WHAT MAKES PEOPLE VOTE REPUBLICAN?

[akdiver 3]

Democrat: What can the government do for me?

Republican: How can I get the government out of my life?

That's about it right there.

As for wages, who is to tell someone else what they should be making? If someone wants to be an idiot and make minimum wage, who's to tell them they can't?

Exactly!!! And if you're willing to work for $2/hr, and I'm willing to pay you $2/hr, then why should anyone tell them they can't?! That's precisely it.

[IAMX 3,055]

As for wages, who is to tell someone else what they should be making? If someone wants to be an idiot and make minimum wage, who's to tell them they can't?

Nodody is telling them they can't make minimum wage. What people are saying is that if you want to continue working a job that only pays minimum wage, don't complain that you can't support your family and claim that its your employer's responsibility to pick up the slack.

There are also other factors into why someone would make minimum wage.

Who are usually working minimum wage jobs? Teenagers. Minorities. Low skill workers.

The suggestion you make is viable for someone who's in a good position like you, or me, to push themselves up the ladder quickly.

There may be other factors, but your question was relating to people who choose to make minimum wage, wasn't it?

Well, they could choose not to work either. What's the problem?

Well lets see, people get sick, people aren't robots who need to work every single day and need time off, as they have this thing called "family" and a "life", and yes, people at a very old age have a tough time working, so rather than let them die instead to let them reap the rewards of their contributions to society.

Wow...so, in other words, you DO think employers should be required to provide all this #######. Wow.

As for me, I simply don't think it is government's responsibility to take care of you, let alone your employer's.

Well, if you're doing work, it seems to me you're taking care of the employer. It's a business relationship, so their job is to keep you as an employee and take care of you as well. Federal law states there are holidays, as well, that the working class deserve off or, if necessary to work, get holiday pay. I guess you don't believe in holiday pay either.

Your beliefs are in direct disagreement with the rest of the first world. By in large. As mentioned previously -- anarchistic.

Edited September 14, 2008 by SRVT

[dalegg 143]

As for wages, who is to tell someone else what they should be making? If someone wants to be an idiot and make minimum wage, who's to tell them they can't?

Nodody is telling them they can't make minimum wage. What people are saying is that if you want to continue working a job that only pays minimum wage, don't complain that you can't support your family and claim that its your employer's responsibility to pick up the slack.

There are also other factors into why someone would make minimum wage.

Who are usually working minimum wage jobs? Teenagers. Minorities. Low skill workers.

The suggestion you make is viable for someone who's in a good position like you, or me, to push themselves up the ladder quickly.

There may be other factors, but your question was relating to people who choose to make minimum wage, wasn't it?

Well, they could choose not to work either. What's the problem?

You are confusing me.

[IAMX 3,055]

You are confusing me.

There isn't one factor as to why one makes minimum wage.

One can choose to take a minimum wage job because they have a family to support, or they can choose not to and go to school, not have a job, and they can live on the street. One can choose it simply because they like menial labor. They can simply not care to go to school and get a professional job. Whatever the case, minimum wage laws are necessary to allow people to work, in every situation, to support themselves or their family in some fashion. Minimum wages are based upon inflation and cost of living.

Now, you don't want minimum wage. Abolish that.

Now you have people making $2/hour, as akdiver wishes, and people instead turning to welfare and crime.

Here's a side factor of minimum wage -- it keeps more people working and less people committing crimes or turning to the government. I'm sure conservatives can relate to these things.

Edited September 14, 2008 by SRVT

[Wei&Shu(Joe) 2]

Democrat: What can the government do for me?

Republican: How can I get the government out of my life?

Another great example, thanks! Not actually true. Oversimplifies the difference to make it appear clearer than it is. Has never demonstrated itself to be true in reality. And yet, seize and freeze...

[akdiver 3]

Well, if you're doing work, it seems to me you're taking care of the employer.

No they are not. They're no more taking care of the employer simply by working there and doing their job than I am by becoming their customer. As you said, it is a business relationship. The "job" of the employer is to produce a service or product that allows them to stay in business and be profitable and nothing more.

Federal law states there are holidays, as well, that the working class deserve off or, if necessary to work, get holiday pay.

Uh, federal law states their are federal holidays and that (most) federal employees get these days off. There is nothing in federal law that mandates any holidays at all or holiday pay for non-federal employees.

I guess you don't believe in holiday pay either.

Sure I do - as long as it is voluntary and not mandated by the federal government for other employers - which happens to currently be the case.

Your beliefs are in direct disagreement with the rest of the first world. By in large. As mentioned previously -- anarchistic.

Yeah, it's a shame the world does not believe in personal responsibility anymore.

[Wei&Shu(Joe) 2]

As for wages, who is to tell someone else what they should be making? If someone wants to be an idiot and make minimum wage, who's to tell them they can't?

Nodody is telling them they can't make minimum wage. What people are saying is that if you want to continue working a job that only pays minimum wage, don't complain that you can't support your family and claim that its your employer's responsibility to pick up the slack.

Again, you guys are coming up with great examples, thank you. Don't deal with the actual argument that is made in this situation, create your own, assign it to people, argue with that.

For those of you who are following this lesson, this poster is demonstrating for you the logical fallacy known as the "straw man argument" and he has done an excellent job of presenting a logically flawed argument so that we can all learn from it.

[IAMX 3,055]

As for wages, who is to tell someone else what they should be making? If someone wants to be an idiot and make minimum wage, who's to tell them they can't?

Nodody is telling them they can't make minimum wage. What people are saying is that if you want to continue working a job that only pays minimum wage, don't complain that you can't support your family and claim that its your employer's responsibility to pick up the slack.

Again, you guys are coming up with great examples, thank you. Don't deal with the actual argument that is made in this situation, create your own, assign it to people, argue with that.

For those of you who are following this lesson, this poster is demonstrating for you the logical fallacy known as the "straw man argument" and he has done an excellent job of presenting a logically flawed argument so that we can all learn from it.

It's not necessarily a straw man argument. He's just using an overly simplistic rationale for a complicated situation. That's representative of idealism. Straw man would be if he used an akdiver-like examples and was like, "well I guess you want employer to feed, bathe, and house him too".

Edited September 14, 2008 by SRVT

[lostinblue 1,989]

Interesting read here. Having a wife from china I have tried to get to understand her history. They have gone from the government controling every aspect of their lives to a great deal of freedom. Not as much as here in the states mind you but so much better than even 10-15 years ago. Socialism has not worked. They are running away from it and the democratic party here is running towards it at full speed. For the people who desire national health care one note. National health care is up and running here in the United States. Just drop in to the local VA hospital. Not a good situation. This is what you will get when you try to nationalize health care. The government went after the tobacco companies. They had deep pockets. We will use that money to help the smokers. How many hospitals have been built to take care of the people who cannot read the warnings on the side of the pack. The money is gone and still a health crises in this country. Big oil is the next big business with deep pockets. Under the threat of "nationalization"(socialism)the democratic machine in washington will handle this also. You had Johnson come along and want to build a great society. People who went on the welfare rolls are now 3-4 generations living off the rest of the united states. The children have never seen a parent HAVE to get up at 6 AM put on a suit or blue shirt and get to work 5 days a week. So why should they get off to school. The number one reason for poverty in this country is unwed mothers. They look for the government to be DADDY.(socialism). When you go back in our history you find immigrants who could not even speak english survive here. NOT by government handouts but by working 2 even 3 jobs per week. They made sure the children went to school and college. When you see articles on minorities rarely are asians included. Failure is not an option for the children. No TV at night and study 6-7 hours per night. With the parents sitting right at the table. This takes care of no child left behind.....Do poor in school and your behind is involved. Just a few reasons to vote republican.Socialism is not an the answer for this country.

[dalegg 143]

Minimum wage laws are consistent with inflation and costs of living. If a business cannot afford a cost of living wage, they shouldn't be in business, or should be doing the work themselves so they don't have anyone to pay. End of story.

Or, they will hire less people at the higher wage and work them harder, and put more people out of work. Seen happen at my own work. You can force employers to pay people any wage you want, but you can't force them to keep anyone on staff.

[lostinblue 1,989]

Minimum wage laws are consistent with inflation and costs of living. If a business cannot afford a cost of living wage, they shouldn't be in business, or should be doing the work themselves so they don't have anyone to pay. End of story.

Or, they will hire less people at the higher wage and work them harder, and put more people out of work. Seen happen at my own work. You can force employers to pay people any wage you want, but you can't force them to keep anyone on staff.

Look to france and their labor laws. You don't dare hire anyone. Unemployment is skyhigh.Created by government mandates.

[IAMX 3,055]

Minimum wage laws are consistent with inflation and costs of living. If a business cannot afford a cost of living wage, they shouldn't be in business, or should be doing the work themselves so they don't have anyone to pay. End of story.

Or, they will hire less people at the higher wage and work them harder, and put more people out of work. Seen happen at my own work. You can force employers to pay people any wage you want, but you can't force them to keep anyone on staff.

Look to france and their labor laws. You don't dare hire anyone. Unemployment is skyhigh.Created by government mandates.

I don't doubt too high a minimum wage has adverse affects.

But the irony in your argument about unemployment rates and government mandates:

Germany is the only first world country not to have a minimum wage law (some have it across their provinces/prefectures/states rather than federally):

8.4% unemployment

France has a high minimum wage:

7.5% unemployment

[IAMX 3,055]

Minimum wage laws are consistent with inflation and costs of living. If a business cannot afford a cost of living wage, they shouldn't be in business, or should be doing the work themselves so they don't have anyone to pay. End of story.

Or, they will hire less people at the higher wage and work them harder, and put more people out of work. Seen happen at my own work. You can force employers to pay people any wage you want, but you can't force them to keep anyone on staff.

However, if an economy is strong, it will create more jobs, which is why unemployment is more a direct correlation with the local economy, the necessity and demand for services, and not minimum wage. This is why San Francisco is just fine with the highest minimum wage in the country, because it is directly relative to the minimum required regarding cost of living. If an economy is weak, less people will be able to afford these wages, less people will also be able to afford much with even making minimum wage and in the lowest tiers of pay anyways, the business will go, and someone else will take their place.

It is also established that one must be able to pay their worker to be able to survive. To survive, one needs a living wage. Reasonably, without government intervention.

Edited September 14, 2008 by SRVT

[akdiver 3]

Germany is the only first world country not to have a minimum wage law (some have it across their provinces/prefectures/states rather than federally):

8.4% unemployment

France has a high minimum wage:

7.5% unemployment

You are implying there is a relationship between the two, when the reality is that it is commonly accepted reason is that these high rates are caused by the inability to get rid of workers when you don't need them, imposed by various government-mandated "worker's rights" laws. Edited September 14, 2008 by akdiver

[IAMX 3,055]

Germany is the only first world country not to have a minimum wage law (some have it across their provinces/prefectures/states rather than federally):

8.4% unemployment

France has a high minimum wage:

7.5% unemployment

You are implying there is a relationship between the two, when the reality is that it is commonly accepted reason is that these high rates are caused by the inability to get rid of workers when you don't need them, imposed by various government-mandated "worker's rights" laws.

Damn those "workers rights". Who needs rights anyways?