Minimum Wage


MYTH: We will always be able to remain fully employed as a nation and it is desirable to do so.

TRUTH: We need massive underemployment to get rid of trivial unnecessary jobs in the economy and make it more efficient in the future by offering free education in a technical field as a realistic hope of future employment to those unemployed and destitute who have a desire to put in the effort and who have the ability and who will try to achieve a greater level of quality education.

With a safety net for the unemployed and destitute there will be no need for a minimum wage because if it is too low then citizens will remain unemployed and destitute supported with basic needs delivered door to door but no vehicle transportation.

Instead without a minimum wage employers will be able to hire teenage offspring to do fast food, clerical help, custodial work, deli work, urban farming, safe factory jobs, and other safe jobs at minimal hourly rates for about 4 hours a day so that they get training in the work ethic on the job with financial help from the family. Children of the employed will have the opportunity to learn basic job and people skills which will be very useful in the employment world where it is frequently said that you can’t get a job without experience.

Transportation to an from work can be done by specialty van, bicycles, and scooters with parental permission.

Teenage offspring of the employed will get all the job experience which they need and then some! We will also be once again in a competitive position with developing countries like China and Russia.

There may be some that feel that there would be less time for school if they worked. Shorten the school day by four hours a day because offspring aren’t learning useful job skills in school anyway and a liberal arts education is overrated and is largely an inefficient trivial pursuit expensive bureaucracy to boot.

Teenage offspring of the unemployed and destitute should not qualify for part time work because it would motivate the adults to have more offspring and send them out to earn spending money for the unemployed and destitute. Instead the teenage offspring of the unemployed and destitute should be spending more time on education which will benefit them later in life.

I don’t believe in using profane language but I use fuck here to get the message across to those working people that I love so much such as furniture movers. Those people have bodily difficult jobs carrying heavy furniture every day and it is a hard boring job. Many of them use fuck and motherfucker every forth word or so and I empathize with them.

I am a man for the working people because I have been there and seen it and experienced it with my own body sweat. Yea, I can also move medium weight furniture. I am not afraid of dirty difficult jobs or any job because different jobs are necessary and to be admired. I worked my butt off doing a speedy job by moving speedily with about three to five boxes at a time strapped to my back. Did I get rewarded for that extra work? No! I was working for minimum wage and there was no incentive to work efficiently and make the customer happy with a speedy move.

The truth is that most of those minimum wage jobs are unjust and in about 10 to 20 years there should be very few minimum wage jobs that robots can’t do better. Most of those minimum wage workers should be educating themselves on the internet for better technologically based jobs. Education retraining in science and technology over the internet at home or in school should be financed by the federal government and the instruction for the audio visual education should be provided by private firms also potentially funded by foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. All the recipients of this free internet education would be the unemployed and destitute and all students in public schools and community colleges and universities.

The truth is that most minimum wage jobs should be robotized and humans should not be trapped into working at minimum subsistence levels for long durations. That kind of work is truly dehumanizing and an unjust exploitation and minimization of the full potential of the human body and mind!!!!!!



If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 1200 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to


If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

Read this person’s blog. I reposted this because I believe in the hard science that has placed animals in environments where they receive 3 hots and a cot for no effort. The end result is that they begin to expect this every day and will quit working as long as it is given to them. Humans are no different and the excuses do not hold because they all cede personal responsibility to someone else and assume that everyone is fucking mindless. Hate fucking Wall Street? Then quit cooperating, stop watching the fucking Kardashians and do something about your own predicament! 

True Freedom


Hello friends, 

I guess that I am getting used to the ‘out of the closet skeptic/atheist’ thing in that I’m being forced to put on my Skepo-vision goggles more often. I still do tend to knee jerk on some things and am trying harder to catch myself when it occurs so bear with me. I was pondering the subject of freedom the other day and came to a conclusion about most of the rhetoric coming from the media about it today. Most liberals hail Edward Snowden as a hero for exposing what he called invasions of public privacy and want him to be fully pardoned. Conservatives want him shot for treason and used as an example of what happens to people who ‘betray U.S interest.’  

I say that freedom is a double edged sword that can cut unclear both ways. People had true freedom in the early 1800’s in that they could strike out on their own, stake a land claim and die of disease, get attacked and slaughtered by the natives or starve to death. In some instances things worked out very well for these people, and as it did, they expanded Government to take on more of humanity’s problems. Branches of Gov. on food inspection, disease, healthcare, etc. started popping up and problems got solved, but as usual, Gov. always oversteps bounds because it is controlled by the greedy and dishonest life form Homo Sapiens. Now we find ourselves watched by cameras on every building and street corner, drones are starting to pop up in the civilian circle and spy equipment has become so sophisticated that it can be used to see through solid walls.

Today we are living in a world that is the natural outcome of the installation of central Government. We cry about violations of our freedom, yet like thought police we tattle on co-workers who talk of non-politically correct things. We curse the police for not coming sooner but decry the use of drones to identify criminal perpetrators. We want to be free of cameras but get pissed when mugged for our paychecks at an ATM. There are many more. Humans do nothing in moderation and usually take the path of least resistance, meaning that we want our freedoms but we will also allow Big Brother access to certain private matters KNOWING that if given them, BB will abuse the people’s trust almost every time! Freedom has it’s trade offs. If you want certain safety, then you have to roll the dice and hope that these safeguards won’t be used for invading your privacy. The human thing to do is to use these safeguards for selfish reasons, so there are your consequences for a central Government. If done away with, the country goes back to robber barons and chaos with people dying at an average age of 40-50. This is actual freedom; really not what you thought of when defining the word, huh? Excuse the simplistic view and analysis, but I was looking for a generic explanation to convey a complex thought. Peace! 


Oprah proves, yet again, her blazing ignorance!

October 16th, 2013
03:20 PM ET

What Oprah gets wrong about atheism

Opinion by Chris Stedmanspecial to CNN

(CNN) – To some, Oprah Winfrey appears to have an almost godlike status. Her talents are well recognized, and her endorsement can turn almost any product into an overnight bestseller.

This godlike perception is fitting, since in recent years Winfrey’s work has increasingly emphasized spirituality, including programs like her own “Super Soul Sunday.”

But what happens when an atheist enters the mix?

A few days ago Winfrey interviewed long-distance swimmer Diana Nyad on Super Soul Sunday. Nyad identified herself as an atheist who experiences awe and wonder at the natural world and humanity.

Nyad, 64, who swam from Cuba to Key West last month, said “I can stand at the beach’s edge with the most devout Christian, Jew, Buddhist, go on down the line, and weep with the beauty of this universe and be moved by all of humanity — all the billions of people who have lived before us, who have loved and hurt.”

Winfrey responded, “Well I don’t call you an atheist then.”

Winfrey went on, “I think if you believe in the awe and the wonder and the mystery then that is what God is… It’s not a bearded guy in the sky.”

Nyad clarified that she doesn’t use the word God because it implies a “presence… a creator or an overseer.”

Winfrey’s response may have been well intended, but it erased Nyad’s atheist identity and suggested something entirely untrue and, to many atheists like me, offensive: that atheists don’t experience awe and wonder.

MORE ON CNN: Diana Nyad completes historic Cuba-to-Florida swim

The exchange between Winfrey and Nyad reminds me of a conversation I once had with a Catholic scholar.

The professor once asked me: “When I talk about God, I mean love and justice and reconciliation, not a man in the sky. You talk about love and justice and reconciliation. Why can’t you just call that God?”

I replied: “Why must you call that God? Why not just call it what it is: love and justice and reconciliation?”

Though we started off with this disagreement, we came to better understand one another’s points of view through patient, honest dialogue.

Conversations like that are greatly needed today, as atheists are broadly misunderstood.

MORE ON CNN: Behold, the six types of atheists

When I visit college and university campuses around the United States, I frequently ask students what words are commonly associated with atheists. Their responses nearly always include words like “negative,” “selfish,” “nihilistic” and “closed-minded.”

When I ask how many of them actually have a relationship with an atheist, few raise their hands.

Relationships can be transformative. The Pew Research Center found that among the 14% of Americans who changed their mind from opposing same-sex marriage to supporting it in the last decade, the top reason given was having “friends, family, acquaintances who are gay/lesbian.”

Knowing someone of a different identity can increase understanding. This has been true for me as a queer person and as an atheist. I have met people who initially think I can’t actually be an atheist when they learn that I experience awe and am committed to service and social justice.

But when I explain that atheism is central to my worldview — that I am in awe of the natural world and that I believe it is up to human beings, instead of a divine force, to strive to address our problems — they often better understand my views, even if we don’t agree.

While theists can learn by listening to atheists more, atheists themselves can foster greater understanding by not just emphasizing the “no” of atheism — our disagreement over the existence of any gods — but also the “yes” of atheism and secular humanism, which recognizes the amazing potential within human beings.

Carl Sagan, the agnostic astronomer and author, would have agreed with Nyad’s claim that you can be an atheist, agnostic or nonreligious person and consider yourself “spiritual.”

As Sagan wrote in “The Demon-Haunted World,”:

“When we recognize our place in an immensity of light‐years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual.”

Nyad told Winfrey that she feels a similar sense of awe:

“I think you can be an atheist who doesn’t believe in an overarching being who created all of this and sees over it,” she said. “But there’s spirituality because we human beings, and we animals, and maybe even we plants, but certainly the ocean and the moon and the stars, we all live with something that is cherished and we feel the treasure of it.”

MORE ON CNN:  ‘Atheist’ isn’t a dirty word, congresswoman

I experience that same awe when I see people of different beliefs coming together across lines of religious difference to recognize that we are all human — that we all love and hurt.

Perhaps Winfrey, who could use her influence to shatter stereotypes about atheists rather than reinforce them, would have benefited from listening to Nyad just a bit more closely and from talking to more atheists about awe and wonder.

I know many who would be up to the task.

Chris Stedman is the assistant humanist chaplain at Harvard University, coordinator of humanist life for the Yale Humanist Community and author of Faitheist: How an Atheist Found Common Ground with the Religious

   – CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Atheism • Belief • Celebrity • Ethics • Faith • Faith Now • God • Inspiration • Nones • Opinion • Spirituality