Free Trade Agreements

[CPCFTW]

Where do you get this crap? I swear, your inability to grasp concepts, evidenced by your constant use of strawman arguments, makes me wonder if you're still a high school student.

So what is the argument?

I indicated that people are perfectly capable of living off minimum wage and still having discretionary income, then people started to argue: But what about clothes? But what about savings? But what about education?

I had $300/mo in discretionary spending in my budget that I posted earlier. You can buy all of that stuff in whatever amount (ie. at your discretion), that you'd prefer. Want new Nike shoes? You can buy a pair a month. Want an education? Save up for 9 months a year, put $2500 in an RESP per year and the government will chip in a $500 CESG grant. In two years you'll have $6000 saved plus the return on your investment.

Want to go to school earlier? Then work more than 40 friggin hours at minimum wage and spend less than $500/mo on food. It's not like my budget was conservative. I eat out almost every day and hardly spend any more than $500 on food.

Edited November 24, 2011 by CPCFTW

[dre]

There are student loans and other programs to help, but no it's not easy. This is why people should get their education while they're young.

The thing is if you need government programs, subsidies, and tax breaks to live, youre not really "making a living".

[Michael Hardner]

The thing is if you need government programs, subsidies, and tax breaks to live, youre not really "making a living".

Not to live but to improve yourself.

[bush_cheney2004]

What do you suppose the "losers" do when there are no social supports available? Disappear?

They go to Canada.

[CPCFTW]

The thing is if you need government programs, subsidies, and tax breaks to live, youre not really "making a living".

Oh god... now people on government ordained minimum wage are too good for government tax breaks?

[bush_cheney2004]

I indicated that people are perfectly capable of living off minimum wage and still having discretionary income, then people started to argue: But what about clothes? But what about savings? But what about education?

LOL! What about internet access? What about the 4G cell phone bill? What about cable TV? What about dining out with equally lost friends?

[dre]

Not to live but to improve yourself.

Sure but my point stands. People who are claiming you can "live" on minimum wage are missing the point that min wage earners pay almost no taxes (other people have to pay for thier healthcare and other government services), and usually end up dependant on all kinds of government programs.

Its bascially the same thing as saying you can live on 1 dollar a month in earnings... well you can! Just go the welfare office.

Earning a living means making enough to live free of subsidies, and paying your share for the services you use.

Edited November 24, 2011 by dre

[CPCFTW]

Sure but my point stands. People who are claiming you can "live" on minimum wage are missing the point that min wage earners pay almost no taxes (other people have to pay for thier healthcare and other government services), and usually end up dependant on all kinds of government programs.

Its bascially the same thing as saying you can live on 1 dollar a month in earnings... well you can! Just go the welfare office.

Good point. Minimum wage should be raised so that everyone can pay for their health care, education, savings, and other government service needs without government assistance. How does $30/hr sound? I can't wait to order my $20 big mac!

Dre's ideal society: 40% unemployment with 60% philosophy PhDs "making a living" flipping burgers for $30/hr.

You're also forgetting that people making minimum wage are generating profits for the companies/employers they work for. Those companies/employers pay taxes on those profits to subsidize the workers making a living.

Edited November 24, 2011 by CPCFTW

[Michael Hardner]

Earning a living means making enough to live free of subsidies, and paying your share for the services you use.

Yes, the other side of the conversation isn't about whether you can live, but how much you have to be supported. If we're going to remove jobs that pay high wages, and generate income taxes then government has to figure out how to balance out the game.

[dre]

Good point. Minimum wage should be raised so that everyone can pay for their health care, education, savings, and other government service needs without government assistance. How does $30/hr sound? I can't wait to order my $20 big mac!

Dre's ideal society: 40% unemployment with 60% philosophy PhDs "making a living" flipping burgers for $30/hr.

You're also forgetting that people making minimum wage are generating profits for the companies/employers they work for. Those companies/employers pay taxes on those profits to subsidize the workers making a living.

That post appears to the result of some kind of turrets episode. I never advocated a large raise in the minimum wage, Im saying its a real stretch to suggest those people are earning a living.

[Michael Hardner]

You're also forgetting that people making minimum wage are generating profits for the companies/employers they work for. Those companies/employers pay taxes on those profits to subsidize the workers making a living.

And the tax system is designed around a certain level of high-wage jobs. Maybe your idea around minimum wage isn't so bad after all ?

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes, the other side of the conversation isn't about whether you can live, but how much you have to be supported. If we're going to remove jobs that pay high wages, and generate income taxes then government has to figure out how to balance out the game.

I disagree...the solution is not more and more government figuring out anything. That's part of the problem.

[cybercoma]

CPCFTW and bush_cheney2004 haven't actually made a single argument for themselves. They just make sarcastic remarks about points that people don't actually make.

[bush_cheney2004]

CPCFTW and bush_cheney2004 haven't actually made a single argument for themselves. They just make sarcastic remarks about points that people don't actually make.

No, we just make our remarks in ways that other adults can understand. Try to keep up.

[dre]

Yes, the other side of the conversation isn't about whether you can live, but how much you have to be supported. If we're going to remove jobs that pay high wages, and generate income taxes then government has to figure out how to balance out the game.

Exactly.

[Bonam]

Actually your entire comment is somewhat insulting to child poverty

WWWTT

So go cry in a corner if you are so insulted?

[dre]

I disagree...the solution is not more and more government figuring out anything. That's part of the problem.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the post you were replying to.

[Bonam]

$20,000/year after taxes with absolutely no savings whatsoever. That would be pretty close to $25,000/year before taxes, which is about $12/hr.

You might want to go check into how much taxes you actually pay if you are working for minimum wage. No one is paying 20% tax if they are earning 20-25k/year. Making up BS doesn't help your point.

[bush_cheney2004]

You might want to go check into how much taxes you actually pay if you are working for minimum wage. No one is paying 20% tax if they are earning 20-25k/year. Making up BS doesn't help your point.

BS is his specialty!

[Bonam]

But we're talking about being stuck at $20K (or close) for life, not as a temporary phase.

Who says? You work 40 hours a week, that leaves 128 hours a week to work on getting ahead.

[dre]

You might want to go check into how much taxes you actually pay if you are working for minimum wage. No one is paying 20% tax if they are earning 20-25k/year. Making up BS doesn't help your point.

Yup. You pay almost no taxes at all, which means you dont pay for all the services you use, and are still basically on welfare, albeit to a lesser degree.

[Bonam]

Working fulltime for $20k per year in basic employment is going to get you where exactly? You're not going from Walmart into a $50k per year job. You're not flipping burgers, cleaning floors, or working security for $20k per year as a stepping block to anything. These people are stuck, unless they upgrade their skills. With no means for saving, how exactly are they going to pay for upgrading their skills without trying to get loans, which will probably be declined due to low income and the very likely scenario of bad credit.

More BS. Any low income person will easily qualify for a government student loan if they get accepted to any kind of post-secondary institution, regardless of their credit.

How can they do well in their studies, if they do manage to find a way in, when they're going to need to work at the same time? It's not impossible, but many of you here seem to have absolutely no regard for how much the odds are stacked against these people.

How? By sacrificing some of their party & social time, that almost all post-secondary students easily find time to engage in for 40+ hours a week in addition to their studies. Oh? Is that too hard? Poor babies. Everything is so stacked against them!

And what is your solution? To make it so that those who did persevere and manage to do all this have to perpetually pay for the lazy asses that didn't bother? No thanks.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yup. You pay almost no taxes at all, which means you dont pay for all the services you use, and are still basically on welfare, albeit to a lesser degree.

False...they still pay consumption taxes, sometimes at regressive rates.

[Bonam]

Yup. You pay almost no taxes at all, which means you dont pay for all the services you use, and are still basically on welfare, albeit to a lesser degree.

That's correct. It's a different issue, however. What was being discussed was whether someone can live on 20k/year in our society, which includes access to various services such as healthcare, education, and transportation infrastructure.

[Bonam]

False...they still pay consumption taxes, sometimes at regressive rates.

In Canada, low income people get a GST/HST rebate check mailed to them quarterly to (approximately) reimburse them for sales taxes paid. Effectively, they don't pay consumption tax, or even pay negative consumption tax since often the quarterly checks will exceed how much they paid in sales tax that quarter.

Edited November 24, 2011 by Bonam