@quackquack saidOf course, unlike you, I want workers to be paid more than $18,000 a year (a $15 an hour minimum wage would mean $31,200 a year to a 40 an hour week worker). But even at the miserable wages many Americans "enjoy", a public investment in child care would be worth it in the short and long run; it would make more workers able to work now and give those workers a chance to advance themselves in their jobs and/or help them avoid periods of unemployment that look bad on a resume. They might even be able to take some college courses and get that education that you seem to think is so important.
I am glad I saved time reading trash. If you want to support a family and need child care make sure you get skills that allow you to be paid more than $18,000. Your idea that we should pay $14,000 of child care so someone can work a $18,000 job is a complete waste of resources and even, understanding your desire to help the disadvantages, I find it difficult to believe you think it is money well spent.
12 Oct 21
@no1marauder saidMarauder, one more thing. In today's economy with Biden/Obama doling out money to get votes, entitlements free everything to non-citizens, etc, not to mention new debt of $5.5T, I think, and you KNOW, that to 'improve all these lives' (lives of their own doing) would be, shall we say, too expensive? In a Utopia, your statement would be correct, ,,,,,and an investment, I invest all the time, reap rewards, we get that. So, it ain't gonna happen. And your mobs will win in the end, I know that, so, it definitely won't happen. Will y'all call it marxism, or come up with a new word?
I already said it.
Yes, you want to make other people's lives miserable when their and their children's lives could be improved by a rather simple government investment which would be cost effective in providing societal benefits in the long run. All because of your misanthropic belief that the majority of your fellow citizens are lazy, worthless "losers".
As to the lazy worthless losers, I would be happy with a thread on that lot, but I ain't gonna start it. People will think I am mean,, or whatever. They think Ayn Rand was mean.
Cheers again. Jack Daniels and me 🙂
12 Oct 21
@no1marauder saidY0ur response to Quack just above, and this post, say we like the ideas you mention, and we do...don't get me wrong. But you are an idealist, and I am a realist.
The "mob", even republican members of the "mob", really like the ideas of free universal pre-K, tax credits for child care, etc. etc. etc. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/americans-want-more-affordable-child-care-options-republican-voters-included-11619630948
Properly structured, properly structured, .....yes, let us do all that within reason, but therein lies the rub. Cannot reason such a program with someone like Biden's administration. It would be impossible. Have you heard about the border? A lot of mouths to feed. And you know what?? (and yes,, I heard this on FOX) The administration is more concerned about getting all the illegals in here, feeding them, than the 600K homeless etc, and the families you have been referring to. So, the programs you mention above are impossible.
You will remember my saying over the years.....We cannot have open borders and welfare at the same time. Well, Marauder, it is here. You are writing like Pollyanna.
12 Oct 21
@averagejoe1 saidThe entire program of universal pre-K, child care credits, etc. etc. would cost $225 billion over ten years or $22.5 billion a year.
Marauder, one more thing. In today's economy with Biden/Obama doling out money to get votes, entitlements free everything to non-citizens, etc, not to mention new debt of $5.5T, I think, and you KNOW, that to 'improve all these lives' (lives of their own doing) would be, shall we say, too expensive? In a Utopia, your statement would be correct, ,,,,,and an investment, I ...[text shortened]... k I am mean,, or whatever. They think Ayn Rand was mean.
Cheers again. Jack Daniels and me 🙂
The US economy's GDP is around $20 trillion and the federal budget is $4.5 trillion.
The program would cost relative peanuts.
12 Oct 21
@averagejoe1 said$7.5T was added to the debt during the Trump administration.
Marauder, one more thing. In today's economy with Biden/Obama doling out money to get votes, entitlements free everything to non-citizens, etc, not to mention new debt of $5.5T, I think, and you KNOW, that to 'improve all these lives' (lives of their own doing) would be, shall we say, too expensive? In a Utopia, your statement would be correct, ,,,,,and an investment, I ...[text shortened]... k I am mean,, or whatever. They think Ayn Rand was mean.
Cheers again. Jack Daniels and me 🙂
Maybe temper your discussion about US debt load.
It is a serious issue. But have your facts straight.
13 Oct 21
@no1marauder saidEvery dollar you write about, at this time, we do not have . SO, in addition to borrowing money for all those green progressive crap programs, you want to borrow the money for pre-K and child care ? I will make a deal with you. Get rid of the crap programs, and I will personally find the money you need to , well, save lives. You First!!!
The entire program of universal pre-K, child care credits, etc. etc. would cost $225 billion over ten years or $22.5 billion a year.
The US economy's GDP is around $20 trillion and the federal budget is $4.5 trillion.
The program would cost relative peanuts.
@no1marauder saidFor our readers, I said to Marauder....."If I live next door to you with one child, and you have 4 children that you cannot afford, do you think that I wish to make your life miserable?"
I already said it.
Yes, you want to make other people's lives miserable when their and their children's lives could be improved by a rather simple government investment which would be cost effective in providing societal benefits in the long run. All because of your misanthropic belief that the majority of your fellow citizens are lazy, worthless "losers".
He answered with the above. Which, I'm sorry, was not an answer to my question. He did, I admit, say 'yes, you wish to make other people's lives miserable', but he left that hanging, did he not? Left it hanging, because we do not know what he means when he says that I make other lives miserable, simply by existing in the house next door. Just by existing. By existing, I am making his life, with 4 children he can't afford, miserable.
For all you libs, in lib school, this is one hell of an exercise in the way liberals think.
13 Oct 21
@no1marauder saidYou are aware, I am sure, that if they work TWO jobs, (heaven forbid) that the $31,200 would be more like (15 + 31 =) $46k per year. Good money for a young feller who is still courting, planning for a family? Am I missing something here? Many people work two jobs. But I get your dilemma.....If you preach this to a young guy, he will be non-plussed about having to work at TWO jobs, when he can be supported by the gooovvveeeerrrrnnnnnnnnnnmmmentt. Oh, Marauder..........
Of course, unlike you, I want workers to be paid more than $18,000 a year (a $15 an hour minimum wage would mean $31,200 a year to a 40 an hour week worker). But even at the miserable wages many Americans "enjoy", a public investment in child care would be worth it in the short and long run; it would make more workers able to work now and give those workers a chance to ad ...[text shortened]... be able to take some college courses and get that education that you seem to think is so important.
13 Oct 21
@AverageJoe1. I wish you could/would prevail on at least one of these posts, so that I could have something to chew on, maybe even find a link on!!!! Sorry, my bourbon kicked in.
13 Oct 21
@no1marauder saidPaying $14,000 for child care for an $18,000 is an unconscionable waste of money. You could probably literally pay bus fare and get someone else from a nearby town to do the job or we could live without the nonessential job done. What you fail to realize is that by paying $14,000 you actually take money out of the economy that could be used efficiently elsewhere.
Of course, unlike you, I want workers to be paid more than $18,000 a year (a $15 an hour minimum wage would mean $31,200 a year to a 40 an hour week worker). But even at the miserable wages many Americans "enjoy", a public investment in child care would be worth it in the short and long run; it would make more workers able to work now and give those workers a chance to ad ...[text shortened]... be able to take some college courses and get that education that you seem to think is so important.
13 Oct 21
@quackquack saidHe doesn’t ‘fail to realize’. He is subjected to lib narratives and, coupled with denial, founders like a fish on a riverbank.
Paying $14,000 for child care for an $18,000 is an unconscionable waste of money. You could probably literally pay bus fare and get someone else from a nearby town to do the job or we could live without the nonessential job done. What you fail to realize is that by paying $14,000 you actually take money out of the economy that could be used efficiently elsewhere.
Give me time, I’m working with him, confident I’ll bring him along……
13 Oct 21
@quackquack saidWhat on a bottle of champagne?
Paying $14,000 for child care for an $18,000 is an unconscionable waste of money. You could probably literally pay bus fare and get someone else from a nearby town to do the job or we could live without the nonessential job done. What you fail to realize is that by paying $14,000 you actually take money out of the economy that could be used efficiently elsewhere.
It's what's called an "investment". which in this case is far more likely to result in a useful societal return than more luxury items for the rich. In fact, if the program was funded by some tax that removed disincentives for economic investment and work like raising the capital gains tax to the same level as work income, it would result in much more propitious economic activity than paper chasing which consumes most of the wealthy's spending.
13 Oct 21
@averagejoe1 saidSo parents are supposed to work two jobs without affordable health care.
You are aware, I am sure, that if they work TWO jobs, (heaven forbid) that the $31,200 would be more like (15 + 31 =) $46k per year. Good money for a young feller who is still courting, planning for a family? Am I missing something here? Many people work two jobs. But I get your dilemma.....If you preach this to a young guy, he will be non-plussed about having to ...[text shortened]... WO jobs, when he can be supported by the gooovvveeeerrrrnnnnnnnnnnmmmentt. Oh, Marauder..........
Brilliant, AJ.
13 Oct 21
@averagejoe1 saidDon't be dense.
For our readers, I said to Marauder....."If I live next door to you with one child, and you have 4 children that you cannot afford, do you think that I wish to make your life miserable?"
He answered with the above. Which, I'm sorry, was not an answer to my question. He did, I admit, say 'yes, you wish to make other people's lives miserable', but he left that hangi ...[text shortened]... le.
For all you libs, in lib school, this is one hell of an exercise in the way liberals think.
Letting people suffer for no good reason other than your peculiar ideas of moral righteousness is outrageous. Here you are vehemently opposing a modest program which would create jobs, raise the incomes of tens of millions of families and help provide a better future for both working parents and their children for petty reasons.