You're probably right, but Republicans tried to privatize it and Democrats called them greedy and said they "hate old people". If you had paid in the same amount of money to a 401k over your career, you would have several times the income in retirement. But for Democrats it's never about doing what's right, it's about having control over you.
At least the fools does not disagree that they are stealing money from him, yet the fool goes at and defends the people he knows are stealing money from him by pointing fingers at the other party. ROFL.
People need to wake up. The moment you are born on this soil & recorded - or migrate & given a SSN, you're signed up to forced labor to the United States Government. Any wages you get - anything at all, you owe Uncle Sam.
This entire country is enslaved to the government & everyone is just fine with that,
Social security and pensions are what's wrong with this economy, literally. When ever someone mentions the national debt, they think "China", but 70% of American debt is owed to .......Americans, for retirement. Even the majority of bailouts are for pensions. And ss is a massive scam , put in place after the depression, in the "new deal". They were going to vote all the politicians out for poor mismanagement, so they bought them off with retirement paid for by future generations. (6% a year for 40 years is still only about 2 1/2 years wages, even with interest). The retirement concept is flawed.
The retired and infirm should stay with relatives or friends. Like in so many other countries. Instead we give a golden year delusion of independent living.
Socialism starts at home
History shows that this is never the case. Quite the opposite. People think only one step into the process. I have to pay more, so I have to hire less. However, laws of supply and demand answer this.
If it were only a few companies required to pay higher wages, then it would destroy jobs. However, with higher minimum wage you will have more money in the hands of the people who are then more likely to be able to spend that money. Non essentials will have a higher demand. With people spending more, there will be an increase in demand for workers. 15 dollars an hour was chosen with calculated reasoning, too, as 15 dollars an hour is around where this effect starts to curve towards a downward trend (paying too much with not enough non-luxury non-essentials to compensate for the increase in pay).
This is what trickle down economy is supposed to look like. People having enough money available to them to make purchases. If money is flowing in a circle, quality of life increases.
Do you think that the collective boards of directors and shareholders will lower their profits just to pay their employees $15 an hour OR do you think that they'll just raise prices and keep their bottom line the same?
I think the latter and, in that scenario, the middle class will get screwed more than anyone else. The poor will be OK because they're used to being poor, yes, they're income went up but so did prices, so it's a wash. The rich will be OK because they're rich. The middle class, however, will see double digit inflation with no pay increase. I know my boss won't give me a raise just because minimum wage workers got a raise.
Totally agree. Currently a basic recruit in the military make only $1,680.90 per month. Raise the minimum wage to $15 then you'd damn well raise military wages across the board. Otherwise, no one will volunteer for Biden's wars when they can make way more flipping burgers. What happens then? Welcome to the draft.
There are people and families in other countries that barely make a few bucks an hour let alone in one day. And here people are complaining that we need minimum wage and to raise payments for flipping burgers. How about minimum wage payments to impoverish people in other countries? I thought democrats loved giving money to those who really need it.
Because it's not the government that's paying it. Government wants to force private businesses to pay more to their employees, and acts shocked when businesses close and/or reduce their workforce because of the extra expenses (like krogers in the cities that mandated an extra 4$ an hour above what workers were already being paid, which was probably minimum wage for most).
The workers in california are unionized, but they barely (like 10¢) make more than minimum wage. However, the minimum wage in California is rather high to begin with, and many cities have set even higher minimums. A change in federal to $15 would have no effect in most of California.
When they raised the minimum wage in Washington, a lot of workers asked their employers to give them less hours because their income would be too high and they would no longer be eligible for welfare checks.
That’s not what I’ve heard from people in the service industries. Of course they’d like to get a decent wage with tips but if they had to choose between a set, “decent” wage without tips vs a lower wage with tips, most of them would choose tips.
DEMOCRATS THINK PEOPLE FLIPPING BURGERS AT A WENDY'S NEED $15/HR AT A MINIMUM TO HAVE A LIVING WAGE; $15/hr x 40 hrs/wk x 52 weeks = $31,200. $31,200/12 mo. = $2,600/mo. WHY ISN'T $2,600/MO THE MINIMUM SOCIAL SECURITY PAYMENT?
hotkeys: D = random, W = upvote, S = downvote, A = back