In the discussion thread: Wall Street Journal Column Says Elizabeth Warren’s Policies Are ‘Disastrous,’ Ignores Actual Data [View all]
Response to lexington filly (Reply #16)
Thu Dec 5, 2013, 08:46 AM
Divernan (11,364 posts)
39. Those few social issues are de minimis tokens compared to rampant corporate/1% favoritism.
And dangled to serve as low cost distractions. We have been jerked around for years by threats posed by Obama's catfood commission and multiple negotiations when it's deliberately "leaked" that chained CPI and other cuts to Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are always on Obama's negotiating table and part of his grand plan. We're expected to tug our forelocks like a bunch of serfs and be grateful that so far the status quo has remained and these threatened changes have not been implemented? Meanwhile the current index used to calculate COLA in no way accurately or fairly reflects or properly weights the budget elements for seniors/retired Americans. Yes the formula for COLAs should be changed, but to make it MORE in line with financial reality, not less so.
ACA will be a great improvement for many, but it is NOT single payer and benefits Big Insurance by forcing many to buy their policies.
Protecting gays & women in the military is the right thing to do, but it conveniently does not cost the govt. anything to do so, and attracts no MIC special interests lobbying against it because there's no profit in those discriminations, and making the military more attractive to women/LGBT increases the reserve of cannon fodder for wars.
And America's "minimum wage" (emphasis on the MINIMUM) remains inhumane and disgraceful.
The last legislated increases in the federal minimum wage, in 2007 and 2008, raised it by steps from $5.15 in 2006 to $7.25 in 2009. That produced the highest purchasing power for the minimum wage since 1981 — but that was still less than its value in 1967.
If the minimum wage had grown at the same rate as the earnings of the top one percent of Americans the federal wage floor would be more than triple the current hourly minimum of $7.25. Instead, the minimum wage has been lower than a poverty wage ever since 1982.
The New York Times compiled those and other basic facts about the minimum wage into an infographic. Together with demographic data about who actually holds minimum-wage jobs — less than a quarter of the minimum-wage workforce are teenagers, and nearly four in ten are over the age of 30 — the graphic makes the fundamental case for fighting inequality and economic hardship by raising the minimum wage. The horizontal red line in the Times graphic indicates the hourly wage necessary for a single parent working full-time with one child to avoid poverty.
In the years since Bill Clinton left office, he's increased his personal (personal, NOT the Clinton Foundation) wealth by over $50 million. But the purchasing power of minimum wage employees has remained below the poverty level. What's wrong with this picture? Who's part of the one percent? Does anyone seriously believe that corporations and big money interests would be paying his exorbitant personal speaking fees OR contributing to his Foundation if they did not anticipate the possibility that the Clintons would regain the White House and remember who bankrolled them personally and politically?
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
|Roy Rolling||Dec 2013||#24|
|go west young man||Dec 2013||#2|
|Jack Rabbit||Dec 2013||#7|
|Hell Hath No Fury||Dec 2013||#8|
|Jackpine Radical||Dec 2013||#28|
|Jack Rabbit||Dec 2013||#36|
|lexington filly||Dec 2013||#16|
Those few social issues are de minimis tokens compared to rampant corporate/1% favoritism.
|Hubert Flottz||Dec 2013||#19|
|Uncle Joe||Dec 2013||#35|
|The Wizard||Dec 2013||#38|
Please login to view edit histories.