Obama wants to raise the minimum wage when we're on the verge of a second recession?

[NYcarbineer]

Clinton increased the minimum wage and all the usual Republican big mouths said it would cost hundreds of thousands of jobs.

They were wrong, as usual.

 

[Bern80]

We've kicked the dog shit out of you four times in the last six presidential elections. Just keep on doing what you're doing and expecting a different outcome. That's the definition of insanity.

I wouldn't call your narrow margins of victory 'kicking the shit' out of anyone. You liberals so easily forget that this country is not in fact democracy, the majority doesn't rule, and might clearly does not make right. It just means more and more of our population is gaining an unhealthy entitlement mentality.

Yeah Yeah....we heard that 47% horse shit from Romney. How's that working for you?

We know what you want......the 1% to hold it all and decide who stays alive and who dies:

And how is blaming other people for your lot in life working out for you in terms of reaching your financial goals? Your statement is complete nonsense. Of what benefit is it to a 1% to strive for such a goal?

 

[Rozman]

Well, that would be a little more the poor would have to spend to help stimulate the economy. Sounds good...

Just think...how much better would it be for the economy if they would raise minimum
wage to $20.00 an hr.If that's not feasible...(DUH!) would Libs feel comfortable with being paid $50 less a week so we can raise minimum wage.And if the answer is yes why not contact the WH and offer that as a suggestion.Put your Lib money where your mouth is ...

 

[uscitizen]

Form a corporate standpoint we need to drop US wages to around $500/mo so we can compete with Chinese labor.
And do aways with all environmental laws.

We would have a real shanty town building boom. New housing starts would go thru the roof.
Of course sales of existing houses would fall below flat.
Car sales would flatline.

 

[dblack]

Clinton increased the minimum wage and all the usual Republican big mouths said it would cost hundreds of thousands of jobs.

They were wrong, as usual.

By how much did he increase it?

It's no accident minimum wage has always been so low as to be a token gesture at best. Our leaders aren't idiots, and they realize the damage a meaningful minimum wage increase would do to the economy.

 

[Stephanie]

Well, that would be a little more the poor would have to spend to help stimulate the economy. Sounds good...

No. it would be more poor out of work living off the government. Which I think is the point.

??????????????????

How would raising the minimum wage be giving money to the "out of work"??? They gotta be....at work...to get minimum wage. And unless they are working for the govt, that minimum wage isn't coming from the govt.

good grief, you can't be for real, FORCING business to pay a wage they can't afford will cause them NOT TO HIRE and possibly lay of workers..

 

[Stephanie]

You're telling us that kids in college who are working at minimum wage deserve poverty wages because they're too stupid?

You hate the poor, admit it.

So, if the college kid can't persuade someone to pay him your idea of a "minimum" wage, he's not allowed to work?

No. This is America. We're supposed to be exceptional. If you want to do business in an exceptional country,

you need to pay a decent wage. If you can't make money paying a decent wage, then maybe you're not cut out to be a businessman in an exceptional country.

what's the minimum wage you pay YOUR WORKERS?

 

[dblack]

You're telling us that kids in college who are working at minimum wage deserve poverty wages because they're too stupid?

You hate the poor, admit it.

So, if the college kid can't persuade someone to pay him your idea of a "minimum" wage, he's not allowed to work?

No. This is America. We're supposed to be exceptional.

Nice. Oh well, I'm sure he'll qualify for some kind of entitlement in your zeitgeist.

 

[Bern80]

You missed the point..but okay. Here it is. Not everyone is fortunate enough to be born in families with means. And alot of "Marketable" skills in relation to executives, from where I sit, is being in the right place at the right time.

I didn't miss the point at all. The above is a pretty well worn, self serving excuse. I can tell at least one way to guarantee you will not get to where you want to be financially: Make excuses for why you aren't where you to be financially instead of actually doing something about it. And no it's not just a matter of right place right time. That's irrelevant if you don't have the skill set to do the job you were in the right place at the right time to get. If you know business executives so well you would know they don't hire people who don't have the skills they need. They don't do that because it isn't in the best interests of making money for the business to hire people that can't add value via the sills they possess.

Sure it does. Ever hear of Henry Ford? His philosophy was to pay people enough to live AND buy his product. Worked like gang busters.

Bad example. Henry Ford was no friend of the labor movement. I guess, the point stands though. Clearly you don't have the brains to see the problems with compensating people based on what they need rather than what they're worth.

Well no..but okay.

This sort of "compensation" theory has been deployed in most of the industrial world.

Really? All those workers in asia are really just fine? Then why do you broken hearted liberals keep complaining about their substandard working conditions and compensation?

 

[Bern80]

Clinton increased the minimum wage and all the usual Republican big mouths said it would cost hundreds of thousands of jobs.

They were wrong, as usual.

Prove it. Can you show that the employment rate of low skilled workers at that time actually went up?

 

[Sallow]

You missed the point..but okay. Here it is. Not everyone is fortunate enough to be born in families with means. And alot of "Marketable" skills in relation to executives, from where I sit, is being in the right place at the right time.

I didn't miss the point at all. The above is a pretty well worn, self serving excuse. I can tell at least one way to guarantee you will not get to where you want to be financially: Make excuses for why you aren't where you to be financially instead of actually doing something about it. And no it's not just a matter of right place right time. That's irrelevant if you don't have the skill set to do the job you were in the right place at the right time to get. If you know business executives so well you would know they don't hire people who don't have the skills they need. They don't do that because it isn't in the best interests of making money for the business to hire people that can't add value via the sills they possess.

Sure it does. Ever hear of Henry Ford? His philosophy was to pay people enough to live AND buy his product. Worked like gang busters.

Bad example. Henry Ford was no friend of the labor movement. I guess, the point stands though. Clearly you don't have the brains to see the problems with compensating people based on what they need rather than what they're worth.

Well no..but okay.

This sort of "compensation" theory has been deployed in most of the industrial world.

Really? All those workers in asia are really just fine? Then why do you broken hearted liberals keep complaining about their substandard working conditions and compensation?

Well first off it's no "excuse". That's basically the way it is. Secondly..when you start with the "you have no brains" meme..it basically means that you are projecting.

Third..most of "asia" is just developing...and it really depends on where you are talking about. Salaries in Japan and Korea are pretty high. Same with Taiwan.

China? Not so much. But they are increasing. Same with India.

And it's not about being "broken hearted", it's about being smart. In an economy based on consumerism..it makes no sense whatsoever to concentrate wealth into a few hands.

History also shows the folly of that.

 

[Bern80]

No. This is America. We're supposed to be exceptional. If you want to do business in an exceptional country,

Your contradictions never end do they? Isn't 1% the definition of exception? What seems unfair to you amkes complete sense to the rest of us. Compensation is based on the value of skills, not need as you wish it to be. It's supply and demand like every other free marker commodity. The greater the demand and rarer the skill the greater the compensation for it. As such it should come as no suprise or be considered unfair that the majority of wealth in a free market is going to be held by a relatively small segement of the population. There is no secret to making money. You determine what skills are in demand that are paying what you want to make and you learn it. That isn't an action plan that requires special priveledge to carry out.

you need to pay a decent wage. If you can't make money paying a decent wage, then maybe you're not cut out to be a businessman in an exceptional country.

Define decent. Again you refuse to play the game by free market rules. Who gets to define what an acceptable profit is in this make believe world of yours? How much are you going to allow me to make before telling me how much I have to give of it in compensation? Again you simply don't see the logistical issues of paying people based on need. Shouldn't a couple with kids get paid more than a single person for the same work then? It seems they should under your paradigm. Still sound moral to you? No, but then again your pea brain didn't think of that did it.

 

[uscitizen]

Mcdonalds profits go up faster in Europe where they are socialist and have a living wage concept for the most part.

 

[Bern80]

Well first off it's no "excuse". That's basically the way it is. Secondly..when you start with the "you have no brains" meme..it basically means that you are projecting.

It is an excuse and easily proved to be so. If it were true then there shouldn't be anyone who has come from nothing who has gained considerable wealth. We know that not to be the case. It is self serving excuse that feeds on itself. You can always fall back on 'well I wasn't born into money, that's why I don't have any'. It's a hell of a lot easier then taking a good hard look at yourself and determining the role that you've played in your outcomes.

Third..most of "asia" is just developing...and it really depends on where you are talking about. Salaries in Japan and Korea are pretty high. Same with Taiwan.

China? Not so much. But they are increasing. Same with India.


And it's not about being "broken hearted", it's about being smart. In an economy based on consumerism..it makes no sense whatsoever to concentrate wealth into a few hands.

History also shows the folly of that.

For you liberals it most certainly is about being broken hearted. Policy based on emotion rather than objective reason is the defining characteristic of liberalism. Create policy that gives a warm fuzzy feeling. Just give people more money, just give them health care, just take away their guns. Let's not think a little harder about whether any of those things are really in a person's best interest. No it doesn't make sense for money to get concentrated onto a smaller and smaller minority, but why is it someone elses responsibility to fix that and not yours? Why is it your bosses responsibility to simply give you what you say you need and not your responsibility to attain the skills that achieve that?

 

[Stephanie]

where does Obama come up with these numbers?
first he claims $250,000 is considered RICH now he want minimum wage to pay $9 a hour.

I think he just pulls numbers out of his ass

 

[uscitizen]

Care to comment on how McDonalds makes money in countrys who have much higher minimum wage than we do?

 

[Bern80]

Mcdonalds profits go up faster in Europe where they are socialist and have a living wage concept for the most part.

Those two things may be occurring at the same time, but is there really a causation component? There is evidence here to the contrary. If you want a real world lesson in supply and demand look no further then the oil boom in North Dakota. They have basically no unemployument. You have McDonalds employees making $12/hr. That's good for flipping burgers. Wages are like that across the board. Everyone must be rich right? WRONG. And this is an example of what happens in the market when wages go up, everything there also costs more. A Big Mac costs more in the ND oil towns than anywhere else in the country. Why? Because the market responded to the increase in incomes. Sellers said 'hey we can charge more for this here because everyone has more disposable income.

Another lesson that liberals don't get about money. Simply throwing money at problems rarely fixes them. That includes the 'problem' of low compensation. You could raise the min wage to $50/hr that isn't going to get rid of poverty because the market is going respond by raising prices on goods in services and the poor will still be poor. They will be poor until they and liberals figure out that more money won't fix the problem. Individuals have to be responsible for fixing their own problems.

 

[Sallow]

Well first off it's no "excuse". That's basically the way it is. Secondly..when you start with the "you have no brains" meme..it basically means that you are projecting.

It is an excuse and easily proved to be so. If it were true then there shouldn't be anyone who has come from nothing who has gained considerable wealth. We know that not to be the case. It is self serving excuse that feeds on itself. You can always fall back on 'well I wasn't born into money, that's why I don't have any'. It's a hell of a lot easier then taking a good hard look at yourself and determining the role that you've played in your outcomes.

Third..most of "asia" is just developing...and it really depends on where you are talking about. Salaries in Japan and Korea are pretty high. Same with Taiwan.

China? Not so much. But they are increasing. Same with India.


And it's not about being "broken hearted", it's about being smart. In an economy based on consumerism..it makes no sense whatsoever to concentrate wealth into a few hands.

History also shows the folly of that.

For you liberals it most certainly is about being broken hearted. Policy based on emotion rather than objective reason is the defining characteristic of liberalism. Create policy that gives a warm fuzzy feeling. Just give people more money, just give them health care, just take away their guns. Let's not think a little harder about whether any of those things are really in a person's best interest. No it doesn't make sense for money to get concentrated onto a smaller and smaller minority, but why is it someone elses responsibility to fix that and not yours? Why is it your bosses responsibility to simply give you what you say you need and not your responsibility to attain the skills that achieve that?

Again you make a whole lot of wide sweeping generalizations to essentially justify some pretty stupid policy. You first assumption is that if you are poor..you've done something wrong. Conversely, if you are rich, you've done something right. That falls neatly, by the way, into the conservative worldview, which dictates that the powerful, are powerful, because of an edict of a higher power..namely a god. Real life isn't like that.

And creating policy that flatens out "classes" has been one of the focal points of this country since it's inception. People who came to this country and started, did so, because they rejected the notion of royalty and aristocracy. And while you may "agree" that it is not a good idea to concentrate wealth, as by the did most of the founders, you reject each and every remedy to that. Which basically means..you really don't buy into that idea.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Well first off it's no "excuse". That's basically the way it is. Secondly..when you start with the "you have no brains" meme..it basically means that you are projecting.

It is an excuse and easily proved to be so. If it were true then there shouldn't be anyone who has come from nothing who has gained considerable wealth. We know that not to be the case. It is self serving excuse that feeds on itself. You can always fall back on 'well I wasn't born into money, that's why I don't have any'. It's a hell of a lot easier then taking a good hard look at yourself and determining the role that you've played in your outcomes.

Third..most of "asia" is just developing...and it really depends on where you are talking about. Salaries in Japan and Korea are pretty high. Same with Taiwan.

China? Not so much. But they are increasing. Same with India.


And it's not about being "broken hearted", it's about being smart. In an economy based on consumerism..it makes no sense whatsoever to concentrate wealth into a few hands.

History also shows the folly of that.

For you liberals it most certainly is about being broken hearted. Policy based on emotion rather than objective reason is the defining characteristic of liberalism. Create policy that gives a warm fuzzy feeling. Just give people more money, just give them health care, just take away their guns. Let's not think a little harder about whether any of those things are really in a person's best interest. No it doesn't make sense for money to get concentrated onto a smaller and smaller minority, but why is it someone elses responsibility to fix that and not yours? Why is it your bosses responsibility to simply give you what you say you need and not your responsibility to attain the skills that achieve that?

You think the people with the money are likely to fix the problem?

And....you're full of shit with the warm fuzzy bullshit.

 

[Bern80]

Again you make a whole lot of wide sweeping generalizations to essentially justify some pretty stupid policy. You first assumption is that if you are poor..you've done something wrong. Conversely, if you are rich, you've done something right. That falls neatly, by the way, into the conservative worldview, which dictates that the powerful, are powerful, because of an edict of a higher power..namely a god. Real life isn't like that.

What stupid policy? That people be paid what they're worth? And yes that is my view that you've done something wrong if you don't merit pay above minimum wage. You hold the opposite view however. That people are not responsible for their outcomes. That the things they do or don't do don't have consequences. We know that to be observably false. And not in small numbers, that is true for the majority of people in this country. That argument has nothing to do with God. That statement fits better into your argument than mine. Your the one that believes people can't be responsible for their outcomes. So if the individual isn't responsible for it, it must be God who's deciding who fails and who succeeds right? I'm arguing that it's the individual that determines their outcomes, not God.

And creating policy that flatens out "classes" has been one of the focal points of this country since it's inception. People who came to this country and started, did so, because they rejected the notion of royalty and aristocracy. And while you may "agree" that it is not a good idea to concentrate wealth, as by the did most of the founders, you reject each and every remedy to that. Which basically means..you really don't buy into that idea.

I have proposed a remedy to it. You just don't like it because it's hard. It requires self motivation. It requires self accountability. Character traits you liberals loathe. The solution is that people adapt. Again this isn't a rocket science problem or solution and it does in fact work. If you want more money find out what skills are demand that pay that money. Learn it and do it.