Question for those pushing a "living wage"

[Skull Pilot]

In reality, the employer does or the government does. You can argue if that is right or not, but it is a fact right now so that can't be argued. Walmart employees that are paid very little are supported by the government. So walmart uses the labor to make billions while the government subsidizes that labor. My tax dollars are making the waltons richer. They should be paying the full price for this labor.

No the person either supports himself or the government does. The idea that any 40 hour a week job should be enough to support a family is a new concept pushed by people who want more control over the private sector.

The private sector benefits from those tax dollars. Without those tax dollars, they would not get workers in high cost of living areas.

The people who get them benefit because they are allowed not to be responsible for supporting themselves.

 

[Skull Pilot]

In reality, the employer does or the government does. You can argue if that is right or not, but it is a fact right now so that can't be argued. Walmart employees that are paid very little are supported by the government. So walmart uses the labor to make billions while the government subsidizes that labor. My tax dollars are making the waltons richer. They should be paying the full price for this labor.

No the person either supports himself or the government does. The idea that any 40 hour a week job should be enough to support a family is a new concept pushed by people who want more control over the private sector.

Then there is this little bullshit nugget.
Plenty of employees working full time that need government assistance to make it. That way the burden of having employees making enough money to survive becomes the problem of the government instead of the employer.

So that would make your bullshit wrong again.

Do you require your employees to seek government assistance so you can pay them less?

Where is it written that one full time job must be enough to support a person or a family?

All my employees get paid what the market will bear in my case that is a minimum of 15-18 an hour for support staff and 75-90 K for my professional staff.

But then again my business is not stuffing burgers or cheap retail items into bags.

 

[Skull Pilot]

In reality, the employer does or the government does. You can argue if that is right or not, but it is a fact right now so that can't be argued. Walmart employees that are paid very little are supported by the government. So walmart uses the labor to make billions while the government subsidizes that labor. My tax dollars are making the waltons richer. They should be paying the full price for this labor.

No the person either supports himself or the government does. The idea that any 40 hour a week job should be enough to support a family is a new concept pushed by people who want more control over the private sector.

No the government supports them. Stats for walmart:
They receive $2.66 billion in government help each year (including $1 billion in healthcare assistance). That works out to about $5,815 per worker. And about $420,000 per store. But the federal and state aid varies widely; in Wisconsin, a study found that it was at least $904,542 a year per store.
How Walmart's Low Wages Cost All Americans, Not Just Its Workers

So tax payers get big bill and the waltons make billions.

Now you can argue if they should be able to collect, but the fact is they can and do now. I don't see any politician changing that.

Walmart does not receive that money the people who will not support themselves do.

 

[Brain357]

No the person either supports himself or the government does. The idea that any 40 hour a week job should be enough to support a family is a new concept pushed by people who want more control over the private sector.

No the government supports them. Stats for walmart:
They receive $2.66 billion in government help each year (including $1 billion in healthcare assistance). That works out to about $5,815 per worker. And about $420,000 per store. But the federal and state aid varies widely; in Wisconsin, a study found that it was at least $904,542 a year per store.
How Walmart's Low Wages Cost All Americans, Not Just Its Workers

So tax payers get big bill and the waltons make billions.

Now you can argue if they should be able to collect, but the fact is they can and do now. I don't see any politician changing that.

Walmart does not receive that money the people who will not support themselves do.

Yes the people who are making the walmart billions.

 

[pvsi]

In another thread someone claimed that people have a right to be paid enough to support a family. I'd like to hear input from others on this.

Does a person with a paper route have the right to be paid enough to support a family?

Should a grocery bagger get paid enough to support a family?

What is the lowest level of job where you think the employers should be required to pay their employees enough to support a family? And how large of a family should this job be able to support?

If my brother quit his computer job and went to work as a Wal-Mart stocker, should he be able to expect Wal-Mart to pay him enough to support his six children?

A man such as myself who works on a political forum educating imbeciles about politics, SHOULD be able to support a family with 11 kids. this way I could write a lot more good posts, but I have to drag my ass out to a second job from time to time, and that distracts me.

Sarcasm aside, our system is so messed up that explaining reality would make me look like such a socialist that would make all liberals look like neocons in comparison. I will only get into that if you ask me.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No the government supports them. Stats for walmart:
They receive $2.66 billion in government help each year (including $1 billion in healthcare assistance). That works out to about $5,815 per worker. And about $420,000 per store. But the federal and state aid varies widely; in Wisconsin, a study found that it was at least $904,542 a year per store.
How Walmart's Low Wages Cost All Americans, Not Just Its Workers

So tax payers get big bill and the waltons make billions.

Now you can argue if they should be able to collect, but the fact is they can and do now. I don't see any politician changing that.

Walmart does not receive that money the people who will not support themselves do.

Yes the people who are making the walmart billions.

Irrelevant.

Stuffing shit into bags is not a job that will support a family. It never was and it never will be and it should never be.

 

[Brain357]

Walmart does not receive that money the people who will not support themselves do.

Yes the people who are making the walmart billions.

Irrelevant.

Stuffing shit into bags is not a job that will support a family. It never was and it never will be and it should never be.

So your saying the largest employer in our country shouldn't pay enough for people to live on? Wow we have quite a problem then. Waltons make billions and the people who help them make it get nothing. That makes a real strong economy.

 

[zeke]

No the person either supports himself or the government does. The idea that any 40 hour a week job should be enough to support a family is a new concept pushed by people who want more control over the private sector.

Then there is this little bullshit nugget.
Plenty of employees working full time that need government assistance to make it. That way the burden of having employees making enough money to survive becomes the problem of the government instead of the employer.

So that would make your bullshit wrong again.

Do you require your employees to seek government assistance so you can pay them less?

Where is it written that one full time job must be enough to support a person or a family?

All my employees get paid what the market will bear in my case that is a minimum of 15-18 an hour for support staff and 75-90 K for my professional staff.

But then again my business is not stuffing burgers or cheap retail items into bags.

How many of your support staff have a family and a life outside of work and still work a part time job? Do you even know? Or care?

If none of your support staff is working part time jobs or receiving food stamps, then you have answered a most vexing question for these boards; what is the amount of a "living" wage. Skull has determined it is 15 to 18 dollars an hour for "support staff". I agree.

What is your business skull? In broad generalities of course.

 

[Skull Pilot]

In reality, the employer does or the government does. You can argue if that is right or not, but it is a fact right now so that can't be argued. Walmart employees that are paid very little are supported by the government. So walmart uses the labor to make billions while the government subsidizes that labor. My tax dollars are making the waltons richer. They should be paying the full price for this labor.

No the person either supports himself or the government does. The idea that any 40 hour a week job should be enough to support a family is a new concept pushed by people who want more control over the private sector.

Really? How many other jobs do your employees have?

I don't know. What they do on their own time is their business. I do know that my full time employees almost never put in a full 40 hours a week. I schedule them for about 38 to limit unintentional overtime but I have told all of them they can certainly work the full 40 since there is always something that needs to be done. But only one of them does.

I had a person complaining about not having enough money and I showed her that by simply working her full 40 hours a week that she would have almost 400 a month in additional income. She has yet to put in a full 40 hours. I have a part time employee that does nothing but complain that she's broke I offered her full time twice she refused both times now I just tune her out when she complains about being broke.

So should I feel bad?

And don't you feel kinda bad sometimes (I know, not likely but maybe) that your full time employees make so little that they have to have a second or third job to support their families? Don't you think a person working 40 hours a week should be able to go home, rest, enjoy a meal and some family time all before coming back to your place of employment to make you a lot of money?

Sorry but 1 40 hour job in retail or fast food is not exhausting. I don't know anyone who ever accomplished anything who only ever worked only 40 hours a week and they managed to have dinner and see their kids.

Instead, you want that employee to rush home, wolf some food, say hi to the kids and head out the door for another 6 or 7 hours of work. Then they can come to your place of work and do a shitty job for you because they've been working for the past 15 hours or so.

What a great idea you have? Not.

I did it for years and still put in more than 40 hours a week. so what's your point?

 

[bripat9643]

In reality, the employer does or the government does. You can argue if that is right or not, but it is a fact right now so that can't be argued. Walmart employees that are paid very little are supported by the government. So walmart uses the labor to make billions while the government subsidizes that labor. My tax dollars are making the waltons richer. They should be paying the full price for this labor.

No the person either supports himself or the government does. The idea that any 40 hour a week job should be enough to support a family is a new concept pushed by people who want more control over the private sector.

The private sector benefits from those tax dollars. Without those tax dollars, they would not get workers in high cost of living areas.

The private sector doesn't benefit in any way from those dollars.If Walmart couldn't attract enough people at the wage offered, it would simply have to offer more and charge accordingly more.

 

[rightwinger]

No the person either supports himself or the government does. The idea that any 40 hour a week job should be enough to support a family is a new concept pushed by people who want more control over the private sector.

The private sector benefits from those tax dollars. Without those tax dollars, they would not get workers in high cost of living areas.

The private sector doesn't benefit in any way from those dollars.If Walmart couldn't attract enough people at the wage offered, it would simply have to offer more and charge accordingly more.

And that, my friend.....is the point

 

[Papageorgio]

Then there is this little bullshit nugget.
Plenty of employees working full time that need government assistance to make it. That way the burden of having employees making enough money to survive becomes the problem of the government instead of the employer.

So that would make your bullshit wrong again.

Do you require your employees to seek government assistance so you can pay them less?

Where is it written that one full time job must be enough to support a person or a family?

All my employees get paid what the market will bear in my case that is a minimum of 15-18 an hour for support staff and 75-90 K for my professional staff.

But then again my business is not stuffing burgers or cheap retail items into bags.

How many of your support staff have a family and a life outside of work and still work a part time job? Do you even know? Or care?

If none of your support staff is working part time jobs or receiving food stamps, then you have answered a most vexing question for these boards; what is the amount of a "living" wage. Skull has determined it is 15 to 18 dollars an hour for "support staff". I agree.

What is your business skull? In broad generalities of course.

His skills, he runs a business, organizes, leads a group of people to produce a product or service, has invested many years, and tons of money to make it work, he produces jobs, he works in the confines of a massive government bureaucracy that forces him to collect taxes. He probably has contracted lawyers, CPA's and others to make sure he is compliant with laws. He probably has his business on his mind 24/7 and worries what the next law will be, how can he keep his business relevant in an ever changing world of competition.

That would be a small part of what most business owners need.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

 

[LiberalMedia]

In another thread someone claimed that people have a right to be paid enough to support a family. I'd like to hear input from others on this.



Does a person with a paper route have the right to be paid enough to support a family?

Should a grocery bagger get paid enough to support a family?

What is the lowest level of job where you think the employers should be required to pay their employees enough to support a family? And how large of a family should this job be able to support?

If my brother quit his computer job and went to work as a Wal-Mart stocker, should he be able to expect Wal-Mart to pay him enough to support his six children?

Answering your questions in order: Yes, yes, any level, any size, and yes.

Pay should directly reflect the need of the employee, not the stinginess of the employer. Deal with it, corporate shills.

 

[zeke]

Skull, you might have missed understanding what I wrote. I was asking about YOUR business. Not fast food or retail.

But I got to ask you skull. You think everyone should be just like you eh?

I think you don't have a very good understanding of human beings. We are all different skull. You may have wanted to work 90 hours a week for what ever reason. Does not mean that everyone else should, would or could work 90 hours a week.

Tough for you to understand that. But that is the way it is.

And because you work 90 hours a week, get off your high horse and quit begging for applause. It was your choice. Your entire life is based on your job and what you do. Not everyone feels that way.

Yet they still gotta eat. And have a roof over their heads. Some basic medical care. Clothes. You know, things like that.

But your math is also fuzzy. Your 38 hour worker will not get paid another 400 dollars a month by working 40 hours. Do the math. 8.2 additional hours x 19.00 dollars equals $155.80.

Or do your employees set their own hours? That would be weird.

You don't exaggerate do you?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Then there is this little bullshit nugget.
Plenty of employees working full time that need government assistance to make it. That way the burden of having employees making enough money to survive becomes the problem of the government instead of the employer.

So that would make your bullshit wrong again.

Do you require your employees to seek government assistance so you can pay them less?

Where is it written that one full time job must be enough to support a person or a family?

All my employees get paid what the market will bear in my case that is a minimum of 15-18 an hour for support staff and 75-90 K for my professional staff.

But then again my business is not stuffing burgers or cheap retail items into bags.

How many of your support staff have a family and a life outside of work and still work a part time job? Do you even know? Or care?

If none of your support staff is working part time jobs or receiving food stamps, then you have answered a most vexing question for these boards; what is the amount of a "living" wage. Skull has determined it is 15 to 18 dollars an hour for "support staff". I agree.

What is your business skull? In broad generalities of course.

I never mention the term living wage.

I pay my people what I pay them because that is what the skill level they need is worth in the market place. The total cost of paying them is reflected in my pricing which is in general on par with the regional norms for my operation. Increasing my prices so as to pay people 40% more ( and you think people should get more of in increase I'm sure) would most likely result in a significant decrease in business and most likely the elimination of some of my employees

And FYI even my part time employees get paid the same hourly rates as many of the full timers. Those full time people who get insurance get 90% of the single premium paid all my employees full and part time get vacation and sick time and can participate in the company 401K with up to a 5% match.

But that's what I pay in a small closely held business with a small staff. I by no means think other businesses should be forced to do the same.

 

[LiberalMedia]

Where is it written that one full time job must be enough to support a person or a family?

All my employees get paid what the market will bear in my case that is a minimum of 15-18 an hour for support staff and 75-90 K for my professional staff.

But then again my business is not stuffing burgers or cheap retail items into bags.

How many of your support staff have a family and a life outside of work and still work a part time job? Do you even know? Or care?

If none of your support staff is working part time jobs or receiving food stamps, then you have answered a most vexing question for these boards; what is the amount of a "living" wage. Skull has determined it is 15 to 18 dollars an hour for "support staff". I agree.

What is your business skull? In broad generalities of course.

His skills, he runs a business, organizes, leads a group of people to produce a product or service, has invested many years, and tons of money to make it work, he produces jobs, he works in the confines of a massive government bureaucracy that forces him to collect taxes. He probably has contracted lawyers, CPA's and others to make sure he is compliant with laws. He probably has his business on his mind 24/7 and worries what the next law will be, how can he keep his business relevant in an ever changing world of competition.

That would be a small part of what most business owners need.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

I'll fix that for you: He sits behind a desk, points fingers, yells at a group of people to produce a product or service, has wasted many years, and tons of his unlimited supply of bourgeois scum money to make it work, he produces "jobs" for unwitting wage slaves, he works alongside a helpful government bureaucracy that doesn't force him to do anything other than keep track of who he pays what amounts. I'll skip your next few lines, as they can be summed up as thus: "Probably probably probably."

Business owners are lazy scumbags that are unable to do anything for themselves so they leech off of society by taking advantage of wage slaves desperate for some form of income they can use to support their families. Capitalists are the real welfare queens.

All it would take to end corporate welfare is to raise the minimum wage to a living wage, and to do this we need only revoke a business owner's access to the company's funds. Let him get paid as a regular, rank and file employee of his own business, and let's see how long it takes before he makes the living wage a reality.

 

[zeke]

Where is it written that one full time job must be enough to support a person or a family?

All my employees get paid what the market will bear in my case that is a minimum of 15-18 an hour for support staff and 75-90 K for my professional staff.

But then again my business is not stuffing burgers or cheap retail items into bags.

How many of your support staff have a family and a life outside of work and still work a part time job? Do you even know? Or care?

If none of your support staff is working part time jobs or receiving food stamps, then you have answered a most vexing question for these boards; what is the amount of a "living" wage. Skull has determined it is 15 to 18 dollars an hour for "support staff". I agree.

What is your business skull? In broad generalities of course.

His skills, he runs a business, organizes, leads a group of people to produce a product or service, has invested many years, and tons of money to make it work, he produces jobs, he works in the confines of a massive government bureaucracy that forces him to collect taxes. He probably has contracted lawyers, CPA's and others to make sure he is compliant with laws. He probably has his business on his mind 24/7 and worries what the next law will be, how can he keep his business relevant in an ever changing world of competition.

That would be a small part of what most business owners need.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

If you don't know what his (skulls) business actually is, why don't you let skull answer the question?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Skull, you might have missed understanding what I wrote. I was asking about YOUR business. Not fast food or retail.

But I got to ask you skull. You think everyone should be just like you eh?

I think you don't have a very good understanding of human beings. We are all different skull. You may have wanted to work 90 hours a week for what ever reason. Does not mean that everyone else should, would or could work 90 hours a week.

Tough for you to understand that. But that is the way it is.

And because you work 90 hours a week, get off your high horse and quit begging for applause. It was your choice. Your entire life is based on your job and what you do. Not everyone feels that way.

Yet they still gotta eat. And have a roof over their heads. Some basic medical care. Clothes. You know, things like that.

But your math is also fuzzy. Your 38 hour worker will not get paid another 400 dollars a month by working 40 hours. Do the math. 8.2 additional hours x 19.00 dollars equals $155.80.

Or do your employees set their own hours? That would be weird.

You don't exaggerate do you?

You're assuming she puts in 38 hours. She comes in well under that on average she clocks in for 32-34 hours and I don't care because it saves me money but she obviously doesn't need the extra income as much as she says she does.

And what part of your ass did you pull the 90 hour a week figure from?

 

[zeke]

Where is it written that one full time job must be enough to support a person or a family?

All my employees get paid what the market will bear in my case that is a minimum of 15-18 an hour for support staff and 75-90 K for my professional staff.

But then again my business is not stuffing burgers or cheap retail items into bags.

How many of your support staff have a family and a life outside of work and still work a part time job? Do you even know? Or care?

If none of your support staff is working part time jobs or receiving food stamps, then you have answered a most vexing question for these boards; what is the amount of a "living" wage. Skull has determined it is 15 to 18 dollars an hour for "support staff". I agree.

What is your business skull? In broad generalities of course.

I never mention the term living wage.

I pay my people what I pay them because that is what the skill level they need is worth in the market place. The total cost of paying them is reflected in my pricing which is in general on par with the regional norms for my operation. Increasing my prices so as to pay people 40% more ( and you think people should get more of in increase I'm sure) would most likely result in a significant decrease in business and most likely the elimination of some of my employees

And FYI even my part time employees get paid the same hourly rates as many of the full timers. Those full time people who get insurance get 90% of the single premium paid all my employees full and part time get vacation and sick time and can participate in the company 401K with up to a 5% match.

But that's what I pay in a small closely held business with a small staff. I by no means think other businesses should be forced to do the same.

What difference does that make?

If you pay your support staff enough money per hour that they do not need a part time job to survive and they don't need food stamps to eat, then they are being paid a wage they can live on.

Hence a "living wage" is 15 to 18 dollars an hour. Not very hard to understand for a business man such as yourself is it?

 

[Pete7469]

In another thread someone claimed that people have a right to be paid enough to support a family. I'd like to hear input from others on this.



Does a person with a paper route have the right to be paid enough to support a family?

Should a grocery bagger get paid enough to support a family?

What is the lowest level of job where you think the employers should be required to pay their employees enough to support a family? And how large of a family should this job be able to support?

If my brother quit his computer job and went to work as a Wal-Mart stocker, should he be able to expect Wal-Mart to pay him enough to support his six children?

Answering your questions in order: Yes, yes, any level, any size, and yes.

Pay should directly reflect the need of the employee, not the stinginess of the employer. Deal with it, corporate shills.

I need a billion dollars a year.