In all likelihood people don't want to work at a job where they can't make a living. We learned during the height of the Pandemic just how much we depend on social workers. Wages need to be adjusted and we need the very wealthy to show more patriotism by funding more of the cost of government. It's to their benefit more than anyone else's.
In all likelihood people don't want to work at a job where they can't make a living. We learned during the height of the Pandemic just how much we depend on social workers. Wages need to be adjusted and we need the very wealthy to show more patriotism by funding more of the cost of government. It's to their benefit more than anyone else's.
In assisted living where I live, many work two jobs. I'm sure they love it, NOT. Yep, the rich need to pay fair share. Which they have defined as nothing.
So, Jeri, what is the solution? From my vantage point, the workers need to unite and this means unions. Without the ability to bring strength in numbers to the negotiating table, they'll end up with subsistence wages, assuming that there is any such thing as a negotiating table. The other possibility is minimum wage laws. Good luck with this idea in Trump-dominated states.
тАжon the тАШRich Getting RicherтАЩ by not paying their fair share frontтАж. The new guy joining the GOP race for the White House, Stuckenberg, making one of his major planks to eliminate inheritance tax. In NYS, I believe inheritance isnтАЩt taxed until it is valued over 1 mil. WhoтАЩs that plank for?
Agreed. The wealthy just need to pay a fair share of taxes or pay them at all. The author of Poverty, by America says that if people just paid their taxes, we would be in much better shape.
The "Middle Class" was growing when taxes on the wealthy and corporations was much higher. It's complicated and while the the 1950's middle class was largely white and male, efforts at inclusion seems to expand up to Reagan; but who gained and who a suffered as a consequence of 40+ years of Reaganomic laws and policies? The truth is out there.
It is not original with me, but it has been observed that the one thing, perhaps the only thing, that one never has enough of is MONEY. There is absolutely no way in 1,000 years that a billionaire can spend that much money on consumables. We need to reimplement the practices of the past and force the ultra wealthy to be more patriotic.
Reaganomics is "Take from the poor and give to the rich." plain and simple; feudalism 2.0. The rich get the cash, the public gets the work and risk. It's like the collateralized debt obligations in the subprime crisis; put dogdoo in a blender, spray it up with golden paint, and call it gold; then find a sucker.
In all likelihood people don't want to work at a job where they can't make a living. We learned during the height of the Pandemic just how much we depend on social workers. Wages need to be adjusted and we need the very wealthy to show more patriotism by funding more of the cost of government. It's to their benefit more than anyone else's.
In assisted living where I live, many work two jobs. I'm sure they love it, NOT. Yep, the rich need to pay fair share. Which they have defined as nothing.
So, Jeri, what is the solution? From my vantage point, the workers need to unite and this means unions. Without the ability to bring strength in numbers to the negotiating table, they'll end up with subsistence wages, assuming that there is any such thing as a negotiating table. The other possibility is minimum wage laws. Good luck with this idea in Trump-dominated states.
тАжon the тАШRich Getting RicherтАЩ by not paying their fair share frontтАж. The new guy joining the GOP race for the White House, Stuckenberg, making one of his major planks to eliminate inheritance tax. In NYS, I believe inheritance isnтАЩt taxed until it is valued over 1 mil. WhoтАЩs that plank for?
WhoтАЩs that plank for?
Who is government for? And for that matter by?
Fair share for those who pay zip is not a new idea.
Agreed. The wealthy just need to pay a fair share of taxes or pay them at all. The author of Poverty, by America says that if people just paid their taxes, we would be in much better shape.
The "Middle Class" was growing when taxes on the wealthy and corporations was much higher. It's complicated and while the the 1950's middle class was largely white and male, efforts at inclusion seems to expand up to Reagan; but who gained and who a suffered as a consequence of 40+ years of Reaganomic laws and policies? The truth is out there.
It is not original with me, but it has been observed that the one thing, perhaps the only thing, that one never has enough of is MONEY. There is absolutely no way in 1,000 years that a billionaire can spend that much money on consumables. We need to reimplement the practices of the past and force the ultra wealthy to be more patriotic.
Reaganomics is "Take from the poor and give to the rich." plain and simple; feudalism 2.0. The rich get the cash, the public gets the work and risk. It's like the collateralized debt obligations in the subprime crisis; put dogdoo in a blender, spray it up with golden paint, and call it gold; then find a sucker.
Those may be the most eloquent words I've ever read with dog poo as the subject.
me too. And I can't get that image out of my mind.