President Obama’s call to raise the minimum wage to $9 an hour provoked not just disagreement from “comedian” Adam Carolla and Bill O’Reilly but the kind of venom and scorn for struggling Americans that Marie Antoinette would have loved. Carolla actually argued that anyone on minimum wage who has children and then uses “our roads” and “our schools” is some kind of good-for-nothing moocher. O’Reilly didn’t challenge that but argued that nobody “willing to work hard” earns minimum wage.
As I’ve previously posted, the working poor are suffering in America. And there are economic forces arrayed against them. But fat cats O’Reilly and Carolla are not only disinterested but full of derision for those not fortunate enough to be earning the big bucks like they do.
O’Reilly’s disdain for the poor was evident just from the fact that he would have presented Carolla as an expert on the subject. Believe me, struggling to make ends meet is no joke to anyone in the midst of it. But O’Reilly quipped that Carolla has “some expertise in this minimum wage deal” because he was once denied a job at Taco Bell. It turns out Carolla is even more of an “expert” because after that rejection he worked at McDonald’s “for $2.90 an hour.” Hinting, of course, that $9 an hour is just a ridiculous extravagance. Just pay no attention to how much purchasing power the minimum wage has lost since in the meanwhile. Neither O’Reilly nor “expert” Carolla did.
Carolla argued that it was a good thing that he hated that job so much and how little he was paid. “If I loved it and I was getting rich, I would still be there.” Which is all the proof you need, ladies and gentlemen, that everyone should suffer even more than he did.
But Carolla wasn’t through:
By the way, the point that everyone is missing in Obama’s speech is not raising the minimum wage, it’s what is the family who’s making minimum wage, what are they doing having two kids? That’s insane. You can’t have two kids when you make minimum wage. By the way, who’s not paying their fair share? I would argue that people that are making minimum wage and having two kids and sending those kids to our schools and using our roads and everything else aren’t paying their fair share.
O’Reilly had a different view:
If you’re willing to work hard, you’re not gonna make minimum wage. If you want to paint a house – there’s a lot of things you can do. Drive a cab. …So all of this is hyperbole as it always is.
Then, without a thought to how economic conditions have changed since these two baby boomers were working in school, they agreed, “You’re supposed to work your way up. (O’Reilly)” and “You’re supposed to be uncomfortable. (Carolla)”
Who's engaging in class warfare now?
Also seems he thinks that people who had their kids at a time when they had a good job should have known better and desisted because they should have known they would lose their job and hence not be entitled to have kids.
Makes my head spin, he does.