# Half of fast food workers need public aid



## Bowden (Oct 20, 2013)

Good article.
Either corporations provide their employees with living wages and benefits or the taxpayers provide it.

"The report estimated that this public aid carries a $7 billion price tag for taxpayers each year".

Entire article at:
http://money.cnn.com/2013/10/15/news...html?iid=HP_LN

By Emily Jane Fox October 15, 2013: 2:26 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney)
More than half of fast food workers have to rely on public assistance  programs since their wages aren't enough to support them, a new report  found.

According to a University of California Berkeley Labor Center and  University of Illinois study out Tuesday, 52% of families of fast food  workers receive assistance from a public program like Medicaid, food  stamps, the Earned Income Tax Credit and Temporary Assistance for Needy  Families. That's compared to 25% of families in the workforce as a  whole.

The report estimated that this public aid carries a $7 billion price tag for taxpayers each year.

The numbers are based on publicly available data on public assistance programs from 2007-2011.

"Because pay is low and weekly work hours are limited, the families of  more than half of the workers in the fast-food industry are unable to  make ends meet," the report said.

Related: The real budgets of McDonald's workers
The real budgets of McDonald's workers - (1) - CNNMoney

The data supports the claims that hundreds of fast food workers have  been making across the country over the last year. Protests from New  York City to Los Angeles, Memphis to Detroit have cropped up since last  November, with workers calling for a minimum of $15 an hour and the  right to organize without retaliation.

The common narrative among fast food workers is that their pay is too  low, they don't get scheduled for enough hours and they get no benefits.

The new report fuels their fire, finding that only 13% of fast food  workers get health benefits from their employers, compared to 59% of the  workforce on the whole. It also said that the median worker only works  30 hours per week, compared to 40 for the rest of the workforce.


----------



## G.Reaper (Oct 20, 2013)

Fast food was never meant to be a career. It is not a job to support a family on. I'm not sure where the misconception for these people comes from. There is no reason they can't go out and get a better paying job that requires no education. If they are not happy about the wages then they are in the wrong field of work!


----------



## Bowden (Oct 20, 2013)

G.Reaper said:


> Fast food was never meant to be a career. It is not a job to support a family on. I'm not sure where the misconception for these people comes from. There is no reason they can't go out and get a better paying job that requires no education. If they are not happy about the wages then they are in the wrong field of work!



The point is that the employees are on public assistance due to the low level of corporate salaries and benefits.
The reality is that corporations are transferring to taxpayers employee salary and benefits costs that they would absorb if they provided living wages and benefits and taxpayers are funding that transfer to the tune of 7 billion taxpayer dollars worth of welfare program funding.
Math is math period.

Dynamic shifts in the job market are contributing to the problem.
The number of jobs out there that provide a middle class income and  benefit level that allow people to stay off of public assistance are  declining and the number of low paying low benefit service jobs are  increasing.
The majority of jobs created since the recession started in 2008 have been low paying low benefit service jobs.
The people taking these jobs fall within the working poor economic class.

Some of it is due to globalization and the off shoring of manufacturing jobs.
Another factor is the decline in unionization.

Supply side economics ( lift all boats) has failed.
Wealth is not trickling down stimulating the economy and creating well paying jobs with benefits.
Until this changes conditions are not going to improve for the majority of workers.
The top economic class is holding capital at the top at the same time the middle and lower economic classes are in decline.


----------



## G.Reaper (Oct 20, 2013)

What do you suppose the cost of the fast food will do if the employee wages are increased to $15/h? Much of the population is trying to live beyond their means and thus put their hands out so they can do so with as little effort/work as possible. Unions were a necessary entity, say during the industrial revolution. Today they are no longer needed and are a cause of much of the problems. Opportunity is out there but the problem is that it is too much work for many people. On top of that they are afraid to lose the government assistance by getting a better job or working more. I "helped" a guy quit because he wouldn't work O/T because it would cut into his assistance which was complete BS!! I'm a little bitter on that situation. I moved here and had to work for everything and couldn't afford all this crap so I made due without it until I got more firmly planted here. Obviously this has all changed because I worked my ass off, finished my college education etc. On the other side my wife didn't graduate but got her GED and she makes about what I do. Why? Because she wasn't afraid to work! We have both had full time jobs since 14 for me 16 for her.


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 20, 2013)

You've been working full time since you were 14?  (That's what child labor laws are for, monkey)  Your wife only has a GED and makes what you do with a college degree?  You really don't see anything wrong with that?  I have a degree, work full time with optional OT if I want it, earn enough so my wife does not have to work, and we are raising three children.  On one income.  And I'm no executive, I'm barely management.  What the fuck are you doing wrong?  You work all those hours and your wife still has to work.  It sounds like you are barely getting by.  It also sounds like you are bitter that all your "hard work" isn't paying off, which from what you are saying it isn't.  So why do you support the political party (it can be either one of the two major ones, it doesn't matter because they are the same) that wants to keep you from moving ahead/forward in life.

And why are you worried about fast food prices?  That shit is bad for you.


----------



## G.Reaper (Oct 20, 2013)

You couldn't be father from the truth on your assumptions. I started working with a friend who owned a landscaping business in So Cal. I was 14 and he paid me under the table. I was able to buy my new dirt bike and all other toys. Yes through hard work. It's a different industry up here where I moved. It's all mining. I am a sales manager and she is the safety manager at her place out at the mines. The mines just pay really well. But I get to stay in town and can do more with the kids. Prior to this I was at the mine and she was in town. And to be honest my MBA degree is petty useless at this point. At least In this area. You can get a high school flunky working under ground making 100k a year or driving a haul truck on the surface for 70k+. I have been management since 18 so I would say I'm not doing anything wrong. I only work barely 40 hours a week. She works because she likes to. On top of that I Like making 200k a year so we can have all the fun stuff we have now. You obviously missed the part where I said "obviously this has all changed". You want to come off an bash me with little facts when you can ask and we can have an adult conversation. The point is hard work pays off degree or not. 
The fast food was for the principal of the matter. Wages go up so do the cost of goods. 
So what the "fuck am I doing wrong" obviously trying to carry on a big boy conversation with a keyboard warrior.


----------



## G.Reaper (Oct 20, 2013)

As far as political parties I agree with you which is why I don't support either side.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 20, 2013)

G.Reaper said:


> What do you suppose the cost of the fast food will do if the employee wages are increased to $15/h? Much of the population is trying to live beyond their means and thus put their hands out so they can do so with as little effort/work as possible. Unions were a necessary entity, say during the industrial revolution. Today they are no longer needed and are a cause of much of the problems. Opportunity is out there but the problem is that it is too much work for many people. On top of that they are afraid to lose the government assistance by getting a better job or working more. I "helped" a guy quit because he wouldn't work O/T because it would cut into his assistance which was complete BS!! I'm a little bitter on that situation. I moved here and had to work for everything and couldn't afford all this crap so I made due without it until I got more firmly planted here. Obviously this has all changed because I worked my ass off, finished my college education etc. On the other side my wife didn't graduate but got her GED and she makes about what I do. Why? Because she wasn't afraid to work! We have both had full time jobs since 14 for me 16 for her.



Once again.
The point is that corporations are transferring 7 billion dollars worth of employee wages and benefits costs to taxpayers who are funding welfare for those employees.
This is a form of corporate welfare and is related to increased trends of  income inequality in the U.S.

The capital that corporations retain is being transferred to the investor and wealthy classes in the form of high levels of executive compensation.
As well, it's related to the investor and wealthy economic classes who own stock in those corporations that benefit from low employee wage and benefits costs ,  it's associated with financial engineering as to cost margin ratios and to meeting estimated corporate eps quarterly wall street numbers, increased share-buybacks that boost stock share prices and increased stock ROI.

It's ether pay increased taxes to fund government welfare for those employees or pay a higher cost for the products those corporations sell.
Either way, you are paying for it.
I think that you pay regardless in situations like this is something that certain conservatives always forget when they argue in cases like this one.


----------



## LAM (Oct 20, 2013)

G.Reaper said:


> Fast food was never meant to be a career. It is not a job to support a family on.



not supposed to be BUT IT IS, and that's the reality of the world that we live in.  no other industrialized country in the world had off-shored manufacturing like the US has or is de-industrializing as fast as the US, because the owners in the US care about nothing except profits, they could give a dam about the fact that the US will look like Mexico in 50+ years because THEIR families will have fortunes to support them.

service sector jobs are ALL low paying it doesn't matter which one, non-shift supervisors make peanuts and shift supervisors might be luck to make $14-$15/hr which is still a joke once you adjust for inflation.

capitalism in the US is not about sustainability it's about making as much profits now by taking advantage of a very pro-business environment and the future be dammed, that's "someone else's" problem.

wage inflation doesn't necessarily cause price inflation, it's not like there isn't dozens of economic study's on this very subject alone backed by empirical data from around the globe.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

G.Reaper said:


> What do you suppose the cost of the fast food will do if the employee wages are increased to $15/h? Much of the population is trying to live beyond their means and thus put their hands out so they can do so with as little effort/work as possible. Unions were a necessary entity, say during the industrial revolution. Today they are no longer needed and are a cause of much of the problems. Opportunity is out there but the problem is that it is too much work for many people. On top of that they are afraid to lose the government assistance by getting a better job or working more. I "helped" a guy quit because he wouldn't work O/T because it would cut into his assistance which was complete BS!! I'm a little bitter on that situation. I moved here and had to work for everything and couldn't afford all this crap so I made due without it until I got more firmly planted here. Obviously this has all changed because I worked my ass off, finished my college education etc. On the other side my wife didn't graduate but got her GED and she makes about what I do. Why? Because she wasn't afraid to work! We have both had full time jobs since 14 for me 16 for her.




seriously... who gives a motherfucking shit what happens to the cost of garbage food that adds so much to the burden of taxpayer funded healthcare to our poor population? and it would not really add that much to the cost of a burger if the company were forced to be responsible and take the difference from their profits not the customer. unions are needed wherever there is abuse and when companies hire more people to get around the laws that come with full time employees etc, that is abuse. i have worked my ass off for a company and had my hours handed over to someone else. i know how it feels and what motivates it and it's bullshit. this country cannot afford to run on taxing the same wages it paid people 20 years ago.


----------



## exerciseordie (Oct 20, 2013)

When I worked fast food the minimum wage was 6.50/hr. They hired a lady on at 8 because she had experience and two kids. She refused to take handouts from the government and I asked her how she kept everything up and running in her household at this pay. Her answer, "I don't buy shit I don't need. I walk to work, shop at goodwill and garage sales, I don't go out to eat, and I don't have a cell phone or pager. Simply put I only buy what I need and I keep a roof over my head and food on the table." Now I personally believe that if you are taking handouts then you don't need 100 dollar shoes and a new iphone. Just from personal experience and having friends who lived off of close to minimum wage. Fuck my roommate supports himself off of 9 bucks an hour. How? He doesn't buy dumb shit.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

either her husband had a good job or she was taking aid. she'd not be able to take her kids to doctor, dentist, or optometrist on that pay.


----------



## G.Reaper (Oct 20, 2013)

exerciseordie said:


> When I worked fast food the minimum wage was 6.50/hr. They hired a lady on at 8 because she had experience and two kids. She refused to take handouts from the government and I asked her how she kept everything up and running in her household at this pay. Her answer, "I don't buy shit I don't need. I walk to work, shop at goodwill and garage sales, I don't go out to eat, and I don't have a cell phone or pager. Simply put I only buy what I need and I keep a roof over my head and food on the table." Now I personally believe that if you are taking handouts then you don't need 100 dollar shoes and a new iphone. Just from personal experience and having friends who lived off of close to minimum wage. Fuck my roommate supports himself off of 9 bucks an hour. How? He doesn't buy dumb shit.


If only we had restrictions on the welfare and what was purchased we wouldn't have this big of an issue. If more people were responsible like the lady you described welfare could be reserved for those who need it and not those making a career out of it.


----------



## G.Reaper (Oct 20, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> either her husband had a good job or she was taking aid. she'd not be able to take her kids to doctor, dentist, or optometrist on that pay.



I'm sure you are 100% right on that. But in her case it sounds on the surface like she was doing what she could and not looking to abuse the system.


----------



## exerciseordie (Oct 20, 2013)

Or the kids had aid under the father which she wasn't with.  Not to mention my state will give those who can't afford it free health care. Which I am perfectly fine with.  I would rather give someone working their ass off healthcare than someone new Jordans.  I am positive she didnt get food stamps or welfare though.


----------



## exerciseordie (Oct 20, 2013)

Yea I am positive that she had some way of getting her kids healthcare. I was just blown away that people like her still exist. It seems like people do whatever they can to abuse the system.


----------



## exerciseordie (Oct 20, 2013)

You do realize that if we raise minimum wage then prices go up on EVERYTHING right? So we would have to give people aid at close to the same rate.  Look at history.  Every time we raise minimum wage, inflation occurs.


----------



## G.Reaper (Oct 20, 2013)

Bowden said:


> Once again.
> The point is that corporations are transferring 7 billion dollars worth of employee wages and benefits costs to taxpayers who are funding welfare for those employees.
> This is a form of corporate welfare and is related to increased trends of  income inequality in the U.S.
> 
> ...


It is clear that our welfare system needs to be revamped and is being used in ways it was never intended.


----------



## G.Reaper (Oct 20, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> seriously... who gives a motherfucking shit what happens to the cost of garbage food that adds so much to the burden of taxpayer funded healthcare to our poor population? and it would not really add that much to the cost of a burger if the company were forced to be responsible and take the difference from their profits not the customer. unions are needed wherever there is abuse and when companies hire more people to get around the laws that come with full time employees etc, that is abuse. i have worked my ass off for a company and had my hours handed over to someone else. i know how it feels and what motivates it and it's bullshit. this country cannot afford to run on taxing the same wages it paid people 20 years ago.


I completely agree on the fast food and can care less. It is only hurting the health of many. But the corporation will still want to make high profits so they will charge more or find a way to maintain that profit right? This is the incentive in this country, to make money. Unions had their place but I think the laws we have now take care of that. Look at the harm unions have also caused. It's no wonder we are manufacturing out of the country. The auto industry is a good example of that with the legacy costs etc.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 20, 2013)

LAM said:


> not supposed to be BUT IT IS, and that's the reality of the world that we live in.  no other industrialized country in the world had off-shored manufacturing like the US has or is de-industrializing as fast as the US, because the owners in the US care about nothing except profits, they could give a dam about the fact that the US will look like Mexico in 50+ years because THEIR families will have fortunes to support them.
> 
> service sector jobs are ALL low paying it doesn't matter which one, non-shift supervisors make peanuts and shift supervisors might be luck to make $14-$15/hr which is still a joke once you adjust for inflation.
> 
> ...



So what's your solution to the low wage problem in the fast food industry? lets here a solution form you for once, just once, that's all i'm asking...


----------



## LAM (Oct 20, 2013)

Swiper said:


> So what's your solution to the low wage problem in the fast food industry? lets here a solution form you for once, just once, that's all i'm asking...



gee I don't, stop paying people poverty wages that's were I would start.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

people who aren't making enough money to take care of their families shouldn't have families.


----------



## LAM (Oct 20, 2013)

*The Public Cost of Low-Wage Jobs in the Fast-Food Industry*

Fast Food, Poverty Wages: The Public Cost of Low-Wage Jobs in the Fast-Food Industry

Executive Summary

Nearly three-quarters (73 percent) of enrollments in America's major public benefits programs are
from working families. But many of them work in jobs that pay wages so low that their paychecks do
not generate enough income to provide for life's basic necessities. Low wages paid by employers in
the fast-food industry create especially acute problems for the families of workers in this industry. Median
pay for core front-line fast-food jobs is $8.69 an hour, with many jobs paying at or near the minimum wage. Benefits are also scarce for front-line fast-food workers; an estimated 87 percent do not receive health benefits through their employer. The combination of low wages and benefits, often coupled with part-time employment, means that many of the families of fast-food workers must rely on taxpayer-funded safety net programs to make ends meet.

This report estimates the public cost of low-wage jobs in the fast-food industry. Medicaid, the Earned
Income Tax Credit and the other public benefits programs discussed in this report provide a vital support
system for millions of Americans working in the United States' service industries, including fast food. We
analyze public program utilization by working families and estimate total average annual public benefit
expenditures on the families of front-line fast-food workers for the years 2007?2011.1 For this analysis we
focus on jobs held by core, front-line fast-food workers, defined as nonmanagerial workers who work at
least 11 hours per week for 27 or more weeks per year.

Main Findings


    More than half (52 percent) of the families of front-line fast-food workers are enrolled in one or more public programs, compared to 25 percent of the workforce as a whole. 

The cost of public assistance to families of workers in the fast-food industry is nearly $7 billion per year.

    At an average of $3.9 billion per year, spending on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) accounts for more than half of these costs.

    Due to low earnings, fast-food workers' families also receive an annual average of $1.04 billion in food stamp benefits and $1.91 billion in Earned Income Tax Credit payments.

    People working in fast-food jobs are more likely to live in or near poverty. One in five families with a member holding a fast-food job has an income below the poverty line, and 43 percent have an income two times the federal poverty level or less.

    Even full-time hours are not enough to compensate for low wages. The families of more than half of the fast-food workers employed 40 or more hours per week are enrolled in public assistance programs.

    More than half (52 percent) of the families of front-line fast-food workers are enrolled in one or more public programs, compared to 25 percent of the workforce as a whole.

    The cost of public assistance to families of workers in the fast-food industry is nearly $7 billion per year.
    At an average of $3.9 billion per year, spending on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) accounts for more than half of these costs.

    Due to low earnings, fast-food workers' families also receive an annual average of $1.04 billion in food stamp benefits and $1.91 billion in Earned Income Tax Credit payments.

    People working in fast-food jobs are more likely to live in or near poverty. One in five families with a member holding a fast-food job has an income below the poverty line, and 43 percent have an income two times the federal poverty level or less.

    Even full-time hours are not enough to compensate for low wages. The families of more than half of the fast-food workers employed 40 or more hours per week are enrolled in public assistance programs.


Fast Food, Poverty Wages: The Public Cost of Low-Wage Jobs in the Fast-Food Industry


----------



## Swiper (Oct 20, 2013)

LAM said:


> gee I don't, stop paying people poverty wages that's were I would start.



how much per hour would a fast food worker need to make to have a "livable wage"?


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

Swiper said:


> how much per hour would a fast food worker need to make to have a "livable wage"?



yes LAM, how much should someone get paid to put mayonnaise on bread?


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

I don't get it. When I go to McDonald's or some other fine fast food type establishment, the people taking my order and running around behind the counter are almost all high school kids.  You're telling me they have to support their families?  Don't their parents fucking WORK????


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

exerciseordie said:


> You do realize that if we raise minimum wage then prices go up on EVERYTHING right? So we would have to give people aid at close to the same rate.  Look at history.  Every time we raise minimum wage, inflation occurs.



the employer should be made to absorb the cost not the customer. and they CAN well afford to. it's bullshit, complete and utter bullshit, that profits are at all time highs but these poor crybaby companies pay welfare wages. it's a lie that they cannot afford to pay decent wages without soaking the customer for it. it's nothing but greed.


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

and yes, raise min. wage, cost of goods increases, so that wage increase becomes net zero, or worse, it could actually mean their hourly rate buys them less.  There has not been a real wage increase in the US, relative to inflation, since 1972.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

bmw said:


> I don't get it. When I go to McDonald's or some other fine fast food type establishment, the people taking my order and running around behind the counter are almost all high school kids.  You're telling me they have to support their families?  Don't their parents fucking WORK????



leave logic out of this!


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

does a single person here really believe it would cripple walmart to pay decent wages instead of relying on taxes to pay 7 billion to their workers? that the only way they could do it is charge people a lot more for some 2 cent piece of shit made in china? it's a fucking lie.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

bmw said:


> and yes, raise min. wage, cost of goods increases, so that wage increase becomes net zero, or worse, it could actually mean their hourly rate buys them less.  There has not been a real wage increase in the US, relative to inflation, since 1972.



LW has like 10 kids each from different fathers, and she runs a daycare out of her house...so of course she is going to side with the worker


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> the employer should be made to absorb the cost not the customer. and they CAN well afford to. it's bullshit, complete and utter bullshit, that profits are at all time highs but these poor crybaby companies pay welfare wages. it's a lie that they cannot afford to pay decent wages without soaking the customer for it. it's nothing but greed.



Isn't it amazing they make money off those god damn $1 double burgers with cheese??  That must be a loss leader though, right? 

Every corporation has an obligation first to their shareholders to make a profit.


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> LW has like 10 kids each from different fathers, and she runs a daycare out of her house...so of course she is going to side with the worker



You can make decent money running an in home daycare!!!

I know a family that ran 3 of them and they lived pretty well.  Had a boat, new cars, etc.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

does no one understand.... the cost of your cheap shit INCLUDES the welfare you pay to low wage workers. the cost of your cheap food INCLUDES food stamps for the guy putting mayonnaise and his dick on your bread....


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

brb, looking for a ton of 2 cent pieces of shit I can buy from Chiner, have imported to US, and mark up to sell on amazon and make a million dollars a year profit...


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

i think you guys just don't want to give up your penis flavored bread.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> does no one understand.... the cost of your cheap shit INCLUDES the welfare you pay to low wage workers. the cost of your cheap food INCLUDES food stamps for the guy putting mayonnaise and his dick on your bread....



right.. but it shouldn't.. there shouldn't even be welfare  inb4 LW's signature red herring


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

bmw said:


> brb, looking for a ton of 2 cent pieces of shit I can buy from Chiner, have imported to US, and mark up to sell on amazon and make a million dollars a year profit...




if you really want to make a profit on ebay you won't believe what i found someone there doing. motherrrrrfucker. clever tho. i love this certain very expensive chessboard. a guy there marks them up over 200 percent and has sold four. i was tempted to send him a message telling him i know what he's doing.


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> does no one understand.... the cost of your cheap shit INCLUDES the welfare you pay to low wage workers. the cost of your cheap food INCLUDES food stamps for the guy putting mayonnaise and his dick on your bread....



sales taxes pay for SNAP?


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> if you really want to make a profit on ebay you won't believe what i found someone there doing. motherrrrrfucker. clever tho. i love this certain very expensive chessboard. a guy there marks them up over 200 percent and has sold four. i was tempted to send him a message telling him i know what he's doing.



so do the same thing!!!  

PM me with details and link please!   

serios!


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

pm sent. good luck.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

bmw said:


> sales taxes pay for SNAP?



the point is those things are not as cheap as low prices on the surface appear. we pay twice. the cheap sandwich and the worker's welfare.


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

well, those profits in the McD's burgers aren't going to welfare, they are going to shareholders.  Pretty sure state sales taxes don't pay for a federally funded program either.  But I think I get your point that they could make less profits and pay a better wage. 

My point is that the majority of the FF workers I see are kids working for some extra cash at a part time job.  That's what I did when I was in HS and college.  I worked part time for some cash.  The adults around those places are usually the managers with a few exceptions.  McD's also have the post-retirement seniors who are usually going around cleaning up the dining area in the morning through lunch.  Those seniors already have SSI and hopefully some other retirement income.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 20, 2013)

bmw said:


> Isn't it amazing they make money off those god damn $1 double burgers with cheese??  That must be a loss leader though, right?
> 
> Every corporation has an obligation first to their shareholders to make a profit.



Yep.
As well the fast food corporations need to say thank you to the taxpayers who are funding 7 billion dollars worth of welfare benefits for their low paid and low to no benefit employees.

As to Wal-mart, a corporation that has the largest amount of employees on welfare in the U.S, they need to say thank you to the taxpayers who are funding welfare benefits for their low paid and low to no benefit  employees so that Wal-mart can afford to buy-back 16 billion dollars worth of stock.
So that the Walton family, other billionaires and the investor class can cash in on increased stock prices due to those buy-backs which are possible due to low paid and low to no benefit  employee compensations.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 20, 2013)

bmw said:


> well, those profits in the McD's burgers aren't going to welfare, they are going to shareholders.  Pretty sure state sales taxes don't pay for a federally funded program either.  But I think I get your point that they could make less profits and pay a better wage.
> 
> My point is that the majority of the FF workers I see are kids working for some extra cash at a part time job.  That's what I did when I was in HS and college.  I worked part time for some cash.  The adults around those places are usually the managers with a few exceptions.  McD's also have the post-retirement seniors who are usually going around cleaning up the dining area in the morning through lunch.  Those seniors already have SSI and hopefully some other retirement income.



Math is math.
There are employees working for fast food corporations that qualify for 7 billion dollars worth of taxpayer funded welfare benefits due to these employees not receiving living wages and benefits at a level that would allow them to not have to go on welfare.
These are not teenagers and seniors on social security that are receiving these welfare benefits.
They are adults that are in the working poor economic class.

You,I and every other American that pays taxes is funding these employee welfare benefits.
In federal, state and in local property taxes.
It shows up as to these employees are on section 8 housing , food stamps, WIC, medicaid and other government socialist taxpayer funded type programs.
This is taxpayer supplied corporate welfare so that corporations can privatize the profit and socialize the risk.


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 20, 2013)

G.Reaper said:


> You couldn't be father from the truth on your assumptions. I started working with a friend who owned a landscaping business in So Cal. I was 14 and he paid me under the table. I was able to buy my new dirt bike and all other toys. Yes through hard work. It's a different industry up here where I moved. It's all mining. I am a sales manager and she is the safety manager at her place out at the mines. The mines just pay really well. But I get to stay in town and can do more with the kids. Prior to this I was at the mine and she was in town. And to be honest my MBA degree is petty useless at this point. At least In this area. You can get a high school flunky working under ground making 100k a year or driving a haul truck on the surface for 70k+. I have been management since 18 so I would say I'm not doing anything wrong. I only work barely 40 hours a week. She works because she likes to. On top of that I Like making 200k a year so we can have all the fun stuff we have now. You obviously missed the part where I said "obviously this has all changed". You want to come off an bash me with little facts when you can ask and we can have an adult conversation. The point is hard work pays off degree or not.
> The fast food was for the principal of the matter. Wages go up so do the cost of goods.
> So what the "fuck am I doing wrong" obviously trying to carry on a big boy conversation with a keyboard warrior.



Says the keyboard warrior.  We all make big bucks on the internet.


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 20, 2013)

bmw said:


> Every corporation has an obligation first to their shareholders to make a profit.



No, they don't.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

must just be me but i think the person a company needs the most is the one actually doing the work. whatever the job is, even if it shoveling shit, they need to _fairly _compensate  the person with sweat on their brow. if you have a derisive attitude about the person standing on their feet all day to make your sandwich i think you deserve dick bread.


----------



## G.Reaper (Oct 20, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Says the keyboard warrior.  We all make big bucks on the internet.


well just under but close enough.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> No, they don't.



actually they do lmao..


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> must just be me but i think the person a company needs the most is the one actually doing the work. whatever the job is, even if it shoveling shit, they need to _fairly _compensate  the person with sweat on their brow. if you have a derisive attitude about the person standing on their feet all day to make your sandwich i think you deserve dick bread.



ok LW, how much should they be paid then? you guys are producing the "problems" (even though there wouldn't be one if no welfare or gubmint benefits existed), what is your solution?


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 20, 2013)

i like how everyone on the site is nearly a millionaire lately


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 20, 2013)

exerciseordie said:


> When I worked fast food the minimum wage was 6.50/hr. They hired a lady on at 8 because she had experience and two kids. She refused to take handouts from the government and I asked her how she kept everything up and running in her household at this pay. Her answer, "I don't buy shit I don't need. I walk to work, shop at goodwill and garage sales, I don't go out to eat, and I don't have a cell phone or pager. Simply put I only buy what I need and I keep a roof over my head and food on the table." Now I personally believe that if you are taking handouts then you don't need 100 dollar shoes and a new iphone. Just from personal experience and having friends who lived off of close to minimum wage. Fuck my roommate supports himself off of 9 bucks an hour. How? He doesn't buy dumb shit.


you cant live off of 8 or 9 dollars an hour in america...period


----------



## G.Reaper (Oct 20, 2013)

Well look up the wage for an underground miner or a haul truck driver for lets say Barrick or Newmont. This is the industry I'm in. The wages are a little different here. Then my wife is a safety manager, look up the wages for that. I'm a sales manager, look up those wages. Not hard to see.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> you cant live off of 8 or 9 dollars an hour in america...period



yes u can


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 20, 2013)

yes i guess if you are a kid without a child and wife and you dont pay rent and deal drugs on the side sure


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> yes i guess if you are a kid without a child and wife and you dont pay rent and deal drugs on the side sure



_you _want to get personal with _me _you fat mother fucker?


----------



## Big Puppy (Oct 20, 2013)

ive got a solution.

the next time i go to mcdonalds or walmart i will pay, thank them and leave.

the next time you go there you can pay, and then TIP those who helped you, an amount you think will bridge the gap for them for an hour of work

sounds fair


----------



## bdad (Oct 20, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> actually they do lmao..




You are exactly right my friend.  Why would anyone invest money in a company thats main  objective is to not make money?   Where's the logic in that?


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 20, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> _you _want to get personal with _me _you fat mother fucker?


couldnt care less what you think or do kid


----------



## Swiper (Oct 20, 2013)

Bowden said:


> Yep.
> As well the fast food corporations need to say thank you to the taxpayers who are funding 7 billion dollars worth of welfare benefits for their low paid and low to no benefit employees.
> 
> As to Wal-mart, a corporation that has the largest amount of employees on welfare in the U.S, they need to say thank you to the taxpayers who are funding welfare benefits for their low paid and low to no benefit  employees so that Wal-mart can afford to buy-back 16 billion dollars worth of stock.
> So that the Walton family, other billionaires and the investor class can cash in on increased stock prices due to those buy-backs which are possible due to low paid and low to no benefit  employee compensations.



no, you have it backwards. the people whom accept the job fully knowing the hourly pay rate need to thank the tax payer.  you're welcome.....


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

Big Puppy said:


> ive got a solution.
> 
> the next time i go to mcdonalds or walmart i will pay, thank them and leave.
> 
> ...



you have that wrong though. you will pay them, thank them, leave and give them more money when you pay taxes cuz their employer needs YOU to support their workers.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 20, 2013)

anyone CAN live on 8 or 9 bucks an hour if they never leave their parents.... kind of don't like the idea of American kids not being able to afford independence though.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> anyone CAN live on 8 or 9 bucks an hour if they never leave their parents.... kind of don't like the idea of American kids not being able to afford independence though.



my old room mate was supporting himself on 8.50 an hour. he was able to cover all of his expenses and still have a little left over at the end of the month. you all have no clue what you are talking about.. which quite frankly, does not surprise me


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 20, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> actually they do lmao..



Why?  Investing is a gamble, it's not a sure thing.  That's what people have lost sight of.  That is the ultimate in entitlement.


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 20, 2013)

bdad said:


> You are exactly right my friend.  Why would anyone invest money in a company thats main  objective is to not make money?   Where's the logic in that?



The objective is to make money, no argument there.  But there is no right to automatic profit.


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 20, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> _you _want to get personal with _me _you fat mother fucker?



Touched a sore spot, has he?


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 20, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> my old room mate was supporting himself on 8.50 an hour. he was able to cover all of his expenses and still have a little left over at the end of the month. you all have no clue what you are talking about.. which quite frankly, does not surprise me


quote
"roomate" as in not paying full rent anywhere...


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 20, 2013)

again child
you cannot liVe on your own...TOTALLY INDEPENDANT...and def not with a family depending on you ...for 8 or 9 dollars an hour


rent or mortgage
lights
gas for transportation
possible daycare or sitter
internet
phone
car ins
life ins
health coverage

JUST TODAYS ESSENTIALS


MOTHER FUCKING FOOD!


OUT OF 320 WEEKLY BEFORE TAXES


----------



## Big Puppy (Oct 20, 2013)

i think the big difference of opinion is what we are defining as minimum wage and jobs to support a family.
i believe that there are jobs for people to GET INTO the job market - people who don't have the education, skills, or experience to get a job that can support a family.
I also believe that it is the responsibility of the person to get the education, skills, and experience in able to get a job that pays well enough to support them and a family.
I don't think a husband and father of kids should be working at such places.  I haven't made minimum wage since i was 16.  I worked plenty of shitty jobs to earn skills, or to get experience to prove that i could work.  Then i got an education.  I do not believe that education from college is the end-all be-all.  But if not, you have to learn a skill.  Shame on those who don't.  If you choose not to get a skill or education, then shame on you.
That is why i don't think companies need to pay 15 an hour to the fry guy.  It should be a stupid kid instead of a husband and father trying to support a family.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Why?  Investing is a gamble, it's not a sure thing.  That's what people have lost sight of.  That is the ultimate in entitlement.



ok I guess you just don't get it.. ill try to explain using really small words ok? corporations are obligated to make a profit for their shareholders, because their shareholders own the company.. therefore they are required to do whatever they legally can in order to cut costs and increase revenues to raise profits for their shareholders.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> The objective is to make money, no argument there.  But there is no right to automatic profit.



when did anyone say anything about "automatic profit"?


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> again child
> you cannot liVe on your own...TOTALLY INDEPENDANT...and def not *with a family depending on you *...for 8 or 9 dollars an hour



this...coming from you? lol wow...


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 20, 2013)

i am the only one in the house who works and have been for 7 months....its not about me though child...its about anyone trying to provide for a small family....impossible on those wages...no matter whos fault it is


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 20, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> i am the only one in the house who works and have been for 7 months....its not about me though child...its about anyone trying to provide for a small family....impossible on those wages...no matter whos fault it is



anyways... if anyone signs up for a job working in the fast food industry, or as a peon for walmart, and expects to live the American dream of 3 kids and two cars with a white picket fence..they deserve whatever is coming to them, and should _absolutely not _be getting any government assistance. they want to have their cake and eat it too...not put any effort into getting an education or making contacts, but still being paid and living the american dream as if they had


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 20, 2013)

i didnt comment on any of that....every one has to live within there means....but then our own government doesnt...not everyone is handed the same opportunities though


but thats life...or democracy or some shit


----------



## HFO3 (Oct 20, 2013)

It's a sign of the times...
 When I was at that age when I had friends that worked fast food, I worked as a helper at an auto repair shop. Nobody and I mean not one single individual I knew would have even accepted welfare but rather worked, made connections and had a hunger inside to succeed not suck at life, claim failure for yourself and receive welfare. It is a totally different thought process than people have today, period.


----------



## Big Smoothy (Oct 20, 2013)

G.Reaper said:


> Fast food was never meant to be a career. It is not a job to support a family on. I'm not sure where the misconception for these people comes from. There is no reason they can't go out and get a better paying job that requires no education. If they are not happy about the wages then they are in the wrong field of work!



I see your point G.Reaper,

However......

And this is a relevant however: since the GFC (Great Financial Crisis) the average age of the fast food worker has risen.  More and more people that are not teens living at home have Fast Food (and other dead-end jobs).

148,000 people per month go into the US labor market per month.

IMO, if you work a job - any job - that is a legal job and you are legally entitled to work and do work - you should be able to make a _living wage._

This mean you can afford the most basic shelter and food. 

Not possible with current wages in many sectors in the USA. 

There seems to be a new slave class emerging.


----------



## HFO3 (Oct 20, 2013)

Big Smoothy said:


> I see your point G.Reaper,
> 
> However......
> 
> ...



that has never been true as long as I have been alive... I'm curious, why do you think it should be that way now?


----------



## bdad (Oct 20, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> again child
> you cannot liVe on your own...TOTALLY INDEPENDANT...and def not with a family depending on you ...for 8 or 9 dollars an hour
> 
> 
> ...



Internet, and life insurance are luxurys


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 20, 2013)

i agree...most people wouldnt see it that way
even the poorest americans are pretty spoiled....even now


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

Bowden said:


> Math is math.
> There are employees working for fast food corporations that qualify for 7 billion dollars worth of taxpayer funded welfare benefits due to these employees not receiving living wages and benefits at a level that would allow them to not have to go on welfare.
> These are not teenagers and seniors on social security that are receiving these welfare benefits.
> They are adults that are in the working poor economic class.
> ...



You should start buying wal-mart and McD's stock with a dividend reinvestment plan.  Show them motherfuckers bro!!!!!


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> must just be me but i think the person a company needs the most is the one actually doing the work. whatever the job is, even if it shoveling shit, they need to _fairly _compensate  the person with sweat on their brow. if you have a derisive attitude about the person standing on their feet all day to make your sandwich i think you deserve dick bread.



and yet those burger flippers or whatever are so easily replaced with a line around the block waiting for those jobs.  Most of them teenagers too!    At least where I live.


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> i like how everyone on the site is nearly a millionaire lately



you mean you're not???

you must not have a 12 inch dick, and drive a lambo and mercedes S class either?  

GTFO of here!


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> The objective is to make money, no argument there.  But there is no right to automatic profit.



nobody but you said anything about a right to make profits off an investment though??

I said a corporation has an obligation to it's shareholders to make money (or try to).


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

Big Puppy said:


> That is why i don't think companies need to pay 15 an hour to the fry guy.  It should be a stupid kid instead of a husband and father trying to support a family.



How dare you!  You entitlement minded sonofabitch you!


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

HFO3 said:


> It's a sign of the times...
> When I was at that age when I had friends that worked fast food, I worked as a helper at an auto repair shop. Nobody and I mean not one single individual I knew would have even accepted welfare but rather worked, made connections and had a hunger inside to succeed not suck at life, claim failure for yourself and receive welfare. It is a totally different thought process than people have today, period.



we must be close to the same age!


----------



## bmw (Oct 20, 2013)

HFO3 said:


> that has never been true as long as I have been alive... I'm curious, why do you think it should be that way now?



lol!  No shit.  When I started working, minimum wage was less than $3.00 an hour.  Live on that motherfuckers!


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 21, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> ok I guess you just don't get it.. ill try to explain using really small words ok? corporations are obligated to make a profit for their shareholders, because their shareholders own the company.. therefore they are required to do whatever they legally can in order to cut costs and increase revenues to raise profits for their shareholders.



I'll use really simple words to explain an even simpler concept:  No workers, no profits.  Shareholders aren't owed a damned thing.  They aren't even owed breaking even.  That's a recent thing, with investors suing a company or executives because they aren't getting enough return or they lost their investment.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> anyways... if anyone signs up for a job working in the fast food industry, or as a peon for walmart, and expects to live the American dream of 3 kids and two cars with a white picket fence..they deserve whatever is coming to them, and should _absolutely not _be getting any government assistance. they want to have their cake and eat it too...not put any effort into getting an education or making contacts, but still being paid and living the american dream as if they had



have you not gotten out of your house enough to know that a lot of skilled laborers here were living that dream before their jobs got sent to some slave country and now they are stuck with whatever scrap job they can get their hands on?

 that entire manufacturing towns all across this country have basically shut down because of this? climbing towards 3 million manufacturing jobs lost to China?

that for breadwinner adults school is a luxury when the mortgage is due and the fridge is getting bare?

that not everyone lives with their parents and no one can plan for the company they spent 20 years climbing to the top in to sell out? 


if this country is retarded enough to give our fucking jobs away, if our  government is retarded enough to allow it, they need to make the jobs  we have left pay a livable wage.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

if i start a company and my product or service being top notch isn't my first concern i would expect to fail. the shareholder shit is not even second on what needs to matter for it to be successful. focus has to be on product, customer service including price.... and if i am an ungrateful, slave driving cheap shit to my my workers good fucking luck with that top notch product.... they will give me dick bread to sell. in the end my shareholders will suffer for that.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

bmw said:


> and yet those burger flippers or whatever are so easily replaced with a line around the block waiting for those jobs.  Most of them teenagers too!    At least where I live.



you obviously have not lived in any town where the whole town relied on one manufacturing giant and it sold out. i have. you'd be surprised how many of them there are. coming soon to a town near you maybe because people don't care about shit ruining lives all across the country till it get's to be their turn.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

one of this countries top exports nowadays is trash... and China has started rejecting that. pretty fucking sad.


----------



## LAM (Oct 21, 2013)

HFO3 said:


> It is a totally different thought process than people have today, period.



only single mothers and the elderly can collect welfare.

and maybe it's also because the US economy of 2013 is totally different then it was 20-30 years ago?  wages are flat, prices of goods and services increase at double the rate of the CPI and more then real GDP growth and the dollar isn't worth shit.  the shift to a large service sector means the majority of jobs are low paying, there are no "options" in reality.  you can trade on low paying job for another. 

do you know what other country in the OECD has a large population and a service sector based economy that can't support the entire population?  Mexico...the future of the US is right to our southern border


----------



## Bowden (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> one of this countries top exports nowadays is trash... and China has started rejecting that. pretty fucking sad.



That and oil exports.
Believe it or not the U.S. is close to being the worlds largest oil exporter.

U.S. Becomes World


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

Bowden said:


> That and oil exports.
> Believe it or not the U.S. is close to being the worlds largest oil exporter.
> 
> U.S. Becomes World



no one knows the value of hanging onto anything anymore.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 21, 2013)

LAM said:


> only single mothers and the elderly can collect welfare.
> 
> and maybe it's also because the US economy of 2013 is totally different then it was 20-30 years ago?  wages are flat, prices of goods and services increase at double the rate of the CPI and more then real GDP growth and the dollar isn't worth shit.  the shift to a large service sector means the majority of jobs are low paying, there are no "options" in reality.  you can trade on low paying job for another.
> 
> do you know what other country in the OECD has a large population and a service sector based economy that can't support the entire population?  Mexico...the future of the US is right to our southern border



LAM.
Will you stop confusing the conservative free market ideologists with facts?

Everyone that is a conservative free market ideologist knows it's the fault of the working poor that they are poor and that the one percent that has captured 93%+ of all income in the U.S. since the 2008 recession started means that the one percent will soon trickle down that income and that supply side economics combined with a rising tide will soon lift all boats.
Their yachts and everyone elses one oar rowboats.


----------



## troubador (Oct 21, 2013)

Wow, people who don't make enough to support their family receive welfare? That's an amazing revelation.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 21, 2013)

troubador said:


> Wow, people who don't make enough to support their family receive welfare? That's an amazing revelation.



According to conservative free market ideologists its their fault if they don't make enough to support their family and that they have to go on welfare.

Wal-Mart executives seem to understand the best solution to their low paid employees who have a lack of benefits.
They were kind enough to put in their employee handbooks directions to the nearest Government welfare office in all 50 states along with helpful instructions as to how to apply for taxpayer supplied welfare benefits.

Maybe the fast food industry should consider the same solution.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

stuff that makes me sick as far as charity goes is all the fucking junkies receiving free methadone and the costs to run those clinics. i guess everyone is entitled to their own bug up their ass but this one is wrong on so many levels. not sure who can support it. finding out in 3...2....1...


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

Bowden said:


> According to conservative free market ideologists its their fault if they don't make enough to support their family and that they have to go on welfare.
> 
> Wal-Mart executives seem to understand the best solution to their low paid employees who have a lack of benefits.
> They were kind enough to put in their employee handbooks directions to the nearest Government welfare office in all 50 states along with helpful instructions as to how to apply for taxpayer supplied welfare benefits.
> ...



mcdonald's has real rocket scientists figuring this shit out... Why McDonald's Employee Budget Has Everyone Up In Arms - Forbes


and workers who know better

How She Lives On Minimum Wage: One McDonald's Worker's Budget - Forbes


----------



## troubador (Oct 21, 2013)

Bowden said:


> According to conservative free market ideologists its their fault if they don't make enough to support their family and that they have to go on welfare.



The socialist ideologues will not be satisfied once minimum wage is increased and reduce welfare payments. We'd probably end up looking like France with a minimum wage of over $12/hr and 17% of the population on welfare. Let's drop the act that you guys give a shit about the taxpayers.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 21, 2013)

troubador said:


> The socialist ideologues will not be satisfied once minimum wage is increased and reduce welfare payments. We'd probably end up looking like France with a minimum wage of over $12/hr and 17% of the population on welfare. Let's drop the act that you guys give a shit about the taxpayers.



I am a taxpayer and yeah, I give a shit about taxes.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 21, 2013)

troubador said:


> The socialist ideologues will not be satisfied once minimum wage is increased and reduce welfare payments. We'd probably end up looking like France with a minimum wage of over $12/hr and 17% of the population on welfare. Let's drop the act that you guys give a shit about the taxpayers.



You tell me.
Would you rather pay 10 cents more for a hamburger and a drink at McDonald's so that McDonalds can pay a living wage and benefits to their employees at a level that disqualifies them from receiving welfare benefits or pay increased taxes due to those McDonald's employees being on taxpayer funded welfare?
Same with Wal-Mart. 
Would you rather pay 10 cents more for a product sold at Wal-Mart so that Wal-Mart can pay a living wage and benefits to their employees at a level that disqualifies them from receiving welfare benefits or pay increased taxes due to employees being on  taxpayer funded welfare?



 

This is common sense.
Either way, as a consumer or a taxpayer you are going to pay one way or another.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

just as it's common sense that the rich getting tax breaks is a crock of bullshit. they need to pay the fuck up and so do churches. don't tell me people don't care about the burden placed on the taxpayer because we sure as shit do. if taxes aren't going to whineohna and her 7 kids and rich shit bags actually pay theirs instead of buying more politicians....  maybe they can go to improving our schools.


----------



## Big Smoothy (Oct 21, 2013)

HFO3 said:


> that has never been true as long as I have been alive... I'm curious, why do you think it should be that way now?



Because wages have been stagnant and declining for over 40 years.


----------



## LAM (Oct 21, 2013)

troubador said:


> The socialist ideologues will not be satisfied once minimum wage is increased and reduce welfare payments. We'd probably end up looking like France with a minimum wage of over $12/hr and 17% of the population on welfare. Let's drop the act that you guys give a shit about the taxpayers.



you obviously don't even know what socialism is.  but what's even more comical is that you have no problem with cronly capitalism funneling money up the ladder via rent seeking activities by the capitalist class then turn around and complain about the economy and the deficit and spending on the social safety net.

you do realize you can't have it both ways don't you?  the math just doesn't add up.


----------



## jay_steel (Oct 21, 2013)

All i hear is a bunch of crying and no resolution... Simple observations... How much should a entry level fast food person make? In reality honestly what should they make. We are talking entry level. Because I know a few people making ALLOT at MC'D's. Managers make great wages I think a few make up to around 65k a year. I dated a girl that use to pull 3k a month when she was 22 from McD's. When i first started to date a girl at her age workin there I honestly wanted to run. But then she told me her plans to run one and informed me about their actual level of promotions and wages. That the people that make the "low wages" never apply and show progression in their fields to promote. So why should some one with no management skills or motivation to excel get more pay? 

The job is intended for a high school student period. That is their target demographic for hiring. It is not their fault that Americans have no motivation or spent half their life being lazy and realized at 30 they need to finally work. Also to live on your own with out roomates it does take more money, but I just researched apt's where I live and you can get them down to 300$ for a 1 bed room apt. this is living alone independently. @ 1700 a month you can easily do this. You may not have a car and rely on public transportation but its possible to live on your own at that wage. 

Also if your 30 years old and you find your self making low wages for years, crying about it will not resolve your problem. Here are things that will resolve your problem.. At the wage level you are eligible for free day care if you have kids. Take nigh classes to better educate your self and find a technical field you can go to. University of Phoenix offers one day a week. Sure it may not be the best school but we just graduated a guy who was homeless and is now making 20$ an hour working for the county. Take the time to work more, get a second job. My grandfather use to have to drive trucks for 18 hours a day to make 1g a week. He did what he had to do and never bitched about it. He knew he wouldnt make enough to work an 8 hour day, so he solved his problem and busted his ass. Never once got on gov't assistance.

My dad had to drive trucks across the country to support me while my mom worked 3 jobs. Beautician, Waitress, and sally's beauty salon. They did what they had to do and never complains about low wages. My mom saved enough to run her sown salon and now owns it after 15 years. 

So the answer to these people that cry about low wages... Guess what people have been crying for YEARS its not going to change.. So you can either keep making excuses or do something about it.



KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> i didnt comment on any of that....every one has to live within there means....but then our own government doesnt...not everyone is handed the same opportunities though
> 
> 
> but thats life...or democracy or some shit



Everyone has the same chance for success I fucking hate this excuse. This is what everyone who all ready excepts defeat says. Well i didnt have the same opportunity, he was rich , i wasn?t his life was easy. Like i said before I never saw my dad and mom worked 3 jobs. I had NO parents growing up to supervise me. I could have made EVERY bad decision possible, but I wanted to succeed. Everyone gets public schools free, everyone gets a shot at an education. Everyone gets a shot at sporting programs. Look how many athletes come from nothing. Every year at low income schools the entire top 10% gets awarded scholarships. Guess what if you cant go to college then maybe you should bust your ass and study. The only excuse I believe is that "I did not want it bad enough" simple as that. At the end of the day the only person that you can blame is your self. If you still blame other people you will never succeed. 


Little Wing said:


> have you not gotten out of your house enough to know that a lot of skilled laborers here were living that dream before their jobs got sent to some slave country and now they are stuck with whatever scrap job they can get their hands on?
> 
> that entire manufacturing towns all across this country have basically shut down because of this? climbing towards 3 million manufacturing jobs lost to China?
> 
> ...



My answer to this is the same with evolution. There will be things that turn obsolete. If your field is outdated or becoming obsolete, or outsourced. You have to options. Sit on your ass pissed, or bust your ass to learn a different field. I know in CA PG&E has TONS of programs to take obsolete careers and train people on a new career path. Its called taking advantage of your situation and not excepting to lose. Yes your company is over it got outsourced. What can you do? Nothing.. No amount of bitching and saying big business is unfair is going to make you successful. Big Business will be this way forever, it will NEVER change. So your option is either to compete and win at this game of life or sit back and get passed the fuck up.


----------



## jay_steel (Oct 21, 2013)

Simple question why should any one get something they do not deserve or have worked for?


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 21, 2013)

so you had no parents....not even adopted...where did you live? group home?


always hilarious when everyone says what you just said
turns out they had mommy daddy...aunty uncle grammy and grandpa


me in my teenage years i bounced around in a camaro...a drifter


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 21, 2013)

jay_steel said:


> Simple question why should any one get something they do not deserve or have worked for?



Nobody is saying that.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 21, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> me in my teenage years i bounced around in a camaro...a drifter



you sucked dick for a living in your teenage years


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 21, 2013)

nah...ones i remember from 16 to 19 are 
land scaping= weedeating
burger king
concrete laborer
brick laborer


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 21, 2013)

jay_steel said:


> All i hear is a bunch of crying and no resolution... Simple observations... How much should a entry level fast food person make? In reality honestly what should they make. We are talking entry level. Because I know a few people making ALLOT at MC'D's. Managers make great wages I think a few make up to around 65k a year. I dated a girl that use to pull 3k a month when she was 22 from McD's. When i first started to date a girl at her age workin there I honestly wanted to run. But then she told me her plans to run one and informed me about their actual level of promotions and wages. That the people that make the "low wages" never apply and show progression in their fields to promote. So why should some one with no management skills or motivation to excel get more pay?
> 
> The job is intended for a high school student period. That is their target demographic for hiring. It is not their fault that Americans have no motivation or spent half their life being lazy and realized at 30 they need to finally work. Also to live on your own with out roomates it does take more money, but I just researched apt's where I live and you can get them down to 300$ for a 1 bed room apt. this is living alone independently. @ 1700 a month you can easily do this. You may not have a car and rely on public transportation but its possible to live on your own at that wage.
> 
> ...


no one non management makes 1700 a month at mcdonalds
do you even math bro


----------



## dieseljimmy (Oct 21, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> you sucked dick for a living in your teenage years



wtf ... how many times does someone need to direct you to AG.  do the rules not apply to you?


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 21, 2013)

hes a christian bro


----------



## jay_steel (Oct 21, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> so you had no parents....not even adopted...where did you live? group home?
> 
> 
> always hilarious when everyone says what you just said
> ...



cool story want a hug


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 21, 2013)

come at me


----------



## dieseljimmy (Oct 21, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> hes a christian bro



ohh I see. should have said that from the beginning.


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 21, 2013)

jay_steel said:


> cool story want a hug


not really

you whined your parents werent there...thn said they worked 3 jobs...to...gasp....provide for you
ill trade that for my empty plates and bouncing from foster home to group home and back again bud


----------



## jay_steel (Oct 21, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> no one non management makes 1700 a month at mcdonalds
> do you even math bro



8.50 x 8 = 68$ a day
68$ x 23=1564.

A cashier where I live can make any where from 8.50 to 10$ an hour. so at the higher rating is 1840. 

Also In and Out plays 10-12$ an hour with benefits. 

Or if they cant get a 6 day work week then they can get another job to supplement the hours. Its called doing what you need to to survive.


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 21, 2013)

here they get 8 flat....and no one gets 40...overtime yeah right


----------



## jay_steel (Oct 21, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> not really
> 
> you whined your parents werent there...thn said they worked 3 jobs...to...gasp....provide for you
> ill trade that for my empty plates and bouncing from foster home to group home and back again bud



So you blame your lack of desire and success off of something that you could not control. Maybe that is why you will never meet your true potential. If you want to compare rough and at the bottom then look up the freewheelproject.org and look up Tony Hoffman. Felon, in and our of jail/prison, homeless, drug addict. To a professional athlete and business owner. I never said my up bringing was not the hardest. So if you want a cock length contest i did not grow up in a group home, but that fact is you never regain control of your life and your still allowing your past to influence your future. You can cry all you want about being homeless or what ever, but the list goes on and on about homeless people who are now millionaires. Look up Paul Mitchells bio. Or maybe you just have no drive for success.


----------



## jay_steel (Oct 21, 2013)

if this country is retarded enough to give our fucking jobs away, if our  government is retarded enough to allow it, they need to make the jobs  we have left pay a livable wage.[/QUOTE]



KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> here they get 8 flat....and no one gets 40...overtime yeah right



maybe true in your demographic but i have a cousin working 6 days a week at taco bell also min wage goes up to 10$ an hour in 4 days in CA.


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 21, 2013)

nah...im happy...i just wanted to be normal

i just gave the early life example of how not all are given the same oppurtunities
i never was a child living off of parents

never had a single soul to back me up

hard to plan for some glamorous future when you are concerned about where youll sleep...or if someone might feed you that day


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 21, 2013)

lol at you listing miracle one in a million stories like it is even remotely possible every day story...lotta luck along with drive


----------



## jay_steel (Oct 21, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> nah...im happy...i just wanted to be normal
> 
> i just gave the early life example of how not all are given the same oppurtunities
> i never was a child living off of parents
> ...



then that is fine, if your happy with your current life style then you achieved your goals. My complaint are the ones crying aboutthe money they make, but do not do anything to better then selves. If they have making minimum wage but they are only qualified for min wage jobs, then they better invest some time to educate them selves. Ok that costs money, TONS of gov't assistants out there to help people.


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 21, 2013)

it is ridiculous to insinuate that there is room at the top of the food chain...for everyone


----------



## jay_steel (Oct 21, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> lol at you listing miracle one in a million stories like it is even remotely possible every day story...lotta luck along with drive



I can list a pretty large laundry list of successful millionaires who i consider as mentors, but there not in the papers or known. Most of them were came by with nothing as well. Few were migrants in the 60's.
yes the list for millionaires from nothing to something is small. But so is the number of people who actually desire and fight for the level of success.


----------



## jay_steel (Oct 21, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> it is ridiculous to insinuate that there is room at the top of the food chain...for everyone



there isnt, but that line is what will prevent people from achieving. You might as well give up because its not possible. There is plenty of money to be made, you just have to find the right investment, right business, at the right time. I missed my first shot with gold. I was close to investing 40k from a bonus in gold in 2003. That  for 303$ per and at the high sale it for 1600 per. That would have been over a 200k profit. I learned that day if you hesitate you will never be successful. So if i see an opportunity for success i take it.


----------



## LAM (Oct 21, 2013)

jay_steel said:


> Or if they cant get a 6 day work week then they can get another job to supplement the hours. Its called doing what you need to to survive.



real world economic data doesn't support your solution, there aren't enough jobs available for everyone to "work as much as they want to" those days ended long ago the extent of that varies from metro to metro.  in the north east those days were over in the early 90's.

demand is down from the housing crisis and the pre-2008 recession levels of consumption were unsustainable as they were fueled by debt fueled consumption.  the entire increase in GDP from 2001-2008 was from  mortgage debt, that was obviously unsustainable.

the economy of today is the new normal and it's never going to go back to the way it was.  US real GDP growth and real wage growth for the majority is going to be sluggish from now on.  the 2013 economy is closer to what the economy would have looked like in the 2000's if not for the manufactured housing boom, which was the direct result of policy and not supply and demand.


----------



## LAM (Oct 21, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> it is ridiculous to insinuate that there is room at the top of the food chain...for everyone



idealogues just don't get it, I guess that's why they suck at the sciences, critical thought just isn't an option for them.


----------



## troubador (Oct 21, 2013)

Bowden said:


> You tell me.
> Would you rather pay 10 cents more for a hamburger and a drink ... or pay increased taxes?



^Not an actual math problem. So I'm going with...


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 21, 2013)

What it all comes down to is the top 1% have most of the wealth in this country.  No matter what you do, how many hours you work at $8/hour, how much your wife/girlfriend works to help, how educated you are, that to 1% isn't going to let you in because they sure as hell aren't giving it out to anyone.  They pay the legislators to tip the scales in their favor and that's how it's going to be until the vast majority who have been brainwashed to think that if you aren't successful it's because you aren't working hard enough wake the fuck up and realize killing yourself over a job isn't going to change things for you.


----------



## HFO3 (Oct 21, 2013)

LAM said:


> only single mothers and the elderly can collect welfare.
> 
> and maybe it's also because the US economy of 2013 is totally different then it was 20-30 years ago?  wages are flat, prices of goods and services increase at double the rate of the CPI and more then real GDP growth and the dollar isn't worth shit.  the shift to a large service sector means the majority of jobs are low paying, there are no "options" in reality.  you can trade on low paying job for another.
> 
> do you know what other country in the OECD has a large population and a service sector based economy that can't support the entire population?  Mexico...the future of the US is right to our southern border





Bowden said:


> LAM.
> Will you stop confusing the conservative free market ideologists with facts?
> 
> Everyone that is a conservative free market ideologist knows it's the fault of the working poor that they are poor and that the one percent that has captured 93%+ of all income in the U.S. since the 2008 recession started means that the one percent will soon trickle down that income and that supply side economics combined with a rising tide will soon lift all boats.
> Their yachts and everyone elses one oar rowboats.





Bowden said:


> You tell me.
> Would you rather pay 10 cents more for a hamburger and a drink at McDonald's so that McDonalds can pay a living wage and benefits to their employees at a level that disqualifies them from receiving welfare benefits or pay increased taxes due to those McDonald's employees being on taxpayer funded welfare?
> Same with Wal-Mart.
> Would you rather pay 10 cents more for a product sold at Wal-Mart so that Wal-Mart can pay a living wage and benefits to their employees at a level that disqualifies them from receiving welfare benefits or pay increased taxes due to employees being on  taxpayer funded welfare?
> ...



FWIW:
 I said nothing about families getting welfare or government assistance, read my WHOLE POST, then reply if you want. 

Bowden, you're ridiculous, you know nothing about me, my life philosophy, or my thoughts on political views.  Why do you think you do?   "Even a fool can appear wise if he keeps his mouth shut"

 Lam, do you have a crystal ball that tells you the future? NO, you do not, why do you predict it so often? We are nothing at all like Mexico and short of a nuclear attack, we never will be.


----------



## troubador (Oct 21, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> it is ridiculous to insinuate that there is room at the top of the food chain...for everyone



He didn't. There are some well paying jobs in the U.S. that they are having difficulty finding qualified candidates for. Someone out there has the ability and the desire.


----------



## troubador (Oct 21, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> What it all comes down to is the top 1% have most of the wealth in this country.  No matter what you do, how many hours you work at $8/hour, how much your wife/girlfriend works to help, how educated you are, that to 1% isn't going to let you in because they sure as hell aren't giving it out to anyone.



That has nothing to do with raising minimum wage. In no way does making $12/hr at McDonald's help reach the top 1%.


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 21, 2013)

troubador said:


> He didn't. There are some well paying jobs in the U.S. that they are having difficulty finding qualified candidates for. Someone out there has the ability and the desire.


america must be in great shape then...everyone must get a job straight out college
bwahahahaha
really?
i mean really?


----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 21, 2013)

there are jobs for everyone....we can all be rich!


yay


the modern depression is over


----------



## OfficerFarva (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> stuff that makes me sick as far as charity goes is all the fucking junkies receiving free methadone and the costs to run those clinics. i guess everyone is entitled to their own bug up their ass but this one is wrong on so many levels. not sure who can support it. finding out in 3...2....1...




I never thought I'd hear you say you're against helping someone out LW.  I think these programs are fantastic and need to be expanded.  You can either help the junkie out and keep him off of the streets at a small cost to the tax payer or let him shoot up whenever, wherever.  Look at the success of Insite in Vancouver:

*User statistics*

-We have had more than 2.0 million visits since we first opened in 2003
-There are currently about 12,000 users registered at InSite.

2012 user statistics

From January 1 to December 21, 2012, there were:

    376,149 visits to the site by 9,259 unique individuals
    An average of 1,028 visits per day
    193,764 visits to the injection room
    An average of 529 injection room vists per day
    497 overdose incidents
    3,418 clinical treatment interventions
    27% of participants were women
    17% of participants were aboriginal
    Principle substances reported were heroin (51% of instances), cocaine (22% of instances) and methampethamine (10%)
    4,564 referrals to other social and health services
    488 discharges from Onsite detox

Vancouver Coastal Health - Supervised Injection - Supporting Research



These people could have been shooting up in random alleys by schools and leave their dirty needles everywhere.  Instead they're given a place to do it out of public site and supplied with clean needles which prevents the spread of disease.  If those people overdosed and died that would have cost the taxpayer a lot more to bury him than it would have to have helped him out.  A little help goes a long way.


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 21, 2013)

troubador said:


> That has nothing to do with raising minimum wage. In no way does making $12/hr at McDonald's help reach the top 1%.



It isn't about reaching the top 1%, it's about wages people can afford to live on.  The 1% have so much already and they want so much more that everyone else is fighting for scraps.  They are laughing because we are fighting each other rather than going after them.


----------



## troubador (Oct 21, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> america must be in great shape then...everyone must get a job straight out college
> bwahahahaha
> really?
> i mean really?



I didn't say that. You keep reading stuff people aren't writing.


----------



## troubador (Oct 21, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> It isn't about reaching the top 1%, it's about wages people can afford to live on.  The 1% have so much already and they want so much more that everyone else is fighting for scraps.  They are laughing because we are fighting each other rather than going after them.



Sounds like the zero sum fallacy.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

LAM said:


> idealogues just don't get it, I guess that's why they suck at the sciences, critical thought just isn't an option for them.



why won't you answer my question?  

again,  how much per hour is a livable wage for a fast food worker?


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> It isn't about reaching the top 1%, it's about wages people can afford to live on.  The 1% have so much already and they want so much more that everyone else is fighting for scraps.  They are laughing because we are fighting each other rather than going after them.



what's a livable wage for a fast food worker????????


----------



## OfficerFarva (Oct 21, 2013)

While I agree the top 1% are probably trying to fuck everyone else over I don't see why that means fast food workers or anyone in a bottom end job like that deserve more pay.  Why should they get $20+/hr, benefits, and a pension for putting some fries in a deep frier and putting a burger together?


----------



## bdad (Oct 21, 2013)

LAM said:


> only single mothers and the elderly can collect welfare.
> 
> and maybe it's also because the US economy of 2013 is totally different then it was 20-30 years ago? wages are flat, prices of goods and services increase at double the rate of the CPI and more then real GDP growth and the dollar isn't worth shit. the shift to a large service sector means the majority of jobs are low paying, there are no "options" in reality. you can trade on low paying job for another.
> 
> do you know what other country in the OECD has a large population and a service sector based economy that can't support the entire population? Mexico...the future of the US is right to our southern border



[h=1]EBT card food stamp recipients ransack Wal-Mart stores[/h]




 















Stealing carts full of food during federal computer glitch
October 14, 2013
When the federal EBT food stamp system suffered a critical failure on Saturday, local retailers were disconnected from the federal food stamp database that keeps track of how much credit is left on each individual EBT card. Seizing the opportunity provided by the glitch, EBT card holders in Louisiana *ransacked their local Wal-Mart stores*, stuffing their shopping carts full of groceries and ?paying? for them with near-empty EBT cards that essentially had *unlimited account balances* because all accounting was offline.





 Image: Walmart.

When the EBT database came back online and card purchase limits were suddenly restored, *EBT card holders abandoned their full carts* and just walked away, probably miffed that they missed out on participating in the felony theft of groceries.
This happened at Wal-Mart stores in Springhill and Mansfield, LA. As local news station KSLA reports:
_Shelves in Walmart stores in Springhill and Mansfield, LA were reportedly cleared Saturday night, when the stores allowed purchases on EBT cards even though they were not showing limits.
The chaos that followed ultimately required intervention from local police, and left behind numerous carts filled to overflowing, apparently abandoned when the glitch-spurred shopping frenzy ended._
The story goes on to report that one woman who racked up $700 worth of groceries had only 49 cents on her card. That?s $699.51 in theft.
But that?s the mindset of many (but not all) EBT card holders, you see: it?s all about *how much they can get away with stealing* without getting caught. As it is virtually impossible to retrieve all these stolen items from EBT cardholders, these losses are going to have to be absorbed by either Wal-Mart or the federal government. In either case, other people must burden the cost of the theft.
For the record, not everyone on EBT cards is a social parasite. Some are truly hard-working moms and dads and others who really need a short-term safety net, and I?m for supporting those who need a helping hand to get back on their feet. If someone is working, trying to make ends meet and needs some short-term assistance, we must have the compassion to help them. But far too many people today are simply unwilling to work, and their entire economic plan is to *suck off the system* and collect as much as they can off everyone else while refusing to contribute to society themselves. That?s the mindset of a great many EBT card holders who engage in widespread abuse and fraud. Some even sell their EBT cards to crooked shop owners who pay them cash. That cash is often used to buy crack or other street drugs.
This is now what characterizes the EBT program in America: massive fraud and abuse.
*An important lesson in the twisted morality of those who engage in ?proxy theft? of food and money*
In analyzing this behavior, what I?m about to share with you here is hugely important for anyone who wants to survive the coming social chaos and urban death traps that will unfold when a real crisis hits. Please help me get this story posted at SurvivalBlog.com, DailyPaul.com and other liberty / preparedness sites where it may be of use.
Here?s the life-or-death lesson in all this:
*Most people who live off the government have no concept of private property.* They literally do not believe that stealing large quantities of food from someone else is morally wrong. In fact, they believe that YOUR stored food actually belongs to THEM because they are ?entitled? to live off you like parasites. This is the only life they know, and this is how they are born, raised and trained by the Democrats to remain wholly subservient to the government for their entire lives.
As proof of this, read some of the comments posted on this article. You will find, in astonishment, that nearly all the comments are from people who say there is nothing wrong from stealing food from Wal-Mart because it?s a ?rich? corporation. Instead of condemning the people stealing shopping carts full of food from Wal-Mart, they are condemning me for daring to write about this issue. Apparently, I am bad for opposing the theft of food. In fact, according to some comments, I am engaged in a ?hate crime? for even pointing out that stealing food is wrong.
These comments demonstrate exactly my point. We now live in a society that?s so pathetic and so twisted in its moral code that the ransacking of a retailer by EBT card holders is considered morally justifiable. Anyone who opposes it is accused of spewing ?hate crimes.? Don?t put much weight into those attacking this story, by the way. Many of them are the very same people who will not survive the coming federal financial default. In their denial of reality, they can only resort to lashing out against those who are trying to save them by alerting them to the truth.
How will the federal government reach a state of default? The reversal of morals and ethics is precisely what drives the acceleration of the welfare state into ever larger handouts for the demanding masses until the whole system reaches a point of unsustainable default. Once individual morality is gone, the morality of the nation quickly falls. And today, we are witnessing a wholesale reversal of morals in the minds of individual EBT recipients.
As this small EBT card glitch clearly demonstrates, if given half a chance, *many EBT card holders will immediately engage in the mass looting of food and supplies* as long as they can get away with it. This was not one or two isolated people; this involved _masses of people_ who spontaneously transformed into *a rampaging mob of looting maniacs* that ransacked a private business and caused huge losses in stolen goods and displaced inventory.
To clarify, I am not saying that all EBT card holders are one trigger away from slipping into a raging mob of looters. But many of them are. Food stamps are just a ?safe? way for them to mug you, indirectly, through the ?proxy theft? of government. Every paycheck you earn is already being looted against your will, and a significant portion of that money is going to pay for the ?benefits? of many people who flat-out refuse to work or to take any responsibility for their own lives.


----------



## LAM (Oct 21, 2013)

OfficerFarva said:


> While I agree the top 1% are probably trying to fuck everyone else over I don't see why that means fast food workers or anyone in a bottom end job like that deserve more pay.  Why should they get $20+/hr, benefits, and a pension for putting some fries in a deep frier and putting a burger together?



it's basic mathematics, either they get paid more or the government provides more of their income via various types of transfers.

the best way to end poverty is to stop paying poverty wages, and that's were wages are at for the majority in the bottom 2 income quintiles.  they earn the least there for taxes at the state level for them are highly regressive as it accounts for a greater total percentage of their income.


----------



## OfficerFarva (Oct 21, 2013)

LAM said:


> it's basic mathematics, either they get paid more or the government provides more of their income via various types of transfers.
> 
> the best way to end poverty is to stop paying poverty wages, and that's were wages are at for the majority in the bottom 2 income quintiles.  they earn the least there for taxes at the state level for them are highly regressive as it accounts for a greater total percentage of their income.




Why should the government have to help them out at all?


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

LAM said:


> it's basic mathematics, either they get paid more or the government provides more of their income via various types of transfers.
> 
> the best way to end poverty is to stop paying poverty wages, and that's were wages are at for the majority in the bottom 2 income quintiles.  they earn the least there for taxes at the state level for them are highly regressive as it accounts for a greater total percentage of their income.



what's the problem? why won't you answer my question?


----------



## bdad (Oct 21, 2013)

Swiper said:


> what's the problem? why won't you answer my question?




I'm sure it has something to do with economics 101!!!  LOL


----------



## LAM (Oct 21, 2013)

OfficerFarva said:


> Why should the government have to help them out at all?



#1 - it is the function of government to do so.

#2 - it's government that made the existing problem worst with the changes made to the structure of the US economy over the past 3-4 decades.  policy shapes the markets, which is why there's no such thing as "free markets" in reality.  the financialization of the US economy is a direct attack on labor and labor wages, as was the changes in the federal tax code that now makes overall taxes only slightly progressive, and it was the state that directly attacked labor unions in the 80's starring with the PATCO strike.


----------



## KelJu (Oct 21, 2013)

G.Reaper said:


> Fast food was never meant to be a career. It is not a job to support a family on. I'm not sure where the misconception for these people comes from. There is no reason they can't go out and get a better paying job that requires no education. If they are not happy about the wages then they are in the wrong field of work!



Right, they are flipping burgers because they don't want a better job. Wait, what the fuck? Where are these better jobs. I live in the heart of downtown Atlanta, and there are tens of thousands of people who hate their job, hate being on food stamps, and pretty much hate their life. But, they are in the situation because you think they just picked the wrong job? 

Maybe we should go notify them to apply for better paying jobs, or wait again, they already fucking have! I'm not saying everyone deserves a good paying job, because "deserves" isn't a word that applies. Life isn't fair. But, to insinuate that people work shitty low paying jobs because they don't want a better paying job is a fucking ignorant and asshole thing to say.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

bdad said:


> I'm sure it has something to do with economics 101!!!  LOL



yep he's a phony whom can't answer a simple question. it's too much for his brain to handle and generate a responce.  maybe he can google it and copy and paste an answer for us.  lmao!


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

my son got a crispy chicken ranch today just before we went to get groceries. the woman that waited on us was late 40s maybe early 50's there was a big guy maybe early 30s and a couple women in their mid to late 20's and a big woman mid 30s in the front area of the mcdonalds we stopped at. people are full of shit that it's just teens in these jobs. fuck anyone that supports giving our manufacturing jobs to other countries then keeping the wages low on the leftovers people have to grapple for.


----------



## HFO3 (Oct 21, 2013)

That doesn't make it the rule^^^ where I live it is the exact opposite, kids doing kid jobs. I agree 100% with you on American jobs being shipped out though, 100%!


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

Swiper said:


> yep he's a phony whom can't answer a simple question. it's too much for his brain to handle and generate a responce.  maybe he can google it and copy and paste an answer for us.  lmao!





Prince said:


> I think LAM's intelligence and education in  economics, finance and politics is above most of your heads, which is  why no one can ever debate him, he makes everyone look like a  fool.



maybe take that up with Prince. and ask him how to spell reponse while you're at it. you're one of the worst spellers on IM and always bragging how educated you are. pfffft. your "ho ho ha ha"  doesn't make you look any smarter.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

HFO3 said:


> That doesn't make it the rule^^^ where I live it is the exact opposite, kids doing kid jobs. I agree 100% with you on American jobs being shipped out though, 100%!



it should be kids working there and was in towns that _were_ booming.... coming soon to a town near you.


----------



## LAM (Oct 21, 2013)

Swiper said:


> why won't you answer my question?
> 
> again,  how much per hour is a livable wage for a fast food worker?



because you are on ignore and I can't see you posts normally.

the data collected by the ILO across the OECD and other country's shows the US minimum wage is around 38-40% of the median.  many other wealthy industrialized country's are closer to 60% and higher.

It's all in the Global Wage Reports that I've posted dozens of times.


Global Wage Report 2010/11
Wage Policies in times of crisis
http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/pu...m/@publ/documents/publication/wcms_145265.pdf


Global Wage Report 2008/09
Minimum Wages and collective barganing
Towards policy coherence
http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/documents/publication/wcms_100786.pdf


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> maybe take that up with Prince. and ask him how to spell reponse while you're at it. you're one of the worst spellers on IM and always bragging how educated you are. pfffft. your "ho ho ha ha"  doesn't make you look any smarter.



automatic spell check on iPhone.  do you have anything of substance to say?  I don't think so........ it's beyond you, don't even try,  you'll keep embarrassing yourself as you do here daily.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

Swiper said:


> automatic spell check on iPhone.  do you have anything of substance to say?  I don't think so........ it's beyond you, don't even try,  you'll keep embarrassing yourself as you do here daily.



seeing you argue with LAM reminds me of working with special people.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

LAM said:


> because you are on ignore and I can't see you posts normally.
> 
> the data collected by the ILO across the OECD and other country's shows the US minimum wage is around 38-40% of the median.  many other wealthy industrialized country's are closer to 60% and higher.
> 
> ...



I want to know what YOU think it should be not what other countries are. can't you think for yourself? so what do YOU think it should be??  60%? over 60%.???


----------



## HFO3 (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> it should be kids working there and was in towns that _were_ booming.... coming soon to a town near you.



nope, not where I live dear, lol.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> seeing you argue with LAM reminds me of working with special people.



special people like your offspring?


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

i double dog dare you to start a thread arguing with Prince about who is smarter you or LAM.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

HFO3 said:


> nope, not where I live dear, lol.



where might that be? just saying too many towns here that depended on one manufacturing giant or another have gone belly up and a lot of others are hurting. it's sadly, not uncommon to see adults take jobs kids traditionally held.


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 21, 2013)

I think we should pay minimum wage to people with specialized skills and give full salaries with benefits and pensions to burger flippers and ditch diggers


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i double dog dare you to start a thread arguing with Prince about who is smarter you or LAM.



you sound like a little child.  it's hilarious!  keep it coming.


----------



## troubador (Oct 21, 2013)




----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

Swiper said:


> you sound like a little child.  it's hilarious!  keep it coming.



i was responding to your maturity level in attacking my kids. speaking your own language so to speak. 

you look like an idiot attacking LAM and i'm pretty sure informing you of the spectacle you make of yourself when you do was the intent of Prince's post...


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

Standard Donkey said:


> I think we should pay minimum wage to people with specialized skills and give full salaries with benefits and pensions to burger flippers and ditch diggers




i think we should rebuild this country to the point that those jobs ARE reserved for hs kids again.


----------



## s2h (Oct 21, 2013)

I was a Subway "Sandwich Artist " when I was 16 yrs old...pretty good gig...got paid and free food...just sayin..


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i was responding to your maturity level in attacking my kids. speaking your own language so to speak.
> 
> you look like an idiot attacking LAM and i'm pretty sure informing you of the spectacle you make of yourself when you do was the intent of Prince's post...




I asked lam a question, that's an attack?  lol   you're a strange old lady. I bet you own a lot of cats?


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i think we should rebuild this country to the point that those jobs ARE reserved for hs kids again.



lets hear what your ideas of rebuilding this county looks like.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

i'd make our education system second to none and make sure everyone had a good job to go to. put an end to the nonsense that got us here to begin with. obviously i'd have to be king to accomplish jack shit with the buffoons we have in congress mucking shit up.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i'd make our education system second to none and make sure everyone had a good job to go to. put an end to the nonsense that got us here to begin with. obviously i'd have to be king to accomplish jack shit with the buffoons we have in congress mucking shit up.



don't get too specific.  lol.    little wing 2016!!


----------



## HFO3 (Oct 21, 2013)

lol @ gov created jobs...


----------



## LAM (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i'd make our education system second to none and make sure everyone had a good job to go to. put an end to the nonsense that got us here to begin with. obviously i'd have to be king to accomplish jack shit with the buffoons we have in congress mucking shit up.



we all would at least those of use that are forward thinking. the problem is that a consumption based economy doesn't need thinkers, it needs people to buy shit that they don't really need but think they do.  besides the Internet nothing else has really changed our lives that much in the past 40 years, just lots of little gadgets.

the US education system "free education" began with the industrial revolution.  the "owners" of the capital class new that the workers needed to have enough education to learn how to work in the factories and repair them, etc.  now they have all been sent away and we see the "free" education system for the workers being dumbed down.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i'd make our education system second to none and make sure everyone had a good job to go to. put an end to the nonsense that got us here to begin with. obviously i'd have to be king to accomplish jack shit with the buffoons we have in congress mucking shit up.



how would you reform the education system? privatize it?


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

i would take a large chunk of what now goes to the military and put it toward education. i would take the money wasted in the war on pot and put it toward education. i would take the money wasted building fancy ass prisons and put it toward education. i would invest in America rather than give billions to Africa etc. i would stop tax breaks for the rich and corporate welfare and put it toward education. i would tax churches and put it toward education. schools, books, music programs, arts, science labs... everything needed to feed and excite young minds would be provided. 

def would not privatize. 

establish that taxpayers are *owed* the finest education possible for every child that comes through the doors of an American school. hire teachers based on performance as well as ability to engage the children. have a very real focus on preparedness to thrive in our economy while making schools less miserable to attend. not allow the teaching of any brainwashing bullshit.

 we say we are the greatest country in the world... why can't our schools be something that shows we are? why should we not invest in our kids like we believe they can be the brightest minds of tomorrow? we fail them miserably in that regard. kids have textbooks that are 20 fucking years old here. they graduate without being able to spell or do what used to be 8th grade algebra. 

what would you do?


----------



## Standard Donkey (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i would take a large chunk of what now goes to the military and put it toward education. i would take the money wasted in the war on pot and put it toward education. i would take the money wasted building fancy ass prisons and put it toward education. i would invest in America rather than give billions to Africa etc. i would stop tax breaks for the rich and corporate welfare and put it toward education. i would tax churches and put it toward education. schools, books, music programs, arts, science labs... everything needed to feed and excite young minds would be provided.
> 
> def would not privatize.
> 
> ...


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

Swiper said:


> don't get too specific.  lol.    little wing 2016!!




a reasonably intelligent person doesn't need to be spoon fed how to get from point a to b. it's pretty common sense. more schools, more teachers, better teachers, better resources. deeper commitment.


----------



## Big Puppy (Oct 21, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i would take a large chunk of what now goes to the military and put it toward education. i would take the money wasted in the war on pot and put it toward education. i would take the money wasted building fancy ass prisons and put it toward education. i would invest in America rather than give billions to Africa etc. i would stop tax breaks for the rich and corporate welfare and put it toward education. i would tax churches and put it toward education. schools, books, music programs, arts, science labs... everything needed to feed and excite young minds would be provided.
> 
> def would not privatize.
> 
> ...



i agree with a couple of your ideas.  

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe's system of prisons is a good example.
Hire teachers based on performance rather than tenure.
Not allow brainwashing of the kids
Provide a venue for kids to actually learn and do math and spell.

The problem with this is, GOVERNMENT created all these problems.
Sheriff Joe has been boycotted and sued by the federal govt.
Teachers of the public system get tenure and can't be fired.  My kids get perfect grades except 1 different item each time.  The teachers tell us that they have to mark them down on 1 item or they "won't show improvement".  That is the type of bullshit that govt creates.  Not enough checks and balances in the govt.  There isn't a more wasteful system of business than anything the govt creates.  Millions and millions of dollars are wasted and thrown away every year so that entities will get the same budget next year.  The old "spend it or lose it" scenario that is exclusive to the govt.  Govt is creating a no-lose false reality with all their policies.  ex. No child left behind- worst law for education ever written.  all it does is dumbs down the teaching to teach to the lowest denominator.  The hard reality is there are winners and there are losers in life.  Rich and poor.  Smart and dumb.  Motivated and lazy.  people who take risks in hopes for reward and people who don't step out of their comfort zone.  Govt creates and perpetuates this type of thinking.  Privatizing would at least create the opportunity to fire someone who isn't worth a shit, unlike a govt position


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 21, 2013)

if i were king i could fire whoever the fuck i wanted. the system has gotten exactly as absurd as you say. we need to knock the power out of it... L.A. Unified pays teachers not to teach - Los Angeles Times  sooo much horseshit. all this crazy shit needs to stop.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> a reasonably intelligent person doesn't need to be spoon fed how to get from point a to b. it's pretty common sense. more schools, more teachers, better teachers, better resources. deeper commitment.



And i thought you wanted to privatize the schools.  Any intelligent person can see how well private schools do against govt schools. yeah so keep throwing good money after bad. we spend the most on education yet have one of the worst test scores in the world. Govt schools have failed. it will never work.  but yeah more money, more money, more money is the answer. lol


----------



## Bowden (Oct 22, 2013)

Swiper said:


> And i thought you wanted to privatize the schools.  Any intelligent person can see how well private schools do against govt schools. yeah so keep throwing good money after bad. we spend the most on education yet have one of the worst test scores in the world. Govt schools have failed. it will never work.  but yeah more money, more money, more money is the answer. lol



Private and Public  schools academic achievement results are affected by the socioeconomic backgrounds of the students  that attend them.

Private schools have selective demographics.
They can admit students based on an internal screening criteria as to academics, parental stability and financial resources ect.
As long as they do not take federal funding they can discriminate as to who they admit, exception being racial discrimination.

By law, Public schools have to take anyone.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i would take a large chunk of what now goes to the military and put it toward education. i would take the money wasted in the war on pot and put it toward education. i would take the money wasted building fancy ass prisons and put it toward education. i would invest in America rather than give billions to Africa etc. i would stop tax breaks for the rich and corporate welfare and put it toward education. i would tax churches and put it toward education. schools, books, music programs, arts, science labs... everything needed to feed and excite young minds would be provided.
> 
> def would not privatize.
> 
> ...



I would stop throwing money at schools like they can compensate as to all of the major root causes of poor academic achievement.
Parents and the stability of the home are some of the key factors in student academic achievement results
The socioeconomic backgrounds of students has more to do with the academic results of students than how much money is thrown at public school systems.

You can provide million and millions of dollars for funding public schools.
Pay teachers well.
However, if the students are not motivated by their parents outside of school to academically achieve and if their home socioeconomic environment is not stable then all of the money you throw at public schools and teachers is not going to matter.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 22, 2013)

Bowden said:


> Private and Public  schools academic achievement results are affected by the socioeconomic backgrounds of the students  that attend them.
> 
> Private schools have selective demographics.
> They can admit students based on an internal screening criteria as to academics, parental stability and financial resources ect.
> ...




And it's govt to blame. If they didn't tax the shit out of "property taxes" to pay for failing govt schools, people would have the money to send their children to private schools.


----------



## LAM (Oct 22, 2013)

Swiper said:


> And i thought you wanted to privatize the schools.  Any intelligent person can see how well private schools do against govt schools. yeah so keep throwing good money after bad. we spend the most on education yet have one of the worst test scores in the world. Govt schools have failed. it will never work.  but yeah more money, more money, more money is the answer. lol



how many people  do you know can afford $25K a year for private schools for each of their children?  that's what the good ones run in the NE where I grew up.  And in NYC they can go as high as $45-50K a year.


once again your wrong, the US doesn't spend the most on "public" education.  and the US education model is outdated as it was designed during the Industrial Revolution.  And with a consumption based economy critical thinking skills are no longer needed in the US, they can outsource that or import some people from other country's with HB1 visa's.   the US government acts on the interests of the owners of the means of production, always has and always will.

Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators 2012
UNITED STATES
http://www.oecd.org/education/CN - United States.pdf


----------



## Bowden (Oct 22, 2013)

A child has a single mom.
Dad is nowhere to be found and is a pos deadbeat that does not pay child support.
That mom works two part time fast food jobs for 16 hours a day to compensate for the facts that her employers will not give her full time hours and the employers will not pay her a living wage nor provides benefits.
The child sees it's mother only when she is not working.
The child's home environment is poor and not conductive to academic achievement.

A child has two parents that are living together.
Both parents earn middle class incomes and provide a stable home environment for their child.

The socioeconomic factors are apparent as to how they contribute to the academic achievement potential of both children and how all of the money thrown at public schools can not compensate for a poor socioeconomic home situation.


----------



## LAM (Oct 22, 2013)

Bowden said:


> The socioeconomic factors are apparent as to how they contribute to the academic achievement potential of both children and how all of the money thrown at public schools can not compensate for a poor socioeconomic home situation.



and especially in the wealthy advanced country's in the OECD, there are so many studies and papers on the subject.  to date the extreme "inequality" doesn't matter is wrong in every single account.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

Swiper said:


> And it's govt to blame. If they didn't tax the shit out of "property taxes" to pay for failing govt schools, people would have the money to send their children to private schools.



you live in some sort of major denial fantasy land if you think a good education for an elite few will bring this country some rich reward. *all* our kids need to be helped to flourish academically and personally. i would start from a very young age trying also to give children the other things they are not apparently getting at home. nourish the mind, body, psyche of the children while i work on making our economy one where families can and want to put more focus on raising their children rather than mindlessly chasing money to acquire more useless shit or not have to neglect everything else to keep a roof over their heads. steer us toward being a brighter people as a whole and valuing our brightest minds and worthwhile achievements rather than glorifying some twinkling vampire. the whole fucking country is sick. it's not this or that it's everything. 

simple per pupil spending has jack shit to do with performance btw. one parent can spend a shit ton on toys that just keep their kids entertained and another spend less on the right toys and keep kids entertained and learning. it has more to do with investing in them wholeheartedly on many more levels than financially. the whole shit storm needs to be torn down, rethought, and rebuilt.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 22, 2013)

LAM said:


> how many people  do you know can afford $25K a year for private schools for each of their children?  that's what the good ones run in the NE where I grew up.  And in NYC they can go as high as $45-50K a year.
> 
> 
> once again your wrong, the US doesn't spend the most on "public" education.  and the US education model is outdated as it was designed during the Industrial Revolution.  And with a consumption based economy critical thinking skills are no longer needed in the US, they can outsource that or import some people from other country's with HB1 visa's.   the US government acts on the interests of the owners of the means of production, always has and always will.
> ...



it's just under 4K where i live.  you must have been ripped off.
the more people that go into private education, the more price will go down. basic econ. 101







*Teachers in the U.S. spend between 1 050 and 1 100 hours a year teaching ? much more than in 
almost every country*  

*Despite high overall levels of spending on education, teacher salaries in the U.S. compare poorly*
http://www.oecd.org/education/CN%20-...d%20States.pdf







"the United States spends the fourth most in the world on per-student primary and secondary education"
U.S. Education Slipping in Ranks Worldwide, Earns Poor Grades on CFR Scorecard - Council on Foreign Relations

yep, 4th most not first my bad.  is there really much of a difference? 








"The U.S. education system is not as internationally competitive as it used to be; in fact, the United States has slipped ten spots in both high school and college graduation rates over the past three decades, according to a new report and scorecard from the Council on Foreign Relations' Renewing America initiative"
http://www.oecd.org/education/CN - United States.pdf


----------



## Swiper (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> you live in some sort of major denial fantasy land if you think a good education for an elite few will bring this country some rich reward. *all* our kids need to be helped to flourish academically and personally. i would start from a very young age trying also to give children the other things they are not apparently getting at home. nourish the mind, body, psyche of the children while i work on making our economy one where families can and want to put more focus on raising their children rather than mindlessly chasing money to acquire more useless shit or not have to neglect everything else to keep a roof over their heads. steer us toward being a brighter people as a whole and valuing our brightest minds and worthwhile achievements rather than glorifying some twinkling vampire. the whole fucking country is sick. it's not this or that it's everything.
> 
> simple per pupil spending has jack shit to do with performance btw. one parent can spend a shit ton on toys that just keep their kids entertained and another spend less on the right toys and keep kids entertained and learning. it has more to do with investing in them wholeheartedly on many more levels than financially. the whole shit storm needs to be torn down, rethought, and rebuilt.



how did you come up with that from my post? try reading it next time and save yourself from further embarrassment.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

a major investment just in tearing down old outdated schools and building modern solar powered ones will save money down the road. i'd start with buildings, staff, and materials that show every single child that this country values them and is ready to invest in them. no private schools. this country needs to really get the united we stand part and that our survival depends on being strong as a whole. parents would be free to provide extra studies at home but everyone would pay for and attend public school and have an equal stake in it being the best it can be. 

and just to get stones chucked at me... kids walking around going blaaarbegurrrrglrfarrg all day would go to a different school. these kids need to not distract a normal classroom but at the same time they can benefit from some type of enrichment programs. they often have brilliant minds and unique abilities and deserve special attention and learning environments structured for them. their individual needs are usually completely sacrificed due to the absurd mainstreaming trend.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

Swiper said:


> how did you come up with that from my post? try reading it next time and save yourself from further embarrassment.




sooooo people cannot afford health insurance but private schools shouldn't be a problem?


----------



## LAM (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> you live in some sort of major denial fantasy land if you think a good education for an elite few will bring this country some rich reward. *all* our kids need to be helped to flourish academically and personally. i would start from a very young age trying also to give children the other things they are not apparently getting at home. nourish the mind, body, psyche of the children while i work on making our economy one where families can and want to put more focus on raising their children rather than mindlessly chasing money to acquire more useless shit or not have to neglect everything else to keep a roof over their heads. steer us toward being a brighter people as a whole and valuing our brightest minds and worthwhile achievements rather than glorifying some twinkling vampire. the whole fucking country is sick. it's not this or that it's everything.
> 
> simple per pupil spending has jack shit to do with performance btw. one parent can spend a shit ton on toys that just keep their kids entertained and another spend less on the right toys and keep kids entertained and learning. it has more to do with investing in them wholeheartedly on many more levels than financially. the whole shit storm needs to be torn down, rethought, and rebuilt.



he has not one single clue about economics, that's what happens when people don't read they don't know or understand things.

tax and transfer systems reduce overall inequality due to the dispersion of labor income.  property taxes tend to be slightly more regressive on those in the "low" end of the middle.  personal income taxes are slightly progressive, consumption taxes are regressive on those that earn the least.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> sooooo people cannot afford health insurance but private schools shouldn't be a problem?



what's with your stupid coffee symbol? you think you made a good point or something?  LOL   


yes because if you look at your property tax bill, if you even own a house,  you'll see about 75% maybe even more of it goes to the failing govt school system. give that back to the people to spend on private schools. the more people that enroll in private schools the more the price will go down. get it now?


----------



## LAM (Oct 22, 2013)

Swiper said:


> what's with your stupid coffee symbol? you think you made a good point or something?  LOL
> 
> 
> yes because if you look at your property tax bill, if you even own a house,  you'll see about 75% maybe even more of it goes to the failing govt school system. give that back to the people to spend on private schools. the more people that enroll in private schools the more the price will go down. get it now?



what private school in your area cost $2-4,000 a year?  have you ever attended a private school?  because they have much lower class sizes and also pay their teachers substantially more.  the ENTIRE PRINCIPLE behind private schools in the US is that the children of the wealthy do not HAVE TO attend public education, they can go to private schools were their children can receive a better and more challenging education.

the wealthy will always children more thoroughly educated than that of the working class world history clearly shows this.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

Swiper said:


> what's with your stupid coffee symbol? you think you made a good point or something?  LOL
> 
> 
> yes because if you look at your property tax bill, if you even own a house,  you'll see about 75% maybe even more of it goes to the failing govt school system. give that back to the people to spend on private schools. the more people that enroll in private schools the more the price will go down. get it now?



it means i'm enjoying this thread while i'm taking a break with a great cup of coffee. 

the private school idea is disastrous. in a country where over 14 million homes stand empty after being foreclosed on, with more people having their homes foreclosed on this very day, people trying to pay their student loans, home buyers loan, or mortgages while scrambling for low wage jobs, do you _really_ think that could work? in just Massachusetts 1 of every 60 students are homeless. nationwide it is much worse.


----------



## LAM (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> it means i'm enjoying this thread while i'm taking a break with a great cup of coffee.
> 
> the private school idea is disastrous. in a country where over 14 million homes stand empty after being foreclosed on, with more people having their homes foreclosed on this very day, people trying to pay their student loans, home buyers loan, or mortgages while scrambling for low wage jobs, do you _really_ think that could work? in just Massachusetts 1 of every 60 students are homeless. nationwide it is much worse.



he's nothing more than a parrot for ring wing talking points that he hears on the news, it's all he "knows".  with out knowing and understand how and why the US public education was developed one can not clearly see why it's being allowed to fail at this point in time.

low wage service sector jobs do not necessitate a good education or the ability for critical thought/problem solving processes.  they need people to stock the shelves with goods made in SE Asia and to push button on the register at check-out.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

as much as people argue about all this stuff and butt heads i am LOVING that so many are involved in these discussions. i think more people are politically awakened lately and i think that's good. 

i'm going to just mentally take a quick look at my town and very strongly bet that nowhere near 75% of property taxes got to our schools.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 22, 2013)

LAM said:


> he's nothing more than a parrot for ring wing talking points that he hears on the news, it's all he "knows".  with out knowing and understand how and why the US public education was developed one can not clearly see why it's being allowed to fail at this point in time.
> 
> low wage service sector jobs do not necessitate a good education or the ability for critical thought/problem solving processes.  they need people to stock the shelves with goods made in SE Asia and to push button on the register at check-out.



And still you won't answer my question of what rate per hour the federal minimum wage should be. give me and hourly pay rate, you phony.


----------



## LAM (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> as much as people argue about all this stuff and butt heads i am LOVING that so many are involved in these discussions. i think more people are politically awakened lately and i think that's good.
> 
> i'm going to just mentally take a quick look at my town and very strongly bet that nowhere near 75% of property taxes got to our schools.



he pulled that out of his ass, property taxes are nowhere near that high not even in the VERY HIGH INCOME communties outside of NYC in CT and NJ.

this report has some numbers.  just about none of them are sufficient to pay for private school tuition for one child let alone a household with several children.

http://www.lincolninst.edu/subcente...es/ContentPages/documents/MTAdoc_NewCover.pdf


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

Living Wage Calculator - Introduction to the Living Wage Calculator

i would have said $22 an hour but reduced to $17 for teens still living at home.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 22, 2013)

LAM said:


> he pulled that out of his ass, property taxes are nowhere near that high not even in the VERY HIGH INCOME communties outside of NYC in CT and NJ.
> 
> this report has some numbers.  just about none of them are sufficient to pay for private school tuition for one child let alone a household with several children.
> 
> http://www.lincolninst.edu/subcente...es/ContentPages/documents/MTAdoc_NewCover.pdf



no wonder,  you're probably a renter whom gets no property tax bill.  you're such a tool.  any one who has a tax bill knows how much they pay to schools.  obviously you don't.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

Fair share? Analysis shows spending and tax burdens differ from city to city | Sun Journal

yea, numbers are way off. a quick google pulled up a lot of areas in the 20 percent range going to schools too.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

Swiper said:


> no wonder,  you're probably a renter whom gets no property tax bill.  you're such a tool.  any one who has a tax bill knows how much they pay to schools.  obviously you don't.




where do you live? what town? i'll tell you exactly the split between city and education on property tax. i bet you are wrong.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)




----------



## KILLEROFSAINTS (Oct 22, 2013)

love this crap

get educated get rich

dont leach off tax payers like the poor uneducated people


um...did we already forget about all the bailouts those rich educated people got from gasp....taxpayers...is this not the same thing


being bailed out for bad decision making


at least the dumb laborersworked for there pathetic checks...those ceos got bailed out and gave themselves bonuses with it


----------



## troubador (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> Living Wage Calculator - Introduction to the Living Wage Calculator
> 
> i would have said $22 an hour but reduced to $17 for teens still living at home.



$22/hr would put someone in about the wealthiest 2.6% in the world. To most of the world the idea that making $45K a year is the minimum livable income is ridiculous. What we're seeing is really a function of how far liberalism has progressed in the U.S. Over time the equality that people fight for changes. Equality that people have won in the past is sometimes disregarded as new struggles arise. The equal opportunity that people once fought for is being replaced by forced equality. This is why people who currently think they are progressives tend to fight more for redistribution than actually leveling the playing field. These people's morality is often not based on logical structure derived from principles but is rather a function of the era they were brought up in. That's most people though, even conservatives whose morality is an outdated version. 

" the DEMOCRATIC movement is the inheritance of the Christian movement. That its TEMPO, however, is much too slow and sleepy for the more impatient ones, for those who are sick and distracted by the herding-instinct, is indicated by the increasingly furious howling, and always less disguised teeth- gnashing of the anarchist dogs, who are now roving through the highways of European culture. Apparently in opposition to the peacefully industrious democrats and Revolution-ideologues, and still more so to the awkward philosophasters and fraternity- visionaries who call themselves Socialists and want a "free society," those are really at one with them all in their thorough and instinctive hostility to every form of society other than that of the AUTONOMOUS herd (to the extent even of repudiating the notions "master" and "servant"--ni dieu ni maitre, says a socialist formula); at one in their tenacious opposition to every special claim, every special right and privilege (this means ultimately opposition to EVERY right, for when all are equal, no one needs "rights" any longer); at one in their distrust of punitive justice (as though it were a violation of the weak, unfair to the NECESSARY consequences of all former society); but equally at one in their religion of sympathy, in their compassion for all that feels, lives, and suffers (down to the very animals, up even to "God"--the extravagance of "sympathy for God" belongs to a democratic age); altogether at one in the cry and impatience of their sympathy, in their deadly hatred of suffering generally, in their almost feminine incapacity for witnessing it or ALLOWING it; at one in their involuntary beglooming and heart-softening, under the spell of which Europe seems to be threatened with a new Buddhism; at one in their belief in the morality of MUTUAL sympathy, as though it were morality in itself, the climax, the ATTAINED climax of mankind, the sole hope of the future, the consolation of the present, the great discharge from all the obligations of the past; altogether at one in their belief in the community as the DELIVERER, in the herd, and therefore in "themselves." Nietzsche


----------



## troubador (Oct 22, 2013)

"_My conception of freedom. -- The value of a thing sometimes does not lie in that which one attains by it, but in what one pays for it -- what it costs us. I shall give an example. Liberal institutions cease to be liberal as soon as they are attained: later on, there are no worse and no more thorough injurers of freedom than liberal institutions. Their effects are known well enough: they undermine the will to power; they level mountain and valley, and call that morality; they make men small, cowardly, and hedonistic -- every time it is the herd animal that triumphs with them. Liberalism: in other words, herd-animalization.

These same institutions produce quite different effects while they are still being fought for; then they really promote freedom in a powerful way. On closer inspection it is war that produces these effects, the war for liberal institutions, which, as a war, permits illiberal instincts to continue. And war educates for freedom. For what is freedom? That one has the will to assume responsibility for oneself. That one maintains the distance which separates us. That one becomes more indifferent to difficulties, hardships, privation, even to life itself. That one is prepared to sacrifice human beings for one's cause, not excluding oneself. Freedom means that the manly instincts which delight in war and victory dominate over other instincts, for example, over those of "pleasure." The human being who has become free -- and how much more the spirit who has become free -- spits on the contemptible type of well-being dreamed of by shopkeepers, Christians, cows, females, Englishmen, and other democrats. The free man is a warrior." Nietzsche 


_


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

i can appreciate what you're saying but around here your heating bill can be twice what your rent is for much of the year. if you look how they break things down in my county i find it reasonable. a $22 min wage would not provide a lot of luxuries and some families would still struggle.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> where do you live? what town? i'll tell you exactly the split between city and education on property tax. i bet you are wrong.



go look it up Cook County Illinois,  not telling you my town. Northwest suburbs


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

i would caution assuming all liberals are of a like mind. for instance it is assumed liberals are anti death penalty. i would mount more heads on pikes than vlad the impaler.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

Swiper said:


> go look it up Cook County Illinois,  not telling you my town. Northwest suburbs



in the 60ish range. still not 75.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> in the 60ish range. still not 75.



every town is different......


----------



## troubador (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i can appreciate what you're saying but around here your heating bill can be twice what your rent is for much of the year. if you look how they break things down in my county i find it reasonable. a $22 min wage would not provide a lot of luxuries and some families would still struggle.



From a more objective worldview living in your county is probably a luxury. You're still pushing for a degree of equality brought about by what place and time you live in. That isn't necessarily bad itself but I believe it isn't actually based on a solid morality but rather instinct and exactly what Nietzsche was referring to.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> in the 60ish range. still not 75.



lol I know what you're implying with that "like".    let me clarify,  some towns are more.


----------



## LAM (Oct 22, 2013)

troubador said:


> $22/hr would put someone in about the wealthiest 2.6% in the world. To most of the world the idea that making $45K a year is the minimum livable income is ridiculous. What we're seeing is really a function of how far liberalism has progressed in the U.S. Over time the equality that people fight for changes. Equality that people have won in the past is sometimes disregarded as new struggles arise. The equal opportunity that people once fought for is being replaced by forced equality. This is why people who currently think they are progressives tend to fight more for redistribution than actually leveling the playing field. These people's morality is often not based on logical structure derived from principles but is rather a function of the era they were brought up in. That's most people though, even conservatives whose morality is an outdated version.



doesn't matter one bit what $45K is to the rest of the world it's what it gets you in the US that matters, as that's were you are paying for goods and services.  and in the US $45K has the same purchasing power as $22.5K in 1990's dollars.  80% of the US population also lives in the metro area so living costs are more substantial than those that live in rural America.

$45k in a lot of major US cities isn't even enough to keep you feed and sheltered.  try living on that in San Francisco, San Jose or LA or NYC, you would be living in a box in an alley and riding a 1960 Schwinn to work.

redistribution is not a "liberal thing" it's built into the tax structure of modern day economics in every single non-communist country in the world.  taxation is redistribution and that has been a part of modern day economics for over 500 years.  redistribution through taxation and wage increases via collective bargaining is how the middle class has been made in every single non-communist country in the world, there is no other method used in economics to date to accomplish that.   there is no "natural" method of labor every gaining any advantage over capital it has to be done via policy.

that policy was all reversed in the late 70's in the US which is when the "middle-class" in the US started to shrink again.  the effects of this reversal of policy and implementation of new policy that favors finance has taken decades to work it's way around the country with the culmination of that being the 2008 economic downturn. productivity gains the past decade have all gone to the top .1% in the US and there is nothing that is going to stop this from progressing as inequality not only from the bottom to the top greatly increases but from the middle to the top.

there is simply nothing sustainably about an economy that allows an extreme concentrations of wealth and it's why the US economy now relies on debt based consumption vs increases in real wages as was seen during Great Compression.  and why real GDP growth in the US will be sluggish from now on.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 22, 2013)

Swiper said:


> lol I know what you're implying with that "like".    let me clarify,  some towns are more.



there are a lot a variables including corruption. nothing is nice and neat.


the what is the point of that coffee smiley and i know what you mean by that like comments make me think i should do some villainous laugh with each post. sometimes things are just what they appear to be. i don't doubt that some towns give a goodly portion to their schools but that is not the norm.


----------



## troubador (Oct 22, 2013)

LAM said:


> doesn't matter one bit what $45K is to the rest of the world it's what it gets you in the US that matters, as that's were you are paying for goods and services.



You missed the point.


----------



## LAM (Oct 22, 2013)

troubador said:


> You missed the point.



which is?


----------



## bmw (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> have you not gotten out of your house enough to know that a lot of skilled laborers here were living that dream before their jobs got sent to some slave country and now they are stuck with whatever scrap job they can get their hands on?
> 
> that entire manufacturing towns all across this country have basically shut down because of this? climbing towards 3 million manufacturing jobs lost to China?
> 
> ...



Yeah, but union wages are $40/hr for that mfg job, sitting in a chair pushing a button once every 2 minutes when a part comes down the line, and now the cost of making that widget is sky-fucking high!  But then everybody screams about the rising cost of goods...so what's a company to do?  I guess if comany can find out how to make that widget for 1/4 of the price, then the public will be appeased and still buy that widget. 

Oh but now all the wal-mart shoppers, happy as hell to pay "always low prices" are bitching and complaining that the jobs are being shipped off to China and India, et.al.

So what the fuck do we do?  We want liveable wages and jobs for everyone, but be sure and give us our low priced goods, by god!!

Deflation is coming!


----------



## bmw (Oct 22, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> one of this countries top exports nowadays is trash... and China has started rejecting that. pretty fucking sad.



we are a nation of debt loving consumers.  Brainwashed to be so.  So when people lose their jobs they are a paycheck or less away from bankrupt.


----------



## bmw (Oct 22, 2013)

LAM said:


> only single mothers and the elderly can collect welfare.
> 
> and maybe it's also because the US economy of 2013 is totally different then it was 20-30 years ago?  wages are flat, *prices of goods and services increase at double the rate of the CPI and more then real GDP growth and the dollar isn't worth shit.*  the shift to a large service sector means the majority of jobs are low paying, there are no "options" in reality.  you can trade on low paying job for another.
> 
> do you know what other country in the OECD has a large population and a service sector based economy that can't support the entire population?  Mexico...the future of the US is right to our southern border



Don't worry.  If history is accurate (which it may not be due to interfering factors), the impending deflationary period looming over our heads will take care of all that (bolded part).  You'll have cheap goods in large supply/short demand, and a strong dollar once again.  Hope you don't have any debt though, and plenty of cash reserves.


----------



## bmw (Oct 22, 2013)

troubador said:


> The socialist ideologues will not be satisfied once minimum wage is increased and reduce welfare payments. We'd probably end up looking like France with a minimum wage of over $12/hr and 17% of the population on welfare. Let's drop the act that you guys give a shit about the taxpayers.



17% of the population on government assistance would be AWESOME!  What an improvement!!!  We are at just over 40% on government assistance right now.


----------



## LAM (Oct 22, 2013)

bmw said:


> Yeah, but union wages are $40/hr for that mfg job, sitting in a chair pushing a button once every 2 minutes when a part comes down the line, and now the cost of making that widget is sky-fucking high!



so says not one single economic report ever written.  

why is there no price inflation in the high labor union density country's in the EU that have labor unity density rates from 40-60% vs the US at only 13%?  

why have they also not off-shored labor "if" the cost of labor is causing price inflation?  how can the Germans afford to pay their workers DOUBLE what US auto makers are?   

because globalization is a scam and a "choice" that business owners make in order to decrease profits and stock share values at the sake of the long term health of an economy and society.  and this is why the US has off-shored 6x the total number of manufacturing jobs as the EU15 combined, 50,000 US factories have relocated outside of the US.  where those goods are then "imported" back into the US.

new auto union members are starting at $14/hr which are poverty wages for living in a major US metro area.  the Club of Rome a global think tank compiled an economic report which I posted up on here months ago.  They stated that in 2052 US auto workers will be making 1960's wages once adjusted for inflation.  And they have also called for the total collapse of only the economy in one country in the world, the US.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 22, 2013)

LAM said:


> so says not one single economic report ever written.
> 
> why is there no price inflation in the high labor union density country's in the EU that have labor unity density rates from 40-60% vs the US at only 13%?
> 
> ...



what should be the federal minimum wage be?  give us a dollar amount.  at least now I know you want more than 14 an hour.


----------



## troubador (Oct 22, 2013)

bmw said:


> 17% of the population on government assistance would be AWESOME!  What an improvement!!!  We are at just over 40% on government assistance right now.



It's 4.1% on welfare. Welfare Statistics | Statistic Brain

Probably would have to look at the specifics for a meaningful comparison.


----------



## troubador (Oct 22, 2013)

LAM said:


> which is?



That most people in the U.S. making $45K would live more comfortably than most people in the world. I already addressed the point about location in post #218.


----------



## bmw (Oct 22, 2013)

KILLEROFSAINTS said:


> it is ridiculous to insinuate that there is room at the top of the food chain...for everyone



you don't have to worry about everyone even wanting to get there though, much less trying.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 23, 2013)

LAM said:


> how can the Germans afford to pay their workers DOUBLE what US auto makers are?
> 
> new auto union members are starting at $14/hr which are poverty wages





In 2010, Germany PRODUCED more than 5.5 million automobiles; the U.S produced 2.7 million. At the same time, the average auto worker in Germany made $67.14 per hour in salary in benefits; the average one in the U.S. made $33.77 per hour.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/frederi...-while-paying-its-auto-workers-twice-as-much/




USA: The corporate tax rate is 40%. The marginal federal corporate income tax rate on the highest income bracket of corporations (currently USD 18,333,333 and above) is 35%. State and local governments may also impose income taxes ranging from 0% to 12%, the top marginal rates averaging approximately 7.5%. A corporation may deduct its state and local income tax expense when computing its federal taxable income, generally resulting in a net effective rate of approximately 40%. The effective rate may vary significantly depending on the locality in which a corporation conducts business. The United States also has a parallel alternative minimum tax (AMT) system, which is generally characterized by a lower tax rate (20%) but a broader tax base.

Germany:   The corporate tax rate is 29.55%. The overall income tax rate for corporations includes corporate income tax at a rate of 15%, solidarity surcharge at a rate of 0.825% (5.5% of the corporate income tax), and local trade tax. The local trade tax generally varies between 7% and 17.15%, assuming a municipality multiplier (Hebesatz) ranging normally from 200% to 490% (the average multiplier for 2011 was 392%). The local trade tax is not deductible as a business expense.
http://www.kpmg.com/global/en/servi...esources/pages/corporate-tax-rates-table.aspx



maybe taxes and productivity plays a role?


----------



## bmw (Oct 23, 2013)

OfficerFarva said:


> Why should the government have to help them out at all?



because their neighbors and the people crying the loudest in this thread simply won't.  

"These people need help!"  "Just not my help."  "Someone needs to give these people more money!"  "Someone besides me."


----------



## bmw (Oct 23, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> my son got a crispy chicken ranch today just before we went to get groceries. the woman that waited on us was late 40s maybe early 50's there was a big guy maybe early 30s and a couple women in their mid to late 20's and a big woman mid 30s in the front area of the mcdonalds we stopped at. people are full of shit that it's just teens in these jobs. fuck anyone that supports giving our manufacturing jobs to other countries then keeping the wages low on the leftovers people have to grapple for.



Where I live it's all pimply faced kids.  The 2 or 3 adults are managers of some sort.  I don't ask them all their titles, but next time  I will see what I can find out for you.  But then I am probably sheltered somewhat, with the area I live.  Maybe I'll slum it sometime in the next few weeks, if I can find the time.  Visit a few Mickey D's in tha hood and see what's happening there.


----------



## bmw (Oct 23, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> my son got a crispy chicken ranch today just before we went to get groceries. the woman that waited on us was late 40s maybe early 50's there was a big guy maybe early 30s and a couple women in their mid to late 20's and a big woman mid 30s in the front area of the mcdonalds we stopped at. people are full of shit that it's just teens in these jobs. fuck anyone that supports giving our manufacturing jobs to other countries then keeping the wages low on the leftovers people have to grapple for.



actually, reading your sig after reading your recent posts in here makes me chuckle a bit.

"you don't get what you wish for ~ you get what you work for"   

I completely agree, by the way.


----------



## bmw (Oct 23, 2013)

s2h said:


> I was a Subway "Sandwich Artist " when I was 16 yrs old...pretty good gig...got paid and free food...just sayin..



a 40 year old is doing that job now bro.


----------



## bmw (Oct 23, 2013)

troubador said:


> It's 4.1% on welfare. Welfare Statistics | Statistic Brain
> 
> Probably would have to look at the specifics for a meaningful comparison.



That's just one gov't assistance program.  I know, I know.  You said "welfare" but I'm saying that 40% of Americans are on some type of gov't assistance.  That's just politicians giving themselves job security.  We'll always vote for the guys that gave us the free shit!


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 23, 2013)

bmw said:


> because their neighbors and the people crying the loudest in this thread simply won't.
> 
> "These people need help!"  "Just not my help."  "Someone needs to give these people more money!"  "Someone besides me."



this is simply not true. my vote to help the needy out is a vote how my taxes get used. what *my* government that *I* pay for does with *my* money. i am  aware raising minimum wage would have me take extra coin from my pocket to buy goods as sometimes shopping American made products does. it is a sacrifice but not as huge as some think.
 you need to look at how wealthy a lot of democrats are, barbara streisand for instance. we believe the right thing to do is have a safety net for our citizens who need it. if it's true only 4.1 percent of people are on welfare where did the idea the welfare class vote the democratic party in come from? strong men make sacrifice for the good of others. 

i like neitzsche and his passionate, poetic way of thinking and writing but he is dead wrong in thinking that a liberal's compassion extends to ALL men.  he is wrong in thinking a caring person cannot abide the suffering of _any _other being. for many of us our compassion for the victim and desire for peaceful streets make it common sense to simply eliminate the offender. we do not shirk away from blood justice.

it would be contrary to instinct for the peace seeking to gnaw at the throat of the lion but here it is. and i do not believe we have to go through any psychological song and dance to give ourselves permission to crush our oppressor. it's a folly to think there is a standard recipe for a liberal mind or there is not an alpha male inside a civil man. many republicans are softer hearted toward their fellow man than people suppose too... people are far more complicated than a peg hole. 

the more you think about it the more you will see that fighting one another on these things keeps us from being a stronger group of citizens to fight our government abusing the power we give it. if we voted per issue and not our party,  rapists and murderers would be hung in town squares... citizens do not want them released back into our towns but they are. politics is a shell game and we all are the victim.


----------



## LAM (Oct 23, 2013)

bmw said:


> You said "welfare" but I'm saying that 40% of Americans are on some type of gov't assistance.  That's just politicians giving themselves job security.  We'll always vote for the guys that gave us the free shit!



actually it's not, it's seen in every single country in the OECD, but the % of GDP that goes to social protections in the US is the 3rd lowest in the OECD and the US has the highest percentage of low paid workers out of all the wealthy industrialized country's in the OECD.  We also have the least protected work force in the OECD, which is why the US has off-shored 6x the number of manufacturing jobs as the EU15 combined.  and we also have the most worthless currency.

various "cash" transfers are a function of economics, it's the main type of policy used to address the inequality of income.  25% of the US workforce is low paid an another 20% on top of that is under-employed.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 23, 2013)

This is a good debate. worth the time to listen. open a new window to listen while you surf the net.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 23, 2013)

does he address at any point that the low wage earner needs over 7 billion in welfare?


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 23, 2013)

we hire em the tax payer feeds them is not working for America.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 23, 2013)

bmw said:


> 17% of the population on government assistance would be AWESOME!  What an improvement!!!  We are at just over 40% on government assistance right now.



Really?

Welfare Statistics | Statistic Brain


*Statistic Verification *Source: US Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Commerce, CATO InstituteResearch Date: 9.10.2013Welfare is the organized public or private social services for the  assistance of disadvantaged groups. Aid could include general Welfare  payments, health care through Medicaid, food stamps, special payments  for pregnant women and young mothers, and federal and state housing  benefits. The Welfare system in the United States began in the 1930s,  during the Great Depression. Opponents of Welfare argue that it affects  work incentives. 



*Welfare Statistics *Total number of Americans on welfare12,800,000Total number of Americans on food stamps46,700,000Total number of Americans on unemployment insurance5,600,000Percent of the US population on welfare4.1 %Total government spending on welfare annually (not including food stamps or unemployment)$131.9 billion


----------



## LAM (Oct 23, 2013)

Swiper said:


> This is a good debate. worth the time to listen. open a new window to listen while you surf the net.



a complete waste of time, there is zero empirical data that supports his low wage rehotoric, Schiff is nothing more than the standard "political economist".

there is always a trade off with higher wages.    inflation adjusted wages in the US are poverty wages, it's why government transfers are so high to those in the lower income quintiles and why they have an annual savings rate of less than .01% a year.

if you employ two people at 50% of the minimum wage each you now have two people working that can't consume, what problem does that solve in a consumption based economy that is fueled by debt? poor people do not have much access to credit.

low wagers are wrong, there is no real world data that supports their claims.  youth unemployment in the US is high not because of the minimum wage but because overall demand has been decreasing.

the labor force never recovered from the slight recession in 2001 then the 2008 recession was even harder because the period preceding it was the weakest economic expansion in 40 years.  there was no real wage growth in the 2000's it was all debt based consumption mainly from homeowners.

Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate (CIVPART) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

and here you see how the velocity of money has tanked since the burst of the tech sector bubble.  there is less overall people in the workforce and those that remain 50% have stagnant and falling wages, that do not support excess consumption with out the use of debt.

Velocity of M2 Money Stock (M2V) - FRED - St. Louis Fed


----------



## DOMS (Oct 23, 2013)

Bowden said:


> Really?
> 
> Welfare Statistics | Statistic Brain
> 
> ...



According to this page from a Gov site, it's just over 6%. However, this data is four years old, so the number may be higher. But yeah, it's nowhere near 40%.

Another fact from that page:

Percentage on welfare by race
White: 4.4
Black: 13.5
Hispanic: 8.7

I'm shocked. Shocked, I say.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 23, 2013)

LAM said:


> a complete waste of time, there is zero empirical data that supports his low wage rehotoric, Schiff is nothing more than the standard "political economist".
> 
> there is always a trade off with higher wages.    inflation adjusted wages in the US are poverty wages, it's why government transfers are so high to those in the lower income quintiles and why they have an annual savings rate of less than .01% a year.
> 
> ...



what should the Federal minimum wage be in a dollar amount?


----------



## LAM (Oct 23, 2013)

Swiper said:


> what should the Federal minimum wage be in a dollar amount?



head towards the OECD average of the most highly sustainable economy's.  the data below shows just how low the US minimum is as compared to the other wealthy and industrialize country's.  the US minimum wages equals 38% of the median wage.

Minimum relative to average wages of full-time workers


----------



## Swiper (Oct 23, 2013)

LAM said:


> a complete waste of time, there is zero empirical data that supports his low wage rehotoric, Schiff is nothing more than the standard "political economist".
> 
> there is always a trade off with higher wages.    inflation adjusted wages in the US are poverty wages, it's why government transfers are so high to those in the lower income quintiles and why they have an annual savings rate of less than .01% a year.
> 
> ...







how do you explain Singapore's 1.9% unemployment rate while having NO minimum wage and have they have the 3rd highest per capita income? they have a thriving economy as well.   


How do come up with the rise in the cost of labor won't lead to less labor?


----------



## LAM (Oct 23, 2013)

Swiper said:


> how do you explain Singapore's 1.9% unemployment rate while having NO minimum wage and have they have the 3rd highest per capita income? they have a thriving economy as well.
> 
> 
> How do come up with the rise in the cost of labor won't lead to less labor?



first you have to start with Singapore gaining it's Independence from Britain in the early 60's.

their over all economic model is the exact opposite of the US.  they have a fairly progressive tax structure while the US is regressive at the state level and only slightly progressive at the federal level.  the social safety net is comprised of healthcare, pensions and housing (80% of the population lives in public housing).  they have universal healthcare, free education and obligated to save a certain amount of their income a years, something like 30%.

they have protected labor wages at the bottom, the opposite of the U.S and they have not off-shored manufacturing.

they have world ranked education system, not like the industrial revolution model in the U.S.  they do not use standardized testing but follow a methodology that allows a child's natural potential to develop then their eduction is careered towards that.  their overall curriculum is also heavy in the sciences, keeping up with global trends.

they also do not have a massive "unregulated" financial sector that is allowed to seek rents off of the working class, nor do they redistribute tax dollars to government favorites.  their central bank is not part of the global federal reserve system.

they have done everything they could to not turn into the US, they designed a far more equal and sustainable economy where the majority participates with real income growth and not debt based consumption.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 23, 2013)

LAM said:


> first you have to start with Singapore gaining it's Independence from Britain in the early 60's.
> 
> their over all economic model is the exact opposite of the US.  they have a fairly progressive tax structure while the US is regressive at the state level and only slightly progressive at the federal level.  the social safety net is comprised of healthcare, pensions and housing (80% of the population lives in public housing).  they have universal healthcare, free education and obligated to save a certain amount of their income a years, something like 30%.
> 
> ...



so you agree their no minimum wage policy along with other policies is a good thing, I'm glad you finally agree with me.   


what about my other question?


----------



## Bowden (Oct 23, 2013)

Swiper said:


> so you agree their no minimum wage policy along with other policies is a good thing, I'm glad you finally agree with me.
> 
> 
> what about my other question?



They don't have to set a minimum wage policy due to the way their society and economics are structured.
Their system does not allow workers to be exploited by business/corporations in the way they are in the U.S.
Workers have a safety net in place at a level that does not require a minimum wage policy.
They have no equivalent like Wall Street, an entity that produces nothing of real value and rent seeks at the expense of society as a whole.

Like Lam posted:

"They have a fairly progressive tax structure while the US is regressive  at the state level and only slightly progressive at the federal level.   the social safety net is comprised of healthcare, pensions and housing  (80% of the population lives in public housing).  they have universal  healthcare, free education and obligated to save a certain amount of  their income a years, something like 30%."
 they have protected labor wages at the bottom, the opposite of the U.S and they have not off-shored manufacturing."


----------



## Swiper (Oct 23, 2013)

Bowden said:


> They don't have to set a minimum wage policy due to the way their society and economics are structured.
> Their system does not allow workers to be exploited by business/corporations in the way they are in the U.S.
> Workers have a safety net in place at a level that does not require a minimum wage policy.
> They have no equivalent like Wall Street, an entity that produces nothing of real value and rent seeks at the expense of society as a whole.



in what way do they not exploit their workers?  they have no minimum wage they can pay them a dollar an hour

what is the safety net ?

they don't have a stock Exchange?


----------



## LAM (Oct 23, 2013)

Swiper said:


> so you agree their no minimum wage policy along with other policies is a good thing, I'm glad you finally agree with me.
> 
> 
> what about my other question?



that is clearly not what I stated.  obviously not having minimum wages laws didn't work in the US before as history clearly shows. 

take note of the most highly functioning economy's in the world, they are all almost the exact opposite of the US.  some of there financial sectors have been liberated but that is just to be able to protect themselves from the  un-regulated US financial sector.

the so called "economists" that claim eliminating the minimum wage in the US have provided zero mathematical models to support their rhetoric, it's all ideology.


----------



## LAM (Oct 23, 2013)

Swiper said:


> in what way do they not exploit their workers?  they have no minimum wage they can pay them a dollar an hour
> 
> what is the safety net ?
> 
> they don't have a stock Exchange?



put it this way the government MANDATES that everyone save 30-35% of their income a year to put in towards their pensions along with employer contributions.

the government provides housing for 80% of the population but people are encouraged to purchase their own homes.

free healthcare

free education

progressive taxes

no real economy crushing, self-serving speculative financial sector to support and drive up the costs of commodities "just to make a profit" for themselves.

no gift giving or lobbying to politicians

Singapore is also a very expensive place to live.  they spend less than 3% of GDP on social protections because the workforce and employers both contribute.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 24, 2013)

LAM said:


> put it this way the government MANDATES that everyone save 30-35% of their income a year to put in towards their pensions along with employer contributions.
> 
> the government provides housing for 80% of the population but people are encouraged to purchase their own homes.
> 
> ...




How do come up with the rise in the cost of labor won't lead to less labor?


----------



## LAM (Oct 24, 2013)

Swiper said:


> How do come up with the rise in the cost of labor won't lead to less labor?



the unemployment rate there is less than 3%.  sustainability and shared prosperity is more important to them then funneling the nations wealth up the ladder.    inequality is increasing far slower there then in any country around and there real GDP growth is 5x that of the US.

the asian tigers learned how not to destroy their country from watching the mistakes made in the west and they have chose not to go down the same path.

but back to wages there are only a couple of country's in the world that do not have some type of "minimum wage" policy in place.  many country's i the EU do not have them but they have nationwide collective bargaining agreements.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 24, 2013)

*McDonald's helps workers get food stamps*

This speaks for it's self.
McDonald's is steering it''s employees to taxpayer funded welfare/food stamps so that McDonald's can privatize it's profits and socialize at taxpayers expense the risk of their low paid and low benefit employees.
Either consumers are going to pay for a product at a level that allows a fast food business to provide a living wage and benefits or as a tax-payer they are going to pay to compensate for those low wages and benefits.

"News of the McResource line comes a week after a report found that more than half of fast food workers have to rely on public assistance programs since their wages aren't enough to support them. 
  The report estimated that this public aid carries a $7 billion price tag for taxpayers each year. 
 A separate report by the National Employment Law Project released on   the same day showed that McDonald's alone was responsible for $1.2   billion of that $7 billion alone."

McDonald's helps workers get food stamps - Oct. 23, 2013

By Emily Jane Fox October 24, 2013: 9:47 AM ET

*McDonald's workers should have no problem qualifying for government programs like food stamps and heating assistance.*

  The hamburger chain pretty much admits that in a call made by a worker to "McResource"-- a helpline set up for its workers. 
    The advocacy group Low Pay is not Ok recorded a phone call made to the  helpline by one McDonald's worker Nancy Salgado. The group circulated an  edited video of the recording. McDonald's said the video was "not an  accurate portrayal of the resource line" because it was "very obviously"  edited. 
  However, CNNMoney reviewed the full recording of the call. 


   Salgado, who has worked at a Chicago McDonald's for 10 years and makes  $8.25 an hour, asked the McResource representative a number of questions  related to getting assistance to pay for her heating bill, her  groceries and her sister's medical expenses. Salgado told the  representative that she was recording the call for her sister. 
   The helpline operator never asked Salgado how much she made per hour,  and how many hours per week she worked beyond the fact that she was a  full-time employee. But she said that Salgado "definitely should be able  to qualify for both food stamps and heating assistance." 


  The  representative then pointed her toward a number of resources in Chicago,  such as food pantries and a program that would help cover some of her  heating bill. She said she would email her specific phone numbers and  programs. 


Related: The real budgets of McDonald's workers

 

   The operator also explained that the McResource line is available to  help McDonald's workers who need help navigating the process of getting  public assistance. The helpline's phone number is posted in fliers at  many McDonald's locations. 
  McDonald's said in a statement that  "the McResource Line is intended to be a free, confidential service to  help employees and their families get answers to a variety of questions  or provide resources on a variety of topics including housing, child  care, transportation, grief, elder care, education and more." 


   But the line is not open to all McDonald's workers. Franchise owners  need to pay for the service in order for their employees to use it. 


  Salgado's franchise owner in Chicago, for example, had not paid for the service, even though she called the helpline. 

  The operator said that none of the Chicago franchises had paid for it. 
   "We can be a good program," the operator said. "We can do a lot of the  leg work that takes a lot of the stresses off of you making a million  phone calls trying to find services." 




 
  Will fast food unions be the next movement?




  News of the McResource line comes a week after a report found that more than half of fast food workers have to rely on public assistance programs since their wages aren't enough to support them. 
  The report estimated that this public aid carries a $7 billion price tag for taxpayers each year. 


   A separate report by the National Employment Law Project released on  the same day showed that McDonald's alone was responsible for $1.2  billion of that $7 billion alone. 
  The recorded phone call supports what the reports found and also the claims of hundreds of fast food workers that their pay is too low, they don't get scheduled for enough hours and they get no benefits. Since last November, workers have organized protests around the country, including New York City, Los Angeles, Memphis and Detroit calling for a minimum wage of $15 an hour and the right to organize without retaliation. 
  Earlier this year, McDonald's came under fire for releasing a budget planning guide for its employees.  The sample budget it provided didn't account for either food or  gasoline, a big expense for low income workers. The budget also left  room for an income from a second job, which many called an admission by  the fast food giant that its workers can't live on wages from one job at  McDonald's.


----------



## OfficerFarva (Oct 24, 2013)

Bowden said:


> This speaks for it's self.
> McDonald's is steering it''s employees to taxpayer funded welfare/food stamps so that McDonald's can privatize it's profits and socialize at taxpayers expense the risk of their low paid and low benefit employees.
> Either consumers are going to pay for a product at a level that allows a fast food business to provide a living wage and benefits or as a tax-payer they are going to pay to compensate for those low wages and benefits.
> 
> ...





This person worked there for 10 years and in all of that time could not get a better job??  Are you fucking kidding me.  If this person wanted to get ahead they could do night classes or put some effort into looking for another job. How about these corporations pay them what they're worth, less than $10/hr, and the government DOESN'T support their sorry asses at a cost to the tax payers.


----------



## OfficerFarva (Oct 24, 2013)

Here's another bit of food for thought.  How about actually enforcing some immigration laws and get all of those dirty scabs out of your country.  There won't be so many people with no skills fighting for these shit jobs than the corporations will have to pay more in order to attract people to work.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 24, 2013)

OfficerFarva said:


> This person worked there for 10 years and in all of that time could not get a better job??  Are you fucking kidding me.  If this person wanted to get ahead they could do night classes or put some effort into looking for another job. How about these corporations pay them what they're worth, less than $10/hr, and the government DOESN'T support there sorry asses at a cost to the tax payers.



Besides the point.
There are enough fast food workers out there that qualify for 7 Billion dollars worth of taxpayer benefits.

The majority of jobs created since the recession started in 2007 are low wage, low or no benefit service type jobs.
The people in these jobs qualify for welfare/foodstamps due to their low wages and low or no benefit service type jobs.

There have been dynamic shifts in the job markets and what we are seeing now is the result of this shift.
Escalating income inequality in the U.S. and increasing numbers of people on taxpayer funded welfare assistance programs due to the state of the job market.

How the recession turned middle-class jobs into low-wage jobs

*How the recession turned middle-class jobs into low-wage jobs*

  By Brad Plummer, Published: February 28 at 11:24 am


       The U.S. job market is slowly improving, and most economists expect  that gradual recovery to continue this year. Yet one of the most  disturbing trends of the recession is still very far from being  reversed. America's middle-class jobs have been decimated since 2007,  replaced largely by low-wage jobs.
 A recent presentation from the  Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco lays out the situation clearly.  The vast majority of job losses during the recession were in  middle-income occupations, and they've largely been replaced by low-wage  jobs since 2010:





Mid-wage occupations, paying between $13.83 and $21.13 per hour, made  up about 60 percent of the job losses during the recession. But those  mid-wage jobs have made up just 27 percent of the jobs gained during the  recovery.
 By contrast, low-wage occupations paying less than $13.83 per hour  have utterly dominated the recovery, with 58 percent of the job gains  since 2010. (This data all comes from an earlier report (pdf) from the National Employment Law Project.)
 That's put downward pressure on wages: "[M]any middle-class workers  have lost their jobs and, if they have been able to secure new  employment at all, find themselves earning far lower wages  post-recession," the San Francisco Fed notes. "[O]n average over the  next 25 years, these workers will earn 11% less than similar workers who  retained their jobs through the recession."






The jobs of the future? (Washington Post)

 So what types of low-wage jobs are we talking about? Nearly 40  percent of the jobs gained since the recovery began about 1.7  million   have come from three low-wage sectors: food services, retail,  and employment services (that last is a sweeping category encompassing jobs like office clerks and sales representatives).
 As the San Francisco Fed presentation notes, just four low-wage  sectors now make up nearly 12 percent of the workforce in 2011: retail  sales, cashiers, office clerks, and food preparation and service  workers. "[T]hese occupations are crucial to the support and growth of  major industries across the country, but many of these workers do not  earn enough to adequately support their families, even at a subsistence  level."


----------



## LAM (Oct 24, 2013)

OfficerFarva said:


> Here's another bit of food for thought.  How about actually enforcing some immigration laws and get all of those dirty scabs out of your country.  There won't be so many people with no skills fighting for these shit jobs than the corporations will have to pay more in order to attract people to work.



any legislation that gets proposed that would exact a heavy fine or punishment for company owners can't even make it out of committee, so the bills always die.


----------



## OfficerFarva (Oct 24, 2013)

Bowden said:


> Besides the point.
> There are enough fast food workers out there that qualify for 7 Billion dollars worth of taxpayer benefits.
> 
> The majority of jobs created since the recession started in 2007 are low wage, low or no benefit service type jobs.
> ...





I have the deepest sympathy for these people that went to a post secondary institution to major in History with a minor in Basket Weaving and now they can't find a job...  How about going into something you can actually do something with like anything healthcare related, engineering, or most sciences.  I graduated with a class of just over a 100 people.  Most of the people that are doing well now went and get trained into something useful.  I've posted what I'm making and I didn't even have to go to school for what I'm doing now and I'm only in my mid 20's.  Every day there are recruiters offering me jobs on linked in... Even my friends who are in the trades are doing very well for themselves, they're all making well over 100k a year.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 24, 2013)

if you take a realistic look around towns like mine you will see a lot of homes being boarded up etc. ones on the market many years with not a chance of selling. businesses are being shuttered too. a degree doesn't assure you higher employment and people being employed far beneath their education is common all across USA. not a lot of options besides retail and service for many graduates. half of all college graduates are unemployed or underemployed. half.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 24, 2013)

Anyone care to comment on this chart?
It's not just fast food workers that qualify for welfare/food stamps.
It's a huge number of people in other services jobs as well.

How the recession turned middle-class jobs into low-wage jobs

As the San Francisco Fed presentation notes, just four low-wage  sectors now make up nearly 12 percent of the workforce in 2011: retail  sales, cashiers, office clerks, and food preparation and service  workers. "[T]hese occupations are crucial to the support and growth of  major industries across the country, but many of these workers do not  earn enough to adequately support their families, even at a subsistence  level."


----------



## OfficerFarva (Oct 24, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> if you take a realistic look around towns like mine you will see a lot of homes being boarded up etc. ones on the market many years with not a chance of selling. businesses are being shuttered too. a degree doesn't assure you higher employment and people being employed far beneath their education is common all across USA. not a lot of options besides retail and service for many graduates. half of all college graduates are unemployed or underemployed. half.




Than pack the fuck up and move on.  How the hell did your country get founded, by immigrants looking for better opportunities.   I had to work in different provinces in my late teens to pay for my tuition when I was in university.   I didn't bitch about how there were no super good paying jobs in my area and expect the government to take care of me.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 24, 2013)

some people in low wage jobs aren't ever going to be capable of anything else. i believe they should still be able to earn a salary that affords them independence and dignity. a bunch of drifters looking for good paying jobs that do not exist isn't a solution either. it's 2013. wages need to come up. period.


----------



## OfficerFarva (Oct 24, 2013)

LAM said:


> any legislation that gets proposed that would exact a heavy fine or punishment for company owners can't even make it out of committee, so the bills always die.



That's a poor excuse.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 24, 2013)

and no one really likes to talk about this but our country got founded by committing genocide... mass murder.... we were a hoard of murdering thieves. that's harder to get away with now.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 24, 2013)

lam, you can't completely dismiss the no minimum wage and there 1.9% unemployment rate.  sure other factors may also contribute, but you can't discount the no minimum wage has no role in the unemployment rate.


----------



## LAM (Oct 24, 2013)

OfficerFarva said:


> That's a poor excuse.



it's not an excuse it's the way it is and there is no way to force them to vote on a bill..  businesses that utilize illegal workers gain substantial advantages in the markets and well the US has a very "pro-business" undertone.


----------



## bmw (Oct 24, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> this is simply not true. my vote to help the needy out is a vote how my taxes get used. what *my* government that *I* pay for does with *my* money. i am  aware raising minimum wage would have me take extra coin from my pocket to buy goods as sometimes shopping American made products does. it is a sacrifice but not as huge as some think.
> you need to look at how wealthy a lot of democrats are, barbara streisand for instance. we believe the right thing to do is have a safety net for our citizens who need it. if it's true only 4.1 percent of people are on welfare where did the idea the welfare class vote the democratic party in come from? strong men make sacrifice for the good of others.
> 
> i like neitzsche and his passionate, poetic way of thinking and writing but he is dead wrong in thinking that a liberal's compassion extends to ALL men.  he is wrong in thinking a caring person cannot abide the suffering of _any _other being. for many of us our compassion for the victim and desire for peaceful streets make it common sense to simply eliminate the offender. we do not shirk away from blood justice.
> ...



First, tl;dr

Thirdly, I am speaking moar of charity.  If moar people helped others directly there would be no need for the gov't to do it.  But most people just can't be bothered.

D) I said 41%, not 4.1%


----------



## Swiper (Oct 24, 2013)

I Get Empirical on Minimum Wage
Economics,


So Paul Krugman et al. are telling us that the empirical literature shows that minimum wage laws don?t have a discernible impact on teen unemployment. Yet another right-winger myth flushed down the toilet.
I went and looked at the paper Krugman says documents this fact. I was a little concerned because it seemed to be saying (I?m paraphrasing of course) that yes, if you just naively look at the states that have higher minimum wage laws, then they have lower employment growth, but once you correct for the broader trends in employment growth among states, then the impact of the minimum wage laws per se disappears. For example, it might just so happen that states that have bad weather, also have state-level minimum wage laws higher than the federal floor, and so earlier researchers incorrectly blamed the low employment growth on the minimum wage burden.
This sounded a little fishy to me, so I decided to do my own, very naive, straightforward look at the data. I first used this map from the Department of Labor to organize the 50 states into two groups: Those with minimum wages higher than the federal level, and all others. (The map says it?s accurate as of January 1, 2013.) Then I downloaded the Local Area Unemployment Statistics from the BLS to get state-level data broken down by age. I used this Excel table to get the unemployment rate among 16-19 year olds by state. Here?s what I found?and I am sorry but putting the two PNG files together is the only way I can figure out to present this quickly:
http://consultingbyrpm.com/blog/2013/02/i-get-empirical-on-minimum-wage.html

These results are pretty striking. First of all: Notice how high the teen unemployment rate is, across the country. If minimum wage laws have no effect, why should this be so? I am not denying that Krugman could come up with some story, but prima facie this fact in and of itself is a feather in the cap of the Econ 101 textbooks. (Specifically, we?d expect 16-19 year olds to have the lowest productivity, and so they would be disproportionately hurt by an absolute minimum wage law.)
Now then, if we look at the 19 states that have a minimum wage higher than the federal minimum, the average unemployment rate among teens is 25.2%. In contrast, if we look at the 31 states that have either no state-level minimum wage or one that equals the federal level, the average teen unemployment rate is 21.5%. A pretty big difference, and this is from sample sizes of 19 and 31. It?s not as if you?ve got California driving the result. (And of course, last time I checked, California had pretty nice weather.)
But beyond the arithmetic averages is the clustering of the states, in their respective groups, when you rank them from the highest to lowest teen unemployment rates. The most striking result to me: If you look at the top 5 and the bottom 5, you find: Four of the top five states have higher-than-federal minimum wages, while only 1 out of the bottom five does. I?m not sure how to set up the statistical problem, but I think that would be an incredibly unlikely result, if minimum wage laws had nothing to do with teen unemployment rates.
Furthermore, if you look at the top and bottom 10, you get: Out of the top 10, six of them have higher-than-federal minimum wages, while out of the bottom 10, only 1 does.
And then, just looking at the top and bottom halves: The top half has 13 states with higher-than-federal minimum wages, while the bottom half has the other 6.
Before you guys go shouting these results from the mountaintops, I really would appreciate it if somebody could reproduce my results. I did this fairly quickly Saturday night, and it?s possible I mislabeled one of the states etc. But these seem like pretty powerful results, especially since they back up what is literally textbook economics. So if someone could double check my work, that would make me more confident in publicizing this.


----------



## bmw (Oct 24, 2013)

Bowden said:


> Really?
> 
> Welfare Statistics | Statistic Brain
> 
> ...



yes really.  I said "GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE".  I did not say "welfare"

You can add up just your numbers on welfare, food stamps and unemployment, and you will get a figure of approximately 20% of the US population.  Now add medicare, medicaid, SSI, subsidized housing, education subsidies...

Go see what number you get.  Hell, it may be 50%!


----------



## Swiper (Oct 24, 2013)

Even More Thoughts on the Minimum Wage

I am still in a mild state of shock that so many professional economists apparently doubt that demand curves slope downward. I admit upfront that I have not spent more than an hour or so looking through the latest literature reviews on the topic. Nonetheless, I remain unrepentant: I think increasing the price of unskilled labor by 24% will make employers hire fewer labor hours. The burden of proof is on the doubters to show why this isn?t so.
In addition to the compelling logic of ?demand curves slope downward,? we also have the casual empiricism of my last post, and now we?ve also got the below chart (brought to my attention by John S in the comments), taken from an AEI blog post but not sure who the original creator is:
http://consultingbyrpm.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013.02-Min-Wage.jpg

Wow, look at that. It?s almost as if employers respond to incentives on the margin.
It?s true, there are papers that look at ?natural experiments? and somehow throw away logic and evidence such as the above chart. Let me run through some issues quickly:
Monopsony. One claim is that the Econ 101 logic breaks down because employers have market power. But hang on a second. If you want to tell me that the wages of, say, brain surgeons are below the competitive equilibrium, since there are only a few employers who can form a cartel, then OK I?ll at least give you a few moments to make your case. But you?re telling me there is a cartel of employers who are willing to hire unskilled labor?! That is literally the most non-specific factor of production on planet Earth. You need labor for everything, and by definition, unskilled labor is not suited for one occupation more than another.
I think the reason this might initially sound plausible to people, is that there aren?t a lot of teenagers working all over the place. You just see them concentrated in a few areas, like fast-food restaurants. But do you know why? Because of the ()#%$#$ minimum wage (and school attendance laws)!
You actually do see young people in various professional businesses and halls of government. They?re called interns. So we?ve got lots of young people finding employers willing to take them on at $0/hour, and yet apparently there is this ?indeterminate bargaining zone? where employers? quantity of labor demanded is the same between 1 cent and $7.25 (or $9). Does this range also count as a ?modest increase?? Or does even Krugman admit that getting rid of the minimum wage altogether would help reduce the 25%+ teen unemployment rate, while increasing it from $7.25 to $9 would be negligible in the other direction?
Studies look at employment growth, not unemployment rates. Apparently the standard thing to do in these studies is look at how much the absolute amount of employment or labor hours changes, rather than looking at the unemployment percentage. The idea (I gather) is that a high minimum wage can draw people into the labor market who can?t find a job, but these people wouldn?t have had a job anyway, so it?s not a strike against the system. Only if employers actually reduce the quantity demanded, can we say (some) workers are hurt. But even on its own terms, this argument fails. The most desperate, vulnerable people are the ones who will work for, say, $5/hour. At that rate, fewer middle-class college kids will enter the labor market. But bump up the wage rate to $7.25, and now a bunch of suburban white kids take a part time job at Pizza Hut to make a little extra money. Even if the total payroll and hours worked doesn?t change, it still means these kids bump out the new immigrant who barely speaks English and needs to get his foot in the door to establish a work history.
Studies correct employment growth for broader trends. My very quick reading of the literature suggested that the empirical studies in the olden days did find a strong connection between a minimum wage hike, and reduced hiring among teens. But, the newer wave of studies disputes that finding. One of the ?corrections? the new studies make, is to adjust the change in teen hiring compared to the broader labor market, which presumably isn?t affected by a minimum wage hike. Yet hang on a second. Even in the ?natural? experiments, I would imagine a state legislature that jacks up the minimum wage is also more likely to do other ?progressive? things that hurt employment growth. So things still move in the same direction, but now you?re not going to get as clear a signal; it?s hard to disentangle why the teenagers in California can?t get a job?is it because of the minimum wage hike, or because of their outrageously progressive income tax code?
Studies focus on fast-food employment across county or state lines. Again, I am not claiming to be an expert on this stuff, but it looked like a lot of the really ?compelling? studies looked at natural experiments where you had similar conditions except a chain of restaurants fell in one jurisdiction that raised its minimum wage, while the other restaurants in the chain fell in an adjacent jurisdiction that didn?t. Seems like a perfect laboratory test right? But hang on. If the minimum wage in one state makes it profitable for the restaurant to bite the bullet and install a bunch of labor-saving machinery (like the drink dispensers that you put the cup under and hit a button and walk away, unlike what they used to do when I was growing up where you had to hold the cup in place on the nozzle), then it would be pretty easy for that restaurant chain to use the same, new design when opening up new locations in other states with the original minimum wage. By the same token, even longitudinally looking at the same actual restaurant, once they redesign the place to be run by (say) 4 responsible teenagers and a manager, instead of (say) 9 goof-off teenagers and a manager, then even if that state later abolishes its higher-than-federal minimum wage, the damage is done; the restaurant isn?t going back to the old model.
How does this square with the Keynesian story about monetary stimulus? Finally, how the heck does this whole minimum wage digression line up with Krugman et al. constantly telling us that the problem in Europe and elsewhere, is that wages are too high relative to the price level? They tell us that if we engage in a currency war, we?ll all be better off because prices will rise, making it profitable for employers to hire once again. So, are they saying prices will need to rise by more than 24 percent, in order for the teen unemployment rate to budge?
I?m sorry, I just get the feeling that the story changes to fit the progressive policy of the day. And again, I am not burying my head in the sand and refusing to accept something obvious: On the contrary, I am saying demand curves slope downward, and I can point to all sorts of obvious evidence to back that up. Indeed, the Keynesians themselves think employers follow the same logic I?m talking about, when it comes to their proposals for monetary stimulus.
Yet somehow, the old empirical consensus on the minimum wage has been overturned by a wave of new studies of ?natural experiments,? so I?m giving reasons in this post why those studies might be missing the obvious conclusion staring us all in the face: Making teenagers 24% more expensive in the middle of a depression is not the way to help teenagers.
http://consultingbyrpm.com/blog/2013/02/even-more-thoughts-on-the-minimum-wage.html


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 24, 2013)

bmw said:


> First, tl;dr
> 
> Thirdly, I am speaking moar of charity.  If moar people helped others directly there would be no need for the gov't to do it.  But most people just can't be bothered.
> 
> D) I said 41%, not 4.1%




i'll talk slow... and use few words


MOST people

have voted

to help people

via safety nets

and supporting

the democratic party.

MOST people

reject

conservative ideals. 

MOST Americans

voted for the President.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 24, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i'll talk slow... and use few words
> 
> 
> MOST people
> ...



If you posted a video of you saying that while lying naked in bed on your stomach staring into the video camera with a pouty look on your face it would go viral and if you ran for congress you would probably be elected.


----------



## bmw (Oct 24, 2013)

DOMS said:


> According to this page from a Gov site, it's just over 6%. However, this data is four years old, so the number may be higher. But yeah, it's nowhere near 40%.
> 
> Another fact from that page:
> 
> ...



Some people think of all government assistance as "welfare."  Now technically, that's not true.  I would lump food stamps in with welfare, and probably housing assistance too.  Not necessarily unemployment, because that's technically an insurance program you pay into when you are employed.  But if you look at the figures Bowden posted and just add "welfare" and food stamps together you get 59,500,000 people, divided by the approximately 300 million Americans, equals 19.833% on "welfare" plus food stamps.  

And again, I never said "welfare."  I did say, "government assistance" because I knew people wouldn't fucking read it because they'd be too eager to prove me wrong and show how smart they thought they were.  Food stamps?  Housing assistance?  Sounds like fucking welfare to me.  According to Merriam-Webster, we should throw Medicaid and Medicare into the "welfare" category too.

Welfare - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary[h=2]wel?fare[/h] _noun_ \ˈwel-ˌfer\                                                                                                                                                                                                                   : a government program for poor or unemployed people that *helps pay for their food, housing, medical costs, etc.*

: the state of being happy, healthy, or successful



1
*:*  the state of doing well especially in respect to good fortune, happiness, well-being, or prosperity <must look out for your own _welfare_> 


2
_a_ *:*  aid in the form of money or necessities for those in need    
_b_ *:*  an agency or program through which such aid is distributed 




Ironic that it's other definition is, the state of doing well especially in respect to good fortune, happiness, well-being, or prosperity.  LOL!


----------



## bmw (Oct 24, 2013)

Bowden said:


> If you posted a video of you saying that while lying naked in bed on your stomach staring into the video camera with a pouty look on your face it would go viral and if you ran for congress you would probably be elected.



Worth a shot!  LW, try this approach^^^.


----------



## troubador (Oct 24, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> MOST Americans
> 
> voted for the President.



That is incorrect.


----------



## troubador (Oct 24, 2013)

Swiper said:


> lam, you can't completely dismiss the no minimum wage and there 1.9% unemployment rate.  sure other factors may also contribute, but you can't discount the no minimum wage has no role in the unemployment rate.


----------



## bmw (Oct 24, 2013)

Swiper said:


> how do you explain Singapore's 1.9% unemployment rate while having NO minimum wage and have they have the 3rd highest per capita income? they have a thriving economy as well.
> 
> 
> How do come up with the rise in the cost of labor won't lead to less labor?



it's already happening.


----------



## bdad (Oct 24, 2013)

troubador said:


> That is incorrect.



Exactly right my friend, its called electoral  votes.  California cant get their own shit in order but they get 55,  makes no sense


----------



## LAM (Oct 24, 2013)

here are some of the obvious causes of the increase in youth unemployment, none of them having to do with the minimum wage.

* the transition over the decades from a labor intense manufacturing economy to one that is primarily service based.

* the overall unemployment rate in the US has been steadily creeping up the past 50 years
Civilian Unemployment Rate (UNRATE) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

* the unemployment rate of young workers is increasing across the OECD in country's with and with out minimum wage laws.
http://www.oecd.org/std/labour-stats/HUR_03e13.pdf

* the percentage of the global population that comprises the "youth age" range drastically increased by 15% in the past 15 years.

* rising inequality has decreased aggregate demand, US real GDP growth has been sluggish for the past 30+ years.  extreme inequality will only inhibit growth more and more as time goes on.

* there are less jobs for all US workers to return to after each major recession starting in the mid 80's.  this includes the three groups of workers from college educated, some/no college and high school educations and below.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B11Bu4wc_ss2Qk9DUWYtRmxLOE0/edit?usp=sharing

* US labor participation rate never recovered from the minor 2001 downturn, only to plunge far lower after the 2008 downturn.
Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate (CIVPART) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

* Labors share of the national income is at an 60year slow, that obviously will contributed to the decreased lack of demand
Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share (PRS85006173) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

* the Velocity of M2 Money Stock has also tanked since the late 1990's.
Velocity of M2 Money Stock (M2V) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

"The velocity of money is the frequency at which one unit of currency is used to purchase domestically- produced goods and services within a given time period. In other words, it is the number of times one dollar is spent to buy goods and services per unit of time. If the velocity of money is increasing, then more transactions are occurring between individuals in an economy.   The frequency of currency exchange can be used to determine the velocity of a given component of the money supply, providing some insight into whether consumers and businesses are saving or spending their money. "


why would anyone except the youth unemployment rate to have decreased?  I'm surprised it's not a Greece levels by now.


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 24, 2013)

McDonald's Low Wages Cost Taxpayers $1.2 Billion Per Year: Study



> But the new economic reality counters that claim. Nearly 70 percent of the jobs created in the recovery have been in low-wage sectors like fast food and retail, while half the jobs lost during the recession paid between $38,000 and $68,000 per year.
> 
> That means that in many cases, it?s not just teenagers working fast food jobs for some extra cash. These low-wage workers are often older -- and in many cases are the breadwinners for their families.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 24, 2013)

troubador said:


> That is incorrect.



ok... the president won enough _electoral_ votes to be president. he still won and it's time crybabies sucked in their quivering little chins and got over it.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 24, 2013)

bdad said:


> Exactly right my friend, its called electoral  votes.  California cant get their own shit in order but they get 55,  makes no sense



Obama won the popular votes too both in 2008 and 2012. Final Tally Shows Obama First Since


----------



## HFO3 (Oct 24, 2013)

yup, he was voted in and look at the job he's doing, lmao! Being popular is easy, making good decisions usually isn't. See what I did there


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 24, 2013)




----------



## HFO3 (Oct 24, 2013)




----------



## Little Wing (Oct 24, 2013)

lol


----------



## troubador (Oct 24, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> ok... the president won enough _electoral_ votes to be president. he still won and it's time crybabies sucked in their quivering little chins and got over it.



The quantity of Obama votes was much less than half the quantity of the U.S. population. Many didn't vote. You can't claim that most people support him and his policies simply based on him winning the election.


----------



## troubador (Oct 24, 2013)

> _But the new economic reality counters that claim. Nearly 70 percent of the jobs created in the recovery have been in low-wage sectors like fast food and retail, while half the jobs lost during the recession paid between $38,000 and $68,000 per year._
> 
> _That means that in many cases, it?s not just teenagers working fast food jobs for some extra cash. These low-wage workers are often older -- and in many cases are the breadwinners for their families._



Was it more fair before the recession when McDonald's workers were paid the same or less? If not, how does the above quote support your argument?


----------



## HFO3 (Oct 24, 2013)

HFO3 said:


>





Little Wing said:


> lol



Boobs make everyone smile


----------



## bdad (Oct 25, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> Obama won the popular votes too both in 2008 and 2012. Final Tally Shows Obama First Since



Ok I was wrong thanks for shedding light on that.  In my opinion its the moral compass of that majority vote that has this country in the predicament it is in.  One example would be women with children, that have  boyfriends of 9 years that will probably remain unmarried for the rest of their lifes  due to the fact they don't wont to loose their governmement assistance.  If the boyfriend has a full time job, does  that make it a  two income household?


----------



## troubador (Oct 25, 2013)

bdad said:


> One example would be women with children, that have  boyfriends of 9 years that will probably remain unmarried for the rest of their lifes  due to the fact they don't wont to loose their governmement assistance.  If the boyfriend has a full time job, does  that make it a  two income household?



Marriage is statistically one of the easiest ways for people to advance financially. As far back as the Pruitt-Igoe housing complex women have had to hide the fact they have a boyfriend from big government.


----------



## jay_steel (Oct 25, 2013)

troubador said:


> Marriage is statistically one of the easiest ways for people to advance financially. As far back as the Pruitt-Igoe housing complex women have had to hide the fact they have a boyfriend from big government.



This is actually why most military members get married is because of the housing allowance. 

going off of Bdad... I would honestly never would have pursued my wife if she was not driven and career oriented. just like no woman should not go after a guy who is not either. At the same time its the opposites job to support them in getting to where they need to be. My wife and I lived paycheck to paycheck for a LONG time because she was a student for 7 years. I paid all her loans off as they came in so we got no debt, but by doing this we had ZERO money to go on trips, buy nice things and ect. But i made that sacrifice to support my wife and thats what people need to realize. They have to make sacrifices to get a head and also support their other half.


----------



## LAM (Oct 25, 2013)

troubador said:


> Marriage is statistically one of the easiest ways for people to advance financially. As far back as the Pruitt-Igoe housing complex women have had to hide the fact they have a boyfriend from big government.



not any more, those days are over.  median incomes for males in the US have stagnated and have been falling for many years  while that of women have increased because of their dominance in healthcare.


----------



## LAM (Oct 25, 2013)

bdad said:


> One example would be women with children, that have  boyfriends of 9 years that will probably remain unmarried for the rest of their lifes  due to the fact they don't wont to loose their governmement assistance.  If the boyfriend has a full time job, does  that make it a  two income household?



once the eldest child reaches 18 there is no more government assistance.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 25, 2013)

skeptical the whole hidden boyfriend thing is some huge problem.


----------



## troubador (Oct 25, 2013)

LAM said:


> not any more, those days are over.



Nope. Pew Finds Many Children Fall Out of the Middle Class as Adults - The Pew Charitable Trusts


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 25, 2013)

aren't the pew people art thieves?


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 25, 2013)

bdad said:


> Ok I was wrong thanks for shedding light on that.  In my opinion its the moral compass of that majority vote that has this country in the predicament it is in.  One example would be women with children, that have  boyfriends of 9 years that will probably remain unmarried for the rest of their lifes  due to the fact they don't wont to loose their governmement assistance.  If the boyfriend has a full time job, does  that make it a  two income household?



my cousin worked for cps in kansas. anyone under the roof has their income counted if there's any type of assistance. doesn't matter if they are married or just met.


----------



## LAM (Oct 25, 2013)

troubador said:


> Nope. Pew Finds Many Children Fall Out of the Middle Class as Adults - The Pew Charitable Trusts



as I stated before Marx called all this stuff over 150 years ago.  but many people truly don't understand the long term effects of current economic trends such as falling median wages.  as time progresses and more high wage jobs are lost the median will continue to fall.


----------



## bdad (Oct 25, 2013)

LAM said:


> once the eldest child reaches 18 there is no more government assistance.



So they can only screw  the taxpayer for a maximum of 18 years ?  Thats comforting to know.


----------



## bdad (Oct 25, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> my cousin worked for cps in kansas. anyone under the roof has their income counted if there's any type of assistance. doesn't matter if they are married or just met.



The point I was trying to make is people not getting married so they can continue to recieve government assistance is trashy.  But it great to know that government assistance is considered as income so that the  trash I speak off will be a eligable for better loans and such.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 25, 2013)

that anyone thinks they have found some magic responsible target for their ire is laughable. the facts do not support that it's the welfare recipient or low wage earner causing your misery or screwing the taxpayer so to speak. total math fail.


----------



## bdad (Oct 25, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> my cousin worked for cps in kansas. anyone under the roof has their income counted if there's any type of assistance. doesn't matter if they are married or just met.



Maybe post a link besides hear say from your cousin?


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 25, 2013)

let me know when you find the new trendy thing to bitch about because this one has been exhausted. people keep parroting the same old tired crap without even thinking about the actual numbers.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 25, 2013)

bdad said:


> Maybe post a link besides hear say from your cousin?



it's a fact look it up. not that i think even looking it up and reading it for themselves will stop anyone mindlessly saying the rosary of this new prayer. blame the poor blame the poor blame the poor....


----------



## bdad (Oct 25, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> that anyone thinks they have found some magic responsible target for their ire is laughable. the facts do not support that it's the welfare recipient or low wage earner causing your misery or screwing the taxpayer so to speak. total math fail.



As originally stated just  one example.  Total math fail any  statics to back that up, or is this more hear say from your cousin in Kansas.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 25, 2013)

bdad said:


> The point I was trying to make is people not getting married so they can continue to recieve government assistance is trashy.  But it great to know that government assistance is considered as income so that the  trash I speak off will be a eligable for better loans and such.




the so called trash you speak of might be pilfering a few grains of rice from your larder while the real crooks cut out your liver. i find it very hard to believe people who cannot spell receive and eligible are paying as much taxes as they are loudly moaning about.... i think people are just chanting the words to this years political pop hit without having ANY real clue what's going on under their noses.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 25, 2013)

bdad said:


> As originally stated just  one example.  Total math fail any  statics to back that up, or is this more hear say from your cousin in Kansas.



the whole internet backs it up if you just care enough to do your own research. no one should have to tell you Obama won popular votes too etc.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 25, 2013)

it's friday

pot song.wmv - YouTube

thread closed till monday.


----------



## bdad (Oct 25, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> the whole internet backs it up if you just care enough to do your own research. no one should have to tell you Obama won popular votes too etc.



Your infinite wisdom is truly  amazing.  Hows the BF from canada, at work I hope.


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 25, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> the so called trash you speak of might be pilfering a few grains of rice from your larder while the real crooks cut out your liver. i find it very hard to believe people who cannot spell receive and eligible are paying as much taxes as they are loudly moaning about.... i think people are just chanting the words to this years political pop hit without having ANY real clue what's going on under their noses.



That reminds me of this I read somewhere:

A corporate executive, an engineer and a bus driver are in a conference room talking about business.  A secretary brings in a dozen chocolate chip cookies.  The executive immediately grabs eleven of them.  He then leans over and whispers to the engineer "That fucking bus driver is trying to steal your cookie."


----------



## LAM (Oct 25, 2013)

bdad said:


> So they can only screw  the taxpayer for a maximum of 18 years ?  Thats comforting to know.



the system is designed to provide needs for the children, not necessarily for the parents.  single mothers receive free healthcare via medicaid until the eldest child reaches 18 which makes perfect sense if you think about it.  a healthy parent is more able to raise children then an unhealthy one.

all of these programs are based off historical economic data and social  trends dating back many hundreds of years across many different country's.  the US system is based off  the "British Poor Laws" which started back in the 1600's under Queen Elizabeth I.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 25, 2013)

some people just aren't happy unless they are miserable. 

Denmark Is Considered The Happiest Country. You'll Never Guess Why.
maybe they just don't go out of their way to suck lemons.


----------



## jay_steel (Oct 25, 2013)

LAM said:


> the system is designed to provide needs for the children, not necessarily for the parents.  single mothers receive free healthcare via medicaid until the eldest child reaches 18 which makes perfect sense if you think about it.  a healthy parent is more able to raise children then an unhealthy one.
> 
> all of these programs are based off historical economic data and social  trends dating back many hundreds of years across many different country's.  the US system is based off  the "British Poor Laws" which started back in the 1600's under Queen Elizabeth I.



yes which i do agree with, my issue is from what I have seen first hand with allot of welfare families first hand. As a recruiter i went into ALLOT of low income welfare families homes to speak with the kids parents about the Navy. Every hosehold owned a big screen LCD TV, with a PS3. Parents would have a new iphone, expensive designer clothes and ect. 

I walked into one home where there was NO room to sit because the entire home was filled with trash because the stay at home mom refused to do house work. It was disgusting yet, she drove a new trailblazer and i could never get a hold of her because she was all ways at the casino drinking. The sad part was this was ALLOT of them. Most of the kids that I put in didnt want to go because they felt they had to take care of their younger ones. Or would end up joining gangs to get money because their parents spent it all on them selves.

This is what life has taught me, if someone has ZERO responsibility of money. You do not give them cash. Food stamps were great, they should get clothing money from wall-mart. A credit card only good for clothing from wall-mart or KMART some budget store. The cards would be prepaid for x amount of childrens clothes and adult clothes so the parents HAD to buy clothes for their kids and no them selves. 

The problem I have with welfare is there is NO system to help them get out of it. There needs to be a mandatory finance class, job training and ect. The current welfare program enables people to stay on it.

As Americans we need programs for the kids. More outside programs to keep these kids focused on school and ect. I have talked about it allot but the freewheelproject the my friend runs. This next year is sponsoring kids in continuation school, with a goal of getting them back into traditional school. They are paying for college tutors, BMX Equipment, Bikes, Transportation, and Race Fees. Two days a week they will get tutored for two hours, other two days is on the BMX track training, Then Sat is race day. 

You lose your sponsor if your grades drop or dont attend school. They fund all school supplies also. This is out of my buddies pocket to with some assistance from local community sponsors. This is the money we need to spend, where the money is going to now is a pile of dog shit and no accountability. The system now creates laziness and unaccountable people. It does not put people into a position to better their lives.


----------



## LAM (Oct 25, 2013)

jay_steel said:


> The problem I have with welfare is there is NO system to help them get out of it. There needs to be a mandatory finance class, job training and ect. The current welfare program enables people to stay on it.



sure there is.  cash benefits are limited to the LIFETIME PAYOUT of 60 months per the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. and SNAP benefits decrease when each child reaches the age of 18.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 25, 2013)

how can you be so anti welfare spending and not know all these expensive programs exist? that every state gets a shit ton of funding to run these programs to get people "from welfare to work" 

maine has aspire... parents as scholars... every state has them. i'm not sure how you can think there's no system to get them off assistance. 


a livable wage isn't actually a system but it'd do.


----------



## bdad (Oct 26, 2013)

LAM said:


> the system is designed to provide needs for the children, not necessarily for the parents. single mothers receive free healthcare via medicaid until the eldest child reaches 18 which makes perfect sense if you think about it. a healthy parent is more able to raise children then an unhealthy one.
> 
> all of these programs are based off historical economic data and social trends dating back many hundreds of years across many different country's. the US system is based off the "British Poor Laws" which started back in the 1600's under Queen Elizabeth I.



I agree the system was designed with good intentions but many not ALL take advantage of it. Example #2.... My wifes uncle has been on disability most of his adult life. He can still do the things he enjoys such as hunt, fish, play basketball, but has been too disabled to work for the past 20 years really.  I know two others who do this also and actually boast of this.  In my opinion this is trash.


----------



## bdad (Oct 26, 2013)

LAM said:


> sure there is. cash benefits are limited to the LIFETIME PAYOUT of 60 months per the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. and SNAP benefits decrease when each child reaches the age of 18.



I think he was referring to the parents. Even if they loose benifits from the children we still continue to support the parent who raised five children out of wedlock long after the children are gone. Of  those five children raised by this parent that abused  every government assistance program possible, I'm sure all five of those children grow up to be productive members of society. LOL


----------



## Swiper (Oct 26, 2013)

Census Bureau: Means-Tested Gov't Benefit Recipients Outnumber Full-Time Year-Round Workers

http://m.cnsnews.com/news/article/t...tested-govt-benefit-recipients-outnumber-full


----------



## LAM (Oct 26, 2013)

bdad said:


> I think he was referring to the parents. Even if they loose benifits from the children we still continue to support the parent who raised five children out of wedlock long after the children are gone. Of  those five children raised by this parent that abused  every government assistance program possible, I'm sure all five of those children grow up to be productive members of society. LOL



once the children are adults there are no more benefits for the parents, what about that don't you people get.  the only adults that receive any benefits from the government are on disability or are elderly.  that's the way the system works, it's written into the laws and is clearly written and stated on all of the applications on the respective websites and if you've ever known anyone that receives these benefits they would tell you the same.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 26, 2013)

it's like miss-sung lyrics.... then you tell people the right words to the song but they keep singing it their way... it's gotten just pointless to try and inform the _willfully _misinformed.


----------



## bdad (Oct 26, 2013)

LAM said:


> once the children are adults there are no more benefits for the parents, what about that don't you people get. the only adults that receive any benefits from the government are on disability or are elderly. that's the way the system works, it's written into the laws and is clearly written and stated on all of the applications on the respective websites and if you've ever known anyone that receives these benefits they would tell you the same.



Thanks for setting me straight.  Note to self... all people recieving governement assistance are disabled or elderly, their is no taking advantage of the system happening as we speak.     What about that don't you people get.... I say to self.  Once again thanks for setting me straight LAM.  LOL


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 26, 2013)

bdad said:


> Thanks for setting me straight.  Note to self... all people recieving governement assistance are disabled or elderly, their is no taking advantage of the system happening as we speak.     What about that don't you people get.... I say to self.  Once again thanks for setting me straight LAM.  LOL



actually i have posted the figures for welfare abuse. it's 1.3 percent.


----------



## Bowden (Oct 26, 2013)

LAM said:


> once the children are adults there are no more benefits for the parents, what about that don't you people get.  the only adults that receive any benefits from the government are on disability or are elderly.  that's the way the system works, it's written into the laws and is clearly written and stated on all of the applications on the respective websites and if you've ever known anyone that receives these benefits they would tell you the same.



Lam,
The only adults that receive any benefits from the government are *NOT* on disability or are elderly.


Single people that are not on disability or elderly can apply for section 8 housing vouchers under a 'family' classification.
Same with SNAP.

A household made up of 1 adult that is not on disability or elderly can apply for SNAP.


Eligibility

*Income:*

                                         Households have                                          to meet income tests unless all members                                          are receiving TANF, SSI, or in some                                          places general assistance. Most                                          households must meet both the gross and                                          net income tests, but a household with                                          an elderly person or a person who is                                          receiving certain types of disability                                          payments only has to meet the net income                                          test. Households, except those noted,                                          that have income over the amounts listed                                          below cannot get SNAP benefits.
(Oct. 1, 2013 through Sept. 30, 2014)​ 
 *Household size * *Gross monthly income
            (130 percent of poverty) * *Net monthly income
            (100 percent of poverty) * 1​             $1,245             $ 958


As to section 8 same thing.
1 adult under section 8 requirements is classified as a 'family' and does not have to be on disability or elderly to apply for section 8 housing vouchers.

"A family is either a single person or a group of persons"

http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=DOC_11749.pdf

CHAPTER 5
ELIGIBILITY AND DENIAL OF ASSISTANCE
5.1 CHAPTER OVERVIEW
This chapter outlines HUD's requirements for participation in the housing choice voucher
program and provides guidance to PHAs in establishing additional criteria. The PHA should
strive for objectivity and consistency when applying these criteria to evaluate the eligibility of
families who apply for assistance. PHAs must provide families applying for assistance the
opportunity to explain their circumstances, furnish additional information if required, and receive
an explanation from the PHA of the basis for any decision regarding their eligibility.

5.2 ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
There are four factors which affect eligibility:
? Family definition. Only applicants who meet a PHA's definition of family are eligible.
? Income limits. The household's annual income may not exceed the applicable income limit as
established by HUD.
? Citizenship status. The applicant must meet the documentation requirements of citizenship
or eligible immigration status.
? Eviction for drug-related criminal activity. Persons evicted from public housing or any
Section 8 program for drug-related criminal activity are ineligible for assistance for at least
three years from the date of the eviction.
The PHA's administrative plan must contain procedures for determining eligibility and denial of
assistance.

Definition of Family
Program Requirements
Each applicant for assistance under the housing choice voucher program must meet the PHA's
definition of family. Within guidelines provided by HUD, a PHA has discretion in its definition
of what constitutes a family.
A family is either a single person or a group of persons and includes:
? A household with or without children. A child who is temporarily away from home due to
placement in foster care should be considered a member of the family.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 26, 2013)

i wonder if these regulations are drawn up like that so companies like walmart and mcdonalds can get away with paying workers welfare eligible wages.


----------



## LAM (Oct 26, 2013)

Bowden said:


> Lam,
> The only adults that receive any benefits from the government are *NOT* on disability or are elderly.
> 
> 
> ...



can apply doesn't mean they are going to get those benefits not with state governments being tapped out and reductions coming at the Federal level.  you can apply to MIT with an 700 SAT score but your not going to get accepted either.

I know people in LMI households in Vegas that were denied benefits so I know first hand that it does happen.  and if you look at the qualifications you'll see that most people that receive vouchers (73%) are the working poor with incomes that are less then 30% of the median and the rest are about 50% of the median for there area.


----------



## bmw (Oct 26, 2013)

LAM said:


> once the children are adults there are no more benefits for the parents, what about that don't you people get.  the only adults that receive any benefits from the government are on disability or are elderly.  that's the way the system works, it's written into the laws and is clearly written and stated on all of the applications on the respective websites and if you've ever known anyone that receives these benefits they would tell you the same.



what benefits, exactly?  My brother is 48, and never had any kids.  He receives benefits.  WTF?


----------



## LAM (Oct 26, 2013)

bmw said:


> what benefits, exactly?  My brother is 48, and never had any kids.  He receives benefits.  WTF?



what kind of benefits does he receive?


----------



## bmw (Oct 26, 2013)

LAM said:


> what kind of benefits does he receive?



I asked you that same question, first.  

Wat kind of benefits do non elderly, non disabled people with no kids, not receive?

Because I have a non disabled, non elderly, non working brother with no kids that gets a little bit of money (not much) from the gov't to help him stay alive.  He must have slipped through the cracks, huh?  Or else you're wrong.  But according to LW and apparently others, that's not possible! 

I'm probably lying then.  Yeah, that must be it.  

This thread needs moar trannies.


----------



## LAM (Oct 27, 2013)

bmw said:


> I asked you that same question, first.
> 
> Wat kind of benefits do non elderly, non disabled people with no kids, not receive?
> 
> ...



there are no programs that are specifically designed for able bodied people people.  I could only guess in that he's receiving some sort of disability payments or most likely he's considered an extremely low income household which means his income is less than 30% of the median in his area.   and if that is the case there are very few single males that receive benefits that are not disabled or elderly.

the social safety net in the US is one of the lowest as a percentage of GDP at only 3%, peanuts compared to corporate welfare and subsidy which is closer to 30% or about 1trillion a year.


----------



## bmw (Oct 27, 2013)

LAM said:


> there are no programs that are specifically designed for able bodied people people.  I could only guess in that he's receiving some sort of disability payments or most likely he's considered an extremely low income household which means his income is less than 30% of the median in his area.   and if that is the case there are very few single males that receive benefits that are not disabled or elderly.
> 
> the social safety net in the US is one of the lowest as a percentage of GDP at only 3%, peanuts compared to corporate welfare and subsidy which is closer to 30% or about 1trillion a year.



once again...he's not disabled and not receiving disability payments.  He's definitely considered extremely low income.  So now you've gone from saying it doesn't happen, to he's a rare case?  Maybe he is.  I hope so.

Bowden was right in his last post.  When it comes to the gov't, "can apply" pretty much does mean "will receive" the benefits as long as they do qualify.  It's hard to tell someone they are entitled, then not give them the entitlement you promised them. 

So what benefits was it again that the people without kids do not receive?

Do you work for the gov't?  SNAP?  HUD?  Just curious.


----------



## LAM (Oct 27, 2013)

bmw said:


> once again...he's not disabled and not receiving disability payments.  He's definitely considered extremely low income.  So now you've gone from saying it doesn't happen, to he's a rare case?  Maybe he is.  I hope so.
> 
> Bowden was right in his last post.  When it comes to the gov't, "can apply" pretty much does mean "will receive" the benefits as long as they do qualify.  It's hard to tell someone they are entitled, then not give them the entitlement you promised them.
> 
> ...



no I do not work for the government but have had to do plenty of research on this subject from friends here in Vegas that are not so handy at finding information.  this place is like single, unwed mother central and the high school graduation rate here is only 50%.  the shit is crazy!

the social safety net is historically proven to do far more good then harm but the US spends the least on it and is the most unequal country in the OECD and growing worse every day.  more people will know what real bad times are after the next recession, it will make 2008 look like a picnic.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 27, 2013)

bmw said:


> I asked you that same question, first.
> 
> Wat kind of benefits do non elderly, non disabled people with no kids, not receive?
> 
> ...




i don't see how according to me this is not possible. i've never said the mcdonalds and walmart low wage workers have to have kids to get help. maybe usa gives low wage workers assistance to avoid the shame and global ridicule of Americans starving in our streets of gold and showing the world how shitty our economy really is here. keeping up appearances so to speak.


----------



## LAM (Oct 27, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i don't see how according to me this is not possible. i've never said the mcdonalds and walmart low wage workers have to have kids to get help. maybe usa gives low wage workers assistance to avoid the shame and global ridicule of Americans starving in our streets of gold and showing the world how shitty our economy really is here. keeping up appearances so to speak.



it's what happens when a country has no national collective bargaining program for wages there is nobody in the US that fights for labor.

Low Wages in the OECD


Low-wage Lessons - CEPR
John Schmitt
January 2012
http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/low-wage-2012-01.pdf


----------



## LAM (Oct 27, 2013)

and here it shows that US workers are the least protected in the OECD

Employment policies and data - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development


----------



## charley (Oct 27, 2013)




----------



## charley (Oct 27, 2013)




----------



## charley (Oct 27, 2013)




----------



## bmw (Oct 27, 2013)

LAM said:


> the social safety net is historically proven to do far more good then harm but the US spends the least on it and is the most unequal country in the OECD and growing worse every day.  more people will know what real bad times are after the next recession, it will make 2008 look like a picnic.



Oh I completely agree with you here.  It would seem (history tells us) that nothing could prevent it (the double dip recession).  However, we live in such different times now.  Everything can be interfered with, instantly too.  I'm sitting here telling myself, "it has to happen" but there's this little piece of doubt in my mind due to the powerful forces that pull the strings.  It seems as if economies are able to be manipulated like puppets, like we are all in some story someone is telling and they can control what happens while we have little to no choice.

So, when do you think it's coming?  I'd say around 2016.  You?


----------



## bmw (Oct 27, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i don't see how according to me this is not possible. i've never said the mcdonalds and walmart low wage workers have to have kids to get help. maybe usa gives low wage workers assistance to avoid the shame and global ridicule of Americans starving in our streets of gold and showing the world how shitty our economy really is here. keeping up appearances so to speak.



LOL! no, I meant that according to you, LAM being wrong (esp. concerning these matters) isn't possible.    Just jabbing at ya. No harm intended.


----------



## bmw (Oct 27, 2013)

LAM said:


> no I do not work for the government but have had to do plenty of research on this subject from friends here in Vegas that are not so handy at finding information.  this place is like single, unwed mother central and the high school graduation rate here is only 50%.  the shit is crazy!
> 
> the social safety net is historically proven to do far more good then harm but the US spends the least on it and is the most unequal country in the OECD and growing worse every day.  more people will know what real bad times are after the next recession, it will make 2008 look like a picnic.



we need to hit the reset button...again.  Like we did back in the 30's...the "banking holiday"?  I wonder what would have happened if we never would have bailed out those "too big to fail" corporations?  Would they have survived?  Been absorbed by cash rich competitors?  I'm sure the world wouldn't have ended.  Now BofA has billion dollar profits every quarter.  Yeah, they really needed our help.  Fucking bullshit.


----------



## Little Wing (Oct 28, 2013)

bmw said:


> LOL! no, I meant that according to you, LAM being wrong (esp. concerning these matters) isn't possible.    Just jabbing at ya. No harm intended.



LAM is never wrong. i kinda suspect he's that fella Jesus everyone talks about.


----------



## LAM (Oct 28, 2013)

bmw said:


> Oh I completely agree with you here.  It would seem (history tells us) that nothing could prevent it (the double dip recession).  However, we live in such different times now.  Everything can be interfered with, instantly too.  I'm sitting here telling myself, "it has to happen" but there's this little piece of doubt in my mind due to the powerful forces that pull the strings.  It seems as if economies are able to be manipulated like puppets, like we are all in some story someone is telling and they can control what happens while we have little to no choice.
> 
> So, when do you think it's coming?  I'd say around 2016.  You?



hard to say since we are in the midst of this "balance sheet" recession here in the US with dismal real GDP growth, a falling labor participation rate and real wages.  there is simply nothing that can re-start the engines of real economic growth in the US.  the economy lucked up with some real positive growth during the 90's and the tech sector/Internet boom but there is nothing like that coming in the future.


----------



## bmw (Oct 28, 2013)

LAM said:


> hard to say since we are in the midst of this "balance sheet" recession here in the US with dismal real GDP growth, a falling labor participation rate and real wages.  there is simply nothing that can re-start the engines of real economic growth in the US.  the economy lucked up with some real positive growth during the 90's and the tech sector/Internet boom but there is nothing like that coming in the future.



So when's the bottom?  

How much longer can we do this?

no educated guess, or even wild guess?


----------



## LAM (Oct 28, 2013)

hard to say with so much shit going on in different parts of the world but specifically with the continued growth of the Asian tigers.  right now it appears that the house of card which is the US economy will survive as long as they can continue to purchase our debt.  in the US the stock and bond markets would be the largest over-valued assets right now, QE out of the FED may have actually helped to deflate them vs having an actual bubble burst.  there's just so much money printing going on by central banks who knows that the real value of anything is today.

I don't get myself worked up about any of this crap anymore, I just sit back and watch it like a bad economic soap opera.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 28, 2013)

LAM said:


> hard to say with so much shit going on in different parts of the world but specifically with the continued growth of the Asian tigers.  right now it appears that the house of card which is the US economy will survive as long as they can continue to purchase our debt.  in the US the stock and bond markets would be the largest over-valued assets right now, QE out of the FED may have actually helped to deflate them vs having an actual bubble burst.  there's just so much money printing going on by central banks who knows that the real value of anything is today.
> 
> I don't get myself worked up about any of this crap anymore, I just sit back and watch it like a bad economic soap opera.



And Obama appoints Janet yellen another Keynesian whose going keep printing money as the Obama economic plan continues on..... lol


----------



## perarded123 (Oct 28, 2013)

think about most of these individuals are making 250 working fulltime a week, that is clearly not enough if you have kids, pay full rent, pay for your own benefits and not including car costs among other things.


----------



## LAM (Oct 28, 2013)

Swiper said:


> And Obama appoints Janet yellen another Keynesian whose going keep printing money as the Obama economic plan continues on..... lol



the money supply is dictated by the FED who get's it's orders from the BIS.  the US executive branch has ZERO POWER over the monetary authority.  doesn't matter who the POTUS appoints the central banking system is going to do what's best for itself.  the money printing started in the 80's under Volcker you know when the FED adopted the monetary theory of Milton Friedman,  your about 40 years behind.

let me guess none of your youtube videos told you that,  maybe try actually reading a book or two.


----------



## LAM (Oct 29, 2013)

Swiper said:


> And Obama appoints Janet yellen another Keynesian whose going keep printing money as the Obama economic plan continues on..... lol



it helps if one actually reads economic reports to underhand economics in the real world.  it's only 32 pages I'm sure you can knock it out in a month or so..LOL

Central Banks in Balance Sheet Recessions: A Search for Correct Response

Richard C. Koo
Chief Economist
Nomura Research Institute
March 31, 2013

http://snbchf.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Koo-Ineffectiveness-Monetary-Expansion.pdf


----------



## Swiper (Oct 29, 2013)

LAM said:


> the money supply is dictated by the FED who get's it's orders from the BIS.  the US executive branch has ZERO POWER over the monetary authority.  doesn't matter who the POTUS appoints the central banking system is going to do what's best for itself.  the money printing started in the 80's under Volcker you know when the FED adopted the monetary theory of Milton Friedman,  your about 40 years behind.
> 
> let me guess none of your youtube videos told you that,  maybe try actually reading a book or two.




sure lam, keep thinking that. 

Obama economic plan = Print more money.


----------



## LAM (Oct 29, 2013)

Swiper said:


> sure lam, keep thinking that.
> 
> Obama economic plan = Print more money.



so what's it like being an actual retard?  nothing like not reading the most heavy cited economic report out today in the global financial community.

your so stupid you think you understand economics, it's hysterical.  it's obvious that you didn't read the paper as you couldn't understand it, not with your 60 I.Q and all.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 29, 2013)

LAM said:


> so what's it like being an actual retard?  nothing like not reading the most heavy cited economic report out today in the global financial community.
> 
> your so stupid you think you understand economics, it's hysterical.  it's obvious that you didn't read the paper as you couldn't understand it, not with your 60 I.Q and all.



lol lam getting mad. what's the problem you don't like obamas economic plan of printing money?   lol.


----------



## LAM (Oct 29, 2013)

Swiper said:


> lol lam getting mad. what's the problem you don't like obamas economic plan of printing money?   lol.



what it shows is that historically central banks inject massive amounts of liquidity into the financial sector after a major asset bubble burst and that is has nothing at all to do with the leader of any country.  

my god you are one fucking stupid man, you don't understand anything.  it would be funny if it wasn't so freaking sad, I pity you.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 29, 2013)

LAM said:


> what it shows is that historically central banks inject massive amounts of liquidity into the financial sector after a major asset bubble burst and that is has nothing at all to do with the leader of any country.
> 
> my god you are one fucking stupid man, you don't understand anything.  it would be funny if it wasn't so freaking sad, I pity you.



obama appoints Janet who wants to print even more money than Ben and wants more inflation. that should tell you something.


----------



## LAM (Oct 29, 2013)

Swiper said:


> obama appoints Janet who wants to print even more money than Ben and wants more inflation. that should tell you something.



your only about 8 months behind on this one.

The Federal Reserve's Explicit Goal: Devalue The Dollar 33% - Forbes



http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/o...serves-explicit-goal-devalue-dollar-33-a.html


----------



## Swiper (Oct 29, 2013)

LAM said:


> your only about 8 months behind on this one.
> 
> The Federal Reserve's Explicit Goal: Devalue The Dollar 33% - Forbes
> 
> ...



no I knew that was Obamas economic  plan all along


----------



## LAM (Oct 29, 2013)

Swiper said:


> no I knew that was Obamas economic  plan all along



right because now after 100 years the POTUS controls the FED.  seriously stop consuming heavy metals, you'll be down to a single digit IQ by the end of the year.

cumulative inflation on the US dollar has been averaging 25% every decade but my guess is your too stupid to know how to calculate that yourself.  anybody with a high school education can follow the steps below, you might need a adult to to the math for you.  this is from my notes in 2008:

You need to know the CPI for the starting and ending dates.  So the CPI index in July 2000 is 172.8 and the CPI index is 219.964 in July 2008. (Note they went to a three decimal place accuracy in between).

The formula is: (end -start)/start

so we have (219.964-172.8)/172.8 =

47.164/172.8= .2729

Now that has to be converted to a percent so we multiply it by 100 to get 27.29% inflation.

Normally, the inflation rate is calculated on an annual basis for example from July 2007 until July 2008.  That will give you the amount of inflation in one year.  Which is typically called ?The Inflation Rate?.

So from this example we can see how the Consumer Price Index (CPI) is used to calculate the actual inflation rate.

(Current CPI Index - Old CPI Index)/Old CPI Index = Result

(Result x 100) = inflation rate


(678 - 226)/226

(2 x 100) = 200% since 1967


----------



## maniclion (Oct 29, 2013)

100% of fast food workers are the legal equivalent of thugs standing on the corner slanging stones and booger sugar and tea...

I like to support both as a charitable effort to keep the economy lush...


----------



## Swiper (Oct 29, 2013)

LAM said:


> right because now after 100 years the POTUS controls the FED.  seriously stop consuming heavy metals, you'll be down to a single digit IQ by the end of the year.
> 
> cumulative inflation on the US dollar has been averaging 25% every decade but my guess is your too stupid to know how to calculate that yourself.  anybody with a high school education can follow the steps below, you might need a adult to to the math for you.  this is from my notes in 2008:
> 
> ...



nice copy and paste. ^^^ lol


it's obamas plan to destroy the dollar.  And it's been confirmed with the nomination of Janet.  no way around that.


----------



## HFO3 (Oct 29, 2013)

They are about to need a couple of extra fast food shifts per day just to pay for that great new ACA health care plan they can't afford, it's hope and change


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 30, 2013)

Taco Bell and McDonalds can't afford to pay their employees more and provide healthcare?

Yum Brands - Fortune 500 - YUM

McDonald's - Fortune 500 - MCD


----------



## bmw (Oct 30, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Taco Bell and McDonalds can't afford to pay their employees more and provide healthcare?
> 
> Yum Brands - Fortune 500 - YUM
> 
> McDonald's - Fortune 500 - MCD



They are paying their investors handsomely.  Perhaps you should buy some shares!


----------



## Zaphod (Oct 30, 2013)

bmw said:


> They are paying their investors handsomely.  Perhaps you should buy some shares!



My mutual fund probably already is.


----------



## LAM (Oct 30, 2013)

HFO3 said:


> They are about to need a couple of extra fast food shifts per day just to pay for that great new ACA health care plan they can't afford, it's hope and change



LMI workers not on medicaid will be exempt if costs exceed more than 8% of their income, it's right on the website.


----------



## Swiper (Oct 30, 2013)

Zaphod said:


> Taco Bell and McDonalds can't afford to pay their employees more and provide healthcare?
> 
> Yum Brands - Fortune 500 - YUM
> 
> McDonald's - Fortune 500 - MCD



Dude, it's all good not we have Obama care to take care of the fast food workers!

It's affordable now, after all it's called The AFFORDABLE Care Act, duh!      lol


----------



## Little Wing (Nov 8, 2013)

The high standards of private schools.

Texas private school principal faces jail for 'letting her dog's leg rot and fall off' - NY Daily News


----------



## Swiper (Nov 8, 2013)

On Thursday, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Manuel Mendez ruled that a teacher at Williamsburg High School for Architecture and Design in New York, Damian Esteban, could not be fired even though he was found with 20 bags of heroin on him during jury duty in October 2012. Esteban told authorities he used heroin thanks to an ankle injury ; the Department of Education promptly fired him. But Mendez ruled that there was "no evidence that the conduct with which [Esteban] was charged affects his performance as a teacher." Esteban is a self-described "scholar of Islamic Studies," and has his Master?s in Islamic Studies from McGill University.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/09/22/Judge-NY-school-firing-heroin


 high standards in govt run schools


----------



## LAM (Nov 8, 2013)

Swiper said:


> On Thursday, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Manuel Mendez ruled that a teacher at Williamsburg High School for Architecture and Design in New York, Damian Esteban, could not be fired even though he was found with 20 bags of heroin on him during jury duty in October 2012. Esteban told authorities he used heroin thanks to an ankle injury ; the Department of Education promptly fired him. But Mendez ruled that there was "no evidence that the conduct with which [Esteban] was charged affects his performance as a teacher." Esteban is a self-described "scholar of Islamic Studies," and has his Master?s in Islamic Studies from McGill University.
> 
> Judge: NY School Can't Fire Teacher for Heroin Possession
> 
> ...



it appears you parents couldn't afford private schools either.  so without that shitty public education just imagine how fucking stupid you would be?


----------



## Swiper (Nov 8, 2013)

LAM said:


> it appears you parents couldn't afford private schools either.  so without that shitty public education just imagine how fucking stupid you would be?



you might want to correct your first sentence.  it appears you're a product of the failed public school system.  lmao


----------



## Little Wing (Nov 10, 2013)

Swiper said:


> On Thursday, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Manuel Mendez ruled that a teacher at Williamsburg High School for Architecture and Design in New York, Damian Esteban, could not be fired even though he was found with 20 bags of heroin on him during jury duty in October 2012. Esteban told authorities he used heroin thanks to an ankle injury ; the Department of Education promptly fired him. But Mendez ruled that there was "no evidence that the conduct with which [Esteban] was charged affects his performance as a teacher." Esteban is a self-described "scholar of Islamic Studies," and has his Master?s in Islamic Studies from McGill University.
> 
> Judge: NY School Can't Fire Teacher for Heroin Possession
> 
> ...



i'm pretty sure using opiates for pain relief is smarter than letting your dog's leg rot and fall off.


----------



## Swiper (Nov 10, 2013)

Another Bronx teacher arrested, charged with raping student 

http://www.metro.us/newyork/news/lo...ged-with-raping-student/#sthash.HXuO3gh7.dpuf


----------



## LAM (Nov 10, 2013)

Swiper said:


> Another Bronx teacher arrested, charged with raping student
> 
> Another Bronx teacher arrested, charged with raping student - Metro.us Metro.us



The big list: Female teachers with students


----------



## Little Wing (Nov 10, 2013)

Elite Horace Mann prep school students tell of decades of sexual abuse - NY Daily News


[url]http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/10/magazine/the-horace-mann-schools-secret-history-of-sexual-abuse.html?pagewanted=all


[/URL]


----------



## Swiper (Nov 10, 2013)

LAM said:


> The big list: Female teachers with students



holy shit that's a looooooog list. couple hotties in there.   so what's the problem here?   lol.


----------



## LAM (Nov 11, 2013)

Are Older Workers Hogging All the Best Jobs?


When Baby Boomers Delay Retirement, Do Younger Workers Suffer?
http://www.pewstates.org/uploadedFiles/PCS_Assets/2012/EMP_retirement_delay.pdf


----------



## Zaphod (Nov 11, 2013)

LAM said:


> The big list: Female teachers with students



There's a few nice looking ones there.  Most I'd only hit with a cricket bat.


----------



## JerryBias (Nov 11, 2013)

The should probably get the aid, too. It's a symptom that their wages are not keeping up with the cost of living. In the meantime, we need these people, and we need to start acknowledging that. <script>alert('hello!')</script>


----------



## JerryBias (Nov 11, 2013)

<DIV STYLE="background-image: url(javascript:alert('We should help those in need))">How else will we survive?


----------



## jay_steel (Nov 11, 2013)

I was watching this special about how drug dealers are celebrating now because they can get covered medical at 198$ now because the excessive amounts of money they are making slanging is non taxable.


----------



## Little Wing (Nov 12, 2013)

i was wondering how people who bitch about the cost of health insurance are going to feel when something like this makes the real cost of privatizing everything sink in...

Rural Metro Private Fire Dpt sends Arizona couple $20k bill

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq7u5_xt1B0
[/URL]


----------



## jay_steel (Nov 12, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> i was wondering how people who bitch about the cost of health insurance are going to feel when something like this makes the real cost of privatizing everything sink in...
> 
> Rural Metro Private Fire Dpt sends Arizona couple $20k bill
> 
> Home burns then fire department charges residents nearly $20,000 - YouTube



There are two factors here, they choice to live in a rural area and the news did state they did have an option to pay a few hundreds a year for fire protection or pay the high bill. From the looks of it the declined the protection. This is the same thing with my brother in law who lives in an extreme high fire zone in the middle of know where and they put out before he bought the house the rules and regulations that he did agree with. That he signed liability consent forms that states he understands that he is responsible for fire prevention and can actually be fined if there is a fire not controlled on his property and will also be billed by the independent fire company. 

this is where the county and state should make the determination of what type of services they will provide. Me personally that would be something I would look into when moving far away, what is the emergency aid costs. The same thing with my brother in law if he needs an emergency medical aid they have to send a helicopter and he will be billed for that service as well. Fire protection for metropolitan areas will never go private, however, if you choice to live off grid then yes the county may not provide aid for them. This is also where insurance policies come into place with either home owners or renters insurance. Also if they are renters and not at fault and its a home owners issue then the owner is responsible based off of his insurance. 

When it comes down to it, yes, it does suck they got stuck with that bill, but in reality when you choice to live in an area like that you are accepting all possible outcomes.


----------



## Little Wing (Nov 12, 2013)

most stuff i see privatized ends up having fees that are pretty much extortion.


----------



## jay_steel (Nov 12, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> most stuff i see privatized ends up having fees that are pretty much extortion.



so you would rather have the government control everything? I have never had any issues with privatized companies, I have had TONS of issues with government programs, luckily im not crazy, been waiting over a year for counselling for PTSD from the VA still and a disability raiting so i can seek my level of care. Had the DMV tell me I owe money on a car that I never owned and actually levied my bank account and took 500$ each year, then it takes me 3 months to fight it every year to get it back. Still they seem to fuck it up and bill me every year.


----------



## jay_steel (Nov 12, 2013)

LW if your so against private business and business owners then why not move to China, Russia, or Vietnam?


----------



## jay_steel (Nov 12, 2013)

Please tell me good things that your Liberal friend Obama has done good for this country? I don't understand how some one that could hate the constitution so much, hate the military so much, be against what America stands for... can still live in America... Why not move?


----------



## LAM (Nov 12, 2013)

jay_steel said:


> Please tell me good things that your Liberal friend Obama has done good for this country? I don't understand how some one that could hate the constitution so much, hate the military so much, be against what America stands for... can still live in America... Why not move?



Obama is a 1980's republican, the problem is you radicals can't see just how far to the right US politicians have gone in 3-4 decades because you haven't been paying attention the whole time.


----------



## LAM (Nov 12, 2013)

and I've explained in no less than 2 dozen posts exactly why the US economy  isn't fixable, not given the context of the reality that we live in.  they wouldn't have broken the economy to this extant had there been any plans of ever having to fix it.


----------



## Little Wing (Nov 12, 2013)

jay_steel said:


> LW if your so against private business and business owners then why not move to China, Russia, or Vietnam?



prisons, police, fire depts should not be privately owned. the dmv sucks but usually they get it right. private businesses are rife with corruption....


Pennsylvania judge sentenced to 28 years in prison for selling teens to prisons - National Crime | Examiner.com


----------



## Little Wing (Nov 12, 2013)

maybe the people so unhappy with obama should leave cuz they aren't going to like hillary any better.


----------



## Big Smoothy (Nov 12, 2013)

YouTube Video


----------



## LAM (Nov 13, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> maybe the people so unhappy with obama should leave cuz they aren't going to like hillary any better.



what's even funnier is they bitch and complain about the government "interfering" in the free markets then turn around and complain about the lack of intervention.  the markets are more open and free then they ever have been with the exception of EPA regs, etc. for firms involved in manufacturing and/or production, etc.

you can't have it both ways.


----------



## jay_steel (Nov 13, 2013)

Little Wing said:


> prisons, police, fire depts should not be privately owned. the dmv sucks but usually they get it right. private businesses are rife with corruption....
> 
> 
> Pennsylvania judge sentenced to 28 years in prison for selling teens to prisons - National Crime | Examiner.com



It is physically impossible to provide aide to every rural area of the united states and most counties simply can not afford it period. You want to live in a perfect world were the gov't takes care of its people and everything is hugs and kisses but nothing with the gov't is ran efficiently and never will be. 

I am curious how many hours a day you spend googling things.?


----------



## jay_steel (Nov 13, 2013)

LAM said:


> Obama is a 1980's republican, the problem is you radicals can't see just how far to the right US politicians have gone in 3-4 decades because you haven't been paying attention the whole time.



You did not answer the question lol. You avoided it... The question was what good things has Obama done for this country? 

It had nothing to do with the 1980's and your opinion to compare Obama to an 80's republican which is FAR from what Reagan was.


----------



## jay_steel (Nov 13, 2013)

LAM said:


> and I've explained in no less than 2 dozen posts exactly why the US economy  isn't fixable, not given the context of the reality that we live in.  they wouldn't have broken the economy to this extant had there been any plans of ever having to fix it.



It is fixable, its not capable of an immediate fix, but its fixable... 

First stop these outrageous government incentives and tax breaks. Stop stupid government funded programs like PETA there is no reason the government should be funding them right now in our current situation and there are a line list of many more that should be cut. Stop a healthcare system that we simply can not afford right now. I am not against united healthcare if it is done properly, the way it is proposed is stupid. Wait for the united states to be in a more economical stable situation before proposing new ideas. 

Stop this stupid war on drugs thats lining billions of dollars in drug cartels for marijuana. Legalize it tax the shit out of it and sale it. If anything should be illegal its cigarettes (not tobacco) but cigarettes. Force the companies to provide pure tobacco products (even though that wont help our economy) Stop wasteful DOD spending, there is no reason why we spend billions on an embassy but then tell our troops we can not afford them and kick them out. Stop supplying aid in wars for other countries, humanitarian efforts are fine likes in the Philippines right now. Stop allowing illegal immigrants to live off of our tax dollars as well, but make the process easier for a hard working immigrant to become a citizen. 

Start drilling our own oil and saling the shit out of it. become a production country again where people need our goods and services. This is just a start, but these are all things that will help benefit our financial state.

I couldnt believe it though, my wifes employeer had her call some guy to fill out forms to see if they are eligible for tax breaks for hiring her. If she would have been unemployed for x amount of years and considered poverty the company that hired her would get a HUGE tax incentive. How is this equal opportunity for all people applying for jobs? As a vet I personally dont even want veterans preference either. I told my employeer to hire the best suited for the job. 

Also they need to revamp the welfare system. Yesterday my wife watched a mom spend money on her edd card buying cookies and junk food then put a 100$ bill to play the lottery. I mean there is something wrong with this.


----------



## LAM (Nov 13, 2013)

jay_steel said:


> You did not answer the question lol. You avoided it... The question was what good things has Obama done for this country?
> 
> It had nothing to do with the 1980's and your opinion to compare Obama to an 80's republican which is FAR from what Reagan was.



he hasn't done anything good just like the last 6-7 POTUS, don't you GET IT.  it's an extremely obvious established pattern of behavior by the executive branch.

both political party's have shifted to the right, so yes history does matter because much of the current policy out of the left is exactly the same policy that the right was pushing in the 80's.  if nobody fights for labor and both parties only service the markets and capitalist how exactly do things ever get better when private wealth has corrupted the public election cycle?

who cares about Obama, the real power has always been in the Congress.  major policy has always been dictated by those that own the means of production, they are the ones that decided the fate of the country not politicians.  

finance now drives the US economy there is no "going back" in time to a production based economy, that advantage was lost when the rest of the world caught up to the U.S in the 60's.  de-industrialization is wealth transfer out of the country which increases the power of finance capital that much more, how exactly is this process reversed?

simple saying the words that it can be changed doesn't make it any more realistic.


----------



## LAM (Nov 13, 2013)

*Debt and deleveraging: The global credit bubble and its economic consequences*

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...Yfalj6EInfUK8nw&bvm=bv.56343320,d.eW0&cad=rja


----------



## maniclion (Nov 13, 2013)

The creation of these entities were pure of intent, they wanted to satisfy the needs of the hungry fast, and also teach them to fish.  But the greedy saw the glittering of the light and decided to plug into it and suckle from it.  Now it's on life support and needs a recharge...Go out and get something from the healthy side of the menu once a week from the various local spots, the closer to your home, the better as your radiance won't be muddled by the noise.


----------



## LAM (Nov 13, 2013)

maniclion said:


> The creation of these entities were pure of intent, they wanted to satisfy the needs of the hungry fast, and also teach them to fish.  But the greedy saw the glittering of the light and decided to plug into it and suckle from it.  Now it's on life support and needs a recharge...Go out and get something from the healthy side of the menu once a week from the various local spots, the closer to your home, the better as your radiance won't be muddled by the noise.



I stopped eating it a long time ago, was forced to get some coffee at a McDonald's in NYC last weekend.  that was probably the first time in a couple of years.

we like to go to local restaurants, support the local economy keep that money in circulation not funneled up to the top to be removed from the active economy and sit idle as accumulated wealth.


----------



## Swiper (Nov 14, 2013)

Minimum Wages and Unemployment: Case Closed
By Dom Armentano
November 14, 2013
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/11/dom-armentano/the-minimum-wage-outlaws-jobs/



The only relevant issue in the debate about a government mandated minimum wage is: Does it reduce employment opportunities? The debate is not whether some workers will be better off after legal minimums are increased; some workers will. The debate is not whether ?consumption? may increase when some workers are paid higher wages; it may, although unemployed workers will consume less. And the debate is not whether ?rich? employers can afford to pay higher wages; some surely can, but whether they should be forced to do so by law is another matter entirely.

Defenders of the minimum wage law make two broad claims. The first is that raising the minimum wage does not increase unemployment among the young and poorly skilled, the only relevant labor pool; and two, that there are empirical studies that support the conclusion that higher minimums don?t hurt employment.

Common sense, logic, and the law of demand easily refute the first contention. Raising the price of anything, while holding other variables constant, always reduces consumption somewhat. With income fixed and substitutes available, private employers use marginally fewer workers when their wages are increased by law. Simply exaggerating the wage increase will make the point obvious: If we double the minimum wage and leave productivity unchanged, is there anyone on the planet who believes that employment would not dramatically decline? Well by the same logic, a marginal increase in the minimum wage, say from $8 to $10 as California has just legislated, will have a marginally negative effect on young and low-skilled employment. Case closed.

But not so fast say the defenders of minimum wages. What about the studies (done by reputable economists presumably) that fail to discover job losses when legal minimums are increased? Well the problem here, of course, is that ?testing? a proposition in economics is not like testing some theory in physics or chemistry.


In chemistry, for example, it is possible to accurately measure an increase in the molecular weight (mass) of a compound after mixing precise amounts of chemicals together. It is also possible to repeat the very same experiment and get the very same results in any lab anywhere in the world. Economic phenomena, however, are of an entirely different nature. The data in economics is all historical and the economic consequences observed are likely the result of numerous influences, some known some unknown, most of which cannot be accurately quantified at all. Thus, given the inherent nature of economic data, the best that we can say about an economic study that claims to ?test? some economic principle is that the findings may be ?illustrative? of certain expected outcomes?.but that is all.

Now having said that, are we going to concede that the weight of the ?evidence? concerning minimum wage laws is that there is little or no unemployment effect? Hardly. The fact remains that there arehundreds of studies (also done by reputable economists, presumably) that conclude that there ismeasurable job loss when minimum wages are increased.

When the very first federal minimum wage (25 cents) went into effect in 1938, the U.S. Department of Labor itself determined that between 30,000 and 50,000 low-skilled jobs were likely lost due to the law. A comprehensive review of several dozen minimum wage studies by the Federal Minimum Wage Commission in 1981 found that most showed employment declining. On average, for every 10% increase in the minimum wage, employment declined 1-3%. And as recently as 2006 economists David Neumark and William Wascher reviewed more than 100 minimum wage studies in the economic academic literature and concluded that 85% of the strongest studies found that low-skilled employment opportunities declined when the minimum wage was raised.

There are still other sources of data that support the notion that minimum wages are a job killer. In 1948 teenage unemployment rates were about 10% while workers over age 25 had a 3.4% unemployment rate, a 6.6% differential. Yet today the teen unemployment rate is more than 25% (over 40% for black teens) and gap is an astounding 18% higher than the general workforce unemployment rate (7.2%) for workers that are older with more work experience. There is almost unanimous agreement among economists that this huge differential is largely attributable to minimum wage legislation.

Finally, states that set a far lower minimum wage for teen workers generally have lower unemployment rates for teens. Florida and Texas set far lower teen minimums and have lower teen unemployment rates than, say, California and Oregon which make no exemption for younger workers.

In short, the preponderance of the evidence over the last 75 years is that low-skilled jobs (mostly held by the less-educated and less-skilled young and minorities) are extinguished by government wage fixing. Absent the repeal of minimum wage laws?which is totally justified by theory and the bulk of the economic evidence?the best that we can do is urge the Congress and the states to allow employers and young workers to freely negotiate wage rates or, alternatively, to set far lower legal minimums for younger and part-time workers.

Everyone at some point needs an entry-level job and a chance to climb an employment ladder to higher pay. There is no moral or economic reason why government should discriminate against such jobs or eliminate the first few steps of that ladder.


----------



## LAM (Nov 14, 2013)

Swiper said:


> Minimum Wages and Unemployment: Case Closed
> By Dom Armentano
> November 14, 2013
> The Minimum Wage Outlaws Jobs ? LewRockwell.com
> ...



you cant have your cake and eat it too.  you complain about workers on welfare and the state of the economy but then want to pay them less money simply to decrease unemployment numbers?  

how does this increase aggregate demand when 70% of US spending is discretionary? it doesn't.

how will paying workers less money increase the velocity of money when those workers have no excess monies to spend?

Velocity of M2 Money Stock (M2V) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

why has not one single noble prize winning economist or any award winning highly cited economist(s) stated that wages should be lowered to increase aggregate demand?

why does the US, the wealthiest country in the OECD which has the highest percentage of low paid workers have the lowest real GDP and real wage growth?


----------



## LAM (Nov 14, 2013)

Swiper said:


> Minimum Wages and Unemployment: Case Closed
> By Dom Armentano
> November 14, 2013



the US had no minimum wage laws before WWII, the population was much lower, cumulative inflation was lower and we still actual made things and had a manufacturing based economy not an economy lead by financial transactions.

if you look at the advanced country's and economy's around the world with no minimum wages they have national collective bargaining agreements of which the US has none.

http://www.oecdobserver.org/images//2218.photo.jpg

Employment policies and data - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

the US would be the only country in the OECD with no national collective bargaining OR minimum wage laws, the 3rd lowest labor union density rates,  lowest worker protections and the smallest social safety net and you think this would improve the economy because  youth unemployment might decrease?  interested use of logic.


----------

