Ted Kennedy, Minimun Wage

[NMCB3]

Originally Posted by TexicanKid

Unfettered laize faire capitalism leads to unions, which is worse than bumping up the minimum wage a little.

There are no pure conservatives or pure liberals, at least not many. We all borrow the best from either side.

Unions are checked buy the free market.For example,if a company hires union employees and as a result becomes uncompetitive in the marketplace.That company must either streamline efficiency to lower costs,get rid of union labor,or face bankruptcy(aka Ford Motor Co.) Redistribution of wealth by government bureaucrats never reaches equilibrium it only purports too.More importantly,minimum wage laws are unconstitutional,bad precedent not withstanding.Furthermore,whether you fancy yourself conservative or liberal, if you advocate using the power of the government to take money from one person and give it to another, against the formers will, for any reason,be it minimum wage,school bonds or welfare.You are a socialist,and like an alcoholic you cant be cured until you admit you have a problem.

[TexicanKid]

Originally Posted by NMCB3

Unions are checked buy the free market.For example,if a company hires union employees and as a result becomes uncompetitive in the marketplace.That company must either streamline efficiency to lower costs,get rid of union labor,or face bankruptcy(aka Ford Motor Co.) Redistribution of wealth by government bureaucrats never reaches equilibrium it only purports too.More importantly,minimum wage laws are unconstitutional,bad precedent not withstanding.Furthermore,whether you fancy yourself conservative or liberal, if you advocate using the power of the government to take money from one person and give it to another, against the formers will, for any reason,be it minimum wage,school bonds or welfare.You are a socialist,and like an alcoholic you cant be cured until you admit you have a problem.

Our party with the $2.9T budget can make no claims about socialists being those who "advocate using the power of the government to take money from one person and give it to another..." without taking on the label themselves.

Unless you consider yourself an anarchist (no issue with that), both sides of our political spectrum tax and redistribute to some degree.

But instead of quibbling, let us unite in supporting our 2nd Amendment freedoms.

[Brickboy240]

Yes, the whole income tax structure is based on income redistribution. Neither party has made in-roads into dismantling this system. Hence the reason many of us have not only given up on the Democrats, but the fake-conservative Republicans as well.

However, many around here (me included) want nothing more than the dismantling of the income tax system and the installation of the "fair tax" or some other consumption type tax.

- Brickboy240

[NMCB3]

Originally Posted by TexicanKid

Our party with the $2.9T budget can make no claims about socialists being those who "advocate using the power of the government to take money from one person and give it to another..." without taking on the label themselves.

Unless you consider yourself an anarchist (no issue with that), both sides of our political spectrum tax and redistribute to some degree.

But instead of quibbling, let us unite in supporting our 2nd Amendment freedoms.

I`m not an anarchist,merely a constitutionalist, therefore viewed as a pariah by both major party's.As such I try to expose transgressions when I see them, which is really easy to do. As you pointed out they are both the same in too many respects, hence the Animal Farm analogy. You are right of course about uniting around the Second Amendment,the whole Constitution for that matter.It would be a shame to have the best form of government ever devised by man handed to us,and then squandered through laziness ignorance,and neglect. In favor of of all things,socialism.Which is nothing more than tyranny,and as history has shown,a stepping stone to totalitarianism and slavery.

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40
Sorry, but people do not have the right to have a job. Many states have "at-will" employment, which means you can fire anyone for any reason. That is how it should be.

The boss is the boss--he/she owns the business. They should be able to fire anyone they want.

You cannot legislate morality. If the owner of a business wants to fire someone, they should be able to fire them for any reason. The government should stay the hell out of it.

Frank

Originally Posted by Alaskapopo

Sorry but I could not disagree with your post more.
Pat

Good--now we know that you think that government should have more control over businesses than the owners do.

Frank

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by Brickboy240

Yes, the whole income tax structure is based on income redistribution. Neither party has made in-roads into dismantling this system. Hence the reason many of us have not only given up on the Democrats, but the fake-conservative Republicans as well.

However, many around here (me included) want nothing more than the dismantling of the income tax system and the installation of the "fair tax" or some other consumption type tax.

- Brickboy240

Fake conservative republicans make me sick.

Both parties unfairly redistribute income--the democrats just do it more...in some cases A LOT more.

Frank

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by nickb

I'll let you do the rest of the math, but that tax bracket is about 12.5% x the extra buck or so an hour x 3% of the population does not add up to diddly.

Further, the gov does not make any "profit", it just goes deeper into debt every year. For this reason alone, they should not be telling anyone how to run a business.

Nick

I know it doesn't add up to a lot. I already acknowleged that.

It was just something that I was thinking about. I bet it adds up to a few million, which still isn't a lot to the government.

I know the don't make "profit". I used the wrong word.

Frank

[nickb]

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

I know it doesn't add up to a lot. I already acknowleged that.

It was just something that I was thinking about. I bet it adds up to a few million, which still isn't a lot to the government.

I know the don't make "profit". I used the wrong word.

Frank

These kind of legislative efforts are just a little "hug" from the politicians to the protectors of the downtrodden. Symbolic, feel good bs that does no good for anyone. There is no other reason to raise minimum wage. And this reason is not a good one. IMHO.

If you are living off of minimum wage for very long after you are hired at your very first job, you really need MUCH more help than a dollar per hour raise could ever provide.

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by nickb

These kind of legislative efforts are just a little "hug" from the politicians to the protectors of the downtrodden. Symbolic, feel good bs that does no good for anyone. There is no other reason to raise minimum wage. And this reason is not a good one. IMHO.

If you are living off of minimum wage for very long after you are hired at your very first job, you really need MUCH more help than a dollar per hour raise could ever provide.

I agree--I've made virtually the same remarks earlier in this thread. It's a feel good measure that they are using to buy votes.

I've ALWAYS been opposed to this minimum wage increase. My taxes comment was just me thinking out loud--trying to find a possible reason that democrats would have to raise the minimum wage.

Frank