Minimum Wage Stuck in the 1950s

[loumeinhart 0]

Quote

I disagree. The super rich owe society/government/"the little people" more because the super rich are benefitting more. That should be fairly obvious by their bank account.

I'm not stating this in regards to taxes but just in general.

I use to work for a rich guy. He would have questionably legal prayer meetings and even at regular meetings he'd sometimes just burst into prayer to thank God for his success and the good Lord's blessings as if he alone had been chosen out of the masses to become wealthy (even though he was the third generation owner of the company).

What I found hilarious was that not ONCE did I ever hear him recognize the minions below him. He really had convinced himself that he alone was responsible for his success.

Quadizzle you mean well but you are terribly misguided.

I'm goin to ask you questions about your above statement. Respond .. or not.

1. Who are the super rich (Larry Kellner, Sean Penn, Dave Mathews, Bill Gates, Ursula Burns, Justin Timberlake, ).. what do these guys/gals owe society in addition to the millions in taxes and charities that they already pay?

2. What ever happened to the 'rich guy' you used to work for? Why aren't you still working for him?

Get a clue and a grip.

Entrepreneurship is discouraged under your point of view yet its the very thing that creates jobs and wealth.

The communist party has a spot for you on their rossiter. Join them, then report back in 10 years and let us all know how it works out for you.

By the way the OP was Min Wage. What's youre minimum wage?

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

I disagree. The super rich owe society/government/"the little people" more because the super rich are benefitting more. That should be fairly obvious by their bank account.

I'm not stating this in regards to taxes but just in general.

I use to work for a rich guy. He would have questionably legal prayer meetings and even at regular meetings he'd sometimes just burst into prayer to thank God for his success and the good Lord's blessings as if he alone had been chosen out of the masses to become wealthy (even though he was the third generation owner of the company).

What I found hilarious was that not ONCE did I ever hear him recognize the minions below him. He really had convinced himself that he alone was responsible for his success.

Quadizzle you mean well but you are terribly misguided.

you appear to be the misguided one
(watch out, watch out, there's a communist about - back to the playground with you)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[loumeinhart 0]

Dude, do you think the slow drooling kid that sat behind you in 6th grade homeroom could be an astronaught? NO! So why then is it a lie?? It's pretty fucking obvious that he cannot be an astonaught OR president. DUHH. Is that a "BIG LIE" like quade says? NO! it's NOT!

[loumeinhart 0]

Quote

you appear to be the misguided one

uhh how

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Dude, do you think the slow drooling kid that sat behind you in 6th grade homeroom could be an astronaught?

so you're not an astronaut
(you must be rich then because everyone wants to be rich)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[loumeinhart 0]

No I'm not but I just want these 2 simple questions answered from quade...

1. Who are the super rich (Larry Kellner, Sean Penn, Dave Mathews, Bill Gates, Ursula Burns, Justin Timberlake, ).. what do these guys/gals owe society in addition to the millions in taxes and charities that they already pay?

2. What ever happened to the 'rich guy' you used to work for? Why aren't you still working for him?

[dreamdancer 0]

and i want you to answer these two simple questions:

are you rich (or do you aspre to be rich if not there yet)?

and, can everyone be rich?

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[loumeinhart 0]

My job depends on rich people. They hire me to play piano for there weddings. When rich people get married they hire photographers, music, catering, bakers, drivers, florists, event planners, etc. Would you liberals rather they were taxed so heavy so they couldnt afford this?

[loumeinhart 0]

Quote

and i want you to answer these two simple questions:

are you rich (or do you aspre to be rich if not there yet)?

and, can everyone be rich?

no
no

[chasteh 0]

Ok.

2008 Average Urban Rate 1.179%
2008 Average Rural Rate 0.781%

Those were the average property tax rates for Idaho last year. If you had one million dollars in property, then you would owe 7,810 dollars for the year, on average, in rural Idaho.

How much of that is contributed to public education, and would it be enough money to compensate someone for private education services, if you got your "money back?"

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

and i want you to answer these two simple questions:

are you rich (or do you aspre to be rich if not there yet)?

and, can everyone be rich?

What is your definition of rich?
(and do you aspire to be that--or to have a lot of money)

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

Ok.

2008 Average Urban Rate 1.179%
2008 Average Rural Rate 0.781%

Those were the average property tax rates for Idaho last year. If you had one million dollars in property, then you would owe 7,810 dollars for the year, on average, in rural Idaho.

How much of that is contributed to public education, and would it be enough money to compensate someone for private education services, if you got your "money back?"

It would certainly help. The private school I'd like to enroll my daughter in costs about $4000/yr. If I got back half my property tax as an educational voucher, that would come pretty close to covering the tuition.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Dude, do you think the slow drooling kid that sat behind you in 6th grade homeroom could be an astronaught? NO! So why then is it a lie?? It's pretty fucking obvious that he cannot be an astonaught OR president. DUHH. Is that a "BIG LIE" like quade says? NO! it's NOT!

Don't you know?

By keeping that kid in "normal" classrooms and slowing everyone else down so he can keep up, we can ALL be astronaut presidents...

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

Dude, do you think the slow drooling kid that sat behind you in 6th grade homeroom could be an astronaught?

so you're not an astronaut
(you must be rich then because everyone wants to be rich)

That was a PA.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Dude, do you think the slow drooling kid that sat behind you in 6th grade homeroom could be an astronaught?

so you're not an astronaut
(you must be rich then because everyone wants to be rich)

That was a PA.

I disagree. And unlike everything else in this forum, that particular opinion of mine isn't up for debate.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[champu 1]

Quote

Quote

If people look hard enough and apply themselves they will find what they want.

Talk about a fantasy.

I hate to break it to you, but we can't all be Presidents and Astronauts. It's just not possible and is one of the "great lies" we as a nation tell ourselves and the next generation.

There's a difference between telling ourselves, "we can all become wildly successful (whether it involves obtaining political power or orbiting the Earth)" and saying, "wildly successful people can come from all walks of life." The latter would be true and could be motivational and the former would be, as you point out, a lie.

Again, however, I don't think that's the point here. Raising minimum wage isn't to help more people on their way to being astronauts.

I think a greater lie than the aforementioned is telling ourselves, "we can all own a house wherever we want, have 2.5 kids, a dog, and afford it all on one 9-5 salary."

/edited to add "wherever we want" clause

[loumeinhart 0]

Quote

That was a PA.

Hardly a PA. To me a Personal Attack is Quade saying that if I humbly start to build wealth by working smart and hard and maybe someday (with a little luck) I can increase my output and generate earnings that reward me and my family with a good life and possibly reap the rewards.... than I should be punished/taxed/discouraged/reprimanded for not looking out for the little guy.

That's a PA

edited to highlight Quade

[loumeinhart 0]

Quade, you are a moderator so don't avoid my question.


What do Larry Kellner, Sean Penn, Dave Mathews, Bill Gates, Ursula Burns, Justin Timberlake owe the American public in addition to what they already pay in taxes and charities?

[chasteh 0]

>1. Who are the super rich (Larry Kellner, Sean Penn, Dave Mathews, Bill Gates, Ursula Burns, Justin Timberlake, ).. what do these guys/gals owe society in addition to the millions in taxes and charities that they already pay?

Were you going to negate the statement:

>The super rich owe society/government/"the little people" more because the super rich are benefitting more. That should be fairly obvious by their bank account.

or are you terribly misguided also?

>Entrepreneurship is discouraged under your point of view yet its the very thing that creates jobs and wealth.

If they weren't benefitting more from society, how could entrepreneurship be discouraged under his point of view?

Or do you mean to say that they do benefit more from society,? If they do benefit more from society,

>Get a clue and a grip.

Show how he doesnt have a "clue" or a "grip."

Does having a "clue" and a "grip" simply mean being as conservative as you are?

>The communist party has a spot for you on their rossiter. Join them, then report back in 10 years and let us all know how it works out for you.

Actually, communism's main purpose is to remove profit from the equation, and simply focus on productivity for the purpose of being productive for mankind. So, really, actual Communism (whereever your example of communism lies. Hint: there is no such example) has a far different result (productivity for utility as opposed to wealth) than what you insinuate it has.

[loumeinhart 0]

I simply want to know what amount super-rich people should pay (according to Quade) in addition to what they're paying now. It's not rocketscience. No one can give me figure. Can you give me a figure?

Am I misguided? Maybe I am.

Quade doesn't have a clue or a grip because he thinks that the rich have to be taxed for me to prosper. That's wrong.

I see your point on communism, it's a completely different system and I probably spoke too soon.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

Quade, you are a moderator so don't avoid my question.

Moderation has nothing to do with personal posting. Being a moderator makes him no more or less likely to respond to your question.

In answer to your question: Justin Timberlake owes the American people a big, fat apology for inflicting that "music" on us.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

>The super rich owe society/government/"the little people" more because the super rich are benefitting more. That should be fairly obvious by their bank account.

Truthfully, a very good argument can be made that those with more wealth are actually wealthy because they benefit society more, not the other way around.

Leaving aside the example of Justin Timberlake, do you really think you've done more for people than Dave Matthews? His music has spoken to millions of people. What have you or I done that's touched even a fraction so many?

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

What do Larry Kellner, Sean Penn, Dave Mathews, Bill Gates, Ursula Burns, Justin Timberlake owe the American public in addition to what they already pay in taxes and charities?

here's what bill gates says about inheritance tax:

Quote

Instead of leaving more debt for the next generation, the United States should retain a robust estate tax and dedicate its revenue to increasing economic opportunity for the next generation.

A responsible reform would increase the amount of wealth exempted by the tax to $2.5 million for an individual and $5 million for a couple -- and include provisions to assist in the transfer of closely held family businesses.

Instead of the present ''flat rate'' system -- where a $5 million estate pays the same rate as a $5 billion estate -- we should adopt a progressive rate structure. Lifting the tax off smaller estates could be paid for by higher rates on estates over $50 million.

In a November ballot initiative, Washington state voters chose to retain their estate tax by substantial margins. Revenue from the state's tax is dedicated to an Education Legacy Trust Fund that last year spent $100 million to reduce K-12 class size and provide college scholarships for working-class students. We should consider a similar design for the federal estate tax.

Such a prudent policy won't happen unless we change our attitude about taxing inheritances. No one makes a fortune alone, without the help of our society's investments. The moral justification for an estate tax is that some of us have disproportionately benefited from the fertile economic soil we have cultivated together.

How many billionaires land on the Forbes 400 list courtesy of our technological and scientific commons, including the Internet, airwaves, biotechnology and mechanical advances? Seeing the invisible role of the commons in individual wealth creation should foster both an attitude of gratitude and recognition of our obligation to pass on similar opportunities. Previous generations did it for us -- and it is our turn to pass on the gift.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1226-25.htm

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[metalslug 36]

Quote

I use to work for a rich guy. He would have questionably legal prayer meetings and even at regular meetings he'd sometimes just burst into prayer to thank God for his success and the good Lord's blessings as if he alone had been chosen out of the masses to become wealthy (even though he was the third generation owner of the company).

What I found hilarious was that not ONCE did I ever hear him recognize the minions below him. He really had convinced himself that he alone was responsible for his success.

I dont completely dismiss your point, especially since this specific example is a 3rd generation owner.
But...
Who appointed his minions? Who appointed the right people in the right positions in order to be profitable? Who devised the incentives to keep them there?
Having you on staff was a stroke of business genius, not so? Surely that deserves reward?

If the rich CEO is not entirely reponsible for the company success then he cant be held reponsible if the company were to fail either, correct?
One rich CEO once told me: "When a fish rots, it always rots from the head on downwards."
...with the implied lesson that the top guy is always indirectly responsible, for better or for worse;
He appoints staff, who in turn appoint other staff, who's overall competency, productivity and profitablity eventually form the sum of the decisions of the top man.

[chasteh 0]

>Truthfully, a very good argument can be made that those with more wealth are actually wealthy because they benefit society more, not the other way around.

That actually was quade's statement, but maybe I can add something here.

So instead society being a major factor in their wealth, you are saying that their wealthy as a result of their benefitting society? Certainly you don't mean this in each and every case. It wouldn't be a very sound argument if you did.

>Truthfully, a very good argument

What? You did NOT just assign truth values to evaluative statements, did you?

Free marketeers often claim that the person who ends up doing more for society ends up earning more money as a reflecton of that. There are plenty of examples in this world of people who have done great damage to society and became obscenely wealthy in the process. (Enron, Halliburton, Disney - just kidding. At least for now)

>Leaving aside the example of Justin Timberlake, do you really think you've done more for people than Dave Matthews?

Can you show me where I said "I think I have done more for people than Dave Matthews," please?

>His music has spoken to millions of people.

Yep. I like some of his music too. He and his band have a lot of talent. Does that mean he did it on his own? Heh. (hint: NOOOOOOO)

>What have you or I done that's touched even a fraction so many?

That would be a tough one. But then you would need to look at the > I placed before the quote I was responding to, which was a quote that the other guy before me used, which was taken from quade's post.