Explain to us Libs, what is a living wage?

[JRK]

Oh bullshit. Post up a credible link showing there are hundreds of thousands of jobs being created by the oil and gas industry. I mean, your son works in that industry.

And is the industry creating that many jobs (as you said) or is it that you THINK they could create that many. See the difference?

Is the area you live in short on energy? No gas? No electricity? What? Where do you think there is an energy shortgage in this country?

Oil, gas industry created 9 percent of new U.S. jobs in 2011:WEF | Reuters
Reuters) - A booming U.S. oil and gas sector was responsible for generating some 9 percent of all new jobs last year, with three indirect jobs for every one directly involved in the industry, a study released on Wednesday found.

Unconventional Oil and Gas Industry Created 1.7 Million Jobs This Year
The U.S. oil and natural-gas rush is hacking away at unemployment, manufacturing a total of 1.7 million jobs this year, according to a study released Tuesday by economic forecaster IHS Global Insight. That number will spike to 2.5 million by 2015, and to almost 3.5 million by 2035, creating “high-quality and high-paying” work at wages on average of about $35 an hour — “dramatically higher” than the average

Interesting sources you chose. One source (Reuters) claimed in the article you linked to, that 37000 direct jobs were created in the oil and gas industry. And that 114000 indirect jobs were created. No where near hundreds of thousands or even the millions that the other source (you know, the right wing rag you selected) claimed were being created by the oil and gas industry.

Did you know that the guy in the gas station making minimum wage is included in the job creation numbers. Temp workers are counted. job placement agencies on line, there are jobs available in the oil and gas industry. For engineers and other high tech. But nowhere near the number of jobs you all claimed.

And to those that got in an industry where they made 100k plus. Where are those jobs?
What field? How much education.

I lived in s GM town for years. Knew many GM factory workers making 100k. Thank God for the unions eh? The city I lived in also was a machining capital. Tool and die makers, top level machinists, mold makers, they all made a real good living. Where did all those jobs go?

Just because large numbers of people were able to make real good incomes before we quit manufacturing things, does not mean that large numbers of people today can make that much.

In other words, your past performance does not guarantee someone elses future results.

And if any of you really made 100k with a high school education, please thank a union member. Either you work for a union shop or the company you work for is paying union scale to keep a union out. Either way, no company pays39 dollars an hour to high school educated people with out some extra incentive.

Union has nothing to do with what I make
It is all about me
and as far as jobs go
Why is it that ND, OKL. LA. Texas are leading the nation in job growth?
what is it you do not unerstand about trickle down economics?
You have the BALLS to mention GM?
your losing a battle that you should have never began

they still owe us billions, in fact they have not paid back one penny as there IPO was financed by the tax payer
Thats a joke dude

and why I make 39.00 an our? get out in the real world and work your ass off, show up on time, take all the training offered and you may find out one day
Unions have nothing to do with work ethic
Unions have nothing to do with hard work

I told you the trade unions are okay in my book, the ones I have managed are.
But that has NOTHING to do with my life, the choices I made

 

[JRK]

10% of 1 million is 100,000
add 1 in 3 after that and you have another 300,000 per 1 million jobs created
BHO has claimed to have created millions (he really is millions short of 08 levels)
so just how many has the Oil and gas created?
How much wealth on wall street is tied to the oil and gas?

 

[Foxfyre]

The sad fact is that BHO's policies have been massively ineffective in stimulating the economy and/or creating jobs. Most of any reductions in unemployment have come through artificially propping up the economy to allow hiring in the government sector at all levels. What little increase in real jobs there have been have been in spite of the current administration rather than a result of its policies.

When you see hundreds of thousands of new unemployment claims every time a new report comes out, it is obvious that the economy is not creating a comparable number of new jobs to offset that.

A fair wage is the market value of labor, not some arbitrary one-size-fits-all number the government assigns. The 'fair wage' is distorted and sidetracked whenever government mandates that a government contract must involve union scale and is also sidetracked whenever people hire and pay under the table so they can pay less. And we have millions of illegals in this country that are being paid in just that way and every one of them is dragging down the market value of wages.

The only way that the fair wage will be increased is for government to get out of the way and let a free market economy work its magic. The more government meddles, and the more government lies about the results of its meddling, the less that is likely to happen.

I think smart people believe nothing that the government tells us at this point.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) announced earlier this morning that based on its monthly survey of establishments, in February 2013:

• U.S. employers added 236,000 non-farm jobs versus the 160,000 that were expected per the WSJ survey of economists; this figure compares to January’s adjusted increase of 119,000 (previously 157,000) and December’s adjusted increase of 219,000 (previously 196,000).

• The BLS Unemployment Rate declined to 7.7% from January’s rate of 7.9%, and is the lowest since December 2008.

• There are now 12.0 million Unemployed Workers, based on BLS’s separate monthly survey of businesses.

However, as we note each month, BLS’s figures do not reflect Real Unemployment, since:
1. BLS counts only those workers who are actively looking for employment, which can vary fairly widely month-to-month due to workers voluntarily removing themselves from the labor force.

•BLS does not include in the BLS Civilian Labor Force either “discouraged workers” (now 0.9 mm) or “other marginally attached workers” (now 1.7 mm).

•BLS does not include among BLS Unemployed Workers the 10.6 million workers in total who are “part-time-of-necessity” (i.e., the so-called “underemployed” who are unable to find full-time jobs or who’ve had their hours cut back) (now 8.0 mm workers), discouraged or other marginally attached.

In contrast, our Summary of U.S. Real Unemployment makes these changes to the Adjusted Civilian Labor Force and in the number of Real Unemployed Workers. In February 2013:

• The number of Real Unemployed Workers decreased by 140,000 to 22.6 million (i.e., the 12.0 mm BLS Unemployed Workers plus the 10.6 mm workers who are part-time-of-necessity, discouraged or other marginally attached). January’s increase in Real Unemployed Workers was an insignificant 10,000.

•The Real Unemployment Rate is now 14.6%, compared to the BLS Unemployment Rate of 7.7%.
Laid Off? Join 31 million unemployed Americans - UCubed ? Blog ? Real Unemployment Rate - February 2013

 

[percysunshine]

Slightly off topic, I had some minor outpatient surgery yesterday at a regional HMO. After my insurance company and I coughed up the money, the doctor and the hospital (facility) split it 50/50. The doctor does these back to back on Fridays and Mondays. Best I can calculate, the doctor (ENT specialist) gets paid $2500/hr on Friday and Monday. I have not got the anesthetist bill yet. I guess he does not charge me if I do not wake up.

 

[Noomi]

If it takes 15.00 an hour to have a "living" wage, well I really dont have an issue with that except that really all your doing is raising the cost to build a widget, or grow a widget to a point in which the 8.00 an hour becomes 15.00 an hour it seems to me
What is a living wage?

A wage you can live on without having to rely on government handouts.

 

[francoHFW]

STILL $11/hr= 1968's min wage in today's $. Tho Australia's $15 would be better or NZ's $13...

 

[Darkwind]

Here is a better question.

What value should you bring to the table to earn a living wage? In other words, flipping a burger brings no value to the company that would warrant a living wage.

So, what does the individual have to bring to the table to qualify for this wage?

 

[buckeye45_73]

What happens when employers build Widgets and don't pay a wage their employees can support their families on?

The taxpayer steps in and subsidizes food, housing and healthcare for that family. Employer gets to profit off of cheap widgets.....taxpayers make up the difference

well who determines that? and why does Burger King have to support a family, if you're flippin burgers, you're probably not a breadwinner.

I love how liberals think all jobs are the same, it's amazing the ignorance of these people.

 

[buckeye45_73]

STILL $11/hr= 1968's min wage in today's $. Tho Australia's $15 would be better or NZ's $13...

why not $100/hour?

 

[Interpol]

What I don't understand about what we've become as a country is that the 6 heirs of Walmart in the Walton family are worth a combined $90 billion, which represents more wealth than everything the bottom 30% of America is worth, yet we have public discussions on threads like these that ask us to justify what a living wage is.

The more important question is why the Walton family doesn't offer great health care to their employees. Or why the Walton family insists on having people labelled as part-timers so they don't have to give them full-timer benefits, even if they work full-time hours.

The average in-store person at Walmart in America makes a little over $7, the minimum wage.

Take $7.25/hr and multiply that by 37.5 hours (a 40/hr work-week with half an hour off each shift for lunch). That makes $271.88.

$271.88 times 4 weeks in a month is $1087.52.

$271.88 times 52 weeks is $14,137.76.

Now, if students are supposed to have the brunt of these jobs, how is that supposed to help them pay for their school debts?

For others who work there, how do you afford health care in America that costs an average of half of your yearly earnings?

How do you pay rent, do groceries and pay for transportation and your phone and cable and internet on that wage?

If full-time Walmart staff in America were making double what they make now, taxpayers in America wouldn't have to subsidize as many things as they do. Personal debt would decrease. More people would have health insurance. There would be more cash flow in America from the segment of our population that does the everyday spending on everyday needs.

You could double every Walmart employee's wage and the Walton family wouldn't actually lose any money because Henry Ford proved that if you treat your employees fairly, they'll stick around and they'll actually buy things from the company store.

 

[TemplarKormac]

STILL $11/hr= 1968's min wage in today's $. Tho Australia's $15 would be better or NZ's $13...

why not $100/hour?

They'll ask for more and more, until it puts such an unbearable strain on employers that they have one of two choices, fold, or let jobs go. Next we have people complaining about why they don't have jobs. Liberals, do you really want this? Because that's the way it will go, like it or not.

 

[DaGoose]

Here is a better question.

What value should you bring to the table to earn a living wage? In other words, flipping a burger brings no value to the company that would warrant a living wage.

So, what does the individual have to bring to the table to qualify for this wage?

Hey liar.

How do you determine the value of any given labor?

.

 

[Foxfyre]

What I don't understand about what we've become as a country is that the 6 heirs of Walmart in the Walton family are worth a combined $90 billion, which represents more wealth than everything the bottom 30% of America is worth, yet we have public discussions on threads like these that ask us to justify what a living wage is.

The more important question is why the Walton family doesn't offer great health care to their employees. Or why the Walton family insists on having people labelled as part-timers so they don't have to give them full-timer benefits, even if they work full-time hours.

The average in-store person at Walmart in America makes a little over $7, the minimum wage.

Take $7.25/hr and multiply that by 37.5 hours (a 40/hr work-week with half an hour off each shift for lunch). That makes $271.88.

$271.88 times 4 weeks in a month is $1087.52.

$271.88 times 52 weeks is $14,137.76.

Now, if students are supposed to have the brunt of these jobs, how is that supposed to help them pay for their school debts?

For others who work there, how do you afford health care in America that costs an average of half of your yearly earnings?

How do you pay rent, do groceries and pay for transportation and your phone and cable and internet on that wage?

If full-time Walmart staff in America were making double what they make now, taxpayers in America wouldn't have to subsidize as many things as they do. Personal debt would decrease. More people would have health insurance. There would be more cash flow in America from the segment of our population that does the everyday spending on everyday needs.

You could double every Walmart employee's wage and the Walton family wouldn't actually lose any money because Henry Ford proved that if you treat your employees fairly, they'll stick around and they'll actually buy things from the company store.

How many living wages do you suppose the Walmart family has made possible for people around the world? How many people have been able to supplement their incomes via Walmart jobs. How many kids got their start on acquiring a work ethic, experience, references by working at minimum wage as a sack boy for a grocery store or on the docks of a business like Walmart? What part of the Walmart fortune did those holding it not earn via their own labor, insight, business ability, risk taking, expertise, and innovation?

How much better off would you be if there was no Walmart? Do you think the Walton's fortunes would have been somehow miraculously disbursed across the land to all who have much less wealth? Do you honetly believe wealth is some finite thing with just so much to go around and therefore it is unfair that some have substantially more than others?

Do you know what wealth creation actually is? And what makes it happen?

This is Economics 100 stuff. Used to be taught in most highschools even. But I'll cut some slack there as it is quite probable that neither highschool nor college academic types are properly schooled in the concepts any more and wouldn't know how to teach them if their lives depended on it.

A wage that does not produce profits for the employer who pays it is not really a wage at all. It is charity.

 

[JRK]

What I don't understand about what we've become as a country is that the 6 heirs of Walmart in the Walton family are worth a combined $90 billion, which represents more wealth than everything the bottom 30% of America is worth, yet we have public discussions on threads like these that ask us to justify what a living wage is.

The more important question is why the Walton family doesn't offer great health care to their employees. Or why the Walton family insists on having people labelled as part-timers so they don't have to give them full-timer benefits, even if they work full-time hours.

The average in-store person at Walmart in America makes a little over $7, the minimum wage.

Take $7.25/hr and multiply that by 37.5 hours (a 40/hr work-week with half an hour off each shift for lunch). That makes $271.88.

$271.88 times 4 weeks in a month is $1087.52.

$271.88 times 52 weeks is $14,137.76.

Now, if students are supposed to have the brunt of these jobs, how is that supposed to help them pay for their school debts?

For others who work there, how do you afford health care in America that costs an average of half of your yearly earnings?

How do you pay rent, do groceries and pay for transportation and your phone and cable and internet on that wage?

If full-time Walmart staff in America were making double what they make now, taxpayers in America wouldn't have to subsidize as many things as they do. Personal debt would decrease. More people would have health insurance. There would be more cash flow in America from the segment of our population that does the everyday spending on everyday needs.

You could double every Walmart employee's wage and the Walton family wouldn't actually lose any money because Henry Ford proved that if you treat your employees fairly, they'll stick around and they'll actually buy things from the company store.

There is some parts of your argument I agree with
What the Waltons are worth is none of our usiness
wht they pay there people is none of our business
with that said

how many people whom work for wall-mart who actually make minimum wage, work less than 40 hours and are not part of the perks such as stock options is a number I woulds like to know
there success should be shared with there employees
to that point if it was that bad then voting union would be a matter that would be on going one would think
as far as I know not one store has went union
makes one wonder who is telling the truth and why is it that they have not went union

 

[JRK]

the problem with wall mart is the same people who bitch about them typically shop there
I try not to, but alas some item cannot be bought in some cities without your local wall mart

 

[zeke]

Why are you rethugs so confused about what a "living wage" is?

It is the amount of money that lets people barely pay the rent. It is a wage where people can not afford health care. Or car repairs. Or some modest savings. A "living wage" is what you have when you do your Christmas shopping at the Goodwill store. A living wage is when you look to food stamps to help feed the family. Or a food pantry. It is a wage where people spend 100% of what they earn on basic living.

Or is all that what should rightly be called a "barely living wage"? That's the amount to many Americans earn. A barley getting by living wage.

And you rethugs evidently think they earn to much.

 

[dblack]

Why are you rethugs so confused about what a "living wage" is?

Probably because, as you've defined it here, it's entirely subjective. They object to it, as a political concept, because it's something each of us determine for ourselves, not something the state can or should dictate.

 

[zeke]

Why are you rethugs so confused about what a "living wage" is?

Probably because, as you've defined it here, it's entirely subjective. They object to it, as a political concept, because it's something each of us determine for ourselves, not something the state can or should dictate.

92 pages of a rethug trying to figure out what a living wage is. And now you say it is subjective.

Might be better to define what is a "subsistance wage". That is really what they are trying to talk about. How much is enough to subsist.

 

[dblack]

Why are you rethugs so confused about what a "living wage" is?

Probably because, as you've defined it here, it's entirely subjective. They object to it, as a political concept, because it's something each of us determine for ourselves, not something the state can or should dictate.

92 pages of a rethug trying to figure out what a living wage is. And now you say it is subjective.

Might be better to define what is a "subsistance wage". That is really what they are trying to talk about. How much is enough to subsist.

Again, it's subjective. Outside the physical requirements to sustain life (which will still, ultimately, be different in every case), the minimum income to 'subsist' depends on where and how a person chooses to live. A subsistence level income in Manhattan would provide a comfortable living in rural Mississippi. Should everyone who decides to move to NYC guaranteed a 'living wage'?

Anyway, I tend to agree that the 'confusion' over what defines a living wage is a bit of ruse, because that's not really the issue. The core disagreement is whether government should be in charge of dictating prices and wages.

 

[JRK]

Why are you rethugs so confused about what a "living wage" is?

It is the amount of money that lets people barely pay the rent. It is a wage where people can not afford health care. Or car repairs. Or some modest savings. A "living wage" is what you have when you do your Christmas shopping at the Goodwill store. A living wage is when you look to food stamps to help feed the family. Or a food pantry. It is a wage where people spend 100% of what they earn on basic living.

Or is all that what should rightly be called a "barely living wage"? That's the amount to many Americans earn. A barley getting by living wage.

And you rethugs evidently think they earn to much.

Hey, your dems think 8.00 an hour is a living wage
do not blame it on the repubs
I stated from the get go that if your going to have a living wage 12.00 an hour is a place to start, maybe 14
I think any employer that has over 20 employees should offer at a tax deduction partial ins.

the issue is then becomes do you stop buying those same products like a big mac at 5.00?
BUT you better get ready to pay 5.00 for a big mac (I have no issue with that)