"Nazis Run Our Space Program" -- Peace Activist Bruce Gag-Me

Pat Flannery wrote:

:Have you ever tried to live on minimum wage? Particularly in a part time
:job with no benefits?
:That's around 176 hours per month, at $5.15 per hour you make $906 per
:month; take off around 1/5 of that for taxes

Preposterous! People at that income level don't PAY taxes; taxes pay
THEM.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

Scott Hedrick wrote:

The root of the problem is in the consumer culture, which ultimately must
collapse, have a nasty depression, then begin anew.



With what exactly? I'm very interested to see what your take on the
brave new world looks like...it sounds pretty austere, but do we at
least get to wear cool uniforms and parade a lot? ;-)

Pat

Scott Hedrick wrote:

If the US Constitution didn't limit the Presidency to native-borns, *I*
would have voted for Thatcher.



The great French quote about Thatcher: "The eyes of Caligula, and the
mouth of Marilyn Monroe."

Pat

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 20:26:14 -0600, in a place far, far away, Pat
Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Have you ever tried to live on minimum wage? Particularly in a part time
job with no benefits?

Independent adults, particularly those with dependents, are not
supposed to live on a minimum wage. If their skills and education are
so minimal as to not command more than that in the market, then they
should be on welfare, or improving that situation.

I made minimum wage when I was a teenager, and was glad of it, and
would have been willing to work for less, because it gave me an
opportunity to work, and earn some extra money while not being a leach
on society.

Minimum wage is for kids, or those with no ambition or
responsibilities, or for people whose income is supplemented by other
means because, for whatever reason, they are truly permanently
incapable of their work being valued at more than a few bucks an hour.
And for those people, a minimum wage (or less) is more than
acceptable, because it beats nothing, and gives them a first rung on
the ladder of earning an eventual adult living.

Fred J. McCall wrote:

Preposterous! People at that income level don't PAY taxes; taxes pay
THEM.


Son, let me illuminate you- I'm not on welfare, I'm not on foodstamps,
I'm not on rental assistance.
I did well last month, and made $912.00
Some months I make $600.00
My rent, television, phone, computer access, electric bill and car
insurance come to around $450.00 per month averaged out throughout the year.
What remains goes for food and everything else that constitutes "living"
in North Dakota.
Luckily there was a sale on Banquet TV dinners recently, so I stocked
up...which is good, because after getting what I needed for my leg
infection, I now have $36.50 to get through the rest of the month on.
I also have $563 in medical expenses to pay off with no health insurance.
Life is good.

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:

Son, let me illuminate you- I'm not on welfare, I'm not on
foodstamps, I'm not on rental assistance.
I did well last month, and made $912.00
Some months I make $600.00
My rent, television, phone, computer access, electric bill and
car insurance come to around $450.00 per month averaged out
throughout the year. What remains goes for food and everything
else that constitutes "living" in North Dakota.
Luckily there was a sale on Banquet TV dinners recently, so I
stocked up...which is good, because after getting what I
needed for my leg infection, I now have $36.50 to get through
the rest of the month on. I also have $563 in medical expenses
to pay off with no health insurance. Life is good.

Pat, you did once say you weighed over 300 lbs, right?

How do you manage that on Banquet TV dinners?

Jim Davis

Pat Flannery wrote:

:Fred J. McCall wrote:
:
:Preposterous! People at that income level don't PAY taxes; taxes pay
:THEM.
:
:Son, let me illuminate you-

And you then proceed to tell me nothing at all that contradicts what I
said above.

Just by the way, I'm probably older than you, 'son'.

:I'm not on welfare, I'm not on foodstamps,
:I'm not on rental assistance.

That's nice. One wonders why not.

:I did well last month, and made $912.00
:Some months I make $600.00

And you do what, again? I'll simply note that the $912 you cite above
amounts to around a month at minimum wage. Making LESS than that says
that you're spending a lot of time not working (and apparently not
bothering to collect unemployment when you're not working, either).

:My rent, television, phone, computer access, electric bill and car
:insurance come to around $450.00 per month averaged out throughout the year.

Try less time on the phone, on the computer, and watching television
and more time working. Life will get better. At the income levels
you claim above, you're spending 1% of your income just on computer
access. If I was spending that level of money on computer access in
comparison to my income (and I've gone much, much higher than that, in
the old days when you paid by the minute), I don't think I'd have room
to whine.

:What remains goes for food and everything else that constitutes "living"
:in North Dakota.
:Luckily there was a sale on Banquet TV dinners recently, so I stocked
:up...which is good, because after getting what I needed for my leg
:infection, I now have $36.50 to get through the rest of the month on.

Try buying food and cooking it rather than buying prepackaged. It's
cheaper that way.

:I also have $563 in medical expenses to pay off with no health insurance.
:Life is good.

Apparently. You have time to sit around here and whine on the
computer.

--
"Well, I met a girl in West Hollywood. I ain't naming names.
She really worked me over good. She was just like Jesse James.
She really worked me over good. She was a credit to her gender.
She put me through some changes, Lord.
Sort of like a Waring blender."
-- Warren Zevon, "Poor, Poor, Pitiful Me"

Jim Davis wrote:

Pat, you did once say you weighed over 300 lbs, right?



Actually I'm under 300 now thanks to the infection.

How do you manage that on Banquet TV dinners?



Cheese helps. Cheese on sale for $2.99 per pound helps even more.
Would you like my recipe for unleavened bread? Flour is cheaper than yeast.

Pat

Fred J. McCall wrote:

Pat Flannery wrote:

:Fred J. McCall wrote:
:
:Preposterous! People at that income level don't PAY taxes; taxes pay
:THEM.
:
:Son, let me illuminate you-

And you then proceed to tell me nothing at all that contradicts what I
said above.

Just by the way, I'm probably older than you, 'son'.


Proving that only the good die young, no doubt.

:I'm not on welfare, I'm not on foodstamps,
:I'm not on rental assistance.

That's nice. One wonders why not.



Try pride. I don't like handouts.

:I did well last month, and made $912.00
:Some months I make $600.00

And you do what, again? I'll simply note that the $912 you cite above
amounts to around a month at minimum wage. Making LESS than that says
that you're spending a lot of time not working (and apparently not
bothering to collect unemployment when you're not working, either).



I do part time work as a technical writer; you do full time work as a
real asshole.
North Dakota is not a going and growing concern. Getting full time work
around here is difficult.
Actually, I'm doing better than a lot of people in this town at the
moment... many of whom are making Methamphetamines to make ends meet.

:My rent, television, phone, computer access, electric bill and car
:insurance come to around $450.00 per month averaged out throughout the year.

Try less time on the phone, on the computer, and watching television
and more time working. Life will get better. At the income levels
you claim above, you're spending 1% of your income just on computer
access.


The television, phone and computer access are on one bill at a flat rate
of $81.00 a month, baring long distance calls- and I spend almost no
time on the phone, other than telling The Bismarck Tribune that I'm on
the federal Do Not Call list.

If I was spending that level of money on computer access in
comparison to my income (and I've gone much, much higher than that, in
the old days when you paid by the minute), I don't think I'd have room
to whine.



Who's whining, I just though a little swat on the balls with the wet
towel of reality might make you realize that not everybody has it as
good as you, and that oddly, they really would like to have it that
good, and don't like being impoverished.
But I'm sure they deserve it, aren't you?

:What remains goes for food and everything else that constitutes "living"
:in North Dakota.
:Luckily there was a sale on Banquet TV dinners recently, so I stocked
:up...which is good, because after getting what I needed for my leg
:infection, I now have $36.50 to get through the rest of the month on.

Try buying food and cooking it rather than buying prepackaged. It's
cheaper that way.



No, I've done the math...I have the giant bag of rice, and the canned
generic vegetables, but that and pasta are two of the few things that
beat Banquet dinners at 87¢ apiece. Even a can of Campbell's tomato soup
is around that nowadays.
At around 400 calories average, you can live off two Banquet meals a day.

:I also have $563 in medical expenses to pay off with no health insurance.
:Life is good.

Apparently. You have time to sit around here and whine on the
computer.



You're big on this whining thing, aren't you? I know, from now on, I'll
just eat cake!

Pat

Scott Hedrick ) wrote:

: "Pat Flannery" wrote in message
: ...
:
:
: Scott Hedrick wrote:
:
: *And thus, the light shines!*
:
: If keeping jobs were really important to America, then we'd learn to live
: on
: a whole lot less than we do. I don't blame China for the problem.
:
:
:
: I don't think increasing austerity for its citizens should be the
: primary economic goal of a evolving civilization.
: That sounds almost Spartan in its inspiration.

: I don't blame China for doing a better job of providing the American market
: what it wants better than the Americans do. The current regulatory
: environment, as well as labor demands, make it much harder to make a profit
: here.

: Neither do I blame Wal-Mart for buying Chinese if they can't get as good a
: deal for a similar American product. For-profit business are not welfare
: providers, meaning that they have no business and would be cheating the
: shareholders providing jobs for the sake of jobs.

: What are the *employees* doing to help improve the bottom line? For example,
: are they writing their government demanding that regulations that increase
: the cost of doing business, such as the minimum wage, be eliminated? Why
: aren't more workers upset that the government assumes they are morons by not
: allowing them to negotiate on their own the value of their labor?

: What are the employees and customers doing to make the playing field level
: between Chinese labor and American labor, so that the final price on the
: shelf remains something the consumer is willing to spend? A tariff on
: Chinese goods won't do that.

Chinese labor unions might.

Eric