Minimum Wage Can Stand Some Maximizing...

[herm0016]

wait. . . . . it was a bipartisian vote, simple politics, people think it will be good so polititions vote for it. . . gov. granholm is the one that pushed it through, our great democtatic gov. who has built up such a great ecomomy as to loose millions of jobs for michigan with all her socilist ideals and her candian background. the state has one of if not the worst unemployment in the country, and is still loosing manufactureing jobs becuase of our high taxes and our crappy insentives for small busniess. devos, the republican canadate for gov. of michigan is a busness man who will beable to help michigan with his extensive knowledge of international busness and economics.

 

[UptheMiddle]

Originally posted by: herm0016
wait. . . . . it was a bipartisian vote, simple politics, people think it will be good so polititions vote for it. . . gov. granholm is the one that pushed it through, our great democtatic gov. who has built up such a great ecomomy as to loose millions of jobs for michigan with all her socilist ideals and her candian background. the state has one of if not the worst unemployment in the country, and is still loosing manufactureing jobs becuase of our high taxes and our crappy insentives for small busniess. devos, the republican canadate for gov. of michigan is a busness man who will beable to help michigan with his extensive knowledge of international busness and economics.

Agreed.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic
Keep in mind though that (and I have argued this before in this thread) the job market is already well ahead of the minimum wage. Even evil Wal-Mart pays its "associates" an average of $9.50/hr., or almost twice the federal minimum wage of $5.15/hr. There are very few workers in America making the minimum wage, and most of them are teenage kids living at home with their parents.

and you have proof of this where???

Proof has already been posted in this thread.

My information on Wal-Mart pay came from this article: Text
And I had the amount wrong, it is actually $9.68/hr.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: smack Down
So the fact that it effects so few is the reason it needs increasing.

The fact that it effects so few demonstrates how ineffectual it is, which has been my argument this entire thread. I have not actually come out against the minimum wage here, I have simply shown that it is nothing but a populist feel-good help-a-crappy-politician-get-reelected issue that actually does very little, if any, good.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: zendari
You assume producers are willing to readily give up their surplus.

The do so based on the same principle that makes consumers do so when the cable company gets a protected monopoly and raises prices; surplus is excess value, you can reduce it to zero and the transaction still occurs.

Most businesses are planned for a certain number of employees and changing that number has costs; this further reduces the effect of minimum wage changes on unemployment as many businesses are not operating at a level where the marginal productivity of an employee is roughly equal to their wage, because of the fixed costs of adding said employee.

Once again I refer you to the beginning of the thread and repeat that minimum wages are not a favorite policy tool of mine, but you have to attack bad policy for the right reasons.

The nature of workers, unlike cable TV and machines in general, is that their productivity and output fluctuates. No firm will hire a worker at 0 or close to 0 surplus and take the risk that it could become negative in the future.

Yep, just like people get old and you feel they should be killed.

And you're afraid of getting old and dying and think your great god government (funded by other people's money, of course) should make you live forever. We get it. You're too deluded to understand that every person's life ends in tragedy. You bring up little singular examples of tragedy thinking you prove your point while the rest of us just sigh at your idiotic state of denial. Tragedy awaits us all. No one is spared. Grit your teeth and get used to it. It's inevitable. Your god won't save you (or anyone) any more than the Christian god will save them.

edit: and your sig... :roll: YOU calling Zendari a troll. That's the ultimate in pot calling the kettle black.

Wow, what drugs are you on now? Pretty strong stuff.

I never said anything about afraid of getting old and dying or great God Government.

If you believe that everyone's life is a tragedy and ends in tragedy then why are you even bothering to live yourself???

 

[thraashman]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: zendari
You assume producers are willing to readily give up their surplus.

The do so based on the same principle that makes consumers do so when the cable company gets a protected monopoly and raises prices; surplus is excess value, you can reduce it to zero and the transaction still occurs.

Most businesses are planned for a certain number of employees and changing that number has costs; this further reduces the effect of minimum wage changes on unemployment as many businesses are not operating at a level where the marginal productivity of an employee is roughly equal to their wage, because of the fixed costs of adding said employee.

Once again I refer you to the beginning of the thread and repeat that minimum wages are not a favorite policy tool of mine, but you have to attack bad policy for the right reasons.

The nature of workers, unlike cable TV and machines in general, is that their productivity and output fluctuates. No firm will hire a worker at 0 or close to 0 surplus and take the risk that it could become negative in the future.

Yep, just like people get old and you feel they should be killed.

And you're afraid of getting old and dying and think your great god government (funded by other people's money, of course) should make you live forever. We get it. You're too deluded to understand that every person's life ends in tragedy. You bring up little singular examples of tragedy thinking you prove your point while the rest of us just sigh at your idiotic state of denial. Tragedy awaits us all. No one is spared. Grit your teeth and get used to it. It's inevitable. Your god won't save you (or anyone) any more than the Christian god will save them.

edit: and your sig... :roll: YOU calling Zendari a troll. That's the ultimate in pot calling the kettle black.

Wow, what drugs are you on now? Pretty strong stuff.

I never said anything about afraid of getting old and dying or great God Government.

If you believe that everyone's life is a tragedy and ends in tragedy then why are you even bothering to live yourself???

Dude, I hate to say it because I tend to agree with your politics, but he's not wrong. You really are becoming the liberal version of Zendari. Just try toning it down a bit. More people listen to you when you don't piss them off.

 

[jlmadyson]

Britain to raise minimum wage to $9.40

MAR. 20 5:27 A.M. ET Britain's minimum wage will increase by 30 pence in October to 5.35 pounds (US$9.40, euro7.71), the government announced Monday.

The rate applies to workers aged 22 and over. The minimum for workers aged 18 to 21 will rise 20 pence to 4.45 pounds ($7.82), while 16- and 17-year-olds will get a 30 pence raise to 3.30 pounds ($5.80).

The increases, in line with recommendations of the Low Pay Commission, are likely to please trade unionists, an important force within the governing Labour Party. But they will dismay some corporate leaders who say rising wages are bad for business.

Treasury chief Gordon Brown is expected to announce his annual budget on Wednesday, and as Prime Minister Tony Blair's government faces allegations of sleaze connected to undeclared loans from rich supporters.

Even for a pro business, low taxes kind of guy I seriously believe we our due for a min wage increase. We have to keep up with the rest of the industrial World even on the low end. Consequently, I believe it would provide a greater good to this economy in the long term.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Citrix
min wage increase = higher prices for my bigmac. :| bad idea.

Do like the poor people do, go without or pack a lunch.

Your "poor people" eat BigMacs. That's one of many reasons why they're poor -- they always pay more than they need to for essential goods and services.

Yeah, while your having champange and the extra-large prime rib at a fancy club. Grow up.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Citrix
min wage increase = higher prices for my bigmac. :| bad idea.

Do like the poor people do, go without or pack a lunch.

Your "poor people" eat BigMacs. That's one of many reasons why they're poor -- they always pay more than they need to for essential goods and services.

Yeah, while your having champange and the extra-large prime rib at a fancy club. Grow up.

:roll:

This is the most idiotic argument possible on the interent. For all you know, I am poor. For all I know, you're richer than Bill Gates. Just because I don't toe the line to your agenda or say all the pretty words you want to hear doesn't make me into the monster you want me to be. It just makes you immature. Forgive me for thinking and daring to question. What's your excuse for never thinking and never questioning?

edit: What I said about the poor was 100% accurate btw. I work in finance, remember? I see that sh!t first hand. The fastest and easiest way to become poor, regardless of income, is bad financial management.

 

[magillig]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: EatSpam
Oh we don't want that! Why do the poor need an increase anyway? After all, all the offshoring of American jobs, tax cuts for the wealthy, and increased energy costs have made goods Cheaper than Ever! (tm). The working poor making $5.15/hr only needs to work three jobs, shop at Wal-mart, and look for the "MADE IN CHINA" logo. Its Cheaper! (tm). Oh, and vote Republican!

You flunk economics. If the minimum wage were raised to $1 million dollars per hour, the poor would still be poor. In fact, they'd be even poorer, because the only thing a raise in the minimum wage does is spur inflation.

If the minimum wage was greatly increased, such as to $50/h or $100/h, it would hurt the economy, but when the minimum wage is increased in small amounts, it helps the economy.
In case your wondering I got this information from my economics class.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: magillig

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: EatSpam
Oh we don't want that! Why do the poor need an increase anyway? After all, all the offshoring of American jobs, tax cuts for the wealthy, and increased energy costs have made goods Cheaper than Ever! (tm). The working poor making $5.15/hr only needs to work three jobs, shop at Wal-mart, and look for the "MADE IN CHINA" logo. Its Cheaper! (tm). Oh, and vote Republican!

You flunk economics. If the minimum wage were raised to $1 million dollars per hour, the poor would still be poor. In fact, they'd be even poorer, because the only thing a raise in the minimum wage does is spur inflation.

If the minimum wage was greatly increased, such as to $50/h or $100/h, it would hurt the economy, but when the minimum wage is increased in small amounts, it helps the economy.
In case your wondering I got this information from my economics class.

Did they forget to teach you about the abstract nature of money there?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: jlmadyson
Britain to raise minimum wage to $9.40

MAR. 20 5:27 A.M. ET Britain's minimum wage will increase by 30 pence in October to 5.35 pounds (US$9.40, euro7.71), the government announced Monday.

The rate applies to workers aged 22 and over. The minimum for workers aged 18 to 21 will rise 20 pence to 4.45 pounds ($7.82), while 16- and 17-year-olds will get a 30 pence raise to 3.30 pounds ($5.80).

The increases, in line with recommendations of the Low Pay Commission, are likely to please trade unionists, an important force within the governing Labour Party. But they will dismay some corporate leaders who say rising wages are bad for business.

Treasury chief Gordon Brown is expected to announce his annual budget on Wednesday, and as Prime Minister Tony Blair's government faces allegations of sleaze connected to undeclared loans from rich supporters.

Even for a pro business, low taxes kind of guy I seriously believe we our due for a min wage increase. We have to keep up with the rest of the industrial World even on the low end. Consequently, I believe it would provide a greater good to this economy in the long term.

I tend to agree, though it really depends on how many workers are affected.

I like the separation of student and adult markets in the British system (Ontario used to have that, but I believe it was eliminated a few years ago; I remember it being something of a big deal as a student to get promoted to adult minimum wage, meaning you were actually on the borderline of useful, at least for a 15-16 year old).

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: magillig

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: EatSpam
Oh we don't want that! Why do the poor need an increase anyway? After all, all the offshoring of American jobs, tax cuts for the wealthy, and increased energy costs have made goods Cheaper than Ever! (tm). The working poor making $5.15/hr only needs to work three jobs, shop at Wal-mart, and look for the "MADE IN CHINA" logo. Its Cheaper! (tm). Oh, and vote Republican!

You flunk economics. If the minimum wage were raised to $1 million dollars per hour, the poor would still be poor. In fact, they'd be even poorer, because the only thing a raise in the minimum wage does is spur inflation.

If the minimum wage was greatly increased, such as to $50/h or $100/h, it would hurt the economy, but when the minimum wage is increased in small amounts, it helps the economy.
In case your wondering I got this information from my economics class.

Did they forget to teach you about the abstract nature of money there?

Nope, they forgot to teach you that if you increase the wage for a small portion of the population, inflation does not eliminate that increase, by a long shot, because you haven't increased total economy-wide nomial income by anything like the increase in the minimum wage. The inflation argument can be made if you claim that the entire increase will be inflated out of the wages of those making more than minimum wage, which is more or less true, but the way you make the argument is patently incorrect.

As far as actually 'helping' the economy goes, I must have missed that class too, and I seem to recall taking a lot of econ classes.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: magillig

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: EatSpam
Oh we don't want that! Why do the poor need an increase anyway? After all, all the offshoring of American jobs, tax cuts for the wealthy, and increased energy costs have made goods Cheaper than Ever! (tm). The working poor making $5.15/hr only needs to work three jobs, shop at Wal-mart, and look for the "MADE IN CHINA" logo. Its Cheaper! (tm). Oh, and vote Republican!

You flunk economics. If the minimum wage were raised to $1 million dollars per hour, the poor would still be poor. In fact, they'd be even poorer, because the only thing a raise in the minimum wage does is spur inflation.

If the minimum wage was greatly increased, such as to $50/h or $100/h, it would hurt the economy, but when the minimum wage is increased in small amounts, it helps the economy.
In case your wondering I got this information from my economics class.

Did they forget to teach you about the abstract nature of money there?

Nope, they forgot to teach you that if you increase the wage for a small portion of the population, inflation does not eliminate that increase, by a long shot, because you haven't increased total economy-wide nomial income by anything like the increase in the minimum wage. The inflation argument can be made if you claim that the entire increase will be inflated out of the wages of those making more than minimum wage, which is more or less true, but the way you make the argument is patently incorrect.

As far as actually 'helping' the economy goes, I must have missed that class too, and I seem to recall taking a lot of econ classes.

What is "the way" I made this argument that is "patently incorrect"? Hey, I have an idea! Let's see how far we can move this from my actual response to EatSpam's absurd bipartisan post!

:roll:

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: magillig

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: EatSpam
Oh we don't want that! Why do the poor need an increase anyway? After all, all the offshoring of American jobs, tax cuts for the wealthy, and increased energy costs have made goods Cheaper than Ever! (tm). The working poor making $5.15/hr only needs to work three jobs, shop at Wal-mart, and look for the "MADE IN CHINA" logo. Its Cheaper! (tm). Oh, and vote Republican!

You flunk economics. If the minimum wage were raised to $1 million dollars per hour, the poor would still be poor. In fact, they'd be even poorer, because the only thing a raise in the minimum wage does is spur inflation.

If the minimum wage was greatly increased, such as to $50/h or $100/h, it would hurt the economy, but when the minimum wage is increased in small amounts, it helps the economy.
In case your wondering I got this information from my economics class.

Did they forget to teach you about the abstract nature of money there?

Nope, they forgot to teach you that if you increase the wage for a small portion of the population, inflation does not eliminate that increase, by a long shot, because you haven't increased total economy-wide nomial income by anything like the increase in the minimum wage. The inflation argument can be made if you claim that the entire increase will be inflated out of the wages of those making more than minimum wage, which is more or less true, but the way you make the argument is patently incorrect.

As far as actually 'helping' the economy goes, I must have missed that class too, and I seem to recall taking a lot of econ classes.

What is "the way" I made this argument that is "patently incorrect"? Hey, I have an idea! Let's see how far we can move this from my actual response to EatSpam's absurd bipartisan post!

:roll:

You flunk economics. If the minimum wage were raised to $1 million dollars per hour, the poor would still be poor. In fact, they'd be even poorer, because the only thing a raise in the minimum wage does is spur inflation.

This is a terrible argument, for two reasons.

One, you're trying to use some form of reductio where such an argument is not appropriate. But being somewhat charitable and trying to pick out your actual argument, what you're claiming is that increasing the minimum wage will produce an equivalent amount of inflation, negating the wage increase. This is not historically accurate, and requires, as far as I can tell, that all wages and other forms of compensation (salaries, etc) increase by the same amount as the minimum wage increase (same percentage). This does not happen; what you actually get for small minimum wage increases is a slight compression of the overall wage scale, as the farther above minimum wage you are, the less likely that you will get a raise in response to the minimum going up. There will be slight inflation, considerably less than the minimum wage increase, and it will be 'paid for' by employers and wage earners who are not nominally affected by the minimum wage increase. This would be my version of the argument, and it's pretty solid.

Sometimes arguing economics with people who almost get it, but not quite, I feel the need to say 'if we're going to have this discussion, we need a better argument for you'

 

[Vic]

Ah yes, because there are no differences of opinion in economics, right? :roll:

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Vic
Ah yes, because there are no differences of opinion in economics, right? :roll:

The only way you can make your version of the argument, unlkess I'm misquoting you (which I'm not) is if all wages go up in response to minimum wage increases. This doesn't happen!

My version is better for a libertarian anyway, because it shows minimum wage laws may be a 'tax' on all other employees. Of course this would lead back to arguments about people being 'paid what they're worth'.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Vic
Ah yes, because there are no differences of opinion in economics, right? :roll:

The only way you can make your version of the argument, unlkess I'm misquoting you (which I'm not) is if all wages go up in response to minimum wage increases. This doesn't happen!

My version is better for a libertarian anyway, because it shows minimum wage laws may be a 'tax' on all other employees. Of course this would lead back to arguments about people being 'paid what they're worth'.

Under my (admittedly) outrageous example of a minimum wage of $1 million per hour, that is exactly what would have to happen (all wages going up), so you must have misquoted me. My point for using such an extreme example was to demonstrate the flexibility in the value of money. That it is not concrete (hell, it's real only because we think it is). Which IMO should be obvious but apparently is not to some.

Hey, if raising the minimum wage will make you feel good, let's go for it. But it's not going to do any good except make you feel good.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Vic
Ah yes, because there are no differences of opinion in economics, right? :roll:

The only way you can make your version of the argument, unlkess I'm misquoting you (which I'm not) is if all wages go up in response to minimum wage increases. This doesn't happen!

My version is better for a libertarian anyway, because it shows minimum wage laws may be a 'tax' on all other employees. Of course this would lead back to arguments about people being 'paid what they're worth'.

Under my (admittedly) outrageous example of a minimum wage of $1 million per hour, that is exactly what would have to happen (all wages going up), so you must have misquoted me. My point for using such an extreme example was to demonstrate the flexibility in the value of money. That it is not concrete (hell, it's real only because we think it is). Which IMO should be obvious but apparently is not to some.

Hey, if raising the minimum wage will make you feel good, let's go for it. But it's not going to do any good except make you feel good.

I've made my lacklustre enthusiasm for minimum wage as a policy tool known before. It's just that it doesn't do what some people claim it does, and every five or six posts in this thread someone chimes in with 'it will just cause inflation and not help anyone' which is not true, or at least only true in a limited sense.

As far as the debate over American minimum wage, today, if it really affects only 2% of the workforce (in which case most of those are probably students) then a 10% or so increase isn't going to affect more than maybe 4% of the population (still mostly students), and I don't think it's worth debating, or implementing.

There are other countries with different circumstances though, and in some cases minimum wage might be the best bad tool available.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Citrix
min wage increase = higher prices for my bigmac. :| bad idea.

Do like the poor people do, go without or pack a lunch.

Your "poor people" eat BigMacs. That's one of many reasons why they're poor -- they always pay more than they need to for essential goods and services.

Yeah, while your having champange and the extra-large prime rib at a fancy club. Grow up.

:roll:

This is the most idiotic argument possible on the interent. For all you know, I am poor. For all I know, you're richer than Bill Gates. Just because I don't toe the line to your agenda or say all the pretty words you want to hear doesn't make me into the monster you want me to be. It just makes you immature. Forgive me for thinking and daring to question. What's your excuse for never thinking and never questioning?

edit: What I said about the poor was 100% accurate btw. I work in finance, remember? I see that sh!t first hand. The fastest and easiest way to become poor, regardless of income, is bad financial management.

You poor? HA, that's funny. You probably have the first dollar you ever earned. I kind of figured my comment would get your greedy little ego going in overtime!!!! :laugh: The WORKING poor don't deserve to be able to eat a Big Mac once in a while, LMAO, and you call me immature? Your just a Scrooge. I imagine you as a slumlord myself.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
You poor? HA, that's funny. You probably have the first dollar you ever earned. I kind of figured my comment would get your greedy little ego going in overtime!!!! :laugh: The WORKING poor don't deserve to be able to eat a Big Mac once in a while, LMAO, and you call me immature? Your just a Scrooge. I imagine you as a slumlord myself.

You imagine me all wrong. Sorry to say. For one thing, I don't own a single investment property. For another, I grew up in the working poor (but that only tarnishes me in your hypocritical eyes, right?). I don't have the first dollar I ever earned (I started working at age 11), and I am not greedy, but actually quite generous (I don't bitch my concerns on an internet forum where it does no good at all in the real world, I actually do something to help). You see, I'm actually trying to help. YOU are the one who is self-serving, merely trying to make yourself feel good by pretending that you are helping. This real-world difference, I am sure, will be utterly and completely lost on you.

Back on topic though, I did not say the working poor don't deserve a Big Mac. That would be miscontruing my statement to the point of unjustly slandering my character (which I am quite sure was your intention). What I did say was that buying a Big Mac instead of brown-bagging is exactly that kind of poor financial decision that keeps the poor poor. That they would be better off if they did not waste their money on Big Macs.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
You poor? HA, that's funny. You probably have the first dollar you ever earned. I kind of figured my comment would get your greedy little ego going in overtime!!!! :laugh: The WORKING poor don't deserve to be able to eat a Big Mac once in a while, LMAO, and you call me immature? Your just a Scrooge. I imagine you as a slumlord myself.

You imagine me all wrong. Sorry to say. For one thing, I don't own a single investment property. For another, I grew up in the working poor (but that only tarnishes me in your hypocritical eyes, right?). I don't have the first dollar I ever earned (I started working at age 11), and I am not greedy, but actually quite generous (I don't bitch my concerns on an internet forum where it does no good at all in the real world, I actually do something to help). You see, I'm actually trying to help. YOU are the one who is self-serving, merely trying to make yourself feel good by pretending that you are helping. This real-world difference, I am sure, will be utterly and completely lost on you.

Back on topic though, I did not say the working poor don't deserve a Big Mac. That would be miscontruing my statement to the point of unjustly slandering my character (which I am quite sure was your intention). What I did say was that buying a Big Mac instead of brown-bagging is exactly that kind of poor financial decision that keeps the poor poor. That they would be better off if they did not waste their money on Big Macs.

They'd be better off if they made an honest days wage for their honest days work. Then they could afford that Big Mac with out being critizied and you could go bitch about something else and offer your "help". Of course you don't want them to have that kind of help because you expect them to be able to compete with people who can live off a dollar a day.

Piss off Vic, you may fool yourself, but you don't fool me.

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: Vic
Hey, if raising the minimum wage will make you feel good, let's go for it. But it's not going to do any good except make you feel good.

:thumbsup:

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
You poor? HA, that's funny. You probably have the first dollar you ever earned. I kind of figured my comment would get your greedy little ego going in overtime!!!! :laugh: The WORKING poor don't deserve to be able to eat a Big Mac once in a while, LMAO, and you call me immature? Your just a Scrooge. I imagine you as a slumlord myself.

You imagine me all wrong. Sorry to say. For one thing, I don't own a single investment property. For another, I grew up in the working poor (but that only tarnishes me in your hypocritical eyes, right?). I don't have the first dollar I ever earned (I started working at age 11), and I am not greedy, but actually quite generous (I don't bitch my concerns on an internet forum where it does no good at all in the real world, I actually do something to help). You see, I'm actually trying to help. YOU are the one who is self-serving, merely trying to make yourself feel good by pretending that you are helping. This real-world difference, I am sure, will be utterly and completely lost on you.

Back on topic though, I did not say the working poor don't deserve a Big Mac. That would be miscontruing my statement to the point of unjustly slandering my character (which I am quite sure was your intention). What I did say was that buying a Big Mac instead of brown-bagging is exactly that kind of poor financial decision that keeps the poor poor. That they would be better off if they did not waste their money on Big Macs.

They'd be better off if they made an honest days wage for their honest days work. Then they could afford that Big Mac with out being critizied and you could go bitch about something else and offer your "help". Of course you don't want them to have that kind of help because you expect them to be able to compete with people who can live off a dollar a day.

Piss off Vic, you may fool yourself, but you don't fool me.

Are you suggesting they are making a dishonest wage for their work?

btw how much do you pay the workers on your farm on an hourly basis?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
You poor? HA, that's funny. You probably have the first dollar you ever earned. I kind of figured my comment would get your greedy little ego going in overtime!!!! :laugh: The WORKING poor don't deserve to be able to eat a Big Mac once in a while, LMAO, and you call me immature? Your just a Scrooge. I imagine you as a slumlord myself.

You imagine me all wrong. Sorry to say. For one thing, I don't own a single investment property. For another, I grew up in the working poor (but that only tarnishes me in your hypocritical eyes, right?). I don't have the first dollar I ever earned (I started working at age 11), and I am not greedy, but actually quite generous (I don't bitch my concerns on an internet forum where it does no good at all in the real world, I actually do something to help). You see, I'm actually trying to help. YOU are the one who is self-serving, merely trying to make yourself feel good by pretending that you are helping. This real-world difference, I am sure, will be utterly and completely lost on you.

Back on topic though, I did not say the working poor don't deserve a Big Mac. That would be miscontruing my statement to the point of unjustly slandering my character (which I am quite sure was your intention). What I did say was that buying a Big Mac instead of brown-bagging is exactly that kind of poor financial decision that keeps the poor poor. That they would be better off if they did not waste their money on Big Macs.

They'd be better off if they made an honest days wage for their honest days work. Then they could afford that Big Mac with out being critizied and you could go bitch about something else and offer your "help". Of course you don't want them to have that kind of help because you expect them to be able to compete with people who can live off a dollar a day.

Piss off Vic, you may fool yourself, but you don't fool me.

Are you suggesting they are making a dishonest wage for their work?

btw how much do you pay the workers on your farm on an hourly basis?

What do you care? You worried I might be taking advantage of someone?