The Dirty Little Truth About the Minimum Wage

[JoeB131]

Well I'm pretty sure YOU never went to college.."done heard"???? How revealing of your intellectual level!

Obviously, you aren't smart enough to realize I was mocking him in a "redneck" voice.

 

[Rustic]

They are providing a service, they gave the consumer what they wanted and now you bitch about it?

God Damn someone like Taylor swift is rich as heck. She provided a service , people bought it

The Waltons destroyed small business in this country, and you want to pat them on the back for it.

Man, you people raise stupid to an art form.

Survival of the fittest...
Anyway, socialism is killing and would have killed "small town" America off anyway much more painfully. Socialism can not and will not tolerate any sort of freedom and those making an extra buck. Shit for brains
Lol

 

[Rustic]

Well, we are still discussing it because you're a muscle-headed moron. No, you shouldn't be making a living wage unless the work you're doing for the one who is paying you is worth a living wage, whatever the fuck that is. No one anywhere is required to provide you a job and you're not required to accept a job. You shouldn't be entitled to a certain wage and no one should be obligated to pay you a certain wage. These factors should be determined by the free market.

Fuck free markets. Free markets are working people sending their children to work in sweatshops...

I frankly think that the person behind the counter at a McDonalds has a lot more to do with providing good service than a CEO who gets 8 figures for making bad decisions.

You are a silly monkey

 

[healthmyths]

Well I'm pretty sure YOU never went to college.."done heard"???? How revealing of your intellectual level!

Obviously, you aren't smart enough to realize I was mocking him in a "redneck" voice.

So you are a racist then? Sad you make fun of hardworking people which again shows your lack of intelligence. Never heard of Eric Hoffer have you and if you did you
would be embarrassed. Oh and by the way mocking people usually is illustrated by putting "quotes" around your text... like you did "redneck"... But your lack of
writing skills plus your obvious totally missing the point of the OP's contribution!

 

[Rustic]

No Joe the consumers who buy shit from Walmart destroyed the small business mom and pop stores.
Again Joe what came first big box stores or mom and pop stores.

Was Sam Walton devious?

Guy, you need to read up on Walmart's marketting tactics...

Like how they'd open a store in a small town, sandbag all the local businesses until they went under, and then close up shop and get consumer to drive miles further away.

Was he wrong to give his kids the money?

He'll no...

Why would you think it's right to give the government the money the empire you created not to your children?

I think we need a sensible estate tax to keep the wealth from accumulating in too few hands and to make sure essential services are continued.

Again, country ran a lot better when the rich paid their fair share.

On your first point, who gives a shit? Survival of the fittest, it's called competing... Can't play the game, get the fuck out.

An estate tax(death tax) is the government taking what does not belong to them whatsoever. They did nothing to earn it so they have zero claim to it, you inbread fucker. Lol

''Fair share?" It means everyone pays the same dollar amount, because it's none of the federal government's business how little or how much any one person makes, now run along to your little communism class. Dip shit
Lol

 

[healthmyths]

Basket weaving?

someday, little timmy, you'll contribute something to a thread.

Today isn't that day. Tomorrow isn't looking promising.

Okay, back to the subject of the OP, which is typical right wing "Greed is Good" and the last thing you want is people voting for wealth redistribution.

The reality is, FDR saved the economy without plunging the country into fascism or authoritarianism. and when WWII was over, we were in a position where our well compensated, unionized middle class created the greatest standard of living the world had ever seen up to that point.

Until Republicans came along and fucked it up.

Hey... dummy... HOW many people work at minimum wage today of $7.25/hour?
YOU also need a little education about WHO of the 3 million are!
Among those paid by the hour, 1.3 million earned exactly the prevailing federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 1.7 million had wages below the federal minimum. Together, these 3.0 million workers with wages at or below the federal minimum made up 3.9 percent of all hourly paid workers.
Of the 3 million... 1.443 million ages 16 to 24!
http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/min...racteristics-of-minimum-wage-workers-2014.pdf
So almost half are under 24 years old and WHAT are their skill sets???
That's it. All this ignorant talk about poor people working at minimum wage!
Almost all of them are ENTRY level jobs for young people that will be replaced by robots!
YOU HAPPY???

Where are YOUR facts!!!

 

[Wyatt earp]

I will leave you guys with a few questions to consider.

If a mandatory minimum wage had never been implemented, what would the average wage for unskilled labor be? Would it be what it is today or less? If less, how much less?

In addition there are no government assistance programs. No welfare, Medicaid employment insurance, etc.

How would this impact our country? Would the crime rate be the same or higher? Would poverty increase or decrease? What impact would this have on the economy?

Not to worry. Boss and Bear have their guns and bibles, they'll be fine when civilization collapses...

I don't even have my 9 mm glock anymore , gave it up , pawned it 12 years ago.

 

[Rustic]

Basket weaving?

someday, little timmy, you'll contribute something to a thread.

Today isn't that day. Tomorrow isn't looking promising.

Okay, back to the subject of the OP, which is typical right wing "Greed is Good" and the last thing you want is people voting for wealth redistribution.

The reality is, FDR saved the economy without plunging the country into fascism or authoritarianism. and when WWII was over, we were in a position where our well compensated, unionized middle class created the greatest standard of living the world had ever seen up to that point.

Until Republicans came along and fucked it up.

Hey... dummy... HOW many people work at minimum wage today of $7.25/hour?
YOU also need a little education about WHO of the 3 million are!
Among those paid by the hour, 1.3 million earned exactly the prevailing federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 1.7 million had wages below the federal minimum. Together, these 3.0 million workers with wages at or below the federal minimum made up 3.9 percent of all hourly paid workers.
Of the 3 million... 1.443 million ages 16 to 24!
http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/min...racteristics-of-minimum-wage-workers-2014.pdf
So almost half are under 24 years old and WHAT are their skill sets???
That's it. All this ignorant talk about poor people working at minimum wage!
Almost all of them are ENTRY level jobs for young people that will be replaced by robots!
YOU HAPPY???

Where are YOUR facts!!!

Joe is too busy hiding in his moms basement to know such things...

 

[dblack]

I will leave you guys with a few questions to consider.


If a mandatory minimum wage had never been implemented, what would the average wage for unskilled labor be? Would it be what it is today or less? If less, how much less?


In addition there are no government assistance programs. No welfare, Medicaid, employment insurance, etc.


How would this impact our country? Would the crime rate be the same or higher? Would poverty increase or decrease? What impact would this have on the economy?

The only honest answer, to all of your questions, is, of course, I don't know. Neither do you. But you seem to be suggesting that, deprived of the coercive power of government, society would simply give up on these problems and wallow in failure. I don't buy that.

 

[Afterword]

I will leave you guys with a few questions to consider.


If a mandatory minimum wage had never been implemented, what would the average wage for unskilled labor be? Would it be what it is today or less? If less, how much less?


In addition there are no government assistance programs. No welfare, Medicaid, employment insurance, etc.


How would this impact our country? Would the crime rate be the same or higher? Would poverty increase or decrease? What impact would this have on the economy?

The only honest answer, to all of your questions, is, of course, I don't know. Neither do you. But you seem to be suggesting that, deprived of the coercive power of government, society would simply give up on these problems and wallow in failure. I don't buy that.

It is what you want - but you have no idea what would happen if you got your way?

 

[dblack]

I will leave you guys with a few questions to consider.


If a mandatory minimum wage had never been implemented, what would the average wage for unskilled labor be? Would it be what it is today or less? If less, how much less?


In addition there are no government assistance programs. No welfare, Medicaid, employment insurance, etc.


How would this impact our country? Would the crime rate be the same or higher? Would poverty increase or decrease? What impact would this have on the economy?

The only honest answer, to all of your questions, is, of course, I don't know. Neither do you. But you seem to be suggesting that, deprived of the coercive power of government, society would simply give up on these problems and wallow in failure. I don't buy that.

It is what you want - but you have no idea what would happen if you got your way?

Yep. Just like you, eh?

In one sense, I do know what would happen. We'd have to work out ways to deal with social problems via voluntary cooperation, rather than state mandates.

 

[owebo]

I will leave you guys with a few questions to consider.


If a mandatory minimum wage had never been implemented, what would the average wage for unskilled labor be? Would it be what it is today or less? If less, how much less?


In addition there are no government assistance programs. No welfare, Medicaid, employment insurance, etc.


How would this impact our country? Would the crime rate be the same or higher? Would poverty increase or decrease? What impact would this have on the economy?

The only honest answer, to all of your questions, is, of course, I don't know. Neither do you. But you seem to be suggesting that, deprived of the coercive power of government, society would simply give up on these problems and wallow in failure. I don't buy that.

It is what you want - but you have no idea what would happen if you got your way?

And you want fascism....ill take the free market.....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No Joe the consumers who buy shit from Walmart destroyed the small business mom and pop stores.
Again Joe what came first big box stores or mom and pop stores.

Was Sam Walton devious?

Guy, you need to read up on Walmart's marketting tactics...

Like how they'd open a store in a small town, sandbag all the local businesses until they went under, and then close up shop and get consumer to drive miles further away.

Was he wrong to give his kids the money?

He'll no...

Why would you think it's right to give the government the money the empire you created not to your children?

I think we need a sensible estate tax to keep the wealth from accumulating in too few hands and to make sure essential services are continued.

Again, country ran a lot better when the rich paid their fair share.

I think we need a sensible estate tax to keep the wealth from accumulating in too few hands and to make sure essential services are continued.

Again, country ran a lot better when the rich paid their fair share.

The rich pay over 70% of all collected income taxes. That's not fair?

"Just what exactly is YOUR fair share of what somebody else worked for?"
Thomas Sowell

Guy, you need to read up on Walmart's marketting tactics...

Like how they'd open a store in a small town, sandbag all the local businesses until they went under, and then close up shop and get consumer to drive miles further away.

They did what????? Care to explain that where it makes any sense?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why would you think it's right to give the government the money the empire you created not to your children?

Because liberals believe that all money belongs to government, and what they allow us to keep is a gift from government to you.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The Waltons destroyed small business in this country, and you want to pat them on the back for it.

Man, you people raise stupid to an art form.

This is true. Before Walmart came along, nobody competed for customers. They all divided the consumers equally so everybody had their share.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That's not to mention out of those 3% of people, most are senior citizens just looking to keep occupied, high school or college kids looking for extra money, or stay at home wives that want to add to the household income while the kids are in school.

So let me get this straight. Senior Citizens lose their shirt in the Wall Street Casino, have to work for minimum wage to keep from eating dog food, and you think this is a good thing?

Battered Housewife Conservatism, everyone. No matter how badly the rich beat him down, he'll keep making excuses for them. He'll drive through the ruins of Cleveland - a true cesspool- and blame poor people for it.

Yeah, that would make it fair to the consumer. Let's see, if we get rid of that million dollar salary, divide that by the tens of millions of products Walmart sells per year, why that could reduce the cost of the products they buy by almost one-cent each.

Okay, let's look at that.


None

"The Walton family, which owns Wal-Mart, controls a fortune equal to the wealth of the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined."

Bivens wrote that in 2010, the wealth of six Walton family heirs was $89.5 billion, 22 percent higher than in 2007.

Meanwhile, the median wealth of American families in 2010 was $77,300, nearly 39 percent lower than three years earlier.

(Median wealth refers to the American family that is exactly wealthier than half of all families and less wealthy than half.)

As for measuring one against the other, Bivens said the Walton family wealth in 2010 was as large as the wealth of the bottom 48.8 million families in the United States, or 41.5 percent of all American families.

Okay, let's look at that.


None

"The Walton family, which owns Wal-Mart, controls a fortune equal to the wealth of the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined."

Bivens wrote that in 2010, the wealth of six Walton family heirs was $89.5 billion, 22 percent higher than in 2007.

Meanwhile, the median wealth of American families in 2010 was $77,300, nearly 39 percent lower than three years earlier.

(Median wealth refers to the American family that is exactly wealthier than half of all families and less wealthy than half.)

As for measuring one against the other, Bivens said the Walton family wealth in 2010 was as large as the wealth of the bottom 48.8 million families in the United States, or 41.5 percent of all American families.

Well.......Okay. But I don't know what that has to do with the fact lowering a CEO's pay won't help any customer one bit.

o let me get this straight. Senior Citizens lose their shirt in the Wall Street Casino, have to work for minimum wage to keep from eating dog food, and you think this is a good thing?

Battered Housewife Conservatism, everyone. No matter how badly the rich beat him down, he'll keep making excuses for them. He'll drive through the ruins of Cleveland - a true cesspool- and blame poor people for it.

Who says they have to work? And even if they did have to, who's fault is that? It's not like nobody knew SS wasn't enough to live on once you get older.

And as a typical lib, you changed all my words around. What I said about old people is that they take these jobs to stay occupied; to have something to do with their time; a way for them to feel like they are participating in society. Not because they have to.

My employer hires retirees to drive our vans for small deliveries. It doesn't pay much, but these people really don't care either. If you ask them why they are still working, they all say pretty much the same thing. They are bored being retired. Either that, or they feel guilty being at home while their (usually younger) wife is out working a full time job.

My father counted the days until retirement. As he neared that day, he always knew how many days he had left to retire. He constantly brought it up at every family event "Yep, 4,327 days until I retire." "Only 2,760 days to go to retirement!"

I thought to myself: this poor guy. He killed himself working as a bricklayer to the point he's counting the days until he can finally have some rest.

On the nearest family event, my father announced he was officially retired. So I asked what he would do with his time. He responded "Well I have a little job here to finish up, a lady called me about a set of front porch steps, and I have another job........"

My father worked 15 years after his retirement. During that time I questioned him about counting the days and all that. He said it's much different working when you want to than working because you have to.

 

[Boss]

Fuck free markets. Free markets are working people sending their children to work in sweatshops...

I frankly think that the person behind the counter at a McDonalds has a lot more to do with providing good service than a CEO who gets 8 figures for making bad decisions.

McDonalds, like Walmart is one of millions of free enterprise success stories.
CEOs get paid what the board of directors think they are worth in the free market.
All of it works together to create a genius system that has lifted more out of poverty and created more millionaires and billionaires than any system man has ever created. This is just an indisputable fact.

What you Socialists like to do is use free market capitalist success against itself. Look at all these rich people hoarding the wealth! ...But they got rich through the free market system and others are getting richer in the process. Yes, the rich are getting richer... but so are the poor and middle... everyone is getting richer if they are engaged in free market capitalism.

Wealth is created through our production but also, our intellectual property, our skills and talents, our ingenuity and technology. The reason this system is best is because it allows individual liberty in all areas. You have consumers, producers, sellers, buyers, transporters and administrators. All work in voluntary manner with each other in mutual transaction and commerce. When there is a higher need than demand, price goes up. When there is plentiful supply and low demand, the price goes down.

The only time this system fails to work is when it becomes over-burdened with government regulation which interferes with free market forces. There are some areas enumerated in the constitution for the system to have reasonable intervention by government to ensure certain things, like having a national defense. But things that aren't enumerated are often the biggest threat to the system. We crossed that line a long time ago but that doesn't mean we should just keep doing it more extremely. We need to revive the free market system, not kill it.

 

[Afterword]

I will leave you guys with a few questions to consider.


If a mandatory minimum wage had never been implemented, what would the average wage for unskilled labor be? Would it be what it is today or less? If less, how much less?


In addition there are no government assistance programs. No welfare, Medicaid, employment insurance, etc.


How would this impact our country? Would the crime rate be the same or higher? Would poverty increase or decrease? What impact would this have on the economy?

The only honest answer, to all of your questions, is, of course, I don't know. Neither do you. But you seem to be suggesting that, deprived of the coercive power of government, society would simply give up on these problems and wallow in failure. I don't buy that.

It is what you want - but you have no idea what would happen if you got your way?

Yep. Just like you, eh?

In one sense, I do know what would happen. We'd have to work out ways to deal with social problems via voluntary cooperation, rather than state mandates.

This was never done before mandatory minimum wage. Churches did what they could do, of course, and still do, but they are and were overwhelmed. They would be even more over-whelmed in the scenario I present. It would be like putting a Band-Aid on a severed leg.

But this is your idea – what is your contingency plan.

More details are needed. Your response was pretty vague.

 

[dblack]

I will leave you guys with a few questions to consider.


If a mandatory minimum wage had never been implemented, what would the average wage for unskilled labor be? Would it be what it is today or less? If less, how much less?


In addition there are no government assistance programs. No welfare, Medicaid, employment insurance, etc.


How would this impact our country? Would the crime rate be the same or higher? Would poverty increase or decrease? What impact would this have on the economy?

The only honest answer, to all of your questions, is, of course, I don't know. Neither do you. But you seem to be suggesting that, deprived of the coercive power of government, society would simply give up on these problems and wallow in failure. I don't buy that.

It is what you want - but you have no idea what would happen if you got your way?

Yep. Just like you, eh?

In one sense, I do know what would happen. We'd have to work out ways to deal with social problems via voluntary cooperation, rather than state mandates.

This was never done before mandatory minimum wage. Churches did what they could do, of course, and still do, but they are and were overwhelmed. They would be even more over-whelmed in the scenario I present. It would be like putting a Band-Aid on a severed leg.

But this is your idea – what is your contingency plan.

More details are needed. Your response was pretty vague.

I have no desire to mandate any particular 'plan' on anyone. That's the point. It's not a proper responsibility of government.

 

[Afterword]

I will leave you guys with a few questions to consider.


If a mandatory minimum wage had never been implemented, what would the average wage for unskilled labor be? Would it be what it is today or less? If less, how much less?


In addition there are no government assistance programs. No welfare, Medicaid, employment insurance, etc.


How would this impact our country? Would the crime rate be the same or higher? Would poverty increase or decrease? What impact would this have on the economy?

The only honest answer, to all of your questions, is, of course, I don't know. Neither do you. But you seem to be suggesting that, deprived of the coercive power of government, society would simply give up on these problems and wallow in failure. I don't buy that.

It is what you want - but you have no idea what would happen if you got your way?

Yep. Just like you, eh?

In one sense, I do know what would happen. We'd have to work out ways to deal with social problems via voluntary cooperation, rather than state mandates.

This was never done before mandatory minimum wage. Churches did what they could do, of course, and still do, but they are and were overwhelmed. They would be even more over-whelmed in the scenario I present. It would be like putting a Band-Aid on a severed leg.

But this is your idea – what is your contingency plan.

More details are needed. Your response was pretty vague.

I have no desire to mandate any particular 'plan' on anyone. That's the point. It's not a proper responsibility of government.

You guys cannot see passed your hate. You have never even considered the consequences.