http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/11/d-c-minimum-wage-would-go-up-to-11-50-hour-under-vincent-orange-s-proposal-97012.html

Once again the inner city crowd wants stuff for free, no skill set or HS diploma and they want 11.50 and hour....this is why they will never be fully productive as a whole, just want money for free.

I love these liberal feel good policies which ultimately lead to failure. Hmm gee what will happen when we raise the MW? Ummm, welp, companies will not open up/and or relocate somwhere else.

What people seem to fail to realize is that all the money that is spent in this country comes from we, the people. So a minimum wage of $7.50 an hour is not enough to live on so they get rent subsidies and food stamps. Who pays that? WE DO. So we raise the minimum wage to 11.50, companies raise their prices to pay for it and who pays that? WE DO. So, let's tax corporate profits more so they pay their fair share. Where do corporations get their money from? From the products and services they sell. So they will raise their prices. And who pays those prices? WE DO. There is no such thing as government money. The government spends and gives away money that they get from us, we the people. And we keep electing the same politicians year after year.

Humbert Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What people seem to fail to realize is that all
> the money that is spent in this country comes from
> we, the people. So a minimum wage of $7.50 an
> hour is not enough to live on so they get rent
> subsidies and food stamps. Who pays that? WE DO.
> So we raise the minimum wage to 11.50, companies
> raise their prices to pay for it and who pays
> that? WE DO. So, let's tax corporate profits
> more so they pay their fair share. Where do
> corporations get their money from? From the
> products and services they sell. So they will
> raise their prices. And who pays those prices?
> WE DO. There is no such thing as government
> money. The government spends and gives away money
> that they get from us, we the people. And we keep
> electing the same politicians year after year.

Here are your choices:

1) You can have someone sitting around, doing nothing productive, collecting government money from various programs. You pay for this in the form of higher taxes, which you have no choice in paying.

2) You can have someone gainfully employed and collecting a paycheck which is sufficient for them to live on. You pay for this in the form of higher prices, which you have some control over, because you can choose whether or not to patronize a particular business.

These are your only two choices. Which one is more constructive and better for society as a whole?

You're Going to Pay Either Way Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Humbert Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What people seem to fail to realize is that all
> > the money that is spent in this country comes
> from
> > we, the people. So a minimum wage of $7.50 an
> > hour is not enough to live on so they get rent
> > subsidies and food stamps. Who pays that? WE
> DO.
> > So we raise the minimum wage to 11.50,
> companies
> > raise their prices to pay for it and who pays
> > that? WE DO. So, let's tax corporate profits
> > more so they pay their fair share. Where do
> > corporations get their money from? From the
> > products and services they sell. So they will
> > raise their prices. And who pays those prices?
>
> > WE DO. There is no such thing as government
> > money. The government spends and gives away
> money
> > that they get from us, we the people. And we
> keep
> > electing the same politicians year after year.
>
> Here are your choices:
>
> 1) You can have someone sitting around, doing
> nothing productive, collecting government money
> from various programs. You pay for this in the
> form of higher taxes, which you have no choice in
> paying.
>
> 2) You can have someone gainfully employed and
> collecting a paycheck which is sufficient for them
> to live on. You pay for this in the form of higher
> prices, which you have some control over, because
> you can choose whether or not to patronize a
> particular business.
>
> These are your only two choices. Which one is more
> constructive and better for society as a whole?


How about option 3. Instead of sitting around being unproductive, the someone increases his/her employability by obtaining technical skills or an education, and then applies for jobs which pay a reasonable salary for the type of work they require.

KeepOnTruckin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> How about option 3. Instead of sitting around
> being unproductive, the someone increases his/her
> employability by obtaining technical skills or an
> education, and then applies for jobs which pay a
> reasonable salary for the type of work they
> require.


Fucking radical.

11.50 is not living wages. It needs to be more inline with profits. There is no reason they could not pay these hard working people 20 dollars a hour. But no let all profits go right to the CEO of the company and corporate management but screw everyone else. The top 1% of a company gets 90% of the profits.

Old lady. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 11.50 is not living wages. It needs to be more
> inline with profits. There is no reason they could
> not pay these hard working people 20 dollars a
> hour. But no let all profits go right to the CEO
> of the company and corporate management but screw
> everyone else. The top 1% of a company gets 90% of
> the profits.


That CEO busted their ass in collage, and then some to get into that position, instead of cutting high school class to get high.
The world needs ditch diggers too.

Old lady. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 11.50 is not living wages. It needs to be more
> inline with profits. There is no reason they could
> not pay these hard working people 20 dollars a
> hour. But no let all profits go right to the CEO
> of the company and corporate management but screw
> everyone else. The top 1% of a company gets 90% of
> the profits.


Sure. What the heck, let's just add a zero to their salary. Woohoo! They're making 115.00/hour.

Now guess what you can do to the prices of all of the goods and services which they buy from other businesses which must do the same.

Net result economically is that they end up in no better position.

The racist capitalist has spoken!

Old lady. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The racist capitalist has spoken!


The realist has spoken.

When those same employees go to buy a pizza from a place paying their employees significantly more, what do you think happens to the price of the pizza? Or their groceries. Or having their hair cut. Etc., etc...

KeepOnTruckin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You're Going to Pay Either Way Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Humbert Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > What people seem to fail to realize is that
> all
> > > the money that is spent in this country comes
> > from
> > > we, the people. So a minimum wage of $7.50
> an
> > > hour is not enough to live on so they get
> rent
> > > subsidies and food stamps. Who pays that?
> WE
> > DO.
> > > So we raise the minimum wage to 11.50,
> > companies
> > > raise their prices to pay for it and who pays
> > > that? WE DO. So, let's tax corporate
> profits
> > > more so they pay their fair share. Where do
> > > corporations get their money from? From the
> > > products and services they sell. So they
> will
> > > raise their prices. And who pays those
> prices?
> >
> > > WE DO. There is no such thing as government
> > > money. The government spends and gives away
> > money
> > > that they get from us, we the people. And we
> > keep
> > > electing the same politicians year after
> year.
> >
> > Here are your choices:
> >
> > 1) You can have someone sitting around, doing
> > nothing productive, collecting government money
> > from various programs. You pay for this in the
> > form of higher taxes, which you have no choice
> in
> > paying.
> >
> > 2) You can have someone gainfully employed and
> > collecting a paycheck which is sufficient for
> them
> > to live on. You pay for this in the form of
> higher
> > prices, which you have some control over,
> because
> > you can choose whether or not to patronize a
> > particular business.
> >
> > These are your only two choices. Which one is
> more
> > constructive and better for society as a whole?
>
>
> How about option 3. Instead of sitting around
> being unproductive, the someone increases his/her
> employability by obtaining technical skills or an
> education, and then applies for jobs which pay a
> reasonable salary for the type of work they
> require.

I wondered how long it was going to take before someone was going to try and insert their own option 3 into this discussion.

Option 3 is a nice option, but it will cost money. Lots and lots of government money, because if someone is too poor to cover their rent, food, utilities and transportation costs, where are they going to get the money to pay for the education you're suggesting they get? Uncle Sugar, is where.

It also doesn't take into account that the average I.Q. in this country is 100. That means that half the population is above this line, but half is below it. If you want to have a reasonable chance of succeeding in college, you have to have an I.Q. of 104, or a shade above average.

What do you do for the people that have an I.Q. of 90, or 80, or 70? They still have to make a living somehow, but I guarantee that they don't have the intellectual ability to be knowledge workers or professionals.

Restructuring the public education system to ensure everyone has a trade when they come out of school is a wonderful idea. However, vo-tech education has been so thoroughly gutted in this country that most systems will basically have to start from scratch, which will cost lots and lots of government money.

I assume that your support of this idea means you're willing to support the concomitant commitment of tax monies (and likely tax increases) that would be required?

Option 3 is a bolt-on to option 2. Call it option 2, subsection A. You get to make enough money to live and pay your bills, but if you want a better life, you can also get more education and training.

Best option is for the federal government to take over ALL medium to large private industry. Once the house and senate is Democrat controlled (less than 10 years) it's time to take a sharpie to the constitution starting with the Second Amendment.

There will always be relatively poor people.

There will always be relatively more stupid people.

There will always be relatively less productive people.

There will always be discrepancies in the pay of some jobs versus the value derived.

Always has been under any and every system ever created by man.

Always will be.

Laugh!!!!!!!!!!

I make over $110. Hell even plumbers make $150 an hour.

Can you even imagine some sucker working for $11.50? Funny stuff!

These guys are funny as hell. Yes I'd like an unskilled worker, who's probably illiterate, and he or she expects this minimum wage. No thanks. That's how capitalism works.

That's less than what an illegal immigrant makes around here for menial work.

Jonny the dude Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/11/d-c-minimum-w
> age-would-go-up-to-11-50-hour-under-vincent-orange
> -s-proposal-97012.html
>
> Once again the inner city crowd wants stuff for
> free, no skill set or HS diploma and they want
> 11.50 and hour....this is why they will never be
> fully productive as a whole, just want money for
> free.


Have you been to DC lately....it is full of white hipsters and yuppies. The poor live in the suburbs and work in DC and go home at night. DC isn't even 40% black anymore.

This may come as a surprise to many people, but it is not surprising to me in the least. For over 40 years I have been actively warning people about the Fascist, right wing take-over of America, but the message has largely fallen on deaf ears. Now, people are finally awakening to the fact that the monster is fully grown and about to eat them and their young. Thankfully the masses are voting in the right direction. Democrat to stop the wicked beast from enslaving the masses even more with wage slavery.

Old lady. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This may come as a surprise to many people, but it
> is not surprising to me in the least. For over 40
> years I have been actively warning people about
> the Fascist, right wing take-over of America, but
> the message has largely fallen on deaf ears. Now,
> people are finally awakening to the fact that the
> monster is fully grown and about to eat them and
> their young. Thankfully the masses are voting in
> the right direction. Democrat to stop the wicked
> beast from enslaving the masses even more with
> wage slavery.

DGGGET Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Have you been to DC lately....it is full of white
> hipsters and yuppies. The poor live in the
> suburbs and work in DC and go home at night. DC
> isn't even 40% black anymore.

Per 2012 Census data, DC was 50.1% African-American and 35,5% non-hispanic white. 9.9% hispanic, and 3.8% Asian,

Old lady. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This may come as a surprise to many people, but it
> is not surprising to me in the least. For over 40
> years I have been actively warning people about
> the Fascist, right wing take-over of America, but
> the message has largely fallen on deaf ears. Now,
> people are finally awakening to the fact that the
> monster is fully grown and about to eat them and
> their young. Thankfully the masses are voting in
> the right direction. Democrat to stop the wicked
> beast from enslaving the masses even more with
> wage slavery.

Cassandra had the same sort of problem. But I think she was dealing with much more intelligent people than the typical bots and intellectual riff-raff that one is apt to find around here.

And people do need to remember that statistically, increases in the minimum wage of a magnitude consistent with what has been customary in recent decades are not associated with any evidence of measureable increases in either inflation or unemployment. When your masters speak to the contrary, they are simply feeding you slop.

Tough One Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> These guys are funny as hell. Yes I'd like an
> unskilled worker, who's probably illiterate, and
> he or she expects this minimum wage. No thanks.
> That's how capitalism works.

Exactly.

The flip side is that if you hire someone, you're expected to pay them enough money that they're actually able to live on that wage and not need government assistance to make ends meet.

I'm even willing to have a tiered system where you're offering some portion of your employees training wages at a percentage of the minimum wage. The caveat is you have to include an actual training component, where your employee is sitting in a classroom and being taught skills OR being directly supervised by a more experienced employee as they perform skill-building tasks which are not directly related to their work, and not just claiming that all the work they do is on-the-job training.

The point is to have everyone who's capable of working doing the work that they're capable of doing and making a wage that they're capable of supporting themselves on.

You're Going to Pay Either Way Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tough One Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > These guys are funny as hell. Yes I'd like an
> > unskilled worker, who's probably illiterate,
> and
> > he or she expects this minimum wage. No thanks.
> > That's how capitalism works.
>
> Exactly.
>
> The flip side is that if you hire someone, you're
> expected to pay them enough money that they're
> actually able to live on that wage and not need
> government assistance to make ends meet.
>
> I'm even willing to have a tiered system where
> you're offering some portion of your employees
> training wages at a percentage of the minimum
> wage. The caveat is you have to include an actual
> training component, where your employee is sitting
> in a classroom and being taught skills OR being
> directly supervised by a more experienced employee
> as they perform skill-building tasks which are not
> directly related to their work, and not just
> claiming that all the work they do is on-the-job
> training.
>
> The point is to have everyone who's capable of
> working doing the work that they're capable of
> doing and making a wage that they're capable of
> supporting themselves on.


A key word being themselves. Entry-level unskilled jobs are not and were never intended to support a single mom and her several kids. There are very few even public lower end jobs which will around here or in other expensive urban areas.

You Might Be A Republican If...


You think that poverty could be abolished if people were just allowed to keep more of their minimum wage.

Old lady. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You Might Be A Republican If...
>
>
> You think that poverty could be abolished if
> people were just allowed to keep more of their
> minimum wage.


^ ...if you post dumb shit like this.

And hour lol.

I moved out when I was 18, rented a room, while making $7.50 an hour (6 years ago), never in my life have I received any GA.


Like the other posters said, those jobs are meant to support 1 person. If you are solo you can make it by just fine, it will be tight but still far from starving.

now doing well, no GA help Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I moved out when I was 18, rented a room, while
> making $7.50 an hour (6 years ago), never in my
> life have I received any GA.
>
>
> Like the other posters said, those jobs are meant
> to support 1 person. If you are solo you can make
> it by just fine, it will be tight but still far
> from starving.

I can certainly relate. At the age of 17 I joined the Army because
the job situation sucked. My parents were poor by Fairfax standards
and I realized it was all up to me. After that, college on the GI Bill
for two years before moving to DC and finding an entry level government
job while finishing my BA at night. The first few years were kind of
tough but I worked part time on weekends occasionally as a data entry
keypunch operator and finding enough money to pay the rent, own a
car, and party my ass off. All the while I never asked my parents for
a dime and never once did I have to think about going hungry. For me
it was all about being financially independent. Maybe I was stupid.
for not sitting on my ass and expecting someone else to do the work.
Fuck Obama.

FREEBORN Wrote:

>
> I can certainly relate. At the age of 17 I joined
> the Army because
> the job situation sucked. My parents were poor by
> Fairfax standards
> and I realized it was all up to me. After that,
> college on the GI Bill
> for two years before moving to DC and finding an
> entry level government
> job while finishing my BA at night. The first few
> years were kind of
> tough but I worked part time on weekends
> occasionally as a data entry
> keypunch operator and finding enough money to pay
> the rent, own a
> car, and party my ass off. All the while I never
> asked my parents for
> a dime and never once did I have to think about
> going hungry. For me
> it was all about being financially independent.
> Maybe I was stupid.
> for not sitting on my ass and expecting someone
> else to do the work.
> Fuck Obama.

govy tax leech. I hope you loose your job.

Are all libs really that braindead? Why don't they just raise the min wage to $200/hr, so everyone can be rich? Fucking morons - you raise min wage, you're going to:

1. Kill jobs.
2. Raise prices.

Businesses are NOT an ATM/welfare machine. Of course, libs believe they own everything and every business, which is why every lib-run area (Detroit, Chicago, DC, Baltimore, etc.) is a hellhole of failure.

In the end, no one ends up ahead when you raise the min. wage. It just creates a cycle of inflation.

Instead, perhaps libs could focus their little brains on improving education and work skills so that min. wage earners can qualify for more high-paying jobs.

Judge Smales Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Old lady. Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > 11.50 is not living wages. It needs to be more
> > inline with profits. There is no reason they
> could
> > not pay these hard working people 20 dollars a
> > hour. But no let all profits go right to the
> CEO
> > of the company and corporate management but
> screw
> > everyone else. The top 1% of a company gets 90%
> of
> > the profits.
>
>
> That CEO busted their ass in collage, and then
> some to get into that position, instead of cutting
> high school class to get high.
> The world needs ditch diggers too.

Too bad you didn't go to collage. I went to college, though, you stupid fucking know nothing.

Old lady. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Best option is for the federal government to take
> over ALL medium to large private industry. Once
> the house and senate is Democrat controlled (less
> than 10 years) it's time to take a sharpie to the
> constitution starting with the Second Amendment.

People like you want more and more government to take over and control every aspect of your life and changing your adult diaper. The problem is you force this on other people who are not helpless fucks such as yourselves. Go live in Syria. There are limits to big government you helpless old bag.

Funny how you are complaining about non-educated people wanting higher wages, but your grammar is on par with that of a 3rd grader. Do you know what 'and' means? Have you heard of the word 'an'?

Yeah, Democrats understand concepts like gay marriage, and getting AIDS cure from the Amazon, but they sure as Hell don't understand economics and finances.

And, believe, me, the yenta above who said something about $20 per hour and profits to the top 1%, yada yada yada: I guarantee she complaints about prices at stores and restaurants all the time.