This is why we need a living wage

[Zombie_Pundit]

What is a 16 year old, part time fry cook at McDonald's worth?

the same amount as a 45 year married fry cook with 3 kids and a mortgage--minimum wage as long as someone else equally capable is willing to do it at minimum wage

I understand the logic, but, since 1997 teenagers in summer jobs have not been eligible for the same federal minimum wage.

http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/chart.htm

5 A subminimum wage -- $4.25 an hour -- is established for employees under 20 years of age during their first 90 consecutive calendar days of employment with an employer.​

 

[sameech]

What is a 16 year old, part time fry cook at McDonald's worth?

the same amount as a 45 year married fry cook with 3 kids and a mortgage--minimum wage as long as someone else equally capable is willing to do it at minimum wage

I understand the logic, but, since 1997 teenagers in summer jobs have not been eligible for the same federal minimum wage.

http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/chart.htm

5 A subminimum wage -- $4.25 an hour -- is established for employees under 20 years of age during their first 90 consecutive calendar days of employment with an employer.​

That is the first I have heard of it and outside waitresses, I have never heard of anyone getting paid less than the standard MW. Interesting.

 

[Zombie_Pundit]

the same amount as a 45 year married fry cook with 3 kids and a mortgage--minimum wage as long as someone else equally capable is willing to do it at minimum wage

I understand the logic, but, since 1997 teenagers in summer jobs have not been eligible for the same federal minimum wage.

http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/chart.htm

5 A subminimum wage -- $4.25 an hour -- is established for employees under 20 years of age during their first 90 consecutive calendar days of employment with an employer.​

That is the first I have heard of it and outside waitresses, I have never heard of anyone getting paid less than the standard MW. Interesting.

It's not such a bad idea. Does a child need to work, or is a child working part time to learn how to be a responsible adult? I would think a child should be in school, not working a full time job like some sort of dickensian dystopia.

There are numerous other exceptions to the federal minimum wage law. Then there is Georgia which actually has a lower state minimum wage and the federal minimum wage is only applicable in certain types of businesses over which the federal government would override states' rights.

 

[racewright]

If the correct answer is really yes, then you should be able to start your own discount store and pay employees that living wage. Then Walmart will have to raise their wages or go out of business to compete with your discount store.

I (let's just say) am 23, have a high school education, made good grades, and a kid. You think I should open my own store?

Bill Gates did.
Steve Jobs did.
Frank Lloyd Wright did.
Mark Zuckerberg did.

Every one of them a college dropout.
Just sayin'

Starting to think College is a negative not a positive as today they are taught to hate rich businesses. My daughter in law and my Granddaughter Both were given failing grades because of there opinions on being a business owner. Both are moving up the ladder in business. Guided by Myself and My son.

 

[Zombie_Pundit]

I (let's just say) am 23, have a high school education, made good grades, and a kid. You think I should open my own store?

Bill Gates did.
Steve Jobs did.
Frank Lloyd Wright did.
Mark Zuckerberg did.

Every one of them a college dropout.
Just sayin'

Starting to think College is a negative not a positive as today they are taught to hate rich businesses. My daughter in law and my Granddaughter Both were given failing grades because of there opinions on being a business owner. Both are moving up the ladder in business. Guided by Myself and My son.

There are plenty of law schools staffed by conservatives with a conservative student body. That's not to say the mainstay of colleges and universities don't have a liberal bias. They do. If colleges, as an aggregate, didn't exhibit this bias then the SCOTUS wouldn't need to keep shutting down their more blatant infringements. One can easily avoid that bias if one majors in science or engineering or medicine. No, meteorology is not politically biased. The debates over policy decisions concerning rising temperatures is a different matter.

 

[beagle9]

So you believe a deli clerk at walmart should get paid more than the college professor because the deli clerk puts more work in? If not, then you don't really believe that.

I don't think that anyone is saying what you sameech are implying, so why are you implying that someone thinks a Walmart Deli worker should make more or the same as a College Professor when they are not ? People just want to be in a structured pay system that has the standard minimum entrance pay, and then have raises and benefits that are suitable for them to live on as they work their way up in life. The problem is that these companies have been trying to get away from or out of that structured pay system concept over the years, and they are trying to adapt a world view or system of doing things when it comes to the treatment of it's workforces here. They are doing this instead of keeping the type systems that had made this nation strong and secure over the years.

And this is where the democratic "progressive" argument always breaks down--Walmart is NOT a manufacturer--they are a retailer. They do not "outsource" everything any more than any other retailer does. Do you think Kroger makes their own products too?

Since there is no competition just go down to the port and give a couple desperate people a penny or two and have them work for you. THE WORKERS ARE REPLACEABLE, (R)ight, so treat them and pay them as scum.

Walmart is just one link in the chain that has been created, where as they are all working together in this tightly wound chain. So of course Wal-mart isn't doing this just on their own, so sameech is trying to seperate Wal-mart from the chain, but it is a game of smoke and mirrors, and it is obvious in what he attempts to do in that respect.

We don't have a port in my area. Individual workers are replaceable. Perhaps your issue is with those who are willing to work less for their fair pay than for people who are more greedy.

Individual workers are replaceable (Yes) and easily so when they have no representation or understanding of what is happening to them, so your view of them as being low information voters is also correct when it comes to this stuff in which they have no representation on or no clue on. More greedy you say, or is it that they are just more wise to what goes on when they know their company could pay them a living wage, but refuses to do so all due to it's extreme appetite for the greed of it's own ?

Eventually, the workers are going to wise up and demand their worth. History repeats itself.

I doubt it, at least not in my lifetime. The democratic party keeps labor pretty neutered. Low wage workers are also low information voters.

Yes and the companies that work low wage workers for years, are glad that these workers are low information voters, because their so called savior Barack sure has lied to them or handled their case in a most idiotic way. Bottom line is that the workes need representation in some fields of the market place or rather they will get used and trashed by their employers because they have no representation or guidence that could help them from being abused or exploited.

 

[sameech]

I don't think that anyone is saying what you sameech are implying, so why are you implying that someone thinks a Walmart Deli worker should make more or the same as a College Professor when they are not ? People just want to be in a structured pay system that has the standard minimum entrance pay, and then have raises and benefits that are suitable for them to live on as they work their way up in life. The problem is that these companies have been trying to get away from or out of that structured pay system concept over the years, and they are trying to adapt a world view or system of doing things when it comes to the treatment of it's workforces here. They are doing this instead of keeping the type systems that had made this nation strong and secure over the years.

If you are forcing people to pay someone one dime more than the labor supply-demand dictates, then you are interfering in private markets. There is no justification to do it "just a little" that isn't justification for doing it "quite a bit". What these companies are doing is adapting to a changing marketplace in a global environment. What made this country strong was lack of competition, now we have more than enough to justify containing wages/labor costs in order to be competitive.

Walmart is just one link in the chain that has been created, where as they are all working together in this tightly wound chain. So of course Wal-mart isn't doing this just on their own, so sameech is trying to seperate Wal-mart from the chain, but it is a game of smoke and mirrors, and it is obvious in what he attempts to do in that respect.

oh yes the other democratic fallacy--when forced to confront the truth that Walmart isn't doing anything different than Target, they suddenly shift to the "They are a symbol of all the others we don't ever mention: meme.

Individual workers are replaceable (Yes) and easily so when they have no representation or understanding of what is happening to them, so your view of them as being low information voters is also correct when it comes to this stuff in which they have no representation on or no clue on. More greedy you say, or is it that they are just more wise to what goes on when they know their company could pay them a living wage, but refuses to do so all due to it's extreme appetite for the greed of it's own ?

walmart workers clearly do not want a union or they would have one already.

Yes and the companies that work low wage workers for years, are glad that these workers are low information voters, because their so called savior Barack sure has lied to them or handled their case in a most idiotic way. Bottom line is that the workes need representation in some fields of the market place or rather they will get used and trashed by their employers because they have no representation or guidence that could help them from being abused or exploited.

When workers decide to organize a labour party instead of supporting the democrats with the hope that this might just be the year they decide to throw us some alms instead of some other group, then they will have a voice. Instead, they continue to support the political parties that are bought and paid for by their employers and then wonder why nothing ever changes.

 

[Zombie_Pundit]

I don't think that anyone is saying what you sameech are implying, so why are you implying that someone thinks a Walmart Deli worker should make more or the same as a College Professor when they are not ? People just want to be in a structured pay system that has the standard minimum entrance pay, and then have raises and benefits that are suitable for them to live on as they work their way up in life. The problem is that these companies have been trying to get away from or out of that structured pay system concept over the years, and they are trying to adapt a world view or system of doing things when it comes to the treatment of it's workforces here. They are doing this instead of keeping the type systems that had made this nation strong and secure over the years.

If you are forcing people to pay someone one dime more than the labor supply-demand dictates, then you are interfering in private markets. There is no justification to do it "just a little" that isn't justification for doing it "quite a bit". What these companies are doing is adapting to a changing marketplace in a global environment. What made this country strong was lack of competition, now we have more than enough to justify containing wages/labor costs in order to be competitive.

The minimum wage represents a price control. It is most certainly interfering with the free market. To impose a price control on anything is to interfere with the free market.
Let's review the logic of imposing that price control:
"...the exploitation of a class of workers who are in an unequal position with respect to bargaining power, and are thus relatively defenceless against the denial of a living wage, is not only detrimental to their health and wellbeing, but casts a direct burden for their support upon the community. What these workers lose in wages, the taxpayers are called upon to pay. The bare cost of living must be met."
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 300 US 379 - 1937
If you abolish the minimum wage you will increase the number of persons on public assistance. I propose a goal for the minimum wage, which I'm pretty sure is already the goal for minimum wage:
No single person shall be eligible for SNAP or Medicaid if they work 40 hours per week.
This means they need to earn 150% of poverty or higher as a single person.

(SNAP and Medicaid eligibility is determined in "% of poverty")​

I'm pretty sure this is already the case. In order to maintain this standard, the minimum wage must be increased to match inflation. To argue otherwise is to allow the existing minimum wage to fall below the eligibility limits or worse yet to abolish it all together.

Additionally, there is little room for competition in labor between our American Standard of Living and the developing world. To argue otherwise is to strap blinders onto ourselves such that we cannot see new opportunities and nearsightedness such as to enjoin us to race to the bottom of wages. Jobs that have been sent overseas aren't coming back, at least not anytime soon. Racing to the bottom won't help us, and won't help the workers in developing countries whose real wages are increasing due to global trade. When a job is shipped off overseas, don't wonder if you could have bowed and scraped a little lower. Get new skills. For people who simply cannot adapt to new industries, Vocational Rehabilitation could be used for cases where serious deficiencies exist
Vocational rehabilitation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As a matter of national policy we should look to opening new markets, like the Japan Cellular Telephone And Third Party Radio Agreement which opened Japan to the American cellphone standards, that help advance new industries and new job opportunities for Americans. Other national policies can and do encourage the growth of new industry. The goal is not for the government to be new industry. The goal is for government to seed new industry, and this has been and continues to be a very successful model over the long term. Of course there are some examples deserving of ridicule. And the ridicule is good because it forces government to change directions in its efforts to seed new opportunities for our people.

 

[Andylusion]

the same amount as a 45 year married fry cook with 3 kids and a mortgage--minimum wage as long as someone else equally capable is willing to do it at minimum wage

I understand the logic, but, since 1997 teenagers in summer jobs have not been eligible for the same federal minimum wage.

http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/chart.htm

5 A subminimum wage -- $4.25 an hour -- is established for employees under 20 years of age during their first 90 consecutive calendar days of employment with an employer.​

That is the first I have heard of it and outside waitresses, I have never heard of anyone getting paid less than the standard MW. Interesting.

I have Zombie on my ignore list, because he's made it clear he is typically too immature to handle direct conversation.

But I will reply to you.

There is a youth minimum wage, but it's largely ignored. There are two reasons for this.

First, most states have a minimum wage, that is higher than the youth federal minimum wage.

http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm

There are only 5 states that have no minimum wage.

There are additionally 4 states that have a minimum wage, below the Federal $7.25 minimum wage.

Most states have their State Minimum wage, automatically adjust to the Federal Minimum wage.

In other words, in 41 states, the Youth minimum wage has absolutely no application. The state laws, prevent the use of the lower wage rates.

In 4 of the other states, they have a lower wage, but it's not $4.25. The lowest is $5.15 in one state, and $6+ in the other 3.

So only 5 states, can use the lowest minimum wage.

However, even then, most employers are not willing to use that lower 'youth minimum wage', because of the 1996 law, has a displaced worker clause.

You can look it up if you want to, but the clause basically says employers can not let one employee go, in order to hire an employee that gets the 'youth minimum wage'.

The purpose is to prevent an employer from hiring a youth worker for $4.25, and then after 3 months firing off that worker to hire another youth worker for $4.25.

Of course the problem is, that creates a legal trap for employers. Turn over rate at the lowest income end, is high to begin with. And high school students, knowing they have no intention of staying, often show up late, work poorly, lie about their car breaking down, so they can go on a date.

But if the company fires that guy, and then hires a new youth worker on, and uses the $4.25 wage, the fired guy, who really got fired for being late, lying, and not doing a good job, could pull a lawsuit out of butt and the company would spend thousands defending it.

So the bottom line is, it's true in theory, but in practice, almost never used.

 

[Zombie_Pundit]

I understand the logic, but, since 1997 teenagers in summer jobs have not been eligible for the same federal minimum wage.

http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/chart.htm

5 A subminimum wage -- $4.25 an hour -- is established for employees under 20 years of age during their first 90 consecutive calendar days of employment with an employer.​

That is the first I have heard of it and outside waitresses, I have never heard of anyone getting paid less than the standard MW. Interesting.

There is a youth minimum wage, but it's largely ignored. There are two reasons for this.

First, most states have a minimum wage, that is higher than the youth federal minimum wage.

http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm

There are only 5 states that have no minimum wage.

There are additionally 4 states that have a minimum wage, below the Federal $7.25 minimum wage.

Most states have their State Minimum wage, automatically adjust to the Federal Minimum wage.

In other words, in 41 states, the Youth minimum wage has absolutely no application. The state laws, prevent the use of the lower wage rates.

Bad assumption.
Here is the law for Washington state, one of the 41 you ruled out.
Wages, Breaks & Meal Periods

What is the minimum wage for minor workers?
The minimum wage for 16- and 17-year-old workers is the same as for adults — $9.32 in 2014. Minors under 16 may be paid 85 percent ($7.92) of the state minimum wage.​

Minimum wage laws vary state to state, but you assume that because 41 states have a minimum wage higher than the federal minimum wage that they therefore have no provisions for a sub-minimum wage based on age. Obviously it is allowed in Washington State. California has a specific provision for its use and it is used. You are obviously mistaken concerning Washington State you are also mistaken concerning California and I really don't want to look up the other 39.

 

[pinqy]

What is a 16 year old, part time fry cook at McDonald's worth?

the same amount as a 45 year married fry cook with 3 kids and a mortgage--minimum wage as long as someone else equally capable is willing to do it at minimum wage

If you are 45, and working part time, as a fry cook, when you have 3 kids and mortgage..... then you are an idiot.

Why? If your spouse earns enough to support, or mostly support the family, any money is "extra" and McDonald'has flexible hours and doesn't require any skills.

You could drive truck, and triple your income.

Only if you get your CDL, which Is an investment you might not want, and the hours and travel can be difficult.

You would mow lawns, and double your income.

which requires a capital investment and is limited to daylight hours.

You could do anything, and increase your income.

perhaps, but would it meet the schedule you want and would it require additional investment (of time or money) and would it be something you want to do?

That's one of the issues with a "living wage:" at part time hours it's not a living wage and most people working minimum wage don't need more.

 

[Skull Pilot]

the same amount as a 45 year married fry cook with 3 kids and a mortgage--minimum wage as long as someone else equally capable is willing to do it at minimum wage

If you are 45, and working part time, as a fry cook, when you have 3 kids and mortgage..... then you are an idiot.

Why? If your spouse earns enough to support, or mostly support the family, any money is "extra" and McDonald'has flexible hours and doesn't require any skills.


Only if you get your CDL, which Is an investment you might not want, and the hours and travel can be difficult.

You would mow lawns, and double your income.

which requires a capital investment and is limited to daylight hours.

You could do anything, and increase your income.

perhaps, but would it meet the schedule you want and would it require additional investment (of time or money) and would it be something you want to do?

That's one of the issues with a "living wage:" at part time hours it's not a living wage and most people working minimum wage don't need more.

It doesn't matter what you want.

If you need more money to support your family you do what you have to to make it happen.

That is what an adult does.

 

[sameech]

It doesn't matter what you want.

If you need more money to support your family you do what you have to to make it happen.

That is what an adult does.

Drug dealing, prostitution, murder for hire?

 

[Skull Pilot]

It doesn't matter what you want.

If you need more money to support your family you do what you have to to make it happen.

That is what an adult does.

Drug dealing, prostitution, murder for hire?

Idiot.

All those things endanger the family you are supposed to be protecting.

 

[sameech]

It doesn't matter what you want.

If you need more money to support your family you do what you have to to make it happen.

That is what an adult does.

Drug dealing, prostitution, murder for hire?

Idiot.

All those things endanger the family you are supposed to be protecting.

So suddenly it is not about getting money for your family, it is about protecting them? Money is money.

BTW, this is the clean debate zone, so way to class the place up.

 

[pinqy]

If you are 45, and working part time, as a fry cook, when you have 3 kids and mortgage..... then you are an idiot.

Why? If your spouse earns enough to support, or mostly support the family, any money is "extra" and McDonald'has flexible hours and doesn't require any skills.


Only if you get your CDL, which Is an investment you might not want, and the hours and travel can be difficult.
which requires a capital investment and is limited to daylight hours.

You could do anything, and increase your income.

perhaps, but would it meet the schedule you want and would it require additional investment (of time or money) and would it be something you want to do?

That's one of the issues with a "living wage:" at part time hours it's not a living wage and most people working minimum wage don't need more.

It doesn't matter what you want.

Of course it does. If you don't want more money, why should an employer be required to pay you more? You take or don't take a job based on what you want.

If you need more money to support your family you do what you have to to make it happen.

Right.

 

[beagle9]

If you are 45, and working part time, as a fry cook, when you have 3 kids and mortgage..... then you are an idiot.

Why? If your spouse earns enough to support, or mostly support the family, any money is "extra" and McDonald'has flexible hours and doesn't require any skills.


Only if you get your CDL, which Is an investment you might not want, and the hours and travel can be difficult.
which requires a capital investment and is limited to daylight hours.

You could do anything, and increase your income.

perhaps, but would it meet the schedule you want and would it require additional investment (of time or money) and would it be something you want to do?

That's one of the issues with a "living wage:" at part time hours it's not a living wage and most people working minimum wage don't need more.

It doesn't matter what you want.

If you need more money to support your family you do what you have to to make it happen.

That is what an adult does.

Yep, and without proper representation, you might just run into some bad situations that will only be there to offer you a job when you are down and out, and they will be more than willing to use you, exploit you, and abuse you while you are in a pickle, but that's all A-ok with yall now isn't it ? I mean if people fall through the cracks, and get abused well that is A-Ok with yall isn't it ?

I mean a man has to do what a man has to do you say, and that is what a wolf in sheeps clothing loves to come walking right on in the door next.

The problem is these days, is that there is so much corruption that people almost have no place to go anymore, and so there you have it so now what ?

 

[beagle9]

I don't believe in raising the minimum wage. I simply believe in a fair days pay for a fair days work.

Sure, it's a good business model. Outsource everything you can and pay your workers as little as possible. Lot's of profit for BUSINESS, not so much gain for America..

Since there is no competition just go down to the port and give a couple desperate people a penny or two and have them work for you. THE WORKERS ARE REPLACEABLE, (R)ight, so treat them and pay them as scum.

Eventually, the workers are going to wise up and demand their worth. History repeats itself.

What is a 16 year old, part time fry cook at McDonald's worth?

Not the federal minimum wage. Did you not know that?

How can you say that about someone that you don't know other than his age or status, when of course you don't know the talents the 16 year old may have altogether within himself ? He might be able to hold down two positions at once, and also help another in the process, but he deserves less than the federal minimum wage you say ? Some of you people are just sick in the heads I think, and your greed is becoming of you. You see, this is how a corporatist thinks, where as he wants everyone in the same category or pay no matter what his talents or qualities are in life, so as I have said early on in this thread look out because the slight of hand is quick, and you might not pick up on these things, but I do.

 

[Zombie_Pundit]

What is a 16 year old, part time fry cook at McDonald's worth?

Not the federal minimum wage. Did you not know that?

How can you say that about someone that you don't know other than his age or status, when of course you don't know the talents the 16 year old may have altogether within himself ? He might be able to hold down two positions at once, and also help another in the process, but he deserves less than the federal minimum wage you say ? Some of you people are just sick in the heads I think, and your greed is becoming of you. You see, this is how a corporatist thinks, where as he wants everyone in the same category or pay no matter what his talents or qualities are in life, so as I have said early on in this thread look out because the slight of hand is quick, and you might not pick up on these things, but I do.

Beagle,
I was not passing judgement on the hypothetical 16-year-old.
I was stating a fact. Federal law does not mandate paying teenage workers in their first 90 days with any one employer the federal minimum wage. There is a separate Youth Minimum Wage codify into federal law. This means, by federal law, an employer can employ a youth worker over a summer and pay them a subminimum wage. In fact, Beagle, there are many exceptions to the federal minimum wage. You may not like these exceptions, but these exceptions exist.

 

[beagle9]

Not the federal minimum wage. Did you not know that?

How can you say that about someone that you don't know other than his age or status, when of course you don't know the talents the 16 year old may have altogether within himself ? He might be able to hold down two positions at once, and also help another in the process, but he deserves less than the federal minimum wage you say ? Some of you people are just sick in the heads I think, and your greed is becoming of you. You see, this is how a corporatist thinks, where as he wants everyone in the same category or pay no matter what his talents or qualities are in life, so as I have said early on in this thread look out because the slight of hand is quick, and you might not pick up on these things, but I do.

Beagle,
I was not passing judgement on the hypothetical 16-year-old.
I was stating a fact. Federal law does not mandate paying teenage workers in their first 90 days with any one employer the federal minimum wage. There is a separate Youth Minimum Wage codify into federal law. This means, by federal law, an employer can employ a youth worker over a summer and pay them a subminimum wage. In fact, Beagle, there are many exceptions to the federal minimum wage. You may not like these exceptions, but these exceptions exist.

Gotcha, I think I may have been directing my thoughts in the sense that this meant something else, but now I see the gest or rather the context of what you were saying this in.