Comments on: Gingrich’s laborious plan to save the youth of America Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 By: OneOfTheSheep Sat, 10 Dec 2011 08:04:01 +0000 @smarkus,

So? Back in 1960 Minimum wage jobs were plentiful. At today’s minimum wage, many have been automated, as I said.

What’s your point in opening YOUR mouth in this manner? Two dimensional comment in a three dimensional world.

By: smarcus Thu, 08 Dec 2011 06:53:32 +0000 @OneOfTheSheep…With inflation, that $1 in 1960 is worth about $7.65 today, coincidentally, the current federal minimum wage of $7.25/hour.

Sometimes, “It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt.”

By: OneOfTheSheep Thu, 08 Dec 2011 06:36:07 +0000 I worked at minimum wage back in 1960 or so for $1/hr. assembling instruments. With no experience I was happy to get an inside job assembling meters. I paid my rent, food and transportation for several months and got one, possibly two raises; being transferred to a drill press where I tapped case mounting bosses. The experience was a good one.

The minimum wage is so high today that the low-skill simple jobs that can be automated have been. Look around…almost all Clerks and a lot of Secretaries have been replaced now that low-level managers have computers. A lot of order-takers and shipping people are similarly unnecessary in the world of today. But automation of tasks is the real saver…robots don’t take breaks, get sick, have mental problems, drink, use drugs, get vacations or medical benefits, or get a pension.

The higher the minimum wage goes, the faster entry-level jobs and the valuable experience (and resolve to get an education for a “better” life) disappear.

What “poor kids” need is the availability of low paid internships that prepare them for “real” jobs and give them the understanding and perception necessary to keep such “real” jobs. If they want to work for a “head janitor” at school for low pay to help their family pay it’s bills AND for some extra tutoring in weak subjects, I think they would be far, far better off in the long run.

Unfortunately THEIR peers are certain to sabotage any honest desire or specific effort(s) to lift themselves out of the “poor” life. So long as education and work aren’t “cool”, their deadend peers set the governing agenda and a person can get killed going against that.

By: Micileen Tue, 06 Dec 2011 23:22:01 +0000 I believe that his intent is to break the cycle of poverty into which the majority of minority children find themselves born into. The out of wedlock birthrate nationally among African Americans exceeds seventy percent and in some precincts in New York more than eighty percent. That is not a political statement, but simply a statistical reality. Countless billions of dollars are being spent in an attempt to educate children who often reside in a household with no history of a live-in father or one that has experienced the rewards that can be achieved through personal growth and educational attainment. Forget the political rhetoric. Why don’t you want for those children exactly what would you want for your own offspring?

By: MidwestVoice Tue, 06 Dec 2011 21:51:51 +0000 Here in the Midwest over the last couple of years there has been a Republican push to loosen (or remove) the child labor laws. Similar to the Republican mantra that removing ‘regulation’ is important to let companies ‘get on with business’, this is just more of the same.

None will be content until the US is no different than any other poor 3rd world nation where there is lots of cheap labor (kids are great, you don’t have to pay them as much and they eat lots less and take up less space!) and the environment is ruined forever without those ‘pesky’ regulations. As an avid sci-fi fan, I find it frightening to see that some of the social ideas and directions that I read about years ago in science fiction are starting to be proposed by our current crop of Republicans. Unfortunately, the ideas are NOT the ones in which humans use advanced technology to the benefit of all mankind and improve the planet. No, these ideas are from the darker sci-fi books where an elite runs the entire planet and after completely destroying the viability of the ecosystem, they escape off-world to start anew leaving billions to die on the ruined planet which can no longer sustain them. Is this the Republican vision for the future?