Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
44 user(s) are online (24 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 2
Guests: 42

meltedopsicle, jerseymom, more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 3 »


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#81
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/8/6 19:41
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 528
Offline
Quote:

srs7191 wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

Adonis wrote:
It's worth noting that the intention of the first minimum wage laws were to keep blacks from taking the jobs of whites.

And it's been doing exactly that ever since.


What point exactly are you trying to make? You seem to be suggesting employers would only hire blacks when the wage was lower than that of whites.


He made his point in his post. Minimum wage laws were originally introduced to keep "undesirables" out the work place. Not just blacks, but other minorities and women.

Same principles at play today, even if not the intention of the policy.


Thanks!

Posted on: 2/11 19:46
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#80
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/16 23:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 830
Offline
Quote:

srs7191 wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

Adonis wrote:
It's worth noting that the intention of the first minimum wage laws were to keep blacks from taking the jobs of whites.

And it's been doing exactly that ever since.


What point exactly are you trying to make? You seem to be suggesting employers would only hire blacks when the wage was lower than that of whites.


He made his point in his post. Minimum wage laws were originally introduced to keep "undesirables" out the work place. Not just blacks, but other minorities and women.

Same principles at play today, even if not the intention of the policy.



Funny, it seems the very people you are referring to are pushing hard for the minimum wage increase. But I'm sure you guys know what's better for them.

Posted on: 2/11 19:07
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#79
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/13 21:38
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3614
Offline
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The original employees at fast food restaurants were high school teenagers/college students and retired seniors. It was never meant to be employment for raising a family. Immigrants took those jobs and it became the staple for their income. I remember going to a fast food restaurant and gave the cashier $4.01 so I would get back six dollars from a ten. The cashier was clueless to what I was doing and another cashier had to help her. It didn't help her English was limited.


You gave the cashier $4.01 and expected $6 back? Where did the $10 come in? How does this make any sense?

Was the bill $4.01, you gave the cashier $10.01 and expected $6 back? If so, why didn't you say?

No wonder the cashier was confused...


you see even the divine miss Y might be not be numerate....or perhaps the cashier that yvonne was trying to scam her.

Posted on: 2/10 19:36
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#78
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2017/10/28 15:03
From Paulus Hook
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 27
Offline
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

Adonis wrote:
It's worth noting that the intention of the first minimum wage laws were to keep blacks from taking the jobs of whites.

And it's been doing exactly that ever since.


What point exactly are you trying to make? You seem to be suggesting employers would only hire blacks when the wage was lower than that of whites.


He made his point in his post. Minimum wage laws were originally introduced to keep "undesirables" out the work place. Not just blacks, but other minorities and women.

Same principles at play today, even if not the intention of the policy.

Posted on: 2/10 19:22
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#77
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/16 21:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3040
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The original employees at fast food restaurants were high school teenagers/college students and retired seniors. It was never meant to be employment for raising a family. Immigrants took those jobs and it became the staple for their income. I remember going to a fast food restaurant and gave the cashier $4.01 so I would get back six dollars from a ten. The cashier was clueless to what I was doing and another cashier had to help her. It didn't help her English was limited.


You gave the cashier $4.01 and expected $6 back? Where did the $10 come in? How does this make any sense?

Was the bill $4.01, you gave the cashier $10.01 and expected $6 back? If so, why didn't you say?

No wonder the cashier was confused...



Posted on: 2/10 18:30
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#76
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/13 21:38
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3614
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The original employees at fast food restaurants were high school teenagers/college students and retired seniors. It was never meant to be employment for raising a family. Immigrants took those jobs and it became the staple for their income. I remember going to a fast food restaurant and gave the cashier $4.01 so I would get back six dollars from a ten. The cashier was clueless to what I was doing and another cashier had to help her. It didn't help her English was limited.
i see many adult NATIVES working at mcdonalds. and perhaps her english was limited, but maybe she wasn't very numerate without a calculator something that plagues many english speakers too

Posted on: 2/9 13:48

Edited by hero69 on 2019/2/9 14:08:26
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#75
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4760
Offline
The original employees at fast food restaurants were high school teenagers/college students and retired seniors. It was never meant to be employment for raising a family. Immigrants took those jobs and it became the staple for their income. I remember going to a fast food restaurant and gave the cashier $4.01 so I would get back six dollars from a ten. The cashier was clueless to what I was doing and another cashier had to help her. It didn't help her English was limited.

Posted on: 2/9 11:05
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#74
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/16 23:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 830
Offline
Quote:

Adonis wrote:
It's worth noting that the intention of the first minimum wage laws were to keep blacks from taking the jobs of whites.

And it's been doing exactly that ever since.


What point exactly are you trying to make? You seem to be suggesting employers would only hire blacks when the wage was lower than that of whites.

Posted on: 2/9 9:43
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#73
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/8/6 19:41
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 528
Offline
It's worth noting that the intention of the first minimum wage laws were to keep blacks from taking the jobs of whites.

And it's been doing exactly that ever since.

Posted on: 2/8 19:50
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#72
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/16 23:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 830
Offline
If you go back historically and increase for inflation when we get to $15 an hr it will be about a 50% increase over traditional minimum wage. The issue here is that too many living wage jobs have left the state and country. The dems feel that a suitable replacement is a low skilled minimum wage job that they can force the employer to over pay for. Murphy is in way over his head he has no idea what the ramifications of this will be. It has been a failure in Seattle but it doesnt matter they are all on the bandwagon. Just like Pelosi when she said we have to pass Obamacare so that we can see whats in it.

Posted on: 2/7 23:04
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#71
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/27 20:34
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 888
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Politicians should look at San Francisco's experiment with the $15 minimum wage. One of its many unintended consequences was forcing a lot of "mom and pop" shops into closing down, and for low skilled workers to see their hours cut back.

There have been many studies done, and here is a Forbes write up on the matter:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/adammills ... -wages-impact-employment/



Well reasoned article

Quote:
These results don’t necessarily mean minimum wage increases are bad policy. They do, however, support the notion that higher minimum wages have a cost, namely fewer employment opportunities for lower-skill workers. It’s important that we recognize this cost in any discussion about minimum wage policy.


I agree.

Posted on: 2/7 22:55
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#70
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/27 20:34
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 888
Offline
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
This is really a slick move to increase tax collected by the state. Hopefully it wont put too many places out of business or cause too many to decrease staff.


Businesses suffering the most will be McDonalds franchieses and other shitty employers.

It's not going to chase anyone out, but it may lead to price increases for consumers that consume shitty, cheap products.

Tax collection on people making minimum wage isnt going to make a dent in the budget.


Curious what you mean by "McDonalds franchises and other shitty employers". Is there something wrong with those types of jobs... or the businesses themselves?


The type of employer. They pay their people minimum wage, keep them under 30 hours a way to avoid paying benefits, treat them like shit while simultaneously delivering a shit product to their consumers.

I worked for a McDonald's franchisee in my youth. Worst job I ever had. The best was a warehouse job for a small independent grocer.

Posted on: 2/7 22:52
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#69
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3690
Offline
Politicians should look at San Francisco's experiment with the $15 minimum wage. One of its many unintended consequences was forcing a lot of "mom and pop" shops into closing down, and for low skilled workers to see their hours cut back.

There have been many studies done, and here is a Forbes write up on the matter:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/adammills ... -wages-impact-employment/


Posted on: 2/7 17:40
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#68
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4760
Offline
Right now those fast food restaurants are now replacing their employees with self-serving stations. Murphy worries about private business but ignores the pension payment or the fact the state pension retirees had their payment frozen in 2011.

Posted on: 2/7 15:50
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#67
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/5/12 18:51
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1517
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
This is really a slick move to increase tax collected by the state. Hopefully it wont put too many places out of business or cause too many to decrease staff.


Businesses suffering the most will be McDonalds franchieses and other shitty employers.

It's not going to chase anyone out, but it may lead to price increases for consumers that consume shitty, cheap products.

Tax collection on people making minimum wage isnt going to make a dent in the budget.


Curious what you mean by "McDonalds franchises and other shitty employers". Is there something wrong with those types of jobs... or the businesses themselves?

Posted on: 2/7 15:07
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#66
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/27 20:34
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 888
Offline
Quote:

jerseymom wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
This is really a slick move to increase tax collected by the state. Hopefully it wont put too many places out of business or cause too many to decrease staff.


You also have to consider the unintended consequences to the individual. If a minimum wage worker who supplements their income with state assistance has their income "bumped up" how does that impact their benefits? Will there be a group of workers who somehow find that their net gain doesn't adequately cover the assistance they used to receive - or will the increase deem them partially or completely ineligible? Is that one of the goals of the Fight for Fifteen?


Exactly right! It's not a justification to not raise the minimum wage but it is a legitimate unintended consequence.

Posted on: 2/7 10:02
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#65
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/27 20:34
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 888
Offline
Quote:

135jc wrote:
This is really a slick move to increase tax collected by the state. Hopefully it wont put too many places out of business or cause too many to decrease staff.


Businesses suffering the most will be McDonalds franchieses and other shitty employers.

It's not going to chase anyone out, but it may lead to price increases for consumers that consume shitty, cheap products.

Tax collection on people making minimum wage isnt going to make a dent in the budget.

Posted on: 2/7 9:59
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#64
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/7/9 15:50
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2057
Offline
Quote:

135jc wrote:
This is really a slick move to increase tax collected by the state. Hopefully it wont put too many places out of business or cause too many to decrease staff.


You also have to consider the unintended consequences to the individual. If a minimum wage worker who supplements their income with state assistance has their income "bumped up" how does that impact their benefits? Will there be a group of workers who somehow find that their net gain doesn't adequately cover the assistance they used to receive - or will the increase deem them partially or completely ineligible? Is that one of the goals of the Fight for Fifteen?

Posted on: 2/7 9:57
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#63
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/16 23:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 830
Offline
This is really a slick move to increase tax collected by the state. Hopefully it wont put too many places out of business or cause too many to decrease staff.

Posted on: 2/7 9:37
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#62
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/20 13:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2522
Offline

Murphy signs bill to boost New Jersey’s minimum wage to $15

By Updated 02/04/2019 02:24 PM EST

Gov. Phil Murphy signed legislation Monday that will gradually raise New Jersey’s minimum wage to $15 an hour for most workers by 2024, making it the fourth state to approve a policy that not long ago was considered a pipe dream in Democratic circles.

“It is a great day to make history for New Jersey’s working families,” Murphy said in an auditorium in Elizabeth that was bursting with supporters and had the feel of a pep rally. “We’ve talked long enough about putting New Jersey on a responsible path to raising the minimum wage. Today we start on this path.”

This bill signing culminates more than a year of negotiations and is a major victory for Murphy and the state’s Democrat-controlled Legislature. It also puts New Jersey on a growing list of blue states — California, Massachusetts and New York, as well as the District of Columbia — that have authorized such a jump in the minimum wage.

https://www.politico.com/states/new-je ... minimum-wage-to-15-836467


Posted on: 2/6 7:17
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#61
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/20 13:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2522
Offline

Murphy and Democratic Leaders Agree on $15 Minimum Wage — Little Else


Posted on: 2017/11/21 10:20
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#60
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/20 13:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2522
Offline

Fulop: Raising the minimum wage to $15 is an opportunity for N.J. to lead | Opinion

By Star-Ledger Guest Columnist
March 12, 2016 at 10:11 AM

By Steve Fulop

I've always believed that actions speak louder than words. Whether it was leaving Wall Street in the days after 9/11 to enlist in the Marine Corps, taking on the corrupt political machine in Jersey City or leading the first administration in New Jersey to enact paid sick leave, actions and results have mattered — much more than just talking about getting things done.

In October 2015, I was among the first elected leaders in New Jersey, standing with my friend, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, to advocate for an increase in the minimum wage to $15 per hour.

Q&A: Can N.J. absorb a minimum wage boost of up to $15 an hour?

And last week, after months of careful planning, I signed an executive order making Jersey City the first city in New Jersey to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour for municipal workers. Over 500 adult city employees — full- and part-time, seasonal and nonseasonal — will be impacted by this increase.

And, because we've managed our budget responsibly for the past three years with no tax increase, we were able to accomplish this without putting an extra burden on taxpayers. In fact, the minimum wage increase is already allowed for in 2016's tax-neutral budget.

Of course, this issue affects more than just Jersey City employees. Working families across New Jersey are struggling. Currently in this state, a minimum wage employee needs to work 13 hours a day and seven days a week just to make ends meet. This is outrageous and unfair to those who put in an honest day's work.

As proudly progressive as we are in New Jersey, too often we lag behind on issues such as this. From marriage equality to paid sick leave, environmental issues or the DREAM Act, I believe New Jersey should have led the charge in advancing these issues when they first came to be discussed. Instead, officials in Trenton failed to advance these issues — only following through once the path was already paved.

Raising the minimum wage is an opportunity for us to lead.

And we shouldn't delay, lest we fall behind again. As states across the nation propose phasing in the $15 minimum wage by 2021, some of our leaders in the New Jersey Senate have proposed a phase-in that wouldn't fully implement the wage increase until 2024.

New Jersey's working families have waited long enough. Now is not time for more rhetoric — it's time for action.

Steve Fulop is the Democratic mayor of Jersey City.

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2 ... _to_15_is_an_opportu.html


Posted on: 2016/3/12 10:29
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#59
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/5/28 23:09
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 697
Offline

Posted on: 2016/3/7 8:16
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#58
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4760
Offline
Dan, tax abated properties are not exempted from water and sewer bills. Both regular and tax abated properties will receive their annual increases next year of 3.75 for both water and sewer. My comment, if Fulop is going to be generous, be generous to the ratepayer. The MUA stated it had a $60 million surplus and wanted to return some of the money to rate payers when Fulop took the money. The surplus came about due to the perpetual annual increases. Every year, both taxes and water liens are sold to lien holders because some citizens cannot afford either their water or tax bills. Let's stop taking away their homes by reducing the rates especially water rates.

Posted on: 2016/3/3 11:13
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#57
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/2/6 18:13
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1199
Offline
while I think that this comment belongs better on the thread about the 2016 budget and if it was about fairness, the mua over payment should have been refunded to the payer, which includes tax abated properties. but, by instead transferring the funds into the budget and thereby reducing the amount of money needed to be raised by taxes, it only benefits property owners that pay conventional taxes and who would otherwise pay a property tax increase if this action was not done.

so, since none of the over payment is shared with those residents of tax abated homes, a greater benefit goes to those who pay conventional taxes. its like clawing back a little money from the tax abated properties.

like stalling on the property tax revaluation, it is not equitable, but you and I benefit.


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Now that Fulop is giving $15.00 to low wage earners, perhaps he can return our MUA overpayment, which is $31.5 million and stop the 3.75 increase in water and 3.75 increase in sewer rates for the following years. These are annual perpetual increases. If he is going to be generous, then remember the people who pay into the MUA.

Posted on: 2016/3/3 11:05
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#56
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4760
Offline
Now that Fulop is giving $15.00 to low wage earners, perhaps he can return our MUA overpayment, which is $31.5 million and stop the 3.75 increase in water and 3.75 increase in sewer rates for the following years. These are annual perpetual increases. If he is going to be generous, then remember the people who pay into the MUA.

Posted on: 2016/3/2 20:54
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#55
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3690
Offline
Quote:
Wishful_Thinking wrote: Quote:
bodhipooh wrote: Also, the recent minimum wage increase in San Francisco offers some cautionary tales for proponents of such an increase in other cities. While many have benefited, some businesses (including some that supported the increase) have been forced to close their doors after being unable to turn a profit after their payroll costs increased so much.
San Jose, CA, on the other hand reports a positive impact of raising their minimum wage http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci ... ge-year-old-success-story.
Thanks for posting that link. I read through it, and it "felt" a little too slanted, so I did a quick search and discovered that the two authors were a professor and student that drafted the original petition to raise the minimum wage. Not quite impartial reporting. Regardless, I can't argue against their statements. I would only point out that the minimum wage in SF is currently $12.25, while in San Jose it is $10.30. That's a 20% difference, and one that is likely quite significant in the aggregate. Both of those minimum pale in comparison to Mayor Flop's minimum wage of $15, which is a full 45% higher than San Jose and, 20% higher than San Francisco. You do understand those are substantial percentages, right? Again, I do not begrudge a minimum wage worker a raise. This conversation is more of a philosophical diversion to me. I am neither in favor or against a minimum wage increase. Actually, I am in favor of some sort of raise. But, when cities act unilaterally, they may end up hurting the very same workers they are determined to help. If a worker is no longer able to qualify for state and federal benefits, like free healthcare, food stamps, financial assistance, etc, has the city actually helped them? Most people have VERY LITTLE grasp on finances, and they will not have the wherewithal to evaluate their overall financial plus/minus of a minimum wage increase and whether and how to limit the impact by perhaps working less hours, etc. Quote:
One might draw the conclusion that San Jose is a better example for Jersey City than San Fran, as we don't have the rampant income inequality driving up the cost of residential and commercial rents the way they do.
Where did you get this!? If anything, I think the opposite may be true. Jersey City strikes me as the classic example of a "tale of two cities". We have condos and brownstones that exceed one million dollars abutting dilapidated and poor properties. Do you have some sort of misplaced idea of income equality across JC?? From Greenville to DTJC you will find everything between true poverty and millionaires. When I volunteer at the local soup kitchen, I am always a bit alarmed by the ever increasing amount of people we are helping and feeding on a regular basis, and a lot (most?) of these people are residents in DTJC. In any case, the point I am trying to make is that we have some serious income inequality in this city, much more serious than the average person may realize.

Posted on: 2016/3/2 20:13
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#54
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/10/15 13:32
From Heights
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 766
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:

Also, the recent minimum wage increase in San Francisco offers some cautionary tales for proponents of such an increase in other cities. While many have benefited, some businesses (including some that supported the increase) have been forced to close their doors after being unable to turn a profit after their payroll costs increased so much.


There are several articles about the bookstore in SF closing, the owner also noted the impact of escalating rents and competition from Amazon. That doesn't mean it won't be important to look at the types of business that employ people at such a low wage - most are in service industries such as food and health that are "sticky", i.e. where jobs are less likely to be shipped overseas. I doubt food prep and providing health services are repetitive enough to merit developing automation for those positions.

San Jose, CA, on the other hand reports a positive impact of raising their minimum wage http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci ... ge-year-old-success-story. One might draw the conclusion that San Jose is a better example for Jersey City than San Fran, as we don't have the rampant income inequality driving up the cost of residential and commercial rents the way they do.

Posted on: 2016/3/2 13:51
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#53
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/16 23:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 830
Offline
My wife works for a govt. program that hires $10/hr. Many if not all of these employees qualify for wic foodstamps and a housing allowance. These benefits already extend them past 15/hr. Since the increase is happening on a city level the govt will not chant the income levels required for these programs. This means they will lose the benefit. So in the end what does it accomplish except as many point out votes.

Posted on: 2016/3/1 22:46
Print Top


Re: Fulop and the ‘Fight for Fifteen’
#52
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/5/28 23:09
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 697
Offline
By the way, if you support this idea, could you explain why 15? Why not 20? Or 150 for that matter? Would it not be better if everyone was paid 150? Wouldn't people live better?

How did you arrive at the number, and why do you not want to go for a higher one?


Posted on: 2016/3/1 21:15
Print Top




(1) 2 3 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017