The GOP Congressional Overreach will Soon Begin

[SAYIT]

Yes skilled people do get paid more and they should, but that hardly says much about the economy in general. Engineers and construction workers are paid well in part because of how profitable those businesses are.

So you DO understand supply and demand. Demand for those with skills is greater and they are paid accordingly. Those without skills are paid less. As gov't dictates a federal minimum for the least skilled, is it not logical they will also want to dictate a maximum for the most skilled? Do we really need federal involvement in our wage scale when states can do the job.

Except that NO ONE is proposing a maximum now are they? That is what matters.

The point you so assiduously avoid is that our federal gov't HAS NO BUSINESS setting the wage scale. Not at the high end and not at the bottom.

 

[SAYIT]

Try to grasp this concept: Obama wants a higher minimum-wage. He wants to pay college and H.S. students $15/hour to flip burgers. Well, he doesn't want to pay it. He wants to force businesses to pay it.

Then he opens our borders, promising amnesty and the folks flood in looking for work. Businesses fire their college and H.S. student workers and replace them with illegals who are only here because Obama has a pen. They pay them $6 and have to worry about Obama using the IRS to take away their businesses. Now they have no choice but to either go fully automated, hire illegals, or sell their businesses.

Talking about overreach.

You're profoundly ignorant. The average fast food worker is 29 years old.

And already makes more than minimum wage.

 

[martybegan]

If your labor is only worth $4 to $5 in value, why should you be paid $15?

Who exactly decides worth? Businesses? Business' only concern is maximizing profit.

I'm not even deciding worth. 16.5 million people make less than 10.10 per hour. Due to inflation, the last time someone could live comfortably off 10.10 per hour was the 1960s. Rasing the wage is about the nature of how income has evolved economically in this country.

Worth is decided by value. If the government has to force you to pay someone more than they are worth, it leads to either products or services costing more than they are actually worth, or the product or service being discontinued due to non viability at the offered cost.

Economics 101 billybutt.

Um okay who decides value? Businesses pay miminum wage so often not because of value of the employer, but because it is the easiest way to maximize profit. They pay it because they know they can.

Here's an economics lesson for you: if people have bigger paychecks, they spend more money on the market. That helps the economy in general.

The market decides value. If a job requires a certain amount of skill, the market sets the wage on that skill.

An engineering firm offering minimum wage would never be able to hire engineers. A construction company, even a non union one, offering minimum wage for carpentry, electrical, or plumbing work would not have any workers capable of doing the job.

And as for your last point, by that logic we should set the minimum wage to $50 an hour, oh wait, then a cup of coffee would cost $35 each.

Your logic requires that inflation and the cost of production does not exist.

The market decides value. What are you talking about? Where is this metric of yours revered by economists exactly?

Yes skilled people do get paid more and they should, but that hardly says much about the economy in general. Engineers and construction workers are paid well in part because of how profitable those businesses are.

If, due to inflation, people can't make a comfortable living under 15/h, that is what matters. 10s of millions of people make less than that. The average fast food worker is 29. People can't afford to go to school to learn new skills. That keeps them where they are. Skilled workers are becoming less and less prevalent in today's economy. To suggest laziness is the main reason for this is profound ignorance. What about all these children in families of working parents who lack proper nutrition and healthcare? Where's their choice in having a better life? If people are willing to work full time, shouldn't they be given a wage they can provide with?

You people are so dense. No one is suggesting we raise the wage to $50 an hour. You people reason like children over this issue. Obviously it shouldn't be higher than 15/h.

We are not either, but your logic on this dictates that this is a viable solution to the issue. its your positions lack of reasonableness that is laid plain by this.

Inflation is CAUSED by making someone earn more than they are worth, can you not get that through your thick skull?

and as for the other stuff, boo fucking hoo. Poor life choices should not be funded out of my wallet.

 

[mudwhistle]

Try to grasp this concept: Obama wants a higher minimum-wage. He wants to pay college and H.S. students $15/hour to flip burgers. Well, he doesn't want to pay it. He wants to force businesses to pay it.

Then he opens our borders, promising amnesty and the folks flood in looking for work. Businesses fire their college and H.S. student workers and replace them with illegals who are only here because Obama has a pen. They pay them $6 and have to worry about Obama using the IRS to take away their businesses. Now they have no choice but to either go fully automated, hire illegals, or sell their businesses.

Talking about overreach.

You're profoundly ignorant. The average fast food worker is 29 years old.

Actually no. That's the average. Fast-food workers start at 16 and go as high as 60-70. If the average is only 29 that means most of them are still in school or in that age group. I was still going to school when I was 27. Working a register part-time was the only kind of job I had time for because I was going to school full-time and needed to study several hours per day.

 

[bendog]

I cannot believe they would be so crazy as to give Obama a veto/shutdown over privatizing medicare.

 

[Stephanie]

All this is is the NYSLIME stirring up the shit for the Democrats

fall for it at ALL OUR PERIL

contact the Republicans and TELL them what you want done. listen to no one else, especially the NYSLIMES

 

[Billy000]

Who exactly decides worth? Businesses? Business' only concern is maximizing profit.

I'm not even deciding worth. 16.5 million people make less than 10.10 per hour. Due to inflation, the last time someone could live comfortably off 10.10 per hour was the 1960s. Rasing the wage is about the nature of how income has evolved economically in this country.

Worth is decided by value. If the government has to force you to pay someone more than they are worth, it leads to either products or services costing more than they are actually worth, or the product or service being discontinued due to non viability at the offered cost.

Economics 101 billybutt.

Um okay who decides value? Businesses pay miminum wage so often not because of value of the employer, but because it is the easiest way to maximize profit. They pay it because they know they can.

Here's an economics lesson for you: if people have bigger paychecks, they spend more money on the market. That helps the economy in general.

The market decides value. If a job requires a certain amount of skill, the market sets the wage on that skill.

An engineering firm offering minimum wage would never be able to hire engineers. A construction company, even a non union one, offering minimum wage for carpentry, electrical, or plumbing work would not have any workers capable of doing the job.

And as for your last point, by that logic we should set the minimum wage to $50 an hour, oh wait, then a cup of coffee would cost $35 each.

Your logic requires that inflation and the cost of production does not exist.

The market decides value. What are you talking about? Where is this metric of yours revered by economists exactly?

Yes skilled people do get paid more and they should, but that hardly says much about the economy in general. Engineers and construction workers are paid well in part because of how profitable those businesses are.

If, due to inflation, people can't make a comfortable living under 15/h, that is what matters. 10s of millions of people make less than that. The average fast food worker is 29. People can't afford to go to school to learn new skills. That keeps them where they are. Skilled workers are becoming less and less prevalent in today's economy. To suggest laziness is the main reason for this is profound ignorance. What about all these children in families of working parents who lack proper nutrition and healthcare? Where's their choice in having a better life? If people are willing to work full time, shouldn't they be given a wage they can provide with?

You people are so dense. No one is suggesting we raise the wage to $50 an hour. You people reason like children over this issue. Obviously it shouldn't be higher than 15/h.

We are not either, but your logic on this dictates that this is a viable solution to the issue. its your positions lack of reasonableness that is laid plain by this.

Inflation is CAUSED by making someone earn more than they are worth, can you not get that through your thick skull?

and as for the other stuff, boo fucking hoo. Poor life choices should not be funded out of my wallet.

There is no evidence inflation is affected by raising the wage. My god think about what you're saying. "More than they are worth". There is no objective measurement for what you are saying. You are talking about an abstract, subjective idea here when you say a worker's "worth". That means there is no way their "worth", whatever that even means, will negatively affect the economy.

The economy can only improve with higher wages because of the boost to consumer spending. As long as the wage was gradually raised over a few years, the initial negative effect on the market would be insignificant.

 

[Billy000]

Try to grasp this concept: Obama wants a higher minimum-wage. He wants to pay college and H.S. students $15/hour to flip burgers. Well, he doesn't want to pay it. He wants to force businesses to pay it.

Then he opens our borders, promising amnesty and the folks flood in looking for work. Businesses fire their college and H.S. student workers and replace them with illegals who are only here because Obama has a pen. They pay them $6 and have to worry about Obama using the IRS to take away their businesses. Now they have no choice but to either go fully automated, hire illegals, or sell their businesses.

Talking about overreach.

You're profoundly ignorant. The average fast food worker is 29 years old.

Actually no. That's the average. Fast-food workers start at 16 and go as high as 60-70. If the average is only 29 that means most of them are still in school or in that age group. I was still going to school when I was 27. Working a register part-time was the only kind of job I had time for because I was going to school full-time and needed to study several hours per day.

Most of them are going to school? Um no. That isn't true.

 

[martybegan]

Worth is decided by value. If the government has to force you to pay someone more than they are worth, it leads to either products or services costing more than they are actually worth, or the product or service being discontinued due to non viability at the offered cost.

Economics 101 billybutt.

Um okay who decides value? Businesses pay miminum wage so often not because of value of the employer, but because it is the easiest way to maximize profit. They pay it because they know they can.

Here's an economics lesson for you: if people have bigger paychecks, they spend more money on the market. That helps the economy in general.

The market decides value. If a job requires a certain amount of skill, the market sets the wage on that skill.

An engineering firm offering minimum wage would never be able to hire engineers. A construction company, even a non union one, offering minimum wage for carpentry, electrical, or plumbing work would not have any workers capable of doing the job.

And as for your last point, by that logic we should set the minimum wage to $50 an hour, oh wait, then a cup of coffee would cost $35 each.

Your logic requires that inflation and the cost of production does not exist.

The market decides value. What are you talking about? Where is this metric of yours revered by economists exactly?

Yes skilled people do get paid more and they should, but that hardly says much about the economy in general. Engineers and construction workers are paid well in part because of how profitable those businesses are.

If, due to inflation, people can't make a comfortable living under 15/h, that is what matters. 10s of millions of people make less than that. The average fast food worker is 29. People can't afford to go to school to learn new skills. That keeps them where they are. Skilled workers are becoming less and less prevalent in today's economy. To suggest laziness is the main reason for this is profound ignorance. What about all these children in families of working parents who lack proper nutrition and healthcare? Where's their choice in having a better life? If people are willing to work full time, shouldn't they be given a wage they can provide with?

You people are so dense. No one is suggesting we raise the wage to $50 an hour. You people reason like children over this issue. Obviously it shouldn't be higher than 15/h.

We are not either, but your logic on this dictates that this is a viable solution to the issue. its your positions lack of reasonableness that is laid plain by this.

Inflation is CAUSED by making someone earn more than they are worth, can you not get that through your thick skull?

and as for the other stuff, boo fucking hoo. Poor life choices should not be funded out of my wallet.

There is no evidence inflation is affected by raising the wage. My god think about what you're saying. "More than they are worth". There is no objective measurement for what you are saying. You are talking about an abstract, subjective idea here when you say a worker's "worth". That means there is no way their "worth", whatever that even means, will negatively affect the economy.

The economy can only improve with higher wages be she of the boost to consumer spending. As long as the wage was gradually raised over a few years, the initial negative effect on the market would be insignificant.

a person's labor adds value to a product or service. increasing the cost of the labor requires either an increase in the cost of the good or service, or savings somewhere else.

Naturally increasing higher wages, be it from increased skills in the labor force, or productivity gains improve the economy, artificial ones do not.

 

[Stephanie]

News stations and newspapers to SHUN folks
Lets move FORWARD instead of allowing them to keep taking us back with their SHIT reporting that is only meant to help the Democrat party not, WE THE PEOPLE

 

[paulitician]

I hope not. I'm basically in favor of 'Do-Nothing Congresses' at this point. It's about damage control now. The less they do, the better off the Country is. But that being said, i'd like to see them do a few things. Like tweaking or scrapping Obama's Health Care debacle. At the very least, end the Mandate.

But otherwise, i'd like to see them on as many Recesses as possible. When they're away, i know that can't do anymore damage.

 

[Billy000]

Um okay who decides value? Businesses pay miminum wage so often not because of value of the employer, but because it is the easiest way to maximize profit. They pay it because they know they can.

Here's an economics lesson for you: if people have bigger paychecks, they spend more money on the market. That helps the economy in general.

The market decides value. If a job requires a certain amount of skill, the market sets the wage on that skill.

An engineering firm offering minimum wage would never be able to hire engineers. A construction company, even a non union one, offering minimum wage for carpentry, electrical, or plumbing work would not have any workers capable of doing the job.

And as for your last point, by that logic we should set the minimum wage to $50 an hour, oh wait, then a cup of coffee would cost $35 each.

Your logic requires that inflation and the cost of production does not exist.

The market decides value. What are you talking about? Where is this metric of yours revered by economists exactly?

Yes skilled people do get paid more and they should, but that hardly says much about the economy in general. Engineers and construction workers are paid well in part because of how profitable those businesses are.

If, due to inflation, people can't make a comfortable living under 15/h, that is what matters. 10s of millions of people make less than that. The average fast food worker is 29. People can't afford to go to school to learn new skills. That keeps them where they are. Skilled workers are becoming less and less prevalent in today's economy. To suggest laziness is the main reason for this is profound ignorance. What about all these children in families of working parents who lack proper nutrition and healthcare? Where's their choice in having a better life? If people are willing to work full time, shouldn't they be given a wage they can provide with?

You people are so dense. No one is suggesting we raise the wage to $50 an hour. You people reason like children over this issue. Obviously it shouldn't be higher than 15/h.

We are not either, but your logic on this dictates that this is a viable solution to the issue. its your positions lack of reasonableness that is laid plain by this.

Inflation is CAUSED by making someone earn more than they are worth, can you not get that through your thick skull?

and as for the other stuff, boo fucking hoo. Poor life choices should not be funded out of my wallet.

There is no evidence inflation is affected by raising the wage. My god think about what you're saying. "More than they are worth". There is no objective measurement for what you are saying. You are talking about an abstract, subjective idea here when you say a worker's "worth". That means there is no way their "worth", whatever that even means, will negatively affect the economy.

The economy can only improve with higher wages be she of the boost to consumer spending. As long as the wage was gradually raised over a few years, the initial negative effect on the market would be insignificant.

a person's labor adds value to a product or service. increasing the cost of the labor requires either an increase in the cost of the good or service, or savings somewhere else.

Naturally increasing higher wages, be it from increased skills in the labor force, or productivity gains improve the economy, artificial ones do not.

Look I agree a person's labor adds to the value of product and services but I fail to see why that justifies keeping wages as they are now. If a person is a shitty worker they get fired like always. As long as a person is doing their job well, they deserve a wage they can live off of.

 

[martybegan]

The market decides value. If a job requires a certain amount of skill, the market sets the wage on that skill.

An engineering firm offering minimum wage would never be able to hire engineers. A construction company, even a non union one, offering minimum wage for carpentry, electrical, or plumbing work would not have any workers capable of doing the job.

And as for your last point, by that logic we should set the minimum wage to $50 an hour, oh wait, then a cup of coffee would cost $35 each.

Your logic requires that inflation and the cost of production does not exist.

The market decides value. What are you talking about? Where is this metric of yours revered by economists exactly?

Yes skilled people do get paid more and they should, but that hardly says much about the economy in general. Engineers and construction workers are paid well in part because of how profitable those businesses are.

If, due to inflation, people can't make a comfortable living under 15/h, that is what matters. 10s of millions of people make less than that. The average fast food worker is 29. People can't afford to go to school to learn new skills. That keeps them where they are. Skilled workers are becoming less and less prevalent in today's economy. To suggest laziness is the main reason for this is profound ignorance. What about all these children in families of working parents who lack proper nutrition and healthcare? Where's their choice in having a better life? If people are willing to work full time, shouldn't they be given a wage they can provide with?

You people are so dense. No one is suggesting we raise the wage to $50 an hour. You people reason like children over this issue. Obviously it shouldn't be higher than 15/h.

We are not either, but your logic on this dictates that this is a viable solution to the issue. its your positions lack of reasonableness that is laid plain by this.

Inflation is CAUSED by making someone earn more than they are worth, can you not get that through your thick skull?

and as for the other stuff, boo fucking hoo. Poor life choices should not be funded out of my wallet.

There is no evidence inflation is affected by raising the wage. My god think about what you're saying. "More than they are worth". There is no objective measurement for what you are saying. You are talking about an abstract, subjective idea here when you say a worker's "worth". That means there is no way their "worth", whatever that even means, will negatively affect the economy.

The economy can only improve with higher wages be she of the boost to consumer spending. As long as the wage was gradually raised over a few years, the initial negative effect on the market would be insignificant.

a person's labor adds value to a product or service. increasing the cost of the labor requires either an increase in the cost of the good or service, or savings somewhere else.

Naturally increasing higher wages, be it from increased skills in the labor force, or productivity gains improve the economy, artificial ones do not.

Look I agree a person's labor adds to the value of product and services but I fail to see why that justifies keeping wages as they are now. If a person is a shitty worker they get fired like always. As long as a person is doing their job well, they deserve a wage they can live off of.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Unions have been preventing shitty workers from being fired for decades, its their main purpose.

No one deserves anything when it comes to employment wages, you have to earn it, and what your earn has to add enough value to the product or service to make it viable.

Again with the entitlement mentality.

 

[Billy000]

The market decides value. What are you talking about? Where is this metric of yours revered by economists exactly?

Yes skilled people do get paid more and they should, but that hardly says much about the economy in general. Engineers and construction workers are paid well in part because of how profitable those businesses are.

If, due to inflation, people can't make a comfortable living under 15/h, that is what matters. 10s of millions of people make less than that. The average fast food worker is 29. People can't afford to go to school to learn new skills. That keeps them where they are. Skilled workers are becoming less and less prevalent in today's economy. To suggest laziness is the main reason for this is profound ignorance. What about all these children in families of working parents who lack proper nutrition and healthcare? Where's their choice in having a better life? If people are willing to work full time, shouldn't they be given a wage they can provide with?

You people are so dense. No one is suggesting we raise the wage to $50 an hour. You people reason like children over this issue. Obviously it shouldn't be higher than 15/h.

We are not either, but your logic on this dictates that this is a viable solution to the issue. its your positions lack of reasonableness that is laid plain by this.

Inflation is CAUSED by making someone earn more than they are worth, can you not get that through your thick skull?

and as for the other stuff, boo fucking hoo. Poor life choices should not be funded out of my wallet.

There is no evidence inflation is affected by raising the wage. My god think about what you're saying. "More than they are worth". There is no objective measurement for what you are saying. You are talking about an abstract, subjective idea here when you say a worker's "worth". That means there is no way their "worth", whatever that even means, will negatively affect the economy.

The economy can only improve with higher wages be she of the boost to consumer spending. As long as the wage was gradually raised over a few years, the initial negative effect on the market would be insignificant.

a person's labor adds value to a product or service. increasing the cost of the labor requires either an increase in the cost of the good or service, or savings somewhere else.

Naturally increasing higher wages, be it from increased skills in the labor force, or productivity gains improve the economy, artificial ones do not.

Look I agree a person's labor adds to the value of product and services but I fail to see why that justifies keeping wages as they are now. If a person is a shitty worker they get fired like always. As long as a person is doing their job well, they deserve a wage they can live off of.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Unions have been preventing shitty workers from being fired for decades, its their main purpose.

No one deserves anything when it comes to employment wages, you have to earn it, and what your earn has to add enough value to the product or service to make it viable.

Again with the entitlement mentality.

If a worker is working as many hours a week they are allowed and are doing their job well, why wouldn't they deserve a liveable wage?

 

[Stephanie]

At least someone is standing up for "we the people" from the Overreach of the Democrat party. WAKE up people you just took power away from Democrats because of crap like this FROM the NySLIMES:

snip:
Trey Gowdy Takes on Obamacare Architect For Lying to "Stupid" Americans
Katie Pavlich|Nov 12, 2014

• Last night onThe Kelly File, South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy made an appearance to address comments made byObamacare architect and MIT professor Jonathan Gruberin 2013 about the deliberate "tortuous" language used to mislead "stupid" Americans about the healthcare overhaul in order to get it through Congress.
  "I can't get past the irony to get to the arrogance. The most transparent administration since the continent shifted had to rely on artifice and deception to pass its signature piece of legislation, you can't make that up. He had to lie to people and then he justified it so I can't even get past the irony of that to get to the arrogance of him calling our fellow Americans stupid," Gowdy said. "I would say to the professor... you want to see how stupid the American citizens are take a look at last Tuesday night because they rejected you, this bill and this administration."
  "He just proved that he is willing to lie. He's willing to lie because he has the arrogance of thinking that he knows what is best for this country and the citizens and voters do not, so keep that in mind the next time anybody tries to sell you on a big piece of legislation by calling this comprehensive," Gowdy continued, adding that he'd like to see someone from the administration apologize for what Gruber said. "They lied, they got away with it and they got the bill that they wanted."
  During the show, host Megyn Kelly pointed out that the Obama administration presented Gruber as an "honest broker" to the American people when Obamacare was being debated and eventually passed in 2010. She also ran through a list of examples of how many times Gruber visited the White House and his extensive relationship with President Obama as a top advisor and architect of the law

ALL of it here:

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...hitect-for-lying-to-stupid-americans-n1917580

 

[martybegan]

We are not either, but your logic on this dictates that this is a viable solution to the issue. its your positions lack of reasonableness that is laid plain by this.

Inflation is CAUSED by making someone earn more than they are worth, can you not get that through your thick skull?

and as for the other stuff, boo fucking hoo. Poor life choices should not be funded out of my wallet.

There is no evidence inflation is affected by raising the wage. My god think about what you're saying. "More than they are worth". There is no objective measurement for what you are saying. You are talking about an abstract, subjective idea here when you say a worker's "worth". That means there is no way their "worth", whatever that even means, will negatively affect the economy.

The economy can only improve with higher wages be she of the boost to consumer spending. As long as the wage was gradually raised over a few years, the initial negative effect on the market would be insignificant.

a person's labor adds value to a product or service. increasing the cost of the labor requires either an increase in the cost of the good or service, or savings somewhere else.

Naturally increasing higher wages, be it from increased skills in the labor force, or productivity gains improve the economy, artificial ones do not.

Look I agree a person's labor adds to the value of product and services but I fail to see why that justifies keeping wages as they are now. If a person is a shitty worker they get fired like always. As long as a person is doing their job well, they deserve a wage they can live off of.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Unions have been preventing shitty workers from being fired for decades, its their main purpose.

No one deserves anything when it comes to employment wages, you have to earn it, and what your earn has to add enough value to the product or service to make it viable.

Again with the entitlement mentality.

If a worker is working as many hours a week they are allowed and are doing their job well, why wouldn't they deserve a liveable wage?

because what they are doing does not add enough value to the product or service provided to justify it. and of all the terms "livable wage" is the fuzziest of them all.

 

[paulitician]

The market decides value. If a job requires a certain amount of skill, the market sets the wage on that skill.

An engineering firm offering minimum wage would never be able to hire engineers. A construction company, even a non union one, offering minimum wage for carpentry, electrical, or plumbing work would not have any workers capable of doing the job.

And as for your last point, by that logic we should set the minimum wage to $50 an hour, oh wait, then a cup of coffee would cost $35 each.

Your logic requires that inflation and the cost of production does not exist.

The market decides value. What are you talking about? Where is this metric of yours revered by economists exactly?

Yes skilled people do get paid more and they should, but that hardly says much about the economy in general. Engineers and construction workers are paid well in part because of how profitable those businesses are.

If, due to inflation, people can't make a comfortable living under 15/h, that is what matters. 10s of millions of people make less than that. The average fast food worker is 29. People can't afford to go to school to learn new skills. That keeps them where they are. Skilled workers are becoming less and less prevalent in today's economy. To suggest laziness is the main reason for this is profound ignorance. What about all these children in families of working parents who lack proper nutrition and healthcare? Where's their choice in having a better life? If people are willing to work full time, shouldn't they be given a wage they can provide with?

You people are so dense. No one is suggesting we raise the wage to $50 an hour. You people reason like children over this issue. Obviously it shouldn't be higher than 15/h.

We are not either, but your logic on this dictates that this is a viable solution to the issue. its your positions lack of reasonableness that is laid plain by this.

Inflation is CAUSED by making someone earn more than they are worth, can you not get that through your thick skull?

and as for the other stuff, boo fucking hoo. Poor life choices should not be funded out of my wallet.

There is no evidence inflation is affected by raising the wage. My god think about what you're saying. "More than they are worth". There is no objective measurement for what you are saying. You are talking about an abstract, subjective idea here when you say a worker's "worth". That means there is no way their "worth", whatever that even means, will negatively affect the economy.

The economy can only improve with higher wages be she of the boost to consumer spending. As long as the wage was gradually raised over a few years, the initial negative effect on the market would be insignificant.

a person's labor adds value to a product or service. increasing the cost of the labor requires either an increase in the cost of the good or service, or savings somewhere else.

Naturally increasing higher wages, be it from increased skills in the labor force, or productivity gains improve the economy, artificial ones do not.

Look I agree a person's labor adds to the value of product and services but I fail to see why that justifies keeping wages as they are now. If a person is a shitty worker they get fired like always. As long as a person is doing their job well, they deserve a wage they can live off of.

I actually agree with you for the most part. The incentive to be a good productive worker has been steadily eroding for years. Pay increases are hard to come by these days. Corporations are despicably stingy, and one could even call them 'Evil,' The Workers see no point anymore. The incentives have been eliminated.

It's all about the Slave Labor now. American Businesses have finally gotten what they always wanted. They have now sufficiently driven wages down enough. They merely adopted China and others' Slave Labor practices. So now here we are. There's a whole lot of simmering frustration & anger out there. And one day the pot's gonna boil over.

 

[Billy000]

There is no evidence inflation is affected by raising the wage. My god think about what you're saying. "More than they are worth". There is no objective measurement for what you are saying. You are talking about an abstract, subjective idea here when you say a worker's "worth". That means there is no way their "worth", whatever that even means, will negatively affect the economy.

The economy can only improve with higher wages be she of the boost to consumer spending. As long as the wage was gradually raised over a few years, the initial negative effect on the market would be insignificant.

a person's labor adds value to a product or service. increasing the cost of the labor requires either an increase in the cost of the good or service, or savings somewhere else.

Naturally increasing higher wages, be it from increased skills in the labor force, or productivity gains improve the economy, artificial ones do not.

Look I agree a person's labor adds to the value of product and services but I fail to see why that justifies keeping wages as they are now. If a person is a shitty worker they get fired like always. As long as a person is doing their job well, they deserve a wage they can live off of.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Unions have been preventing shitty workers from being fired for decades, its their main purpose.

No one deserves anything when it comes to employment wages, you have to earn it, and what your earn has to add enough value to the product or service to make it viable.

Again with the entitlement mentality.

If a worker is working as many hours a week they are allowed and are doing their job well, why wouldn't they deserve a liveable wage?

because what they are doing does not add enough value to the product or service provided to justify it. and of all the terms "livable wage" is the fuzziest of them all.

How does it not justify it? Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? You're talking about borderline slavery here dude.

And no, it is far from fuzzy. It based off tangible ideas like inflation, cost of living rates, and prices of goods and services.

 

[Billy000]

The market decides value. What are you talking about? Where is this metric of yours revered by economists exactly?

Yes skilled people do get paid more and they should, but that hardly says much about the economy in general. Engineers and construction workers are paid well in part because of how profitable those businesses are.

If, due to inflation, people can't make a comfortable living under 15/h, that is what matters. 10s of millions of people make less than that. The average fast food worker is 29. People can't afford to go to school to learn new skills. That keeps them where they are. Skilled workers are becoming less and less prevalent in today's economy. To suggest laziness is the main reason for this is profound ignorance. What about all these children in families of working parents who lack proper nutrition and healthcare? Where's their choice in having a better life? If people are willing to work full time, shouldn't they be given a wage they can provide with?

You people are so dense. No one is suggesting we raise the wage to $50 an hour. You people reason like children over this issue. Obviously it shouldn't be higher than 15/h.

We are not either, but your logic on this dictates that this is a viable solution to the issue. its your positions lack of reasonableness that is laid plain by this.

Inflation is CAUSED by making someone earn more than they are worth, can you not get that through your thick skull?

and as for the other stuff, boo fucking hoo. Poor life choices should not be funded out of my wallet.

There is no evidence inflation is affected by raising the wage. My god think about what you're saying. "More than they are worth". There is no objective measurement for what you are saying. You are talking about an abstract, subjective idea here when you say a worker's "worth". That means there is no way their "worth", whatever that even means, will negatively affect the economy.

The economy can only improve with higher wages be she of the boost to consumer spending. As long as the wage was gradually raised over a few years, the initial negative effect on the market would be insignificant.

a person's labor adds value to a product or service. increasing the cost of the labor requires either an increase in the cost of the good or service, or savings somewhere else.

Naturally increasing higher wages, be it from increased skills in the labor force, or productivity gains improve the economy, artificial ones do not.

Look I agree a person's labor adds to the value of product and services but I fail to see why that justifies keeping wages as they are now. If a person is a shitty worker they get fired like always. As long as a person is doing their job well, they deserve a wage they can live off of.

I actually agree with you for the most part. The incentive to be a good productive worker has been steadily eroding for years. Pay increases are hard to come by these days. Corporations are despicably stingy, and one could even call them 'Evil,' The Workers see no point anymore. The incentives have been eliminated.

It's all about the Slave Labor now. American Businesses have finally gotten what they always wanted. They have now sufficiently driven wages down enough. They merely adopted China and others' Slave Labor practices. So now here we are. There's a whole lot of simmering frustration & anger out there. And one day the pot's gonna boil over.

I really think people who don't see this from our perspective simply lack the cognitive empathy. It doesn't affect them, therefore they don't see it as a problem.

 

[martybegan]

We are not either, but your logic on this dictates that this is a viable solution to the issue. its your positions lack of reasonableness that is laid plain by this.

Inflation is CAUSED by making someone earn more than they are worth, can you not get that through your thick skull?

and as for the other stuff, boo fucking hoo. Poor life choices should not be funded out of my wallet.

There is no evidence inflation is affected by raising the wage. My god think about what you're saying. "More than they are worth". There is no objective measurement for what you are saying. You are talking about an abstract, subjective idea here when you say a worker's "worth". That means there is no way their "worth", whatever that even means, will negatively affect the economy.

The economy can only improve with higher wages be she of the boost to consumer spending. As long as the wage was gradually raised over a few years, the initial negative effect on the market would be insignificant.

a person's labor adds value to a product or service. increasing the cost of the labor requires either an increase in the cost of the good or service, or savings somewhere else.

Naturally increasing higher wages, be it from increased skills in the labor force, or productivity gains improve the economy, artificial ones do not.

Look I agree a person's labor adds to the value of product and services but I fail to see why that justifies keeping wages as they are now. If a person is a shitty worker they get fired like always. As long as a person is doing their job well, they deserve a wage they can live off of.

I actually agree with you for the most part. The incentive to be a good productive worker has been steadily eroding for years. Pay increases are hard to come by these days. Corporations are despicably stingy, and one could even call them 'Evil,' The Workers see no point anymore. The incentives have been eliminated.

It's all about the Slave Labor now. American Businesses have finally gotten what they always wanted. They have now sufficiently driven wages down enough. They merely adopted China and others' Slave Labor practices. So now here we are. There's a whole lot of simmering frustration & anger out there. And one day the pot's gonna boil over.

I really think people who don't see this from our perspective simply lack the cognitive empathy. It doesn't affect them, therefore they don't see it as a problem.

Or we actually understand how economics work, and have an aversion to spending other people's money for them.