I think you done been whooshed…
I agree with you with the assumption that the economy has the potential to provide a surplus. The US economy does have tremendous unrealized potential. I think it’s time to start pushing for a basic income.
They don’t honestly believe that. They say they do purely for political purposes. It’s no different than some on the right who say humanity has no impact on climate.
I’d be more in favor of that than the minimum wage, but is it politically viable? Where would the money come from?
It would come from people who earned it. Mostly the middle class.
Says the Welfare Queen of the SDMB.
The irony, it burns.
Never taken welfare in my life. Every time you try to equate this, you just look more and more like a fool.
Riiiiight.
Well, Fact checking this leads to…
You be the judge.
It’s just that curlcoat, along with a whole shitload of other folk, employ a very narrow definition of what ‘welfare’ is. And mostly it’s the ‘all those other people are getting welfare but I’m not’ mentality.
In fact, any transfer of funds from the state or any alleviation of financial burden (tax concessions, rebates or similar) are all forms of welfare. Here in Australia (just as an example) we have middle-class families crying foul that they’re paying for single-parents to bring up kids, conveniently forgetting that they get government assistance via family payments and child-care concessions.
Or they’re lucky enough to be able to afford an investment property, and can claim monetary benefit via negative gearing.
Or companies who reckon they’re going to go under without government grants…
They’re ALL, every single one of them, TAXPAYER FUNDED. They’re all a form of welfare. They’re all part of the contract we abide by in a modern capitalist society.
So for curlcoat (and all the others who moan and groan about the welfare state) to proclaim that they’ve never been part of the welfare system is total bullshit.
When breathing the government’s air and driving on the government’s road is considered welfare don’t you think the word loses meaning?
Yes, yes it does.
Now you see why it is a completely ‘loaded’ term when applied to ‘those who are not of my socio-economic group’.
See??
Not to mention the person getting the $15 now has to pay more in taxes, so combined with the above, they are worse off than before.
Minimum wage laws are evil disguised as good.
They are a song that politicians sing in an election year to get those minimum wage workers to the polls. Never mind they just killed 95% of the summer/part time jobs by replacing them with robots and longer lines at the check out counter. Minimum wage jobs are for those entering the work force. What are they going to want, full benefits and a cushy retirement too? Most of us worked minimum wage jobs while in college and/or otherwise improved our skills by our own efforts. We knew minimum wage, whether $2.50 and hour or $20.00/hr. was just a start, not a career goal.
Should the OP get paid more for what she* does? Quite possibly yes.
Should everybody everywhere in the country who’s currently making less than $15.00 an hour get paid more for what they do? That’s a lot harder to justify.
Whether $15.00 a hour (or any other particular amount) is “paltry” depends on your living expenses (which can vary wildly) and what you’re doing to earn it.
*(I hope I’m remembering right that brujaja is a she)
Assuming “brujaja” is a pun on the Spanish word “bruja” (witch, female), then probably so.
Not really. When my family was poor and on welfare we were part of the socioeconomic group that was poor and on welfare. I am not sure what your point is. Are you saying poor people on welfare don’t know that they are on welfare?
And that’s between them and their employer. They should convince their employer that they are worth more if they truly are.
But forcing an employer to give everyone a raise is not the answer.
And for someone making 12 bucks an hour and paying 2K a month for housing, giving them a raise to $15 or even $20 an hour isn’t going to help that. It’s like giving them a gift certificate good towards 10 grand off a new Rolls Royce.
San Fran is pricey, but I refuse to believe there isn’t adequate housing for less than two thousand dollars.
A quick check on Zillow shows me studios for $1500, but not many. And that’s SF proper, not even looking at a 90-minute radius. Nor looking at rooms in large group houses, splitting a 2-bedroom (what I did until age 28), etc.
Illustrating your complete inability to understand what you read. Or that you lie. You can pick. I didn’t take welfare when I qualified for it, much less be upset because I’m not getting it now.
Only in your mind. Words have definitions.
And most of them shouldn’t be happening. You want to have kids, you pay for them and quit looking to others to do so. But of course, thats the crux of the argument - if I agreed with you WRT the raising of children, you wouldn’t be going on about this.
Again, only in your mind. Welfare is what people get when they have more expenses than income, at a government set rate. They don’t ever have to worked, or paid taxes or done anything that is a benefit to society - indeed, if they have selfishly had kids, they are far more likely to get welfare, and to get more of it for longer. Social security is a government forced pension plan on people who work for a living, that Trump is apparently going to try to abolish because of idiots like you. Since you are too stupid to understand the difference, you should just stop. Especially when you are making statements on something that you have no experience with.