Looks like both chances to raise America's $5.15 an hour federal minimum wage failed yesterday.  Good, in my opinion.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-min08.html

That sucks.  I'd like to see the people who voted this down try to live on $5.15 an hour.  Some of the jobs I send my temps on only pay $5.50 and I hate sending people out to those jobs.

No link???


Maybe it's a joke I'm not getting, or maybe you need to look again.

Maybe it's a joke I'm not getting, or maybe you need to look again.


no seriously, it wasn't there earlier. now it works.

Looks like both chances to raise America's $5.15 an hour federal minimum wage failed yesterday.  Good, in my opinion.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-min08.html


Yeah, lets keep all those minimum wage worker (lazy ba3t4rds) in poverty, thats all they deserve.

Seems to me that anyone who is wiling to work deserves to make a living wage doing it.

I am glad the Santorum amendment was shot down though because of the "comp-time" provision and the increase in the exemption from $500,000 to $1 mil. it contained.  And not that the Santorum amendment went down in a bigger way than the Kennedy amendment.  This was all in my local paper, so I didn't go to the web site.

I hope the main bill also goes down in flames, or at least gets blocked and dies.  Anything banks and credit card companies want, I oppose.

I hope the main bill also goes down in flames, or at least gets blocked and dies.  Anything banks and credit card companies want, I oppose.


The democrats attempted a filibuster, the republicans asked for cloture.  The final vote was 69-29 (if I remember correctly.)  Since you only need 60 votes to stop a filibuster, the bill passes the US Senate!

Looks like both chances to raise America's $5.15 an hour federal minimum wage failed yesterday.  Good, in my opinion.



Anyone who thinks it's "good" that a p***ant wage amount like that isn't being raised obviously hasn't had to live on it, and obviously doesn't give a d*mn about people. Let's see you come out of your ivory tower for a while and see how long you could survive on $5.15 an hour. You wouldn't be able to afford the Internet to keep spewing out this sort of drivel, that's for sure. If I sound spiteful, that's because I am. I've had to live on the minimum wage in the past and it's not something I'd wish on anybody.

Anyone who thinks it's "good" that a p***ant wage amount like that isn't being raised obviously hasn't had to live on it, and obviously doesn't give a d*mn about people. Let's see you come out of your ivory tower for a while and see how long you could survive on $5.15 an hour.


That is where your logic is flawed.  The federal minimum wage is meant to keep people from slave labor, not be a living wage.  You're suppose to start off at a reasonable minimum and then move up, you're not suppose to live on it.

That is where your logic is flawed.  The federal minimum wage is meant to keep people from slave labor, not be a living wage.  You're suppose to start off at a reasonable minimum and then move up, you're not suppose to live on it.


And your logic is flawed if you think that people aren't forced to live on it, because they are. If you're a capitalist, and you can get away with paying people the absolute minimum you're allowed, you do it. The only people who are going to be hurt by increasing the minimum wage are the b*stards who won't pay their employees anything above it, and lemee tell you there's many of them out there.

Anyone who thinks it's "good" that a p***ant wage amount like that isn't being raised obviously hasn't had to live on it, and obviously doesn't give a d*mn about people. Let's see you come out of your ivory tower for a while and see how long you could survive on $5.15 an hour. You wouldn't be able to afford the Internet to keep spewing out this sort of drivel, that's for sure. If I sound spiteful, that's because I am. I've had to live on the minimum wage in the past and it's not something I'd wish on anybody.


You go Powerslave!!!  Sock it to em

.
The democrats attempted a filibuster, the republicans asked for cloture. The final vote was 69-29 (if I remember correctly.) Since you only need 60 votes to stop a filibuster, the bill passes the US Senate!


You needn't instruct me on the rules of the Senate, thank you.


That is where your logic is flawed. The federal minimum wage is meant to keep people from slave labor, not be a living wage. You're suppose to start off at a reasonable minimum and then move up, you're not suppose to live on it.


What drivel.  With hunreds of thousands of people working for the minimum, this is simply a crock of bull dung.  It is evan more so when we look at the manufacturing jobs that have been shipped off shore, and now increasingly the high tech jobs as well. 

If you work for a living, you should be able to derive a living from your work.

And your logic is flawed if you think that people aren't forced to live on it, because they are. If you're a capitalist, and you can get away with paying people the absolute minimum you're allowed, you do it. The only people who are going to be hurt by increasing the minimum wage are the b*stards who won't pay their employees anything above it, and lemee tell you there's many of them out there.


Look, you and the left probably can come up with several reasons why people who earn the minimum wage deserve more money, but the government should have no role whatsoever in setting the wage that an employer will/can pay.  That is a matter to be settled in the private sector, not by corrupt politicians looking for nothing more then a few cheap votes.  If you want to earn more than the minimum wage, or if you want a raise, you find a way to earn it.  You do something to become more valuable to your boss and then talk about (to your boss) what pay you think you deserve for your work.

Please stop with this nonsense about raising a family on the minimum wage.  If you can't earn more than the minimum wage, you have no business having children.   Develop some job skills.

That is where your logic is flawed.  The federal minimum wage is meant to keep people from slave labor, not be a living wage.  You're suppose to start off at a reasonable minimum and then move up, you're not suppose to live on it.


That is where your logic is flawed. Having a brother and son who are not equipped mentally to hold anything but jobs that pay minimum, or near minumum, I can tell you that there are many for whom
the mandated minimum wage is one on which they rely, and many are incapable of retraining or additional education, they are working at peak performance.  Beyond that it is necessary to have rank and file workers.  If you have 10 rank and file, and all do what it takes to work their way up, there won't be room for all of them, you will still need the rank and file.  To pay less than a living wage is the same as saying, you and the job you do, are not worthy of respect.

That is a matter to be settled in the private sector, not by corrupt politicians looking for nothing more then a few cheap votes.


Maybe we could leave it to the likes of Carla Fiorina, Ken Lay,(Ken who...? oh yeah bushies buddy, whatever happened to him?) etc...

Look, you and the left probably can come up with several reasons why people who earn the minimum wage deserve more money, but the government should have no role whatsoever in setting the wage that an employer will/can pay.  That is a matter to be settled in the private sector, not by corrupt politicians looking for nothing more then a few cheap votes.  If you want to earn more than the minimum wage, or if you want a raise, you find a way to earn it.  You do something to become more valuable to your boss and then talk about (to your boss) what pay you think you deserve for your work.

Please stop with this nonsense about raising a family on the minimum wage.  If you can't earn more than the minimum wage, you have no business having children.   Develop some job skills!  Is that hard to understand?


i agree with you, really. i've been sucking hind tit for years with minimum wages jobs and i have a four year old son to help raise and i can't keep up. the opportunity for me to complete my highschool has opened up for me in the next school year. i'll finish that and go to college. i believe if you want help, do it yourself, the government can't always help you.

i agree with you, really. i've been sucking hind tit for years with minimum wages jobs and i have a four year old son to help raise and i can't keep up. the opportunity for me to complete my highschool has opened up for me in the next school year. i'll finish that and go to college. i believe if you want help, do it yourself, the government can't always help you.


I'll tell that to my son who is autistic. In the world of the GW's he wouldn't have minimum wage, social security, independent housing.  In GWs world I guess the best thing would be to take people such as
him out onto the tundra and leave them, help decrease the surplus population.

I'll tell that to my son who is autistic. In the world of the GW's he wouldn't have minimum wage, social security, independent housing.  In GWs world I guess the best thing would be to take people such as
him out onto the tundra and leave them, help decrease the surplus population.


wouldn't he get subsidized then. i'm talking about being able bodied and so is GW. i've seen people around me living off of minimum wages and welfare. they have the potential to get off of their arses but they don't.

Look, you and the left probably can come up with several reasons why people who earn the minimum wage deserve more money, but the government should have no role whatsoever in setting the wage that an employer will/can pay.  That is a matter to be settled in the private sector, not by corrupt politicians looking for nothing more then a few cheap votes.  If you want to earn more than the minimum wage, or if you want a raise, you find a way to earn it.  You do something to become more valuable to your boss and then talk about (to your boss) what pay you think you deserve for your work.

Please stop with this nonsense about raising a family on the minimum wage.  If you can't earn more than the minimum wage, you have no business having children.  Develop some job skills!  Is that hard to understand?


Well than, will you support strong enforcement of workers' rights to form labor unions?  Will you condem Wal-Mart for firing workers who try to organize? 

What you are suggesting is that the market should determine wages.  Fine, we'll play on your turf.  If you want the market to decide wage rates that you would also, IF you are an American, support workers' right to free assemley, and that means the right to form unions.  When govbernments abroad (and here) interfere with that right they are distorting the labor market in favor of one class against another.  Under those conditions, any talk of labor levage is just so much right wing bull crap.

Well than, will you support strong enforcement of workers' rights to form labor unions?  Will you condem Wal-Mart for firing workers who try to organize? 

What you are suggesting is that the market should determine wages.  Fine, we'll play on your turf.  If you want the market to decide wage rates that you would also, IF you are an American, support workers' right to free assemley, and that means the right to form unions.  When govbernments abroad (and here) interfere with that right they are distorting the labor market in favor of one class against another.  Under those conditions, any talk of labor levage is just so much right wing bull crap.


I know about unions.  Here at my local 709 we just went on strike against Lockheed.  I was one of the about 600 people who voted against the strike, but around 1,200 did.  So we are on strike.  I will not cross the picket line and I will not be a scab, but it pains me to see these rookies who are going to go hungery because they think they will strike two days and get everything they want from Lockheed Martin.  Idiots.  I got the funds to survive, but they don't.  What can I say?

I pay union dues, I am not a freerider.  I usually support unions, workers' rights, and not letting the guy with the 15 million a year bonus screw the security guards by giving them rusty broken-down handguns (which they did before 9/11.)  I support all unions and think anyone who wants to work union or unionize, should be able to.

wouldn't he get subsidized then. i'm talking about being able bodied and so is GW. i've seen people around me living off of minimum wages and welfare. they have the potential to get off of their arses but they don't.

Well said!  :)

wouldn't he get subsidized then. i'm talking about being able bodied and so is GW. i've seen people around me living off of minimum wages and welfare. they have the potential to get off of their arses but they don't.

How about respecting the worker by paying a wage and offering benefits that enable them to pay their own way.  If they could afford to pay for  the "Dead Peasants Policy" they should be able to pony up a bit more in the envelope.  To me it is all a matter of respect. I respect people who go work everyday and I feel it insulting to that anyone who does should be forced to beg the government for help with food, shelter, education, clothing. 

How about respecting the worker by paying a wage and offering benefits that enable them to pay their own way.  If they could afford to pay for  the "Dead Peasants Policy" they should be able to pony up a bit more in the envelope.  To me it is all a matter of respect. I respect people who go work everyday and I feel it insulting to that anyone who does should be forced to beg the government for help with food, shelter, education, clothing. 


dead peasants policy? i'm from canada and i guess i'm over my head here. in canada people with disabilities and special needs get help from the government no questions asked. in fact health workers insist on it.

dead peasants policy? i'm from canada and i guess i'm over my head here. in canada people with disabilities and special needs get help from the government no questions asked. in fact health workers insist on it.


A "Dead Peasants Policy" ( a term that appears to have originated in a Wal Mart corporate email) is when a company(such as wal mart) insures its employees, without their knowledge, and name themselves(the company) beneficiary.  If an emplyee dies while employed the company gets $50,000(that seems to be the standard).  They gave the rationale that since they have to train the employee, and will have to train another to replace the lost worker, they have a vested interest in the employees life.  Once again, the employees were not told that their lives were insured and that the company was the beneficiary.  If the employee is worth $50,000 to the company they should be worth at least, and I mean very least, say....$10 bucks an hour.  And here in the states people with disabilities and/or special needs have to answer alot of questions.  Activists for special needs are kept especially busy keeping an eye on legislation that changes constantly in regards to benefits and who will get them.
It is sad, very, very sad.

I have always found our GWB to be pro-bully.  That's what the Republican Party is.  It is the party of bullies.  GWB works for a defense contractor.  Defense contractors collaborate with politicians to soak the taxpayers for all they possibly can.  No Whig in his right mind would have supported such filthy behavior, but to today's Republicans, it's their whole raison d'etre.  The GOP is not conservative, it is Fascist.  Let's always keep that clear.  The U.S. government keeps a veneer of democracy, but it is basically a Fascist government in which politicians conspire with big business to concentrate capital in fewer and fewer hands.
The veneer of democracy says business ought to clean up their own messes.  However, the de facto Fascist policy shows the U.S. government relieving businesses of legal sanctions and forcing the taxpayers to foot the bill for environmental damage.  That's just one example.

It is a matter of course that GWB would start a thread celebrating the defeat of minimum wage increases.  In Fascist parlance, it is against the founding documents of this country for government to step in on behalf of have-nots.  On the other hand, it is free market capitalism for government to forgive the rich and powerful their debts and trespasses, and help these special interests get even richer and even more powerful.  That's the Fascist Groove Thang we are seeing now.

Whatever the majority of legislators (Republican and many Dems) give as an excuse to keep the minimum wage the weakest it has ever been, bear in mind they are merely rolling over for their wealthy benefactors (or "malefactors" in this case).

And remember, it is exactly the same with the morally bankrupt bankruptcy bill the Fascists are currently ramming through Congress

Every time a Republican politician invokes the name of Jesus, he is committing blasphemy.

pro-republican=pro-fascist and pro-bully.

Please stop with this nonsense about raising a family on the minimum wage.  If you can't earn more than the minimum wage, you have no business having children.   Develop some job skills.



This dribble from the same person who said on another thread that living in poverty was not a reason for abortion. Now he is saying these same people that they  don't deserve to have kids.

Not everybody has the chance to get those good paying jobs.

The idea that you just need to develop a few skills to get yourself out of the vicious cycle of poverty and unemployment is a myth perpetuated by the middle classes. The poor know it's a lie, and so do the rich. If all it took to get ahead in life was to stand up for yourself a bit and make a go of it, no one would be poor, and if you believe that can be possible then there's no hope for you. It's a very rare thing when a person can rise above their place in life to become a captain of industry or some kind of multi-millionaire. Most people who start at the bottom, stay at the bottom. The ones who start in the middle, stay in the middle and the ones at the top are always at the top. Do you really believe it's possible that the black guy who sweeps the toilets at Boeing could one day become the president of the company if he just straightens up and flies right a bit? That the hillbilly kid from Buttf***k, SC, can end up as President of the USA?

Most of this sort of rags to riches stuff happens in the entertainment and sport industries, and even then many are called but few are chosen, but the chances of it are better than they are in just about any other field. When was the last time you heard about a person who started in a company by sweeping floors and ended up as the CEO? Rupert Murdoch started out as an office boy, but guess what? His dad owned the company! My supervisor at work is 20. Did he work his way up from copy boy? No. He started as a cadet, and you know how he got the cadetship? His stepdad is in middle-management! My wife has done numerous training courses in marketing, office administration and clerical work in the past few years and she can't even get a job at McDonalds. The minimum wage might be designed to keep people from slave labour, but at least slaves don't have to pay rent or buy groceries.

I think the days of "working your way up the corporate ladder" are long gone. 

This is part of my point, crazymom. The days of working your way up the corporate ladder have never existed, except for a very small amount of people. Most people in the workforce don't climb very high at all, or if they do, they move slowly.

I think a lot of how people get ahead in the business world is not a matter of what you know but WHO you know. Nepotism at it best (or worse). I have known people who work two or three jobs at minimum wage with no benefits, STILL have problems making ends meet. I would DARE anyone to call them lazy. And if (Goddess forbid) that person gets sick, they are totally screwed. I think it is totally obsene that a CEO can make more money in an hour than some workers can make in a year. I would like to see these fat cats TRY to live on minimum wage-then we will probably see changes to the system. But, that is highly unlikely.




Cat

Oh, come on guys.  Corporations aren't ethical or unethical, PEOPLE are ethical or unethical.  The sleazy corporate CEO you read about in the paper would be just as sleazy if he were working the register at Starbucks.  He'd just be stealing from the register instead of cooking the corporate books.  And the principled, hardworking minimum wage guy working in the mailroom would be just as principled if he were a CEO.  Character is not situational.  Nor it is defined by your education, income or your political orientation.

You can't get a realistic view of corporate America from the headlines any more than you can get a realistic view of conservatism and liberalism from the self-important loudmouths who always manage to get their faces on TV.

Oh, come on guys.  Corporations aren't ethical or unethical, PEOPLE are ethical or unethical.  The sleazy corporate CEO you read about in the paper would be just as sleazy if he were working the register at Starbucks.  He'd just be stealing from the register instead of cooking the corporate books.  And the principled, hardworking minimum wage guy working in the mailroom would be just as principled if he were a CEO.  Character is not situational.  Nor it is defined by your education, income or your political orientation.

You can't get a realistic view of corporate America from the headlines any more than you can get a realistic view of conservatism and liberalism from the self-important loudmouths who always manage to get their faces on TV.


Yes, but the unethical corporate CEO does serious damage to the lives of the hardworking minimum wage people by lobbying congress(paying off) to keep the wages low, at the same time they are stuffing their pockets with their unethical wads of cash(I almost called them earnings, they are not)
Corporate America has engineered the gap between the lowest and highest(themselves) paid workers in the USA so that it is the largest gap since(I believe) the thirties.That is a reality.

Yeah, lets keep all those minimum wage worker (lazy ba3t4rds) in poverty, thats all they deserve.

Seems to me that anyone who is wiling to work deserves to make a living wage doing it.


Virtually all economists agree that increasing the minimum wage hurts those it is intended to help by leading to increased unemployment.  Some employers are unable to pass along all of the wage increases to their customers and are forced to lay off employees.

Minimum wages are what employees earn in entry level positions.  The minimum wage is definitely not a living wage, but virtually all hard working people either get raises or get the experience they need to qualify for higher paying positions.

Setting wage levels through legislation, instead of through market based mechanisms, harms the economy a lot more than it helps it.

Yes, but the unethical corporate CEO does serious damage to the lives of the hardworking minimum wage people by lobbying congress(paying off) to keep the wages low, at the same time they are stuffing their pockets with their unethical wads of cash(I almost called them earnings, they are not)
Corporate America has engineered the gap between the lowest and highest(themselves) paid workers in the USA so that it is the largest gap since(I believe) the thirties.That is a reality.

Thank you, Danoota, that's what I was thinking.
If you took Dubya at infancy and had him raised in a broken home in some godawful housing project, he would become a lower-level dope dealer before getting murdered for short-counting the big guy!

Jenkins wrote:
Virtually all economists agree that increasing the minimum wage hurts those it is intended to help by leading to increased unemployment.  Some employers are unable to pass along all of the wage increases to their customers and are forced to lay off employees.

Minimum wages are what employees earn in entry level positions.  The minimum wage is definitely not a living wage, but virtually all hard working people either get raises or get the experience they need to qualify for higher paying positions.

Setting wage levels through legislation, instead of through market based mechanisms, harms the economy a lot more than it helps it.
This is a canard promoted by lying liars like Rush Limbaugh and Fred Barnes.  It's the same logic used by that anthropmorphic pile of poo we call a president when he said it's no good to tax the rich, 'coz they hire lawyers and get out of paying.
You could chop the minimum wage down to two bucks an hour, and the corporations would still lay-off American workers first chance they got, so long as they could pay ten cents an hour in some third world hell hole.
The lower the minimum wage, the lower the median wage.  A family of four cannot survive on $7.25 an hour.  Heck, not even two wages of $7.25.  Three full-time wages of $7.25 would see a family of four barely squeaking by.  Maybe they would do OK in the deep south, but not here in the northeast.
My friend, your corporate executives don't care much for market-based mechanisms.  They prefer to have the government pay them to shut down their American factories and relocate overseas, not to mention outsource their customer service to India.
BIG BUSINESS = BIG GOVERNMENT.  You won't have one without the other.
As for virtually all economists, you might as well add "who work for the Heritage Foundation and write editorials for the Wall Street Journal.
::)

If GW and his buddies all had their way, can you imagine what this country would be like, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy come to mind, sadly we are headed in that direction.

If GW and his buddies all had their way, can you imagine what this country would be like, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy come to mind, sadly we are headed in that direction.

Ayyuh!

When someone runs a company they do a plan that encompasses the cost of doing business. Included in that plan is the cost of labor.  The problem is they write in huge bonuses to themselves as a cost of labor, then cry about the cost of labor when it comes to paying the lowest wage earners.  bunch of @ssholes, make me sick. >:(

Oh, come on guys.  Corporations aren't ethical or unethical, PEOPLE are ethical or unethical.  The sleazy corporate CEO you read about in the paper would be just as sleazy if he were working the register at Starbucks.  He'd just be stealing from the register instead of cooking the corporate books.  And the principled, hardworking minimum wage guy working in the mailroom would be just as principled if he were a CEO.  Character is not situational.  Nor it is defined by your education, income or your political orientation.

You can't get a realistic view of corporate America from the headlines any more than you can get a realistic view of conservatism and liberalism from the self-important loudmouths who always manage to get their faces on TV.


Correct.  And here is an example:

Farrah Gray grew up in a roach infested apartment in Chicago.  He made his first million at 14.  He recently spoke to school children in Naples, Florida.   Gray believes everyone is directly responsible for whom they become, no matter their circumstances.  Read his story (linked below.)  You may learn something.

http://www.naplesnews.com/npdn/business/article/0,2071,NPDN_14901_3605195,00.html

Farrah Gray grew up in a roach infested apartment in Chicago.  He made his first million at 13.  He recently spoke to school children in Naples, Florida.



Well, Mr. Gray sounds like an interesting story, but I think it's more important for kids to see more realistic examples of success.  Making a million by the age of 13 is not a realistic goal for 99.99% of PRIVILEGED kids, much less underprivileged ones.  Better they should hear from an engineer, a novelist, a computer programmer, an academic, or a more typical example of a successful entrepreneur.



Gray believes everyone is directly responsible for whom they become, no matter their circumstances. 



And someone taking responsibility for himself does not excuse me from being a decent human being and giving him a hand when he needs it.



You may learn something.



Was that comment directed at me?  ???

can someone cut and paste the Farrah Gray story for those of us who don't want to fill out the registration form?

can someone cut and paste the Farrah Gray story for those of us who don't want to fill out the registration form?


Sure.

20-year-old 'Reallionaire' exhorts students to give their best effort in life

http://mas.scripps.com/NPDN/2005/03/07/N-GreyFarrah_d.jpg
Farrah Gray describes himself as "America's Reallionaire."

He's as real as they come.

At 20, Farrah Gray has achieved more than most will in a lifetime.

He describes himself as America's Reallionaire and when he shared his rags-to-riches story with Golden Gate High School students Tuesday, he touched them in a way few speakers can.

The teenagers hooted, hollered, clapped, whistled and even stomped their way through his high-energy speech. Afterward they lined up to meet him one-on-one, feeling inspired and looking for help in pursuing their dreams.

Students jammed into the high school's auditorium by the hundreds for his three presentations. Some clamored for front-row seats, maybe in hopes that his success would rub off on them if they just got close enough.

A body guard stood closely behind Gray as he spoke.

Gray grew up in a broken-down apartment in the inner city of Chicago. His mother worked three jobs, but still his family needed public assistance to get by. There were days when there was barely any food in the fridge.

"We had no furniture," he said. "We had rats and roaches running around. We had to sleep on the floor with the rats and the roaches."

A young Farrah started asking himself why he had to live this way, and he became determined to get himself and his family to the "other side of the mountain."

At 6 years old, he sold body lotion for $1.50 door-to-door. He mixed together leftover lotion and baby powder that he found around the house to make "new" bottles. He earned $50. He treated his mother to a buffet dinner at a Chinese restaurant, and the feeling he got inspired him to keep going.

By 7, he carried a business card reading "21st Century CEO," though he didn't even know what CEO meant.

He'd heard someone introduced as a CEO on TV and it sounded important. He toted around a red lunch box as a briefcase, and handed his card out to anyone who would take it.

At 8, he organized a group of his friends to create UNEEC, the Urban Neighborhood Economic Enterprise Club. Ultimately, the club raised $1 million to develop the group's entrepreneurial ideas and start various businesses. The club's success landed him his own radio show called "Backstage Live" in Las Vegas.

"A lot of people did hang up on us," Gray said. "All I heard was dial tones."

By 12, Gray had established himself as a national speaker.

Today, he commands $10,000 per appearance.

At 13, he started his own company called Farr-Out Foods, headquartered in New York. The company sold pancakes based on his grandma's recipe for syrup. It did $1.5 million in sales, making him a millionaire at 14.

Gray later sold the company for $1 million.

After making his first million, his first goal was to retire his mother and grandmother, who worked so hard to make ends meet. He bought homes for them and hired housekeepers and chefs so they don't have to cook or clean.

During the past few years, Gray has racked up a long list of other achievements. He's acquired INNERCITY Magazine, he's financed a comedy show on the Las Vegas strip and last year he published his first book called "Reallionaire: Nine Steps to Becoming Rich from the Inside Out." His book is endorsed by former President Bill Clinton.

Gray defines a Reallionaire as "someone who has discovered that there is more to money than having money. A person who understands that success is not just about being rich in your pocket; you have to be rich on the inside, too."

Gray believes everyone is directly responsible for whom they become, no matter their circumstances. He said three questions should be asked when determining what to do with your life: What comes easy to you, what would you do and not get paid for, and how can you be of service?

"So many people don't use their gifts," he said. "I think the richest place is the cemetery. A lot of people die without using their gifts."

He told students they have to work on themselves from the inside out. It worked for him. He pursued his dreams, though he heard many times that he would fail.

As an African-American, he said, the statistics say he should either be dead or in jail. But, he said, through "hard work, a prayer, a goal and a vision" he beat the odds. He said he owes a lot of his success to his mother, who taught him that he could do anything he put his mind to.

He said it's important to have a sense or urgency and to hustle.

"Comfort is the enemy of achievement," he said. "So many people get comfortable with their money, their credit cards and what they have today."

He challenges himself to do better every day. And he encouraged students to do the same.

"I believe that average is really the bottom of the top and the top of the bottom," he said.

To that, he heard cheers from the students.

He encouraged students not to give in to peer pressure and not to do drugs. And he had a special message for women in the crowd.

Respect yourself, he said.

"Show us your mind and stop showing us your behind," he said to rousing applause.

After the first session, one student came out chanting "Respect your moms," while others lined up to get his autograph and personal advice.

Alexis Urquizo, a junior, asked him how to pursue creating a new video game technology that she's dreamed up. She jotted down his phone number and e-mail address so she could talk to him some more.

"I thought he was awesome," she said. "It inspired me. I have an idea and I think I can do something with it."

Kyle Sprague, a fellow classmate, also left inspired.

He dreams of becoming an Air Force fighter pilot or going into the U.S. Special Forces, though his friends have told him he can't do it.

"I want to see combat either way," he told Gray. "Then I want to go into marine biology."

He's been studying Gray's book in his English class, and he said he likes it because it's so straightforward.

Jeremy Kelly, also a junior, said he was surprised that Gray was so down-to-earth and that the millionaire agreed to come to the school. Gray didn't charge the school for his speech.

"It's the new school and it has the reputation of being in the bad part of town, which really isn't true," Kelly said. "I never thought he would have come here."

Surprised you posted that story -- this 'freeloader' and his family lived off the government dole at one point.  Don't you have a problem with that?  If they hadn't had that extra support to survive, who knows, he might have ended up another casualty -- I mean another lazy good-for-nothing drain on society.

;)

ay?

I pay union dues, I am not a freerider.  I usually support unions, workers' rights, and not letting the guy with the 15 million a year bonus  I support all unions and think anyone who wants to work union or unionize, should be able to.




Really?  I'm quite surprised.  How, than, can you support the union busting policies advocated by this admin?  Seems to me there is a really BIG disconnect between this statement and others you have made.  For example (and I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, just  looking for the continuity in your logic) you have advertised yourself as a self made man, but don't you own at least some of your afluance to the fact that you have a union (a collective entity) that has struggled (maybe before your t8ime) to get its members where they are today? 

You support this bankrupcy "reform" initiative, but what would happen to your life style if not only you lost your job, but also incurrec catostrophic medical bills?  Your afluance is dependant on so many things beyond your direct control (as is mine) that it makes one's head spin.

My students just read a review article about debt peonage.  Are we not (most of us) debt peons?  We may not owe our employers directly, but we are dependant on what they pay us to keep our creditors happy.  The big differance is that debt peons have some security, since if "the boss" throws them out, the boss looses what has been advanced.  In our case, the boss looses nothing, but we loose our homes, cars, pensions etc.  And we call ourselves "free" workers?  At least the peon can appeal to a personal relationship with the patron while we are subjected to the impersonal forces of the market.  When one discusses "freedom" in this context, one must ask "freedom from what, or to do what?"  Is the freedom to starve really such a great thing?

Really?  I'm quite surprised.  How, than, can you support the union busting policies advocated by this admin?  Seems to me there is a really BIG disconnect between this statement and others you have made.  For example (and I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, just  looking for the continuity in your logic) you have advertised yourself as a self made man, but don't you own at least some of your afluance to the fact that you have a union (a collective entity) that has struggled (maybe before your t8ime) to get its members where they are today? 


I may owe something to the union, and the fact that the strike in the past got me free dental coverage.  Yes, I owe a lot to unions.  But sometimes they anger me, like with this strike going on now over not getting a big enough sign-on bonus or some sh**.  There are three Lockheeds in America, I think one is in Texas, one is in California, and one is here in Georgia.  The workers in Texas and California voted for the contract offered by Lockheed.  The ones here didn't.  It's no mystery why.  The seniority levels at the three plants explain it.  Mostly rookies who think management is going to give them everything they want if they strike for a week.  Same thing happened a few years ago.  We had a strike for seven weeks and ended up with less.  I fear the same thing is about to happen.  Some of these people are going to go broke and I feel sorry for them.  Over 300 people have already (in just the first two days) crossed the picket line, where as our last strike we only had around 70 people in all cross from the time the strike started till the time it ended.

Now then, Bush is somewhat wrong on unions as was Reagan.  But I don't put that issue at the top of my list.  I'm not going to vote for someone who disagrees with me 80% of the time just for the union when I can vote for someone like Bush who agrees with me 75% of the time.  Now Reagan was wrong with the air traffic controler strike, firing them like that.  But Bush as far as I know hasn't done anything like that.

Correct.  And here is an example:

Farrah Gray grew up in a roach infested apartment in Chicago.  He made his first million at 14.  He recently spoke to school children in Naples, Florida.   Gray believes everyone is directly responsible for whom they become, no matter their circumstances.  Read his story (linked below.)  You may learn something.

http://www.naplesnews.com/npdn/business/article/0,2071,NPDN_14901_3605195,00.html

Since the rightwing argument always loses on the sciences of sociology and statistics, they have to resort to these "Horatio Alger" stories as a smokescreen.  What a focking joke!
:P

The conservative media loves to lionize those who beat great odds.  But when you ask why odds are so great, they call you a "bleeding heart liberal."  Bunch of flag-waving corporate automatons!

LeoShane wrote:
Surprised you posted that story -- this 'freeloader' and his family lived off the government dole at one point.  Don't you have a problem with that?  If they hadn't had that extra support to survive, who knows, he might have ended up another casualty -- I mean another lazy good-for-nothing drain on society.
You make a great point here!
:)

The cynic in me says there is a lot more to this Farrah story than what is posted. But of course if anyone with gumption can do this, and an eight year old at that, what is your excuse GW? ???

I may owe something to the union, and the fact that the strike in the past got me free dental coverage.  Yes, I owe a lot to unions.  But sometimes they anger me, like with this strike going on now over not getting a big enough sign-on bonus or some sh**.  There are three Lockheeds in America, I think one is in Texas, one is in California, and one is here in Georgia.  The workers in Texas and California voted for the contract offered by Lockheed.  The ones here didn't.  It's no mystery why.  The seniority levels at the three plants explain it.  Mostly rookies who think management is going to give them everything they want if they strike for a week.  Same thing happened a few years ago.  We had a strike for seven weeks and ended up with less.  I fear the same thing is about to happen.  Some of these people are going to go broke and I feel sorry for them.  Over 300 people have already (in just the first two days) crossed the picket line, where as our last strike we only had around 70 people in all cross from the time the strike started till the time it ended.

Now then, Bush is somewhat wrong on unions as was Reagan.  But I don't put that issue at the top of my list.  I'm not going to vote for someone who disagrees with me 80% of the time just for the union when I can vote for someone like Bush who agrees with me 75% of the time.  Now Reagan was wrong with the air traffic controler strike, firing them like that.  But Bush as far as I know hasn't done anything like that.


What union/local are you in? (I'm in Teamsters Local 41, Kansas City.)

I agree with GW on this one..  while I don't "like" the fact that businesses pay so little, I don't necessarily think it is right that one can start up a business, putting many times their whole savings into it, and then be told how to run it, what to pay, whether there has to be other companies just like yours to avoid a monopoly, what you can charge (without being accused of gouging), whether you can allow smoking in your business, how many restrooms you need to have, etc.

heII, why don't they just pay the quarterly taxes too, since they're basically running the show anyway??

and before you jump on me about how we favor "corporations" and the "big guys"... remember that not all business falls into this category.  If the mom & pop shops can't afford to stay in business anymore, ALL our business will belong to the corporate world.  Not good.

Virtually all economists agree that increasing the minimum wage hurts those it is intended to help by leading to increased unemployment.  Some employers are unable to pass along all of the wage increases to their customers and are forced to lay off employees.



But from the opposite point of view, people making minimum wage can't afford to buy as much stuff, so the stores don't sell as much stuff, so they have to lay off employees.  If more people were making more money, they could spend more money, the stores would need more stuff which would lead to more jobs.

What concerns me most of all is how low the minimum wage is in America. The minimum adult wage where I live is about $9.80. Plus we have free health care and low-rent public housing, and people here still struggle.

What concerns me most of all is how low the minimum wage is in America. The minimum adult wage where I live is about $9.80. Plus we have free health care and low-rent public housing, and people here still struggle.


Wait, where do you live?  The highest minimum wage in America is in the state of Washington where it's $7.16 an hour.

I may owe something to the union, and the fact that the strike in the past got me free dental coverage.  Yes, I owe a lot to unions.  But sometimes they anger me, like with this strike going on now over not getting a big enough sign-on bonus or some sh**.  There are three Lockheeds in America, I think one is in Texas, one is in California, and one is here in Georgia.  The workers in Texas and California voted for the contract offered by Lockheed.  The ones here didn't.  It's no mystery why.  The seniority levels at the three plants explain it.  Mostly rookies who think management is going to give them everything they want if they strike for a week.  Same thing happened a few years ago.  We had a strike for seven weeks and ended up with less.  I fear the same thing is about to happen.  Some of these people are going to go broke and I feel sorry for them.  Over 300 people have already (in just the first two days) crossed the picket line, where as our last strike we only had around 70 people in all cross from the time the strike started till the time it ended.

Now then, Bush is somewhat wrong on unions as was Reagan.  But I don't put that issue at the top of my list.  I'm not going to vote for someone who disagrees with me 80% of the time just for the union when I can vote for someone like Bush who agrees with me 75% of the time.  Now Reagan was wrong with the air traffic controler strike, firing them like that.  But Bush as far as I know hasn't done anything like that.




Interessting points.  Certainly unoins make bas descisions.  I resigned from my union's barganing team for just that reason, and while the strategy I advocated might not have proven better, the one we pursued was a disaster. 

Its true that, to my knowledge, no union at a federal facility has been decertified, as with the Air Traffic Controllers (who were striking for better eqiupment as I recall) during Bush's watch, rules have been promulgated at the Dept of Labor that weaken the right to organize, and enforcements of that right has been VERY lax.  Clearly, this isn't as splashy as what Reagan did, but it is just as harmfull to workers' rights.

And, in all scincerity, and no sarcasm intended, let me thank you for an interesting and thoughtful response.

I agree with GW on this one..  while I don't "like" the fact that businesses pay so little, I don't necessarily think it is right that one can start up a business, putting many times their whole savings into it, and then be told how to run it, what to pay, whether there has to be other companies just like yours to avoid a monopoly, what you can charge (without being accused of gouging), whether you can allow smoking in your business, how many restrooms you need to have, etc.

heII, why don't they just pay the quarterly taxes too, since they're basically running the show anyway??

and before you jump on me about how we favor "corporations" and the "big guys"... remember that not all business falls into this category.  If the mom & pop shops can't afford to stay in business anymore, ALL our business will belong to the corporate world.  Not good.


The problem I have with this is that that to me, if one wants to open a business, one has to be willing to accept established standards for doing buisiness.  If you can't (or refuse) to accept those standards, than don't evan thin k about opening a business.  Pay fair wages to those who really make your business work.  Maintain a safe and sanitary workplace etc.  These are the costs of doing business.  They are the social responsibility of those who would take advantage of our market economy.  As a society, it seems to me, we have a right to protect ourselves.  That's why we have laws against DWI (in Vt. .08% is the limit, why? I don't know.  Is it arbitrary?  Probably).  So too, we have, I think, the right to insist that Gov't enforce sanitary standards on restaurants etc.  You might want to read an old book, Upton Sinclair's The Jungle to get an idea of what pre-regulation life was like. 

But from the opposite point of view, people making minimum wage can't afford to buy as much stuff, so the stores don't sell as much stuff, so they have to lay off employees.  If more people were making more money, they could spend more money, the stores would need more stuff which would lead to more jobs.


Yes, this does seem to make sense, but you are taliking "demand side" economics, which the Repubs have rejected since Presidant Jelly Bean.

The problem I have with this is that that to me, if one wants to open a business, one has to be willing to accept established standards for doing buisiness. If you can't (or refuse) to accept those standards, than don't evan thin k about opening a business. Pay fair wages to those who really make your business work. Maintain a safe and sanitary workplace etc. These are the costs of doing business. They are the social responsibility of those who would take advantage of our market economy. As a society, it seems to me, we have a right to protect ourselves. That's why we have laws against DWI (in Vt. .08% is the limit, why? I don't know. Is it arbitrary? Probably). So too, we have, I think, the right to insist that Gov't enforce sanitary standards on restaurants etc. You might want to read an old book, Upton Sinclair's The Jungle to get an idea of what pre-regulation life was like.
ou can't (or refuse) to accept those standards, than don't evan thin k about opening a business.  Pay fair wages to those who really make your business work.  Maintain a safe and sanitary workplace etc.  These are the costs of doing business.  They are the social responsibility of those who would take advantage of our market economy.  As a society, it seems to me, we have a right to protect ourselves.  That's why we have laws against DWI (in Vt. .08% is the limit, why? I don't know.  Is it arbitrary?  Probably).  So too, we have, I think, the right to insist that Gov't enforce sanitary standards on restaurants etc.  You might want to read an old book, Upton Sinclair's The Jungle to get an idea of what pre-regulation life was like. 


Although I tend to have strong conservative views, I am open to compromise since I realize that there are MANY conservatives and MANY liberals in this country, which is necessary for a proper form of democracy.  I would accept a minimum wage increase for businesses with over 500 employees.  They should be able to afford it.  However, a business run by a family, such as a dry cleaners that only has 2 employees shouldn't have to fold because someone decides to up the ante.  This leads back to my theory from one of the other threads that "liberty comes at the cost of liberty".  People's rights to fair wages jeopardize the liberties of small businesses.  It is already hard enough for the small clothing store to compete with Wal-Mart, the privately owned grocer to compete with Safeway, etc.

When Wal-Mart and Safeway can take on this increase without having to raise prices by noticable amount, the little guys cannot.  Which will put them even further behind.

Organized labor = weekend
No organized labor = no weekend

Now do you wanna ride the union bus?

Organized labor = weekend
No organized labor = no weekend

Now do you wanna ride the union bus?


Heck, weekends are a given. I want 30 days vacation, full health-care coverage, and guaranteed time and a half pay for overtime. Any ANYTHING over 40 hours should be considered overtime.

Heck, weekends are a given. I want 30 days vacation, full health-care coverage, and guaranteed time and a half pay for overtime. Any ANYTHING over 40 hours should be considered overtime.

Click click, beep beep, laptop, cell phone, palm-pilot, text messaging, instant-messaging...
now you can go to work on the boat!!!

Click click, beep beep, laptop, cell phone, palm-pilot, text messaging, instant-messaging...
now you can go to work on the boat!!!


;D what is this from?

;D what is this from?


Aw, dad, but I have homework...
That's alright, son, you can do it on the boat!!
(make fishing gesture)

--John Bender
The Breakfast Club

"Aw, dad, but I have homework"
"That's alright son, you can do it on the boat!!
(make fishing gesture)

--John Bender
The Breakfast Club




Oh my requests may seem fancy schmancy to the good ol' US of A where words like pension and vacation are believed to be French for "commie", but they are standard in Europe for the most part.

Heck, weekends are a given. I want 30 days vacation, full health-care coverage, and guaranteed time and a half pay for overtime. Any ANYTHING over 40 hours should be considered overtime.


I got that, and time and a half for more than eight hours in a day, double time for over 10 hours in a day. That is the way it should be, can could be.  Before people start boo hooing about people who can't start up a business be aware that small business owners generally pay BETTER than large corporations, and are more flexible, they are coming under the crunch now only because since the privatization of the medical industry the costs of health related "products"(insurance) have skyrocketed.  It is big business that is fighting the minimum wage/benefit battle.  You know, guys like Ken Lay.