"The Ranger" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:11:21 GMT, "Peter Aitken"
> > wrote:
> > "baker" > wrote in message
...
> > > sf > wrote in
:
> > > > On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 12:13:20 GMT, baker > wrote:
>
> > > > > They chose to work there.
> > > > >
> > > > Said like a holier than thou person with job choice.
> > > >
> > > Did you choose the jobs you've had, or were they
> > > chosen for you?
> > >
> > For a lot of people, job choice consists of chosing between
> > McDonalds and Burger King.
>
> Nonsense. There are blue collar jobs that pay more than minimum
> wage everywhere. Migrant workers fill those positions regularly
> because the local population finds them distasteful or beneath
> their dignity.
>
> > It's easy to say that they should
> > "get an education and better themselves" and many do, but
> > others do not have the chance. It's also undeniably true that
> > many people simnply don't have the smarts or the ambition
> > to do so, but that's no reason why they should be sentenced
> > to living in poverty their whole lives.
>
> For the simple reason no one owes them anything. We are a country
> built on always attempting to better ourselves, whether fiscally,
> emotionally, or in some other manner. When the person _chooses_ not
> to better themselves, then they are destined to remain in poverty.
> It's that simple.

Why do you say "chooses" when my argument is quite clearly based on the fact
that many people do *not* have a choice? Also, I disagree with your premise
that "no one owes them anything." Our society is based on the premise that
work is good and that people who work should be fairly compensated. When
someone works 40 or 60 hours a week and can barely scrape by, something is
wrong.

>
> > Anyone who is willing to work and play by the rules should
> > be able to make a decent life for themselves and their family.
>
> The migrant families (Mexican, Nicaraguans, Costa Ricans, El
> Salvadoran, Vietnamese, Chinese, Irish, Australian, and Hindi are
> just a few) I know do make (and have made) decent lives for
> themselves and their families. They very much play by the host's
> rules.
>

Good for them, but so what? This is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

> > A country that can afford to pay executives tens of millions
> > a year can surely afford a little more at the other end of the
> > scale.
>
> We've already seen how that system works. I seem to remember it
> failing and taking a former world power down with it.
>

Don't be bloody silly - there's absolutely no comparison. We (the US)
already have a minimum wage - does that make us "Communist" and doomed to
fall?

--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.