I see nothing wrong with raising minimum wage to keep up with inflation. What's all the complaining about. 7.25 isn't that much anyways. In a perfect society wages would be determined by how hard people work instead of what they do. Of course the amount of training before hand would also be a factor.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Screw raising the minimum wage.
Instead, how about lowering inflation? What does it matter if I make $90k a year if that $90k is worth half it was 5-10 years ago? Make my dollar worth a damn.
Instead, how about lowering inflation? What does it matter if I make $90k a year if that $90k is worth half it was 5-10 years ago? Make my dollar worth a damn.
Last edited by Dizik (2007-01-29 09:52:55)
If they are able bodied and of sound mind and are older than 25 and are relying on a minium wage increase in America, then yes they are deadbeats. seriously.Spark wrote:
@ Lowing:
Do you seriously think that the entire lower-class - tens of millions of people - are all just deadbeats who don't give a shit?
Seriously.
There is no example you can give, that I can not throw personal responsibility on to argue against it. I dare you.
Person Responsibility, ambition, drive, devotion, dedication will over come any obstical. Sitting around waiting for someone to finally, artifically, raise your worth will not.
Go ahead try me.
Yes, he is right. FORGET about trying to convince me that someone shold take responsibility for themselves and their goals and make something worth while out of themselves. Why should they, voting democrat is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy easier than getting off your dead ass and get educated and get a fuckin' job!!Spearhead wrote:
this thread is showing nothing new from lowing....
There were arguments about minimum wage/working class dating back to last summer
I'd suggest to just forget about trying to convince him
That opinion is very similar to Patrick Bateman's in American Psycho - just before he killed a homeless person - because ". . . you and I simply have nothing in common."lowing wrote:
Yes, he is right. FORGET about trying to convince me that someone shold take responsibility for themselves and their goals and make something worth while out of themselves. Why should they, voting democrat is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy easier than getting off your dead ass and get educated and get a fuckin' job!!Spearhead wrote:
this thread is showing nothing new from lowing....
There were arguments about minimum wage/working class dating back to last summer
I'd suggest to just forget about trying to convince him
Did no one else notice that this is Edward Kennedy, not Ted? It says it in big letters across the screen.
Same person.chittydog wrote:
Did no one else notice that this is Edward Kennedy, not Ted? It says it in big letters across the screen.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
chittydog wrote:
Did no one else notice that I'm an idiot?
Last edited by chittydog (2007-01-29 16:25:50)
SO the liberal point of view is that personal responsibility is for "psychos"? How sad, but very believabletopal63 wrote:
That opinion is very similar to Patrick Bateman's in American Psycho - just before he killed a homeless person - because ". . . you and I simply have nothing in common."lowing wrote:
Yes, he is right. FORGET about trying to convince me that someone shold take responsibility for themselves and their goals and make something worth while out of themselves. Why should they, voting democrat is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy easier than getting off your dead ass and get educated and get a fuckin' job!!Spearhead wrote:
this thread is showing nothing new from lowing....
There were arguments about minimum wage/working class dating back to last summer
I'd suggest to just forget about trying to convince him
STUTTERING AND....STUTTERING AND.....SMOKING THE REEFER.
lol, what an idiot.
lol, what an idiot.
No takers huh?? Figureslowing wrote:
If they are able bodied and of sound mind and are older than 25 and are relying on a minium wage increase in America, then yes they are deadbeats. seriously.Spark wrote:
@ Lowing:
Do you seriously think that the entire lower-class - tens of millions of people - are all just deadbeats who don't give a shit?
Seriously.
There is no example you can give, that I can not throw personal responsibility on to argue against it. I dare you.
Person Responsibility, ambition, drive, devotion, dedication will over come any obstical. Sitting around waiting for someone to finally, artifically, raise your worth will not.
Go ahead try me.
As usual, shine a light on a liberal and they are off running for the woodwork.
Last edited by lowing (2007-01-30 16:33:57)
Not sure if you are referring to me, but if you are all I can say is this, I have been clear on how I feel about people with no motivation, drive or responsibility for themselves. I recall NO stuttering about it.siciliano732 wrote:
STUTTERING AND....STUTTERING AND.....SMOKING THE REEFER.
lol, what an idiot.
Are you saying we have a responsibility to kill homeless people?lowing wrote:
SO the liberal point of view is that personal responsibility is for "psychos"? How sad, but very believabletopal63 wrote:
That opinion is very similar to Patrick Bateman's in American Psycho - just before he killed a homeless person - because ". . . you and I simply have nothing in common."lowing wrote:
Yes, he is right. FORGET about trying to convince me that someone shold take responsibility for themselves and their goals and make something worth while out of themselves. Why should they, voting democrat is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy easier than getting off your dead ass and get educated and get a fuckin' job!!
Last edited by Turquoise (2007-01-30 21:20:45)
I prefer people adhere to personal responsibility as well, but I also believe that society has a responsibility to help the needy. Granted, this help should be limited and mostly done through charity, but I can understand why welfare is still a necessary thing.lowing wrote:
No takers huh?? Figureslowing wrote:
If they are able bodied and of sound mind and are older than 25 and are relying on a minium wage increase in America, then yes they are deadbeats. seriously.Spark wrote:
@ Lowing:
Do you seriously think that the entire lower-class - tens of millions of people - are all just deadbeats who don't give a shit?
Seriously.
There is no example you can give, that I can not throw personal responsibility on to argue against it. I dare you.
Person Responsibility, ambition, drive, devotion, dedication will over come any obstical. Sitting around waiting for someone to finally, artifically, raise your worth will not.
Go ahead try me.
As usual, shine a light on a liberal and they are off running for the woodwork.
In short, welfare should be a temporary aid program. For example, someone is down on their luck and loses their job but still has a family to feed. I don't mind helping them along for a year, if they get a job by the end of that year.
I don't consider myself a liberal, more of a conservative, but either way there's no point in arguing with a neo-con, because they always think they are right and damn the rest. So you have lost my interest.lowing wrote:
No takers huh?? Figureslowing wrote:
If they are able bodied and of sound mind and are older than 25 and are relying on a minium wage increase in America, then yes they are deadbeats. seriously.Spark wrote:
@ Lowing:
Do you seriously think that the entire lower-class - tens of millions of people - are all just deadbeats who don't give a shit?
Seriously.
There is no example you can give, that I can not throw personal responsibility on to argue against it. I dare you.
Person Responsibility, ambition, drive, devotion, dedication will over come any obstical. Sitting around waiting for someone to finally, artifically, raise your worth will not.
Go ahead try me.
As usual, shine a light on a liberal and they are off running for the woodwork.
Also, the only thing worse than a stubborn neo-con, is a stubborn neo-con with really shitty spelling skills. The route you are taking this discussion down is not one of facts, logic or reason, instead it's a path of personal opinions about the character of others.
So, no.
I agree, but a lack of planning, drive, motivation, and desire by someone does not constitute a "needy" personTurquoise wrote:
I prefer people adhere to personal responsibility as well, but I also believe that society has a responsibility to help the needy. Granted, this help should be limited and mostly done through charity, but I can understand why welfare is still a necessary thing.lowing wrote:
No takers huh?? Figureslowing wrote:
If they are able bodied and of sound mind and are older than 25 and are relying on a minium wage increase in America, then yes they are deadbeats. seriously.
There is no example you can give, that I can not throw personal responsibility on to argue against it. I dare you.
Person Responsibility, ambition, drive, devotion, dedication will over come any obstical. Sitting around waiting for someone to finally, artifically, raise your worth will not.
Go ahead try me.
As usual, shine a light on a liberal and they are off running for the woodwork.
In short, welfare should be a temporary aid program. For example, someone is down on their luck and loses their job but still has a family to feed. I don't mind helping them along for a year, if they get a job by the end of that year.
I would really be interested in anything I have posted about personal responsibility that makes me a neo-con and you completely disagree with.Cougar wrote:
I don't consider myself a liberal, more of a conservative, but either way there's no point in arguing with a neo-con, because they always think they are right and damn the rest. So you have lost my interest.lowing wrote:
No takers huh?? Figureslowing wrote:
If they are able bodied and of sound mind and are older than 25 and are relying on a minium wage increase in America, then yes they are deadbeats. seriously.
There is no example you can give, that I can not throw personal responsibility on to argue against it. I dare you.
Person Responsibility, ambition, drive, devotion, dedication will over come any obstical. Sitting around waiting for someone to finally, artifically, raise your worth will not.
Go ahead try me.
As usual, shine a light on a liberal and they are off running for the woodwork.
Also, the only thing worse than a stubborn neo-con, is a stubborn neo-con with really shitty spelling skills. The route you are taking this discussion down is not one of facts, logic or reason, instead it's a path of personal opinions about the character of others.
So, no.
I don't care about other's "character". You can still be an asshole and be successful. I am talking about have the rest of society taking care of those who choose not to take care of themselves. You seem to have a problem with this. What is it?
Well, you are correct that most people don't "plan" on losing their job or getting injured or sick.lowing wrote:
I agree, but a lack of planning, drive, motivation, and desire by someone does not constitute a "needy" personTurquoise wrote:
I prefer people adhere to personal responsibility as well, but I also believe that society has a responsibility to help the needy. Granted, this help should be limited and mostly done through charity, but I can understand why welfare is still a necessary thing.lowing wrote:
No takers huh?? Figures
As usual, shine a light on a liberal and they are off running for the woodwork.
In short, welfare should be a temporary aid program. For example, someone is down on their luck and loses their job but still has a family to feed. I don't mind helping them along for a year, if they get a job by the end of that year.
oops, sorry buddy, you just disqualified your examples because I support helping those that can not help themselves, and alweays maintained that . Getting sick would apply to that now wouldn't it?Turquoise wrote:
Well, you are correct that most people don't "plan" on losing their job or getting injured or sick.lowing wrote:
I agree, but a lack of planning, drive, motivation, and desire by someone does not constitute a "needy" personTurquoise wrote:
I prefer people adhere to personal responsibility as well, but I also believe that society has a responsibility to help the needy. Granted, this help should be limited and mostly done through charity, but I can understand why welfare is still a necessary thing.
In short, welfare should be a temporary aid program. For example, someone is down on their luck and loses their job but still has a family to feed. I don't mind helping them along for a year, if they get a job by the end of that year.
Losing your job also applies, it is called unemployment for 6 months.
I love it when a thread is abandoned that can not be defended.
Or bashing our heads against a brick wall trying to figure out how anyone can be so stubborn, blind and stupid.lowing wrote:
No takers huh?? Figureslowing wrote:
If they are able bodied and of sound mind and are older than 25 and are relying on a minium wage increase in America, then yes they are deadbeats. seriously.Spark wrote:
@ Lowing:
Do you seriously think that the entire lower-class - tens of millions of people - are all just deadbeats who don't give a shit?
Seriously.
There is no example you can give, that I can not throw personal responsibility on to argue against it. I dare you.
Person Responsibility, ambition, drive, devotion, dedication will over come any obstical. Sitting around waiting for someone to finally, artifically, raise your worth will not.
Go ahead try me.
As usual, shine a light on a liberal and they are off running for the woodwork.
Really??, maybe try forming an argument that I can not defeat with personal responsibility and drive and motivation and actual fucking effort!!!Bubbalo wrote:
Or bashing our heads against a brick wall trying to figure out how anyone can be so stubborn, blind and stupid.lowing wrote:
No takers huh?? Figureslowing wrote:
If they are able bodied and of sound mind and are older than 25 and are relying on a minium wage increase in America, then yes they are deadbeats. seriously.
There is no example you can give, that I can not throw personal responsibility on to argue against it. I dare you.
Person Responsibility, ambition, drive, devotion, dedication will over come any obstical. Sitting around waiting for someone to finally, artifically, raise your worth will not.
Go ahead try me.
As usual, shine a light on a liberal and they are off running for the woodwork.
But no matter what we say, you use that as an excuse, regardless of whether it's appropriate. No matter how airtight an argument we put to you, you'll still ignore it. You're like the proverbial brick wall.
Just checking....lowing wrote:
oops, sorry buddy, you just disqualified your examples because I support helping those that can not help themselves, and alweays maintained that . Getting sick would apply to that now wouldn't it?Turquoise wrote:
Well, you are correct that most people don't "plan" on losing their job or getting injured or sick.lowing wrote:
I agree, but a lack of planning, drive, motivation, and desire by someone does not constitute a "needy" person
Losing your job also applies, it is called unemployment for 6 months.
So, personal responsibility is an excuse?? See, now you know the real problem.Bubbalo wrote:
But no matter what we say, you use that as an excuse, regardless of whether it's appropriate. No matter how airtight an argument we put to you, you'll still ignore it. You're like the proverbial brick wall.
Give me just one argument where an able bodied person has an "excuse" NOT to be responsible for their choices and actions. Remember, I support those that truly can not help themselves, handicapped mentally or physically, children etc. and I need to subsidize them for their entire lives. Just one!!!