LogFAQs > #958207853

I mean, I don't get the opposition to a living wage. People won't work for less than they need to eat. Besides, people can pay living wages and still be wealthy. The title originally said "80% of the wealth" but I had to shorten it because of the character limit.

What people are saying is that rich people have a right to choke the life out of others. It's like saying, "I worked hard enough to ensure you starve." It doesn't work that way. And I can't see any reason why anyone would defend it except out of pure malice -- a vivacious malice in which they see themselves in the role of the abuser and not the abused.

"Ignorance" doesn't even cut it. But this point, people have to know that isn't enough to get by on. Maybe you could live on $8 to $12 an hour back when you could get a hamburger, French fries, and a Coke with change back or your $5. Since the prices have doubled, so has what it costs to survive.

I know there's the possibility of food stamps, but that's a creating a socialist welfare state when you throw your arms up and say, "Everyone can be living on rations," instead of, "Everyone has a right to earn enough to eat." And, if I'm not mistaken, that's the very thing which conservatives are supposed to be in greatest opposition to.