Should all jobs be required to pay at least a living wage?

[Delia]

Define "living wage".

A wage that allows a person to be self-sufficient and have all basic needs met for an extended period of time. For this thread assume:

Transportation
Food
Clothing
Shelter
Healthcare

Without relying on anyone else.

OK, let's go with that:
Food and shelter. Period. Anything else is not a basic 'need'. I mean, why don't you include entertainment, technology (periodically updated to remain current), companionship, travel/vacation?

I propose a more novel concept, one that became outmoded when government got involved, how about you live within your means? If you can't afford to rent (or buy) a McMansion, you rent a modest apartment. If you can't afford a spanky new car, you don't have one, you walk or use public transportation. I you can't afford the latest cell phone or computer, you don't have them. If you can't afford to shop at Old Navy, you go to Salvation Army. No one is entitled to have what someone else has if they have not earned it.

In addition;

 

[Delia]

Living wage.

Just wondering, how much should that be... and lets say you got your way, in 1 year, that's 365 days later do you see that "living wage" being the same as it was a year ago when you got your way or would the living wage be the new poverty?

Isn't that COLA? My husband gets a cost-of-living raise every year, in addition to his regular raise.

 

[Delia]

But really, you degenerates are advocating slavery and its just as easy as calling you out on it.

No one's advocating slavery, dumbass.

It would be better though, wouldn't it? Food, clothing, shelter, healthcare. Covered, just like that.

 

[The Rabbi]

The chart is sort of meaningless. For starters, almost all people working min wage are not heads of households or sole breadwinners. Second, the people who do work min wage do not work anything like 40 hours a week. I see immigrants trying to get ahead and they are working about 90 hrs a week. Because that's what it takes.

 

[dblack]

But really, you degenerates are advocating slavery and its just as easy as calling you out on it.

No one's advocating slavery, dumbass.

It would be better though, wouldn't it? Food, clothing, shelter, healthcare. Covered, just like that.

Just like what, exactly?

 

[Delia]

No one's advocating slavery, dumbass.

It would be better though, wouldn't it? Food, clothing, shelter, healthcare. Covered, just like that.

Just like what, exactly?

Slaves had food, clothing, shelter and healthcare. The person I was responding to said nobody is advocating slavery - but slaves were better off than what people in this thread think people should have or be entitled to.

 

[The Rabbi]

It would be better though, wouldn't it? Food, clothing, shelter, healthcare. Covered, just like that.

Just like what, exactly?

Slaves had food, clothing, shelter and healthcare. The person I was responding to said nobody is advocating slavery - but slaves were better off than what people in this thread think people should have or be entitled to.

Except slaves had no ability to save money, or advance their station in life, or move without permission. Kind of like welfare recipients today.

 

[dblack]

It would be better though, wouldn't it? Food, clothing, shelter, healthcare. Covered, just like that.

Just like what, exactly?

Slaves had food, clothing, shelter and healthcare. The person I was responding to said nobody is advocating slavery - but slaves were better off than what people in this thread think people should have or be entitled to.

You're stumbling on a really important and subtle point about the welfare state. Freedom and the kinds of entitlements you're advocating don't mix. Caretaker government treats us all as wards of the state, not responsible for our own well-being and therefore not allowed to decide for ourselves how to live.

 

[Delia]

I'm not talking about welfare. I'm talking about people working full-time for minimum wage, and not even being able to afford their own apartment.

 

[Oldstyle]

A wage that allows a person to be self-sufficient and have all basic needs met for an extended period of time. For this thread assume:

Transportation
Food
Clothing
Shelter
Healthcare

Without relying on anyone else.

OK, let's go with that:
Food and shelter. Period. Anything else is not a basic 'need'. I mean, why don't you include entertainment, technology (periodically updated to remain current), companionship, travel/vacation?

I propose a more novel concept, one that became outmoded when government got involved, how about you live within your means? If you can't afford to rent (or buy) a McMansion, you rent a modest apartment. If you can't afford a spanky new car, you don't have one, you walk or use public transportation. I you can't afford the latest cell phone or computer, you don't have them. If you can't afford to shop at Old Navy, you go to Salvation Army. No one is entitled to have what someone else has if they have not earned it.

In addition;

I'm curious how it was determined that a 2 bedroom apartment was what was required? Why not a 1 bedroom or a studio? If you're going to have 2 bedrooms and you're making minimum wage then I'd suggest getting a roommate (or 3!) to help defray the cost. Better yet rent a house with four bedrooms and get housemates for the other three bedrooms and split the utilities four ways. That's what I did when I was starting out. Didn't even have to think about it because it was such an obvious thing to do. Buy a car that looks like shit but runs well. Don't eat out. Don't smoke cigarettes at $6 a pack. Don't waste your money on booze and lottery tickets. Don't have cable...don't have a cell phone. Don't have a big screen TV. Don't want to deprive yourself of life's "goodies"? Fine...if you're not making enough money with 1 minimum wage job get a second. Don't want to work the extra hours? Cut back on the goodies.

 

[Noomi]

^a person cannot work two full time jobs. People need to sleep and eat, you know.
I would suggest getting a roommate, but people tend to be wary - you have to share the bills, and if you get a roommate who spends hours on the phone and brings the bill up, then why should you have to pay for it?

You should be able to afford a one bedroom apartment on minimum wage, working full time. You can forfeit everything else, all other luxuries, but you should be able to afford that house.

 

[percysunshine]

Should all jobs be required to pay at least a living wage?

Assume a living wage for the area, not a national one-size-fits-all standard.

Why or why not?

First, define the word 'living'.

 

[asterism]

If most jobs dont pay a living wage, either by amount paid or hours allowed the result is millions of people that want to work and do work but cant feed their kids and dont make enough to meet their basic needs and you will have more people on food stamps...and if you stop that you will have alot more criminals stealing to feed their family.

For 2011, there were 3,829,000 people who earned at or below minimum wage (does not include overtime or tips). About half were age 16-24 (and 92% of them were unmarried). 2/3ds were part time workers. Married women made up a large chunk, too. Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers 2011

The thing is that very few people make at or near minimum wage. If you're young, single, starting out you get paid less because you don't need as much.

A "living wage" is completely different for a 16 year old high school student who lives at home. My "living wage" when I was 16 was Zero. Married with kids is a lot higher.

Trying to pay a living wage will massively overpay many people much more than they need/want, and that's amazingly inefficient.

And again, what about Sweden? No minimum wage at all, yet they don't have the horrors you imagine.

That's a very good point.

With regards to low wage workers supporting families, the government assistance fills that need but only for those who demonstrate the need. It does not include those who don't need it and they are able to earn money that is spent and have opportunities to move up the career ladder.

Those opportunities and jobs disappear if the minimum is set too high and then those low wage workers supporting families are 100% dependent on government instead of only partially.

 

[asterism]

A wage that allows a person to be self-sufficient and have all basic needs met for an extended period of time. For this thread assume:

Transportation
Food
Clothing
Shelter
Healthcare

Without relying on anyone else.

OK, let's go with that:
Food and shelter. Period. Anything else is not a basic 'need'. I mean, why don't you include entertainment, technology (periodically updated to remain current), companionship, travel/vacation?

I propose a more novel concept, one that became outmoded when government got involved, how about you live within your means? If you can't afford to rent (or buy) a McMansion, you rent a modest apartment. If you can't afford a spanky new car, you don't have one, you walk or use public transportation. I you can't afford the latest cell phone or computer, you don't have them. If you can't afford to shop at Old Navy, you go to Salvation Army. No one is entitled to have what someone else has if they have not earned it.

In addition;

That chart is wildly inaccurate. There are plenty of places where basic living is possible on 40 hours of minimum wage in Florida, Georgia, Virginia, New Hampshire, Texas, Louisiana, and Michigan. That's just places where I know direct examples.

 

[asterism]

^a person cannot work two full time jobs. People need to sleep and eat, you know.
I would suggest getting a roommate, but people tend to be wary - you have to share the bills, and if you get a roommate who spends hours on the phone and brings the bill up, then why should you have to pay for it?

You should be able to afford a one bedroom apartment on minimum wage, working full time. You can forfeit everything else, all other luxuries, but you should be able to afford that house.

It's entirely possible to work two full time jobs. I did it for years. When I started my own business 80 hours a week seemed like a vacation.

 

[Oldstyle]

^a person cannot work two full time jobs. People need to sleep and eat, you know.
I would suggest getting a roommate, but people tend to be wary - you have to share the bills, and if you get a roommate who spends hours on the phone and brings the bill up, then why should you have to pay for it?

You should be able to afford a one bedroom apartment on minimum wage, working full time. You can forfeit everything else, all other luxuries, but you should be able to afford that house.

I used to live in Aspen, Colorado, Noomi...one of the most expensive places to rent on the planet. I worked two full time jobs the first year I was in town...one as a property manager because it gave me a salary and a free apartment...and another as a bartender. I averaged 90 hours a week and still managed to eat, sleep and ski. It's amazing what you can do if you're motivated. When I was back in college I worked summers pouring concrete foundations and I worked 7 days a week from 5AM until 8 or 9 at night. Why so much? Because they were busy and would pay overtime...which I'd be pulling down by the end of the third day. I worked my ass off but I banked a ton of money. My point is...you CAN work two full time jobs if you need to do so to get yourself established.

As for roomates? Choose wisely and you don't end up with idiots that don't pay their bills. The fact is...if you split up the cost of housing...it's a LOT more affordable.

 

[Oldstyle]

^a person cannot work two full time jobs. People need to sleep and eat, you know.
I would suggest getting a roommate, but people tend to be wary - you have to share the bills, and if you get a roommate who spends hours on the phone and brings the bill up, then why should you have to pay for it?

You should be able to afford a one bedroom apartment on minimum wage, working full time. You can forfeit everything else, all other luxuries, but you should be able to afford that house.

It's entirely possible to work two full time jobs. I did it for years. When I started my own business 80 hours a week seemed like a vacation.

I don't think most of the progressives here have any concept of how hard most people who DO own their own businesses work. It's amusing to listen to someone who's "work adverse" pontificate about how greedy business owners are and how they don't "deserve" to make what they do and need to pay their hourly employees more. Right now there are literally thousands of business owners that aren't taking a salary because the business can't afford it. Their hourly employees are getting paid for THEIR work but there is no guarantee that a profit will be there to pay the owner.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Should all jobs be required to pay at least a living wage?

Assume a living wage for the area, not a national one-size-fits-all standard.

Why or why not?

Actually, the military does it in the form of VHA (Variable Housing Allowance). If you live in San Diego, your VHA is much more for there than it is for say............Memphis TN.

The military tries to make sure that you can have a place to live.

 

[ReallyMeow]

I'm also going to have to raise the pay for line cooks who now make $15 an hour to $20-$22 an hour to keep them happy.

Then whats stopping them from making you pay them that much right now? No shit sherlock.

When I raise all my labor cost in such a way I'm going to have to pass those costs along to my customers. The dinner that I now charge $25 for...I'm going to have to get $35 for.

You are assuming alot. For one, that people who spend $25 on food even give a flying fuck about the cost of a meal to begin with. Or that luxuries like eating out should have any bearing on the discussion at all. Tell me where you got 40% hyper inflation from. I think its funny how you people claim to espouse the free market, yet once the rubber meets the road its all about the entitlement of business owners to maintain their current level of income.

What is the definition of a "living wage"?

Let me google that for you

If most jobs dont pay a living wage, either by amount paid or hours allowed the result is millions of people that want to work and do work but cant feed their kids and dont make enough to meet their basic needs and you will have more people on food stamps...and if you stop that you will have alot more criminals stealing to feed their family.

For 2011, there were 3,829,000 people who earned at or below minimum wage (does not include overtime or tips). About half were age 16-24 (and 92% of them were unmarried). 2/3ds were part time workers. Married women made up a large chunk, too. Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers 2011

The thing is that very few people make at or near minimum wage. If you're young, single, starting out you get paid less because you don't need as much.

A "living wage" is completely different for a 16 year old high school student who lives at home. My "living wage" when I was 16 was Zero. Married with kids is a lot higher.

Trying to pay a living wage will massively overpay many people much more than they need/want, and that's amazingly inefficient.

There we go again, a conservative fishing for reasons to hate Americans: Single? You ought to live in poverty!

Then the converse, "You got some chick pregnent? why should I have to give you a raise for making bad decisions, go beg from the govt". You live in a fantasy world where an employer gives raises for having a family, if that were true than half of children wouldnt be fed by foodstamps you nitwit.

And again, what about Sweden? No minimum wage at all, yet they don't have the horrors you imagine.

Employee rights - SWEDEN.SE
You're full of shit.

A collective agreement is an agreement between unions and employers on wages and working conditions in force at the workplace: wages, working hours, compensation for sickness leave and injury, etc. The collective agreement includes insurance for employees, such as sickness and accident insurance.
...
One of their main roles is to drive and support collective bargaining, in which unions negotiate with employers to ensure a common set of rights that apply to all employees at a workplace, regardless of whether or not they are union members.

Collective bargaining agreements vary from sector to sector. Whether it applies to work contracts, working hours, equality or other working conditions, each agreement has full legal force. This means that if a dispute arises, it can be negotiated by the local union directly with the employer, or by the national union at a regional or central level.

The collective agreement is your guarantee that the same rules apply for you as for other employees and sets a limit on minimum conditions. The employer can of course offer better terms than what the collective agreement states — but not worse. If a workplace has no collective agreement, it is the employer who determines the conditions. The local union can help you establish collective bargaining at the workplace.

Just like what, exactly?

Slaves had food, clothing, shelter and healthcare. The person I was responding to said nobody is advocating slavery - but slaves were better off than what people in this thread think people should have or be entitled to.

Except slaves had no ability to save money, or advance their station in life, or move without permission. Kind of like welfare recipients today.

NOW YOU'RE GETTING IT!

If working meant being able to get ahead, then the welfare state would disappear.

 

[pinqy]

For 2011, there were 3,829,000 people who earned at or below minimum wage (does not include overtime or tips). About half were age 16-24 (and 92% of them were unmarried). 2/3ds were part time workers. Married women made up a large chunk, too. Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers 2011

The thing is that very few people make at or near minimum wage. If you're young, single, starting out you get paid less because you don't need as much.

A "living wage" is completely different for a 16 year old high school student who lives at home. My "living wage" when I was 16 was Zero. Married with kids is a lot higher.

Trying to pay a living wage will massively overpay many people much more than they need/want, and that's amazingly inefficient.

There we go again, a conservative fishing for reasons to hate Americans: Single? You ought to live in poverty!

I'm baffled how you got hate or the idea that I think single people should live in poverty. My point was that the current minimum wage IS a living wage for the majority of the people receiving it because they DO NOT need more. Try actually answering the facts: What "living wage" is needed for a 17 year old high school student who lives at home and works a part time job for extra spending money? How is that "poverty?"

Again, almost nobody relies on the minimum wage to live. The majority of minimum wage earners are part time workers.

Then the converse, "You got some chick pregnent? why should I have to give you a raise for making bad decisions, go beg from the govt". You live in a fantasy world where an employer gives raises for having a family, if that were true than half of children wouldnt be fed by foodstamps you nitwit.

I have no idea how you got that. That's just bizzarre.

Employee rights - SWEDEN.SE
You're full of shit.

No, I said Sweden has no minimum wage. They do not. They DO have Union agreements on wages and conditions that enforceable under contract law, but there is no legally required minimum wage..it is all established by the Unions and collective bargaining agreements.