Boehner decides tax cuts for the rich are more important than the debt

[^_^ 5,021]

We should abolish all welfare programs, thus eliminating the ability for people to buy food and housing on the taxpayer's dime.

Then, we should mandate (assuming SCOTUS approves the federal government's right to impose mandates) that all Americans have structurally sound housing and purchase food for their families.

So what happens then? The poor suddenly can't meet the mandates.

They end up leaving the workforce because they have to go to jail.

Grocery stores and farms and McDonald's nationwide are faced with a massive labor shortage.

They increase wages so all their people can meet the mandates.

Voila, you have a living wage and all it took was a free market with a slight nudge from big government in the form of a mandate!

[Ban Hammer 13,722]

Indeed. Which is why the ultra rich will always invest in buying a tax code that benefits them and only them.

should that be true, why are they paying such a disproportionate part of the taxes then?

I thought the idea of a fair wage has more to do with the job being done than on being silly in hyperbole. I know this opens the door to ridiculous overcompensation at 'the top'... but hey, we don't do that in the USA. Lets be less ridiculous and more invested in better taking care of American workers. Sounds like something of a campaign slogan- even used by the GOP not too long ago. Remember?

do you not think $5.25 an hour for flipping burgers is fair?

[웃 910]

should that be true, why are they paying such a disproportionate part of the taxes then?

Exactly. They need to pay their fair share...How come their taxes are so low!

[^_^ 5,021]

do you not think $5.25 an hour for flipping burgers is fair?

$5.25 for flipping burgers is highway robbery. That's why I can't hate on illegals, they do that work for a wage that is truly reflective of its economic worth.

[slim 1,533]

$5.25 for flipping burgers is highway robbery. That's why I can't hate on illegals, they do that work for a wage that is truly reflective of its economic worth.

And what we should all be doing. If we're working somewhere we should expect a pay level commensurate with industry standards - not a wage guaranteed by the government.

[mawilson 2,133]

We should abolish all welfare programs, thus eliminating the ability for people to buy food and housing on the taxpayer's dime.

Then, we should mandate (assuming SCOTUS approves the federal government's right to impose mandates) that all Americans have structurally sound housing and purchase food for their families.

So what happens then? The poor suddenly can't meet the mandates.

They end up leaving the workforce because they have to go to jail.

Grocery stores and farms and McDonald's nationwide are faced with a massive labor shortage.

They increase wages so all their people can meet the mandates.

Voila, you have a living wage and all it took was a free market with a slight nudge from big government in the form of a mandate!

You could just mandate a minimum wage of $15 an hour (assuming that's a "living wage") without sending people to prison.

[slim 1,533]

The labor shortage would be covered by illegals and then on the back side, all those prison guards and related staff would fill the unemployment needs. It's a win-win!

[^_^ 5,021]

You could just mandate a minimum wage of $15 an hour (assuming that's a "living wage") without sending people to prison.

No that would be government overreach. Mandating they all have nice apartments is not

[Zero Sum 305]

should that be true, why are they paying such a disproportionate part of the taxes then?

do you not think $5.25 an hour for flipping burgers is fair?

Disproportionate? Are they not rich anymore?

You must mean the capital rates they pay. Poor rich people. Victims.

Flip burgers for that wage, then get back to us with a rational answer.

And what we should all be doing. If we're working somewhere we should expect a pay level commensurate with industry standards - not a wage guaranteed by the government.

At some point you could introduce into your argument the wage/cost of living ration. Just a thought.

[Ban Hammer 13,722]

Disproportionate? Are they not rich anymore?

You must mean the capital rates they pay. Poor rich people. Victims.

Flip burgers for that wage, then get back to us with a rational answer.

i've worked for less than that, so where do you want your fail sign?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

i've worked for less than that, so where do you want your fail sign?

Yes, Chuck, we know that. But that was when a dozen eggs cost as many pennies, bacon was 35 cents a pound and a loaf of bread cost a nickel.

[Zero Sum 305]

i've worked for less than that, so where do you want your fail sign?

Back like 20 years ago, perhaps? The sign should go nicely there with your reading fail.

[Ban Hammer 13,722]

Yes, Chuck, we know that. But that was when a dozen eggs cost as many pennies, bacon was 35 cents a pound and a loaf of bread cost a nickel.

how about for $8.25 as recently as less than a decade ago, while being responsible for 55k in cash and over a dozen employees?

Back like 20 years ago, perhaps? The sign should go nicely there with your reading fail.

not even. but keep trying.

[Zero Sum 305]

how about for $8.25 as recently as less than a decade ago, while being responsible for 55k in cash and over a dozen employees?

not even. but keep trying.

Congratulations. And for the record, the rate is $5.25, to which you said you've worked less for. Keep your sign (you still need it )

[Ban Hammer 13,722]

Congratulations. And for the record, the rate is $5.25, to which you said you've worked less for. Keep your sign (you still need it )

i'm aware of what the rate is. in 1980 i worked for less than $3 an hour. so what's your point?