Bernie Supporters and Bad Memes

[jakefromstatefarm]

(08-14-2015, 07:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Okay then.  If we eliminate all of these benefits then where are the people who are struggling to stay above poverty with them going to find the extra funds to make up the difference?

Are there really millions of jobs out there for them to fill?

Where is the money going to come from to keep them out of poverty?  

So you're saying that we are stuck paying for these programs until the end of time?  There's no end in sight?

At no point can we expect people to take responsibility for themselves or not have children that they can't afford?

I can't afford a Corvette.  I know I can't afford a Corvette.  I don't go and buy a Corvette and then expect other people to pay for it. 

[fredtoast]

(08-14-2015, 07:54 PM)jakefromstatefarm Wrote: So you're saying that we are stuck paying for these programs until the end of time?  There's no end in sight?

Yes,  I have been trying to get that pont through your head for days.

There will ALWAYS be a large portion of the labor force that works at low paying jobs.  I have told you this a dozen times.  Even if every single person works as hard as he can there still will not be enough good paying jobs for everyone to have one.  That is the way the system works.  

Anyone who believes that if everyone just worked harder that there would magically be no more low paying jobs has been brainwashed.

[GMDino]

(08-14-2015, 07:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Okay then.  If we eliminate all of these benefits then where are the people who are struggling to stay above poverty with them going to find the extra funds to make up the difference?

Are there really millions of jobs out there for them to fill?

Where is the money going to come from to keep them out of poverty?  

Well they go get a job somewhere making minimum wage!!!!11!!11!!!!

And if that's the only job they can get tough for them!  Should have worked harder!

[jakefromstatefarm]

(08-15-2015, 03:31 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes,  I have been trying to get that pont through your head for days.

There will ALWAYS be a large portion of the labor force that works at low paying jobs.  I have told you this a dozen times.  Even if every single person works as hard as he can there still will not be enough good paying jobs for everyone to have one.  That is the way the system works.  

Anyone who believes that if everyone just worked harder that there would magically be no more low paying jobs has been brainwashed.

You'll never get that point into my head.  What's stupid today will remain stupid infinitely. 

Yes, there will always be a large portion of the labor force that works at low paying jobs.  They are called teenagers, high school dropouts entering the workforce, unskilled laborers, and retirees. 

Those should be the only groups of people working for minimum wage, not a 40 year old trying to raise a family.  

[fredtoast]

(08-15-2015, 11:15 AM)jakefromstatefarm Wrote: You'll never get that point into my head.  What's stupid today will remain stupid infinitely. 

Yes, there will always be a large portion of the labor force that works at low paying jobs.  They are called teenagers, high school dropouts entering the workforce, unskilled laborers, and retirees. 

Those should be the only groups of people working for minimum wage, not a 40 year old trying to raise a family.  

So if everyone went to high school and all labor was "skilled" then what would happen?  Would all of thoise low paying jobs suddenly disappear and be replaced by high paying jobs? THAT is my point.

And how many people wait until they are forty to start a family?  When my wife was over 35 and had a child she was considered "high risk".  So should every woman be forced to wait until she is the high risk range to start a family.

[jakefromstatefarm]

(08-15-2015, 12:36 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So if everyone went to high school and all labor was "skilled" then what would happen?  Would all of thoise low paying jobs suddenly disappear and be replaced by high paying jobs?  THAT is my point.  

And how many people wait until they are forty to start a family?  When my wife was over 35 and had a child she was considered "high risk".  So should every woman be forced to wait until she is the high risk range to start a family.

When did I say that people wait until they 40 to start a family?   I said "raise a family".  I'm 40 and have a 14 year old daughter, therefore I'm "raising a family". 

Not all labor is skilled.  It's never going to be.  It doesn't require a high school diploma or a college degree to work the grill at McDonald's.  Those are unskilled, entry-level positions that aren't there for someone to "raise a family" on. 

Your answer is to force businesses into paying those people wages that they're simply not worth. 

Your answer will lead to kiosks in place of cashiers, and eventually automation anywhere that technology allows it.

On a related note, I saw a program the other day on TV that showed a technological advancement in the test phase.  It's a grocery store, that has a U-Scan type of system that utilizes RFID chips in the packaging.  The customer walks their cart through a thing that looks like a metal detector, and instantly all of the items are rung in without removing a thing from the cart. 

These are the types of things that businesses that use unskilled labor will do in response to "living wage" increases. 

WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING!

[fredtoast]

(08-15-2015, 12:49 PM)jakefromstatefarm Wrote: These are the types of things that businesses that use unskilled labor will do in response to "living wage" increases. 

These are the types of things corporations have been doing for years and will continue to do in the future even if the minimum wage is never raised.

[fredtoast]

(08-15-2015, 12:49 PM)jakefromstatefarm Wrote: When did I say that people wait until they 40 to start a family?   I said "raise a family".  I'm 40 and have a 14 year old daughter, therefore I'm "raising a family". 

I was just agreeing with you.  You were the one saying that forty year old people with skills are not working for minimum wage.  Did you mean to say 26 years old instead?

[jakefromstatefarm]

(08-15-2015, 12:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: These are the types of things corporations have been doing for years and will continue to do in the future even if the minimum wage is never raised.

You don't think that essentially doubling the cost of labor will give them incentive to invest in this technology sooner, or at a more rapid pace? 

So what happens when the labor force participation rate falls down catastrophically because of this?  You can't force companies to hire people that they don't need, right?  If that's the case, what's been solved here?

The lucky ones that still have employment are receiving a "living wage" and the rest will just be put on the government boob until the end of time? 

Great plan, Fred.  

[fredtoast]

(08-15-2015, 12:57 PM)jakefromstatefarm Wrote: So what happens when the labor force participation rate falls down catastrophically because of this?  You can't force companies to hire people that they don't need, right?  

Demand is what determines production and employment levels.  Increase in wages will increase consumption and demand.

Are you saying that right now companies are paying a lot of people they don't need?

[jakefromstatefarm]

(08-15-2015, 01:01 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Demand is what determines production and employment levels.  Increase in wages will increase consumption and demand.

Are you saying that right now companies are paying a lot of people they don't need?

How will an increase in wages increase consumption and demand?

If that's the case, why doesn't the government just send everyone a check for a million dollars?  Surely that would increase consumption and lead to higher employment, right?

[fredtoast]

(08-15-2015, 01:05 PM)jakefromstatefarm Wrote: How will an increase in wages increase consumption and demand?

People in the lowest income brackets spend a much higher percentage of their wages than they save.  increased spending creates an increas in demand.

[fredtoast]

(08-15-2015, 01:05 PM)jakefromstatefarm Wrote: If that's the case, why doesn't the government just send everyone a check for a million dollars?  Surely that would increase consumption and lead to higher employment, right?

So you don't understand the difference between increasing the money supply and redistributing profits?

If you really don't then tell me and I will take the time to educate you.

But if you really do have the education you claim then you know better and are just trying to be stupid.  and I don't waste my time with people intentionally trying to look stupid.

[jakefromstatefarm]

(08-15-2015, 01:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So you don't understand the difference between increasing the money supply and redistributing profits?

If you really don't then tell me and I will take the time to educate you.

But if you really do have the education you claim then you know better and are just trying to be stupid.  and I don't waste my time with people intentionally trying to look stupid.

Yeah, I think we're done here.

[fredtoast]

(08-15-2015, 01:26 PM)jakefromstatefarm Wrote: Yeah, I think we're done here.

[jakefromstatefarm]

(08-15-2015, 02:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote:

Yeah, don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.

I didn't give up because of your superior arguments and intellect. 

I gave up because of your lack thereof. 

[fredtoast]

(08-15-2015, 03:10 PM)jakefromstatefarm Wrote: Yeah, don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.

I didn't give up because of your superior arguments and intellect. 

I gave up because of your lack thereof. 

Then you are admitting that you do not know the difference in the economic impact of increasing money supply compared to redistributing profits?

[jakefromstatefarm]

(08-15-2015, 03:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then you are admitting that you do not know the difference in the economic impact of increasing money supply compared to redistributing profits?

No, I'm not admitting such a thing.

I'm admitting that arguing with you on things like economics is like having a conversation with my dog about physics. 

Just keep telling yourself that you're right though. 

[fredtoast]

(08-15-2015, 03:18 PM)jakefromstatefarm Wrote: No, I'm not admitting such a thing.

Well if you know the difference then why did you ask such a dumbass question?

[jakefromstatefarm]

(08-15-2015, 03:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Well if you know the difference then why did you ask such a dumbass question?

Because you're the dumbass that thinks there's something morally acceptable in taking the profits of a private business and redistributing it to the masses.

Here's a list below of liberals who have given up their fortunes in the name of income inequality:



















The end.