You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:misterID wrote:This.
I really, really like Yang but he has a smaller chance than Amy. They never give him any time.
And it doesn't matter how bad Gabbard is, Google shouldn't do this to ANYONE.
I really don’t see how you go from trump and these hard right republicans to Yang and free income.
How do you go from fuck $15 minimum wage to this?!
I don't support Trump.
Yang is the only one talking automation, but like I said, he has about as much chance as his UBI idea has to actually passing a Congress and Senate vote. Wherever that $15 minimum wage has been implemented, the cost of living in that area has skyrocketed completely undermining its benefits.
You in this post is meant in the plural...as you all...as in our country
Re: US Politics Thread
misterID wrote:mitchejw wrote:I really don’t see how you go from trump and these hard right republicans to Yang and free income.
How do you go from fuck $15 minimum wage to this?!
I don't support Trump.
Yang is the only one talking automation, but like I said, he has about as much chance as his UBI idea has to actually passing a Congress and Senate vote. Wherever that $15 minimum wage has been implemented, the cost of living in that area has skyrocketed completely undermining its benefits.
Why wouldn’t the same occurr with free money from the government?
Not taking a side here...but if you’re going to take the stance that you do here about minimum wage then why would it be any different?
My stance is this: instead of raising the minimum wage for entry level jobs with high turnaround, there's like 6 million jobs available with good pay that people need to be transitioned to. Here in TN we have something called Tennessee Promise which helps pay for two years of college/trade school to do that. If there was any way UBI could work it would have been through Nixon's plan to subsidize low wage jobs for the working poor, not for everyone.
Where I stand with Yang is to introduce AI/Robotics/Automation regulation and taxes. This would have to be a global initiative that I think Trump could be good at and actually get AOC and Sanders on board.
Re: US Politics Thread
Randall Flagg wrote:mitchejw wrote:I thought that only applies to President.
The amendment clarifies that should the President die, be incapacitated or removed, the VP assumes the presidency. As the amendment also prohibits a person from serving more than 6 years through 2 terms as President, it would also prohibit them from the position of VP. I guess you could argue that so long as Obama didn't take over the Presidency with more than 2 years left in Biden's term it could be legal, but most scholars view it as a blanket prohibition.
Oops, the bolded portion is actually from the 22nd amendment, not the 25th. Goof on me. The 12th Amendment says anyone not eligible to be President, can't be VP.
When i went through all that constitutional stuff in school, i don’t recall the precautionary stuff about a VP potentially becoming president again.
It seems awfully presumptuous.
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:misterID wrote:I don't support Trump.
Yang is the only one talking automation, but like I said, he has about as much chance as his UBI idea has to actually passing a Congress and Senate vote. Wherever that $15 minimum wage has been implemented, the cost of living in that area has skyrocketed completely undermining its benefits.
Why wouldn’t the same occurr with free money from the government?
Not taking a side here...but if you’re going to take the stance that you do here about minimum wage then why would it be any different?
My stance is this: instead of raising the minimum wage for entry level jobs with high turnaround, there's like 6 million jobs available with good pay that people need to be transitioned to. Here in TN we have something called Tennessee Promise which helps pay for two years of college/trade school to do that. If there was any way UBI could work it would have been through Nixon's plan to subsidize low wage jobs for the working poor, not for everyone.
Where I stand with Yang is to introduce AI/Robotics/Automation regulation and taxes. This would have to be a global initiative that I think Trump could be good at and actually get AOC and Sanders on board.
Right...and those things you’re talking about are good...but it doesn’t directly address your concerns about cost of living and inflation.
I firsee the exact same things occurring in both instances.
Re: US Politics Thread
misterID wrote:mitchejw wrote:Why wouldn’t the same occurr with free money from the government?
Not taking a side here...but if you’re going to take the stance that you do here about minimum wage then why would it be any different?
My stance is this: instead of raising the minimum wage for entry level jobs with high turnaround, there's like 6 million jobs available with good pay that people need to be transitioned to. Here in TN we have something called Tennessee Promise which helps pay for two years of college/trade school to do that. If there was any way UBI could work it would have been through Nixon's plan to subsidize low wage jobs for the working poor, not for everyone.
Where I stand with Yang is to introduce AI/Robotics/Automation regulation and taxes. This would have to be a global initiative that I think Trump could be good at and actually get AOC and Sanders on board.
Right...and those things you’re talking about are good...but it doesn’t directly address your concerns about cost of living and inflation.
I firsee the exact same things occurring in both instances.
Not really. If you start demanding Alabama pay the same as New York, according to the non partisan research group who just studied it, $15 an hour minimum wage would put over three million people out of work. Businesses would close, hours would be slashed and your local McDonald's would be operated through a kiosk. Whatever good is made through higher wages is offset by the repercussions. Instead of screwing with the market you're simply filling openings.
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:misterID wrote:My stance is this: instead of raising the minimum wage for entry level jobs with high turnaround, there's like 6 million jobs available with good pay that people need to be transitioned to. Here in TN we have something called Tennessee Promise which helps pay for two years of college/trade school to do that. If there was any way UBI could work it would have been through Nixon's plan to subsidize low wage jobs for the working poor, not for everyone.
Where I stand with Yang is to introduce AI/Robotics/Automation regulation and taxes. This would have to be a global initiative that I think Trump could be good at and actually get AOC and Sanders on board.
Right...and those things you’re talking about are good...but it doesn’t directly address your concerns about cost of living and inflation.
I firsee the exact same things occurring in both instances.
Not really. If you start demanding Alabama pay the same as New York, according to the non partisan research group who just studied it, $15 an hour minimum wage would put over three million people out of work. Businesses would close, hours would be slashed and your local McDonald's would be operated through a kiosk. Whatever good is made through higher wages is offset by the repercussions. Instead of screwing with the market you're simply filling openings.
Yes...we’re in agreement on all that.
Why wouldn’t giving away money be better than a $15 minimum wage?
Many of the same conditions are present. You have low skilled labor or the jobless making more income.
Don’t you see the parallels?
Re: US Politics Thread
I guess it depends on how you think we should give away money.
I don't see it as the same. You're not putting the burden on those businesses that would be most impacted by having to raise wages and the ripple effect. You're moving someone from a low wage job to a job with a higher salary, most likely somewhere else. Since the majority of low wage jobs are entry level, you'll never run out of those workers. That's the best way I can explain it. It's better to move a worker to another job than throw the entire market i to turmoil. Raising minimum wage isn't actually improving their life.
Re: US Politics Thread
I guess it depends on how you think we should give away money.
I don't see it as the same. You're not putting the burden on those businesses that would be most impacted by having to raise wages and the ripple effect. You're moving someone from a low wage job to a job with a higher salary, most likely somewhere else. Since the majority of low wage jobs are entry level, you'll never run out of those workers. That's the best way I can explain it. It's better to move a worker to another job than throw the entire market i to turmoil. Raising minimum wage isn't actually improving their life.
But it would be a new tax burden. So you either pay higher minimum wage or you pay more taxes.
We’re already running at a massive deficit. A base universal income would probably cost more than healthcare.
Re: US Politics Thread
misterID wrote:I guess it depends on how you think we should give away money.
I don't see it as the same. You're not putting the burden on those businesses that would be most impacted by having to raise wages and the ripple effect. You're moving someone from a low wage job to a job with a higher salary, most likely somewhere else. Since the majority of low wage jobs are entry level, you'll never run out of those workers. That's the best way I can explain it. It's better to move a worker to another job than throw the entire market i to turmoil. Raising minimum wage isn't actually improving their life.
But it would be a new tax burden. So you either pay higher minimum wage or you pay more taxes.
We’re already running at a massive deficit. A base universal income would probably cost more than healthcare.
Which is why it would never pass.
Fixing the tax system and healthcare/entitlements is the best way of bringing down the debt.
