• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

#LivetheWage

Josie said:
Jan Schakowsky, a Congressional member, is beginning her "Live the Wage" menu where she pretends she makes minimum wage and can only eat as much as she can afford. Here is her first menu:

RE https://twitter.com/janschakowsky/status/492378179966078976

Looks like a normal menu to me. Three meals a day with snacks. No one's starving with that menu.
Click to expand...

I always think those people are screwed up. I listen to a podcast and they were complaining about how hard it would be to eat on the amount of money someone gets for food stamps. They did a stunt where they were going to live for a month on what a family of four could get for food stamps, something like $132-138 a month and they complained the whole time about how hungry they were and how horrible it was and nobody could ever be happy doing that.

I do it every month! Our typical grocery bills for a family of 4 is right in line with that. We can afford to buy whatever we want, we just don't. They complained most about not being able to afford beer. There's a simple solution to that, don't drink it! I get sick of listening to these liberals whine about how hard things are. They're really not. Maybe they're just spoiled.
 
Lutherf said:
Poverty in America is different than poverty in the third world. Things like clean, potable running water, electricity, substantial housing, telephone, television and an ample supply of food are taken for granted.

Other stuff that this charade neglects to include is that minimum wage jobs are supposed to be temporary. If you consider an entry level position to be a career or a ceiling you've sold yourself short. These are supposed to be jobs for people just entering the work force who have other sources of household income.
Click to expand...

You'd be amazed how many liberals can't get that through their heads. They think minimum wage jobs are supposed to be living wage jobs that you can raise a family on. They're out of their minds.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
What she isnt taking into factor is 1.)Housing 2.)Bills 3.)Transportation 4.)Medical costs, etc etc
Click to expand...

5) beer, 6) cigarettes, 7) HBO, 8) couple or three nights out at the club per week
 
Cephus said:
You'd be amazed how many liberals can't get that through their heads. They think minimum wage jobs are supposed to be living wage jobs that you can raise a family on. They're out of their minds.
Click to expand...

Libbos are opposed to ambition. Ambition would destroy their agenda.
 
shavingcollywob said:
It also neglects to mention how few minimum wage workers are actually supporting households.

Your average minimum wage worker is using that money to supplement what their parents or spouse are making.
Click to expand...

About half of all MW workers are 25 or older.

As far as supplementing the income of their parents or spouse, i'd like to see where you got that info from. it sounds like you made it up
 
apdst said:
5) beer, 6) cigarettes, 7) HBO, 8) couple or three nights out at the club per week
Click to expand...

Awhhh yes. The "welfare queen" argument made by the great Reagan.
 
Josie said:
Jan Schakowsky, a Congressional member, is beginning her "Live the Wage" menu where she pretends she makes minimum wage and can only eat as much as she can afford. Here is her first menu:

RE https://twitter.com/janschakowsky/status/492378179966078976

Looks like a normal menu to me. Three meals a day with snacks. No one's starving with that menu.
Click to expand...

This is a poorly conceived stunt. She should try "living the wage" not just by taking food into account, but let's talk about rent, transportation, bills/utilities, clothes, supplies and living necessities etc. Not to mention all the costs associated with childcare if you have a kid. I make more than minimum wage but these are the choices that people on the low end of the wage scale have to make and balance every single day. It's not just about food.
 
StillBallin75 said:
This is a poorly conceived stunt. She should try "living the wage" not just by taking food into account, but let's talk about rent, transportation, bills/utilities, clothes, supplies and living necessities etc. Not to mention all the costs associated with childcare if you have a kid. I make more than minimum wage but these are the choices that people on the low end of the wage scale have to make and balance every single day. It's not just about food.
Click to expand...

Throw in just one health emergency or car breakdown and bam, you're toast. There's also the awesome bank overdraft fee circle cluster**** that every poor person is intimately familiar with.
 
Lutherf said:
Poverty in America is different than poverty in the third world. Things like clean, potable running water, electricity, substantial housing, telephone, television and an ample supply of food are taken for granted.
Click to expand...

Why the hell do you think we should allow any Americans to live without those things? This is the wealthiest country in the world. We SHOULD be able to take those things for granted. What relevance do third world countries have on economic disparity here? If there was a significant number of people living in the kind of poverty you're describing, this wouldn't be nearly as wealthy or powerful a country as it is.

Other stuff that this charade neglects to include is that minimum wage jobs are supposed to be temporary. If you consider an entry level position to be a career or a ceiling you've sold yourself short. These are supposed to be jobs for people just entering the work force who have other sources of household income.
Click to expand...

The 1970s called and want their jobs policies back. "Supposed" and "are" don't resemble each other much. The careers that minimum wage workers are supposed to move in to have dried up, and experience in minimum wage jobs doesn't lead to anything else anymore. The gap between wage work and career work has widened. Why is it so hard for you to understand that?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
What she isnt taking into factor is 1.)Housing 2.)Bills 3.)Transportation 4.)Medical costs, etc etc
Click to expand...
You forgot partying, cable TV, hot clothes, cell phone with unlimited everything.... ya know, "essentials"
 
Paschendale said:
Why the hell do you think we should allow any Americans to live without those things? This is the wealthiest country in the world. We SHOULD be able to take those things for granted. What relevance do third world countries have on economic disparity here? If there was a significant number of people living in the kind of poverty you're describing, this wouldn't be nearly as wealthy or powerful a country as it is.



The 1970s called and want their jobs policies back. "Supposed" and "are" don't resemble each other much. The careers that minimum wage workers are supposed to move in to have dried up, and experience in minimum wage jobs doesn't lead to anything else anymore. The gap between wage work and career work has widened. Why is it so hard for you to understand that?
Click to expand...
You shouldnt allow it. You and all the rest of the very caring liberals should pay for it out of your pocket. Because you care.

And maybe the answers are found in building and growing an economy with sustainable middle income jobs and not trying to turn minimum wage jobs into careers. Next thing you know you will be petitioning for college degrees for fry cooks.

'allow'. Geeeeeeeezus. Its no wonder this country is so ****ed.
 
Paschendale said:
Why the hell do you think we should allow any Americans to live without those things? This is the wealthiest country in the world. We SHOULD be able to take those things for granted. What relevance do third world countries have on economic disparity here? If there was a significant number of people living in the kind of poverty you're describing, this wouldn't be nearly as wealthy or powerful a country as it is.



The 1970s called and want their jobs policies back. "Supposed" and "are" don't resemble each other much. The careers that minimum wage workers are supposed to move in to have dried up, and experience in minimum wage jobs doesn't lead to anything else anymore. The gap between wage work and career work has widened. Why is it so hard for you to understand that?
Click to expand...
I would say there are a significant number of people in America living in conditions like that.

I graduated in 2001 and worked at walmart during college for minimum wage. I was able to get by. I lived off of ramen noodles and rice but that was purely by choice so I could go out and drink on weekends. It wasn't nearly as difficult as people make it out to be. As for the whole providing for a family thing, don't have kids if you can't afford them. This is the biggest problem, we have people spitting out babies with no idea how they are going to provide for them. I have a coworkers with 4-5 kids and all of them complain nonstop about how much of a struggle it is to make bills. Its like I always told them they are struggling due to the decisions they made, instead of blaming others for thier mistakes start taking responsibility for your own actions. I find it hard to have pity on people who bring misfortune on themselves especially when due to a backwards tax code and government I have to pay for it.
 
Cephus said:
They did a stunt where they were going to live for a month on what a family of four could get for food stamps, something like $132-138 a month and they complained the whole time about how hungry they were and how horrible it was and nobody could ever be happy doing that.

I do it every month! Our typical grocery bills for a family of 4 is right in line with that.
Click to expand...
Assuming 3 meals per day, that works out to 38 cents per meal. What are you feeding your kids?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
What she isnt taking into factor is 1.)Housing 2.)Bills 3.)Transportation 4.)Medical costs, etc etc
Click to expand...

5. The fact that minimum wage earners tend to be the second or third incomes in a household.
6. An endless array of government programs providing support to those who are not.
 
Josie said:
Jan Schakowsky, a Congressional member, is beginning her "Live the Wage" menu where she pretends she makes minimum wage and can only eat as much as she can afford. Here is her first menu:

RE https://twitter.com/janschakowsky/status/492378179966078976

Looks like a normal menu to me. Three meals a day with snacks. No one's starving with that menu.
Click to expand...

Where is she getting that, in the Congressional Dining Room? :lamo
 
cpwill said:
5. The fact that minimum wage earners tend to be the second or third incomes in a household.
6. An endless array of government programs providing support to those who are not.
Click to expand...

I've seen no evidence that either one of those is true
 
cpwill said:
5. The fact that minimum wage earners tend to be the second or third incomes in a household.
6. An endless array of government programs providing support to those who are not.
Click to expand...

You know the whole thing is bull****. She's a poser.
 
cpwill said:
6. 63 percent of workers who earn less than $9.50 per hour (well over the minimum wage of $7.25) are the second or third earner in their family.

7. As of 2012 there were 126 separate, overlapping programs designed to fight poverty.


:) But methinks you will still see no evidence. You cannot make someone see what they do not wish to.
Click to expand...

Young people working for minimum wage can pool their resources by sharing apartments and doing other such things to increase their buying power until they work their way to a better position. It's done all the time.
 
cpwill said:
6. 63 percent of workers who earn less than $9.50 per hour (well over the minimum wage of $7.25) are the second or third earner in their family.

7. As of 2012 there were 126 separate, overlapping programs designed to fight poverty.


:) But methinks you will still see no evidence. You cannot make someone see what they do not wish to.
Click to expand...

Your first link doesn't support your first claim. It says that about 55% are under 25 and that 43% come from households earning more than 50K. IOW, 43% are kids who are in a family that earns more than 50k. The other 57%, the majority, are not.

2) The fact that there are a lot of public assistance programs does not mean that they are all available to those who earn minimum wage
 
Cardinal said:
What's your ambition?
Click to expand...

At a minimum, it's getting off the porch and going to work. I'm fixin' to pull out the driveway, soon as I post this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom