Working well into your 70s because you can’t afford to retire.

[Anonymous]

Oh yes, proof of what happened from SENATOR MIKE LEE.

http://dailysignal.com/2017/04/04/we-cant-bail-out-social-security-disability-insurance-forever-heres-a-reform-proposal/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not country’s job to fix. They should have saved more when they were young.

Hard to "save more" when almost half of Americans only have access to low wage jobs that don't pay enough to save anything.

So raise the minimum wage and put more people out of work? That won't help.

When an employer employs someone for 40 hours out of every week it's no longer relevant what the employer thinks that person is worth paying. When you take up that much of someone's time you become responsible for their livelihood and have a fundamental responsibility to pay them a living wage.

Employers should be paying living wages. The fact that taxpayers are picking up the slack for what companies should be paying by providing benefits like food stamps to low wage workers amounts to massive corporate welfare.

It’s actually better in the long run for companies to provide job training rather than inflated wages.
If you give a man a fish....

Just say no to hand outs. Say yes to hand ups!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not country’s job to fix. They should have saved more when they were young.

Hard to "save more" when almost half of Americans only have access to low wage jobs that don't pay enough to save anything.

So raise the minimum wage and put more people out of work? That won't help.

When an employer employs someone for 40 hours out of every week it's no longer relevant what the employer thinks that person is worth paying. When you take up that much of someone's time you become responsible for their livelihood and have a fundamental responsibility to pay them a living wage.

Employers should be paying living wages. The fact that taxpayers are picking up the slack for what companies should be paying by providing benefits like food stamps to low wage workers amounts to massive corporate welfare.

It’s actually better in the long run for companies to provide job training rather than inflated wages.
If you give a man a fish....

Just say no to hand outs. Say yes to hand ups!

Living wages and job training are not mutually exclusive. And living wages aren’t inherently inflated wages. Across the board wages for all but the top earners have stagnated in this country. CEOs and thier directs get inflated wages; the rest of the population gets table scraps and that’s accelerated under GOP leadership.

Interesting to see all the Ayn Randian contempt for the working and middle class on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sold a house for a woman who worked in a hospital laundry for 30 years and her pension was $18 a month, and her social security was $400 a month. She was in her 80s and had a reverse mortgage to pay for her living costs. She was able to pay off the reverse mortgage when her house sold and we got her into a county subsidized apartment. She had about $30,000 left from the sale of the house and $418 a month to live on.

Did she not work the first 20 or 30 years of her adult life?

At hee peak earning years this woman was a laundress.

Do you really think she could have had a job that paid more than living wage before that? Please try to think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been assuming that SS will be means tested or otherwise not available by the time I retire.

There's an easy fix: Eliminate or raise the $127,200 cap on SS contributions, and implement means testing, since folks like Warren Buffett do not need SS. Those two things alone would make SS solvent for the next couple of generations.

The upper-middle class liberals here would scream holy terror.

I posted earlier. We are done with the cap by mid March. It's ridiculous that we aren't asked to pay more into the system.

Because we do not pay enough into the "system" as it is. Lets see, Federal, State, local, Property Taxes, Luxury Taxes, Sales Taxes, registration fees, gas taxes... What am I missing?

Liberal, sigh.

How much of that money went to Bush's wars and wasteful defense spending?

Idiots, sigh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not country’s job to fix. They should have saved more when they were young.

Hard to "save more" when almost half of Americans only have access to low wage jobs that don't pay enough to save anything.

So raise the minimum wage and put more people out of work? That won't help.

When an employer employs someone for 40 hours out of every week it's no longer relevant what the employer thinks that person is worth paying. When you take up that much of someone's time you become responsible for their livelihood and have a fundamental responsibility to pay them a living wage.

Employers should be paying living wages. The fact that taxpayers are picking up the slack for what companies should be paying by providing benefits like food stamps to low wage workers amounts to massive corporate welfare.

It’s actually better in the long run for companies to provide job training rather than inflated wages.
If you give a man a fish....

Just say no to hand outs. Say yes to hand ups!

Living wages and job training are not mutually exclusive. And living wages aren’t inherently inflated wages. Across the board wages for all but the top earners have stagnated in this country. CEOs and thier directs get inflated wages; the rest of the population gets table scraps and that’s accelerated under GOP leadership.

Interesting to see all the Ayn Randian contempt for the working and middle class on this thread.

Living wages are inherently inflated. They are artificially and arbitrarily set without regard to productivity or market conditions, thus, by definition, they are inflated.

You still believe in gravity, don't you, or are you that far gone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not country’s job to fix. They should have saved more when they were young.

Hard to "save more" when almost half of Americans only have access to low wage jobs that don't pay enough to save anything.

So raise the minimum wage and put more people out of work? That won't help.

When an employer employs someone for 40 hours out of every week it's no longer relevant what the employer thinks that person is worth paying. When you take up that much of someone's time you become responsible for their livelihood and have a fundamental responsibility to pay them a living wage.

Employers should be paying living wages. The fact that taxpayers are picking up the slack for what companies should be paying by providing benefits like food stamps to low wage workers amounts to massive corporate welfare.

It’s actually better in the long run for companies to provide job training rather than inflated wages.
If you give a man a fish....

Just say no to hand outs. Say yes to hand ups!

Living wages and job training are not mutually exclusive. And living wages aren’t inherently inflated wages. Across the board wages for all but the top earners have stagnated in this country. CEOs and thier directs get inflated wages; the rest of the population gets table scraps and that’s accelerated under GOP leadership.

Interesting to see all the Ayn Randian contempt for the working and middle class on this thread.

Last time I looked, income inequality rose most under Obama. Why did Obama hate the poor and middle class that his policies when the democrats controlled both houses benefited the liberal elite?
Sorry to burst your bubble .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not country’s job to fix. They should have saved more when they were young.

Hard to "save more" when almost half of Americans only have access to low wage jobs that don't pay enough to save anything.

So raise the minimum wage and put more people out of work? That won't help.

When an employer employs someone for 40 hours out of every week it's no longer relevant what the employer thinks that person is worth paying. When you take up that much of someone's time you become responsible for their livelihood and have a fundamental responsibility to pay them a living wage.

Employers should be paying living wages. The fact that taxpayers are picking up the slack for what companies should be paying by providing benefits like food stamps to low wage workers amounts to massive corporate welfare.

It’s actually better in the long run for companies to provide job training rather than inflated wages.
If you give a man a fish....

Just say no to hand outs. Say yes to hand ups!

Living wages and job training are not mutually exclusive. And living wages aren’t inherently inflated wages. Across the board wages for all but the top earners have stagnated in this country. CEOs and thier directs get inflated wages; the rest of the population gets table scraps and that’s accelerated under GOP leadership.

Interesting to see all the Ayn Randian contempt for the working and middle class on this thread.

Last time I looked, income inequality rose most under Obama. Why did Obama hate the poor and middle class that his policies when the democrats controlled both houses benefited the liberal elite?
Sorry to burst your bubble .

[Anonymous]

Because he put a bunch of mandates out there that the market did not receive well and wasted. Of course it's going to go to the top. They write the 3000 page bills whether a dem or a rep is in power.

Smaller government and more individuals making their own decisions in life instead of a bureaucrat dictating nirvana from an ivory tower is the the only way to fix this screwed up country.

[Anonymous]

A lot of people with nothing in old age were spend thrifts

DCUM is well aware that grandma and grandpa are often completely irresponsible in many ways

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been assuming that SS will be means tested or otherwise not available by the time I retire.

There's an easy fix: Eliminate or raise the $127,200 cap on SS contributions, and implement means testing, since folks like Warren Buffett do not need SS. Those two things alone would make SS solvent for the next couple of generations.

The upper-middle class liberals here would scream holy terror.

I posted earlier. We are done with the cap by mid March. It's ridiculous that we aren't asked to pay more into the system.

Because we do not pay enough into the "system" as it is. Lets see, Federal, State, local, Property Taxes, Luxury Taxes, Sales Taxes, registration fees, gas taxes... What am I missing?

Liberal, sigh.

How much of that money went to Bush's wars and wasteful defense spending?

Idiots, sigh.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been assuming that SS will be means tested or otherwise not available by the time I retire.

There's an easy fix: Eliminate or raise the $127,200 cap on SS contributions, and implement means testing, since folks like Warren Buffett do not need SS. Those two things alone would make SS solvent for the next couple of generations.

The upper-middle class liberals here would scream holy terror.

I posted earlier. We are done with the cap by mid March. It's ridiculous that we aren't asked to pay more into the system.

Because we do not pay enough into the "system" as it is. Lets see, Federal, State, local, Property Taxes, Luxury Taxes, Sales Taxes, registration fees, gas taxes... What am I missing?

Liberal, sigh.

How much of that money went to Bush's wars and wasteful defense spending?

Idiots, sigh.

Exactly.

Do you realize how many people in this area benefit from “wasteful defense spending””?”
Hoards of government workers on this forum truly believe their agency’s mission is NOT part o f the problem.
I just ????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not country’s job to fix. They should have saved more when they were young.

Hard to "save more" when almost half of Americans only have access to low wage jobs that don't pay enough to save anything.

So raise the minimum wage and put more people out of work? That won't help.

When an employer employs someone for 40 hours out of every week it's no longer relevant what the employer thinks that person is worth paying. When you take up that much of someone's time you become responsible for their livelihood and have a fundamental responsibility to pay them a living wage.

Employers should be paying living wages. The fact that taxpayers are picking up the slack for what companies should be paying by providing benefits like food stamps to low wage workers amounts to massive corporate welfare.

It’s actually better in the long run for companies to provide job training rather than inflated wages.
If you give a man a fish....

Just say no to hand outs. Say yes to hand ups!

Living wages and job training are not mutually exclusive. And living wages aren’t inherently inflated wages. Across the board wages for all but the top earners have stagnated in this country. CEOs and thier directs get inflated wages; the rest of the population gets table scraps and that’s accelerated under GOP leadership.

Interesting to see all the Ayn Randian contempt for the working and middle class on this thread.

Why did Obama let immigration go so out of control and flood the labor market which kept wages low?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been assuming that SS will be means tested or otherwise not available by the time I retire.

There's an easy fix: Eliminate or raise the $127,200 cap on SS contributions, and implement means testing, since folks like Warren Buffett do not need SS. Those two things alone would make SS solvent for the next couple of generations.

The upper-middle class liberals here would scream holy terror.

I posted earlier. We are done with the cap by mid March. It's ridiculous that we aren't asked to pay more into the system.

Because we do not pay enough into the "system" as it is. Lets see, Federal, State, local, Property Taxes, Luxury Taxes, Sales Taxes, registration fees, gas taxes... What am I missing?

Liberal, sigh.

How much of that money went to Bush's wars and wasteful defense spending?

Idiots, sigh.

Exactly.

Do you realize how many people in this area benefit from “wasteful defense spending””?”
Hoards of government workers on this forum truly believe their agency’s mission is NOT part o f the problem.
I just ????

I've never worked in federal space. Neither have most of my peers. There are other industries here - financial, healthcare, IT, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not country’s job to fix. They should have saved more when they were young.

Hard to "save more" when almost half of Americans only have access to low wage jobs that don't pay enough to save anything.

So raise the minimum wage and put more people out of work? That won't help.

When an employer employs someone for 40 hours out of every week it's no longer relevant what the employer thinks that person is worth paying. When you take up that much of someone's time you become responsible for their livelihood and have a fundamental responsibility to pay them a living wage.

Employers should be paying living wages. The fact that taxpayers are picking up the slack for what companies should be paying by providing benefits like food stamps to low wage workers amounts to massive corporate welfare.

It’s actually better in the long run for companies to provide job training rather than inflated wages.
If you give a man a fish....

Just say no to hand outs. Say yes to hand ups!

Living wages and job training are not mutually exclusive. And living wages aren’t inherently inflated wages. Across the board wages for all but the top earners have stagnated in this country. CEOs and thier directs get inflated wages; the rest of the population gets table scraps and that’s accelerated under GOP leadership.

Interesting to see all the Ayn Randian contempt for the working and middle class on this thread.

Why did Obama let immigration go so out of control and flood the labor market which kept wages low?

Citation?