Let's raise the minimum wage! It's good for business, it's good for America!

[Hutch Starskey]

Is there another possibility? A limit on maxim income? Let's go the other way here. CEO's or actors or sports stars, all get a cap on their income limit based on percentage of average American worker income. Period.

Or how about going the completely opposite way and abandoning Marxism. It doesn't work...

we have never actually tried that, that isn't Marxism, either. A CEO's income or actor or a sports figure should be merit based, not handed out to them. I want a million dollars because I think I merit it? Nobody merits the income Apple execs, Hollywood Oscar winners or NFL quarterback earns. It's pure bullshit.

Most everybody is paid by how much they make for their employer.

If everybody tunes in to the television series Big Bang Theory, and the company is making 30 million a week off of the program, they pay their actors one million dollars an episode each. They couldn't pay that kind of money unless they were making that kind of money.

If a star baseball pitcher is drawing in crowds at the stadium and people tuning into the baseball game on television, the baseball team is making millions off of that pitcher, so they pay him X millions per year.

If a CEO is making 10 million a year, it's likely that his or her talents are bringing in the company twice or more that kind of money.

Socialism is not only a failure in society, it's a failure in business as well. Government should not run business--business should run business and government should run government.

Most everybody is paid by how much they make for their employer.

Really?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Raising the minimum wage is not the issue the issue is how much should it be raised. I don't object to bumping the minimum wage up some but don't support doubling it to $15.00 an hour.

There was a time when people bumped up their own wages without government. Why should government bump up anything? If you want a bump up, do it yourself.

Don't you like people like blackhawk who so freely are willing to decide what other people should spend on their employees and at what rate people who want to work will be denied jobs?

A lot of people just don't understand how business works--for instance:

If I'm an employer and want to give one worker a dollar an hour raise, it would cost me $40.00 a week assuming that this one employee works 40 hours a week.....that's what they think....

In reality, there are other costs associated with that one dollar an hour raise. Employers have to match your SS and Medicare contributions. If you make more money, they take more out of your check for SS and Medicare, and the employer has to match that new figure.

Then you have unemployment and Workman's compensation to consider. Those insurances go up with the new wages of that employee.

Then there is time off to consider, and perhaps an IRA from your employer which again--he matches a percentage of what you make. Even with only a two week vacation, those two weeks plus paid holidays really add up.

And that's one employee with only a one dollar an hour raise. What happens when government forces that employer to pay five, six or seven dollars an hour more to his over two dozen employees? It's a hell of a lot of money.

 

[Markle]

yes! Lets make it 15 bucks per hour!

Why not $27.50?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Is there another possibility? A limit on maxim income? Let's go the other way here. CEO's or actors or sports stars, all get a cap on their income limit based on percentage of average American worker income. Period.

Or how about going the completely opposite way and abandoning Marxism. It doesn't work...

we have never actually tried that, that isn't Marxism, either. A CEO's income or actor or a sports figure should be merit based, not handed out to them. I want a million dollars because I think I merit it? Nobody merits the income Apple execs, Hollywood Oscar winners or NFL quarterback earns. It's pure bullshit.

Most everybody is paid by how much they make for their employer.

If everybody tunes in to the television series Big Bang Theory, and the company is making 30 million a week off of the program, they pay their actors one million dollars an episode each. They couldn't pay that kind of money unless they were making that kind of money.

If a star baseball pitcher is drawing in crowds at the stadium and people tuning into the baseball game on television, the baseball team is making millions off of that pitcher, so they pay him X millions per year.

If a CEO is making 10 million a year, it's likely that his or her talents are bringing in the company twice or more that kind of money.

Socialism is not only a failure in society, it's a failure in business as well. Government should not run business--business should run business and government should run government.

Most everybody is paid by how much they make for their employer.

Really?

View attachment 74255

So WTF does this chart prove?

 

[kaz]

Raising the minimum wage is not the issue the issue is how much should it be raised. I don't object to bumping the minimum wage up some but don't support doubling it to $15.00 an hour.

There was a time when people bumped up their own wages without government. Why should government bump up anything? If you want a bump up, do it yourself.

Don't you like people like blackhawk who so freely are willing to decide what other people should spend on their employees and at what rate people who want to work will be denied jobs?

A lot of people just don't understand how business works--for instance:

If I'm an employer and want to give one worker a dollar an hour raise, it would cost me $40.00 a week assuming that this one employee works 40 hours a week.....that's what they think....

In reality, there are other costs associated with that one dollar an hour raise. Employers have to match your SS and Medicare contributions. If you make more money, they take more out of your check for SS and Medicare, and the employer has to match that new figure.

Then you have unemployment and Workman's compensation to consider. Those insurances go up with the new wages of that employee.

Then there is time off to consider, and perhaps an IRA from your employer which again--he matches a percentage of what you make. Even with only a two week vacation, those two weeks plus paid holidays really add up.

And that's one employee with only a one dollar an hour raise. What happens when government forces that employer to pay five, six or seven dollars an hour more to his over two dozen employees? It's a hell of a lot of money.

Yep, I am an employer and that's it exactly.

Another factor is that when the minimum wage goes up, I fire the people who aren't worth the new wage and hire better people since I have to pay more. The minimum wage is a hurdle, not a tide. It really, truly actually is

 

[blackhawk]

Raising the minimum wage is not the issue the issue is how much should it be raised. I don't object to bumping the minimum wage up some but don't support doubling it to $15.00 an hour.

There was a time when people bumped up their own wages without government. Why should government bump up anything? If you want a bump up, do it yourself.

Don't you like people like blackhawk who so freely are willing to decide what other people should spend on their employees and at what rate people who want to work will be denied jobs?

In July it will it will be seven years since the federal minimum wage was raised so forgive if I don't think a bump up is a national disaster.

What does that have to do with what I said? But as to what you said, the people who do get fired are acceptable losses to benefit the people who were going to get the raises anyway?

How many people not losing their jobs over the wage requirements you're willing to dictate to them are acceptable you you?

First of most of what you just said blather that made no sense. Second I'm not suggesting a doubling of the minimum wage but a modest increase of it of 50 to 75 cents which I don't think will destroy businesses. Last this whole issue is a great example of what's wrong in the country today one side insisting the minimum wage has to doubled the other insisting it can't be raised at all and neither willing to consider there could be a middle ground.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Raising the minimum wage is not the issue the issue is how much should it be raised. I don't object to bumping the minimum wage up some but don't support doubling it to $15.00 an hour.

There was a time when people bumped up their own wages without government. Why should government bump up anything? If you want a bump up, do it yourself.

Don't you like people like blackhawk who so freely are willing to decide what other people should spend on their employees and at what rate people who want to work will be denied jobs?

A lot of people just don't understand how business works--for instance:

If I'm an employer and want to give one worker a dollar an hour raise, it would cost me $40.00 a week assuming that this one employee works 40 hours a week.....that's what they think....

In reality, there are other costs associated with that one dollar an hour raise. Employers have to match your SS and Medicare contributions. If you make more money, they take more out of your check for SS and Medicare, and the employer has to match that new figure.

Then you have unemployment and Workman's compensation to consider. Those insurances go up with the new wages of that employee.

Then there is time off to consider, and perhaps an IRA from your employer which again--he matches a percentage of what you make. Even with only a two week vacation, those two weeks plus paid holidays really add up.

And that's one employee with only a one dollar an hour raise. What happens when government forces that employer to pay five, six or seven dollars an hour more to his over two dozen employees? It's a hell of a lot of money.

Yep, I am an employer and that's it exactly.

Another factor is that when the minimum wage goes up, I fire the people who aren't worth the new wage and hire better people since I have to pay more. The minimum wage is a hurdle, not a tide. It really, truly actually is

Agreed, and I didn't even consider what costs to an employer would be if that employee works more than 40 hours a week--let's say the employee works 50 hours a week. Now you have to consider that's an extra 50 cents an hour more for each hour of overtime the employer has to pay.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

This has been a hot button issue this campaign season, with the Democrat morons salivating at the mouth at the votes they hope to buy with promises of a minimum wage increase. Is there actually support among the people for this, though?

I see I am the only one that voted for the donkey show!

Minimum wage should be on the state and local level and should have never been on the Federal Level.

Many will disagree with me but what it cost to live in California is not the same cost to live in Kentucky, the Dakota's or Texas, so leave it at the state level to raise it if needed...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Raising the minimum wage is not the issue the issue is how much should it be raised. I don't object to bumping the minimum wage up some but don't support doubling it to $15.00 an hour.

There was a time when people bumped up their own wages without government. Why should government bump up anything? If you want a bump up, do it yourself.

Don't you like people like blackhawk who so freely are willing to decide what other people should spend on their employees and at what rate people who want to work will be denied jobs?

In July it will it will be seven years since the federal minimum wage was raised so forgive if I don't think a bump up is a national disaster.

What does that have to do with what I said? But as to what you said, the people who do get fired are acceptable losses to benefit the people who were going to get the raises anyway?

How many people not losing their jobs over the wage requirements you're willing to dictate to them are acceptable you you?

First of most of what you just said blather that made no sense. Second I'm not suggesting a doubling of the minimum wage but a modest increase of it of 50 to 75 cents which I don't think will destroy businesses. Last this whole issue is a great example of what's wrong in the country today one side insisting the minimum wage has to doubled the other insisting it can't be raised at all and neither willing to consider there could be a middle ground.

Oh, there is a middle ground, but that's decided by the states which many pay over the federal minimum wage already.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Here is "tell it like it is " Trump

Here is Trump providing a hazy clarification of what he is actually saying ...OH Lord..

Donald "Sham Wow" Trump
"Now, if I increase it on the wealthy, they're still going to pay less than they pay now," the presumptive Republican nominee said. "I'm not talking about increasing from this point. I'm talking about increasing from my tax proposal."
?????
Read more: How Trump clarified his position on taxing the wealthy - CNNPolitics.com

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Is there another possibility? A limit on maxim income? Let's go the other way here. CEO's or actors or sports stars, all get a cap on their income limit based on percentage of average American worker income. Period.

Or how about going the completely opposite way and abandoning Marxism. It doesn't work...

we have never actually tried that, that isn't Marxism, either. A CEO's income or actor or a sports figure should be merit based, not handed out to them. I want a million dollars because I think I merit it? Nobody merits the income Apple execs, Hollywood Oscar winners or NFL quarterback earns. It's pure bullshit.

Most everybody is paid by how much they make for their employer.

If everybody tunes in to the television series Big Bang Theory, and the company is making 30 million a week off of the program, they pay their actors one million dollars an episode each. They couldn't pay that kind of money unless they were making that kind of money.

If a star baseball pitcher is drawing in crowds at the stadium and people tuning into the baseball game on television, the baseball team is making millions off of that pitcher, so they pay him X millions per year.

If a CEO is making 10 million a year, it's likely that his or her talents are bringing in the company twice or more that kind of money.

Socialism is not only a failure in society, it's a failure in business as well. Government should not run business--business should run business and government should run government.

Most everybody is paid by how much they make for their employer.

Really?

View attachment 74255

So WTF does this chart prove?

Pretty much the opposite of what I quoted you saying.

 

[kaz]

Raising the minimum wage is not the issue the issue is how much should it be raised. I don't object to bumping the minimum wage up some but don't support doubling it to $15.00 an hour.

There was a time when people bumped up their own wages without government. Why should government bump up anything? If you want a bump up, do it yourself.

Don't you like people like blackhawk who so freely are willing to decide what other people should spend on their employees and at what rate people who want to work will be denied jobs?

In July it will it will be seven years since the federal minimum wage was raised so forgive if I don't think a bump up is a national disaster.

What does that have to do with what I said? But as to what you said, the people who do get fired are acceptable losses to benefit the people who were going to get the raises anyway?

How many people not losing their jobs over the wage requirements you're willing to dictate to them are acceptable you you?

First of most of what you just said blather that made no sense. Second I'm not suggesting a doubling of the minimum wage but a modest increase of it of 50 to 75 cents which I don't think will destroy businesses. Last this whole issue is a great example of what's wrong in the country today one side insisting the minimum wage has to doubled the other insisting it can't be raised at all and neither willing to consider there could be a middle ground.

By what right do you intervene when an employer offers an employee a job? Why is your OK necessary?

And I'll dumb down the obvious point in my post for you. I'm not paying someone worth $5 an hour when I have to be forced by people like you to pay $10 an hour, I'll find someone worth $10. You just fucked the guy I was willing to hire for $5. How do you not get that?

 

[blackhawk]

There was a time when people bumped up their own wages without government. Why should government bump up anything? If you want a bump up, do it yourself.

Don't you like people like blackhawk who so freely are willing to decide what other people should spend on their employees and at what rate people who want to work will be denied jobs?

In July it will it will be seven years since the federal minimum wage was raised so forgive if I don't think a bump up is a national disaster.

What does that have to do with what I said? But as to what you said, the people who do get fired are acceptable losses to benefit the people who were going to get the raises anyway?

How many people not losing their jobs over the wage requirements you're willing to dictate to them are acceptable you you?

First of most of what you just said blather that made no sense. Second I'm not suggesting a doubling of the minimum wage but a modest increase of it of 50 to 75 cents which I don't think will destroy businesses. Last this whole issue is a great example of what's wrong in the country today one side insisting the minimum wage has to doubled the other insisting it can't be raised at all and neither willing to consider there could be a middle ground.

Oh, there is a middle ground, but that's decided by the states which many pay over the federal minimum wage already.

Yes I'm aware some states do that some have economies that can handle that some don't which is why I would support a small increase in the federal minimum wage not the doubling of it as many want.

 

[kaz]

Raising the minimum wage is not the issue the issue is how much should it be raised. I don't object to bumping the minimum wage up some but don't support doubling it to $15.00 an hour.

There was a time when people bumped up their own wages without government. Why should government bump up anything? If you want a bump up, do it yourself.

Don't you like people like blackhawk who so freely are willing to decide what other people should spend on their employees and at what rate people who want to work will be denied jobs?

A lot of people just don't understand how business works--for instance:

If I'm an employer and want to give one worker a dollar an hour raise, it would cost me $40.00 a week assuming that this one employee works 40 hours a week.....that's what they think....

In reality, there are other costs associated with that one dollar an hour raise. Employers have to match your SS and Medicare contributions. If you make more money, they take more out of your check for SS and Medicare, and the employer has to match that new figure.

Then you have unemployment and Workman's compensation to consider. Those insurances go up with the new wages of that employee.

Then there is time off to consider, and perhaps an IRA from your employer which again--he matches a percentage of what you make. Even with only a two week vacation, those two weeks plus paid holidays really add up.

And that's one employee with only a one dollar an hour raise. What happens when government forces that employer to pay five, six or seven dollars an hour more to his over two dozen employees? It's a hell of a lot of money.

Yep, I am an employer and that's it exactly.

Another factor is that when the minimum wage goes up, I fire the people who aren't worth the new wage and hire better people since I have to pay more. The minimum wage is a hurdle, not a tide. It really, truly actually is

Agreed, and I didn't even consider what costs to an employer would be if that employee works more than 40 hours a week--let's say the employee works 50 hours a week. Now you have to consider that's an extra 50 cents an hour more for each hour of overtime the employer has to pay.

First, we restrict overtime pay. Second, we push them to be more productive during the day and reduce their down time to the legal minimum. Nice for families who needed it and we were willing to pay it, huh?

Then we look at other ways to not need the overtime, like automation, offshoring, outsourcing and other process improvements, none of which benefit employees

 

[Redfish]

yes! Lets make it 15 bucks per hour!

Bullshit, lets make it $100/hour. That would really stimulate the economy, If 15 is good, why isn't 100 great?

 

[kaz]

Don't you like people like blackhawk who so freely are willing to decide what other people should spend on their employees and at what rate people who want to work will be denied jobs?

In July it will it will be seven years since the federal minimum wage was raised so forgive if I don't think a bump up is a national disaster.

What does that have to do with what I said? But as to what you said, the people who do get fired are acceptable losses to benefit the people who were going to get the raises anyway?

How many people not losing their jobs over the wage requirements you're willing to dictate to them are acceptable you you?

First of most of what you just said blather that made no sense. Second I'm not suggesting a doubling of the minimum wage but a modest increase of it of 50 to 75 cents which I don't think will destroy businesses. Last this whole issue is a great example of what's wrong in the country today one side insisting the minimum wage has to doubled the other insisting it can't be raised at all and neither willing to consider there could be a middle ground.

Oh, there is a middle ground, but that's decided by the states which many pay over the federal minimum wage already.

Yes I'm aware some states do that some have economies that can handle that some don't which is why I would support a small increase in the federal minimum wage not the doubling of it as many want.

Just a few people lose their jobs for your compassion that doesn't cost you anything, no biggie

 

[Little-Acorn]

A fast-food manager is talking to his crew, six or seven people standing around him with brooms, spatulas etc.

He says:

"I have good news, and I have bad news.

"The good news is, the new Minimum Wage law says I have to pay you more.

"The bad news is, I can't afford that, so two of you are fired."

 

[Redfish]

A fast-food manager is talking to his crew, six or seven people standing around him with brooms, spatulas etc.

He says:

"I have good news, and I have bad news.

"The good news is, the new Minimum Wage law says I have to pay you more.

"The bad news is, I can't afford that, so two of you are fired."

OR, I am going to have to install self serve kiosks instead of human order takers, so you are all fired.

 

[Little-Acorn]

OR, I am going to have to install self serve kiosks instead of human order takers, so you are all fired.

Doesn't matter.

Liberals "did something to help people", so they feel wonderful now.

That was the reason for raising the minimum wage in the first place.

The fact that it provides no net benefits - it hurts the country as much as it helps - isn't important to them.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Don't you like people like blackhawk who so freely are willing to decide what other people should spend on their employees and at what rate people who want to work will be denied jobs?

In July it will it will be seven years since the federal minimum wage was raised so forgive if I don't think a bump up is a national disaster.

What does that have to do with what I said? But as to what you said, the people who do get fired are acceptable losses to benefit the people who were going to get the raises anyway?

How many people not losing their jobs over the wage requirements you're willing to dictate to them are acceptable you you?

First of most of what you just said blather that made no sense. Second I'm not suggesting a doubling of the minimum wage but a modest increase of it of 50 to 75 cents which I don't think will destroy businesses. Last this whole issue is a great example of what's wrong in the country today one side insisting the minimum wage has to doubled the other insisting it can't be raised at all and neither willing to consider there could be a middle ground.

Oh, there is a middle ground, but that's decided by the states which many pay over the federal minimum wage already.

Yes I'm aware some states do that some have economies that can handle that some don't which is why I would support a small increase in the federal minimum wage not the doubling of it as many want.

i'm in favor of no minimum wage. It's not governments place to tell businesses how much they should pay their employees.