Serious question: How on earth could anyone oppose a policy that would effectively give low-skilled workers (workers who barely make enough money to feed themselves, let alone a family), higher wages? After all, we live in difficult economic times, and it doesn’t seem wholly unreasonable that individuals working in low-skilled jobs should be entitled to a minimum, universally agreed upon standard of living. And indeed, as you might expect, this isn’t by any means an unpopular idea: According to a recent Gallup poll, almost all the Democrats -- and precisely half the Republicans -- surveyed would vote “for” a proposal...
Nawlins:***Wow...the same false rhetoric every statist uses. "We don't want big government, just the right amount of government, but we need more government cause we haven't found the right size yet."*** Other than your false representation at the end, the whining insistence that the underlying reality is always more government, what is "false" about it? Sometimes the market is better when it is governed less and sometimes it is better when it is governed more. The market provides practical and provisional signals. It is NOT the frigging Hand of Providence.
- Quotes of the day Allahpundit 11 hours ago
- This HHS official’s resignation letter says everything you’ve ever thought about bureaucracy Mary Katharine Ham 11 hours ago
- Venezuelan official: John Kerry is a “murderer” and these protests are pretty much all his fault Erika Johnsen 12 hours ago
- Sarah Palin to launch “Rogue TV” Allahpundit 13 hours ago
- Jay Carney leaving the White House? Allahpundit 13 hours ago
- Ramirez on Attkisson’s departure Ed Morrissey 14 hours ago