You’re talking about more than half the country there Eagle. You sure about that, because it doesn’t make much sense.
I’m not sure your point, because I was speaking in a philosophical sense. If you are saying that welfare programs can help poor people who vote Republican, well of course they can. What I am talking about is the philosophical positions of the two parties. The right tends to value the notion of “rugged individualism” whereas the left tends to value the notion of collectivism. But I digress, and I don’t want to go off on a tangent. Do you believe salary should be based upon the number of children a person has?
I’ve never understood what a “living wage” is supposed to mean anyway. Does it mean enough to afford a studio apartment, a beanbag chair to sleep in, and top ramen? As long as all the essentials are covered right? And since when is it the employer’s job to take care of their employees on their off time? Why not just provide room.and board at the place of work? They do that in other countries. At least that way, the employer could somewhat control the employee’s costs that necessitate a “living wage” to begin with.
That is why I put that concept with regards to the number of children a person has. The cost of food, healthcare, clothing, childcare, etc., goes up exponentially with each successive child. But you do notice that most of those who do advocate for a so-called living wage have not said much if anything regarding this.
Factor in whether parents are actually spending that money on taking care of their children or blowing that money on crap they don’t need as well? There are some people who have no business having kids, period.
How one votes in an election does not determines ones philosophical views, and I am more specifically referring to today’s democratic party. Why do you think Obama made the comment “you didn’t build that”? His philosophy is predicated by a government centered view.
That’s not what I said. I’m not talking about individual voters. Also the context of the thread is in regards to the number of children a person has.
“Using U.S. cities with a population over 100,000 and the most recent FBI statistics on violent crime, USA Today formulated a list of the top ten most dangerous cities in America. Of these ten, eight are currently run by Democratic mayors and city councils, and two are controlled by Independents. Of the past ten mayors of each of the three most violent cities in America — Birmingham , Detroit, and St. Louis — eight have been Democrats. All told, the three most violent cities in this country have been under nearly uninterrupted Democratic control for more than half a century. With violent crime rates exceeding 1,400 incidents per 100,000 citizens in each of these cities…. Admittedly, it is difficult to identify a significant correlation using only one criteria. However, an analysis of poverty and unemployment indicates a similarly distressing pattern.”
“Referencing data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau, CBS News composed a list of the top ten most impoverished cities in the United States. The ubiquity of Democratic governance is heightened in this context, as nine out of the ten poorest cities are run by Democrats…… Of the ten major U.S. cities with the highest levels of unemployment, nine are run by Democrats. The Bureau of Labor Statistics identifies Detroit, Fresno, and Las Vegas as the cities with the most unemployment, listing Detroit as number one with an unemployment rate of 24.8 percent.”
The Unfortunate Truth of Democratic Urban Governance
Trump claims that communities have suffered under Democratic control. He’s not wrong.
Reading time: 6 min read
https://www.yahoo.com/news/baltimore-breaks-city-record-killings-per-capita-2017-160045125.html
Shall I post articles showing that the poorest states in the country with least educated and unhealthy populations are GOP controlled??
Yes please.
Actually for this thread I would like answers to the OP. I put out another thread a few back that looked to debate in “what way are Democrat policies are better for the middle class”. That would be more appropriate there.
So the business owners in your neighborhood built all of the infrastructure that allows their businesses to run? 
That’s pretty funny man.
It could be. It could also be predicated by more society-centered view.
None of that matters to me. I’m not interested in who built what.
“Living wage” is purely subjective on the part of the wage earner. Our nation’s poverty level is much higher than any other country’s poverty level. Our wage expectations are based on the desire to live as affluently as possible on the lowest salary.
A “living wage” could be considered the minimum to have bare essentials. We used to be ok with that.
A living wage is that which is sufficient that you don’t have to worry about paying bills, rent, and necessary items.
COLA only applies to Overseas Cost of Living Allowance and is a non-taxable allowance designed to offset the higher overseas prices of non-housing goods and services.
Having been the wife of a USMC officer for almost 20 years I lived the overseas Military life and if furnished housing was not available on base then off base (non-housing) was necessary and you got an allowance for that and depending on how many dependents in the family & bedrooms needed would determine the amount of COLA.
The best thing aboiut that silly option is we need more children. lol!
Dems could invent entire bureaucracies devoted to divining your wages…lol
There’s stateside COLA as well, in high cost of living areas. And I think you’re confusing COLA with Overseas Housing Allowance.
