Pages: 1 … 3 4 5

 

2007-02-04 19:02:32
usmarine2007
Banned
+374|6793|Columbus, Ohio

Cougar wrote:

usmarine2007 wrote:

You took that WAY out of context.
I'm replying to both of you.


I honest to God, without a shadow of doubt and beyond any reasoning, cannot understand why anyone would want to deny a $2 dollar minimum wage increase, which BTW is the first in 10 years. 

What the fuck!?
Well, I see it as a double edged sword.  It helps people who truly need it, but it also breeds mediocrity in some people.  Someone like your Mom for example, deserves more money than someone who just wants to float thru life.  Unfortunately, food stamps and welfare are given to people who DO NOT want to try hard, get the same money if not more than your Mom.  And that is not fair.

Last edited by usmarine2007 (2007-02-04 19:03:56)

2007-02-04 19:09:06
lowing
Banned
+1,662|7077|USA

Cougar wrote:

lowing wrote:

The one thing none of you are acknowledging is this. Minimum wage is for HS and college students, to get beer books and gas money. It is not meant as a living wage. For a 30 year old to be pissed off because he can't make 7.25 an hour, because he really needs it to live has a much bigger problem than minimum wage.

The most powerful country in the world has ensured the OPPORTUNITY and FREEDOM to earn as much or as little as it's citizens choose. It is not in place to hand hold everyone through life. That responsibility falls on the individual.
.......................................................are you fucking serious?

Example of why you are wrong:

My mother (yes my biological mother), worked at a plant in Ada, Oklahoma making suiters(sp?), like what are used in surgery's.  She made nearly 15 bucks an hour doing this job and was very skilled at it.  So skilled that she actually became a trainer for the company and became a low-end manager for her department.  Then her company decided they wanted to outsource to Mexico because Mexicans would do the same job for $3 an hour. 

So, now that my mother has no job because hers got outsourced to Mexico and is now turning 55, her health isn't doing so well.  Her hands are so eaten up with that carpel tunnel stuff and arthritis she can barely move her hands and actually qualifies for workmans comp.  Only problem is, workmans comp only pays about $200 a month, which isn't enough for anyone to live on really.  The real problem, is the fact that even if she could work, the only place that will hire her will be a minimum wage job, since she is nearly 60 and has no formal training in anything other than what she did for 18 years, making suiters.  So she has a choice between workmans comp or minimum wage, neither of which are enough to survive on.  But according to you, she is just a deadbeat and worthless dumbass with no strive in life to better herself.  Even though she had a good paying job that she was able to excel in for nearly two decades, she's just a worthless bum and we shouldn't help her out at all. 

Of course, there are deadbeats out there, but there are also people that need help and need some extra money to survive.  Some of these people are victims of circumstance and shouldn't be shunned.  Just because you crawled out of a gutter doesn't mean every single person in America can, besides, even if they did, someone has to do the work that they leave behind.



I really do not see how in the hell anyone can disagree with a 2 fucking dollar minimum wage increase, of which, is the first in nearly 10 years.  Madness.
Well, first, if your Mom is disabled, then that would fall under the stipulation I have made ( but conviently left out during rebuttals by people such as yourself) in ALL of my posts on this topic, which is we need to help those that can not help themselves.

Second, if her health was not even the issue, loosing your job qualifies you for unemployment benifits which are all ready in place. If I am not mistaken it can carry you for up to a year.


To be honest, you should be on my side on this issue, if there were less money GIVEN AWAY to people who do not exercise personal responsibility for themselves, there would be plenty of money available to go to people just like your Mom.

I hope her health improves, all my best for her, really.
2007-02-04 19:22:22
lowing
Banned
+1,662|7077|USA

Cougar wrote:

usmarine2007 wrote:

I feel bad for her.  But, in lowings defense, she had the opportunity to go to school or get trained in another field over those 18 years right?  I know I have, since I refuse to learn just one job, for all the reasons you stated above.
Jesus fucking Christ.  It's always something.  Yeah, she should have learned how to fly a plane while she was working in Ada, as well as learn how to be a gourmet chef and a professional stunt woman. 

So let me get this straight:

In order for someone not to be a deadbeat lazy ass loser, they must:

1: Go to college.
2. Go to college again.
3. Never be poor......ever.
4. Never make a mistake......ever.
5. Have at least 2 backup professions, just in case one gets outsourced to Mexico.
6. Never get disabled......ever.
7. Start from the bottom and work to the top, because starting at the top just makes you spoiled.
8. Do all of this before the age of 20.
9. Never have children.
10. Never have a life.
11. Never work for minimum wage, and if you do, enjoy the fuck out of it.
12. Be fluent in 4 different foreign languages.
13. Go to war.  Twice.
14. Be a Republican.
15. Be a conservative.
16. Have an online persona that tells people how worthless they are because they aren't millionares.
17. Have an online persona that tells people how, if they work minimum wage jobs, they are worthless to society and should kill themselves.


Go eat a dick.
1. no need for college to be successful
2. same
3.good plan, NOT being poor sure helps in, well, NOT being poor.
4.mistakes are made by everyone, just don't expect everyone else to correct yours.
5.why not if you are able. I do
6.plenty of disabled people in the workforce who choose NOT to be disabled.
7.that is a new one, not sure what the hell you are talking about there, but, sticking with a job with loyality can have pay-offs, or not. It is a gamble. You need to decide how secure your career is as you progress in it.
8.rediculous, but before 40 sure would help.
9.rediculous, just be able to feed and clothe them. Hows that for planning?
10.a good job provides the meand for a good life. Get it now?
11.nope, never said this. NEVER stay stagnant at a minimum wage job might be a good career move though.
12. No need, not yet. Plenty of successful people don't speak multipule languages. They just hire those that do.
13.rediculous, I am successful and I have never been to war.
14.Don't hurt, cuz if you are going to rely on the democrat handouts for your livelyhood, then you now understand YOUR problem.
15. see 14.
16.I am not a millionare but am meerly an upper middle class citizen. I just don't blame EVERYONE ELSE for not being a millionare.
17.If you are 25-old and healthy, and you have never worked anything more than a minimum wage job then you are worthless and deserve everything your life WILL NOT bring you.

As far as "eating dick", with my income, I can afford steak, so I will pass.

Last edited by lowing (2007-02-04 19:32:58)

2007-02-04 19:40:02
Cougar
Banned
+1,962|7191|Dallas

lowing wrote:

To be honest, you should be on my side on this issue, if there were less money GIVEN AWAY to people who do not exercise personal responsibility for themselves, there would be plenty of money available to go to people just like your Mom.
I see your point now, and thank you for the kind words, however would you or would you not agree that poverty breeds crime, and in the end taxpayers will still be paying (if not paying more) for prisons and prison upkeep along with all the government funded rehabilitation programs?  It seems to me that in poverty you have 3 options:

1. Work hard and improve the situation.
2. Live within the means that minimum wage provides.
3. Crime.

As you and I can both agree, very few people are going to do option 1.  However, I believe that more people would do option 1 if it were a little easier on them.  Also, raising the minimum wage to a level where people who follow option 2 can actually irk out a living may stop some of them from resorting to option 3, crime. 

It really comes down to what you would rather spend your tax money on.  Republicans choose to spend the money on prisons and police, where as democrats seem to want to spend it on minimum wage increases and things that put money into the pockets of the poor.  Either way, YOUR spending the money for it.
2007-02-04 19:43:42
golgoj4
Member
+51|7200|North Hollywood

Kmarion wrote:

Looks like somebody needs another drink?

I don't understand why we can't let the Job market dictate wages. Unemployment is at historic lows. There are plenty of job opportunities. Can't the employee decide who he wants to work for?  If an employer is not paying enough just go down the street and work for they guy that is. That will force them to increase wages/benefits. This is just an area I would not like to see government interference.
Yeah the problem is if all the companies don't want to pay a living wage, what then? Look at the trend of dumping benefits lately. The market is moving to screw the worker so the gov't needs to step in. Im normally for that, and since I work for myself I dont like being told what I have to pay people. But at the same time, there has to be some respectable wage that allows people to function in this society without making them perpetually poor. Not everyone can just say 'eff this' and go do their own thing.
2007-02-04 19:48:26
lowing
Banned
+1,662|7077|USA

Cougar wrote:

lowing wrote:

To be honest, you should be on my side on this issue, if there were less money GIVEN AWAY to people who do not exercise personal responsibility for themselves, there would be plenty of money available to go to people just like your Mom.
I see your point now, and thank you for the kind words, however would you or would you not agree that poverty breeds crime, and in the end taxpayers will still be paying (if not paying more) for prisons and prison upkeep along with all the government funded rehabilitation programs?  It seems to me that in poverty you have 3 options:

1. Work hard and improve the situation.
2. Live within the means that minimum wage provides.
3. Crime.

As you and I can both agree, very few people are going to do option 1.  However, I believe that more people would do option 1 if it were a little easier on them.  Also, raising the minimum wage to a level where people who follow option 2 can actually irk out a living may stop some of them from resorting to option 3, crime. 

It really comes down to what you would rather spend your tax money on.  Republicans choose to spend the money on prisons and police, where as democrats seem to want to spend it on minimum wage increases and things that put money into the pockets of the poor.  Either way, YOUR spending the money for it.
Nope all you gotta do is enforce the laws and stop the criminal rights bullshit law suits. Make prison so bad that you will do ANYTHING not to go there. Maybe even get an education and a job. As it is the stereotype for prison is one of 3 squares a day, a roof over your head, a library so you can come out of jail as a lawyer, a gym, and lets not forget HBO. Wonder why that is.

Last edited by lowing (2007-02-04 19:51:13)

2007-02-04 19:58:01
Cougar
Banned
+1,962|7191|Dallas

lowing wrote:

Nope all you gotta do is enforce the laws and stop the criminal rights bullshit law suits. Make prison so bad that you will do ANYTHING not to go there. Maybe even get an education and a job. As it is the stereotype for prison is one of 3 squares a day, a roof over your head, a library so you can come out of jail as a lawyer, a gym, and lets not forget HBO. Wonder why that is.
"all you gotta do is enforce the laws"......lawl.  That has seemed to work real well for the past 40 years.  War on Drugs anyone?

Also, maybe if the people in jail would have had 3 square meals a day, a library so they could be a lawyer and HBO to keep them entertained, they wouldn't be in jail in the first place, because they would be lawyers or something to that effect.  It is a common sense fact that if people have more of what they needs they won't be as apt to commit crimes to get those things.
2007-02-04 20:01:14
lowing
Banned
+1,662|7077|USA

Cougar wrote:

lowing wrote:

Nope all you gotta do is enforce the laws and stop the criminal rights bullshit law suits. Make prison so bad that you will do ANYTHING not to go there. Maybe even get an education and a job. As it is the stereotype for prison is one of 3 squares a day, a roof over your head, a library so you can come out of jail as a lawyer, a gym, and lets not forget HBO. Wonder why that is.
"all you gotta do is enforce the laws"......lawl.  That has seemed to work real well for the past 40 years.  War on Drugs anyone?

Also, maybe if the people in jail would have had 3 square meals a day, a library so they could be a lawyer and HBO to keep them entertained, they wouldn't be in jail in the first place, because they would be lawyers or something to that effect.  It is a common sense fact that if people have more of what they needs they won't be as apt to commit crimes to get those things.
I agree, we just seem to disagree on whose responsible for making sure the citizens get what they need, the individual or the govt. I say the individual. THe govt. already did its part, provided you with the freedom and oportunity to succeed or fail as you chooses.
2007-02-04 20:17:48
Cougar
Banned
+1,962|7191|Dallas

lowing wrote:

Cougar wrote:

lowing wrote:

Nope all you gotta do is enforce the laws and stop the criminal rights bullshit law suits. Make prison so bad that you will do ANYTHING not to go there. Maybe even get an education and a job. As it is the stereotype for prison is one of 3 squares a day, a roof over your head, a library so you can come out of jail as a lawyer, a gym, and lets not forget HBO. Wonder why that is.
"all you gotta do is enforce the laws"......lawl.  That has seemed to work real well for the past 40 years.  War on Drugs anyone?

Also, maybe if the people in jail would have had 3 square meals a day, a library so they could be a lawyer and HBO to keep them entertained, they wouldn't be in jail in the first place, because they would be lawyers or something to that effect.  It is a common sense fact that if people have more of what they needs they won't be as apt to commit crimes to get those things.
I agree, we just seem to disagree on whose responsible for making sure the citizens get what they need, the individual or the govt. I say the individual. THe govt. already did its part, provided you with the freedom and oportunity to succeed or fail as you chooses.
I agree totally with you, it is up to the individual.  But my argument is, that there are some people in some areas that DO need extra help from the government.  I think it is kind of sad that you have areas, for example, in California like the O.C. were Sophmores drive BMW's and Humvees to school and then you have a place not to far away like, say, Compton, where children walk to school through ghettos riddled with gang violence and drug abuse. 

Now for someone in the O.C. who is 22 and working a minimum wage job.......yeah, what a pinche slacker, however in an area like Compton, minimum wage may pretty much be all there is to do. 

I think the government needs to recognize these area's and poor more of the funding into those types of areas instead of spreading it equally to areas that may not need it as bad.
2007-02-04 20:26:48
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6955|Global Command

Cougar wrote:

lowing wrote:

Cougar wrote:


"all you gotta do is enforce the laws"......lawl.  That has seemed to work real well for the past 40 years.  War on Drugs anyone?

Also, maybe if the people in jail would have had 3 square meals a day, a library so they could be a lawyer and HBO to keep them entertained, they wouldn't be in jail in the first place, because they would be lawyers or something to that effect.  It is a common sense fact that if people have more of what they needs they won't be as apt to commit crimes to get those things.
I agree, we just seem to disagree on whose responsible for making sure the citizens get what they need, the individual or the govt. I say the individual. THe govt. already did its part, provided you with the freedom and oportunity to succeed or fail as you chooses.
I agree totally with you, it is up to the individual.  But my argument is, that there are some people in some areas that DO need extra help from the government.  I think it is kind of sad that you have areas, for example, in California like the O.C. were Sophmores drive BMW's and Humvees to school and then you have a place not to far away like, say, Compton, where children walk to school through ghettos riddled with gang violence and drug abuse. 

Now for someone in the O.C. who is 22 and working a minimum wage job.......yeah, what a pinche slacker, however in an area like Compton, minimum wage may pretty much be all there is to do. 

I think the government needs to recognize these area's and poor more of the funding into those types of areas instead of spreading it equally to areas that may not need it as bad.
Bro, I lived in the O.C. for 23 years and go to Compton 1-2 X a month.
It's all about the parents.

Those people wallow in their own shit. Trust me, the motivated ones get the fuck out and go elsewhere. It wouldn't matter how much money you poured in, it would still be Compton.
2007-02-04 20:34:20
Not
Great success!
+216|7003|Chandler, AZ

lowing wrote:

any bets on what is in his glass, Gin or Vodka??

Screw him and any able bodied person with the lack of personal responsibility to do something with their lives so they don't need the govt. to control their income.

Cougar wrote:

"all you gotta do is enforce the laws"......lawl.  That has seemed to work real well for the past 40 years.  War on Drugs anyone?

Also, maybe if the people in jail would have had 3 square meals a day, a library so they could be a lawyer and HBO to keep them entertained, they wouldn't be in jail in the first place, because they would be lawyers or something to that effect.  It is a common sense fact that if people have more of what they needs they won't be as apt to commit crimes to get those things.
Yeah, nobody who built a fortune in the United States commited any criminal acts did they? Take a look at how Rockefeller took care of business. He was responsible for more than a few murders to get where he got. "Behind every great fortune, there is a great crime."

How many under the table deals do you think media tycoons have made? You have to be insane to think that you make as much money as most wealthy people have made without cutting a few throats and being a ruthless human being. Nobody just wants to give you that much money, and nobody truly just "earns" it through "hard work". I'm not saying that those things aren't admiriable, and I'm not saying that wealthy people haven't worked hard to get where they're at. I'm just saying that they sure as hell didn't get where they are on those characteristics alone, and they sure as hell aren't squeaky clean, law-abiding citizens either.

If what you claim is true, explain the massive tax evasion scams lately. Surely those people had their basic needs covered. Sure, they aren't out mugging a random woman on the street, they're just robbing a few thousand employees of everything they have. Yet somehow that doesn't seem as bad as holding up a liquor store, does it.

Last edited by Not (2007-02-04 20:42:25)

2007-02-04 21:46:43
Cougar
Banned
+1,962|7191|Dallas

Not wrote:

lowing wrote:

any bets on what is in his glass, Gin or Vodka??

Screw him and any able bodied person with the lack of personal responsibility to do something with their lives so they don't need the govt. to control their income.

Cougar wrote:

"all you gotta do is enforce the laws"......lawl.  That has seemed to work real well for the past 40 years.  War on Drugs anyone?

Also, maybe if the people in jail would have had 3 square meals a day, a library so they could be a lawyer and HBO to keep them entertained, they wouldn't be in jail in the first place, because they would be lawyers or something to that effect.  It is a common sense fact that if people have more of what they needs they won't be as apt to commit crimes to get those things.
Yeah, nobody who built a fortune in the United States commited any criminal acts did they? Take a look at how Rockefeller took care of business. He was responsible for more than a few murders to get where he got. "Behind every great fortune, there is a great crime."

How many under the table deals do you think media tycoons have made? You have to be insane to think that you make as much money as most wealthy people have made without cutting a few throats and being a ruthless human being. Nobody just wants to give you that much money, and nobody truly just "earns" it through "hard work". I'm not saying that those things aren't admiriable, and I'm not saying that wealthy people haven't worked hard to get where they're at. I'm just saying that they sure as hell didn't get where they are on those characteristics alone, and they sure as hell aren't squeaky clean, law-abiding citizens either.

If what you claim is true, explain the massive tax evasion scams lately. Surely those people had their basic needs covered. Sure, they aren't out mugging a random woman on the street, they're just robbing a few thousand employees of everything they have. Yet somehow that doesn't seem as bad as holding up a liquor store, does it.
What?  Do you have me confused with lowing?
2007-02-05 01:31:55
CC-Marley
Member
+407|7255
Ohhhh the "Swimmer" is not a good man.
2007-02-05 15:04:19
lowing
Banned
+1,662|7077|USA

Not wrote:

lowing wrote:

any bets on what is in his glass, Gin or Vodka??

Screw him and any able bodied person with the lack of personal responsibility to do something with their lives so they don't need the govt. to control their income.

Cougar wrote:

"all you gotta do is enforce the laws"......lawl.  That has seemed to work real well for the past 40 years.  War on Drugs anyone?

Also, maybe if the people in jail would have had 3 square meals a day, a library so they could be a lawyer and HBO to keep them entertained, they wouldn't be in jail in the first place, because they would be lawyers or something to that effect.  It is a common sense fact that if people have more of what they needs they won't be as apt to commit crimes to get those things.
Yeah, nobody who built a fortune in the United States commited any criminal acts did they? Take a look at how Rockefeller took care of business. He was responsible for more than a few murders to get where he got. "Behind every great fortune, there is a great crime."

How many under the table deals do you think media tycoons have made? You have to be insane to think that you make as much money as most wealthy people have made without cutting a few throats and being a ruthless human being. Nobody just wants to give you that much money, and nobody truly just "earns" it through "hard work". I'm not saying that those things aren't admiriable, and I'm not saying that wealthy people haven't worked hard to get where they're at. I'm just saying that they sure as hell didn't get where they are on those characteristics alone, and they sure as hell aren't squeaky clean, law-abiding citizens either.

If what you claim is true, explain the massive tax evasion scams lately. Surely those people had their basic needs covered. Sure, they aren't out mugging a random woman on the street, they're just robbing a few thousand employees of everything they have. Yet somehow that doesn't seem as bad as holding up a liquor store, does it.
Yup, and when they get caught they get punished. Again though just like any other crimes, their's isn't near as severe as it should be. Enforcement is the key. Severe enforcement.

Cougar, you talk about the war on drugs. I say stop spending money on the war on drugs. Some crack head that OD's does not affect my life one bit. Some anyone addicted to any drugs I say fuck them. Goes back to personal responsibility and choices. I have no time for it. You wanna smoke even cigarettes? By all means inhale deep and hold it as long as you can, the sooner you dumb fucks die off the sooner I can get a table at my favorite restaurants without having to breathe in your polluted air. Just like my life liberty and happiness does not affect some drug dealer or user from interacting. My successful law abiding prosperous life does not affect them dealing and ODing. I have no problem with it. You choose that life you knock yourself out without any interference from me, on your life, library and your sorry ass excuse for happiness.

Last edited by lowing (2007-02-05 20:07:50)

2007-02-05 20:46:01
lowing
Banned
+1,662|7077|USA

Cougar wrote:

lowing wrote:

Cougar wrote:


"all you gotta do is enforce the laws"......lawl.  That has seemed to work real well for the past 40 years.  War on Drugs anyone?

Also, maybe if the people in jail would have had 3 square meals a day, a library so they could be a lawyer and HBO to keep them entertained, they wouldn't be in jail in the first place, because they would be lawyers or something to that effect.  It is a common sense fact that if people have more of what they needs they won't be as apt to commit crimes to get those things.
I agree, we just seem to disagree on whose responsible for making sure the citizens get what they need, the individual or the govt. I say the individual. THe govt. already did its part, provided you with the freedom and oportunity to succeed or fail as you chooses.
I agree totally with you, it is up to the individual.  But my argument is, that there are some people in some areas that DO need extra help from the government.  I think it is kind of sad that you have areas, for example, in California like the O.C. were Sophmores drive BMW's and Humvees to school and then you have a place not to far away like, say, Compton, where children walk to school through ghettos riddled with gang violence and drug abuse. 

Now for someone in the O.C. who is 22 and working a minimum wage job.......yeah, what a pinche slacker, however in an area like Compton, minimum wage may pretty much be all there is to do. 

I think the government needs to recognize these area's and poor more of the funding into those types of areas instead of spreading it equally to areas that may not need it as bad.
Or for a novel idea, how about you get latched on to a govt assistence program that already exists and move your ass up and out. Nobody should have to apologize for being successful nor should they have to share what they have earned with those they choose not to.

 

Pages: 1 … 3 4 5

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard