McConnell's Legislative Graveyard Continues

[Deuce]

Politics is the art of the possible, Deuce. If you put together a bill that is just pretty much your dream list, then don't be surprised when everyone who doesn't share your dreams doesn't automatically jump on board. If you don't have the votes, then you've got to be willing to reach out and try to incorporate some of the things the other side wants as well.

Universal healthcare is a tough nut to crack, let's face it. We have been looking at different ways of getting there since Truman was President... I'm thinking it's still a ways off yet.

What "the other side wants as well" is NOT universal healthcare, though. That's not a compromise, that's just not doing the thing you want to do.

So, your solution to Democrats not getting anything useful done is to just not attempt anything useful. Sorry, not buying it. We tried this dumb right wing compromise, it's called the Affordable Care Act and Republicans STILL VOTED AGAINST IT EN MASSE. Despite their propaganda, this wasn't a radical leftist socialist bill. This was a giant handout to insurance companies and it was mostly written by the insurance industry. Republicans whined about being cut out of the process and yet they had more than a hundred different amendments added to the bill. They lie about just about everything, so what's the point of attempting compromise?

$15/hour minimum wage? Hell, if I was in the Senate, you wouldn't even get me to vote for that. My benchmark is whatever it takes a single parent working full time with two kids to hit the poverty line. Last time I ran the numbers, that was about $10.40 or so an hour... so I'd go to $11/hour, annually indexed to the poverty line. I think you could round up enough Republican votes with that kind of a proposal.

People who think $15/hour is some exorbitant amount aren't worth talking to about this because they're just out of touch with reality. The American poverty line is absurdly defined. $15/hour is the compromise position. Workers are more productive than ever, if worker pay had kept up with productivity in America the pay would be over $20, not $10.

And no, actually, you can't round up enough Republican votes with that kind of proposal. They already tried and Republicans already shot it down. Only a handful ever expressed support. Edit: Quick google search finds two. Romney and Cotton.

 

[Eriech]

If every single republican votes no and every single democrat votes yes, the Democrats win. So yeah...it's the fault of two dems.

Or to the credit of 2 Democrats.

Pelosi and her Democrat majority is a huge threat to America. She will be gone soon.

 

[Cordelier]

What "the other side wants as well" is NOT universal healthcare, though. That's not a compromise, that's just not doing the thing you want to do.

So, your solution to Democrats not getting anything useful done is to just not attempt anything useful. Sorry, not buying it. We tried this dumb right wing compromise, it's called the Affordable Care Act and Republicans STILL VOTED AGAINST IT EN MASSE. Despite their propaganda, this wasn't a radical leftist socialist bill. This was a giant handout to insurance companies and it was mostly written by the insurance industry. Republicans whined about being cut out of the process and yet they had more than a hundred different amendments added to the bill. They lie about just about everything, so what's the point of attempting compromise?



People who think $15/hour is some exorbitant amount aren't worth talking to about this because they're just out of touch with reality. The American poverty line is absurdly defined. $15/hour is the compromise position. Workers are more productive than ever, if worker pay had kept up with productivity in America the pay would be over $20, not $10.

And no, actually, you can't round up enough Republican votes with that kind of proposal. They already tried and Republicans already shot it down. Only a handful ever expressed support. Edit: Quick google search finds two. Romney and Cotton.

Minimum wage isn't about productivity, Deuce. It's what you pay someone because you can't pay them any less. When you get to that point, it's more about principle than economics. My principle is that nobody who works a full time job and has a couple of kids should be living in poverty. But you still get to that line well-short of $15... and no matter how you cut it, $11 is still a major improvement over $7.50.

You ask what the point of compromise is? It's to get things done. It's either that or a dictatorship. Your choice. But I'll tell you this... we're never going to get anything done by just butting our heads together and hoping to demolish the other side come election time. That's the definition of insanity... keep doing the same thing and expecting different results. It's just not going to happen. The whole country is so locked into it's own points of view that the only way we're going to make any headway at all is at the margins... it's by being flexible enough to sit down with the people you disagree with and try to hammer out enough support to come to a deal.

 

[Deuce]

Minimum wage isn't about productivity, Deuce. It's what you pay someone because you can't pay them any less. When you get to that point, it's more about principle than economics. My principle is that nobody who works a full time job and has a couple of kids should be living in poverty. But you still get to that line well-short of $15... and no matter how you cut it, $11 is still a major improvement over $7.50.

Someone making $11/hour with two children is still living in poverty.

Let's take your single parent minimum wage example. Traditional advice is for housing to be no more than 30% of your income, right? 40 hours a week x 52 weeks a year x $11/hour is $22,880, just over that FPL line. 30% of that is $6,864/year or $572/month.

According to rent.com, $572/month pays rent on a two bedroom apartment in zero cities in the United States. It doesn't even pay for a studio apartment in Baton Rouge, LA, the cheapest city in the country. And let's not pretend a family of three living in a studio apartment is reasonable. Average 2BR rent is cheapest in Grand Forks, ND, at $890/month, and we're well shy of that.

https://www.rent.com/research/cheapest-rent-in-the-us/

You ask what the point of compromise is? It's to get things done.

Except, no, nothing actually gets done. Where have you been for the last fifteen years?

 

[Cope]

In 2019, the House passed 400 bills but Trump and the Republicans in the Senate ignored most of them. It was clear that the House continued to care about passing legislation that would help the nation but when it reached McConnell and Trump, all of that got buried.



Since Biden took office and the Democrats have been in control of the House and semi-control of the Senate, the roar about the "Democrats are failing at doing their jobs" has been "the thing" circulating all around. Even many Democrats are saying "we are failing". Nonetheless, the situation is not as simple as the media and the parties are saying. The reality is that McConnell is still speaker of the Senate and with there being a 50/50 split between Democrats and Republicans and Manchin and Synema (Democrats that have consistently been leaning to the Republican side), the Senate continues to be a graveyard for passage of bills to help the American public;.

and yet, the graveyard continues:



It is evident that the Republicans continue to be the DeFacto "ruling party" as nothing can actually get done if McConnell does not agree and convincing McConnell to go along with anything the Democrats propose, is an impossibility.

I think McConnell has to go before this country gets anything done, or at least anything that helps the American people and not only the pocketbook of the rich people.

Aren't we all glad that we will forever be on daylights savings though??!

 

[Cope]

The moral of the story is that supermajorities are going to be required to pass legislation. As long as the filibuster is in play simple majorities are not going to mean squat.

Honestly, that is a benefit.

NO legislation should pass that doesn't DIRECTLY or INDIRECTLY help a good majority of Americans.

 

[Cope]

Someone making $11/hour with two children is still living in poverty.

Minimum wage laws aren't meant for a single supporter to raise a family. I suggest to them to not have children and/or add another income producer to the family dynamic.

Except, no, nothing actually gets done. Where have you been for the last fifteen years?

 

[Cordelier]

Someone making $11/hour with two children is still living in poverty.


Except, no, nothing actually gets done. Where have you been for the last fifteen years?

Well, I'd say they're pretty well-off compared with someone making $7.50/hour with two children, wouldn't you?

I've been watching the last 15 years.... and for the 15 before that. I've seen the system work and I've seen it not work. And I've got to say, I haven't been much-impressed by either side for the last 15 years. It's been a steady diatribe of partisan cartoonishness from the Democrats and Republicans alike. Enough is enough... it's about time the adults on both sides started taking control again.

 

[Deuce]

Minimum wage laws aren't meant for a single supporter to raise a family. I suggest to them to not have children and/or add another income producer to the family dynamic.

They are explicitly meant to be a living wage, claims to the contrary are propaganda.

Besides, the poster I am talking to explicitly chose this as a metric.

 

[Deuce]

Well, I'd say they're pretty well-off compared with someone making $7.50/hour with two children, wouldn't you?

I've been watching the last 15 years.... and for the 15 before that. I've seen the system work and I've seen it not work. And I've got to say, I haven't been much-impressed by either side for the last 15 years. It's been a steady diatribe of partisan cartoonishness from the Democrats and Republicans alike. Enough is enough... it's about time the adults on both sides started taking control again.

I was a late edit, so lets repeat what I added in:

Let's take your single parent minimum wage example. Traditional advice is for housing to be no more than 30% of your income, right? 40 hours a week x 52 weeks a year x $11/hour is $22,880, just over that FPL line. 30% of that is $6,864/year or $572/month.

According to rent.com, $572/month pays rent on a two bedroom apartment in zero cities in the United States. It doesn't even pay for a studio apartment in Baton Rouge, LA, the cheapest city in the country. And let's not pretend a family of three living in a studio apartment is reasonable. Average 2BR rent is cheapest in Grand Forks, ND, at $890/month, and we're well shy of that. Go to a high-falutin' place like Milwaukee and our 2BR rent doubles.

https://www.rent.com/research/cheapest-rent-in-the-us/

Edit: And our hypothetical family magically paid zero taxes.

 

[Cordelier]

I was a late edit, so lets repeat what I added in:

Let's take your single parent minimum wage example. Traditional advice is for housing to be no more than 30% of your income, right? 40 hours a week x 52 weeks a year x $11/hour is $22,880, just over that FPL line. 30% of that is $6,864/year or $572/month.

According to rent.com, $572/month pays rent on a two bedroom apartment in zero cities in the United States. It doesn't even pay for a studio apartment in Baton Rouge, LA, the cheapest city in the country. And let's not pretend a family of three living in a studio apartment is reasonable. Average 2BR rent is cheapest in Grand Forks, ND, at $890/month, and we're well shy of that.

https://www.rent.com/research/cheapest-rent-in-the-us/

Cities have the power to mandate their own minimum wage... as do States. All the Federal minimum wage does is give them a floor to base their decisions on.

 

[Deuce]

Cities have the power to mandate their own minimum wage... as do States. All the Federal minimum wage does is give them a floor to base their decisions on.

A floor that is laughably unable to meet even the grossly low bar that was set by you and is therefore not accomplishing what you tried to claim is its purpose.

 

[Cordelier]

A floor that is laughably unable to meet even the grossly low bar that was set by you and is therefore not accomplishing what you tried to claim is its purpose.

You can characterize $11/hour however you want. I think it's fair, though, and it strikes a balance between giving low-wage earners what they deserve without pricing them out of the job market. The higher you go with this, the more likely your next interaction at McDonald's is going to be with a food-dispenser than an actual human.

 

[Deuce]

You can characterize $11/hour however you want.

But I didn't. You did. You defined the criteria for what minimum wage is supposed to be and your own proposal fails to meet that criteria.

I think it's fair, though,

Do you? Because your own threshold was a single parent with two children, and $11/hour simply does not support that.

and it strikes a balance between giving low-wage earners what they deserve without pricing them out of the job market. The higher you go with this, the more likely your next interaction at McDonald's is going to be with a food-dispenser than an actual human.

McDonald's workers in Denmark get paid over $20/hour and have health insurance and like four weeks vacation. It's not pricing them out of the market. It's reducing profits.

Furthermore, it's ludicrous to suggest that minimum wage is the reason we're seeing automation. Everyone is blaming minimum wage for those ordering kiosks at McDonald's, but did you run the math on that? How much do you think they cost compared to an actual human? Let's do some more numbers, I'll separate that into a followup post.

 

[Cordelier]

But I didn't. You did. You defined the criteria for what minimum wage is supposed to be and your own proposal fails to meet that criteria.


Do you? Because your own threshold was a single parent with two children, and $11/hour simply does not support that.


McDonald's workers in Denmark get paid over $20/hour and have health insurance and like four weeks vacation. It's not pricing them out of the market. It's reducing profits.

Furthermore, it's ludicrous to suggest that minimum wage is the reason we're seeing automation. Everyone is blaming minimum wage for those ordering kiosks at McDonald's, but did you run the math on that? How much do you think they cost compared to an actual human? Let's do some more numbers, I'll separate that into a followup post.

And my criteria is based on where the Census bureau puts the poverty line for a family of three with one adult on a nation-wide basis. Obviously the cost of living is going to be higher in cities than it will be for the country as a whole.

But just go back and read your posts... it's like you're on some kind of Holy Crusade to make life perfect for everyone. That's an unobtainable goal. Isn't it better to just be content with making life better? Why go down with the ship waving the flag if it means that at the end of the day you get no bill and people are still stuck with $7.50/hour? That's just an exercise in political masturbation.

 

[Deuce]

@Cordelier

So, the ordering kiosk. Let's say the glorified tablet is $1000, which is about the price of a large-sized iPad retail. Now, this is veerrryy generous, as a company like McDonald's is going to be ordering like a hundred thousand of these things, they're not going to be paying full retail price of already-overpriced products like Apple sells.

Now, it's not just a tablet. You have to install them in a kiosk, wire them to power, set them up to connect to the payment system, etc. Let's say this is another $1000 for every single tablet. Again, generous. Then we'll double this again with installation costs. $4000 per kiosk. Of course, customers are slower with these kiosks than trained employees, so let's say you need three of them for each employee replaced. $12000 for each employee you replace, which is generous as customers being three times slower may be a stretch. Of course, the kiosk can run 24/7 so in reality these three kiosks are replacing more than one person, but we'll be generous again and skip that.

Of course, this is a one-time cost. The ongoing costs are lower, but we'll again be generous and plan on an outlandishly high 50% failure rate, meaning you have to fully replace half of all your kiosks including ALL hardware AND all installation costs EVERY year, so $6000/year to operate these kiosks per employee replaced. Keep in mind that a 50% failure rate is utterly ridiculous and would have McDonald's suing the supplier into oblivion.

We're matching a $3/hour wage here, and that was being ludicrously conservative on the cost of the kiosk.

The wage isn't the barrier to entry here, and it never was.

 

[Deuce]

And my criteria is based on where the Census bureau puts the poverty line for a family of three with one adult on a nation-wide basis. Obviously the cost of living is going to be higher in cities than it will be for the country as a whole.

Yes, you blindly accepted the poverty line when the poverty line doesn't meet your own threshold. That's the point. You can't actually support a family of three on that income.

Show me the place where your own threshold is met. Because I browsed rent in the wonderful metropolis of Carson, Iowa, population 721, and the 2BR rent was $700.

 

[Cordelier]

@Cordelier

So, the ordering kiosk. Let's say the glorified tablet is $1000, which is about the price of a large-sized iPad retail. Now, this is veerrryy generous, as a company like McDonald's is going to be ordering like a hundred thousand of these things, they're not going to be paying full retail price of already-overpriced products like Apple sells.

Now, it's not just a tablet. You have to install them in a kiosk, wire them to power, set them up to connect to the payment system, etc. Let's say this is another $1000 for every single tablet. Again, generous. Then we'll double this again with installation costs. $4000 per kiosk. Of course, customers are slower with these kiosks than trained employees, so let's say you need three of them for each employee replaced. $12000 for each employee you replace, which is generous as customers being three times slower may be a stretch. Of course, the kiosk can run 24/7 so in reality these three kiosks are replacing more than one person, but we'll be generous again and skip that.

Of course, this is a one-time cost. The ongoing costs are lower, but we'll again be generous and plan on an outlandishly high 50% failure rate, meaning you have to fully replace half of all your kiosks including ALL hardware AND all installation costs, so $6000/year to operate these kiosks per employee replaced. Keep in mind that a 50% failure rate is utterly ridiculous and would have McDonald's suing the supplier into oblivion.

We're matching a $3/hour wage here, and that was being ludicrously conservative on the cost of the kiosk.

The wage isn't the barrier to entry here, and it never was.

McDonald's knows how to run their business far better than I ever could tell them. All I know is that the higher their labor costs get, the more they get absorbed by higher productivity from their employees... and failing that, higher costs that get passed on to their customers. Either way, it's going to be the minimum wage workers who will get it in the neck. Higher productivity means they won't need as many employees to produce the same output .... and higher prices means less volume which means they won't need as many employees either.

 

[Deuce]

McDonald's knows how to run their business far better than I ever could tell them. All I know is that the higher their labor costs get, the more they get absorbed by higher productivity from their employees... and failing that, higher costs that get passed on to their customers.

Then the costs get passed on to their customers! Why should your burger be subsidized by both my tax dollars and by having human beings live in abject poverty? You run further and further from your own starting position with each post.

Either way, it's going to be the minimum wage workers who will get it in the neck. Higher productivity means they won't need as many employees to produce the same output .... and higher prices means less volume which means they won't need as many employees either.

"Raising minimum wage harms minimum wage workers" is too stupid to bother with. Lots of places are paying $15/hour now, how're those unemployment rates going again? Minimum wage increases have never been shown to have a dire effect on unemployment rates. Any effects are minor and temporary.

 

[Cordelier]

Then the costs get passed on to their customers! Why should your burger be subsidized by both my tax dollars and by having human beings live in abject poverty? You run further and further from your own starting position with each post.


"Raising minimum wage harms minimum wage workers" is too stupid to bother with. Lots of places are paying $15/hour now, how're those unemployment rates going again? Minimum wage increases have never been shown to have a dire effect on unemployment rates. Any effects are minor and temporary.

Come back to reality, Deuce. What's so magical about $15/hour? Why not $25/hour? Why not $30/hour? Hell, why not $50/hour?

My only point is that whatever number we decide is fair to everyone, there has to be some basis in reality here. Just because I'm advocating for $11/hour and you happen to favor $15/hour doesn't mean we're on opposite sides of the French Revolution here. So give it a break with the histrionics. Similarly, just because the Biden Administration is advocating $15/hour doesn't mean it is written in stone. There is a lot of room under that number to negotiate with the other side.

The 2020 Poverty Threshold for a family of three, with two children under 18 was $20,852. Working 40 hours a week, 50 weeks a year, you'd need to make $10.43/hour to hit that threshold. That's my basis for advocating $11/hour. That seems fair to me. Naturally, I'd prefer to see people making more than that... but if we're establishing a baseline, $11/hour seems a fair place to start. As people gain more experience and on-the-job training and as their productivity increases from the baseline, hopefully their wages will rise accordingly.

 

[NuffSaid]

Mitch has kept the rainbows and unicorns party from spending the country into Venezuela like oblivion.

At the end of fiscal year 2020, the debt was $26.9 trillion. Trump added $6.7 trillion to the debt between fiscal year 2017 and fiscal year 2020, a 33.1% increase, largely due to the effects of the coronavirus pandemic and 2020 recession.

In his FY 2021 budget, Trump's budget included a $966 billion deficit.10 However, the national debt actually grew by $1.5 trillion between October 1, 2020, and October 1, 2021.

Yep, Mitch sure did help

 

[Deuce]

Come back to reality, Deuce. What's so magical about $15/hour? Why not $25/hour? Why not $30/hour? Hell, why not $50/hour?

Why not zero? You disagree with $15/hour, surely this means you want to eliminate the minimum wage entirely. Your position can be extrapolated to anything I want. Right?

What was that about reality?

My only point is that whatever number we decide is fair to everyone, there has to be some basis in reality here.

Hang on, are you sure about this? Because you immediately follow up with this:

Just because I'm advocating for $11/hour and you happen to favor $15/hour doesn't mean we're on opposite sides of the French Revolution here.

You are the one acting this way! You are pretending $15/hour "has no basis in reality."

So give it a break with the histrionics. Similarly, just because the Biden Administration is advocating $15/hour doesn't mean it is written in stone. There is a lot of room under that number to negotiate with the other side.

Whoah buddy. Calm down. Stop throwing things around your room and screaming in rage at your computer monitor. It's not healthy. All I did was calmly and rationally calculate the implications of a standard created by you! You got proven wrong with your own idea, and you're in a blind rage over it. Arguments are so much easier to win when you just pretend the other person is losing their mind, isn't it? So, quit your "histrionics."

The 2020 Poverty Threshold for a family of three, with two children under 18 was $20,852. Working 40 hours a week, 50 weeks a year, you'd need to make $10.43/hour to hit that threshold. That's my basis for advocating $11/hour.

We already went over this. I already demonstrated, mathematically, that your basis for advocating for $11/hour is arbitrary and worthless. The FPL figures are just made up and no longer connect to the reality of living in America.

That seems fair to me. Naturally, I'd prefer to see people making more than that... but if we're establishing a baseline, $11/hour seems a fair place to start. As people gain more experience and on-the-job training and as their productivity increases from the baseline, hopefully their wages will rise accordingly.

The data shows quite conclusively that wages do not rise with productivity. If that were the case, McDonald's workers would be at $20/hour by now, not $11. That's not liberal "histrionics," that's math.

Infographic: Minimum Wage Fraction of Productivity Increase

This chart shows the projected U.S. minimum wage if it rose alongside productivity, 1950-2020.

www.statista.com

Contrary to popular libertarian belief, the world is not a fair and just place and peoples' pay is not inherently determined by the value of their labor. Elon Musk did not work a million times harder than you.

 

[Luckyone]

Come back to reality, Deuce. What's so magical about $15/hour? Why not $25/hour? Why not $30/hour? Hell, why not $50/hour?

I am surprised of you saying: "What's so magical about $15/hour? Why not $25/hour? Why not $30/hour? Hell, why not $50/hour?"

You truly should know why $15 is the amount that has been determined.

There is something called the "living wage indicator" that determines was amount is enough:

What determines a living wage?

A living wage is a socially acceptable level of income that provides adequate coverage for basic necessities such as food, shelter, child services, and healthcare. The living wage standard allows for no more than 30% to be spent on rent or a mortgage and is sufficiently higher than the poverty level.

 

[Cordelier]

Why not zero? You disagree with $15/hour, surely this means you want to eliminate the minimum wage entirely. Your position can be extrapolated to anything I want. Right?

What was that about reality?


Hang on, are you sure about this? Because you immediately follow up with this:


You are the one acting this way! You are pretending $15/hour "has no basis in reality."

Whoah buddy. Calm down. Stop throwing things around your room and screaming in rage at your computer monitor. It's not healthy. All I did was calmly and rationally calculate the implications of a standard created by you! You got proven wrong with your own idea, and you're in a blind rage over it. Arguments are so much easier to win when you just pretend the other person is losing their mind, isn't it? So, quit your "histrionics."

We already went over this. I already demonstrated, mathematically, that your basis for advocating for $11/hour is arbitrary and worthless. The FPL figures are just made up and no longer connect to the reality of living in America.


The data shows quite conclusively that wages do not rise with productivity. If that were the case, McDonald's workers would be at $20/hour by now, not $11. That's not liberal "histrionics," that's math.

Infographic: Minimum Wage Fraction of Productivity Increase

This chart shows the projected U.S. minimum wage if it rose alongside productivity, 1950-2020.

www.statista.com

Contrary to popular libertarian belief, the world is not a fair and just place and peoples' pay is not inherently determined by the value of their labor. Elon Musk did not work a million times harder than you.

Cut the deck however you want, Deuce, but to get this discussion back on track... you're never going to get the Republicans to sign off on $15/hour. It'd be a hard enough challenge to get them to sign off on $11/hour.... but to me, that figure is justified by Census Bureau estimates and it is also in the middle ground between $7.50/hour and the proposed $15/hour. If there's a deal to be done, it's going to be in that neck of the woods.

 

[Cordelier]

I am surprised of you saying: "What's so magical about $15/hour? Why not $25/hour? Why not $30/hour? Hell, why not $50/hour?"

You truly should know why $15 is the amount that has been determined.

There is something called the "living wage indicator" that determines was amount is enough:

What determines a living wage?

A living wage is a socially acceptable level of income that provides adequate coverage for basic necessities such as food, shelter, child services, and healthcare. The living wage standard allows for no more than 30% to be spent on rent or a mortgage and is sufficiently higher than the poverty level.

But Lucky, no matter how you serve it up, it's still pie-in-the-sky. The Republicans are never going to sign off on $15/hour. So the choice now is either to let the bill fail and keep it at $7.50/hour or meet the Republicans halfway and try to get something around $11/hour.

I'm willing to work from the Census Bureau estimates to arrive at the $11/hour figure. I think it's justifiable given the poverty threshold numbers... and I think with a little finagling, there'd be enough Republicans who could sign off on that.