Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Bernie Sanders: It's Impossible To Live On The Minimum Wage" video.

  1. Great point. The title is misleading. A one bedroom in my city is around $600. A two bedroom is $750. If you get a roommate in a two bedroom you are only paying $375. You are saving $225 a month.
    4
  2. And FDR turned a recession into a depression for a reason, he was economically illiterate.
    3
  3. Less than 4% of workers earn the min. wage. As is businesses already pay more even though they have the option not to.
    3
  4. But yet several people seem to be doing it. You know why? Because most on min. wage are not even poor to begin with. Bernie is once again showing how dumb he is. When broken down there is not one single good reason to even have a min. wage
    2
  5. EnderGold And how many min. wage workers are 1. working full time 2. trying to rent out one bedroom apartments 3. are even poor to begin with
    2
  6. No it won't. Money is not the issue, creation of wealth is.
    2
  7. Eric Oxner And your side is wrong.
    1
  8. ***** It is making the assumption that min. wage workers are 1. poor 2. work full time 3. all rent one bedroom apartments All of which, for the most part, is not true.
    1
  9. MrSlutzkin, every recession in this country, except for two, took around 5 years or less to recover from. The two that took the longest to recover from were the Great Depression and the one we are in now. They are also the only times the federal government tried to "fix" the economy with massive spending. Anyone who thinks FDR was a great president also think that Matt Millen was a great GM for the Detroit Lions.
    1
  10. Neku, FDR hindered recovery and created the federal government we have no, corrupt and inefficient.
    1
  11. Let me fix that FDR quote "No person which depends on the government to force a business to pay them a higher wage has any right to continue in this country. By higher wage I mean a wage that is more than what that worker is worth in the market."
    1
  12. SodaBoy628 NFL players are paid millions because with TV contracts they generate a lot of money for the NFL and the teams.  The players are the main reason why people watch the game, so they are worth that much.  "Another thing, why the fuck should ANYONE with a job not be able to afford a decent living?" There are several ways to have a "decent" living (which is subjective and vague).  Having a roommate, living with parents, having a partner who earns more and so on. It isn't simply about the wage. "And regarding your reply about the long recovery during the 1930s, you are out of your fucking mind if you think America would be able to recover from a 25% unemployment rate within a few years." They could of. We had it around 16% after the crash of 1921 and within two years was back down to around 4%.  At 25% it would have taken maybe three or four years, but not almost 10. It was over 20% for over ten years, that is pathetic and inexcusable.
    1
  13. SodaBoy628 " People who work at McDonald's help generate a lot of money for their restaurants" Not a lot. "So why aren't THEY being paid a living wage?" Well, they are alive so I will say they already are. " And don't say "because they flip burgers", because NFL players throw a football, run, and catch a football. Something literally ANYONE can do." But can you do it well enough to where you get millions to watch you and TV stations are willing to sign million dollar contracts for? "What I meant by "decent living" is being able to afford living on your own, WITHOUT financial assistance from others." What do you mean live on your own?  As in have your own business? Own your own place?  If you rent you are avoiding property taxes and maintenance expenses.  So right away you have financial assistance. " The unemployment rate dropped AFTER 1933. Like I said, it takes a long time for the economy to recover when 25% of people are unemployed." Barely http://www.nber.org/chapters/c2644.pdf "During the 1920s, Wall Street wasn't regulated. That, combined with increasing wealth inequality caused by Harding and Coolidge's tax cuts, is what directly led to the Wall Street Crash of 1929." A little vague.  Recessions happen, how we recover is key.  FDR tried to spend his way to a recovery, it didn't work.
    1
  14. Duncan Muhcokiner It says "living".  To me that is being alive. If your landlord raised your rent to repair your apartment, that is poor business practice on their part unless the fire was your fault.  I agree that renting to tenants is a risk as I have been a part of it.   
    1
  15. SodaBoy628 You feel that McDonalds workers should be paid millions.  
    1
  16. SodaBoy628"Decent" is vague and subjective. Why not a studio?  Why not a three bedroom house with a yard and three roommates?  Don't people deserve a yard to maybe grow a garden?   
    1
  17. SodaBoy628 The word "decent" is vague and subjective.  That is the issue.  
    1
  18. SodaBoy628 And that is your arbitrary standard.  What is it based off of? 
    1
  19. Duncan Muhcokiner If they are healthy enough to work than they are alive.
    1
  20. TheReasonMaster123 Where am I wrong?
    1
  21. Duncan Muhcokiner Now you want to move the goal post and make up your own definition of "living"?
    1
  22. Duncan Muhcokiner They are living life to the fullest. Their fullest just so happens to be at a low wage job. That low wage job is also how they make a living.   
    1
  23. Duncan Muhcokiner  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/living
    1
  24. Duncan Muhcokiner We are defining "living", not "make a living". These people are alive thus the wage they earn is a "living wage".
    1
  25. Duncan Muhcokiner Somewhat, but so do others. Even at that it was minimal and I still had to pull out a loan.  In graduate school I am on my own.  I have had friends who fell on hard times and I helped them out.  That is what a society should do, and not by force.  Instead you want to do it by force which is  a problem.  I have no problem helping others out, I just don't want it to be done by force. Also, the way you want to do it does not help at all.  If you raise the min. wage a business will just raise prices and cut hours.  A business is not a charity.  But the fact that you wish ill will on someone shows your true colors.  I don't wish that on people, I want people to be educated and knowledgeable on the issues.  I can say this to you, I hope you run a business and then the government comes and raises the min. wage forcing you to decide which employees to cut and what you should say to them.  
    1
  26. Duncan Muhcokiner Nope, it says "living wage"? You have to look up the definition of "living" and "wage". Kyle says "living wage", Bernie says "living wage".  Not "making a living".  I hope the real world calling you is towards studying economics. 
    1
  27. Duncan Muhcokiner List the states 
    1
  28. Duncan Muhcokiner The study does not list them making the study bogus.  
    1
  29. Bernie supporters feel that having a roommate is degrading.
    1
  30. The federal government does try to do things which is part of the reason why rent is so high. No different than college tuition. Also, local governments have tried too much as well such as rent control.
    1
  31. Blair, the min. wage is at an all time high. You comparing the min. wage to overall productivity is incredibly foolish.
    1
  32. Jason R Couple things 1. you can't compare the min. wage to inflation because not everything inflates 2. if you do want to do that than you have to look back when it was first implemented, than it will be around $4
    1
  33. Jason R If you want to tie the min. wage to inflation than you are saying that everything inflates which is not true.  Let me ask you, what is the value of the Blockbuster employee? So no, you can't compare the min. wage to inflation.  You picking the year 1968 is cherry picking at its finest.
    1
  34. Jason R A VCR, if you used how much is cost in 1980 would cost over $500 now. So would you pay over $500 for a VCR? The point with Blockbuster is that some jobs decrease in value, some increase, and others stay the same. Just like automation will make some jobs valued to be $0.  You can use inflation to compare the cost for anything, not just wages.  You are cherry picking 1968 to push propaganda.  It is meaningless. 
    1
  35. Jason R Sure, we can do that.  If we did that several min. wage jobs would be lower in value considering how the price of labor is outpacing productivity in those parts of the job sector.
    1
  36. Jason R Looking at productivity is not going to help your cause by the way.
    1
  37. It is one thing to say facts, it is another to properly interpret them. All Bernie did was show how many hours you have to work on min. wage to pay for one month's rent in a one bedroom. What does that prove? Nothing.
    1
  38. The counter here is that Bernie is making a dumb standard. Rent in my city is around $600 for a one bedroom (at least in my apartment complex). For a two bedroom it is $750. If you get a roommate you go from paying $600 in a one bedroom to $375. That is saving $225 a month. But Bernie ignores that, he is simply looking at how many hours it takes to live in a one bedroom.
    1
  39. ***** There are ways to cut costs. My main point is that all Bernie is doing is showing how many hours you have to work to afford a one bedroom apartment. That means nothing.  He can show a chart showing how many hours it takes to buy a home, it is the same thing. 
    1
  40. SaiyanZ Rage Exactly.
    1
  41. LI G, how many min. wage workers are 1. working full time 2. living on their own 3. are trying to raise a family People have to make sacrifices in life, that is just how it goes If you don't want a roommate than work another job, work a higher paying job, or rent out a studio. You can't always get what you want and at times you have to make cuts. Several college students have roommates to pay for rent, that's life. What getting a roommate shows is that you can survive on the min. wage if you know what you are doing.
    1
  42. GravianS Why not? 
    1
  43. GravianS Ok, what?  
    1
  44. GravianS I am awful because I know facts? 
    1
  45. Ll G What Sanders is saying is pointless.  He might as well say how many hours you have to work at min. wage to buy a new computer.  It means nothing and removes several variables.  Sanders is making the false assumption that 1. most min. wage workers work fulltime 2. min. wage workers live by themselves 3. min. wage workers are even poor to begin with What he said is factual, but so does him saying you have to work X amount of hours to buy a new car in the US.  It means nothing.  Or similar to the gender earnings gap, it is a fact but for several reasons.  Facts are one thing, how you interpret them shows ones real intelligence. Bernie, once again, showed he has a mental disorder.  
    1
  46. Ll G  http://cdn.theatlantic.com/newsroom/img/posts/Sabia_Burkhauser_SEJ_Jan10.pdf That shows that people earning $9.50/hr or less are typically not poor.  That is also a fact. 
    1
  47. GravianS Bernie is making the false assumption that those on min. wage are 1. poor 2. work full time 3. live by themselves All which are false.  So his numbers make no sense. Also, studios may be trashy at times, but so what?  We are talking about poor people hear.  And how many poor people remain poor?  You are making the false assumption that several people who live in those studios do so for their entire life.  Again, that is not the case, and if it were it is the rare occasion.   I don't have a mental disorder.  Bernie does.  He complains about rich people but than owns three homes himself.  In debates with people who disagree with him he always reverts to the same talking points over and over again. He has signs of narcissism.  It is shown in how Bernie only donates 4% of his income to charity where the Clintons donated around 11% in 2014.  Bernie claims he wants to help people but than doesn't in the end.  He is all talk and no actions.  He has a mental disorder. Now tell me, were did I ever show I was a sociopath?  Because I can see past Bernie's rhetoric? Also, most economists disagree with Bernie and will find what Bernie presented here to be asinine.
    1
  48. GravianS So I am out of touch with reality because I realize that people working the min. wage have other options to live in besides one bedroom apartments?  You do know that half of min. wage workers are younger than 25 years old?  So I guess all those 15, 16 and 17 year olds are working real hard trying to pay rent for their one bedroom apartment they are living at on their own.  
    1
  49. stevevai6732, Bernie is being deceptive. He is ignoring the fact that there are other options such as studio apartments and getting roommates. While what he is presenting is "factual" in a sense, it is being deceptive. It is lying with statistics.
    1
  50. Ll G It is false and deceptive because Bernie is literally lying with statistics.  Say you have four people living in a one bedroom, take his numbers and divide them by four and you are done.  But what Bernie is presenting is making it seem that min. wage workers 1. all work full time 2. are trying to live on their own Both of which, for the most part is not true. Pretty much in the end what he is presenting is pointless as he is giving the illusion that there are no other options beside one bedroom apartments. " If you have to get a roommate while working 40 hours at minimum wage, then you cannot survive on your own" In reality no on can live on their own.  How did that person get a job to begin with?  By someone hiring them.  But, more importantly, if they are renting they don't own the place they live in meaning they are at the mercy of the landlord. "  The poor have made all the sacrifices. They have been the productive ones, but have seen little to none of the increased wages" Not true at all. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/prin1.t02.htm Look at unit labor cost, especially in the food service industry which typically pays the low wages.  It is positive meaning that the cost of labor is outpacing productivity.  Again, more facts. "1 in 6 children are living in poverty, and the majority of U.S. workers who are working full time are making a wage that is below the poverty line." Not true.  Most in poverty don't have a job. "If a business can't pay its employees a living wage, then it should not exist" If a worker can't justify earning a higher wage then they should not exist.  See how easy it is to transform your asinine argument.  If you raise the min. wage a business will do just that, fire their least productive workers. ". Two years ago a CEO was making on average 204 times what his or her median worker was." If you were to take the top 6 executives of Walmart and spread their salaries to the 525,000 lowest paid employees they will earn an extra $147 a year, that's it.  Also, what you are saying it not exactly true https://www.aei.org/publication/hillary-and-bernie-both-complain-about-excessive-ceo-pay-but-the-average-ceo-makes-less-than-hillarys-speaking-fee/ Bernie's salary as a Senator is comparable to that of the average CEO https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes111011.htm "If you fail to see how destructive that is, then you also have problems doing math." I have a math minor so I understand math well.  The fact is that Bernie is showing once again that either he does not understand math and statistics, can lie very well with it, or does have a mental disorder.
    1
  51. Daniel Holm "Since when can four people live in a one-bedroom apartment?" Quite often really. "Bernie isn't saying all minimum-wage workers should live in a one-bedroom apartment. He is saying that the average minimum-wage worker should be able to afford living in a one-bedroom apartment." Why? What's wrong with roommates?  What's wrong with a studio?  And why rent? Why not own?  Bernie is setting some arbitrary standard that, honestly, makes zero sense. "Why are you bringing up average CEOs? That isn't the conversation we're having. Comparing the average worker to the average CEO isn't particularly relevant." Why not?  Bernie tries that.  You have to be fair with your analysis.  Also, it shows how easily one can manipulate the numbers which is what Bernie is doing.  I understand math well which is why I saw right past Bernie's crap.  There are several options for people to live in that are cheaper than a one bedroom apartment. There is nothing that says the standard should be for a one bedroom apartment.  Again, why not owning an apartment and include property taxes? Bernie is pushing propaganda. Luckily we have enough intelligent people in the country to see right past it.
    1
  52. Daniel Holm" Four people living in a one-bedroom apartment is inhuman. Period." Why? I see nothing inhuman about it.  "There's nothing wrong with roommates, but you cannot have roommates in a one-bedroom apartment" I did, several do.  Nothing wrong with it.  It motivated me to work harder to get my own place. "The conversation is about one-bedroom apartments. If you split the cost of a more expensive multiple-bedroom apartment (thus ending up with a lower overall rent), then you aren't the topic of the conversation." The conversation is how Bernie set an arbitrary standard that makes zero sense. He is giving the illusion that the only way someone can live is by themselves in a one bedroom apartment when there are a lot of different options. "The bare minimum for a "liveable wage" is that a person can rent a one-bedroom apartment without being forced to share his personal space." Set by who? Also, if two people are living in a one bedroom they are, by definition, living. "Bernie isn't trying to do that. Bringing up average CEOs is fundamentally different to bringing up top CEOs. " Bernie compared to CEOs to average workers. That is being deceptive.  Bernie is manipulating his numbers to push his propaganda.  No different than the gender earnings gap in he is comparing a female school teacher to a male doctor. "There may be cheaper options, but forcing people into communal living is inhumane. It really should not need to be explained." No one is forcing anyone to do anything.  One can say that forcing someone to work is inhumane. "Bernie isn't pushing "propaganda". He is pointing out a specific issue, with data to back his claims up." He is cherry picking his data to push propaganda.
    1
  53. Daniel Holm There are far worse situations you can live in.  Chances are if you are living in a one bedroom with three other people you are very busy to begin with and you are hardly home, like most college students. " Anecdotal evidence counts for very little. The fact that you were capable of living together in that situation has no bearing on whether someone else is also capable of it." Sometimes you have to make sacrifices. It is doable. "No, he is simply addressing that. He is having a conversation about a specific issue. You are claiming he is saying that is the only conversation it is possible to have. He isn't saying that." Why isn't he bringing up other means of living such as roommates?  Instead he is saying we should raise the min. wage when I can easily say "well, how about you just get roommates".  Both make paying off rent easier (assuming, falsely, that raising the min. wage does not kill jobs). Bernie is not giving other options. "By common consensus." Again, who? "Two people living in a one-bedroom apartment is again not the conversation we're having." And why not?  We should explore all options, not just ones you want to look at. "Comparing a specific subset of something to the average of something else is not inherently deceptive." Yes it is. He is changing the numbers to push his propaganda.  He is ignoring several other factors as well such as how many people do those CEOs hire. "If minimum wage is not high enough for someone to afford a one-bedroom apartment, then yes, you are forced" Not necessarily.  You have to also realize who works the min. wage.  Most are a second or third earner a household.  We don't set wages based on what it can afford, a wage is set based on the market as determined by the worker's value and skill. It is up to you to find a way to live.  If that means having roommates than so be it.  Bernie is arbitrarily wanting to set the min. wage to the price of rent. That is not how it works. "This is not cherry-picking, because the data you want to include is not relevant, which is why it wasn't included" It is relevant.  If you want to set a wage based on rent than you have to look at all rent. If you want to explore how one can live off of the min. wage you have to explore all options instead of just raising it.  You can't ignore what you don't agree with.  Also, in the end, wages are not set by rent. When an employer hires you they don't ask for how much your rent is, they pay you what you are worth.
    1
  54. Daniel Holm" You just said that getting roommates would be the solution. That implies it would be the solution regardless of the state of the rest of your life. If it only works if you're not at home much, then it doesn't work in general. The solution has to apply to everyone." If your income is that low I suggest you start working harder to move up. "It was doable for you. That does not mean it is doable for everyone." For the most part it is. "Because raising the minimum wage is a solution that works across the board, whereas "find a roommate" does not. " Not really.  You are not taking into account job loss and increase in demand for one bedroom apartments.  Assume that the min. wage increases and not jobs are lost, now you just increased the demand for one bedroom apartments which there is a limit of.  Now you raised rent.  We are having a similar problem in my city.  The university is accepting more and more students and two new businesses came in one that pays $15/hr and another that pays $21/hr.  As a result we are limited in apartments and rentals and rent has been going up. So with your solution you will be increasing the price of rent. "By common consensus. Society, if you want a different term. The social contract." Again, who. I see no names, only the asinine term "social contract" which means nothing. "Because it is not always possible. Even if you want to find a roommate, you may not be able to. Since that is possible, we have to focus on the situation where you are living alone, otherwise those people end up thoroughly screwed." But if there are not enough one bedroom apartments, then what? "No, it isn't. If I want to know how much better top athletes are than the average person, then it makes no sense for me to compare the average athlete to the average person -- that doesn't give me any data that is relevant. It is not "deceptive", it is simply a question of the exact topic I am interested in. Bernie compares the top CEOs to the average worker because that is the discrepancy he wants to address." Again, how many jobs do those CEOs create.  If you were to take the top 6 executives of Walmart and spread their salary to the 525,000 lowest paid employees of Walmart they will earn an extra $147 a year. That's it.  That is why they are paid so much.  Again, different perspective. "Minimum wage is arbitrary no matter how you slice it - it is a minimum. If it were purely based on the market, there would be no minimum wage." It is based on the market as it is $0.  If you are not worth $7.25/hr you will earn $0. The problem is that if you are not worth $7.25/hr but instead are worth $5/hr, you will still earn $0. That is what the min. wage does. "The minimum wage exists for one purpose: to ensure a livable wage." You are forcing how much is paid per hour, not per week.  If hours are cut what does it matter? "Your argument is an argument against having a minimum wage in the first place. That's a conversation we could have, but it's not this conversation." If you want to have that conversation then fine, we can.  My argument is that Bernie is hiding things.  As I showed with the Walmart executives and spreading their salary to other workers, you see that if you do that those workers don't see a significant increase in their income.  Now does that make how much they earn right?  That is debatable.  But it puts it in a different perspective. Bernie is giving his perspective and hiding the other side of the argument. That is where he is in the wrong.  With one bedroom apartments, what happens when you increase the demand for them?  Rent will go up.  You are Bernie are not taking that into account, or how a wage is how much is paid per hour, not per week.
    1
  55. Daniel Holm Yes, I was serious. You can never account for everyone.  You can't just say build more.  That is the problem we are running into now in my city.  We are trying to but you have to buy the land and than start to build them.  It takes time.  Meanwhile rent is going up.  What I showed you with the Walmart executives is that they are responsible for that many employees which is why they get paid more.  It shows why they are paid that much.  Bernie chooses to ignore that. "That's demonstrably false. Feel free to actually research it. Kyle just did a segment on it, I believe." It is not false.  When the min. wage goes up so does unemployment for the youth and unskilled workers. Black teen unemployment went up when the min. wage was put in place.  Kyle thinks the min. wage should be $22/hr because overall productivity is at that point. Overall productivity produces $22/hr, but you still have workers that produce very little, they are the minimum.  So pretty much Kyle is an economic illiterate. "The minimum wage is made in the context of a full-time job, i.e. 37.5 hours per week. It's simply how the system is set up." Except only around 2% work full time, (BLS standard of 35 hours a week).  So they are not even getting fulltime hours. "While I could easily have missed it, I haven't heard him say that the wages of CEOs should be divided amongst workers. I've only heard him say there's a discrepancy between what a CEO earns and what their workers do." Ok, what do you suggest we do?  I showed you that cutting their pay won't lead to others getting more money or higher wages?  At that point all he is doing is making a statement, I don't see what is wrong at that point?  He might as well say that people go ice fishing in Minnesota.  "Again, we're only talking in the context of a full-time job. That is a fixed amount of hours per week. So it is per week too, for what that's worth." Nope, a business can just cut hours which you have no control over.  The min. wage tells the business how much they have to pay them per hour, not per week.  So if they cut hours, what have you solved?  "If demand increases, supply will also increase" It doesn't work like that.  Someone has to produce.  If production is not there than it won't be there. "If one-bedroom apartments become so desired that there are no more to be had, then the market is obviously ripe for new one-bedroom apartment housing." Again, someone has to build it.  That means buying the land, the supplies, hiring the workers, getting permits, paying property taxes, sales tax when the land is bought, running the apartment complex and so on.  Raising prices is easier because of the pain to build a new apartment complex and run it. 
    1
  56. Daniel Holm Why does Bernie bring up the fact that CEOs earn so much?  Again, he can say the Cubs won the World Series, all he is doing is stating something.  I don't see a problem.
    1
  57. If the min. wage was $1,000,000 an hour then it will only take on hour to be a millionaire. Now what does that mean? Nothing. Just like Bernie's chart means nothing.
    1
  58. BabiiGoat All Bernie did was show how many hours you need to work on min. wage to pay one month's rent in certain states.  That does not prove anything.  He might as well say how many hours you have to work to be able to buy a Porsche.  He is making the false assumption that min. wage workers are 1. the primary earners of a household 2. live alone in a one bedroom as opposed to having roommates or living in a studio 3. work full time 4. are even poor to begin with He is pulling wool over people's eyes. 
    1
  59. Ryne Green Income does not equal all wealth.  If you want to spread wealth you have be giving away property.
    1
  60. Pridetoons Reviews You spend income, not wealth.  I have seen other countries, you really can't compare.
    1
  61. Pridetoons Reviews That covers a lot.
    1
  62. The Martyrer But yet you never give one citation yourself. 
    1
  63. The Martyrer I gave facts and explanation.
    1
  64. Ok, now how about a studio with two roommates? Let us change the standard a bit.
    1
  65. The Cadaver Times change. More people are going to college.  The economy changes all the time. 
    1
  66. The Cadaver There are plenty of jobs out there, you just have to get the skills to do it. When the tractor replaced the farm hand than people went to factories. Now they have to go to skilled jobs. There are plenty in healthcare.  
    1
  67. The Cadaver Some jobs won't be automated.  People can go to college and obtain skills. If we get to a point where every job is automated then that will be great.  As of now we are very far from that, not even within our lifetime.  
    1
  68. The Cadaver You are pull out a loan to attend college.  "We've been trying "supply-side economics" for decades" No we haven't.  That is the issue.  The rich are holding their money out of the country because the second it enters the country it will get taxed. 
    1
  69. Ll G We have a progressive tax code and regulations that hurt economic growth.  We also have to many social welfare programs.  Now I will admit that we have crony capitalism, but that is not supply side economics.  
    1
  70. The Cadaver Yes, they are being forced out because of taxes and regulations.  Is labor a part of it?  Somewhat, but there are several reasons why businesses leave and several expenses in how businesses operate.  
    1
  71. The Cadaver We have not been deregulating nor lowering taxes.   
    1
  72. The Cadaver What's your point?  There are more to taxes than just what is being shown.  The payroll tax was increased in the mid 60s and is causing many problems.  I'll leave this here:  http://www.politico.com/agenda/agenda/story/2016/1/obama-regulations-2016
    1
  73. The Cadaver Yes it is relevant, just like how you only showed me part of the taxes that are involved in our tax code.  You ignore the Tax Reform Act of 1969 and the payroll tax expansion.  Fact is that the complicated tax code and regulations are hurting the economy.   
    1
  74. The Cadaver How are companies putting their employees on welfare?  I have yet to see that. We have been using these social welfare programs for 40 years and nothing really improved.  It is time for a change.  
    1
  75. The Cadaver I worked a min. wage job when the min. wage was $5.15/hr. Also, the reality is that the vast majority of those earning $9.50/hr or less are not poor.  McDonalds can't afford higher wages. 
    1
  76. The Cadaver Most McDonalds are franchised, so no, they can't afford higher wages.  My story is not anecdotal, research showed low wage workers are not poor. http://cdn.theatlantic.com/newsroom/img/posts/Sabia_Burkhauser_SEJ_Jan10.pdf
    1
  77. I really think the definitions of "supply-side economics" and "progressive" continues to escape. I can easily name one regulation, that is the min. wage. When broken down there really is not one single good reason to even have a min. wage. But somehow people continue to push for it despite the damage it does.
    1
  78. LI G, I also love the fact that you, like most ultra liberals point to Reagan for all of the "problems" we have. We have also been having a war on poverty since the 60s and guess what, poverty has remained stagnate during that time. Before the war on poverty poverty was dropping. You are either choosing to deny or ignore facts.
    1
  79. Ll G You are an ultra liberal based on your defense of Bernie.  You are quick to defend his facts when they are empty.  There is a war on poverty declared in 1964, again, another fact. Unemployment dropped under Reagan, again, another fact. Under Clinton unemployment was at a record low and we saw a surplus. Reagan worked well with a democratic congress and Clinton worked well with a republican congress.  Common sense is never a strong argument.  Anyone who uses that phrase is hiding the fact that they don't know what they are talking about.  
    1