NationStates Jolt Archive

No, but it's fun as hell to fire.


There's a local grocery store here, family owned, and it will go under undoubtedly if min wage is raised


The children that get killed by crazy students, criminals, and people having fun would disagree.

Yea. We have a lil grocery store here too. but thats about it. Everything else is the exact, same, corperate, urban spawn, Wal-Mart, KFC, Micky-D bullshit that covers most of this country. If people have a little more money to spend, Some of it will be spent in your little grocery store. Then maybe a local video store. Then a few peeps will pool their money together and open a Pizza joint. Then a hardware store. And so on. Then the damage caused by Republican reckless spending can once again undergo the repair process.

A Tech-9, Semi-automatic, that holds 30 rounds, is not required to kill a deer.

but it is damn useful in revolutionary defense

Not unless if those folks are all laid off to keep the business running.

Take Dell for example. Massive lay-offs so that they can set up a manufacturing plant in India.

dell is hardly a 'Mom&Pop' store.

dell is hardly a 'Mom&Pop' store.

I was referring to the scenario of the basic priciple of 'minimum wages'.:rolleyes:

but it is damn useful in revolutionary defense

Not if the army sides with the government.

but it is damn useful in revolutionary defense

Agreed! But we don't have one of those going on right now! Do we? Just innocent people that are damm tired of the need to defend themseves while trying to live a normal life!

No, it is not a word. You have taken the first step towards winning one yourself ;)

Alright, someone whom knows of the awesome Darwin Awards.:rolleyes:

I was referring to the scenario of the basic priciple of 'minimum wages'.:rolleyes:

fair enough, but even Dell falls under the principle of "if you agree to pay your workers more, then they will have more to spend on not only your products, but all products in general, driving the economy further"

Many conservative economists speak of lowering taxes on wealthy investors, because it will drive the stock market.

I tend to believe that giving money to the people who buy the most products (either tax breaks for the poor, or in min. wage increases) will do more to stimulate the economy than stock ever will.

However there is a problem that will occur to counter the increased wages, inflation. With more money in the air, means that the prices of goods will go up. This is the result in an increase of money.

Eventually, due to the increase of the money flowing around, the dollar's value will drop.

All of this is BAD.

However there is a problem that will occur to counter the increased wages, inflation. With more money in the air, means that the prices of goods will go up. This is the result in an increase of money.

Eventually, due to the increase of the money flowing around, the dollar's value will drop.

All of this is BAD.


hyperbole, eh?

let's try this on for size:

a man works all day for minimum wage, stops at the store on the way home and spends his paycheck on food. Nice for the farmers, but do you know what he didn't buy? Toys for his babies, a calculator for his little boy, a new lamp, a better car, and all the little things that make life better.

multiply that by every worker in the nation, and what will see is a massive rise in unemployment as toy makers, electronics companies, furniture manufacturers, and auto makers go out of business because nobody is making enough to spend it on anything but what is absolutely necessary anymore.

congrats: you beat inflation. the dollar is worth more than a solid gold Mercedes. too bad nobody has any.



see? I can exaggerate, too!

what we need is a plan that fluctuates as the economy does.

And right now, the economy needs a higher minimum wage.

Hey, I checked this thread because I wanted to hear "we won, get over it"
I wanted to hear about idiosyncratic results, and some whacky details about individual races in the US mid-terms.
And I'm getting Economics 101 ?

Hey, I checked this thread because I wanted to hear "we won, get over it"
I wanted to hear about idiosyncratic results, and some whacky details about individual races in the US mid-terms.
And I'm getting Economics 101 ?

Economics are related into this discussion, so yes. Take a seat.

"Everyone, we have a new student!"

However there is a problem that will occur to counter the increased wages, inflation. With more money in the air, means that the prices of goods will go up. This is the result in an increase of money.

Eventually, due to the increase of the money flowing around, the dollar's value will drop.

Oh you bet your ass it's going to drop! Democrats are hard working people, not magicians. But if anyone can rebound the dollar. It's them! Oh It's true!!!

Hey, I checked this thread because I wanted to hear "we won, get over it"
I wanted to hear about idiosyncratic results, and some whacky details about individual races in the US mid-terms.
And I'm getting Economics 101 ?

Actually, I completely lost track of which topic this was (I've been refreshing it in a separate window)

If a mod wants us to take the minimum wage debate to another thread, just say so...


In other news:

We won! get over it.

Now see, there is a problem in your scenario. This is a capitalistic nation. If someone sees a need, they fill it...or get someone else to do it for them.

What do you mean "We won"?

I sure as heck didn't win anything...

-looks gloomily at his hands-

Now see, there is a problem in your scenario. This is a capitalistic nation. If someone sees a need, they fill it...or get someone else to do it for them.

you mean like cheap labor from india?

hey, hey: guess what India has?

a lower minimum wage than us!

and it's working wonders for the people living there, I can tell you.


the solution for outsourcing is simple: every time an American company hires a foreign worker, they have to pay <$that job's wage if it were in America> in taxes.

take the money that this raises, and eliminate sales taxes (to offset the increased price)


and raise minimum wage, so that people can still afford to buy things: you know, so businesses can still sell things to people? and stay in business?

What do you mean "We won"?

I sure as heck didn't win anything...

-looks gloomily at his hands-

"We" = Democrats

"won" = got more seats than you in the house of representatives

Now that would work better. I think. I'm losing my sense of knowledge! Argh, stupid lack of sleep...

"We" = Democrats

"won" = got more seats than you in the house of representatives

What makes you think I'm not a Democrat? I'm just of no affiliation.

What makes you think I'm not a Democrat? I'm just of no affiliation.

read the second sentence of what you wrote.

then read the first sentence again.

they sort of answer each other...

It was one of those...rather awkward moments that could be taken as either a joke, or just me not really thinking due to lack of sleep.:p

It was one of those...rather awkward moments that could be taken as either a joke, or just me not really thinking due to lack of sleep.:p

fair enough.

it's 4:00 AM here, and I would be sleep deprived, too (hell, i'd probably be in bed) except that I woke up at 9 feeling nauseous and had a headache, and I crashed on the couch and slept until 3 this afternoon.


...yea...


well...


how 'bout that House of representatives?

All of congress needs a complete make-over.

Heh, it's five here. I should be sleeping, but since I have to get up in an hour, there really is no point.

I'm staying up a little while longer, until they say the rest of the races will be fought over in court from now till Christmas. :p

I'm staying up a little while longer, until they say the rest of the races will be fought over in court from now till Christmas. :p

-Whispers-

"Sir, when are we going to try and take over the Capitol Building again?"

"Uhh...well...since these people are at eachother's throats, now is the time to strike! The South shall rise again a-yep!"

............................................

Granted, I'm not a supporter of the South. I just think it's a funny thing to say.

However there is a problem that will occur to counter the increased wages, inflation. With more money in the air, means that the prices of goods will go up. This is the result in an increase of money.

Eventually, due to the increase of the money flowing around, the dollar's value will drop.

All of this is BAD.

While I don't necessarily agree with the inflation aspect of your argument, price increases are the main reason I am against increasing the minimum wage.

I make $9.00 an hour. If the federal wage increases from $5.15 to, say, $6.50, am I going to see a raise to $10.35 an hour?

No, I won't.

Prices will go up...and my income will remain the same...my buying power will have been reduced, possibly to a significant degree, depending on how big the increase in the minimum wage is and to what extent prices increase.

The same will happen to everyone who makes a mid-level income...the poor become slightly less poor, while the middle class becomes much more poor.

Now I'm no economics major, and I know that numerous states have higher minimum wage standards...is there a flaw in this reasoning that I don't see that has been demonstrated in one of these states?

the solution for outsourcing is simple: every time an American company hires a foreign worker, they have to pay <$that job's wage if it were in America> in taxes.


And see all major American companies move to Ireland in an afternoon? I mean, they all already have offices there.

I've never seen a serious answer to an economic problem that is less than a full A4 in length. One-sentence answers are cool for campaign bullshit, they just have this one minor problem: They never work!

About the minimum wage, inflation and the price of dollar: Yes, a big hike in minimum wage would have a measurable effect on the price of dollar. And this would be a good thing: The cheaper dollar is, the more money Americans spend on American products and services as the price of imports from, especially, Asia, grow bigger. Just look at the Trade decifit: It's clear it isn't sustainable, but in the modern world there isn't much that can be done about it (except running to the street and shouting "Stop spending more than you're making damnit!"). Cutting the price of the dollar is an effective measure.

(edit)And just to point out, it would have massive negative side-effects, yes I am aware of that. I just cannot see a more effective way.(/edit)

-Whispers-

"Sir, when are we going to try and take over the Capitol Building again?"

"Uhh...well...since these people are at eachother's throats, now is the time to strike! The South shall rise again a-yep!"

............................................

Granted, I'm not a supporter of the South. I just think it's a funny thing to say.

I live in the South but some of my views are not very popular.

-whispers-

If the South had won the Civil War, Germany would have defeted Japan..................................................In Memphis. ;)

Woah. New PC game coming out soon that was like a "If Germany won and had invaded America, then what would happen?"

Woah. New PC game coming out soon that was like a "If Germany won and had invaded America, then what would happen?"

...


just go to sleep.

I promise: when you read this in the morning, you're going to be totally WTF'ed? out.

"No no no no no! Economics is the study of the Money system! ARGH!"

-Beats the children with sticks.-

"LEARN FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!"

"No no no no no! Economics is the study of the Money system! ARGH!"

-Beats the children with sticks.-

"LEARN FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!"

Actually, Economics is a religious faith. It's deity is money, ie a thing which only has value by an act of faith.

At least you didn't claim Economics was a Science :p

Actually, Economics is a religious faith. It's deity is money, ie a thing which only has value by an act of faith.

At least you didn't claim Economics was a Science :p

lol

Fried Tuna;11918433']And see all major American companies move to Ireland in an afternoon? I mean, they all already have offices there.

I've never seen a serious answer to an economic problem that is less than a full A4 in length. One-sentence answers are cool for campaign bullshit, they just have this one minor problem: They never work!

I know it's simple, but, to me, it makes sense.

why do companies send their labor overseas?

because it's cheaper there.

And if we want them to keep their labor on our shores?

make it so that it's not cheaper anymore.

you could do that by letting them pay the American workers less, or you could penalize them for hiring foreigners at all.

lowering minimum wage does not help the people it is meant to help (the American workers) because it means that they would make less than the sweatshop workers in China and India.

Hence: tax the companies for exporting labor, and use that money to help the unemployed.



This is similar to my view concerning Illegal Immigration.

why do illegal immigrants come here?

because the American companies pay them to.

why do American companies hire them?

because they're cheaper.

why are they cheaper?

because minimum wage laws do not apply to illegal immigrants.


extend Minimum wage to cover illegals, and companies will no longer have any incentive to hire illegals: they might as well hire Americans, because the wages are the same.

Making companies provide citizenship papers for all their workers is a lot harder to enforce than making companies show paycheck receipts.

While I don't necessarily agree with the inflation aspect of your argument, price increases are the main reason I am against increasing the minimum wage.

I make $9.00 an hour. If the federal wage increases from $5.15 to, say, $6.50, am I going to see a raise to $10.35 an hour?

No, I won't.

Prices will go up...and my income will remain the same...my buying power will have been reduced, possibly to a significant degree, depending on how big the increase in the minimum wage is and to what extent prices increase.

The same will happen to everyone who makes a mid-level income...the poor become slightly less poor, while the middle class becomes much more poor.

Now I'm no economics major, and I know that numerous states have higher minimum wage standards...is there a flaw in this reasoning that I don't see that has been demonstrated in one of these states?

Havn't had much of a chance to explore that possibility since 1996. Have we?

I see your buying power staying exactly the same (poor people have this tendency to spread money into the economy as fast as they make it) whilst you enjoy a lower crime rate.

I see your buying power staying exactly the same (poor people have this tendency to spread money into the economy as fast as they make it) whilst you enjoy a lower crime rate.

I fail to see your connection to my argument...

My wages have not increased...yet prices have gone up. My buying power is reduced.

How does the spending habits of anyone else affect that? Are you saying that if the poor spend all their new income that prices will start coming back down? I fail to see how that will happen.

I really am ignorant regarding this topic...I know I must be screwing up somewhere. :confused:

why do companies send their labor overseas?
because it's cheaper there.
And if we want them to keep their labor on our shores?
make it so that it's not cheaper anymore.
you could do that by letting them pay the American workers less, or you could penalize them for hiring foreigners at all.
Hence: tax the companies for exporting labor, and use that money to help the unemployed.

I do not question any point of your logic about making hiring foreigners cost more, there is no flaw in it. The flaw is in the assumption that you can tax the companies. In the modern world it is faster, and cheaper, to move massive amounts of money half-way across the world than it is to go there yourself. If you add a company tax that the companies don't like, they just move to another country. There'll be massive amounts of countries that want them, Ireland being the place to be at the moment. It literally wont take a day to change an American company that pays it taxes to America and employs some foreigners into a foreign company that employs some Americans and imports goods or services.

And because of this pesky free-trade thing, you cannot even tariff them.


This is similar to my view concerning Illegal Immigration.
why do illegal immigrants come here?
because the American companies pay them to.
why do American companies hire them?
because they're cheaper.
why are they cheaper?
because minimum wage laws do not apply to illegal immigrants.
extend Minimum wage to cover illegals, and companies will no longer have any incentive to hire illegals: they might as well hire Americans, because the wages are the same.

This works. Most illegal immigrants come to America because they want work, and work isn't a resource that needs to be protected. IMHO Illegal immigrants are only a problem because they are illegal. Make them legal and most of the problems fade away. Besides, what exactly happened to:
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”

I know it's simple, but, to me, it makes sense.

why do companies send their labor overseas?

because it's cheaper there.

And if we want them to keep their labor on our shores?

make it so that it's not cheaper anymore.

you could do that by letting them pay the American workers less, or you could penalize them for hiring foreigners at all.

lowering minimum wage does not help the people it is meant to help (the American workers) because it means that they would make less than the sweatshop workers in China and India.

Hence: tax the companies for exporting labor, and use that money to help the unemployed.



This is similar to my view concerning Illegal Immigration.

why do illegal immigrants come here?

because the American companies pay them to.

why do American companies hire them?

because they're cheaper.

why are they cheaper?

because minimum wage laws do not apply to illegal immigrants.


extend Minimum wage to cover illegals, and companies will no longer have any incentive to hire illegals: they might as well hire Americans, because the wages are the same.

Making companies provide citizenship papers for all their workers is a lot harder to enforce than making companies show paycheck receipts.

How do you plan on taxing people that aren't legally citizens of your country?

I fail to see your connection to my argument...

My wages have not increased...yet prices have gone up. My buying power is reduced.

How does the spending habits of anyone else affect that? Are you saying that if the poor spend all their new income that prices will start coming back down? I fail to see how that will happen.

I really am ignorant regarding this topic...I know I must be screwing up somewhere. :confused:

Active consumers fuel the economy in America. Lets say for some reason (pissed off or something...the reason not being the point), everybody in America cut thier consumer buying down to almost nothing (bare essentials) for a couple of weeks. NOW how is your buying power? Great for the moment eh? Think it will stay that way. Think maybe then, we have an ecocomic crisis when too many companies go out of business? Maybe yours too? Now your making 0 per hour.

The exact same thing has been happening in America but not over the 2 week period. (past few years) If fewer and fewer people patronize your business, how secure will those nine big ones per hour be?

Fried Tuna;11918517']...
It literally wont take a day to change an American company that pays it taxes to America and employs some foreigners into a foreign company that employs some Americans and imports goods or services.

And because of this pesky free-trade thing, you cannot even tariff them.

I think you just harpooned that one. It was an entertaining scheme, tho.

Besides, what exactly happened to:
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”

It was poetry. Shed a tear if you must.
It sounds like a unsurpassably crap immigration policy to me.

Come on you partisans. I want to hear some crowing, some hedging. Let's have some "stick it to the man!", some "fight the power!" A half-decent conspiracy theory even.

Perhaps I should just read the whole thread. All 290 posts of it :snivel:

How do you plan on taxing people that aren't legally citizens of your country?

Make your pick:

A) Just like every other country in the world taxes those working within it's borders.

B) Initially, I wont, because they'll be on minimum wage, thus taxing them costs nearly as much as you can tax from them. However, most people, even most immigrants, don't stay on minimum wage too long, and by the time they are making a reasonable paycheck they most likely will be legal citizens.

Oh,if you meant his plan of taxing outsourcing, he wouldn't be taxing the people but the company. Which wouldn't work.

Active consumers fuel the economy in America. Lets say for some reason (pissed off or something...the reason not being the point), everybody in America cut thier consumer buying down to almost nothing (bare essentials) for a couple of weeks. NOW how is your buying power? Great for the moment eh? Think it will stay that way. Think maybe then, we have an ecocomic crisis when too many companies go out of business? Maybe yours too? Now your making 0 per hour.

This is rather speculative, as I don't think anything would make everyone stop spending money like that...short of say nuclear war.

It also doesn't really make sense, as if everyone stops buying, prices will drop dramatically.

I'm trying to find a real world argument as to why I should support a minimum wage increase, because at the moment I see no reason why I should...if prices go up, and my wage remains the same, my ability to purchase goods and services will be reduced, regardless of how other people choose to spend their money.

The exact same thing has been happening in America but not over the 2 week period. (past few years) If fewer and fewer people patronize your business, how secure will those nine big ones per hour be?

The company I work for, a hotel chain, has seen buisness steadily improve since before I started here, and it's a service that will always be needed.

I think my job is pretty secure.

It was poetry. Shed a tear if you must.
It sounds like a unsurpassably crap immigration policy to me.


It did get USA from poor backward country in the middle of nowhere to the most powerful country in earth. Every generation there were new fears of immigrants swamping the country and taking the jobs of real Americans, every time they were wrong.

The single most important thing in a immigration policy is attracting the right immigrants, ie the ones that wont mind honest work, screw languages and skin colors. All the rest is just insignificant.

The company I work for, a hotel chain, has seen buisness steadily improve since before I started here, and it's a service that will always be needed.

I think my job is pretty secure.

Famous last words! By Auto workers, steel workers, general assembly operators, grocery chains, airlines. No sure bets in this world. Are there?

Fried Tuna;11918610']It did get USA from poor backward country in the middle of nowhere to the most powerful country in earth. Every generation there were new fears of immigrants swamping the country and taking the jobs of real Americans, every time they were wrong.

The single most important thing in a immigration policy is attracting the right immigrants, ie the ones that wont mind honest work, screw languages and skin colors. All the rest is just insignificant.

Damnit, I want to debate the point, but I can't think of a single thing wrong with what you just said.

Famous last words! By Auto workers, steel workers, general assembly operators, grocery chains, airlines. No sure bets in this world. Are there?

The first three are more the result of automation and foreign competition than any actual lack of demand.

There are still plenty of grocery chains out there that I see. Some go out of buisness, and some new ones form, but they are still around.

Airlines are as much a result of fuel costs and labor practices as they are anything else.

A hotel might be the closest thing to a sure bet there is, short of a bar or restaurant. People will always be traveling, either for buisness or pleasure...they need to stay somewhere.

Theoretically, the company I work for could go out of buisness in the near future, but it won't be because people are no longer going to hotels. I said it's a service that will always be needed...not that it is an economic sector that is immune to the rules which govern all others.

When they start replacing desk clerks with robots, then I'll start worrying. ;)




But that still does nothing to answer my question regarding minimum wage.....

Went with the Greens this time, in exactly two state offices. Voted for "No Selection" everywhere else. (Those of you who feel it necessary to point out the hypocrisy of my complaining while voting "No Selection:" Yes, I know. I tried to vote "Democrat." Honestly, I stood there in the voting booth staring at the screen and I tried real hard. But I just couldn't do it.) And the aforementioned propositions, seeing as how I have at least a theoretical modicum of influence there.Couldn't you have just written somebody in? That's what I did for our governor's race - I wrote in the Green Party candidate for my House of Representatives District.
Sadly, he didn't win the District, the incumbent Democrat did, but he did get over 10% of the vote. (Okay, so the two of them were the only ones on the ballot, but still...)

How do you plan on taxing people that aren't legally citizens of your country?CNN is lying.
US Unducomentados do pay most taxes...

and they do not get all the social services those taxes are supposed to be paying..

I am somewhat skeptical that the Dems. will win back the majority, I'm reasonably sure they will gain some seats, but not the overwhelming victory some on here foresee.

Wrong, wrong, wrong

pssst, The United States of America was "born" in 1789, not 1776. You might want to alter unless you want to look like an idiot.

The United States of America was "born" on March 1st 1781... It was re-designed in 1787, which was legally completed when the 9th state ratified the new Constitution on June 21st 1788 [New Hampshire], replacing the United States of America's previous incarnation under the Articles of Confederation. Legally there have been TWO "United States of America"-s, one as a Confederation [1781-1788] and another one as a Federation [1789-present].

The United States of America was "born" on March 1st 1781... It was re-designed in 1787, which was legally completed when the 9th state ratified the new Constitution on June 21st 1788 [New Hampshire], replacing the United States of America's previous incarnation under the Articles of Confederation. Legally there have been TWO "United States of America"-s, one as a Confederation [1781-1788] and another one as a Federation [1789-present].

Correct, however as I noted, and you note, there have been two "United States of America"s, one that died in 1788 and another that emerged in 1789 and continues.

THIS america. THIS country was "born" in 1789. The entity that existed prior, though it was named the same, was an entirely different legal entity.

I am named after my great grandfather, we share the same name. We are NOT the same person, and he died before i was born (hence being named after him in fine jewish tradition).

To say that the "first" united states and this one are the same, just rearranged structurally is as much sense as saying the USSR and Russia are the same, just arranged structurally.

The confederate United States and the federation of the United States had fundamentally different regime structures, one died, the other was born.

Indeed, before that it was the Confederate States of America.

Articles of Confederation Article I. 'The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."'

Even under the Articles of Confederation it was still called the United States of America.

Articles of Confederation Article I. 'The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."'

Even under the Articles of Confederation it was still called the United States of America.

again, that's nice.

as I said my (dead) great grandfather and I have the same name. Are we the same person?

The articles of the confederation, the supreme law of the confederation, were abolished, struck down, trashed, burned, tossed away. The structure of that nation was demolished and rebuilt into something else.

It shared the same name, ok, but so what? It was not hte same country.

of course, that's one of like three issues that essentially everyone in the country agrees on. ban assault weapons, raise the minimum wage, and kick insurance companies in the teeth.

Most people I know agree with the last two but not the first. Where I live it's pretty much a non-issue.

I guess you could say minimum wage is a non-issue here now too because the state recently raised it, and we really don't care what you people do in your states. The point is, everyone I know thinks $5.15 is far too low.

What part of stop do you not understand? You lost, Its 1776 and nothing will change that! STOP, for the love of god STOP! Nobody cares anymore!:headbang:

Provide to me complete textual proof of the existance of any legal entity titled as "The United States of America" in 1776 (or indeed at any point in time before 1781), according the the Declaration of Independence the entity which delcared its independence from the Brittish crown was "The Thirteen united States of America".

Can we get back on topic, please?

Couldn't you have just written somebody in? That's what I did for our governor's race - I wrote in the Green Party candidate for my House of Representatives District.
Sadly, he didn't win the District, the incumbent Democrat did, but he did get over 10% of the vote. (Okay, so the two of them were the only ones on the ballot, but still...)

All of the parties are well represented on my state's ballot. However, my voting Green for two offices should not be mistaken for support for the Green Party (although I'm told by some "Libertarians" that I'm now officially communist :rolleyes: ). I simply felt that those two individuals were best for those two offices, but, at the moment, I lack political representation at the party level. Thus "No Selection" for the vast majority of offices (I looked real hard for the "None of the Above" option, like any well designed ballot should have, but...)

Correct, however as I noted, and you note, there have been two "United States of America"s, one that died in 1788 and another that emerged in 1789 and continues.

THIS america. THIS country was "born" in 1789. The entity that existed prior, though it was named the same, was an entirely different legal entity.

I am named after my great grandfather, we share the same name. We are NOT the same person, and he died before i was born (hence being named after him in fine jewish tradition).

To say that the "first" united states and this one are the same, just rearranged structurally is as much sense as saying the USSR and Russia are the same, just arranged structurally.

The confederate United States and the federation of the United States had fundamentally different regime structures, one died, the other was born.

Actually the previous entity underwent a restructure, it did not "die"... The entity of the United States of America transformed from a Confederation of United States to a Federation of United States... THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA under the Confederation adopted a new form of Federal Oversight/Government in the Constitution, so "die" is too harsh a clarifier to apply to the situation. "The United States" as a body was formed under the Articles, and it was the people of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA(of the Articles) which ordained and established the Constitution, whereas it was the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia which established the Confederation and stiled themselves "The United States of America"... So it is more rightly said that the present Government of the United States of America was born in 1789, The United States of America as an entity was born in 1781, and the Thirteen united States of America were "born" independent in 1776.

Most people I know agree with the last two but not the first. Where I live it's pretty much a non-issue.

all i know is that every time they poll it nationally, it's like 75 or 80%.

all i know is that every time they poll it nationally, it's like 75 or 80%.

I guess we're just kinda strange up here in the northwoods.

Wrong, wrong, wrong

Don't have to rub it in. :p

Why are the Republicans called the Grand Old Party when the Democrats are actually older?

The best part of all of this is that even ABC news is now predicting up to 30 dem pickups, and so far not a single dem incumbent has been beaten. Can you say "referendum on Bush, Iraq, and the GOP"? How about "Tidal wave"?
Let's not get our hopes up two high with "predictions" and "projections" and exit polls.

Why are the Republicans called the Grand Old Party when the Democrats are actually older?

I guess claiming to have Lincoln in your corner gives you benefits when it comes to nicknames.

Let's not get our hopes up two high with "predictions" and "projections" and exit polls.

you mean the part where almost every precinct in the nation has reported their results, and the democrats have gained at least 29 seats?

This isn't exit polls, this is results.

So I guess all this fear of electoral fraud and hacked voting machines turned out to be for naught?

So I guess all this fear of electoral fraud and hacked voting machines turned out to be for naught?

I think the hype helped deter a potential problem.

with everyone on the lookout for anything that even smelled like voter fraud, everyone was too afraid of getting caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

or should it be "hand in the ballot box"?

I think the hype helped deter a potential problem.

with everyone on the lookout for anything that even smelled like voter fraud, everyone was too afraid of getting caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

or should it be "hand in the ballot box"?
Actually, there were many instances of people having problems getting to cast their votes because of these machines and because of other problems, including election fraud and voter intimidation immediately prior to the election, about which there will probably be investigations. But overall, the results were not close enough for it to matter.

Except in Virginia, where they would have had a problem if Allen had demanded a full recount. No paper trails, apparently...

Actually, there were many instances of people having problems getting to cast their votes because of these machines and because of other problems, including election fraud and voter intimidation immediately prior to the election, about which there will probably be investigations. But overall, the results were not close enough for it to matter.

well, we haven't heard anything like the "county in Florida casts negative votes for gore"

are you sure there are no paper trails in Virginia?

Why do you even have voting machines? All they seem to do is screw things up

Well, that gave George a real shock. He looked dazed like living nightmare was taking over :p

He looked dazed like living nightmare was taking over :p
From his perspecitve, it is.

http://www.wyolife.com/kerryfest/WHAT'S-HER-FACE.gif

Going back on the arguments of an increased minimum wage. The idea is that you give more purchasing power to the poor. Whom buy more things which bring more revinue into companies and their products. Having more revinue these companies really don't need to raise the price on products. Unless some jerk fat cat exec needs to give himself a 390 million dollar retirement pension. Any way the people that would see a raise in minimum wage as hurtfull would be small mom and pop businesses that might be struggling. Key word is struggling. A couple of bucks more an hour for labor costs on maybe 30 workers isn't going to bankrupt a company that's doing fine.
I'm not sure where some people get it's going to cost jobs. During the 90's the minimum wage was raised and yet still jobs were everywhere.

Here's more food for thought. If we make the South American immigrants legal ( because they sure as hell aren't going anywhere ) we can start taxing them! Not to mention they have been contributing to Americas continued growth which helps make us the major player that we are ( population wise ). To those economists out there what does it mean when a nation has a growing and larger population? Let me give you a clue Europe had to start a Union to help compete against the U.S.'s size and economic might on the world stage. America has grown strong, because of it's immigrants.

The same complaints where had with the Irish immigrants and the Italian immigrants. They'll take our jobs, make our country a huge slum....yadda ...yadda...yadda.The U.S. didn't got to hell then and it won't this time either.
As is most Americans who's families been here more than three generations , my name might be Scottish but my gene pool is very diverse, Irish, Dutch, Native American, English, Scottish, German, Italian.

Face it, sometimes we might not like our influx of immigrants, but we're made stronger because of them.

By the way, back on topic of the thread. The next two years is going to be one hell of an intresting next two years!

Going back on the arguments of an increased minimum wage. The idea is that you give more purchasing power to the poor. Whom buy more things which bring more revinue into companies and their products. Having more revinue these companies really don't need to raise the price on products.

Minimum wage is a junk law and raising it will only hurt the economy. Moreover, it doesn't raise the purchasing power of the poor because everything else is forced to raise with it. Besides, "established" adults living on minimum wage need to rethink their lives and find themselves a real job.


I'm not sure where some people get it's going to cost jobs. During the 90's the minimum wage was raised and yet still jobs were everywhere.

You're ignoring the fact that the economy boomed during the '90's due to the .com rush. A little thing called the internet was the biggest reason the economy did good for most of the '90's.


Here's more food for thought. If we make the South American immigrants legal ( because they sure as hell aren't going anywhere ) we can start taxing them! Not to mention they have been contributing to Americas continued growth which helps make us the major player that we are ( population wise ).

Why do we have to condone illegal activities? Oh, come to America illegally--don't even bother to learn our language, either--and you'll be granted immediate amnesty. They're breaking the law; I don't know what people don't seem to see about that.

To those economists out there what does it mean when a nation has a growing and larger population? Let me give you a clue Europe had to start a Union to help compete against the U.S.'s size and economic might on the world stage. America has grown strong, because of it's immigrants.

..and it's still not the equal of the US, economically. Our states have higher GDP's than entire European nations.


By the way, back on topic of the thread. The next two years is going to be one hell of an intresting next two years!

Unlikely. Nothing significant will change, save for something unpredictable (terrorist attack, perhaps) occuring.

Minimum wage is a junk law and raising it will only hurt the economy. Moreover, it doesn't raise the purchasing power of the poor because everything else is forced to raise with it. Besides, "established" adults living on minimum wage need to rethink their lives and find themselves a real job.


How is raising the minimum wage going to hurt the economy when majority of employers already pay well above the minimum wage already? Companies are only going to use it as an excuse to raise their prices. Like I said it's only going to hurt the mom and pop businesses that are struggling. Although, I will agree with you that some adults do need to rethink their lives and get a real job.

You're ignoring the fact that the economy boomed during the '90's due to the .com rush. A little thing called the internet was the biggest reason the economy did good for most of the '90's.

Please, really as it stands now the stock market is closing higher and higher. Should we create another boom of some type so companies won't feel the need to raise prices on a minimum wage that's already a joke? Like I said before, the majority of employers are already paying well above the current minimum wage.

Why do we have to condone illegal activities? Oh, come to America illegally--don't even bother to learn our language, either--and you'll be granted immediate amnesty. They're breaking the law; I don't know what people don't seem to see about that.

I didn't say it was right asshole. I was suggesting that we turn our problem into fortune. Would you rather we round them all up and shoot them in the head?

..and it's still not the equal of the US, economically. Our states have higher GDP's than entire European nations.

That's my point exactly, duh.

Rasing minimun wage makes total sense for the large companys. Yes, it will hurt the small buisnises a little but if they are doing OK they won't go bankrupt over a few extra dollars an hour. Which is more important the fat cats at the head of the corperation or the potentionally hundreds or thousands people that work for them. Overall this should help the economy.