First of all, I am *not* advocating throwing money at people. Since when did a living wage become some sort of welfare? Second of all, you really want to give schools *more* responsibility? Um, no. They aren't dealing well with the ones they have already. I really don't care if my prospective employee knows what a mortgage is, and would not presume to do financial counseling for them. That's almost as insulting as teaching a ten-year-old he'll have it made if he just doesn't do drugs. My point is this - in one of the poorest states of the Union, the wage for an *intern* is at least ten an hour. Why are adults being paid any less? Since you apparently don't know what a multiplier effect is and haven't read any of the economic people I am referring to, I'll overlook your insulting reference to a moral soapbox. That was an economic argument. I am disappointed that you didn't recognize it. The idea is that a living wage benefits the community and that when you factor the externalities into the cost-benefit analysis, it may even benefit the employer. The moral argument is the one made above, that it's the right thing to do. I am still interested in any contrary views, but you apparently don't have one if you have to wave around centuries-old discredited theses. I do wonder why it has to be compulsory, but apparently it does, and there are numerous examples of a paradigm shift that had to be legislated. You yourself were advocating this with respect to gay marriage were you not? ::shrug:: Dana
On 9/26/05, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Dana wrote: > > Getting back to my previous example, when you're working three jobs > because > > that's what it takes to pay the rest, no, actually, you probably *don't* > > have the option of going to school, even if you were otherwise qualified > and > > could afford it. > > > > I'm not saying "screw the poor", I'm saying there's a better solution > than the minimum wage. You've not commented on that solution; you've > just turned my point into some scrooge hyperbole (see Dickens) without > addressing its merits. You seem to enjoy believing that those that > oppose your solution are ogres with no moral sense. > > Consider this: maybe your solution won't work and mine does. Who's > the ogre now? The person pushing methods sure to fail or the one > trying to succeed? > > Again, my solution to poverty AND a 1000 other problems is to beef up > our educational system and change our job market entry points. > > For example, take Ike's response about how he made mistakes early that > closed doors for him. That happens to lots of people. A better > education system, however, can prevent those types of mistakes and > thus create a smarter worker. > > I bet over 90% of high school graduates couldn't tell you how a > mortgage works much less do a financial analysis on how to best > approach their career. > > What I find absolutely ironic about your moral soapbox is that it's > the most insulting: "Hey, these morons will never be smart enough to > figure things out so let's just toss money at the dummies." > > I'm taking the 'teach a man fish' approach while you favor a keep 'em > down approach by making them dependant on an artificial wage. Why > should a monkey leave the cage when all he has to do to get a pellet > is tap your heart strings? > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:175089 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
