really....so anything i want, the government should provide because of that statement?
Jeebus, Yurt - there is that equivalency thing again.
That's not what was being said, at all. What is the matter with you?
really....so anything i want, the government should provide because of that statement?
I see 'promote', not 'provide'. That should mean that the opportunity is there to take, but nothing about being guaranteed anything.First paragraph, first sentence: "....promote the general welfare...."
How is that ensured when a roof over one's head isn't affordable with a minimum wage?
Blow me toothless Brit. Just cause you are poor and England still has no message boards or dentist is no reason to attack me simpleton.
It's about what constitutes a living wage. The minimum wage isn't enough to live on. There's something wrong with that picture.
http://www.livingwage.geog.psu.edu/counties/06037
I see 'promote', not 'provide'. That should mean that the opportunity is there to take, but nothing about being guaranteed anything.
then why am I not guaranteed personal protection and security from the government?It's a pretty fuzzy area, imo. This isn't an agrarian, sparsely populated country anymore. Without certain services and assistance, which are generally ascribed to any characterization of "welfare state," things would likely get pretty bad in a hurry - and not just for those at the lower levels. Increased crime, homeless, poverty - these things affect everyone, and lower the state of the "general welfare."
So a fry cook should make as much money as tradesmen?
then why am I not guaranteed personal protection and security from the government?
Of course not. But a fry cook should make enough to at least survive with a roof over his head.
my view is based on the law of the land and judicial precedent, which clearly states that the government is not responsible nor liable for my protection and security. so again, how is 'promote the general welfare' interpreted as being provided any basic means whatsoever?I don't think there are any real guarantees in society. But you should be able to expect such protection and security - and, for the most part, you get it. I know your view is someone different from that of most people on this one.
I don't think there are any real guarantees in society. But you should be able to expect such protection and security - and, for the most part, you get it. I know your view is someone different from that of most people on this one.
Well that's about what a tradesmen makes. So you're naturally going to say 'well raise everyones wages' And of course to compensate, everyones prices will rise.
The fact remains, if you want a living wage, you need a SKILL. Unskilled labors gets unskilled wages.
sure you can live on it, if you are living at home...
my view is based on the law of the land and judicial precedent, which clearly states that the government is not responsible nor liable for my protection and security. so again, how is 'promote the general welfare' interpreted as being provided any basic means whatsoever?
Fine. And if the wages aren't enough to survive on, then tough shit - be homeless, go without basic needs, etc. That's your assertion, correct?
Fine. And if the wages aren't enough to survive on, then tough shit - be homeless, go without basic needs, etc. That's your assertion, correct?
I doubt that. Normally people that work in those arenas use other options. Such as more than one person in the family working, roommates, supplemental food stamps, etc.
I doubt that. Normally people that work in those arenas use other options. Such as more than one person in the family working, roommates, supplemental food stamps, etc.
Food stamps, isn't that a general welfare thingie of the government![]()