So What Do You Think Is A Fair And Decent Wage?...

[Foxfyre]

This was a still-born thread more than two days ago, because it assumed that that the question it raised can be logically and reasonably answered.

After 179 useless responses, (sadly, many of my own) are there anybody still responding to this thread familiar with the term: "Beating a dead horse"?

It obviously wasn't stillborn because it has generated quite a bit of thoughtful and mostly respectful and civil discussion.

Most of those on the left are incapable of recognizing and focusing on a specific concept and discussing it separate from ideology, partisanship, and/or the politics of personal destruction. And of course consider it a 'non subject' when they are required to focus on the concept itself. I don't put you in those ranks, but if you do focus on the concept Paulitcian is getting at, the subject is actually quite fascinating. Nowhere near a dead horse.

 

[Foxfyre]

The government wouldn't be making the decision. The government would simply be removing the incentive for employers to exercise something that unethical with impunity.

The government is telling an employee that you are not allowed to take a job for $2 an hour, we are prohibiting you from doing that. How is it not government making the decision?

Then you end up with stories like a restaurant that let a homeless guy sweep the sidewalk in front for a meal, and they had to stop because of employment and minimum wage laws. There is no law that is so small or innocuous that politicians and bureaucrats cannot abuse it.

No, I am not saying that at all. I am saying that I can see justification for not allowing somebody to mislead people into working for free by dangling a promise of or even hope of a non existent job out there that will never ever be offered to anybody. A low minimum wage would take care of that.

But I do balance that against your other analogy. When I was a kid there were still hobos who were the homeless of that day, but they did not expect handouts or free anything from anybody. They took it as a badge of self respect to work for a meal or a few coins they received, and the town's people always gave them the work. And it is wrong to deny people the dignity of work just because you can't afford to pay them what the government says you must pay if they work foryou.

I'm still thinking it through.

The employer would have no way to know that the guy who is allowing him to work for free has absolutely no intention of ever hiring him or training him to do anything. And he could provide free labor for days before he finally caught on to the scam. And there is the possibility that an unscrupulous employer could utilize unpaid apprentices in that way in lieu of hiring a work force.

But even at say $3/hour, the scammed employee would not walk away with absolutely nothing.

Isn't that what the Founders intended the government to do? To ensure that we could not do economic or physical violence to each other with impunity so that our unalienable rights would be secured? To leave it up to the individual to determine what is and is not acceptable economic or physical violenceis anarchy. And that secures nobody's rights.

That still comes with the assumption that bureaucrats in Washington make those decisions over our lives better than we do ourselves. I don't get the founding fathers argument at all. When did they say government should proactively make our decisions for us on anything?

I don't always do this, only if the right person comes along. But I have had two assistants who I paid squat, though it was a little above minimum wage. They were both recent college graduates and worked for me roughly 9 months or so. The intent was never for it to be a long term position.

I worked their asses off. I have only done it when I felt someone was special. They were not working without a net, then weren't making final decisions on important matters, but I sent them out to do endless leg work for me. I was awed by both their creativity and willingness to go outside their comfort zone to do whatever I asked. One still works for me, the other doesn't, but only because he wanted to go in a direction I had nothing to offer him.

But you didn't pay the people nothing at all. You didn't mislead them that if they work for free for awhile as an apprentice, they would have opportunity to qualify for a paying job, and then not give them that opportunity.

You're reading into my argument a lot of stuff and assumptions that simply are not there. I do not want government to have any role whatsoever re what a person's labor is worth in the private sector. That should be left strictly to the free market.

But I do see a role for government in making it illegal to cheat people and steal their labor with impunity.

On the other hand, if I want to agree to work for $3/hour, that should be my right. If that is all I can afford to pay to get something done, it should be my right to pay somebody who is willing to work for that $3/hour. Also, if I OFFER to work for somebody free, with no expectation of receiving a job offer, just so I can get some experience and learn the ropes, or wish to help somebody who wants to work for me on that basis, that should be our unalienable right also.

But I should not be able to get somebody to work for me for free by lying to them that they will then have opportunity to work for money.

I don't know how I can make it any clearer than that. I must not be communicating well.

 

[kaz]

But you didn't pay the people nothing at all. You didn't mislead them that if they work for free for awhile as an apprentice, they would have opportunity to qualify for a paying job, and then not give them that opportunity

Donald Trump actually didn't invent the concept. Though I'll give him credit for the term "apprentice." I had several mentees like that in the corporate world. It was more by accident that it happened when I started owning my own businesses. It just sort of came up twice, and worked out both times.

I helped them with advice, but I didn't help them by paving the way. For example I needed a new office space, so I assigned one to contact business brokers, find available spaces and evaluate the tradeoffs. When brokers started getting calls from a 22 year old kid asking about office spaces on my behalf, they started calling me.

I wouldn't take the call, I had my admin confirm they were representing me, but to tell them to talk to the "project manager." That sort of thing happened regularly actually for both of them. I never talked to anyone they were dealing with until the end when we were nailing down the deals. A lot of it was also straight out grunt work. Two of my fondest employees. They both are doing great in their careers, no wonder.

I was a hard worker out of college, but I started out at $33K, which was pretty decent for a wet behind the ears college grad in 1988. So I can't claim to have started out quite like they did.

 

[Foxfyre]

But you didn't pay the people nothing at all. You didn't mislead them that if they work for free for awhile as an apprentice, they would have opportunity to qualify for a paying job, and then not give them that opportunity

Donald Trump actually didn't invent the concept. Though I'll give him credit for the term "apprentice." I had several mentees like that in the corporate world. It was more by accident that it happened when I started owning my own businesses. It just sort of came up twice, and worked out both times.

I helped them with advice, but I didn't help them by paving the way. For example I needed a new office space, so I assigned one to contact business brokers, find available spaces and evaluate the tradeoffs. When brokers started getting calls from a 22 year old kid asking about office spaces on my behalf, they started calling me.

I wouldn't take the call, I had my admin confirm they were representing me, but to tell them to talk to the "project manager." That sort of thing happened regularly actually for both of them. I never talked to anyone they were dealing with until the end when we were nailing down the deals. A lot of it was also straight out grunt work. Two of my fondest employees. They both are doing great in their careers, no wonder.

I was a hard worker out of college, but I started out at $33K, which was pretty decent for a wet behind the ears college grad in 1988. So I can't claim to have started out quite like they did.

I DID start out like they did. My first real job paid $1/hour. I worked for less than that for spending money and sometimes for tuition when I was in college. The experience I got, however, was invaluable.

 

[kaz]

But you didn't pay the people nothing at all. You didn't mislead them that if they work for free for awhile as an apprentice, they would have opportunity to qualify for a paying job, and then not give them that opportunity

Donald Trump actually didn't invent the concept. Though I'll give him credit for the term "apprentice." I had several mentees like that in the corporate world. It was more by accident that it happened when I started owning my own businesses. It just sort of came up twice, and worked out both times.

I helped them with advice, but I didn't help them by paving the way. For example I needed a new office space, so I assigned one to contact business brokers, find available spaces and evaluate the tradeoffs. When brokers started getting calls from a 22 year old kid asking about office spaces on my behalf, they started calling me.

I wouldn't take the call, I had my admin confirm they were representing me, but to tell them to talk to the "project manager." That sort of thing happened regularly actually for both of them. I never talked to anyone they were dealing with until the end when we were nailing down the deals. A lot of it was also straight out grunt work. Two of my fondest employees. They both are doing great in their careers, no wonder.

I was a hard worker out of college, but I started out at $33K, which was pretty decent for a wet behind the ears college grad in 1988. So I can't claim to have started out quite like they did.

I DID start out like they did. My first real job paid $1/hour. I worked for less than that for spending money and sometimes for tuition when I was in college. The experience I got, however, was invaluable.

When I was a kid, my father was always gone and I spent a lot of time with my grandfather. He was an accountant, but his hobby was carpentry and he was good at it, he taught me the craft. In college, I used that to build custom cabinets, built in shelving, anything people wanted that involved staining, painting and woodworking. I charged a flat $10 an hour. I started working for family friends, but I got known and never did not have work to do. In the last couple years, I had two customers who never did not give me a job when I had time because they said they did not want me to find other customers. :0) Though I didn't do it for spending money, I paid my way through college that way. My parents helped a little, but not a lot.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Donald Trump actually didn't invent the concept. Though I'll give him credit for the term "apprentice." I had several mentees like that in the corporate world. It was more by accident that it happened when I started owning my own businesses. It just sort of came up twice, and worked out both times.

I helped them with advice, but I didn't help them by paving the way. For example I needed a new office space, so I assigned one to contact business brokers, find available spaces and evaluate the tradeoffs. When brokers started getting calls from a 22 year old kid asking about office spaces on my behalf, they started calling me.

I wouldn't take the call, I had my admin confirm they were representing me, but to tell them to talk to the "project manager." That sort of thing happened regularly actually for both of them. I never talked to anyone they were dealing with until the end when we were nailing down the deals. A lot of it was also straight out grunt work. Two of my fondest employees. They both are doing great in their careers, no wonder.

I was a hard worker out of college, but I started out at $33K, which was pretty decent for a wet behind the ears college grad in 1988. So I can't claim to have started out quite like they did.

I DID start out like they did. My first real job paid $1/hour. I worked for less than that for spending money and sometimes for tuition when I was in college. The experience I got, however, was invaluable.

When I was a kid, my father was always gone and I spent a lot of time with my grandfather. He was an accountant, but his hobby was carpentry and he was good at it, he taught me the craft. In college, I used that to build custom cabinets, built in shelving, anything people wanted that involved staining, painting and woodworking. I charged a flat $10 an hour. I started working for family friends, but I got known and never did not have work to do. In the last couple years, I had two customers who never did not give me a job when I had time because they said they did not want me to find other customers. :0) Though I didn't do it for spending money, I paid my way through college that way. My parents helped a little, but not a lot.

I'm not sure what my father charged, but when we were kids, he set up a "corporation" for us. Like your grandfather, Dad was a talented carpenter. He taught us to build cabinets and other small, wooden craft objects that he sold for us. All of the involved children were aware that part of our "income" had to pay for the materials we used to build our wares. After that was paid for, we were allowed to reinvest some of the net "income" and we were permitted to decide how to otherwise spend the "excess" profits.

 

[Mac1958]

.

All of us should be paid the same, because that's the fair way to do things so that no one's feelings will be hurt just because they make less than someone else, no one will be a member of the Evil Rich or a boss in an Evil Corporation, no one will have more than anyone else and we can all live together in a collective harmony as Our Great & Glorious Leaders in Central Planning take care of us, because they care about us, we're all the same and just part of a big community working for our leaders and that's what the Constitution says 'n stuff.

.

 

[Noomi]

$15 an hour minimum for a casual worker it should be, and I am going by over here, not over there.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Enough to eat, watch t.v and raise a small family

Maybe own a car...Doesn't have to be new either.

 

[Londoner]

A letter to the private sector... on what is fair

We spend trillions protecting your oil fields in the middle east.

We spend trillions protecting your most profitable investments with a patent system. [Do you know how much money it costs to run a patent system? Do you know how much the market begs for and depends upon it? Do you know that this is pure government intervention in the market?]

We spend trillions upon countless trillions giving you an advanced industrial infrastructure - indeed, we make massive public investments in technology so you can profit. [Did you know that everything from containerization to satellite technology came out of the state sector? Do you know what kind of technology came out of the Cold War Defense and NASA programs and was seeded into the private sector? Do you know the kind of profits that have come from satellite technology alone? Do you know the public investment in aerospace technology? Research the subsidies Boeing got from the defense department. So many of our most profitable sectors have been almost wholly dependent on government subsidies and research partnerships]

We use Fed policy to chase money into the stock market so that you and your ventures are well capitalized. We expanded credit so American consumers can keep buying your products.

We wprotect your global trade routes so you can harvest cheap labor and raw materials from unstable parts of the globe. Indeed, we have built an empire of bases so that we can stabilize all the dangerous regions which contain your emerging markets. [Do you know how much money it costs to stabilize/protect the global market system? Do you what the military and administrative costs are of managing an entire global market system? .... so that Walmart can get their products made in Chain, Taiwan and Honduras?]

We subsidize a vast public university system so that you have the most well educated workers in the world.

We build roads so you can bring products and customers to market.

We build energy grids and water plants across the nation. We built the Hoover Dam and invested trillions so that the Colorado River delta to allow the entire Southwest to be inhabited (and thereby support massive commerce . . . for your profitable ventures).

But here is what we ask in exchange. We ask that you admit to your Republican voters how much help you get from government. And one more thing. We did you a big favor back in the 80s, under Reagan. We liberalized trade and made it easier for you to take advantage of ultra-cheap labor in freedom hating nations. And we let you ship millions of solid middle class jobs out of the country. And we dismantled many of the "After market" policies and programs that helped the middle class in order make room for your tax cuts. And you became the wealthiest private sector in world history. You have so much money that you can fund elections and staff government, and destroy any politician who does not vote your way. As a result of you shipping jobs to cheaper labor markets, coupled with dismantling all the postwar programs that boosted middle class purchasing power, Americans have had to borrow more and more money just to survive and buy your products. Consequently the middle class is, in the aggregate, broke - they can no longer make up for the lost wages/benefits with credit. We need to go back to the system we had during the postwar years when you made solid profits but this nation also invested in the middle class . . . by giving them affordable education, health care, and livable wages. After all, we depend on their consumption to keep the domestic economy afloat. But it all starts with you being honest to your Republican voters about how much help you receive . They need to know that we are no longer living in Ayn Rand's Russia where Stalin steals the family pharmacy. To the contrary, the pharmaceutical now owns the government.

 

[Foxfyre]

A letter to the private sector... on what is fair

We spend trillions protecting your oil fields in the middle east.

We spend trillions protecting your most profitable investments with a patent system. [Do you know how much money it costs to run a patent system? Do you know how much the market begs for and depends upon it? Do you know that this is pure government intervention in the market?]

We spend trillions upon countless trillions giving you an advanced industrial infrastructure - indeed, we make massive public investments in technology so you can profit. [Did you know that everything from containerization to satellite technology came out of the state sector? Do you know what kind of technology came out of the Cold War Defense and NASA programs and was seeded into the private sector? Do you know the kind of profits that have come from satellite technology alone? Do you know the public investment in aerospace technology? Research the subsidies Boeing got from the defense department. So many of our most profitable sectors have been almost wholly dependent on government subsidies and research partnerships]

We use Fed policy to chase money into the stock market so that you and your ventures are well capitalized. We expanded credit so American consumers can keep buying your products.

We wprotect your global trade routes so you can harvest cheap labor and raw materials from unstable parts of the globe. Indeed, we have built an empire of bases so that we can stabilize all the dangerous regions which contain your emerging markets. [Do you know how much money it costs to stabilize/protect the global market system? Do you what the military and administrative costs are of managing an entire global market system? .... so that Walmart can get their products made in Chain, Taiwan and Honduras?]

We subsidize a vast public university system so that you have the most well educated workers in the world.

We build roads so you can bring products and customers to market.

We build energy grids and water plants across the nation. We built the Hoover Dam and invested trillions so that the Colorado River delta to allow the entire Southwest to be inhabited (and thereby support massive commerce . . . for your profitable ventures).

But here is what we ask in exchange. We ask that you admit to your Republican voters how much help you get from government. And one more thing. We did you a big favor back in the 80s, under Reagan. We liberalized trade and made it easier for you to take advantage of ultra-cheap labor in freedom hating nations. And we let you ship millions of solid middle class jobs out of the country. And we dismantled many of the "After market" policies and programs that helped the middle class in order make room for your tax cuts. And you became the wealthiest private sector in world history. You have so much money that you can fund elections and staff government, and destroy any politician who does not vote your way. As a result of you shipping jobs to cheaper labor markets, coupled with dismantling all the postwar programs that boosted middle class purchasing power, Americans have had to borrow more and more money just to survive and buy your products. Consequently the middle class is, in the aggregate, broke - they can no longer make up for the lost wages/benefits with credit. We need to go back to the system we had during the postwar years when you made solid profits but this nation also invested in the middle class . . . by giving them affordable education, health care, and livable wages. After all, we depend on their consumption to keep the domestic economy afloat. But it all starts with you being honest to your Republican voters about how much help you receive . They need to know that we are no longer living in Ayn Rand's Russia where Stalin steals the family pharmacy. To the contrary, the pharmaceutical now owns the government.

What is tragic, is that you seem to believe what you wrote here.

 

[ScienceRocks]

A letter to the private sector... on what is fair

We spend trillions protecting your oil fields in the middle east.

We spend trillions protecting your most profitable investments with a patent system. [Do you know how much money it costs to run a patent system? Do you know how much the market begs for and depends upon it? Do you know that this is pure government intervention in the market?]

We spend trillions upon countless trillions giving you an advanced industrial infrastructure - indeed, we make massive public investments in technology so you can profit. [Did you know that everything from containerization to satellite technology came out of the state sector? Do you know what kind of technology came out of the Cold War Defense and NASA programs and was seeded into the private sector? Do you know the kind of profits that have come from satellite technology alone? Do you know the public investment in aerospace technology? Research the subsidies Boeing got from the defense department. So many of our most profitable sectors have been almost wholly dependent on government subsidies and research partnerships]

We use Fed policy to chase money into the stock market so that you and your ventures are well capitalized. We expanded credit so American consumers can keep buying your products.

We wprotect your global trade routes so you can harvest cheap labor and raw materials from unstable parts of the globe. Indeed, we have built an empire of bases so that we can stabilize all the dangerous regions which contain your emerging markets. [Do you know how much money it costs to stabilize/protect the global market system? Do you what the military and administrative costs are of managing an entire global market system? .... so that Walmart can get their products made in Chain, Taiwan and Honduras?]

We subsidize a vast public university system so that you have the most well educated workers in the world.

We build roads so you can bring products and customers to market.

We build energy grids and water plants across the nation. We built the Hoover Dam and invested trillions so that the Colorado River delta to allow the entire Southwest to be inhabited (and thereby support massive commerce . . . for your profitable ventures).

But here is what we ask in exchange. We ask that you admit to your Republican voters how much help you get from government. And one more thing. We did you a big favor back in the 80s, under Reagan. We liberalized trade and made it easier for you to take advantage of ultra-cheap labor in freedom hating nations. And we let you ship millions of solid middle class jobs out of the country. And we dismantled many of the "After market" policies and programs that helped the middle class in order make room for your tax cuts. And you became the wealthiest private sector in world history. You have so much money that you can fund elections and staff government, and destroy any politician who does not vote your way. As a result of you shipping jobs to cheaper labor markets, coupled with dismantling all the postwar programs that boosted middle class purchasing power, Americans have had to borrow more and more money just to survive and buy your products. Consequently the middle class is, in the aggregate, broke - they can no longer make up for the lost wages/benefits with credit. We need to go back to the system we had during the postwar years when you made solid profits but this nation also invested in the middle class . . . by giving them affordable education, health care, and livable wages. After all, we depend on their consumption to keep the domestic economy afloat. But it all starts with you being honest to your Republican voters about how much help you receive . They need to know that we are no longer living in Ayn Rand's Russia where Stalin steals the family pharmacy. To the contrary, the pharmaceutical now owns the government.

What is tragic, is that you seem to believe what you wrote here.

You just destroyed your creditability if you don't understand what he just said.

 

[blackhawk]

A fair and decent wage would be determined by what type of job you have the skills needed to that job and of course how well you do the job it would vary from profession to profession and person to person.

 

[Foxfyre]

A letter to the private sector... on what is fair

We spend trillions protecting your oil fields in the middle east.

We spend trillions protecting your most profitable investments with a patent system. [Do you know how much money it costs to run a patent system? Do you know how much the market begs for and depends upon it? Do you know that this is pure government intervention in the market?]

We spend trillions upon countless trillions giving you an advanced industrial infrastructure - indeed, we make massive public investments in technology so you can profit. [Did you know that everything from containerization to satellite technology came out of the state sector? Do you know what kind of technology came out of the Cold War Defense and NASA programs and was seeded into the private sector? Do you know the kind of profits that have come from satellite technology alone? Do you know the public investment in aerospace technology? Research the subsidies Boeing got from the defense department. So many of our most profitable sectors have been almost wholly dependent on government subsidies and research partnerships]

We use Fed policy to chase money into the stock market so that you and your ventures are well capitalized. We expanded credit so American consumers can keep buying your products.

We wprotect your global trade routes so you can harvest cheap labor and raw materials from unstable parts of the globe. Indeed, we have built an empire of bases so that we can stabilize all the dangerous regions which contain your emerging markets. [Do you know how much money it costs to stabilize/protect the global market system? Do you what the military and administrative costs are of managing an entire global market system? .... so that Walmart can get their products made in Chain, Taiwan and Honduras?]

We subsidize a vast public university system so that you have the most well educated workers in the world.

We build roads so you can bring products and customers to market.

We build energy grids and water plants across the nation. We built the Hoover Dam and invested trillions so that the Colorado River delta to allow the entire Southwest to be inhabited (and thereby support massive commerce . . . for your profitable ventures).

But here is what we ask in exchange. We ask that you admit to your Republican voters how much help you get from government. And one more thing. We did you a big favor back in the 80s, under Reagan. We liberalized trade and made it easier for you to take advantage of ultra-cheap labor in freedom hating nations. And we let you ship millions of solid middle class jobs out of the country. And we dismantled many of the "After market" policies and programs that helped the middle class in order make room for your tax cuts. And you became the wealthiest private sector in world history. You have so much money that you can fund elections and staff government, and destroy any politician who does not vote your way. As a result of you shipping jobs to cheaper labor markets, coupled with dismantling all the postwar programs that boosted middle class purchasing power, Americans have had to borrow more and more money just to survive and buy your products. Consequently the middle class is, in the aggregate, broke - they can no longer make up for the lost wages/benefits with credit. We need to go back to the system we had during the postwar years when you made solid profits but this nation also invested in the middle class . . . by giving them affordable education, health care, and livable wages. After all, we depend on their consumption to keep the domestic economy afloat. But it all starts with you being honest to your Republican voters about how much help you receive . They need to know that we are no longer living in Ayn Rand's Russia where Stalin steals the family pharmacy. To the contrary, the pharmaceutical now owns the government.

What is tragic, is that you seem to believe what you wrote here.

You just destroyed your creditability if you don't understand what he just said.

The fact that I do understand what he wrote here prompted my comment.

I also understand that it is totally off topic and was probably intended to be.

So Matthew, what do you consider to be a fair and decent wage?

 

[Noomi]

A fair and decent wage would be determined by what type of job you have the skills needed to that job and of course how well you do the job it would vary from profession to profession and person to person.

That means the employer chooses how much you are paid. You could be an excellent worker and work 8 hours a day at a concreting job but be paid less than $5 an hour because the employer thinks that is all you are worth, when the employee should be paid at least five times as much.

 

[Interpol]

A fair and decent wage is one that makes it so that taxpayers don't have to help pay the employees of multinational corporations that make billions of dollars every year.

McDonald's even has a McResource Help Line for its employees, which steers them right into Food Stamps, Welfare, Medicaid, etc.

I find that ridiculous.

If minimum wage were $15, taxpayers would save billions, it would help lower our deficit, and would reduce healthcare costs since millions of people would have the means to afford all of their own healthcare instead of being partially subsidized.

It's a no-brainer: we need to raise the minimum wage. It's a moral imperative and it makes good business sense.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Of course, the first thing the companies will have to do is downsize their minimum wage workforce, cut the hours of many others, and heap more responsibilities on those who remain. It should be interesting to see how much work a low-skilled minimum wage worker can stand. Kinda like a science experiment, cool.

Then, of course, those who have lost their jobs and those who had their hours cut and those who didn't get the jobs because the employers aren't hiring will end up on welfare.

I guess then the government can step in again and force companies to hire minimum wage workers whether they need them or not. Because that's the job of government: Step in and force.

More and more and more power to Our Great & Glorious Leaders In Central Planning, because they love us and they care.

Great stuff, let's do it, this should be fun.

.

 

[zeke]

.

Of course, the first thing the companies will have to do is downsize their minimum wage workforce, cut the hours of many others, and heap more responsibilities on those who remain. It should be interesting to see how much work a low-skilled minimum wage worker can stand. Kinda like a science experiment, cool.

Then, of course, those who have lost their jobs and those who had their hours cut and those who didn't get the jobs because the employers aren't hiring will end up on welfare.

I guess then the government can step in again and force companies to hire minimum wage workers whether they need them or not. Because that's the job of government: Step in and force.

More and more and more power to Our Great & Glorious Leaders In Central Planning, because they love us and they care.

Great stuff, let's do it, this should be fun.

.

Project much Mac? They said the same things to Henry Ford after he raised wages for his workers.

But it is so nice to see you so concerned that CEO's and other executives that you worship might have to take a cut in their more than sufficient pay checks so that their employees could make a little better wages.

Yea i can see the suffering that a man or woman making a million dollars a year would have if they only made $900,000k.

Why I just don't think an executive can get by on 900,000 thousand dollars a year. Or even 750,000. How would they do it Mac?

Face it Mac, you make your living (financial planning?) working with the more affluent among us. You don't want to say anything bad about them (rich people). That's how you make YOUR money. But really. Have a little more empathy for people like me who work for a living.

If your beloved executives made a little less so their employees could make a little more, it would be alright Mac. The world wouldn't end if the top 1% had a decrease in their income. Really. And some things (like the economy) would actually improve.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Of course, the first thing the companies will have to do is downsize their minimum wage workforce, cut the hours of many others, and heap more responsibilities on those who remain. It should be interesting to see how much work a low-skilled minimum wage worker can stand. Kinda like a science experiment, cool.

Then, of course, those who have lost their jobs and those who had their hours cut and those who didn't get the jobs because the employers aren't hiring will end up on welfare.

I guess then the government can step in again and force companies to hire minimum wage workers whether they need them or not. Because that's the job of government: Step in and force.

More and more and more power to Our Great & Glorious Leaders In Central Planning, because they love us and they care.

Great stuff, let's do it, this should be fun.

.

Project much Mac? They said the same things to Henry Ford after he raised wages for his workers.

But it is so nice to see you so concerned that CEO's and other executives that you worship might have to take a cut in their more than sufficient pay checks so that their employees could make a little better wages.

Yea i can see the suffering that a man or woman making a million dollars a year would have if they only made $900,000k.

Why I just don't think an executive can get by on 900,000 thousand dollars a year. Or even 750,000. How would they do it Mac?

Face it Mac, you make your living (financial planning?) working with the more affluent among us. You don't want to say anything bad about them (rich people). That's how you make YOUR money. But really. Have a little more empathy for people like me who work for a living.

If your beloved executives made a little less so their employees could make a little more, it would be alright Mac. The world wouldn't end if the top 1% had a decrease in their income. Really. And some things (like the economy) would actually improve.

For the record, a couple dozen of my clients are small business owners, people who are busting their ass seven days a week to run and grow their businesses. You know, the same people who "didn't build that". Since you're so concerned about people making too much money, I'd think a good idea would be for Our Great & Glorious Leaders in Central Planning to impose income caps. Would you like that?

But I'm glad you didn't dispute my points, you evidently realized you could not and decided instead to throw a few straw men at me. Good, I appreciate that.

Raise the minimum wage to $50 an hour, I truly don't care. I've pretty much completed my grieving process for this country and I'm happy to observe.

.

 

[BDBoop]

.

Of course, the first thing the companies will have to do is downsize their minimum wage workforce, cut the hours of many others, and heap more responsibilities on those who remain. It should be interesting to see how much work a low-skilled minimum wage worker can stand. Kinda like a science experiment, cool.

Then, of course, those who have lost their jobs and those who had their hours cut and those who didn't get the jobs because the employers aren't hiring will end up on welfare.

I guess then the government can step in again and force companies to hire minimum wage workers whether they need them or not. Because that's the job of government: Step in and force.

More and more and more power to Our Great & Glorious Leaders In Central Planning, because they love us and they care.

Great stuff, let's do it, this should be fun.

.

Project much Mac? They said the same things to Henry Ford after he raised wages for his workers.

But it is so nice to see you so concerned that CEO's and other executives that you worship might have to take a cut in their more than sufficient pay checks so that their employees could make a little better wages.

Yea i can see the suffering that a man or woman making a million dollars a year would have if they only made $900,000k.

Why I just don't think an executive can get by on 900,000 thousand dollars a year. Or even 750,000. How would they do it Mac?

Face it Mac, you make your living (financial planning?) working with the more affluent among us. You don't want to say anything bad about them (rich people). That's how you make YOUR money. But really. Have a little more empathy for people like me who work for a living.

If your beloved executives made a little less so their employees could make a little more, it would be alright Mac. The world wouldn't end if the top 1% had a decrease in their income. Really. And some things (like the economy) would actually improve.

For the record, a couple dozen of my clients are small business owners, people who are busting their ass seven days a week to run and grow their businesses. You know, the same people who "didn't build that". Since you're so concerned about people making too much money, I'd think a good idea would be for Our Great & Glorious Leaders in Central Planning to impose income caps. Would you like that?

But I'm glad you didn't dispute my points, you evidently realized you could not and decided instead to throw a few straw men at me. Good, I appreciate that.

Raise the minimum wage to $50 an hour, I truly don't care. I've pretty much completed my grieving process for this country and I'm happy to observe.

.

You didn't dispute his, either. You changed the subject, and then tried to end the thread.