Breaking News: Restaurants Closing All Over Seattle As $15 Minimum Wage Mandate Starts April 1st.

[zeke]

Would you have any problem with it if they simply did away with minimum wage altogether?

Here's a better question.
Why do you want even more people getting government assistance? Why oh why is that a good idea?

 

[dblack]

Would you have any problem with it if they simply did away with minimum wage altogether?

Here's a better question.
Why do you want even more people getting government assistance? Why oh why is that a good idea?

I asked first. Care to take a crack at it?

 

[Camp]

We have a good way to determine what a minimum wage should be. We allow the federal government to determine a minimum wage. That gets passed on to the state government to make adjustments if the state wishes. Finally, we allow county, town and city governments to make further adjustment the was Seattle did.

Why stop there? What about boroughs and neighborhoods? Families? Individuals? Why not let each person decide for themselves what they're minimum acceptable wage will be?

Because we elect people to make certain kinds of decisions that are deemed to be of importance to the community and need common accepted agreements to prevent problems among the population. We pass laws about things that need resolution and agreement to prevent misunderstandings.

That's really the question, isn't it? DID we, in fact, elect people to make decisions regarding what jobs we can work, and for how much? That certainly wasn't my understanding.

I am viewing only the topic of the OP. It was the city of Seattle that passed the minimum wage law. SeaTac, a city bordering on Seattle had passed such a law previously and it seemed to have worked without any great difficulty. I have no problem with a city determining what they consider a fair minimum wage for their city.

Would you have any problem with it if they simply did away with minimum wage altogether?

Not if they got approval to do so from the federal and state levels. The federal government and the state government both have financial interest and investments in maintaining a minimum wage. Federal and state programs subsidize the difference a worker makes between minimum wage and what the state or federal governments determine is the income that decides the amount of a subsidy. Lowering the minimum wage increases the cost of the subsidy. This would cost the tax payer huge amounts unless and until subsidies were adjusted to accommodate the reduced wages. A city that brought wages below the federal and state minimums would simply be passing on cost to the state and federal governments to benefit commercial interest in their particular area. It baffles me that conservatives are against minimum wages. That is a pro business kind of idea, not a conservative one. A conservative should not be in favor of government subsidizing private business. Minimum wage laws are meant to reduce government subsidies to working people.

 

[zeke]

I asked first. Care to take a crack at it?

My answer was in my first poet eh?

OK. There are already too many people who work full time jobs who qualify for government assistance. Way to many. And those numbers are at today's minimum wage.

If there was no minimum wage required to be paid, employers would reduce their payroll by paying less. And there would be no ability to stop that from happening. So even more people would be able to get and keep getting government assistance even though they go to work everyday.

So your turn.

Why do you want more people to be able to qualify for government assistance?
Or do you think companies would not take advantage of the no MW law that you seem to favor?

 

[zeke]

A conservative should not be in favor of government subsidizing private business. Minimum wage laws are meant to reduce government subsidies to working people.

Besides me and you and a few others, there are no "conservatives" around here.

Just a bunch of self loathing right wing whack jobs. Nothing "conservative" about them. Radical right wing loons.

 

[dblack]

I asked first. Care to take a crack at it?

My answer was in my first poet eh?

What does that mean? Do you think local government should be able to ignore federal mandates?

Just to be clear, I'm simply calling bullshit on the claim by "living wage" supporters defending Seattle's policy on local or state's rights grounds. They sure as hell wouldn't support efforts to override the federal mandate. So, let's drop the pretense, mkay?

Why do you want more people to be able to qualify for government assistance?

Because if we're going to run a social safety net, all taxpayers should be responsible for maintaining it. We should never indulge the temptation to use government to target unpopular minorities for persecution.

 

[dblack]

A conservative should not be in favor of government subsidizing private business. Minimum wage laws are meant to reduce government subsidies to working people.

Besides me and you and a few others, there are no "conservatives" around here.

Just a bunch of self loathing right wing whack jobs. Nothing "conservative" about them. Radical right wing loons.

I'm neither conservative, nor 'right wing'. Though I can certainly appreciate your view that I'm a 'loon'.

 

[dblack]

Why stop there? What about boroughs and neighborhoods? Families? Individuals? Why not let each person decide for themselves what they're minimum acceptable wage will be?

Because we elect people to make certain kinds of decisions that are deemed to be of importance to the community and need common accepted agreements to prevent problems among the population. We pass laws about things that need resolution and agreement to prevent misunderstandings.

That's really the question, isn't it? DID we, in fact, elect people to make decisions regarding what jobs we can work, and for how much? That certainly wasn't my understanding.

I am viewing only the topic of the OP. It was the city of Seattle that passed the minimum wage law. SeaTac, a city bordering on Seattle had passed such a law previously and it seemed to have worked without any great difficulty. I have no problem with a city determining what they consider a fair minimum wage for their city.

Would you have any problem with it if they simply did away with minimum wage altogether?

Not if they got approval to do so from the federal and state levels.

Hehe... nice.

It baffles me that conservatives are against minimum wages. That is a pro business kind of idea, not a conservative one.

I do agree with you there. Most conservatives these days are more interested in indulging business interests than in protect our rights. Same with liberals, albeit in slightly different ways.

 

[Camp]

Because we elect people to make certain kinds of decisions that are deemed to be of importance to the community and need common accepted agreements to prevent problems among the population. We pass laws about things that need resolution and agreement to prevent misunderstandings.

That's really the question, isn't it? DID we, in fact, elect people to make decisions regarding what jobs we can work, and for how much? That certainly wasn't my understanding.

I am viewing only the topic of the OP. It was the city of Seattle that passed the minimum wage law. SeaTac, a city bordering on Seattle had passed such a law previously and it seemed to have worked without any great difficulty. I have no problem with a city determining what they consider a fair minimum wage for their city.

Would you have any problem with it if they simply did away with minimum wage altogether?

Not if they got approval to do so from the federal and state levels.

Hehe... nice.

It baffles me that conservatives are against minimum wages. That is a pro business kind of idea, not a conservative one.

I do agree with you there. Most conservatives these days are more interested in indulging business interests than in protect our rights. Same with liberals, albeit in slightly different ways.

These labels of conservative, liberal and others have been so abused that they have become meaningless. Reagan would no longer be accepted as a conservative and Kennedy would no longer be accepted as a liberal.

 

[zeke]

I'm neither conservative,

Well ok them. I am a conservative and I find it objectionable that my tax dollars are used to support full time, private industry workers. I'm so damned conservative that I think the company should pay their workers enough that they can't qualify for government assistance.

Guess I am old fashioned that way. But then again, I have never worked for minimum wage so I have never asked for government assistance to live.

I have always made a livable wage. How about you? Always worked and made pretty good money? Or struggled to get by?

 

[zeke]

Because if we're going to run a social safety net, all taxpayers should be responsible for maintaining it. We should never indulge the temptation to use government to target unpopular minorities for persecution.

Do you not understand the the social safety net was NEVER intended to be used by people with full time jobs?

Big difference between people real down on their luck needing help and full time workers getting part of their income from the government.

Or can't you even see that?

 

[dblack]

Because if we're going to run a social safety net, all taxpayers should be responsible for maintaining it. We should never indulge the temptation to use government to target unpopular minorities for persecution.

Do you not understand the the social safety net was NEVER intended to be used by people with full time jobs?

Big difference between people real down on their luck needing help and full time workers getting part of their income from the government.

Or can't you even see that?

Yeah? So what? What are you getting at? The question is whether taxpayers should fund the social safety net, or whether employers should be "drafted" and assigned the responsibility.

 

[dblack]

I'm neither conservative,

Well ok them. I am a conservative and I find it objectionable that my tax dollars are used to support full time, private industry workers. I'm so damned conservative that I think the company should pay their workers enough that they can't qualify for government assistance.

That's exactly why I'm not a conservative.

 

[Ame®icano]

Can you clarify any of these?

Hey, here is what I know for sure.
You don't make a "livable wage" of you wouldn't be asking such stupid fucking questions.

Are you a MW or close to it worker who gets government assistance? Sounds like it.

If I am, would I be supporting it instead opposing it?

But don't worry about me. Can you answer any of the questions I asked?

 

[Skull Pilot]

How about me?

If I couldn't survive on one job I worked 2 or 3

When I was young I shared an apt with 4 other guys. I lived on 5 for a dollar Ramen soups for months on end

IOW I did what I had to do to pay my bills I find that in general putting your head down and hustling gets far better results than whining.

So $5 an hr. is a decent livable wage to you? Ok. At least you answered the question. Gotta give you some props for that i guess.

It doesn't matter what your starting wage is.

A career is a ladder not a bed. The times I worked for MW in the past I was never more than 6 months away from a pay raise or a promotion because I didn't think being a bag boy or a stock clerk was a job that would support me


I'm sorry but if you're still making MW after 20 years on a job then it's your own fault not your employer's

In america today no one lasts 20 years at a company. And if you build cars or forged steal for 19 years and all those jobs left your town you might end up working at walmart.

We just got to make sure our government looks out for the middle class so we dont all become the working poor.

I will never have to work at Walmart

That's what a lot of my consevative friends said before 2007. They ate their words.

I'll never need unemployment I'll never need foodstamps. Or the classic "I'd work at MCD before I'd...

Liars. Until it happens you dont know what you would do. And I find conservatives are quickest to put their hands out.

Unlike you people I save my money and have since I was in my 20s.

And trust me if my business went belly up tomorrow which it won't I will be just fine

 

[Skull Pilot]

How about me?

If I couldn't survive on one job I worked 2 or 3

When I was young I shared an apt with 4 other guys. I lived on 5 for a dollar Ramen soups for months on end

IOW I did what I had to do to pay my bills I find that in general putting your head down and hustling gets far better results than whining.

So $5 an hr. is a decent livable wage to you? Ok. At least you answered the question. Gotta give you some props for that i guess.

It doesn't matter what your starting wage is.

A career is a ladder not a bed. The times I worked for MW in the past I was never more than 6 months away from a pay raise or a promotion because I didn't think being a bag boy or a stock clerk was a job that would support me


I'm sorry but if you're still making MW after 20 years on a job then it's your own fault not your employer's

In america today no one lasts 20 years at a company. And if you build cars or forged steal for 19 years and all those jobs left your town you might end up working at walmart.

We just got to make sure our government looks out for the middle class so we dont all become the working poor.

I will never have to work at Walmart

Never say never. And thanks to people who who actually care about American Workers, you'll make more than $5 an hr. You're welcome.

I haven't worked for another person for 15 years and I would rather bet on myself and make my own way than work for someone else.

And the only reason people are "struggling" in this country is because they choose to.

There are literally countless opportunities to make money in this country.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Define fair

I've asked you guys for a long time to put a number on what you think is a decent livable wage for average American Workers in today's America. You guys always duck & run. What do you think an average American can survive on today? Take a shot, throw a number out there.

And I've told you that it's up to you to earn what you need to pay your bills. If your no skill job isn't paying you enough then you can get a second job or learn a skill that will warrant higher pay

Heres all we're saying. Between 1950 and 2000 we had high paying manufacturing union labor middle class jobs. We allowed all those jobs to go to China mexico and everywhere else. I know that benefitted the rich and the rest of the world but it didn't help america.

Our gov has a responsibility to look out for the masses. If not capitalism will have us grateful for $5 a day.

Still no explanation what livable wage is. Anyone?

It is then same type of question liberals will never answer like:

When discussing then school system:

How much money do The schools need?

The poor have smart cell phones, 50 inch T.V.s , a/c but for some reason god only knows they can not get any ID to vote.

They think in there strange minds they can force the higher labor cost On to the stockholders or CEOs

I've actually asked the question many times here. And it's usually the Corporate-bootlickers who duck & run from the question. I've asked for you guys to put some numbers on it. What's a decent livable wage for an average American Worker these days. I've thrown a few numbers out there. I said possibly about $11 - $15 an hr. How bout you?

And I've asked you if people really need 600 a week to live who says it all has to come from one full time job?

Why can't it come from a full time job AND and part time job or side business?

Like I said no one who has ever become a success ever worked only 40 hours a week

 

[Skull Pilot]

Still no explanation what livable wage is. Anyone?

You right wingers sure are confused about this number aren't ya?
A "livable wage" is earnings great enough that the worker does not qualify for direct government assistance ( SNAP, housing allowance, heat allowance etc) at any level.

The other number is "poverty wages". Those people earn so little they do qualify for all those government benefits,
Those people do not make a "livable wage".

Hope that helps you.

Why are you faggots always so ignorant and redneckish???

Fucking morons have never heard of Google??

When you enter proper search terms, you get intelligent results ...................

Define : Living Wage

Search Results

1. DEFINITION of 'Living Wage' A theoretical wage level that allows the earner to afford adequate shelter, food and the other necessities of life. The living wage should be substantial enough to ensure that no more than 30% of it needs to be spent on housing.
2. Living Wage Definition | Investopedia
   Terms Beginning With L Investopedialiving_wage.asp

Make sure you note the fucking term "THEORETICAL" before you make any more moronic statements ........................

The poverty threshold, or poverty line, is the minimum level of income deemed adequate in a particular country.

No relevance to this conversation at all, just a fucking buzz word thrown out to elicit sympathy ........................

Grow the fuck up, join a real conversation with out all your faggot bull shit ....................................

So what do you think is a decent livable wage for an average American Worker today? Just throw some numbers out there. Forget the Politics and loyal defense of Corporations.

Just put a number out there that you think is decent wage for an average American Worker. I already threw some numbers out there. I said between $11 - $15 an hr is a decent start. Now your turn.

WHat do you think is the minimum skill level that warrants a 600 a week salary?

 

[Ame®icano]

Still no explanation what livable wage is. Anyone?

You right wingers sure are confused about this number aren't ya?
A "livable wage" is earnings great enough that the worker does not qualify for direct government assistance ( SNAP, housing allowance, heat allowance etc) at any level.

The other number is "poverty wages". Those people earn so little they do qualify for all those government benefits,
Those people do not make a "livable wage".

Hope that helps you.

Why are you faggots always so ignorant and redneckish???

Fucking morons have never heard of Google??

When you enter proper search terms, you get intelligent results ...................

Define : Living Wage

Search Results

1. DEFINITION of 'Living Wage' A theoretical wage level that allows the earner to afford adequate shelter, food and the other necessities of life. The living wage should be substantial enough to ensure that no more than 30% of it needs to be spent on housing.
2. Living Wage Definition | Investopedia
   Terms Beginning With L Investopedialiving_wage.asp

Make sure you note the fucking term "THEORETICAL" before you make any more moronic statements ........................

The poverty threshold, or poverty line, is the minimum level of income deemed adequate in a particular country.

No relevance to this conversation at all, just a fucking buzz word thrown out to elicit sympathy ........................

Grow the fuck up, join a real conversation with out all your faggot bull shit ....................................

So what do you think is a decent livable wage for an average American Worker today? Just throw some numbers out there. Forget the Politics and loyal defense of Corporations.

Just put a number out there that you think is decent wage for an average American Worker. I already threw some numbers out there. I said between $11 - $15 an hr is a decent start. Now your turn.

WHat do you think is the minimum skill level that warrants a 600 a week salary?

They "feel" they should just show up for work and get "living wage".

I wonder where they get it from. Oh, of course.

Rather than use living as an ambiguous term to avoid clarifying a specific wage, he uses the term "decent" to ambiguously define a standard of living which represents his unclear wage. Just as back then, liberals today will bullshit you and will never give you a straight answer.

 

[Ame®icano]

The entire concept of mandating a 'living wage' is based on ignorance and wishful thinking. Those supporting it simply don't understand how the value of a given job is resolved.

It's not determined by the employer, nor the employee. It's decided by society, by all of us, as an aggregate of the economic decisions we make on a daily basis. And some of you can't accept the fact that we've decided that some jobs simply aren't worth a "living wage". In response to that uncomfortable fact, you believe you can change it by passing a law. You think that you can simply slap a different number on a given job and society will suddenly change it's view of the relative value of that job.

But reality doesn't work that way. Minimum wage laws don't make low-paying jobs worth more. They just make them illegal.

Excellent post.

You see, "living wage" should provide one with "decent" living that will enable them with buying clothes from faggot fashion designers who produce everything in the 3rd world. At the same time, they're buying shit from companies like Apple who produce everything in inhumane Foxconn factories. They're giving amnesty to illegals and handing out H1B visas that directly destroy the value of American labor and college degrees.

Then they demand $15/hr to mop floors at Taco Bell while all of the above prices their asses right out of the market.

The problem with liberals is they think they can meddle it he economy all they want, and everything will work out in their favor. And those with that liberal arts degree think they have a grasp of how economies work when at the end of the day every poor ghetto in America was created by liberals and maintained by liberals.