US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2085

On July 08 2015 09:44 darthfoley wrote:


A lawful minimum wage? $7.25? Are you serious?

Really? Walmart has to run Thanksgiving food drives for their employees and you're championing our pitifully low minimum wage?

Wal-Mart spokeswoman Kayla Whaling quickly responded to the criticism, saying the drive was planned by one of the store's employees, who was collecting food for two co-workers who were on a leave of absence and unable to work.
...
Dawnne Sulaitis, who has worked at Wal-Mart for 19 years, said she asked for permission to hold the food drive when she found out that two families would be down to one income over the holidays.
...
Wal-Mart came under similar criticism last year, when an employee held a food drive for one co-worker who had lost their home in a fire, and for another who had stopped receiving child support from her ex-husband.

On July 08 2015 09:54 Sermokala wrote:
People who want higher minimum wage should be showing how that feeds other minimum wage jobs. This living wage argument just feeds into too much of a class warfare angle.

On July 08 2015 10:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:

Clearly you didn't read my posts, but I'll entertain your ignorance.

GH implied that a min wage didn't exist so I pointed out that it does. I never claimed that it was awesome or whatever you've imagined.

As for Walmart, the last story of that happening was an employee (not the company) collecting donations for other employees who were on a leave of absence and unable to work.


Link

Helping people out after a fire... so horrible... I'm literally crying...

A spike in intravenous drug use in a growing number of U.S. counties has led to soaring infection rates of hepatitis C and HIV in communities across the country. Increasingly these counties are pushing for the creation of needle exchange programs, but politics and bureaucracy appears to be slowing the spread of such harm reduction programs.

By enabling access to health care, rehab facilities and addressing social inequalities that exacerbate substance abuse, advocates say harm reduction programs, like needle exchanges, help to reduce the negative health effects of drug injection.

“There has been a big change in how state legislators view overdose and view drug-related harm in general,” said Corey Davis, the deputy director of the National Health Law Program.

But despite renewed interest in clinics where people can receive treatment and drop off contaminated wares in exchange for clean ones, political and bureaucratic hurdles are preventing widespread implementation — even after epidemics in Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky and elsewhere raised national alarm.

In April, an HIV outbreak in Scott County, Indiana grabbed headlines when health officials there recorded more than 100 cases in a month. The number grew to 169 by June — more than 30 times the county’s yearly average. Most infections occurred from injecting Opana, a popular painkiller containing oxymorphone, with contaminated needles.

Following the outbreak, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence waived the state’s anti-needle ban that criminalized the possession of a syringe without a medical reason and signed a law allowing county officials to request permission to establish their own needle exchange programs — though these clinics were not eligible for state funding.

While some saw this as opening the door for harm reduction clinics across the state, the reaction so far has been muted. Only two counties have made use of the new rules, though a third county is considering establishing an exchange, according to local reports.

Health officials in Scott County, Indiana, declared a health emergency and established a needle exchange program in April to slow the spread of HIV.

On July 08 2015 13:50 IgnE wrote:
The misunderstanding here is that in Jonny's world if you raise the minimum wage you have to get rid of benefits or the EITC because that automatically follows. He doesn't seem to understand that most of the discussion about raising the minimum wage assumes that any raise in the minimum wage is a direct increase to people working at or near minimum wage, and that they won't be somehow netting even because they no longer qualify for the EITC or their benefits have been cut.

On July 07 2015 11:07 GreenHorizons wrote:


It's the most accessible and easiest to enforce, are a couple better reasons.

For instance you mentioned the EITC. Many people don't get it because they don't even know they qualify, they don't file (because they are told they don't have to), or when they do get it they don't even get all of it because some tax preparation company takes a slice. That ~$910,000,000 in profits from H&R Block isn't primarily coming from millionaires.

On July 08 2015 14:02 JonnyBNoHo wrote:

Nope. But thanks for being the third person to play the 'I really didn't read Jonny's posts but I'm going to comment on them now" game.

On July 07 2015 11:40 JonnyBNoHo wrote:

The EITC isn't perfect but it is currently the largest anti-poverty program in the country. It's also widely regarded as a public policy success story, and more directly effective at combating poverty than a higher minimum wage.

Higher wages means you lose out on other benefits as well as the EITC. Not all households will navigate that change well. Not every employer is going to be able to support large single earner households at a 'living' level, meaning that the public will have to step in an provide assistance anyways.