Because many low paying jobs today are not physically intensive. Because food that is not particularly healthy for you is the cheapest.
Do you mean, redistributing wealth by having a bloated military that buys unnecessary equipment at very large profit margins for the owners. Or do you mean redistribution of wealth by handouts to drug companies and their owners and executives through Medicare Part D. Or do you redistribution of wealth by agricultural subsidies that create a trade barrier with other countries?
Last I checked a sweet potato costs a fraction of a bag of potato chips.
That would help when sensationalist claims of “abject poverty in the US” are being bandied about as though it was real.
Crony capitalism is as immoral as socialism, why do you ask?
Here again we seem to see a sentiment built around a belief that the working poor should be grateful for what they have. If you just go to work, attend mass, and read. You’ll not have a well formed opinion on what this world contains. You could visit a few “tent cities” outside any large city in the southwest. There you might find the level of poverty you seek.How about you first learn what absolute poverty really is and then we’ll be on the same page.
Let me help…
No one in the US is severely deprived of these basic needs unless they so choose not to use the resources made available to them. If a charity doesn’t provide these services, our government does.
The things that sprang up when people bought houses they couldn’t possibly afford in the first place lost them?
It’s almost like this sum of $15.00/hr. has been thrown out of context. Perhaps to make the claims of the working poor seem unjust. I believe however that this was a figure intended for a certain community. Never been, but I guess that they looked at costs etc. then came up with $15.00 as a minimum.
Kind of funny how the so-called economic conservatives never reduce these expenses when they are in power. After all, Medicare Part D came under President Bush, for example. So, you’ll excuse me that I find it funny that the only time a certain part of the electorate gets outraged is when we’re talking about redistribution of wealth to our poorest when we don’t hold our politicians’ feet to the fire on the other parts of redistribution. And I won’t even go to the utter incompetence of the same politicians to address issues like abortion (or, I guess that where the sneaky Democrats stop the fully committed Republicans).
So now it’s just poverty and not absolute poverty? Or are you talking about the poor? Well which is it that you’re trying to have an “honest discussion” about? You use the words interchangeably as if they mean the same things. They don’t. There is also no standard measure for poverty. Governments use the income method because it’s the easiest for determining benefits. However, income tells us nothing of whether people’s needs are being met, which is truly the only thing that matters.Wow you really can’t stand knowing that people are poor in this country and going without the basic necessities of life. How about you not haggle over absolute poverty versus poverty? People are not making living wages in this country. They barely have enough to pay rent and buy food. That’s it. And a lot of families are living in the streets. Whole families because mom or dad can’t get a job, or are being payed so little it just covers food, if that.
People who actually go without the basic necessities of life come down with a bad case of dead very quickly. The problem here is that a lot of the things you call absolute necessities are frills and you don’t seem to get it.
You’re right, there are people who don’t. They should get new jobs that pay more, not demand more pay at their current job (which cannot afford to pay them more) for absolutely nothing in return. You really don’t seem to get it, so I’m going to lay it out real simple for you - if you double the pay of employees at McDonalds, their prices will absolutely HAVE to go up (likely nearly double) to compensate. Since prices go up so much, much less people will patron McDonalds to save money. As a result, McDonald’s business will be hurt and they will have to lay off workers and close stores, creating even MORE people without jobs who can’t afford to feed their kids. Your “solution” makes it worse, not better.
The cost of living has been going up for a whole lot longer than that and the middle class is vanishing because of liberal policies like the one this article is about, not conservative ones. You are advocating for things that will ultimately accelerate the disappearance of the middle class.
In this case, it is not enough to be Christian. One must have a grasp of economics too. We do not accept the problem, but we also understand the problem and know the cause and are fighting against it. You clearly do not, and are inadvertently fighting FOR it.
I was in Denver for WYD. The homeless people were right there for all to see.
The one thing that is clear is that both democrats and republicans are parties of big government.
Please tell me more about my opinion. I’m all ears.
Good thing I have not claimed to be an “economic conservative” isn’t it?
You can find how poverty levels are determined by using a search engine on your computer.
But so many seem to think or imply that they are wrong to strike. This is precisely why they are striking. For some this is their sole employment and they can do no better. Why should anyone have to be paid poverty wages and be expected to accept that as OK or fair? It is not.
Actually very very few fast food workers were involved with the"strike" It was mostly people hired by unions to picket.
