Please comment on the OP...about minimum wage workers
Posted By: not having a living wage? nm on 2008-10-21
In Reply to: If business taxes are increased, guess who they pass the increase down to?? - tomkat
x
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
she said her experience was w/ minimum wage workers
she said it herself what they were paid - minimum wage -duh
I refer to minimum wage workers because...
This type of work normally paid minimum wage. I, however, did not...
GOP-Run Senate Kills Minimum Wage Increase...sm
GOP-Run Senate Kills Minimum Wage Increase
Republican-controlled Senate derails proposed election-year increase in minimum wage
WASHINGTON, Jun. 22, 2006
By DAVID ESPO AP Special Correspondent
(AP)
(AP) The Republican-controlled Senate smothered a proposed election-year increase in the minimum wage Wednesday, rejecting Democratic claims that it was past time to boost the $5.15 hourly pay floor that has been in effect for nearly a decade.
The 52-46 vote was eight short of the 60 needed for approval under budget rules and came one day after House Republican leaders made clear they do not intend to allow a vote on the issue, fearing it might pass.
The Senate vote marked the ninth time since 1997 that Democrats there have proposed _ and Republicans have blocked _ a stand-alone increase in the minimum wage. The debate fell along predictable lines.
Americans believe that no one who works hard for a living should have to live in poverty. A job should lift you out of poverty, not keep you in it, said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass. He said a worker paid $5.15 an hour would earn $10,700 a year, almost $6,000 below the poverty line for a family of three.
Kennedy also said lawmakers' annual pay has risen by roughly $30,000 since the last increase in the minimum wage.
Republicans said a minimum wage increase would wind up hurting the low-wage workers that Democrats said they want to help.
For every increase you make in the minimum wage, you will cost some of them their jobs, said Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga.
He described the clash as a classic debate between two very different philosophies. One philosophy that believes in the marketplace, the competitive system ... and entrepreneurship. And secondly is the argument that says the government knows better and that topdown mandates work.
The measure drew the support of 43 Democrats, eight Republicans and one independent. Four of those eight Republicans are seeking re-election in the fall.
Democrats had conceded in advance that this attempt to raise the minimum wage would fare no better than their previous attempts. At the same time, they have made clear in recent days they hope to gain support in the coming midterm elections by stressing the issue. Organized labor supports the legislation, and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said that contrary to some impressions, most minimum wage workers are adults, not teenagers, and many of them are women.
When the Democrats control the Senate, one of the first pieces of legislation we'll see is an increase in the minimum wage, said Kennedy.
His proposal would have increased the minimum wage to $5.85 beginning 60 days after the legislation was enacted; to $6.55 one year later; and to $7.25 a year after that. He said inflation has eroded the value of the current $5.15 minimum wage by 20 percent.
With the help of a few rebellious Republicans, House Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee succeeded in attaching a minimum wage increase last week to legislation providing funding for federal social programs. Fearing that the House would pass the measure with the increase intact, the GOP leadership swiftly decided to sidetrack the entire bill.
I am opposed to it, and I think a vast majority of our (rank and file) is opposed to it, House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Tuesday.
Pressed by reporters, he said, There are limits to my willingness to just throw anything out on the floor.
On Wednesday, his spokesman, Kevin Madden, said Boehner has told fellow Republicans the House will have to deal with this some way. He said no decisions had been made.
While Democrats depend on organized labor to win elections, Republicans are closely aligned with business interests that oppose any increase in the federal wage floor or would like changes in the current system.
Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, offered an alternative that proposed a minimum wage increase of $1.10 over 18 months, in two steps.
The increase was coupled with a variety of provisions offering regulatory or tax relief to small businesses, including one to exempt enterprises with less than $1 million in annual receipts from the federal wage and hour law entirely. The current exemption level is $500,000, and a Republican document noted the amount had lagged behind inflation.
Additionally, Republicans proposed a system of optional flextime for workers, a step that Enzi said would allow employees, at their discretion, to work more than 40 hours one week in exchange for more time off the next. Unions generally oppose such initiatives, and the Republican plan drew 45 votes, with 53 in opposition.
MMVI The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
then why were you referring to "minimum wage" workers
I never said I'm for giving them a handout...don't know where that's coming from. I was just pointing out the quality of employee you get when you pay minimum wage...why would you refer to minimum wage if you paid them well and didn't pay min wage? I wouldn't expect to get the most reliable people if I were paying minimum.
I said typical minimimum wage workers
I paid well above minimum wage...I guess reading my post it looks like I paid minimum. That was my mistake.
Yesterday IBM laid off American workers but kept Indian workers, SM
and I'm sure they don't make chump change. Looks like we are becoming Zimbabwe! Thank O for that.
Why not? The basic minimum that should be required. nm
.
Very true. Can anyone imagine living on minimum...sm
wage and being made to feel you are not valued, never mind paying your bills. There are a LOT of working poor out there that do not look for a handout and struggle every day to be good parents. It is unbelievable to me that so many people think that the poor are all lazy and worthless. I am sure the sterotype makes the rich able to justify not paying a little more to those lazy ignorant people that just need to pull themselves up by their boot straps while I have a house for every month of the year and a yacht and never have to worry about if my light or heating bill is paid or if I have enough money to buy food for my kids. Don't get me started.
minmum wage
I think a lot of people are forgetting that the minimum wage jobs are mainly the non-degree jobs and basically are for those high-school/ college kids who are trying to save up money for whatever...It's unfortunate that these jobs have become the main source of income for a lot of adults trying to raise a family. However, you can't just raise the minimum wage without it affecting the total picture for the businesses involved. It will create higher prices and/or lay-offs from those businesses. It always has in past times.
This is exactly why there is a state welfare system and also unemployement for those who qualify. There is basic medical insurance also provided to those who once again qualify for it. I know by experience that there are some things these insurances pay on that private ones don't. For example, when I was a manager of a retail store years ago, I needed to get my front teeth capped secondary to a car accident. My insurance didn't cover enough of the cost as they felt it was more "cosmetic." However, one of my employees ended up getting all of her teeth capped via Medicaid with no cost to her at all. I finally was able to afford my two teeth caps about 15 years later.
Obama has done what most presidents do. They get done a few of the things they promise in their campaigns but then change their tune on the majority of issues. It appears he is much more interested in the banks and insurance companies than with the average person. His solution is to keep giving them more and more money. He wants to give breaks to "first time" home buyers and "troubled" mortgage holders...if the banks go along with it that is. Why not just require all banks to adjust any mortgage above the current interest rate period! No qualifying, no nothing, just press the key and change the rate. Yes, it will involve some paperwork on the bank's end but so what.
Reality is a bank is there to make money and they won't decrease their profits unless mandated to do so. Regardless of whether it is coming from a mortgage, credit card, etc.
Wage-Law Enforcement
As the wages of most MTs has gradually dwindled to pennies (I made 10 cpl 16 years ago....now that's considered "good.") It's nice to see there may be some help on the horizon. BTW - they can stuff their VBC. Article link: http://www.truthout.org/032609LA
US Steps up Wage-Law Enforcement
Wednesday 25 March 2009
by: Melanie Trottman | Visit article original @ The Wall Street Journal
US Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis said she is committed to ensuring that all workers are paid at least minimum wage and proper overtime. (Photo: Getty Images)
Washington - The Labor Department is hiring 150 more investigators to enforce wage and child labor laws in the wake of a government probe that found the agency failed to effectively fight wage theft over the last few years.
The stepped-up hiring is a signal to employers that attempts to dodge full payment of wages will be met with new focus, and the latest sign of the increasingly vigorous approach to workplace regulation President Barack Obama vowed his Labor Department would take.
In addition to the 150 investigators being hired to help enforce wage and child labor laws, the department is hiring another 100 investigators in Wage and Hour as part of the government stimulus plan to ensure contractors on stimulus projects are in compliance with applicable laws. The total of 250 will increase staff in the division by more than a third.
Posible new "boon" to the economy? Higher minimum wages??.....PSM
I was just thinking, we did a lot of discussion yesterday about welfare reform, the bloated welfare roles that we have now, and how to end it. How about passing a DECENT, HONEST, REALISTIC minimum wage act that is based on the present economy, the proposed future economay, and will make it more profitable for an American to get a fair-paying job on which he can feed his family, pay his REASONABLE mortgage, pay his bills, etc., instead of having the minimum wage so low that it is actually more profitable for many families to say on welfare, medicaide, and food stamps, along with subsidised housing AND NOT have to juggle three low-paying jobs to do it? Don't you think that if American workers felt they were more faily paid, were being compensated fairly for their efforts, and would bring home enough wages each week to live within comfortable means, that more and more folk would jump off the roles and into a job (of course, we first need the part of the stimulus package to address keeping our companies solvent and employing). Just a thought!!! 
and jobs that pay min. wage often have to scrape the bottom of the barrel - nm
:)
Not hourly wage - paid by the amount of people they registered nm
x
Comment on Bush comment
I heard Bush this morning saying that no one predicted or knew that the New Orleans levees would give way. Well, that is not true. This was widely predicted by engineers and meteologists. The engineers predicted it for years if/when a major hurricaine hit, as well as engineers and meteorologists predicting this 1-2 days before Katrina. I even told my boyfriend last Sunday night that they were predicting some levees would break, that New Orleans would be in water the same depth as Lake Pontchartrain and that thousands could die. Gee, guess I should be a White House advisor.
My other gripe is that this federal response seems a bit slow. Like maybe Monday afternoon things should have been put into motion instead of......Thursday? But then, I'm sure not an expert.
too ignorant a comment to comment on...nm
nm
Okay, WORKERS.
30-40% of WORKERS don't pay income taxes. Is that better? And only recently has he started saying workers. No one was ever counting children or people who did not work. Of course, you realize, you are classifed as a "worker" if you work one day a year, right?
The same question...if he is going to give a tax cut or break or whatever he wants to call it for 95% of WORKERS...30-40% of whom do not pay federal income taxes NOW...HOW is he going to do that without cutting someone a check. How else is he going to get the money to them? Please explain.
Especially the power workers
God bless those people who came all the way down there, slept in their trucks in stifiling weather (because the media and gawking politicians hogged all the hotels that were left) and helped string line and get our power back on. They are heros, as well as all those who donated time and goods.
On the other hand, SHAME on the people from Indiana who printed up a bunch of Katrina T-shirts and had the nerve to come down there to sell them! Those who survived Katrina need no darn T-shirt proclaiming they did!
Instead of cutting the workers' pay, they should
cutting THEIR pay. After all, they're the ones who aren't doing their jobs very well (if at all). Same with AIG - they get the cash, and then give their company *pets* huge *retention* checks. (Yeah, right. Sounds like a big fat bonus, to me.) The big companies' CEOs just don't get it. They want more money, more money, more money, and no matter how you cut it, bailout or no bailout, the one who loses is the little guy. There's no way they're going to completely restructure and retool if they get the money, they'll just keep on doing like they're doing. The Big Three need to die a natural death, no more artificial life support or resuscitation measures - DNR, DNI !!! Then, let a NEW, leaner-meaner-greener American car industry be born in their place. Same goes for the banks. And the insurance companies. And healthcare (mis)management. Let the sick and the weak ones die, and healthier ones grow in their place. Kind of like the forests. If wildfires are prevented for too long a time, the forest gets choked with dead/sick trees and overcrowding, and when a fire finally does roar through (like at Yellowstone in the late 1980's), it's a WHOPPER. Same thing is happening in American business right now.
Union Workers
How does your husband feel about voting out in the open; no more secret ballots? That's quite audacious!
Todd Palin is a card-carrying union guy, too.
And why did the union workers
walk off the job? That's right. For better benefits, health care, retirement and working conditions which ALSO benefited non-union workers, even those scabs who went in and did the jobs. Thanks to Ronald Reagan, the Great (NOT!) the unions have lost their teeth in the ability to even strike and thus to bargain. Ole Ronnie got employers the "right to permanently replace workers." Read up on the history of unions. Ever watch the movie "Jimmy Hoffa?" Yes he made deals with criminals i.e. the mafia but he did much to help workers too. Ultimately he paid with his life. Union/non-union is sort of like arguing democrat/republican. Those for/against don't want to hear any side other than their own.
What? The workers work for nothing?
That's news to me. I thought the workers got paid.
But you see which auto workers are
handouts, and the workers are not complaining about their jobs. I am talking about the ones mentioned recently in the news here in the Southeastern US. Those workers are making(including all their benefits) around $35 an hour. The unionized big 3 workers making $70+ an hour for the same work. Is that contract worth that much?
I took it as we are unskilled workers
sent overseas and basically there is nothing that can be done about it. This has been going on for years, but to be called unskilled? We need to now be better educated for other work opportunities in the United States. So I might as well pack it in and go back to school to do something else, even though I have an AA degree with Medical Transcription skills and schooling.
Here is an article about the poll workers. sm
It is from the Boston Globe. They only give a brief description. There was more discussion on it in one of the grassroots forums.
Apparently,the poll workers did have permission to be there, and the NH GOP told them to stand their ground.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/politics/primarysource/2008/01/obama_and_paul.html
AAMT is not a workers' union.
x
I might have to if your man gets elected. Maybe we'll be co workers nm
x
Here's hoping Chicago workers' sit-in and
good things to come. As Bank of America acquires Merrill-Lynch (whose CEO has the utter gall to request a $10 million bonus pay-out after the ML sell-out) they are refusing credit to Republic Windows and Doors out of Chicago after receiving $15 billion in TARP funds. The workers are fighting back to recover the pay and benefits they have already earned and their governor is backing them up. Now that's what I'm talkin' about !
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aw5QzWC86Vl8&refer=home
not 95% of Americans - 95% of American WORKERS -
From Barackobama.com/taxes:
Obama’s Comprehensive Tax Policy Plan for America will:
Cut taxes for 95 percent of WORKERS and their families with a tax cut of $500 for WORKERS or $1,000 for WORKING couples.
Provide generous tax cuts for low- and middle-income seniors, homeowners, the uninsured, and families sending a child to college or looking to save and accumulate wealth.
Eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses, cut corporate taxes for firms that invest and create jobs in the United States, and provide tax credits to reduce the cost of healthcare and to reward investments in innovation.
Dramatically simplify taxes by consolidating existing tax credits, eliminating the need for millions of senior citizens to file tax forms, and enabling as many as 40 million middle-class Americans to do their own taxes in less than five minutes without an accountant.
unemployed auto workers' pay
per their contract, if unemployed they receive FULL pay. The loss would be benefits, but they get full pay for not working if they are laid off. That should give them time for re-education.
Most employers are cutting workers because they want
Money-money-money-money-
money-money-money-money-
money-money-money-money-money-money-money-money-
money-money-money-money-money-money-money-money!
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Maybe they should tax offshore workers doing OUR work.
Right on! If we workers made more money, we'd
I think you misunderstand government workers
The people who are getting the benefits are not really the people with constituents (they're not members of congress). These are the ones who work for the federal government, like people who work for the dept of agriculture, for the VA, for the dept of state, etc.
NYC using fed millions to fight sick WTC workers. sm
Shame on them. Looks like the articles by the Daily News is finally getting them some much needed attention.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/438101p-369136c.html
By all means give the union workers a pay cut S/M
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ocwage_05092008.htm
Going way down the page you will find the median pay for medical transcriptionists is approximately $15.02 per hour. This being the case, if you are one of those fortunate enough to be making $20 or more per hour, I assume you will be recommending a pay cut for yourself and all others who are making more than the median in order to bring pay more in line with other workers. Translated that means leaving more in the coffers for the big CEOs. I don't know whether some of you are BDD or what.
The practices of healthcare workers do need work - sm
Healthcare workers fail to take the time with patients to discuss disease prevention and health promotion.
If you are going to give money to re-educate the auto workers....... sm
then it would follow that money should be given to sustain and re-educate the people in other industries (MT comes to mind) that are suffering because of big suit mismanagement and jobs going overseas. What about the thousands upon thousands of other displaced workers in the public sector that have lost their jobs? Will they need to be re-educated as well? Will there be jobs available to them, even if they are re-educated?
Maybe that's what all those re-education centers all over America are for. hmmmmmmm
Workers walk off job rather than read McCain script.
Some three dozen workers at a telemarketing call center in Indiana walked off the job rather than read an incendiary McCain campaign script attacking Barack Obama, according to two workers at the center and one of their parents.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/dozens_of_call_center_workers.php
For crying out loud. His target group IS workers
are so low that they come up not owing tax at the end of the year, then it would not be possible to give them a tax cut or a tax credit, unless it is a refundable tax credit. So far, you have not provided any evidence that Obama is proposing a REFUNDABLE tax credit. As a matter of fact, why do you supposed he call this tax credit "Making WORK pay." The credit will zero out at zero tax liability unless it is a refundable tax credit. Again, it seems like you cannot produce any evidence that this is the case. Or can you? What about the socialist question with regard to progressive tax reform proposals only being socialist at Obama's hands, an no other president in history since 1913, including the 7 republicans who raise the top income bracket rates to as high as 63% to 94%, as opposed to Obama, whose intent is to restore that rate back to 39.6% as it was in 2000 when Bush took office?
proposed tax policies which include granting rebates to most US workers.
That statement jumped out at me.
New Bush rule makes it easier to hire foreign workers
Dec 10, 8:43 PM EST
Administration changes to farm worker hiring afoot
By SUZANNE GAMBOA
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- As it prepares to leave office, the Bush administration is moving to make it easier for U.S. farming companies to hire foreign field workers, which farmworker groups say will worsen wages and working conditions.
Farm groups said that changes to the H2A visa program, used by the agriculture industry to hire temporary farm workers, were posted on the Labor Department's Web site at midnight Tuesday but have since been taken down.
Labor Department spokesman Terry Shawn said whatever was posted wasn't the final version of the new rule, which Shawn said would be released Thursday and published in the Federal Register on Dec. 18.
The Bush administration published a proposed version of the new rule last Feb. 13 and received nearly 12,000 public comments, Shawn added. The next version will be a final rule and can take effect 30 days after publication. Some of its provisions would take effect in mid-January and others later in the year, the farmworker groups said.
Farm worker advocates and the United Farm Workers union said the version that appeared on the Web site would lead to a flood of cheaper workers.
"The government has decided to offer agriculture employers really low wages, low benefits, no government oversight to bring in foreign workers on restricted visas and thereby convince them they should do this instead of hiring undocumented workers," said Bruce Goldstein, executive director of Farmworker Justice, a group that advocates for farmworkers.
The changes in the posted version would drop a requirement that an employer get the Labor Department to certify it faces a worker shortage before it can get visas for foreign workers; instead, employers would be allowed to simply attest in writing to a shortage. That version of the new rule also would change the method for calculating wage minimums for workers and relieve employers of a requirement to recruit in states or communities where other employers already are hiring farm workers, Goldstein said.
But Assistant Labor Secretary Leon Sequeira said Wednesday evening the agency is not dropping the obligation to obtain certification, which is required by law.
Paul Schlegel, American Farm Bureau public policy director, said many of the changes will make the program a little less burdensome for employers. He said existing laws prevent employers from hiring foreign workers if the jobs can be filled by U.S. workers.
"My members want to make sure they have a legal supply of labor," said Schlegel, who added that he had not reviewed all the proposed changes.
The rule changes are a part of a pattern of last-minute regulatory changes being rushed into effect by the Bush administration before President-elect Barack Obama's Jan. 20 inauguration.
The effect is to make it harder for Obama to change course on some policies favored by Republicans and the business community.
"We are hopeful that the Obama administration would recognize the utter mistake and unfairness of this proposal," Goldstein said. Congress has a procedure for reversing the rules, he said.
Many of the last-minute changes by the Bush administration have come in the area of public lands and the environment, including easing regulations on mining waste and allowing handguns in national parks. Another pending rule would grant greater leeway to railroads to transport hazardous materials through densely populated areas.
Larger-Than-Life Corporate Salaries are Unfair to Average American Workers. see article.
Commentary: Larger-Than-Life Corporate Salaries are Unfair to Average American Workers
Date: Friday, April 14, 2006
By: Judge Greg Mathis, BlackAmericaWeb.com
Despite slower-than-anticipated growth and lower-than-expected profits, many corporations have generously rewarded their leaders, while simultaneously reducing lower-level staff salaries and benefits in an attempt to control costs. This disturbing practice only serves to further widen the gap between America’s wealthy few and its working class and clearly demonstrates just how little this country values its workforce.
At a time when most American workers are struggling to make basic ends meet and worrying how they’ll manage to save enough for retirement, many of this country’s corporate chief executives are stuffing their pockets with larger-than-life compensation packages that include high base salaries, stock options and ample pension plans. In 2004, the average chief executive’s salary at a large company was more than 170 times that of the average worker’s pay. Last year, executive salaries grew 25 percent, while that of the average American worker grew only 3.1 percent.
Even when a company struggles, their CEOs are still rewarded. For example, the current CEO of a global manufacturing firm received over $11 million in compensation last year, despite the company’s $3.4 billion revenue loss, an 11-percent drop in stock value and a staff reduction of 17,000 workers. There are similar stories at corporations across the country. While worker pensions are frozen and many are asked to do without raises, CEOs manage to earn their multi-million dollar bonuses.
It’s no surprise that CEOs are cleaning up. Consider this: Corporations often use compensation committees to set their executive salaries. Many of these committees use outside consultants to help guide the process. These consultants are often already contracted to do other work for the company. The conflict of interest here is obvious: The consultant won’t upset the CEO -- and risk losing other contracts -- by setting a more realistic, performance based pay model.
Many corporate CEOs are, in short, getting over, and it is a slap in the face of every American worker. While it is understood that executive salaries would greatly exceed that of the average worker’s, there is no logical argument to explain why the growth rate between the two is so dramatically different. To protect its workforce, corporate America must ensure worker’s salaries grow at rates that keep pace with the cost of living, while slowing the rate of growth of CEO salaries. Corporate boards must stop rewarding CEOs with multi-million dollar bonuses. It is unacceptable for a company to lay off thousands of workers and then turn around and pay an executive for a job well done.
As a country, we often ask our government to think about the needs of the average American, and rightly so. However, if America is to truly prosper, the corporations that feed our local economy must also consider and respect the well-being of average worker.
---
Judge Greg Mathis is national vice president of Rainbow PUSH and a national board member of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.
Comment
Why did you choose the Hilter comparison?
Here is what I saw in Hitler:
1. Megalomania - yes, possibly in Bush.
2. Skillful use of the propaganda of hate to unite a nation and incite a lust for war. Blaming of select ethnic group for Germany's woes -- yes, I see some similarity there, but Bush seems more like "oops, sorry I accidentlly killed you" to the Iraquis (Islam nations) rather than "I will place you in concentration camps until you are all exterminated."
3. Hitler was mentally ill but still capable of great, inspirational speeches and inspiring confidence in the masses -- Bush is kind of dopey and I'm not sure who he inspires, really, if much of anyone.
4. Hitler seemed to have an agenda to exterminate -- as mentioned, I don't see that in Bush.
Well, I had fun with this. WWII is an area that I know quite a bit about.
Comment
Did gt actually say there were NO socialist Jews? I took her to mean that Jews in general should not be categorized as socialists. There are probably socialist Irish, socialist Catholics, socialist African-Americans....but that doesn't mean you label the entire ethnic group as such. Common sense would dictate this. Just as I keep saying, you cannot label all liberals or all democrats as having the same ideals and belief systems. You seem to keep trying to put square pegs in round holes here....or, as also has been mentioned...thinking only in black and white when the world and all its people are shades of gray. It makes me very sad to see this and I end up feeling hopeless about the future of our country and of the world.
As far as Chomsky, I haven't read tons of his writing but what I did read a few years ago I very much liked. Could it be a case of you taking some things he wrote out of context? Or perhaps some things he wrote were more fiery or radical than you were comfortable with? Perhaps you didn't survey his writings as a whole and only picked out a few you didn't like. When you make an accusation as you did, please provide examples to back up your comments.
Your comment...
I think I do your understand your point....basically you are saying his comment was taken out of context? It did seem that what I read of this quote was more that he was careless in his comments - they touched a nerve, as I said. It seemed he was looking at a cultural problem from a tongue-in-cheek statistical line of reasoning, and perhaps spoke before thinking. At least, I HOPE that's all it was. I have not read this all that carefully, I must admit. I also admit I know NOTHING about him personally or his past.
Thanks for your intelligent commentary.
Comment
Obviously your beliefs bring you solace and comfort and that is a benefit that religion offers, in my opinion, and that is very good if it helps you.
However, perhaps you should not generalize. I was a hospice worker as well as watching my mother die from cancer. She was a life-long agnostic and I don't believe it ever even crossed her mind to call out to Jesus or Zeus or any other deity. She made the most graceful exit from this world I have ever seen and was at peace with that process.
I do agree though that in times of extreme stress many folks may want to enlist the aid of a higher power, but please don't assume that we all turn to Jesus.
Just a comment
Does this apply to anyone who helps a specific region? That would certainly limit a lot of programs that target specific groups of the poor. So when President Johnson launched his War on Poverty targeting Appalachia he should have been required to live there? I am just so happy to see interest and help provided for the most downtrodden sectors of our society (as well as worldwide) that I can see no good reason to require that the folks contributing have to change their place of residence.
Had to comment
The story about your prescriptions rings so true! My insurance company sends me these little papers after every x-ray, lab test, etc. that outlines what I paid, what they paid, and whether or not the price was reduced. I had blood tests that I was initially told cost $1,150. (I almost passed out!) After a few months of arguing with the insurance company and the lab, I get one of these little papers that says my $1,150 bill was knocked down to $150 - without my insurance paying anything. The lab went ahead and reduced the price since my insurance was obviously not going to pay for it. I've had this done with hospital bills, too. I just love looking at those numbers. Someone is making a HUGE profit somewhere for them to be able to cut the price down that much. Kinda like when I worked in retail and I got to see the difference between what the store paid to the manufacturer and what the price tag said. Sometimes I'd almost rather not know...
Just another comment
I've been watching all stations of the news. I'm not voting for Obama. I don't trust him. I also don't trust McCain and not voting for him. I'm sure I will write in someone's name. With that said I have seen no "love fest" with Obama (watch CNN, MSNBC, and FOX). I'm not seeing this "love fest", however it was so obvious with Clinton. It was so obvious and so nauseating that I always had a bucket nearby to retch in.
As for McCain..who is saying that he is supposed to "hide" the fact that he was tortured. I've never heard that on any station. However, McCain keeps playing it over and over and over. This is not the Vietnam war and I don't care what anyone says...just because he was tortured doesn't make him qualified to be President. What makes some qualified is having your "faculties" together. Know what country you are talking about and know what's going on with the countries. DH and I were looking at each other funny when he's talking about Iran and says the Israeli people and vice versa. He doesn't know where the Taliban are, and for sure he has no idea or plans to get this country back on its feet. He is a war mongerer and that's all he's planning for. If its not one country he'll start up a war somewhere else. It's what he thrives on.
As for September 11th - the truth will come out one day and people will be shocked and in denial.
First of all, i appreciate very much your comment...
about her daughter.
That being said...there are women in high places who have young children. I do not think that precludes Sarah Palin from serving. She has been managing as governor, including firing the state chef because she wanted to cook for her own kids.
JFK had young children. Both John and Caroline were very young. Jackie did a fine job raising them. They were/are fine young people.
the difference is that Sarah is VP, not president, and her husband will be taking a larger role. There are a lot of husbands who stay at home more to take care of children because of the wife's career. I don't remember how old amy carter was...13 maybe?
At any rate, that is not an issue for me. Those children seem happy and well adjusted after their mom being a mayor and then a governor, and I have no reason to believe they will suffer if she is VP.
I think that just brings her closer to understanding career women, who can have both without excluding the other. I think that makes her closer to mothers, period. She understands.
But that is just my opinion...and you are certainly entitled to yours.
Just a comment
Having offspring is not the only reason to get married as your post suggests (not saying it says that, just saying it "suggests" that). You said "If same-gender marriage was to be then where would there be offspring". There are a lot of man/women couples who cannot have children (like me), should that have stopped us from getting married? Loving a person and wanting to spend the rest of your life with them and share the same rights every other human being get to have should be the basis for a marriage. Just leave the offspring to couples who can have kids. The world will still be fruitful and multiple.
|
