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.

 

End all social welfare programs immediately

page: 8
20
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion

originally posted by: SmurfRider

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: SmurfRider

Well basic wage laws I think take care of themselves in a more competitive environment


What do you mean?
Would you support a government paid basic wage law if all social programs were eradicated?


I haven't thought about it I don't know.


Just say no to that question. When the government sets wage basic, you get inflation. Just as commercial competition reduces prices, employment competition will establish the wages. Why work for Joe who only wants to pay me $13/hour as a Certified Pharmacy Tech, when Bob will pay me $17.50/hour. I'm not making those numbers up. Joe will likely have to settle for unexperienced and uncertified Techs, while Bob gets his pick.
edit on 27-4-2016 by BELIEVERpriest because: typo




posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Our country has a pattern of ambivalent, vacillating opinions and policies pertaining to taking care of our poor.
Read the history.

We make provisions for the needy, and sometimes large groups arise complaining about it; resenting it, making a big political stink about it, (their tax dollars, lazy people, the same reasons we see on this thread which are in no way unique,and have been around for decades upon decades) so with enough complaints and hell-raising, policies eventually change.

Following policy implementations, we have groups arise who complain about seeing bread lines and having to see starving people passing out in the streets from hunger, sick of seeing the malnourished and beggars lining their streets, and having to read about exorbitantly high death rates in newborns, so off we go again to make policies to provide for them.

Think "The New Deal", but the pattern began before the Great Depression.

Depending on the political climate du jour -the whim of the people, and the willingness of the incumbent political players to bend to public opinion, as to how we manage poverty.

I HOPE someday we will reach a point as a nation in which we evolve enough finally, to accept that humanity and society will never be perfect, and we must make allowances for that. Make it part of the plan. It's reality, like it or not.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Those people sitting on the corner begging for money are not a part of the social net we have in place, if they were then they wouldn't need to beg for money because the government would be assisting them.

If people do not stop to help those who have fallen through the net right now, what makes you think they would start doing it once there is not just one guy but 3 or 4 on that same street corner all because their assistance was totally cut?

And as far as the woman standing on the corner, how can you be so sure she hasn't been to places applying? It's not easy getting a job when you walk in with dirty clothes on and no reliable means of transportation. Usually the employer will laugh you out the door because A: you look dirty and B: you have no means of transportation so how can he rely on you to be at work on time if at all?

Getting a job isn't as easy as you make it out to be especially when you are homeless.
edit on 4/27/2016 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1




Those people sitting on the corner begging for money are not a part of the social net we have in place, if they were then they wouldn't need to beg for money because the government would be assisting them.


In my town, the people begging for money on the corner are Millennials who beg in shifts and split the profits. They are fully capable of working, standing in the heat all day, and I know those tattoos and piercings they wear cost them something. I wonder what their budget is?

I myself am a Millennial, so don't think I'm some senile old guy hating on the younger generations.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Unless Joe has other perks that compensate for what he isn't paying in raw cash. Then he might find some well-qualified techs who will take perks in lieu of hard cash.

Or it could also be that Bob is an absolute jerk. You may make a lot more, but you go through hell to do it. So working for Joe might be worth the cut in pay.

Simple differences in wages aren't always the telling difference. Husband stays where he is because even though he makes on the low end for what he does, the corporate culture is better than it is at other companies and all the perks make up for it, plus it's one of the few places that still offers a pension. So, even though he could command a higher salary elsewhere ... he stays.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The solution is not to completely do away with our social nets, that only creates the problem.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The solution is not to completely do away with our social nets, that only creates the problem.


The solution is to STOP handing tax money out to the lazy and let the private sector empower the Charity organizations to do their jobs independent of the GOD DAMNED GOVERNMENT. GROW UP!
edit on 27-4-2016 by BELIEVERpriest because: typos



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

But why?

Why have they fallen through the net? Single woman with two kids? No reason why she's not in the net. No reason why she can't go apply to be a clerk or waitress. Not even any reason why she can't take some of the panhandling money she has and go to the City Union Mission where she could be connected to all those things and other programs to put her back on her feet.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

So you honestly think that they make enough money from panhandling to not only live off of but to actually WANT to do it? I don't believe that for a second. The amount of people I see driving past someone holding a sign does not give me any confidence that someone can live off of such a system, much less make them want to do it.
edit on 4/27/2016 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I agree, because I'm living that scenario. I'm making top dollar for my position, but I am way overworked. And this is in a society where the Government sets wages, so it really has not helped. Wages need to be determined by employment competition and the needs of the local economy.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

So you honestly think that they make enough money from panhandling to not only live off of but to actually WANT to do it? I don't believe that for a second. The amount of people I see driving past someone gilding a sign does not give me any confidence that someone can live off of such a system, much less make them want to do it.


You are being naïve. I know for a fact that there are places desperate for workers in the area, but no one will apply anywhere because they don't want to lose their handout.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:38 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The solution is to make these greedy ass corporations pay a living wage and stop them from paying themselves exorbitant salaries at the cost of their employees livelihoods.

The problem lies in the greed of the mega rich who ride on the backs of their minimum wage slaves. Get jobs to pay more and a social net would not be needed and would encourage these "free loaders" (as some call them) to go out and get a job.

The problem is the rich NOT the poor. It's unbelievable that people have it so backwards.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Flatfish

What your saying has nothing to do with the conversation


For starters, You were the one repeatedly asking posters to tell you how much it cost to hire an employee. I gave you a truthful answer.

When it comes to both corporate & social welfare, you should know that for the most part, they are both products of corporate mentality and greed. Especially when it comes to publicly traded companies that are under constant pressure to increase profits year over year to satisfy their shareholders.

They lobby for trade policies that allow them to outsource and/or relocate their manufacturing base overseas, essentially pitting one standard of living against another in a mad race to the bottom. All in the name of enhancing their profit margins for shareholders.

With the exception of those people, who for one reason or another will always be un-employable, the need for social welfare is a byproduct of a failing economy brought on by unfair trade policies that pit the American worker against those of third world countries.

They are not the cause of failing businesses. They are the result of failed business policy on a national level.

The quickest way to reduce social welfare is to reform our trade policies and pass living wage legislation.

edit on 27-4-2016 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The solution is to make these greedy ass corporations pay a living wage and stop them from paying themselves exorbitant salaries at the cost of their employees livelihoods.

The problem lies in the greed of the mega rich who ride on the backs of their minimum wage slaves. Get jobs to pay more and a social net would not be needed and would encourage these "free loaders" (as some call them) to go out and get a job.

The problem is the rich NOT the poor. It's unbelievable that people have it so backwards.


Your solution is going to kill this country.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The solution is to make these greedy ass corporations pay a living wage and stop them from paying themselves exorbitant salaries at the cost of their employees livelihoods.

The problem lies in the greed of the mega rich who ride on the backs of their minimum wage slaves. Get jobs to pay more and a social net would not be needed and would encourage these "free loaders" (as some call them) to go out and get a job.

The problem is the rich NOT the poor. It's unbelievable that people have it so backwards.


Christ himself said that the poor would always be with us.

Sounds to me like he knows something you don't.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

How? Is paying a living wage really that far out of the realm of possibility? If so, the problem leads back to greed.

The problem lies with the RICH not the poor. If the rich weren't so greedy then people would not need welfare in the first place. Pay a living wage and welfare wouldn't be needed, it's as simple as that.
edit on 4/27/2016 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Christ also fed people and healed them free of charge.

Poor people aren't a product of people like Jesus, that's for sure.
edit on 4/27/2016 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The solution is to make these greedy ass corporations pay a living wage and stop them from paying themselves exorbitant salaries at the cost of their employees livelihoods.

The problem lies in the greed of the mega rich who ride on the backs of their minimum wage slaves. Get jobs to pay more and a social net would not be needed and would encourage these "free loaders" (as some call them) to go out and get a job.

The problem is the rich NOT the poor. It's unbelievable that people have it so backwards.


Christ himself said that the poor would always be with us.

Sounds to me like he knows something you don't.


Wasn't that passage actually about Jesus telling his disciples that is was ok for a woman to anoint him with expensive perfume, instead of selling it to feed the poor, because the poor will always be here, but Jesus would not be?



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The solution is to make these greedy ass corporations pay a living wage and stop them from paying themselves exorbitant salaries at the cost of their employees livelihoods.

The problem lies in the greed of the mega rich who ride on the backs of their minimum wage slaves. Get jobs to pay more and a social net would not be needed and would encourage these "free loaders" (as some call them) to go out and get a job.

The problem is the rich NOT the poor. It's unbelievable that people have it so backwards.


Pay close attention:

If you make businesses and corporations pay a "living wage", they will compensate by raising the price of goods and services.

If you pass a law capping prices on top of setting a "living wage", then people start losing jobs.

If you force businesses and corporations to stop firing people in order to keep their business floating, then businesses close and leave the country.

Businesses make profits to share profits with their workers. They have the right to determine wages as the workers have the right to work elsewhere.

You want to punish prosperity.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Then the problem lies on the shoulders of the employers and their greed.

Didn't Jesus say to sell all you have, give to the poor, and to follow him? It seems as though you are defending those who do not follow what Jesus told us to do.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join