Into the Night
Contributor
I already explained this. Argument of the stone.
Federal deficit grows by 32% to $900B
- Thread starter LV426
- Start date
I already explained this. Argument of the stone.
Into the Night
Contributor
Into the Night
Contributor
Price controls don't work. They inevitable cause shortages. All a minimum wage does is put people out of work.
Into the Night
Contributor
This is right out of Karl Marx. Capitalism is not predatory.
Walmart succeeds because people go in there to buy stuff, not because of 'subsidies' (which aren't subsidies). A tax break is not a subsidy. I guess you would rather not have Walmart at all, and that includes the jobs they provide and the convenience they provide for their customers.
Tax breaks are not subsidies. Amazon succeeds because people buy stuff from their web site. Lately, they also succeed because people buy use of their cloud services they've built, which their own website runs on.
Again, I guess you would rather not have any of the jobs that Amazon brings to a community at all. Zero is better than low wages to you.
No one...and I mean no one...is entitled to any wage. Minimum wage laws are price controls. Price controls never work. They always cause shortages. The free market is immortal. You can't kill it. Price discovery is the ONLY workable way to figure the price of a product or service.
Want to make more money? Then make yourself worth more to somebody! Get an education, get training in a skill, get some motivation, get SOMETHING that makes you worth more than the unskilled, the unmotivated, and the uneducated. For example, learn to code. Amazon will pay you more for that over paying someone to shove boxes around in a warehouse.
Bezos succeeds because he provides products and services that people are willing to pay for at the price he is asking for it. It's as simple as that.
Joe Capitalist
Racism is a disease
People can't live on minimum wage? Who made living on minimum wage a mandate?
I am adamantly against the government setting wages. Let the market decide the wages. That's what capitalism is all about. Nobody's taking advantage of anybody. Businesses need minimum wage workers. Minimum wage workers need businesses. It's a symbiotic relationship. Wages are commensurate with skills and the demand for those skills. It's the cornerstone of capitalism.
Why the hatefest against businesses? Private industry makes the country run. And Americans get rich investing in theses companies. Federal Government never made anybody rich...Except for politicians.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
I know.......I love the fact that my taxes went down and you people who don't pay taxes didn't get a cut..........
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
you mean you made the argument of a stone head........
In 2014, 13 states all raised their minimum wage, and all 13 had faster job growth in the aggregate than the 37 states that didn't raise their minimum wages.
States That Raised Minimum Wage See Faster Job Growth, Report Says
In a report on Friday, the 13 states that raised their minimum wages on Jan. 1 have added jobs at a faster pace than those that did not.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...inimum-wage-see-faster-job-growth-report-says
Yes it is.
"Predatory loans" most definitely exist and were prevalent during the mortgage bubble Conservatives were inflating in the 00's. In fact, Conservatives were such fans of predatory lending that they enacted a 19th-century OCC rule that removed state protections specifically against predatory lending back in 2003:
In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government's actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../02/13/AR2008021302783.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Sure they are. Taxpayer-funded breaks to preserve corporate profits. Completely subsidies. It's silly to pretend they're not.
And no one...and I mean no one...is entitled to own a business.
In 2014, 13 states all raised their minimum wage and all 13 states saw faster job growth than the 37 states that didn't.
So here comes the part where a Conservative, who won't divulge any personal details on this board, tries to subjectively judge the worth of someone's employment. How about we put you under the microscope and determine your value and worth? Let's see...I don't see you doing anything but posting non-stop 24/7 on these boards, even after your previous account was probably suspended. So what do you actually do for society? Nothing. You just posture on a message board. Fact is, you're probably one of those "unskilled, unmotivated, and uneducated" people you are trying to judge here. That's pretty typical projection from an insecure Conservative, and would be par for the course.
I would never judge your job based on my subjective opinion, but I sure as shit will judge your character. And you appear to have no moral character. You're just a posturing fraud.
Into the Night
Contributor
You seem to think that all loans are predatory, that all capitalists are predatory, etc. You are a bigot. Those banks and institutions that made such loans in the mid 2000's were PROTECTED BY OBAMA. They should have been left to go bankrupt. Those loans were caused by a Fed putting out easy money.
Into the Night
Contributor
Taxes breaks are not subsidies. They are not taxpayer funded.
Who decides who can own a business??? You??? You are not a dictator, dude!
Into the Night
Contributor
Argument from randU fallacy.
STRAW MAN!
I never said that.
So this is you being weak.
Go fuck yourself with your straw men.
Ross Perot was the last presidential candidate that at least gave lip service to the deficit.
Gary Johnson was the only presidential candidate that had a track record of vetoing any spending bill that didn't have a tax increase to pay for it or vetoing a tax cut without a reduction in spending, both the heretic idea of (gasp!) fiscal responsibility.
Gary Johnson was the only presidential candidate that had a track record of vetoing any spending bill that didn't have a tax increase to pay for it or vetoing a tax cut without a reduction in spending, both the heretic idea of (gasp!) fiscal responsibility.
Like clockwork, the Conservative responding to this thread must seize upon imaginary victimhood because his shitty argument fell to pieces when I showed not only is there predation in capitalism, but Conservatives actively fostered and defended that predation because they lack moral character.
No, they were protected by Bush and the Conservatives who refused to break up the banks, REMEMBER?!? You were the ones who said we couldn't break up the banks. You didn't give a good reason why. And yes, Obama should have taken a hard line on the banksters. But they wouldn't have been banksters in the first place if you all hadn't defended them throughout Bush the Dumber. Conservatives opposed any banking reform, period.
No they weren't. The Fed was raising interest rates for at least two years before the subprime bubble started.
Is this cawacko using a different MB ID? If so, weak sauce, bruh.
They are most definitely taxpayer-funded because the taxes corporations don't pay, taxpayers end up paying.
Cutting taxes has the same net effect on the budget as increasing spending.
Only, cutting taxes doesn't create jobs. Cutting taxes only creates deficits. It's those deficits you feign concern over in order to extract cuts to spending to which you're ideologically opposed.
I see right through it. You're not clever enough to hide it.
The State does because the State issues a charter for your business. You can't just create a business because you feel like it. You're not entitled to owning a business. Not anymore than anyone is entitled to a job.