@AverageJoe1 saidHence that health is named, like education, as something other than infrastructure, but just as important to the well-being of society.
Come on man, you do not even say enough here to respond to. Just a replay of all our discussions. But I would like for you to tell everyone that reads this what a livable wage is. A 22-year-old can live on a $20/hr wage.
A man doing the same job that has three children cannot live on $20/hr. So does that mean what you just suggested as meaningless, that it is actually ...[text shortened]... ctual basis for saying no one wants government owned grocery stores? Please don’t be like Sunhouse.
The mimimum wage is exactly what it says. The mimimum wage once can survive on, in relative decency.
Now, if you claim that the minimum wage is say enough to sustain 1 adult and one 1 kid on, then what to do if it’s 2 adults with 3 kids? Surely there has to be some form of compensation for that 3rd kid, especially if laws are being made to promote the survival of every foetus within society?
Now, if you have a decent minimum wage for 1 person and 1 kid, that has to include costs of raising or caring for said kid. Obviously.
Obviously the mimimum amount required is different between New York city and Hazzard county Mississippi.
So, what you are looking at, at a near local level in the US, is a degree of mimimum wage.
Now, with work at home options for many people, why not work in New York (for a bettr minimum wage) and live in Hazzard?
Yeah… so, my question to you is then, instead of seeing problems Joe, how would you address this situation with everyone benefitting?
@shavixmir said(NORTH AMERICAN). Compensation is........
Hence that health is named, like education, as something other than infrastructure, but just as important to the well-being of society.
The mimimum wage is exactly what it says. The mimimum wage once can survive on, in relative decency.
Now, if you claim that the minimum wage is say enough to sustain 1 adult and one 1 kid on, then what to do if it’s 2 adults with 3 kids ...[text shortened]... hen, instead of seeing problems Joe, how would you address this situation with everyone benefitting?
the money received by an employee from an employer as a salary or wages.
plural noun: compensations
You might not have meant this exact word in your post, but in any event, compensation has to come from somewhere. You said that there has to be compensation for the 3rd kid......the kid he had that he cannot afford? For you to make sense, to elicit a comment from us, can you not tell us where the money would come from??? Or, are you asking Me, at the bottom of your post, last sentence, to address this situation with everyone benefitting? (see my tried and true analogy below)
This keeps this issue simple..., let us resolve this and then we look at the ret of your post, zeroing in on your references to dignityk etc, and telling me to not see problems, when your post is all about problems. C'mon man.
Analogy: You have one kid, I have 3 living next door to you;. to what extent would you have a duty to my tight situation, we make the same amount of money. Consider that you are trying to save money for your son's college, and maybe get him a used car. Are you, and/or society, responsible for choices that I have made? If you invoke the well-being of society, getting money from everyone else, how will that play out? I cannot answer your incomplete premise.
@AverageJoe1 saidI’m very surprised you want to go there.
(NORTH AMERICAN). Compensation is........
the money received by an employee from an employer as a salary or wages.
plural noun: compensations
You might not have meant this exact word in your post, but in any event, compensation has to come from somewhere. You said that there has to be compensation for the 3rd kid......the kid he had that he cannot afford? For you to ...[text shortened]... getting money from everyone else, how will that play out? I cannot answer your incomplete premise.
Lots of people don’t want kids.
Lower education (documented research) results in more pregnancies in under 23 year olds.
And US law is enforcing anti-abortion laws.
Surely, Joe, if the morals and financial stimulus were enlighned, this would not be.an issue?
The US is actiively promoting breeding, but unwilling to pay for the results.
No?
@shavixmir saidWht does equal profit from bonuses? I assume you are writing about privately owned busineses?? Like, if I have a widget factory and decide to give bonuses..........PLEASE stay with me here......I decide that morning to gie everyone $1000. Are you saying that government should tell me, or regulate, or dictate what you call 'equal profit from bonuses'?? Govt tells me that the bonuses should be $1800??
Better pay, better work conditions, equal profit from bonusses.. that’s the sort of thing you’ll be talking about.
What are you saying, Zahlanzi. Maybe if you could do an analogy on my paying bonuses at my factory. Can I just, well, ...you know, pay bonuses? how about NOT pay bonuses to workers who have not earned bonuses??
@shavixmir saidIf they fall into the category of the 50M that cannot take care of their problems, children, etc, I think we should pay whatever it takes. But if you are the guy next door who made bad decisions, too many kids, does not work as hard as you do, you want the government to provide what you call 'FINANCIAL STIMULUS" to the guy next door, when you have made all of the right choices, and you look over the hedge and see the government cover all of his kids? HIS kids? Not the govt kids. HIS kids.
I’m very surprised you want to go there.
Lots of people don’t want kids.
Lower education (documented research) results in more pregnancies in under 23 year olds.
And US law is enforcing anti-abortion laws.
Surely, Joe, if the morals and financial stimulus were enlighned, this would not be.an issue?
The US is actiively promoting breeding, but unwilling to pay for the results.
No?
You need another thread about your moral thingy and your people making bad choices, that is not the issue, is it.......
You will not speak to this paragraph, will you.
Financial Stimulus??????
@AverageJoe1 saidHow about the workers dictating what sort of bonus you should get?
Wht does equal profit from bonuses? I assume you are writing about privately owned busineses?? Like, if I have a widget factory and decide to give bonuses..........PLEASE stay with me here......I decide that morning to gie everyone $1000. Are you saying that government should tell me, or regulate, or dictate what you call 'equal profit from bonuses'?? Govt tells ...[text shortened]... well, ...you know, pay bonuses? how about NOT pay bonuses to workers who have not earned bonuses??
@AverageJoe1 saidNo, government shouldn't tell you whether or not to pay bonuses. But that is why Medicare for All is so important. 😆
Wht does equal profit from bonuses? I assume you are writing about privately owned busineses?? Like, if I have a widget factory and decide to give bonuses..........PLEASE stay with me here......I decide that morning to gie everyone $1000. Are you saying that government should tell me, or regulate, or dictate what you call 'equal profit from bonuses'?? Govt tells ...[text shortened]... well, ...you know, pay bonuses? how about NOT pay bonuses to workers who have not earned bonuses??
Medicare for All will allow workers to leave your sh**ty factory and migrate to one that DOES pay bonuses. 😆
@shavixmir saidFraught with problems, would you not say? I'd say no. More of a downside than an upside, you read about that in economics class.
How about the workers dictating what sort of bonus you should get?
There are hundreds of factories. They accept a job at factory A, and if they find it does not have enough upside for them to get promotions, increases in salary, they find a better-paying job and resign from this one.
If they find that the second factory is being forced by Mamdani to have the employees decide how much money they want (I think y'all call it a living wage,,,,,each man to be paid what he and family need to live on..). If they realize that this concept will likely grind the factory down to a halt, they leave THAT factory for one that is profitable with a great future.
I get the tenor or your question, but it would be better if you explain to us how You Think that could work. Make your post interesting. However, you will dilute such a post if you mention what 'other countries' do. I'd just retort with something like we have the American Disabilities Act and other gold standards of living, but stick with the question, please.
2 edits
@spruce112358 saidSee? Here we have Spruce invoke 'medicare for all' in his answer totally irrelevant. I think all of you can invoke a lot of free stuff ...duuuhhhh... but that is not the issue presented by Shav. Geez.
No, government shouldn't tell you whether or not to pay bonuses. But that is why Medicare for All is so important. 😆
Medicare for All will allow workers to leave your sh**ty factory and migrate to one that DOES pay bonuses. 😆
Hmmmm,,,,as this comment stems from 'other countries' meds, I myself hereby invoke that THIS country has more conveniences than any other country in the world. Maybe its greatest asset when it comes to daily lliving. OMG, i just wne off -subject in my effort to highlight 'other countries'. Let's wait for Shav's answer, telling us how he could justify 300 employees deciding on their bonuses.
@AverageJoe1 saidMedicare for All is not 'free stuff.' It is making healthcare a utility - quite normal since you and your doctor buddies priced health out of existence for working people. 😆
See? Here we have Spruce invoke 'medicare for all' in his answer totally irrelevant. I think all of you can invoke a lot of free stuff ...duuuhhhh... but that is not the issue presented by Shav. Geez.
Hmmmm,,,,as this comment stems from 'other countries' meds, I myself hereby invoke that THIS country has more conveniences than any other country in the world. Maybe i ...[text shortened]... t's wait for Shav's answer, telling us how he could justify 300 employees deciding on their bonuses.
@spruce112358 saidYeah, we all get it about the prices, blah blah.
Medicare for All is not 'free stuff.' It is making healthcare a utility - quite normal since you and your doctor buddies priced health out of existence for working people. 😆
But the issue is.....free. Am I right so far???
Two Points. There is a tried and true adage, nothing is free.
Secondly, since it would NOT be free, that means the meds received by a patient are Paid For by someone else.
Everyone, this poster attempts to substitute the concept of 'free' by saying that healthcare should be a utility. But Utilities are paid for by taxpayers. That means that taxpayers are paying for healthcare in the Spruce World.
C'mon, Spruce, don't muddy up posts. Just say what you mean, instead of veiling it in 'utility'. Call it a Piggy Bank if you want to, which taxpayers fund.
Here. you go". "Hello this is Spruce. Everyone in town, put $1000 in the piggy bank from which all citizens will draw funds to pay for their healthcare."
Same thing, shorter post.
@AverageJoe1 saidThe underlying theme of all of you fellers, be you capitalists, socialists, communists or Marxists, is that you have one neighbor paying for (fill in anything here) of their neighbor next door,...... that is the long and short of it.
Yeah, we all get it about the prices, blah blah.
But the issue is.....free. Am I right so far???
Two Points. There is a tried and true adage, nothing is free.
Secondly, since it would NOT be free, that means the meds received by a patient are Paid For by someone else.
Everyone, this poster attempts to substitute the concept of 'free' by saying that healthc ...[text shortened]... from which all citizens will draw funds to pay for their healthcare."
Same thing, shorter post.
It could be one country (USA) paying for problems of another country , or one person paying for the abortion or the college or the tranee operation of another person.
That is the long and short of it. YOu can not, and you will not, justify this.
@AverageJoe1 saidThe problem at present is healthcare costs which are rising FAR above the inflation rate, not where the money comes from. 😆
Yeah, we all get it about the prices, blah blah.
But the issue is.....free. Am I right so far???
Two Points. There is a tried and true adage, nothing is free.
Secondly, since it would NOT be free, that means the meds received by a patient are Paid For by someone else.
Everyone, this poster attempts to substitute the concept of 'free' by saying that healthc ...[text shortened]... from which all citizens will draw funds to pay for their healthcare."
Same thing, shorter post.
A public utility sets prices for services that are controlled by a board - in this case the 'board' would be Medicare. 😆
When prices are constrained to something reasonable (about 1/3 of what they are presently) people will use a variety of measures to pay for them: insurance, out-of-pocket, gummint assistance etc.
@AverageJoe1 saidOh I absolutely will justify this. YOU have to PAY for people who CANNOT DO FOR THEMSELVES! 😆
The underlying theme of all of you fellers, be you capitalists, socialists, communists or Marxists, is that you have one neighbor paying for (fill in anything here) of their neighbor next door,...... that is the long and short of it.
It could be one country (USA) paying for problems of another country , or one person paying for the abortion or the college or the tran ...[text shortened]... another person.
That is the long and short of it. YOu can not, and you will not, justify this.
Anything else would be uncivilized. We don't want people rummaging in garbage cans for food and living (and dying) on the streets. It makes a mess and drives down property values. And it violates "the social contract" because anyone in that situation is no longer morally bound to respect YOUR property rights. i.e. it is not immoral for them to steal to survive. Don't want that because again - creates a mess, need police, courts, prisons, endless paperwork, etc. (which you AGAIN get the bill for! Trust me, my way is cheaper.)
So yes. YOU have to PAY and give them FREE STUFF! Because we are way, WAY smarter than you and we worked it out and this is better.
Plus its morally right and what Jesus would do - NOT THAT THAT MATTERS TO YOU YOU FUUKING PHARISEE!
That's clear now, right? 😆
@spruce112358 saidYou thus confirm that it is your belief that everyone is responsible for everyone else. I don't believe that. Speaking morally, you are somewhat correct, and to stave off the possibility of someone stealing, we should support the 50M peiople in this country who cannot fend for themselves, need food, clothing and shelter. If that is available to them, and they slip off and steal something anyway, they are Wrong! You are aware that every month of so AvJoe (me) reitererates that we should provide for the unfortunate. So I am not a Pharisee. Sorry you see it that way. Further, you are off on desperate people. My post says that we should not pay for someone else's college and tranee operations. How about ole Spruce answer that for me, instead of taking off like foreigners Zahlanzi/Shav with nasty posts?
Oh I absolutely will justify this. YOU have to PAY for people who CANNOT DO FOR THEMSELVES! 😆
Anything else would be uncivilized. We don't want people rummaging in garbage cans for food and living (and dying) on the streets. It makes a mess and drives down property values. And it violates "the social contract" because anyone in that situation is no longer morally bo ...[text shortened]... t Jesus would do - NOT THAT THAT MATTERS TO YOU YOU FUUKING PHARISEE!
That's clear now, right? 😆
Should taxpayers pay for the expenses of people who are not destitute?? That was the issue. Not the wretch in Les Miserables who stole a loaf of bread. And the candlesticks.
Spruce?