It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So, this is how a Milennial sees a solution to the "Living Wage" issue....

page: 18
30
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Discotech



Just imagine a world where people are free to follow their dreams because they are not held back because they don't have the time or the money to chase those dreams, imagine how much of a better world we would live in if everybody was happy following their dreams

Yeah, I know. That would be cool, right?

While we're at it, I imagine it would be awesome to be able to teleport myself anywhere I want to because I really dislike airports.

edit on 12/31/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Discotech

What I think will happen is, minimum wage goes to 15/hr. Then those people with degrees and/or work in a skilled field will simply take the jobs of the asshats who complain that their wages aren't fair. Why not? Why wouldn't someone working in a prison for 15/hr take the walmart greeter job, or the Circle K cashier position for 15/hr?



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

This isn't about ambition or wanting more or wanting to work harder though

It's about creating a fair baseline for all, anyone who wants to go beyond that baseline is perfectly free to do so

Having a minimum income wouldn't stop people from being ambitious or wanting more

A minimum income would be the first step to creating a better society and hopefully a better world



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Discotech

But you can't guarantee a minimum income without taking from someone else.

That is theft, or communism, or totalitarianism, or despotism. Whatever you want to call it.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
There is not enough income for you to raise an additional $3 trillion dollars, that would require adding $10-12 trillion dollars in GDP onto what is already the world's largest economy.


Put a 1% transaction tax on Wall Street. I forget the exact numbers but it's projected that such a thing would generate $8 trillion per year (yes, actual trillions). With that money we could eliminate income taxes and business taxes while being able to find the $3 trillion this would cost, maintain all other current spending, and even have some extra to increase spending in some areas while paying down the debt.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

So tax is theft, communism, totalitarianism or despotism ?

I guess that's why all the multi million/billion income companies have offshore accounts to avoid said theft

So some billionaires lose a few billion

So some millionaires lose a few million

So some massive corporations can only pay 20% less to their already wealthy shareholders

What a horror that would be in order to make for a more fair and just world



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Discotech

How is it fair that four members of my family have to support three other members of the family when the three are perfectly capable of supporting themselves if they got off the couch and found (and kept) a job?
We're not talking here about people who are disabled and can't work to support themselves. We're talking about men who have refused to use birth control and are "baby Daddy" to two or more kids because their welfare/food stamps and myriad other benefits are increased by the number of children they can produce. Men who mooch off their parents and grandparents for rent, electricity and food because they've spent the rent money on a cool new tattoo! The parents aren't going to let those babies go hungry and cold so they basically enable this behavior.
It isn't the billionaires who are taking the money---it's lazy bums. There I've said it. That's what is driving down the middle class in our little community and in my family. It is people with beer pocketbooks indulging their champagne desires and expecting others to foot the bill. They expect to have the lifestyle their parents worked 20 or 30 years to obtain upon high school or college graduation.
Please explain why each individual should have their own apartment and car and cell phone and amenities for simply drawing breath while contributing nothing to the society of which they are a part.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed

$6000 per year on rent?! Hahaha thats a fantasy for us NYers. I live just outside city limits and my humble one bedroom basement apt is more than double that.

Look, i know the easy answer is to just up and move to somewhere cheaper. But in reality, thats easier said than done. For many of us, all of our family is here. And if you're sharing custody of a child, moving out of state simply isnt an option.

Not excuses, just life.


I think even 6,000 per month is a fantasy in NYC. Your Minimum wage will be 9.00 per hour in 2016, unfortunately 90 per hours is still not good in NYC.




edit on 31-12-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Discotech
A minimum income would be the first step to creating a better society and hopefully a better world


Give us a number so we can see what you are talking about.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 05:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Discotech

So some massive corporations can only pay 20% less to their already wealthy shareholders

What a horror that would be in order to make for a more fair and just world


Do you have a 401k for your retirement or plan on having a retirement fund?...lol Yep its only the wealthy right...
edit on 31-12-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Discotech

We have a baseline now, and it isn't enough.

Do you know what happens when you raise that baseline? It quickly becomes the same thing as the baseline we have now - not enough.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Discotech

No, because that's not how it works and you know it. You could confiscate all the wealth of the top 1% tomorrow and you still wouldn't have anywhere near enough for what you want even for one year.

You have to squeeze EVERYONE who does on their own to support you.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

It's difficult to give a specific number as living costs vary city to city to country to country

But a rough idea and what would be enough would be

A home to live in with enough room for having a family with 1 child (want more children then work for it so you have the space and the means to support more children) which would basically be a 2 bedroom house with living room, kitchen, bathroom.

Enough money for basic food needs, no lobsters or caviar on the menu but enough to cater for your family for breakfast, lunch and dinner

Enough money for electricity, water and gas

And a further 5% of whatever the total would be for "luxuries" ie internet, television, maybe the odd movie

Ideally Electricity, water and gas would be state run so essentially free

Anything else you would have to find a means to earn some extra money to pay for it

Now here's a question to all of you...

The majority of people who do work, earn barely enough to survive let alone live in this expensive world, there's people all around the world who work harder than any chief exec or CEO yet only have enough to eat a bowl rice each day and go without a reliable source of water and they can forget about anything as luxurious as a computer and internet. In countries where the poverty isn't as extreme, there's still people who spend 60% of their life working their asses off in order to just survive, they go without holidays, they sometimes have to go without food, they run up debts just to stay afloat because whoever they're working for doesn't give a damn about them and if they don't work hard enough they'll get fired as there's plenty more destitute folk who will work hard for them so they can enjoy their lavish lives of luxury.

Now tell me, what kind of life is that ? How can you honestly tell me, that, that is a good life or say "well it's life"

Because that isn't living, it's only just surviving at the bare minimum

To me, if that is life for the majority, then I would rather just kill myself than endure that life of servitude or even be a part of this utterly corrupt and broken system in the hopes that something better lies beyond

And just to add, I said this in another thread on life but I feel it applies here too




I view society as broken, I suffer existential depression due to this, everyone I speak to says "oh you need to enjoy life" but when I think about it, what is there to enjoy ?

Let's simplify "life" as it is now

Most people work 8 hours a day doing jobs that don't really provide much satisfaction They spend almost 2 hours a day traveling to and from said job They spend 7 hours a day sleeping They spend up to an hour in the morning getting ready for work

So that's 18 hours of a 24 hour day not living During the working week, when you do get home you spend roughly an hour cooking and eating and by the time all that is done you're generally so exhausted from the days grind that there's little you can do for yourself so you're left with 5 hours to live each day, providing you have the energy and don't resort to just sitting in front of a screen on a couch.

So then you just have the weekends, but most use their weekends to do household chores, gardening, shopping

So really, what is life ? What's the point apart from just being a cog doing some bull# job that provides no sense of worth in order to pay your taxes to support wars, corrupt politicians and contributing towards a broken societal system that has little consideration for quality of life and only focus is about keeping the broken system running. Not to mention most who are part of this system are barely struggling to survive on the little pay they get from their crappy job.

Sorry if this seems all depressing but when you think about it, there is very little living in life

edit on 31/12/15 by Discotech because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Discotech

Why would anyone who makes a good living want to reduce the amount of money they have in order to give it to people who didn't earn it?

You'd have to take it by force.

I make a good living. When you spout the higher taxes, you are taking away from me and my family.

You'd have to use overwhelming force in order for you to take what is mine.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Discotech


The majority of people who do work, earn barely enough to survive let alone live in this expensive world, there's people all around the world who work harder than any chief exec or CEO yet only have enough to eat a bowl rice each day and go without a reliable source of water and they can forget about anything as luxurious as a computer and internet. In countries where the poverty isn't as extreme, there's still people who spend 60% of their life working their asses off in order to just survive, they go without holidays, they sometimes have to go without food, they run up debts just to stay afloat because whoever they're working for doesn't give a damn about them and if they don't work hard enough they'll get fired as there's plenty more destitute folk who will work hard for them so they can enjoy their lavish lives of luxury.


Define "hard work."

Most people who live subsistence work physically harder, yes, than someone like my husband. But my husband works at a job that could see him in jail if he makes the wrong mistakes. Desk jockey? Yeah, but he spends upwards of 10 hours a day keeping important things straight knowing that it's potentially more than just his head on a platter if he doesn't do a good job.

Maybe that's not "hard work," but it is high stakes. And I'd say he more than earns what he makes and brings home.

Why do you deserve a cut of it?



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

a reply to: DBCowboy

You do both realise that EVERYBODY gets a cut

DBCowboy you would get the minimum income
Ketsuko your husband would get the minimum along with you too

You'd probably be better off after tax is taken with the minimum income

A solution for the tax could be incremental brackets of earning

low wages above a certain cap pay 1% extra tax, the more you earn the higher the tax %

But if you're poisoned by capitalistic greed then really no sensible answer is going to sway you to being less selfish and more altruistic in helping create a better society for people to live as it would appear you're both quite content with the current system



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Discotech
a reply to: Xtrozero

It's difficult to give a specific number as living costs vary city to city to country to country

But a rough idea and what would be enough would be

A home to live in with enough room for having a family with 1 child (want more children then work for it so you have the space and the means to support more children) which would basically be a 2 bedroom house with living room, kitchen, bathroom.


How about even if you want to have your first kid, work for more to get it. Single person cost would be more per person than a married couple, so how does that work? The single guy pays 1000 for rent and the married could split 1000 for 500 each.



Enough money for basic food needs, no lobsters or caviar on the menu but enough to cater for your family for breakfast, lunch and dinner

Enough money for electricity, water and gas

And a further 5% of whatever the total would be for "luxuries" ie internet, television, maybe the odd movie

Ideally Electricity, water and gas would be state run so essentially free

Anything else you would have to find a means to earn some extra money to pay for it


So I hire you to flip burgers am I responsible to provide you this, or provide you and your wife that doesn't work for me this? Once again I'm not attacking, just trying to figure this out.




Now here's a question to all of you...

The majority of people who do work, earn barely enough to survive let alone live in this expensive world, there's people all around the world who work harder than any chief exec or CEO yet only have enough to eat a bowl rice each day and go without a reliable source of water and they can forget about anything as luxurious as a computer and internet. In countries where the poverty isn't as extreme, there's still people who spend 60% of their life working their asses off in order to just survive, they go without holidays, they sometimes have to go without food, they run up debts just to stay afloat because whoever they're working for doesn't give a damn about them and if they don't work hard enough they'll get fired as there's plenty more destitute folk who will work hard for them so they can enjoy their lavish lives of luxury.


Why is the rich always the bad guy here. A billion people poor in India and it is the rich's fault. I just do not understand this logic unless you are suggesting the whole world pulls all monies and then takeover the feeding housing and support of 7 billion people.


Now tell me, what kind of life is that ? How can you honestly tell me, that, that is a good life or say "well it's life"


It seems you have established what is a good life for all..hehe doesn't work that way. Have you actually traveled around the world, I have, many countries. There are a lot of happy people that we would see as poor, but they do not. Speaking of others outside of the US. The one thing in common in most parts of the world that we do not see much is synergy of groups. In America it is always about the one person appt, one person living wage, one family living wage, and the world is just not like that. Privacy is not a right it is a luxury, so go to Japan and you will see a small house with great grandparents, grandparent, moms, dads and kids all under one roof. I say Japan because they are 1st world, but it is the same all over, but America.



Because that isn't living, it's only just surviving at the bare minimum

To me, if that is life for the majority, then I would rather just kill myself than endure that life of servitude or even be a part of this utterly corrupt and broken system in the hopes that something better lies beyond


When the hell have we stopped surviving? But you hit the nail on the head...no one wants to survive anymore just live some utopia life, well I would love to see that too, but what if you were back 200 years with this attitude you would not live long. Life is survival period, sorry.



Most people work 8 hours a day doing jobs that don't really provide much satisfaction They spend almost 2 hours a day traveling to and from said job They spend 7 hours a day sleeping They spend up to an hour in the morning getting ready for work

So that's 18 hours of a 24 hour day not living During the working week, when you do get home you spend roughly an hour cooking and eating and by the time all that is done you're generally so exhausted from the days grind that there's little you can do for yourself so you're left with 5 hours to live each day, providing you have the energy and don't resort to just sitting in front of a screen on a couch.


Man has never had it so good. You do not need to go back very far to see everyone working 16 per day 7 days a week. That is why Sundays were so important as a day off to the point to put on your good stuff. See how working 40 hours a week compares to 112 per week...lol



So then you just have the weekends, but most use their weekends to do household chores, gardening, shopping


I hope you are kidding, for I can't handle this line at all....




So really, what is life ?


Reading above, you and I have totally different views of what is life...


edit on 31-12-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Reading above, you and I have totally different views of what is life...


Yes, that is clear

To you life is about surviving, carrying on with the status quo and not bothering to question and spawning in order to let your offspring repeat the process just to keep the human race chugging a long

For me I look for meaning and relevance, I do not wish to spawn offspring in this hideous society we find ourselves in, I do not wish to survive, the only reason I haven't killed myself is because I care for my family and don't wish to harm them. I'm highly intelligent, have an IQ of 141, constantly think about things and always looking for a reason to exist, I've had a perfect upbringing with the best mother and grandparents, don't know my father or his side of my family, I aced high school despite being kicked out, I aced college, I've worked at Mc Donalds, I've also handled multi million pound insurance schemes getting paid incredibly well, I live better than most, I have plenty of money.

Yet none of it interests me because I keep thinking of how awful the world currently is with the current societal system, I yearn for something better than what we currently have and have pretty much had throughout our history in differing degrees but most of all I don't want this for myself, I want this for everybody to actually have a life, to explore and see our planet, to follow dreams, I just want a world where everybody is happy and I believe systems like this help us step towards that kind of utopian world



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: nullafides

So.....if I have this right, they want the government to pay everyone??? Put us all on what amounts to welfare???

This, if nothing else, shows how badly the public school system has failed.




Yepp, you've got it right. That's precisely what the snowflakes want.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Discotech

I don't think you'll ever convince me that having the government take more from me will benefit me.

It is not altruistic to have the government take more of my income and give it to people who did not earn it.




top topics



 
30
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join