|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,830 Likes: 110
Legend
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,830 Likes: 110 |
jc
something is really odd about what's happening with the financials right now.
now, i'm not an economist, but has anybody else noticed the silence from even republicans about the debt? like....even though they didn't vote for the recent COVID package, they aren't all that vocal about it right now.
they've decided to just focus on the border crisis. even with the way social media is today, the constant droning on about debt and deficit was far more vocal from the start of obama's presidency than it is biden.
and it's making wonder if it has to do with the fact that currencies and such just isn't measured the same anymore. what i mean is that there was always this notion (real or not) that the value of a country's currency is based on its actual physical resources. thats why there were always conservatives talking about the gold standard and such.
but now its seems like nobody is really concerned about the numbers. i dont hear republicans, fox news, corporations, or much of anybody really saying anything. at best, its nowhere near the level of concern they use to project.
is it because of how digital society has become? seems like the economy is more tied into software updates than anything else. it use to be a favorite talking point to fear monger the base, but now they aren't even using that now. its just border and cancel culture they care about.
there's gonna be a sell off in the market because there's always a sell off...but it just seems like it doesn't even really matter anymore. the corrections are quick and the recoveries are even quicker.
i really don't know if its a good or bad thing. or maybe its just was inevitable the more advanced we get as a society and economy? just strange. I believe the reasons for the silence is it’s a lot worse than “we the people” may ever know. The GOP was never transparent and trump was busy keeping us from panic.
A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives.
– Jackie Robinson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,504 Likes: 806
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,504 Likes: 806 |
Didn't see that because I was busy laughing at how you would answer. I've only been reading your posts for like 15-20 years, so I had no idea how you would respond...  I did. And he didn’t disappoint. He couldn’t answer with real data so he continues to just pull crap out of thin air as usual. Nothing new and continues to make up wild conspiracies theories without proof. It’s what the party of trump has become. Cool. Now go back to having your head buried in the sand.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,668 Likes: 380
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,668 Likes: 380 |
That's not what he "hit on" at all. But let me ask you this, if you knew making twenty more dollars a week would cut of your childrens healthcare, would you try to make that twenty more dollars per week?
It seems you're trying to place the blame of a very flawed system on the backs of those who work in it. At least you understand my point. I fully understand why people would seek to not make that extra $20. I understand the system is flawed. We don't have a disagreement here. That's why I said it probably wouldn't do all that much good. No matter what people make, those nearing the cutoff will look for ways to not go over...I get it. It’s almost like healthcare insurance shouldn’t be tied to employment. Like it should be universal? Maybe it’d help solve at least an aspect of this issue?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 67,388 Likes: 1306
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 67,388 Likes: 1306 |
I tried to hint in that direction. When you're living under a system that makes a certain earning point the deciding factor of whether you can afford to have medical attention for your family, using that as some excuse not to pay your workers a living wage, you're making your workers pay for that flawed system.
Maybe if people cared more about lower waged working people than making them pay for the flawed system, we could manage to help lower the costs of social programs and set up a structure where workers may see the possibility of getting ahead.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,504 Likes: 806
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,504 Likes: 806 |
That's not what he "hit on" at all. But let me ask you this, if you knew making twenty more dollars a week would cut of your childrens healthcare, would you try to make that twenty more dollars per week?
It seems you're trying to place the blame of a very flawed system on the backs of those who work in it. At least you understand my point. I fully understand why people would seek to not make that extra $20. I understand the system is flawed. We don't have a disagreement here. That's why I said it probably wouldn't do all that much good. No matter what people make, those nearing the cutoff will look for ways to not go over...I get it. It’s almost like healthcare insurance shouldn’t be tied to employment. Like it should be universal? Maybe it’d help solve at least an aspect of this issue? I don't know. Now you are trying to gum up the works. That is probably a whole different discussion, but I understand how it could be related. The same could be said for food stamps(snap) and housing subsidy. If making an extra $20 a week cut you from $120 a week in snap down to $60 or zero, how is that a good deal? It's not, we all agree on that. Nobody is going to say that is a good deal. People are trapped on the government plantation by design. Mostly to maintain a loyal voter base as much as anything else. Just to touch on insurance since you brought it up, I don't want to ignore your question. Most employer offered insurance is cheaper for the employee to buy than if they bought it themself because the employer is picking up usually around half, if not a bit more than half. Here is my question. Lets say the employer had to paid the employee whatever their portion might be if the employee opted out. The employee would gain the employer portion and their portion added back in to their paycheck. How many of those people would actually take that added money and seek a health care plan? I am talking about talking about relatively low income earners. You come up with that number because I am sure Perfect is going to ask me "what does low income earner mean!" LOL You set the amount, I am sure we will probably be in the same ballpark on that total.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 67,388 Likes: 1306
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 67,388 Likes: 1306 |
So it seems you're saying we shouldn't pay workers a living wage because our system is screwed up? Or are you saying we should pay them a living wage and fix the system?
Because as of now I seem to be getting the message that you're saying we shouldn't pay them a living wage because the system is screwed up.
I'm pretty sure if you paid a worker 50% more they wouldn't be too concerned with their SNAP benefits.(food stamps) You do realize that a lot of these programs are tied in with you looking for a job and not refusing employment now, right?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,504 Likes: 806
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,504 Likes: 806 |
Short on time....have to make a bank run with wife.
First, I am not against a living wage. I am all for a living wage.
We disagree on on what jobs should have to abide by that wage and at what age people should make that.
1. I don't think a 16 year old should start at 415 per hour.
2. Those wages should apply more to mfg jobs and maybe exempt some service industry jobs.
Got to go...check back in a few hours
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,830 Likes: 110
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,830 Likes: 110 |
Lol ....415 ...I know typo.
I love how you create reasons and spin who should get and what minimum wages are meant for. As if you know.
1. So you’re not for equal pay for equal work? That’s why women are paid less then men now. So explain to me (when you have time) exactly why should anyone doing the same exact work be paid a different minimum wage because of age now?
Why is it, that conservative junkies, GOP, trump flag wavers want to hold certain ethnic groups, women, and the young to different standards and to hold them collectively under their thumbs? Really, what’s with that? I think I know, but I’ll let you speak your mind first.
2. I’m betting every mfg job in the USA is already paying their employees over $15 hr. Or damn close to that. Prove me wrong. And besides if they aren’t making $15 an hr you just said in a post earlier “that group” would quit their manufacturing jobs just to avoid losing their welfare handouts and food stamps anyways.
A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives.
– Jackie Robinson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 Likes: 83
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 Likes: 83 |
They aren't. 9. to the worker, 12 costs the company.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,830 Likes: 110
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,830 Likes: 110 |
A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives.
– Jackie Robinson
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Biden calls to raise the federal
minimum wage to $15 per hour
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/PortlandDawg/banner.jpg)