Author Topic: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage  (Read 3428 times)

Online taxed

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23677
  • Gender: Male
  • At some point, the money is due.
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #15 on: October 29, 2014, 06:50:38 PM »
I've gotten sorta used to feeling like the crazy one. It goes with the territory!  :tounge:

This child TEACHES for a living? Teaches what? Don't you find that frightening?

I do.  It's sad he thinks he's actually teaching something valuable to kids.
Gab  |  Disqus  |  BitChute  |  Minds | Parler

Offline The Observer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
  • Gender: Male
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #16 on: October 29, 2014, 07:39:04 PM »
I do.  It's sad he thinks he's actually teaching something valuable to kids.

It's strange you should say that, it's what the liberals tell me, seriously.

When you pay your taxes, that’s State interference, but they’re need to pay for the roads, armed forces, police . . . that you use, or depend on to live in a civilized society. When your taxes are used to prevent absolute poverty from occurring, that’s to prevent the type of death and starvation you see in Africa happening in America. When your taxes are used to try to promote equality with a working population, that’s socialism. On the one hand, you don’t want mass absolute poverty, as seen in the 1930’s, but on the other you seek to prevent a dependency culture. The point of my op is that under socialism and its emphasis on equality, you’ve now joined Europe in which increasing numbers see welfare as a life style choice and THAT is bad.

You now live in a post-industrial society; the huge car manufacturers, the ship building, steel . . . are now industrial wastelands. Wall-Mart and Wall Street are the new industries, neither of which produce, but speculate and sell; they’re what are referred to as service industries. The times of plenty from the 50’s to the 80’s were courtesy of the war dead in an employment market short of workers and you now have a new generation of people entering a non-existent employment market. 

Revolutions start in countries of absolute poverty, not in those of nations with some sort of guarantee of daily requirements necessary to sustain life. You wouldn’t have had a Bolshevik revolution in Russia if the people weren’t starving. All governments across the western world now have to provide the mass unemployed with some form of income, because the alternative is another revolution of the type that ends in a ‘people’s socialist’ republic. Think it through, take all the unemployed off welfare tomorrow and what would follow? No, they wouldn’t find jobs, there aren’t enough jobs to cater for them all, but what I argue for is welfare with strings attached. Perhaps voluntary community work, or subsidized food instead of cash payments, which allow people to sit drinking beer and watching Oprah Winfrey all day.

I’m both amazed and sad that I have to write this sort of thing for people in a supposedly educated first world country and the best you can do is throw insults? It proves my point about dumbness?
   
I’m all for personal wealth accumulation, small government, individual choice . . . but I’m also a realist and America is symptomatic of a society of laissez faire materialism and dog eat dog that people are now voting against. Conservatism isn’t some right wing nationalistic ideal hijacked by the Americans, its about self-reliance, it’s about the family, its about values and morals which make a country strong and prosperous. It’s about providing opportunities for people to work their way up . . . left wing communism/progressivism or right wing fascism was never part of the American dream.   
« Last Edit: October 29, 2014, 07:42:53 PM by The Observer »

Offline Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 66920
  • Gender: Male
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #17 on: October 29, 2014, 08:16:03 PM »
Do I detect a bit of trolling here Solar?
How clueless are you? You come to a Conservative TEA forum, post lies, and have the audacity to claim I'm the one trolling?
#WWG1WGA

Offline Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 66920
  • Gender: Male
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #18 on: October 29, 2014, 08:23:12 PM »
   
I’m all for personal wealth accumulation, small government, individual choice . . . but I’m also a realist and America is symptomatic of a society of laissez faire materialism and dog eat dog that people are now voting against. Conservatism isn’t some right wing nationalistic ideal hijacked by the Americans, its about self-reliance, it’s about the family, its about values and morals which make a country strong and prosperous. It’s about providing opportunities for people to work their way up . . . left wing communism/progressivism or right wing fascism was never part of the American dream.   
You finally said something I absolutely agree with, and you just described TEA.
#WWG1WGA

Offline The Observer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
  • Gender: Male
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #19 on: October 29, 2014, 08:29:01 PM »
You finally said something I absolutely agree with, and you just described TEA.

But I'm the crazy one? There are more right wing stormfront nationalists here than conservatives.

Offline Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 66920
  • Gender: Male
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #20 on: October 29, 2014, 08:31:24 PM »
But I'm the crazy one? There are more right wing stormfront nationalists here than conservatives.
Show me one racist post!
#WWG1WGA

Online taxed

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23677
  • Gender: Male
  • At some point, the money is due.
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #21 on: October 29, 2014, 10:18:17 PM »
Show me one racist post!

Well that didn't take long.
Gab  |  Disqus  |  BitChute  |  Minds | Parler

Offline The Observer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
  • Gender: Male
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #22 on: October 29, 2014, 10:54:55 PM »
Well that didn't take long.

So now you want me to explain the difference between a nationalist and a racist? I just can't be bothered any more. Don't worry, I'm leaving soon.

Online taxed

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23677
  • Gender: Male
  • At some point, the money is due.
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #23 on: October 29, 2014, 11:02:55 PM »
So now you want me to explain the difference between a nationalist and a racist? I just can't be bothered any more. Don't worry, I'm leaving soon.

Please, no.  You are a lot of fun.
Gab  |  Disqus  |  BitChute  |  Minds | Parler

Offline quiller

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17781
  • Gender: Male
  • Reinstate dueling for Congress
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #24 on: October 30, 2014, 03:01:11 AM »
But I'm the crazy one? There are more right wing stormfront nationalists here than conservatives.

So your post gets moved and you childishly label everyone here a racist Stormfront member.


Online taxed

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23677
  • Gender: Male
  • At some point, the money is due.
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #25 on: October 30, 2014, 08:11:12 AM »
It's strange you should say that, it's what the liberals tell me, seriously.
Oooh, I'm a liberal now!  I love academic wit.  No wonder I fell asleep in my junior college classes.

Quote
When you pay your taxes, that’s State interference,
Yeah, interference.  It's like when I walk to the store and get mugged, that's mugger interference.

Quote
but they’re need to pay for the roads, armed forces, police . . . that you use, or depend on to live in a civilized society.
Wrong.  They are used to fund unions and corruption.  Roads?  You must not have driven through Detroit, or seen a highway project at a standstill for years.  Our roads and highways could be paved in gold if that's where the money was going.  Police? Those are the first budgets cut when municipalities and governments overspend.  Armed forces need to be financed through taxes, but we could do that with significantly less, and through another tax system.  Income taxes are theft, and a weapon of control by the government and Marxists.

Quote
When your taxes are used to prevent absolute poverty from occurring,
They don't.  That's a silly concept that has been brainwashed into your head.  Understand, it is hard for someone to be poverty-stricken if they have a trade or skill, and can work.

Quote
that’s to prevent the type of death and starvation you see in Africa happening in America.
Wrong.  Capitalism solves the poverty problem.  Africa has every natural resource known on the planet.  There is no natural reason for them to be in poverty.

Quote
When your taxes are used to try to promote equality with a working population, that’s socialism. On the one hand, you don’t want mass absolute poverty, as seen in the 1930’s, but on the other you seek to prevent a dependency culture. The point of my op is that under socialism and its emphasis on equality, you’ve now joined Europe in which increasing numbers see welfare as a life style choice and THAT is bad.

You now live in a post-industrial society; the huge car manufacturers, the ship building, steel . . . are now industrial wastelands. Wall-Mart and Wall Street are the new industries, neither of which produce, but speculate and sell; they’re what are referred to as service industries. The times of plenty from the 50’s to the 80’s were courtesy of the war dead in an employment market short of workers and you now have a new generation of people entering a non-existent employment market.
Yes, government has been hurting our country.
 
Quote
Revolutions start in countries of absolute poverty, not in those of nations with some sort of guarantee of daily requirements necessary to sustain life. You wouldn’t have had a Bolshevik revolution in Russia if the people weren’t starving. All governments across the western world now have to provide the mass unemployed with some form of income, because the alternative is another revolution of the type that ends in a ‘people’s socialist’ republic. Think it through, take all the unemployed off welfare tomorrow and what would follow? No, they wouldn’t find jobs, there aren’t enough jobs to cater for them all, but what I argue for is welfare with strings attached. Perhaps voluntary community work, or subsidized food instead of cash payments, which allow people to sit drinking beer and watching Oprah Winfrey all day.
You're not totally lost.  I'd like to yank welfare all at once and watch the leeches flop around like a fish who jumped into a boat.  However, if we were reducing welfare at some decent rate to ween them off, then fine.

Quote
I’m both amazed and sad that I have to write this sort of thing for people in a supposedly educated first world country and the best you can do is throw insults? It proves my point about dumbness?
Sure.
 
Quote

I’m all for personal wealth accumulation, small government, individual choice . . .
I saying, I do think there is hope for you.  Your heart is in the right place.

Quote
but I’m also a realist and America is symptomatic of a society of laissez faire materialism and dog eat dog that people are now voting against.
Huh?

Quote
Conservatism isn’t some right wing nationalistic ideal hijacked by the Americans, its about self-reliance, it’s about the family, its about values and morals which make a country strong and prosperous. It’s about providing opportunities for people to work their way up . . . left wing communism/progressivism or right wing fascism was never part of the American dream.   
I think there is a miscommunication between you and the rest of us.  Maybe a language barrier, maybe you're at a lower level intellectually, but I think there is hope.  You go off track, then say something like this that is right on.
Gab  |  Disqus  |  BitChute  |  Minds | Parler

Offline Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 66920
  • Gender: Male
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #26 on: October 30, 2014, 09:04:25 AM »

  I saying, I do think there is hope for you.  Your heart is in the right place.
Huh?

I believe his statement of:    "I’m all for personal wealth accumulation, small government, individual choice . . ."

Is nothing more than a lie, especially after reading the link he supplied.
#WWG1WGA

Online taxed

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23677
  • Gender: Male
  • At some point, the money is due.
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #27 on: October 30, 2014, 09:36:12 AM »
I believe his statement of:    "I’m all for personal wealth accumulation, small government, individual choice . . ."

Is nothing more than a lie, especially after reading the link he supplied.

It's weird that he didn't understand some basic economic concepts.  Oh, he's an academic professor.  Never mind, it's not weird.
Gab  |  Disqus  |  BitChute  |  Minds | Parler

Offline TboneAgain

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Gender: Male
  • Alex, I'll try "THINGS ONLY I KNOW" for $200.
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #28 on: October 30, 2014, 09:54:38 AM »
It's weird that he didn't understand some basic economic concepts.  Oh, he's an academic professor.  Never mind, it's not weird.

How can you teach much of anything -- especially social science -- when your grasp of economics is so tenuous that you think money and wealth are the same thing? How can you expect to be taken seriously in any discussion when you present statements like, "Poverty is absolute," and three sentences later use the phrase "relative poverty?" Why should I waste time on someone who originates a thread entitled "The case against relative poverty [!?] and the minimum wage," then criticizes my reply as being from "someone who writes a long post about something entirely different (economics)?"
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. -- Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; IT IS FORCE. -- George Washington

Online taxed

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23677
  • Gender: Male
  • At some point, the money is due.
Re: The case against relative poverty and the minimum wage
« Reply #29 on: October 30, 2014, 10:02:56 AM »
How can you teach much of anything -- especially social science -- when your grasp of economics is so tenuous that you think money and wealth are the same thing? How can you expect to be taken seriously in any discussion when you present statements like, "Poverty is absolute," and three sentences later use the phrase "relative poverty?" Why should I waste time on someone who originates a thread entitled "The case against relative poverty [!?] and the minimum wage," then criticizes my reply as being from "someone who writes a long post about something entirely different (economics)?"

My fave was how you base your pricing on your payroll....
Gab  |  Disqus  |  BitChute  |  Minds | Parler

 

Powered by EzPortal