h102

That would presume they would not take less profit, which shows the real problem is they are profiteering,not that the wages increased!

It doesn't matter if the increase price of products, because people don't haveto buy their products, duh! No, they aren't government because you can make your coffee at home or buy from another chain, you cannot just refuse to pay taxes. Paying more taxes after you make more money is good,it expands the tax base and lowes taxes for all, do you enjoy pay taxes for the billionaire class? If no one is richer after a wage increase, then why does everyone want one? Sure, but we shouldn't be doing the elites dirty work for them. Let them pay their own workers.

This is just brainless and stupid. Ordinary middle class people don't own multibillion dollar businesses employing these workers. And if you are so cheap to not be able to pay an extra 1 cent for a coffee, then you probably aren't a middle class person to begin with. And corrupt shitholes all have low wages, proof that low wages contribute to corruption and shithole status.

I don't even need a source, I am my own source, I am an expert in this area. Wage increases for low income workers increases the amount of money in the economy, which in turn frees up money that was hoarded by the millionaire and billionaire class. These workers then spend this money, which creates more jobs. The rich were hoarding it or buying private jets with it, now it is being spent in local communities in walmart and paying for rent. It creates zero inflation because it is not adding new money, it is just shifting it from the elitist billionaires into the hands of normal people. Wealth redistribution to the poor workers is good. The best evidence of this is high mandatory income regions like Norway, Australia, Luxembourg, etc have incredibly low unemployment rates, where low minimum wages areas of Asia, Latin America and Africa are crummy with high unemployment. Low min wages lead to job loss, stagnant failing economies, and crime and violence, and long term instability. Further we can see that having people paid below living wage is just a bad policy. There is no free lunch, if the employer is not paying a living wage, that person is still living, so someone else (taxpayers, me and you) are paying the workers of billionaires because they are cheap skates. I don't want to pay for the elitist to get rich off the back of the poor.

No, it is economics, eocnomic reality. All your right-wing paid for shills will not change the facts.

Since Wynne raised the min wage, jobs went up.

Utter non-sense, we have the most jobs added in 94 years in a quarter, wages are still not rising.

Sure, but who can look at the disaster they are and try to defend these modelsof government. At least in most small towns kids are not resorting to sniffing gaslines. We are stigmatizing aboriginals by putting them in special pieces of land and telling them how different they are from normal society. No one else who lives in normal areas has this problem. End the reserves, let them have their own cities like normal people or ethnic enclaves.

Gerrymandering is used by both parties, heavily in the south and midwest by the Republicans, heavily in Maryland by Dems. Gerrymandering will be ineffective in the south as all the poor-middle class liberal people are being booted out of california, new york, and chicago and moving to Texas, Arizona, Nevada and Georgia and Florida.

They should abolish all the reserves. indian act is racist.

The constitution doesn't grant birth right citizenship for illegal immigrants, its not in there.

Yeah they will, under his order they will lose it and then they will be deported.

How is it moot, they will be deported onc they lose citizenship.

But this goes beyond that, we are talking about constitutional rights for foreigners, which were never intended to have them. You have the right to bear arms, sure, but do you really think that covers people vacationing and illegals crossing the border? You have the right to free speech, but you can't pass a citizenship interview test if you are of poor moral character and have a pattern of saying retarded or outlandish things. You also cannot donate money (considered speech ie citizens united case) as a foreigner in the US, despite free speech being the first amendment interpreted the most broadly.

They could vote during reconstruction. When reconstruction ended, the states simply stopped following the laws because the federal government refused to enfforce them. Plus, think of what you are comparing, MANY African Americans could not vote because they had to pay poll taxes or guess the number of jelly beans in a jar, whereas Native Indians couldn't vote because they weren't citizens. Big difference. Even where African Americans couldn't vote due to violence, voter intimidation, obscure laws that made it harder if not impossible to vote, they were still regarded as citizens. The reality is they wouldn't need a 1924 INdian citizenship Act if Indians were counted under the 14th amendment. Nope, Trump is right, this will be approved by his conservative supreme court.

So am I, but the facts are unchanged.

I'm not assuming, it is very clear what congress intent was, we know this from the slaughterhouse case and historical facts. Native Indians could not vote off of that Amendment, because it never applied to them. "This finally was stated with the Indian Citizenship Act which was created on June 2, 1924. This act showed progress in that Natives would not have to give up being a Native to be a citizen of the United States. This included being an enrolled member of a tribe, living on a federally recognized reservation, or practicing his or her culture.[55] However, this did not create the right to vote automatically." Trump will succeed, the court is originalist majority.

Illegally, they work their way throught Mexico, Usa, etc. Under the originalist intent, the 14th amendment only applies to African Americans, along with the 13th and 15th as confirmed by the Slaughterhouse case. Trump is surprisingly, in the legal right, for once. You are also wrong, in thinking the 14th Amendment originally applied to natives, the natives were not allowed to vote or counted as citizens until the 1970s, it was never written for them. As such, Trump is right, no birthright citizenship, we need to go all the way back and stripaway anchor baby citizenship.

predictions were wrong, more jobs were made not less, inefficient employers cut hours, but good employers made more hours because their business grew.

No, he isn't, he is making more red tape

no there was a freeze.

Realistically, you will have some stateless children, because what happens when the child is born outside the parents home nation, the parent was often times themself of dubious origin... Ie. there were many middle eastern wars that made tons of refugees, people who were run out of their houses and had no time to take documents to prove who they were, often they belong to minority ethnic groups in this country and no one wants to recognize them, they then leave their country illegally to get a chance somewhere else and have kids. This is how people end u stateless.

Good, they need to end baby tourism from China, Trump finally get something right after 2 years.

Are you serious or is this sarcastic? I am curious which version of history did you read and from where?

You refused to read studies, but I am closed minded because I realized the discussion was useless because you just wanted to push your opinion and not consider facts.