| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
coboardhead
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 4303
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2015 9:41 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| i wonder if a ISIS militant, running for cover from a missile thinks..."drat, I wish they would quit sending us free stuff"! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2015 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| As he runs for cover under one of the 500 or so free MV,s that we left there in a stupid act of military redistribution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2015 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nail-ponder posted: | Quote: | Oh my gosh they even explain how much that free lunch costs......
From the government link.....
http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/NSLPFactSheet.pdf
9. How much does the program cost?
Quote:
The National School Lunch Program cost $11.6 billion in FY 2012. By comparison, the lunch program's total cost in 1947 was $70 million; in 1950, $119.7 million; in 1960, $225.8 million; in 1970, $565.5 million; in 1980, $3.2 billion; in 1990, $3.7 billion; and in 2000, 6.1 billion.
|
While there is a lot of money going into this program, I am good with the kids getting lunches (and breakfast for many) if their families CAN'T / OR ARE UNABLE to provide the food.
The trend is frightening, so why is there no accountability for the neglectful parents? By 2020, will the cost be $22 billion? Is this all a product of a low minimum wage?
And by the way, I am not opposed to raising the minimum wage, but not to $15, which is $31,200 a year for a first job, uneducated, unskilled worker, assuming they get to work a 40 hr. week. Because of the ACA, many won't get their 40 hours and benefits, because the small businesses want to keep expenses as low as possible and medical coverage is expensive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2015 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
'And by the way, I am not opposed to raising the minimum wage, but not to $15, which is $31,200 a year for a first job, uneducated, unskilled worker, assuming they get to work a 40 hr. week."
More likely than not, the minimum wage person is an illegal adult Hispanic with a family to feed, and as we all should know well, the ACA doesn't apply to illegal aliens. Morever, should we be advocates for small businesses that depend on hiring illegal immigrants at minimum wage?
Last edited by swchandler on Sun Jul 12, 2015 11:16 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2015 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am wondering why any business that hires illegals would follow any minimum wage law. They are breaking the law by hiring them, so why not pay the lowest wage possible.
One reason that minimum wage remains low is because there are probably 5-10 million illegals willing to work for just about any wage. Few are motivated to cough up more than minimum wage when the supply of cheap workers is well beyond the available number of jobs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2015 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Techno--do you remember that the current immigration policies were established by Ronald Reagan in order to undercut the cost of agricultural wages? Hmm. The Republicans set the table, refuse to change the policies, and have never enforced the law against big business. So how does it become liberal policy?
Your second point is equally absurd. The Republicans have slow walked modernization and adequate funding for the IRS, and for gun laws. Systematically. Then they scream that it is a failure.
| Quote: | By Rebecca Shabad - 06/10/15 10:36 AM EDT
House Republicans want to cut $838 million from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for fiscal 2016, which begins Oct. 1.
The reduction would be more than double the $350 million Congress cut from the agency’s budget for 2015.
For next year, the IRS would receive $10.1 billion, which is below the agency’s sequester limit and below the level Congress enacted 12 years ago. The amount would allow the IRS to perform its core duties, the House Appropriations Committee said.
The details were outlined Wednesday in the Financial Services and General Government Operations spending bill, which also contains $75 million more than current levels to improve the rate the IRS answers phone calls from taxpayers.
The GOP-led panel said the bill includes several provisions to rein in the Obama administration’s “overreach.”
“The legislation includes provisions to stop the IRS from further implementing the individual mandate under ObamaCare, to protect the right to free speech and political involvement, and to prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from implementing a net-neutrality order,” a bill summary said.
|
But of course, those cuts reduce income and increase fraud--which the GOP knows.
R | Quote: | | elative to inflation-adjusted FY 2010 levels, cumulative budget cuts for the Internal Revenue Service, inspectors general, program integrity initiatives, and the GAO totaled approximately $6.3 billion from FY 2011 to FY 2014. (see Table 1) Based on data culled from various federal government sources, those cuts increased waste, fraud, and abuse by around $27.2 billion over the same time period. Combining the fiscal savings from the cuts with the resulting increases in waste, fraud, and abuse yields an estimated $20.9 billion in higher budget deficits as a consequence of these misguided austerity measures. |
The objective is to create talking points for you righties to rant about without any comprehension of how we got there. Kind of like the low-information "Jackass" movie generation at their worst.
Theater of the absurd. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Come on Mac, read my posts. You said:
| Quote: | Techno--do you remember that the current immigration policies were established by Ronald Reagan in order to undercut the cost of agricultural wages? Hmm. The Republicans set the table, refuse to change the policies, and have never enforced the law against big business. So how does it become liberal policy?
Your second point is equally absurd. The Republicans have slow walked modernization and adequate funding for the IRS, and for gun laws. Systematically. Then they scream that it is a failure.
|
The immigration problem today is being ignored by Obama, along with the "sanctuary cities" issue that has recently come to light. Just keep all of them here, we need the cheap labor is the left's solution. The "it's Ragan's fault" BS is just as juvenile as it's Bush's fault BS that you cough up when you won't acknowledge or ignore the issue at hand.
My second point which you totally failed to read or understand was about the impact of illegal aliens on the minimum wage. What's "slow walked modernization and adequate funding for the IRS and for gun laws" have to do with minimum wage??????? And my post was absurd??? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Obama proposed immigration reform, Congress (the Republicans) refused to bring it to a vote. The last immigration legislation was Ronnie's. Those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it. Many of them just parrot right wing talking points, with no idea how wrong they are. When they are corrected they call the corrections "juvenile."
Life inside the bubble. Absurd indeed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mac said: | Quote: | | Obama proposed immigration reform, Congress (the Republicans) refused to bring it to a vote. |
And this is different than the 100's of bills passed by the House that Reid refused to bring to a vote? Neither side chooses to compromise, so there is gridlock. Just as much a left issue as a right issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2015 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quite different. Since day 1, the Republican leadership has enforced rigid discipline to prevent negotiation with Obama on virtually all issues. there are only about three exceptions--most recently the trade bill.
If you don't understand the diference between Obama and Congress, then I guess you actually believe that simplifying the tax code is politically feasible--and that any Republican will support it. Just after you finish paying for the bridge, you can buy that one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
