ADVERTISEMENT

Karen Handel: "I do not support a livable wage"

unless they start disassociating themselves from trump, then yeah, it's gonna get pretty ugly for them come midterms.
We will just have to agree to disagree. Both sides are full of clowns. Trump says dumb dumb things but the left seems to be trying to push moderates away. Letting the fringe left control the headlines is every bit as bad as anything Trump can do.
 
Deciphering your uneducated rant basically you have no clue what a livable wage is, point taken.

deciphering your elitist rant, your idea of a 'livable' wage is you and your ilk getting to decide how much of other people's earnings and time to confiscate, so you can use the power of the state to coerce them to give it un-earned to others of your choosing.

What have you achieved that gives you the arrogance to imagine that you could competently judge such things for others (all the while, applying none of those rules and hardships on yourself or your cronies) ?
 
Let's also consider Ossoff's response which was ennentially: if you work 40 hours a week you deserve to live comfortably.

Well sorry, but dropping fries, bagging groceries or making lattes for 40 hours a week doesn't mean that you deserve anything other than a fair wage for the actual work done. This fantasy that you deserve anything because you do any sort of work is laughable.

Edit: he said "if someone works a 40 hour work week, they deserve the kind of standard of living that Americans expect." Please elaborate John. Headlining Handel saying "I don't support a livable wage" is a cheap talking point.
 
Last edited:
Can someone please explain the Dems strategy here? Bash Trump, offer free sh!t, and get support from MSM? Americans are smarter than that. They have no reasonable ideas.

A livable wage is not "free shit". A livable wage is the concept that if you work a 40 hour work week, you should be able to feed your family. That is the American dream. If we are willing to revive an efficient energy sector (coal) to give miners their jobs back, why can't we pay people a living wage?
 
Some of you don't want people on welfare. You also don't want people that are working what you consider "menial" jobs to make a living wage because the market supposedly "dictates" that those jobs aren't worth that wage. You also don't support reduced cost community college-level education for people to improve their skillset to raise themselves out of poverty, so I am unsure how you expect people to gain skills to raise themselves out of poverty.

So do you support a permanent underclass, then? Or would you rather the underclass just kill themselves? Although if they did that, then who would serve you fries at the drive-thru?

Like it or not, the poor aren't just going away. And contrary to belief, most of them aren't just lazing around. The majority of them are working, which is what you say you want. It has to go beyond "well, they just need to get a better job then". At what number of people does it go beyond "personal responsibility"? Because yeah, some people can lift themselves up out of poverty with hard work and determination. But we are talking over 40 million Americans that live in poverty. Do you really expect that 40 million people can collectively decide that at once, that they are simultaneously going to improve their lot in life? Or is poverty just something that some people have to deal with because, tough shit?

This is a serious question, would be nice to get a serious answer besides "Trump y'all".

Thanks --

Mr. DT
 
She is absolutely correct but did a poor job of explaining why. A livable wage means raising the minimum wage substantially and having it disproportionately higher than ever before. The minimum wage was NEVER intended to support a family or even an individual fully. It was created for decent humane pay for unskilled and minimally skilled entry level jobs and temporary jobs. It was to allow teenagers and others get jobs that can they can quickly train for in these settings. Ideal for teenagers and part-time work. It was never intended for a person or family to rely on it completely for their living.

I believe the minimum wage should be linked to a cost of living index or such and automatically adjusted every year or two. It should not be a politicized issue in Congress every few years.

Increasing it to a livable wage will kill many small businesses and raise prices and make teenage and temporary employment very difficult.
 
deciphering your elitist rant, your idea of a 'livable' wage is you and your ilk getting to decide how much of other people's earnings and time to confiscate, so you can use the power of the state to coerce them to give it un-earned to others of your choosing.

What have you achieved that gives you the arrogance to imagine that you could competently judge such things for others (all the while, applying none of those rules and hardships on yourself or your cronies) ?

You get it. Thank you. These kids when their work drive exceeds their sex drive will arrive at the same conclusions as we did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigTimeTiger
A livable wage is not "free shit". A livable wage is the concept that if you work a 40 hour work week, you should be able to feed your family. That is the American dream. If we are willing to revive an efficient energy sector (coal) to give miners their jobs back, why can't we pay people a living wage?
Because it kills employment and many small businesses and suppresses the economy. The math does not make sense. Prices for many goods and services will skyrocket. A movie ticket will need to be $16 immediately for example to make it work. Does the 16 year old pimple-faced kid taking your movie ticket need to be paid an hourly wage high enough to fully support a family? That is what you are asking for.

Anyone willing to work and with an ounce of motivation will easily find a job that pays way above minimum wage. Easily. Minimum wage and livable wage should not be thought of as synonymous. They are different things.

Setting the mentally limited and truly disabled aside, if you can only get a minimum wage job and need to support your family, your thinking and philosophies took a bad wrong turn somewhere.

And if all or even 95% of able Americans are willing to actually work 40 hrs per week, this whole thread goes away and we become near Utopia and we could greatly reduce our taxes.
 
Can someone please explain the Dems strategy here? Bash Trump, offer free sh!t, and get support from MSM? Americans are smarter than that. They have no reasonable ideas.

No dude. Americans are NOT smarter than that. That's how the Republicans came to power in the last few elections. Bash Obama and everything he did. Try and obstruct anything that might help us out. Promise all kinds of improvements. You don't need to actually deliver on them. Americans will flock to you like lemmings. (Dems did this vs George W. and it worked). Dems are doing that vs. Trump and company. If history is any kind of teacher, it's going to work again.

The problem here is that both parties are being run by the lunatic fringe (neither of which are able to govern). So SURPRISE, it's not going to work! And Americans lurch from Dem to Rep like a drunken sailor somehow expecting it to be different THIS TIME.

We as a country need to move to the center. Very liberal policies don't work. There has to be production and business and at SOME POINT, the books have to balance. And we have to cut off some entitlements to make that happen. See California for liberal policies run amok. Very conservative policies don't work. You can't cut the government's revenue stream off by huge tax cuts to the wealthier and somehow "hope" that there's investment, new jobs, production just because you put more money in someone's pocket. See Kansas and LA for conservative policies run amok. MOVE TO THE CENTER!! It won't be perfect, but it will WORK.
 
Last edited:
I believe the minimum wage should be linked to a cost of living index or such and automatically adjusted every year or two. It should not be a politicized issue in Congress every few years.

Increasing it to a livable wage will kill many small businesses and raise prices and make teenage and temporary employment very difficult.
@StSimonsIslandTiger - Spot on and you are right. Most Libs pushing the increase don't care and really never have cared about the Small business sector. They only want to control the Minions while stuffing their pockets full of cash.

Want to kill America, lets do this.
 
deciphering your elitist rant, your idea of a 'livable' wage is you and your ilk getting to decide how much of other people's earnings and time to confiscate, so you can use the power of the state to coerce them to give it un-earned to others of your choosing.

What have you achieved that gives you the arrogance to imagine that you could competently judge such things for others (all the while, applying none of those rules and hardships on yourself or your cronies) ?

It's elitist to expect people who work 40 hours a week to be able to have the necessities in life (food, shelter, clothes, etc.)? So now it's not enough that poor people should get one job they need to get 2 jobs?
 
Some of you don't want people on welfare. You also don't want people that are working what you consider "menial" jobs to make a living wage because the market supposedly "dictates" that those jobs aren't worth that wage. You also don't support reduced cost community college-level education for people to improve their skillset to raise themselves out of poverty, so I am unsure how you expect people to gain skills to raise themselves out of poverty.

So do you support a permanent underclass, then? Or would you rather the underclass just kill themselves? Although if they did that, then who would serve you fries at the drive-thru?

Like it or not, the poor aren't just going away. And contrary to belief, most of them aren't just lazing around. The majority of them are working, which is what you say you want. It has to go beyond "well, they just need to get a better job then". At what number of people does it go beyond "personal responsibility"? Because yeah, some people can lift themselves up out of poverty with hard work and determination. But we are talking over 40 million Americans that live in poverty. Do you really expect that 40 million people can collectively decide that at once, that they are simultaneously going to improve their lot in life? Or is poverty just something that some people have to deal with because, tough shit?

This is a serious question, would be nice to get a serious answer besides "Trump y'all".

Thanks --

Mr. DT

Here is the problem with your stance. It is well know that you can decrease your chance of living in poverty by about 90%-95% by following a few simple rules. Graduate from high school, don't get pregnant before you graduate from high school, etc. Liberals never stress these few points that make a "HUGE" difference in the quality of life that you live. Libs are more interested in keeping people in permanent poverty so they can play their typical nanny state BS card.
 
Let's also consider Ossoff's response which was ennentially: if you work 40 hours a week you deserve to live comfortably.

Well sorry, but dropping fries, bagging groceries or making lattes for 40 hours a week doesn't mean that you deserve anything other than a fair wage for the actual work done. This fantasy that you deserve anything because you do any sort of work is laughable.

Edit: he said "if someone works a 40 hour work week, they deserve the kind of standard of living that Americans expect." Please elaborate John. Headlining Handel saying "I don't support a livable wage" is a cheap talking point.
Sure but by not putting the responsibility on the employer to give a livable wage you are basically ensuring that people working full time will be forced to rely on government assistance. Just look at Walmart and the racket they have. https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareo...-2-billion-in-public-assistance/#5f9ba6bb720b
 
She is absolutely correct but did a poor job of explaining why. A livable wage means raising the minimum wage substantially and having it disproportionately higher than ever before. The minimum wage was NEVER intended to support a family or even an individual fully. It was created for decent humane pay for unskilled and minimally skilled entry level jobs and temporary jobs. It was to allow teenagers and others get jobs that can they can quickly train for in these settings. Ideal for teenagers and part-time work. It was never intended for a person or family to rely on it completely for their living.

I believe the minimum wage should be linked to a cost of living index or such and automatically adjusted every year or two. It should not be a politicized issue in Congress every few years.

Increasing it to a livable wage will kill many small businesses and raise prices and make teenage and temporary employment very difficult.
If you tie to CPI you would arrive at a minimum wage in the $12-18$ range for states, which would defeat the purpose if you want to keep it low. If you take that idea and create a "commodity basket" to chain MW increases/decreases to then you would get a flexible amount that would rise and fall with the cost of oil, food, healthcare, etc..

Two issues will still exist...1. The minimum wage would still go up substantially (20-30%) from where it is in most states. 2. In many instances when the economy is growing rapidly, we would actually be paying less to MW earners, which in turn will slow down that growth.
 
Here is the problem with your stance. It is well know that you can decrease your chance of living in poverty by about 90%-95% by following a few simple rules. Graduate from high school, don't get pregnant before you graduate from high school, etc. Liberals never stress these few points that make a "HUGE" difference in the quality of life that you live. Libs are more interested in keeping people in permanent poverty so they can play their typical nanny state BS card.
There actually isn't any income difference in high school graduates and non-graduates anymore for young workers. Trade school, or a two year degree, is required before you actually realize income gains for educational attainment levels.

Pretty sure no one is out there encouraging teen pregnancy, and it is now at an all-time historical low because of the wider access to contraceptives and sex-ed.
 
For Christ sake 7.25 is a liveable wage.

7.25*22*8=1276 / month... And at that level you basically pay no income tax and very little state or ss so call it 1100 after taxes.

In any county in South Carolina you can find a 2 bedroom apartment for 350$/month .

Utilities 55 for power 40 for water 35 for cell phone

Cars aren't a need but let's say 90/ month for gas. 100 for insurance. 300/ month for groceries

Still 130 left in the account.


Democrats are greedy af. This would be middle to upper middle in 160 of 210 counties in the world. They see that other people have worked their asses off and have more than them, and decide that they should have it too. Fvck John Ossoff.
 
If you tie to CPI you would arrive at a minimum wage in the $12-18$ range for states, which would defeat the purpose if you want to keep it low. If you take that idea and create a "commodity basket" to chain MW increases/decreases to then you would get a flexible amount that would rise and fall with the cost of oil, food, healthcare, etc..

Two issues will still exist...1. The minimum wage would still go up substantially (20-30%) from where it is in most states. 2. In many instances when the economy is growing rapidly, we would actually be paying less to MW earners, which in turn will slow down that growth.
Even with my very conservative thinking, I concede the MW needs to be adjusted regularly and even should be raised some now. I wish Congress would legislate automatic adjustments- say every 2 years. This keeps it at a reasonably fair rate for workers and makes teenage and seasonal employment budgets predictable for businesses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nmerritt11
Because it kills employment and many small businesses and suppresses the economy. The math does not make sense. Prices for many goods and services will skyrocket. A movie ticket will need to be $16 immediately for example to make it work. Does the 16 year old pimple-faced kid taking your movie ticket need to be paid an hourly wage high enough to fully support a family? That is what you are asking for.

Anyone willing to work and with an ounce of motivation will easily find a job that pays way above minimum wage. Easily. Minimum wage and livable wage should not be thought of as synonymous. They are different things.

Setting the mentally limited and truly disabled aside, if you can only get a minimum wage job and need to support your family, your thinking and philosophies took a bad wrong turn somewhere.

And if all or even 95% of able Americans are willing to actually work 40 hrs per week, this whole thread goes away and we become near Utopia and we could greatly reduce our taxes.
I agree with you that minimum wage does not need to feed a family. Minimum wage should only take care of one person. But $7.25 isn't gonna cover that when you include rent, car bills, health insurance, etc.
I also agree that raising it to $15 would hurt small businesses and to a larger degree the economy. it would also force big businesses to try to minimize their workforce with automated machines or other cost cutting measures (if they aren't already).
But I can't disagree with you more about finding a job. Job applications are mainly done online now and automated. If all you have on your resume is restaurant experience, chances are you aren't going to be looked at for any other kind of job except physical labor...which often times pays minimum wage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dcollie
Its too complicated for govt to just dictate a standard minimum everywhere, even though we had one historically

$15 an hour in lower Anderson County (just to pick a spot) is a ton difference than $15 an hour in Atalanta, NYC, Seattle, SF, San Diego etc etc

Cost of living is exponentially different

Im all for a national standard that is fair, and leave it to locals if they decide more is needed - and more probably is needed in many places

There. Problem solved. Next issue
 
For Christ sake 7.25 is a liveable wage.

7.25*22*8=1276 / month... And at that level you basically pay no income tax and very little state or ss so call it 1100 after taxes.

In any county in South Carolina you can find a 2 bedroom apartment for 350$/month .

Utilities 55 for power 40 for water 35 for cell phone

Cars aren't a need but let's say 90/ month for gas. 100 for insurance. 300/ month for groceries

Still 130 left in the account.


Democrats are greedy af. This would be middle to upper middle in 160 of 210 counties in the world. They see that other people have worked their asses off and have more than them, and decide that they should have it too. Fvck John Ossoff.
Where do you live where you can find $350 apartments and paying less than $60 a month for power? Your scenario is also assuming you aren't making car payments and don't have health or life insurance. Also, that's $130 left in the account. For the month. With nothing being saved or invested.
 
For Christ sake 7.25 is a liveable wage.

7.25*22*8=1276 / month... And at that level you basically pay no income tax and very little state or ss so call it 1100 after taxes.

In any county in South Carolina you can find a 2 bedroom apartment for 350$/month .

Utilities 55 for power 40 for water 35 for cell phone

Cars aren't a need but let's say 90/ month for gas. 100 for insurance. 300/ month for groceries

Still 130 left in the account.


Democrats are greedy af. This would be middle to upper middle in 160 of 210 counties in the world. They see that other people have worked their asses off and have more than them, and decide that they should have it too. Fvck John Ossoff.
wouldnt matter much in Charleston County because if they found an apartment that cheap they would be dead from gunshot fire in less than a month
 
Let me lead off with, I am a moderate Republican. I have always voted for the party but don't always agree with everything a republican says. I am usually turned off by Democratic social issues which has kept me voting Republican.

Now, the issue has been touched on some in this thread but hasn't been stated exactly. The issue is America has developed, over time, into a work force that requires too many "low level" employees. This is just one example but consider this:

last year was the first year in our history that Americans spent more money at restaurants than at the grocery store. Sounds harmless but think about that. The number is 700 BILLION dollars was spent on food that wasn't made at home. That number was 600 Million in 1985. In percents, it was 50.4% LY vs. 23% spent eating out in 1985. That change is an enormous change in culture. Think about the low level labor that requires. And we aren't talking about the upper class here. Everyone across all classes is eating out.

Edit: there is a strong argument that eliminating food stamps and EBT would actually promote smarter spending from the families that currently qualify. And more money would be spent on healthy items at the store. Not all families spend poorly but I work in the grocery business and you all would be appalled at what is spent with EBT $. For example more units of shell fish and beef sold last year with EBT than comparably portioned chicken. Which means more money was spent on less tonage of expensive meats than tonage of affordable meats. And don't get me started on how much money was spent on Frappacinos made in in-store Starbucks kiosks. Yes cold drinks can be purchased with EBT.

I am of the mind that we have changed too quickly as a culture and are dealing with very difficult issues as a result. I am all about women in the workforce but the desire to have a 2 parent income is having massive effects. (My wife and I both work). It's almost necessary to do this for millennials for a number of reasons but the main reason is lower average wages across all US jobs below executive levels.

The food industry is just one example but a huge one. You can apply this logic to entertainment as well. I don't know the numbers on cellular data either but I would imagin we spend a butt load on all things data and not all of that money stays in the US. Could be wrong on that though.

I am of the belief that Americans need to focus on providing a service/goods globally for long term success. We need to stay on the cutting edge of development (not just Tech) to tap into a global market to bring more demand for American products and services. Every outsourced job has an effect on American $$. Whether it's a low level telecom job or better paying manufacturing/tech/IT job, every position filled outside of the US has an effect. Do I think we need to regulate from a government level? NO. Is all outsourcing bad? NO. But as Americans, we should be conscious of our spending and companies we do business with at a family level.

It is sad that Americans have to work 40-50 hours (most retail and restaurant are 50) a week and can't support the "American Dream". If Susie and Johnny have to work 50 hours per week, then who is raising Billy? Daycare...and that costs money. Who is cooking? McDonalds...and that costs money.

I think there is some merit to the idea. A FT job should support a family but I don't think raising the minimum wage does anything except create inflation. We need to attack this issue on a different front. People are spending frivolously and we are allowing other nations to profit on our stupidity. Teach your kids to be responsible and you can be part of the solution.

End rant.
 
Last edited:
Im very conservative, and doubt in my lifetime I could ever force myself to vote for a Dem

That being said - Republicans are most definitely gonna struggle in the mid terms.

History tells us it will. I think only once since WWI has the sitting President's party not suffered a midterm net loss in seats in the first election after taking office. Its just a cycle.

People will scream the "Trump-effect", those that want that talking point. But it is just history repeating itself
 
Where do you live where you can find $350 apartments and paying less than $60 a month for power? Your scenario is also assuming you aren't making car payments and don't have health or life insurance. Also, that's $130 left in the account. For the month. With nothing being saved or invested.
Of course no health or life insurance those aren't pieces of this equation, though you could get life for what 7/month? And no car payment, you shouldn't be borrowing money for a car if this is your situation. I have an employee that lives in Clemson for 500/ month including water. I'm not going to do the research but I'm nearly sure that trailers are no where near as expensive as two bedrooms in Clemson.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT