• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What about the stupid?

Hard Truth

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
9,122
Reaction score
3,751
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This is a question primarily addressed to conservatives and libertarians:

The arguments opposing unionization, living wages, minimum wages, minimum wage increases and government benefits for the working poor are primarily based on the argument that the lowest wage working poor deserve to be paid poorly because they have not made an effort to increase their education and/or skills. What out people who do not have the mental capacity for higher level jobs? I am not referring to the mentally or developmentally disabled, but the people at the lower end of average intelligence.

What kind of life are those lower intelligence, relatively unskilled workers entitled to when they work full time?

Should they be able to afford their own apartment, quality food, a car, health care, to raise children?

If they deserve more than a minimum wage can provide, should they be required to move to a less expensive region?

Should they go to private charities for support rather than get government benefits such as food stamps?

Is there a limit to how little an employer can pay such a person before it is immoral exploitation?

Is there a limit to how little an employer can pay such a person before it should be illegal exploitation?

Would your answers be the same if the obstacle to obtaining more skills/education are not intelligence, but other circumstances such as having children to raise?

Would your answers be the same if the reason that the worker hasn't obtained more skills/education is that they have other life priorities (i.e. working on their acting career), or they just don't want to( fearful or lazy)?

If these different types of unskilled workers (the unintelligent, the life circumstance and the lazy/other priorities) should be treated differently, what mechanism/laws should be used to create these divisions and allow for different treatment of the three types?
 

sawyerloggingon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
14,700
Reaction score
5,703
Location
Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Can't address all your questions (there's like a dozen) so I'll go with unionization. Unions are breaking company's and not letting them compete in a global market not to mention what they are doing to state and county budgets. They do more harm than good, cost more jobs than they create and end up lowering peoples wages when they lose their good factory job and have to go to work flipping burgers.
 

davidtaylorjr

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
6,775
Reaction score
1,123
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
This is a question primarily addressed to conservatives and libertarians:

The arguments opposing unionization, living wages, minimum wages, minimum wage increases and government benefits for the working poor are primarily based on the argument that the lowest wage working poor deserve to be paid poorly because they have not made an effort to increase their education and/or skills. What out people who do not have the mental capacity for higher level jobs? I am not referring to the mentally or developmentally disabled, but the people at the lower end of average intelligence.

What kind of life are those lower intelligence, relatively unskilled workers entitled to when they work full time?

Should they be able to afford their own apartment, quality food, a car, health care, to raise children?

If they deserve more than a minimum wage can provide, should they be required to move to a less expensive region?

Should they go to private charities for support rather than get government benefits such as food stamps?

Is there a limit to how little an employer can pay such a person before it is immoral exploitation?

Is there a limit to how little an employer can pay such a person before it should be illegal exploitation?

Would your answers be the same if the obstacle to obtaining more skills/education are not intelligence, but other circumstances such as having children to raise?

Would your answers be the same if the reason that the worker hasn't obtained more skills/education is that they have other life priorities (i.e. working on their acting career), or they just don't want to( fearful or lazy)?

If these different types of unskilled workers (the unintelligent, the life circumstance and the lazy/other priorities) should be treated differently, what mechanism/laws should be used to create these divisions and allow for different treatment of the three types?
The notion that we are entitled to anything other than life, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness, is ridiculous. Notice it doesn't say we have a right to happiness, we have a right to pursue it. Big difference. Life, you have the right to live your natural life, that doesn't include free healthcare. Liberty, you have the right to make choices that do not infringe on the liberties of others, and then as I stated the pursuit of happiness. In other words, you really have the right to work hard to get where you want to be. Entitlements infringe on my liberties because it takes money out of my pocket and gives it to somebody else, that's wrong. If I choose to do it, that is one thing, I shouldn't be forced to do it.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,615
Reaction score
37,821
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The notion that we are entitled to anything other than life, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness, is ridiculous. Notice it doesn't say we have a right to happiness, we have a right to pursue it. Big difference. Life, you have the right to live your natural life, that doesn't include free healthcare. Liberty, you have the right to make choices that do not infringe on the liberties of others, and then as I stated the pursuit of happiness. In other words, you really have the right to work hard to get where you want to be. Entitlements infringe on my liberties because it takes money out of my pocket and gives it to somebody else, that's wrong. If I choose to do it, that is one thing, I shouldn't be forced to do it.
I almost agree with this, but have one exception with your view - those that are truely disabled, physically or mentally still deserve life, liberty (as much as is possible) and to persue happiness with gov't assistance.
 

Hard Truth

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
9,122
Reaction score
3,751
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The notion that we are entitled to anything other than life, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness, is ridiculous. Notice it doesn't say we have a right to happiness, we have a right to pursue it. Big difference. Life, you have the right to live your natural life, that doesn't include free healthcare. Liberty, you have the right to make choices that do not infringe on the liberties of others, and then as I stated the pursuit of happiness. In other words, you really have the right to work hard to get where you want to be. Entitlements infringe on my liberties because it takes money out of my pocket and gives it to somebody else, that's wrong. If I choose to do it, that is one thing, I shouldn't be forced to do it.
Would I be wrong in thinking that your political philosophy simply doesn't care what happens to poor people and that you feel that only private charities and individuals should be empowered to help them? Apparently you also feel that it is OK to exploit workers with excessively low pay and there should be no legal limit to such exploitation, correct?
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
117,839
Reaction score
33,967
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Would I be wrong in thinking that your political philosophy simply doesn't care what happens to poor people and that you feel that only private charities and individuals should be empowered to help them? Apparently you also feel that it is OK to exploit workers with excessively low pay and there should be no legal limit to such exploitation, correct?
Putting words in people's mouths, in attempt to turn someone into a strawman, does not qualify as debate.

This begs the question: should they be allowed to post?
 

TheGirlNextDoor


DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
20,033
Reaction score
7,647
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Would I be wrong in thinking that your political philosophy simply doesn't care what happens to poor people and that you feel that only private charities and individuals should be empowered to help them? Apparently you also feel that it is OK to exploit workers with excessively low pay and there should be no legal limit to such exploitation, correct?
How in the world did you draw such a conclusion from what he posted?
 

Hard Truth

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
9,122
Reaction score
3,751
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
How in the world did you draw such a conclusion from what he posted?
If someone opposes all government regulation of wages or government assistance for low wage workers, I don't see how they can not be willing to accept the only possible outcomes. Those outcomes would be wages going as low as someone will accept, and the only form of available assistance being charity.
 

GottaGo

Rock and a hard place
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
4,910
Location
Miles to go before I sleep
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
This is a question primarily addressed to conservatives and libertarians:

The arguments opposing unionization, living wages, minimum wages, minimum wage increases and government benefits for the working poor are primarily based on the argument that the lowest wage working poor deserve to be paid poorly because they have not made an effort to increase their education and/or skills. What out people who do not have the mental capacity for higher level jobs? I am not referring to the mentally or developmentally disabled, but the people at the lower end of average intelligence.

What kind of life are those lower intelligence, relatively unskilled workers entitled to when they work full time?
The life that their wages can earn them. Those who reach adulthood and still have not reached certain monetary levels, do receive government assistance to cover necessities.

Should they be able to afford their own apartment, quality food, a car, health care, to raise children?
No, those are not 'rights' and as this country stands today, must be earned.

If they deserve more than a minimum wage can provide, should they be required to move to a less expensive region?
Certain areas already have a minimum wage that is higher than the FMW. The have the right to choose where they live, and if they don't feel they can make the income to support themselves in one area, they are free to move to another area.

Should they go to private charities for support rather than get government benefits such as food stamps?
Personally, I would prefer they did go to charities, but unfortunately they aren't in every street corner. I feel that government assistance is too lax in their requirements as to what foods should be covered under those assistance programs.

Is there a limit to how little an employer can pay such a person before it is immoral exploitation?
It's why FMW exists.

Is there a limit to how little an employer can pay such a person before it should be illegal exploitation?
See above

Would your answers be the same if the obstacle to obtaining more skills/education are not intelligence, but other circumstances such as having children to raise?
Having children is their choice. No one else should have to be responsible for taking care of someone else's choice in life, and there are those who would love to be able to claim their circumstances is why they don't have a higher income, and deserve someone elses income to support them.

Would your answers be the same if the reason that the worker hasn't obtained more skills/education is that they have other life priorities (i.e. working on their acting career), or they just don't want to( fearful or lazy)?
See above.

If these different types of unskilled workers (the unintelligent, the life circumstance and the lazy/other priorities) should be treated differently, what mechanism/laws should be used to create these divisions and allow for different treatment of the three types?
No, they are not different, as we all make choices in life, and those who make those choices should carry the repercussions of those choices, good and bad. It is not other people's responsibility to bear the weight of other people's choices. To voluntarily contribute time, labor and/or money to help those less fortunate is our humanity. Being taxed and or 'forced' to give of our income or ourselves dies nothing to help those people find their way above the water mark.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,615
Reaction score
37,821
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Would I be wrong in thinking that your political philosophy simply doesn't care what happens to poor people and that you feel that only private charities and individuals should be empowered to help them? Apparently you also feel that it is OK to exploit workers with excessively low pay and there should be no legal limit to such exploitation, correct?
Quite a lot of assuming there, Skippy. You were the one implying that "the stupid" are unlikely to advance beyond a minimum wage job, without backing up that assumption in any way. Nobody has objected to the FLSA or the establishemnt of a federal minimum wage, in fact, many local and state gov'ts have required paying more than the federal minimum wage. There are vast regional differences in the cost of living, often reflected in the minimum wages that must be offered to attract applicants in them.
 

Hard Truth

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
9,122
Reaction score
3,751
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Thank you GottaGo for being willing to answer these tough questions honestly.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
117,839
Reaction score
33,967
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You were the one implying that "the stupid" are unlikely to advance beyond a minimum wage job, without backing up that assumption in any way.
Good point.
 

trfjr

Banned
Joined
Feb 27, 2013
Messages
3,114
Reaction score
1,004
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I almost agree with this, but have one exception with your view - those that are truely disabled, physically or mentally still deserve life, liberty (as much as is possible) and to persue happiness with gov't assistance.
why does it have to be with government assistance cant it be with the compassion of their fellow man. why do we have to be forced why cant we choose who and when we help
back in the day we would help our fellow man or neighbor or church member if they lost their job or got ill they didn't need government assistance it was the right thing to do. Now that we have all these government assistance programs people feel they don't need to help. it is taken care of. we have become complacent it is some one else problem
 

Hard Truth

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
9,122
Reaction score
3,751
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Quite a lot of assuming there, Skippy. You were the one implying that "the stupid" are unlikely to advance beyond a minimum wage job, without backing up that assumption in any way. Nobody has objected to the FLSA or the establishemnt of a federal minimum wage, in fact, many local and state gov'ts have required paying more than the federal minimum wage. There are vast regional differences in the cost of living, often reflected in the minimum wages that must be offered to attract applicants in them.
I have come across many people on this forum and elsewhere opposed to all minimum wage laws, and others opposed to a federal minimum wage low.

Also, minimum wage is not a living wage in many parts of the country and many have argued against any increases.

I'm not assuming that all of the less intelligent will never get beyond a minimum wage job, but it seems a near certainty that some of them never will.
 

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
30,944
Reaction score
9,014
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Back in the day [before Big Gov] if you didn't work, you didn't eat. That was great incentive.
 

iliveonramen

Pontificator
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Messages
11,257
Reaction score
5,711
Location
On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Back in the day [before Big Gov] if you didn't work, you didn't eat. That was great incentive.
The good ol days...

Actually to go further if you did work you barely had enough to eat and things like scurvy were rampant in the south...well until big government decided to muscle in and put Vitamin in corn meal. Damn those bureaucrats!
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,615
Reaction score
37,821
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
why does it have to be with government assistance cant it be with the compassion of their fellow man. why do we have to be forced why cant we choose who and when we help
back in the day we would help our fellow man or neighbor or church member if they lost their job or got ill they didn't need government assistance it was the right thing to do. Now that we have all these government assistance programs people feel they don't need to help. it is taken care of. we have become complacent it is some one else problem
Around here we can and do help each other out, but often that is limitted to perhaps building an access ramp or taking someone to church or the store. Many simply do not have enough extra time or money to support another person reliably on a full time basis. The role of gov't need not be much beyond that already in place via SS/Medicare/Medicaid but surely you can see that some places are too sparsely populated, or have a generally depressed local population, to bear those costs alone. I agree that the level of gov't help afforded should not be very generous, or be so freely given that it is wasted, but see a clear need for it in many cases of extreme disability/hardship.
 

davidtaylorjr

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
6,775
Reaction score
1,123
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I almost agree with this, but have one exception with your view - those that are truely disabled, physically or mentally still deserve life, liberty (as much as is possible) and to persue happiness with gov't assistance.
Perhaps, but that wasn't what the OP was talking about unless I misread.
 

Hard Truth

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
9,122
Reaction score
3,751
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Back in the day [before Big Gov] if you didn't work, you didn't eat. That was great incentive.
We're discussing the quality of life for low wage workers.
 

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
30,944
Reaction score
9,014
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The good ol days...
Lot of hard work, daylight till dusk. Too many these days don't have a clue what it would take to survive without freebies.

I have a feeling that in the near future they're gonna find out.
 

iliveonramen

Pontificator
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Messages
11,257
Reaction score
5,711
Location
On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Lot of hard work, daylight till dusk. Too many these days don't have a clue what it would take to survive without freebies.

I have a feeling that in the near future they're gonna find out.
Yup..nothing like 12 hours of hard work and taking home a wage barely able to survive on. Teaches you some perspective. Why even they had it easy...back in the an 16 hour factory shifts the real deal...and mix in a little workplace death or mutilation...I for one can't wait until those good times return.
 

GottaGo

Rock and a hard place
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
4,910
Location
Miles to go before I sleep
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Yup..nothing like 12 hours of hard work and taking home a wage barely able to survive on. Teaches you some perspective. Why even they had it easy...back in the an 16 hour factory shifts the real deal...and mix in a little workplace death or mutilation...I for one can't wait until those good times return.
Then you're going to have along wait.... laws are in place that prevent many of those conditions you speak of.

Drama doesn't address the problem.
 

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
30,944
Reaction score
9,014
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Yup..nothing like 12 hours of hard work and taking home a wage barely able to survive on. Teaches you some perspective. Why even they had it easy...back in the an 16 hour factory shifts the real deal...and mix in a little workplace death or mutilation...I for one can't wait until those good times return.
I never said anything about easy. And forget the straw man...I'm not playing
 
Last edited:

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
30,944
Reaction score
9,014
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
We're discussing the quality of life for low wage workers.
Most low paying jobs are and should be stepping stones to something better.

Didn't you listen to Ashton Kutcher the other night?
 

iliveonramen

Pontificator
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Messages
11,257
Reaction score
5,711
Location
On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Then you're going to have along wait.... laws are in place that prevent many of those conditions you speak of.

Drama doesn't address the problem.
Laws fought for and created due to pressure by labor and labor unions. The writing is on the wall...get rid of big government/regulation/minimum wage blah blah blah...it's just a pro-corporatism message wrapped in individualism. As Labor loses power and the bulwark against big business loses why on earth do you think those laws can't be repealed or changed?
 
Top Bottom