• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Hillary for President!



And Bailey Brothers Building and Loan went bankrupt. If they choose to run their business into bankruptcy in order to be charitable, God bless them. Did I miss the part of the movie where the government forced them to do any of that?
 
Presumably her goal in life is not to keep doing this and never get a raise or a promotion. I certainly hope not. Like most people she will do this until she gets a better job, or gets promoted, or some education and moves up in her career choices. Some other entry level person who has no skills or experience will do this job when she is done with it. If they don't pay enough for anyone to want to do it, they'll have to pay more.

That doesn't matter, the job will always be there. The argument that we need poverty wages to make the economy go is the same one used to say we needed slavery and the same one used to say we need underpaid illegal immigrants. Yes, it's a luxury to walk higher on the suffering of others but it doesn't make society better. Go to an island resort and go off the property to see the hotel workers living in shanty towns. That's what some seem to want here. I think that lowers the quality of living for everyone. I think our quality of living is better is no one here is hungry.
 
And Bailey Brothers Building and Loan went bankrupt. If they choose to run their business into bankruptcy in order to be charitable, God bless them. Did I miss the part of the movie where the government forced them to do any of that?

No, you missed the part that the rich guy put those people down to soften his lack of compassion and Jimmy Stewart defended them as human beings being better citizens if they had a better life.
 
That doesn't matter, the job will always be there. The argument that we need poverty wages to make the economy go is the same one used to say we needed slavery and the same one used to say we need underpaid illegal immigrants. Yes, it's a luxury to walk higher on the suffering of others but it doesn't make society better. Go to an island resort and go off the property to see the hotel workers living in shanty towns. That's what some seem to want here. I think that lowers the quality of living for everyone. I think our quality of living is better is no one here is hungry.

Our quality of life is already worse because artificially high union wages and benefits destroyed our manufacturing industry.

I don't understand how anyone can look at today's economy and not understand, the more costs you impose on business, specifically on hiring, the fewer people who are going to have good jobs with decent wages. If I have to pay the guy who sweeps my floor a "living wage", my manager and my drivers and my customer service people who have skill and experience all have to be paid more as well. The money has to come from somewhere. It comes from raising prices which hurts my business and my customers, or it comes from cutting jobs. I do not have a magic money fountain in the back room.

The main source of poverty in this country is not low paying full time jobs...it's unemployment (not working at all) and underemployment (not working full time or year round). Of those who work full time and year round, only 2.8% are in poverty. More than 60% of those in poverty do not work at all.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=24970
 
I think the gov should not have to subsidizing companies for paying poverty wages. Let the companies pay the living wage and let welfare be for those who can't work or who have gaps in employment.

Problem is that for too many people having a somewhat lower standard of living on welfare and doing nothing versus having to get up every day and go to a job is a better deal.
 
No, you missed the part that the rich guy put those people down to soften his lack of compassion and Jimmy Stewart defended them as human beings being better citizens if they had a better life.

I am all for everyone having a better life...the way to get there is to create a robust, growing economy where businesses aren't penalized for investing and hiring and expanding. Your emotional appeals and demagoguery are not facts.
 
I think the highest morality is to minimize the suffering of conscious beings. Everyone knows I'm in atheist and I think religion is a bad thing. But there's some philosophies contained in religions that are good. Everyone go read Matthew 25.
 
I think the highest morality is to minimize the suffering of conscious beings.

I completely agree. i simply disagree that your approach would do that. In fact I think it would cause more suffering.

Why not just pay everyone $100,000/ year, if we're being generous? Because obviously there are no impacts on jobs and prices when wages rise, right?
 
Stealing from others to give to the misfortune doesn't give you any moral high ground.
 
Was at a reception last night. Stood and listen to a guy blather on about Hillary. I downed the rest of my beer, Belcher and walked off.
 
I think the highest morality is to minimize the suffering of conscious beings,

People can afford to buy more food and toilet paper at Wal-Mart because it costs less.
 
People can afford to buy more food and toilet paper at Wal-Mart because it costs less.

I can't believe you want poor people to have to suffer the effects of cheap low quality toilet paper. Heartless *******.
 
I can't believe you want poor people to have to suffer the effects of cheap low quality toilet paper. Heartless *******.
No, no, see the idea is that poor people can afford the good toilet paper if they buy it at Wal-Mart.
 
I think the gov should not have to subsidizing companies for paying poverty wages. Let the companies pay the living wage and let welfare be for those who can't work or who have gaps in employment.

Ah yes "living wage"...a wage that is high enough to maintain a normal standard of living.

So how exactly would you administer a living wage? A living wage for cashier A with 3 mouths to feed would be higher than cashier B that needs to only provide for him/herself. Nice...higher pay for A for doing the same work as B.. great for morale.
Wages are based on skill level, promotions etc...not how many babies you can pop out. Another example at how liberal "solutions" to a problem only create new ones.




.

js0hz9.jpg
 
What must it be like going through life as a shill for a political party, ignoring real life negative results, so long as it helps your party amass more power over people's lives?

There are a few kinds of liberals

1. Young - they don't know any better yet. They haven't seen that liberals are full of ****.
2. Apathetic - they don't follow anything and only respond to slogans.
3. Pseudo-intellectual. They think they are smarter than they are and support liberal policies because they've been told they are brilliant and they want to be thought of as brilliant,
4. Those in on the scam. The ones directly benefiting from growing the government. Mostly those in charge but also those who know their fortunes are tied to big government.
 
Last edited:
doh


86% Say No to Hillary in MSNBC Poll

image77-199x300.jpg
 
Wow, that's pretty telling. Even the PMSNBC commies don't like that evil *****.

Americas-Final-Nail.jpg


Republicans Encouraged By Clinton Fundraising

Republican National Committee head Reince Priebus expressed optimism over reports Hillary Clinton will raise over $2.5 billion for her campaign. "Unless they can figure out how to make that many commercials without actually showing their candidate or playing her voice, they're in very serious trouble," said Priebus.
 
Last edited:
doh


86% Say No to Hillary in MSNBC Poll

image77-199x300.jpg

Until November 2016 when they would sooner chew their arm off than vote for a Republican.
 
I had a client who got minimum wage cleaning hotel rooms. She worked a full 40 hours on her feet or her knees the whole time. It's a vital job for everyone who wants a clean toilet when they check into a hotel. it's a cheap response to belittle people doing the job by suggesting that if they had any worth they would be promoted to a higher paying job. the reason it''s a cheap point is because we as a society need people to do those ****** jobs. Can't the people doing the ****** jobs most of us would turn our noses up at, get paid enough for rent, food, an occasional movie, etc...all without needing gov't assistance? Why would you rather pay them through your taxes in welfare than through a slightly higher room rate?

As I have noted previously in other threads, I agree fully that those who perform worthwhile work should get paid a decent salary. Henry Ford paid his employees more than the "going rate," because he wanted his employees to be able to buy the cars they were building.

The American economy benefits from employees earning a decent wage. I was born into a middle class family. I was fortunate to have 2 parents who did everything they could for their children, but we were sure as hell not rich. I worked through college in jobs like painting, washing dishes at a restaurant (the dishwashing equipment ran the temperature up in that room to 120 degrees), working as a waiter, going door-to-door to selling **** in 100 degree heat. I appreciate the amount of work needed to perform these jobs.

That said, I have some legitimate questions about "living wages":

1. Who decides what a "living wage" is?
2. Is the wage dependent on the cost of living?
3. If yes to the prior question, will not the living room punish employers in major metropolitan areas like New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, etc.?
4. Will not the living wage in those circumstances drive employers to relocate to Arizona, Nevada, parts of Texas, etc.?
5. Finally, if the Democratic party is so ******* concerned with living wage, why do they CONSTANTLY encourage illegal immigration, since illegal immigrants drive wages DOWN, DOWN, DOWN????
 
Until November 2016 when they would sooner chew their arm off than vote for a Republican.

well yeah - but Hillary will be facing a dem contender or two first - she might not even make it into the big ring if too many more skeletons fall out of her closet
 
Even the PMSNBC commies don't like that evil *****.

it's in the bag

Media’s Hillary Lovefest Underway, While GOP Candidates Face Tough Questions


Cue the Hillary Clinton media lovefest.

All you need to know about the next 18 months of media coverage in the Hillary vs. press match-up is summed up in this hilarious video. Reporters are running, not walking, to catch Clinton in her “Scooby van” as she kicked off her campaign in Iowa.

Screen-Shot-2015-04-17-at-12.43.57-PM-300x174.png


To quote legendary MLB catcher Yogi Berra: “It’s like déjà vu all over again.”

After living through the 2008 coronation of then-Senator Barack Obama, we know how this play is going to end. Barring any miracles, Clinton will cruise to the nomination. And from then on, most of the coverage of her speeches, policies, and even grandma-hood will slant in her favor.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/medi...ay-while-gop-candidates-face-tough-questions/
 
well yeah - but Hillary will be facing a dem contender or two first
Doubtful.

- she might not even make it into the big ring if too many more skeletons fall out of her closet
The media will defend her all the way and ignore any skeletons. The skeletons have been out there and being added to every year for the past 24.

 
Last edited:
Top