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:***Cut the sh!t with your "moral equivalence" drivel. This type of ad hominem garbage when you're confronted with dissenting opinion is tiring. You've yet to address any questions posed to you.*** There is no moral equivalence with me. Liberalism has a very high degree of moral differentiation. It is just that with monetarism, public choice, supply side, Ayn Rand, rational expectations, Austrian school, or whatever, the fundamental assumption is that fiscal policy has no constructive role to play in the life of an economy, and that is wrong. I answer any and all questions posed to me. Boo hoo to someone else about being insulted.
- Surge: Walker regains the lead in Wisconsin Guy Benson 32 mins ago
- Gallup: Americans trust in the media matches historic low Noah Rothman 1 hour ago
- Obama’s administration at war with itself over ISIS strategy Noah Rothman 1 hour ago
- Video: Biggest insurer in MN pulling out of state exchange Ed Morrissey 2 hours ago
- House passes bill authorizing Obama to train Syria’s “moderate” rebels, with most Republicans voting yes Allahpundit 3 hours ago
- John Kerry to Code Pink: If you care about women, you should want to fight ISIS Allahpundit 3 hours ago