• 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!

McJobs and the Minimum Wage[W:123,226]

keith said:
What Reagan meant was a separate minimum wage for youth, not blacks. There is a reason Jimmy did not jump all over that. Reagan had brought up the idea of a separate minimum wage for youth before.
Click to expand...
Youth min wages already existed, it was the level that made him notorious. He called for half of the existing youth wage.

I already showed that the changes in youth wage levels had no impact on White youth unemployment.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Youth min wages already existed, it was the level that made him notorious. He called for half of the existing youth wage.

I already showed that the changes in youth wage levels had no impact on White youth unemployment.
Click to expand...

A very sound idea that would have employed every youth looking for work.
 
ernst barkmann said:
the 14th amendment was created for the slave population only, and stated by the ussc in 1873.

it essentially, took 1-8 of the BOR, and made the states adhere to them, becuase the BOR did not apply to the states before the civil war.

1 -8 of the BOR are limitations on the government.......they are restrictive clauses, which the government cannot make laws concerning.
Click to expand...
What is your point? You are still ignoring the 1937 finding.....still falling back to White slave owner viewpoints.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
I'm not sure of what laws you might be in favor with regarding trade or its associated issues, but I will say that I'm a proponent of fair trade, not free trade policies. Intel used to do most of its manufacturing in this country until environmental regulations forced it to move overseas to remain competitive. We have no problem with other countries producing energy products, yet we are not willing to take advantage of our own resources which would provide jobs for many of the currently unemployed in this country...
Click to expand...

US Constitution gives Congress the power to basically do what they want with science and useful arts (patents, effectively). Large corporations feed money into these Senators to get what they want. Presently if you build a patent (I have multiple international patents I authored), the verbiage (claims) and the art is yours for a small period of time. Major corporations in USA take those claims and that art and engineer exactly what your published patent intended. The reason they steal these ideas is two reasons:
1. Defense of patents costs on average $2.5 million to $4 million, and based on present patent law a non-defensed patent isn't worth a lot of money. The average patent owner can never defend the theft.
2. Even if a patent is defended, typically the corporation that stole the idea has to pay less than 10% of their ill gotten gains back to the true patent owners.

These corporations first steal the idea, then send them overseas to be manufactured. If you merely consider a few things such as televisions / monitors, computers, cell phones, and microwave ovens; we are talking about USA technologies that are in at least 90% of ever household on this planet. Had these all been protected from reverse engineering, USA would have tens of millions of more jobs right now and our economy would be much healthier due to increased wages, increased taxes, lower unemployment, and less entitlements.
 
ernst barkmann said:
sorry no, telling me of white slaves owners is not the subject, .....delegated powers are...so you fail to.
Click to expand...

no
he has shown us that the supreme court has already formed an opinion
and that opinion is at variance with your own
which means you lose
 
keith said:
A very sound idea that would have employed every youth looking for work.
Click to expand...
What are you basing this on? I already showed the wage level changes (varying in real terms) did not affect UE levels.
 
ernst barkmann said:
white slave owners?.......wondering how we went from delegated power of congress, .............to owning slaves.
Click to expand...
Wow, now the ignoring of history since founding......extends into ignoring the arguments already posted.

Short term memory loss?
 
justabubba said:
no
he has shown us that the supreme court has already formed an opinion
and that opinion is at variance with your own
which means you lose
Click to expand...

excuse what does white slaves owners have to do with it, since your choosing to side with him, since he has been professing that line?

again so you can understand, congress has only delegated powers, anything outside those delegated powers in unconstitutional.
 
ernst barkmann said:
excuse what does white slaves owners have to do with it, since your choosing to side with him, since he has been professing that line?

again so you can understand, congress has only delegated powers, anything outside those delegated powers in unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
The SC court already found min wage is Constitutional.

QED.
 
Snappo said:
US Constitution gives Congress the power to basically do what they want with science and useful arts (patents, effectively). Large corporations feed money into these Senators to get what they want. Presently if you build a patent (I have multiple international patents I authored), the verbiage (claims) and the art is yours for a small period of time. Major corporations in USA take those claims and that art and engineer exactly what your published patent intended. The reason they steal these ideas is two reasons:
1. Defense of patents costs on average $2.5 million to $4 million, and based on present patent law a non-defensed patent isn't worth a lot of money. The average patent owner can never defend the theft.
2. Even if a patent is defended, typically the corporation that stole the idea has to pay less than 10% of their ill gotten gains back to the true patent owners.

These corporations first steal the idea, then send them overseas to be manufactured. If you merely consider a few things such as televisions / monitors, computers, cell phones, and microwave ovens; we are talking about USA technologies that are in at least 90% of ever household on this planet. Had these all been protected from reverse engineering, USA would have tens of millions of more jobs right now and our economy would be much healthier due to increased wages, increased taxes, lower unemployment, and less entitlements.
Click to expand...

All the jobs associated with those things you mention were based here until regulations made it unprofitable to continue to do so...
 
ernst barkmann said:
can you point, to where they see this power int he constitution?

no becuase its not there, no where in congress's 18 powers are wage controls.
Click to expand...
Backwards, the legality is not prohibited.
 
ernst barkmann said:
excuse what does white slaves owners have to do with it, since your choosing to side with him, since he has been professing that line?

again so you can understand, congress has only delegated powers, anything outside those delegated powers in unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

go to gimmesometruth's post #439 and refute this excerpt:
... The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes, ruled that the minimum wage law did not violate the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment ...
Click to expand...
i look forward to reading your attempts to refute it
 
AlabamaPaul said:
All the jobs associated with those things you mention were based here until regulations made it unprofitable to continue to do so...
Click to expand...

Wrong Paul. These corporations merely realized it was MORE profitable to make these things using little children shackled to electronics workstations in the third world. Making these in USA would still be profitable if we protected from reverse engineering and the ONLY way to buy these items were from Americans. American companies are finding they are really not beholden to protecting Americans in this new global economy with wide open trade.
 
ernst barkmann said:
you have shown nothing, owning slaves, has nothing to do with delegated powers, slaves are not in article 1 section 8.
Click to expand...
Are you trying to argue that slavery was unconstitutional in the 18th century?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Backwards, the legality is not prohibited.
Click to expand...

“[Congressional jurisdiction of power] is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any.” – James Madison, Federalist 14

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined . . . to be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.” – James Madison, Federalist 45

“The Constitution allows only the means which are ‘necessary,’ not those which are merely ‘convenient,’ for effecting the enumerated powers. If such a latitude of construction be allowed to this phrase as to give any non-enumerated power, it will go to every one, for there is not one which ingenuity may not torture into a convenience in some instance or other, to some one of so long a list of enumerated powers. It would swallow up all the delegated powers, and reduce the whole to one power, as before observed” – Thomas Jefferson, 1791

“This specification of particulars [the 18 enumerated powers of Article I, Section 8] evidently excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd as well as useless if a general authority was intended.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 83

No legislative act … contrary to the Constitution can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 78
 
Snappo said:
Wrong Paul. These corporations merely realized it was MORE profitable to make these things using little children shackled to electronics workstations in the third world. Making these in USA would still be profitable if we protected from reverse engineering and the ONLY way to buy these items were from Americans. American companies are finding they are really not beholden to protecting Americans in this new global economy with wide open trade.
Click to expand...

The chip manufacturing industry produces a lot of toxic waste. These industries were deemed to be not wanted in the US. Even Jobs told the President he wouldn't/couldn't move many of his jobs back to the US due to the regulatory environment. When it becomes more important not to have particular industries in the country, there will be fewer jobs in those industries...
 
justabubba said:
go to gimmesometruth's post #439 and refute this excerpt:

i look forward to reading your attempts to refute it
Click to expand...


excuse me, the 14th amendment is what?

it makes state adhere to the bill of rights........the bill of rights are a limitation placed on governments............the bill of rights are declaratory and restrictive clause placed on the government.........or have you missed reading that
 
ernst barkmann said:
No legislative act … contrary to the Constitution can be valid.
Click to expand...
And I keep pointing to the fact that in 1937 the SC found that Washinton's min wage did not violate the Constitution.

QED
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom