PDA

View Full Version : The Republican-controlled Senate refused Wednesday to raise the minimum wage


Chiefs Minor Satellite
06-21-2006, 05:27 PM
If we raise the minimum wage are we only increasing the prevailing wage of the illegal immigrants?

Sounds very democratic to me.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Republican-controlled Senate refused Wednesday to raise the minimum wage, rejecting an election-year proposal from Democrats for the first increase in nearly a decade.


The vote was 52-46, eight short of the 60 needed (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/21/minimum.wage.reut/index.html?section=cnn_topstories).


"I don't think the Republicans get it," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy,
D-Massachusetts, who backed a proposal for a three-step increase in the current wage floor to $7.25 an hour. The federal minimum wage has been fixed at $5.15 an hour since 1997.


Republican critics said the minimum wage was a job killer, not the boon to low-wage workers portrayed by Democrats.


"This is a classic debate between two different philosophies. One
philosophy believes in the marketplace, competition and entrepreneurship, and the second is a philosophy that says government knows best," said Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Georgia. He said France and Germany have high minimum wages but also high unemployment.


But Kennedy and other advocates of an increase said minimum wage workers have been without a raise since 1997.


Underscoring the political context of the debate, he said if Democrats win the Senate this November, a minimum wage increase will be one of the first pieces of legislation to be considered.

patteeu
06-21-2006, 05:52 PM
Good, they should have repealed it.

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 05:55 PM
Good, they should have repealed it.

:thumb:

jspchief
06-21-2006, 06:04 PM
But Kennedy and other advocates of an increase said minimum wage workers have been without a raise since 1997.
If anyone has been working at a minimum wage job since 1997 and not received a raise, it is because they are a blathering idiot.

What a ridiculous statement.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 06:57 PM
If anyone has been working at a minimum wage job since 1997 and not received a raise, it is because they are a blathering idiot.

What a ridiculous statement.

Because those 10 cent a year raises really makes for a great standard of living.

I will say this much. As a student, the difference between 7.25 and 5.25 is immense. It makes a huge difference when it comes time to pay the bills. The last time that I checked, the economy didn't exactly tank when we raised it in 97. Furthermore, since Bush seems so keen on replacing skilled labor positions with unskilled workers, this would at least allow them to eek out a standard of living that would creep above poverty.

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 07:04 PM
Because those 10 cent a year raises really makes for a great standard of living.

I will say this much. As a student, the difference between 7.25 and 5.25 is immense. It makes a huge difference when it comes time to pay the bills. The last time that I checked, the economy didn't exactly tank when we raised it in 97. Furthermore, since Bush seems so keen on replacing skilled labor positions with unskilled workers, this would at least allow them to eek out a standard of living that would creep above poverty.

As ssoon as you raise the cost of labor, the cost of the end product will go up accordingly. There is no increase in the buying power for those at minimum wage, there is a loss of buying power for everyone else who doesn't get a $2.00 an hour bump mandated by the governement.

Don't know about where you are but here in Austin it is almost impossible to find a job that pays minimum wage. The market is taking care of itself just fine when starting wages for fast food are around $7.00 an hour.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 07:09 PM
As ssoon as you raise the cost of labor, the cost of the end product will go up accordingly. There is no increase in the buying power for those at minimum wage, there is a loss of buying power for everyone else who doesn't get a $2.00 an hour bump mandated by the governement.

Don't know about where you are but here in Austin it is almost impossible to find a job that pays minimum wage. The market is taking care of itself just fine when starting wages for fast food are around $7.00 an hour.

Do you really think that a $2 bump in the minimum wage will cause a domino effect all the way across the board?? Yes, some of the middle and *gasp* upper classes will lose a scintilla of their buying power...but they aren't at risk of losing their asses right now. Sometimes it's nice to have a little charity.

mikey23545
06-21-2006, 07:16 PM
Do you really think that a $2 bump in the minimum wage will cause a domino effect all the way across the board?? Yes, some of the middle and *gasp* upper classes will lose a scintilla of their buying power...but they aren't at risk of losing their asses right now. Sometimes it's nice to have a little charity.

Work your way up like a decent Republican would, you whiny little sniveler.

This is such a straw man, it is a natural issue for Dems to take up. Almost no one works for minimum wage except college kids and some entry level wage earners. If you are over 20 years old and making minimum wage, the problem is with you, not some Buy-a-vote legislation.

Donger
06-21-2006, 07:18 PM
Do you really think that a $2 bump in the minimum wage will cause a domino effect all the way across the board??

Yes, I do. Let the market dictate what people are paid, not government.

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 07:19 PM
Do you really think that a $2 bump in the minimum wage will cause a domino effect all the way across the board?? Yes, some of the middle and *gasp* upper classes will lose a scintilla of their buying power...but they aren't at risk of losing their asses right now. Sometimes it's nice to have a little charity.

It's not the middle class I am thinking of. It is the 20 year old who started at minimum wage a couple years ago and is now making $6.50 an hour as a reward for his hard work up until now. Raise the minimum wage and where is he at? Right back at the bottom of the heap making the same as the new guy that started yesterday.

Let the "free market" take care of itself, that is what this country is supposed to be about. Get the government out of our daily lives! :cuss:

jspchief
06-21-2006, 07:39 PM
Because those 10 cent a year raises really makes for a great standard of living.

I will say this much. As a student, the difference between 7.25 and 5.25 is immense. It makes a huge difference when it comes time to pay the bills. The last time that I checked, the economy didn't exactly tank when we raised it in 97. Furthermore, since Bush seems so keen on replacing skilled labor positions with unskilled workers, this would at least allow them to eek out a standard of living that would creep above poverty.Have you ever even had a job?

If you last a few years at a job that starts you at minimum wage, you won't be getting 10 cent raises, you'll be managing the place.

As others have said, minimum wage jobs are almost non-existent unless you're 14 years old. At least in this part of the country.

I'm not going to make claims about what it will do to the economy. But the notion that there are hard working people out there that are being held in poverty due to the minimum wage is absurd. Good employees are in too much demand for employers to be cheap about paying them.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 07:48 PM
Have you ever even had a job?

If you last a few years at a job that starts you at minimum wage, you won't be getting 10 cent raises, you'll be managing the place.

As others have said, minimum wage jobs are almost non-existent unless you're 14 years old. At least in this part of the country.

I'm not going to make claims about what it will do to the economy. But the notion that there are hard working people out there that are being held in poverty due to the minimum wage is absurd. Good employees are in too much demand for employers to be cheap about paying them.

I just finished my first year in grad school. Here is a listing of the jobs that I've had through 4-year school, including high school.

Golf Course Maintenance: Minimum
Hy-Vee: Minimum
Campus Job: Minimum
Radio Shack: Minimum + a small bonus if our store met a sales quota at the end of the month and small bonuses if I sold certain products (cell phones, namely).
Worked at a Pharmaceutical company in KC making $10/hour, but since I was independently contracted I was taxed at a 40% rate which made my effective wage about 6.50.

Keep in mind the last job was after I had graduated with a 3.9 GPA from one of the best schools in the Midwest, having worked 25 hours a week while doing so, and supporting myself throughout college.

I just don't buy that line.

BTW, the district office of the Radio Shack that I worked at was in Ankeny, IA, so yes they do in fact exist.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 07:53 PM
It's not the middle class I am thinking of. It is the 20 year old who started at minimum wage a couple years ago and is now making $6.50 an hour as a reward for his hard work up until now. Raise the minimum wage and where is he at? Right back at the bottom of the heap making the same as the new guy that started yesterday.

Let the "free market" take care of itself, that is what this country is supposed to be about. Get the government out of our daily lives! :cuss:

The free market is inherently corrupt, IMO. Without proper regulation you end up with small numbers of people screwing all the less fortunate out of their meager pittance.

recxjake
06-21-2006, 07:54 PM
GOOD JOB!

all raising the minimum wage does is increase inflation....

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 07:56 PM
Yes, I do. Let the market dictate what people are paid, not government.

You do realize that this was tried in the 19th century. The last I checked it was an unmitigated disaster for the majority of the country.

recxjake
06-21-2006, 07:57 PM
If you make minimum wage... you suck...

Donger
06-21-2006, 07:59 PM
You do realize that this was tried in the 19th century. The last I checked it was an unmitigated disaster for the majority of the country.

And yet we amazingly survived and are still the world's most powerful economy. Hardly what I'd call 'an unmitigated disaster.'

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 08:00 PM
And yet we amazingly survived and are still the world's most powerful economy. Hardly what I'd call 'an unmitigated disaster.'

Perhaps because of the movement for worker's rights, genius :shake:

Donger
06-21-2006, 08:01 PM
Perhaps because of the movement for worker's rights, genius :shake:

Or, perhaps in spite of it.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 08:42 PM
Yes, I do. Let the market dictate what people are paid, not government.
:thumb: What he said.

Chiefs Minor Satellite
06-21-2006, 09:13 PM
I was taxed at a 40% rate which made my effective wage about 6.50.



I think you need to go back to school, like grammar school. When I took math 40% of $10.00 was $4.00. $10.00-$4.00=$6.00 not $6.50.

Cochise
06-21-2006, 09:31 PM
If anyone has been working at a minimum wage job since 1997 and not received a raise, it is because they are a blathering idiot.


Don't blame Teddy, they are his base.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 09:35 PM
I think you need to go back to school, like grammar school. When I took math 40% of $10.00 was $4.00. $10.00-$4.00=$6.00 not $6.50.

Effective rate, dipshit. The taxes that I would have had taken out of my paycheck had I worked at a $6.50/hour job are roughly equivalent to being taxed 40% at a $10.00/hour job. I suggest you bone up on both your vocabulary and your reading comprehension you dumb slunt.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 09:38 PM
Or, perhaps in spite of it.

Are you neolithic in every sense of the word?? In spite of those goddamned chimney sweeps, those f*cking rat bastard 8 year olds who wanted to be protected from death at 9, our economy managed to survive. I guess you'd just assume piss on OSHA too?? F*ck those factory workers, if a giant steel hood turns their brains into salsa, just throw them in a gutter and go buy another. Their dumb whore wives?? They can be hookers for the upper class.

Some world you desire.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 09:39 PM
I just finished my first year in grad school. Here is a listing of the jobs that I've had through 4-year school, including high school.

Golf Course Maintenance: Minimum
Hy-Vee: Minimum
Campus Job: Minimum
Radio Shack: Minimum + a small bonus if our store met a sales quota at the end of the month and small bonuses if I sold certain products (cell phones, namely).
Worked at a Pharmaceutical company in KC making $10/hour, but since I was independently contracted I was taxed at a 40% rate which made my effective wage about 6.50.

Keep in mind the last job was after I had graduated with a 3.9 GPA from one of the best schools in the Midwest, having worked 25 hours a week while doing so, and supporting myself throughout college.

I just don't buy that line.

BTW, the district office of the Radio Shack that I worked at was in Ankeny, IA, so yes they do in fact exist.
This is EXACTLY why you should dump your political philosophy.
See, now, I'm a woman ( who allegedly make less) and I made a lot more than that when I worked my way through college.

You woulda made more as a bartender. See Hamas...choices. It's all about choices.

Cochise
06-21-2006, 09:40 PM
Hell I made more than $6.50 an hour working at an amusement park when I was in high school.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 09:42 PM
This is EXACTLY why you should dump your political philosophy.
See, now, I'm a woman ( who allegedly make less) and I made a lot more than that when I worked my way through college.

You woulda made more as a bartendar. See Hamas...choices. It's all about choices.

The first time I came across someone like you, I would have done this:

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9Q_vCcFPWE0"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9Q_vCcFPWE0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Chiefs Minor Satellite
06-21-2006, 09:44 PM
Effective rate, dipshit. The taxes that I would have had taken out of my paycheck had I worked at a $6.50/hour job are roughly equivalent to being taxed 40% at a $10.00/hour job. I suggest you bone up on both your vocabulary and your reading comprehension you dumb slunt.

I've worked contracts for years. You dont know what you are talking about.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 09:47 PM
This is EXACTLY why you should dump your political philosophy.
See, now, I'm a woman ( who allegedly make less) and I made a lot more than that when I worked my way through college.

You woulda made more as a bartendar. See Hamas...choices. It's all about choices.

I had to look for 3 months to find a job that would pay me 7 dollars. I was a pharmacy technician with 2 years experience, and was only getting $6 at one of my last jobs. Worked in a physical therapy clinic and made $6.50.

But what you're saying is you trust big business to provide enough for the people they employ. Where I am, the most a person could make without prior skill or education is 7 bucks starting out. That's not enough, and I know that if they upped the minimum wage, that would start to go up just due to competition.

For the minimum wage to stay this low, is basically our government saying they feel its sufficient income to sustain food, water and shelter for someone. And then people wonder why some stay on government assistance and keep having children instead of workng. Its cause we reward people more for staying home, than we do for getting a job. If our minimum wage offered more for people than sitting on their butt, then maybe this wouldn't be a problem.

Moooo

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 09:52 PM
I've worked contracts for years. You dont know what you are talking about.

Obviously you've never filled out a 1090 then or talked to a tax lawyer. But go ahead, keep telling yourself that you aren't full of shit.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 09:53 PM
Minimum wage destroys jobs. It mostly affects teen workers today. If you don't have skill or prior education, there are jobs that people don't like or aren't willing to do that pay more: like a garbage collector, bartendar or waiter/waitress. There are more...or you could offer a service to people on things they don't want to do or have the time. My cousin lost his job, not high paying at all...went out and cleaned houses makes $1500 a week and is now adding people under him. Other than that, one can always improve oneself.

There is also sales. The top paying job in the country if you're good at it.
Can always learn to get good at it.

The job as a technician that did not pay you well just means it was not high enough demand for it to pay you more.

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 09:57 PM
I had to look for 3 months to find a job that would pay me 7 dollars. I was a pharmacy technician with 2 years experience, and was only getting $6 at one of my last jobs. Worked in a physical therapy clinic and made $6.50.

But what you're saying is you trust big business to provide enough for the people they employ. Where I am, the most a person could make without prior skill or education is 7 bucks starting out. That's not enough, and I know that if they upped the minimum wage, that would start to go up just due to competition.

Most jobs that pay minimum wage do so to allow a profit margin while still maintaining the $.99 menu items. I know, I worked that industry for 15 years. The only flexible item in the budget of most restaurants is labor cost. When you raise the cost of that labor, their end product prices have to go up as well or they shut the doors and noone makes anything.

For the minimum wage to stay this low, is basically our government saying they feel its sufficient income to sustain food, water and shelter for someone. And then people wonder why some stay on government assistance and keep having children instead of workng. Its cause we reward people more for staying home, than we do for getting a job. If our minimum wage offered more for people than sitting on their butt, then maybe this wouldn't be a problem.

Moooo

The question of welfare is an entirely different subject. The fact that people can sit on their butts and get money for nothing is one of the bigger social problems we have in this country IMO. Some people need help, I do not deny that. But there are other ways than to force me to support them through my taxes to get this accomplished.

Sorry, minimum wage and welfare are two of my biggest hot button topics in the political arena.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 09:59 PM
Minimum wage destroys jobs. It mostly affects teen workers today. If you don't have skill or prior education, there are jobs that people don't like or aren't willing to do that pay more: like a garbage collector, bartendar or waiter/waitress. There are more...or you could offer a service to people on things they don't want to do or have the time. My cousin lost his job, not high paying at all...went out and cleaned houses makes $1500 a week and is now adding people under him. Other than that, one can always improve oneself.

There is also sales. The top paying job in the country if you're good at it.
Can always learn to get good at it.

Name a place where you could get a job as a bartender without school or experience. I didn't apply for bartender jobs because I was too young at the time, but I applied at 5 waiter jobs and got nothing (even though they have a different minimum wage than regular workers).

You're looking at it on an individualistic level. You're right, ANYONE can find a great job that pays a lot if they look long enough, but EVERYONE can't. Minimum wage is not a job-killer, it promotes competition between possible employees and gives them incentive to perform their job well.

Besides, minimum wage should stay constant with the rate of the dollar. Its going to need to go up naturally, yet every time it gets so low its impractical, people complain.

Moooo

Chiefs Minor Satellite
06-21-2006, 09:59 PM
Obviously you've never filled out a 1090 then or talked to a tax lawyer. But go ahead, keep telling yourself that you aren't full of shit.

You know, you seem to be someone that feels that he knows everything under the sun. I don't fill out 1090's I hire out of work college graduates to do that for me. You looking for a job?

I am issued the 1099 at the end of the year. I have my accountant get my taxes ready for filing. I pay quarterly estimates just like every other self employed American.

I've been audited 4 times in the past 7 years and have never had to pay any fines. I'd say that makes me one of the people in the country that handles his taxes properly.

Always remember 40% of 10 is not 6.5

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 10:00 PM
Minimum wage destroys jobs. It mostly affects teen workers today. If you don't have skill or prior education, there are jobs that people don't like or aren't willing to do that pay more: like a garbage collector, bartendar or waiter/waitress. There are more...or you could offer a service to people on things they don't want to do or have the time. My cousin lost his job, not high paying at all...went out and cleaned houses makes $1500 a week and is now adding people under him. Other than that, one can always improve oneself.

There is also sales. The top paying job in the country if you're good at it.
Can always learn to get good at it.

The job as a technician that did not pay you well just means it was not high enough demand for it to pay you more.

Of course!! Everyone can make it here if they just try hard enough. It's the American Dream everyone!!. What flavor is the Kool-Aid these days?

Sales jobs are predicated upon lying: They're easy to do if you are a sociopath, or if you don't know enough to not care. If you actually happen to sell a product that helps people, be rest assured, it will generally (see not always) be marked up to the point where many, many people cannot afford it (case in point: HIV Meds)

Guy comes home with his $500 paycheck

Guy: Hey honey, I don't think we're going to be able to pay all of our bills.
Wife:Don't worry, it's just because your job isn't in high enough demand.
Guy: Oh, ok. I'll just go out and start work on flux capacitors tomorrow.

:shake:

jettio
06-21-2006, 10:00 PM
As ssoon as you raise the cost of labor, the cost of the end product will go up accordingly. There is no increase in the buying power for those at minimum wage, there is a loss of buying power for everyone else who doesn't get a $2.00 an hour bump mandated by the governement.

Don't know about where you are but here in Austin it is almost impossible to find a job that pays minimum wage. The market is taking care of itself just fine when starting wages for fast food are around $7.00 an hour.

For someone that claims to favor the market, your analysis of the price of goods sold mocks universal priniciples of microeconmics accepted by economists of any political ideology.

If you have a microeconomics text, you need to review pricing, supply and demand curves and market clearing price.

If the costs of production rise, that does not really impact the market clearing price, unless you are dealing with businesspeople that do not know how to price to maximize profit.

If the costs of production make it so that the market clearing price results in a net loss, you might see production of that good ceased by that producer unless there are reasons to stay in the game long term until it becomes profitable again.

Anyway, your analysis is political piffle and not real economic behavior.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:03 PM
Name a place where you could get a job as a bartender without school or experience. I didn't apply for bartender jobs because I was too young at the time, but I applied at 5 waiter jobs and got nothing (even though they have a different minimum wage than regular workers)

You're looking at it on an individualistic level.... Minimum wage is not a job-killer, it promotes competition between possible employees and gives them incentive to perform their job well.

Moooo


You can do bartending training in 40 hours.


You're right, ANYONE can find a great job that pays a lot if they look long enough, but EVERYONE can't.
Wellif you believe that than I guess you can't.

because...

Those who believe they can...can!
If you are defeated in spirit before you try you'll never win.
Change your thoughts and your actions should follow.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 10:03 PM
You know, you seem to be someone that feels that he knows everything under the sun. I don't fill out 1090's I hire out of work college graduates to do that for me. You looking for a job?

I am issued the 1099 at the end of the year. I have my accountant get my taxes ready for filing. I pay quarterly estimates just like every other self employed American.

I've been audited 4 times in the past 7 years and have never had to pay any fines. I'd say that makes me one of the people in the country that handles his taxes properly.

Always remember 40% of 10 is not 6.5

How many times do I have to tell you this: 6.5 is going to be taxed at around a 15% rate=a little less than 6/hour

60 percent of 10 is 6/hour.

Hooked on Fonix yet??

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:06 PM
Wellif you believe that than I guess you can't.

because...

Those who believe they can...can!
If you are defeated in spirit before you try you'll never win.
Change your thoughts and your actions should follow.

That's nice and all for me or you, but there are jobs out there that pay only 5.15 an hour. Someone HAS to take them, who is it going to be? There are more minimum-wage jobs than there are dependants out there. Mathematically, someone who is an independant has to take one of these jobs...

By increasing the minimum wage, you are offering these people incentive to get a job instead of living off the fat of the land.

Moooo

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 10:08 PM
You can do bartending training in 40 hours.



Wellif you believe that than I guess you can't.

because...

Those who believe they can...can!
If you are defeated in spirit before you try you'll never win.
Change your thoughts and your actions should follow.

I inquired to do bartender training this summer
Cost for 40 hours= 750 dollars.

Just let me look underneath my couch cushions. You are like a Tony Robbins tape that keeps playing over and over and over...

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:10 PM
I inquired to do bartender training this summer
Cost for 40 hours= 750 dollars.

Just let me look underneath my couch cushions. You are like a Tony Robbins tape that keeps playing over and over and over...

That's nothing. And it will pay itself back in one week. Take a loan.

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 10:11 PM
For someone that claims to favor the market, your analysis of the price of goods sold mocks universal priniciples of microeconmics accepted by economists of any political ideology.

If you have a microeconomics text, you need to review pricing, supply and demand curves and market clearing price.

If the costs of production rise, that does not really impact the market clearing price, unless you are dealing with businesspeople that do not know how to price to maximize profit.

If the costs of production make it so that the market clearing price results in a net loss, you might see production of that good ceased by that producer unless there are reasons to stay in the game long term until it becomes profitable again.

Anyway, your analysis is political piffle and not real economic behavior.

Well, since I never went to college, I have never taken a microeconomics course. I speak from my experiences in the real world since I started my first job in 1976. So I do not even know what you mean by "market clearing price." Perhaps you can educate me on how a company that is in stiff competition and thus keeps it's prices as low as possible to remain in the market can have it's costs raised and still survive with its' profit in place.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 10:11 PM
That's nothing. And it will pay itself back in one week. Take a loan.

Because god knows, there's nothing like the bar scene in a college town during summer break...of course I can easily bartend during the semester since I'm only taking 12 hours of grad courses and teaching two comp classes, while also working on my thesis and Ph.D applications. :shake:

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:13 PM
That's nice and all for me or you, but there are jobs out there that pay only 5.15 an hour. Someone HAS to take them, who is it going to be? There are more minimum-wage jobs than there are dependants out there. Mathematically, someone who is an independant has to take one of these jobs...

By increasing the minimum wage, you are offering these people incentive to get a job instead of living off the fat of the land.

Moooo
Correct me if I am wrong...but I thought it was the Mexican immigrants that are doing these jobs because there are no Americans who want to do them?

Other than that...how bout being a waiter?

I waitressed through school and I always had enough money. Not rich but enough.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:14 PM
Because god knows, there's nothing like the bar scene in a college town during summer break...of course I can easily bartend during the semester since I'm only taking 12 hours of grad courses and teaching two comp classes, while also working on my thesis and Ph.D applications. :shake:
Quite a few of my students bartend. Some take a few less courses. Of course it takes them longer to complete.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 10:15 PM
Mexicans are working in hog processing plants, doing construction and cleaning houses because they can be paid 3rd world wages and be happy with them. Since they aren't legal, no minimum wage precedents apply.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:17 PM
Mexicans are working in hog processing plants, doing construction and cleaning houses because they can be paid 3rd world wages and be happy with them. Since they aren't legal, no minimum wage precedents apply.

My point was I heard it was places like Micky D's and other minimum wage jobs. I see them at Micky D's all the time.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:20 PM
Correct me if I am wrong...but I thought it was the Mexican immigrants that are doing these jobs because there are no Americans who want to do them?

Other than that...how bout being a waiter?

I waitressed through school and I always had enough money. Not rich but enough.

Applied to 5 waiter jobs in vain. Also women get tons more money waiting tables than guys. Its one of the few jobs that favors women (bartenders is another).

And I'm sorry, but "them," need as much money to live in America as everyone else. Offering lower wages to first-generation immigrants is insulting to the American dream.

Moooo

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:23 PM
Applied to 5 waiter jobs in vain. Also women get tons more money waiting tables than guys. Its one of the few jobs that favors women (bartenders is another).

Tell Hamas that. He says we're oppressed and held down from discrimination.

I always said inequality can work in a woman's favor at times!! :)

See Hamas. I told ya' so! :p

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:24 PM
Tell Hamas that. He says we're oppressed and held down from discrimination.

I always said inequality can work in a woman's favor at times!! :)

See hamas. I told ya' so! :p

Yeah, the only times a woman makes more money than a man is if they're hot, and use their body to make it. Bartending, waitressing, stripping, modeling, etc... It is discriminatory when they don't take you seriously, and just want to see your ass.

I don't know about you, but I'd be pissed if I was a hot chick. I have a lot of good ideas and a great mind, and would hate to not even be looked in the eyes when people are talking to me. Of course ugly chicks don't have this happen, but they also don't have an advantage at these jobs, so take your pick...

Moooo

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 10:27 PM
Tell Hamas that. He says we're oppressed and held down from discrimination.

I always said inequality can work in a woman's favor at times!! :)

See Hamas. I told ya' so! :p

Because god knows, this is good for women's equality...as long as she has great tits, and is anorexic, she's A-Ok with us

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:27 PM
Yeah, the only times a woman makes more money than a man is if they're hot, and use their body to make it. Bartending, waitressing, stripping, modeling, etc... It is discriminatory when they don't take you seriously, and just want to see your ass.

I don't know about you, but I'd be pissed if I was a hot chick. I have a lot of good ideas and a great mind, and would hate to not even be looked in the eyes when people are talking to me. Of course ugly chicks don't have this happen, but they also don't have an advantage at these jobs, so take your pick...

Moooo

She can get in the door of some places in the corporate world but if she can't so the job I can't see it lasting.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:29 PM
She can get in the door of some places in the corporate world but if she can't so the job I can't see it lasting.

Women have no advantage in the corporate world. Like I said, the only place they do is when their body gives them the advantage.

Moooo

jspchief
06-21-2006, 10:29 PM
Mexicans are working in hog processing plants, doing construction and cleaning houses because they can be paid 3rd world wages and be happy with them. Since they aren't legal, no minimum wage precedents apply.Bullshit. You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about on this subject.

jettio
06-21-2006, 10:29 PM
Well, since I never went to college, I have never taken a microeconomics course. I speak from my experiences in the real world since I started my first job in 1976. So I do not even know what you mean by "market clearing price." Perhaps you can educate me on how a company that is in stiff competition and thus keeps it's prices as low as possible to remain in the market can have it's costs raised and still survive with its' profit in place.

I think that the stiff competition would also have to pay their workers the higher minimum wage.

I think an interesting question about this whole minimum wage thing would be the impact on the number of people eligible for the earned income credit.

If a someone has kids and the best they can do is minimum wage, they make an amount if money that means no federal taxes and they get up to a couple thousand from the treasury. It is intended to help people who work but do not make much money.

Somebody go read up on this and report back. I nominate recjake if he is not out chasing girls.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:30 PM
Because god knows, this is good for women's equality...as long as she has great tits, and is anorexic, she's A-Ok with us

I just don't buy that in every case.
Except for strippers and models, ( I'm not talking that kind of money anyway. I'm talking more than minimum wage). I've seen girls, even older woman who aren't that and they make good pay tending bar and waitressing. I've also seen more men bartend. You act as if every customer is a young man.

I also read taller men get paid more too!

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 10:31 PM
I think that the stiff competition would also have to pay their workers the higher minimum wage.

I think an interesting question about this whole minimum wage thing would be the impact on the number of people eligible for the earned income credit.

If a somene has kids and the best they can do is minimum wage, they make an amount if money that means no federal taxes and they get up to a couple thousand from the treasury. It is intended to help people who work but do not make much money.

Somebody go read up on this and report back. I nominate recjake he is not out chasing girls.

I know that the federal poverty level for a family of 3 is 14,000 and change. A minimum wage job pays barely over 10. Raising it to 7,25 would bring it right up to this poverty level.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 10:34 PM
Bullshit. You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about on this subject.

Oh really?? Milan, Missouri, about 30 miles from where I went to college is home to a corporate hog farm known as Premium Standard Farms. This area went from less than 1% Hispanic to over 75% Hispanic in less than a decade. Where do they all work?? Said Hog Farm. Look at a construction crew the next time you are out and see how many of them are Hispanic. Why, b/c they can be paid cash under the table at a far lower rate than other workers.

4321

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:34 PM
Women have no advantage in the corporate world. Like I said, the only place they do is when their body gives them the advantage.

Moooo


Well, Moo that is just not true. I KNOW it's not true because I've made good money off the corporate world...and I know many more. Example: Disney hires artist to do exploratory design work for two weeks. Pay: $36,000. That wasn't me..but I know it was someone...a female too. Hired by a female creative director too.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 10:35 PM
Well, Moo that is just not true. I KNOW it's not true because I've made my money off the corporate world...and I know many more.

And yet 95% of all CEOs are men...

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:37 PM
Well, Moo that is just not true. I KNOW it's not true because I've made my money off the corporate world...and I know many more.

Do you think the amount of women you know in the corporate world exceeds that of the men? Cause women are something like 52% of the population, I mean if what you're saying is fully true, then 52% of the corporate world would be women as well...

Moooo

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:38 PM
And yet 95% of all CEOs are men...


Hmmm....you do know that Eisner of Disney offers health benefits to gay partners too without the govt telling him they have to?

BTW I edited above...I wasn't done.

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 10:38 PM
I think that the stiff competition would also have to pay their workers the higher minimum wage.

I think an interesting question about this whole minimum wage thing would be the impact on the number of people eligible for the earned income credit.

If a someone has kids and the best they can do is minimum wage, they make an amount if money that means no federal taxes and they get up to a couple thousand from the treasury. It is intended to help people who work but do not make much money.

Somebody go read up on this and report back. I nominate recjake if he is not out chasing girls.


If your profit margin is $.02 on the dollar (net of course) and your labor cost goes up $.01 you have lost 1/2 your profit margin. You want to know why customer service has gone to hell in this country? Because the business owner has to try to maintain that $.02 margin and the only wiggle room they have is the labot cost. So, cut 10% of your work force and wind up with people standing in longer lines, employees who are expected to do 10% more work in the same amount of time become more frazzled and less likely to maintain a cheerful attitude, etc.

If most of the market is already paying above this false wage level, what is the point in raising it? It is a feel good political move to show how compassionate the pols are for the poor.

I really would appreciate an answer to my other question about market clearing price, I really am curious what this is and see an opportunity to learn. I may not have gone to college but I have a good head on my shoulders and still very much enjoy learning new things.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:39 PM
Do you think the amount of women you know in the corporate world exceeds that of the men? Cause women are something like 52% of the population, I mean if what you're saying is fully true, then 52% of the corporate world would be women as well...

Moooo
Go into a thread in the lounge and see what I say to that. Hams will direct you.
Many women pick jobs with time flexibility due to other choices particularly when they have kids. Those choices result in lower pay. I made such adjustments myself.

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 10:40 PM
Do you think the amount of women you know in the corporate world exceeds that of the men? Cause women are something like 52% of the population, I mean if what you're saying is fully true, then 52% of the corporate world would be women as well...

Moooo

That would only be the case if all women wanted to work in those fields. My wife is perfectly happy as a stay at home mom, that is her career of choice and I fully support it for many reasons.

I am not saying women have the same playing field. I think it is much better than it was and about as good as it can get via legislation.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:42 PM
That would only be the case if all women wanted to work in those fields. My wife is perfectly happy as a stay at home mom, that is her career of choice and I fully support it for many reasons.

I am not saying women have the same playing field. I think it is much better than it was and about as good as it can get via legislation.
:thumb: I agree and what could be more imporant than preparing a child for life? Best darn job on the planet.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:42 PM
If most of the market is already paying above this false wage level, what is the point in raising it? It is a feel good political move to show how compassionate the pols are for the poor.

Have you ever worked for minimum wage? I had a boss who said that no matter how long I worked there I would never get a raise above minimum wage, and that if she could pay me, along with all her workers 1 dollar an hour she would, cause that's all anyone deserves.

These types of people need restrictions on them. I don't understand how people can say that business can be trusted to look out for the people. Its not their job, their job is to make money.

Moooo

listopencil
06-21-2006, 10:43 PM
When the minimum wage went up quite a while ago (I don't remember the year, it was before '97) I worked for Taco Bell Corporate and they reacted by changing the way they prepped food. They called it K Minus or Quick Prep and the idea was to cut down on the number of labor hours needed to get raw product ready and to concentrate the labor dollars in the front of the store instead. They did this because they knew that they couldn't afford to have as many people working per hour as they had in the past. This is one way that companies deal with raises in the Minimum Wage. They cut back on the total number of jobs available. This is also why Taco Bell food doesn't taste as good as it used to.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:44 PM
And yet 95% of all CEOs are men...

For some reason...that kind of job just doesn't appeal to me. :hmmm:

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:44 PM
That would only be the case if all women wanted to work in those fields. My wife is perfectly happy as a stay at home mom, that is her career of choice and I fully support it for many reasons.

I am not saying women have the same playing field. I think it is much better than it was and about as good as it can get via legislation.

I totally disagree with that. Countries like Sweeden have proven that women can be just an integral part of the workplace as men. They have done so through legislation.

Moooo

listopencil
06-21-2006, 10:45 PM
:thumb: I agree and what could be more imporant than preparing a child for life? Best darn job on the planet.


It's an incredibly demanding job but the benefits are excellent.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 10:45 PM
Oh really?? Milan, Missouri, about 30 miles from where I went to college is home to a corporate hog farm known as Premium Standard Farms. This area went from less than 1% Hispanic to over 75% Hispanic in less than a decade. Where do they all work?? Said Hog Farm. Look at a construction crew the next time you are out and see how many of them are Hispanic. Why, b/c they can be paid cash under the table at a far lower rate than other workers.

4321I've owned a construction company for 10 years. I'll guarantee there isn't a single illegal being paid "third world wages" on any construction site in the state of Iowa, or for that matter anywhere in the midwest. Nor is it happening at hog lots or hotel housekeeping departments.

Are some of them being paid less than typical wage? Yes. "Far" less? No.

I think you'd be suprised at how much employers appreciate the work that those Mexicans put in. The money that is being saved by using them isn't in the wages that are being paid.

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 10:46 PM
Have you ever worked for minimum wage? I had a boss who said that no matter how long I worked there I would never get a raise above minimum wage, and that if she could pay me, along with all her workers 1 dollar an hour she would, cause that's all anyone deserves.

These types of people need restrictions on them. I don't understand how people can say that business can be trusted to look out for the people. Its not their job, their job is to make money.

Moooo

I worked for 15 years in fast food, many times at or slightly above minimum wage. If I had a boss like that, I would find a different job as soon as I could. Employers like that do not deserve decent employees. The only way they can get away with that kind of attitude about the people who are running their business is if the employees are willing to allow it to happen. Yes, there are terrible, mean people out there. That doesn't mean that you have to put up with it, there are always options. As I tell my kids, do not give me problems, give me solutions.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:46 PM
When the minimum wage went up quite a while ago (I don't remember the year, it was before '97) I worked for Taco Bell Corporate and they reacted by changing the way they prepped food. They called it K Minus or Quick Prep and the idea was to cut down on the number of labor hours needed to get raw product ready and to concentrate the labor dollars in the front of the store instead. They did this because they knew that they couldn't afford to have as many people working per hour as they had in the past. This is one way that companies deal with raises in the Minimum Wage. They cut back on the total number of jobs available. This is also why Taco Bell food doesn't taste as good as it used to.

They can afford it, Pepsico is not hurting. They just didn't want to make any less than their 6-7 digit-a-day profit margin. CEOs in this country make usually about 15 times more than CEOs of other countries. Tell me again their companies can't afford it.

Moooo

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:47 PM
I worked for 15 years in fast food, many times at or slightly above minimum wage. If I had a boss like that, I would find a different job as soon as I could. Employers like that do not deserve decent employees. The only way they can get away with that kind of attitude about the people who are running their business is if the employees are willing to allow it to happen. Yes, there are terrible, mean people out there. That doesn't mean that you have to put up with it, there are always options. As I tell my kids, do not give me problems, give me solutions.

It was THE only fast food job for 30 miles in any direction. Kids worked there or the grocery store, and it was no better. I think, though, you'd get a quarter raise after a year there, but that's cause they were a chain grocery store.

Moooo

jspchief
06-21-2006, 10:47 PM
Have you ever worked for minimum wage? I had a boss who said that no matter how long I worked there I would never get a raise above minimum wage, and that if she could pay me, along with all her workers 1 dollar an hour she would, cause that's all anyone deserves.

These types of people need restrictions on them. I don't understand how people can say that business can be trusted to look out for the people. Its not their job, their job is to make money.

MooooWhere do you live? So far all of your anecdotes on the subject don't fit any area that I know.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:49 PM
It's an incredibly demanding job but the benefits are excellent.


That depends on who you work for! ROFL

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:51 PM
jk listopencil


http://img328.imageshack.us/img328/7696/mykid4ir.jpg
A hundred years from now, It will not matter what my bank account was,
Or the kind of car I drove, But the world may be different,
Because I was important in the life of a child.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:51 PM
Where do you live? So far all of your anecdotes on the subject don't fit any area that I know.

I lived in a town in southern Missouri just on the border of Arkansas. We were 30 minutes away from a Wal-Mart, McDonalds, Movie Theater, etc... We were also about 90 miles away from a Mall or Best Buy or anything like that.

Then I moved to Springfield, where the going rate for most jobs is about 6-7.

Moooo

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:53 PM
I lived in a town in southern Missouri just on the border of Arkansas. We were 30 minutes away from a Wal-Mart, McDonalds, Movie Theater, etc...

Moooo
I hope you moved for better opportunities.

listopencil
06-21-2006, 10:54 PM
They can afford it, Pepsico is not hurting. They just didn't want to make any less than their 6-7 digit-a-day profit margin. CEOs in this country make usually about 15 times more than CEOs of other countries. Tell me again their companies can't afford it.

Moooo


Actually Pepsi hasn't owned Taco Bell for a while now. When they did, Taco Bell was its own division and profit-and-loss was managed at the store level or you didn't have a job anymore. I know what the numbers were. We wouldn't have been making money if we hadn't done that.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:54 PM
I hope you moved for better opportunities.

I moved for opportunities, period. There are people down there who have worked at jobs for 10 years and are still making 8-something.

Moooo

Moooo
06-21-2006, 10:56 PM
Actually Pepsi hasn't owned Taco Bell for a while now. When they did, Taco Bell was its own division and profit-and-loss was managed at the store level or you didn't have a job anymore. I know what the numbers were. We wouldn't have been making money if we hadn't done that.

My point still remains. The economy might recieve a bump in the bottom line of a lot of prices, but it puts money in the hands of those who need it.

In all, it helps closen the gap between the haves and havenots, which in this country is greatly needed.

Moooo

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 10:56 PM
I lived in a town in southern Missouri just on the border of Arkansas. We were 30 minutes away from a Wal-Mart, McDonalds, Movie Theater, etc...

Moooo

Are we talking about while you were growing up or as an adult trying to live on your own? Honestly, if it is the latter, you needed to move where there were more opportunities. I understand a little more where that one boss got her attitude. Things in towns and cities is much different because you have to compete to get employees, not the other way around as it appears you were dealing with.

This has been a great discussion and I will certainly return to it tomorrow but I get to go home from my job now and see my family (those not already asleep).

jspchief
06-21-2006, 10:57 PM
I lived in a town in southern Missouri just on the border of Arkansas. We were 30 minutes away from a Wal-Mart, McDonalds, Movie Theater, etc...

MooooI just know from experience that most employers don't have the luxury of treating good employees in the manner that you portray. No matter where you go in this country, the number 1 problem business owners will tell you they face is "finding quality help".

Cheap help hasn't been a consideration for a long time. It's good help. Granted there are always limits on the wages that are practical for a particular job, but 99% of employers still recognize that good help is worth the occasional pay raise.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 10:59 PM
I just know from experience that most employers don't have the luxury of treating good employees in the manner that you portray. No matter where you go in this country, the number 1 problem business owners will tell you they face is "finding quality help".

..and young quality help is even harder.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:00 PM
My point still remains. The economy might recieve a bump in the bottom line of a lot of prices, but it puts money in the hands of those who need it.

In all, it helps closen the gap between the haves and havenots, which in this country is greatly needed.

MooooRaised labor costs are going to get passed to the consumer.

You can bitch about greedy CEOs and business owners, but the fact remains they are going to maintain their profit margin. A raised minimum wage isn't going to make them any less greedy.

It does little good to put an extra $20 in the hands of the little guy if doing so makes his cost of living go up by $21.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 11:01 PM
I just know from experience that most employers don't have the luxury of treating good employees in the manner that you portray. No matter where you go in this country, the number 1 problem business owners will tell you they face is "finding quality help".

Cheap help hasn't been a consideration for a long time. It's good help. Granted there are always limits on the wages that are practical for a particular job, but 99% of employers still recognize that good help is worth the occasional pay raise.

Only certain people equate money made to how well they do their job. Some people will do the same work when getting paid 5 as they do 10.

Moooo

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 11:03 PM
I've owned a construction company for 10 years. I'll guarantee there isn't a single illegal being paid "third world wages" on any construction site in the state of Iowa, or for that matter anywhere in the midwest. Nor is it happening at hog lots or hotel housekeeping departments.

Are some of them being paid less than typical wage? Yes. "Far" less? No.

I think you'd be suprised at how much employers appreciate the work that those Mexicans put in. The money that is being saved by using them isn't in the wages that are being paid.

And yet, there are still families living 10 to a home with dirt floors in said town :shrug:

Edit: Third World was a bit of a misnomer b/c it harkens up images of 15 cents/day. However, I guarantee that the Mexicans at PSF are making quite a bit less than the whites there.

listopencil
06-21-2006, 11:04 PM
Raised labor costs are going to get passed to the consumer.

You can bitch about greedy CEOs and business owners, but the fact remains they are going to maintain their profit margin. A raised minimum wage isn't going to make them any less greedy.

It does little good to put an extra $20 in the hands of the little guy if doing so makes his cost of living go up by $21.



Yep, that's the real point here.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 11:06 PM
Yep, that's the real point here.

Except there is no mathematical or economic reason why "x" increase in pay would mandate that the price of the product is raised "x"+5%.

dirk digler
06-21-2006, 11:07 PM
When the minimum wage went up quite a while ago (I don't remember the year, it was before '97) I worked for Taco Bell Corporate and they reacted by changing the way they prepped food. They called it K Minus or Quick Prep and the idea was to cut down on the number of labor hours needed to get raw product ready and to concentrate the labor dollars in the front of the store instead. They did this because they knew that they couldn't afford to have as many people working per hour as they had in the past. This is one way that companies deal with raises in the Minimum Wage. They cut back on the total number of jobs available. This is also why Taco Bell food doesn't taste as good as it used to.

I used to work for Taco Bell all through HS and college and for a few years was manager of a Taco Bell in OP. The food was a hell of lot better when we made stuff fresh, the quick prep shit is sucks.

Anyway my feeling on this it is a damn shame that the Senate didn't pass this bill. There is alot more people making minimum wage than most of you think and IMHO the minimum wage should be at least $8 /hr.

listopencil
06-21-2006, 11:07 PM
My point still remains. The economy might recieve a bump in the bottom line of a lot of prices, but it puts money in the hands of those who need it.

In all, it helps closen the gap between the haves and havenots, which in this country is greatly needed.

Moooo

The only experience I've had in a minimum wage environment (8.5 years) didn't turn out that way. I had to get by with fewer employees and prices went up across the board.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 11:08 PM
Raised labor costs are going to get passed to the consumer.

You can bitch about greedy CEOs and business owners, but the fact remains they are going to maintain their profit margin. A raised minimum wage isn't going to make them any less greedy.

It does little good to put an extra $20 in the hands of the little guy if doing so makes his cost of living go up by $21.

Right, but since not everyone will be affected by the minimum wage, the amount cost of living will go up will still be less than the amount minimum wage goes up. Even if it made things go up across the board 5%, it still doesn't equal the 40% increase people making minumum wage would see. And there's no way it would go up 40%, there's not enough people making it to influence our economy that way. If you figure 10% of people make minimum wage, that would be the equvelant of about less than 5% of the total amount of dollars made by Americans.

I'm well aware of the downside. The higher cost of living will not fall on those making minimum wage, it will fall on the middle class, and higher-up working class. That's the whole point, the middle and upper guys take a hit for the little guy. If you don't like the principle that's fine, but don't disguise it by saying it won't work.

Moooo

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:08 PM
Only certain people equate money made to how well they do their job. Some people will do the same work when getting paid 5 as they do 10.

MooooI'm not sure how that relates to my point.

I'm not claiming that employers pay more because they think it make employees work harder. I'm saying that employers appreciate good workers enough that they will reward them in hopes of keeping them.

You make it sound like the world is full of slave driving employers, looking for the most work for the cheapest price. The reality is most employers are happy to have anybody at all, and don't mind paying the good ones respectable wages.

If you're struggling through a series of minimum wage jobs, you're what my father used to refer to as the "5% of the workforce that is unemployable". Jobs are out there to be had. If someone is struggling to find a good one, it's likely because they are part of the loser segment of America.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 11:10 PM
I'm not sure how that relates to my point.

I'm not claiming that employers pay more because they think it make employees work harder. I'm saying that employers appreciate good workers enough that they will reward them in hopes of keeping them.

You make it sound like the world is full of slave driving employers, looking for the most work for the cheapest price. The reality is most employers are happy to have anybody at all, and don't mind paying the good ones respectable wages.

If you're struggling through a series of minimum wage jobs, you're what my father used to refer to as the "5% of the workforce that is unemployable". Jobs are out there to be had. If someone is struggling to find a good one, it's likely because they are part of the loser segment of America.

I don't believe that. It may be the case in a smaller business, but 60% of all American jobs are big business, where the people dictating people's pay are being told by a guy in some other place what to do. A company's only job is to make money. And the only reason they pay more is competition, which in itself is not sufficient to regulate wage.

And please define, "loser." Its a very vague term.

Moooo

listopencil
06-21-2006, 11:10 PM
I used to work for Taco Bell all through HS and college and for a few years was manager of a Taco Bell in OP. The food was a hell of lot better when we made stuff fresh, the quick prep shit is sucks.

Anyway my feeling on this it is a damn shame that the Senate didn't pass this bill. There is alot more people making minimum wage than most of you think and IMHO the minimum wage should be at least $8 /hr.


I live in a dinky little town in Northern California where a huge number of people have minimum wage jobs. The ones who suffer are parents. Both parents can work at minimum wage and it's still incredibly hard to get by for them. I just question the effect on inflation it would have.

And you're right, the quick prep stuff is shit compared to the old stuff.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 11:10 PM
. That's the whole point, the middle and upper guys take a hit for the little guy. If you don't like the principle that's fine, but don't disguise it by saying it won't work.

Moooo

But that undermines the very nature of their argument, which is thinly veiled class warfare based on a premise of greed and selfishness.

listopencil
06-21-2006, 11:13 PM
I'm not sure how that relates to my point.


If you're struggling through a series of minimum wage jobs, you're what my father used to refer to as the "5% of the workforce that is unemployable". Jobs are out there to be had. If someone is struggling to find a good one, it's likely because they are part of the loser segment of America.




I have to agree with you. I started at Taco Bell as a 40 hour/week fryer and quit as a GM, would have been running multiple units shortly if I had stayed on.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 11:13 PM
I don't believe that. It may be the case in a smaller business, but 60% of all American jobs are big business, where the people dictating people's pay are being told by a guy in some other place what to do. A company's only job is to make money. And the only reason they pay more is competition, which in itself is not sufficient to regulate wage.

And please define, "loser." Its a very vague term.

Moooo


No most businesses in America are small businesses.
If a complahy did not make money, you wouldn't even have a job....you better hope they make money. I doubt big business is hurt as much as small business with such legislation.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:14 PM
And yet, there are still families living 10 to a home with dirt floors in said town :shrug:

Edit: Third World was a bit of a misnomer b/c it harkens up images of 15 cents/day. However, I guarantee that the Mexicans at PSF are making quite a bit less than the whites there.What you don't understand is these Mexicans spent all of their lives living ten to a house with dirt floors in Mexico. They do it by choice, usually sending a large portion of the money they would have spent on upscale living back to Mexico to support family or to pay to get family smuggled across.

You look at them and think they must be living in misery, meanwhile they are calling to the one phone in their hometown in Oaxaca to tell their old neighbor how good life is in the US.

Are the mexicans making less then the whites? Probably. Are they making less than minimum wage? Probably not.

dirk digler
06-21-2006, 11:14 PM
I'm not sure how that relates to my point.

I'm not claiming that employers pay more because they think it make employees work harder. I'm saying that employers appreciate good workers enough that they will reward them in hopes of keeping them.

You make it sound like the world is full of slave driving employers, looking for the most work for the cheapest price. The reality is most employers are happy to have anybody at all, and don't mind paying the good ones respectable wages.

If you're struggling through a series of minimum wage jobs, you're what my father used to refer to as the "5% of the workforce that is unemployable". Jobs are out there to be had. If someone is struggling to find a good one, it's likely because they are part of the loser segment of America.



I graduated college and went to work for the local sheriff's office as a deputy making $6 an hour while supporting my wife going to college and raising a newborn. I brought home $920 a month. Could you live on $920 a month?

Luckily now I have 2 college degrees and I make good money but those were some rough ****ing times.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 11:15 PM
Jobs are out there to be had. If someone is struggling to find a good one, it's likely because they are part of the loser segment of America.

Precisely. Same thought entered my head too.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 11:16 PM
Luckily now I have 2 college degrees and I make good money but those were some rough ****ing times.

I think most people have gone through such times.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:16 PM
But that undermines the very nature of their argument, which is thinly veiled class warfare based on a premise of greed and selfishness.It's reality bub. If you think the greedy business owners are suddenly going to become less greedy, you're living in candyland. Welcome to the world of capitalism.

listopencil
06-21-2006, 11:17 PM
I graduated college and went to work for the local sheriff's office as a deputy making $6 an hour while supporting my wife going to college and raising a newborn. I brought home $920 a month. Could you live on $920 a month?



When was this?

Moooo
06-21-2006, 11:19 PM
No most businesses in America are small businesses.
If a complahy did not make money, you wouldn't even have a job....you better hope they make money. I doubt big business is hurt as much as small business with such legislation.

You missed my whole post explaining this. And although there may be more businesses that are small, the percentage of jobs leans towards big business.

Those hit will not be businesses at all. They will compensate with raising their product or service rates. The ones hit will be the consumer, but as I said before, the benefit of 5-10% of the population will be absorbed by distributing it over everyone. Its the higher-working, middle, and upper class taking a hit for the little guy.

As I said before, if you don't like the idea of this, that's fine, but don't go around saying it won't work.

Moooo

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:19 PM
I graduated college and went to work for the local sheriff's office as a deputy making $6 an hour while supporting my wife going to college and raising a newborn. I brought home $920 a month. Could you live on $920 a month?

Luckily now I have 2 college degrees and I make good money but those were some rough ****ing times.I could find 10 jobs tommorrow that pay more than $920 a month.

But more to the point, how long did you have to work for $6 per hour before you got a raise, promotion, or found a better job? Almost everyone has to start at the bottom. My contention is with the notion that people are forced to wallow at the bottom for their entire lives.

dirk digler
06-21-2006, 11:20 PM
When was this?

8 years ago.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 11:23 PM
As I said before, if you don't like the idea of this, that's fine, but don't go around saying it won't work.

I'll say whatever I like thank you. I already know such things do not work and won't work miracles for anyone who doesn't find a way out of even having to rely on min wage work for a lifetime. But I'm not about to re-educate someone in basic economics either.

listopencil
06-21-2006, 11:23 PM
8 years ago.


That's pretty rough, but it would have beeen easier if you hadn't had a wife and a newborn. I know you can't really plan these things. Hell, I've got four kids and the same thing applies to me now. But If I was alone then yes, I could have lived off of $920 a month eight years ago. I probably would have gotten another job on the side.

dirk digler
06-21-2006, 11:25 PM
I could find 10 jobs tommorrow that pay more than $920 a month.

But more to the point, how long did you have to work for $6 per hour before you got a raise, promotion, or found a better job? Almost everyone has to start at the bottom. My contention is with the notion that people are forced to wallow at the bottom for their entire lives.

The point of taking the job was so my wife could finish her degree, we would have relatives that were able to watch our daughter, and plus I had a CJ degree and this was supposed to be the start of my Law enforcement career.

The 3 years I was there the county rejected all raises.

The point I was making is that it is damn near impossible to survive on minimum wage especially when you are trying to raise a family.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:26 PM
And please define, "loser." Its a very vague term.

MooooIMO there is a percentage of the American workforce that consists solely of losers. I'm not talking about people that can't work due to disability, illness, etc. I'm talking about the people that hop from job to job, every year or two (or less), never quite understanding that there's more to a job than punching in and punching out. They're the guys that are 35 years old, and are still filling out applications that have a work history that resembles an 18 year old's.

They are deadbeats. They either can't follow rules, can't get along with coworkers, can't show up regularly, can't stay off drugs, or any collection of the criteria combined. These people are the reason illegals are getting jobs. It's better to break the law and pay an illegal that works hard, than waste another 6 months training a deadbeat that will be filling out another app in 7 months.

listopencil
06-21-2006, 11:26 PM
I could find 10 jobs tommorrow that pay more than $920 a month.

But more to the point, how long did you have to work for $6 per hour before you got a raise, promotion, or found a better job? Almost everyone has to start at the bottom. My contention is with the notion that people are forced to wallow at the bottom for their entire lives.


Even in my dinky little town there are three jobs that start at $9, $12 and $14 within comfy driving distance right off the top of my head. Not everyone can do it, though. You have to work hard and pass a drug test. That rules a lot of people out. Then again, that's part of what you were referring to as the loser segment of the country.

listopencil
06-21-2006, 11:29 PM
The point I was making is that it is damn near impossible to survive on minimum wage especially when you are trying to raise a family.


Yep. But I don't think it is the Federal governments place to mandate that everyone has to be paid enough to raise a family.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:30 PM
The point I was making is that it is damn near impossible to survive on minimum wage especially when you are trying to raise a family....while putting one parent through college.

Your situation was predicated by a number of choices that included raising a family, allowing your spouse to finish college, and you getting your foot in the door of what you thought your future career was.

I think those other factors are notable.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 11:32 PM
It's reality bub. If you think the greedy business owners are suddenly going to become less greedy, you're living in candyland. Welcome to the world of capitalism.

Which is bullshit, IMHO.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:35 PM
Which is bullshit, IMHO.Well, I hope you never have success in your professional life then. Because that's what it's about.

dirk digler
06-21-2006, 11:35 PM
Yep. But I don't think it is the Federal governments place to mandate that everyone has to be paid enough to raise a family.

But I do think they should mandate a higher minimum wage because IIRC the poverty level is at the highest level in history.

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 11:36 PM
Which is bullshit, IMHO.

Does the "H" stand for "Humble" or "Hamas?"
:p

Moooo
06-21-2006, 11:39 PM
None of you are addressing my point.

Come up with whatever excuse you will, but minimum wage will succeed in increasing the standard of living for the lower class. Its benefit will be absorbed throughout the economy, meaning the people who will see a negative effect are the middle and upper class.

If you guys don't think this is right, then that's an opinion, but please don't go around saying its not going to work.

Moooo

dirk digler
06-21-2006, 11:40 PM
...while putting one parent through college.

Your situation was predicated by a number of choices that included raising a family, allowing your spouse to finish college, and you getting your foot in the door of what you thought your future career was.

I think those other factors are notable.

I agree that we had choices and maybe we didn't make the right choices because we did get divorced and we fought alot about money. I look back and think I really don't understand why we fought over money because we didn't have any to fight over.

But just think about the single African-Amercian woman raising her 2 kids alone, because the father was a deadbeat loser and left her, all the while making minimum wage. It is almost depressing.

Mr. Laz
06-21-2006, 11:40 PM
of course they did .......


now if it was for giving every millionaire another free million they'd be all for it.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:42 PM
I agree that we had choices and maybe we didn't make the right choices because we did get divorced and we fought alot about money. I look back and think I really don't understand why we fought over money because we didn't have any to fight over.

But just think about the single African-Amercian woman raising her 2 kids, because the father was a deadbeat, all the while making minimum wage. It is almost depressing.I think if that single woman shows up to work everyday and works hard, she won't be working for minimum wage forever.

And that's ignoring that fact that she went out and had two kids that she couldn't afford.

listopencil
06-21-2006, 11:46 PM
I agree that we had choices and maybe we didn't make the right choices because we did get divorced and we fought alot about money. I look back and think I really don't understand why we fought over money because we didn't have any to fight over.

That is hard. When our money has gotten tight we fight more as well. Every little purchase that the other one makes that isn't absolutely necessary reminds you of every time you've gone without.

But just think about the single African-Amercian woman raising her 2 kids, because the father was a deadbeat, all the while making minimum wage. It is almost depressing.


I'm all for hard ass legislation designed to make sperm donors (I don't consider them worthy of the title "Father") pay for their offspring. That situation is what our Welfare System is designed for. I don't mind my taxes going to provide childcare and training for these ladies at all.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 11:46 PM
None of you are addressing my point.

Come up with whatever excuse you will, but minimum wage will succeed in increasing the standard of living for the lower class. Its benefit will be absorbed throughout the economy, meaning the people who will see a negative effect are the middle and upper class.

If you guys don't think this is right, then that's an opinion, but please don't go around saying its not going to work.

MooooI'll put it this way. I don't have any desire to make less so someone else can make more. Just because I worked my way up to middle class, I don't need the government to legislate socialism because some other deadbeat is incapable of doing the same thing. I'll readily admit that I'm greedy that way, and it's certainly a reason I don't agree with a minimum wage hike.

but I also don't think it will have any effect on the standard of living for the lower class. The bottom of the market is set by how much the poorest can afford. If the poorest can afford a little more, us greedy bastards are just going to raise the market as much as we can get away with.

listopencil
06-21-2006, 11:52 PM
I don't need the government to legislate socialism...


I know what you mean and I agree with you but I don't see socialism being legislated out of our government any time soon. If they are going to steal my money at least give it to someone who can use it as a helping hand into a better life.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 11:52 PM
I'll put it this way. I don't have any desire to make less so someone else can make more. Just because I worked my way up to middle class, I don't need the government to legislate socialism because some other deadbeat is incapable of doing the same thing. I'll readily admit that I'm greedy that way, and it's certainly a reason I don't agree with a minimum wage hike.

but I also don't think it will have any effect on the standard of living for the lower class. The bottom of the market is set by how much the poorest can afford. If the poorest can afford a little more, us greedy bastards are just going to raise the market as much as we can get away with.

THANK YOU for cutting through the crap and saying it how it is. I disagree on your last half, though, as many things are priced out of market for the poorest, cause businesses know instead of appealing to 100% of the market and charging 100%, they can get more for a product by appealing to the top 75% of the market and charging 200%.

Think of what a person who is truely poor can really afford, and you'll see what I mean. Other than food and other small luxuries, there's really nothing they can go for. It sure isn't going to affect the price of Cars or a Cell Phone, or even fast food.

Moooo

dirk digler
06-21-2006, 11:53 PM
I think if that single woman shows up to work everyday and works hard, she won't be working for minimum wage forever.

And that's ignoring that fact that she went out and had two kids that she couldn't afford.

I agree.

jsp, sometimes in life shit happens and what if they were married but he cheated on her and then left her? Is that her fault? Of course not but it happens every day. Now instead of 2 incomes she has 1 minimum wage job and supporting 2 kids.

listopencil
06-21-2006, 11:54 PM
I lived in a town in southern Missouri just on the border of Arkansas. We were 30 minutes away from a Wal-Mart, McDonalds, Movie Theater, etc... We were also about 90 miles away from a Mall or Best Buy or anything like that.

Then I moved to Springfield, where the going rate for most jobs is about 6-7.

Moooo


Is there a Wal Mart Distribution Center within a 45 minute drive of you?

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 11:56 PM
I know what you mean and I agree with you but I don't see socialism being legislated out of our government any time soon. If they are going to steal my money at least give it to someone who can use it as a helping hand into a better life.
I understand your sentiment, but a lof of socialism is for the middle-class...and socialism makes more people poorer. I'd rather we have policies that lead to more wealth creation.

Moooo
06-21-2006, 11:56 PM
Is there a Wal Mart Distribution Center within a 45 minute drive of you?

I don't know what you're talking about. There's a Sam's down the road...

Where I was there was NOTHING. There wasn't even a stoplight in the entire COUNTY I lived in. And you could get more for a job, about 50 cents an hour more. But considering I could only work 5 hour shifts after school and it cost 4 bucks to get down there and back, this route was better.

Moooo

listopencil
06-22-2006, 12:01 AM
I understand your sentiment, but a lof of socialism is for the middle-class...and socialism makes more people poorer. I'd rather we have policies that lead to more wealth creation.

I agree. I'd rather do without it but I don't see it going away.

Miles
06-22-2006, 12:03 AM
Two things I found suprising about this proposal. The substantial increase suggested and how how many votes it actually recieved.

listopencil
06-22-2006, 12:11 AM
I don't know what you're talking about. There's a Sam's down the road...




Wal-Mart has a huge footprint in Missouri. I think there are two DC's (warehouses) there. That's the starting at $12/hour job I was referring to that would require hard work and clean urine. Within three years you would be making close to $20/hour if you wanted to. I wonder how far you are from one of them?

Moooo
06-22-2006, 12:15 AM
Wal-Mart has a huge footprint in Missouri. I think there are two DC's (warehouses) there. That's the starting at $12/hour job I was referring to that would require hard work and clean urine. Within three years you would be making close to $20/hour if you wanted to. I wonder how far you are from one of them?

I'm in Springfield. I can only work at night, though, cause I go to school in the daytime, and the school I go to is really small, and doesn't offer any night classes in my major.

And urine doesn't bother me. I worked at a Taco Bell... that was inside of a gas station. You haven't seen anything till you've seen that.

Moooo

Edited to add: I misunderstood. I don't do drugs, no.

Logical
06-22-2006, 12:29 AM
If anyone has been working at a minimum wage job since 1997 and not received a raise, it is because they are a blathering idiot.

What a ridiculous statement.You obviously have never managed a fast food place. Not giving raises is the standard not unusual in the least.

Logical
06-22-2006, 12:38 AM
I believe CA minimum was is about 6.75 an hour it has not exactly bankrupted the state nor has it led to out of control inflation. I think this is a strawman by the Republicans.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-22-2006, 12:47 AM
In the US, the minimum wage fell about 29% in real terms between 1979 and 2003.

Since the introduction of a national minimum wage in the UK in 1999, its effects on employment were subject to extensive research and observation by the Low Pay Commission. The bottom line there is, employment has not been reduced, productivity has increased in affected companies (especially service companies),[10] and neither trade unions nor employer organisations contest the minimum wage, although especially the latter had been doing so heavily until 1999.

listopencil
06-22-2006, 12:49 AM
I'm in Springfield. I can only work at night, though, cause I go to school in the daytime, and the school I go to is really small, and doesn't offer any night classes in my major.

And urine doesn't bother me. I worked at a Taco Bell... that was inside of a gas station. You haven't seen anything till you've seen that.

Moooo

Edited to add: I misunderstood. I don't do drugs, no.


DC's have various shifts. you should check it out if there's one anywhere near you.

listopencil
06-22-2006, 12:51 AM
You obviously have never managed a fast food place. Not giving raises is the standard not unusual in the least.


Not true if you work for the actual company instead of a franchise.

the Talking Can
06-22-2006, 01:01 AM
Why would a Christian nation have a minimum wage?

We don't offer healthcare, just like the Bible instructs.

Logical
06-22-2006, 01:15 AM
Why would a Christian nation have a minimum wage?

We don't offer healthcare, just like the Bible instructs.Wow now there is a tangent. Interesting

Rausch
06-22-2006, 02:14 AM
EMPLOYERS won't raise their minimum wage.

Could this expalin our immigration problem?

Naaaaah...

Chiefs Minor Satellite
06-22-2006, 04:42 AM
How many times do I have to tell you this: 6.5 is going to be taxed at around a 15% rate=a little less than 6/hour

60 percent of 10 is 6/hour.

Hooked on Fonix yet??

I might be, at least I'm not hooked on crack!

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 07:08 AM
In the US, the minimum wage fell about 29% in real terms between 1979 and 2003.

Yeah, but a lot of people have had their pay cut, lost their jobs and/or work two jobs or more hours...at least in recent past years. So if the market isn't increasing their pay right now why should anyone else's.

Since the introduction of a national minimum wage in the UK in 1999, its effects on employment were subject to extensive research and observation by the Low Pay Commission. The bottom line there is, employment has not been reduced, productivity has increased in affected companies (especially service companies),[10] and neither trade unions nor employer organisations contest the minimum wage, although especially the latter had been doing so heavily until 1999.


The problem I have with this, is that it does not take into consideration the unseen as it only measures what can be seen. It can never measure the number of jobs never created or that an employer may just have one worker do the work of two instead of creating a new job.

patteeu
06-22-2006, 07:32 AM
Women have no advantage in the corporate world. Like I said, the only place they do is when their body gives them the advantage.

Moooo

You're wrong about that.

A capable woman in the corporate world who dedicates her life to her job in the way that many men do has an advantage over an equally capable man.

Do you think the amount of women you know in the corporate world exceeds that of the men? Cause women are something like 52% of the population, I mean if what you're saying is fully true, then 52% of the corporate world would be women as well...

Moooo

Women, as a group, make different life choices than men. It is this disproportionate representation and our society's fixation on that kind of thing that gives competent, career minded women an advantage over men in the corporate world. Most corporations are looking for women to promote to fill their diversity needs. This might not be how it works at the top levels of management, but it's definitely how it works at entry level and middle management in many industries.*


------------

* This is more true in some industries than others. And, I think it appearance makes more of a difference for women than for men.

Baby Lee
06-22-2006, 09:10 AM
THANK YOU for cutting through the crap and saying it how it is. I disagree on your last half, though, as many things are priced out of market for the poorest, cause businesses know instead of appealing to 100% of the market and charging 100%, they can get more for a product by appealing to the top 75% of the market and charging 200%.

Think of what a person who is truely poor can really afford, and you'll see what I mean. Other than food and other small luxuries, there's really nothing they can go for. It sure isn't going to affect the price of Cars or a Cell Phone, or even fast food.

Moooo
Yeah, raising the minimum wage is gonna effect the price of Manolo Blahniks, Hermes scarves, and a Krell home theater, but the price of a Big Mac or Chapula Supreme will escape unscathed.
Quite the opposite, the effects of raising the minimum wage can be pretty effectively walled off to the poorest among us.
No more $.99 Whopper Jr. because the minimum wage went up? Fine I'll stop by Whole Foods and pick up some Yuppy organic shit and whip it up tonight. Been meaning to eat healthier anyways.
The price of getting my lawn mowed went up again? Fine, I'll just buy a mower and do it myself. Been needing more exercise anyone.
And that's the blue collar/working class/middle class response. White collar and uber-rich don't even have a response because they're not buying things that are made with US minimum wage labor.

jspchief
06-22-2006, 09:10 AM
You obviously have never managed a fast food place. Not giving raises is the standard not unusual in the least.I don't have to manage one of those places to know that minimum wage isn't the standard, let alone a permanent wage.

Every fast food restaruant in this state is hiring at $7 per hour.

banyon
06-22-2006, 09:58 AM
Why does everyone in this thread against an increase seem to be ignoring this fact?

The last time that I checked, the economy didn't exactly tank when we raised it in 97.

Inflation didn't change, it actually went down after the last raise. Unemployment didn't significantly change either.

Isn't the actual data relevant?

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 11:42 AM
Why does everyone in this thread against an increase seem to be ignoring this fact?

Inflation didn't change, it actually went down after the last raise. Unemployment didn't significantly change either.

Isn't the actual data relevant?

I can't speak for the others but I'm ignoring it because:

Fact: Inflation is when the govt prints more money flooding the economy with more dollars in circulation cheaping the value of the dollar. This is essentially a stealth tax. Dollar today is worth about $.04 to it's original value. Inflation is not a real increase in price due to increase costs.

I also believe in the subjective value of labor and costs.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-22-2006, 11:49 AM
Why does everyone in this thread against an increase seem to be ignoring this fact?



Inflation didn't change, it actually went down after the last raise. Unemployment didn't significantly change either.

Isn't the actual data relevant?

Wasn't this patently obvious to anyone who was not battling a coma at the time? How low can expectations of the intelligence of the opposing side be?

StcChief
06-22-2006, 11:55 AM
At this time with our current debt and business climate, inflation pressure, min. wage increase makes little sense.

Take an economics class.

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 12:00 PM
Wasn't this patently obvious to anyone who was not battling a coma at the time? How low can expectations of the intelligence of the opposing side be?
No! Not when you operate on the wrong definition of inflation. :harumph:

banyon
06-22-2006, 01:07 PM
I can't speak for the others but I'm ignoring it because:

Fact: Inflation is when the govt prints more money flooding the economy with more dollars in circulation cheaping the value of the dollar. This is essentially a stealth tax. Dollar today is worth about $.04 to it's original value. Inflation is not a real increase in price due to increase costs.

I also believe in the subjective value of labor and costs.

This isn't accurate. Inflation can occur with an increase in the money supply or increased consumption prices.

banyon
06-22-2006, 01:10 PM
At this time with our current debt and business climate, inflation pressure, min. wage increase makes little sense.

Take an economics class.

Why don't you try responding to the actual data instead of tossing around insults. I would bet $ that I have taken more econ classes than anyone who posted in this thread with the exception of BEP and maybe jettio, and there are perfectly viable explanations well within sound economic principles about why a min.wage increase would not lead to inflation, and what does the debt have to do with this? If anything severe inflation would actually reduce what we owe on the debt by making outstanding principal less valuable in real terms.

banyon
06-22-2006, 01:12 PM
No! Not when you operate on the wrong definition of inflation. :harumph:

I appreciate what you are saying, but I don't think the Fed and the Treasury is going to adopt some Austrian insitute's definition of inflation to fix the problem, so let's operate with the standard terminolgy please.

chagrin
06-22-2006, 01:23 PM
Why don't you try responding to the actual data instead of tossing around insults.
Yet another example of you and yours deflecting and redirecting, see below, or reprimand your brother, cracka ass cracka (since this isn't truly a racial slur)

Allow me to quote another intellectual dipshit, "Wasn't this patently obvious to anyone who was not battling a coma at the time? How low can expectations of the intelligence of the opposing side be?"


You two deserve each other

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 01:25 PM
... or increased consumption prices.

No banyon that's a common misconception....they are NOT the same. Increase in price is an increase in price reflecting other market phenomena. An increase in price due to more money in circulation is just compensation for the shrinking value of money...it's like climbing a ladder while really being on the same rung.


It's not an Austrian definition either.

banyon
06-22-2006, 01:50 PM
Yet another example of you and yours deflecting and redirecting, see below, or reprimand your brother, cracka ass cracka (since this isn't truly a racial slur)

Allow me to quote another intellectual dipshit, "Wasn't this patently obvious to anyone who was not battling a coma at the time? How low can expectations of the intelligence of the opposing side be?"


You two deserve each other


I don't know what your issue is with me, but you always seem very bitter against what I post. We're both Royals fans, we should stick together and let the political BS remain political BS.

I don't post like 'Hamas', despite your description. I try my best to treat other posters with respect and address the post and not the poster. If I fall short of that sometimes, then I try to make amends.

banyon
06-22-2006, 01:55 PM
No banyon that's a common misconception....they are NOT the same. Increase in price is an increase in price reflecting other market phenomena. An increase in price due to more money in circulation is just compensation for the shrinking value of money...it's like climbing a ladder while really being on the same rung.

Price increases may force the Fed's hands, but still it is the increased consumption costs that is the cause, not monetary policy.

patteeu
06-22-2006, 02:06 PM
But that undermines the very nature of their argument, which is thinly veiled class warfare based on a premise of greed and selfishness.

If it's class warfare, it's a defensive war. The class warriors here are the people who think like you and Moooo who want to artificially enhance the wages of the minimum wage worker at the expense of the middle and upper classes.

banyon
06-22-2006, 02:15 PM
If it's class warfare, it's a defensive war. The class warriors here are the people who think like you and Moooo who want to artificially enhance the wages of the minimum wage worker at the expense of the middle and upper classes.

I agree with you that it's defensive, but I disagree with you on which side is doing the defending. The middle class is shrinking in this country and the upper 1% have a larger share of the total national wealth than ever before.

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 02:22 PM
Price increases may force the Fed's hands, but still it is the increased consumption costs that is the cause, not monetary policy.

That's cognitive dissonance or propaganda by redefinition of words.

The key to understanding inflation is it is a MONETARY phenomenon, not a supply/demand imbalance in a commodity.

Webster’s massive current unabridged dictionary defines inflation as “a persistent, substantial rise in the general level of prices related to an increase in the volume of money and resulting in the loss of value of currency.”


I can post charts showing that inflation is actually soaring since year 2000.
Food and energy has been taken out of the statistics...and those are rising rapidly. I notice it at the supermarket every week and can see it.

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 02:25 PM
I agree with you that it's defensive, but I disagree with you on which side is doing the defending. The middle class is shrinking in this country and the upper 1% have a larger share of the total national wealth than ever before.

I agree with you but this does not contradict patteeu, as he said this has been done at the expense of the middle-class. These things are the RESULT of the Keynesian economics our govt uses which is basically a form of socialism. This creates equal poverty for all. Less of this approach not more is the answer.

patteeu
06-22-2006, 02:49 PM
I agree with you that it's defensive, but I disagree with you on which side is doing the defending. The middle class is shrinking in this country and the upper 1% have a larger share of the total national wealth than ever before.

When you take money from someone by something other than an arms length exchange, that's aggression. Government mandated pricing (of labor in this case) falls into that category. Corporations making what some call obscene profits and corporate boards agreeing to pay their CEO's huge bonuses do not.

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 03:04 PM
When you take money from someone by something other than an arms length exchange, that's aggression. Government mandated pricing (of labor in this case) falls into that category. Corporations making what some call obscene profits and corporate boards agreeing to pay their CEO's huge bonuses do not.
:clap: Great post!

banyon
06-22-2006, 03:21 PM
When you take money from someone by something other than an arms length exchange, that's aggression. Government mandated pricing (of labor in this case) falls into that category. Corporations making what some call obscene profits and corporate boards agreeing to pay their CEO's huge bonuses do not.

Oh, I don't know about that. Jesus didn't care much for the moneylenders either. Have you seen our personal debt ratios lately?

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-22-2006, 03:29 PM
When you take money from someone by something other than an arms length exchange, that's aggression. Government mandated pricing (of labor in this case) falls into that category. Corporations making what some call obscene profits and corporate boards agreeing to pay their CEO's huge bonuses do not.

Is there any reprehensible action taken by the haves that you will not defend??

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 03:31 PM
Is there any reprehensible action taken by the haves that you will not defend??
No. I don't steal or allow others to. :)

jettio
06-22-2006, 04:37 PM
If your profit margin is $.02 on the dollar (net of course) and your labor cost goes up $.01 you have lost 1/2 your profit margin. You want to know why customer service has gone to hell in this country? Because the business owner has to try to maintain that $.02 margin and the only wiggle room they have is the labot cost. So, cut 10% of your work force and wind up with people standing in longer lines, employees who are expected to do 10% more work in the same amount of time become more frazzled and less likely to maintain a cheerful attitude, etc.

If most of the market is already paying above this false wage level, what is the point in raising it? It is a feel good political move to show how compassionate the pols are for the poor.

I really would appreciate an answer to my other question about market clearing price, I really am curious what this is and see an opportunity to learn. I may not have gone to college but I have a good head on my shoulders and still very much enjoy learning new things.

I did a google and the wikipedia entry looks okay for explanation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand

If you know graphs, Price is the veritcal axis and Quantity is the horizontal axis. For the supply curve the quantity produced is proportional to the price, that is the higher the price the more that suppliers would provide for the market.

For the demand the curve the quantity that would be sold is inverse to price.

I did not mean to be a wiseguy, I often see people who should know better claim that pricing is a function of various expenses of production.

The supply curve will be different if costs of production go up, but for the most part the price is based on maximizing gross sales.

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 05:25 PM
I believe in the subjective value of prices.

If something costs $10,000 to make and no one wants it...it's worth nothing! :)

banyon
06-22-2006, 05:53 PM
I believe in the subjective value of prices.

If something costs $10,000 to make and no one wants it...it's worth nothing! :)

that theory is less applicable the higher the inelasticity of the good you are dealing with. Petroleum appears these days to be highly inelastic and is likely one of the main culprits of the creeping inflationary pressures.

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 06:03 PM
that theory is less applicable the higher the inelasticity of the good you are dealing with. Petroleum appears these days to be highly inelastic and is likely one of the main culprits of the creeping inflationary pressures.

Nope! That's a real price increase. Probably some inflation in there too. The fact that so many people want it just shows they value it. If it gets too high, people cut back...it comes down to what they want to do with their money. That's value again—subjective.

If someone came out with a product that did the same as petroleum, that was cleaner for a lot less money and no reliance on the ME what do you think would happen?

That's subjective.

Not saying the other things don't enter in from the view of the supplier or business owner trying to stay in business and keep a profit... but utlimately it comes down to what the consumer values, what he is willing to pay for something over other choices—all of which are subjective. Just because a lot of people value the same thing doesn't change this.

banyon
06-22-2006, 06:22 PM
Nope! That's a real price increase. Probably some inflation in there too. The fact that so many people want it just shows they value it. If it gets too high, people cut back...it comes down to what they want to do with their money. That's value again—subjective.

If someone came out with a product that did the same as petroleum, that was cleaner for a lot less money and no reliance on the ME what do you think would happen?

That's subjective.

Not saying the other things don't enter in from the view of the supplier or business owner trying to stay in business and keep a profit... but utlimately it comes down to what the consumer values, what he is willing to pay for something over other choices—all of which are subjective. Just because a lot of people value the same thing doesn't change this.

Yes, demand dictates price, but so does supply. Inflationary pressures can come from either side. I think this is becoming a tangent. The point I was trying to make is that inflation is not simply a result of decisions by the monetary authority. You don't even need a monetary authority to have inflation. Inflation is an increase in price of goods, typically measured in this country by the Consumer Price index. That's what Greenspan, and now Vernanke watches when making decisions about the money supply.

Logical
06-22-2006, 06:34 PM
I don't have to manage one of those places to know that minimum wage isn't the standard, let alone a permanent wage.

Every fast food restaruant in this state is hiring at $7 per hour.Then you live in an unusual state. The only reason they pay more than min wage out here is to get some anglo speaking workers. They load up with Mexican speaking employees for all the non-communication with customer positions at minimum wage.

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 06:45 PM
Yes, demand dictates price, but so does supply. Inflationary pressures can come from either side. I think this is becoming a tangent. The point I was trying to make is that inflation is not simply a result of decisions by the monetary authority. You don't even need a monetary authority to have inflation. Inflation is an increase in price of goods, typically measured in this country by the Consumer Price index. That's what Greenspan, and now Vernanke watches when making decisions about the money supply.


Banyon, That's because you're a Keyenesian you buy into these definitions and theories. Inflation, the proper definition, is adding money to the supply. I just gave you the dictionary definition.

I know what Greenspan and Bernanke ( totally out to lunch this one is) believe and do... that they watch prices but that's because they're manipulating the economy through the money supply. Hence their micromanagement. And just because there is group thought agreement that this is necessary and right won't change reality. Those policies create the booms and busts we have and what you're witnessing is the distortions in the market that they create. Central banking is nothing more than Keyenesian socialism.

Valiant
06-22-2006, 11:08 PM
If we raise the minimum wage are we only increasing the prevailing wage of the illegal immigrants?

Sounds very democratic to me.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Republican-controlled Senate refused Wednesday to raise the minimum wage, rejecting an election-year proposal from Democrats for the first increase in nearly a decade.


The vote was 52-46, eight short of the 60 needed (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/21/minimum.wage.reut/index.html?section=cnn_topstories).


"I don't think the Republicans get it," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy,
D-Massachusetts, who backed a proposal for a three-step increase in the current wage floor to $7.25 an hour. The federal minimum wage has been fixed at $5.15 an hour since 1997.


Republican critics said the minimum wage was a job killer, not the boon to low-wage workers portrayed by Democrats.


"This is a classic debate between two different philosophies. One
philosophy believes in the marketplace, competition and entrepreneurship, and the second is a philosophy that says government knows best," said Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Georgia. He said France and Germany have high minimum wages but also high unemployment.


But Kennedy and other advocates of an increase said minimum wage workers have been without a raise since 1997.


Underscoring the political context of the debate, he said if Democrats win the Senate this November, a minimum wage increase will be one of the first pieces of legislation to be considered.



Have not read any other comments but there is good and bad of this, if minimum wage was raised the total cost of living would go up and most markets would raise the prices to affect that... But those people would have more pocketable money in the shorterm and pay a little bit more into the tax pool...

patteeu
06-24-2006, 09:03 AM
Oh, I don't know about that. Jesus didn't care much for the moneylenders either. Have you seen our personal debt ratios lately?

I don't understand the point here.

patteeu
06-24-2006, 09:04 AM
Is there any reprehensible action taken by the haves that you will not defend??

Of course there is. I won't defend any reprehensible action by anyone, practically by definition.

BucEyedPea
06-24-2006, 01:11 PM
Of course there is. I won't defend any reprehensible action by anyone, practically by definition.

Careful there patteeu, that there question is a land-mine....gotta pull a Clinton or a lawyeresque tactic here: it depends on how you define the word "reprehensible."

Don't forget what is reprehensible to a commie,or a socialist is not reprehensible to those who value other systems.

I feel the whole reason why the right and the left don't get along is because they have different values.

penchief
06-25-2006, 02:30 PM
If you make minimum wage... you suck...

Not necessarily. I just returned from a trip to Richmond, Virginia. While driving around I couldn't help but notice how often I saw women walking to their fast-food jobs in the sweltering heat while dressed in their fast-food uniforms. It struck me how disproportionate it seemed that I rarely saw a man walking to work in his fast-food uniform. It also struck me that most of these women appeared to be age 25-35 and African American. I could only assume that they must also have children.

I'll bet all those African American women walking to their minimum wage fast-food jobs in their dark blue, brown, and black polyester uniforms just so they can feed their children agree with you 100%; they make minimum wage becuse they suck.

listopencil
06-25-2006, 10:12 PM
I'll bet all those African American women walking to their minimum wage fast-food jobs in their dark blue, brown, and black polyester uniforms just so they can feed their children agree with you 100%; they make minimum wage becuse they suck.

No, they would make more money if they sucked. A whore is more highly paid than a Whopper Flopper. If you really give a crap about African American women who walk to work in dark colored uniforms to feed imaginary children, ponder their skills and education. Ponder the High School drop out rate of African American women in Virginia. The answer is not artificialy raising the wages of unskilled positions, the answer is for our citizens to aquire those skills. Other than that a person is going to have to try to get higher than minimum wage with a strong work ethic and native intelligence, by earning promotions that bring better pay. Those jobs that pay more than minimum wage and offer benefits are available in the fast food industry. But you can't get them if you "suck".

penchief
06-26-2006, 12:07 AM
No, they would make more money if they sucked. A whore is more highly paid than a Whopper Flopper. If you really give a crap about African American women who walk to work in dark colored uniforms to feed imaginary children, ponder their skills and education. Ponder the High School drop out rate of African American women in Virginia. The answer is not artificialy raising the wages of unskilled positions, the answer is for our citizens to aquire those skills. Other than that a person is going to have to try to get higher than minimum wage with a strong work ethic and native intelligence, by earning promotions that bring better pay. Those jobs that pay more than minimum wage and offer benefits are available in the fast food industry. But you can't get them if you "suck".

I agree with much of what you say. I am an advocate of self-determination because I do believe that individuals are fundamentally equipped to overcome life's obstacles. I have lived the work ethic in my own life and understand very well it's importance. However, I also believe it would be shortsighted to overlook the fact that external factors can become artificial barriers to that end.

Acquiring skills often costs money. With the rising cost of a college education, it's hardly likely that even someone earning well over minimum wage could afford to send themselves or their kids to college.

I've also worked in fast food and the benefits weren't that good. Granted, it was two decades ago but I can't imagine that those corporations are voluntarily doing better these days. I might be suprised but I doubt they are not taking advantage of the current business climate.

My comments about what I observed in Richmond were just that....observations. I was pointing out that a lot of people are working minimum wage jobs because that is all they can find. Maybe they are stupid but maybe they are hard working and honest, too. Maybe they aren't stupid at all but are caught up in a self-perpetuating environment.

Maybe the poverty level should be lowered because we shouldn't have working families living below the poverty level, IMO.

BucEyedPea
06-26-2006, 08:02 AM
Acquiring skills often costs money. With the rising cost of a college education, it's hardly likely that even someone earning well over minimum wage could afford to send themselves or their kids to college.



We have massive amounts of govt aid for education, another factor that contributes to increasing tuition costs as it keeps demand high. Nevertheless, it's there and it's favorable to the poor as well. Not only that but if you've ever sent away for one of those govt grant books, those are particularly favorable to single moms. Ultimately, it's never the money. It lies within the person to a large degree. Ever hear,some of those people think? They're defeatists. They don't want a solution...they like having the problem.There were some in this thread.

patteeu
06-26-2006, 11:08 AM
Careful there patteeu, that there question is a land-mine....gotta pull a Clinton or a lawyeresque tactic here: it depends on how you define the word "reprehensible."

Don't forget what is reprehensible to a commie,or a socialist is not reprehensible to those who value other systems.

I feel the whole reason why the right and the left don't get along is because they have different values.

That was my point. I'm using my own definition of "reprehensible" knowing full well that it is likely to be a completely different definition than a socialist like 'Hamas' would use. If a member of the 'haves' molests the babysitter or if he drives off a bridge and forgets to go for help for the girl trapped in his car, I'll consider it "reprehensible" and condemn it. If he just makes a boatload of money in exchange for his honest work though, I'm OK with it.

penchief
06-26-2006, 11:54 AM
We have massive amounts of govt aid for education, another factor that contributes to increasing tuition costs as it keeps demand high. Nevertheless, it's there and it's favorable to the poor as well. Not only that but if you've ever sent away for one of those govt grant books, those are particularly favorable to single moms. Ultimately, it's never the money. It lies within the person to a large degree. Ever hear,some of those people think? They're defeatists. They don't want a solution...they like having the problem.There were some in this thread.

Much of that is true but at the same time that college costs are skyrocketing those financial aid programs you mention are also getting squeezed. Plus, interests rates are going up on student loans. Add to that lower wages and lessening benefits, and it will become increasingly more difficult for middle and lower class citizens to take advantage of a college education. Even if they are lucky enough to get a college degree most people will end up working for subpar wages while paying back their loans for half their lives. If Cheneyburton gets it's way most 4-year grads will be flipping whoppers, anyway.

IMO, the gap between those who have much and those who have little is only compounded when access to education and health care is determined by privelege. Equal opportunity and equal access are two important ideals to a free and democratic society, IMO.

What is currently happening in this country appears to be a rolling back of equal opportunity and equal access in favor of corporate greed and the consolodation of political and economic power, IMO.

BucEyedPea
06-26-2006, 12:24 PM
Much of that is true but at the same time that college costs are skyrocketing those financial aid programs you mention are also getting squeezed. Plus, interests rates are going up on student loans. Add to that lower wages and lessening benefits, and it will become increasingly more difficult for middle and lower class citizens to take advantage of a college education. Even if they are lucky enough to get a college degree most people will end up working for subpar wages while paying back their loans for half their lives. If Cheneyburton gets it's way most 4-year grads will be flipping whoppers, anyway.

IMO, the gap between those who have much and those who have little is only compounded when access to education and health care is determined by privelege. Equal opportunity and equal access are two important ideals to a free and democratic society, IMO.

What is currently happening in this country appears to be a rolling back of equal opportunity and equal access in favor of corporate greed and the consolodation of political and economic power, IMO.

I agree with you penchief, that those things are happening in this country, but it's not just because of corporations and the Chenyburton's of this world. It is happening as we become an increasingly socialist state...this has always created more poverty and worse conditions. Wage and price controls are socialism. Nafta, Gatt, Cafta, Ftaa etc and all such fake free-trade treaties are simply devices for redistributing America's wealth while are protectionist for certain corporations. They are also loaded with subsidies. It all sounds compassionate on paper but it doesn't work. And don't kid yourself, the big corporations like it as it makes it just that more difficult for start-ups and the smaller guy to compete against them. Welcome to Third-Way Socialism. (corporate). However, more people are going to college than ever before.

Clint in Wichita
06-26-2006, 02:27 PM
Work your way up like a decent Republican would, you whiny little sniveler.

This is such a straw man, it is a natural issue for Dems to take up. Almost no one works for minimum wage except college kids and some entry level wage earners. If you are over 20 years old and making minimum wage, the problem is with you, not some Buy-a-vote legislation.

Just like Christianity being "under attack".

Speaking of "buy-a-vote" legislation, Republicans make promises relating to god, guns, and gays, but never, ever deliver. Gets 'em elected, though.

penchief
06-26-2006, 03:14 PM
I agree with you penchief, that those things are happening in this country, but it's not just because of corporations and the Chenyburton's of this world. It is happening as we become an increasingly socialist state...this has always created more poverty and worse conditions. Wage and price controls are socialism. Nafta, Gatt, Cafta, Ftaa etc and all such fake free-trade treaties are simply devices for redistributing America's wealth while are protectionist for certain corporations. They are also loaded with subsidies. It all sounds compassionate on paper but it doesn't work. And don't kid yourself, the big corporations like it as it makes it just that more difficult for start-ups and the smaller guy to compete against them. Welcome to Third-Way Socialism. (corporate). However, more people are going to college than ever before.

Was it socialism in early 20th century America that promoted the exploitation of American workers and their families? I don't think so. I think the conditions that early industrialists forced upon our citizens during that era created an environment that fertilized the socialist movement in this country.

IMO, this administration has been tasked to restore the status quo that existed before worker rights and protections took hold. And they're doing a mighty fine job of it.

BucEyedPea
06-26-2006, 03:46 PM
Was it socialism in early 20th century America that promoted the exploitation of American workers and their families? I don't think so. I think the conditions that early industrialists forced upon our citizens during that era created an environment that fertilized the socialist movement in this country.
I'll agree that savage management was the other extreme, although some claims were exaggerated. I don't recommend no laws at all to protect workers from certain unfairnesses. But economic fascism, socialism or communism are still not workable solutions and to add 70-80 years of these to the mix continuously just brings about a day or reckoning sooner or later. I say those days are upon us.

I mean what would you rather have: bones thrown to the lowest rung workers permanently or an environment that has opportunities so that those who will improve themselves or take risks have some incentive to do so?


IMO, this administration has been tasked to restore the status quo that existed before worker rights and protections took hold. And they're doing a mighty fine job of it.

Such as?
I don't ask that sarcastically. It's just when you make such an allegation with no specifics it's hard to see if I agree with you or not.

What worker's rights and protections has he taken away?
And what do you mean by worker's rights?

I see Bush as every bit a socialist, including being a corporate one too, as any previous democrat. In fact I read a great article that made a claim that we get more of this type of legislation under a Republican president than a Democratic one because people's guards are down. It had lots of specifics in it too. Sad to say but it seems true.

Republican and Democrat don't mean anything anymore. More socialism becomes more inevitable each decade. The two parties are only used to create dialetical materialism arguments: thesis - anti-thesis. In the end we wind up with Third Way Socialism. This just leaves the grass roots members or each party feeling alienated imo. This is today's status-quo.

FringeNC
06-26-2006, 03:49 PM
Everyone who has ever had a class in economics knows that a minumim wage reduces employment. That argument aside, even if you don't care about the reduction in employment, why would the minimum wage be at the federal level than the state level? First off, wages very across the country. Secondly, it may be popular in some states -- if they want to enact such idiocy, let them. Why try impose to it on everyone? If Massachusetts, Rhode Island, or NY wants a $50 min wage, let them try it...

Maybe we can reduce illegal immigration if we just convince Mexico to institute a high min. wage, right? That's the only reason they're not rich, right? They lack progressive legislation.

Yes, there are poor people. I just don't see who liberals have anything to add to the debate about it, though. People are poor because for behavioral reasons. The key to reducing poverty is changing the behavior of the underclass. And I'm not saying they are necessarily morally culpable for their behavior; that doesn't matter one way or another. Somehow changing the attitude among the black youth that doing well is school doesn't make you a sell-out "Uncle Tom" and crap like that is the key. The black ghetto culture is one of the major problems, as well as terrible inner-city schools (despite massive funding, they still are a joke).

I'm just so sick of liberals trying to claim the moral high ground with policies such as the min wage which make the poor worse off. If you care about the poor, how about look at the "root causes"?

BucEyedPea
06-26-2006, 03:54 PM
Fringe, I brought the state versus federal level up for minimum wage on another board. Someone corrected me on the fact that states that have min wage ( we had it on a referendum question in Florida and it passed...things like that usually do) can only apply it to businesses that are Florida based only but not others. That it did not apply to businesses that were in many states. I asked how this worked and haven't received a response yet. I am assuming for now, that this may have to do with interstate commerce laws. I know the fed congress has that power. If anyone can clue me in on specifics I'd appreciate. I don't feel like looking it up.

penchief
06-26-2006, 04:04 PM
New York does have it's own minimum wage which is higher than the federal minimum wage. I think it's supposed to go up another dollar next year, too.

FringeNC
06-26-2006, 04:06 PM
Fringe, I brought the state versus federal level up for minimum wage on another board. Someone corrected me on the fact that states that have min wage ( we had it on a referendum question in Florida and it passed...things like that usually do) can only apply it to businesses that are Florida based only but not others. That it did not apply to businesses that were in many states. I asked how this worked and haven't received a response yet. I am assuming for now, that this may have to do with interstate commerce laws. I know the fed congress has that power. If anyone can clue me in on specifics I'd appreciate. I don't feel like looking it up.

That's not right.

http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm

BucEyedPea
06-26-2006, 04:13 PM
That's not right.

http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm

Thank you. It doesn't seem to clarify if it doesn't apply to certain businesses though...or I didn't see it.

penchief
06-26-2006, 04:15 PM
Everyone who has ever had a class in economics knows that a minumim wage reduces employment. That argument aside, even if you don't care about the reduction in employment, why would the minimum wage be at the federal level than the state level? First off, wages very across the country. Secondly, it may be popular in some states -- if they want to enact such idiocy, let them. Why try impose to it on everyone? If Massachusetts, Rhode Island, or NY wants a $50 min wage, let them try it...

Maybe we can reduce illegal immigration if we just convince Mexico to institute a high min. wage, right? That's the only reason they're not rich, right? They lack progressive legislation.

Yes, there are poor people. I just don't see who liberals have anything to add to the debate about it, though. People are poor because for behavioral reasons. The key to reducing poverty is changing the behavior of the underclass. And I'm not saying they are necessarily morally culpable for their behavior; that doesn't matter one way or another. Somehow changing the attitude among the black youth that doing well is school doesn't make you a sell-out "Uncle Tom" and crap like that is the key. The black ghetto culture is one of the major problems, as well as terrible inner-city schools (despite massive funding, they still are a joke).

I'm just so sick of liberals trying to claim the moral high ground with policies such as the min wage which make the poor worse off. If you care about the poor, how about look at the "root causes"?

While self-determination is definitely a huge factor in someone achieving his or her personal goals, external factors cannot be completely ignored. If that were the case there would be no dictatorships or countries with great disparities between rich and poor. To suggest that everyone deserves the conditions that they've been subjected to is somewhat shortsighted, IMO.

Artificial barriers can be mandated by governments or by ruling classes. Our own history is a testament to that idea. According to some, slaves deserved to be slaves, African-Americans deserved to be second class citizens, women deserved not to have the vote, and small children deserved 15-hour days in sweat shops for pennies.

To suggest that behavior is the sole reason that some people live in poverty is just plain wrong, IMO. What is capable of happening anywhere else in this world is easily possible here. Human nature is human nature irregardless of borders.

FringeNC
06-26-2006, 04:27 PM
Thank you. It doesn't seem to clarify if it doesn't apply to certain businesses though...or I didn't see it.

All businesses are effectlively interstate...

Bootlegged
06-26-2006, 04:31 PM
While self-determination is definitely a huge factor in someone achieving his or her personal goals, external factors cannot be completely ignored. If that were the case there would be no dictatorships or countries with great disparities between rich and poor. To suggest that everyone deserves the conditions that they've been subjected to is somewhat shortsighted, IMO.

Artificial barriers can be mandated by governments or by ruling classes. Our own history is a testament to that idea. According to some, slaves deserved to be slaves, African-Americans deserved to be second class citizens, women deserved not to have the vote, and small children deserved 15-hour days in sweat shops for pennies.

To suggest that behavior is the sole reason that some people live in poverty is just plain wrong, IMO. What is capable of happening anywhere else in this world is easily possible here. Human nature is human nature irregardless of borders.

Murtha would fix it.

BucEyedPea
06-26-2006, 04:35 PM
small children deserved 15-hour days in sweat shops for pennies.

This is where I take partial issue with the progressives of the earlier industrial revolution.

Where were those children before working in those shops?
They were begging out in the streets.
If you were young back then which would have looked like a better option?

Now I am not at all advocating for a return to child labor, but when we went from an agrarian society to a mass production society, you have to look at the relative improvement of even the worse case scenarios. Children always worked helping their families on their farms even before then. Was one reason for the summer school break.

In addition to the fact that more people could afford things that only the weathy could afford such as a change of clothes and soap to bathe more often because of mass production. Oh! But the Industrial Revolution is given a thoroughly bad rap by today's progressives as if it was the progressives alone that did anything to improve our conditions.

I was interested in hearing some specifics about what worker rights Bush has taken away...and what exactly is a worker's "rights?" Are these protected in the US Constitution?

penchief
06-26-2006, 06:15 PM
This is where I take partial issue with the progressives of the earlier industrial revolution.

Where were those children before working in those shops?
They were begging out in the streets.
If you were young back then which would have looked like a better option?

Now I am not at all advocating for a return to child labor, but when we went from an agrarian society to a mass production society, you have to look at the relative improvement of even the worse case scenarios. Children always worked helping their families on their farms even before then. Was one reason for the summer school break.

In addition to the fact that more people could afford things that only the weathy could afford such as a change of clothes and soap to bathe more often because of mass production. Oh! But the Industrial Revolution is given a thoroughly bad rap by today's progressives as if it was the progressives alone that did anything to improve our conditions.

I was interested in hearing some specifics about what worker rights Bush has taken away...and what exactly is a worker's "rights?" Are these protected in the US Constitution?

When I say, "rights" I use the term broadly. I think worker safety should trump profit. The recent rash of mining disasters exemplifies the underming and non-enforcement of those protections under the current political climate. Workers should have a reasonable expectation not to die unnecessarily.

Although the 40-hour work week is not a right it was borne from unfair practices. This administration endorsed rolling back overtime for "white collar Wall Street" types but the reality is that my 62 year-old mother who earns $8.15 per hour at Rite Aid lost her overtime.

This administration stood back and allowed corporations to reneg on their guaranteed pension plans. Even though they later said they didn't like it they acknowledged it with a wink and a nod.

Their efforts to drive down wages and bankrupt the national treasure only continue to compound the situation.

Even quality of life issues such as health care and environmental protections are directley related to the work environment. A factory that provides income for a community can often be a double-edged sword when they spew toxins into the very same communities they profess to serve.

We should always be shooting for progress. There is no reason to turn the clock back on worker conditions and benefits. A healthy robust community where opportunity and financial security are the end result of a job only contributes to the fiber of the community and the country. When everyone has a stake in the outcome there is a sense of interdependency and loyalty that transcends politics and profit. That sense of community and country is what made this nation great, IMO.

listopencil
11-08-2006, 12:12 PM
This looked a good thread to bump now that MO has upped Minimum Wage.

listopencil
02-13-2013, 11:38 AM
Hey, look. I bumped a thread.

bevischief
02-14-2013, 12:00 PM
Who still gets paid the minimum wage any more?