Login or register


Last status update:
Gender: male
Age: 29
Date Signed Up:11/13/2009
Last Login:9/28/2016
Content Ranking:#4579
Comment Ranking:#1699
Highest Content Rank:#1163
Highest Comment Rank:#242
Content Thumbs: 2732 total,  3024 ,  292
Comment Thumbs: 20781 total,  22276 ,  1495
Content Level Progress: 19% (19/100)
Level 127 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 128 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry
Comment Level Progress: 30.8% (308/1000)
Level 317 Comments: Wizard → Level 318 Comments: Wizard
Content Views:33108
Times Content Favorited:208 times
Total Comments Made:2737
FJ Points:2264

latest user's comments

#3 - Yes she is. 10/29/2015 on Missing the point +172
#65 - "The first attempt at establishing a national m…  [+] (2 replies) 10/29/2015 on back on +11
User avatar
#169 - averagewhitekid (10/29/2015) [-]
That still doesn't mean it was intended to live on
It just meant it was the first reasonable amount of money for a reasonable amount of work that they figured
This was also during the Great Depression, so there's that
User avatar
#199 - Daeiros (10/29/2015) [-]
"No business which depends for existence on paying less than LIVING WAGES to its workers has any right to continue in this country." - President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1933
That seems pretty straightforward to me. If you are working a full time job, you should be able to live off of that job.

"In 2012, there were 3.6 million hourly paid workers in the United States with wages at or below the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. These workers made up 4.7 percent of the 75.3 million workers age 16 and over who were paid at hourly rates."

But that is hardly an accurate account because most minimum wage jobs will give you a raise after 90 days, and then again each year you are with the company.

"According to the Economic Policy Institute’s State of Working America, a stunning 35 million Americans – 26 percent of our workforce – earn less than $10.55 an hour"

"When you are living in the United States, you will likely want to budget approximately $1000 – $1500 per month for housing and utilities."

That's for a basic one bedroom apartment, depending on where you live, not including food or transportation or anything else. At 10.55 an hour, times 40 hours, times 52 weeks, that gives us just under $22,000 per year before taxes, so take 15% off and you are left with $18,700, and just to have a place to live, without even eating, you need between $12,000 and $18,000 depending on what area you live in, so that leaves you with between 6,700 and $700 per year for food and travel to and from work, along with anything else you might need like clothes, toilet paper, soap, etc.

That all works out to mean that more than a quarter of the American population is living on less than $13.46-$128.00 per week to pay for everything other than living indoors with power and plumbing. That's the ones earning 45% more than the minimum wage, mind you, at minimum wage, you'd have either $57.69 in you pocket per week, or you'd be $57.69 in debt per week before you have even bought groceries.

This a a quarter of the population we are talking about here, a quarter of the population has less than $130 per week to survive on after paying rent and utilities. Oh but wait, we almost forgot! Health insurance is now required by law and not having it will land you with a hefty fine at the end of the year, and that will probably run you at least another $30 per week, so that's $100 dollars per week to survive on, at best, for 1/4 of the people in the US.
#62 - I'm sure a link between LCD screens and cancer will be discove…  [+] (4 replies) 10/29/2015 on back on +1
User avatar
#204 - spinthatrecord (10/30/2015) [-]
I for one look forward to the freak out when they say chlorine leads to cancer.
#95 - mattyl (10/29/2015) [-]
Imagine the title "Breaking news: Touching wooden doors does not cause cancer" followed by a 3 page text, discussing how wooden doors have nothing to do with cancer. No one would want to read that.

You haven't heard about studies not finding a connection between cancer and something else because they're not making the news if they are not interesting. There is an ocean of studies on all sorts of topics out there, never having had any attention because the results yielded nothing of significance and were boring.
User avatar
#71 - cuntism (10/29/2015) [-]
We are fully aware how LCD screens work, the science of it is completely understood, so you're actually safe on that front
#73 - anon (10/29/2015) [-]
Yea but most of these researchers just look for a link, so e.g. people that stare at LCD screens have more sedentary life style and somehow that is linked to cancer, and the media would have a headline LCDs cause cancer