Politics

[GoIrish41]

Too many people are forgetting choice is a huge factor here. See above my background. I've not been perfect, nor has my family that's for sure. But we struggled and sacraficed to get an education. We worked hard starting at the bottom. We spent modestly and saved. We relied on ourselves and not the government. We did not have children that we could not support. Even though my parents grew up very poor in large families, they still made it work.

People today can elect to stay in school. They can elect to go to college (it doens't have to be expensive). They can elect to work hard and be productive. They can elect to use contraceptives. They can elect to raise their children the right way, even if a single parent (see contraceptive above). They can elect to drive a beater and live in a modest home instead of going into debt.

People, and this includes many of my neighbors and friends, do not elect to do these things. Is it my fault they do not?

IMO, choice is more the issue than race or anything else these days. That's one reason I donate and volunteer to the local refugee organization. The people there want to be productive citizens, and make good choices. They are not looking for handouts.

Are you implying that African Americans choose to live in households that make $33,460 instead of the $50,502 that all other races' households make? If this is what you are saying, then it would seem that either African Americans are predisposed to choosing to live in poverty or that you are agreeing with the age-old sterotype of Aferican Americans being lazy. I don't think that either of those things is true in any general sense, but if African Americans are not being discriminated against broadly I can think of no other conclusions to draw from your statement. Remember, those numbers came from a survey (the Census, I believe, and someone will surely correct me if I'm wrong) with a sampeling the size of all adults in the United States.

I respect what you and your family did to make your way in the world, but I think you are attaching your circumstances onto everyone else. As hard as you think it was to get where you got, I would suggest that it is much, much more difficult for a black teenager growing up in the inner city, even if all the other factors that teenager was facing were identical to your own. You seem like a guy open minded enough to appreciate that may be a possibility.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

...You can only issue bonuses up to 100 percent of one's salary...

Then companies would just issue higher salaries...

 

[Buster Bluth]

Minimum wage increases are inflationary. Walmart would charge more to account for the higher cost of doing business and they would remain the low cost provider given their operational efficiency. Restaurants are already charging more to account for their increased cost of doing business thanks to Obamacare (anyone else notice everything on the average menu is $1 more than a year ago?)

So if Walmart charges more, is that putting Mitt Romney and the DC millionaires out or is it putting out the poor and middle class who actually shop there? Inflation is a silent killer for the poor and middle class and it is no way to grow an economy. (Enter BO drinking beer pic from a couple pages ago). That is why I find it laughable when Obama's preferred policies punch the poor in the face while they embrace him as their savior.

Not necessarily, they could just replace people with automation or simply not hire.

To everyone else: say what you will about Walmart, but they hire a ton of society's fringe folk who are basically unemployable. They hired my uncle (a bipolar schitzo) no questions asked. All of those old people at the door checking bags and saykng hello are already on govt assistance and are very happy (and fortunate) to have a job. It gets them out of the old folks home and a ton of cash.

Before you scoff at "a ton," realize that old folks who are a ward of the state get $40 monthly in cash for spending. For a lot of them, being a greeter at Walmart is a God send.

The much larger point is that we simply cant have a real economy of these people. That isnt Walmart's fault, or capitalism's, or even any President's.

 

[Ndaccountant]

In terms of expanding, maybe we should do one of the few smart things the EU is considering doing for banksters and instead we should just do it across the board. You can only issue bonuses up to 100 percent of one's salary.

If if the Fortune 500 companies stop issuing these crazy bonuses maybe they would even more capital for expansion. Not that I buy into the fact that if Walmart had to pay $10.10 an hour they would be too poor to expand.

You do realize why bonuses are that high, right? It's called at risk compensation. If you limit the amount of at risk compensation, the amount not at risk will increase (or there would be deferred comp or increased stock grants) which would further worsen the issue the limit is supposed to address.

 

[chicago51]

Minimum wage increases are inflationary. Walmart would charge more to account for the higher cost of doing business and they would remain the low cost provider given their operational efficiency. Restaurants are already charging more to account for their increased cost of doing business thanks to Obamacare (anyone else notice everything on the average menu is $1 more than a year ago?)

So if Walmart charges more, is that putting Mitt Romney and the DC millionaires out or is it putting out the poor and middle class who actually shop there? Inflation is a silent killer for the poor and middle class and it is no way to grow an economy. (Enter BO drinking beer pic from a couple pages ago). That is why I find it laughable when Obama's preferred policies punch the poor in the face while they embrace him as their savior.

These are baseless claims.

Minimum wage does not cause unemployment.

A Higher Minimum Wage Will Not Hurt U.S. Businesses | Center for American Progress

Minimum wage does not cause inflation.

Minimum Wage Hikes Do Not Cause Inflation

 

[chicago51]

Not necessarily, they could just replace people with automation or simply not hire.

To everyone else: say what you will about Walmart, but they hire a ton of society's fringe folk who are basically unemployable. They hired my uncle (a bipolar schitzo) no questions asked. All of those old people at the door checking bags and saykng hello are already on govt assistance and are very happy (and fortunate) to have a job. It gets them out of the old folks home and a ton of cash.

Before you scoff at "a ton," realize that old folks who are a ward of the state get $40 monthly in cash for spending. For a lot of them, being a greeter at Walmart is a God send.

The much larger point is that we simply cant have a real economy of these people. That isnt Walmart's fault, or capitalism's, or even any President's.

Companies are already doing that. You actually think companies are hiring more people than they need right now because wages are low?

If a company can replace someone with a machine they are going to do it with or without a minimum wage increase.

Things could get crazy in the future because of automation but I buy the logic that low wages are holding companies back from automating.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Companies are already doing that. You actually think companies are hiring more people than they need right now because wages are low?

If a company can replace someone with a machine they are going to do it with or without a minimum wage increase.

Things could get crazy in the future because of automation but I buy the logic that low wages are holding companies back from automating.

Companies do not have an endless source of resources and must learn to allocate their resources in the most profitable way. Right now, minimum wage is not something they are concerned with and trying to reduce jobs that pay at the level would divert resources away from things of greater concern.

However, the moment wages go up, there is increased incentive to find ways to mitigate those costs.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Companies do not have an endless source of resources and must learn to allocate their resources in the most profitable way. Right now, minimum wage is not something they are concerned with and trying to reduce jobs that pay at the level would divert resources away from things of greater concern.

However, the moment wages go up, there is increased incentive to find ways to mitigate those costs.

Right, usually you just get fewer hours on your shift.

 

[potownhero]

Most polls out there have about 70 percent wanting to raise the minimum wage. I actually think this could be the Democrats ticket to beating the gerrymandering taking back the House of Representitives.

Minimum wage question: Why do democrats and liberals want to hurt people with no experience or skills?

 

[GoIrish41]

Minimum wage question: Why do democrats and liberals want to hurt people with no experience or skills?

hurt people?

 

[chicago51]

So many things wrong with this as well.

First, to say entitlements are earned, is completely false. Unless you are re-writing the dictionary along with the Constitution. Entitlements are benefits granted by the government or program, or a persons feeling that they are owed something. Earning something is recieving something in exchange for effort. Check out Websters my friend.

Second.... regarding infrastructure. If you've been to non-3rd world countries in Western Europe, you will see that our infrastructure is better than most. If you want to compare us against some of the better 3rd World nations, go no farther than MX, BZ, Honduras, or any of the CA or SA countries. Paved roads, piped in gas, piped in water, sewer systems, all luxuries. Brown outs are frequent (I run a business in BZ and know), and communications is iffy at best. You're complaining about a pothole when these guys don't have a paved road to drive on. Ever had to dig a well or poor your sewage into a gutter. for internet, the most effort US citizens have to go through is to find the closest McD's or Starbucks.

Now I'm not saying we don't need to update or improve, but you are incredibly detached from reality here.

And about me,,, my family made less than 50k for a good portion of my growing up. Both parents came from large poor families of 10 or more kids. My mother grew up with an outhouse, 10 siblings, in a 4 room house. My father, a bit better, 9 siblings in a 2 bedroom. My mother went without food some nights during some challenging times to keep me fed in my early childhood. When things got a little beter, my parents busted their @$$es, both ot them to keep me in the neigborhood Catholic school. My mom got her GED, improved herself, and got a job with AT&T. My father went into the service, got out, and was the first person in his family to work his way through college, and became an accountant. Both improved their positions greatly without being entitled or given anything. I had to pay my way through college. I worked full time, paid as I went, and I graduated without debt. I now make a very good living as an executive of a fast growing technology company. I donate and volunteer regularly, and actually will be dropping off donations this weekend to a refugee center. My mother volunteers frequently and donates way more than a person at her age and on a limited income should.

My point above is, my family and I didn't need entitlements. We didn't need social programs. We didn't need big college loans. We worked hard and sacrificed to improve our situtions. We saved and paid our modest homes off. We give and help because it's the right thing to do, not because we are forced to by the government. The Constitution talks about inalienable rights, not entitlements. The Constituion does not talk about creating a welfare state. Today people believe thier country owes them something. I believe we owe our country something, and it's not high taxes. See JFK and Webster please.

If you against entitlements (aka wealfare) does that include corporate welfare and corporate entitlements?

I actually have more respect for those that want to cut at the social safety and also want to close all these corporate welfare tax loopholes than those that only want to take down the social safety net?

If you are under the nobody should squat people need to work hard and be accountable. Ok fine thats your view point but don't be a hypocrite and stick up for all these tax loopholes which do the same thing for corporations. Corporations are people now the Supreme Court said so. So they shouldn't get entitlements either right?

 

[chicago51]

Minimum wage question: Why do democrats and liberals want to hurt people with no experience or skills?

Why do DC republicans want to hurt 99% of Americans instead of changing or closing these loopholes which don't benefit many middle class Americans one bit?

• 28 Percent Limitation on Certain Deductions and Exclusions ($482 billion) – Sec. 201

Lowers the cap on individual income tax breaks to 28%, providing a flat rate benefit for itemized deductions. Only 30% of taxpayers itemize their deductions. Further, the value of a deduction corresponds to an individual’s marginal tax rate – making itemization highly regressive. For example, itemized deductions totaling $10,000 reduce taxes for a person in the 15 percent bracket by $1,500 (15 percent of $10,000) but cut taxes by $3,900 for a person in the 39 percent bracket (39 percent of $10,000). While “itemizers” include individuals from all income levels, this proposal holds lower earners completely harmless, only affecting households earning above $223,000 annually.

• Close Carried Interest Loophole ($17 billion) – Sec. 201

Ensures that carried interest income from service partnerships is taxed as ordinary income. Hedge fund executives and other investment managers can currently count their share of the firms’ profits as an investment in the partnership rather than as a fee for service. This allows some of the highest-income Americans to pay much lower tax rates (15% in 2012 and 23% in 2013) than they would pay if their fee was correctly taxed as ordinary income (up to 39%), even though the funds they manage are not their own and managing the money is their job.

• Close Loopholes for Jets and Yachts ($4 billion) – Secs. 251 & 421

Removes tax advantages provided to owners of private jets and yacht owners. Current law enables owners of private airplanes to receive a more generous five-year depreciation instead of the seven years provided to commercial airlines. This provision allows a seven-year depreciation for all jet owners. Also, about 500,000 boat owners nationwide can decrease their income-tax bill every year by declaring their vessels a second home. This provision only permits people who use their boats as their primary residence to receive a tax benefit. (includes bill text from Rep. Quigley)

• Close International Tax System Loopholes ($161 billion) – Secs. 401-405

Closes corporate tax loopholes and cracks down on offshore tax abuses that encourage corporations to move jobs offshore. Offshore corporations that are managed from the United States would no longer be able to claim foreign status and dodge taxes on their non-U.S. income. In addition, the bill eliminates tax incentives for moving U.S. jobs offshore and transferring intellectual property offshore. The bill gives the Treasury Department stronger authority to take tough new actions to combat tax haven banks and jurisdictions that help U.S. clients evade taxes. (includes bill text from Sen. Levin and Rep. Neal)

• End Fossil Fuel Subsidies ($94 billion) – Secs. 301-311

Repeals tax breaks, financial assistance, exploration and development expensing, preferential tax treatment of royalties, and domestic manufacturing deductions, for oil, natural gas, and coal producers. Despite the fossil fuel industries being among the most profitable on earth, the U.S. government gives them tens of billions of dollars in subsidies through the tax code. The five largest U.S. oil companies earned about $1 trillion in profits over the past decade, yet in recent years, companies like Exxon Mobil and Chevron paid zero federal income taxes. These subsidies distort markets and are detrimental to creating a clean energy economy, reducing our reliance on oil, and cutting carbon pollution.

• Close Exclusion of Foreign-Earned Income Loophole ($71 billion) – Sec. 231

Closes an exclusion enabling U.S. citizens working abroad to avoid paying any federal U.S. taxes on incomes below $95,100 for individuals and $190,200 for couples. This allows citizens to shelter income and violates the principle that U.S. citizens with similar income should incur similar tax liabilities. This measure closes the exclusion, but retains the tax deductions and credits for taxes paid to a foreign government and housing benefits for U.S. citizens working abroad. (bill text from Rep. Tierney)

• Close Corporate Deductions for Stock Options Loophole ($25 billion) – Secs. 331-332

Repeals the “Facebook loophole” that allows a company to deduct stock options cashed in by an employee at the inflated current market value, rather than the original cost to the corporation. In addition, this provision would impose a $1 million cap on deductions related to stock options, the current standard applied to other types of executive compensation. (bill text from Sen. Levin)

• Close Estate Tax Loopholes ($23 billion) – Secs. 501-504

Closes estate tax loopholes to ensure that the value of the property is recorded consistently between estates and beneficiaries. It requires that all estates’ values be reported to the IRS, that grantor retained annuity trusts have a minimum ten year basis, and that generation skipping trusts have minimum and maximum terms. (bill text from Rep. McDermott)

• Close S Corporation Loophole ($13 billion) – Sec. 241

Closes a loophole that allows wealthy professionals, like lobbyists or lawyers, to avoid paying Medicare tax on their earnings. Under current law, businesses organized as S-corporations do not pay corporate taxes, and income earned is passed through to shareholders who report that income on their personal tax returns. But if these shareholders are also employees, they can choose to treat some of their income as business profit, which lets them escape payroll taxes. Newt Gingrich used this loophole to avoid paying $69,000 in Medicare taxes in 2010, by declaring much of his income as S Corporation profits.

• Reduce Corporate Meal and Entertainment Deduction to 25% ($70 billion) – Sec. 341

Lowers the corporate deduction of the cost of meals and entertainment to 25%. Current law allows businesses to write off 50% of the cost of meals and entertainment, even though eating and entertaining are personal expenses and this exception is subject to frequent abuse.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

...

...Under current law, businesses organized as S-corporations do not pay corporate taxes, and income earned is passed through to shareholders who report that income on their personal tax returns. But if these shareholders are also employees, they can choose to treat some of their income as business profit, which lets them escape payroll taxes.

This is already illegal if they're implying what I think they're implying.

 

[irishpat183]

Haha since when do developped countries compare themselves to the rest of the world? Id say relative to white people

Since liberals love using it for Health care and gun arguments.....

 

[irishpat183]

Are you implying that African Americans choose to live in households that make $33,460 instead of the $50,502 that all other races' households make? If this is what you are saying, then it would seem that either African Americans are predisposed to choosing to live in poverty or that you are agreeing with the age-old sterotype of Aferican Americans being lazy. I don't think that either of those things is true in any general sense, but if African Americans are not being discriminated against broadly I can think of no other conclusions to draw from your statement. Remember, those numbers came from a survey (the Census, I believe, and someone will surely correct me if I'm wrong) with a sampeling the size of all adults in the United States.

I respect what you and your family did to make your way in the world, but I think you are attaching your circumstances onto everyone else. As hard as you think it was to get where you got, I would suggest that it is much, much more difficult for a black teenager growing up in the inner city, even if all the other factors that teenager was facing were identical to your own. You seem like a guy open minded enough to appreciate that may be a possibility.

That's just dumb. It's the choices that have put them in the position to make less money.

Come on, you're not that clueless.

 

[irishpat183]

Umm?

Black Median Household income: $33,460
(all races $50,502)

There are so many factors that go into that. Gimmie a break.

 

[GoIrish41]

That's just dumb. It's the choices that have put them in the position to make less money.

Come on, you're not that clueless.

Some make dumb choices. Some of other races make dumb choices. Heck, I've made dumb choices. But we are talking about the entire African American population of the country. You're saying that these folks are all making choices that keep them at the bottom of the food chain and all of the other races are not making those choices? That would make me ask the question, why? That doesn't sound probable to me. Maybe I AM clueless, but this really sounds an awful lot like saying black people are lazy? Or maybe they are just more morally inferior in some way that keeps them from "getting it." In any case, it sounds a bit offensive to me.

 

[chicago51]

There are so many factors that go into that. Gimmie a break.

Like the unequal distribution of funds for public schools.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Like the unequal distribution of funds for public schools.

Like the unequal distribution of parents.

 

[irishpat183]

Some make dumb choices. Some of other races make dumb choices. Heck, I've made dumb choices. But we are talking about the entire African American population of the country. You're saying that these folks are all making choices that keep them at the bottom of the food chain and all of the other races are not making those choices? That would make me ask the question, why? That doesn't sound probable to me. Maybe I AM clueless, but this really sounds an awful lot like saying black people are lazy? Or maybe they are just more morally inferior in some way that keeps them from "getting it." In any case, it sounds a bit offensive to me.

But you phrased it as if to say that IrishYJ was implying that they choose to make that kinda money.

And yes! people of all colors and sizes make dumb choices all the time.

What % of blacks go to college compared to other races?

What % of blacks get in trouble with the law compared to other races?

What % of blacks grow up in a single family home? (not their choice, I admit)

I mean, there are reasons that can explain these kinds of things. Its not just because "they're black and this country is racist, so they make less money"

That's absolute crap.


I'm a firm believer that anyone of any color can make it. You make your situation. There are kids that have climbed outta dumpsters to make a fortune in this country. What do you say about them? Why can't we use them as the example set for everyone...rather than let those that do nothing, control the way we think/legislate about a particular minority group?

 

[Irish Houstonian]

...this really sounds an awful lot like saying black people are lazy?...

Perhaps the misunderstanding is that a person's wealth isn't just a number showing how many hours he or she has worked in his or her lifetime. A lot goes into what determines a person's wealth/income, and effort is just a part of that. A lot of it is business acumen, timing, industry, personality, intelligence, savings, investment, and good old fashion luck.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Some make dumb choices. Some of other races make dumb choices. Heck, I've made dumb choices. But we are talking about the entire African American population of the country. You're saying that these folks are all making choices that keep them at the bottom of the food chain and all of the other races are not making those choices? That would make me ask the question, why? That doesn't sound probable to me. Maybe I AM clueless, but this really sounds an awful lot like saying black people are lazy? Or maybe they are just more morally inferior in some way that keeps them from "getting it." In any case, it sounds a bit offensive to me.

This little fantasy isn't going into fit your narrative, which originally was irishpat and other conservatives like me are racist and sexist. Irishpat gave a solid response, lots of people make lots of bad decisions from every color and creed.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Like the unequal distribution of funds for public schools.

Don't get me started. Local cities/ municipalities/ townships and states are responsible for funding their public schools. No one else. If you're upset that a school in Lake Forest has more "funding" than a school on the south side of Chicago, go bring it to your local reps or your governor. Or go figure out who is paying for the kids' education and who should start ponying up something.

We've been down this road previously in this thread.

 

[chicago51]

Don't get me started. Local cities/ municipalities/ townships and states are responsible for funding their public schools. No one else. If you're upset that a school in Lake Forest has more "funding" than a school on the south side of Chicago, go bring it to your local reps or your governor. Or go figure out who is paying for the kids' education and who should start ponying up something.

We've been down this road previously in this thread.

It is a state and local issue. I never said it wasn't. I can bring up any government issue I want.

 

[GoIrish41]

But you phrased it as if to say that IrishYJ was implying that they choose to make that kinda money.

And yes! people of all colors and sizes make dumb choices all the time.

What % of blacks go to college compared to other races?

What % of blacks get in trouble with the law compared to other races?

What % of blacks grow up in a single family home? (not their choice, I admit)

I mean, there are reasons that can explain these kinds of things. Its not just because "they're black and this country is racist, so they make less money"

That's absolute crap.


I'm a firm believer that anyone of any color can make it. You make your situation. There are kids that have climbed outta dumpsters to make a fortune in this country. What do you say about them? Why can't we use them as the example set for everyone...rather than let those that do nothing, control the way we think/legislate about a particular minority group?

I'm saying that they do not have the choice if they make $33k instead of $55k. He's saying that because they make bad choices, they are stuck making $33k. I'm completely disagreeing and suggesting that there is something bigger at work than just blaming blacks for being poor. I'm saying that there is discrimination and prejudices and stereotypes they have to overcome that others do not. I'm saying that, given the same opportunities in the same circumstances they would choose to make $55k instead of $33k, but at some point no matter how hard a person tries he will come to the point where he throws his arms in the air and says "f*ck it," why the hell should I even try if nobody is going to give me a shot or let me play on a level field. Sure, a few people have gone from rags to riches and you know why they stand out? Because there is so few of them. A lot of these folks are trapped and all they hear from a lot of people is, "you are lazy," or "it's only a matter of time before you are going to get in trouble." They aren't making the decision, others are making the decision for them and it almost never goes their way.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Everybody realizes that there are white people making $33k/year too, right...? There a quite a few of them who would consider that a pretty good salary, and I wouldn't necessarily call them "lazy" either.

 

[GoIrish41]

Everybody realizes that there are white people making $33k/year too, right...? There a quite a few of them who would consider that a pretty good salary, and I wouldn't necessarily call them "lazy" either.

Sure there are. But we are talking about household income and we are not talking onsies and twosies. We are talking about the average of every African American household in the country making that salary. These aren't the exceptions to the rule that you are describing, these are the rules.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Sure there are. But we are talking about household income and we are not talking onsies and twosies. We are talking about the average of every African American household in the country making that salary. These aren't the exceptions to the rule that you are describing, these are the rules.

I have no idea what you're saying here.

 

[Golden_Domer]

Like the unequal distribution of parents.

100% agree.

"Gang recruitment is a powerful lure for the products of broken homes and single-parent households" as gang members are likely to "receive little guidance or attention from family members at home." (Chicago Crime Commission Report,1995)

There is a disproportionate number of black single-parent families. The lack of a functioning family unit and, by extension, a nurturing community is what drives the black youth to do things like this, which, unfortunately, is becoming too common in Chicago, where I live:

19 kids were arrested. Getting arrested is a good first step to a sh!tty future.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

I'm saying that they do not have the choice if they make $33k instead of $55k. He's saying that because they make bad choices, they are stuck making $33k. I'm completely disagreeing and suggesting that there is something bigger at work than just blaming blacks for being poor. I'm saying that there is discrimination and prejudices and stereotypes they have to overcome that others do not. I'm saying that, given the same opportunities in the same circumstances they would choose to make $55k instead of $33k, but at some point no matter how hard a person tries he will come to the point where he throws his arms in the air and says "f*ck it," why the hell should I even try if nobody is going to give me a shot or let me play on a level field. Sure, a few people have gone from rags to riches and you know why they stand out? Because there is so few of them. A lot of these folks are trapped and all they hear from a lot of people is, "you are lazy," or "it's only a matter of time before you are going to get in trouble." They aren't making the decision, others are making the decision for them and it almost never goes their way.

It's a shame you still look at our country like it's 1952 given how far we've come. Really is. Racism is like poverty: you're never going to have 0% of it, but you are off the ledge today with some of your posts.