The living wage

[The Rabbi]

You're assume profit margins are concrete and static. If they were, outsourcing wouldn't happen.

You just shot yourself in the foot. Outsourcing occurs precisely to save labor costs and increase potential profit margin. More likely though margin remains the same but prices are lowered, increasing volumes.

How much have the prices been falling in your local shoppe as more and more companies have outsourced?

Little, if at all. It's all about exploiting the world proletariat to maximize profit margin.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...on-of-the-proletariat-what-is-free-trade.html

Too easy
Does Wal-Mart really save you money? | Marketplace From American Public Media

I realize if you live on food stamps you probably don't see any of it. But shockingly most people are not in your situation.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Right always insists that the government can't create jobs

Once again you lie, dissemble and perpetuate intellectual fraud. All in one sentence, which is pretty impressive.
The Right (whoever that is) does not maintain government cannot create jobs. Obviously they do. The claim is that these jobs are not beneficial to the economy, providing for the most part no economic value.

So... Ronnie's dad was a ******* parasitic teatsucker and his government scrip did nothing to help the grocer who sold pappa the food little Ronnie ate?

Reagan's father was an alcoholic, a fact he never hid.
Are you off your meds? Again?

 

[JBeukema]

You just shot yourself in the foot. Outsourcing occurs precisely to save labor costs and increase potential profit margin. More likely though margin remains the same but prices are lowered, increasing volumes.

How much have the prices been falling in your local shoppe as more and more companies have outsourced?

Little, if at all. It's all about exploiting the world proletariat to maximize profit margin.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...on-of-the-proletariat-what-is-free-trade.html

Too easy
Does Wal-Mart really save you money? | Marketplace From American Public Media

I realize if you live on food stamps you probably don't see any of it. But shockingly most people are not in your situation.

'You know what saved us money?

Slavery

Clearly, in the interest of saving money and being competitive in the world market, we must reinstate the slave trade

 

[The Rabbi]

How much have the prices been falling in your local shoppe as more and more companies have outsourced?

Little, if at all. It's all about exploiting the world proletariat to maximize profit margin.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...on-of-the-proletariat-what-is-free-trade.html

Too easy
Does Wal-Mart really save you money? | Marketplace From American Public Media

I realize if you live on food stamps you probably don't see any of it. But shockingly most people are not in your situation.

'You know what saved us money?

Slavery

Clearly, in the interest of saving money and being competitive in the world market, we must reinstate the slave trade

Blahblahblah.
You're so ******* predictable.

 

[JBeukema]

you're the one defending slavery so you can save a few bucks

 

[shintao]

'Living wage': a pleasant-sounding yet meaningless catchphrase that allows you, like 'change' to project whatever the **** Utopian pipedream you wish unto it.

Yeah, I have a feeling you just don't get it, and here we are on page 10.

You want to be paid for taking the grocer's food and you accuse others of not understanding the world?

You want to drop your drawers and be paid for photographs of your ass?

 

[JBeukema]

Yeah, I have a feeling you just don't get it, and here we are on page 10.

You want to be paid for taking the grocer's food and you accuse others of not understanding the world?

You want to drop your drawers and be paid for photographs of your ass?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Ok Shittowel... why not make the living wage, I dunno, $75,000 per year?

 

[The Rabbi]

you're the one defending slavery so you can save a few bucks

Are you actually this stupid and dysfunctional in real life? That might explain things.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

you're the one defending slavery so you can save a few bucks

Are you actually this stupid and dysfunctional in real life? That might explain things.

Does this guy does know that slaves, by definition... don't get paid?

 

[JBeukema]

you're the one defending slavery so you can save a few bucks

Are you actually this stupid and dysfunctional in real life? That might explain things.

Does this guy does know that slaves, by definition... don't get paid?

Their payment was their room and board

Thus was the rhetoric of the slavekeeper

Thus is also the language of the capitalist, who seeks to provide the worker with just enough in wages to survive and continue to labour

 

[Two Thumbs]

This living wage crap cracks me up.

Lets say that magic number is 50k/year

Imagine how much a burger and fries will have to cost to pay 2-3 shifts of teens to run any burger joint.

Cover the cost of a cashier in anything.

Better get used to automation, b/c no one is going to hire anyone to do anything that can be replaced by a machine.

Seriously, why pay 10 people 50k when you can pay 1 person 50k to fix the machines.

How many doctors will finish all the college and training and everyotherdamnthing for 50k?

Another useless post put up and supported by people that don't think things through.

 

[shintao]

Ok Shittowel... why not make the living wage, I dunno, $75,000 per year?

It could be depending on where you live, but lets say it takes $75,000.00 somewhere to make all the ends meet (shelter/cloths/food/utilitys), but the worker is making only 1/2 of that, so he needs two jobs to survive.

That means he takes another mans job, who is sent to unemployment, his family is forced on welfare, and he loses everything he has acquired in the last 20 years (house/car/pension/savings).

Now YOU have to pay more taxes to support his unemployment and his families welfare and section 8 housing, and the taxes he would have been paying himself. It all falls on your shoulders.

So the question is, do you want all Americans working and getting by, or do you want 1/2 the workers working and paying taxes to support the laid-off 1/2 of workers? That is the reality of the situation.

When only 1/2 of the workers working, production is cut in half, prices have to increase to maintain the profits, and when that fails the business leaves for Mexico. So who should be paying for the unemployed families? YOU, or business owners?

Note: The living wage is set by the area of America and city, so that an closer figure can be obtained that insures the worker can survive there. That is what th calculator of LW is about. So it is not the same amount everywhere, some areas lower, some areas higher.

 

[shintao]

This living wage crap cracks me up.

Lets say that magic number is 50k/year

Imagine how much a burger and fries will have to cost to pay 2-3 shifts of teens to run any burger joint.

Cover the cost of a cashier in anything.

Better get used to automation, b/c no one is going to hire anyone to do anything that can be replaced by a machine.

Seriously, why pay 10 people 50k when you can pay 1 person 50k to fix the machines.

How many doctors will finish all the college and training and everyotherdamnthing for 50k?

Another useless post put up and supported by people that don't think things through.

Obviously a post you have not read, then built a strawman to blow over with an imbecilic example. LMAO!! Then you claim you are thinking? That is what I find is funny, well maybe hilarious is a better word, and I was reminded of the circus clowns under the big tent.

 

[The Rabbi]

Ok Shittowel... why not make the living wage, I dunno, $75,000 per year?

It could be depending on where you live, but lets say it takes $75,000.00 somewhere to make all the ends meet (shelter/cloths/food/utilitys), but the worker is making only 1/2 of that, so he needs two jobs to survive.

.

Warning: Fixed number of jobs fallacy in progress.
A person who takes a second job isn't taking anything from anyone. The job was created and he filled it. As Worker 1 works and buys things he creates demand elsewhere which will hire Worker 2.
France tried the whole job rationing thing, reducing the workweek to 35 hours so other people would come work the rest and they would "create" more jobs.
Worked out about as well as you would expect. Total failure.

 

[thereisnospoon]

you're the one defending slavery so you can save a few bucks

Do you ever get tired of posting dumb shit all the time?
Slavery? Where the **** did THAT come from?
You pro-union lefties are a ******* miracle.
Tell ya what, go ahead and open a business. A candy store. And hire three people. Set their salary at $75k per year and you can pay 100% of their health insurance as well. Let's see how long you stay in business.
And the point that overpaying, yes overpaying employees at unrealistic rates allows them to among other things, allow their spouse to stay home with the kids, or allows him to have just ONE job thus not taking "another man's job", is pure tripe. It's not believable. And it is simply not practical.
These people who want government to waive a magic wand and mandate high wages to all workers have neglected to examine the incredible cost to business, the inevitable sharp rise in consumer prices and loss, yes loss of available jobs.
This is an idea born of pure reactionary and emotional motives. It's junk. No one with an ounce credibility nor politician who wants to continue holding his office in the very near future would even propose such a preposterous idea.
Enough already.

 

[JBeukema]

Ok Shittowel... why not make the living wage, I dunno, $75,000 per year?

It could be depending on where you live, but lets say it takes $75,000.00 somewhere to make all the ends meet (shelter/cloths/food/utilitys), but the worker is making only 1/2 of that, so he needs two jobs to survive.

.

Warning: Fixed number of jobs fallacy in progress.
A person who takes a second job isn't taking anything from anyone. The job was created and he filled it. As Worker 1 works and buys things he creates demand elsewhere which will hire Worker 2.

By that reasoning, every worker makes a job for another worker and there would never be any unemployment, save for those who don't look and aren't counted.

 

[JBeukema]

you're the one defending slavery so you can save a few bucks

Do you ever get tired of posting dumb shit all the time?
Slavery? Where the **** did THAT come from?

His entire argument is that anything which raises prices is bad. He applies this to laws designed to protect the working class.

You pro-union lefties are a ******* miracle.

You're an idiot

Tell ya what, go ahead and open a business. A candy store. And hire three people. Set their salary at $75k per year and you can pay 100% of their health insurance as well. Let's see how long you stay in business.

Nice strawman. Cite where I've suggested forcing the average shopkeeper to do any such thing.

Read my posts in this very thread, especially my responses to the poster who started the thread.

This is an idea born of pure reactionary and emotional motives.

A fine summary of your post

 

[Rozman]

People live on minimum wage now so your argument is full of shit. Further it is NOT the Federal Governments business what an employer pays his employees. Might be a States business if the people agree and vote for it in an amendment to their State Constitution.

No it's not.

No one "lives' On the minimum wage..

They either get supplemental help from the government or have multiple wage earners in the household.

We've got something like a 13 trillion dollar economy..with some 24% of that going to 2% of the people in this country.

Lately companies have been booting employees..leaving the rest to pick up the slack and not paying the overtime..thanks to the rule changes by the Bush administration.

That's theft.

Additionally..the TARP basically covered the losses of the big risk takers. And they are at it again..paying themselves multimillion dollar bonuses.

That's theft as well.

Why is it conservatives reward this horrendous behavior...while punishing the poor?

I wish you guys would just get it over with and tell us what you really want...just get it out there and be done with it.

Here let me help you.

phase one....seize all assets of anyone who made over a million dollars last year....
phase two....have the banks who hold the mortgage of those individuals homes seize them
phase three....have these rich people brought to the nearest sports stadium where those the have nots are sitting in the stands throwing tomatoes at these folks.
phase four...every 10th "former" rich person goes to the microphone and apologizes"


How am I doing so far.

Next time I'm bored and I have recovered from laughing at the Ed Shultz show I will continue with this.

 

[haileydavey]

During the Cold War Americans liked comparing their broadly shared prosperity to the rank poverty of the 3rd world.

Indeed, America was proud of her great postwar middle class. Average citizens could afford to send their children to college. This was not the case in Russia or the 3rd world.

America derived its superiority not from its landed gentry, but from the fact that a man born without means was given an opportunity equal to those born in wealth. This was not the case in the 3rd world, which lacked upward mobility aka freedom.

Consider the poster child of postwar New Deal assistance: Ronald Reagan. His family was poor -- struggling, going nowhere, besieged. FDR's New Deal saved them. Jack Reagan, Ronnie's father, was given a GOVERNMENT JOB as part of the New Deal work program. This allowed them to lift young Ronnie out of poverty, so he could make something of himself.

FDR didn't believe the Reagan's were Welfare Queens. FDR believed they were real Americans. [too bad Ronnie didn't have this attitude when he became president]

FDR invested in something more precious than energy, big pharma, or Wall Street; he invested in the American People -- he invested in Ronald Reagan. He gave him a leg-up, so he could become productive and make something of himself.

FDR believed in the American people. He thought they were worth investing in. He trusted them.

When the New Right got rid of FDR's approach to the middle class, they unwittingly got rid of the middle class. The money never trickled down. America spent 30 years creating a narrow class of aristocrats who own government and media. We lost that shining city of the hill -- the very thing we used to point to when we claimed superiority over the 3rd world, which didn't have a middle class. We lost the very Government support which pulled Ronald Reagan out of poverty.

How ironic: if Reagan had been born during the age of Reagan (1980-2010), he would have never risen out of poverty. He would have been called a Welfare Queen.

The Republicans know not what they do.

Back then they WORKED for the government checks. It was not provided to them in exchange for nothing. It was not welfare but a government job.

The Right always insists that the government can't create jobs

I am not "the right". I have my own POV and do not base it on right or left but on life and how it has affected me.