• 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!

Big review set by Democrats after election losses

What agenda would that be?

Oh, they don't have positions on issues, like the Republicans?


Really? And who made it a problem because SAS it did not crop up overnight?

Yeah really, there were actually more Republican voters, hence the majority of wins. ;)

Immigration has been an ongoing problem that neither side is addressing realistically.


Right, because rights that protect everyone are bad and bigotry and selfishness are so much better.

I just gave reasons why the older people are slow to change, doesn't mean I agree. You're drawing false conclusions from too little information.


Because record profits and market levels are terrible.

I'm sorry but that's a bunch of crappola. Profits and overvalued markets aren't helping the lower, middle classes with increased cost of living expenses, low wages, unemployment and lack of benefits.
 
So you are saying that it should be you who makes such determinations because someone died and left you in charge or because you are the only one who can do so? I am curious, what is your valuation system?

What are you talking about?
 
Yes, its called treating people decently rather than exploiting a person's desperate situation. Its akin to giving a dying person in the deert a free or cheap glass of water rather than charging as much as you can.

Really? The water in the middle of the desert example? You know, no one is sitting around in the middle of the desert with nothing else around for miles selling water.

Sure, I could be a nice guy and overpay for labor, but if everyone else in the industry is paying people ten dollars an hour for the work and I'm paying twenty-five for the work I better have a way to make up the difference.
 
Yes, its called treating people decently rather than exploiting a person's desperate situation. Its akin to giving a dying person in the deert a free or cheap glass of water rather than charging as much as you can.

Except they're going to need another one shortly, and then another and another until the rest of the tribe is hurting for water too.
 
If you feel strongly about it then use YOUR money.

How are you different than any other thief that roams the streets?

Worker's are not thieves, they give their time. effort and knowledge. A worker that does his/her job well and works full-time deserves a wage that they can live on.
 
Oh, they don't have positions on issues, like the Republicans?
Positions yes, but what is the agenda?

Yeah really, there were actually more Republican voters, hence the majority of wins. ;)
taht was not the point, the point was being afraid of immigration and I was positing that it was the older voters who created the problem.

Immigration has been an ongoing problem that neither side is addressing realistically.
Yea, for a very long time now.

I just gave reasons why the older people are slow to change, doesn't mean I agree. You're drawing false conclusions from too little information.
Fair enough, my bad then.

I'm sorry but that's a bunch of crappola. Profits and overvalued markets aren't helping the lower, middle classes with increased cost of living expenses, low wages, unemployment and lack of benefits.
So what are yo complaining about then?
 
Worker's are not thieves, they give their time. effort and knowledge. A worker that does his/her job well and works full-time deserves a wage that they can live on.
This is a wonderful example of Marxism at work. Cool beans.

People are paid based on the value they bring to the organization they work for. If they cannot live on what they earn they need to upgrade their skills.
 
Worker's are not thieves, they give their time. effort and knowledge. A worker that does his/her job well and works full-time deserves a wage that they can live on.

You don't believe in entry level jobs? Every job has to be a career job?
Like the guy who wipes down your car after it's been washed? Really?
 
What is actually wrong about wages being determined by value? What would you base it on? That someone is human and needs stuff?

Yours is circular reasoning, that's the problem. "You are paid this much, therefore your work is this valuable."

It's incorrect, based on some weird fairy tale universe where everything is fair and everyone is paid what they "deserve," no more, no less.
 
You don't believe in entry level jobs? Every job has to be a career job?
Like the guy who wipes down your car after it's been washed? Really?

Do you think it is possible for everyone to have a "career job" that pays a "living wage?"
 
Positions yes, but what is the agenda?

Agenda would be like a plan or set of common talking points on certain issues.

taht was not the point, the point was being afraid of immigration and I was positing that it was the older voters who created the problem.

How did the older voters create the porous border problem or desire for cheap labor in the south west?

Yea, for a very long time now.

We can't realistically ship all illegals back, but we can pardon the ones here that aren't criminals and control the border better.

Fair enough, my bad then.

No problem, assumptions happen.

So what are yo complaining about then?

I'm not complaining, I was simply giving an opinion as to why older conservatives swung the vote this election.
 
Do you think it is possible for everyone to have a "career job" that pays a "living wage?"

Your definition of a career job and mine are two entirely different animals...no doubt.
But thanks for answering my question with a deflection.
 
Your definition of a career job and mine are two entirely different animals...no doubt.
But thanks for answering my question with a deflection.

I was using your definition, whatever that may be. the real world is more complicated than your overly simple questions, so I was hoping to get some discussions along those lines to more accurately give you my opinion on the subjects .

have a nice day.
 
Yours is circular reasoning, that's the problem. "You are paid this much, therefore your work is this valuable." It's incorrect, based on some weird fairy tale universe where everything is fair and everyone is paid what they "deserve," no more, no less.
Do you have an alternative method that may be sustainable over the long term??
 
Do you have an alternative method that may be sustainable over the long term??

Of course he does. All pinkos do. Make sure people get paid whatever the government thinks is right. What the employer and employee want and agree to is never as important or right as what liberals want and demand.</sarcasm>
 
Big review set by Democrats after election losses







The Democrats were handed such big losses, because they've pushed the liberal agenda too hard. There weren't enough voters to counter the older and middle aged conservatives, who are afraid of the immigration issue, acceptance of LGBT community, social programs, legalization of marijuana, taxes and poor economic performance. Too much change, too soon got a lot of the older vote out, meaning the Dems need to slow their roll and find some middle ground. Obama's unpopularity and lack of response, especially on the recent News coverage of ISIS and Ebola hasn't helped. The Dems risk having no majorities or Presidency in 2016, if they don't learn to compromise on how hard they go left.. looking to pick up the swing vote from the middle.

Both parties don't seem to realize that a majority of people are split or in the middle of many political issues, not to the extremes.

It seems pretty clear to me that liberals are not learning from their mistakes on this. Not the easy way, at least. That's OK. IT just means they'll get another lesson from the school of hard knocks in 2016, which suits me fine.
 
It seems pretty clear to me that liberals are not learning from their mistakes on this. Not the easy way, at least. That's OK. IT just means they'll get another lesson from the school of hard knocks in 2016, which suits me fine.

I actually see both parties becoming more extreme, with the republicans becoming more fractured. It seems when one side or the other gets a majority, they get cocky and overestimate their position.
 
Yours is circular reasoning, that's the problem. "You are paid this much, therefore your work is this valuable."

It's incorrect, based on some weird fairy tale universe where everything is fair and everyone is paid what they "deserve," no more, no less.

What is fair and what is not is up to individual opinion and therefore can not be used to measure anything in an objective manner. How wages are determined is not based on what you believe is fair or what I believe is fair, but by market forces and individual efforts of those involved in the process. There are those jobs where the supply is low and those looking for the work can demand higher wages, and those jobs where the supply is very large and those involved have no real power to gain higher wages. There is nothing about the process that demands wages be in a certain range or even that wages have to be able to survive on. That is simply your ideology speaking that only speaks towards government coercion, not voluntary interaction.
 
You wanted to assign value to people's work for the purposes of compensation. Which part of the question was confusing for you?

Your labor has a certain value to those interested in acquiring it. Sorry, but wages are determined by value.
 
Wasserman Schultz said in a video announcing the project. "We know we're right on the issues. The American people believe in the causes we're fighting for.

That assumption right there may be the problem.

Which, in the wake of historical losses, demonstrates that she, the head of the party is seriously out of touch
 
Back
Top Bottom