Heaven forbid the government would come between an employee and employer.
By all means, let's start repealing anachronistic labor laws. Then we could really start raking in the dough.
Posted on 07/21/2007 11:19:10 AM PDT by libertarianPA
I have been trying to get government programs overturned for a long time.. its never going to happen, even Reagan doubled or tripled the federal budget. And Bush dramatically increased many of these programs. Finally I said well if we are going to spend so much money lets do it in an intelligent way.
Your posts are a mess of socialist idioicy.
I mean government funded school.
A government school for nurses? Because the gov't does such a great job of education now?
I also think the military should be in charge of medicaire/medicaid and also give free schooling for doctors, nurses, physicians assistants and so on.
Why the military run medicare and medicaid? Is that really something for the military to take on? You really want to put the people in charge of protecting the country in charge of a massive socialist organization? Why stop at doctors and nurses? Why not accountants and businessmen? What about the market for doctors is screwed up that it requires gov't intervention? (Hint: It's gov't intervention). You are talking here about full blown socialism, not just a smart way to spend money.
Any commercially valuable degree I would have government funded school as an option.
Why? Why should joe carpenter pay for some kid to go to grad school?
The thing is we already are paying for the cost of poor people, so we might as well spend money to mitigate poverty and have a more highly trained valuable workforce.
OK, but, the reason they are poor is usually not a lack of training, its the decisions they have made in life. You really think you are going to take a bunch of welfare bums and make them doctors?
Instead of helping them with housing subsidy, healthcare for their children, and even k-12 which they aren’t paying for with a low wage.
Yet, you have stated earlier you want the gov't to expand its role in healthcare and education. Weird.
If we decide that we aren’t going to help people at all, which I am also ok with that direction.. then I can see not helping to make the workforce more valuable and skilled.
What makes you think that the workforce will be more skilled if the government does it?
Interesting article. IIRC, the local Kansas City ACORN nutcases complained that they were not able to afford to pay their workers the minimum wage. Simply couldn’t accomplish their bogus voter registration mission if they had to pay those outrageous minimum wages.
A government school for nurses? Because the gov't does such a great job of education now? Why the military run medicare and medicaid? Is that really something for the military to take on? You really want to put the people in charge of protecting the country in charge of a massive socialist organization? Why stop at doctors and nurses? Why not accountants and businessmen? What about the market for doctors is screwed up that it requires gov't intervention? (Hint: It's gov't intervention). You are talking here about full blown socialism, not just a smart way to spend money.
I prefer government funded private or county school. I'm not talking spending any additional money. For example with healthcare we spend 700 billion on medicaire/medicaid, then a huge amount more on military healthcare for current and retired members and families. Then an enormous amount more for all government employees and their families. I put the total we are already spending at just over 1 trillion. That is 3,300$ per American citizen. Well France last time I checked was spending less then that, and they have universal healthcare.
So why do we spend the same and yet peopel like you and me then in addition need private healthcare insurance which is very costly? Its because our government is basically disfunctional.. but I see the military as the last functional part of our government. A lot is because on military bases regulations and liabilities don't extend there. So they can actually get things done, plus the military unlike every other branch is a meritocracy. For example with energy we can't solve our energy problems, because of lawyers and endless bureaucracy. But a Bush administration official had a good idea, build the nuclear plants on military bases, and sell the power out of them.
OK, but, the reason they are poor is usually not a lack of training, its the decisions they have made in life. You really think you are going to take a bunch of welfare bums and make them doctors?
Welfare bums might be unemployable. But I've known like young single moms who can't get out of the rut they are in, because they are always faced with expenses to live their life. I don't think they would make good doctors, but I am sure there is some skill they could learn, where they could get a dramatic increase in pay. For example if they became a nurse and made 30$ an hour, and a lot more when you count all the benefits, then they could actually function without government help.
I guess I'm not sure what your overall point here is.. is your point that our costs are too high because some healthcare is in the private sector, and that we should move to a model that is more like France's since it is cheaper?
So why do we spend the same and yet peopel like you and me then in addition need private healthcare insurance which is very costly? Its because our government is basically disfunctional.. but I see the military as the last functional part of our government.
I'm not so sure that is the case outside of killing, i.e. administrative functions, but I could be wrong.
A lot is because on military bases regulations and liabilities don't extend there.
That won't last is healthcare moves there.
Welfare bums might be unemployable. But I've known like young single moms who can't get out of the rut they are in, because they are always faced with expenses to live their life. I don't think they would make good doctors, but I am sure there is some skill they could learn, where they could get a dramatic increase in pay. For example if they became a nurse and made 30$ an hour, and a lot more when you count all the benefits, then they could actually function without government help.
Well, to the extent we pay poor people, I prefer trying to help them to just giving them stuff.
Heaven forbid the government would come between an employee and employer.
By all means, let's start repealing anachronistic labor laws. Then we could really start raking in the dough.
Nice try, equating child labor (not adults) with interfering between the agreed upon wages of two adults. But, even if thats ok, you are a cheap bastard. Why not just have the minimum wage be $100 per hour? Why do you hate poor people so much?
Like, what kind of car can she buy for the extra money? Assume 40 hours a week, at 70 cents an hour, take out social security and other taxes, that’s about 20 bucks a week, 52 weeks would be $1000 total.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You can get a pretty good used car for $2500.
Raising the minimum wage is a big joke. The working class poor are going to take it in the shorts again. As soon as they passed this legislation all the landlords, and merchants raised their prices too. Everyone wants to get ahead, but it’s the little guy who gets hurt again. I wish one of the mental giants who passed this crap would explain to me HOW it helps. In fact, many small business owners have had to lay people off. Basically, it hurts more than it helps.
You didn’t mention that also when the minimum wage increases, there are more people competing for the job. As a result, the more experienced people tend to get hired... making it really, really hard for high school kids and folks without job skills to even get started...
The government would very quickly get back the costs of those skills by taxes on those people in the future. In my city I’ve seen people get stuck in poverty. Especially single mothers. They have to stay at the dead end job to meet the next few months payments.
I think the best solution is a school loan. Throwing money at single moms is not the solution since they won't feel responsibility to see it through the program. It's called, there is no such thing as a free lunch. These mother's got into this situation themselves. They got pregnant. They got pregnant before getting married. Getting pregnant and being unmarried before the age of 18 is the SINGLE biggest cause of poverty.
If you don't understand this or don't want to... then you are on the wrong website.
Spoken like a card carrying union member whose wage scale is based on the minimum wage. Or someone who is really, really naive. Every time the government raises the minimum wage ABOVE the natural wages -- somebody loses a job.
I don't think the government should be involved in anything. Every time a government (public sector) job is created, jobs are taken away from the private sector.
Now riddle me this, which sector pays for everything?
And I believe that Reagan increased the budget for defense not social programs...
What is your intelligent way to spend money?
Private. Everything.
I’m waiting for them to raise it to $100 an hour. Then we’ll all be rich.
Ding ding ding! We have a winner! :)
I think student loans are a good idea. The thing is with young people, is they often do make wrong choices. And we are paying to subsidize their housing, food, children’s education and especially healthcare for the rest of their life right now.
Often people without a stake in the community turn to drugs or alcohol and giving up on being good citizens. Plus its hard in our example of a single mom with a dead end job to find a decent husband.
I too would rather get rid of all the government intervention and argued it for oh 10-15 years as a libertarian. 98-99% of Americans don’t agree with the no help line.
Uh, how could anyone survive on 5 or 6 bucks an hour and besides Haiti, where in hell could they possibly afford rent at this rate?
instead, the money is given to someone who did nothing but most probably made bad choices in life.
In short, money is taken from the productive people and given to the nonproductive people.
Now I got a question for you, I am not familiar what is going on with welfare programs these days, but didn't a welfare reform bill get passed in the 90s to prevent lifetime reliance?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.