The new Republican plan.

[toubab]

The Republican plan is, as it's always been, for the Oligarchs that own and operate America to convince the 40% poor, uneducated white people that they too can be Oligarchs if only they would vote Republican. And its been the most successful mass brain washing since the death of Christ.

With the 40% party loyalists, they only need to pick up another 11% from the scattering of disjointed interest voters.

Fortunately for most Americans, the way the Electoral College is set up, there will never be another Republican President in my lifetime.

Don't be so sure about that. There's still a chance the Democrats will nominate Hillary.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

Is it just me or does someone complaining about the racism of a candidate tossing around "house nigger", "massuh", and telling another poster that "they must be white" seem just a tad... um.. insanly hypocritical to anyone else?

Wait, we're talking about Drunkenstein here.. Carry on.

Here comes the white man trying to control me. I will say what ever I damn well want, go control house nigger like Sean Renaud who will bend over backwards to get your approval. But of course you can't do that, you can't even control your child molesting wife.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Because of pure neutrality.

That's what Switzerland is since hundreds of years.

No other country could have avoided Nazi invasion just by declaring "neutrality," if the Nazis really wanted to invade it. Switzerland has the advantage of being a convenient place to store your money and other loot in case you should lose the war.

 

[toubab]

If conservative Republicans had a fully functioning collective brain Mitt Romney would be president today instead of Barack Obama. The fact they wouldn't vote for Romney because he is "too liberal" or "a Mormon" or some other bullshit reasoning tells you how stupid some of them are. Democrats should thank whatever deity they have that their main political opponents are Republicans.

 

[Adre]

If conservative Republicans had a fully functioning collective brain Mitt Romney would be president today instead of Barack Obama. The fact they wouldn't vote for Romney because he is "too liberal" or "a Mormon" or some other bullshit reasoning tells you how stupid some of them are. Democrats should thank whatever deity they have that their main political opponents are Republicans.

So Democrats are smarter than Republicans, which means they're likely better able to govern. That's what you said.

 

[OjosMojo]

Here comes the white man trying to control me. I will say what ever I damn well want, go control house nigger like Sean Renaud who will bend over backwards to get your approval. But of course you can't do that, you can't even control your child molesting wife.

You just went off the GB plantation - you know that don't you, you racist pos?

 

[toubab]

So Democrats are smarter than Republicans, which means they're likely better able to govern. That's what you said.

No, that's not what I said. But if you consider automatically voting party regardless of candidate to be smart, then by that definition Democrats are smarter. Has nothing to do with ability to govern well.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Smarter doesn't necessarily mean you have leadership skills.

The Republican plan is, as it's always been, for the Oligarchs that own and operate America to convince the 40% poor, uneducated white people that they too can be Oligarchs if only they would vote Republican. And its been the most successful mass brain washing since the death of Christ.

With the 40% party loyalists, they only need to pick up another 11% from the scattering of disjointed interest voters.

Fortunately for most Americans, the way the Electoral College is set up, there will never be another Republican President in my lifetime.

You have a lot of faith in a system that gives little reason for it. The reality is the Electoral College keeps the Republicans relevant. Without it a lot of their tiny states that add up given time wouldn't REALLY matter.

But Hillary is easily the best bet for the Dems. Bernie is a huge risk.

oh you socilaist asshats that think min wage must be $15 an hour.

hey, news flash why don't you retards try to improve yourselves instead of doing the bare min amount of work?

oh wait, the downfall with socialism is the fact that 'work is hard'

I think most economists have stated that $20 an hour is the ideal actually but that's not happening for at least twenty thirty years based on past trends when America actually got raises.

And everybody can't improve themselves, take yourself for instance. Work is hard. No, it's really not and that's the modern problem.

 

[Que]

Smarter doesn't necessarily mean you have leadership skills.



You have a lot of faith in a system that gives little reason for it. The reality is the Electoral College keeps the Republicans relevant. Without it a lot of their tiny states that add up given time wouldn't REALLY matter.

But Hillary is easily the best bet for the Dems. Bernie is a huge risk.



I think most economists have stated that $20 an hour is the ideal actually but that's not happening for at least twenty thirty years based on past trends when America actually got raises.

And everybody can't improve themselves, take yourself for instance. Work is hard. No, it's really not and that's the modern problem.

I saw somewhere the other day that if you account for wage deflation periods as well as wage inflation and compare minimum wage now to when the idea was instituted, minimum wage would be $4.16 right now. Simply adjusting it for inflation does not account for what it was intended to do, set a minimum floor, not elevate no skilled workers to par with minimally skilled and sometimes skilled workers.

Wages are not rising so why should those with the least to contribute get a raise to put them at the level with people that have developed a marketable skill?

 

[PoppingTom]

Simply adjusting it for inflation does not account for what it was intended to do, set a minimum floor, not elevate no skilled workers to par with minimally skilled and sometimes skilled workers.

Wages are not rising so why should those with the least to contribute get a raise to put them at the level with people that have developed a marketable skill?

Set a minimum floor, right, but according to what?

The very reason of minimum wages is to ensure working people can live out of that wage in a minimum standard, not to equal non-skilled to skilled workers.

Wages are not rising, right, and if there was no minimum wage, wages would still continue to fall.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I saw somewhere the other day that if you account for wage deflation periods as well as wage inflation and compare minimum wage now to when the idea was instituted, minimum wage would be $4.16 right now. Simply adjusting it for inflation does not account for what it was intended to do, set a minimum floor, not elevate no skilled workers to par with minimally skilled and sometimes skilled workers.

Wages are not rising so why should those with the least to contribute get a raise to put them at the level with people that have developed a marketable skill?

This appears to be two separate statements mixed together. Not accusing you of doing anything intentionally.

I would love to see the knots they must have tied themselves into to arrive at that calculation. These are numbers I actually find fascinating so I've done a fair bit of digging into it. But I can't find my old links right now, I'll see. Regardless deflation in America is exceedingly rare and never sustained. I'm sure there is some way you could pick some years and do the math to make it say whatever you want. Unless someone is arguing that the dollar today isn't worth less than the dollar in any random year past this first part is just easily ignored until more details are released.

The second is what it's purpose was for. Your second part is basically a modern retelling of the history combined with a conservative outlook. For the first part you have to go look the labor movements of the late 19th and early 20th centuries in particular how minimum wage, child labor and the 40 hour work week came about initially. And it all basically boils down to the minimum wage had nothing to do with skill. IT was simply set as the amount of money a man could live on.

There is no rational reason why raising the minimum wage up to a higher point would put them on par with minimally and skilled workers. Because this is the textbook example of a rising tide lifts all ships. A raise for the guys on the bottom is a raise for everybody and has been historically. Because those skilled guys are STILL skilled and can simply demand more you still can't replace them.

Wages aren't rising for a few reasons. Outsourcing is one. Automation is one. The lack of unions is one (one that could easily counteract the first two with sufficient strength) and the minimum wage not getting boosted would likely also be one. When I can make $10 an hour sweeping floors you will pay me $15 to manage your schedule. It's just math.

 

[Adre]

Smarter doesn't necessarily mean you have leadership skills.

Perhaps, but I'll bet on smart versus stupid anytime.

 

[Oh_That_Guy]

Perhaps, but I'll bet on smart versus stupid anytime.

A smart person is probably more likely to be a better leader but there have been plenty of dumbasses that were good leaders. Leadership is often more about personality than anything else.

 

[Adre]

A smart person is probably more likely to be a better leader but there have been plenty of dumbasses that were good leaders. Leadership is often more about personality than anything else.

I'd be interested in hearing who these plenty of dumbasses are.

 

[Oh_That_Guy]

I'd be interested in hearing who these plenty of dumbasses are.

Go around to any large corporation, find what divisions or groups are successful and/or have leaders that are well liked, talk to said leaders. I'm guessing 30% are dumb as a box of hammers about anything other than what they do.

 

[Sean Renaud]

What they do is the only thing that is important. However leading involves delegation. You only need to be so good at the actual task because that's not your job.

 

[PoppingTom]

Leadership is often more about personality than anything else.

Leadership is first about knowing your business, then comes personality.

Some people pretend to be dumb, as this is easier for people to handle than the smartass.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

love how you ass munching obama retard slaves accomplish nothing