increased min wage...

[saggyjones]

No, they souldn't. Employers are not responsible for your personal health. This country was founded on the ideals of leaders like Franklin and Hamilton -- both self-made men who came from nothing to make something of their lives. Throughout our history, this idea has been carried through from Andrew Jackson, to Frederick Douglass to Abraham Lincoln to Andrew Carnegie to Oprah Winfrey.

Not everyone has the capability of those people to rise up like they did because they don't really have any extraordinary skills.

Self-responsbility is the backbone of this country, not relying on other people to take care of you. If you want Socialism -- go to Europe (though with all of the Muslims coming flooding the EU it's only a matter of time before they come under Sharia law).

So what if it's the backbone of this country? Why are you so afraid of change? I believe companies should be required to provide health care because it would 1. help the economy (like I stated above) and 2. allow everyone to be insured for health. It doesn't mean equal insurance for everyone but there needs to be a standard, like a minimum wage for health care.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

So what if it's the backbone of this country? Why are you so afraid of change? I believe companies should be required to provide health care because it would 1. help the economy (like I stated above) and 2. allow everyone to be insured for health. It doesn't mean equal insurance for everyone but there needs to be a standard, like a minimum wage for health care.

Healthcare is not your employers responsibility and not the government's responsibility.

 

[saggyjones]

Healthcare is not your employers responsibility and not the government's responsibility.

OK that's your opinion, and I have mine.

However you provide no evidence or even a point as to why this statement is true, so I'll discredit it until you provide something to back it up.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

OK that's your opinion, and I have mine.

However you provide no evidence or even a point as to why this statement is true, so I'll discredit it until you provide something to back it up.

There's nothing to be backed up. I'm a conservative. I hold conservative values. My conservative thinking encourages me to value qualities like limited government, humility, loyalty, sacrifice, dedication, respect, patriotism, and hard work.

You're a liberal. You believe in big government, hand-outs, relying on others, income redistribution, and rewarding those who don't feel like working.

That's the difference. I believe that people should take care of themselves. You believe that it's the government and employers job to take care of the employees.

 

[saggyjones]

There's nothing to be backed up. I'm a conservative. I hold conservative values. My conservative thinking encourages me to value qualities like limited government, humility, loyalty, sacrifice, dedication, respect, patriotism, and hard work.

You're a liberal. You believe in big government, hand-outs, relying on others, income redistribution, and rewarding those who don't feel like working.

I believe in limited government economic interference, except in health care. I think welfare is a good idea for the disabled but not for those who don't feel like working. Income redistribution is extremely liberal. There are shades of gray you know, and I'm not a socialist. I believe a free market is the best answer.

What gives you the idea that liberals don't believe in humility, loyalty, sacrifice, dedication, respect, patriotism, and hard work? Now you're resorting to stereotypes that don't even make sense.

That's the difference. I believe that people should take care of themselves. You believe that it's the government and employers job to take care of the employees.

I believe that it would be beneficial to the poor and to the economy for companies to be required to provide health care. You should drop some of those stereotypes and think rationally for a second instead of basing everything on stupid classifications of liberal and conservative.

 

[InterestedParty]

OK that's your opinion, and I have mine.

However you provide no evidence or even a point as to why this statement is true, so I'll discredit it until you provide something to back it up.

I believe that it would be beneficial to the poor and to the economy for companies to be required to provide health care. You should drop some of those stereotypes and think rationally for a second instead of basing everything on stupid classifications of liberal and conservative.

Ironic isn't it, you discredit the opinion of someone else yet you offer your own without providing any evidence or even a point to back up the claim that it would be beneficial to the economy for companies to be required to provide health care.

How exactly would it be beneficial to the economy for companies to provide health care? Better yet, how do the pros outweigh the cons to do this?

 

[USMC the Almighty]

What gives you the idea that liberals don't believe in humility, loyalty, sacrifice, dedication, respect, patriotism, and hard work? Now you're resorting to stereotypes that don't even make sense.

I didn't say "Liberals don't believe in humility, loyalty, sacrifice,dedication, respect, patriotism, and hard work" (though some aspects may be true). I said that as a result of my conservative values I believe in those things. You're inferring a point that I wasn't making

I believe that it would be beneficial to the poor and to the economy for companies to be required to provide health care.

It would also be beneficial to the poor for our country to go Communist.

The fact of the matter is that for an economy, science, technology, or society to advance, people will be inevitably be left behind. Now if you subscribe to certain elements of Social Darwinism, then you believe that the people who get left behind are the weakest, dumbest, laziest, etc. At any rate, it's impossible for the government to please everyone -- and it shouldn't try to.

A government's job is to provide a military, uphold infrastructure, and collect taxes for these two things. That's it. Not healthcare, welfare, medicaid, or social secuirty.

You should drop some of those stereotypes and think rationally for a second instead of basing everything on stupid classifications of liberal and conservative.

I was merely talking about my values as a conservative individual. Show me where I was stereotyping liberals?

 

[saggyjones]

I didn't say "Liberals don't believe in humility, loyalty, sacrifice,dedication, respect, patriotism, and hard work" (though some aspects may be true). I said that as a result of my conservative values I believe in those things. You're inferring a point that I wasn't making

I apologize then.

It would also be beneficial to the poor for our country to go Communist.

Yes it would. How does that relate to this at all? Just because two things are beneficial for a group doesn't make them the same.

The fact of the matter is that for an economy, science, technology, or society to advance, people will be inevitably be left behind. Now if you subscribe to certain elements of Social Darwinism, then you believe that the people who get left behind are the weakest, dumbest, laziest, etc. At any rate, it's impossible for the government to please everyone -- and it shouldn't try to.

But what are the drawbacks to providing health care? I have mentioned only positives and you haven't mentioned a single negative aspect.

A government's job is to provide a military, uphold infrastructure, and collect taxes for these two things. That's it. Not healthcare, welfare, medicaid, or social secuirty.

Why? Why shouldn't a government provide more? You are simply stating things without backing them up.

I was merely talking about my values as a conservative individual. Show me where I was stereotyping liberals?

I was trying to suggest that you should look at stuff rationally and see the benefit of it even if it doesn't exactly match your normal beliefs. You stick too much to conservative ideals and you don't seem to take other points into consideration; you seem to be intent on disproving everything that doesn't fit exactly in line with the conservatives stereotype.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Yes it would. How does that relate to this at all? Just because two things are beneficial for a group doesn't make them the same.

My point was that just because something benefits a segment of the population doesn't mean you should blindly institute it, i.e. Communism might raise the living conditions of the poor and elevate their social status -- but it would also halt all advancement and progression, make everyone equally miserable, and likely be responsible for millions of deaths.

But what are the drawbacks to providing health care? I have mentioned only positives and you haven't mentioned a single negative aspect.

There are countless drawbacks. Companies might get frustrated and raise their prices which would damper consumer sentiment thus retarding the economy. Corporations would also be further enticed to move their work overseas where they wouldn't be forced to provide health care. And most importantly to me, it would correspond to an increase in governmental power and control -- something that I strongly reject. As I have noted before, I believe firmly in limited government and self-responsibility.

Why? Why shouldn't a government provide more? You are simply stating things without backing them up.

Because that's not what our Founding Fathers wanted our government to do. They founded a nation that in itself is a "rags-to-riches" story where people can support themselves -- not have other people do it for them.

They didn't want a big. powerful central government that was omnipresent in peoples' lives for fear that it would eventually degenerate into tyranny.

The Founding Fathers couldn't emphasize anymore the neccessity in small, limited, and removed federal government. Social Secuirty, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, Universal Healthcare -- this kind of thing would have haunted them.

I was trying to suggest that you should look at stuff rationally and see the benefit of it even if it doesn't exactly match your normal beliefs. You stick too much to conservative ideals and you don't seem to take other points into consideration; you seem to be intent on disproving everything that doesn't fit exactly in line with the conservatives stereotype.

While my conservative virtues and values certainly guide the way I live, I am not 100% in line with all conservatives. For instance, have you read my thoughts on gay marriage?

 

[saggyjones]

My point was that just because something benefits a segment of the population doesn't mean you should blindly institute it, i.e. Communism might raise the living conditions of the poor and elevate their social status -- but it would also halt all advancement and progression, make everyone equally miserable, and likely be responsible for millions of deaths.

Well even though you provided no evidence as to why Communism would do this I agree with you. But as I said (and backed up) forcing companies to provide a certain amount of health insurance would benefit the economy as a whole and also the lower class, without hurting anyone else, except perhaps the owners of Wal-Mart who have plenty of money to spare.

There are countless drawbacks. Companies might get frustrated and raise their prices which would damper consumer sentiment thus retarding the economy.

Only companies like Wal-Mart would raise prices because small businesses almost always provide insurance already to their employees. And if Wal-Mart raised prices that would force them to compete on the same level as everyone else, including all the small businesses. Right now they are driving these small businesses out and eliminating competition, which according to Adam Smith (the father of capitalism as I'm sure you know) is the backbone of a true laissez-faire system. But if they competed small businesses would be allowed to rise up and compete, benefiting the economy.

Corporations would also be further enticed to move their work overseas where they wouldn't be forced to provide health care.

That's a good point, but this (and other outsourcing problems) can be solved by putting tariffs on goods from companies that outsourced, increasing their incentive to stay in the US.

And most importantly to me, it would correspond to an increase in governmental power and control -- something that I strongly reject. As I have noted before, I believe firmly in limited government and self-responsibility.

There would still be health insurance companies they would just be paid for by employers rather than employees. The government would have no part in it except to enforce it.

Because that's not what our Founding Fathers wanted our government to do. They founded a nation that in itself is a "rags-to-riches" story where people can support themselves -- not have other people do it for them.

Actually our founding fathers wanted a government in which the people ruled themselves and had freedom of speech and religion. America was never a rags-to-riches story, we were prosperous from the very beginning because of tremendous resources available. Our country is really based on freedom and to be able to vote for what you believe is right, so a measure like this that goes through congress and is voted on fairly would be exactly what the founding fathers wanted. Just because our ideals aren't exactly the same doesn't mean we aren't still following the same principles. I don't think any founding father would agree that we should live by the exact same principles as they did 220 years later. Times change.

They didn't want a big. powerful central government that was omnipresent in peoples' lives for fear that it would eventually degenerate into tyranny.

I fail to see how this measure would transform into tyranny. In fact it's helping the people.

The Founding Fathers couldn't emphasize anymore the neccessity in small, limited, and removed federal government. Social Secuirty, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, Universal Healthcare -- this kind of thing would have haunted them.

Addressed above.

While my conservative virtues and values certainly guide the way I live, I am not 100% in line with all conservatives. For instance, have you read my thoughts on gay marriage?

I'm talking about this issue, and I was saying that you seem to go along with the conservative viewpoint without really thinking about it. But you explained your reasoning so nevermind this.

 

[Lennonist]

I disagree

Alright USMC marine i totally disagree completely in your stance

First you have the crazy mccartheist attitude about communism
omg its gonna halt all human advancement
well first communism is the final stage of human history and in no ways halts the advancement of the human race
a russian cosmonaut was the first person in space and in many ways capitalism has the potential to hinder scientific and cultural advances

such as not providing money for research or big companies producing counter research and so on

next you say that this could lead to outsourcing and what not but that can be solved with out having an extremely low minimum wage such as the ideas saggy jones mentioned


then you say that the founding fathers wouldnt have wanted it this way
well

the founding fathers were radicals in the greatest sense of the word
in fact benjamin franklin said there should be a revolution every twenty years

and so what if our founding fathers wanted it to be this way

they are not infalable
they had slaves
they were rich fat white men who were sick of paying taxes

omg what a scandalous idea of tarnishing the godlike perceptions of our fore fathers

and the biggest reason for an increase in minimum wage is........duh duh duh....


THEY DESERVE IT!!!!!

it is their labor why should they have to seal it as a commodity for less than a livable wage

i have a friend who works at a sandwich shop and he makes sandwiches that are very expensive and yet he only makes minimum wage

minus the cost of the materials and the building and the lights and stove and so on and so forth

he gets roughly about a quarter out of every sandwich he makes

why does he not get that complete profit???

this is the most treachorous case of corporate robbery





hey u can write me off as a crazy commie but it doesnt make my points any less valid

 

[Grounded]

and the biggest reason for an increase in minimum wage is........duh duh duh....


THEY DESERVE IT!!!!!

it is their labor why should they have to seal it as a commodity for less than a livable wage

I agree with you on this part. I do believe that they deserve it. But not everyone gets what they deserve.

Also, raising the minimum wage can hurt many small businesses in the U.S. Don't the small entrepreneurial businesses in the U.S. deserve raise in profits too? Tens of thousands of businesses in the U.S. go bankrupt a year. Don't they deserve some profits too?

I have nothing against raising minimum wage so that large corporations have to pay more money to their workers, but raising minimum wage hurts the small businesses and makes it difficult to compete with the large corporations.

 

[Dave]

I wouldn't really say the teenager working at McDonalds deserves a raise. The typical minimum wage worker is young (16-25), not married, with no dependants. When Democrats passed this law they only actually helped 2% of the adult (over 25) working force. These aren't people that are struggling to pay a mortgage, they are just wanting some extra spending money. Also, we have to note that about 3/5 of those working at or below the federal minimum wage are employed in service industries such as resteraunts or bars, where tips are commonly used to supplement their income.

http://stats.bls.gov/cps/minwage2004.htm

 

[vyo476]

I wouldn't really say the teenager working at McDonalds deserves a raise. The typical minimum wage worker is young (16-25), not married, with no dependants. When Democrats passed this law they only actually helped 2% of the adult (over 25) working force. These aren't people that are struggling to pay a mortgage, they are just wanting some extra spending money. Also, we have to note that about 3/5 of those working at or below the federal minimum wage are employed in service industries such as resteraunts or bars, where tips are commonly used to supplement their income.

http://stats.bls.gov/cps/minwage2004.htm

Why do we have a minimum wage? To make sure that all wages are livable. Why raise the minimum wage? Inflation means that people making minimum wage couldn't survive off it. Perhaps only 2% were affected at the time of this rate increase, but if they'd waited another ten years or so the percentage would have been a bit higher. This is a preemptive solution to the problem. Yes, Democrats do that preemption thing too...scary, isn't it?

 

[Dave]

Why do we have a minimum wage? To make sure that all wages are livable. Why raise the minimum wage? Inflation means that people making minimum wage couldn't survive off it. Perhaps only 2% were affected at the time of this rate increase, but if they'd waited another ten years or so the percentage would have been a bit higher. This is a preemptive solution to the problem. Yes, Democrats do that preemption thing too...scary, isn't it?

Actually, I would have to say the purpose of a minimum wage is to make sure that people are being paid a fair exchange for the work they are doing. I agree that inflation makes wage increases necessary with time, but it is not necessary right now.