Do politicians speak english anymore?
08-03-2006, 10:55 PM
#1
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
usually i more or less get this ****, but this one is perplexing, i am apparently missing something....
http://www.kgw.com/sharedcontent/APStories.../D8J989V00.html
OK, so this bill was to raise the min wage and reduce the estate tax, two things I think would be good, 1 we all know you can't live off of min wage, it should be raised. 2 the estate tax, AKA death tax SUCKS, you work all your life, pay taxes on your income, dividends and investments, build a successful, biz, etc... and your relatives pay 50%!!! on money in which taxess have already been paid, this can be especially hard on small, family owned businesses, say your dad dies, leaves you the family business worth 1 million bucks, you gotta come up with 500k to keep going.
ok so onto the vote, two washington state senators voted against it because it would repeal the already higher min wage in washington state. my question is why? I thought a state law, that improved in anyway on the federal law was not superceded by the federal law? So why would say a higher federal min wage, which is lower then the state min wage lower the state min wage? i dont understand it.
http://www.kgw.com/sharedcontent/APStories.../D8J989V00.html
OK, so this bill was to raise the min wage and reduce the estate tax, two things I think would be good, 1 we all know you can't live off of min wage, it should be raised. 2 the estate tax, AKA death tax SUCKS, you work all your life, pay taxes on your income, dividends and investments, build a successful, biz, etc... and your relatives pay 50%!!! on money in which taxess have already been paid, this can be especially hard on small, family owned businesses, say your dad dies, leaves you the family business worth 1 million bucks, you gotta come up with 500k to keep going.
ok so onto the vote, two washington state senators voted against it because it would repeal the already higher min wage in washington state. my question is why? I thought a state law, that improved in anyway on the federal law was not superceded by the federal law? So why would say a higher federal min wage, which is lower then the state min wage lower the state min wage? i dont understand it.
08-03-2006, 11:08 PM
#3
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
Originally Posted by j9fd3s' post='831323' date='Aug 4 2006, 12:03 AM
i didnt read the whole thing, but yeah it seems like they didnt vote for increasing the minimum wage because it would inturrupt the higher minimum wage that they already had?
my heat does hurt now
yea which is totally confusing to me, does that mean any change in federal min wage below washington min wage will lower the wa min wage? If so that ******* blows, cause they are going to vote against any increase for the rest of the nation that would subsequently lower the washington min wage.
I swear they should all appear on tv in a house of mirrors, it would make perfect sense then. throw some smoke in, the occasional flash bang, i wouldnt be confused at all.
08-03-2006, 11:12 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: California
Posts: 22,465
yah even reading what you wrote was confusing! i'm not sure what the big deal is anyways, i dont think i know anyone who has a minimum wage job. even at our shithole of a store the cheapest guy is like $8/hr, minimum is around $6?
#3 is only 18 too, so he lives at home and stuff.
#3 is only 18 too, so he lives at home and stuff.
08-03-2006, 11:21 PM
#5
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
Originally Posted by j9fd3s' post='831328' date='Aug 4 2006, 12:12 AM
yah even reading what you wrote was confusing! i'm not sure what the big deal is anyways, i dont think i know anyone who has a minimum wage job. even at our shithole of a store the cheapest guy is like $8/hr, minimum is around $6?
#3 is only 18 too, so he lives at home and stuff.
u live in calilfornia, so no there prolly arent many people on min wage..... take a look at the south, you'll find some people that would be pretty happy to see a min wage increase.
08-03-2006, 11:57 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: California
Posts: 22,465
Originally Posted by phinsup' post='831329' date='Aug 3 2006, 09:21 PM
u live in calilfornia, so no there prolly arent many people on min wage..... take a look at the south, you'll find some people that would be pretty happy to see a min wage increase.
yeah, huh. last time i was in florida, we took one of those airboat gator tours, and about a week after we got back i saw our tourgide on tv....
08-04-2006, 07:17 AM
#7
Super Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 2,532
Actually, I'm against the min wage increase, simply because it eliminates jobs. I happen to think a low-paying job is better than having people unemployed. Maybe I've taken too many economics classes.
But there is no doubt that politicians and the "work" they do are a crock of ****.
But there is no doubt that politicians and the "work" they do are a crock of ****.
08-04-2006, 11:19 AM
#8
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
Originally Posted by 1988RedT2' post='831352' date='Aug 4 2006, 08:17 AM
Actually, I'm against the min wage increase, simply because it eliminates jobs. I happen to think a low-paying job is better than having people unemployed. Maybe I've taken too many economics classes.
But there is no doubt that politicians and the "work" they do are a crock of ****.
Well the right will argue that in wage costs jobs and tax cuts to businesses will trickle down to the employees. The left will argue that historically an increased min wage has had little effect on the unemployment rate and the additional money would be funneled directly into the retail sector.
The left and right could sight an equal number of economists that have a viable argument for their cause.
The reality is, we're in BIG trouble in the retail market, people are spending less money and it's gonna hurt us in the market, people simply do not have the money to spend they did a year ago, or 2 years ago or 5 years ago and there no one arguing this problem.
In the end the only winner will be China as our thirst for cheap foreign made junk is getting even stronger, maybe out of necessity due to our lack of funds.
08-04-2006, 11:37 AM
#9
Super Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 2,532
What?! Left-wing economists? I doubt they exist. I can honestly say I've never met one. The whole basic philosophy of the Democratic Party is at fundamental odds with the science of economics. That's not to say there aren't some fruitcake pseudo-economists out there that will support the Democratic Party, but their credentials came out of cereal boxes.
08-04-2006, 11:51 AM
#10
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
Originally Posted by 1988RedT2' post='831377' date='Aug 4 2006, 12:37 PM
What?! Left-wing economists? I doubt they exist. I can honestly say I've never met one. The whole basic philosophy of the Democratic Party is at fundamental odds with the science of economics. That's not to say there aren't some fruitcake pseudo-economists out there that will support the Democratic Party, but their credentials came out of cereal boxes.
nice to see you keep an open mind.