| |
Discussion: U.S. Election 2016: Primary Season
Member Since: 9/25/2011
Posts: 12,630
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Jolie's Lips
OMG the amount of dislikes for Hillary Clinton's interviews on "The View". A Rebecca Black-sized mess! People really don't like her.
 |
It's just the little bernies 
It makes sense since most of them are younger and familiar with YouTube, unlike most of Hillary's supporters.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/2/2014
Posts: 6,697
|
Can the primary just get here already? This wait between polls is like torture.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
Quote:
Originally posted by iheartBrit
It's just the little bernies
It makes sense since most of them are younger and familiar with YouTube, unlike most of Hillary's supporters. |
To be fair, Secretary Clinton does have very low approval and likability numbers not only among average Americans, but also among Democrats. "Dislikes" on social media are pretty expected, especially since you're dealing with demographics that she doesn't even appeal to to begin with.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
The $15 minimum wage is totally conceivable, everywhere.
In many of those places where the $15 minimum wage plan has been planned to be implemented over the course of the next few years, it’s been shown that the cost of living there would even command way more by the time they’re fully implemented (in some of these cases, a $15 minimum wage is even way too low right now, and needs to be higher).
My problem with people opposing the $15 minimum wage is that many of their concerns are just too late to be taken care of right now, and many of them just lack the deep understanding of the fact that a federal minimum wage will not be adopted at the same time rates in all regions across the country, and certainly won’t be adopted in tight periods that would wreck the economy in places with low income rates.
Let’s be as objective as possible and go straight to employment: on this aspect of the argument, we’re backed by the facts and statistics, which seemingly show that big increases in local wage floors has absolutely no discernible effect on employment; not positive, not negative, but essentially no effect. From a very unbiased point of view, this is more than enough to assure that while there will probably be more negative aftermath about a minimum wage implementation on a federal level, yet it won’t be resounding enough to originate major concern right now. Even giant American multinational investment banking firms like Goldman Sachs have come out to admit that economic literature hasn’t discovered any passive or negative effects of raising the wage floor in past times, and the only way to be able to note out large-scale concerns is if we actually begin to put the increase into action.
The fluidity of a minimum wage increase strategy needs to be recognized; $15 an hour won’t be achieved at the same intervals of time in Arkansas as it would in Connecticut, adjustments to the federal plan will most definitely be made once analysts and statisticians weigh in when proposals are being set. Different adjustments would also take care of the type of businesses the increase is targeting, including setting different standards for how many employees an enterprise can have before being eligible to comply under the act. For example, in New York, the law that was recently passed would affect business with 10+ workers, that number should be altered to suit different areas with different economic abilities.
My main issue is, In places like Rural West Virginia, one of the poorest in the country, a single parent with a child would still need an average hourly wage of $19.5-$20, minorities and women there would need to work for like, double, triple, quadruple the time they do now in order to get to that living wage. Even single individual adults with no children in Rural Georgia, a very poor region as well, are on the verge of crossing the $15 hourly wage needed for a “modest yet adequate standard of living”, according to EPI. Let’s not even get into places like VA Suburbs, Burlington VT, Massachusetts Metro area, etc. where a single adult needs something along the lines of $18-$19 an hour, $33 if they have a child and that is IF they work 40 hours a week (if we go by the current average working hours, the numbers may surge to as high as $22 for a single individual, $41 if they have a child in those kinds of wealthy places). So now, to shift away from the highly-opinionated altercations and back-and-forth bickering between standpoints, let’s just recognize that the current inevitable demand for a $15 federal minimum wage increase is gradually leaving no more room for economists to get into further argumentations on the issue, but rather have legislators and executives work into consensus to find the most sensible adjustments to the $15 policy in different areas of the country and begin trying out an arrangement that is unavoidably needed so that the damages in the working class are less prominent over the next years, so that an average family in an average state like Oregon isn’t struggling with an average of 30k yearly deficit in needed income to secure a "modest yet adequate" standard of living. It’s just too late for this, that’s my take on it.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Giselle
I am interested in the conspiracy theories about Bill and Hillary's marriage though. I was talking to this woman who believes they made a deal back in the 80s/90s. That he would run and then she would. Like if Hillary was plotting that from the very beginning  |
Former Miss Arkansas said that Hillary was a lesbian, and had to get into this kind of marriage for political purposes. I don't think it's true, but to think about it is just...
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/6/2011
Posts: 31,849
|
Quote:
Originally posted by rivers
My grandma told me Hillary should have been a better wife/mother and shouldn't have been so obsessed with her career. I was ready to drag her but honestly there's no helping the older generation. They are stuck in their old ways.  |
Hillary actually got into to trouble with the housewives of America while Bill was running in the 90s because she's said that she's sorry that she didn't stay home and bake cookies and instead decided to have her own life and career.  Hillary has been facing criticism about being a strong independent women for over 20 years. Its no different now. People still don't like that she's so assertive, smart, successful and powerful, especially men.  They hide their misogynistic views by saying things like "she's a corporate democratic who**" or "she's a criminal" but we all know that they are simply scared and uncomfortable at the thought of a powerful woman or a female president. 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/7/2015
Posts: 11,012
|
Quote:
Originally posted by heckinglovato
The $15 minimum wage is totally conceivable, everywhere.
In many of those places where the $15 minimum wage plan has been planned to be implemented over the course of the next few years, it’s been shown that the cost of living there would even command way more by the time they’re fully implemented (in some of these cases, a $15 minimum wage is even way too low right now, and needs to be higher).
My problem with people opposing the $15 minimum wage is that many of their concerns are just too late to be taken care of right now, and many of them just lack the deep understanding of the fact that a federal minimum wage will not be adopted at the same time rates in all regions across the country, and certainly won’t be adopted in tight periods that would wreck the economy in places with low income rates.
Let’s be as objective as possible and go straight to employment: on this aspect of the argument, we’re backed by the facts and statistics, which seemingly show that big increases in local wage floors has absolutely no discernible effect on employment; not positive, not negative, but essentially no effect. From a very unbiased point of view, this is more than enough to assure that while there will probably be more negative aftermath about a minimum wage implementation on a federal level, yet it won’t be resounding enough to originate major concern right now. Even giant American multinational investment banking firms like Goldman Sachs have come out to admit that economic literature hasn’t discovered any passive or negative effects of raising the wage floor in past times, and the only way to be able to note out large-scale concerns is if we actually begin to put the increase into action.
The fluidity of a minimum wage increase strategy needs to be recognized; $15 an hour won’t be achieved at the same intervals of time in Arkansas as it would in Connecticut, adjustments to the federal plan will most definitely be made once analysts and statisticians weigh in when proposals are being set. Different adjustments would also take care of the type of businesses the increase is targeting, including setting different standards for how many employees an enterprise can have before being eligible to comply under the act. For example, in New York, the law that was recently passed would affect business with 10+ workers, that number should be altered to suit different areas with different economic abilities.
My main issue is, In places like Rural West Virginia, one of the poorest in the country, a single parent with a child would still need an average hourly wage of $19.5-$20, minorities and women there would need to work for like, double, triple, quadruple the time they do now in order to get to that living wage. Even single individual adults with no children in Rural Georgia, a very poor region as well, are on the verge of crossing the $15 hourly wage needed for a “modest yet adequate standard of living”, according to EPI. Let’s not even get into places like VA Suburbs, Burlington VT, Massachusetts Metro area, etc. where a single adult needs something along the lines of $18-$19 an hour, $33 if they have a child and that is IF they work 40 hours a week (if we go by the current average working hours, the numbers may surge to as high as $22 for a single individual, $41 if they have a child in those kinds of wealthy places). So now, to shift away from the highly-opinionated altercations and back-and-forth bickering between standpoints, let’s just recognize that the current inevitable demand for a $15 federal minimum wage increase is gradually leaving no more room for economists to get into further argumentations on the issue, but rather have legislators and executives work into consensus to find the most sensible adjustments to the $15 policy in different areas of the country and begin trying out an arrangement that is unavoidably needed so that the damages in the working class are less prominent over the next years, so that an average family in an average state like Oregon isn’t struggling with an average of 30k yearly deficit in needed income to secure a "modest yet adequate" standard of living. It’s just too late for this, that’s my take on it.
|
Who has the time to read all of this?  I admire your dedication.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2010
Posts: 71,871
|
Quote:
Originally posted by heckinglovato
Former Miss Arkansas said that Hillary was a lesbian, and had to get into this kind of marriage for political purposes. I don't think it's true, but to think about it is just... |
imagine if all of that is true and she's paying Donald Trump to run against her because her unfavorables are ao high shed lose to anyone else 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2010
Posts: 71,871
|
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/30/2011
Posts: 2,986
|
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/5/2011
Posts: 3,159
|
I watched the debate twice and the more I hear Hillary talk the more I fall in love with her. Her knowledge is really incredible. I could listen to her talk all day. I think that's why it's hard for people to understand her or feel she's a flip flopper during debates she can't give specifics at a debate because of the time limit and she wants to go into major detail and it's hard for her to dumb down her responses because the issues just aren't simple and she gets a bit flustered. Just listen to her explaining how to break up the banks, or the issues in Libya or the minimum wage. It's so easy to just yell "We gotta break them up!" "The 1% is gonna pay!" "15$ Minimum Wage everywhere!" but it's just not that simple it's way more to getting it accomplished.
This is why I enjoy town halls because Hillary can get into specifics and give a full complete answer. Plus it's more personal.
She's so detailed, sharp and poised and takes notes literally showing Bernie respect while he's talking meanwhile he's making faces or looking dumbfounded I don't think he looked at her once while she was talking. People notice little things like that. A President has a certain demeanor and Hillary has it ..Obama has it...Bill had it (he's getting old)...Kennedy had it ...Bernie not so much. I also love her laugh and grin when she knows she's about to slay an answer or for example when Bernie backtracked about switching to natural energy from fossil fuels/coal "We don't phase it out tomorrow" which was Hillary's basic point but he criticized her. He just out of touch and I think a lot of people noticed that last night.
He still has't given any specifics for his plans when called out about his plans not being able to work and not getting passed he still can't give specifics and resorts to calling out Wall Street or Hillary being part of the 1%. Honestly I don't think people care that much about Wall Street or The Big Banks or Hillary being in the 1% that's why his core issue is not resonating with a MAJORITY of voters. She's wealthy we get it but it's not like she was born into wealth like Donald Trump. She worked extremely hard to get where she is so if she's offered to be paid $200,00+ to make a speech...who cares! Get money bish! That's what I call a boss she has the resume and experience to allow these opportunities. I'm sure if Bernie could he would. I think it's admirable that she's as powerful as she is.
Anyways I loved her debate outfit. Gave me Olivia Pope teas! I really hope she grows her hair out long again. I wonder if her style will change a bit when she becomes President. I like the pantsuits but I hate those long jackets she's been wearing this trench jacket is much better. I want her POTUS fashion to slay.
 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/7/2015
Posts: 11,012
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RatedG²
imagine if all of that is true and she's paying Donald Trump to run against her because her unfavorables are ao high shed lose to anyone else |
It would be quite genius 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/6/2011
Posts: 31,849
|
Quote:
Originally posted by mermaid_ariel
I watched the debate twice and the more I hear Hillary talk the more I fall in love with her. Her knowledge is really incredible. I could listen to her talk all day. I think that's why it's hard for people to understand her or feel she's a flip flopper during debates she can't give specifics at a debate because of the time limit and she wants to go into major detail and it's hard for her to dumb down her responses because the issues just aren't simple and she gets a bit flustered. Just listen to her explaining how to break up the banks, or the issues in Libya or the minimum wage. It's so easy to just yell "We gotta break them up!" "The 1% is gonna pay!" "15$ Minimum Wage everywhere!" but it's just not that simple it's way more to getting it accomplished.
|
I agree with this entire post. 
sorry sis I didn't want to repost the entire thing.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/15/2012
Posts: 22,487
|
Bernie Bros VS Hillary Hunties
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 1,809
|
"You could take [Goldman Sachs CEO] Lloyd Blankfein into a dark alley," Clinton once said, according to former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. "And slit his throat, and it would satisfy them for about two days. Then the blood lust would rise again."
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/2/2014
Posts: 9,645
|
Quote:
Originally posted by heckinglovato
The $15 minimum wage is totally conceivable, everywhere.
In many of those places where the $15 minimum wage plan has been planned to be implemented over the course of the next few years, it’s been shown that the cost of living there would even command way more by the time they’re fully implemented (in some of these cases, a $15 minimum wage is even way too low right now, and needs to be higher).
My problem with people opposing the $15 minimum wage is that many of their concerns are just too late to be taken care of right now, and many of them just lack the deep understanding of the fact that a federal minimum wage will not be adopted at the same time rates in all regions across the country, and certainly won’t be adopted in tight periods that would wreck the economy in places with low income rates.
Let’s be as objective as possible and go straight to employment: on this aspect of the argument, we’re backed by the facts and statistics, which seemingly show that big increases in local wage floors has absolutely no discernible effect on employment; not positive, not negative, but essentially no effect. From a very unbiased point of view, this is more than enough to assure that while there will probably be more negative aftermath about a minimum wage implementation on a federal level, yet it won’t be resounding enough to originate major concern right now. Even giant American multinational investment banking firms like Goldman Sachs have come out to admit that economic literature hasn’t discovered any passive or negative effects of raising the wage floor in past times, and the only way to be able to note out large-scale concerns is if we actually begin to put the increase into action.
The fluidity of a minimum wage increase strategy needs to be recognized; $15 an hour won’t be achieved at the same intervals of time in Arkansas as it would in Connecticut, adjustments to the federal plan will most definitely be made once analysts and statisticians weigh in when proposals are being set. Different adjustments would also take care of the type of businesses the increase is targeting, including setting different standards for how many employees an enterprise can have before being eligible to comply under the act. For example, in New York, the law that was recently passed would affect business with 10+ workers, that number should be altered to suit different areas with different economic abilities.
My main issue is, In places like Rural West Virginia, one of the poorest in the country, a single parent with a child would still need an average hourly wage of $19.5-$20, minorities and women there would need to work for like, double, triple, quadruple the time they do now in order to get to that living wage. Even single individual adults with no children in Rural Georgia, a very poor region as well, are on the verge of crossing the $15 hourly wage needed for a “modest yet adequate standard of living”, according to EPI. Let’s not even get into places like VA Suburbs, Burlington VT, Massachusetts Metro area, etc. where a single adult needs something along the lines of $18-$19 an hour, $33 if they have a child and that is IF they work 40 hours a week (if we go by the current average working hours, the numbers may surge to as high as $22 for a single individual, $41 if they have a child in those kinds of wealthy places). So now, to shift away from the highly-opinionated altercations and back-and-forth bickering between standpoints, let’s just recognize that the current inevitable demand for a $15 federal minimum wage increase is gradually leaving no more room for economists to get into further argumentations on the issue, but rather have legislators and executives work into consensus to find the most sensible adjustments to the $15 policy in different areas of the country and begin trying out an arrangement that is unavoidably needed so that the damages in the working class are less prominent over the next years, so that an average family in an average state like Oregon isn’t struggling with an average of 30k yearly deficit in needed income to secure a "modest yet adequate" standard of living. It’s just too late for this, that’s my take on it.
|
Isn the issue that raising minimum wage will decrease the number of jobs.
Then also have the" does that mean all jobs wages should be increased" Should someone with a certificate, and degree make the same as someone who does in blue collar work.
Why would anyone become a nursing assistant when they could just be a sales associate
Then we come too that free 2 year community college thing, wouldn't most kids just drop out of HS, of school so they could jump early on college then?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
Quote:
Originally posted by rac7d
Isn the issue that raising minimum wage will decrease the number of jobs.
Then also have the" does that mean all jobs wages should be increased" Should someone with a certificate, and degree make the same as someone who does in blue collar work.
Why would anyone become a nursing assistant when they could just be a sales associate.
|
In my post, I debunked the first conspiracy theory that raising the minimum wage is directly connected to major job losses, at least not in rates that are to raise major concern right now. We need to start adopting the increase gradually on a federal level in order to find out if there's more behind this so that adjustments can be made on time.
The second part just doesn't make sense. There's a current minimum wage set and different jobs already bring in different incomes to their workers based on the type of jobs conducted and that will continue to be true after increases in the minimum wage federally. It's a minimum wage, not a standardized wage for everybody.
Quote:
Originally posted by rac7d
Then we come too that free 2 year community college thing, wouldn't most kids just drop out of HS, of school so they could jump early on college then?
|
Making community colleges tuition-free is essentially part of Clinton's plan in her New College Compact, not Bernie's. Bernie is tackling the issue of common public college education.
I also don't think that would be a big issue, since Community Colleges are already relatively extremely cheap and people aren't abusing the system, most of them also let non-high school graduates enroll in General Education programs and vocational training only, or things along the lines of that, it's really no big deal.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/6/2011
Posts: 31,849
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tymps.
Bernie Bros VS Hillary Hunties
|
omg Hillary Hunties yas!!
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/20/2012
Posts: 27,830
|
Quote:
Originally posted by heckinglovato
The $15 minimum wage is totally conceivable, everywhere.
In many of those places where the $15 minimum wage plan has been planned to be implemented over the course of the next few years, it’s been shown that the cost of living there would even command way more by the time they’re fully implemented (in some of these cases, a $15 minimum wage is even way too low right now, and needs to be higher).
My problem with people opposing the $15 minimum wage is that many of their concerns are just too late to be taken care of right now, and many of them just lack the deep understanding of the fact that a federal minimum wage will not be adopted at the same time rates in all regions across the country, and certainly won’t be adopted in tight periods that would wreck the economy in places with low income rates.
Let’s be as objective as possible and go straight to employment: on this aspect of the argument, we’re backed by the facts and statistics, which seemingly show that big increases in local wage floors has absolutely no discernible effect on employment; not positive, not negative, but essentially no effect. From a very unbiased point of view, this is more than enough to assure that while there will probably be more negative aftermath about a minimum wage implementation on a federal level, yet it won’t be resounding enough to originate major concern right now. Even giant American multinational investment banking firms like Goldman Sachs have come out to admit that economic literature hasn’t discovered any passive or negative effects of raising the wage floor in past times, and the only way to be able to note out large-scale concerns is if we actually begin to put the increase into action.
The fluidity of a minimum wage increase strategy needs to be recognized; $15 an hour won’t be achieved at the same intervals of time in Arkansas as it would in Connecticut, adjustments to the federal plan will most definitely be made once analysts and statisticians weigh in when proposals are being set. Different adjustments would also take care of the type of businesses the increase is targeting, including setting different standards for how many employees an enterprise can have before being eligible to comply under the act. For example, in New York, the law that was recently passed would affect business with 10+ workers, that number should be altered to suit different areas with different economic abilities.
My main issue is, In places like Rural West Virginia, one of the poorest in the country, a single parent with a child would still need an average hourly wage of $19.5-$20, minorities and women there would need to work for like, double, triple, quadruple the time they do now in order to get to that living wage. Even single individual adults with no children in Rural Georgia, a very poor region as well, are on the verge of crossing the $15 hourly wage needed for a “modest yet adequate standard of living”, according to EPI. Let’s not even get into places like VA Suburbs, Burlington VT, Massachusetts Metro area, etc. where a single adult needs something along the lines of $18-$19 an hour, $33 if they have a child and that is IF they work 40 hours a week (if we go by the current average working hours, the numbers may surge to as high as $22 for a single individual, $41 if they have a child in those kinds of wealthy places). So now, to shift away from the highly-opinionated altercations and back-and-forth bickering between standpoints, let’s just recognize that the current inevitable demand for a $15 federal minimum wage increase is gradually leaving no more room for economists to get into further argumentations on the issue, but rather have legislators and executives work into consensus to find the most sensible adjustments to the $15 policy in different areas of the country and begin trying out an arrangement that is unavoidably needed so that the damages in the working class are less prominent over the next years, so that an average family in an average state like Oregon isn’t struggling with an average of 30k yearly deficit in needed income to secure a "modest yet adequate" standard of living. It’s just too late for this, that’s my take on it.
|
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 43,104
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RatedG²
|
Why does he not have a muzzle yet?
|
|
|
|
|
|
