D.C. to vote on $11.50 minimum wage

D.C. to vote on $11.50 minimum wage

There are 905 comments on the WPTZ-TV Plattsburgh story from Dec 3, 2013, titled D.C. to vote on $11.50 minimum wage. In it, WPTZ-TV Plattsburgh reports that:

Once you're logged in, at the top of each article, video or slideshow you will see a list of your Facebook friends who recently visited Choose to share stories you'e read with your friends or turn sharing OFF to keep your reading experience anonymous .

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WPTZ-TV Plattsburgh.

xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#692 Dec 26, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>yes, my GF and i are looking at traveling for a few years from tourist town to tourist town so we can live in say, Vail, for a season, and then move on to the nest swanky place for a season. with my valid class a CDL and ability to pas a DOT drug test, i can get a job anywhere, any time..one that we can live off of.
Without a doubt. How many other careers can you have that allow you to live anywhere in the US and still be able to work without a problem? If not for my friends and family, I certainly wouldn't be living in Cleveland or anywhere east of the great lakes.
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#693 Dec 26, 2013
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
Then millions of people would have no healthcare. That doesn't make sense. We need good paying jobs and quality national healthcare.
It makes all the sense in the world.

The ultimate goal of DumBama and the Democrats is to destroy our insurance based healthcare we've had for decades. Once that is accomplished, then everybody is a government dependent unless you are independently wealthy.

After our health insurance companies are gone, there will be nowhere to turn for alternative healthcare.

Government dependents commonly vote Democrat. The more Democrat voters, the better for Democrat politicians. This plan is not to get everybody insured. DumBama could care less whether you get healthcare or get hit by a train. The only thing he wants to insure is that Democrats have unchallenged power for many years to come. That's what this really is all about.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#694 Dec 26, 2013
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
It makes all the sense in the world.
The ultimate goal of DumBama and the Democrats is to destroy our insurance based healthcare we've had for decades. Once that is accomplished, then everybody is a government dependent unless you are independently wealthy.
After our health insurance companies are gone, there will be nowhere to turn for alternative healthcare.
Government dependents commonly vote Democrat. The more Democrat voters, the better for Democrat politicians. This plan is not to get everybody insured. DumBama could care less whether you get healthcare or get hit by a train. The only thing he wants to insure is that Democrats have unchallenged power for many years to come. That's what this really is all about.
and you think the system we have had was working well? why?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#695 Dec 26, 2013
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Without a doubt. How many other careers can you have that allow you to live anywhere in the US and still be able to work without a problem? If not for my friends and family, I certainly wouldn't be living in Cleveland or anywhere east of the great lakes.
if you are a good bartender or chef you can also usually find work when you want to pretty much anywhere...

there are many jobs hell, you can get a fast food job anywhere also, but don't expect to live on that wage, as it takes no skill to do that job.

“Mocking Liberal Brain Disorder”

Since: Jan 11

Canton, OH

#696 Dec 26, 2013
If idiot leftists really "cared" about the poor, they'd demand min wage be $100 an hour.

Don't they want the poor to be rich?
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#697 Dec 26, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>and you think the system we have had was working well? why?
I didn't say that. The system we had was not working well, but making it worse is no solution.

The biggest problem we had was the expense of medical care. But to solve that problem, you have to bring down the cost and THEN decide how we will pay for it.

There are nearly a dozen things we could have done to accomplish that, some of them not costing any money at all. But along came this 2,700 page abortion that few were able to decode and many that didn't understand what they could decode.

I will say one thing about our system: if you don't like the insurance, hospital or doctor you had, you can always change that. Once government totally takes over, there are no options.

“bar0ckalypse n0w”

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#698 Dec 26, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>what would the doctors know about health care insurance?
You can't be serious.

“bar0ckalypse n0w”

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#699 Dec 26, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>if you are a good bartender or chef you can also usually find work when you want to pretty much anywhere...
there are many jobs hell, you can get a fast food job anywhere also, but don't expect to live on that wage, as it takes no skill to do that job.
Bartending and chef jobs are service economy jobs. You can't have a service economy without manufacturing. Liberals killed manufacturing and it's a matter of time before you kill the food service business.

nancy got umpteen waivers for all her favorite san Francisco restaurants.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/03/28/17...
Chicopee

New Fairfield, CT

#700 Dec 26, 2013
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
All the sources you cite are pro-business and anti-union.
The reason why workers are on unemployment compensation for 99 weeks is because there are not enough full-time jobs that pay a living wage.
Corporate profits are rising. But that money isn't being invested in new workers and/or higher wages. Corporations are buying back stock to inflate worth and reward wealthy stock holders while American workers are left behind. We are going through a new guilded age where the economy only works for the rich.
Someday someone will wake up and light a match. All it takes is a spark.
Till von Wachter is pro-business and anti union? Can you cite a source for that tidbit? Do you even know what he does for a living?

The publications listed ran articles that mostly concerned Wachter;s testimony before congress in 2011, citing data from previous decades which demonstrates that a certain percentage of people who receive long term unemployment will sit on their cans and wait until the benefits run out before they start seriously looking for another job. These people actually raise the unemployment rate by 1%. His concern is that this actually slows economic recovery. People who aren't earning money aren't spending it.

Johannes Schmeider and Stefan Bender are economists from Denmark and Germany, who have similar data from their own countries, where unemployment benefits last for up to four years.

Corporate profits are rising? In what sectors? In what states? You repeat talking points equating all sectors with Wall Street,(the evil rich) and think that these blanket statements apply across the board because someone else says so. They don't.
Joe

Chalfont, PA

#701 Dec 27, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>Till von Wachter is pro-business and anti union? Can you cite a source for that tidbit? Do you even know what he does for a living?

The publications listed ran articles that mostly concerned Wachter;s testimony before congress in 2011, citing data from previous decades which demonstrates that a certain percentage of people who receive long term unemployment will sit on their cans and wait until the benefits run out before they start seriously looking for another job. These people actually raise the unemployment rate by 1%. His concern is that this actually slows economic recovery. People who aren't earning money aren't spending it.

Johannes Schmeider and Stefan Bender are economists from Denmark and Germany, who have similar data from their own countries, where unemployment benefits last for up to four years.

Corporate profits are rising? In what sectors? In what states? You repeat talking points equating all sectors with Wall Street,(the evil rich) and think that these blanket statements apply across the board because someone else says so. They don't.
And who controls the House.... The GOP. To make their case for cutting unemployment compensation (which they succeeded in doing) they're going to call right-wing economists to testify before committees they control.

Being unemployed is like being under house arrest. You can't do anything. But you attempt to paint a picture that people are having a grand time. Searching for a job is a job, and there are days when you need a break. Don't be so harsh. Don't sound like that moron Aphellon.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#702 Dec 27, 2013
mjjcpa wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't be serious.
you can[t be so idiotic...
do doctors run health insurance companies? no, no they do not...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#703 Dec 27, 2013
mjjcpa wrote:
<quoted text>
Bartending and chef jobs are service economy jobs. You can't have a service economy without manufacturing. Liberals killed manufacturing and it's a matter of time before you kill the food service business.
nancy got umpteen waivers for all her favorite san Francisco restaurants.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/03/28/17...
no, it had nothing to do with liberals or conservatives...

you, once again, have absolutely no idea what you are talking about...

“bar0ckalypse n0w”

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#704 Dec 27, 2013
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
And who controls the House.... The GOP. To make their case for cutting unemployment compensation (which they succeeded in doing) they're going to call right-wing economists to testify before committees they control.
Being unemployed is like being under house arrest. You can't do anything. But you attempt to paint a picture that people are having a grand time. Searching for a job is a job, and there are days when you need a break. Don't be so harsh. Don't sound like that moron Aphellon.
My friend's wife was on unemployment until her benefits ran out. She magically found a job that month. It was a longer commute and a lower position, but it's better than sitting home taking our money or having her house foreclosed upon.

While she was home on unemployment, she did NOTHING to further her career. She could have gotten a degree in that time.
1 post removed
Joe

Chalfont, PA

#706 Dec 27, 2013
mjjcpa wrote:
<quoted text>My friend's wife was on unemployment until her benefits ran out. She magically found a job that month. It was a longer commute and a lower position, but it's better than sitting home taking our money or having her house foreclosed upon.

While she was home on unemployment, she did NOTHING to further her career. She could have gotten a degree in that time.
That analogy is akin to GOPers comparing the federal budget to a family household budget. Absurd and narrow.
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#707 Dec 27, 2013
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
That analogy is akin to GOPers comparing the federal budget to a family household budget. Absurd and narrow.
Not really. They both work the same way. When you spend more than you take in, you wind up in trouble.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#708 Dec 27, 2013
mjjcpa wrote:
<quoted text>
Bartending and chef jobs are service economy jobs. You can't have a service economy without manufacturing. Liberals killed manufacturing and it's a matter of time before you kill the food service business.
nancy got umpteen waivers for all her favorite san Francisco restaurants.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/03/28/17...
Exactly and you are correct about Nancy.
Chicopee

New Fairfield, CT

#709 Dec 27, 2013
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
And who controls the House.... The GOP. To make their case for cutting unemployment compensation (which they succeeded in doing) they're going to call right-wing economists to testify before committees they control.
Being unemployed is like being under house arrest. You can't do anything. But you attempt to paint a picture that people are having a grand time. Searching for a job is a job, and there are days when you need a break. Don't be so harsh. Don't sound like that moron Aphellon.
It's fairly clear that I've been debating with a wall.

If you bothered to check out those names or investigate which committee was testified before (bi-partisan, BTW), then you would understand that party affiliation has nothing to do with this debate...something you can't seem to accept. Or the fact that this testimony was presented over two and a half years ago. Congress passed extensions at that time, despite the testimony, which just shoots more gaping holes into your R v D opinion.

I've been unemployed...most Americans have, at some point. And most of us know one or more people who took advantage of being paid to sit home. Even you know at least one person who's done this.

But you aren't going to hear anything you don't want to hear, which is why you won't even make an attempt to research the stats yourself.

I'm not harsh, I'm realistic, and not especially partisan. That's like wearing a set of blinders.
Chicopee

New Fairfield, CT

#710 Dec 27, 2013
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
That analogy is akin to GOPers comparing the federal budget to a family household budget. Absurd and narrow.
This country is $17 trillion in debt. Means tested assistance being paid out by our government has nearly doubled in the last four years to just under $1 trillion a year, and tens of millions of people are about to get bounced onto the Medicaid rolls and get free medical. Only it's not really free, is it? Someone's going to have to pony up those billions of dollars.

You do understand that this country can only generate the money to pay for all this for so long before it runs out? You do understand that if you confiscated everything from those evil rich people, it wouldn't be enough to run this show for a year?

I don't think you do understand.
2 posts removed
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#713 Dec 28, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>
It's fairly clear that I've been debating with a wall.
If you bothered to check out those names or investigate which committee was testified before (bi-partisan, BTW), then you would understand that party affiliation has nothing to do with this debate...something you can't seem to accept. Or the fact that this testimony was presented over two and a half years ago. Congress passed extensions at that time, despite the testimony, which just shoots more gaping holes into your R v D opinion.
I've been unemployed...most Americans have, at some point. And most of us know one or more people who took advantage of being paid to sit home. Even you know at least one person who's done this.
But you aren't going to hear anything you don't want to hear, which is why you won't even make an attempt to research the stats yourself.
I'm not harsh, I'm realistic, and not especially partisan. That's like wearing a set of blinders.
Perhaps, but there is one party that favors spending regardless of the problems it will create down the road.

Those on the left just don't understand the word "broke."

Broke means no money. Broke likely means in debt. Broke means failure.

So the question is, why would anybody elect candidates that support failure? Why would low-information voters insist on failure? Why would they even promote it?
Joe

Chalfont, PA

#714 Dec 28, 2013
Chicopee wrote:
<quoted text>This country is $17 trillion in debt. Means tested assistance being paid out by our government has nearly doubled in the last four years to just under $1 trillion a year, and tens of millions of people are about to get bounced onto the Medicaid rolls and get free medical. Only it's not really free, is it? Someone's going to have to pony up those billions of dollars.

You do understand that this country can only generate the money to pay for all this for so long before it runs out? You do understand that if you confiscated everything from those evil rich people, it wouldn't be enough to run this show for a year?

I don't think you do understand.
I'm a political analyst. Of course I understand the issues of the day. But I understand that there is more than enough wealth in this nation to care for all Americans. Some people escape from paying taxes, others don't pay enough. And then we have corporate loopholes and tax shelters.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 1 min russianrepukes 286,762
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 1 min old_moose 25,440
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 min Yeah 1,580,609
News Dear Trump Voters: The 1950's Aren't Coming Back 2 min george 1,244
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 4 min Dr Z 316,309
News How should an angry liberal celebrate the Fourt... 5 min Rose of Tralee 864
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 5 min Tre H 8,382
More from around the web