Explain to us Libs, what is a living wage?

[dnsmith35]

When I went to college, most of us didn't borrow much to do it. The rich kids could afford to pay their way. The rest of us worked summers, nights, weekend, or, in my case, for the university itself here and there during the week. And because the university utilized so much student labor for almost everything, the tuition, fees, housing, and other expenses were kept low enough for us to pretty much pay our way as we went along, maybe with some help from home for those who could get it.

My son and daughter did take out some student loans--our son because he chose to marry an expensive wife--she is no longer his wife--and our daughter because she accelerated her studies to get her degrees faster and that left her less time to work. But both owed less than $10 thousand when they graduated and for those with a marketable degree, that is very easy to pay off.

My son and daugher-in-law are currently putting our granddaughter through college on a pay-as-you-go basis and hope she will obtain her degree without taking out any student loans. It can be done for those who plan for it and manage competently. A living wage is what will pay for what you absoluely need and have to have; not necessarily all that you want.

So why have college cost escalated so much in recent decades? Look to federal government involvement for most of it; unions who won't allow students to do what the union workers do, tons of government tax payer provided grants, and a sense of entitlement that we are owed an education paid for by others. In order to get more and more federal monies, the universities don't even try to do anything economically or efficiently--what they get is based on what they say they need.

You can look at almost anything the government has become involved in--education, healthcare, etc.--and see how costs escalated almost immediately far faster than the rate of inflation in every single case.

If you want more people to earn a living wage, start rolling back the federal government to its constitutionally mandated responsibilities and let we the people handle it. Whenever that happens, wages generally will be in line with what they have to pay for.

Amen brother. 4 of my children have bachelor degrees and two of those have master degrees. #5 has an associate degree. No loans. Young people do not need to start off their lives with debt.

 

[JRK]

Point is, college has NEVER been more expensive, or the costs rising faster, than under voodoo, and especially, BOOOOSH. Same with health costs.
Pub propaganda, totally WRONG, blames everything on the black guy, the gay guy, and the poor and unemployed. Get out of the way, ignorant or greedy BANANA REPUBLICANS they have these days. The majority want a modern country, with affordable college, health care, and a living wage.

That would be $11, the equivalent of 1968's min. wage, and similar to every other modern country.

Franco this events have litlee to do with the Govt and the last I cked Booooooosh has not been the president for years
Blame?
look at the numbers of who is getting govt monies

 

[DiamondDave]

just had to answer a 2 year old question???

 

[JRK]

just had to answer a 2 year old question???

and that is a problem why?
and for the record it was only 19 months old

 

[ClosedCaption]

just had to answer a 2 year old question???

My My my...Heres Dave in a thread that he was just trying to tell me the reasoning didn't exist in Conservative circles in the Costco pays their employees $15 an hour thread. But here he is in a thread that espouses the ideology he tried to say didn't exist i.e. High wages equals higher prices.

Funny thing is he never came back to that thread....but landed here. Been busy I bet

 

[JRK]

just had to answer a 2 year old question???

My My my...Heres Dave in a thread that he was just trying to tell me the reasoning didn't exist in Conservative circles in the Costco pays their employees $15 an hour thread. But here he is in a thread that espouses the ideology he tried to say didn't exist i.e. High wages equals higher prices.

Funny thing is he never came back to that thread....but landed here. Been busy I bet

the issue here is the left fight for a 50 cents per hour wage and call it helping the poor
if your trying to raise a faimly on 8.00 an hor, 40 houes a week there better be 2 of you doing it

 

[Foxfyre]

just had to answer a 2 year old question???

My My my...Heres Dave in a thread that he was just trying to tell me the reasoning didn't exist in Conservative circles in the Costco pays their employees $15 an hour thread. But here he is in a thread that espouses the ideology he tried to say didn't exist i.e. High wages equals higher prices.

Funny thing is he never came back to that thread....but landed here. Been busy I bet

the issue here is the left fight for a 50 cents per hour wage and call it helping the poor
if your trying to raise a faimly on 8.00 an hor, 40 houes a week there better be 2 of you doing it

Yup. Minimum wage was never intended to be a living wage. It was intended to prevent employers from paying people nothing at all to apprentices who were benefitting the employer while they learned the ropes. But it started out and remained modest so that employers would apprentice people and teach them the ropes so that they could obtain marketable skills and then support themselves.

I have accepted minimum wage or close to it a number of times just because I knew that once I had my foot in the door, I could show my employer he had reason to pay me much better in order to keep me. But without the minimum wage entry level, I never would have been given the opportunity.

Neither my husband nor I made enough to really support a family when we married, but between us we had five jobs supplying income. Over the years, when we needed extra income, we've taken on extra work, a paper route, offered to take a night shift here or there, drilling wheat on a farm, doing freelance legal work, or whatever we had to do to support ourselves or achieve specific goals. We felt blessed to live in a country and in a right-to-work state that allowed us such opportunity. And as we made ourselves more and more valuable to employers, our income increased also. And when there was insufficient opportunity to work for others, we went into business for ourselves and loved the freedom that allowed.

There has never been a time in our lives that we thought our well being, livelihood, security, or opportunity was anybody's responsibility other than ours. We tried to raise our children with that same perspective.

Nobody should have a right to a living wage. That is something we should expect to prepare ourselves to merit and work for until employers are begging us to take the wages they offer and offer us incentives. In such a system, there is always much more opportunity for those willing to accept the responsibility and work for it.

 

[rightwinger]

Wal-Mart's low wages cost taxpayers - Jun. 4, 2013


According to the report, the cost of Wal-Mart's low wages isn't just felt by workers like Stinnett, but also transferred to American taxpayers. The report zeroes in on Wal-Mart in Wisconsin. That's because the state releases information on how many workers are enrolled in its public health care program broken down by employer.
At the end of 2012, there were 3,216 Wal-Mart employees who were enrolled in Wisconsin public health care programs, more than any other employer. Add in the dependents of Wal-Mart workers and the total jumps up to 9,207.
Factoring in what taxpayers contribute for public programs, the report estimated that one Wal-Mart supercenter employing 300 workers could cost taxpayers at least $904,000 annually.



So.......WalMart profits off of low wages and passes on employee expenses to local taxpayers

 

[Foxfyre]

Walmart also hires 2.1 million people in the USA alone, so chances are it probably hires more people in Wisconsin than any other entity. You have to put these things in perspective. Also if Walmart paid its people substantially more, it would cut significantly into the $7 billion it pays in taxes to the federal government - additional to the state governments in which it operates - and there would be less money to fund those public health organizations. And that isn't even assuming those who would be laid off, or have their hours cut, or would never be hired plus the higher prices that the poor would pay along with everybody else for the products Walmart offers.

There is always more than one side to these things.

Nobody is forced to work for Walmart. But a whole bunch of folks who do are grateful to be offered a job.

 

[TemplarKormac]

What is a living wage?

Something you earn, not something you demand on a silver platter.

 

[Foxfyre]

What is a living wage?

Something you earn, not something you demand on a silver platter.

That's the short, succinct version.

But you're right of course. A mandated wage or government subsidy of any kind is not a wage at all. It is welfare or a mandatory gratuity. Those who receive it should not be proud.

 

[TemplarKormac]

What is a living wage?

Something you earn, not something you demand on a silver platter.

That's the short, succinct version.

But you're right of course. A mandated wage or government subsidy of any kind is not a wage at all. It is welfare or a mandatory gratuity. Those who receive it should not be proud.

Hey, that's what grammaw taught me

 

[TemplarKormac]

You liberals... you want more and more. It's like trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip.

 

[Foxfyre]

You liberals... you want more and more. It's like trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip.

Well I want everybody who needs a living wage to be able to earn one. But the fact is, the only way to accomplish that without robbing Peter to pay Paul--a process that generally reduces almost everybody's opportunities to prosper more--is to achieve a stable economy and full employment. When it has to compete more to attract good people. Walmart (and everybody else) will pay more. But because we all will prosper, we can better afford the resulting higher prices that will naturally follow those higher wages.

 

[rightwinger]

Walmart also hires 2.1 million people in the USA alone, so chances are it probably hires more people in Wisconsin than any other entity. You have to put these things in perspective. Also if Walmart paid its people substantially more, it would cut significantly into the $7 billion it pays in taxes to the federal government - additional to the state governments in which it operates - and there would be less money to fund those public health organizations. And that isn't even assuming those who would be laid off, or have their hours cut, or would never be hired plus the higher prices that the poor would pay along with everybody else for the products Walmart offers.

There is always more than one side to these things.

Nobody is forced to work for Walmart. But a whole bunch of folks who do are grateful to be offered a job.

Yes.....people are grateful to work anywhere

Walmart takes advantage of that. They offer barebones wages and cut hours so they are not required to pay benefits

Who makes up for it? The taxpayer
Who reaps the profit? Walmart

 

[AmazonTania]

Walmart also hires 2.1 million people in the USA alone, so chances are it probably hires more people in Wisconsin than any other entity. You have to put these things in perspective. Also if Walmart paid its people substantially more, it would cut significantly into the $7 billion it pays in taxes to the federal government - additional to the state governments in which it operates - and there would be less money to fund those public health organizations. And that isn't even assuming those who would be laid off, or have their hours cut, or would never be hired plus the higher prices that the poor would pay along with everybody else for the products Walmart offers.

There is always more than one side to these things.

Nobody is forced to work for Walmart. But a whole bunch of folks who do are grateful to be offered a job.

Yes.....people are grateful to work anywhere

Walmart takes advantage of that. They offer barebones wages and cut hours so they are not required to pay benefits

Who makes up for it? The taxpayer
Who reaps the profit? Walmart

Why don't they quit?

 

[TemplarKormac]

You liberals... you want more and more. It's like trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip.

Well I want everybody who needs a living wage to be able to earn one. But the fact is, the only way to accomplish that without robbing Peter to pay Paul--a process that generally reduces almost everybody's opportunities to prosper more--is to achieve a stable economy and full employment. When it has to compete more to attract good people. Walmart (and everybody else) will pay more. But because we all will prosper, we can better afford the resulting higher prices that will naturally follow those higher wages.

Makes sense.

 

[Mac1958]

.

I only waded through a few of the (currently) 88 pages of this thread, but I'm definitely curious -- has anyone provided a specific figure for a "living wage"? I'd love to know, because I have many questions regarding what a "living wage" is:

• Would there be provisions for the cost of living for a specific geographical area?
• Would a married person make more than a single person?
• What if the married person's spouse works?
• What if the position does not justify the wage? I assume the employer simply must lose money on each employee in that position?
• What if the employee has been foolish with their money, buying a new car or a new teevee or a thousand video games? Is the employer supposed to pay them more because their "living wage" is higher than that of a peer?

With these (and other) variables, who is to decide what a "living wage" is, and what would your best shot at a "living wage" be?

For starters. Looking forward serious answers to my serious questions.

.

 

[Intense]

Walmart also hires 2.1 million people in the USA alone, so chances are it probably hires more people in Wisconsin than any other entity. You have to put these things in perspective. Also if Walmart paid its people substantially more, it would cut significantly into the $7 billion it pays in taxes to the federal government - additional to the state governments in which it operates - and there would be less money to fund those public health organizations. And that isn't even assuming those who would be laid off, or have their hours cut, or would never be hired plus the higher prices that the poor would pay along with everybody else for the products Walmart offers.

There is always more than one side to these things.

Nobody is forced to work for Walmart. But a whole bunch of folks who do are grateful to be offered a job.

Yes.....people are grateful to work anywhere

Walmart takes advantage of that. They offer barebones wages and cut hours so they are not required to pay benefits

Who makes up for it? The taxpayer
Who reaps the profit? Walmart

Maybe the answer for you is working at a Vegan Restaurant washing dishes and working your way up the ladder. We are each looking for different things RW. Crippling small business effects everyone they touch or service. What is your position on unpaid Internships and those that take advantage of it? I bet a part time job at Wall-mart doesn't look so bad in comparison, at least in relation to having pocket change.

 

[rightwinger]

Walmart also hires 2.1 million people in the USA alone, so chances are it probably hires more people in Wisconsin than any other entity. You have to put these things in perspective. Also if Walmart paid its people substantially more, it would cut significantly into the $7 billion it pays in taxes to the federal government - additional to the state governments in which it operates - and there would be less money to fund those public health organizations. And that isn't even assuming those who would be laid off, or have their hours cut, or would never be hired plus the higher prices that the poor would pay along with everybody else for the products Walmart offers.

There is always more than one side to these things.

Nobody is forced to work for Walmart. But a whole bunch of folks who do are grateful to be offered a job.

Yes.....people are grateful to work anywhere

Walmart takes advantage of that. They offer barebones wages and cut hours so they are not required to pay benefits

Who makes up for it? The taxpayer
Who reaps the profit? Walmart

Maybe the answer for you is working at a Vegan Restaurant washing dishes and working your way up the ladder. We are each looking for different things RW. Crippling small business effects everyone they touch or service. What is your position on unpaid Internships and those that take advantage of it? I bet a part time job at Wall-mart doesn't look so bad in comparison, at least in relation to having pocket change.

Do the taxpayers have to subsidize the workforce in that vegan restaurant so that they can make more profit?