-
[QUOTE=psprowler;542522]What I meant by better choices is not dropping out of high school or chasing the party life during the early adulthood years instead of securing a job and a future. Deciding that a job is more important than doing drugs, deciding not to have unprotected sex....repeatedly.....knowing you don't have the financial means to deal with the consequences.
There ARE indeed better choices than lower paying jobs for those that chose to arm themselves with the necessary skills. For those that chose not to do the legwork, then the lower paying jobs that require no special skill set is what's left. Employers of these positions shouldn't have to artificially "inflate" the wages to offset the lack of skill just so everybody is equal, when they in fact are not. Increase the minimum wage to 20.00 an hour, then the cost of goods will be passed on to the consumer, and people will still be in the same situation unable to afford "necessities" - they'll just be making 20.00 an hour instead of 7.25 or whatever it is. The poverty level for government benefits will rise accordingly and the same number will require assistance. The dollar menu at McDonald's will become the five dollar menu at McDonald's.[/QUOTE]
--
why should the tax payer have to pay part of an employees wages as gov assistance so the employer can make a bigger profit.... He might as well be getting food stamps himself if his employees qualify for them.
-
I hope the job market keeps getting better so wages continue to rise.... Maybe our country will regain some of what it has lost in the last decade or two
-
[QUOTE=Hlleonard;542524]--
why should the tax payer have to pay part of an employees wages as gov assistance so the employer can make a bigger profit.... He might as well be getting food stamps himself if his employees qualify for them.[/QUOTE]
The tax payer shouldn't - the employee should make the attempt to better themselves instead of making the choices they make and then expect others to bail them out when the money runs dry. Those that pay in the most rarely utilize the service and those that pay in the least utilize it the most. Government assistance should be for those that truly need it - medical hardship, disability, handicap, etc. If 100% of the people made a legitimate effort and put forth the legwork then 5% would need assistance. That's speculation and my perfect world, but when the first number drops from 100 the second number will climb towards 50. Eventually half the people will work to support the other half that won't. "D" or "R" denomination means squat, until personal accountability comes to the fore front this country will continue with the steady state of decline. Nobody wants to take responsibilty for the choices they make.
Basically what we disagree on is the number of people that legitimately need the help versus those that could do better but simply choose not to.
-
[QUOTE=psprowler;542528]The tax payer shouldn't - the employee should make the attempt to better themselves instead of making the choices they make and then expect others to bail them out when the money runs dry. Those that pay in the most rarely utilize the service and those that pay in the least utilize it the most. Government assistance should be for those that truly need it - medical hardship, disability, handicap, etc. If 100% of the people made a legitimate effort and put forth the legwork then 5% would need assistance. That's speculation and my perfect world, but when the first number drops from 100 the second number will climb towards 50. Eventually half the people will work to support the other half that won't. "D" or "R" denomination means squat, until personal accountability comes to the fore front this country will continue with the steady state of decline. Nobody wants to take responsibilty for the choices they make.
Basically what we disagree on is the number of people that legitimately need the help versus those that could do better but simply choose not to.[/QUOTE]
--
everybody cant be a doctor... Just because somebody has to pick up your trash shouldnt mean he has to choose between food and heat so his company can realize bigger profits.
-
We have a good country for reasons other than the greed you guys seem to hold dear.
-
[QUOTE=Hlleonard;542531]We have a good country for reasons other than the greed you guys seem to hold dear.[/QUOTE]
Good grief you blame Reagan Obama has huge increase in people on food stamps and welfare. We have second generation prop,e on welfare they are gaming the system. We have a food pantry here in my town they have serve 900 people the right wing folks you are knocking go to the pantry donate their money and time unloading trucks filling boxes etc. the lady who runs it told me they can not ask how much money they make nor can they ask them to come help unload trucks or fill boxes. I asked her if anyone volunteered to help she said two out do nine hundred, I asked her if they appreciated the food pantry she said some do but most think they are entitled. I drive by the pantry and see all the cars and don't see many junkers.
I think everyone on the government teat should pass a drug test, I also think they should join a union and strike for better benefits.
-
[QUOTE=Hlleonard;542531]We have a good country for reasons other than the greed you guys seem to hold dear.[/QUOTE]
Greed doesn't motivate me, but thanks for trying to paint me in that light. I'll tell you what does motivate me - raising my kids to become productive citizens that know right from wrong. Thats why I go to work every day. I don't try to live like an NFL superstar on my salary. If I did, I'd be in the same boat as the trash collector that tries to live like a neurosurgeon. When I lived in college I lived like I had no money. I plucked fish out of cedar creek in auburn indiana for food, drove a beat up saturn and walked up to the hospital breakroom if I wanted to watch tv. A lot of people have a distorted view when it comes to needs vs wants. Plenty of money for smokes, rims, gadgets, bigger houses than necessary, newer cars, nice clothes, etc. but not enough money for the rent/house note or food. Flat screen tv's, dish network, iPhone 6, high speed internet, going to the movies and eating out three times a week aren't necessities like advertisers would have you believe. Oxygen, some form of roof over your head, water, and food are necessities. If you truly can't afford the latter with your job, then yeah, take a handout, on me. No problem with that whatsoever. How many people do you see griping about having no money post it on an online forum of some sort from their smartphone? Check any relevant comments section from a yahoo article sometime. You had the money for Internet and the time to post about it.
Do you really think if the minimum wage is raised employers won't reduce jobs and raise costs to offset the wage increase?
-
[QUOTE=Tyme2fish;542448]It's easier to sit home and get free benefits. Why work? :mad:[/QUOTE]
More and more are on the Gubment teat now. That's the next class of people the Liberals want on their side. We heard the story time and time again......why work for a living? Why work two jobs? Why save and not buy the car or house you can't afford? Why educate yourself? Why worry about anything? .........the gubment understands and its not fair to you that you can't stay in the jobs meant for high school kids for the rest of your life and make a nice living.
-
[QUOTE=waterdog101;542513]I don't know any way to find out, but I would like to know how many million people work two jobs and have to get food stamps to help feed their children.[/QUOTE]
I would like to know how many scam the system.....my figure would be much higher than yours. I say this because in my life I met ZERO people people who fall into your question. I have met many more who scam the system!
-
[QUOTE=Hlleonard;542459]Hasn't been a long time ago I was hearing "don't take low paying jobs"... now people are doing that and and the business world is whining because they can't fill food stamp jobs... We need more of that, if businesses have to pay better wages to get people to work for them then were are all better off for it.. You don't agree the country would be in better shape if people earned enough to take care of themselves and didn't qualify for food stamps?[/QUOTE]
So that's the answer huh? A company pays its $20 per hour guy $$40 per hour and his $40 per hour $60? Random numbers but still what do you thing would happen to their goods or services they provide? Think it will increase in price? How about companies who drive trucks for a living....will they demand better pay? How about the auto makers.....think they will charge more since they are paying their employees twice as much?? Of course this imaginary scenario can go on and on but in the end all we have done is raise the reference. I mean if $20 an hour households can't afford life and all of a sudden they can at $40 an hour don't you thing all the good and services they use has gone up and they are back to the same situation??
This experiment you speak of doesn't work. We just lived through it. Obamacare and fuel...two of the highest demands on our company in the last 10 years has made us change a few things. Did we go out and pay our guys more because of either drain? Nope, we raised our labor rates, enacted a trip charge and it still not enough. To combat health insurance we get smaller bonuses and at some point will prolly be on the gubment teat. Looks like a diabolical plan to me by obama. Get into private health insurance and make it expensive as hell and people will come to gubment for their seemingly cheaper version.
-
[QUOTE=Hlleonard;542472]--
think what you want... We are a better country today without soup lines... What you guys advocate is more of the same... Every person in this country that works for a wage should belong to a labor union and should not feel a need to work for peanuts simply because there is a certain section who thinks the country is set up for them exclusively...[/QUOTE]
Unions are not the answer. Many men and women do fine without them.
-
[QUOTE=Hlleonard;542518]--
The right wing , posting on boards like this one, for the most part have no clue and could care less... Reagan started this crap and it continually gets worst and the right wing is oblivious to the damage his "trickle down" nonsense has done to this country.... He turned loose the monster that allowed the top to rape the rest of the country, Bill Clinton helped the situation a small amount but by no means fixed it...[/QUOTE]
Any of that so called raping being done by Liberals? Any Liberal CEO making millions in bonuses? Any Liberal who does well means that "trickle down" worked or is it still unfair and evil?
Oh i have a clue since I still work for a living where as your retired and past your money making years. I comment based more on what I experience as opposed to some propaganda by either party. Your scenarios of making us all get better pay with Unions controlling us sounds an awful like having the gubment take care of us. Why do we need a group directly controlling what we do? Can't we be responsible for our actions and live with the consequences of our actions? Union members can hide behind their union card and if the gubment controlled everything how would we clean up the losers?? Hell we can't do it now!!!
