Raise the Minimum Wage

Lets say I except that, which I don't, one would extrapolate that another form of govt is better for the poor. It's not socialism or communism, nothing leaves poor dead people in their wake like those two. Where capitalism has done more for freeing and feeding the world than any other system in the history of the planet, what system would you like to see in place. Originally Posted by thisguy23

Oh please. Our government system is no more responsible for the existence of poor people than capitalism is. On the contrary, capitalism is what leads to poor people, and our government system is in place to account for that, and aid those who are left behind.

I'm perfectly ok with capitalism. But i also realize the realities of it, both the negative as well as the positive. And reality #1 is that you can't have capitalism without also having people at the lower end of the scale. Because without having people at the lower end of the scale, you have communism. So people like you can piss and moan all you want about people who fail to "lift themselves up by their bootstraps", but the fact is that without them, you become one of 'em. Meaning if everyone behind us became as well off as you and I, then you and I would be the poor ones on the block.

like the gallon of milk that used to cost $2.50 is now $4.00 because we didn't increase minimum wage ? Originally Posted by CJ7

Excellent example of a product that has "value", CBJ7! If you and others weren't ready, willing and able to buy that product for $4 per gallon, it wouldn't be on the market for that price, CBJ7.

Or gas, which goes up and down like a yo-yo. Originally Posted by Doove

Another excellent example of a product people place "value" on, Doofus! If you and others didn't place a certain "value" on a product, i.e. how much of your labor are you willing to sacrifice in exchange for the product, the product wouldn't be on the market for that price. Another great example of a product people place "value" on, Doofus, is cigarettes. Despite the outrageous tax burden put on tobacco products by socialist lib-retards, "[s]moking is still a relatively inexpensive pleasure that less-educated and lower-income people are more susceptible to pursuing."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stanto..._b_627057.html


High Cigarette Prices in New York Mostly Just Hurt the Poor

"Despite New York imposing the highest cigarette tax in the nation, there was no noticeable decline in smoking among the state's poorest citizens between 2003 and 2010, according to a new study with no silver lining. People making less than $30,000 a year spend 23.6 percent of their income on cigarettes, almost ten points higher than the national average, while those earning more than $60,000 spend an average of just 2.2 percent of their income on the same expensive packs."

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...hurt-poor.html

Where capitalism has done more for freeing and feeding the world than any other system in the history of the planet, what system would you like to see in place. Originally Posted by thisguy23

Capitalism has certainly created more wealth than any other economic system in human history, which is a good thing that makes other things possible, but by itself it defines no mechanism to free or feed anyone. Capitalists may have done that at times, but there were other factors and conditions that had to exist for that to happen.

I truly believe that capitalism (barring the discovery of a better system someday) is a vital component in a successful democracy, but there is a balance that is required for both to work together because they are in inherent opposition. Capitalism is essentially monarchical/dictatorial - he who has the gold rules. Thus, it is always seeking to overthrow the good of the whole to pursue more good for only the few capitalists. Now possibly if we had a way to make everyone a capitalist to one degree or another we might find a way to lessen that tension, but so far it has probably worked all to the good. Not sure how we would get to that system either, but what I do know is the few companies that I worked for that gave me significant equity were where I worked the hardest (other than working my own startups) and enjoyed working the most.

BTW, I'm not totally against monarchy/dictatorship because it is an efficient system to some extent. Far more efficient when it needs to be than democracy. Unfortunately for the good of the society/many it is dependent upon a benevolent monarch/dictator and those are few and far between.

I really think that many conservatives/Republicans are actually anti-democratic (hate democracy) underneath it all (deny it and give good reasons please if you think I"m wrong). I suspect many of them they would be thrilled to be able to pass a law to take away the vote from all Democrats and for that matter make the U.S. a one party state. Otherwise why would they demonize people in their own party as RINOs and try to drive them out when they don't agree with them or toe the party line? That is just plain nasty and undemocratic behavior. It goes against freedom of speech and freedom of association.

Another excellent example of a product people place "value" on, Doofus! If you and others didn't place a certain "value" on a product, i.e. how much of your labor are you willing to sacrifice in exchange for the product, the product wouldn't be on the market for that price. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Yeah, Doofus, but gas and milk are so far from free market products that it just isn't worth even talking about. There have been consistent scandals all across the country about dairy price fixing, not to mention all the ag laws (with corporate subsidies) that attempt to keep the prices up. Gas, petroleum, is a true commodity market and worldwide, but it is driven a lot by speculation and not so much by real market forces. Also, after 150 years it is still being supported by massive subsidies in many different ways. Value has little to do with either. Cigarettes are quite addictive, in case you weren't aware, so it has less to do with value and more to do with cravings.

If you think we have free markets and competition here or elsewhere you are fooling yourself. Big corporations don't want competition, they vastly prefer monopolies if they can get them and once they have significant market penetration they will use any means at their disposal to quash any competition or market disruption including laws and regulations. They talk out of one side of their mouths and do as they please, but really want to have no regulations for themselves and to write all regulations for others if possible. Fair playing field is not in their vocabulary and they hate small business (at least in their business - in other areas it is fine). Ask any honest businessman if you can find one. Any that want a fair playing field and competition are either not successful or a sap.

Oh please. Our government system is no more responsible for the existence of poor people than capitalism is. On the contrary, capitalism is what leads to poor people, and our government system is in place to account for that, and aid those who are left behind.

I'm perfectly ok with capitalism. But i also realize the realities of it, both the negative as well as the positive. And reality #1 is that you can't have capitalism without also having people at the lower end of the scale. Because without having people at the lower end of the scale, you have communism. So people like you can piss and moan all you want about people who fail to "lift themselves up by their bootstraps", but the fact is that without them, you become one of 'em. Meaning if everyone behind us became as well off as you and I, then you and I would be the poor ones on the block. Originally Posted by Doove

Yes, you will always have people at the low end of the scale. But the average at the low end of the scale in ultra successful countries like Switzerland is far higher than the average low end of the scale in the USA. It has to do with the character of the people, and their personal initiative.
Switzerland and Austria are far better countries than the USA - go to either and see for yourself.

Yeah, Doofus, but gas and milk are so far from free market products that it just isn't worth even talking about. There have been consistent scandals all across the country about dairy price fixing, not to mention all the ag laws (with corporate subsidies) that attempt to keep the prices up. Gas, petroleum, is a true commodity market and worldwide, but it is driven a lot by speculation and not so much by real market forces. Also, after 150 years it is still being supported by massive subsidies in many different ways. Value has little to do with either. Cigarettes are quite addictive, in case you weren't aware, so it has less to do with value and more to do with cravings.

If you think we have free markets and competition here or elsewhere you are fooling yourself. Big corporations don't want competition, they vastly prefer monopolies if they can get them and once they have significant market penetration they will use any means at their disposal to quash any competition or market disruption including laws and regulations. They talk out of one side of their mouths and do as they please, but really want to have no regulations for themselves and to write all regulations for others if possible. Fair playing field is not in their vocabulary and they hate small business (at least in their business - in other areas it is fine). Ask any honest businessman if you can find one. Any that want a fair playing field and competition are either not successful or a sap. Originally Posted by austxjr

You're a very ignorant fool if you are arguing that "demand" has nothing to do with market price. Plus, your so called "cigarette addicts" at some point made a conscious decision to shell out the money for that first pack. NYC smokers who started today, made that decision even as a pack costs $12+ per pack. Smokers have and continue to readily exchange the profits of their labor for that product because they place a "value" on it.

Capitalism has certainly created more wealth than any other economic system in human history, which is a good thing that makes other things possible, but by itself it defines no mechanism to free or feed anyone. Capitalists may have done that at times, but there were other factors and conditions that had to exist for that to happen.

So you agree with me, good.

I truly believe that capitalism (barring the discovery of a better system someday) is a vital component in a successful democracy, but there is a balance that is required for both to work together because they are in inherent opposition. Capitalism is essentially monarchical/dictatorial - he who has the gold rules. Thus, it is always seeking to overthrow the good of the whole to pursue more good for only the few capitalists. Now possibly if we had a way to make everyone a capitalist to one degree or another we might find a way to lessen that tension, but so far it has probably worked all to the good. Not sure how we would get to that system either, but what I do know is the few companies that I worked for that gave me significant equity were where I worked the hardest (other than working my own startups) and enjoyed working the most.

He who has the gold does not rule, he or she who gets the votes leads. No matter how much money you do or don't have your vote counts the same. The poorest man can cancel out the richest mans vote with the swipe of a pen.

BTW, I'm not totally against monarchy/dictatorship because it is an efficient system to some extent. Far more efficient when it needs to be than democracy. Unfortunately for the good of the society/many it is dependent upon a benevolent monarch/dictator and those are few and far between.

There would be a civil war before anything like that happens here..

I really think that many conservatives/Republicans are actually anti-democratic (hate democracy) underneath it all (deny it and give good reasons please if you think I"m wrong). I suspect many of them they would be thrilled to be able to pass a law to take away the vote from all Democrats and for that matter make the U.S. a one party state. Otherwise why would they demonize people in their own party as RINOs and try to drive them out when they don't agree with them or toe the party line? That is just plain nasty and undemocratic behavior. It goes against freedom of speech and freedom of association. Originally Posted by austxjr

I cant speak for everyone but I like democracy, and I have a feeling most others do as well.
When they demonize someone in their own party its nothing the dems haven't done also, so in your world that would make the dems anti-democratic also. So with both parties anti-democratic I have to wonder why we still have the system we do.

Something we can agree on, I like your avatar. Who is it?

Increasing the federal minimum wage to $9.80 by July 1, 2014, would raise the wages of about 28 million workers, who would receive nearly $40 billion in additional wages over the phase-in period

remind everyone how injecting $40 billion into the economy is a bad thing ... people who need a $1.00 an hour raise will spend that $1.00 on items that keeps them alive, ie, food, clothing, shelter, gas etc Originally Posted by CJ7

Once again, you folks keep dodging the question. If raising the mimimum wage with "inject $40 billion into the economy".. (where will that $40 billion come FROM by the way, out of thin air??), why go for a piddly $2.05 an hour raise. Why not boost it to $20/hr? Or $30/hr. If boosting it to $10.10 an hour is good.. wouldn't that be BETTER?

like the gallon of milk that used to cost $2.50 is now $4.00 because we didn't increase minimum wage ? Originally Posted by CJ7

Excellent example of a product that has "value", CBJ7! If you and others weren't ready, willing and able to buy that product for $4 per gallon, it wouldn't be on the market for that price, CBJ7.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Actually, it probably would thanks to Congress blatantly interfering with the free market for decades. With the assistance of lobbyists of course.

Milk prices are only PARTIALLY due to market considerations.

http://www.cato.org/publications/com...an-milk-prices

Oh please. Our government system is no more responsible for the existence of poor people than capitalism is. On the contrary, capitalism is what leads to poor people, and our government system is in place to account for that, and aid those who are left behind.

I'm perfectly ok with capitalism. But i also realize the realities of it, both the negative as well as the positive. And reality #1 is that you can't have capitalism without also having people at the lower end of the scale. Because without having people at the lower end of the scale, you have communism. So people like you can piss and moan all you want about people who fail to "lift themselves up by their bootstraps", but the fact is that without them, you become one of 'em. Meaning if everyone behind us became as well off as you and I, then you and I would be the poor ones on the block. Originally Posted by Doove

I don't even know where to start none of what you said makes any sense.

OMG! Democrats create more poor compared to capitalism.

As an example: look at Obama's new work qualifications for welfare.

- If you are laying in bed you are working
- If you read a book you are working
- If you go to a PTA meeting you are working

Democrats don't want people to have any responsibility. That is how they enslave people and get them to vote Democratic in elections. Democrats fought the abolishment of slavery and figured out a new way to enslave people - welfare.

Give a man a fish feed him for a day - Democrat
Teach a man to fish feed him for a lifetime - Republican

Democrats support Socialism, Marxism, and Communism all about keeping a person down and not letting them get ahead and dependent on the Government!!!

Capitalism everyone has a chance to succeed.

Oh please. Our government system is no more responsible for the existence of poor people than capitalism is. On the contrary, capitalism is what leads to poor people, and our government system is in place to account for that, and aid those who are left behind.

I'm perfectly ok with capitalism. But i also realize the realities of it, both the negative as well as the positive. And reality #1 is that you can't have capitalism without also having people at the lower end of the scale. Because without having people at the lower end of the scale, you have communism. So people like you can piss and moan all you want about people who fail to "lift themselves up by their bootstraps", but the fact is that without them, you become one of 'em. Meaning if everyone behind us became as well off as you and I, then you and I would be the poor ones on the block. Originally Posted by Doove

well put Rocky ... When are you gonna start calling everybody faggot?

I don't even know where to start none of what you said makes any sense. Originally Posted by thisguy23

Sorry if a little common sense is over your head.

Once again, you folks keep dodging the question. If raising the mimimum wage with "inject $40 billion into the economy".. (where will that $40 billion come FROM by the way, out of thin air??), why go for a piddly $2.05 an hour raise. Why not boost it to $20/hr? Or $30/hr. If boosting it to $10.10 an hour is good.. wouldn't that be BETTER? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

It's called "striking a balance". Now shut up already.

Sorry if a little common sense is over your head. Originally Posted by Doove

Sorry for no response, it could be so far ahead of me that I cant even understand it yet or so far behind me that I've forgot about it already.