Employment is a contractual arrangement between the employee and the employer.
Why the government feels it has the right to dictate the terms of a volitional contract is beyond me.
And anyway, it is all an arbitrary decision -- $10, $15, $150 -- who can say with certainty what a job is worth beyond what the employer and employee negotiate it to be?
What is beyond Socialists like Alprova (and why Fairmon you continue to engage and argue with him after all these years is beyond me!) is that there are unintended consequences to forceful intervention in free market decisions.
Economics 101 -- an government demand to increase wages has the unintended consequence of (a) having businesses resort to more economical means to control costs (raising prices on customers, eliminating operations, mechanizing the workforce, etc.), and (b), it makes it harder for unskilled workers without skills the opportunity to work an economically-sensible job to prove their value and advance up the career ladder.
Look -- if you want to better your lot in life and you get paid minimum wage, either (a) get another job, or (b) work two jobs and create a plan of action to better your career.
You are NOT my responsibility; you are YOUR responsibility.
Now excuse me while I have to get ready to work, as millions on welfare depend on me.
As a small business owner, I pay $825 a month for myself, my wife, and 3 kids for a $11,000 deductible Obamacare plan.
I receive no subsidy, but my uninsurable 29-year old wife is covered, so I am grateful.
Point is -- these teachers just don't know how easy they have it, and should express some appreciation at the quality of their taxpayer-funded benefits compared to us in the private sector.
Like many Americans, I'd buy "American" (someone define that for me please) if the quality of the car wasn't complete garbage.
Who in their right mind would buy a GM car nowadays?
The UAW is smart.
What's the best way to eat an elephant?
One bite at a time.
Any good salesperson knows that getting any sort of small foothold in a large account is the first step to winning to whole she-bang.
If the UAW only gets in the door, it will be a matter of time before they work their way into the account (VW) wider and deeper.
What conditions brought about the loss of your limb (correct me if I'm wrong)? Serious question.
Health care was reasonably accessible to indigents pre-AFA -- just ask Erlanger's CFO.
Reform doesn't mean, "Throw more of someone else's money at the problem" without regard to WHO's money is being thrown at, and WHY it is or isn't ethical to do so in the first place. That's typically the Progressive solution.
Unfortunately, Republicans, who are constantly outmaneuvered by Democrats and always on the defensive, continue to bumble and fail to produce any sort of alternative, creative, liberty-minded solution to the health care problem.
Here's the inherent problem with the Climate Change believers.
Let's say they are completely right -- Man-made global warming is true and preventable.
Further, let's say America initiates laws and regulatory action to cut emissions 50% within the next 10 years.
The inherent problem is STILL not solved. Why? Because GLOBAL climate change is a GLOBAL problem.
And with countries such as China, Russia, and other rising powers concerned with growing their power internationally, the last thing they care about is diminishing its strength by dismantling its infrastructure, to maybe make a marginal decrease in global warming/cooling/climate change.
And the bottom line is this will NEVER happen under current geo-political conditions, thus, the argument to dismantle our current fossil-fuel-driven power infrastructure is moot.
Clay is right!
After 50 years and billions of dollars, we STILL need MORE of your money to fight this "war!" (which has no definable end-point or limits).
Pay no attention that the multitude of those in poverty have the highest of living standards relative to the WORLD, where our "poor" live better than ROYALTY of the past, and better than the mass impoverished of the present.
Walk into 95% of those considered "living in poverty" and you will find:
1) TVs (mostly big screens)
2) Cable/Direct TV
3) Running water
4) Electricity to heat and cool
5) Access to food -- be it through food subsidies or our effective charitable groups
6) Insurance -- Medicare for those on disability, over 65, and Medicaid to pay for most of the difference, and for those younger with children.
WHAT ELSE does someone who is "poor" need to have that JUSTIFIES the involuntary seizure of other people's property (money)?
How is this even debatable?
At what point is ENOUGH? Is there no limit to what these programs need?
Bottom line is for 95% of people, poverty is a mindset, developed over a LIFETIME, a set behavior patterns, much like the pattern of violence in the hood. Like violence, poverty is an outcome that mostly is dependent on non-prudent decisions -- what you see in propaganda pieces is the outcome of a lifetime of bad decisions. My question is why should I or anyone who sacrifices to succeed be FORCED to pay for someone who didn't?
Adversity MUST be overcome individually for there to be any resounding, permanent changes. Ain't no Road to Cibola that's going to solve inherent, internal, individual problems.
I get what you're saying. You feel you are being called out unfairly and unethically.
Let's say none of what Easy and Al saying about your past is true. Guess what? It's still... THE INTERWEBS!
It's not the real world!
Do you realize that, for the first 1 or 2 years I contributed to this forum, I would waste my valuable time objecting to Al and his hardcore Maobama Socialism?
After those years and the last 3 I've more or less spent away from here doing something actually productive with my life, he's still the same person; nothing I say or anyone else has said is going to change his opinion, or anyone else's opinion.
My point is -- why would you (or anyone for that matter) waste valuable breath and mental occupation over an Internet feud?
This forum bares no impact on REALITY -- it is a distraction away from more important matters. Who cares what Al (or anyone) thinks of you? You could walk away, never come back, and this forum would have ZERO practical effect on your reality (not including what effect YOU let it have on yourself).
AL and Jack -- after several years of verbal jousting, 'tis time to pick a spot to meet, beat the sh!t out of each other, laugh it off, and call it even.
Jack -- I've been a forum geek for 15 years and I've never witnessed trolling at such an elite level.
Of the 3 or 4 years I've read the Bennett cartoons and contributed on occasion, Al has been here and has irked me plenty of times with his Socialist bent.
That said, I never would allow his divergent views to bother me to the point of putting his picture on my avatar, or trolling him beyond attacking his political view points.
Give it up, Jack. And Al, stop feeding the troll.
Lastly, welcome back, Easy123 -- by the way, I've been reading Arguably by Christopher Hitchens -- great reading; highly recommended.
An interpretation from an atheist (me).
Read the title of the cartoon.
Bennett substitutes the deity for a Scientist.
That should be enough to quantify a Christian's frustration.
And, besides, does the TFP keep Bennett for his depth of introspective, thoughtful works, or for his ability to stoke madness in the hearts of Conservative Christians (and increase web hits and newspaper circulation)?