$15/hr: It's Indefensible and Irresponsible for Conservatives to Support Hillary Over Trump

[anatess2]

So Hillary goes to New York to celebrate with Cuomo the passing of the $15/hr minimum wage law.

Rush Limbaugh yesterday:

"Whoever it is, whoever it is needs to beat Hillary.  By the way, this $15 an hour minimum wage, Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown in California has admitted that it is not any good, but he's gonna do it anyway because it's liberal orthodoxy.  Andrew Cuomo's gonna do it because it's liberal orthodoxy.  It's another one of these things.  They think the minimum wage is gonna go up 15 bucks and everybody making it from whatever it is now, is gonna make 15 bucks.  It's not what's gonna happen.  Employers are gonna have to fire people.  There is not a pile of unused money in small businesses that the owners are hoarding or buying yachts with instead of paying "a fair wage.""

 

"I mean, the more I think about that, the more agitated and angry I get, and especially, you know, each time I hear -- and it's a lot of times.  You do, too.  You hear elected Republicans saying it.  There are certain conservative groups made up of media members and bloggers who are saying that they would just soon have Hillary as Trump, and they're trying to make it look they're for Cruz when that's just not their primary thing; they're just anti-Trump.  I mean, anybody -- anybody -- who would knowingly do anything that helps this bunch of people stay in power need to seriously have their heads examined.

That just borders on irresponsibility like I haven't seen in a long time, and it tells me how personally people are taking all this.  They're taking it personally that people support Trump, taking it personally that people don't want Trump, taking it personally that people support Cruz, taking it personally that people don't support Cruz, as though just because you have a blog or just because you have a column or just because you have a guest appearance on Fox, that you ought to be able to convince everybody to agree with you.

And then when they don't you get mad at 'em and say, "Okay, fine! Well, if it takes it, I'm gonna support Hillary if you don't see it my way!" What is that?  But there's a lot of it going on out there, and it's on the Democrat side, too, except I don't hear any Bernie supporter saying, "You know what?  I would vote for Trump!"  I don't hear any Bernie supporter saying, "You know what? If I didn't get my way, I'm voting for Cruz."  I don't hear any of that on their side. 

Anybody who wants four more years of the last seven years, has got to be in this for themselves, while trying to make it look like that's the last thing they care about.  This is just... People say, "You know, we're in a crisis here! We're about to lose the country." 

Then how in the name of anything can you actually admit that you would vote Hillary Clinton? 

"'Cause Trump... Trump will destroy the Republican Party!"

You think Hillary Clinton being elected won't destroy the Republican Party? "

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2016/04/05/it_s_indefensible_and_irresponsible_for_conservatives_to_support_hillary_over_trump

 

Edited April 6, 2016 by anatess2

[David13]

That horrid female plans on destroying a lot more than the Republican Party.

dc

[Jane_Doe]

Yeah, get to vote between Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dum, and Tweedle Dummer.  Wait... this sounds much like it is every election...

Edited April 6, 2016 by Jane_Doe

[unixknight]

IMHO:

Clinton's primary motive is personal power.  She became a senator from New York, a state she wasn't even from, as a way to gain political clout and a stepping stone to the White House.  She feels entitled to the nomination and, if reports are accurate, was enraged in 2008 when some unknown IL senator "stole" her shot.  Now she thinks the Democrat nomination, and the White House, are hers by right.  This is a perfect example of why people who crave power shouldn't have it.

I don't like Bernie Sanders' politics but at least the guy seems to be coming from a more honest position (for a politician).  I won't vote for him under any circumstance, but I'd rather have him over Hillary Clinton.

Edited April 6, 2016 by unixknight

[Guest MormonGator]

2 hours ago, unixknight said:

IMHO:

Clinton's primary motive is personal power.  She became a senator from New York, a state she wasn't even from, as a way to gain political clout and a stepping stone to the White House.  She feels entitled to the nomination and, if reports are accurate, was enraged in 2008 when some unknown IL senator "stole" her shot.  Now she thinks the Democrat nomination, and the White House, are hers by right.  This is a perfect example of why people who crave power shouldn't have it.

I don't like Bernie Sanders' politics but at least the guy seems to be coming from a more honest position (for a politician).  I won't vote for him under any circumstance, but I'd rather have him over Hillary Clinton.

My thoughts totally, 100% agree. 

 

Bernie is authentic, and in my view you can be authentic and wrong. 

Edited April 6, 2016 by MormonGator

[NeuroTypical]

Just out of curiosity, is there anyone on this board who actually doesn't understand why a $15/hr min wage is a horribly misguided and harmful thing?

[anatess2]

So, my son is in 7th grade.  His best friend from school got a job over the weekend working at the grocery, 3 weeks after his 14th bday.  He makes $8.50/hr.  At my job, we hired a brand new tech support guy who is about to graduate from college in May... for $14.50/hr.  He is on a 6-month internship.

Now, imagine what happens to the wages if the minimum wage was increased to $15/hr.  There is no way a tech support guy will accept $15/hr when a 14-year-old can get the same thing bagging groceries...

So yeah, that might not upset New Yorkers, but that will, for sure, kill a whole slew of businesses in Florida.

Edited April 6, 2016 by anatess2

[Guest MormonGator]

22 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Just out of curiosity, is there anyone on this board who actually doesn't understand why a $15/hr min wage is a horribly misguided and harmful thing?

Here are a few reasons: 
The minimum wage actually doesn't help low skilled workers-it prices them out of the job market. 
Next, if you get a raise from 10.50 an hour to 15.00 an hour, your buddy gets fired to cover your wage increase. 
Next, prices overall will increase for everyone to pay for the wages being forced up. 

 

There are other harmful reasons. These are just a few. It's basic economics. Basic, basic economics. 

Edited April 6, 2016 by MormonGator

[LeSellers]

What few people are willing to admit is the fact that the work these people do is not worth $15/hr. It is not worth $8/hr.

The people may be worth $15 or even $50, but their work is not. If it were, they'd be earning $15/hr because the market place would bid their pay up to that point.

As MormonGator said, it is basic economics. How sad that we don't get it. How much sadder that they don't get it. Minimum wage (which shouldn't even exist) jobs are not the jobs anyone should expect to live on, not alone, not with a family. They're minimum wage because that's all they're worth as workers. The people who work them should expect to get more responsibility, to become more skilled and to produce more so the boss can pay them more. But so many just assume that because they, as people, are worth more, they should get paid what they, as people, as worth, not what they, as workers, are worth.

Lehi

Edited April 16, 2016 by LeSellers

[NeuroTypical]

In other words:

 

[Guest MormonGator]

The minimum wage issue is another attempt at misguided compassion that will eventually unravel and blow up in everyones face. Compassion is a good thing, but you also need basic logic and reason. 

[Guest]

I have a friend who is a "flaming liberal" (his words).  And he absolutely hates Communism.  Yet he seems to have no problem with Socialism.

He phoned me a couple days ago to let me know he's decided to move to Houston.  I'm not going to ask him why.

[anatess2]

42 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

The minimum wage issue is another attempt at misguided compassion that will eventually unravel and blow up in everyones face. Compassion is a good thing, but you also need basic logic and reason. 

I have become more jaded in my advancing age.  I don't think the minimum wage issue in the US is a misguided attempt at compassion.  Rather, I believe that the minimum wage issue in the US is the American equivalent to what Filipino political candidates do - paying you money to buy your vote.  At least, in the Philippines, the vote-buying expense ends at the ballot box.  The US equivalent spends and spends and spends to secure more elections to come.

[Guest MormonGator]

8 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

I have become more jaded in my advancing age.  I don't think the minimum wage issue in the US is a misguided attempt at compassion.  Rather, I believe that the minimum wage issue in the US is the American equivalent to what Filipino political candidates do - paying you money to buy your vote.  At least, in the Philippines, the vote-buying expense ends at the ballot box.  The US equivalent spends and spends and spends to secure more elections to come.

I agree in part. I've met many wonderful people full of true compassion for others who are just naive or ignorant of economics. 

And I've met soulless opportunists who like Jerry Brown who know that the minimum wage hike doesn't work economically and do it just to appear "compassionate, cool and hip" as they do it strictly for votes. 

[Blackmarch]

20 hours ago, anatess2 said:

So, my son is in 7th grade.  His best friend from school got a job over the weekend working at the grocery, 3 weeks after his 14th bday.  He makes $8.50/hr.  At my job, we hired a brand new tech support guy who is about to graduate from college in May... for $14.50/hr.  He is on a 6-month internship.

Now, imagine what happens to the wages if the minimum wage was increased to $15/hr.  There is no way a tech support guy will accept $15/hr when a 14-year-old can get the same thing bagging groceries...

So yeah, that might not upset New Yorkers, but that will, for sure, kill a whole slew of businesses in Florida.

if you force poeple to raise wages, 9 times out of 10 they'll make up the loss of income in other ways, ie firings or raising the prices of goods.

the one guy who decided to raise the minimum wage in his company significantly (mostly at the cost of his income) had half of the company walk out on him.

[anatess2]

22 minutes ago, Blackmarch said:

if you force poeple to raise wages, 9 times out of 10 they'll make up the loss of income in other ways, ie firings or raising the prices of goods.

the one guy who decided to raise the minimum wage in his company significantly (mostly at the cost of his income) had half of the company walk out on him.

Oh yeah!  I remember that story!  I think he qualifies for special snowflake...

[Backroads]

When I hear this, I always have to joke "Will my salary be increased accordingly?"

One of my friends, who was already teetering on that line between working and being a stay-at-home-mom, officially quit when her company raised the minimum wage. Which is great for those entering that company, but not for those already there who suddenly have their value decreased.

[Guest MormonGator]

1 hour ago, Backroads said:

When I hear this, I always have to joke "Will my salary be increased accordingly?"

One of my friends, who was already teetering on that line between working and being a stay-at-home-mom, officially quit when her company raised the minimum wage. Which is great for those entering that company, but not for those already there who suddenly have their value decreased.

Remember that noble CEO who decided to "pay everyone equally"? He had several people quit too and it blew up in his face. 

[NightSG]

23 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Now, imagine what happens to the wages if the minimum wage was increased to $15/hr.  There is no way a tech support guy will accept $15/hr when a 14-year-old can get the same thing bagging groceries...

Don't know if it's still there, but there used to be a company constantly advertising in the Dallas paper for experienced support techs at $7/hr when minimum was $5.25.  Night shift at QuikTrip was making $13.25 at the time.  Night shift cashier at Albertson's was $11.  Virtually every major call center was starting techs with no experience and 2 weeks training at or above $9/hr plus benefits.  I was making $15.50 as an in-house hardware tech with a couple years experience and no certifications.

I talked to a few people who had checked out the $7/hr place just out of curiosity.  It was apparently somebody trying to start an onsite tech support business who could never manage to find enough people to actually get it going.  They also expected the techs to provide their own vehicle and insurance at that price, with IRS-rate mileage reimbursement.

[NeuroTypical]

I remember reading Atlas Shrugged, and being impacted by the philosophy and mindset, but thinking the actual plot and characters were kind of out-in-left-field.  People like that don't really exist, I thought.  Maybe in Russia where Rand came from, but surely not here, right?

Anyone read the book?  Remember the hippie chick that inherited the auto business from her dad and ran it into the ground by doing dumb stuff like we're talking about in this thread?

Anyone remember at the end of that book, the empty shelves in stores, and that refugee family trying to make it across the country in a horse-drawn carriage?

Yeah, don't vote for Bernie.  

[Guest MormonGator]

13 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Anyone read the book?  Remember the hippie chick that inherited the auto business from her dad and ran it into the ground by doing dumb stuff like we're talking about in this thread?

 

Yes, but I prefer the Fountianhead. Both books are outstanding. 

Rand is someone you either love or hate. 

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

5 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

I remember reading Atlas Shrugged, and being impacted by the philosophy and mindset, but thinking the actual plot and characters were kind of out-in-left-field. 

I've read it. Oneof my friends left the church in large part due to that book and those ideas. My friend was really into objectivism for awhile. Fortunately, she has now put that behind her. Real life (hardship)does that sometimes. 

I'm not a fan of Ayn Rand and her glorification of selfishness.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Yes, but I prefer the Fountianhead. Both books are outstanding. 

Rand is someone you either love or hate. 

Not really.  I had quite a distaste for the selfishness that @LiterateParakeet mentioned as well as Rand's brazen brand of atheism.  Yet I appreciated her love of small government.

I was on the Atlas Shrugged Movie forum and I pointed out the differences between objectivism and "Christian libertarianism".  Some understood.  Others didn't appreciate it.

Selfishness                                                          vs        righteous self-interest.

Power/authority is a means of controlling us       vs.       government is manmade but God made man

Service is appreciated, but not encouraged        vs.       Service is encouraged, but by our own individual will and not at the point of a government gun

Fear of hell or fear of death is the same             vs.       We do not love government, but we love God.

 

Edited April 8, 2016 by Guest

[Guest]

To the OP.  I do not believe the title line.

Both are for government control just in a different way.  As you examine the difference it seems like Hillary is more harmful than Trump.  But look down the road and Trump is far worse.

Hillary understands there are limits.  She will at least be reigned in by other politicians and "put on a show".
 Trump doesn't acknowledge any limits.  He will do whatever he wants as long as he has 34 senators in his pocket.

Hillary believes in political double speak.
 Trump believes in bully speech.

Hillary wants a $15/hr minimum wage which will eventually stabilize after a few years of harmful adjustment.
Trump wants whatever will benefit him, ignoring the future.  What he wants will damage the country for at least a generation.

Hillary will at least speak the line of "tolerance" and "compassion" -except for conservatives.
Trump will spew hatred at everyone that displeases him.

Yes, overall, I'd much prefer Clinton over Trump.  I still don't know about Sanders.  But regardless, all three will damage the country -- badly.

******************************************************************************

Here's my preliminary prediction.  Certainty 60%.
The Democrat candidate will win.

If Trump gets the nomination, too many conservatives will stay home.  Democrat wins.

If Cruz gets the nomination, he may not get as many of the swing votes, and Trump will run as a third party drawing away 1/3 of the conservative votes.  Democrat wins.

For now Clinton has the nomination.  But there are still a few obstacles that may put a hiccup in the process.  Too early to predict.

 

 

[Guest MormonGator]

34 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Not really.  I had quite a distaste for the selfishness that @LiterateParakeet mentioned as well as Rand's brazen brand of atheism.  Yet I appreciated her love of small government.

 

 

No, really. You are among the very, very few that don't have strong feelings one way or another towards her. She actually IS among the most polarizing authors out there, for sure. You might be in the middle, but she is extremely polarizing. 

Edited April 8, 2016 by MormonGator