F
freeRadical
Guest
So business owners and entrepreneurs don’t earn wages?They can become wage-earners if they wish.
LOVE!
- Status
E
estesbob
Guest
Problem is to many people wanting to express love with other people’s moneyIf everybody chose LOVE, we would not even be having these debates.
LOVE!
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
In teaching us charity, the Gospel instructs us in the preferential respect due to the poor and the special situation they have in society; the more fortunate should renounce some of their rights so as to place their goods more generously at the service of others.
—Pope Paul VI, Octogesima Adveniens (1971), paragraph 23
E
estesbob
Guest
Yes they should The question is should the govt force them to do so.
R
ringil
Guest
If they are unwilling to contribute to the society they are a part of then YES! THe government has a right to “force” them to.
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
The common good of society, including our caring for the poor, is something government should insure even if it means taxing the more fortunate.
LOVE!
E
estesbob
Guest
Which is an Act of neither love or charityThe common good of society, including our caring for the poor, is something government should insure even if it means taxing the more fortunate.
LOVE!
P
ProVobis
Guest
I found out a long time ago that unless you’re a sports player, generally you have to give or produce before you collect anything. even a minimum wage. My next door neighbor used to go around to do all the neighbors’ plumbing for practically nothing. Today he’s a multimillionaire with his own company.
J
jc4751
Guest
In reading this, I don’t see Paul VI calling for government to forcibly separate people from their wealth.
J
jc4751
Guest
What is your definition of love, Robert? Is it spoiling a child because you love them so much you don’t want to see them sad? Or is it insisting that they earn their privileges?If everybody chose LOVE, we would not even be having these debates.
LOVE!
It is also offensive to assume that because people don’t support your fantasies about the forced redistribution of wealth under some hand-waving plan of Catholic charity (which, incidentally will never happen as most Marxists HATE Catholics), that we do not love. I wish I didn’t have taxes taken out of my paycheck to support military adventurism and the showering of funds to domestic entities as political favors. I’d be then set to give quite a bit to Catholic charity as I see fit.
Speaking of charity, do you actually know anyone in the 1%? I do, and all of them give large amounts to numerous charities and causes.
J
jc4751
Guest
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
Let’s keep clear that we’re not talking about people who want to become multimillionaires, but people who simply would like to make ends meet and seek a very modest amount of prosperity.
I’m personally content with my living conditions, even though I live below the poverty level. The truly spiritual person does not want any more prosperity than that to cover his very modest lifestyle.
LOVE!
J
jc4751
Guest
This is what is so frustrating about these kinds of discussions. Everyone has this mental construct that the same failings found in the business owners they’re targeting (greed, a sense of entitlement, and the desire to exploit others) won’t be found in people who get elected to political office. At least a business owner or corporation has to offer something people want to buy, or else they go out of business. If no one wants to buy the government “product,” they get a tank through the front door. I’m not saying we should do away with government, but a more realistic mental picture might be a help, to start with.It is not “progress” to confiscate more wealth from those who have lawfully earned it. De Tocqueville saw the potential that politicians would ultimately bribe the electorate with the money of others, and he felt that this would spell the end of America. Politicians reaching even deeper into other people’s pockets is nothing more than old-fashioned stealing.
Anyone who would vote against politicians for refusing to vote for job-killing minimum wage hikes is a fool. How much failure do voters have to see before they realize that it is this economic illiterate Obama and his minions who are most responsible for our steep decline?
J
jc4751
Guest
$7.50 an hour, at 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year = $15,600. The federal poverty line for a single person is $11,490. Help me out here – minimum wage is more than enough for a single person to stay out of poverty, according to the government. You say you’re happy, living south of $11,490 a year. Where’s the fire behind this smoke, anyway?Let’s keep clear that we’re not talking about people who want to become multimillionaires, but people who simply would like to make ends meet and seek a very modest amount of prosperity.
I’m personally content with my living conditions, even though I live below the poverty level. The truly spiritual person does not want any more prosperity than that to cover his very modest lifestyle.
LOVE!
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
I did not realize that the poverty level was so low. I’m above the poverty level. But I would not expect too many people would be able to make ends meet at the current minimum wage.
LOVE!
P
ProVobis
Guest
People need to look past living wages and just making ends meet. These days at the low interest rates and high longevity you practically need a couple of million so you don’t outlive your savings when you retire. Hardly prosperity when you think about it.
I
ishii
Guest
No, gnjsdad. You’re reading into my post things I did not say. Reality is there is no free lunch. If you want better, you need more job skills that give your labor more value. The “no free lunch” comment was made in response to those who suggest that we merely legislate that companies have to pay workers more. What that means is the companies will: A) go out of business. B) hire fewer workers C) raise their prices. In other words, the money has to come from somewhere! (i.e. there is no free lunch). But if someone truly “wants better” then gain some skills, learn a vocation that will command a better wage.
The market decides, gnjsdad. Would people pay for a $15 hamburger at McDonald’s? Some might, but many probably not. But since you brought up the CEO: the CEO of McDonald’s makes about 10 million a year salary. Take away half and give it to the workers. That’s 5 million - spread out over 500,000 McDonald’s employees = an extra $2 per year! Its very easy to speak in platitudes, slogans, stoke the envy, etc. But the reality is a bit more complex, isn’t it. If they paid McDonalds workers $15 an hour, they would raise their prices. Fewer people would get a burger at McDonald’s. They would need fewer workers as a result. Then people would lose their job at McDonald’s. Now Robert Stock would answer: “that’s okay, give them welfare!”
Another example: in Seattle where they are considering raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour for waiters at restaurants - the effect would be to cause many to go out of business. They would simply have to raise their prices. If you raise prices you get fewer customers. You might keep a few high end restaurants and only rich people would go. But the middle class and professional class customers would decrease because they can’t afford it. The problem with all this desire to legislate a “living wage” is that it is not based on reality and the laws of economics. Its a dreamworld.True. Who said we leave everything up to market forces? Of course charity has to play a role to help people in addition to the safety net our country has. But the more we meddle in business - such as trying to legislate laws that are opposed to the laws of economics, the worse off are the very people we are trying to help. Then again, liberal/left policies have so many unintended consequences that hurt people.
Its totally relevant. But I agree - learning a new skill is not necessarily easy. And having worked minimum wage jobs before - including recently, I appreciate the challenges people have in getting to the next level where they can make a better wage. How many people here have worked a minimum wage job in the past two years? I have, gnjsdad. An appeal to envy toward those who make more will not help people get ahead. Refering to CEO’s and administrators as “thieves” does not help anyone get ahead. I have noticed that those who find themselves in minimum wage jobs come from a variety of backgrounds and circumstances. The goal should not be for people to work permanently in minimum wage jobs but to pass through those jobs on their way to a better job. I mean, who wants to do low-wage menial work forever?
Lastly, here is a point that I’ve yet to hear: the increase in minimum wages would seem to increase the tendency to automate things - to eliminate those kinds of jobs which require minimum wage workers. Now you can go to a grocery store and not have any interaction with a worker at all. Some are old enough to remember full service gas stations and ushers in theators. According to the economist Walter Williams, those jobs were the casualties of minimum wage laws. Perhaps. In any case, there are adverse effects of an increase in minimum wages that people here who are supposedly trying to help “the little guy” are not considering.
Ishii
F
freeRadical
Guest
You can thank the FED and their Keynesian policy for low interest rates.
G
garn9173
Guest
How then do you afford posting on the internet at 9pm? If I lived below the poverty line, paying for HSI would be the last of my worries, especially in a hgh cost of living area like LA.Let’s keep clear that we’re not talking about people who want to become multimillionaires, but people who simply would like to make ends meet and seek a very modest amount of prosperity.
I’m personally content with my living conditions, even though I live below the poverty level. The truly spiritual person does not want any more prosperity than that to cover his very modest lifestyle.
LOVE!
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
Reading the writing on the wall, it seems certain that the minimum wage will be increased substantially in the near future. The stress and frustration that the current minimum wage causes is needless, and can be lessened considerably.
LOVE!
LOVE!
- Status