Minimum Wage Topic

It's quite obvious (and even more pathetic) that you've run out of things to argue, so now you're looking to resurrect something from a couple of weeks ago to argue again.

Good job.  You'll be on your own this time.
6/30/2014 9:55 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 6/29/2014 9:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/29/2014 7:52:00 PM (view original):
Sez the guy who confused tax rate and effective tax rate.  And who also looks to Bill James for economic advice for running the country.
I didn't confuse anything. Someone's overall tax rate is their effective rate.
You brought it up, dumbshit.
6/30/2014 10:10 AM
This has annoyed me for a couple of days and it looks like moy deleted a few posts because, I assume, they didn't convey what he thought was the "right" message about himself if he intended to be soooooooo dismissive of the choices other people make.   I'm hard on people making bad choices and saying "I just can't get ahead."   But moy is in another league.

The short version is moy/wife make more than 100k each and, at least moy, work long hours.   When burnsy asked how to convince lower class kids to value education, moy mentioned something about a "lack of discipline" at home.  I'm not sure how moy knows if his kids are getting proper discipline with his 70+ hour work week.   Simply put, he and his wife are making a decision to accumulate money at the expense of family time.  I'm pretty sure they could get by on one salary but they want "stuff" now and in the future.  A lot of people would call that a poor decision.  I assume he is OK with his decision.

However, if a poor person smokes or a retiree gambles, he's all over them about their "poor" decisions.   They may be but, before condemning people for their decisions, take a look in the mirror.

Poor decisions I made this weekend:
Ate pizza(much more healthier food available)
Drank(definitely not healthy)
Played softball(injury risk)
Left gym after 30 minutes(wasn't "into" it)
Donated to animal shelter(will not help my situation today or in the future)
Sped on interstate(illegal)

That's off the top of my head.  I'm sure there are a lot more.   However, I'm fine with each and every one of them.  All brought some level of happiness to me.  So, sometimes, people make poor decisions because it makes them happy for a moment.
6/30/2014 11:10 AM
I have no problem with people making poor decisions.  But they shouldn't be getting (MY) tax dollars to subsidize them.

Nor should they be allowed to infringe in any way upon my right to not be around people who make bad decisions (e.g. second hand smoke, drunk driving, sanitation issues, etc.)

If you wanna get drunk or stoned in your own house, sit in your own stink, and eat cheezy poofs until you die at the age of 45, GO AHEAD.  But don't expect any government money for it.
6/30/2014 3:37 PM
I don't know that everyone below poverty level gets govt assistance and smokes.   Old people gambling probably do but that the SS system.

You are around people who make bad decisions every day.   In fact, I bet you've made a bad one.
6/30/2014 4:02 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/30/2014 11:10:00 AM (view original):
This has annoyed me for a couple of days and it looks like moy deleted a few posts because, I assume, they didn't convey what he thought was the "right" message about himself if he intended to be soooooooo dismissive of the choices other people make.   I'm hard on people making bad choices and saying "I just can't get ahead."   But moy is in another league.

The short version is moy/wife make more than 100k each and, at least moy, work long hours.   When burnsy asked how to convince lower class kids to value education, moy mentioned something about a "lack of discipline" at home.  I'm not sure how moy knows if his kids are getting proper discipline with his 70+ hour work week.   Simply put, he and his wife are making a decision to accumulate money at the expense of family time.  I'm pretty sure they could get by on one salary but they want "stuff" now and in the future.  A lot of people would call that a poor decision.  I assume he is OK with his decision.

However, if a poor person smokes or a retiree gambles, he's all over them about their "poor" decisions.   They may be but, before condemning people for their decisions, take a look in the mirror.

Poor decisions I made this weekend:
Ate pizza(much more healthier food available)
Drank(definitely not healthy)
Played softball(injury risk)
Left gym after 30 minutes(wasn't "into" it)
Donated to animal shelter(will not help my situation today or in the future)
Sped on interstate(illegal)

That's off the top of my head.  I'm sure there are a lot more.   However, I'm fine with each and every one of them.  All brought some level of happiness to me.  So, sometimes, people make poor decisions because it makes them happy for a moment.
I totally support people making their own decisions. The thing is decisions have consequences. I have no problem with any of your 'poor' decisions unless you expect me to pay for your triple bypass, liver transplant, or speeding ticket..... In which case I have a huge problem with your decisions.
6/30/2014 11:47 PM
That's a far cry from your "THEY'RE POOR AND THEY SMOKE!!!" and "THEY'RE OLD AND THEY GAMBLE!!!!!" stance a few days ago.    And, if you're so supportive of people making their own decisions, why did you delete a handful of posts?
7/1/2014 6:35 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/1/2014 6:35:00 AM (view original):
That's a far cry from your "THEY'RE POOR AND THEY SMOKE!!!" and "THEY'RE OLD AND THEY GAMBLE!!!!!" stance a few days ago.    And, if you're so supportive of people making their own decisions, why did you delete a handful of posts?
I deleted only the one post because I prefer I don't have too much personal info out on the internet. I still stand by it.

The 'poor and they smoke' stance is because the smoking data is factual and it easily supports that fact that 28% of those under the poverty line make poor financial (and in this case health) choices. w/o financial education for these people tax payers end up supporting these behaviors. As an ex-smoker - smoked for 14 years - I have made poor choices - and since quitting 5 years ago my wife and I are healthier and save $8,000 a year from not buying smokes (thats $40,000 over 5 years). I don't care if you smoke - just not on the tax payers dime.

The gambling stance was just an observation... I do think its sad when I hear someone saying 'their goes my bus money for the week' like its no big deal. it is a big deal... if its their bus money then they shouldn't be gambling with it. but hey - thats their choice.... they can live with it and walk next week. If someone wants to **** away their SS checks at the casino I really don't care... they earned that $ by working hard... and its theirs to spend, or save.
7/1/2014 8:51 AM (edited)

I am 100% certain you deleted another post in response to burnsy "How to we stress the importance of education to children from the lower class?"   Your response was something along the lines of "Good question.   Could stem from a lack of discipline at home."    Which annoyed me because you've already said you sacrfice time with your family for money.  Couple that with the data you deleted and you're not working to "get by", you're doing it to accumulate money and, as a by product, farming out the raising of children in order to do so.    

A single parent has no choice(of course, they could have not been a single parent but that cow has left the barn).  Or possibly, a two parent household HAS to work in order to get by.   They have to eat and pay rent.  As such, they too are spending less time with their children and farming out parenting.  

I'm not fond of poor people even having kids.  To me, that seems like a poor choice.   But, once that happens, they have created a situation where they can't make parenting their top priority.   You can.  And that annoys me because A) parenting should be top priority B) you're very dismissive of the choices of the poor as if they're just wandering thru life smoking, drinking and producing babies that they will not raise. 

Now see what you've done?  You made me defend poor people.

7/1/2014 9:08 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/1/2014 9:08:00 AM (view original):

I am 100% certain you deleted another post in response to burnsy "How to we stress the importance of education to children from the lower class?"   Your response was something along the lines of "Good question.   Could stem from a lack of discipline at home."    Which annoyed me because you've already said you sacrfice time with your family for money.  Couple that with the data you deleted and you're not working to "get by", you're doing it to accumulate money and, as a by product, farming out the raising of children in order to do so.    

A single parent has no choice(of course, they could have not been a single parent but that cow has left the barn).  Or possibly, a two parent household HAS to work in order to get by.   They have to eat and pay rent.  As such, they too are spending less time with their children and farming out parenting.  

I'm not fond of poor people even having kids.  To me, that seems like a poor choice.   But, once that happens, they have created a situation where they can't make parenting their top priority.   You can.  And that annoys me because A) parenting should be top priority B) you're very dismissive of the choices of the poor as if they're just wandering thru life smoking, drinking and producing babies that they will not raise. 

Now see what you've done?  You made me defend poor people.

I didn't delete that post... Or the one saying I send them to 'school' only 3 days a week. I think you have the wrong impression of daycares.... I'm sure there are some that are like babysitting factories or sweatshops or whatever.... But ours costs $2500 a month, has strict curriculum, is accredited, and most of the teachers have maters degrees. We send them there 3 days a week to give them a jump start on education so they can excel in life. Education is key. We also stay in contact with their teachers daily to see what our kids are doing and what WE as parents need to work on with them at home. There are other benefits from them going to school like when they go to preschool they can already read, are very good at socializing with other children, can share, etc. Already when our 3 year old gets together with other 'home taught' 3 year olds she is much more well spoken and better behaved. Its a combo of parents working together with teachers to educate children - that's why. Its not a teachers JOB to raise kids, only to help teach them. Too many people ship their kids off to school to raise their kids... Then let them play on the iPad at home... Instead of actively participating in their homework with them. I only have 1 TV in the house and my daughter very rarely sees the iPad because our family values spending time together.

As for the other point... You're correct. I'm not working to 'get by'... I am working to accumulate money. One can never save enough - inevitably something will go wrong. My wife had 2 crowns replaced which because of an insurance error on our part cost us $3k. My son just had successful surgery a couple weeks ago.... Before insurance it costs $6k. The A/C is going to need replacing. Maybe $3k? If my wife wasn't working all of that would go on a credit card most likely. Also - finally when the kids go to kindergarten and my wife looks for a new job no one will hire her if she is out of work for 6 years - it will kill her career. Other factors like what would happen if I lost my job and she doesn't work? Who's paying the mortgage then? Or what's retirement going to look like with only one income? How are we going to afford 2 college tuitions and a wedding in 15-20 years? And really, my wife enjoys her job helping sick kids get better at the hospital... She also worked hard to get a masters degree to get to where she is.


Bottom line there are a lot of factors that go into our decision to send the kids to school 3 days a week.... Maybe we chose poorly, maybe not.... But we haven't asked for any government assistance to pay for this choice.
7/1/2014 10:41 AM
It's not fun to be judged, is it?

You're making decisions that I'm sure you feel are correct.  Maybe you're making a few that you're not 100% positive.   And, like everyone else on earth, you make a few decisions you know are bad.  While I feel like we're at least in the same chapter if not on the same page, I just felt you were being overly judgemental of bad decisions by the less wealthy.  To me, that felt like a 180 of "Tax them more because they'll miss it less."    And that annoyed me.
7/1/2014 11:16 AM
Posted by moy23 on 6/26/2014 5:49:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/26/2014 5:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 6/26/2014 5:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/26/2014 4:54:00 PM (view original):
It's not a good excuse, I agree.
To me almost everything boils down to education (including financial, nutritional, etc). Educated people are wealthier, healthier, and make better life decisions. Solve that problem and most other problems are solved. The attention is unfortunately always directed elsewhere... Whether its wars, class, race, or minimum wage.
It's a great point.  How do we solve that problem? 
tough challenge considering how much influence the media (tv and internet). hollywood, and the music industry currently have on children. Rapping about money, cash, hoes doesn't necessarily scream 'education is cool'. its also tough because many families now a days need 2 working parents to do more than just get by so where is the discipline at home.

i'll have to give it some thought...
For Mike. Still 100% certain?
7/1/2014 11:21 AM

Nope.

Do you supply discipline at home while working 70 hours per week?   I'll do the math for you.  8-8(for 60 hours).   I assume there's some transit time.  I'll give you an hour total.  8-9.   Time to get ready for work(which is certainly not spent with children.  I can get ready in half an hour.   7:30 AM - 9 PM.    I assume your small children have a reasonable bed time.   At best, you get to tuck them in.   So where is the discipline at home? 

7/1/2014 11:54 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/1/2014 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Nope.

Do you supply discipline at home while working 70 hours per week?   I'll do the math for you.  8-8(for 60 hours).   I assume there's some transit time.  I'll give you an hour total.  8-9.   Time to get ready for work(which is certainly not spent with children.  I can get ready in half an hour.   7:30 AM - 9 PM.    I assume your small children have a reasonable bed time.   At best, you get to tuck them in.   So where is the discipline at home? 

M, Tu, F.... My wife leaves for work at 4:30 in the morning and picks them up from daycare at 5pm. I get up with the kids at 6:30a and drop them off by 8a at the latest. W my wife stays home with them all day. I stay home with them 2 Thursdays a month and my retired mother in law does the other 2 Thursdays. I don't golf or go to bars anymore so that I can spend time with my family on the weekends. So other than 27 hours a week (M, Tu, F from 8 to 5p) they are at home.

Another exanple... Both my parents worked as well. My mother worked night shifts from 7p-7a as a nurse.... My dad at a company doing the 9-5 thing. A parent was always home with the kids... although it was tough on their relationship.

If you want to make it work you can.... But its not easy.
7/1/2014 12:14 PM (edited)
Basically everything I've wanted to say in this thread, just written better.

"Which is why the fundamental law of capitalism must be: If workers have more money, businesses have more customers. Which makes middle-class consumers, not rich businesspeople like us, the true job creators. Which means a thriving middle class is the source of American prosperity, not a consequence of it. The middle class creates us rich people, not the other way around."


7/1/2014 1:13 PM
◂ Prev 1...117|118|119|120|121...127 Next ▸
Minimum Wage Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.