Actually, it's even finer where there are these people called employers. It's the employers that create the jobs, and nobody else can have a right to something nobody else is willing to create for them. You've failed to define the word "job", and because you can't do that, you can't claim anyone has a "right" to one. When are you going to define the word "job"? Remember, the Mayor has had many jobs, and he knows what the word means. Explain why a "living" wage is required. What is more reasonable to expect to happen is that if an employer can't find someone to work for the wages the job is worth, the job doesn't get done...or machines do it, instead. Want to know what happens to all those useless (*)(*)(*)(*)s flipping burgers if a serious attempt is made to force their pay to scales they're not worth? The machines move in, the flippers are pushed out the door. Why should the customers have to deal with rude cashiers when an ATM machine WILL do the job cheaply, reliably, and without the lice? Good luck pushing for astronomical wages for make work jobs. That's going to continue to provide real work for real engineers for decades to come. Their worth is determined by the profits their labor brings to the company. Legislation forcing their wages past the profit margin leads to the company having no reason to have them on the payroll. How many maids you got cleaning your house? You ain't got none because it's not profitable for you to have them. Why shouldn't there be a law passed requiring everyone with a job above the median wage hiring at least one house-keeper and paying them a "living" wage? Isn't it unfair that you have knick-knacks to dust but you're too cheap to hire a professional knick-knack duster at living wage rates? The peole did decide just that when they ratified the Constitution that makes socialism illegal in the US. The Mayor can't state where it's written because there's no such thing as a "right to a job" or a "right to a living". But you won't because the Mayor has logic on his side, you have old Marxist tracts that are as meaningful as anything the Jehovah Witness or the huskies drop off. Yes, it does indeed. It's immoral for those that refuse to learn the skills needed to survive in this world to steal from those that can survive. If they choose to live a live that can't be lived, they should learn to live with their choice for as long as they can. What's stopping you from using your own money to support them? YOU brought up the morality issue. Where's your moral foundation when you're hoarding as much cash as you can while insisting others be robbed to follow the moral code you preach but refuse to follow? You have no clue what morality is, you want to pretend it can be used to shame your betters into doing the things you refuse to do. It won't. And those same fools believe they should be exempted from putting all their money where their mouths are. (*)(*)(*)(*) "society", standards are defined by every individual. Your standards say people who refuse to work should live a middle class lifestyle. Fine. YOU give them YOUR money. The Mayor's standards are if they won't work, they deserve the standard of living they worked to achieve. Can't get fairer than that. You do realize that pi is an infinite sequence of random digits, and like pi each individual is a random assortment of skills and talents, and unlike pi those skills are acquired by personal choice. When a person CHOOSES to have no skills of value on the job marketplace, those people have chosen to be the paving stones on the road to their individual hell. Their body, their choice, right? No. It's you fascists that believe in the right of your elitist masters to control the nation's resources. That's always worked so wonderfully under you socialists, with 180,000,000 dead in war, some 120,000,000 or so dead of malaria and AIDS and other preventable wonders. Way to go, FASCISTS! We always knew you could do exactly that. But that's not what Americans call success. The Americans believe that if people earn a living, they get to keep their earings, except, of course, for those taxes required to run the CONSTITUTIONAL functions of government. You have no morals, you're a liberal. Of course you won't be debating this any further, you haven't debated it at all. You've merely made an appeal to emotion and then dug a hole and pulled it in after you. See that last sentence of yours? You're pretending "reason" is an emotional current. Which means you have no clue at all.
no person who's only skill is fogging a water glass when breathing on it deserves $15/hour, that is ridiculous.
supply side economics should be supplying us with better governance at lower cost. full employment of resources should be a benchmark Standard regarding the market for labor. we could solve simple poverty with existing infrastructure in our republic.
