RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


NaiveTempest -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/18/2008 5:42:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

Unless the US solves its problems with social security and healthcare, the US may lose its perfect credit rating within a decade.

Many banks are growing worried that the US has no plans to deal with a social security system projected to start running a deficit within the next 8 years. And to worsen the worries, some politicians want to expand welfare programs such as medicaid and medicare and provide healthcare coverage to 47 million Americans without much plan on how such an expansion would be paid for.

So will the liberals in here tell me how we are going to pay for MORE social services if we are not going to be able to pay for the ones we already had? It appears unless we cut these programs, we will run into bankruptcy.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fcc631cc-bfe6-11dc-8052-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1


Maybe Congress can stop getting pay-raises and all those corporations laying people off and going overseas can stop trying to make their own pockets fatter? Just a few helpful suggestions. I would also suggest that congress put more money into education and protecting our borders/enforcing immigration laws; that might help cut some of the problem off at two sources hopefully. Or at least slow it down.




TheGorenSociety -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/19/2008 9:43:21 AM)

Just remember cascading meltdown are you prepared for  it?




subfever -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/19/2008 2:28:03 PM)

quote:

Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy


Well, for the past two decades or so, I've been convinced that banks are the greatest threat to the welfare of the citizens.

And a tip of the cap to Marc2b for his so-called rant.




Real0ne -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/19/2008 3:59:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NaiveTempest
Maybe Congress can stop getting pay-raises and all those corporations laying people off and going overseas can stop trying to make their own pockets fatter? Just a few helpful suggestions. I would also suggest that congress put more money into education and protecting our borders/enforcing immigration laws; that might help cut some of the problem off at two sources hopefully. Or at least slow it down.



How about an amendment to the cnstitution to remove corporate personhood?  Ditto on the education in fact there should be a eith and 1/2 grade where they learn nothing but governemtn and history subjects chosen by the local jurisdiction nOT the fed.






Marc2b -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/20/2008 10:23:03 AM)

quote:

Hard work will do nothing but give you callouses.  Being astute enough to take advantage of life's circumstances is what will make a person successful.


You can be the most astute person in the world, it won't amount to anything if you don't get up off your kiester and work.  Hard work is not the only ingrediant to success but it is an essential one.

Edited to add:  thanks to RealOne and subfever for the accolades.  RealOne, I've been looking into Ron Paul but don't know a whole bunch about him yet.  From what I do know we seem to agree on more than we would disagree.  More inportantly, he appears to advocate that we actually follow the Constitution - something I'm very much in favor of. 

I forgot one very important thing in my rant:

Kill the minumum wage! 

(I fail to understand why we insist on putting teenagers and unskilled laborers out of work)




thompsonx -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/20/2008 12:23:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

Hard work will do nothing but give you callouses.  Being astute enough to take advantage of life's circumstances is what will make a person successful.


You can be the most astute person in the world, it won't amount to anything if you don't get up off your kiester and work.  Hard work is not the only ingrediant to success but it is an essential one.
Would you mind telling us who among the Forbes 1000 worked for their money?


Edited to add:  thanks to RealOne and subfever for the accolades.  RealOne, I've been looking into Ron Paul but don't know a whole bunch about him yet.  From what I do know we seem to agree on more than we would disagree.  More inportantly, he appears to advocate that we actually follow the Constitution - something I'm very much in favor of. 

I forgot one very important thing in my rant:

Kill the minumum wage! 

(I fail to understand why we insist on putting teenagers and unskilled laborers out of work)
How does a minimum wage put teenagers and unskilled laborers out of work?




Marc2b -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/20/2008 10:02:53 PM)


quote:

Would you mind telling us who among the Forbes 1000 worked for their money?


Oh man, there are so many things wrong with this question, I’m not sure where to begin. I guess I’ll start by saying I’ve no idea who among the Forbes 1000 works for their money although I suspect that the answer is most of them, if not all of them. Managing money is a lot of work. Not to mention the effort you have to put in learning how to manage money. And that’s just for those who inherited their wealth. It take even more work to make a fortune.
 
Perhaps I’m reading you wrong but I find inherent in this question a bias (in addition to you usual bias against anyone who can afford a Rolls Royce) against non-physical labor, as if physical labor is the only labor that counts as work. It does not. Even a desk job can leave you exhausted at the end of a long day. I’ve done both blue collar and white collar work in my day and believe me, work is work.
 
I also find in the question a most unfortunate definition of success, as if one has to be super wealthy in order to be a success. Surely you don’t mean that? I’m not poor but I am far from rich and I consider myself to be successful. Interesting job, decent home, working vehicle, good friends, a girlfriend who doesn’t nag, and cable television to boot. What constitutes success is for each and everyone of us to define.
 
My biggest problem with the question is that you are attempting to use a specific to discredit a known generality. Save for those comparatively rare individuals born with a silver spoon in their mouth (which is not to say they won’t ever work even if they don’t have to), sitting on your butt doing nothing will not lead to success (unless sitting on your butt doing nothing is your definition of success). You cannot accumulate wealth unless you produce. The fact that there are a few people in the word that need never work does not refute my contention.
 
By the way, why the Forbes 1000? Isn’t it the Forbes 500? I dunno, I don’t read Forbes.

quote:

How does a minimum wage put teenagers and unskilled laborers out of work?

 
By pricing the jobs they can perform out of the market. A paying job comes into existence for only one reason – somebody needs something done and they do not have the knowledge and/or skill and/or time and/or inclination to do it themselves, so they pay someone to do it for them. Jobs, like any other commodity in the economy are subject to the law of supply and demand – they have a value. Set the cost of a job artificially higher than it’s worth then such jobs begin to disappear (can anyone say outsourcing) or go underground (under the table pay, illegal immigrant labor).
 
There was a day in this country when, as you pulled your car into the gas station, two or three teenagers came out of the station to pump your gas, check your tires, check your fluids, etc. That day is now gone. Why? Because no businessman in his right mind is going to pay a teenager $7.15 (current New York State minimum wage) an hour to pump gas.




Amaros -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/21/2008 7:04:09 AM)

Banks and investment houses have fucked themselves up out of greed, and now want to blame somebody else, and get bailed out so they can do it again.

What is needed here is financial transparency legislation and legislation that specifies stock options be counted as compensation, we'd have largely avoided the bulk of these bubbles and scams if that legislation hadn't been blocked by republicans back in the Ninties.

No question who's side the Bush administration and the handpicked Supreme Court is on, judging by the recent slap in the face to investors in the recent decision to protect co-conspiritors in accounting scams.

Of course they'd like to get their hands on SS, it's always better to play these games with OPM.




thompsonx -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/21/2008 7:18:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b


quote:

Would you mind telling us who among the Forbes 1000 worked for their money?


Oh man, there are so many things wrong with this question,

The only thing wrong with this question is that you can't or wont answer it.
 
 I’m not sure where to begin. I guess I’ll start by saying I’ve no idea who among the Forbes 1000 works for their money although I suspect that the answer is most of them, if not all of them.
Do a little research and you will find out that none of them do.
 
 Managing money is a lot of work. Not to mention the effort you have to put in learning how to manage money. And that’s just for those who inherited their wealth. It take even more work to make a fortune.
For those who can't tango there is always the Texas two step.  Perhaps you might get a dictionary and look up the word work.
 
Perhaps I’m reading you wrong

You most definitely are.  Try reading what I actually say and not what you want to hear.


but I find inherent in this question a bias (in addition to you usual bias against anyone who can afford a Rolls Royce) against non-physical labor, as if physical labor is the only labor that counts as work. It does not. Even a desk job can leave you exhausted at the end of a long day. I’ve done both blue collar and white collar work in my day and believe me, work is work. 
I have no bias against those who can afford a Rolls Royce and you can cite no reference of mine stating such.  I do have a bias against those who use their wealth to keep the not wealthy in that state.
 
I also find in the question a most unfortunate definition of success,

It was a question not a definition.
 
 as if one has to be super wealthy in order to be a success
Your definition not mine.
 
Surely you don’t mean that? I’m not poor but I am far from rich and I consider myself to be successful. Interesting job, decent home, working vehicle, good friends, a girlfriend who doesn’t nag, and cable television to boot. What constitutes success is for each and everyone of us to define. 
I thought you said you worked for your families business?
 
My biggest problem with the question is that you are attempting to use a specific to discredit a known generality.

Not so.  I simply asked you who among the Forbes 1000 worked for their money.
 
 
 Save for those comparatively rare individuals born with a silver spoon in their mouth
Kinda like those on the Forbes 1000.
 
 
 (which is not to say they won’t ever work even if they don’t have to), sitting on your butt doing nothing will not lead to success (unless sitting on your butt doing nothing is your definition of success).
 You cannot accumulate wealth unless you produce. The fact that there are a few people in the word that need never work does not refute my contention.
Who specifically on the Forbes 1000 has worked to produce anything? 
 
By the way, why the Forbes 1000? Isn’t it the Forbes 500? I dunno, I don’t read Forbes.

Forbes has several lists of wealthy people...I was just giving you the largest list so you might have an easier time of finding at least one of them who actually works for his or her money. 

quote:

How does a minimum wage put teenagers and unskilled laborers out of work?

 
By pricing the jobs they can perform out of the market.

You mean paying them what their time is worth.
 
 
 A paying job comes into existence for only one reason – somebody needs something done and they do not have the knowledge and/or skill and/or time and/or inclination to do it themselves, so they pay someone to do it for them. Jobs, like any other commodity in the economy are subject to the law of supply and demand – they have a value.
This is absolutely correct
 
 
 
 
 Set the cost of a job artificially higher than it’s worth then such jobs begin to disappear
You mean like the incompetent cocksucker that was the CEO of Home Depot who got a 250,000,000 severance check for his incompetence when they fired his ass.
His job did not disappear.
 
(can anyone say outsourcing) or go underground (under the table pay, illegal immigrant labor). 
This is absolutely fatuous.
This is the same argument that the slave holders used to justify slavery.  "If we had to pay the slaves what "free labor" is paid  we could not sell our product".
If you have a business that cannot exist by paying labor what it is worth you do not have a business.
You seem not to know much about the history of labor/management relations.  Management in the past has had the position of locking the doors to the factory and saying "when you are hungry enough to eat dirt then you will come back to work for what I am willing to pay you.  In the mean time I have all the money I need so go fuck yourself and your demands for a living wage"
 
There was a day in this country when, as you pulled your car into the gas station, two or three teenagers came out of the station to pump your gas, check your tires, check your fluids, etc.

Your memory is a little faulty here Mark.  More often than not the person who pumped your gas and washed your windshield etc was a full grown man...who in many cases was the owner of the establishment. 
Never in your lifetime has there not been a minimum wage in this country.
Those teenagers you refer to were making minimum wage.  So if it worked then why not now?
 
 
 That day is now gone. Why? Because no businessman in his right mind is going to pay a teenager $7.15 (current New York State minimum wage) an hour to pump gas. 
Of course not, now  he gets that labor for free from his patrons. 
While I have never worked for minimum wage, I do remember that it was .90 cents an hour when I was in high school.  Gasoline was .30 cents a gallon.  Hamburger was .35 cents a pound and bread was .25 cents a loaf.  Today federal minimum wage is just under $6.00 an hour and gasoline is $3.00 a gallon bread is over a dollar a loaf and hamburger is over two dollars a pound.   My point is that the number of hours you need to work for basic commodities has not changed dramatically.  All that has changed are the numbers.
Outsourcing is simply a method to evade the constitutional ban on slavery in this country.  We can't legally use American slaves but there is no constitutional ban on Chinese,Indian or Mexican slaves.  If you want to re institute slavery then get your congressman to introduce a bill to repeal the 13th14thand 15th amendment.
If you were to raise the minimum wage to about $15 an hour then an illegal could not get a job in this country.  At $15 an hour citizens would take the jobs that illegals now get $5 an hour for.
You won't work for $1 an hour but somehow you think someone else will.
You say that the minimum wage in New York is $7.15.  Where in New York can you live on $14,000 a year, that is assuming that you are working full time.  




MadameTakhisis -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/21/2008 5:54:36 PM)

It is apparent why I choose to beat people. Most people talk to much and not the people who should be talking! Please check these links for a glimpse at you goverment.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2007/290107rockefellergoal.htm

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

Beat your love one, grab your beer or appletini and relax to some truths that may be more than most can handle. The first clip is of Arron Russo who passed but before he did he left a few warnings of our elected offices. There are more links I just felt this one is the most potent. So google him and see what else he had to say about taxes. The second Zeitgiest ,Hee he he, Did you know the First to be written in history wearing a KILT was Pharoah? There goes Scottish Rights! Any ways the Z link is long but is like crack if you love a look at the truth! You wont feel the same about life after seeing these two links. I would love some real conversation on these links only by those with enough courage to watch the whole thing not the half ass squawkers who like to speak without all the info. I appoplgize in advance for showing you what will disrupt your closet veiws of race, history, religion and politics. I think It is great people are concerned about all of our wellbeing it is just a shame we are to lazy to find the truth, support it, and get on the same dam page! Sad part some of you will support and agree with the corruption that you`ll witness watching Z ! I know why I am a Sadist, truths like this allows me to do the things I do to those who need it most.









Marc2b -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/21/2008 8:21:12 PM)

quote:

The only thing wrong...

 
Wow. You’re in full form. But that’s okay because that’s what I miss when you go away. I will get back to you on this. I’ve too much to do tomorrow to stay up to 3am getting eye strain, but I will get back to you on this.




thompsonx -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/21/2008 8:45:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

The only thing wrong...

 
Wow. You’re in full form. But that’s okay because that’s what I miss when you go away. I will get back to you on this. I’ve too much to do tomorrow to stay up to 3am getting eye strain, but I will get back to you on this.

Marc2b:
That is one of the reasons I use the large font,so you don't get eye strain and can concentrate on your Texas Two Step.[;)]
thompson




MzMia -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/21/2008 8:49:16 PM)

thompsonx, you are a real beast!
I submit ! [sm=mrpuffy.gif]

lol




Marc2b -> RE: Banks: Welfare costs greatest threat to US economy (1/22/2008 5:43:13 PM)

quote:

The only thing wrong with this question is that you can't or wont answer it.

Yes I did. I said I had no idea.

quote:

Do a little research and you will find out that none of them do.

Well, I looked up number one on the list, Bill Gates, and he founded Microsoft. Starting a company takes a lot of work. Same thing for number two, Warren Buffet, who started out as a newspaper delivery boy. Sergey Brin, number five on the list, is one of the co-founders of Google. I seriously doubt that he did so by resting in a lawn chair and sniffing his toe jam.

quote:

For those who can't tango there is always the Texas two step. Perhaps you might get a dictionary and look up the word work.

work
n. Physical and/or mental effort or activity directed toward the production or accomplishment of something.
 
That’s according to the Free Online Dictionary.

quote:

I have no bias against those who can afford a Rolls Royce and you can cite no reference of mine stating such. I do have a bias against those who use their wealth to keep the not wealthy in that state.

Oh please. How many times have I heard terms like "uber-rich"?

quote:

It was a question not a definition.

Yes, it was a question but questions rest upon assumptions and your question seemed to rest upon an assumption that only rich people count as successful.
 
quote:

I thought you said you worked for your families business?

I do. That where I work. That’s where I do my job.

quote:

Not so. I simply asked you who among the Forbes 1000 worked for their money.

But for what purpose if not in an (vain) attempt to discredit the general notion that one has to work for their money?
 
quote:

Who specifically on the Forbes 1000 has worked to produce anything?

Once again, let’s start with Bill Gates who worked to produce a software company.

 
quote:

Forbes has several lists of wealthy people...I was just giving you the largest list so you might have an easier time of finding at least one of them who actually works for his or her money.

Well the Forbes "One" would have been sufficient since the first person on the list is Bill Gates.
 

quote:

You mean paying them what their time is worth.

You mean what you consider their time is worth. I consider the employer and the employee to be in a better position to make that decision.

quote:

This is absolutely correct

Well, at least we agree on something. Now if you would just keep repeating this mantra: Marc2b is always right ... Marc2b is always right.... perhaps we can build this into a meaningful relationship.

quote:

You mean like the incompetent cocksucker that was the CEO of Home Depot who got a 250,000,000 severance check for his incompetence when they fired his ass.

His job did not disappear.

Once again, you are using a specific in a vain attempt to discredit a known generality.
 
quote:

This is absolutely fatuous.

No it’s not.

quote:

This is the same argument that the slave holders used to justify slavery. "If we had to pay the slaves what "free labor" is paid we could not sell our product".

So? How does that discredit the argument? The fact that some nefarious people use a particular argument to advance a nefarious agenda does not in an of itself negate the argument. Some Muslims use the Koran to advocate killing infidels, does that negate the entire religion of Islam?
 
With me the point is moot, anyway. How many times on these boards have I said that I want a free society. Slavery (the real kind, not the fun BDSM kind) has no place in a free society. One of the bedrock principles of a free society is that each individual is free to sell their own labor (be it physical or mental).

quote:

If you have a business that cannot exist by paying labor what it is worth you do not have a business.

True, but the question, once again, is what is the labor worth? If the price of labor is set artificially high by the government so that you can’t afford to pay it, you are not going to have a business. But it doesn’t even have to go that far. If the price of labor is artificially set higher than it’s worth, many would be employers – even though they could afford it – will not pay for it (and will look for cheaper alternatives) because they don’t want to spend that much. Once again, labor is like any other commodity – if the price is to high people aren’t going to pay for it. Haven’t you ever walked into a store, saw something you wanted but, when you saw the price, decided against it – not because you couldn’t afford it but because to you it wasn’t worth that much?

quote:

You seem not to know much about the history of labor/management relations. Management in the past has had the position of locking the doors to the factory and saying "when you are hungry enough to eat dirt then you will come back to work for what I am willing to pay you. In the mean time I have all the money I need so go fuck yourself and your demands for a living wage"

And what did it get them? A seat at the negotiating table across from some union representatives, that’s what! Now please don’t give me a spiel about strikes and violent confrontations and new laws, my point is that your fear that a repeal of the minimum wage (which I do know will never happen in my lifetime) will lead to the vast majority of Americans being turned into dirt poor peons is unfounded.
 
quote:

Your memory is a little faulty here Mark. More often than not the person who pumped your gas and washed your windshield etc was a full grown man...who in many cases was the owner of the establishment.

In many cases, but not in all. The very fact that different people and businesses have different circumstances is why I am against the general concept that you can legislate the perfect society.

quote:

Never in your lifetime has there not been a minimum wage in this country.

Those teenagers you refer to were making minimum wage. So if it worked then why not now?

You’re making my point. It’s not working now because increases in the minimum wage have priced the jobs out of the market. Before you bring it up, I will grant that there are other factors involved in why jobs disappear (changes in technology, for example) but the fact remains – if an employer is told he must pay X dollars an hour for a certain job, and he doesn’t think it is worth X dollars, he is less likely to make the hire.


quote:

Of course not, now he gets that labor for free from his patrons.

If their willing to do it, why not? One less expense. If people wanted more service, and were willing to pay for it, there would be more full service stations. 

quote:

While I have never worked for minimum wage, I do remember that it was .90 cents an hour when I was in high school. Gasoline was .30 cents a gallon. Hamburger was .35 cents a pound and bread was .25 cents a loaf. Today federal minimum wage is just under $6.00 an hour and gasoline is $3.00 a gallon bread is over a dollar a loaf and hamburger is over two dollars a pound. My point is that the number of hours you need to work for basic commodities has not changed dramatically. All that has changed are the numbers.


Actually, the real question would be: if their had been no minimum wage, would wages have kept up with prices? I suspect that you would say no because of the uber-rich and right wing thugs and heartless factory owners and all that. I believe that they would have for two reasons. First, systems seek equilibrium. You can’t sell things to people who can’t afford them. Second, despite my seeming cynicism at times I am generally optimistic and have faith in humanity. Mostly I have faith that people will do (or at least attempt) what is in their best (or what they perceive to be in their best) interest. Even with a minimum wage people demanded higher wages. They unionized and got them. Why would a lack of a minimum wage have impeded that process? If anything, it just might have propelled it.

quote:

Outsourcing is simply a method to evade the constitutional ban on slavery in this country. We can't legally use American slaves but there is no constitutional ban on Chinese,Indian or Mexican slaves. If you want to re institute slavery then get your congressman to introduce a bill to repeal the 13th14thand 15th amendment.

Outsourcing is paying less for labor than you have to. Personally, I’m not keen on outsourcing (how about going to bat for the home team if you can, huh?) but that doesn’t mean I don’t understand why it happens which is what I have been saying all along – that such jobs are being priced out of the American Market.
 
quote:

If you were to raise the minimum wage to about $15 an hour then an illegal could not get a job in this country. At $15 an hour citizens would take the jobs that illegals now get $5 an hour for.

[sm=hair.gif]
 
That's me at the mere thought of the negative impact on the economy that a sudden doubling of the minimum wage would have.
 
If you raise the minimum wage to fifteen dollars an hour you will put a lot of people out of work. Some will lose their jobs because the employer doesn’t want to pay that much. Some will lose their jobs because their employer can’t pay that much. Many small businesses will go under, others will have to reduce their work force. How does that in anyway help these people? How does taking people off the tax rolls (and onto unemployment and welfare) help government revenue? The illegals, however, will have a much easier time finding a job because you’ve just increased the incentive to seek cheap labor.

quote:

You won't work for $1 an hour but somehow you think someone else will.

No, actually, I don’t think there would be many who would work for a dollar an hour. But there might be some willing to do a job for three or four dollars an hour and then they would have money they would not otherwise have.

quote:

You say that the minimum wage in New York is $7.15. Where in New York can you live on $14,000 a year, that is assuming that you are working full time.

Quite a few places actually. Don’t make the mistake many out of state folk make and equate New York the State with New York the City. Aside from New York City (which the rest of us New Yorkers regard as some sort of weird aberration that, unfortunately, controls state politics) and a few other good sized cities (Buffalo, Syracuse, Rochester), New York the state is largely rural, consisting a small farming communities. Many of the folk there (some of who I know personally) are probably classified as poor by the government but they are self sufficient and money is not the only measure of wealth.
 
But there is in your question another underlying assumption that I question. Why ask why someone could live on $14,000 a year? Why is it that every time the minimum wage issue comes up people speak of a living wage? Why is it presumed that every job must be a job that can support somebody? What’s wrong with jobs that just add to the primary (supporting) income of a family? What’s wrong with jobs that just put a little extra spending money in somebody’s pocket? Those are the jobs that minimum wage laws price out of the market. I can see no logical or moral reason for doing so.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875