Poverty is a criminal offense in America OP/ED.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-11-2013, 07:40 PM
RE: Poverty is a criminal offense in America OP/ED.
Just ignore him Frank. He has no intention of rational debate.
He's just some pissed off old man who's blaming "the man" for his own shitty life.

They tell me I'm the shit, I'm like 'duh...'
[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes earmuffs's post
26-11-2013, 08:01 PM (This post was last modified: 26-11-2013 08:05 PM by sporehux.)
RE: Poverty is a criminal offense in America OP/ED.
I once overheard some hippy like 20yr old whine about the cost of a toasted sandwich.
"Ingredients are like 1 dollar tops, such a rip off"
No thought to the % component of rent, wages, insurance, several taxes, loss prevention, advertising, equipment renewal, loan repayments and finally a net profit amount.
So the owner can pay for his kids braces (for teeth that if god had designed equal to a monkeys would not be needed)

While I will take a liberal over a rightwinger any day.
They can be so ignorant about simple logic.

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like sporehux's post
26-11-2013, 09:43 PM
RE: Poverty is a criminal offense in America OP/ED.
(26-11-2013 08:01 PM)sporehux Wrote:  I once overheard some hippy like 20yr old whine about the cost of a toasted sandwich.
"Ingredients are like 1 dollar tops, such a rip off"
No thought to the % component of rent, wages, insurance, several taxes, loss prevention, advertising, equipment renewal, loan repayments and finally a net profit amount.
So the owner can pay for his kids braces (for teeth that if god had designed equal to a monkeys would not be needed)

While I will take a liberal over a rightwinger any day.
They can be so ignorant about simple logic.

Don't forget money for the lawsuit because some tosser employee spat in the food that one time...

They tell me I'm the shit, I'm like 'duh...'
[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2013, 03:42 AM
RE: Poverty is a criminal offense in America OP/ED.
Brian37.

Seems like most here are just explaining to you their view on economics, along with a few belittling statements. First off, I am not the grammar or spelling police, if I cant understand your post at all, I would not be responding. I will respond to your post as best as I can understanding what you said or the “jest” of your post. Yes the message is the most important, but spelling and grammar is the means of your important message being conveyed to another person in an understandable format.

As a self employed person in the skilled blue collar trades. I have noticed a tremor in the economic market of main street some years ago about 2008. A lot of people lost their houses as a result of the banking crisis and housing bubble. Many of my well to do clients are just fine. My middle class and lower middle class clients have taken an economic beating. I drive by their houses,.. they are either on “short sale” or “bank owned”. When I switch on the radio, the economic news is either Obama bashing or how good things are on the economic front. When the talking heads to get to the problems of main street, they seem to focus on a personal failure of the individual and not an issue with the economy. In a nut shell, the acknowledgment of a poor class is just ignored or seen as a personal failure. Many call those on obamacare as mooches. Called food stamp recipients lazy etc....in all honesty, I have no solution and no solution will be found on here.


“Son, I see the leftiest here protest all the god damn time. They protest everything. Yet do they win elections? Nope, because the vast majority vote for the normal quiet party sitting on the side not making a fuss. On the side lines not giving a fuck is where your majority are... “

well the Christians say that the atheists protest too much. Why are the Atheists always suing municipalities....i am sure the media is filled with stories about the “war on Christmas”. You say the lefties on here protest too much, the Christians say the atheists protest too much. It just a matter of perspective.


“Ahhh... slactivism. 'Cause doing stuff is hard. “

coming from a person with 11.18 posts per day as of 12/1/13 at 228am comment another who has 11.82 post per day. I am lucky to get 1 post per day. At least a “slacktivest” is more predisposed to volunteer for the cause they believe in then a non “slacktivest”. In my eyes, you both come across as “slacktivests”


“and please, don't ever eat where I work, I will fucking spit in your food.”

what will that achieve....spiting on some guys food. Just because you don’t see eye to eye,...its childish.


“No it is not, you stupidly think I am the only dishwasher in the world? You think I am the only poor person in the world? “

I think they are trying to push your buttons...or in thethinkingathiest forum talk “they are fucking with you”. Do I have to include “fuck” in every third post? Fuck fuck fuck,...did I say enough fucks to satisfy the forum?


“An intelligent person would take it to the next level and ask himself: "Now _HOW_ can I encourage the company to pay the employees more, without making things worse, and what are the consequences of my actions?" Liberals, however, don't go that far. That's way too intellectual. They just send in the police to force the shop owner at gunpoint to "pay his staff more". “

That “police” you speak of is the state department of Labor. Usually the state enforces min wage laws. There is no police to force the shop owner to “pay his staff more”. Its done administratively, not criminally. Most liberals tend to be in favor or reeducation programs, take displaced workers and retrain them for other types of work. Contrary to you comment, “When it backfires and things fall apart they just look baffled and say "Duh, I wonder why that happened". Such programs are quite fruitful. Employers get a stream of employees trained on the state dime, the state gets to reduce the welfare rolls and subsidizing wal-mart workers via food stamps.


“For example, it's well-known that Walmart unnecessarily hires "greeters" who do nothing but stand at the door and say hello. It's totally unnecessary,”

walmart get a large “kick-back” from the government to hire those workers. Till it was proven that such companies would get a kick-back from the government to hire a food stamp recipient, and pay such a low wage that the recipient still qualified for food stamps. Some states forbid such a practice, they refuse to give the kickback to the company, if the new-hiree qualifies for stamps. Walmart hiring few greeters has more to with states catching on to this double dipping trick and less to do with minimum wage.


“what effect does this have on the greeter who went from living with some dignity and pride of being self-supporting, and is now totally dependent on handouts from taxpayers? Do you guys ever think through the consequences of your actions?”

Most walmart workers are not self supporting. Yes there are some are retired, use it as a 2ed job, or are a 2 job household. Most use their walmart job as a important means of income.


“So let's say you go in guns a blazing and pass a new minimum wage law...”
The passage of such laws are very popular. Poll after poll proves that. Chris Christie, the governor of NJ, was re-elected and his veto to increase the NJ minimum wage was overridden by the people's vote.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2013, 04:43 AM
RE: Poverty is a criminal offense in America OP/ED.
(01-12-2013 03:42 AM)shallwechat71 Wrote:  Fuck fuck fuck,...did I say enough fucks to satisfy the forum?

Fuck, no. Better step it up, n00b. Angel

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2013, 05:53 AM
RE: Poverty is a criminal offense in America OP/ED.
(26-11-2013 08:01 PM)sporehux Wrote:  I once overheard some hippy like 20yr old whine about the cost of a toasted sandwich.
"Ingredients are like 1 dollar tops, such a rip off"
No thought to the % component of rent, wages, insurance, several taxes, loss prevention, advertising, equipment renewal, loan repayments and finally a net profit amount.
So the owner can pay for his kids braces (for teeth that if god had designed equal to a monkeys would not be needed)

While I will take a liberal over a rightwinger any day.
They can be so ignorant about simple logic.

Um sorry, we are not talking about all mom and pop shops here. Walmart even after it gets all its bills paid CAN afford to pay better and the same with their suppliers.

The pay gap is destroying this country.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2013, 06:13 AM
RE: Poverty is a criminal offense in America OP/ED.
(01-12-2013 05:53 AM)Brian37 Wrote:  ...
The pay gap is destroying this country.

[Image: Chea+Sim+and+Hun+Sen+laughing+(Darren+Wh...uters).jpg][Image: 1304-03%20Laughing%20Chinese%20Woman.jpg][Image: little-chinese-girl-laughing.jpg]
[Image: 403162_10150613644143465_129446698464_11...4237_n.jpg]

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2013, 12:43 PM
RE: Poverty is a criminal offense in America OP/ED.
(01-12-2013 03:42 AM)shallwechat71 Wrote:  That “police” you speak of [to enforce minimum wage laws] is the state department of Labor... There is no police to force the shop owner to “pay his staff more”. Its done administratively, not criminally.

Really? So let's say I am a shopkeeper and I hire someone with a disability to act as a greeter for $8/hour. Now the minimum wage is raised to $15/hour, and I cannot afford to spend that much on a greeter, but I don't want to fire the poor guy either. So I simply refuse to comply, and continue paying him $8/hour. What happens? Sure, I'll get administrative notices, and eventually court orders, and if I keep resisting a 'contempt of court' order. My business may get dissolved, and the license revoked. But if I continue to refuse to comply, and continue running my shop as I did before, continue paying him $8/hour no matter what administrative action is taken, are you saying that I will never be arrested by a police officer with a gun threatening to tase or shoot me if I resist?

See, libertarians, reject the use of violence on moral grounds. It is not reciprocal, and therefore not moral, that the shopkeeper, who is not himself using violence, should be subjected to violence. That violates codes of morality. Therefore, we try to get the shopkeeper to raise wages by finding ways to incentivize him so that it's in his best interest. We want all transactions to be voluntary, a win-win for all parties. Sure, that means you can never get 100% compliance, and some shopkeepers may keep paying only $8/hour. BUT, if by encouraging economic growth, there will be other jobs for that employee that pay more, and the shopkeeper will have no choice if he wants to keep the employee. All done without violence.

But liberals are so used to using violence to solve every problem that they no longer see it as violence. They're totally desensitived and numb, as evidenced by your comment that it's "administrative" and not "criminal" and the police/guns will never be involved. The only way you can force people to comply against their will when it's not their interest is to always hold the threat of violence over their head.

(01-12-2013 03:42 AM)shallwechat71 Wrote:  “When it backfires and things fall apart they just look baffled and say "Duh, I wonder why that happened".

You dispute that statement I made of liberals. Ok, surely we agree that liberals complain that for the past 40 years inequality has gotten worse and worse, and the concentration of wealth at the top gets more and more as the poor become poorer and poorer. And if you look at the country's gini coefficient, you can see the trend started around 1971, precisely when the Austrian economists predicted it would happen based on the change of monetary policy.

So, please, put your money where your mouth is and copy/paste one link where any liberal or Keynesian has ever tried to explain what changed at that time, and why since then, whether we have high taxes or low taxes, whether the country's run by liberals or conservatives, inequality keeps getting worse and worse. I dare you to find one time where they've ever disputed the Austrians' logic, or explained why the Austrians were wrong in explaining the cause. Please, give it a try. If, like me, you can't find any, then that is a very good indication that the Austrian economists are right, and the Keynesians/liberals ARE causing the inequality they complain so much about, and that they're just burying their head in the sand, ignoring the facts, and saying "Duh, I wonder why that happened".

(01-12-2013 03:42 AM)shallwechat71 Wrote:  Walmart hiring few greeters has more to with states catching on to this double dipping trick and less to do with minimum wage.

Give me a break. Let's say the minimum wage was raised to $50/hour. Are you seriously saying that Walmart would just go ahead and pay $50/hour for a greeter?

On the other hand, let's assume that the government got out of the way completely and had no minimum wage. Isn't it obvious that with the high unemployment we have now, a lot of people would be willing to work for whatever they could get (assuming it didn't force them to give up some other government benefit like unemployment)? Therefore, companies that desired low-cost superfluous labor would keep offering less and less until an equilibrium was reached where they could no longer find anybody willing to work for less. And if this spurred economic growth and unemployment remained non-existent, then wages would rise since companies would HAVE to pay more to get people, until eventually pay was HIGHER than it would have been with a minimum wage.

The problem is this requires a leap of faith in the free-market system, which liberals aren't willing to make. They see themselves as the anointed saviors who will save everyone, the social engineers who pull all the strings. But, again, look at Switzerland. They took that leap of faith. There's no minimum wage at all. And now the janitor at McDonald's makes about $40k/year, gets a month's paid vacation, and gets healthcare. It's eliminated inter-generational dependency on government, and is the only place where the poorest in society make at least half the median. But liberals never take the time to study the Austrian system, and free-market economics. They just ignore it because there's no role in it for them. They don't get to satisfy their god-complex by pulling all the strings. But, if liberals DID open their mind and actually listen and study, they'd see that they are causing the problems they claim to be saving us from, like high unemployment and low wages.

(01-12-2013 03:42 AM)shallwechat71 Wrote:  “So let's say you go in guns a blazing and pass a new minimum wage law...”
The passage of such laws are very popular. Poll after poll proves that. Chris Christie, the governor of NJ, was re-elected and his veto to increase the NJ minimum wage was overridden by the people's vote.

Sure, I agree. Very few voters study free-market economics. So, when liberals come in, promising to be the Messiah and save them from all their ills, and they say they'll wave a magic wand and make their problems go away, yes, it's appealing. Voters like it. But that doesn't mean it's right and that it's not making the problem worse.

Here are the 8 states with the highest minimum wage. Notice a trend? All but Vermont have higher than average unemployment, and most states with higher minimum wage have MUCH higher unemployment than the 7.3% national average. We'll have to check back in a couple years to see what impact this has on NJ's unemployment rate. But the fact that you guys are ignoring the correlation is really dangerous. Let's assume the $1/hour raise proved to be beneficial overall, doing more good than harm. How can you guys know that if you completely ignore the harm? If you're only looking at half the equation (the good) and ignoring the other half (the harm of higher unemployment) how can you possibly be trusted to decide if the good outweighs the harm? I challenge to find when the supporters of higher minimum wage ever acknowledge the harm (unemployment) and make an informed decision. I've seen that they always ignore it.

8. California (unemployment 12.1 percent; minimum wage $8.00)
7. Massachusetts (unemployment 7.4 percent; minimum wage $8.00)
6. Vermont (unemployment 5.9 percent; minimum wage $8.15)
5. Connecticut (unemployment 9.0 percent; minimum wage $8.25)
4. Illinois (unemployment 9.9 percent; minimum wage $8.25)
3. Nevada (unemployment 13.4 percent; minimum wage $8.25)
2. Oregon (unemployment 9.6 percent; minimum wage $8.50)
1. Washington (unemployment 9.3 percent; minimum wage $8.67)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2013, 09:30 PM
RE: Poverty is a criminal offense in America OP/ED.
“...They're totally desensitized and numb, as evidenced by your comment that it's "administrative" and not "criminal" and the police/guns will never be involved. “

its not a liberal or conservative thing, its just the laws of the usa. Nothing to do with me calling it administrative law. There is a whole body of law study called administrative law. If there are any lawyers on here, they are familiar. The police are charged with enforcing the laws. If you dislike the laws, work to change the laws. But I feel more people are in-favor of a higher minimum wage then those against it. If you resist arrest,.. the cop has every right to protect themselves. I guess you would be the fool to hassle the arresting officer over a refusal to pay a min wage to your workers.


“See, libertarians, reject the use of violence on moral grounds. It is not reciprocal, and therefore not moral, that the shopkeeper, who is not himself using violence, should be subjected to violence. “

Please stop with the moral high ground argument. Resisting arrest is an act of violence. You plea your case at court and vote for those who nirror your views.


“Therefore, we try to get the shopkeeper to raise wages by finding ways to incentivize him so that it's in his best interest. We want all transactions to be voluntary, a win-win for all parties. Sure, that means you can never get 100% compliance, and some shopkeepers may keep paying only $8/hour. BUT, if by encouraging economic growth, there will be other jobs for that employee that pay more, and the shopkeeper will have no choice if he wants to keep the employee. All done without violence.”

that is one of the purposes of worker reeducation programs I was referring to on my earlier post.


“...whether the country's run by liberals or conservatives, inequality keeps getting worse and worse.... “ and “...the Keynesians/liberals ARE causing the inequality they complain so much about,...”

first the liberals or conservatives then its just the liberals only. Seems like you will just cherry-pick the facts that suit your view perspective. I suspect the reality is more inequality done by liberals and conservatives, then just a one side. I suspect more people have a more complicated perspective of life then just liberal or conservative.


“Give me a break. Let's say the minimum wage was raised to $50/hour.”

people are advocating a few dollars more,...not 50 per hour. 50 an hour is well above the average income of a middle class American. Your example is in unrealistic hyperbole. The swiss push to enact a minimum wage law is to help those not covered by collective agreements.


“But, again, look at Switzerland. They took that leap of faith. There's no minimum wage at all. And now the janitor at McDonald's makes about $40k/year, gets a month's paid vacation.”

if it too good to be true, then it is not true. Doing a quick Google search. True, the Swiss have no min wage law, (there is a strong push to create one to help those not covered by labor agreements) but large portion of workers are covered by collective barging agreements. So are those agreements are inflating the wages and costs as the conservatives believe that collective agreements have done here, or is it the miracle of libertarian economics as you believe. You would say is a result of libertarian economics. If a custodian made 40K year with a collective agreement in Switzerland, is a miracle of libertarian economics. If a custodian made 40K a year a with collective agreement in the USA people would be blaming the liberal “god complex pulling strings”


“Sure, I agree. Very few voters study free-market economics. So, when liberals come in, promising to be the Messiah and save them from all their ills, and they say they'll wave a magic wand and make their problems go away, yes, it's appealing. Voters like it. But that doesn't mean it's right and that it's not making the problem worse. “

in other words if the voters don’t see things your way,...they are miss-informed and the need to “study” to see things your way. That's the same stuff the opposition says when they lost an elections...”they don’t understand us”
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2013, 10:09 PM
RE: Poverty is a criminal offense in America OP/ED.
(01-12-2013 09:30 PM)shallwechat71 Wrote:  “Give me a break. Let's say the minimum wage was raised to $50/hour.”

people are advocating a few dollars more,...not 50 per hour. 50 an hour is well above the average income of a middle class American. Your example is in unrealistic hyperbole.

Then why did you refuse to answer it? The reason is because the answer is obvious; it we raised the minimum wage $50/hour unemployment would be, let's say, 80%. However, what if we increase the minimum wage $.50/hour, but we do it 100 times? Aren't we still going to reach the 80% unemployment number? Therefore, each $.50/hour increase IS having an effect on unemployment. If it had ZERO effect, you could raise it $.50/hour indefinitely, because ZERO times anything is always ZERO. Thus, the $.50/hour DOES have an effect—it does introduce some harm (unemployment) as well as some good (higher wages). So I go back to my claim that if you are unable to recognize the harm, then you are not in a position to decide if the good outweighs the harm. Only people who can factor in BOTH the harm and the good can make informed comments.

(01-12-2013 09:30 PM)shallwechat71 Wrote:  True, the Swiss have no min wage law... but large portion of workers are covered by collective barging agreements... If a custodian made 40K year with a collective agreement in Switzerland, is a miracle of libertarian economics. If a custodian made 40K a year a with collective agreement in the USA people would be blaming the liberal “god complex pulling strings”

Firstly, you're choosing to bury your head about what the Swiss accomplished. The fact is unions have no special legal protections in Switzerland, so the only reason the workers had the power to form unions and force employers to recognize them is because they developed such a thriving economy and low unemployment that workers were in the driver's seat. Whereas in a country with 20% unemployment and no government protection of unions, they simply cannot unionize; there are too many non-union workers happy to take the job. Thus, strong unions is the result of a strong economy—it is not what creates a strong economy.

So, the fact that workers in Switzerland can form unions speaks to the successful of their libertarian policies. And libertarians ARE pro-union. All libertarians care about is a reciprocal system that eliminates violence, and collective bargaining is an EXCELLENT way for workers to get better working conditions and higher wages. We are all in favor of such non-violent solution. Just look at the Libertarian party's policy statement: “We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions”. A Libertarian would never criminalize unions (ie stop them with violence) when unions themselves are not using violence! That's goes against the whole point of libertarianism. The only time some Libertarians criticize unions is when they're for government workers because in this case, there is a monopoly (ie only 1 government), and everybody is forced already to pay that monopoly (ie pay taxes), so there's a case to be made that allowing the government to engage in collective actions, like strikes that shut-down public transit, are in fact increasing the force/coercion, because taxpayers will be forced (with violence) to pay more. But that's a unique situation for public workers.

(01-12-2013 09:30 PM)shallwechat71 Wrote:  “See, libertarians, reject the use of violence on moral grounds. It is not reciprocal, and therefore not moral, that the shopkeeper, who is not himself using violence, should be subjected to violence. “

Please stop with the moral high ground argument. Resisting arrest is an act of violence. You plea your case at court and vote for those who nirror your views.

Typical. It's never violence when the police do it. So back in the days of the Salem witchhunts, when the majority, through a democratic judicial process, convicted women of witchcraft and sent the police to arrest them and burn them at the stake, it's the women who were initiating violence if they resisted getting burned alive.

We will have to agree to disagree. In my book, violence is violence no matter who is doing it. If a bullet enters my body frankly I don't care if the guy pulling the trigger has a badge or not. To me it's all violence.

(01-12-2013 09:30 PM)shallwechat71 Wrote:  “...whether the country's run by liberals or conservatives, inequality keeps getting worse and worse.... “ and “...the Keynesians/liberals ARE causing the inequality they complain so much about,...”

first the liberals or conservatives then its just the liberals only. Seems like you will just cherry-pick the facts that suit your view perspective.

No. I've always said, at least in the US, BOTH conservatives and liberals do the same thing. Both Democrats and Republicans have the same monetary policy, which is the inequality gets worse no matter who is in charge. The only difference is that the Democrats complain about inequality and pay lip service to the issue. It's just a marketing pitch. So, I'm not blaming liberals more than conservatives for inequality, I'm calling liberals out for being hypocritical on this particular issue.

(01-12-2013 09:30 PM)shallwechat71 Wrote:  in other words if the voters don’t see things your way,...they are miss-informed and the need to “study” to see things your way. That's the same stuff the opposition says when they lost an elections...”they don’t understand us”

Yeah, but I have proof. Look at how many times I can throw questions out at all the liberals on this forum and they run from them, just like you refused to answer my question about what a $50/hour min wage increase would have on unemployment. IF you truly understood the issue I'm discussing, then you would have been able to answer that question, and you would have acknowledged that any raise in the minimum wage must logically have some impact on unemployment, or you would have refuted it. But if you run from the issue that indicates you don't understand it. You also completely ignored the empirical data in my post showing that the states with the highest minimum wage also have high unemployment. If you understood it, you'd have addressed it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: