Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 21:22:46
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Booming Thunderer
Minnesota
|
Either you have never looked through their clothing selection, or you live in a poorly dressed community, could be either.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 21:23:02
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Sure Space Wolves Land Raider Pilot
skulking around the internet
|
djones520 wrote:
My wife enjoys shopping at goodwill. On the days she drags me in there, I have learned that it would be very easy to put together several outfits that were respectable looking, for a very fair price.
Fair enough, you'd definitely struggle to put together a decent outfit at my local charity shops (I'm assuming they're vaguely comparable).
|
It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and erase all doubt.
4000pts Steel Talons |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 21:25:24
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Member of the Ethereal Council
|
to be fair, There are MANY churches, groups, govt institutions that give you suits or dress ware
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 21:31:31
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Kid_Kyoto
|
Actually, I DID manage to find a suit that fit me almost perfectly (it was a little big) that I wore to my first job interview. The guys there made fun of me for both, wearing a suit too large, and wearing a suit at all. I got the job though.
I still have it. It's my party suit now. Automatically Appended Next Post: I find it difficult to discuss this luxury business any further without having a nailed down definition of luxuries.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/01 21:33:11
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 21:34:17
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Old Sourpuss
|
Frazzled wrote:Your definition of housing for one person is indeed a luxury.
I'm sick of your fething bullgak Frazz. Having a bedroom, a bathroom, and a dining/kitchen area is not the high end of living. Not all of us grew up with the need to gak behind a tree while watching out for sabertooth cats and mammoth and not all of us grew up with 5 bathrooms, and enough bedrooms to sleep in a different one every night! The housing section of the self-sustainability standard, the thing I've been discussing this entire thread, says that the cost of housing is based on the uses the most recent Fair Market Rents (FMRs), which are calculated annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for each state’s metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas. FMRs include utilities (except telephone and cable) and reflect the cost of housing that meets basic standards of decency. FMRs are generally set at the 40th percentile, meaning that 40% of the housing in a given area is less expensive than the FMR.
Here is what the HUD describes as "standards of decency"
Sanitary facilities
---The dwelling unit must include sanitary facilities within the unit.
---The sanitary facilities must be in proper operating condition and adequate for personal cleanliness and disposal of human waste.
---The sanitary facilities must be usable in privacy.
Food preparation and refuse disposal
---The dwelling unit must have suitable space and equipment to store, prepare, and serve food in a sanitary manner.
Space and security
---The dwelling unit must provide adequate space and security for the family.
-----At a minimum, the dwelling unit must have a living room, a kitchen and a bathroom.
-----The dwelling unit must have a least one bedroom or living/sleeping room for every two persons. Other than very young children, children of opposite sex, may not be required to occupy the same bedroom or living/sleeping room.
-----Dwelling unit windows that are accessible from the outside must be lockable.
-----Exterior doors to the unit must be lockable.
Thermal environment
---The dwelling unit must be able to provide a thermal environment that is healthy for the human body.
Illumination and electricity
---Each room must have adequate natural or artificial illumination to permit normal indoor activities and to support the health and safety of occupants.
---The dwelling unit must have sufficient electrical sources so occupants can use essential electrical appliances.
--- Electrical fixtures and wiring must not pose a fire hazard.
Structure and materials
---The dwelling unit must be structurally sound.
---The structure must not present any threat to the health and safety of the occupants and must protect the occupants from the environment.
Interior air quality
---The dwelling unit must be free of air pollutant levels that threaten the occupants’ health.
Water supply
---The water supply must be free of contamination.
Lead-based paint
The Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 4821 - 4846) and the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 and implementing regulations 4 CFR Part 35 Subparts A, B, M, and R apply to the housing choice voucher program.
Access
---Use and maintenance of the unit must be possible without unauthorized use of other private properties.
---The building must provide an alternate means of exit in case of fire.
Site and neighborhood
---The site and neighborhood must be reasonably free from disturbing noises and reverberations
or other dangers to the health, safety, and general welfare of the occupants.
Sanitary condition
---The dwelling unit and its equipment must be in sanitary condition.
Smoke Detectors.
---On each level of the dwelling unit including basements, but excluding spaces and unfinished attics at least one battery-operated or hard-wired smoke detector in proper operating condition must be present.
---Smoke detectors must be installed in accordance with and meet the requirements of the National Fire Protection Association Standards (NFPA) 74 or its successor standards.
---If a hearing-impaired person is occupying the dwelling unit, the smoke detectors must have an alarm system designed for hearing-impaired persons as specified in NFPA 74.
So there you go Frazz, basic standards of decency set up and accepted by the government, including your great state of Texas's government. Since I know you're as old as my father (older than dirt), I've taken and bolded the appropriate areas so that your feeble, failing eyes can see the text that is important to my oh so luxurious standards of housing.
You can't argue that the Standard is arguing for wages that are too high because it bases everything on the actual cost of goods in the current market place (which is why the standard for a single adult in my county is different from a single adult in Cincy's county).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
The job I have now, and the job I interviewed for recently I had a dress shirt and tie from Goodwill, a hand me down sports coat from my dad, and pants I've had for almost a decade now. The most expensive thing were my shoes.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/01 21:35:21
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+

Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 21:44:26
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Kid_Kyoto
|
Alfndrate wrote:
Thermal environment
---The dwelling unit must be able to provide a thermal environment that is healthy for the human body.
Water supply
---The water supply must be free of contamination.
Interesting, those were luxuries we hadn't even considered up until this point.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/01 21:44:43
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 21:55:42
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Sniping Reverend Moira
|
Yeah, hearing is required, cooling is not. You can much more easily freeze to death than you can overheat, at least in most parts of the US.
Contaminant free water isn't really much or a luxury, is it? Unless you're drawing from your own well, your municipality is already doing that
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 21:55:45
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
daedalus wrote: Frazzled wrote: Alfndrate wrote:
So you're cool with people being able to afford housing, food and transportation?
Your definition of housing for one person is indeed a luxury.
Certain definitions of luxury would include shoes.
Pfft shoes are for the weak!
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 21:59:25
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
Alfndrate wrote: Frazzled wrote:Your definition of housing for one person is indeed a luxury.
I'm sick of your fething bullgak Frazz. Having a bedroom, a bathroom, and a dining/kitchen area is not the high end of living. Not all of us grew up with the need to gak behind a tree while watching out for sabertooth cats and mammoth and not all of us grew up with 5 bathrooms, and enough bedrooms to sleep in a different one every night! The housing section of the self-sustainability standard, the thing I've been discussing this entire thread, says that the cost of housing is based on the uses the most recent Fair Market Rents (FMRs), which are calculated annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for each state’s metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas. FMRs include utilities (except telephone and cable) and reflect the cost of housing that meets basic standards of decency. FMRs are generally set at the 40th percentile, meaning that 40% of the housing in a given area is less expensive than the FMR. Here is what the HUD describes as "standards of decency" Sanitary facilities ---The dwelling unit must include sanitary facilities within the unit. ---The sanitary facilities must be in proper operating condition and adequate for personal cleanliness and disposal of human waste. ---The sanitary facilities must be usable in privacy. Food preparation and refuse disposal ---The dwelling unit must have suitable space and equipment to store, prepare, and serve food in a sanitary manner. Space and security ---The dwelling unit must provide adequate space and security for the family. -----At a minimum, the dwelling unit must have a living room, a kitchen and a bathroom. -----The dwelling unit must have a least one bedroom or living/sleeping room for every two persons. Other than very young children, children of opposite sex, may not be required to occupy the same bedroom or living/sleeping room. -----Dwelling unit windows that are accessible from the outside must be lockable. -----Exterior doors to the unit must be lockable. Thermal environment ---The dwelling unit must be able to provide a thermal environment that is healthy for the human body. Illumination and electricity ---Each room must have adequate natural or artificial illumination to permit normal indoor activities and to support the health and safety of occupants. ---The dwelling unit must have sufficient electrical sources so occupants can use essential electrical appliances. --- Electrical fixtures and wiring must not pose a fire hazard. Structure and materials ---The dwelling unit must be structurally sound. ---The structure must not present any threat to the health and safety of the occupants and must protect the occupants from the environment. Interior air quality ---The dwelling unit must be free of air pollutant levels that threaten the occupants’ health. Water supply ---The water supply must be free of contamination. Lead-based paint The Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 4821 - 4846) and the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 and implementing regulations 4 CFR Part 35 Subparts A, B, M, and R apply to the housing choice voucher program. Access ---Use and maintenance of the unit must be possible without unauthorized use of other private properties. ---The building must provide an alternate means of exit in case of fire. Site and neighborhood ---The site and neighborhood must be reasonably free from disturbing noises and reverberations or other dangers to the health, safety, and general welfare of the occupants. Sanitary condition ---The dwelling unit and its equipment must be in sanitary condition. Smoke Detectors. ---On each level of the dwelling unit including basements, but excluding spaces and unfinished attics at least one battery-operated or hard-wired smoke detector in proper operating condition must be present. ---Smoke detectors must be installed in accordance with and meet the requirements of the National Fire Protection Association Standards (NFPA) 74 or its successor standards. ---If a hearing-impaired person is occupying the dwelling unit, the smoke detectors must have an alarm system designed for hearing-impaired persons as specified in NFPA 74. So there you go Frazz, basic standards of decency set up and accepted by the government, including your great state of Texas's government. Since I know you're as old as my father (older than dirt), I've taken and bolded the appropriate areas so that your feeble, failing eyes can see the text that is important to my oh so luxurious standards of housing. You can't argue that the Standard is arguing for wages that are too high because it bases everything on the actual cost of goods in the current market place (which is why the standard for a single adult in my county is different from a single adult in Cincy's county). Automatically Appended Next Post: The job I have now, and the job I interviewed for recently I had a dress shirt and tie from Goodwill, a hand me down sports coat from my dad, and pants I've had for almost a decade now. The most expensive thing were my shoes. I like the bold! Evidently you should be able afford better than many many studio apartments in NY and San Francisco making minimum wage at McDonalds. Why does a burger flipper get more then many people in San Francisco? Why do you deserve a separate bedroom? Why do you deserve a dining area? Thats pretty choice for a single guy. Note your standard is better then the high end dorm I'm paying rediculous amounts of money to house the money pit that is Number One Son. He does have the benefit of being on a floor with 70% bouncing baby coeds though... Automatically Appended Next Post: cincydooley wrote:Yeah, hearing is required, cooling is not. You can much more easily freeze to death than you can overheat, at least in most parts of the US. Contaminant free water isn't really much or a luxury, is it? Unless you're drawing from your own well, your municipality is already doing that in Texas at one time, air conditioning was required under warranties of habitability. Because when its 105 you canmore easily die of heat exhaustion then freezing to death.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/10/01 22:04:19
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 22:16:34
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
surixurient wrote:xruslanx wrote: surixurient wrote:xruslanx wrote:. It would be very strange if people in real terms were poorer now than they were 100 years ago, where someone in a low-paid job *could* support a family.
 100 years ago supporting a family meant being able to keep them from starving to death.
Sure. That and clothes. And heating. That takes up a huge chunk of lower income earners' money even today. I have friends who struggle to provide for kids on minimum wage, if it weren't for government handouts they simply couldn't afford to.
By struggling i take it you mean that they can barely afford their smart phone payments, cable tv subscription, and weekly alcohol and cigarette consumption. For how many years have they worked at minimum wage without any sort of promotion? Whose fault in that? It may seem to you like I am being cruel, but the reality is that we live in the lap of luxury compared to 100 years ago and have little to complain about. These are first world problems, and anyone is more than capable of living out a fulfilled and happy life with problems such as those found in a first world country.
People 100 years ago had cigarettes and alcohol too. But they were cheaper then because the government didn't actively hate the poor.
And earning mimimum wage in your 20s isn't a sign of failure.
|
The plural of codex is codexes.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 22:22:53
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Veteran ORC
|
xruslanx wrote: surixurient wrote:xruslanx wrote: surixurient wrote:xruslanx wrote:. It would be very strange if people in real terms were poorer now than they were 100 years ago, where someone in a low-paid job *could* support a family.
 100 years ago supporting a family meant being able to keep them from starving to death.
Sure. That and clothes. And heating. That takes up a huge chunk of lower income earners' money even today. I have friends who struggle to provide for kids on minimum wage, if it weren't for government handouts they simply couldn't afford to.
By struggling i take it you mean that they can barely afford their smart phone payments, cable tv subscription, and weekly alcohol and cigarette consumption. For how many years have they worked at minimum wage without any sort of promotion? Whose fault in that? It may seem to you like I am being cruel, but the reality is that we live in the lap of luxury compared to 100 years ago and have little to complain about. These are first world problems, and anyone is more than capable of living out a fulfilled and happy life with problems such as those found in a first world country.
People 100 years ago had cigarettes and alcohol too. But they were cheaper then because the government didn't actively hate the poor.
And earning mimimum wage in your 20s isn't a sign of failure.
You think that cigarettes and alcohol are as expensive as they are because the "Government hates the poor"?
I used to work on the Canadian border at a gas station. Let me tell you, Cigarettes cost $25 a pack in Canada, and a roll of Copenhagen Chew costs $20. I constantly was told about how much cheaper it was in the US, as a pack of cigarettes is at most $6.40 (Newport) and at $3.85 the cheapest (Sonoma). Heck, our Copenhagen only costs $4.64 with tax.
Do you know why it's so much more expensive up there? Universal Health Care; the government simply does NOT want it's citizens smoking/chewing, because they have to pay for it.
We will see an increase in cig prices, but NOT because the "government hates the poor".
|
I've never feared Death or Dying. I've only feared never Trying. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 22:35:08
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
Slarg232 wrote:
You think that cigarettes and alcohol are as expensive as they are because the "Government hates the poor"?
I used to work on the Canadian border at a gas station. Let me tell you, Cigarettes cost $25 a pack in Canada, and a roll of Copenhagen Chew costs $20. I constantly was told about how much cheaper it was in the US, as a pack of cigarettes is at most $6.40 (Newport) and at $3.85 the cheapest (Sonoma). Heck, our Copenhagen only costs $4.64 with tax.
Do you know why it's so much more expensive up there? Universal Health Care; the government simply does NOT want it's citizens smoking/chewing, because they have to pay for it.
We will see an increase in cig prices, but NOT because the "government hates the poor".
No, the government hates the poor. In terms of aggregate cost to society, you *want* people to smoke and drink. Dying of lung cancer in your 60s is a lot cheaper than living into your 80s, drawing a pension all that time, probably on medication, hearing aids, free eye tests, hip replacements, cat scans. And the entire time the chance of further degenerative diseases developing goes up and up - things like Parkinson's, dementia, etc.
Alcohol and cigarettes are expensive because the political class of our country despise the poor. There is no reason whatsoever for 80% of the price of a packet of cigarettes to go to the government, other than a cultural sneer at the living habits of the poor.
|
The plural of codex is codexes.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 22:46:12
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Booming Thunderer
Minnesota
|
xruslanx wrote:
And earning mimimum wage in your 20s isn't a sign of failure.
in your early 20s, certainly not. late 20s, your starting to run low on excuses at that point. Automatically Appended Next Post: xruslanx wrote: Slarg232 wrote:
You think that cigarettes and alcohol are as expensive as they are because the "Government hates the poor"?
I used to work on the Canadian border at a gas station. Let me tell you, Cigarettes cost $25 a pack in Canada, and a roll of Copenhagen Chew costs $20. I constantly was told about how much cheaper it was in the US, as a pack of cigarettes is at most $6.40 (Newport) and at $3.85 the cheapest (Sonoma). Heck, our Copenhagen only costs $4.64 with tax.
Do you know why it's so much more expensive up there? Universal Health Care; the government simply does NOT want it's citizens smoking/chewing, because they have to pay for it.
We will see an increase in cig prices, but NOT because the "government hates the poor".
No, the government hates the poor. In terms of aggregate cost to society, you *want* people to smoke and drink. Dying of lung cancer in your 60s is a lot cheaper than living into your 80s, drawing a pension all that time, probably on medication, hearing aids, free eye tests, hip replacements, cat scans. And the entire time the chance of further degenerative diseases developing goes up and up - things like Parkinson's, dementia, etc.
Alcohol and cigarettes are expensive because the political class of our country despise the poor. There is no reason whatsoever for 80% of the price of a packet of cigarettes to go to the government, other than a cultural sneer at the living habits of the poor.
agreed
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/01 22:47:27
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 22:48:13
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
surixurient wrote:xruslanx wrote:
And earning mimimum wage in your 20s isn't a sign of failure.
in your early 20s, certainly not. late 20s, your starting to run low on excuses at that point.
What, like not being born into a wealthy family? Yeah those lazy fethers.
You do realise that America is the one nation on earth that denies the existance of the class system, right? In most countries if you're poor, it's accepted that is a factor of your social class. But no in America, if you're born into a poor family and have to attend a rubbish school, it's *your* fault that you're poor.
|
The plural of codex is codexes.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 22:50:57
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Fate-Controlling Farseer
|
xruslanx wrote: surixurient wrote:xruslanx wrote:
And earning mimimum wage in your 20s isn't a sign of failure.
in your early 20s, certainly not. late 20s, your starting to run low on excuses at that point.
What, like not being born into a wealthy family? Yeah those lazy fethers.
You do realise that America is the one nation on earth that denies the existance of the class system, right? In most countries if you're poor, it's accepted that is a factor of your social class. But no in America, if you're born into a poor family and have to attend a rubbish school, it's *your* fault that you're poor.

No... it's your fault that you didn't pick yourself up and make a better life for yourself.
I was born into a poor family. Went to a poor school. Earning 55k a year right now,and will be making 62k a year next year. We all make choices in life that have consequences. Choosing to waste your childhood gets you to end up being poor your adult life. Sucks to be you.
|
Full Frontal Nerdity |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 22:53:02
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Veteran ORC
|
xruslanx wrote: Slarg232 wrote:
You think that cigarettes and alcohol are as expensive as they are because the "Government hates the poor"?
I used to work on the Canadian border at a gas station. Let me tell you, Cigarettes cost $25 a pack in Canada, and a roll of Copenhagen Chew costs $20. I constantly was told about how much cheaper it was in the US, as a pack of cigarettes is at most $6.40 (Newport) and at $3.85 the cheapest (Sonoma). Heck, our Copenhagen only costs $4.64 with tax.
Do you know why it's so much more expensive up there? Universal Health Care; the government simply does NOT want it's citizens smoking/chewing, because they have to pay for it.
We will see an increase in cig prices, but NOT because the "government hates the poor".
No, the government hates the poor. In terms of aggregate cost to society, you *want* people to smoke and drink. Dying of lung cancer in your 60s is a lot cheaper than living into your 80s, drawing a pension all that time, probably on medication, hearing aids, free eye tests, hip replacements, cat scans. And the entire time the chance of further degenerative diseases developing goes up and up - things like Parkinson's, dementia, etc.
Alcohol and cigarettes are expensive because the political class of our country despise the poor. There is no reason whatsoever for 80% of the price of a packet of cigarettes to go to the government, other than a cultural sneer at the living habits of the poor.
You're right; it would be far more appropriate to tax milk, bread, or cloths. You know, basic needs instead of just "Oh hey, let me get an addiction to this substance".
And no, I'm not anti smoking; I smoked a pipe in college.
|
I've never feared Death or Dying. I've only feared never Trying. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 23:03:46
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
djones520 wrote:
No... it's your fault that you didn't pick yourself up and make a better life for yourself.
The logical conclusion to that line of thought is that you think every single poor person is inferior to you. Do you think that?
Actually, would you mind expanding on this a bit? Could you outline exactly how you are superior to 95% of your countrymen? Specifically intellectually and morally.
Slarg232 wrote:
You're right; it would be far more appropriate to tax milk, bread, or cloths. You know, basic needs instead of just "Oh hey, let me get an addiction to this substance".
And no, I'm not anti smoking; I smoked a pipe in college.
Well that still counts as anti-smoking. If you think people should be punished specifically for smoking, for no other reason than that they smoke, then that's anti-smoking.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/10/01 23:05:31
The plural of codex is codexes.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 23:40:43
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Veteran ORC
|
xruslanx wrote:
Slarg232 wrote:
You're right; it would be far more appropriate to tax milk, bread, or cloths. You know, basic needs instead of just "Oh hey, let me get an addiction to this substance".
And no, I'm not anti smoking; I smoked a pipe in college.
Well that still counts as anti-smoking. If you think people should be punished specifically for smoking, for no other reason than that they smoke, then that's anti-smoking.
If being "Pro-Necessities" and thinking it's better to tax something that isn't in that group than anything in that group makes me anti smoking, then I guess I am.
And thanks for dodging my point, you proved me correct.
|
I've never feared Death or Dying. I've only feared never Trying. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/01 23:45:22
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Renegade Inquisitor de Marche
|
So...
The government hates the poor so they charge you more money in the hopes that somehow means you smoke and drink more so you can die in your 60's and same them money?
Either you're arguing for the government to start wiping out smokers and drinkers through neglect (By way of stopping taxes on those products so people die quicker) or you are literally arguing against yourself...
|
Dakka Bingo! By Ouze
"You are the best at flying things"-Kanluwen
"Further proof that Purple is a fething brilliant super villain " -KingCracker
"Purp.. Im pretty sure I have a gun than can reach you...."-Nicorex
"That's not really an apocalypse. That's just Europe."-Grakmar
"almost as good as winning free cake at the tea drinking contest for an Englishman." -Reds8n
Seal up your lips and give no words but mum.
Equip, Reload. Do violence.
Watch for Gerry. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/02 00:33:58
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
wow... I can believe someone would call basically EVERY SINGLE BACHELOR PAD, or even my first apartment, which was one room (living/bed/dining whatever, it was all the same room with a bed, desk, drawers ect fit in somehow) bathroom, and kitchen, both wide enough to stand in, but not to lay down across, something less then adequate.
thats just fine for a single person, was about 300 square feet...
you do not need a whole separate room for a bed, couch, tv and all this stuff you need more room for, but supposedly dont have because you are so kept down be the man and all.
I just folded by mattress up against the wall, and continued living life just fine, at the minimum wage budget, and getting ahead bit by bit.
one clean room, a kitchen/bathroom, is all one person needs.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/02 00:35:04
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/02 00:37:16
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
Slarg232 wrote:xruslanx wrote:
Slarg232 wrote:
You're right; it would be far more appropriate to tax milk, bread, or cloths. You know, basic needs instead of just "Oh hey, let me get an addiction to this substance".
And no, I'm not anti smoking; I smoked a pipe in college.
Well that still counts as anti-smoking. If you think people should be punished specifically for smoking, for no other reason than that they smoke, then that's anti-smoking.
If being "Pro-Necessities" and thinking it's better to tax something that isn't in that group than anything in that group makes me anti smoking, then I guess I am.
And thanks for dodging my point, you proved me correct.
There is a tax on non-nessesities, it's called VAT. VAT is applied to tobacco and alcohol, but in addition to this there are further taxes that the government slapped on them in a specific effort to reduce consumption of said products.
Which is all fine and dandy, until you remember that the main consumers of these products are poor people. Hence they represent nothing less than a sanitised political establishment (let's be honest, how many MPs smoke? Most of them probably don't even *know* anyone who smokes) sneering at the "dirty" habits of the poor.
|
The plural of codex is codexes.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/02 00:37:51
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Sniping Reverend Moira
|
xruslanx wrote:]
The logical conclusion to that line of thought is that you think every single poor person is inferior to you. Do you think that?
Actually, would you mind expanding on this a bit? Could you outline exactly how you are superior to 95% of your countrymen? Specifically intellectually and morally.
What in the happy feth are you talking about. Logical conclusion? Hardly. The logical conclusion is that he's harder working then other poor people that haven't made the effort to change their socioeconomic status or that blame their situation for their failure. We have too many examples of poor people that become successful in the United States for your claim to be even a remotely cogent argument.
Well that still counts as anti-smoking. If you think people should be punished specifically for smoking, for no other reason than that they smoke, then that's anti-smoking.
Punishing? feth off. No one forces anyone to smoke or drink. They're luxury vices. IMO, they should be taxed more. I also think prostitution should be legalized, regulated, and taxed. Same with marijuana sales. And both of those should similarly be taxed to high hell. Automatically Appended Next Post: xruslanx wrote:. .
Which is all fine and dandy, until you remember that the main consumers of these products are poor people. Hence they represent nothing less than a sanitised political establishment (let's be honest, how many MPs smoke? Most of them probably don't even *know* anyone who smokes) sneering at the "dirty" habits of the poor.
And this is just more ignorant barely cohesive ramblings. These vice products are the "products of poor people". You're nuts. gak, our president smokes.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/02 00:40:33
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/02 00:41:24
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
cincydooley wrote:
What in the happy feth are you talking about. Logical conclusion? Hardly. The logical conclusion is that he's harder working then other poor people that haven't made the effort to change their socioeconomic status or that blame their situation for their failure. We have too many examples of poor people that become successful in the United States for your claim to be even a remotely cogent argument.
So what is the cause of him being harder working? I want to actually see him express his own sense of superiority over his fellow man that his opinion demonstrates, rather than hiding behind rhetoric.
|
The plural of codex is codexes.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/02 00:42:52
Subject: Re:Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
ITT, poor people are only poor because they are lazy and/or stupid.
|
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/02 00:49:59
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Veteran ORC
|
xruslanx wrote: Slarg232 wrote:xruslanx wrote:
Slarg232 wrote:
You're right; it would be far more appropriate to tax milk, bread, or cloths. You know, basic needs instead of just "Oh hey, let me get an addiction to this substance".
And no, I'm not anti smoking; I smoked a pipe in college.
Well that still counts as anti-smoking. If you think people should be punished specifically for smoking, for no other reason than that they smoke, then that's anti-smoking.
If being "Pro-Necessities" and thinking it's better to tax something that isn't in that group than anything in that group makes me anti smoking, then I guess I am.
And thanks for dodging my point, you proved me correct.
There is a tax on non-nessesities, it's called VAT. VAT is applied to tobacco and alcohol, but in addition to this there are further taxes that the government slapped on them in a specific effort to reduce consumption of said products.
Which is all fine and dandy, until you remember that the main consumers of these products are poor people. Hence they represent nothing less than a sanitised political establishment (let's be honest, how many MPs smoke? Most of them probably don't even *know* anyone who smokes) sneering at the "dirty" habits of the poor.
If only the poor smoke, why is the "fat cat big wig corporate leader CEO decision maker guy" always smoking a cigar?
|
I've never feared Death or Dying. I've only feared never Trying. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/02 00:53:40
Subject: Re:Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Old Sourpuss
|
Ouze wrote:ITT, poor people are only poor because they are lazy and/or stupid.
To be fair, I was a stupid 18 yr old when I enrolled at the college I enrolled at
Slarg232 wrote:If only the poor smoke, why is the "fat cat big wig corporate leader CEO decision maker guy" always smoking a cigar?
Because of status. That pack of Pall Mall menthols aren't the same sort of status symbol that the cuban cigar that guy is smoking.
|
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+

Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/02 01:00:18
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
Slarg232 wrote:
If only the poor smoke, why is the "fat cat big wig corporate leader CEO decision maker guy" always smoking a cigar?
...this is why debating on the internet is pointless.
You honestly are demanding that I prove that poor people smoke more than rich people? Sigh. There's some stats here if you like. I look forward to future posts demanding proof that the pope is catholic and that bears gak in the woods.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/10/02 01:01:42
The plural of codex is codexes.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/02 01:06:00
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Renegade Inquisitor de Marche
|
xruslanx wrote: Slarg232 wrote:
If only the poor smoke, why is the "fat cat big wig corporate leader CEO decision maker guy" always smoking a cigar?
...this is why debating on the internet is pointless.
You honestly are demanding that I prove that poor people smoke more than rich people? Sigh. There's some stats here if you like. I look forward to future posts demanding proof that the pope is catholic and that bears gak in the woods.
Sorry but there are more poor people than rich people so even if they smoke the same amount per person poor people overall will smoke more than rich people. You seem to be saying that either rich people don't smoke or drink or that they are exempt from vat...
|
Dakka Bingo! By Ouze
"You are the best at flying things"-Kanluwen
"Further proof that Purple is a fething brilliant super villain " -KingCracker
"Purp.. Im pretty sure I have a gun than can reach you...."-Nicorex
"That's not really an apocalypse. That's just Europe."-Grakmar
"almost as good as winning free cake at the tea drinking contest for an Englishman." -Reds8n
Seal up your lips and give no words but mum.
Equip, Reload. Do violence.
Watch for Gerry. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/02 01:07:41
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak
|
PhantomViper wrote:People are paid what they are worth, if society believes that minimum wage workers aren't worth enough to be able to afford housing on their own, then so be it. Arguing for a raise in minimum wage is then the same as arguing for people to be paid more than they are worth in societies eyes.
Society sets the minimum wage. If they increase it, surely that's what they think it is worth in their eyes? Automatically Appended Next Post:
Motivation is great, but it isn't the beginning and end of the issue. To go out and get a better job you also need time and resources (for training, job interviews etc). And when you need to work 60 hours a week just to break even, then there's little time or money left over to
Exactly how much the greater motivation is offset by the lack of time and money... is something we know. We know it because we can look at countries where the minimum wage and social safety net are high, and see they've got high social mobility (lots of people from lower socio-economic groups moving in to middle and upper socio-economic groups), while at the same time we can see in countries where the minimum wage and social safety is low there is much less social mobility (very few people from lower socio-economic groups moving in to the middle and upper groups).
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/02 01:14:01
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/02 01:14:15
Subject: Cali raises minimum wage to 10$ an hour
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
purplefood wrote:xruslanx wrote: Slarg232 wrote:
If only the poor smoke, why is the "fat cat big wig corporate leader CEO decision maker guy" always smoking a cigar?
...this is why debating on the internet is pointless.
You honestly are demanding that I prove that poor people smoke more than rich people? Sigh. There's some stats here if you like. I look forward to future posts demanding proof that the pope is catholic and that bears gak in the woods.
Sorry but there are more poor people than rich people so even if they smoke the same amount per person poor people overall will smoke more than rich people. You seem to be saying that either rich people don't smoke or drink or that they are exempt from vat...
Okay I'll spell it out nice and simply.
Cigarettes and alcohol make up a far larger percentage of the income of the poor than they do of the rich. Happy now?
|
The plural of codex is codexes.
|
|
 |
 |
|