Can There Be A Compromise on Minimum Wage?

[OnePercenter]

Minimum wage should be $23.50/hr.

Democrats want to increase it because it helps people.

Republicans don't because they like slaves.

 

[Zander]

Wages are between the employer and employee. No government input is required.

I own a company and employ people. In my experience, nobody is underpaid or overpaid - they get what they negotiate for and they either pay their freight, or they hit the road.......

PS- nobody in my company earns minimum wage.

 

[OnePercenter]

Wages are between the employer and employee. No government input is required.

I own a company and employ people. In my experience, nobody is underpaid or overpaid - they get what they negotiate for and they either pay their freight, or they hit the road.......

PS- nobody in my company earns minimum wage.

If employees weren't seen as those to take advantage of by some employers I'd agree.

 

[Imperious]

No, because the poor will always want more, and they will always want to be equal to the wealthy, while the wealthy will always want to stay on top, therefore they suppress this want. It's a endless cycle, even if we raised the minimum wage, the issue would just resurface again in 8 - 9 years.

 

[OnePercenter]

No, because the poor will always want more, and they will always want to be equal to the wealthy, while the wealthy will always want to stay on top, therefore they suppress this want. It's a endless cycle, even if we raised the minimum wage, the issue would just resurface again in 8 - 9 years.

So we should tweak the system to benefit the rich?

 

[Againsheila]

No, because the poor will always want more, and they will always want to be equal to the wealthy, while the wealthy will always want to stay on top, therefore they suppress this want. It's a endless cycle, even if we raised the minimum wage, the issue would just resurface again in 8 - 9 years.

So raise it and index it to inflation, problem solved.

 

[Mac1958]

.

I'd think there could be a good, workable compromise on most of the issues that are plaguing this country.

Unfortunately, every single major issue is immediately politicized by both whacked-out, narcissistic ends of the political spectrum, meaning that it's dumbed down, simplified and turned into just another opportunity to spout partisan goofery.

So, to answer the question, uh, no, doubtful.

.

 

[Politico]

Yes there is a compromise. Get government out of our business and we'll agree to not mention it again.

 

[FA_Q2]

No. There is no middle ground nor should there be. There is no reason to raise the minimum wage as it accomplishes nothing but rearranging the cost of goods to reflect the new market reality. Further, there is no golden bullet with witch to raise it. Your conversation on this thread proves that handily – you went from being poor to middle of the road to above the median in your conversation without ever changing what you make. In essence, a minimum wage means completely different things in New York than it does in Georgia. The idea that the feds need to come in and make things ‘fair’ is asinine

 

[BobPlumb]

Yes there will be a compromise in the future. The minimum wage will be raised. The increase will be small enough that it has little obvious effect on the economy but large enough to give the politicians that support it have something to brag about.

 

[editec]

The left wants 15.00 an hour, and the right doesn't want an increase at all, right? (Am I missing something?)

Nope think you got it.

So is there a middle ground people are willing to reach? Personally, living in the South, where people get by on about 7.25/hour just fine (so long as they're single anyway), I don't see much reason to increase it to 15.00/hour.

It is cheaper in Dixie I'm told

So how about meet in the middle? 10/hour? 9/hour?

Good enough in Dixie, (I guess) not good enough in many places.

The reason I ask this is because I fear that if no compromise as such is made Obama will just freight train a 15.00/hour minimum wage policy.

He can ONLY impose that rate on companies DOING BUSINESS with the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. (and he ought to, in my opinion)

(Incidentally, I make 12.00/hour and I'm considered upper-middle class.)

ON $24,000 a year gross?

Well if you're living a middle class live on that ( gross before tax)income, you're probably making it because you have other assets that are sustaining you.

Some of my rich friends try to tell me they live on paltry sums like $10k a year.

Then I point out that they own their homes and they have no expenses because of what they inherited and they cannot imagine what I am talking about. That's because being rich they truly have no idea what it means to have to support yourself on an income.


YOu can live on $$24000 a year but you are not middle class if that's ALL you have to sustain you..not at today's cost of living.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Wages are between the employer and employee. No government input is required.

I own a company and employ people. In my experience, nobody is underpaid or overpaid - they get what they negotiate for and they either pay their freight, or they hit the road.......

PS- nobody in my company earns minimum wage.

If employees weren't seen as those to take advantage of by some employers I'd agree.

If a company wont pay,they end up with the dredges of that industry and they will likely fail. So as long as you're not a lazy piece of shit you shouldnt have to worry about working for crappy wages.

 

[Noomi]

The left wants 15.00 an hour, and the right doesn't want an increase at all, right? (Am I missing something?)

So is there a middle ground people are willing to reach? Personally, living in the South, where people get by on about 7.25/hour just fine (so long as they're single anyway), I don't see much reason to increase it to 15.00/hour.

So how about meet in the middle? 10/hour? 9/hour?

The reason I ask this is because I fear that if no compromise as such is made Obama will just freight train a 15.00/hour minimum wage policy.

(Incidentally, I make 12.00/hour and I'm considered upper-middle class.)

If Republicans had their way, low income earners would be paid $2 or less per hour.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The left wants 15.00 an hour, and the right doesn't want an increase at all, right? (Am I missing something?)

So is there a middle ground people are willing to reach? Personally, living in the South, where people get by on about 7.25/hour just fine (so long as they're single anyway), I don't see much reason to increase it to 15.00/hour.

So how about meet in the middle? 10/hour? 9/hour?

The reason I ask this is because I fear that if no compromise as such is made Obama will just freight train a 15.00/hour minimum wage policy.

(Incidentally, I make 12.00/hour and I'm considered upper-middle class.)

We should do the only sensible thing, set the federal minimum wage at $0.00 per hour.

I have an MIT study that shows why. who has something better?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The left wants 15.00 an hour, and the right doesn't want an increase at all, right? (Am I missing something?)

So is there a middle ground people are willing to reach? Personally, living in the South, where people get by on about 7.25/hour just fine (so long as they're single anyway), I don't see much reason to increase it to 15.00/hour.

So how about meet in the middle? 10/hour? 9/hour?

The reason I ask this is because I fear that if no compromise as such is made Obama will just freight train a 15.00/hour minimum wage policy.

(Incidentally, I make 12.00/hour and I'm considered upper-middle class.)

I thought the left wanted $10.10 per hour?

When did you think that?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I heard fifteen.

The short answer is no, nor should there be. It's also obvious you don't have a family if you think $12 an hour is a part of the middle class.

According to MIT, that would depend on where you live.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I make 12/hour and my wife makes 10/hour. Not only do we get by with power, water, food, gas, car/insurance, phone, and 2 kids, we usually have some left by the end of the week.

Even if you combine your wages you are nowhere near upper middle class.
I consider upper middle class to start around 150,000 a year. And even that depends on where you live.

Funny, the experts consider upper middle class to be around $62,500 in the US.

 

[OnePercenter]

The left wants 15.00 an hour, and the right doesn't want an increase at all, right? (Am I missing something?)

So is there a middle ground people are willing to reach? Personally, living in the South, where people get by on about 7.25/hour just fine (so long as they're single anyway), I don't see much reason to increase it to 15.00/hour.

So how about meet in the middle? 10/hour? 9/hour?

The reason I ask this is because I fear that if no compromise as such is made Obama will just freight train a 15.00/hour minimum wage policy.

(Incidentally, I make 12.00/hour and I'm considered upper-middle class.)

We should do the only sensible thing, set the federal minimum wage at $0.00 per hour.

I have an MIT study that shows why. who has something better?

Spoken like a true 'I've got mine so fuck everyone else sociopath.'

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I make 12/hour and my wife makes 10/hour. Not only do we get by with power, water, food, gas, car/insurance, phone, and 2 kids, we usually have some left by the end of the week.

Even if you combine your wages you are nowhere near upper middle class.
I consider upper middle class to start around 150,000 a year. And even that depends on where you live.

Funny, the experts consider upper middle class to be around $62,500 in the US.

Funny.....try that 62,500 in NY and see how far it gets you. Not sure if you got to exited and didnt finish reading my post or what,but I thought I made it pretty clear that it depended on where you live.

 

[Disir]

The push for $15 an hour is coming, by and large, by fast food workers but has grown to incorporate many who are paid minimum wage. Where it is being fought, there should be no compromise.

Consider the following:

This issue has become more known as we learn just how far some companies have gone in putting their employees on public assistance. According to one study, American fast food workers receive more than $7 billion dollars in public assistance. As it turns out, McDonald's has a “McResource” line that helps employees and their families enroll in various state and local assistance programs. It exploded into the public when a recording of the McResource line advocated that full-time employees sign up for food stamps and welfare.

Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest private sector employer, is also the biggest consumer of taxpayer supported aid. According to Florida Congressman Alan Grayson, in many states, Wal-Mart employees are the largest group of Medicaid recipients. They are also the single biggest group of food stamp recipients. Wal-mart’s "associates" are paid so little, according to Grayson, that they receive $1,000 on average in public assistance. These amount to massive taxpayer subsidies for private companies.

Why are profitable, dividend-paying firms receiving taxpayer subsidies? The short answer is, because they can. The longer answer is more complex and nuanced.

Both McDonald's and Wal-Mart are engaging in perfectly legal behavior. The system was set up long ago in ways that failed to imagine companies doing this. Yes, they are taking advantage of the taxpayer, but they are also operating within the law.

Which means it is time to change those outdated rules.

How McDonald's and Wal-Mart Became Welfare Queens - Bloomberg


There are some excellent business owners that treat their employees very well. If every business treated their employees well then this wouldn't be an issue. We cannot assume that everyone who owns a business is on the up and up.

Many of the people that are against raising the minimum wage are also trying to destroy the safety nets in place or privatize them so they get their cut. The push for $15 is just the invisible hand giving them the finger. (I crack myself up)