't reality.

wackadoodle.

 

[danielpalos]

It has to do with economics and "growing the size of the pie."

Which you don't do by simply mandating an artificially high wage. If that were possible, we'd just set the MW to $100/hr and be done with poverty altogether.

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour. The left subscribes to rational choice theory whenever possible.

Whenever possible?! You mean whenever convenient.

Social costs also have to be considered. The right wing seems to care about merely lucre.

Ok, and what social costs need to be considered?

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, anyway.

 

[danielpalos]

Let them starve

Good solution......that will fix them for being poor

I'll take up bank robber if given that choice.

Or you could find a better paying job, or start your own business. Interesting that gaining money illegally is your solution.

Should he move to an alleged, Right to Work State and advocate for a legal right to work?

Idiot!

You mean people do not have a right to work in those states?

No, they currently don't. We need Persons in those States to advocate for Truth in Legislative Advertising laws.

 

[Papageorgio]

Which you don't do by simply mandating an artificially high wage. If that were possible, we'd just set the MW to $100/hr and be done with poverty altogether.

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour. The left subscribes to rational choice theory whenever possible.

Sadly, with you that's not possible. You just keep repeating the same nonsense over and over.

in other words, you got nothing but repeal coming into an election cycle. I recommend, better solutions at lower cost.

No, you recommend a bunch of blargling. Your arguments have all been systematically destroyed many times, yet you seem to think they're still relevant.

in other words, you got nothing but repeal coming into an election cycle. I recommend, better solutions at lower cost.

So what is your better solution at a lower cost.

 

[Hal-9000]

Why do conservatives make shit up and lie all the time ?

Why do you deny what you are and what you believe in?

because your making things up in your little trumptard head does not mean it is reality. in fact, if you made it up in your little head, it isn't reality.

wackadoodle.

What did I make up, be specific little one

 

[Papageorgio]

I'll take up bank robber if given that choice.

Or you could find a better paying job, or start your own business. Interesting that gaining money illegally is your solution.

Should he move to an alleged, Right to Work State and advocate for a legal right to work?

Idiot!

You mean people do not have a right to work in those states?

No, they currently don't. We need Persons in those States to advocate for Truth in Legislative Advertising laws.

You could first target Congress and the "Affordable HealthCare Act", that could be the first change.

Then you could go work on the "Fairness Doctrine."

 

[rightwinger]

I'll take up bank robber if given that choice.

Or you could find a better paying job, or start your own business. Interesting that gaining money illegally is your solution.

Should he move to an alleged, Right to Work State and advocate for a legal right to work?

Idiot!

You mean people do not have a right to work in those states?

No, they currently don't. We need Persons in those States to advocate for Truth in Legislative Advertising laws.

You mean they should have named it the ....Right to be Paid Less Act

 

[rightwinger]

Or you could find a better paying job, or start your own business. Interesting that gaining money illegally is your solution.

Should he move to an alleged, Right to Work State and advocate for a legal right to work?

Idiot!

You mean people do not have a right to work in those states?

No, they currently don't. We need Persons in those States to advocate for Truth in Legislative Advertising laws.

You could first target Congress and the "Affordable HealthCare Act", that could be the first change.

Then you could go work on the "Fairness Doctrine."

My favorite was the "Patriot Act"
Who could vote against something like that?

 

[hadit]

Whenever possible?! You mean whenever convenient.

Social costs also have to be considered. The right wing seems to care about merely lucre.

Without lucre you have nothing with which to pay the demands. The left wing seems to think that they can just mandate a bunch of stuff with no regard for reality.

The democrats actually ran a budget surplus. The republicans financed tax cuts for the rich and put it on the Peoples' dime, coming into an election cycle.

"The democrats" did no such thing.

Yes, they did. It was a democrat administration not a republican administration.

No, it was a democrat president with a Republican House and Senate. Bubba could sign nothing that wasn't sent to him from the Republicans. "The democrats" didn't do it, it was done by both parties working together.

 

[hadit]

Let them starve

Good solution......that will fix them for being poor

I'll take up bank robber if given that choice.

Or you could find a better paying job, or start your own business. Interesting that gaining money illegally is your solution.

Should he move to an alleged, Right to Work State and advocate for a legal right to work?

Idiot!

You mean people do not have a right to work in those states?

Daniel likes to pretend "right to work" means that he has the right to collect unemployment without having to have held a job first. You have to translate.