Wack-a-doodle liberals are...

[OntheRail]

Originally Posted by davew

The government unions are still doing well. Some retirement programs are basically going to break the bank of some cities/states...

You can only increase the property taxes so much until no one can afford to live there..

Was going to make the same statement...

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

When I read something that says we've been released from union tyranny and it is the Great Society that has led us to the downward spiral I have to shake my head. Wages have essentially stagnated since our release from union tyranny which makes any thinking person wonder if the two things could be connected. Clinton and the Congress reformed welfare. One of the first things Obama did was cut taxes for the middle class (conveniently forgot that, didn't we). Reality does a much better job of explaining why we are where we are than the ridiculous fantasies some concoct. A lot easier to figure out the chicken and the egg when you understand biology.

In your own words, what did the Great Society actually do for the American people in the long run?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by tucker6

In your own words, what did the Great Society actually do for the American people in the long run?

Gave you something to whine incessantly about.

First, why don't you tell me what you think the Great Society was and how it was the key to some downward spiral we've been on since then. Try to remember it was 1964 and we are fifty years down that road.

And don't forget to give me specifics on how the last 50 years have been a living hell for you because of the great society.

Seriously. I can't wait to see you connect Medicare (I gave you one for free) to Apple moving to China.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by maddog42

Wack-a-doodle liberals are.... the reason we have a minimum wage. At one time trump said $7.25 was too high.

That's an improvement. Ronald Reagan had said that $3.25 an hour was too high.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by davew

The government unions are still doing well. Some retirement programs are basically going to break the bank of some cities/states...

You can only increase the property taxes so much until no one can afford to live there..

The number of people in public employee unions is a very small percentage of all workers. But many of them make my point eloquently. Cops and firemen very often are able to retire at relatively young ages with disabilities, and yes, they are able to afford comfortable middle class lives.

If you want to divert the conversation to pensions we can talk about that. But you know who you can't blame? The workers who accepted the deal the government made with them.

I'll bet you didn't know that in many states career public employees are not eligible for social security. Their pension is their retirement.

I'll bet you didn't know states like New Jersey failed to fund their share of the employee pension program for many years, and then whined about not having enough money. You make a deal and then renege, you can't just blame greedy employees.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by maddog42

Wack-a-doodle liberals are.... the reason we have a minimum wage.

Also known as a legal prohibition of the creation of any jobs that are not worth $15 an hour or whatever, and a legal prohibition of young and untrained workers getting any jobs if their present labor is not worth $15 an hour.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

Gave you something to whine incessantly about.

First, why don't you tell me what you think the Great Society was and how it was the key to some downward spiral we've been on since then. Try to remember it was 1964 and we are fifty years down that road.

And don't forget to give me specifics on how the last 50 years have been a living hell for you because of the great society.

Seriously. I can't wait to see you connect Medicare (I gave you one for free) to Apple moving to China.

Soooo, you have nothing but deflection and strawmen. Thanks for playing.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Soooo, you have nothing but deflection and strawmen. Thanks for playing.

I know we aren't supposed to call out the dunces, but my post was about how the severe loss in union jobs has eroded the middle class. Any mention I made about the Great Society was simply being perplexed how anyone could blame the Great Society for whatever it was you were blaming the Great Society for. Your flippant response confirmed what I thought. You don't understand what has happened in the last 50 years so you make an unsubstantiated connection to a program 50 years and eight presidents ago. Read my post again. At no point did I defend the great society - I simply expressed astonishment than anyone could come to that conclusion. And you still haven't explained either what the spiral is you are talking about and how it relates to the Great Society.

Your question to me - what did the Great Society do for the American people in the long run would have been a good question if my post was like yours - an off the cuff, unsubstantiated defense of a 50 year old program. But I didn't. I simply said your rant about unions was off because you didn't understand the connection between unions and a robust middle class.

You're the one who dissed the Great Society. As I expected, you were either unwilling or unable to explain yourself. This is the general approach of the whack-a-doodle conservatives - make unsubstantiated, off the cuff statements that are supposed to be self-evident. Obamacare bad. Muslims bad. Immigration bad. No analysis. No nuance. And if someone asks you to defend the off the cuff remark, you turn around and say, no you explain why I'm not right. You got caught being a blowhard and didn't have the balls (or the brains) to defend your position. You want to debate me on the Great Society, you tell me exactly how the elements of the Great Society - The Civil Rights Act, Volunteers in Service to America, Head Start, The Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Medicare among others - lead to this downward spiral. I gave you my analysis - the demise of unions and the demise of the middle class were coincidental, and I don't think unrelated.

So you have nothing but deflection and strawmen.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

That's an improvement. Ronald Reagan had said that $3.25 an hour was too high.

Still is for some jobs.
Seriously, people need o get their heads out of their arsses about min wages.
Stock boys after school, retired people looking to get out of house a few hours, pizza delivery college kids - none of them neither needs or deserves a living wage.

[ElKabong]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

That's an improvement. Ronald Reagan had said that $3.25 an hour was too high.

That was what, 36 years ago?

What did FDR consider a fair minimum wage in 1945? Just curious... Going back yet another 36 years here...

[maddog42]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

That's an improvement. Ronald Reagan had said that $3.25 an hour was too high.

After perusing the Consumer Price Index which has went up almost 3 times since 1980.... I would say that it really isn't an improvement.

[maddog42]

Originally Posted by Tom

Still is for some jobs.
Seriously, people need o get their heads out of their arsses about min wages.
Stock boys after school, retired people looking to get out of house a few hours, pizza delivery college kids - none of them neither needs or deserves a living wage.

Maybe you need to get your head out of your ass? These People don't DESERVE a LIVING wage?!?! What are they supposed to do? Starve? Many of these people are.

[zico20]

Originally Posted by maddog42

Maybe you need to get your head out of your ass? These People don't DESERVE a LIVING wage?!?! What are they supposed to do? Starve? Many of these people are.

Who decides what a living wage is? A living wage is most definitely different in California compared to Alabama. If that is the case, then should it not be left up to the states to decide what it should be. The federal government needs to stay out of the minimum wage business.

Also, would not two 40 hour jobs at 7.50 apiece be then considered a livable wage. Why do people only have to work 40 hours to live on? If you need more money, work more hours. That has been the way for decades, has it not.

[davew]

Originally Posted by maddog42

Maybe you need to get your head out of your ass? These People don't DESERVE a LIVING wage?!?! What are they supposed to do? Starve? Many of these people are.

What about the people who drink, are on drugs, show up to work when/if they feel like it? Who would want them as an employee?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by maddog42

Maybe you need to get your head out of your ass? These People don't DESERVE a LIVING wage?!?! What are they supposed to do? Starve? Many of these people are.

Maybe you should learn how to read before you shoot off your mouth.

A stock boy in high school needs a living wage?

You are going to sit there and tell me any part time stock boy CONTRIBUTES anything remotely close to the value of a living wage?

You can't possibly be that ignorant.
Can you?