|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
Kilroy posted:No, but democratic socialism is. You can run on Democratic Socialism without a bunch of crazy purity tests
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 05:56 |
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:lmao because these two things are equal in any way shape or form And yet, JeffersonClay. Crank pragmatism is a hell of a drug.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:You can run on Democratic Socialism without a bunch of crazy purity tests Aaaand there it is, the patented liberal whining about purity tests to dodge around having to defend a position.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:You can run on Democratic Socialism without a bunch of crazy purity tests
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:Aaaand there it is, the patented liberal whining about purity tests to dodge around having to defend a position. What Positions do I have to defend exactly? Democrats aren't perfect politicians. Even Sanders recognizes that. Their political positions aren't sancrosanct. By his very arguement he opens himself up to the same fine combed examination he plays out to the rest of the crowd. If raising minimum wage in states that currently have $8 minimum wage puts some small business owners out of business and hands their market over to large corporations, who benefits?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:You can run on Democratic Socialism without a bunch of crazy purity tests Actually you do to some extent, because the Democrats' brand of "not Republicans!" is, uh.... not doing too hot right now. A good purity test would be understanding the value of wielding public power and not simply submitting to the whims of private power. Pelosi, Schumer, Clinton, and Obama all fail this test. Hence why people are so pissed.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:What Positions do I have to defend exactly?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:If raising minimum wage in states that currently have $8 minimum wage puts some small business owners out of business and hands their market over to large corporations, who benefits? What makes you think raising the minimum wage would put small business owners out of business?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:36
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:What Positions do I have to defend exactly? ...the people who have 7 dollars an hour more in their pockets. Of whom there are more than there are 'small business owners.' This is not a difficult question.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:What makes you think raising the minimum wage would put small business owners out of business? I do wonder whether a business that relies on paying it's employees such a low wage to survive, is worth having around, but our economy is so hosed up it seems unfair to focus on that one thing. Institute basic income, abolish minimum wage, and let small businesses pay people whatever they want. Seems fair enough to me since none of those employees will be doing the work on pain of destitution.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:You made a positive claim that only establishment fanatics care about the Russia stuff. As much as I hate to admit it, the Russia stuff is probably the biggest talking point among mainstream liberals right now. A good example is that study showing how like 60% of Maddow's segments were about it. My parents both voted for Bernie Sanders and they have talked more about the Russia thing than anything else. Wow, you're telling me that mainstream liberals who only listen to establishment outlets think that the nothingburger russia narrative (which we both agree that the establishment outlets are heavily pushing) has legs?!?  Majorian's poll also says that 50% of Republicans don't want tax cuts for the wealthy and l-o-loving-l if you actually think that reflects reality. Call Me Charlie fucked around with this message at 23:54 on May 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:It probably would. At the very least, large companies are in a better position to absorb the increased cost or source the labor from somewhere else, than small businesses. Agreed, incidentally, but I figure it's an easier sell after you push $15/hr through. Not to mention you should see consumer spending jump upwards after its implementation- the dinosaurs will die, but some new animals will pop up in the aftermath.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:What makes you think raising the minimum wage would put small business owners out of business? Because it would. They can't afford to pay workers more money when many of them are struggling as is. Small Businesses pay the exact same tax rates as large corporations. Often in fact they pay more, as large corporations have lobbied to buy out numerous tax loopholes from congress. They get none of the economic benefits of economies of scale enjoyed by large corporations, but face all the disbenefits of being taxed equally to a large corporation or more. Raising the minimum wage without accounting for small business is essentially destroying small business in favor of Wal-Mart, Amazon, and all the large behemoths that already exist or would form out of such legislation. Raising the minimum wage must be done with attention to local economies, or it has the chance of damaging them, business owners, and by connection their workers. Ze Pollack posted:...the people who have 7 dollars an hour more in their pockets. So basically destroying the middle class to benefit the lower classes? I mean you assume there will be jobs available when those small businesses go out of business...at the large corporations...And that said jobs have not been taken over by robots And people wonder why some middle class people voted for Trump.... The American middle class must be defended. As a latino small business owners must be protected. Small Business is a essential part of America. Latin Americans have created more small businesses in the United States since 2008 than all other races combined. Why do you want to hurt latin americans? Taintrunner posted:Actually you do to some extent, because the Democrats' brand of "not Republicans!" is, uh.... not doing too hot right now. A good purity test would be understanding the value of wielding public power and not simply submitting to the whims of private power. Oh I agree 100%. The Democrats have been on the side of Big Private Power. But Big Private Power != The Middle Class. It doesn't even equal the Upper Middle Class. Or what we consider Upper Class traditional Big Private Power = large multinational Corporations. Nothing more and nothing less. And I reject any kind of "Progressive" policy that benefits large corporations while harming small business, directly or indirectly. I believe that much of both the GOP and the Democrats playbooks do this equally.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:It probably would. At the very least, large companies are in a better position to absorb the increased cost or source the labor from somewhere else, than small businesses. I've seen no evidence to suggest that raising the minimum wage will kill jobs or hurt small businesses. In fact IIRC it actually increases employment because large swaths of customers now can buy more stuff which drives up demand. Mincome still isn't a bad idea though.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:Wow, you're telling me that mainstream liberals who only listen to establishment outlets think that the nothingburger russia narrative (which we both agree that the establishment outlets are heavily pushing) has legs?!? The "mainstream liberals" you're talking about are the majority of the country. The fact that you don't care about this story is pretty much the least relevant factor in this entire discussion. Stop being a baby and admit you were wrong to say that no one but a handful of people care about this. quote:Majorian's poll also says that 50% of Republicans don't want tax cuts for the wealthy and l-o-loving-l if you actually think that reflects reality. A lot of Trump's supporters genuinely believed that he wouldn't cut taxes for the wealthy, and that Hillary would be more likely to favor Wall Street and the billionaire class. They were idiots, but hey, guess what? They make up a large proportion of the GOP.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The "mainstream liberals" you're talking about are the majority of the country. The fact that you don't care about this story is pretty much the least relevant factor in this entire discussion. Stop being a baby and admit you were wrong to say that no one but a handful of people care about this. And yet....TRUMP! But please, let's cheer the Democratic Party on as they chase after their own Benghazi (surely that won't hurt our credibility, right?) and think that red-baiting for 4+ years is going to get them the presidency back in 2020. We don't need to change anything, we're the majority!!!! Majorian posted:A lot of Trump's supporters genuinely believed that he wouldn't cut taxes for the wealthy, and that Hillary would be more likely to favor Wall Street and the billionaire class. They were idiots, but hey, guess what? They make up a large proportion of the GOP. He literally ran on lowering everybody's taxes including corporations. How could they think he wouldn't lower taxes on the wealthy? Did they never listen to him speak once? Or know the GOP's position on our glorious job creators? Call Me Charlie fucked around with this message at 00:13 on May 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
What's with the left screaming about a ~constitutional crisis~ over Trump firing Comey? Are they trying to say the president can't shitcan someone who's appointed by the president? 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:thank you for explaining why anti-racists are the real racists, antifascists are the real fascists, and counterrevolutionaries are the real revolutionaries The point isn't that 'anti-racists are the real racists', a line used almost exclusively to excuse the bigotry of racists. It's that the self appointed leaders of progressivism (such as yourself), wouldn't know what a revolution actually looks like, because they're arrogant tossers more interested in politics as a team game like football, then politics as a philosophy. Revolutions are positive in spirit, they sweep away all existing prejudices and invert already existing social dogmas. You, are negative in spirit, and you've internalized the carefully constructed rube goldberg machine liberals have made for themselves, to protect themselves from introspection. No introspection is necessary if you're committed to the belief that some totally disconnected phantom called racism caused Hillary's loss. But that leaves questions unanswered. How did Obama win where Hillary lost? Why have things gotten worse over the past 4 years? Is racism itself without cause, simply the result of the pure malice that white people of course inherit (being white), or is it caused by something else? These, and other questions, haven't been reckoned with by people like yourself, because they imply uncomfortable uncertainties about long held assumptions, that have dominated activism. But rather than confront that, you of course naturally gravitate to harassing the people who point this out to you. After all, if you can get them to shut up, the problem goes away, right? So you see, the potential for revolution exists - outside of you.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:And yet....TRUMP! Except that I've been pretty clear in saying that the Dems still need to focus primarily on the economy and unfucking themselves as a party; nowhere did I suggest that this needs to be the primary focus of the Democratic electoral strategy going forward. Also, "red-baiting"? Please. My grandfather was a defector from the USSR during the 40's. He faced real red-baiting when he came here. Investigating Trump because he may be compromised isn't red-baiting; don't use phrases you don't understand. quote:He literally ran on lowering everybody's taxes including corporations. Wrong again. Majorian fucked around with this message at 00:23 on May 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:21
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:Because it would. They can't afford to pay workers more money when many of them are struggling as is. That good old liberal standby, supply-side economics. Sure is a shame money given to the working class just evaporates into nothingness, and never enters circulation in the local economy. quote:So basically destroying the middle class to benefit the lower classes? If you believe for a moment that small business owners constitute the middle class, I have tragic news for you about everything else the republican who told you about how the economy works said. It's been thirty years, minimum, since that was last the case, and even back then it was only possible through squinting really hard and proclaiming every doctor in the country a small business owner. The middle class has the same bosses, the same reporting structure, and the same corporate hierarchy to deal with as the lower class these days; they just sit in front of a computer instead of standing behind a counter all day. And it turns out they can only start businesses if they know they have family members' money to fall back on in case it fails. quote:And I reject any kind of "Progressive" policy that benefits large corporations while harming small business, directly or indirectly. Huh. Ostensible left-winger who's terrified of the lower class benefiting at the expense of the middle, thinks the solution to the democratic party's woes is to be more racist, and believes that small business owners are still a thing that exists with any meaningful political or economic power. ...you wouldn't happen to be Rahm Emmanuel, would you?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
ISIS CURES TROONS posted:What's with the left screaming about a ~constitutional crisis~ over Trump firing Comey? Are they trying to say the president can't shitcan someone who's appointed by the president? The President has the power to pardon anyone who assassinates Democratic congresspeople in DC, but like if he did that, it'd be a crisis. A constitutional crisis is when the President is arguably operating "legally" but in doing so is destabilizing
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
ISIS CURES TROONS posted:What's with the left screaming about a ~constitutional crisis~ over Trump firing Comey? Are they trying to say the president can't shitcan someone who's appointed by the president? It could lead to a constitutional crisis, because the President firing someone tasked with investigating him, under the direct advice of an Attorney General who was supposed to have recused himself from this case because he lied to the Senate, is pretty not-good.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
Whining about small businesses, while wages have remained stagnant with inflation is concern trolling, the minimum wage should increase because that's the fair thing to do. America hasn't gotten a pay rise since the 70s, yet people are working longer hours than ever. Business owners have made off like bandits, while the people they employ get a poo poo sandwich. gently caress off with your crocodile tear poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:Because it would. They can't afford to pay workers more money when many of them are struggling as is. You do realize that most proponents of the $15 minimum wage explicitly say that genuinely small businesses like that should be exempt, right? Also that the minimum wage should be raised gradually over a number of years, not just jacked up immediately to $15/hour. Majorian fucked around with this message at 00:34 on May 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
Small business owners already regularly stretch just how badly they can treat their staff by virtue of their size exempting them from some things in labor laws and reducing the risk of dealing with unions on the regular. They deserve no loving pedestal.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:28
|
|
|
ISIS CURES TROONS posted:What's with the left screaming about a ~constitutional crisis~ over Trump firing Comey? Are they trying to say the president can't shitcan someone who's appointed by the president? The president just canned the lead of an open investigation he's associated with. The new lead of the organization will be chosen largely by Trump's allies. I have no idea if the investigation would have turned up anything*, but if there is no independent investigation, there's absolutely no way to consider it non-compromised now. *(imo, probably not anything directly tied to Trump himself, but given the lies everyone around him have already been caught on (jeff sessions ffs) I'm sure some allies would go down)
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:Wow, you're telling me that mainstream liberals who only listen to establishment outlets think that the nothingburger russia narrative (which we both agree that the establishment outlets are heavily pushing) has legs?!? Most Democrats are still mainstream liberals, and that includes a portion of Sanders voters (who voted for him more because they viewed him as being more progressive than Clinton than because of being socialists/leftists themselves). Actual leftists, while a growing political faction, are still a minority of Democrats as a whole.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Revolutions are positive in spirit, they sweep away all existing prejudices and invert already existing social dogmas. You, are negative in spirit, and you've internalized the carefully constructed rube goldberg machine liberals have made for themselves, to protect themselves from introspection. Marxism-via-Blizzard-Entertainment. Delightful. No material conditions need be considered, no, it is a a sickness of the soul that has produced the servants of the dread "idpol," who must be vanquished in ascending order of sweet drops in order to proceed to the next tier. quote:No introspection is necessary if you're committed to the belief that some totally disconnected phantom called racism caused Hillary's loss. But that leaves questions unanswered. How did Obama win where Hillary lost? Why have things gotten worse over the past 4 years? Is racism itself without cause, simply the result of the pure malice that white people of course inherit (being white), or is it caused by something else? These, and other questions, haven't been reckoned with by people like yourself, because they imply uncomfortable uncertainties about long held assumptions, that have dominated activism. But rather than confront that, you of course naturally gravitate to harassing the people who point this out to you. After all, if you can get them to shut up, the problem goes away, right? We do not disagree on the bolded point, rudatron. Where we differ is your assumption that, having recognized there are underlying causes and exacerbating factors for racism, it should no longer be fought against. Nobody believes you bear the Mark of Cain for your whiteness, save possibly you. Like so many reactionaries before you, you imagine being judged for the benefits you have received, and let it fuel a bizarre persecution complex whereby true equality will only be achieved once you, personally, no longer feel any twinges of shame for society having privileged you above others. Entertaining little paradox, really. No purer expression of white guilt than accusing others of it.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:39
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:Majorian's poll also says that 50% of Republicans don't want tax cuts for the wealthy and l-o-loving-l if you actually think that reflects reality. You of all people should be comfortable with the idea of dumbasses voting for Trump because they thought he would help the poor and fight Wall Street
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Except that I've been pretty clear in saying that the Dems still need to focus primarily on the economy and unfucking themselves as a party; nowhere did I suggest that this needs to be the primary focus of the Democratic electoral strategy going forward. Reminder that all of this started because I was making fun of Democrats for not using a real slam dunk criticism against the Republicans when they had a chance and are now hitching their wagons to this loving idiocy. Why am I not shocked that you linked to the WaPo over something that's factually wrong and disconnected from reality? http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/28/politics/donald-trump-tax-plan/ Also I'm bummed out that you edited out the part about low information voters. I was going to drop this fun little note. https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/815256370958237696 Call Me Charlie fucked around with this message at 01:03 on May 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:Reminder that all of this started because I was making fun of Democrats for not using a real slam dunk criticism against the Republicans when they had a chance and are now hitching their wagons to this loving idiocy. Well, on one hand, you're right that they shouldn't treat this as a silver bullet, and I've said so myself multiple times. But calling it "nonsense" is just ignorant. You don't understand why this is important, and why so many Americans find it important, so you dismiss it. That's a really dumb mindset. quote:Why am I shocked that you linked to the WaPo over something that's factually wrong and disconnected from reality? He said, before posting a CNN piece.  The fact of the matter is, Trump was all over the place during the campaign on his promises. People heard what they wanted to hear. The fact that you're dismissing that Quinnipiac poll because it tells you something you didn't know about how Americans perceive tax cuts for the wealthy is also a mindset that is dumb. And why do you think that tweet you posted helps your case?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 01:02
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Well, on one hand, you're right that they shouldn't treat this as a silver bullet, and I've said so myself multiple times. But calling it "nonsense" is just ignorant. You don't understand why this is important, and why so many Americans find it important, so you dismiss it. That's a really dumb mindset. Yet you defend the people that want to treat it as a silver bullet while also attempting to put the boots to me for 'dismissing' the incorrect people that are either desperate or cynical enough to think that this will be the thing that topples Trump's presidency. That's not a dumb mindset. The dumb thing would be going 'hey, mom & dad are talking about it and Rachel Maddow spends 60% of her show talking about it so there must be something here  '. That's Iraq/Benghazi levels of dumb. Majorian posted:He said, before posting a CNN piece. I wanted to link to something you'd believe without me having to jump through more hoops. Since CNN doesn't work for you, how about Donald Trump's own webpage? quote:1. If you are single and earn less than $25,000, or married and jointly earn less than $50,000, you will not owe any income tax. That removes nearly 75 million households – over 50% – from the income tax rolls. They get a new one page form to send the IRS saying, “I win,” those who would otherwise owe income taxes will save an average of nearly $1,000 each. https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/trump-tax-reform.pdf That pretty clearly states that he's going to lower taxes across the board and that was revealed in 2015. Or maybe you're one of the dopes that thinks Trump promised universal healthcare because he said 'I'm going to take care of everybody' during a 60 Minutes interview (ignoring the whole second half of his statement where he said "But for the most it's going to be a private plan and people are going to be able to go out and negotiate great plans with lots of different competition with lots of competitors with great companies and they can have their doctors, they can have plans, they can have everything.") idk
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:Yet you defend the people that want to treat it as a silver bullet while also attempting to put the boots to me for 'dismissing' the incorrect people that are either desperate or cynical enough to think that this will be the thing that topples Trump's presidency. When you call it "nonsense," that suggests that you think there's nothing to this story at all, never mind it being a silver bullet. I haven't seen anybody here argue that it's going to be a silver bullet - just that at this point, the Dems could get some mileage out of it. quote:I wanted to link to something you'd believe without me having to jump through more hoops. Since CNN doesn't work for you, how about Donald Trump's own webpage? CNN works fine for me; my point was, it's ridiculous of you to dismiss WaPo as "establishment media" in one breath, and then literally in the next, cite CNN. As for his website, as I said, he jumped all over the place on his positions. I posted one prominent example of that. The reason why we're on this derail is because you suggested that there's no way that half of Republican voters could possibly not support tax cuts for the rich. You brought that up because you didn't want to take the Quinnipiac poll I posted seriously, because it contradicts your narrative that only beltway insiders care about the Russia-Trump connection. That is manifestly not the case. Just be an adult and admit it, okay? e: Also here's another study that shows that a lot of Republicans oppose tax cuts for the highest income brackets. (51% of them, in this case; only 24% support them) Majorian fucked around with this message at 02:27 on May 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 02:20
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:That's not a dumb mindset. The dumb thing would be going 'hey, mom & dad are talking about it and Rachel Maddow spends 60% of her show talking about it so there must be something here If a message is commonly being propagated by Democratic politicians and Democratic-affiliated media, it makes sense to assume (absent any evidence to the contrary or some public backlash) that most Democrats probably care about it to some extent. My anecdote was because you asserted that the Russia stuff was something only a minority of elite establishment Democrats cared about, which is definitely not the case. People respond to what they see and hear in the media, and the Russia stuff has been headlining liberal media nonstop for a long time now. As nice as it might be to imagine, most Democrats are not yet socialists/leftists and still identify with establishment politicians and media. The portion who don't is growing, but they're still a minority. More Democratic primary voters voted for Clinton in the primary, and you can, at the very least, assume that those people care about the Russia stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:If a message is commonly being propagated by Democratic politicians and Democratic-affiliated media, it makes sense to assume (absent any evidence to the contrary or some public backlash) that most Democrats probably care about it to some extent. My anecdote was because you asserted that the Russia stuff was something only a minority of elite establishment Democrats cared about, which is definitely not the case. People respond to what they see and hear in the media, and the Russia stuff has been headlining liberal media nonstop for a long time now. And even a lot of us who voted Bernie and are to the left of the Dems, but think the U.S. having an insanely far right president who is potentially compromised by an even more insanely far right government, is a bad state of affairs. We don't know for a fact yet that Trump is, but we absolutely need to find out.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
It's not a bad idea for the left to come to its senses about Russia. We had a good couple months of Chapo leftists laughing at the notion of Russians hacking Abuela but it seems the general sentiment has moved towards sanity.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 02:35
|
|
|
Majorian posted:You do realize that most proponents of the $15 minimum wage explicitly say that genuinely small businesses like that should be exempt, right? This is actually worse. It doesn't solve anything. All the workers at small businesses would leave small businesses and start working for large corporations due to better wages and benefits available to them See the difference between me and a lot of progressives is that they seem to see the cause of inequality being the middle and middle upper class and small business owners and small businesses. I believe the cause of inequality comes entirely from large Corporations. Our move to the wal-mart and centralized model of large stores put millions of small businesses out of business. I believe Small Business can be a strong tool to lift people into the middle class, many who would not have the opportunity to enter it in other ways. I lived overseas and I am a latino and I've seen countries like Colombia or Brazil where most of the businesses are not large Wal-Marts...but small bread stores, and repair shops, started often out of peoples own homes. You go to a capital like Bogota and there are bread stores on every loving corner baking fresh bread. And they all make money. They all give people a way to earn a income that they didn't have otherwise. Ways that don't involve mining in a mine. Or farming in a field. Or selling your body for prostitution. Or trafficking drugs. We've lost that. We've moved to a different model. And the big thing is the corporations bought out the government and government didn't do it's job protecting businesses from other larger businesses like it should have. The system was RIGGED and continues to be RIGGED not only against the poor and middle class and common man, but against small businesses. As a progressive I believe capitalism is essential to the functioning of a society, but that it must be controlled and regulated and that larger businesses are prevented from preying on smaller businesses. I want to bring poverty relief to people. That is my top goal. But if we have to put middle class families who have worked their life at a business out of business to do so it seems very counterproductive to me. I can go to my town and see all these small little stores the local latino population have put in. Grocery Stores, Taco Stands, Hairdressers, they built that with their own two hands. Poor uneducated workers mostly from Mexico and Central America that large corporations preyed upon as cheap labour came here and were able to escape that factory life through these businesses. And you and a lot of people are saying "gently caress Them" with your goals without considering how exactly to deal with them. I believe we should raise the minimum wage, of course. My state voted to raise the minimum wage above the state and federal limits in fact. But we can't just go and put in the same minimum wage in every single state. In some states $15 isn't enough. In some states it's too much. Consideration needs to be taken. That will remain philosophy and continue to be my way forward. It's a philosophy I think the majority of Americans can agree with. That most of the Democratic party will support and that can win elections. Ze Pollack posted:
I really don't think you understand what the middle class is in this country. Or the Upper-Middle Class is. gently caress I think you don't even understand what Small Business is. And I think most Americans fail to understand it. Small Businesses have less than 25 employees. The vast majority have less than 10. Ze Pollack posted:Huh. Ostensible left-winger who's terrified of the lower class benefiting at the expense of the middle, thinks the solution to the democratic party's woes is to be more racist, and believes that small business owners are still a thing that exists with any meaningful political or economic power. I am not terrified of the lower class benefitting. But you would have to be blind to see the Middle Class shrinking in this country and not be worried about rebuilding it. Having a country made up of lower class people with some extra benefits because their poor is pointless. Our goal needs to be to come up with ways to move people towards the middle class. Either via universal income, wage increases, education or some other solution. A state where the vast majority of the population relies on government benefits to survive is not a ideal solution to the issues and if anything wlll lead to a situation like Venezuela. rudatron posted:Whining about small businesses, while wages have remained stagnant with inflation is concern trolling, the minimum wage should increase because that's the fair thing to do. America hasn't gotten a pay rise since the 70s, yet people are working longer hours than ever. Business owners have made off like bandits, while the people they employ get a poo poo sandwich. Wage's have remained stagnant because of what has happened to Small Businesses and the rise of large corporate monopolies who promote wage fixing. How can people continue to be this blind and fail to connect the dots? ISeeCuckedPeople fucked around with this message at 02:53 on May 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:Small Businesses have less than 25 employees. The vast majority have less than 10. by who's definition?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 03:21
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:This is actually worse. It doesn't solve anything. All the workers at small businesses would leave small businesses and start working for large corporations due to better wages and benefits available to them Um, if livable wages and benefits are a Wal-Mart ploy to drive small business under by stealing their workers, why aren't they executing this strategy already. They don't have to wait for a minimum wage law that exempts small business before they can steal all the workers, if minimum wage does what you claim then the Wal-Marts of the world can just pay more right now to kill all small business owners. Yet they aren't.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 05:56 |
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:I believe capitalism is essential to the functioning of a society, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 03:32
|
|
