The President Obama Thread

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by DACrowe

Actually, I think what he proposed on immigration reform was very positive and is very doable given the current political climate. Also, his proposals to push pre-school education and using federal aide to refocus community colleges to even partner with high schools were very intriguing ideas to me and, again, seem like common sense for all sides.

As for one moment that I think rips away through any cynicism...



If you notice, especially after the clip ended, Boehner is crying. That really actually pisses me off. He sees all these families who's lives were hurt or ruined by gun violence and he'll cry for them. But he won't lift a damn finger to try and stop it in the future. That is so pathetic.

Maybe because nothing they are proposing will stop it....
I'm all for pretty much ALL THAT IS BEING PROPOSED....but in reality, until we get a solid check on our mental health in this country, we will continue to have things like Sandy Hook happen, that is just reality...

But, again I'm all for universal registration and background checks, I'm all for no sell of arms or ammunition on the internet, I'm all for all of those things, but a ban on specific guns, I'm sorry but that will not make a difference, IMO. I really like Feinstein, I respect her a lot, but she is way out of her realm when making this kind of legislation.

[enterthemadness]

Originally Posted by SV Fan

I am using Walmart as an example of companies that pay like crap, not saying they would pay every single person in the US to get them to 9 bucks. That being said their is alot of people who work 40 hour weeks that get paid minimum wage who still get government subsidies such as food stamps and welfare because they below the poverty line, why should the tax payer pay for Walmart(or anybody else) to cheaply pay for somebody's services.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/1...our-safety-net

Basically if Walmart has to increase prices on a bottle of shampoo 10 cents so be it, stop using the government to fund your business(I generally try shop at places that pay their employees properly so it won't hurt me) and pay your employees a liveable wage

Worked there for nearly two years....rather....get shoulder tackled by Ray Lewis, just out of the damn blue, than go back there.

[Holiday]

Originally Posted by SV Fan

I am using Walmart as an example of companies that pay like crap, not saying they would pay every single person in the US to get them to 9 bucks. That being said their is alot of people who work 40 hour weeks that get paid minimum wage who still get government subsidies such as food stamps and welfare because they below the poverty line, why should the tax payer pay for Walmart(or anybody else) to cheaply pay for somebody's services.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/1...our-safety-net

Basically if Walmart has to increase prices on a bottle of shampoo 10 cents so be it, stop using the government to fund your business(I generally try shop at places that pay their employees properly so it won't hurt me) and pay your employees a liveable wage

I see the reasons for raising the minimum wage and the good intentions behind it but I also see the actual outcome; layoffs and even higher youth unemployment.

You have to understand the minimum wage law makes the labor of unskilled workers illegal. If a person's labor is worth 7 dollars an hour, but the minimum wage is 9 dollars, they're not getting hired.

[DACrowe]

Originally Posted by Kelly

Maybe because nothing they are proposing will stop it....
I'm all for pretty much ALL THAT IS BEING PROPOSED....but in reality, until we get a solid check on our mental health in this country, we will continue to have things like Sandy Hook happen, that is just reality...

But, again I'm all for universal registration and background checks, I'm all for no sell of arms or ammunition on the internet, I'm all for all of those things, but a ban on specific guns, I'm sorry but that will not make a difference, IMO. I really like Feinstein, I respect her a lot, but she is way out of her realm when making this kind of legislation.

So...because limiting access to firearms will not stop all gun related deaths and we need better mental healthcare in this country, something I agree with by the way (why not psyche exams for all would-be gun owners?)...because of all that, it's okay to do nothing?

That's the logic you are using. Sorry, Boehner will do nothing because he's scared of the NRA and the nutjobs in his caucus he's lost control of. So, he can weep for those whose lives are needlessly ruined by gun violence but will not lift a finger to help.

[Webfoot Hero]

Originally Posted by DACrowe

So...because limiting access to firearms will not stop all gun related deaths and we need better mental healthcare in this country, something I agree with by the way (why not psyche exams for all would-be gun owners?)...because of all that, it's okay to do nothing?

That's the logic you are using. Sorry, Boehner will do nothing because he's scared of the NRA and the nutjobs in his caucus he's lost control of. So, he can weep for those whose lives are needlessly ruined by gun violence but will not lift a finger to help.

And adding more laws for many understaffed and underfunded local law enforcement agencies, who already have a hard time enforcing laws currently on the book, isn't going to do much either. Addressing the economic disparity, bullying, mental health, and decline of basic decency will do more for gun violence than just banning things that are merely a symptom, rather than a cause.

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by DACrowe

So...because limiting access to firearms will not stop all gun related deaths and we need better mental healthcare in this country, something I agree with by the way (why not psyche exams for all would-be gun owners?)...because of all that, it's okay to do nothing?

That's the logic you are using. Sorry, Boehner will do nothing because he's scared of the NRA and the nutjobs in his caucus he's lost control of. So, he can weep for those whose lives are needlessly ruined by gun violence but will not lift a finger to help.

I don't think there is a proposal out there where they want to do "nothing"....I think the priorities are simply different. You have one group that wants to enforce the laws on the books BETTER, and set restrictions as far as the mental health aspect....and those that want to ban anything with a trigger. I believe there is a happy medium between those two.

As far as the rest of what you wrote, I don't know....nothing has been put forward yet that isn't wholly to one side of the spectrum I just mentioned...

[Holiday]

State of the Union Breakdown

[chaseter]

Originally Posted by SV Fan

A 9 dollar minimum wage means 3500K more a year to a full time worker on minimum wage, that's money we can either cut in welfare programs or that most likely will be spent stimulating the economy(assuming the min wage earner doesn't use welfare programs). You can't tell me their is some wrong when a Company that earns over 15B a year profit pays it's employees so bad that they drain 2.7B out of welfare programs from the Government(tax payers)

As for Tax increase, this country needs to work on infrastructure programs. Infrastructure = jobs. You need to get the money somewhere. Their is alot of tax loopholes that are being abused that won't hurt the majority of US citizens that if you close you can raise some cash

I thought it was currently $8 something but it's $7.25. A $1.75/hour increase is even more idiotic Jesus Hosanna Christ.

Profits isn't something that should be regulated. What a private company does with their profits is their business. This isn't Russia. Either stop buying from that company or don't work for them. You can't be weekend warriors and go out and protest Walmart and then go get your groceries from them on Monday. You can't complain about your $7.25 an hour job and then just continue to work there. Right now with this tough economy that really isn't an option to quit (it's a foolish option nonetheless) because you hate your boss...you have to suck it up for a little bit.

Again, I think a small increase is fine. It can't stay that low year after year. Maybe a 2-3% increase each year. If it is also on a set increase schedule then you have employers and businesses ready for the change. You can't just come out and say that you want minimum wage to increase by 25%. Jesus these people in Washington are idiots.

I agree we need to cut programs...but we need to look at our debt first because it affects all of us.

[chaseter]

Also, the Dems increased it in 2009...how did that work out?

[Holiday]

Originally Posted by chaseter

Again, I think a small increase is fine. It can't stay that low year after year. Maybe a 2-3% increase each year. If it is also on a set increase schedule then you have employers and businesses ready for the change. You can't just come out and say that you want minimum wage to increase by 25%. Jesus these people in Washington are idiots.

It could if the government would stop destroying it's currency. That's the real problem.

[Marvolo]

Minimum wage increase? Sounds good. If these billion dollar corporations would pay their employees more than scraps then the government wouldnt need to step in and force them to do it. $7.25 an hour wont even support a single person living on their own let alone a person with kids. And telling the person to get a second job only deprives others of having a job.

[Kelly]

I agree, but I think this thing of increasing suddenly 25% is crazy....and will backfire tremendously....if they are going to do this to these businesses every 5 or so years, they need to go ahead and do it in stages over that 5 years. You can't hit them with Obamacare, higher taxes, and then 25% increase in minimum wage all in the same year. It will backfire, I guarantee it....

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by Kelly

I agree, but I think this thing of increasing suddenly 25% is crazy....and will backfire tremendously....if they are going to do this to these businesses every 5 or so years, they need to go ahead and do it in stages over that 5 years. You can't hit them with Obamacare, higher taxes, and then 25% increase in minimum wage all in the same year. It will backfire, I guarantee it....

I agree with this. Its too much all too soon. Gradual increase over the next five years is the better way to go.

[Holiday]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

Minimum wage increase? Sounds good. If these billion dollar corporations would pay their employees more than scraps then the government wouldnt need to step in and force them to do it. $7.25 an hour wont even support a single person living on their own let alone a person with kids. And telling the person to get a second job only deprives others of having a job.

Someone who is low skilled (because that's what minimum wage jobs are, jobs for people with little or no skills) shouldn't be having children.

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by Holiday

Someone who is low skilled (because that's what minimum wage jobs are, jobs for people with little or no skills) shouldn't be having children.

There is so much wrong with this sentiment I can't even begin to break it all down. Suffice it to say the propagation of our species and the basic instinctual drives of our species should not be hindered and determined by a purely artificial probelm we have created. There is a reason why cases of depression and suicide continually increase in our population, and it isn't a far stretch to assume that a major part of it is our natural instincts clashing with our more modern lifestyle and the stress we pile on ourselves. The desire and ability to procreate and live a meaningful life should not be reserved for the rich and well skilled.

[Holiday]

The word is propagation but anyway, a person's life is their own responsibility, as well as the lives of any children they decided to have, not the government. And what is your definition of "rich" because anyone can live a meaningful life, regardless of income.

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by Holiday

The word is propagation but anyway, a person's life is their own responsibility, as well as the lives of any children they decided to have, not the government. And what is your definition of "rich" because anyone can live a meaningful life, regardless of income.

Spelling corrected, though, you knew what I meant. I never said a person's life wasn't their responsibility nor that their children was the responsibility of the government. You said that low income non skilled people should not have children which is a ridiculous thing to say. We as a progressive society should not be limiting our propagation to a select few. Its the mark of a species moving in th wrong direction. My definition of "rich" is irrelevent and a shifting one based on many factors. I only brought it up, because you equated income and skill level with someone's right to bare children. This goes beyond government and points to a problem with our modern society when we as a species are becoming increasingly depressed and hindering propagation based on money.

Also, your original post completely missed the point of my original post which is that multi-billion dollar corporations should be paying their employees more than scraps. People can't live off scraps. In 700+ years we still have peasants working for fuedal lords. This day and age we just call them corporations. I see a slight problem with that.

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by Holiday

Someone who is low skilled (because that's what minimum wage jobs are, jobs for people with little or no skills) shouldn't be having children.

Anyone has a right to have children....but people do need to be much more responsible in the reproduction area that's for sure.

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by Kelly

Anyone has a right to have children....but people do need to be much more responsible in the reproduction area that's for sure.

I agree about the responsibilty part. If you do happen to find yourself in a low income scraps job (as many do nowadays) be careful. Don't sleep around, and don't assume a condom is a 100% fail-safe. But every person should be able to have at least 1 child if they choose before they are in their 40s. We should be working towards a more stable society that properly and adequately fosters this.

[Motown Marvel]

Would it make sense to have a base minimum wage, but companies who earn over a certain amount a year would be held to a higher minimum wage standard? Because I understand how $9 an hour might be high for a small business, but not for multi-billion dollar businesses.

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by Motown Marvel

Would it make sense to have a base minimum wage, but companies who earn over a certain amount a year would be held to a higher minimum wage standard? Because I understand how $9 an hour might be high for a small business, but not for multi-billion dollar businesses.

I like the concept, but I'm not sure how it would work with unions....

And hell, I wish I was working for $7.25 an hour instead of the salary I get. Damn, I would be rollin in the money. LOL

[justinlancaster]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DS0XXFdyfI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBhKpYcBCMQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUBK9_4OQIs

We should be working to phase out the minimum wage. See Walter Williams explain in the above videos. It destroys opportunities for those on the bottom rung of the economic latter.

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by Motown Marvel

Would it make sense to have a base minimum wage, but companies who earn over a certain amount a year would be held to a higher minimum wage standard? Because I understand how $9 an hour might be high for a small business, but not for multi-billion dollar businesses.

I like that.

Originally Posted by justinlancaster

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DS0XXFdyfI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBhKpYcBCMQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUBK9_4OQIs

We should be working to phase out the minimum wage. See Walter Williams explain in the above videos. It destroys opportunities for those on the bottom rung of the economic latter.

That is all well and good, but corporations have proven they would just cut everyone's pay to the absolute bare minimum to help their own profits. Minimum wage is the only keeping corporations like walmart and mcdonald's from paying 15 cents an hour.

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

I like that.

I don't think unions would go for it....you have members in the same area of work, but because one is working for a larger company making more profit they will make more in minimum wage. I just don't see them going for that....

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by Kelly

I don't think unions would go for it....you have members in the same area of work, but because one is working for a larger company making more profit they will make more in minimum wage. I just don't see them going for that....

Frankly the Unions can get the hell out of the way of progress. Ironic statement, I know.

Obviously our current system is failing us. We have to try some new approaches to our problems. The Unions shouldn't be allowed to hold up progress for the whole country and our future economy, because something doesn't fit into their old ways.