Beau
Well-known member
The video posted above is spot on. Why would a company continue to deal with $15.00 minimum wage, the cost of benefits, the cost of training, the entitlement attitude and various HR issues, if - it is no longer cost effective - because of the requirement to pay people well in excess of what the job demands. Lets even allow the Democraps to make it worse, by adding the COVID bill "adder" that inflates unemployment benefits until (at least) M/E September. Yea, that's it. Lets create a disincentive for people only "qualified" to fill lower wage positions, because if they were to accept a position it would result in a loss of the (COVID bill inflated) compensation.
And the answer is NOT to increase the minimum wage even more or continue the COVID coddling.
Hum, lets see - we will do away with menial jobs by automating the positions rather than overpay these disinterested and entitlement-rich spoiled brats.
Who loses? The disinterested and entitlement-rich spoiled brats.
This won't turn out well.
Basically, the Democraps appeal to the selfishness of the the disinterested and entitlement-rich spoiled brats, and get to look magnanimous, by increasing the minimum wage, but that also increases the cost of doing business so that the effective minimum wage for the disinterested and entitlement-rich spoiled brats effectively eventually becomes zero, when they are displaced. Oh course, that makes them dependent on the Government to pay them, since they are unemployed.
Seems to be working just as the socialist left intends ....
But the statements regarding the Brookings Institute study are correct.
According to the Brookings Institutes:
"Policy aimed at promoting economic opportunity for poor children must be framed within three stark realities. First, many poor children come from families that do not give them the kind of support that middle-class children get from their families. Second, as a result, these children enter kindergarten far behind their more advantaged peers and, on average, never catch up and even fall further behind. Third, in addition to the education deficit, poor children are more likely to make bad decisions that lead them to drop out of school, become teen parents, join gangs and break the law.
In addition to the thousands of local and national programs that aim to help young people avoid these life-altering problems, we should figure out more ways to convince young people that their decisions will greatly influence whether they avoid poverty and enter the middle class. Let politicians, schoolteachers and administrators, community leaders, ministers and parents drill into children the message that in a free society, they enter adulthood with three major responsibilities:
(1) at least finish high school,
(2) get a full-time job, and
(3) wait until age 21 to get married and have children.
Our research shows that of American adults who followed these three simple rules, only about 2 percent are in poverty and nearly 75 percent have joined the middle class (defined as earning around $55,000 or more per year). There are surely influences other than these principles at play, but following them guides a young adult away from poverty and toward the middle class."
NOT the Democrap model, not by a mile.
In contract, the Democrap model appears to be more like:
(1) Question your gender, and have your body irreparably mutilated at an age when you are not ready to make life long commitments,
(2) Stay home, play with your cell phone, become a self-proclaimed expert in everything because of your "feelings" (which are devoid of any practical experience or financial reality), and post all of your nonsense all over social media (not to mention someone specific, like Greta (I'll Cry and Make Faces Because I am a Super-Intellect) Thunberg),
(3) Have sex with people you are not committed to because, well - why not - because you can always have a Government funded abortion (remember in the words of Joe Biden Sr. (Barry Sotero) they wouldn't want to be "punished with a baby"). Invalid Link Removed (Apparently Sotero believes it is better to abort than to let details like morality or personal responsibility enter the picture)
Seems like the Democraps pander to the poor and almost ensure that these people DO NOT avoid these life-altering problems, and their programs incentivize exactly the wrong behaviors. Who would have guessed?
And yes, I am "sure" that the Brooking Institute items (1) - (3) above would be considered "racist".
And the answer is NOT to increase the minimum wage even more or continue the COVID coddling.
Hum, lets see - we will do away with menial jobs by automating the positions rather than overpay these disinterested and entitlement-rich spoiled brats.
Who loses? The disinterested and entitlement-rich spoiled brats.
This won't turn out well.
Basically, the Democraps appeal to the selfishness of the the disinterested and entitlement-rich spoiled brats, and get to look magnanimous, by increasing the minimum wage, but that also increases the cost of doing business so that the effective minimum wage for the disinterested and entitlement-rich spoiled brats effectively eventually becomes zero, when they are displaced. Oh course, that makes them dependent on the Government to pay them, since they are unemployed.
Seems to be working just as the socialist left intends ....
But the statements regarding the Brookings Institute study are correct.
According to the Brookings Institutes:
"Policy aimed at promoting economic opportunity for poor children must be framed within three stark realities. First, many poor children come from families that do not give them the kind of support that middle-class children get from their families. Second, as a result, these children enter kindergarten far behind their more advantaged peers and, on average, never catch up and even fall further behind. Third, in addition to the education deficit, poor children are more likely to make bad decisions that lead them to drop out of school, become teen parents, join gangs and break the law.
In addition to the thousands of local and national programs that aim to help young people avoid these life-altering problems, we should figure out more ways to convince young people that their decisions will greatly influence whether they avoid poverty and enter the middle class. Let politicians, schoolteachers and administrators, community leaders, ministers and parents drill into children the message that in a free society, they enter adulthood with three major responsibilities:
(1) at least finish high school,
(2) get a full-time job, and
(3) wait until age 21 to get married and have children.
Our research shows that of American adults who followed these three simple rules, only about 2 percent are in poverty and nearly 75 percent have joined the middle class (defined as earning around $55,000 or more per year). There are surely influences other than these principles at play, but following them guides a young adult away from poverty and toward the middle class."
NOT the Democrap model, not by a mile.
In contract, the Democrap model appears to be more like:
(1) Question your gender, and have your body irreparably mutilated at an age when you are not ready to make life long commitments,
(2) Stay home, play with your cell phone, become a self-proclaimed expert in everything because of your "feelings" (which are devoid of any practical experience or financial reality), and post all of your nonsense all over social media (not to mention someone specific, like Greta (I'll Cry and Make Faces Because I am a Super-Intellect) Thunberg),
(3) Have sex with people you are not committed to because, well - why not - because you can always have a Government funded abortion (remember in the words of Joe Biden Sr. (Barry Sotero) they wouldn't want to be "punished with a baby"). Invalid Link Removed (Apparently Sotero believes it is better to abort than to let details like morality or personal responsibility enter the picture)
Seems like the Democraps pander to the poor and almost ensure that these people DO NOT avoid these life-altering problems, and their programs incentivize exactly the wrong behaviors. Who would have guessed?
And yes, I am "sure" that the Brooking Institute items (1) - (3) above would be considered "racist".
Last edited:
