Democrats and socialism are NOT the problem

a reply to: Advantage

Yes they are..


I took maybe a semester class in Jr. high and then a full course later in high school.. both were required for everyone..


It is fair to say it could be a constant every year course..,but there is absolutely atleast one required class

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I agree people are not lazy. I remember growing up in the 70s and seeing Big Oil executives testify in front of Congress once or twice per year on why gasoline prices are so high. I think gasoline prices are probably twice as high as they should be.

Or, the CEOs have to be more generous in sharing corporate profits in terms of raising wages. There are two parts of this equation.

Why is it that people always blame the worker? I don't understand. People work plenty hard.

These blanket statements really make it hard to respond to these kinds of threads.

'People are not lazy' just doesn't make sense.

Lets take a look at this from the standpoint of subsets of 'people'...

First, people 'who work for a living' I would agree are generally not lazy. That said, there is a difference between just working. and working 'smart'.

Second, people who live much of their lives on the public dole/welfare, I would submit are generally lazy and of the 'victim mentality', and generally tend to blame others for the sorry state of their lives.

Third - there is no comparison to this second category of people and those whop are born into poverty in third world countries. I spent a couple of months in India - the poverty there, for the majority of people, is mind-blowingly staggering, and they generally have no way out. You cannot appreciate just how fortunate you are to not be born somewhere like that, until you experience it first hand.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Absolutely.. everyone is not management material..

But everyone needs to eat, live and have something resembling a worthwhile life..


So are you saying that in the richest country in the world people with EXCELLENT work ethics should still live in poverty?!?!

Imho the problem is that we allow employers to employ ADULTS, for full time work weeks that pay less than one person can possibly survive on..


That is OBVIOUSLY crazy..

A full time job should AT LEAST pay for the worst food, shelter, clothes, phone and something left for entertainment and savings...


If a job pays less than that, it is not a profitable business.. the owner is a slum lord.

originally posted by: JustJohnny
So are you saying that in the richest country in the world people with EXCELLENT work ethics should still live in poverty?!?!

No, I'm saying that they don't live in poverty.

a) If they have an excellent work ethic, especially today, they have a job, and

b) even if they have no skills that allow them to have a high paying job, people living in 'poverty' in the USA actually don't, when compared to those truly impoverished around the world.

The difference is, people here in the States do actually have a very real opportunity to better themselves, and pull themselves up out of the lowest income earners.

Imho the problem is that we allow employers to employ ADULTS, for full time work weeks that pay less than one person can possibly survive on.

I agree - those unskilled jobs should go to young people just entering the workforce, including teen-agers.

Those kinds of extremely low-skilled jobs are not and never should be expected to sufficient to live on on an ongoing basis.

That is OBVIOUSLY crazy.

Yes, and the direct result of the stupid 'minimum wage' laws, and concept that extremely low skilled jobs should be the kind of job an adult wanting to support themselves on an ongoing basis, much less raise a family, should expect to be able to do so on.

A full time job should AT LEAST pay for the worst food, shelter, clothes, phone and something left for entertainment and savings.

Says who?

Put another way - the Job Market should dictate that, not some politician.

If a job pays less than that, it is not a profitable business.. the owner is a slum lord.

Pure unadulterated BS.

So this once again boils down to the wealth gap, elites using their wealth to manipulate our economy, and boomers with their heads in the sand thinking 2019 is 1979.

Wake me up when the rhetoric changes and we start working to equalize the opportunity in this country, and take the power back from corporations and govt.

Can we please have our apocolypse now?

a reply to: tanstaafl

A) not even remotely...


Plenty of people with good work ethics in crap parts of the country with little or no work available are absolutely unemployed..

But that is irrelevant If they do work and yet do not get paid enough to support ONE individual in the most minimum circumstances.


B) You could make that same argument about anything...in any era..

Before central plumbing you could say “why do you need a well .. the creek is right there!! “

The standard of living constantly changes and is measured relative to the average in a society NOT on what was acceptable decades to centuries earlier.. obviously


There are already not enough “good jobs” for every hard working Americans... by design..


Take a fast food place since we are discussing the lower end of the wage scale..


The fast food place will have 50 employees, one GM and a couple managers.. maybe a supervisor or 2.. right??


Well assuming every employee is a super stud worker.. there are still only 6 people out of those 50 who even have the opportunity to advance..

The rest must go elsewhere or stay making less than can support ONE HUMAN BEING..

And then what if there is no good work in your area??

D) the thought that those jobs are meant for teenagers is a fiction..

Ask anyone who has worked in ANY of those places if they could survive with all teenagers and adult managers???


That is hilarious.. and do not forget all of these places catch crap for having bad service... do you think it gets better if the adults are removed?!!!

Of course not..

Those places are build on catching hard up adults willing to work for less than they are worth..


That is there business model.

If they are not sufficient to live off if , assuming a full time work week.. then how does it still exist?!?!

Because tax payers pay the difference... or they sell drugs of do whatever dirt it takes to break even..


D) now that is silly...


Minimum wage sets every other wage in the country .. in any country..


Think of it as units of labor..

A grill cook making minimum wage is one unit of labor..


His boss might bet paid twice what he does, so he makes 2 units of labor..


A Dr. makes 100 units of labor..


Whatever the minimum is , always effects the average and the maximum.


How would one even start their math from the top or middle lol?!!

E) common sense says that a business should pay enough to support one human being for a full time work week.. if not the business is not actually profitable.. they are slum lords putting their cost on the rest of us so they make more profits..

a reply to: tanstaafl

And PS no one thinks the bottom rung jobs should support a family of 4... that is conservative propaganda.

People only expect for it to support the one individual working that job...


Not a crazy expectation

a reply to: dfnj2015

Every time you, or some other socialist, whom live in CAPITALIST countries and complaint how socialism and communism will liberate us all I have to laugh. People like you ignore history and re-write it for your own left-wing agenda. Not to mention the narcissism that the left/people like you partake in claiming that you speak for all Americans, or even "for all the poor people."

EVERY TIME socialism and communism has been tried it has led to the most draconian and authoritarian systems the world has ever known. EVERY TIME. But people like you re-write history, and claim "socialism and communism has never been tried."

To you, and those whom agree with you, the murder of over 140 million people by communism and socialism, and the millions more imprisoned for daring to not kowtow to the left-wing agenda of socialism/communism is "not enough." Like it always happens, socialists/communists continue to make false promises,, which unfortunately causes many to believe these lies and embrace such destructive systems.

It's ironic to me how every affront you leftists make, and every insult you throw at others whom don't "believe what you believe" is only a reflection of yourselves.

When leftists talk about "the greed of CEOs" and how such "leftists should have the money earned by not only CEOs but by regular people whom have succeeded in any business," it should be obvious that those "left-wingers/socialists/communists" are the most selfish, and greedy people in the world.

At least be truthful. You want the hard earned work of millions of people in the middle class, and you don't want to have to work hard for it. You just want it, and want everything given to you free.

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: tanstaafl

A) not even remotely...

Virtually 100%...

Plenty of people with good work ethics in crap parts of the country with little or no work available are absolutely unemployed.

Define 'plenty of people'. Are there cases/areas like you describe? Almost certainly - but they are very, very far from the norm.

But that is irrelevant If they do work and yet do not get paid enough to support ONE individual in the most minimum circumstances.

If it is a job that does not warrant high enough pay to support someone in the most minimum circumstances, then they need to get some minimal skill set that will enable them to get a better paying job.

There are already not enough “good jobs” for every hard working Americans...

The unemployment numbers prove you wrong.

by design.

Yeah, 'the man' is keeping you down. Please.

Take a fast food place since we are discussing the lower end of the wage scale.

Sorry, but burger flipping and is not and never will be a job someone should expect to earn a 'living wage' on. Those kinds of jobs are for teenagers just entering the workforce, or people unwilling or incapable of acquiring skills enabling them to get a better job.

You do realize it is this ridiculous notion that will result in the loss of all of those jobs to automation, right?

The fast food place will have 50 employees, one GM and a couple managers.. maybe a supervisor or 2.. right?

Dunno, never worked at one, but that number sounds pretty high to me - but for grins I'll assume you're right...

Well assuming every employee is a super stud worker.. there are still only 6 people out of those 50 who even have the opportunity to advance.

I call pure BS on that.

And then what if there is no good work in your area??

Move/go to where the jobs are.

D) the thought that those jobs are meant for teenagers is a fiction.

Ask anyone who has worked in ANY of those places if they could survive with all teenagers and adult managers???
Just wanted to point out that this discussion is kindof meaningless without breaking down the different kinds of jobs and what each pays.

Those places are build on catching hard up adults willing to work for less than they are worth.

They are worth what the best job t hey can get pays... nothing more. The market determines this, and that is the only way that makes sense.

If they are not sufficient to live off if , assuming a full time work week.. then how does it still exist?!?!

Many people have had to work 2 or even 3 jobs to make ends meet at times... I have nothing but respect for someone who does that without crying that they are 'owed' more...

Because tax payers pay the difference... or they sell drugs of do whatever dirt it takes to break even..

Minimum wage sets every other wage in the country .. in any country.

Really? So, before minimum wage laws, what set every other wage?

Oh, right... the free market. But we can't have that. Oh no, freedom is just too mean and ugly to people who have no skills.

Think of it as units of labor..

No, the business owner thinks of it in terms of cost of doing business. He creates a product. He sells it. The free market determines what people are willing to pay. He then has to figure out how to create the product at a low enough cost - including your labor - in order to make a profit. If he can't afford to pay you more than $5/hr, then that is what that job is worth. If you can't livee off of that, then find another job.

E) common sense says that a business should pay enough to support one human being for a full time work week.. if not the business is not actually profitable.. they are slum lords putting their cost on the rest of us so they make more profits..

Now that is silly. No, I take that bask, that is plain stupid, and exhibits a pure ignorance about how real businesses work in a free market.

Now to go find a country that actually allows truly free markets to exist.

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: tanstaafl

And PS no one thinks the bottom rung jobs should support a family of 4... that is conservative propaganda.

People only expect for it to support the one individual working that job...

Not a crazy expectation

Crazy? No, Unrealistic? Absolutely.

Jobs pay what the market will bear, nothing more. When you try to force it, you do far more harm than good. You put small businesses out of business, and you incentivize big businesses to streamline and, yes, fire people they can no longer afford to pay for the work performed. This is what is driving automation in a very big way. Soon, those minimum wage jobs you love to champion so much? They will be gone, replaced by automated ordering terminals and robots.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: tanstaafl

And PS no one thinks the bottom rung jobs should support a family of 4... that is conservative propaganda.

People only expect for it to support the one individual working that job...

Not a crazy expectation

Crazy? No, Unrealistic? Absolutely.

Jobs pay what the market will bear, nothing more. When you try to force it, you do far more harm than good. You put small businesses out of business, and you incentivize big businesses to streamline and, yes, fire people they can no longer afford to pay for the work performed. This is what is driving automation in a very big way. Soon, those minimum wage jobs you love to champion so much? They will be gone, replaced by automated ordering terminals and robots.

If we were a true "free market" you may make sense. But with corporate welfare, tax cuts, corporate socialism, and pay for play, the market is so corrupt that the market doesnt bear a wage any more. It is all about how little the corp can pay without getting in trouble, while maximizing profit for the elites whom already own most of the wealth.

I am all for a free market, but that isnt what we have.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: dfnj2015

The result is the American people are gouged into poverty by the pricing fixing of wages, products, and services. The evidence is right here in this graph:

Very very few people are in poverty due to a series of unfortunate event. Many are there because of choice and mindset.

We live in a country that you are free to get any job, you can move. You can get an education. You can forage.
The problem is that too many people are lazy and would rather complain.

You don't get out much, do you?

"free to get any job" - most of which don't pay a living wage.
"you can move" - yeah, when you can't afford to live, just pack right up and move, free of charge. Nobody will charge you when you're down and out.
"You can get an education" - yeah, to get a better job that still doesn't pay a living wage. Are you in a household where there is more than one worker bringing in an income? Remember when one income earner could raise a family because they got a living wage?
"you can forage" - when's the last time you foraged? What did it to do your self esteem when you did?
"The problem is that too many people are lazy and would rather complain" - no, the problem is too many people like you don't know what it's like to live on the edge of going under each month. Until you've had to live on $800 a month, don't act you know what it's like. You're forced in a hole you can't get out of.

People like you are part of the problem. Just keep your mouth shut and don't exacerbate an already tough situation for people living on the edge because of no fault of their own.

originally posted by: cognizant420
a reply to: dfnj2015
I think anyone on welfare or assistance of any kind should be drug tested and denied if positive.

I think everybody should be drug tested and denied a wage if positive. You don't think drugs affect politicians? Bosses? CEOs? Your average worker? People who take drugs can potentially affect everybody in a negative way. So you agree that drugs are the problem not just the people who take them and who happen to live on aid?

Edit to add:
So, you're saying that anyone NOT "on welfare or assistance of any kind should be" allowed to take drugs?

originally posted by: KnoxMSP
If we were a true "free market" you may make sense.

I never claimed we were a fully functional free market. We have certain aspects - much more so than most other places - but certainly not even 75%.

But with corporate welfare,

I am 100% in favor of abolishing all corporate welfare (subsidies)

tax cuts,
I am in favor of abolishing all corporate income taxes.

Since corporations don't pay taxes (people do - to the corp it is simply another 'cost of doing business'), all it is is a hidden tax on individuals.

corporate socialism,

Not sure what you mean by this, care to elaborate?

and pay for play,

I am in favor of outlawing all lobbying (and declaring it to be exactly what it is - bribery, and criminally punishable as such)

Otherwise, again, not sure what you are referencing here.

originally posted by: revswim
Poor people in our country have access to food, clothes, housing, etc.

Do you undertand the difference between "access to" and "the money to be able to afford to purchase?" I have an elderly friend (74) who is widowed and makes less than $800 a month. Her son owns the house she lives in but still makes her pay for it monthly. Sometimes her bills are so high, she can't afford food. And in no month can she afford the clothes she has "access" to because her electric bill was $250. Or the check she wrote bounced and the bank kept running it through, charging her a $37.50 fee all three times they reran it through. Or the guy who mows her lawn keeps charging more and more for the same service. Where do you think this extra money comes from? Simple, she has to do without in other areas. How do you think this would make a person in this situation feel when they can't even afford life's little luxuries like maybe going out to eat, or buying a new outfit, or even affording cable tv? What a lot of people take for granted, people like her have to treat like extravagances and do without.

How would it make you feel if you were forced to live in this enviornment, but weren't allowed to participate in this society that calls you lazy just because you're poor and can't afford to do everything that two-income households can barely afford to do? Not many people understand this concept/reality when they look down their noses on people getting help and are "too lazy to work."

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: dfnj2015

If the corporations would stop selling cars with advertisements based on emotions then we would not have so many heroin addicts of debt.

Choice - turn off tv

The answer is always people are at fault. It's never the case wages simply are enough make ends meet. I'm so sick of this mentality. People work hard. Americans work hard. Everything just costs too much. There are two sides of this equation. Why is it we only focus on one side of the equation. It's always the worker's fault. It's always the little guys fault.

Well said! People who are making it in this society have no clue what is happening to the people who are not making it in this society.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Where is that promised land that those people you believe can just pick up and get outta Dodge and go to. . There ain't none.

there are 24,000 job openings.

How many of those 24,000 jobs pay a true living wage?

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: JustJohnny
So are you saying that in the richest country in the world people with EXCELLENT work ethics should still live in poverty?!?!

A full time job should AT LEAST pay for the worst food, shelter, clothes, phone and something left for entertainment and savings.

Says who?

"A full time job should AT LEAST pay for the worst food, shelter, clothes, phone and something left for entertainment and savings."
Says who?

My response is this - it USED to work that way. What was wrong with that way?

originally posted by: KnoxMSP
So this once again boils down to the wealth gap, elites using their wealth to manipulate our economy, and boomers with their heads in the sand thinking 2019 is 1979.

Wake me up when the rhetoric changes and we start working to equalize the opportunity in this country, and take the power back from corporations and govt.

Can we please have our apocolypse now?

This is the true problem - people who say idiotic things like "boomers with their heads in the sand thinking 2019 is 1979. " People who say this probably never lived in 1979. Life was much better then, and if you don't know that for a fact, you have no right to an opinion in the matter. How can 2019, where most families have to have two people working and bringing in an income just to survive, be better than 1979, where one person, working a regular 40-hour week could support a family of 5? There is no way 2019 is better than 1979. And guess who gets to decide which year we get to live in - 2019 or 1979? The consumer. That's all of us, if we would only stand together on this matter and demand it.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: tanstaafl

A) not even remotely...

Virtually 100%...

Plenty of people with good work ethics in crap parts of the country with little or no work available are absolutely unemployed.

Define 'plenty of people'. Are there cases/areas like you describe? Almost certainly - but they are very, very far from the norm.

But that is irrelevant If they do work and yet do not get paid enough to support ONE individual in the most minimum circumstances.

If it is a job that does not warrant high enough pay to support someone in the most minimum circumstances, then they need to get some minimal skill set that will enable them to get a better paying job.

There are already not enough “good jobs” for every hard working Americans...

The unemployment numbers prove you wrong.

by design.

Yeah, 'the man' is keeping you down. Please.

Take a fast food place since we are discussing the lower end of the wage scale.

Sorry, but burger flipping and is not and never will be a job someone should expect to earn a 'living wage' on. Those kinds of jobs are for teenagers just entering the workforce, or people unwilling or incapable of acquiring skills enabling them to get a better job.

You do realize it is this ridiculous notion that will result in the loss of all of those jobs to automation, right?

The fast food place will have 50 employees, one GM and a couple managers.. maybe a supervisor or 2.. right?

Dunno, never worked at one, but that number sounds pretty high to me - but for grins I'll assume you're right...

Well assuming every employee is a super stud worker.. there are still only 6 people out of those 50 who even have the opportunity to advance.

I call pure BS on that.

And then what if there is no good work in your area??

Move/go to where the jobs are.

D) the thought that those jobs are meant for teenagers is a fiction.

Ask anyone who has worked in ANY of those places if they could survive with all teenagers and adult managers???

Just wanted to point out that this discussion is kindof meaningless without breaking down the different kinds of jobs and what each pays.

Those places are build on catching hard up adults willing to work for less than they are worth.

They are worth what the best job t hey can get pays... nothing more. The market determines this, and that is the only way that makes sense.

If they are not sufficient to live off if , assuming a full time work week.. then how does it still exist?!?!

Many people have had to work 2 or even 3 jobs to make ends meet at times... I have nothing but respect for someone who does that without crying that they are 'owed' more...

Because tax payers pay the difference... or they sell drugs of do whatever dirt it takes to break even..

Minimum wage sets every other wage in the country .. in any country.

Really? So, before minimum wage laws, what set every other wage?

Oh, right... the free market. But we can't have that. Oh no, freedom is just too mean and ugly to people who have no skills.

Think of it as units of labor..

No, the business owner thinks of it in terms of cost of doing business. He creates a product. He sells it. The free market determines what people are willing to pay. He then has to figure out how to create the product at a low enough cost - including your labor - in order to make a profit. If he can't afford to pay you more than $5/hr, then that is what that job is worth. If you can't livee off of that, then find another job.

E) common sense says that a business should pay enough to support one human being for a full time work week.. if not the business is not actually profitable.. they are slum lords putting their cost on the rest of us so they make more profits..

Now that is silly. No, I take that bask, that is plain stupid, and exhibits a pure ignorance about how real businesses work in a free market.

Now to go find a country that actually allows truly free markets to exist.

You are so wrong on every rebuttal of yours. Remember back in the 1950s when we had "burger flippers?" Those people were able to raise a family and only one person had to work in the family to be able to raise said family. Trust me, it happened. It was possible then. Why is it not possible now? Because the powers that be are trying to bring down America to third-world status and by stopping paying people a living wage to work is a good way to bring that about.