How do people survive on minimum wage?

[occupied]

You are comparing the two, but regardless--obviously the goal is to set up concentration camps and systematically murder us all.

OK you are useless, sorry to attempt a reasonable dialog with you.

Is that what you were doing? I asked you two times what you thought the minimum wage should be, and all you did was rant on about how Republicans want to destroy decades of labor laws and regulations and constantly ask for what reason they want to do this.

Perhaps you don't understand what reasonable dialogue BTW do leftists not believe in spell check? I'm not trying to be the grammar police but try to make an attempt to seem like you graduated high school.

And I chose to disregard your question and asked some of my own, it's how the game is played. I spell-check everything and my grammar is pretty fair, are you talking to someone else?

 

[Google]

OK you are useless, sorry to attempt a reasonable dialog with you.

Is that what you were doing? I asked you two times what you thought the minimum wage should be, and all you did was rant on about how Republicans want to destroy decades of labor laws and regulations and constantly ask for what reason they want to do this.

Perhaps you don't understand what reasonable dialogue BTW do leftists not believe in spell check? I'm not trying to be the grammar police but try to make an attempt to seem like you graduated high school.

And I chose to disregard your question and asked some of my own, it's how the game is played. I spell-check everything and my grammar is pretty fair, are you talking to someone else?

I answered yours--the Republicans want to do these things because they hate humanity and want us all to labor in concentration camps.

NOW will you answer mine?

 

[buckeye45_73]

Is that what you were doing? I asked you two times what you thought the minimum wage should be, and all you did was rant on about how Republicans want to destroy decades of labor laws and regulations and constantly ask for what reason they want to do this.

Perhaps you don't understand what reasonable dialogue BTW do leftists not believe in spell check? I'm not trying to be the grammar police but try to make an attempt to seem like you graduated high school.

And I chose to disregard your question and asked some of my own, it's how the game is played. I spell-check everything and my grammar is pretty fair, are you talking to someone else?

I answered yours--the Republicans want to do these things because they hate humanity and want us all to labor in concentration camps.

NOW will you answer mine?

No he's a pussy.

 

[auditor0007]

---(They don't they just exist after 3 years they become zombies)----

Article> One of my clients recently reported getting a job at a fast-food restaurant. Since she's been unemployed and desperately looking for work for nearly a year, I was thrilled for her. She was very excited that she'll be making $7.50 an hour -– a whole quarter more than minimum wage.



After she left my office, I got out a calculator. I've never worked for minimum wage, so I didn't know exactly how much -- or how little -- money that is.



Assuming 80 hours per pay period, my client will be bringing home around $462 every two weeks. That's with no health insurance or retirement contributions.



If I brought home $924 a month, would I even be able to survive? I decided to find out.

read more How do people survive on minimum wage?- MSN Money

If someone doesn't like getting paid minimum wage, pick up a fucking book and make yourself smarter.

I don't feel any sympathy for anyone who can't find more than a minimum wage job. The vast majority of them are unmotivated and lazy.

Those people who work at minimum wage jobs work harder than anyone else. I don't know of many easy jobs that pay minimum wage.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You are comparing the two, but regardless--obviously the goal is to set up concentration camps and systematically murder us all.

OK you are useless, sorry to attempt a reasonable dialog with you.

Is that what you were doing? I asked you two times what you thought the minimum wage should be, and all you did was rant on about how Republicans want to destroy decades of labor laws and regulations and constantly ask for what reason they want to do this.

Perhaps you don't understand what reasonable dialogue BTW do leftists not believe in spell check? I'm not trying to be the grammar police but try to make an attempt to seem like you graduated high school.

You jest. Do you realize how many times you have used "a" when you should have used "an" in this thread?

 

[newpolitics]

You're right about someone needing to work those minimum-wage jobs. Where your wrong is in your obvious assumption about who that "someone" is. Minimum-wage jobs are intended to be entry-level, foot-in-the-door positions for people just entering the job market, or re-entering after a long absence. They are not intended to be filled by older people with families to support.

And there will ALWAYS be people who are just entering the job market. You seem to have some sort of notion that it's ever going to be possible for EVERYONE in the working world to ALL have too much education and experience for entry-level, ALL AT ONCE. That's not how it works. The one certain thing in the world is change. People will get older; people will die; new people will be born.

Also, one of the primary purposes of a minimum-wage, entry-level jobs is SUPPOSED to be to teach young people how much it sucks to be poor and unskilled, so they'll be motivated to improve their lot in life.

There is no purpose for minimum wage jobs. I agree they are good jobs for young people to start, and incidentally may teach them to never want to work that job again once they leave, but that is not the explicit or implicit purpose of those jobs. There is no mission statement for minimum-wage jobs stating "to kick your ass so you never want to do this again." They simply exist. It is very sad to hear or see someone who works a minimum-wage job who has a family, but at that point, it is too late. You are stuck. Perhaps they made a bad decision to have kids without the resources, but whats done is done. Someone with a family and with no GED, even if it is free, makes getting a GED out of the question because the opportunity cost for the time needed to go to class is too expensive given what could be made working instead. it becomes a desperate scramble to work as many jobs as possible. That's a miserable existence. If we are talking about minorities, Compound that with institutional racism, sexism, and other societal barriers to upward mobility, and you have one painful, stressful existence, day after day, and the feeling that you are truly at the bottom of the rung. That is depressing and I imagine, completely hopeless. Then you have the republican narrative simply telling you its your fault... who cares? Whats the difference at that point?

Of course there is a purpose of min wage jobs. Namely to do min wage work. What? You thought jobs were a form of charity?
Few people spend years at min wage. Actually no one does. People getting those jobs eventually develop skills that make them more valuable, increasing their wage.
Have you ever worked a day in your life?

You misunderstood my application of the word "purpose" you sarcastic peon, so you're entire premise is false. Of course the purpose of a job is to work- that's included in the definition of a job. I was refuting an earlier claim that the purpose is to teach young people good work ethic. Try reading.

 

[The Rabbi]

There is no purpose for minimum wage jobs. I agree they are good jobs for young people to start, and incidentally may teach them to never want to work that job again once they leave, but that is not the explicit or implicit purpose of those jobs. There is no mission statement for minimum-wage jobs stating "to kick your ass so you never want to do this again." They simply exist. It is very sad to hear or see someone who works a minimum-wage job who has a family, but at that point, it is too late. You are stuck. Perhaps they made a bad decision to have kids without the resources, but whats done is done. Someone with a family and with no GED, even if it is free, makes getting a GED out of the question because the opportunity cost for the time needed to go to class is too expensive given what could be made working instead. it becomes a desperate scramble to work as many jobs as possible. That's a miserable existence. If we are talking about minorities, Compound that with institutional racism, sexism, and other societal barriers to upward mobility, and you have one painful, stressful existence, day after day, and the feeling that you are truly at the bottom of the rung. That is depressing and I imagine, completely hopeless. Then you have the republican narrative simply telling you its your fault... who cares? Whats the difference at that point?

Of course there is a purpose of min wage jobs. Namely to do min wage work. What? You thought jobs were a form of charity?
Few people spend years at min wage. Actually no one does. People getting those jobs eventually develop skills that make them more valuable, increasing their wage.
Have you ever worked a day in your life?

You misunderstood my application of the word "purpose" you sarcastic peon, so you're entire premise is false. Of course the purpose of a job is to work- that's included in the definition of a job. I was refuting an earlier claim that the purpose is to teach young people good work ethic. Try reading.

You were refuting your own strawman. Good.
Because that is not the purpose of min wage jobs. That is a beneficial effect of them.
You then posit "institutional racism and sexism" as though such things actually exist. They do not. Especially in the min wage job world.
Then you posit a family person stuck in a min wage job for years unable to get ahead. Like that happens. It does not.
In all your post is a fantasy of working class life seen from the vantage of liberal middle class guilt. You should try working those jobs once in a while and see what reality is like.

 

[newpolitics]

Of course there is a purpose of min wage jobs. Namely to do min wage work. What? You thought jobs were a form of charity?
Few people spend years at min wage. Actually no one does. People getting those jobs eventually develop skills that make them more valuable, increasing their wage.
Have you ever worked a day in your life?

You misunderstood my application of the word "purpose" you sarcastic peon, so you're entire premise is false. Of course the purpose of a job is to work- that's included in the definition of a job. I was refuting an earlier claim that the purpose is to teach young people good work ethic. Try reading.

You were refuting your own strawman. Good.
Because that is not the purpose of min wage jobs. That is a beneficial effect of them.
You then posit "institutional racism and sexism" as though such things actually exist. They do not. Especially in the min wage job world.
Then you posit a family person stuck in a min wage job for years unable to get ahead. Like that happens. It does not.
In all your post is a fantasy of working class life seen from the vantage of liberal middle class guilt. You should try working those jobs once in a while and see what reality is like.

You are leaving logical argument at home. I was refuting a strawman made by someone else. I never posited that there was a purpose to min. wage jobs. Someone else did. How many times am I going to have to explain this?

It is common sense, and is demonstrable, that institutional sexism and racism exists, with for example, statistics on womens wage rates as compared to mens for the same job or the sheer wealth distribution among people of different races (except to the conservatives mind, because it fuddles up their claims about the world being totally fair). The denial of such dynamics in society is itself racist and sexists, and this is why the conservative party is racist and sexist.

Further, I wasn't 'positing' anything. I was stating hypotheticals, but to deny their veracity is simply ignorant.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

You misunderstood my application of the word "purpose" you sarcastic peon, so you're entire premise is false. Of course the purpose of a job is to work- that's included in the definition of a job. I was refuting an earlier claim that the purpose is to teach young people good work ethic. Try reading.

You were refuting your own strawman. Good.
Because that is not the purpose of min wage jobs. That is a beneficial effect of them.
You then posit "institutional racism and sexism" as though such things actually exist. They do not. Especially in the min wage job world.
Then you posit a family person stuck in a min wage job for years unable to get ahead. Like that happens. It does not.
In all your post is a fantasy of working class life seen from the vantage of liberal middle class guilt. You should try working those jobs once in a while and see what reality is like.

You are leaving logical argument at home. I was refuting a strawman made by someone else. I never posited that there was a purpose to min. wage jobs. Someone else did. How many times am I going to have to explain this?

It is common sense, and is demonstrable, that institutional sexism and racism exists, with for example, statistics on womens wage rates as compared to mens for the same job or the sheer wealth distribution among people of different races (except to the conservatives mind, because it fuddles up their claims about the world being totally fair). The denial of such dynamics in society is itself racist and sexists, and this is why the conservative party is racist and sexist.

Further, I wasn't 'positing' anything. I was stating hypotheticals, but to deny their veracity is simply ignorant.

What utter rubbish....

 

[The Rabbi]

You misunderstood my application of the word "purpose" you sarcastic peon, so you're entire premise is false. Of course the purpose of a job is to work- that's included in the definition of a job. I was refuting an earlier claim that the purpose is to teach young people good work ethic. Try reading.

You were refuting your own strawman. Good.
Because that is not the purpose of min wage jobs. That is a beneficial effect of them.
You then posit "institutional racism and sexism" as though such things actually exist. They do not. Especially in the min wage job world.
Then you posit a family person stuck in a min wage job for years unable to get ahead. Like that happens. It does not.
In all your post is a fantasy of working class life seen from the vantage of liberal middle class guilt. You should try working those jobs once in a while and see what reality is like.

You are leaving logical argument at home. I was refuting a strawman made by someone else. I never posited that there was a purpose to min. wage jobs. Someone else did. How many times am I going to have to explain this?

It is common sense, and is demonstrable, that institutional sexism and racism exists, with for example, statistics on womens wage rates as compared to mens for the same job or the sheer wealth distribution among people of different races (except to the conservatives mind, because it fuddles up their claims about the world being totally fair). The denial of such dynamics in society is itself racist and sexists, and this is why the conservative party is racist and sexist.

Further, I wasn't 'positing' anything. I was stating hypotheticals, but to deny their veracity is simply ignorant.

It is common sense among liberals. In the real world there is no insitutitonal racism or sexism. The stats you mention are easily explainable by other means, especially the shorter tenure most women have in jobs owing to time off for child rearing.
Your hypotheticals are simply a fancy name for fantasies. Therefore they are not true.

 

[newpolitics]

You were refuting your own strawman. Good.
Because that is not the purpose of min wage jobs. That is a beneficial effect of them.
You then posit "institutional racism and sexism" as though such things actually exist. They do not. Especially in the min wage job world.
Then you posit a family person stuck in a min wage job for years unable to get ahead. Like that happens. It does not.
In all your post is a fantasy of working class life seen from the vantage of liberal middle class guilt. You should try working those jobs once in a while and see what reality is like.

You are leaving logical argument at home. I was refuting a strawman made by someone else. I never posited that there was a purpose to min. wage jobs. Someone else did. How many times am I going to have to explain this?

It is common sense, and is demonstrable, that institutional sexism and racism exists, with for example, statistics on womens wage rates as compared to mens for the same job or the sheer wealth distribution among people of different races (except to the conservatives mind, because it fuddles up their claims about the world being totally fair). The denial of such dynamics in society is itself racist and sexists, and this is why the conservative party is racist and sexist.

Further, I wasn't 'positing' anything. I was stating hypotheticals, but to deny their veracity is simply ignorant.

What utter rubbish....

Another braindead response from the right.

 

[The Rabbi]

You are leaving logical argument at home. I was refuting a strawman made by someone else. I never posited that there was a purpose to min. wage jobs. Someone else did. How many times am I going to have to explain this?

It is common sense, and is demonstrable, that institutional sexism and racism exists, with for example, statistics on womens wage rates as compared to mens for the same job or the sheer wealth distribution among people of different races (except to the conservatives mind, because it fuddles up their claims about the world being totally fair). The denial of such dynamics in society is itself racist and sexists, and this is why the conservative party is racist and sexist.

Further, I wasn't 'positing' anything. I was stating hypotheticals, but to deny their veracity is simply ignorant.

What utter rubbish....

Another braindead response from the right.

It's the only possible response to utter rubbish. Calling a spade a spade and all.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

You are leaving logical argument at home. I was refuting a strawman made by someone else. I never posited that there was a purpose to min. wage jobs. Someone else did. How many times am I going to have to explain this?

It is common sense, and is demonstrable, that institutional sexism and racism exists, with for example, statistics on womens wage rates as compared to mens for the same job or the sheer wealth distribution among people of different races (except to the conservatives mind, because it fuddles up their claims about the world being totally fair). The denial of such dynamics in society is itself racist and sexists, and this is why the conservative party is racist and sexist.

Further, I wasn't 'positing' anything. I was stating hypotheticals, but to deny their veracity is simply ignorant.

What utter rubbish....

Another braindead response from the right.

What's brain dead are your idiotic premises and your broken English and poor grammar.

Fuck off twit.

 

[The T]

You misunderstood my application of the word "purpose" you sarcastic peon, so you're entire premise is false. Of course the purpose of a job is to work- that's included in the definition of a job. I was refuting an earlier claim that the purpose is to teach young people good work ethic. Try reading.

You were refuting your own strawman. Good.
Because that is not the purpose of min wage jobs. That is a beneficial effect of them.
You then posit "institutional racism and sexism" as though such things actually exist. They do not. Especially in the min wage job world.
Then you posit a family person stuck in a min wage job for years unable to get ahead. Like that happens. It does not.
In all your post is a fantasy of working class life seen from the vantage of liberal middle class guilt. You should try working those jobs once in a while and see what reality is like.

You are leaving logical argument at home. I was refuting a strawman made by someone else. I never posited that there was a purpose to min. wage jobs. Someone else did. How many times am I going to have to explain this?

It is common sense, and is demonstrable, that institutional sexism and racism exists, with for example, statistics on womens wage rates as compared to mens for the same job or the sheer wealth distribution among people of different races (except to the conservatives mind, because it fuddles up their claims about the world being totally fair). The denial of such dynamics in society is itself racist and sexists, and this is why the conservative party is racist and sexist.

Further, I wasn't 'positing' anything. I was stating hypotheticals, but to deny their veracity is simply ignorant.

See the bolded word? YOU should not concentrate on those but focus on the real world.

 

[Texanmike]

There is nothing to envy of the Chinese. They are communists and their labor work force is essentially slave labor. Which is why would should be putting tariffs on all their crap they export to us.

Yah US consumers need to pay more for the Chinese imports.

Ype I agree if it had been implemented 15 years ago.

Or US consumers can buy American. And yes it would cost more, not sure what your point is. Slave labor is always going to be cheaper. You complain about outsourcing to shithole countries yet you're against tariffs which would promote companies keeping their jobs here....

Tarrifs are not the answer.

Mike

 

[midcan5]

They don't, they can't, I've been saying that for years, more than 75% of those working for minimum wage are adults and minimum wage currently has the lowest spending power in history. In the richest country in the world, the poorest worker should make a living wage.

What is a 'living wage'? Given that if a business increases what it pays its workers, it generally has to increase the price to its customers... therefore the cost of living goes up, which means the 'living wage' is no longer a 'living wage' which means it needs to be increased... which leads to increased prices to customers, which leads to an increase in the cost of living, which leads to an increase in the 'living wage', which leads to.... I think you get where I'm going with this. There is no simple answer... and people really should recognize that and stop expecting simple answers.

The same heartless imbeciles that thank this post will defend the rich based on some twisted morality that reverses Robin Hood. You people are sad specimens of human.

"What is a human life worth? You may not want to put a price tag on a it. But if we really had to, most of us would agree that the value of a human life would be in the millions. Consistent with the foundations of our democracy and our frequently professed belief in the inherent dignity of human beings, we would also agree that all humans are created equal, at least to the extent of denying that differences of sex, ethnicity, nationality and place of residence change the value of a human life." What Should a Billionaire Give – and What Should You?, by Peter Singer

"On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned."UBI and the Flat Tax


http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/220510-the-greatest-job-creator-of-all-time.html#post5188615


http://www.usmessageboard.com/humor/176686-bonuses-for-billionaires.html#post3896395


"Do not waste your time on Social Questions. What is the matter with the poor is Poverty; what is the matter with the rich is Uselessness." George Bernard Shaw

.

 

[newpolitics]

You were refuting your own strawman. Good.
Because that is not the purpose of min wage jobs. That is a beneficial effect of them.
You then posit "institutional racism and sexism" as though such things actually exist. They do not. Especially in the min wage job world.
Then you posit a family person stuck in a min wage job for years unable to get ahead. Like that happens. It does not.
In all your post is a fantasy of working class life seen from the vantage of liberal middle class guilt. You should try working those jobs once in a while and see what reality is like.

You are leaving logical argument at home. I was refuting a strawman made by someone else. I never posited that there was a purpose to min. wage jobs. Someone else did. How many times am I going to have to explain this?

It is common sense, and is demonstrable, that institutional sexism and racism exists, with for example, statistics on womens wage rates as compared to mens for the same job or the sheer wealth distribution among people of different races (except to the conservatives mind, because it fuddles up their claims about the world being totally fair). The denial of such dynamics in society is itself racist and sexists, and this is why the conservative party is racist and sexist.

Further, I wasn't 'positing' anything. I was stating hypotheticals, but to deny their veracity is simply ignorant.

It is common sense among liberals. In the real world there is no insitutitonal racism or sexism. The stats you mention are easily explainable by other means, especially the shorter tenure most women have in jobs owing to time off for child rearing.
Your hypotheticals are simply a fancy name for fantasies. Therefore they are not true.

Ideals of fairness betray a cognitive distortion in the form of wishful thinking. There are undoubtedly people with families working minimum wage jobs, and it is easy to imagine how that would make impossible any time investment towards education when money is needed now. I did not provide any specific stats, but I shouldn't needed to. A look at the world in which we leave should be enough. I'm not sure what world you're living in.

Your explanation for the difference in wage rates mentioned is nonsensical, and is actually quite laughable if that is the basis for your claims. I assume the basis for your claims on equality across race are equally as nonsensical.

 

[The Rabbi]

You are leaving logical argument at home. I was refuting a strawman made by someone else. I never posited that there was a purpose to min. wage jobs. Someone else did. How many times am I going to have to explain this?

It is common sense, and is demonstrable, that institutional sexism and racism exists, with for example, statistics on womens wage rates as compared to mens for the same job or the sheer wealth distribution among people of different races (except to the conservatives mind, because it fuddles up their claims about the world being totally fair). The denial of such dynamics in society is itself racist and sexists, and this is why the conservative party is racist and sexist.

Further, I wasn't 'positing' anything. I was stating hypotheticals, but to deny their veracity is simply ignorant.

It is common sense among liberals. In the real world there is no insitutitonal racism or sexism. The stats you mention are easily explainable by other means, especially the shorter tenure most women have in jobs owing to time off for child rearing.
Your hypotheticals are simply a fancy name for fantasies. Therefore they are not true.

Ideals of fairness betray a cognitive distortion in the form of wishful thinking. There are undoubtedly people with families working minimum wage jobs, and it is easy to imagine how that would make impossible any time investment towards education when money is needed now. I did not provide any specific stats, but I shouldn't needed to. A look at the world in which we leave should be enough. I'm not sure what world you're living in.

Your explanation for the difference in wage rates mentioned is nonsensical, and is actually quite laughable if that is the basis for your claims. I assume the basis for your claims on equality across race are equally as nonsensical.

IOW you have no proof, no evidence, not even a logical argument. But it just HAS to be as you say because there are poor people in America. That means ipso facto there must be discrimination and racism.
You are little short of a troll.
Dismissed.

 

[Foxfyre]

Whether women or minorities are paid less than others in the same job is a separate topic from a discussion of minimum wage. However, minimum wage is a great equalizer as everybody who agrees to work for minimum wage receives the same minimum wage regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, disability, experience, references, ability, talent, aptitude, or skill sets.

So far as inequity in opportunity, promotion, and wages, the free market as generally been a much better method for people to get ahead rather than government manipulation.

 

[newpolitics]

You were refuting your own strawman. Good.
Because that is not the purpose of min wage jobs. That is a beneficial effect of them.
You then posit "institutional racism and sexism" as though such things actually exist. They do not. Especially in the min wage job world.
Then you posit a family person stuck in a min wage job for years unable to get ahead. Like that happens. It does not.
In all your post is a fantasy of working class life seen from the vantage of liberal middle class guilt. You should try working those jobs once in a while and see what reality is like.

You are leaving logical argument at home. I was refuting a strawman made by someone else. I never posited that there was a purpose to min. wage jobs. Someone else did. How many times am I going to have to explain this?

It is common sense, and is demonstrable, that institutional sexism and racism exists, with for example, statistics on womens wage rates as compared to mens for the same job or the sheer wealth distribution among people of different races (except to the conservatives mind, because it fuddles up their claims about the world being totally fair). The denial of such dynamics in society is itself racist and sexists, and this is why the conservative party is racist and sexist.

Further, I wasn't 'positing' anything. I was stating hypotheticals, but to deny their veracity is simply ignorant.

See the bolded word? YOU should not concentrate on those but focus on the real world.

You're missing the point of the hypothetical, which was meant to illustrate THE REAL WORLD or act as a close approximation. Are you implying that people with families don't ever work minimum wage jobs? If you admit that they do, which is the only answer, then my hypothetical is sound enough to offer a glimpse into that world. That's all. Stop being so fucking angry and self-rigtheous. Godamned conservatives assholes.