Minimal Wage. Raises. Inflation. Cost of living.

[Markle]

I've been told that such things as Ambulance rides are so expensive is because of all the freebies they have to give to people who can't pay. Those who pay have to pay enough to cover those who don't.

If Ambulances had to go into bidding wars before they picked you up, like Uber and Lyft, then things would be different.

Another change which is desperately needed is Tort Reform. Desperately!

Much as I oppose most of the systems in place in Great Britain, they do have a system which reduces lawsuits by a great deal.

We need a system where if you sue me, and you lose, you pay your own legal expenses and all my costs as well. That would eliminate thousands of frivolous lawsuits. Right now, a company will pay a nominal amount rather than go through the litigation. If the plaintiff had to decide whether to sue and if they lost they could be faced with monumental legal fees.

That does not preclude a plaintiff's attorney from taking a case on a contingency basis. If they're confident in the case, they'll be happy to take the case. If it is iffy, and the payout might only be $50,000-$100,000 they're going to pass. Which is a good thing.

 

[Markle]

No truer comment has ever been posted in support of the thinking of the self righteous and callous conservatives set.

How is it callous when someone is taught to support themselves, stand up for themselves, be personally responsible, regaining their self-respect and soul a bad thing?

Being callous is teaching a whole group of people that they are unworthy and it is the fault of others. That they are not as good as other people and without the help of these race baiters working to get them something for nothing, they would starve is brutal and steals the very heart and soul of those people.

 

[Markle]

How are the people making minimum wage going to be able make when companies who pay minimum usually provides no type of healthcare.

Either English is your third or fourth language or you've had a few too many adult beverages...again.

[The] Language would have nothing to do with it. The worlds[sic] are spelled correctly, just missed a few words.

I did not say the words were incorrectly spelled. Your sentence simply makes no sense.

Your response also has poor grammar and misspelling. If that's the extent of your education, that's a shame. Maybe spend a bit more time proofing your response before tapping "POST REPLY".

 

[Markle]

Poverty line is any annual amount of income $12,060 or less for 1 person
Minimum wage annual income for 1 person is $15,080
The annual income required to cover 1 persons annual cost of living in Allegheny county PA is $20,606

To me minimum wage is poverty.

Yes it is, that's why you work hard to get out of making minimum wage. After all, most people who start a job at minimum wage will be earning more within the first four months if they stay at that same job.

I agree! I had 2 jobs in my life where I made minimum wage, at a fitness club my Sr. year in high school, and at mcdonalds when I was going to get my cdl A. I would work 40 hours a week and an 80 hour check I took home $478 for two weeks. The jobs that pay the least expect the most. Just for the fact that they make you slave for minimum wage, I would do something illegal before I ever went back. I don't know any job that pays minimum wage that will increase it after 4 months. I hear people that make minimum wage only get maybe a raise of 25 cents an hour after a year, I even heard 15 cents.

Well, that's reliable.

 

[Muhammed]

I believe we should raise the minimum wage to at least 10 bucks per hour.

So does Trump.

 

[Slyhunter]

Minimum wage isn't enough annual income required to cover an individuals cost of living.

That is NOT the purpose of a minimum wage. What part of that do you refuse to believe or accept? It just makes you look foolish.

Please answer these same questions you have ignored in the past.

What is the average income of a household where one of the workers earns minimum wage?

How many households are there in the United States existing on only one worker earning minimum wage?

The answers to your questions don't matter.
The question that matters is, Can I support my family. Don't give a fuck about other people.

 

[ThatDude30]

Minimum wage isn't enough annual income required to cover an individuals cost of living.

That is NOT the purpose of a minimum wage. What part of that do you refuse to believe or accept? It just makes you look foolish.

Please answer these same questions you have ignored in the past.

What is the average income of a household where one of the workers earns minimum wage?

How many households are there in the United States existing on only one worker earning minimum wage?

I know what the purpose of minimum wage. Doesn't matter what the purpose is. If it was $3 an hour no matter how much a company is making they would love the chance to pay their workers only $3 an hour.
MY point is that, Any American citizen working a full time position in the United States of America should make enough to cover their annual cost of living wages. I don't care what the purpose of minimum wage is. There still are people who work full time living off minimum wage, and that shouldn't be the case.

 

[ThatDude30]

It is one reason for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage.

Not even. $10 an hour would cover most people annual cost of living. In Allegheny county PA, The annual income required to cover their annual cost of living expenses $20,606. That is roughly $9.91 an hour working 40 hours a week.

 

[ThatDude30]

How are the people making minimum wage going to be able make when companies who pay minimum usually provides no type of healthcare.

Either English is your third or fourth language or you've had a few too many adult beverages...again.

[The] Language would have nothing to do with it. The worlds[sic] are spelled correctly, just missed a few words.

I did not say the words were incorrectly spelled. Your sentence simply makes no sense.

Your response also has poor grammar and misspelling. If that's the extent of your education, that's a shame. Maybe spend a bit more time proofing your response before tapping "POST REPLY".

lol. People can make mistake especially when they consumed a little scotch. Nothing to do with education buddy. Your life that lame to where you spend all your time on here just waiting for someone to make a mistake so you can jump at and be the first one to point it out? You, your opinions, and responses mean not a thing to me. You will never have an impact on any of my ideas or opinions. Your opinions are worthless to me. I really don't care for your responses.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Minimum wage isn't enough annual income required to cover an individuals cost of living.

That is NOT the purpose of a minimum wage. What part of that do you refuse to believe or accept? It just makes you look foolish.

Please answer these same questions you have ignored in the past.

What is the average income of a household where one of the workers earns minimum wage?

How many households are there in the United States existing on only one worker earning minimum wage?

I know what the purpose of minimum wage. Doesn't matter what the purpose is. If it was $3 an hour no matter how much a company is making they would love the chance to pay their workers only $3 an hour.
MY point is that, Any American citizen working a full time position in the United States of America should make enough to cover their annual cost of living wages. I don't care what the purpose of minimum wage is. There still are people who work full time living off minimum wage, and that shouldn't be the case.

Minimum wage workers represent between 3% and 4% of the US workforce. Even if one third of them were trying to support themselves (or others) on that wage, we are talking about 1% of the workforce.

I can't see making a national effort for this 1% of people who are in charge of their own destiny. No measure comes without ramifications. Some startup businesses may be forced to close. Some may reconsider opening up a business in the first place. An employer may reduce or eliminate benefits for their workforce in exchange for paying more in wages. It's just not as clean-cut as you might think.

When an employer gives a worker a one dollar an hour increase, it costs the employer more than that one dollar an hour. It increases the employers matching contribution to Social Security and Medicare. It costs more to pay that worker while they are not working such as holidays and vacation just to name a few. It increases the cost of their Workman's compensation and Unemployment insurance.

So you take a small family owned company like the one I work for. They have ten employees. A measure passes that increases minimum wage by $2.50 an hour. That's $25.00 an hour more an employer has to pay his or her employees. At the end of the day, that's a $200.00 additional per day expense. At the end of the week, that's a $1,000 expense. At the end of the month, $5,000 expense, and again, that's just the wage alone.

If the company is working more than 40 hours per week, add even more expense because now that one dollar per hour is a dollar fifty an hour past 40.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No truer comment has ever been posted in support of the thinking of the self righteous and callous conservatives set.

How is it callous when someone is taught to support themselves, stand up for themselves, be personally responsible, regaining their self-respect and soul a bad thing?

Being callous is teaching a whole group of people that they are unworthy and it is the fault of others. That they are not as good as other people and without the help of these race baiters working to get them something for nothing, they would starve is brutal and steals the very heart and soul of those people.

Q. "How is it callous when someone is taught to support themselves, stand up for themselves, be personally responsible, regaining their self-respect and soul a bad thing?"

A. By blaming an entire set of people as irresponsible and lazy, and not providing a ladder for them to lift themselves up. In fact the efforts by callous conservatives is to remove the ladder and keep the poor, especially the working poor in a hole.

That hole might be one they dug themselves or one which was created by the anomalies of birth or life or people like you.

The ladder does not need to be two stories high, all it needs - and what callus cons and the self righteous reject - are equal opportunities, equal rights and a geteway to a better life.

 

[danielpalos]

It is one reason for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage.

I don't know about that high. $15 an hour will most likely effect inflation. I calculated that a person whose cost of living expenses require an annual income of $20,606, will need to earn $9.91 an hour working 40 hours a week.

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour anyway. A higher minimum privatizes costs instead of socialize costs in favor of their bottom line.

 

[danielpalos]

It is one reason for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage.

Not even. $10 an hour would cover most people annual cost of living. In Allegheny county PA, The annual income required to cover their annual cost of living expenses $20,606. That is roughly $9.91 an hour working 40 hours a week.

Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour anyway. We could also improve the efficiency of our economy.

 

[task0778]

No truer comment has ever been posted in support of the thinking of the self righteous and callous conservatives set.

How is it callous when someone is taught to support themselves, stand up for themselves, be personally responsible, regaining their self-respect and soul a bad thing?

Being callous is teaching a whole group of people that they are unworthy and it is the fault of others. That they are not as good as other people and without the help of these race baiters working to get them something for nothing, they would starve is brutal and steals the very heart and soul of those people.

Q. "How is it callous when someone is taught to support themselves, stand up for themselves, be personally responsible, regaining their self-respect and soul a bad thing?"

A. By blaming an entire set of people as irresponsible and lazy, and not providing a ladder for them to lift themselves up. In fact the efforts by callous conservatives is to remove the ladder and keep the poor, especially the working poor in a hole.

That hole might be one they dug themselves or one which was created by the anomalies of birth or life or people like you.

The ladder does not need to be two stories high, all it needs - and what callus cons and the self righteous reject - are equal opportunities, equal rights and a geteway to a better life.

Problem is that the Left wants people to be paid based on what they need vs what they're worth, as defined by their market value. Nobody on the right or left is saying that anyone should be denied an equal opportunity, equal rights, or a gateway to a better life, but they seem to want a guarantee of success and they don't seem to be willing to accept the consequences for their decisions made earlier in life.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No truer comment has ever been posted in support of the thinking of the self righteous and callous conservatives set.

How is it callous when someone is taught to support themselves, stand up for themselves, be personally responsible, regaining their self-respect and soul a bad thing?

Being callous is teaching a whole group of people that they are unworthy and it is the fault of others. That they are not as good as other people and without the help of these race baiters working to get them something for nothing, they would starve is brutal and steals the very heart and soul of those people.

Q. "How is it callous when someone is taught to support themselves, stand up for themselves, be personally responsible, regaining their self-respect and soul a bad thing?"

A. By blaming an entire set of people as irresponsible and lazy, and not providing a ladder for them to lift themselves up. In fact the efforts by callous conservatives is to remove the ladder and keep the poor, especially the working poor in a hole.

That hole might be one they dug themselves or one which was created by the anomalies of birth or life or people like you.

The ladder does not need to be two stories high, all it needs - and what callus cons and the self righteous reject - are equal opportunities, equal rights and a geteway to a better life.

Problem is that the Left wants people to be paid based on what they need vs what they're worth, as defined by their market value. Nobody on the right or left is saying that anyone should be denied an equal opportunity, equal rights, or a gateway to a better life, but they seem to want a guarantee of success and they don't seem to be willing to accept the consequences for their decisions made earlier in life.

They look at business as people who open up a company as a social obligation to society. They open a business to provide good jobs, to provide a living wage, to provide great benefits, and to keep people off of social programs.

For the businesses that don't meet their standards, it's not because the owner wants to expand their company, it's not because the company is in competition with other businesses that produce the same products or services, it's because they are greedy and want to keep all the money for themselves.

Because business owners are greedy, somebody needs to come in and regulate where their money goes. Somebody needs to pry that cash from their clenched fists and distribute it to the little guy, you know, the people that do all the "real" work. Because after all, operating a business isn't real work.

 

[ThatDude30]

Minimum wage isn't enough annual income required to cover an individuals cost of living.

That is NOT the purpose of a minimum wage. What part of that do you refuse to believe or accept? It just makes you look foolish.

Please answer these same questions you have ignored in the past.

What is the average income of a household where one of the workers earns minimum wage?

How many households are there in the United States existing on only one worker earning minimum wage?

I know what the purpose of minimum wage. Doesn't matter what the purpose is. If it was $3 an hour no matter how much a company is making they would love the chance to pay their workers only $3 an hour.
MY point is that, Any American citizen working a full time position in the United States of America should make enough to cover their annual cost of living wages. I don't care what the purpose of minimum wage is. There still are people who work full time living off minimum wage, and that shouldn't be the case.

Minimum wage workers represent between 3% and 4% of the US workforce. Even if one third of them were trying to support themselves (or others) on that wage, we are talking about 1% of the workforce.

I can't see making a national effort for this 1% of people who are in charge of their own destiny. No measure comes without ramifications. Some startup businesses may be forced to close. Some may reconsider opening up a business in the first place. An employer may reduce or eliminate benefits for their workforce in exchange for paying more in wages. It's just not as clean-cut as you might think.

When an employer gives a worker a one dollar an hour increase, it costs the employer more than that one dollar an hour. It increases the employers matching contribution to Social Security and Medicare. It costs more to pay that worker while they are not working such as holidays and vacation just to name a few. It increases the cost of their Workman's compensation and Unemployment insurance.

So you take a small family owned company like the one I work for. They have ten employees. A measure passes that increases minimum wage by $2.50 an hour. That's $25.00 an hour more an employer has to pay his or her employees. At the end of the day, that's a $200.00 additional per day expense. At the end of the week, that's a $1,000 expense. At the end of the month, $5,000 expense, and again, that's just the wage alone.

If the company is working more than 40 hours per week, add even more expense because now that one dollar per hour is a dollar fifty an hour past 40.

I understand where you are coming from. There were 701,000 people who earned minimum wage in 2016 and another 1.5 million who earned less then minimum wage. Total percentage of the 2 is 2.7%. That is a very low percentage, but the 2.2 million people who earned minimum wage or less is an exact number of people who made $7.25 or less. 2.7% looks like a small number but it is actually 2.2 million people.
My whole issue is not only focused on the people who make minimum wage or less cant afford their required annual income to cover their cost of living expenses every year, m issue is also focused on those how make less then the wage the need to make to be able to cover cost of living.
Some companies, instead of paying $7.25 per hour, they pay $7.30 per hour so they can say the pay more than minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage to a rate so everyone can cover their cost of living wouldn't just benefit the people who are making minimum wage but those how make a little more than minimum but not enough.

In Allegheny county Pa, the average cost of living for 1 person is $20,606 a year. $9.91 an hour will get you that amount.
So on top of the 2.2 million people how make exactly $7.25 or less, add the people who make $7.26-$9.90 who also don't make enough to cover cost of living. So now that 2.7%, 2.2 million people that number will now increase to a larger percentage.

In 2017 federal Poverty level for 1 person is $12,060 or less annually. $15,080 is the amount before taxes a minimum wage worker will make a year. So there take home is roughly $13,926, only $1,866 more than the poverty level. To me that is not much of a difference and I consider that poverty. Any annual income that cannot cover cost of living expenses is still poverty to me.

Now add the 40.5 million people suffering from poverty, there are a lot of people that can make it.

So not only would increasing the minimum wage benefit the people who exactly make the minimum or less but those that make a little more but not enough.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Minimum wage isn't enough annual income required to cover an individuals cost of living.

That is NOT the purpose of a minimum wage. What part of that do you refuse to believe or accept? It just makes you look foolish.

Please answer these same questions you have ignored in the past.

What is the average income of a household where one of the workers earns minimum wage?

How many households are there in the United States existing on only one worker earning minimum wage?

I know what the purpose of minimum wage. Doesn't matter what the purpose is. If it was $3 an hour no matter how much a company is making they would love the chance to pay their workers only $3 an hour.
MY point is that, Any American citizen working a full time position in the United States of America should make enough to cover their annual cost of living wages. I don't care what the purpose of minimum wage is. There still are people who work full time living off minimum wage, and that shouldn't be the case.

Minimum wage workers represent between 3% and 4% of the US workforce. Even if one third of them were trying to support themselves (or others) on that wage, we are talking about 1% of the workforce.

I can't see making a national effort for this 1% of people who are in charge of their own destiny. No measure comes without ramifications. Some startup businesses may be forced to close. Some may reconsider opening up a business in the first place. An employer may reduce or eliminate benefits for their workforce in exchange for paying more in wages. It's just not as clean-cut as you might think.

When an employer gives a worker a one dollar an hour increase, it costs the employer more than that one dollar an hour. It increases the employers matching contribution to Social Security and Medicare. It costs more to pay that worker while they are not working such as holidays and vacation just to name a few. It increases the cost of their Workman's compensation and Unemployment insurance.

So you take a small family owned company like the one I work for. They have ten employees. A measure passes that increases minimum wage by $2.50 an hour. That's $25.00 an hour more an employer has to pay his or her employees. At the end of the day, that's a $200.00 additional per day expense. At the end of the week, that's a $1,000 expense. At the end of the month, $5,000 expense, and again, that's just the wage alone.

If the company is working more than 40 hours per week, add even more expense because now that one dollar per hour is a dollar fifty an hour past 40.

I understand where you are coming from. There were 701,000 people who earned minimum wage in 2016 and another 1.5 million who earned less then minimum wage. Total percentage of the 2 is 2.7%. That is a very low percentage, but the 2.2 million people who earned minimum wage or less is an exact number of people who made $7.25 or less. 2.7% looks like a small number but it is actually 2.2 million people.
My whole issue is not only focused on the people who make minimum wage or less cant afford their required annual income to cover their cost of living expenses every year, m issue is also focused on those how make less then the wage the need to make to be able to cover cost of living.
Some companies, instead of paying $7.25 per hour, they pay $7.30 per hour so they can say the pay more than minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage to a rate so everyone can cover their cost of living wouldn't just benefit the people who are making minimum wage but those how make a little more than minimum but not enough.

In Allegheny county Pa, the average cost of living for 1 person is $20,606 a year. $9.91 an hour will get you that amount.
So on top of the 2.2 million people how make exactly $7.25 or less, add the people who make $7.26-$9.90 who also don't make enough to cover cost of living. So now that 2.7%, 2.2 million people that number will now increase to a larger percentage.

In 2017 federal Poverty level for 1 person is $12,060 or less annually. $15,080 is the amount before taxes a minimum wage worker will make a year. So there take home is roughly $13,926, only $1,866 more than the poverty level. To me that is not much of a difference and I consider that poverty. Any annual income that cannot cover cost of living expenses is still poverty to me.

Now add the 40.5 million people suffering from poverty, there are a lot of people that can make it.

So not only would increasing the minimum wage benefit the people who exactly make the minimum or less but those that make a little more but not enough.

So what makes you think that a company will increase their wages for employees that make slightly better than minimum wage? That's just a guess on your part. More than likely they won't make adjustments to all their employees wages except minimum because it's the new law. Then the employees who were making just above minimum will be at minimum. I don't know how that helps matters any.

And again, not many people are trying to support themselves on minimum wage. Many are homemakers just getting some extra money while the kids are in school; college kids that work when the opportunity presents itself; retired people who feel worthless just sitting at home and need something to do. Kids out of high school still living at home with mom and dad.

I worked my share of minimum wage jobs in a younger day. It was low income that inspired me to try harder; to figure out a way to learn more things and find some kind of career. If somebody back then made minimum wage $12.00 an hour, I may have spent much of my life at my first job at the car wash.

I used to rent to a younger couple who both worked fast food joints. They never had any money, but always came up with rent and able to pay their utilities. They were pretty good tenants. Anyway, the reason they didn't pursue better opportunities is because they loved their pot, and better paying jobs usually drug test employees.

She moved here with her girlfriend when she was 19. The girlfriend left and a boyfriend moved in. They left in their mid 20's. It was always my hope that they would get sick of living check to check, give up the pot, and start to make something of themselves. I'm sure it will happen at some point, but the longer they wait, the tougher it will be to accomplish anything in life. Now if our state set a $15.00 minimum wage, that would likely prolong their failed path, and they may end up working fast food joints into their 30's or 40's. By then, it would be too late to make any serious life changes.

 

[ThatDude30]

I know that minimum wage jobs aren't meant to be a career, but unfortunately that's not the case for a lot of people. People say well if you want to make more go get a degree or trade. Well it is not that easy. Lack of education is one of the top causes of poverty. People just cant afford to pay for their education. Minimum wage sure cant. Not everyone has parents or relatives who saved up to send their child or grand child to college. Not everyone can get financial aid or student loans without having to pay an amount every month through out the time they attend a college or trade school.

I understand that minimum wage only accounts for a small percentage of the US workforce. What about the 1.5 million people who earned less that minimum wage last year? What about the people who make $7.26 which is technically more than minimum wage and not included in the percent of minimum wage in the US workforce? What about the people who make more than minimum wage but not quite enough? If you add all those numbers together you will get a higher percentage and total number of people.

If you don't make enough annually to cover the cost of living(the bare minimum cost of living) to me its still considered under the poverty level.

The minimum wage is just an amount low enough to where you wont receive any help from the government and just high enough so they can say you make to much.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I understand that minimum wage only accounts for a small percentage of the US workforce. What about the 1.5 million people who earned less that minimum wage last year? What about the people who make $7.26 which is technically more than minimum wage and not included in the percent of minimum wage in the US workforce? What about the people who make more than minimum wage but not quite enough? If you add all those numbers together you will get a higher percentage and total number of people.

Send those people our way. We need them. The US is short over 30,000 drivers industry can't find. Some places will not only train you, but pay you while you learn. Once licensed, you only have to work for that company for a year under contract. After that, you have a promising career where destiny is within your grasp.

Right now our roads are loaded with foreigners. They are driving 75,000 lbs vehicles and can't even read English. They are here because Americans won't take these jobs. Industry has to do something to fill the void. I'm sure they would love to hire Americans, but can't find enough of them that want to work.

 

[ThatDude30]

Minimum wage isn't enough annual income required to cover an individuals cost of living.

That is NOT the purpose of a minimum wage. What part of that do you refuse to believe or accept? It just makes you look foolish.

Please answer these same questions you have ignored in the past.

What is the average income of a household where one of the workers earns minimum wage?

How many households are there in the United States existing on only one worker earning minimum wage?

I know what the purpose of minimum wage. Doesn't matter what the purpose is. If it was $3 an hour no matter how much a company is making they would love the chance to pay their workers only $3 an hour.
MY point is that, Any American citizen working a full time position in the United States of America should make enough to cover their annual cost of living wages. I don't care what the purpose of minimum wage is. There still are people who work full time living off minimum wage, and that shouldn't be the case.

Minimum wage workers represent between 3% and 4% of the US workforce. Even if one third of them were trying to support themselves (or others) on that wage, we are talking about 1% of the workforce.

I can't see making a national effort for this 1% of people who are in charge of their own destiny. No measure comes without ramifications. Some startup businesses may be forced to close. Some may reconsider opening up a business in the first place. An employer may reduce or eliminate benefits for their workforce in exchange for paying more in wages. It's just not as clean-cut as you might think.

When an employer gives a worker a one dollar an hour increase, it costs the employer more than that one dollar an hour. It increases the employers matching contribution to Social Security and Medicare. It costs more to pay that worker while they are not working such as holidays and vacation just to name a few. It increases the cost of their Workman's compensation and Unemployment insurance.

So you take a small family owned company like the one I work for. They have ten employees. A measure passes that increases minimum wage by $2.50 an hour. That's $25.00 an hour more an employer has to pay his or her employees. At the end of the day, that's a $200.00 additional per day expense. At the end of the week, that's a $1,000 expense. At the end of the month, $5,000 expense, and again, that's just the wage alone.

If the company is working more than 40 hours per week, add even more expense because now that one dollar per hour is a dollar fifty an hour past 40.

I understand where you are coming from. There were 701,000 people who earned minimum wage in 2016 and another 1.5 million who earned less then minimum wage. Total percentage of the 2 is 2.7%. That is a very low percentage, but the 2.2 million people who earned minimum wage or less is an exact number of people who made $7.25 or less. 2.7% looks like a small number but it is actually 2.2 million people.
My whole issue is not only focused on the people who make minimum wage or less cant afford their required annual income to cover their cost of living expenses every year, m issue is also focused on those how make less then the wage the need to make to be able to cover cost of living.
Some companies, instead of paying $7.25 per hour, they pay $7.30 per hour so they can say the pay more than minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage to a rate so everyone can cover their cost of living wouldn't just benefit the people who are making minimum wage but those how make a little more than minimum but not enough.

In Allegheny county Pa, the average cost of living for 1 person is $20,606 a year. $9.91 an hour will get you that amount.
So on top of the 2.2 million people how make exactly $7.25 or less, add the people who make $7.26-$9.90 who also don't make enough to cover cost of living. So now that 2.7%, 2.2 million people that number will now increase to a larger percentage.

In 2017 federal Poverty level for 1 person is $12,060 or less annually. $15,080 is the amount before taxes a minimum wage worker will make a year. So there take home is roughly $13,926, only $1,866 more than the poverty level. To me that is not much of a difference and I consider that poverty. Any annual income that cannot cover cost of living expenses is still poverty to me.

Now add the 40.5 million people suffering from poverty, there are a lot of people that can make it.

So not only would increasing the minimum wage benefit the people who exactly make the minimum or less but those that make a little more but not enough.

So what makes you think that a company will increase their wages for employees that make slightly better than minimum wage? That's just a guess on your part. More than likely they won't make adjustments to all their employees wages except minimum because it's the new law. Then the employees who were making just above minimum will be at minimum. I don't know how that helps matters any.

And again, not many people are trying to support themselves on minimum wage. Many are homemakers just getting some extra money while the kids are in school; college kids that work when the opportunity presents itself; retired people who feel worthless just sitting at home and need something to do. Kids out of high school still living at home with mom and dad.

I worked my share of minimum wage jobs in a younger day. It was low income that inspired me to try harder; to figure out a way to learn more things and find some kind of career. If somebody back then made minimum wage $12.00 an hour, I may have spent much of my life at my first job at the car wash.

I used to rent to a younger couple who both worked fast food joints. They never had any money, but always came up with rent and able to pay their utilities. They were pretty good tenants. Anyway, the reason they didn't pursue better opportunities is because they loved their pot, and better paying jobs usually drug test employees.

She moved here with her girlfriend when she was 19. The girlfriend left and a boyfriend moved in. They left in their mid 20's. It was always my hope that they would get sick of living check to check, give up the pot, and start to make something of themselves. I'm sure it will happen at some point, but the longer they wait, the tougher it will be to accomplish anything in life. Now if our state set a $15.00 minimum wage, that would likely prolong their failed path, and they may end up working fast food joints into their 30's or 40's. By then, it would be too late to make any serious life changes.

There is no guessing. I know if the company had the choice to pay minimum wage or more, of course they are going to pay minimum. Majority of companies if not all who pay minimum wage does not provide any basic health care coverage. And everyone keeps using $15 an hour minimum wage in their examples when I never once said it needed to be that high. $10 an hour should be enough to cover most of American citizens annual cost of living expenses.

Your missing the point, reality is there are people who make minimum wage which is just a little more than the federal poverty level in 2017. Reality is there are people who do work full time earning minimum wage. Get a better job, but reality is a college degree or a trade skill isn't cheap and a lot of americans cant afford extra education. Lack of education is a major contributor of Americas Poverty issue, simply because people cant afford it

Slightly better then minimum wage isn't better. It still wont cover annual cost of living expenses. My point is that the minimum wage should be a wage to where you can cover annual cost of living expenses, the bare minimum. Slightly more still doesn't cover it. The issue isn't just the people that exactly make $7.25, the issue is someone who works full-time in America not being able to cover annual cost of living.

I never once said that minimum wage should be $15 an hour. I'm saying $9.91-$10 per hour would be enough to cover 1 persons annual cost of living expenses, totaling $20,606.

Annual minimum wage is $15,080 a year before taxes. Roughly $13,926 after. If some one living in Allegheny Co. PA has an annual cost of living of $20,606, how can they cover their cost of living with only $13,926? They still are short $6,680.

You need to make $9.91 an hour working full time to be able to cover the cost of living of $20,606 a year.

The average annual cost of living for 1 person that lives In Cuyahoga Co. Ohio(Cleveland) is $20,635 a year. You need to make $9.92 working 40 hours a week to be able to cover your cost of living.

So answer me this. Do you think it is right/fair for someone to work full time and barely make ends meet and still need several thousand more a year to cover their cost of living? To be able to pay rent for shelter, food on the table, heat and light, water and sewage. To not have to worry about only being able to pay this and that but this has to wait? Can buy food but gas will be shut off? Minimum wage jobs don't provide any type of benefits. So you injure you leg outside of work and have to miss 1, 2, maybe 3 months of work and you don't have any type of long term or short term medical insurance?

You don't think that every American Citizen working full time shouldn't have to be paid a rate to cover their cost of living?

You think that its ok for a company like Mcdonalds who made a gross profit of $10.2 billion last year and most of their employees make only minimum wage and they provide no type of health insurance which is required by law now to have?

Put the companies and corporation views to the side, and look at it from a workers point of view.
Shouldn't every citizen that works full time be able to cover their annual cost of living?
Considering the 67.9 million citizens on welfare and that number does not include the 70.5 million who are enrolled in Medicaid, the 65.1 people who receive benefits from SSA. So there is 203.5 million people that do not have to work and live better then the people who decide to work?

To me Any American Citizen working full time in America should make an annual income that covers their annual cost of living expenses.
I bet if the minimum wage was enough to cover every citizens annual cost of living expenses the percent of people on welfare will decrease. If I was making minimum wage making $15,080 a year before taxes and bringing home $13,926, only 1,866 more then the poverty level in which one could receive benefits, I would just manipulate the government like most people on welfare and get free housing, all utilities paid, $700+ a month in food stamps, and Free healthcare instead of busting my ass for 40 hours a week, company taking advantage and expecting more and more from you, no paid vacation, no paid personal days, and no healthcare.