According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour [W: 676]

[Threegoofs]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

That's always my question. If these people aren't earning a living wage, then how are they, er, alive?

Love the strong support for the 'Living on the brink of death wage'.

Maybe that should be a Conservative plank.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.

The first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.

Raising the minimum wage still isn't the same as Marxism or whatever.

 

[upsideguy]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

OK. So, if a family of four has one working parent earning a "living wage" of $15.00 per hour, 40 hours per week ($600wk or $31,200yr) , then if both parents are working then for the family to earn the same living wage, both parents only need to earn $7.50 per hour, 40 hours per week ($600wk or $31,200yr). This $31,200 is actually $6900 more than the poverty level for that family of $24,300 - enough extra to pay for daycare expenses.

Federal Poverty Guidelines - 2016 | Mass Legal Services

What an interesting line of thinking.... except that it is wrong on so many levels. To begin with, as another poster pointed out, most people in this bracket are single earner head of households. Second, it isn't completely additive as their are costs associated with wage earning. So, maybe you can make a case for poverty level under $15/hr, but declaring it as $7.50 is nothing more than numeric masturbation.

 

[upsideguy]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

That's always my question. If these people aren't earning a living wage, then how are they, er, alive?

The social safety net.... aka Welfare for Walmart.

 

[cpwill]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

The social safety net.... aka Welfare for Walmart.

The only way Wal-Mart gets' welfare is through tax breaks. I'm fully in support of a flat tax code so that moneyed interests find it difficult or impossible to pay for politicians to give them a carve-out in the code.


However, if we provide a social safety net for our individual citizens, then that rather means that the wage required to live drops.

 

[cpwill]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

What an interesting line of thinking.... except that it is wrong on so many levels. To begin with, as another poster pointed out, most people in this bracket are single earner head of households.

Who Makes Minimum Wage.

 

[upsideguy]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

The only way Wal-Mart gets' welfare is through tax breaks. I'm fully in support of a flat tax code so that moneyed interests find it difficult or impossible to pay for politicians to give them a carve-out in the code.


However, if we provide a social safety net for our individual citizens, then that rather means that the wage required to live drops.

The fact that the government picks up the tab for health care and food for low wage workers is indeed a subsidy to Walmart. It allows Walmart to continue to hire at minimum to slightly above minimum wage, with the government bridging the gap to actually havinig a "living". That is corporate welfare as Walmart does not have to pay the true cost of labor.

The reason people can live under the living wage is because we have a social safety net to make the difference. The living wage is based on self-sustainment.

 

[Quazimodo]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

Years ago, a guy came into my business and said, " I want a job." I told him to go find one. The next week a guy came in and said, "I want to work." I told him what I could pay him and he accepted the offer. He worked for every penny. If he hadn't, I'd have fired him. He worked his way up and he got pay increases based on his contribution to the company.

I was fair with my employees and my employees were fair with me. We formed an unwritten, unspoken compact, and together we succeeded. They all knew that they were free to find another job and I knew that I could replace them if they left. Nobody was holding anybody hostage. We all played our parts.

Their wages were spent in our community. Their taxes helped our country. They played their roles masterfully and so did I.

Not everybody wants to be a captain. Not everybody wants to own a ship. Not everybody wants to be crew. So, when you find a good captain and a good ship and a good crew, you can believe that your cargo will make it to the next port. It's called trust. If a profit is made, the largest share of the profit goes to the person who takes the greatest risk. On good years, there are bonuses.

A strong work ethic and a belief in capitalism is the best explanation for a successful outcome.

Socialists and fascists and communists don't accept the model I provided above. They believe that everything should be reduced to its lowest common denominator, that everyone should wear the same color cloths and eat the same foods. Their view of equality is that everybody looks, acts, and thinks the same. They believe that the governing body can provide solutions to all human problems and concerns. "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." A redistributive economic system then takes from those who can and will, and gives to those who can't or won't. In a Marxist society, the system takes from those who are forced to work, and gives to those who won't or can't.

So, where do you think the $15.00 per hour wage will come from? If a government employee is guaranteed a hourly minimum wage, the money will come from you, and it will come by force. Your taxes will go up and you quality of life will go down. This system is the system your socialist/communist president advances everyday.

Sadly, there are people, even members here, who believe they deserve a $15.00 an hour minimum wage for doing menial work. Those people are the ones who are taking us to the notorious "tipping point." Once there are enough people who are paid because the government says they must be paid, there will no longer be an incentive to improve one's lot in life.

My little morality play won't end happily. In time, real producers will accept inevitable defeat. There will be no more money to pay the burger flippers and low end gov't. workers. Our once proud moral fabric will become threadbare from constant, unending stress, and as a nation, we will collapse. At that point, global communism will sweep in and do to us exactly what Nikita Khrushchev said would happen back in the 60s, "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you."

Think hard! Before you give away what 400 years of heroic human sacrifice built with nothing else in mind but you and you children, decide once and for all, are you an American or not?

 

[cpwill]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

The fact that the government picks up health care and food for low wage workers is a subsidy to Walmart

.

No, it isn't. If (for some reason) we cut WIC by a third tomorrow, there is no forcing function that would require a minimum wage employer to raise their wage correspondingly for those employees who used WIC.

If anything, by providing entry level jobs, these places are subsidizing the State, who would otherwise have to pay more in been benefits.

The reason people can live under the living wage is because we have a social safety net to make the difference. The living wage is based on self-sustainment.

Then we shouldn't try to fix the minimum wage to the living wage, but rather the safety net to the individual circumstances and individual wage. For example, a 50% negative income tax on all monies not earned below 200% of the FIT, which would adjust for both differing wages and differing family circumstances.



Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

 

[Quazimodo]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

.

No, it isn't. If (for some reason) we cut WIC by a third tomorrow, there is no forcing function that would require a minimum wage employer to raise their wage correspondingly for those employees who used WIC.

If anything, by providing entry level jobs, these places are subsidizing the State, who would otherwise have to pay more in been benefits.



Then we shouldn't try to fix the minimum wage to the living wage, but rather the safety net to the individual circumstances and individual wage. For example, a 50% negative income tax on all monies not earned below 200% of the FIT, which would adjust for both differing wages and differing family circumstances.



Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

How do we absorb the lost revenue?

 

[cpwill]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

How do we absorb the lost revenue?

What lost revenue?

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

 

[Quazimodo]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

What lost revenue?

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

I was looking at the 50% negative income tax. Thanks.

 

[Grand Mal]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

According to this liberal, any thread with the title, "According to liberals..." is bound to be bull****.
It's inevitable, like a law of nature or somesuch.

 

[mmi]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

Socialists and fascists and communists don't accept the model I provided above.

I suppose we're required to somehow tolerate fascists, but I don't see much in yer little parable that would bother socialists a whole lot, and there aren't very many communists.

But the sermon about common denominators, gubmint solving every problem, and a Marxist society is unwarranted.

>>If a government employee … the money will come from you

The minimum wage might go up to $10.10, it's not going to $15 anytime soon. There aren't many gubmint jobs that pay less than ten.

>>people … who believe they deserve a $15.00 an hour minimum wage for doing menial work … are taking us to the notorious "tipping point."

There's not enough political support to enact $15. You can relax.

>>Once there are enough people who are paid because the government says they must be paid, there will no longer be an incentive to improve one's lot in life.

I think a staggered increase to the MW to $10.10 will have a positive impact on the economy. I expect people earning anywhere near that low a wage will continue to struggle just to get by and so won't lose any incentive, and those motivated to earn a middle-class wage will continue to aspire to that achieve that goal.

>>global communism will sweep in and do to us exactly what Nikita Khrushchev said would happen back in the 60s, "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you."

"Bury" is a poor translation, but he did mean that Soviet-style communism would outlast Western capitalism, … and you must have noticed that the USSR ain't been around for a while.

>>are you an American or not?

Yes, but I reject yer view that increasing the MW is another step along a road to some sort of oppressive gubmint and an unmotivated labor force.

 

[Quazimodo]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

I suppose we're required to somehow tolerate fascists, but I don't see much in yer little parable that would bother socialists a whole lot, and there aren't very many communists.

But the sermon about common denominators, gubmint solving every problem, and a Marxist society is unwarranted.

>>If a government employee … the money will come from you

The minimum wage might go up to $10.10, it's not going to $15 anytime soon. There aren't many gubmint jobs that pay less than ten.

>>people … who believe they deserve a $15.00 an hour minimum wage for doing menial work … are taking us to the notorious "tipping point."

There's not enough political support to enact $15. You can relax.

>>Once there are enough people who are paid because the government says they must be paid, there will no longer be an incentive to improve one's lot in life.

I think a staggered increase to the MW to $10.10 will have a positive impact on the economy. I expect people earning anywhere near that low a wage will continue to struggle just to get by and so won't lose any incentive, and those motivated to earn a middle-class wage will continue to aspire to that achieve that goal.

>>global communism will sweep in and do to us exactly what Nikita Khrushchev said would happen back in the 60s, "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you."

"Bury" is a poor translation, but he did mean that Soviet-style communism would outlast Western capitalism, … and you must have noticed that the USSR ain't been around for a while.

>>are you an American or not?

Yes, but I reject yer view that increasing the MW is another step along a road to some sort of oppressive gubmint and an unmotivated labor force.

Good post!

 

[mmi]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

Good post!

I appreciate the positive feedback.

Yer the second "very conservative" member I've encountered recently where I feel there's a possibility of finding common ground. I'd say I don't have a problem with ideology as long as people are reasonable. I value conservatism properly applied.

In regard to yer signature, I can see you have questions about Clinton, but do you think she'll make a good president?

 

[Quazimodo]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

I appreciate the positive feedback.

Yer the second "very conservative" member I've encountered recently where I feel there's a possibility of finding common ground. I'd say I don't have a problem with ideology as long as people are reasonable. I value conservatism properly applied.

In regard to yer signature, I can see you have questions about Clinton, but do you think she'll make a good president?

Thank you for the positive feedback. I value everybody's thoughts and positions. We can disagree without being disagreeable.

Having spent roughly 20-something years being a fairly vigilant observer of all things Clinton, I find her to represent a significant threat to our country. I won't bore you with my laundry list and I hope you will be gentleman enough not to ask, but at her core I find her to be dishonest and disingenuous to such an extreme that even an old cynic like myself just can't push her over the line. From her Rose days to the most recent public e-mail mess, she just really smells bad to me. Add in Benghazi, a fiasco which most people including the parents of our Ambassador find to be despicable, and my only hope for her is that she rides off into the sunset, maybe as soon as next week.

I hope the legal system will ultimately provide remedy for all those she has hurt.

It's getting late over here in EST, so if you'll excuse me, I'm going to toddle off to bed. I hope we get to chat again.

 

[cpwill]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

I was looking at the 50% negative income tax. Thanks.

Ah. Well, negative tax rates are alresy typical due to the receipt of government support in one form or another. When I ran the math, I replaced the federal programs TANF, WIC, UI, SSDI, SNAP, and the EITC, with the NIT, so it was more of a one-for-one swap.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

 

[Moderate Right]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

What an interesting line of thinking.... except that it is wrong on so many levels. To begin with, as another poster pointed out, most people in this bracket are single earner head of households. Second, it isn't completely additive as their are costs associated with wage earning. So, maybe you can make a case for poverty level under $15/hr, but declaring it as $7.50 is nothing more than numeric masturbation.

Is it the fault of the one percent that these poor single parent families only have one parent?

 

[Critter7r]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

I will never understand how the OP continually rails against increasing taxes on the people that can most afford it, but feels it's ok to dictate that the level of income for low-wage earners "is enough".

And, FWIW, I don't feel that raising taxes on those most able to afford it is the method we should be seeking to carry out the whole redistribution of wealth idea, either. Businesses need to come to realize that it's the employees (generally) that make the company what it is. We need a system where more of the profits are directed toward them instead of shareholders.

I'm not intimately-familiar enough with all the processes to lay out a detailed plan to accomplish that end, but I'm aware enough to realize that this constant accumulation of dollars at the top isn't sustainable. SSE proponents continually harp on the fact that we deficit-spend too much and then endorse policies that encourage money to pool at the top without seeing the disconnect they are creating. (or maybe they do see it, but "I'ma get mine ... " keeps them from changing anything.

 

[Critter7r]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

Why should buyers of labor be forced to pay a price for it that caters to those in society who have a tendency to reproduce without a co-parenting partnership?

The buyers of labor should pay as much for labor as the market requires, and for the same reason that the buyers of labor pay as little as the market will allow.

Hint: The reason that labor demands more pay for their work doesn't enter into the discussion. i.e. Labor is demanding more pay. Either the buyers of labor pay it or they don't. Negotiations likely ensue.

 

[Critter7r]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

Liberals demanding $15 per hour as a "living wage" don't account for hours worked in a week, so why should I? Liberals claim that $15 per hour IS a living wage without any stipulation whatsoever on how many hours per week that is. They don't clamor for a higher wage than $15 from McDonalds, just because McDonalds only gives their workers 15-25 hours per week.

Many, many middle class families have TWO working parents in order to make ends meet so why should the poorer be any different? Maybe if the poorer had to have two working parents in order to make ends meet, more families would have two parents.

Stop trying to regulate morality and attempting to punish those whose morality doesn't align with your own.

 

[Moderate Right]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

I will never understand how the OP continually rails against increasing taxes on the people that can most afford it, but feels it's ok to dictate that the level of income for low-wage earners "is enough".

And, FWIW, I don't feel that raising taxes on those most able to afford it is the method we should be seeking to carry out the whole redistribution of wealth idea, either. Businesses need to come to realize that it's the employees (generally) that make the company what it is. We need a system where more of the profits are directed toward them instead of shareholders.

I'm not intimately-familiar enough with all the processes to lay out a detailed plan to accomplish that end, but I'm aware enough to realize that this constant accumulation of dollars at the top isn't sustainable. SSE proponents continually harp on the fact that we deficit-spend too much and then endorse policies that encourage money to pool at the top without seeing the disconnect they are creating. (or maybe they do see it, but "I'ma get mine ... " keeps them from changing anything.

But the huge majority of businesses, which are small businesses, don't have any extra profits to redistribute to the poorer. They have merely found a different way to earn their wages by being the employer rather than the employee. This is what I mean by attacking all businesses just because of the excesses of the one percent. In fact, the truth is that most of the one percent are actually paying higher wages than Joe Shmoe business owner. You're hurting the wrong people.

 

[Moderate Right]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

Stop trying to regulate morality and attempting to punish those whose morality doesn't align with your own.

Are you kidding me? Who is it that wants to regulate the morality of those one percent who they claim exploit the 99%?

 

[Critter7r]

Re: According To Liberals The Living Wage Should Be $7.50 Per Hour

Are you kidding me? Who is it that wants to regulate the morality of those one percent who they claim exploit the 99%?

Nobody is trying to regulate their morality. We just want them to pay their workers more. No morality play there.