This wanker used liberal, nanny-state logic, in a slightly enhanced form to show that forcing minimum wage laws is never the answer. If forcing employers to pay $10/hr will help, wouldn't $15 be even better? Why not $20???? What minimum wage laws do is put a kibosh on entry level jobs. Minimum wage laws also tends to quash the desire to rise above entry level to those that aren't motivated. Government force is contrary to free market. So now the poor can pay half again as much for a Big Mac. My restaurant tenant explained exactly what it does to his business when he must pay his dishwasher $10/hr. I have washed dishes in restaurants so I do know what it entails. You work really hard for a while, then you stand around and drink coffee or tease the waitresses. It is a job meant for high school kids and dropouts to raise "date money". Not a job to raise a family of four on. My tenant now has to raise his prices 3% to start. That effects everybody.
I'm really curious as to what former name I know you by to help put this conversation in perspective. But lets first start with the basics of your argument. I only had a handful of jobs that were go, go, go, from clock-in to clock-out, and I can assure you from personal experience that employees are not paid more for working harder or seeking advancement. Employees are paid more for first of all "qualifications" (generally educational) and "self-motivation". But Employers are equally as satisfied with employees that are reliable/dependable. I've also been in the position of hiring, promotion, and firing employees. And I have to say that ambitious employees (constantly seeking justification for the next pay increase) was not always my favorite or sought after employee. Every company has a budget and training cost just like everything else. For me the most valuable employee was the one that I could depend on and aford. That means I also had an obligation to keep them well fed, in top-health, and relaxed and stress-free as possible. Some companies held different policies of "work 'em to the bone and replace them when they wash-out" but that has never been a successful policy.
We ONLY give 50% of the entire federal budget in social benefit programs? Is that all? Only $2,300,000,000.oo? Hey, we could just totally eliminate the military and increase it to $2,900,000,00.oo. Around $3,000,000,000.oo if we also cut veteran's veterans. That would solve everything, right? Obviously, anyone doesn't agree can't be a Christian. That's the logic of some of the Democrats on this forum.
Well considering that 5/6th ($500 billion) of our military spending goes to maintaining our nuclear arsenal that we vow (with each president) to never use, while we ignore our national infrastructure (that we use daily), education, healthcare, and law-enforcement, crime and punishment reform that's falling into the realm of third-world nations. I'd have to say cutting back on military spending sounds like an excellent idea. Note: the VA falls under healthcare.
I really think you need to learn how to debate earnestly ..... and you cannot do that as long as you are dependent upon urban cliches for orientation.
You are Ziggy, right? I am Barryhoff. May I share my method of hiring in the Construction trades? First off, I prefer sub-contractors or entrepreneurial types. When I was strictly a masonry contractor I had basically two questions I'd ask. 1- "Are you good to your word"? 2- " What is your hourly wage?" In the early eighties the going rate for a mason was $12/hr. Most guys would say $12. I would let them work until lunch then make my decision. Had one guy tell me "I need at least $10. I'm not the fastest guy in town but you'll never tear my work down." After the first week I paid him $15. He became my foreman and we worked together at least ten years. My idea is that character matters most. I was raised to think of myself as a marketable commodity. Raised my children to think the same way. Whatever you do, make your self valuable. We don't do "tenure". We ARE our own union. I know many that strive to get their Masters degree. They believe after that, they are entitled. Doesn't always work.
Debate earnestly? According to your mindset?? Are you a snowflake afraid of melting?? I gave you a model that demonstrates the logic of minimum wage accurately. If $10 is good, $15 would be better. If you are going to allow some bureaucrat to decide what a risk taking business man HAS to pay, then you better be prepared to address your logic. I will not accuse you of disearnest debate as you accused me. I am saying you don't even debate.
Oh you're Barry? Well I myself never hired the entrepreneurial type because I was myself so, and there's not mush room in a company for more than one. As an employer I searched for "soldiers" those who understood that following orders was more valuable than questioning orders. The reason for that is because when I make decisions it's my neck on the line if things go wrong. But if I have someone second-guessing me (because they're the ambitious entrepreneurial type) and their ideas turnout to be more effective then it's still my job on the line. I know that might sound wrong, however considering that the first rule in an emergency situation is to first take care of one's self before saving another because heroes that die cannot help anyone. And lets be honest, giving someone a job is saving them from poverty. But it's not really a one-sided operation because employers need employees just as much as employees need employers. You yourself who claimed to seek the ambitious type found your next forman among the more humble type, but even in his humility he knew his bottom-line.
As our Founders said, government exists to promote the common welfare, not the corporate welfare. Anyone who denies that is a liar and hates America.
With the exception of "browns", which is merely a shade of skin color, lazy blacks, gays, and feminists are their own worst enemy. It's bad enough that they waste their lives playing in the gutter of identity politics and amoral behaviors, but worse yet that they want to impose their "victim card" mentality on everyone else just trying to make a living on their own. The current Republican attempt at "repeal and replace" is an example of RINO politics in full force. Instead of mandating us with government penalties, they want to mandate us into subsidizing the insurance companies. So yes, to the point of the RINO's being controlled by big business, I will grant you that. It could be Trump's Waterloo, imo, and I am hoping that he will start catering instead to the policy proposals of Rand Paul and the Freedom Caucus in the House, before he signs this thing into law. However, the rest of Trump's agenda I am mostly in support of, and I suspect it will do much to move the country forward. The idea that the Democrats are capable of fixing anything, as you so suggest, lies well outside my thought processes.
I doubt that. In any case, cliches do not impress me. If there is (was) enough of a fact base to render American social problems acceptable then it is short-sighted to think that a mere cliche is sufficient to "prove the point".
Going by the attitudes I see first hand with younger workers in particular, that earn the current minimum, I can tell you the boldened section is spot on.
Is your burying your head In the sand when exposed to the "Real World" facts something you do on a regular basis? Are you singing... "LAALALALALA"?
The discussion is about government's responsibility to the poor, if any. I stated that a fair system all but eliminates poverty giving the thread a better foundation for debate. You'r mate is satisfied with making absurd conclusions which is counterproductive to any subject.
My "Mate"? I'm pretty friendly with everyone to be honest.... I generally consider you all mates. Anyway, I was attempting to point out to you, through real world, current observations, that the initial comment of yours I quoted, had no cliche from the member you quoted. Calling anything cliche, which you ave no direct exposure to, knowledge of, or understanding of, doesn't make for a productive debate either.
Zig/Diamond..... I find your perspective valuable and I believe I understand. In certain settings, politics enter into the game. When I worked "production masonry" as a journeyman, that did happen several times. So I see your point as well taken. I so hated that environment, I became a General and self employed. I do .however, play well with others. Today I worked with another General laying out footings for a house. I know my place. It is his job so he is lead man. I just assist. To many minds complicate things. We don't need to sabotage others, we compliment them. I enjoy the Contractors I work with. It's a win win.
Government, in a democratic society, is the People governing themselves and, through representative government, expressing their moral values. The reality that all advanced nations on earth provide assistance to their citizens in need is an affirmation of human decency as well as an index of their success as nations. Ideologues must provide an example of an actual, extant nation whose paradigm they would rather follow. Their airy-fairy confections are not reality. For pragmatists with an ethical sensibility, it's obvious what actually works. It's the best that humans have actually managed achieve. Please imagine a ladder with steps numbered from zero at the bottom to 10 at the top. Suppose we say that the top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you, and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you. On which step of the ladder would you say you personally feel you stand at this time, assuming that the higher the step the better you feel about your life, and the lower the step the worse you feel about it? Which step comes closest to the way you feel? Norway 7.537 Denmark 7.522 Iceland 7.504 Switzerland 7.494 Finland 7.469 Netherlands 7.377 Canada 7.316 New Zealand 7.314 Australia 7.284 Sweden 7.284 Israel 7.213 Costa Rica 7.079 Austria 7.006 United States 6.993 Ireland 6.977 Germany 6.951 Belgium 6.891 Luxembourg 6.863 United Kingdom 6.714 Chile 6.652 http://www.gallup.com/products/1709..._medium=mainnav&utm_campaign=gallup_analytics There is no rational arguing with success, but ideological fanatics dismiss reason.
