I don't understand why republicans reject both a minimum wage hike and welfare for the poor

[Redfish]

Thats because you're stupid.
WHat is hard to understand about some people being worth only 5/hr or 10/hr?

Who's worth $5/hr In your estimation?
Unless you're in your 80's , MW has existed your entire lifetime. What criteria do you use to determine who is worth less than MW?

I can answer that question quite easily, Hutch. Someone with no job skills that you have to train is "worth less" than minimum wage to their employer. They are in fact a negative drain on that business.

If they're worthless than don't hire them: )

Thats exactly what happens. Now you have a large class of unemployed and unemployable people who are doomed to gov't dependence for life. I think we see who the real "D-Bag" is here.

NO! The standard for a burger flipper is the same whether the person is 16 or 60, skilled or unskilled, black or white, male or female. The person either does the job or gets fired. No one is forced out of burger flipping.

when welfare pays almost as much as working, they will choose welfare every time. The problem is not MW being too low, its welfare wages being too high..

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Are yu truly incapable of reading his post and understanding it?
Do you have any proof there are more min wage jobs today than ever before?

There was nothing to read.
So you can't produce any study outlining the negative affects that MW increases have had over the last 77 years, yet you all predict they will happen? Why do you suppose there is no data supporting your view?

There were two links in his post. Do you need me to repost them?

I read them both. Neither spoke to my question of how 77 years of MW increases have adversely affected our economy in the ways you all say it does.

What would persuade you that was the case?

the liberal mind is devoid of logic, you are wasting your time.

Show me the proof of your logic.
Show us the report that shows this has been the case for every MW increase in the last 77 years. By your logic we should have 50% unemployment by now and only college grads working MW jobs.

 

[Oldstyle]

Why do you suppose that is? It isnt that there are no jobs for those people. It's that you have people who are worth 10/hr, people worth 8/hr, people worth 5/hr and people worth 2/hr. But if you set the minimum at 10/hr you'll only hire people who are worth 10/hr. The people worth less than that wont get hired at all. Which is whyyou dont see them working at those jobs anymore.

What kind of logic is this?
That makes no sense whatsoever.

Thats because you're stupid.
WHat is hard to understand about some people being worth only 5/hr or 10/hr?

Who's worth $5/hr In your estimation?
Unless you're in your 80's , MW has existed your entire lifetime. What criteria do you use to determine who is worth less than MW?

I can answer that question quite easily, Hutch. Someone with no job skills that you have to train is "worth less" than minimum wage to their employer. They are in fact a negative drain on that business.

If they're worthless than don't hire them: )

I didn't say they were worthless, Hutch...I simply pointed out that at that point in their career they are not worth what they are being paid.

What you have to keep in mind is that anything you do to make that initial cost to the employer more expensive than it already is...the less likely they will be to hire someone without job skills and train them...which means if you're a young person looking for your first job then you're going to be facing some real obstacles to landing that first job.

 

[The Rabbi]

Thats because you're stupid.
WHat is hard to understand about some people being worth only 5/hr or 10/hr?

Who's worth $5/hr In your estimation?
Unless you're in your 80's , MW has existed your entire lifetime. What criteria do you use to determine who is worth less than MW?

I can answer that question quite easily, Hutch. Someone with no job skills that you have to train is "worth less" than minimum wage to their employer. They are in fact a negative drain on that business.

If they're worthless than don't hire them: )

Thats exactly what happens. Now you have a large class of unemployed and unemployable people who are doomed to gov't dependence for life. I think we see who the real "D-Bag" is here.

NO! The standard for a burger flipper is the same whether the person is 16 or 60, skilled or unskilled, black or white, male or female. The person either does the job or gets fired. No one is forced out of burger flipping.

You've never managed a company. I doubt you'e ever worked for one.
Not everyone gets paid the same wage at the same job. Whatever the job some people are more skilled or better employees so make more money. Is this foreign to you?

 

[bornright]

Believe it or not, both the left and the right want to end welfare for the poor. The left just has a realistic and humane way of doing it.

$153 billion of public assistance is spent on people because of their low wage jobs. 18 million people make less than $10.10 per hour. How many more do you think make less than $15? If the minimum was raised to $10.10, republicans are to stupid/immature to realize that far less people would be eligible for programs like food stamps. It would dramatically fix the fucking problem of the poor on welfare!

Like it or not, $15 as a minimum wage would be a base wage kept up with the rate of inflation. The last time someone could live comfortably off 10.10 per hour was the fucking 60s. Since the recession, low wage jobs out number higher wage jobs. That means MILLIONS OF PEOPLE have no choice but to accept low wage jobs.

As long as it was gradually raised over a couple of years, the initial cost to the market would be minimized. Prices would go up, but not nearly enough to offset the consumer spending power created by it. Consumer spending would boom. The market would begin to create jobs. Way more than the jobs that would have been scrapped initially. Prices would also go down.

Look the only reason most (not all) CEOs are against raising wages is because it just easier to for them to keep the ridiculous money they make rather than invest in a strong labor force. The average CEO makes over 300x what the average worker makes. Sure we can all agree CEOs deserve a wealthy life for all their hard work, but do you really think they deserve 300x more?

Hell no.

wasn't the minimum wage $1.34 an hr back in the 60,s? If you put the math to it considering inflation your buying power would be about the same.

How expensive would that fast food cost?

Many leftist dream that raising the minimum wage does not negatively affect the economy. If this is so why not just raise it to $50 an hr? you should really give this some thought. Get someone to add the numbers for you.

 

[Andylusion]

Thats because you're stupid.
WHat is hard to understand about some people being worth only 5/hr or 10/hr?

Who's worth $5/hr In your estimation?
Unless you're in your 80's , MW has existed your entire lifetime. What criteria do you use to determine who is worth less than MW?

It s not my estimation. It is the business owner's estimation. Lets say I own a car wash. I am washing cars at $5 or 10 a car. I can afford to pay up to 8/hr. But I cannot afford to pay 8/hr to a guy who maybe shows up for work on time, maybe shows up 20 minutes late, maybe doesnt show up at all. Or a guy who wants to sit on his ass and not wash cars. Or a guy just out of prison who may beat up my customers. For them, they're worth $5/hr until they can prove they show up on time sober and ready to work
Is that not clear to you?

It's not clear because it's not reality. There's a MW to protect workers from D-bag employers like the one you presented.

How is preventiong workers from getting jobs protecting them? If the min wage is 10/hr I will never hire someone who isnt worth that to me. Those people will remain unemployed, which is precisely why teen unemployment is so high.
How is someone offering a job a "D-bag"? Do you think employment is a form of charity?

You're simply wrong. Employers need the number of people they need to meet their obligations.
If my McDonald's needs 15 people to meet the demand for my lunch rush I'm not going to let 4 go because of a MW increase and cut my own throat. I'll keep all 15 and find a way to make it work. By your logic after a few decades of MW increases there should only be 2 people left on shift.

"find a way to make it work"......

That's straight out of Atlas Shrugged. You should read that.

You haven't had to balance your own check book, making that kind of statement.

I was actually working at McDonald's in the 1990s, when the minimum wage went from $4.25 to $5.25. First thing they did was fire 3 employees. Poof.... gone.

Yeah, they'll make it work... with fewer employees, or with more Kiosks and machines. Money doesn't grow on trees behind the store sparky. If wages are forced up, then either you have to charge customers a higher price for food (which they do), or they have lay off employees to reduce labor costs (which they do), and often both.

 

[Redfish]

There was nothing to read.
So you can't produce any study outlining the negative affects that MW increases have had over the last 77 years, yet you all predict they will happen? Why do you suppose there is no data supporting your view?

There were two links in his post. Do you need me to repost them?

I read them both. Neither spoke to my question of how 77 years of MW increases have adversely affected our economy in the ways you all say it does.

What would persuade you that was the case?

the liberal mind is devoid of logic, you are wasting your time.

Show me the proof of your logic.
Show us the report that shows this has been the case for every MW increase in the last 77 years. By your logic we should have 50% unemployment by now and only college grads working MW jobs.

When I was in high school the minimum wage was $1/hr. I worked 44 hours for $44, then had a few dollars taken for taxes. But, I was a high school kid who needed spending money and I was glad to get it. It also kept me off the street and out of trouble. It also taught me how to work, how to deal with a boss, how to deal with customers, and how to appreciate money that I worked for. If the MW had been increased during those times either I or some other kid would have lost that learning experience.

 

[Oldstyle]

Thats because you're stupid.
WHat is hard to understand about some people being worth only 5/hr or 10/hr?

Who's worth $5/hr In your estimation?
Unless you're in your 80's , MW has existed your entire lifetime. What criteria do you use to determine who is worth less than MW?

It s not my estimation. It is the business owner's estimation. Lets say I own a car wash. I am washing cars at $5 or 10 a car. I can afford to pay up to 8/hr. But I cannot afford to pay 8/hr to a guy who maybe shows up for work on time, maybe shows up 20 minutes late, maybe doesnt show up at all. Or a guy who wants to sit on his ass and not wash cars. Or a guy just out of prison who may beat up my customers. For them, they're worth $5/hr until they can prove they show up on time sober and ready to work
Is that not clear to you?

It's not clear because it's not reality. There's a MW to protect workers from D-bag employers like the one you presented.

How is preventiong workers from getting jobs protecting them? If the min wage is 10/hr I will never hire someone who isnt worth that to me. Those people will remain unemployed, which is precisely why teen unemployment is so high.
How is someone offering a job a "D-bag"? Do you think employment is a form of charity?

You're simply wrong. Employers need the number of people they need to meet their obligations.
If my McDonald's needs 15 people to meet the demand for my lunch rush I'm not going to let 4 go because of a MW increase and cut my own throat. I'll keep all 15 and find a way to make it work. By your logic after a few decades of MW increases there should only be 2 people left on shift.

If I'm that McDonald's operator and you force a $15 an hour minimum wage on me...I'm going to either raise my prices substantially or I'm going to cut my labor force accordingly. My prediction is that what will happen is the elimination of humans taking an order from customers...with that position being replaced by a touch screen ordering system. You can see it being tried already in chains like Panera Bread. You'll see it implemented on a much wider scale if you pass "living wage" laws.

 

[Oldstyle]

So what have you "gained"? You've taken away "gateway jobs" where young people learn job skills. You've punished the very people who most NEED that first job.

 

[The Rabbi]

So what have you "gained"? You've taken away "gateway jobs" where young people learn job skills. You've punished the very people who most NEED that first job.

But it makes them feel better. "Let's give America a raise!"

 

[Andylusion]

So what have you "gained"? You've taken away "gateway jobs" where young people learn job skills. You've punished the very people who most NEED that first job.

But it makes them feel better. "Let's give America a raise!"

It's all about 'feelings', not about what is actually good or positive. Setting the minimum wage will reduce the number of low wage workers statistically..... of course becaues they will be unemployed, and thus the number of low wagers is 'lower'. Yay... feel good. Who cares people are cut off with little opportunities. Who cares if youth unemployment ends up 25% like France. We "feel" better about it.

Morons.

 

[bendog]

Who's worth $5/hr In your estimation?
Unless you're in your 80's , MW has existed your entire lifetime. What criteria do you use to determine who is worth less than MW?

I can answer that question quite easily, Hutch. Someone with no job skills that you have to train is "worth less" than minimum wage to their employer. They are in fact a negative drain on that business.

If they're worthless than don't hire them: )

Thats exactly what happens. Now you have a large class of unemployed and unemployable people who are doomed to gov't dependence for life. I think we see who the real "D-Bag" is here.

NO! The standard for a burger flipper is the same whether the person is 16 or 60, skilled or unskilled, black or white, male or female. The person either does the job or gets fired. No one is forced out of burger flipping.

when welfare pays almost as much as working, they will choose welfare every time. The problem is not MW being too low, its welfare wages being too high..

I'm not for a min wage hike, or at least not much of one, but you clearly have no idea of what govt assistance programs the working poor actually qualify for.

 

[Redfish]

I can answer that question quite easily, Hutch. Someone with no job skills that you have to train is "worth less" than minimum wage to their employer. They are in fact a negative drain on that business.

If they're worthless than don't hire them: )

Thats exactly what happens. Now you have a large class of unemployed and unemployable people who are doomed to gov't dependence for life. I think we see who the real "D-Bag" is here.

NO! The standard for a burger flipper is the same whether the person is 16 or 60, skilled or unskilled, black or white, male or female. The person either does the job or gets fired. No one is forced out of burger flipping.

when welfare pays almost as much as working, they will choose welfare every time. The problem is not MW being too low, its welfare wages being too high..

I'm not for a min wage hike, or at least not much of one, but you clearly have no idea of what govt assistance programs the working poor actually qualify for.

oh, but I do. I know people living on them. I know exactly what they provide.

 

[Oldstyle]

I can answer that question quite easily, Hutch. Someone with no job skills that you have to train is "worth less" than minimum wage to their employer. They are in fact a negative drain on that business.

If they're worthless than don't hire them: )

Thats exactly what happens. Now you have a large class of unemployed and unemployable people who are doomed to gov't dependence for life. I think we see who the real "D-Bag" is here.

NO! The standard for a burger flipper is the same whether the person is 16 or 60, skilled or unskilled, black or white, male or female. The person either does the job or gets fired. No one is forced out of burger flipping.

when welfare pays almost as much as working, they will choose welfare every time. The problem is not MW being too low, its welfare wages being too high..

I'm not for a min wage hike, or at least not much of one, but you clearly have no idea of what govt assistance programs the working poor actually qualify for.

I'm not against a social safety net, Bendog but when the policies that you've put in place to "assist" people actually harm them then it's time to take a step back and ask yourself if you've really helped or have in fact harmed those you wanted to help.

 

[bendog]

If they're worthless than don't hire them: )

Thats exactly what happens. Now you have a large class of unemployed and unemployable people who are doomed to gov't dependence for life. I think we see who the real "D-Bag" is here.

NO! The standard for a burger flipper is the same whether the person is 16 or 60, skilled or unskilled, black or white, male or female. The person either does the job or gets fired. No one is forced out of burger flipping.

when welfare pays almost as much as working, they will choose welfare every time. The problem is not MW being too low, its welfare wages being too high..

I'm not for a min wage hike, or at least not much of one, but you clearly have no idea of what govt assistance programs the working poor actually qualify for.

I'm not against a social safety net, Bendog but when the policies that you've put in place to "assist" people actually harm them then it's time to take a step back and ask yourself if you've really helped or have in fact harmed those you wanted to help.

Exactly so.

I think one of the most damaging aspects of "liberalism" is the notion that we should make taking public assistance to not carry a negative stigma. One of the founding principles of John Locke and Calvin was essentially to shame people out of poverty. Just "giving" somebody something is not necessarily helping them.
Now Schips is a bit different. Kids aren't adults.

 

[chikenwing]

Believe it or not, both the left and the right want to end welfare for the poor. The left just has a realistic and humane way of doing it.

$153 billion of public assistance is spent on people because of their low wage jobs. 18 million people make less than $10.10 per hour. How many more do you think make less than $15? If the minimum was raised to $10.10, republicans are to stupid/immature to realize that far less people would be eligible for programs like food stamps. It would dramatically fix the fucking problem of the poor on welfare!

Like it or not, $15 as a minimum wage would be a base wage kept up with the rate of inflation. The last time someone could live comfortably off 10.10 per hour was the fucking 60s. Since the recession, low wage jobs out number higher wage jobs. That means MILLIONS OF PEOPLE have no choice but to accept low wage jobs.

As long as it was gradually raised over a couple of years, the initial cost to the market would be minimized. Prices would go up, but not nearly enough to offset the consumer spending power created by it. Consumer spending would boom. The market would begin to create jobs. Way more than the jobs that would have been scrapped initially. Prices would also go down.

Look the only reason most (not all) CEOs are against raising wages is because it just easier to for them to keep the ridiculous money they make rather than invest in a strong labor force. The average CEO makes over 300x what the average worker makes. Sure we can all agree CEOs deserve a wealthy life for all their hard work, but do you really think they deserve 300x more?

Hell no.

Hell yes.

They stayed in school, got educated, got a marketable skill, didn't have a bunch of kids they couldn't afford and you want to reward those who did none of these things just because they breath. Bullshit.

You repubs have such one track minds. Yes obviously many single women have children that they shouldn't have had, but why don't you ever think of the kids? Should those kids grow up in poverty because of their irresponsible mother? They need public support if there aren't higher wages available.

And??
So you have quote after quote of Conservatives saying what you claim??
Well you don't and can't,the right doesn't want to end anything,just make those programs sustainable and equitable,you break the piggy bank an nobody get a thing.

 

[Billy000]

Also, I will no longer discuss CEO pay with morons who don't know the role of a CEO

Lol go for it. While you're at it, justify why these people deserve 300x more than the average worker.

 

[Billy000]

Progressive economic policy come with a 100% Guaranteed Fail. It creates only 2 classes of people: the ruling class and slaves

You're just making shit up as usual. That bullshit just sounds correct to you but in reality it is completely ridiculous.

 

[Redfish]

Also, I will no longer discuss CEO pay with morons who don't know the role of a CEO

Lol go for it. While you're at it, justify why these people deserve 300x more than the average worker.

do beyonce and jay z deserve the pay that they get?

 

[Redfish]

Progressive economic policy come with a 100% Guaranteed Fail. It creates only 2 classes of people: the ruling class and slaves

You're just making shit up as usual. That bullshit just sounds correct to you but in reality it is completely ridiculous.

nope, what he said is accurate. in a socialist marxist progressive collectivist system like you fools say you want, all of the money and all of the power is concentrated in a very small group of super elites and everyone else is "equally" miserable.