Question for those pushing a "living wage"

[Bush92]

We had living wage blue collar jobs at one time in America. Now they have all gone to China. Everything you buy at Wal-Mart that says "made in China", use to be an Americans job. China must stop deflating its currency and stealing trade secrets. U.S. trade policies of the 1990's were a disaster.

 

[Fishlore]

The issue of a living wage goes beyond the economics of the labor market to the much more fundamental question of what sort of society do we want America to be. The fact is that we are a supremely rich country and can afford pretty much whatver kind of society we want. What do we want?

Conservatives seem obsessed with what kind of society we DON'T want. We don't want a society in which layabouts are supported in luxury by those who work. We don't want a society in which women enjoy abortion on demand. We don't want a society in which same-sex marriage is legal or drugs decriminalized. Etc. etc.

But what kin of society do we want? Do we really want equality of opportunity for all kids? Do we want a society in which upward mobility is the reward of the hard-working and the clever?
Do we want a society which, in the name of common decency, establishes a minimum standard of living below which even the undeserving are not allowed to fall?

I think many conservatives are so angrily obsessed with what they don't want that they have given little thought to the articulation of what the do want. Too bad

 

[protectionist]

In another thread someone claimed that people have a right to be paid enough to support a family. I'd like to hear input from others on this.

Does a person with a paper route have the right to be paid enough to support a family?

Of course!

Should a grocery bagger get paid enough to support a family?

Of course!

What is the lowest level of job where you think the employers should be required to pay their employees enough to support a family?

There is no lowest level. The living wage (for 40 hours/week) should be based on enough to support a family of 4, not some notion about levels of job. Determining pay by levels of job should only apply to very skilled jobs wherin workers are in short supply, and thereby at much higher levels of pay, not anything to do "enough to support a family."

If my brother quit his computer job and went to work as a Wal-Mart stocker, should he be able to expect Wal-Mart to pay him enough to support his six children?

Maybe not 6 kids, but certainly enough to support a family of four.

 

[protectionist]

Let's examine the logic of that statement.

You say you are subsidizing Wal-mart. For that to be true, that would mean that the people who get jobs at Walmart could get jobs somewhere else supporting themselves, and they aren't taking those jobs.

Let's say you're FOS and they aren't turning down jobs that would support themselves, that would mean that they can't, which means Wal-mart is helping taxpayers by partially deferring the cost of their being on welfare.

You don't get the implication of that, do you, Brain?

I get the Walton's are making billions with help from corporate welfare. My tax dollars shouldn't be going to billionaires. You don't get that do you? How about we just start gov run stores that pay better and close walmart? Would be about the same thing, just cutting out the billionaires.

The logical fallacy you just committed is begging the question.

So let's say wal-mart raises wages to $15 an hour or whatever you want. So then they fire all their current employees and hire better ones. Then their current employees are back entirely on welfare.

How did this help you exactly?

What would make the new employees be any better than the old ones ? I shop in WalMart all the time. I get good assistance from the employees there. The cashiers do their jobs all right. I see no reason to let anybody go.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Walmart Employs 1% Of America. Should It Be Forced To Pay Its Employees More? - Business Insider

So if they pay $7 bil in taxes maybe they need to be taxed more. Last I checked they have over 8000 stores which cost tax payers over a million each.

After reading the whole article it seems to really support my plan to change corp taxes.

The stores don't cost you anything the slugs who won't work enough to pay their bills and the government that has made it easier than ever to get welfare are what's costing you.

 

[protectionist]

Complete, utter nonsense. There is quite literally an infinite number of unfilled jobs out there. Anyone that would go hungry would only do so out of being to lazy to get off their ass.

Welcome to Fantasy Island

Ecnomics is anything you want it to be

A liberal chastising someone for not grasping economics, OK, that made me laugh...

Anyone who is serious about wanting a job could get one. Maybe not paying what they want, maybe they need to work harder and care more about their job. But no one has an excuse not to be able to get one.

There are millions of Americans who want a job and can't get one. Reasons are various. Automation is one. Immigration is another. Much of it is employer discrimination. Discrimination based on age, weight, not enough education, too much education, affirmative action, length of time being unemployed, health history, not knowing somebody, etc. Fools with no direct knowledge of this, sometimes call these excuses. Those who talk from experience know better.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Tell me how much is standing there scanning bar codes and stuffing crap in a bag worth per hour?

Those cashiers don't even have to be able to add anymore a ******* retard could do the job.

If your job is so easy a retarded person could do it you certainly don't deserve 15 an hour.

And if you're over 25 and still earning minimum wage you sir or madam are a ******* loser.

 

[protectionist]

Walmart Employs 1% Of America. Should It Be Forced To Pay Its Employees More? - Business Insider

So if they pay $7 bil in taxes maybe they need to be taxed more. Last I checked they have over 8000 stores which cost tax payers over a million each.

After reading the whole article it seems to really support my plan to change corp taxes.

The stores don't cost you anything the slugs who won't work enough to pay their bills and the government that has made it easier than ever to get welfare are what's costing you.

What's so easy about getting welfare ? Where I live, the only thing an able-bodied person without children can get, is food stamps (which is minimal $), and medicaid which is wortheless, since no doctors or dentists accept it anymore.
You don't get a dime to pay for housing, a car, gas or insurance for a car, if you already have one, or clothing. If you have pets and suddenly become indigent, you get nothing for pet food, cat litter, or veterinarian care.

You could get a cell phone, but you have only a small # of minutes free per month. You get no internet or cable TV.

In short, living on welfare is miserable, if you can even do it at all.

 

[Skull Pilot]

So if they pay $7 bil in taxes maybe they need to be taxed more. Last I checked they have over 8000 stores which cost tax payers over a million each.

After reading the whole article it seems to really support my plan to change corp taxes.

The stores don't cost you anything the slugs who won't work enough to pay their bills and the government that has made it easier than ever to get welfare are what's costing you.

What's so easy about getting welfare ? Where I live, the only thing an able-bodied person without children can get, is food stamps (which is minimal $), and medicaid which is wortheless, since no doctors or dentists accept it anymore.
You don't get a dime to pay for housing, a car, gas or insurance for a car, if you already have one, or clothing. If you have pets and suddenly become indigent, you get nothing for pet food, cat litter, or veterinarian care.

You could get a cell phone, but you have only a small # of minutes free per month. You get no internet or cable TV.

In short, living on welfare is miserable, if you can even do it at all.

Food stamps are welfare.

And tell me aren't you sheep all whining that Walmart employees are getting welfare even though they are working?

Seems to me it's pretty easy to get if people working full time can get it.

 

[rightwinger]

Complete, utter nonsense. There is quite literally an infinite number of unfilled jobs out there. Anyone that would go hungry would only do so out of being to lazy to get off their ass.

Welcome to Fantasy Island

Ecnomics is anything you want it to be

A liberal chastising someone for not grasping economics, OK, that made me laugh...

Anyone who is serious about wanting a job could get one. Maybe not paying what they want, maybe they need to work harder and care more about their job. But no one has an excuse not to be able to get one.

You are confusing what one person is capable of accomplishing and what 30 million people are capable of accomplishing. One person can hustle to put himself above the rest, 30 million is the rest

One person can achieve through gumption, for 30 million to succeed you need economic change.

 

[protectionist]

Tell me how much is standing there scanning bar codes and stuffing crap in a bag worth per hour?

Those cashiers don't even have to be able to add anymore a ******* retard could do the job.

If your job is so easy a retarded person could do it you certainly don't deserve 15 an hour.

And if you're over 25 and still earning minimum wage you sir or madam are a ******* loser.

The only time there should be talk of "worth per hour" is in the case of highly skilled workers, who need to be persuaded to take job. ei. the job has to pay significantly more than some other jobs that they could take. For bagging merchaindise on cashier checkout lines, this isn't the case. For that, the only criteria, ought to be to pay someone (for full-time work) enough for them to live on (otherwise why bother?), and this should be a moral minimum standard that a moral society sets for itself. Anything less than a living wage (for 40 hr/wk), is essentially stealing from the worker (difference between fair/proper/living wage and that actual wage)

You deserve the $15 hour because that what you need, not because of how easy or difficult the job is. No job should pay less than $15/hour, and in some high cost of living localities (ex. San Francisco, New York), the eminimum should be a lot more than that.

No, you're not a loser if you're whatever age and doing unskilled work. for some people that work is what they choose to do. They have that right. We don't all need to be rocket scientists.

 

[Brain357]

Walmart Employs 1% Of America. Should It Be Forced To Pay Its Employees More? - Business Insider

So if they pay $7 bil in taxes maybe they need to be taxed more. Last I checked they have over 8000 stores which cost tax payers over a million each.

After reading the whole article it seems to really support my plan to change corp taxes.

The stores don't cost you anything the slugs who won't work enough to pay their bills and the government that has made it easier than ever to get welfare are what's costing you.

The greedy people making billions while collecting corp welfare are costing me. You blame the poor when the rich are calling all the shots.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Tell me how much is standing there scanning bar codes and stuffing crap in a bag worth per hour?

Those cashiers don't even have to be able to add anymore a ******* retard could do the job.

If your job is so easy a retarded person could do it you certainly don't deserve 15 an hour.

And if you're over 25 and still earning minimum wage you sir or madam are a ******* loser.

The only time there should be talk of "worth per hour" is in the case of highly skilled workers, who need to be persuaded to take job. ei. the job has to pay significantly more than some other jobs that they could take. For bagging merchaindise on cashier checkout lines, this isn't the case. For that, the only criteria, ought to be to pay someone (for full-time work) enough for them to live on (otherwise why bother?), and this should be a moral minimum standard that a moral society sets for itself. Anything less than a living wage (for 40 hr/wk), is essentially stealing from the worker (difference between fair/proper/living wage and that actual wage)

You deserve the $15 hour because that what you need, not because of how easy or difficult the job is. No job should pay less than $15/hour, and in some high cost of living localities (ex. San Francisco, New York), the eminimum should be a lot more than that.

No, you're nor a loser if you're whatever age and doing unskilled work. for some people that work is what they choose to do. They have that right. We don't all need to be rocket scientists.

If you choose to remain unskilled and never better yourself you don't deserve much and you certainly don't deserve 15 an hour.

 

[RKMBrown]

Welcome to Fantasy Island

Ecnomics is anything you want it to be

A liberal chastising someone for not grasping economics, OK, that made me laugh...

Anyone who is serious about wanting a job could get one. Maybe not paying what they want, maybe they need to work harder and care more about their job. But no one has an excuse not to be able to get one.

There are millions of Americans who want a job and can't get one. Reasons are various. Automation is one. Immigration is another. Much of it is employer discrimination. Discrimination based on age, weight, not enough education, too much education, affirmative action, length of time being unemployed, health history, not knowing somebody, etc. Fools with no direct knowledge of this, sometimes call these excuses. Those who talk from experience know better.

We call them excuses because they are excuses. I'll put 1k on the table that you can't find me someone that I can't find a job for in 1 week. The only rule is the person can't be "insane" or in "jail" or disabled to the point where they can't communicate with others, such as over the phone. Disabled would include being a drug addict, alcoholic, Alzheimers, <80 IQ etc.

 

[protectionist]

The stores don't cost you anything the slugs who won't work enough to pay their bills and the government that has made it easier than ever to get welfare are what's costing you.

What's so easy about getting welfare ? Where I live, the only thing an able-bodied person without children can get, is food stamps (which is minimal $), and medicaid which is wortheless, since no doctors or dentists accept it anymore.
You don't get a dime to pay for housing, a car, gas or insurance for a car, if you already have one, or clothing. If you have pets and suddenly become indigent, you get nothing for pet food, cat litter, or veterinarian care.

You could get a cell phone, but you have only a small # of minutes free per month. You get no internet or cable TV.

In short, living on welfare is miserable, if you can even do it at all.

Food stamps are welfare.

And tell me aren't you sheep all whining that Walmart employees are getting welfare even though they are working?

Seems to me it's pretty easy to get if people working full time can get it.

Yes, I just said food stamps are welfare. So thanks so much for that, Mr. Echo.

Seems to me that getting welfare is NOT easy to get, when you can't get enough to pay for housing, pay electric bills, clothing and car expenses, etc. And what you get for food stamps could have you losing 50 pounds, in about 3 months.

 

[kaz]

I get the Walton's are making billions with help from corporate welfare. My tax dollars shouldn't be going to billionaires. You don't get that do you? How about we just start gov run stores that pay better and close walmart? Would be about the same thing, just cutting out the billionaires.

The logical fallacy you just committed is begging the question.

So let's say wal-mart raises wages to $15 an hour or whatever you want. So then they fire all their current employees and hire better ones. Then their current employees are back entirely on welfare.

How did this help you exactly?

What makes you think the current employees wouldn't earn the higher wage? Now they would have more incentive to do a good job. Now they might get my business.

You've obviously never managed anyone in your life, it doesn't work that way. No one works harder because they are paid more and no one who has ever managed anyone would say that.

You can hire a lot more reliable employee in the $10-$12 range than minimum wage. And you can hire a lot better employee than that when you get to $15 an hour. So obviously Walmart paying more will hire better employees and the ones now are going to be on the street.

So again, how did this help you exactly? Now you're paying the full freight.

 

[Brain357]

Tell me how much is standing there scanning bar codes and stuffing crap in a bag worth per hour?

Those cashiers don't even have to be able to add anymore a ******* retard could do the job.

If your job is so easy a retarded person could do it you certainly don't deserve 15 an hour.

And if you're over 25 and still earning minimum wage you sir or madam are a ******* loser.

Those people have made the Walton's the richest family in the world.

 

[protectionist]

Tell me how much is standing there scanning bar codes and stuffing crap in a bag worth per hour?

Those cashiers don't even have to be able to add anymore a ******* retard could do the job.

If your job is so easy a retarded person could do it you certainly don't deserve 15 an hour.

And if you're over 25 and still earning minimum wage you sir or madam are a ******* loser.

The only time there should be talk of "worth per hour" is in the case of highly skilled workers, who need to be persuaded to take job. ei. the job has to pay significantly more than some other jobs that they could take. For bagging merchaindise on cashier checkout lines, this isn't the case. For that, the only criteria, ought to be to pay someone (for full-time work) enough for them to live on (otherwise why bother?), and this should be a moral minimum standard that a moral society sets for itself. Anything less than a living wage (for 40 hr/wk), is essentially stealing from the worker (difference between fair/proper/living wage and that actual wage)

You deserve the $15 hour because that what you need, not because of how easy or difficult the job is. No job should pay less than $15/hour, and in some high cost of living localities (ex. San Francisco, New York), the eminimum should be a lot more than that.

No, you're nor a loser if you're whatever age and doing unskilled work. for some people that work is what they choose to do. They have that right. We don't all need to be rocket scientists.

If you choose to remain unskilled and never better yourself you don't deserve much and you certainly don't deserve 15 an hour.

You think that because you thing the wage should be determined by what the employees work is worth to you, in business income and profits. I say that's a false premise. I say what is needed to live on is the criteria for unskilled work, regardless of the income the work brings in.

 

[RKMBrown]

Welcome to Fantasy Island

Ecnomics is anything you want it to be

A liberal chastising someone for not grasping economics, OK, that made me laugh...

Anyone who is serious about wanting a job could get one. Maybe not paying what they want, maybe they need to work harder and care more about their job. But no one has an excuse not to be able to get one.

You are confusing what one person is capable of accomplishing and what 30 million people are capable of accomplishing. One person can hustle to put himself above the rest, 30 million is the rest

One person can achieve through gumption, for 30 million to succeed you need economic change.

No, you need those 30m to learn gumption. It's not about putting yourself over others it's about putting work over being lazy.

 

[kaz]

Tell me how much is standing there scanning bar codes and stuffing crap in a bag worth per hour?

Those cashiers don't even have to be able to add anymore a ******* retard could do the job.

If your job is so easy a retarded person could do it you certainly don't deserve 15 an hour.

And if you're over 25 and still earning minimum wage you sir or madam are a ******* loser.

Those people have made the Walton's the richest family in the world.

Those bastards! That's disgusting!