To those saying flipping burgers or dunking fries deserves 15.00 per hour...

[JoeB131]

Why do you keep making welfare an employer problem instead of a government problem? Employers don't put people on welfare--government puts people on welfare. So blame the government for it.

No, Employers do put people on welfare.

Let's look at it this way. Our GDP is bout 17 Trillion. If you divided that evenly across the 170 million in the workforce, everyone would earn six figures, have a comfortable life and never, ever need to so on welfare.

Instead, we have the top 1% who have 43% of the wealth and the top 20% who have 87% of the wealth.

The ironic thing is you whine about the pittance we pay poor people to not riot, but don't complain about the 40 million retired people living high on the hog with Social Security and Medicare.

But that's white people welfare.

 

[JoeB131]

They left the way they came in. So why minimum wage jobs? Because they both smoked pot and lower paying jobs don't drug test like better paying ones. They are probably doing the same today.

It was always my hope for them that they'd realize how much life they are giving up to smoke grass, quit, and try to find better paying futuristic jobs.

If the Democrats took over and increased the federal MW pay to $15.00 an hour, my former tenants may never see the light for better paying jobs. They may work those fast food jobs into their 30's, 40's or even 50's before realizing how they wasted their lives. And of course then, it's way too late to start a career.

Oh, noes, they were smoking Pot!!!! Didn't they see Reefer Madness!

 

[Humorme]

. Ray, Ray, Ray... Your right no one is forced, but what can be done (is that very smart people can read a situation of an employee), and it can be capitalized upon in that situation by using it to keep the person right where they want the person to be, and to work to lesson the chances of opportunity for that person.. This is usually done in order to keep the person working without an ability to freely choose to move on, and especially if there is no viable options to become better educated due to time constraints that are caused by working 14 hours a day in some cases or to have better financial circumstances come their way all due to (fair treatment), in which would release them being there by design if was the case in which they couldn't see so easily..

I don't buy into anything you said. I've never seen it happen and I never heard of anybody who knows of it happening. The only control my employer has over me is what time to come in and how many days I work. That's it. it's the same way with every working person.

You are foolish. Not everyone has the same emotional, intellectual or educational capabilities. Not everyone has the same level of responsibility. But, I'm finished debating the point. If you don't understand it, then you are blindly following fools that have talking points and no real solution.

No, I don't understand it because I don't believe other than a tiny fraction have these disabilities you keep bringing up. I believe that only around 3% of our workforce are paid minimum wage. Out of that small percentage, most are high school or college kids, stay at home wives, or retirees just looking to make extra money. I believe that mosts people making minimum wage today will not be making minimum wage next year provided they stay with the same company and do a good job.

People with "true" disabilities are taken care of by our social programs. Hell......people that can still work full-time get on those very same social programs.

First, I have an apology to make.

I use the term "minimum wage," but for purists (and I'd bet my last dollar you are one), the minimum wage is the least amount of money you can pay to an employee under federal law.

For me anything below poverty level is the minimum wage as even places like MickeyDs pay more than the federal minimum wage.

Be that as it may, you can talk theory all day long, but I grew up in this kind of atmosphere until I ran away from home and made a better life for myself. And today, I have a wife whose son is a product of our generation.

He was neglected by his father and basically (for all intents) all but abandoned. And now, no amount of punishment could reverse his lot in life. I happen to know that he is not an anomaly, but a fairly representative example of what our generation has turned out.

If I had my way, many parents would be in prison for abuse. A lifetime of mollycoddling and enabling their kids has led to the worse form of human beings on the face of the earth. In any event, you cannot punish them into maturity and good choices. You cannot suppress wages in order to pander to those with more money than common sense.

We will either look for a viable solution or the socialists will take over.

So how would an increase in minimum wage help your wife's son?

Nothing personal, but you don't have the experience you claim. Insofar as the temp agency issue you described, that is not true. It may have happened in one or two instances, but I've spent decades on all sides of that issue. There are many companies that the only way in the door is through the door to some companies is via a temp agency. Sometimes it takes a year or more, so you are actually an indentured servant (aka s

. Ray, Ray, Ray... Your right no one is forced, but what can be done (is that very smart people can read a situation of an employee), and it can be capitalized upon in that situation by using it to keep the person right where they want the person to be, and to work to lesson the chances of opportunity for that person.. This is usually done in order to keep the person working without an ability to freely choose to move on, and especially if there is no viable options to become better educated due to time constraints that are caused by working 14 hours a day in some cases or to have better financial circumstances come their way all due to (fair treatment), in which would release them being there by design if was the case in which they couldn't see so easily..

I don't buy into anything you said. I've never seen it happen and I never heard of anybody who knows of it happening. The only control my employer has over me is what time to come in and how many days I work. That's it. it's the same way with every working person.

You are foolish. Not everyone has the same emotional, intellectual or educational capabilities. Not everyone has the same level of responsibility. But, I'm finished debating the point. If you don't understand it, then you are blindly following fools that have talking points and no real solution.

No, I don't understand it because I don't believe other than a tiny fraction have these disabilities you keep bringing up. I believe that only around 3% of our workforce are paid minimum wage. Out of that small percentage, most are high school or college kids, stay at home wives, or retirees just looking to make extra money. I believe that mosts people making minimum wage today will not be making minimum wage next year provided they stay with the same company and do a good job.

People with "true" disabilities are taken care of by our social programs. Hell......people that can still work full-time get on those very same social programs.

First, I have an apology to make.

I use the term "minimum wage," but for purists (and I'd bet my last dollar you are one), the minimum wage is the least amount of money you can pay to an employee under federal law.

For me anything below poverty level is the minimum wage as even places like MickeyDs pay more than the federal minimum wage.

Be that as it may, you can talk theory all day long, but I grew up in this kind of atmosphere until I ran away from home and made a better life for myself. And today, I have a wife whose son is a product of our generation.

He was neglected by his father and basically (for all intents) all but abandoned. And now, no amount of punishment could reverse his lot in life. I happen to know that he is not an anomaly, but a fairly representative example of what our generation has turned out.

If I had my way, many parents would be in prison for abuse. A lifetime of mollycoddling and enabling their kids has led to the worse form of human beings on the face of the earth. In any event, you cannot punish them into maturity and good choices. You cannot suppress wages in order to pander to those with more money than common sense.

We will either look for a viable solution or the socialists will take over.

So how would an increase in minimum wage help your wife's son?

Nothing personal, but I don’t think you are paying enough attention to this thread to be engaged in it.



First, before I respond to what you asked me, you made some claims about temp workers that I know to be false.



In my situation I have had several decades experience with temp agencies from every angle: working for the temp agency, hiring people through them, and even working in them. In some companies the only way in is via a temp agency which means you sell yourself into indentured servitude and maybe you do or maybe you do not get the job.



In many instances, a company will tell you that if you work hard, the job will become permanent. So, the temps work long hours for low pay and when the company gets caught up, the temps get laid off, the company hires another batch in a few weeks and the charade keeps going on and on.



Again, for the umpteenth time, in the case of my wife’s son, the minimum wage does not apply. He. Like many felons, may never see the inside of a prison. He, like many felons, live off the system. He, like many felons, will never be rehabilitated.



AND I DO NOT SUPPORT ANY MINIMUM WAGE OF ANY KIND. THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT THE EMPLOYER PAYS IS BETWEEN THE EMPLOYER AND THE EMPLOYEE.



My ideas are ways to incentivize, not force employers to pay decent wages. At all times, under my proposals, it is the choice of the employer to utilize tax incentives and pay more in wages / less in taxes OR low wages / higher taxes. The concept is, when companies pay poverty level wages, the people are taxed and so is the employer since the difference between poverty level and living comes from the government… which is we, the people, which in turn is taxes (corporate and personal.)

Sorry about the double post but it was a computer glitch and now edit won't allow a correction.

 

[Humorme]

My field of work is in law. So, let me assure you, the Brown decision did not over-turn Dred Scott:

What Supreme Court case overturned Dred Scott vs. Sandford? | eNotes

Did the Fourteenth Amendment overturn the Dred Scott case

The point I was making is that the law is seldom what you think it is and can easily be overturned by the Courts.

Fine, talk to yourself because real lawyers, judges and our citizens know it did.

Dred Scott: Separate but equal is Constitutional.

Brown vs Board of Education Separate but equal is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Now continue talking to yourself or splitting hairs or whatever it is you like to do to yourself.

I have this discussion with law professors and constitutional practitioners on a regular basis. Maybe you'd like to be a guest at one of the meetings?

 

[Humorme]

Why do you keep making welfare an employer problem instead of a government problem? Employers don't put people on welfare--government puts people on welfare. So blame the government for it.

No, Employers do put people on welfare.

Let's look at it this way. Our GDP is bout 17 Trillion. If you divided that evenly across the 170 million in the workforce, everyone would earn six figures, have a comfortable life and never, ever need to so on welfare.

Instead, we have the top 1% who have 43% of the wealth and the top 20% who have 87% of the wealth.

The ironic thing is you whine about the pittance we pay poor people to not riot, but don't complain about the 40 million retired people living high on the hog with Social Security and Medicare.

But that's white people welfare.

I was with you until that part about Socialist Security and Medicare. That amount of money is a pittance and you are not even guaranteed the principal amount back from Uncle Scam once you retire. IIRC Socialist Security tops out at $1300 a month and they still tax it.

 

[Humorme]

I will keep repeating this for you. I don't know what point you're trying to make. So, I will not fathom an answer. If you're asking what a poor child's chances are, they are still not equal to the rich kid's AND they have the disadvantage of not having been reared to set priorities.

You, answering my question, which is quite simple and you have provided nothing to date is quite simple, shall we try again? If you don't know, just say you have no clue, admit to being ignorant about a subject you profess to know thoroughly, but you are ignorant about the topic.

Once again....

Why are you afraid to answer my simple question? For your convenience, allow me to repost here:

Other than money, what is the single most important difference between a child being raised in poverty and a child being raised above the poverty level?

Are you an idiot? I've answered this many many times. You want people to understand what you're getting at without clarifying your position. I'm not a freaking mind reader.

I was raised for most of my young life below the poverty level. Nobody could give you the right answer unless they had spent some of their time in both scenarios.

Generally though, poor kids are subjected to piss poor role models to learn from and they learn all the wrong ways of doing things.

 

[Humorme]

Dude, get a life. This thread is about whether or not low end workers deserve a realistic wage.

The rest of the shit that you allude to is off topic, personal, and irrelevant. Grow up, get a life, and leave me alone. I gave you the opportunity to take this up in PM and you didn't. Give it a rest now.

You want to showboat and prove how many misguided National Socialists back your warped version of "conservatism" while lying to the posters here and trying to badger me. This is not the place nor the proper thread for it.

So, excuse the Hell out of me while I ignore you.

You made an accusation I voted for Hillary and I responded by saying I didn’t. Then you claim I am always insulting, and called me a name. Then you claimed I started the insults and when I asked for proof you now claim I am off topic? Lol!

I made the claim because you made an idiotic, chickenshit, bogus claim that I was a lefty. I took it to PM. Got a problem with me? Take it up in PM.

I don’t PM people, if you can’t tell it out here then it doesn’t need to be said. Again more personal insults. This is a zone 2 thread you are violating the TOS.

And you, sir, began that violation by making this a series of personal insults. Get a life; get over it.

Prove it!

Dude, get a life. This thread is about whether or not low end workers deserve a realistic wage.

The rest of the shit that you allude to is off topic, personal, and irrelevant. Grow up, get a life, and leave me alone. I gave you the opportunity to take this up in PM and you didn't. Give it a rest now.

You want to showboat and prove how many misguided National Socialists back your warped version of "conservatism" while lying to the posters here and trying to badger me. This is not the place nor the proper thread for it.

So, excuse the Hell out of me while I ignore you.

You made an accusation I voted for Hillary and I responded by saying I didn’t. Then you claim I am always insulting, and called me a name. Then you claimed I started the insults and when I asked for proof you now claim I am off topic? Lol!

I made the claim because you made an idiotic, chickenshit, bogus claim that I was a lefty. I took it to PM. Got a problem with me? Take it up in PM.

I don’t PM people, if you can’t tell it out here then it doesn’t need to be said. Again more personal insults. This is a zone 2 thread you are violating the TOS.

And you, sir, began that violation by making this a series of personal insults. Get a life; get over it.

Prove it!

Okay. Fine. Just read your posts on this thread.

 

[Papageorgio]

You made an accusation I voted for Hillary and I responded by saying I didn’t. Then you claim I am always insulting, and called me a name. Then you claimed I started the insults and when I asked for proof you now claim I am off topic? Lol!

I made the claim because you made an idiotic, chickenshit, bogus claim that I was a lefty. I took it to PM. Got a problem with me? Take it up in PM.

I don’t PM people, if you can’t tell it out here then it doesn’t need to be said. Again more personal insults. This is a zone 2 thread you are violating the TOS.

And you, sir, began that violation by making this a series of personal insults. Get a life; get over it.

Prove it!

You made an accusation I voted for Hillary and I responded by saying I didn’t. Then you claim I am always insulting, and called me a name. Then you claimed I started the insults and when I asked for proof you now claim I am off topic? Lol!

I made the claim because you made an idiotic, chickenshit, bogus claim that I was a lefty. I took it to PM. Got a problem with me? Take it up in PM.

I don’t PM people, if you can’t tell it out here then it doesn’t need to be said. Again more personal insults. This is a zone 2 thread you are violating the TOS.

And you, sir, began that violation by making this a series of personal insults. Get a life; get over it.

Prove it!

Okay. Fine. Just read your posts on this thread.

I did,

 

[Liquid Reigns]

Automation may soon render much of them obsolete.
McDonald's hits all-time high as Wall Street cheers replacement of cashiers with kiosks

Have you ever gone to a place with these?

The only place I've seen that has tried to use these is Panera Bread. The only time people use these is if there is a long line at the counter. People would still rather give their order to a person.

Similarly, Jewel Osco tried to use self-checkout for a while. Then they realized they were losing too much money when people "neglected" to scan things.

Yes I have, we have a number of fast food places/home improvement/retail stores that have these kiosks/self checkouts in them. Quite simple to use, one employee overseeing the checkouts verse 4 that would have been required to man the registers.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Why do you keep making welfare an employer problem instead of a government problem? Employers don't put people on welfare--government puts people on welfare. So blame the government for it.

No, Employers do put people on welfare.

Let's look at it this way. Our GDP is bout 17 Trillion. If you divided that evenly across the 170 million in the workforce, everyone would earn six figures, have a comfortable life and never, ever need to so on welfare.

Instead, we have the top 1% who have 43% of the wealth and the top 20% who have 87% of the wealth.

The ironic thing is you whine about the pittance we pay poor people to not riot, but don't complain about the 40 million retired people living high on the hog with Social Security and Medicare.

But that's white people welfare.

You do know that the top 1% don't get their money from a paycheck don't you?

And I hate to tell you this but not all skills are equal. Putting burgers and fires into paper bags is not a skill that is worth 6 figures

 

[Liquid Reigns]

I have this discussion with law professors and constitutional practitioners on a regular basis. Maybe you'd like to be a guest at one of the meetings?

LMFAO No you don't. Your Sovereign Citizen/Militia/Tax Protest buddies are not law professors nor constitutional practitioners. You do not have a law degree, and you never worked in "law". Being the Secretary of a White Nationalist group that was the liaison between Richard Barret (the White Nationalist attorney and your White Nationalist group) where Barret won your group 2 freedom of speech cases, doesn't constitute you as having "law" experience. Being a witness in a child custody case doesn't constitute you as having "law" experience. Defending yourself in a domestic abuse case doesn't constitute you as having "law" experience.

Now its funny how real law professors and actual law practitioners all disagree with your claim about Dred Scott. Brown did overturn exactly what Markle stated. The 1866 CRA and the 14A nullified the rest of the Dred Scott decision.

 

[Papageorgio]

Automation may soon render much of them obsolete.
McDonald's hits all-time high as Wall Street cheers replacement of cashiers with kiosks

Have you ever gone to a place with these?

The only place I've seen that has tried to use these is Panera Bread. The only time people use these is if there is a long line at the counter. People would still rather give their order to a person.

Similarly, Jewel Osco tried to use self-checkout for a while. Then they realized they were losing too much money when people "neglected" to scan things.

Yes I have, we have a number of fast food places/home improvement/retail stores that have these kiosks/self checkouts in them. Quite simple to use, one employee overseeing the checkouts verse 4 that would have been required to man the registers.

I think it is the way of the future and we will continue to see more and more kiosks in many industries. I also think Joe is very much correct in that most people would rather deal with another person, with face to face interaction. However as the younger generation is growing, they are more apt to order over the internet, go through self check out lines and order through a kiosk. It will take time but I remember how we were told ATM machines would fail because people wouldn't trust the machine to take a deposit or give them the right amount of cash, now we have businesses depositing thousands of dollars through ATM machines.

So I believe these jobs are going away.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Automation may soon render much of them obsolete.
McDonald's hits all-time high as Wall Street cheers replacement of cashiers with kiosks

Have you ever gone to a place with these?

The only place I've seen that has tried to use these is Panera Bread. The only time people use these is if there is a long line at the counter. People would still rather give their order to a person.

Similarly, Jewel Osco tried to use self-checkout for a while. Then they realized they were losing too much money when people "neglected" to scan things.

Yes I have, we have a number of fast food places/home improvement/retail stores that have these kiosks/self checkouts in them. Quite simple to use, one employee overseeing the checkouts verse 4 that would have been required to man the registers.

I think it is the way of the future and we will continue to see more and more kiosks in many industries. I also think Joe is very much correct in that most people would rather deal with another person, with face to face interaction. However as the younger generation is growing, they are more apt to order over the internet, go through self check out lines and order through a kiosk. It will take time but I remember how we were told ATM machines would fail because people wouldn't trust the machine to take a deposit or give them the right amount of cash, now we have businesses depositing thousands of dollars through ATM machines.

So I believe these jobs are going away.

Personally I can't wait for the stores Amazon is working on where you pick up all your shit and when you place it in the cart the totals are all added up and when you leave the store your credit card gets charged.

That is the future. There is no need to take all your shit up to a cashier.

How Amazon Plans to Totally Reinvent Grocery Shopping

 

[Liquid Reigns]

Automation may soon render much of them obsolete.
McDonald's hits all-time high as Wall Street cheers replacement of cashiers with kiosks

Have you ever gone to a place with these?

The only place I've seen that has tried to use these is Panera Bread. The only time people use these is if there is a long line at the counter. People would still rather give their order to a person.

Similarly, Jewel Osco tried to use self-checkout for a while. Then they realized they were losing too much money when people "neglected" to scan things.

Yes I have, we have a number of fast food places/home improvement/retail stores that have these kiosks/self checkouts in them. Quite simple to use, one employee overseeing the checkouts verse 4 that would have been required to man the registers.

I think it is the way of the future and we will continue to see more and more kiosks in many industries. I also think Joe is very much correct in that most people would rather deal with another person, with face to face interaction. However as the younger generation is growing, they are more apt to order over the internet, go through self check out lines and order through a kiosk. It will take time but I remember how we were told ATM machines would fail because people wouldn't trust the machine to take a deposit or give them the right amount of cash, now we have businesses depositing thousands of dollars through ATM machines.

So I believe these jobs are going away.

I deposit business checks with a simple picture of them through my phone, credit cards get swiped through a phone attachment. I don't even have to go to the bank unless I need cash, which is rarely.

I agree, some people still like the interaction, but it is going away, and its doing it without much notice or fan fare anymore.

 

[Papageorgio]

Automation may soon render much of them obsolete.
McDonald's hits all-time high as Wall Street cheers replacement of cashiers with kiosks

Have you ever gone to a place with these?

The only place I've seen that has tried to use these is Panera Bread. The only time people use these is if there is a long line at the counter. People would still rather give their order to a person.

Similarly, Jewel Osco tried to use self-checkout for a while. Then they realized they were losing too much money when people "neglected" to scan things.

Yes I have, we have a number of fast food places/home improvement/retail stores that have these kiosks/self checkouts in them. Quite simple to use, one employee overseeing the checkouts verse 4 that would have been required to man the registers.

I think it is the way of the future and we will continue to see more and more kiosks in many industries. I also think Joe is very much correct in that most people would rather deal with another person, with face to face interaction. However as the younger generation is growing, they are more apt to order over the internet, go through self check out lines and order through a kiosk. It will take time but I remember how we were told ATM machines would fail because people wouldn't trust the machine to take a deposit or give them the right amount of cash, now we have businesses depositing thousands of dollars through ATM machines.

So I believe these jobs are going away.

Personally I can't wait for the stores Amazon is working on where you pick up all your shit and when you place it in the cart the totals are all added up and when you leave the store your credit card gets charged.

That is the future. There is no need to take all your shit up to a cashier.

How Amazon Plans to Totally Reinvent Grocery Shopping

My wife orders almost everything through Amazon, I am still a little resistance because I like to see things physically, and then want everything now.

 

[Papageorgio]

Automation may soon render much of them obsolete.
McDonald's hits all-time high as Wall Street cheers replacement of cashiers with kiosks

Have you ever gone to a place with these?

The only place I've seen that has tried to use these is Panera Bread. The only time people use these is if there is a long line at the counter. People would still rather give their order to a person.

Similarly, Jewel Osco tried to use self-checkout for a while. Then they realized they were losing too much money when people "neglected" to scan things.

Yes I have, we have a number of fast food places/home improvement/retail stores that have these kiosks/self checkouts in them. Quite simple to use, one employee overseeing the checkouts verse 4 that would have been required to man the registers.

I think it is the way of the future and we will continue to see more and more kiosks in many industries. I also think Joe is very much correct in that most people would rather deal with another person, with face to face interaction. However as the younger generation is growing, they are more apt to order over the internet, go through self check out lines and order through a kiosk. It will take time but I remember how we were told ATM machines would fail because people wouldn't trust the machine to take a deposit or give them the right amount of cash, now we have businesses depositing thousands of dollars through ATM machines.

So I believe these jobs are going away.

I deposit business checks with a simple picture of them through my phone, credit cards get swiped through a phone attachment. I don't even have to go to the bank unless I need cash, which is rarely.

I agree, some people still like the interaction, but it is going away, and its doing it without much notice or fan fare anymore.

I agree, I take pictures of checks and deposit them through my phone. You are right though very little fanfare.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Automation may soon render much of them obsolete.
McDonald's hits all-time high as Wall Street cheers replacement of cashiers with kiosks

Have you ever gone to a place with these?

The only place I've seen that has tried to use these is Panera Bread. The only time people use these is if there is a long line at the counter. People would still rather give their order to a person.

Similarly, Jewel Osco tried to use self-checkout for a while. Then they realized they were losing too much money when people "neglected" to scan things.

Yes I have, we have a number of fast food places/home improvement/retail stores that have these kiosks/self checkouts in them. Quite simple to use, one employee overseeing the checkouts verse 4 that would have been required to man the registers.

I think it is the way of the future and we will continue to see more and more kiosks in many industries. I also think Joe is very much correct in that most people would rather deal with another person, with face to face interaction. However as the younger generation is growing, they are more apt to order over the internet, go through self check out lines and order through a kiosk. It will take time but I remember how we were told ATM machines would fail because people wouldn't trust the machine to take a deposit or give them the right amount of cash, now we have businesses depositing thousands of dollars through ATM machines.

So I believe these jobs are going away.

Personally I can't wait for the stores Amazon is working on where you pick up all your shit and when you place it in the cart the totals are all added up and when you leave the store your credit card gets charged.

That is the future. There is no need to take all your shit up to a cashier.

How Amazon Plans to Totally Reinvent Grocery Shopping

My wife orders almost everything through Amazon, I am still a little resistance because I like to see things physically, and then want everything now.

Free 2 day shipping hassle free returns and cheap next day if I really want it. All far better than schlepping to the stores IMO

 

[flacaltenn]

I came onto this thread to discuss the indefensible attitude that some people have toward paying their employees a realistic wage. I dare not say fair wage, minimum wage, and am even cautious about saying livable wage.

This issue is not about right versus left; it is about right versus wrong. When we have poseurs wanting to get personal, but lacking the brains to have a civil discussion nor the balls to back up their bloviating bullshit, then the conversation must be considered over.

Oh, the discussion aint' over yet. A rational response to your "proposal" which you THINK should be an obvious solution to safety nets and welfare is that --- making folks COMFORTABLE in endangered menial jobs is actually immoral and has some very obvious NEGATIVE consequences to the long term welfare of the people involved in your altruistic spending of other people's money..

It's immoral, because you are simply promoting THE JOB and not THE PERSON. By making them comfortable in jobs subject to extinction thru technology, automation or transformation to the web. The focus should be on WHO is ELIGIBLE for inflated wage jobs at the very bottom of the work force. IMO -- only folks who are currently pursuing continuing or higher education should be eligible for min wage jobs. With some exceptions for seniors and the mentally challenged. THAT WAY -- they have a trajectory in the workforce pyramid. A GED would qualify. As would vocational training or comm. College.

Lots of unintended SEVERE negative consequences to promoting jobs to "living wage". Inner city drop-out rates are embarrassing and atrocious. Most of the kids want OUT of their crappy home life and to leave abusive situations. If you dangle $15/hr to flip burgers in front of them -- you're dooming MORE OF THEM to a life of disenfranchisement from market labor. Schools wouldn't be able to KEEP them inside their doors.

That's not progress on "ending slavery".. That's a boat ride directly into slavery. Although I dread using your slavery analogy at all.

. You seem to be of the impression that giving workers a cost of living wage somehow will destroy them, but is that a realistic way of looking at what would actually happen or is it just a form of protectionism or made up excuses in order to stop the bottom from having any increases at all, and especially while stuck in a job or circumstance in their life that doesn't allow them to leave that job. ?? Is this all due to the circumstances that might be beyond ones control in their special set of circumstances yet they are punished for their circumstances in life or exploited for them ?? At what point does their work ethic and etc. play a part ??

I told you WHY a living wage is NOT an efficient substitute for welfare and safety nets. I was ULTRA clear about those points. It's not in any way "an excuse". It's how things work.

I also told you the horrendous consequences of TRYING to stem the awful HS rates while dangling a $15/hr wage in front of them. There are MANY awful side efffects that haven't hit the common man discussions of this topic.

Break-dancing or gang-banging thru HS is not ME exploiting their bad decisions. I offered a new definition of Min Wage job that REQUIRES continuing education of some type. I also noted that the Public Schools have literally PURGED all the vocational, internship training as well as Arts and Music. This also has bearing on RETAINING students thru graduation. It's the bare minimum and going barer all the time. Making GETTING your GED a CONDITION of Min Wage employment does something about this..

 

[flacaltenn]

STill -- that was a better solution than taking on a mountain of debt thru student loans. You did the right thing. MAYBE could have reduced the pain by taking the 1st 2 years at a Comm College. I took freshman year at a Comm College and continued in academics for 5 more years at full colleges of my choice.. No academic advantage in the 1st 2 years of college paying PREMIUM prices for the standard trivial freshman/soph stuff.

What about the OTHER students buying your service? They are ones that have to subsidize jobs that are value-warped and inflated by "living wage".

My point was, 30 years ago what I did was actually an option. Today it isn't, really.

Tuition has skyrocketed, Minimum Wage hasn't kept up with inflation.

Then go to a 2 year school.. They focus on job placement. In Tenn -- we just made 2 year degrees FREE for anybody that maintains a B avg. Only states that aren't drowning in debt can do that.

You can leverage that 2 year degree in Law Enforcement, Medicine, Legal Aide work. Probably trains for 40% or more of the available jobs and positions.

You can ALWAYS go back to school. In fact, your employer might HELP with that when you are a valued employee.

 

[JoeB131]

I was with you until that part about Socialist Security and Medicare. That amount of money is a pittance and you are not even guaranteed the principal amount back from Uncle Scam once you retire. IIRC Socialist Security tops out at $1300 a month and they still tax it.

I was referring to it as a part of the budget, NOT as what an individual gets.