You won’t believe how little $8.25 an hour buys

[Wyatt earp]

You won t believe how little 8.25 an hour buys Oxfam America First Person Blog
Disgusting that this is possible in the "richest country in the world"

Cleaning the movie theater is part of my daughter's duties. But does her job actually pay enough to live on? Photo: Mary Babic/Oxfam America
27Tweet

54Like

1+1

For my hard-working family and friends who earn just above the US minimum wage, a paycheck doesn’t go very far.

My daughter struck it lucky when she landed a job for $8.25 an hour at the local movie theater. They pay 25 cents more than the Massachusetts minimum wage (which is already 75 cents more than the federal wage); they don’t charge her for the monogrammed black polo shirt that constitutes her uniform (unlike some businesses); they let her know her hours a few days ahead; and they are, simply put, nice people: film nerds who enjoy keeping an independent theater alive, who don’t mind if she reads a book while sitting in the box office and waiting for the next rush.

Still, it’s a business. Her hours each week never mount up to the point where they’d be responsible for her healthcare (30 hours a week or more); her schedule varies widely; when it’s slow, they let her go (and it’s been a slow year for movies). And, to reiterate: they pay $8.25 an hour.

You can’t blame them; they’re generous at paying more than the legally required wage. But it is, even for my daughter, a measly wage. She lives at home, but she’s scraping together savings for college, living very simply, contributing to the household.

So what her earnings really translate to? I wondered, after seeing this helpful and harrowing piece on What Life Really Costs at $7.25 an Hour.

First, there’s transportation. After taxes, she brings home $7.62 an hour. Last week, after working for 27 hours (and commuting for about 8 hours), she got a check for $205.71. Just to get there and back: Slice the bus fare off the top (2.10 each way; 4.20 round trip; times four): 205.71 – 16.80 = 188.91.

A sandwich = one hour’s work. Some days, when her shift stretches longer than eight hours, she gets a plain chicken sandwich at the place next door: 7.43 (with tax). So she works a full hour to buy a sandwich. Without a drink.

A book = three hours. She loves books and music, and we visit the library every week. But sometimes she likes to buy the ones she loves the very most. Her favorite graphic novelist, Emily Carroll, just published a beautiful new book, Through the Woods. On Amazon, discounted, it’s $18.10. So she worked almost three hours to buy it.

Work shoes cost a day’s pay. We do most of our shopping at Goodwill, but every once in a while, she indulges. She really needed a good pair of shoes as she stands most of the time at work. She got a cheap pair of Nikes at around $50: Basically, a day’s pay.

And what about college tuition? Again, she got lucky: Smith College offered her a whopping scholarship, covering about half the cost. Which left her with a bill of (only) $24,000 for a year, not counting books, art supplies, etc.

So if she wants to cover one year of college – at this deeply discounted price – she’s going to work 3150 hours. Or 61 hours a week for a year. If she wants to go for the full four years… it would take 12,598 hours. Of course, she couldn’t eat. Or pay rent, take the bus, buy shoes, or get her hair cut. At least she can go to the movies…

So she’s lucky in some ways. But so many workers do not enjoy her luck. In fact, the vast majority of low-wage workers do not match this “Poster Child” profile of the minimum wage worker.

Source: the Economic Policy Institute.
Indeed, the average age of low-wage workers is 35. A third have dependent children at home. In our (extremely fortunate)Congressional district, 34,000 working families are using food stamps, and 71,000 are living below the poverty line .

She lives in Taxachusetts I don't give a fuck, they vote for democrats and high taxes, fuck them crying babies

Btw why don't she bring in a sack lunch? Is it beanth those snobs?

 

[Meathead]

There are whiners and bleeding hearts, and then there are those that work hard, learn and make a better life for themselves and their families. These groups are largely mutually exclusive.

Which needs to be supported?

Billions live in poverty, many working 60+ hours a week to barely scrape by. Whiners?

I had little doubt that you were in the latter group. My hat's off to the billions who worked their asses off and made a better life for themselves instead of whining about it. That would be you and that woman who wrote the article about her daughter having to work 30 hours a week.

The horror! The horror!

How many people live on less then $10 a day? How many live in third world countries? How many people desperately want to get education but can't afford it or have access? The article talked about how hard it is to live on low wages, and shows how hard it is to move up when earning so little.

Sorry chum. Her daughter takes in about $250 a week for 30 hours of work and supports no one.

Stop whining!

We're not talking about a specific person, but if you want to put it down to that, your essentially saying her daughter should fuck herself and get a college education with money that comes from... Oh wait, the job which barely pays enough to hold down an apartment. Flawless. Fuck off.

Her little princess lives at home.

It's got to be tough being a socialist after the fall of the USSR and more recently the socialists in Greece falling to capitalism, badly.

 

[Socialist]

You won t believe how little 8.25 an hour buys Oxfam America First Person Blog
Disgusting that this is possible in the "richest country in the world"

Cleaning the movie theater is part of my daughter's duties. But does her job actually pay enough to live on? Photo: Mary Babic/Oxfam America
27Tweet

54Like

1+1

For my hard-working family and friends who earn just above the US minimum wage, a paycheck doesn’t go very far.

My daughter struck it lucky when she landed a job for $8.25 an hour at the local movie theater. They pay 25 cents more than the Massachusetts minimum wage (which is already 75 cents more than the federal wage); they don’t charge her for the monogrammed black polo shirt that constitutes her uniform (unlike some businesses); they let her know her hours a few days ahead; and they are, simply put, nice people: film nerds who enjoy keeping an independent theater alive, who don’t mind if she reads a book while sitting in the box office and waiting for the next rush.

Still, it’s a business. Her hours each week never mount up to the point where they’d be responsible for her healthcare (30 hours a week or more); her schedule varies widely; when it’s slow, they let her go (and it’s been a slow year for movies). And, to reiterate: they pay $8.25 an hour.

You can’t blame them; they’re generous at paying more than the legally required wage. But it is, even for my daughter, a measly wage. She lives at home, but she’s scraping together savings for college, living very simply, contributing to the household.

So what her earnings really translate to? I wondered, after seeing this helpful and harrowing piece on What Life Really Costs at $7.25 an Hour.

First, there’s transportation. After taxes, she brings home $7.62 an hour. Last week, after working for 27 hours (and commuting for about 8 hours), she got a check for $205.71. Just to get there and back: Slice the bus fare off the top (2.10 each way; 4.20 round trip; times four): 205.71 – 16.80 = 188.91.

A sandwich = one hour’s work. Some days, when her shift stretches longer than eight hours, she gets a plain chicken sandwich at the place next door: 7.43 (with tax). So she works a full hour to buy a sandwich. Without a drink.

A book = three hours. She loves books and music, and we visit the library every week. But sometimes she likes to buy the ones she loves the very most. Her favorite graphic novelist, Emily Carroll, just published a beautiful new book, Through the Woods. On Amazon, discounted, it’s $18.10. So she worked almost three hours to buy it.

Work shoes cost a day’s pay. We do most of our shopping at Goodwill, but every once in a while, she indulges. She really needed a good pair of shoes as she stands most of the time at work. She got a cheap pair of Nikes at around $50: Basically, a day’s pay.

And what about college tuition? Again, she got lucky: Smith College offered her a whopping scholarship, covering about half the cost. Which left her with a bill of (only) $24,000 for a year, not counting books, art supplies, etc.

So if she wants to cover one year of college – at this deeply discounted price – she’s going to work 3150 hours. Or 61 hours a week for a year. If she wants to go for the full four years… it would take 12,598 hours. Of course, she couldn’t eat. Or pay rent, take the bus, buy shoes, or get her hair cut. At least she can go to the movies…

So she’s lucky in some ways. But so many workers do not enjoy her luck. In fact, the vast majority of low-wage workers do not match this “Poster Child” profile of the minimum wage worker.

Source: the Economic Policy Institute.
Indeed, the average age of low-wage workers is 35. A third have dependent children at home. In our (extremely fortunate)Congressional district, 34,000 working families are using food stamps, and 71,000 are living below the poverty line .

She lives in Taxachusetts I don't give a fuck, they vote for democrats and high taxes, fuck them crying babies

Btw why don't she bring in a sack lunch? Is it beanth those snobs?

Jesus Christ, what the hell is wrong with you people? It doesn't matter what state she lives in, should we never help anyone if they're in a place you don't like?

 

[Socialist]

Billions live in poverty, many working 60+ hours a week to barely scrape by. Whiners?

I had little doubt that you were in the latter group. My hat's off to the billions who worked their asses off and made a better life for themselves instead of whining about it. That would be you and that woman who wrote the article about her daughter having to work 30 hours a week.

The horror! The horror!

How many people live on less then $10 a day? How many live in third world countries? How many people desperately want to get education but can't afford it or have access? The article talked about how hard it is to live on low wages, and shows how hard it is to move up when earning so little.

Sorry chum. Her daughter takes in about $250 a week for 30 hours of work and supports no one.

Stop whining!

We're not talking about a specific person, but if you want to put it down to that, your essentially saying her daughter should fuck herself and get a college education with money that comes from... Oh wait, the job which barely pays enough to hold down an apartment. Flawless. Fuck off.

Her little princess lives at home.

It's got to be tough being a socialist after the fall of the USSR and more recently the socialists in Greece falling to capitalism, badly.

The USSR collapsed due to revisionism bud, talk to some historians, and the GDP plummeted after the USSR fell, and many people want it back. Greece failed because of people not paying taxes.. And the retirement age, neither of which have anything to do with socialism.

 

[Meathead]

I had little doubt that you were in the latter group. My hat's off to the billions who worked their asses off and made a better life for themselves instead of whining about it. That would be you and that woman who wrote the article about her daughter having to work 30 hours a week.

The horror! The horror!

How many people live on less then $10 a day? How many live in third world countries? How many people desperately want to get education but can't afford it or have access? The article talked about how hard it is to live on low wages, and shows how hard it is to move up when earning so little.

Sorry chum. Her daughter takes in about $250 a week for 30 hours of work and supports no one.

Stop whining!

We're not talking about a specific person, but if you want to put it down to that, your essentially saying her daughter should fuck herself and get a college education with money that comes from... Oh wait, the job which barely pays enough to hold down an apartment. Flawless. Fuck off.

Her little princess lives at home.

It's got to be tough being a socialist after the fall of the USSR and more recently the socialists in Greece falling to capitalism, badly.

The USSR collapsed due to revisionism bud, talk to some historians, and the GDP plummeted after the USSR fell, and many people want it back. Greece failed because of people not paying taxes.. And the retirement age, neither of which have anything to do with socialism.

You're a dingbat. |Greece collapsed economically because it could not live off the money of others. The USSR fell because socialism does not work outside of a very few wealth-producing homogeneous states, which was certainly not Greece of the Soviet Block.

 

[Socialist]

How many people live on less then $10 a day? How many live in third world countries? How many people desperately want to get education but can't afford it or have access? The article talked about how hard it is to live on low wages, and shows how hard it is to move up when earning so little.

Sorry chum. Her daughter takes in about $250 a week for 30 hours of work and supports no one.

Stop whining!

We're not talking about a specific person, but if you want to put it down to that, your essentially saying her daughter should fuck herself and get a college education with money that comes from... Oh wait, the job which barely pays enough to hold down an apartment. Flawless. Fuck off.

Her little princess lives at home.

It's got to be tough being a socialist after the fall of the USSR and more recently the socialists in Greece falling to capitalism, badly.

The USSR collapsed due to revisionism bud, talk to some historians, and the GDP plummeted after the USSR fell, and many people want it back. Greece failed because of people not paying taxes.. And the retirement age, neither of which have anything to do with socialism.

You're a dingbat. |Greece collapsed economically because it could not live off the money of others. The USSR fell because socialism does not work outside of a very few wealth-producing homogeneous states, which was certainly not Greece of the Soviet Block.

Sorry, but your failure to understand socialism tells me all I need to know, educate yourself, I have videos to help with that in my signature.

 

[TemplarKormac]

When I refer to right wing hatred of the poor, it's in the typical partisan nature of this forum which keeps growing on me, you do realize that statement refers to right wingers who believe the poor need no aid programs, lack any basic understanding of poverty.. You may be an exception, where do you stand on food stamps?

Sure, but in similar partisan fashion, you resort to making value judgements of people who don't agree with you. As a result, you assume every rightist on this board has no compassion for the poor because of it. Have you asked them?

You say they "lack any basic understanding of poverty" but odds are that you don't either. You lack any basic understanding of their situation.

And where do I stand on food stamps? I've considered applying for them myself. But I can just as easily get by on ramen instead of being one more straw on the camel's back. Besides, I've already applied for SSI. As a result, I am prevented from taking on any gainful employment until father government hands down his decision.

Aid programs take the poor hostage, they don't help them.

 

[Socialist]

When I refer to right wing hatred of the poor, it's in the typical partisan nature of this forum which keeps growing on me, you do realize that statement refers to right wingers who believe the poor need no aid programs, lack any basic understanding of poverty.. You may be an exception, where do you stand on food stamps?

Sure, but in similar partisan fashion, you resort to making value judgements of people who don't agree with you. As a result, you assume every rightist on this board has no compassion for the poor because of it. Have you asked them?

You say they "lack any basic understanding of poverty" but odds are that you don't either. You lack any basic understanding of their situation.

And where do I stand on food stamps? I've considered applying for them myself. But I can just as easily get by on ramen instead of being one more straw on the camel's back. Besides, I've already applied for SSI. As a result, I am prevented from taking on any gainful employment until father government hands down his decision.

Aid programs take the poor hostage, they don't help them.

Believe me, the attitudes of right wingers on this board are hostile towards the poor, no one will outright say they hate poor people, but when asking them about food stamps, free medical clinics, free education, UHC, etc. etc.. It becomes clear. Seriously? I know the reality of poverty in America all to well, and I'm sure you do as well. Hostage? What are you talking about? Wages are horrid and stagnant, aid programs are the only way people can get by, so what's the real problem?

 

[IsaacNewton]

You won t believe how little 8.25 an hour buys Oxfam America First Person Blog
Disgusting that this is possible in the "richest country in the world"

Cleaning the movie theater is part of my daughter's duties. But does her job actually pay enough to live on? Photo: Mary Babic/Oxfam America
27Tweet

54Like

1+1

For my hard-working family and friends who earn just above the US minimum wage, a paycheck doesn’t go very far.

My daughter struck it lucky when she landed a job for $8.25 an hour at the local movie theater. They pay 25 cents more than the Massachusetts minimum wage (which is already 75 cents more than the federal wage); they don’t charge her for the monogrammed black polo shirt that constitutes her uniform (unlike some businesses); they let her know her hours a few days ahead; and they are, simply put, nice people: film nerds who enjoy keeping an independent theater alive, who don’t mind if she reads a book while sitting in the box office and waiting for the next rush.

Still, it’s a business. Her hours each week never mount up to the point where they’d be responsible for her healthcare (30 hours a week or more); her schedule varies widely; when it’s slow, they let her go (and it’s been a slow year for movies). And, to reiterate: they pay $8.25 an hour.

You can’t blame them; they’re generous at paying more than the legally required wage. But it is, even for my daughter, a measly wage. She lives at home, but she’s scraping together savings for college, living very simply, contributing to the household.

So what her earnings really translate to? I wondered, after seeing this helpful and harrowing piece on What Life Really Costs at $7.25 an Hour.

First, there’s transportation. After taxes, she brings home $7.62 an hour. Last week, after working for 27 hours (and commuting for about 8 hours), she got a check for $205.71. Just to get there and back: Slice the bus fare off the top (2.10 each way; 4.20 round trip; times four): 205.71 – 16.80 = 188.91.

A sandwich = one hour’s work. Some days, when her shift stretches longer than eight hours, she gets a plain chicken sandwich at the place next door: 7.43 (with tax). So she works a full hour to buy a sandwich. Without a drink.

A book = three hours. She loves books and music, and we visit the library every week. But sometimes she likes to buy the ones she loves the very most. Her favorite graphic novelist, Emily Carroll, just published a beautiful new book, Through the Woods. On Amazon, discounted, it’s $18.10. So she worked almost three hours to buy it.

Work shoes cost a day’s pay. We do most of our shopping at Goodwill, but every once in a while, she indulges. She really needed a good pair of shoes as she stands most of the time at work. She got a cheap pair of Nikes at around $50: Basically, a day’s pay.

And what about college tuition? Again, she got lucky: Smith College offered her a whopping scholarship, covering about half the cost. Which left her with a bill of (only) $24,000 for a year, not counting books, art supplies, etc.

So if she wants to cover one year of college – at this deeply discounted price – she’s going to work 3150 hours. Or 61 hours a week for a year. If she wants to go for the full four years… it would take 12,598 hours. Of course, she couldn’t eat. Or pay rent, take the bus, buy shoes, or get her hair cut. At least she can go to the movies…

So she’s lucky in some ways. But so many workers do not enjoy her luck. In fact, the vast majority of low-wage workers do not match this “Poster Child” profile of the minimum wage worker.

Source: the Economic Policy Institute.
Indeed, the average age of low-wage workers is 35. A third have dependent children at home. In our (extremely fortunate)Congressional district, 34,000 working families are using food stamps, and 71,000 are living below the poverty line .

Good article it spell out the reality.

This is the reason the exemption for taxes should be $25,000 dollars. The same if you make $20,000 or $200,000.

Someone making $8.50/hr has taxes taken out so they are only making $7.62/hr? RIDICULOUS. Many large corporations use enough tax loopholes to avoid paying any taxes.

And it won't change unless the American people vote out the losers that continue this abomination.

 

[Meathead]

Sorry chum. Her daughter takes in about $250 a week for 30 hours of work and supports no one.

Stop whining!

We're not talking about a specific person, but if you want to put it down to that, your essentially saying her daughter should fuck herself and get a college education with money that comes from... Oh wait, the job which barely pays enough to hold down an apartment. Flawless. Fuck off.

Her little princess lives at home.

It's got to be tough being a socialist after the fall of the USSR and more recently the socialists in Greece falling to capitalism, badly.

The USSR collapsed due to revisionism bud, talk to some historians, and the GDP plummeted after the USSR fell, and many people want it back. Greece failed because of people not paying taxes.. And the retirement age, neither of which have anything to do with socialism.

You're a dingbat. |Greece collapsed economically because it could not live off the money of others. The USSR fell because socialism does not work outside of a very few wealth-producing homogeneous states, which was certainly not Greece of the Soviet Block.

Sorry, but your failure to understand socialism tells me all I need to know, educate yourself, I have videos to help with that in my signature.

What was that Reagan said about being a communist means reading Marx and Lenin while understanding it means being anti-communist.

You've adopted an ideology from the industrial revolution which is now in the dustbin of history, and justly so.

 

[Socialist]

We're not talking about a specific person, but if you want to put it down to that, your essentially saying her daughter should fuck herself and get a college education with money that comes from... Oh wait, the job which barely pays enough to hold down an apartment. Flawless. Fuck off.

Her little princess lives at home.

It's got to be tough being a socialist after the fall of the USSR and more recently the socialists in Greece falling to capitalism, badly.

The USSR collapsed due to revisionism bud, talk to some historians, and the GDP plummeted after the USSR fell, and many people want it back. Greece failed because of people not paying taxes.. And the retirement age, neither of which have anything to do with socialism.

You're a dingbat. |Greece collapsed economically because it could not live off the money of others. The USSR fell because socialism does not work outside of a very few wealth-producing homogeneous states, which was certainly not Greece of the Soviet Block.

Sorry, but your failure to understand socialism tells me all I need to know, educate yourself, I have videos to help with that in my signature.

What was that Reagan said about being a communist means reading Marx and Lenin while understanding it means being anti-communist.

You've adopted an ideology from the industrial revolution which is now in the dustbin of history, and justly so.

Why the hell would anyone care what Reagan, a moron who fucked up almost everything, says? You know nothing about marx or Lenin.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Believe me, the attitudes of right wingers on this board are hostile towards the poor, no one will outright say they hate poor people, but when asking them about food stamps, free medical clinics, free education, UHC, etc. etc.. It becomes clear. Seriously?

I'd call this a backtrack. First you said that right wingers hated the poor, now you're saying they are "hostile" to them. I wouldn't even go that far. You equate any disagreement with your advocacy of these programs as hostility or hatred towards the poor. Seriously?

I know the reality of poverty in America all to well, and I'm sure you do as well.

That isn't a sufficient rebuttal. You know nothing of poverty. You, like the liberal rabble in Washington, sit there and proclaim your sympathy for the poor, claim to know their pain, yet have ever experienced it first hand.

Hostage? What are you talking about? Wages are horrid and stagnant, aid programs are the only way people can get by, so what's the real problem?

Aid programs are not "the only way people can get by." That's the whole thing, and part of the problem. The real problem is, you want living wages, which require jobs to earn, yet you want aid programs for them at the same time.

Since applying for SSI, I cannot seek gainful employment without risking a rejection of my claim by the government. If that happens I can't apply for seven years. I'd call that being held hostage.

 

[Meathead]

Why the hell would anyone care what Reagan, a moron who fucked up almost everything, says? You know nothing about marx or Lenin.

And you know nothing of history.

 

[Socialist]

Believe me, the attitudes of right wingers on this board are hostile towards the poor, no one will outright say they hate poor people, but when asking them about food stamps, free medical clinics, free education, UHC, etc. etc.. It becomes clear. Seriously?

I'd call this a backtrack. First you said that right wingers hated the poor, now you're saying they are "hostile" to them. I wouldn't even go that far. You equate any disagreement with your advocacy of these programs as hostility or hatred towards the poor. Seriously?

I know the reality of poverty in America all to well, and I'm sure you do as well.

That isn't a sufficient rebuttal. You know nothing of poverty. You, like the liberal rabble in Washington, sit there and proclaim your sympathy for the poor, claim to know their pain, yet have ever experienced it first hand.

Hostage? What are you talking about? Wages are horrid and stagnant, aid programs are the only way people can get by, so what's the real problem?

Aid programs are not "the only way people can get by." That's the whole thing, and part of the problem. The real problem is, you want living wages, which require jobs to earn, yet you want aid programs for them at the same time.

Since applying for SSI, I cannot seek gainful employment without risking a rejection of my claim by the government. If that happens I can't apply for seven years. I'd call that being held hostage.

It's Partisan language, you actually think I care about what I post on here? Meh. I know about poverty, I'm friends with many who live in poverty, I can realize problems exist if I'm not experiencing them, or can't I? I suppose hunger doesn't exist them. Your line of thought is stupid. Err, how do you propose people get by on, well, I'm in Kentucky, so 7.25 an hour? Err, I propose a basic income, and if not that, strong wages which would cut back on the usage of aid programs due to requirements in place. I sympathize with what you're going through, believe me, I do, partisan hackery and the nature of this forum may make it seem otherwise, but the number one thing to me is class, which we are both one of the same. Disagreement with food stamps or wanting to fed rid of it would primarily affect poor children.. People offer me no better alternatives.. Same with healthcare/rising education costs/etc.. Unfortunately, I know people on this site who would call you a government parasite, which saddens me.

 

[Socialist]

Why the hell would anyone care what Reagan, a moron who fucked up almost everything, says? You know nothing about marx or Lenin.

And you know nothing of history.

Please, tell me all about the principles of Marxism and the history of revolutionary movements.

 

[Meathead]

Why the hell would anyone care what Reagan, a moron who fucked up almost everything, says? You know nothing about marx or Lenin.

And you know nothing of history.

Please, tell me all about the principles of Marxism and the history of revolutionary movements.

OK. they are both failures, the latter since the French Revolution.

 

[Socialist]

Why the hell would anyone care what Reagan, a moron who fucked up almost everything, says? You know nothing about marx or Lenin.

And you know nothing of history.

Please, tell me all about the principles of Marxism and the history of revolutionary movements.

OK. they are both failures, the latter since the French Revolution.

What the hell? The Natalites are going strong in India, communist parties exist worldwide, Cuba is still standing..

 

[Meathead]

Why the hell would anyone care what Reagan, a moron who fucked up almost everything, says? You know nothing about marx or Lenin.

And you know nothing of history.

Please, tell me all about the principles of Marxism and the history of revolutionary movements.

OK. they are both failures, the latter since the French Revolution.

What the hell? The Natalites are going strong in India, communist parties exist worldwide, Cuba is still standing..

As I said, unmitigated failure. I mean if you have to some lunatic fringe groups and Cuba and North Korea as your standard-bearers, you've pretty much lost the game.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Wages have been stagnant for decades, quit your idiotic bullshit and attempts to blame one man for everything. LOL. Yes, because private sector growth under Obama is a great sign of socialism. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

It is called corporatism.
People get it wrong all the time saying free market capitalism is the problem. We don't have a free market, far from it.
The problem is corporatism and the plutocracy/oligarchy it has created.
Since 2009, the top 7% earners have bathed in a 33% increase in earnings while the remaining 93% WORKING Americans have suffered a 5% loss.
Obama has perpetuated the problem even more so than Bush. Even more so than Reagan. Obama is an elitist/corporatist who has been the greatest friend to the super wealthy than perhaps any President before him. And the left are too stupid to realize it.

 

[Socialist]

Why the hell would anyone care what Reagan, a moron who fucked up almost everything, says? You know nothing about marx or Lenin.

And you know nothing of history.

Please, tell me all about the principles of Marxism and the history of revolutionary movements.

OK. they are both failures, the latter since the French Revolution.

What the hell? The Natalites are going strong in India, communist parties exist worldwide, Cuba is still standing..

As I said, unmitigated failure. I mean if you have to some lunatic fringe groups and Cuba and North Korea as your standard-bearers, you've pretty much lost the game.

Cuba is an entire country, with remarkable healthcare, and surviving against all odds.