Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-27-2013, 09:17 AM  
gblowfish gblowfish is offline
Be Kind To Your Pets
 
gblowfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Glorious Independence, MO
Casino cash: $8572
VARSITY
Uncle Lamar Wants to Abolish the Minimum Wage

Because those Wal Mart workers are overpaid, damn it! This guy is the ranking GOP member of the Senate Labor Committee. Wow....

http://tinyurl.com/omaxldm

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), the ranking Republican on the Senate's labor committee, said in a hearing Tuesday that he would prefer to see the minimum wage abolished.

Alexander's declaration came amid a back-and-forth between a witness from the conservative Heritage Foundation and Sens. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). The trio had been debating what kind of impact a higher minimum wage would have on a theoretical worker, and it seemed Sanders wanted to know whether the witness opposed raising the minimum wage or having a minimum wage at all.

"There are some conservatives who do not believe in the concept of the minimum wage," Sanders said to the witness, James Sherk, a labor policy analyst at the think tank.

"Let me jump in," Alexander then said. "I do not believe in it."

The policy debate had been lively, with interruptions all around, and Sanders grew excited at Alexander's interjection.

"So we have a ranking member," Sanders responded. "Alright! There we go!"
Sanders turned to Alexander.

"So you do not believe in the concept of the minimum wage?"

"That's correct," Alexander responded.

"You would abolish the minimum wage?"

"Correct."

"And if someone had to work for two bucks an hour," Sanders continued, "they would work for two bucks an hour?"

Alexander went on to compare a higher minimum wage to a form of welfare. Instead of boosting it, as Congress is now considering, he suggested a common conservative alternative to a federal wage floor -- a higher earned-income tax credit.

"No, I would go for a much more targeted approach," Alexander said. "The question I want to ask, if we are interested in social justice, and we want to honor work instead of getting a welfare check, then wouldn't a more efficient way to help people in poverty be to increase the earned-income tax credit rather than do what we always do here, which is come up with a big idea and send the bill to somebody else? What we're doing is coming up with the big idea and sending the bill to the employer.

"Why don't we just pay for the big ideas we come up with," he continued. "And if we want to create a standard of living for people that's much higher than what they have today, then let's attach the dollars to the job and everybody pay for it. I don't want to do that. But if we were going to do it, then I think that's the way we should do it."

"That's a very interesting discussion for another time," Sanders said with a slight laugh.

Sanders then turned back to Sherk and asked him if he'd support a bill sponsored by Alexander abolishing the minimum wage.

"I believe the minimum wage hurts its intended beneficiaries," Sherk responded. "I do not support the concept of the minimum wage."

"I appreciate your honesty," Sanders replied.
Posts: 27,321
gblowfish is obviously part of the inner Circle.gblowfish is obviously part of the inner Circle.gblowfish is obviously part of the inner Circle.gblowfish is obviously part of the inner Circle.gblowfish is obviously part of the inner Circle.gblowfish is obviously part of the inner Circle.gblowfish is obviously part of the inner Circle.gblowfish is obviously part of the inner Circle.gblowfish is obviously part of the inner Circle.gblowfish is obviously part of the inner Circle.gblowfish is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 01:51 PM   #46
Prison Bitch Prison Bitch is online now
The Bitch is back
 
Prison Bitch's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lees summit
Casino cash: $9334
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC native View Post
If they are legal, then they are entitled to minimum wages which would make wages increase for them and others. You really are a dumb mother****er.
Wait wait wait - I have to ask if you're serious, or just joking here. Are you really claiming that increasing the number of people making minimum wage will INCREASE wages for others?


You cannot possibly be this stupid.
Posts: 13,766
Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 01:53 PM   #47
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $8375
The only reason a minimum wage looks acceptable or reasonable, if you prefer, is because the Fed has increased the money supply which is what really makes people poorer, especially the lower classes and those on fixed incomes like the elderly. It erodes their buying power. Yet, the same people calling for a min wage fully endorse such policies by the Fed because as they say, govt needs to spend during a recession.
__________________
Posts: 57,443
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 01:56 PM   #48
Discuss Thrower Discuss Thrower is offline
<3 <3 <3 <3 <3
 
Discuss Thrower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: No, where do YOU live?
Casino cash: $8724
The minimum wage wouldn't be an issue if it hadn't lost its purchasing power over the last 50 years.
__________________

- credit goes to BoneKrusher for the pic

Chiefs 2015 Opponents:
Home: CLE, PIT, CHI, DET, AFC East. Away: BAL, CIN, GB, MIN, AFC South
Chiefs 2016 Opponents:
Home: JAX, TEN, NO, TB, AFC East. Away: HOU, IND, ATL, CAR, AFC North
Chiefs 2017 Opponents:
Home: BUF, MIA, PHI, WSH, AFC North. Away: NE, NYJ, NYG, DAL, AFC South
Posts: 11,695
Discuss Thrower threw an interception on a screen pass.Discuss Thrower threw an interception on a screen pass.Discuss Thrower threw an interception on a screen pass.Discuss Thrower threw an interception on a screen pass.Discuss Thrower threw an interception on a screen pass.Discuss Thrower threw an interception on a screen pass.Discuss Thrower threw an interception on a screen pass.Discuss Thrower threw an interception on a screen pass.Discuss Thrower threw an interception on a screen pass.Discuss Thrower threw an interception on a screen pass.Discuss Thrower threw an interception on a screen pass.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 02:41 PM   #49
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $6225
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
Cry me a river glowfish!
The average salary of a Walmart store manager in the United States is $83,000 as of October 2010, according to Simply Hired. Varies by location which makes sense.

Simply Hired provided average salaries for the following types of managerial positions at Walmart in the United States as of October 2010: assistant manager, $38,000; customer service manager, $43,000; manager at Walmart's home office, $56,000.

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/facts_7330173_av...#ixzz2XRL2fUMc


You are attempting to defend your position with the Average of a Manager?



Average doesn't say anything about pay.
Managers aren't the typical employee. What is the manager to employee ratio? Why should we care what a manager makes, when discussing the lower level employees?
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,936
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 02:48 PM   #50
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $6225
http://www.theamericanconservative.c...merican-wages/

Raising American Wages…by Raising American Wages


With Americans still trapped in the fifth year of our Great Recession, and median personal income having been essentially stagnant for forty years, perhaps we should finally admit that decades of economic policies have largely failed.

The last two years of our supposed recovery have seen American growth rates averaging well under 2 percent.[i] Although our media often pays greater attention to the recent gains in stock market and asset prices, such paltry growth means that many of the millions of jobs lost in 2008 and 2009 will never be regained, and the broadest measures of American unemployment and underemployment will remain stuck in the vicinity of 15%.[ii] Meanwhile, an astonishing 93% of the total increase in income during the recovery period has been captured by the top one percent of earners, who now hold almost as much net wealth as the bottom 95 percent of our society.[iii] This polarized situation does not bode well for our future, and unless broader social trends in jobs and incomes soon improve, dark days surely lie ahead.

***

If we seek to create jobs and raise incomes for ordinary Americans, we should consider what sorts of jobs and incomes these might be. Since economists and policy analysts tend to have advanced degrees and many leading journalists these days are Ivy League alumni, their employment perceptions may often diverge from reality. So let us review the official government data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), as discussed by Prof. Jack Metzgar of Chicago’s Center for Working-Class Studies and brought to my attention in an excellent column by the late Alexander Cockburn.[iv] Metzgar writes:

The BLS’s three largest occupational categories by themselves accounted for more than one-third of the workforce in 2010 (49 million jobs), and they will make an outsized contribution to the new jobs projected for 2020. They are:

Office and administrative support occupations (median wage of $30,710)

Sales and related occupations ($24,370)

Food preparation and serving occupations ($18,770)

Other occupations projected to provide the largest number of new jobs in the next decade include child care workers ($19,300), personal care aides ($19,640), home health aides ($20,560), janitors and cleaners ($22,210), teacher assistants ($23,220), non-construction laborers ($23,460), security guards ($23,920), and construction laborers ($29,280).

Although our bipartisan elites regularly suggest higher education as the best elixir for what ails our economy and its workers, few of these job categories seem logical careers for individuals who have devoted four years of their life to the study of History, Psychology, or Business Education, often at considerable expense. Nor would we expect the increased production of such degrees, presumably at lower-tier or for-profit colleges, to have much positive impact on the wages or working conditions of janitors or security guards.

Consider that only 20% of current jobs require even a bachelors’ degree.[v]More than 30% of Americans over the age of 25 have graduated college, so this implies that one-third or more of today’s college graduates are over-educated for their current employment, perhaps conforming to the stereotype of the college psychology major working at Starbucks or McDonalds.

Furthermore, this employment situation will change only gradually over the next decade, according to BLS projections. Millions of jobs in our “knowledge economy” do currently require a post-graduate degree, and the numbers are growing rapidly; but even by 2020, these will constitute less than 5% of the total, while around 70% of all jobs will still require merely a high school diploma.[vi]

Education may be valuable for other reasons, but it does not seem to hold the answer to our jobs and incomes problem.

If additional education is a dead end, other partisan nostrums appear equally doubtful. Large cuts in government taxation or regulation are unlikely to benefit the average sales clerk or waitress. And the favored progressive proposal of a huge new government stimulus package has absolutely no chance of getting through Congress; but even if it did, few of the funds would flow to the low-paid private sector service workers catalogued above, and any broader social gains would rely upon a secondary boost in economic activity produced by putting extra government dollars into private pockets.

So how might we possibly raise the wages of American workers who fill this huge roster of underpaid and lesser-skilled positions, holding jobs which are almost entirely concentrated in the private service sector?

***

Perhaps the most effective means of raising their wages is simply to raise their wages.

Consider the impact of a large increase in the federal minimum wage, perhaps to $10 or more likely $12 per hour.

The generally low-end jobs catalogued above are entirely in the non-tradable service sector; they could not be outsourced to even lower-paid foreigners in Bangalore or Manila. Perhaps there might be some incentive for further automation, but the nature of the jobs in question – focused on personal interactions requiring human skills – are exactly those least open to mechanical replacement. Just consider the difficulty and expense of automating the job of a home health care aide, child care worker, or bartender.

With direct replacement via outsourcing or automation unlikely, employers responding to a higher minimum wage would be faced with the choice of either increasing the wages of their lowest paid workers by perhaps a couple of dollars per hour, or eliminating their jobs. There would likely be some job loss,[vii] but given the simultaneous rise in labor costs among all competitors and the localized market for these services, the logical business response would be to raise prices by a few percent to help cover increased costs while also trimming current profit margins. Perhaps consumers would pay 3 percent more for Wal-Mart goods or an extra dime for a McDonald’s hamburger, but most of the jobs would still exist and the price changes would be small compared to typical fluctuations due to commodity and energy prices, international exchange rates, or Chinese production costs.

The resulting one-time inflationary spike would slightly raise living expenses for everyone in our society, but the immediate 20% or 30% boost in the take-home pay of many millions of America’s lowest income workers would make it easy for them to absorb these small costs, while the impact upon the middle or upper classes would be totally negligible. An increase in the hourly minimum wage from the current federal level of $7.25 to (say) $12.00 might also have secondary, smaller ripple effects, boosting wages currently above that level as well.

A minimum wage in this range is hardly absurd or extreme. In 2012 dollars, the American minimum wage was over $10 in 1968 during our peak of postwar prosperity and full employment.[viii] The average minimum wage in Canadian provinces is currently well over $10 per hour, the national figure for France is more than $12, and Australia has the remarkable combination of a minimum wage of nearly $16.50 together with 5 percent unemployment.[ix]




Even a large increase in the minimum wage would have very little impact on America’s international competitiveness since almost everyone employed in our surviving manufacturing export sector – whether in unionized Seattle or non-union South Carolina – already earns far above the current minimum wage. The same is also true for government workers, resulting in negligible increased cost to taxpayers.

Leaving aside the obvious gains in financial and personal well-being for the lower strata of America’s working class, there would also be a large economic multiplier effect, boosting general business activity in our weak economy. America’s working poor tend to spend almost every dollar they earn, often even sinking into temporary debt on a monthly basis.[x] Raising the annual income of each such wage-earner couple by eight or ten thousand dollars would immediately send those same dollars flowing into the regular consumer economy, boosting sales and general economic activity. In effect, the proposal represents an enormous government stimulus package, but one targeting the working-poor and funded entirely by the private sector.

Ironically, it is likely that major elements of the private sector would be perfectly happy with this arrangement. For example, despite their low-wage and anti-worker reputation, Wal-Mart’s top executives lobbied Congress in 2005 for an increase in the minimum wage, concerned that their working-class customer base was growing too impoverished to shop at their stores.[xi] Wal-Mart might never be willing to raise its wages in isolation, but if a higher minimum wage forces all competitors to do the same, then prices can also be raised to help make up the difference, while the large rise in disposable consumer income would greatly increase sales.

***

Although the direct financial benefits to working-class Americans and our economy as a whole are the primary justifications for the proposal, there are a number of subsidiary benefits as well, ranging across both economic and non-economic areas.

First, the net dollar transfers through the labor market in this proposal would generally be from higher to lower income strata, and lower-income individuals tend to pay a much larger fraction of their income in payroll and sales taxes. Thus, a large boost in working-class wages would obviously have a very positive impact on the financial health of Social Security, Medicare and other government programs funded directly from the paycheck. Meanwhile, increased sales tax collections would improve the dismal fiscal picture for state and local governments, and the public school systems they finance.

Furthermore, as large portions of the working-poor became much less poor, the payout of the existing Federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) would be sharply reduced. Although popular among politicians, the EITC is a classic example of economic special interests privatizing profits while socializing costs: employers receive the full benefits of their low-wage workforce while a substantial fraction of the wage expense is pushed onto the taxpayers. Private companies should fund their own payrolls rather than rely upon substantial government subsidies, which produce major distortions in market signals.

Even on the highly contentious and seemingly unrelated issue of immigration, a large rise in the minimum wage might have a strongly positive impact. During the last decade or two, American immigration has been running at historically high levels, with the overwhelming majority of these immigrants being drawn here by hopes of employment.[xii] This vast influx of eager workers has naturally strengthened the position of Capital at the expense of Labor, and much of the stagnation or decline in working-class wages has probably been a result, since this sector has been in greatest direct competition with lower-skilled immigrants.[xiii]

Not only would a large rise in the minimum wage reverse many years of this economic “race to the bottom,” but it would impact immigration itself, even without changes in government enforcement policy. One of the few sectors likely to be devastated by a much higher minimum wage would be the sweatshops and other very low wage or marginal businesses which tend to disproportionably employ new immigrants, especially illegal ones. Sweatshops and similar industries have no legitimate place in a developed economy, and their elimination would reduce the sort of lowest-rung job openings continually drawing impoverished new immigrants. Meanwhile, those immigrants who have already been here some time, learned English, and established a solid employment record would be kept on at higher wages, reaping the same major benefits as non-immigrant Americans within the ranks of the working-poor.

***

Finally, one of the more unexpected benefits of a large rise in the minimum wage would follow from a total reversal of bipartisan conventional wisdom. Whereas our elites regularly tell us that an increase in higher education might have the benefit of raising American wages, I would instead argue that a sharp rise in ordinary wages would have the benefit of reducing higher education, whose growth increasingly resembles that of an unsustainable bubble.

Between 2000 and 2010, enrollment in postsecondary institutions increased 37 percent, compared to just 11 percent during the previous decade, with the recent increase being almost three times that of the growth of the underlying population of 18- to 24-year-olds. Indeed, relative enrollment growth for older students – 25 and above – was far greater than for students in the younger, more traditional ages. Furthermore, “Business” has overwhelmingly become the most popular undergraduate major, attracting nearly as many students as the combined total of the next three categories – Social Sciences and History, Health Sciences, and Education.[xiv]

If rapidly growing numbers of individuals, especially those many years past their high school graduation, are now attending college and majoring in Business, they are probably not doing so purely out of love of learning and a desire for broadening their intellectual horizons. Instead, they have presumably accepted the pronouncements of authority figures that higher education will benefit them economically. Put in harsher terms, they may believe that a college degree is their best hope of avoiding a life of permanent poverty trapped in the ranks of the working-poor.

Although there is a clear mismatch between the requirements of America’s projected jobs and the benefits of a college education, this notion of “college or poverty” may not be entirely mistaken. A recent college graduate is almost 20 percentage points more likely to have a job than a person of the same age with only a high school degree.[xv] As a competitive signaling device, a 4-year degree may help someone land an office job as an administrative assistant rather than one as a fast-food server. But this is costly to the individual and to society.

Even leaving aside the absurdity of young people spending years of their lives studying business theory or psychology to obtain jobs which traditionally went to high school graduates, the financial cost is enormous. A generation or more ago, expenses at solid state institutions and similar colleges were fairly low, and could mostly be financed by small grants, parental savings, and part-time student jobs. But educational costs have increased 133% above inflation over the last thirty years,[xvi] and the government-subsidized college-loan industry has grown in parallel. Last year, the total volume of outstanding student-loan debt passed the trillion dollar mark, now exceeding either credit-card or auto loan debt.[xvii]

Two-thirds of recent college graduates borrowed to finance their education, and their average debt is over $23,000, while the load for those who pursue graduate or professional degrees can easily exceed the hundred thousand dollar mark.[xviii] These debts are exempt from bankruptcy discharge, and unless graduates quickly find high-paying jobs – not easy in an economy with very high youthful unemployment – the required payments may remain larger than the combined total of their federal, state, and local taxes. This privatized “education tax” may become a permanent, terrible burden, pushing any plans for marriage, family, and home purchase into the distant future. Barely half of 18- to 24-year-olds are currently employed, the lowest level in over sixty years,[xix] so we should not be surprised that a quarter of all student-loan payers are currently delinquent.[xx] Without the possibility of bankruptcy to clear their load, permanent debt-peonage for a substantial fraction of the next generation seems a very real possibility.

The aggressive marketing tactics of for-profit colleges and the student loan industry have disturbing parallels with the sub-prime lenders who played a destructive role in the Housing Bubble. Our national elites gave strong public support to the goal of universal home-ownership. Families were warned that if they did not stretch their income and their credit to buy a house at the inflated prices being offered, they would be permanently priced out of the market and condemned to second-class economic citizenship. Today, very similar warnings are made about the failure to invest in a college education, and this is backed by the aggressive advertising and sales tactics of the lucrative and well-connected for-profit sectors of the Higher Education-Industrial Complex, such as University of Phoenix and Kaplan Schools.

The lax lending standards and regulatory policies supporting greater homeownership were a major factor in our catastrophic financial collapse, in which the average family has now lost 40% of its net worth and many millions of Americans are on the edge of foreclosure, bankruptcy, and destitution.[xxi] Nearly everyone lost, while a tiny handful of individuals and companies made vast, unearned fortunes from facilitating the growth of the bubble or later betting upon its collapse. A similar outcome in higher education seems quite likely.

Now consider the impact of a sharp rise in the minimum wage, sufficient to remove the taint of poverty overhanging so many of our lower-tier jobs. Those academically-oriented students who plan to pursue challenging college majors in engineering, computer software, or other STEM fields would be completely unaffected by a rise in pay for home health aides, nor would there be any impact on the college plans of those seeking to broaden their horizons with serious academic study in literature, history, or philosophy.

But for those millions who regard postsecondary education as merely a way of punching their ticket with a “business” degree and thereby gaining a shot at a middle class income, the calculus would be different: four years of academic work, four years of foregone income, and many tens of thousands of dollars in tuition and fees would be weighed against earning a reasonable living straight out of high school or with a form of shorter vocational training like an apprenticeship. Certainly in the past, when well-paid factory jobs were plentiful, a large fraction of students made the latter choice, and seldom regretted it.

Meanwhile, if college enrollments were reduced to those who actually wanted or needed a college education, supply and demand would begin deflating our Higher Education Bubble, forcing a sharp drop in ever-escalating educational costs. Since government loans and subsidies would be targeted at a much smaller pool of students, they could be made more generous, reducing the debt burden on those who do still seek a degree.

***

Public policy experts sometimes glorify complexity, proposing intricate, interlocking systems aimed at a desired result. But such structures are only as strong as their weakest link, and a proposal too complex to fully understand is also too complex to fix. Our government has sought to ensure a decent living for American workers through an enormous array of income subsidies, public benefits, training programs, and educational loans; at this point, many of these components have accumulated powerful and parasitic side-beneficiaries while leaving the working class behind.

Since this vast and leaky conglomeration has failed at its intended goal, perhaps we should just try raising wages instead.

(Originally published November 15, 2012 by The New America Foundation – PDF)

/I don't think there is anything more disgusting than people who complain about the lowest paid, most vulnerable in our society.
//Every American, despite whatever job they hold, if the are willing to work 40 hours a week, deserves a pay that allows them to pay for the basic necessities
///Does anyone else notice that when they talk about minimum wage, it is always in dollars per hour, but when they talk about executive compensation, it is in yearly totals? How about we talk about minimum wage by yearly totals. That would be 15,000 a year. 20$ an hour is only 40,000 a year. That is not a lot of money.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,936
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 02:51 PM   #51
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $6225
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,936
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 02:53 PM   #52
Garcia Bronco Garcia Bronco is offline
No Keys, No Problem
 

Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Denver
Casino cash: $5732
Raising the minimum wage buys short term money gain until the businesses catch up and you're right back where you started. It's like a dog chasing it's tail...or sitting in the ACME slingshot to catch the road runner.
Posts: 22,184
Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 02:58 PM   #53
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $6225
BEP wants to go back to this:







/Darn government regulation, making those freedom loving companies install fire escapes and obey child labor laws.
/so what if 146 people died in the fire in 20 minutes
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,936
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 02:58 PM   #54
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $6225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco View Post
Raising the minimum wage buys short term money gain until the businesses catch up and you're right back where you started. It's like a dog chasing it's tail...or sitting in the ACME slingshot to catch the road runner.
Sorry, there is zero evidence of this.

The minimum wage has been around for decades. Has been raised for decades. Guess what. Nothing you conservatives predicts happens.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,936
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 03:01 PM   #55
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $6225
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
The only reason a minimum wage looks acceptable or reasonable, if you prefer, is because the Fed has increased the money supply which is what really makes people poorer, especially the lower classes and those on fixed incomes like the elderly. It erodes their buying power. Yet, the same people calling for a min wage fully endorse such policies by the Fed because as they say, govt needs to spend during a recession.
No evidence for this either.

Inflation has maintained a steady pace.

You believe the stupidest stuff.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,936
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 03:12 PM   #56
'Hamas' Jenkins 'Hamas' Jenkins is offline
Emptying the Trash
 
'Hamas' Jenkins's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Casino cash: $7701
Quote:
Originally Posted by GloucesterChief View Post
Except you know for that whole thing called the middle class. Pre-industrial world: massive amount of poor people mostly doing subsistence farming, small middle class of tradesman and merchants, smaller upper class nobility. Industrial Revolution: Declining amount of people in poverty, growing middle class, growing upper class as wealth wasn't tied to land anymore.

That 380 also went a lot farther because the currency was not inflated and prices actually dropped through the gilded age. Also what we would call necessary for life today were either luxuries or weren't invented yet.

Also, your thing about child labor? The way the modern Western world is now is the exception in human history. For most of human history children were expected to work on the farm or learning a trade. That is why having a big family traditionally was a good thing more labor availability. During the industrial revolution people weren't shocked by child labor because it was nothing new.
1. Better than bad does not equal good. As the United States moved from an agrarian society to an industrial society the nature of labor changes and the volume of wealth in the country changed. But that does not mean that the economic benefits from industrialization led to better lives for all people at the time. They most certainly didn't, and that is easily seen by looking at the absolutely awful conditions of the slums and tenements that pervaded industrial centers at that time.

2. You are correct that prices dropped. But even with prices dropping 380 dollars was below the poverty level of the time, and poverty isn't a percentile basis, but a measure of adequate wealth. The average familial wage was not enough relative to that time.

3. That's completely immaterial to the discussion. Furthermore, agricultural labor was and has always been exempt, so that's a non-starter.
__________________
A great shot is when you pull it off. A smart shot is when you don't have the guts to try.
Posts: 57,859
'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.'Hamas' Jenkins is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 03:13 PM   #57
Prison Bitch Prison Bitch is online now
The Bitch is back
 
Prison Bitch's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lees summit
Casino cash: $9334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower View Post
The minimum wage wouldn't be an issue if it hadn't lost its purchasing power over the last 50 years.
It shouldn't be an issue regardless. If a company isn't paying enough they won't attract workers. If workers demand too much, they won't attract job offers. It's rather simple. The idea that we need government officials to act as "judges" to determine what this should be is laughable.


These are the same folks who give themselves 35% pay & benefit premiums over the private sector workers. I suppose if you're grossly overpaid, it only makes sense to feel pity on those idiots who actually work in the productive sector.

Last edited by Prison Bitch; 06-27-2013 at 03:21 PM..
Posts: 13,766
Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 03:27 PM   #58
listopencil listopencil is online now
sic semper tyrannis
 
listopencil's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Partibus Infidelium
Casino cash: $7218
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
Cry me a river glowfish!
The average salary of a Walmart store manager in the United States is $83,000 as of October 2010, according to Simply Hired. Varies by location which makes sense.

Simply Hired provided average salaries for the following types of managerial positions at Walmart in the United States as of October 2010: assistant manager, $38,000; customer service manager, $43,000; manager at Walmart's home office, $56,000.

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/facts_7330173_av...#ixzz2XRL2fUMc

...the Logistics and Transportation departments pay substantially better than the stores by the way. I just wanted to throw that out there because everyone tends to think of the stores when they think of Wal Mart.
__________________
"As I walked out the door toward the gate that would lead to my freedom, I knew if I didn't leave my bitterness and hatred behind I'd still be in prison."


Posts: 28,370
listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 03:29 PM   #59
listopencil listopencil is online now
sic semper tyrannis
 
listopencil's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Partibus Infidelium
Casino cash: $7218
Here's a blurb about Wal Mart truck drivers:

What do Wal-mart Fleet Drivers Make Per Year?

The average, experienced Wal-mart fleet driver earns $71,500 per year. This does not include bonuses and profit sharing. Some drivers earn close to or slightly over $100,000 depending on their time with the company. Cash bonuses as well as profit sharing bonuses are awarded each year. Drivers that are just starting with the company may earn slightly less, but with the benefits packages available even a rookie with the company can live comfortably.


http://truck-driver-salary.org/wal-m...driver-salary/
__________________
"As I walked out the door toward the gate that would lead to my freedom, I knew if I didn't leave my bitterness and hatred behind I'd still be in prison."


Posts: 28,370
listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 03:39 PM   #60
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $8375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loneiguana View Post

The minimum wage has been around for decades.Has been raised for decades.
So. That's a logical fallacy and doesn't prove anything.
Quote:
Guess what.
Nothing you conservatives predicts happens.
Generalities are useless and as such this is not true. First off, as Bastiat stated there is the seen and the unseen in an economy. You can't see in a statistic or chart the jobs that don't get created. It's a negative.

There's other tampering that's going on too, which leads to bubbles like dot.com and in real estate which will lead to more jobs during the bubble phase but which get lost in the bust phase.

No guessing here. That's what you're doing. You haven't refuted anything either.
__________________

Last edited by BucEyedPea; 06-27-2013 at 03:57 PM..
Posts: 57,443
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.