We're Lowering Your Wages

[Care4all]

Minimum wage is irrelevant. Almost NO ONE makes minimum wage, anyway. These are the rates that mostly high school kids make flipping burgers, cleaning dishes, manning the checkout stand at WalGreens, greeting at WalMart, etc... Even garbage collectors make 30% or more OVER minimum wage.

Minimum wage are what those entering the job market for the first time earn. Mostly teenagers and college students in part time work. Even telemarketing reps make more than minimum wage.

If you are 30 and making minimum wage, you DESERVE to starve to death if you are that stupid and inept.

the majority of minimum wage workers are ADULTS, and the biggest category are women with children, both single and married....the statistics can be found on this at both the CBO and the GAO sites.... Senior citizens are the 3rd largest group of minimum wage workers

so, do you prefer that the tax payer pay these people a living wage, which we HAVE TO DO WITH THE EITC.....earned income credit?

I personally do not think it is fair that the business makes its profit OFF OF THE LABOR of its employees, while I have to pay for this businesses employees to survive. I believe the business can afford to pay their employees a bit more, and as someone else said, if they can not afford a 50 cent minimum wage hike per hour for their employee then they probably should not be in business....

Maybe you are in business and you prefer that the gvt, me, has to pay for your employees to survive instead of you paying them more, but i do not see this as something that is fair zoomie.

And i am not suggesting these full time workers not get help from the gvt in order to survive, I am suggesting to you, that if these minimum wage workers were paid a little more, then we the tax payer, would have to pay LESS.

We are a wealthy country, there is no reason that we can not come close to paying people that work and produce for these businesses, something closer to a living wage.

I do think this should be done within each state though...the determination of a living wage for essentials can be so different from state to state due to their cost of living differences.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this issue.

Care

 

[editec]

I won't be posting any more replies to this thread today. Our last bank now is the very proud owner of the house we have lived in here for more than a year. We are packing today.

I am SO sorry to read that, Rod. Truly you and your family have my sincerest sympathies.

Is there anything we can do?

 

[Bern80]

I disagree. Many people, for whatever reason end up making minimum wage later in life. Some worked good jobs for 30 years and got laid off, their pension plans stolen and ended up working low wage jobs. I have a friend who has tourette's syndrom. She has an AA degree but can't get a job in her field. She has been working as a maid for more than 20 years. She keeps getting pushed out of her job as hispanics come in and take over. When hours have to be cut, they cut the hours of the American workers and they don't make enough to pay the bills. The hispanics come into these jobs, take over and stick together and take care of their own and to heck with people like my friend. She started another job as a maid at a local casino. I'm hoping she can keep this job until she retires.

My youngest son is low functioning autistic. He makes less than minimum wage in the job he does 3 hours a day. He works hard and steady and he loves his job, he doesn't deserve to starve because you think he's lazy and stupid.

I know you're saying that just to help your argument, but your friend and your son aren't the people we are talking about. I have no problem with helping people that can't have themselves or are handicapped in some way.

I know people that went into construction right out of highschool 30 years ago making between $9.00 and $15.00 an hour, which was a lot of money back then. Guess what, here it is 30 years later and with all the immigrants, their pay has stagnanted and they are lucky to make that $15.00 an hour today. Others have been completely pushed out of their contruction jobs and are starting over again, 30 years later.


The lowest paid worker in this country deserves a living wage and pay should go up from there. This is not a poor country, there is no excuse for the working poor.

Same question for you that I asked RodISHI:

Why is it someone elses responsibility, more so than your own, to provide for yourself?

 

[Bern80]

the majority of minimum wage workers are ADULTS, and the biggest category are women with children, both single and married....the statistics can be found on this at both the CBO and the GAO sites.... Senior citizens are the 3rd largest group of minimum wage workers

The more important statistic would be of the people on minimum wage, how many of them are using it as their only source of income?

If that is actually true about who the min wage earners are and that we are still working under the assumption they should all be provided a living wage, I would have to imagine it would be different for all those people. the woman with children is going to need enough to provide the basics for herself and her kid(s). It would have to be something less for the married couple seeing as how one half of the equation should be pulling some weight. It would have to be something else for the senior citizen as their drug expenses are usually considerable. I am saying all this because if even want to entertain this ridiculous idea that it is businesses obligation to provide a living wage (rather use your god given brain to figure out how to do it on your own) we need to have a real discussion about the logistics. Both sides are talking ideals, but behind these ideals of the way we think things should be some major details need to be ironed out.

Now given all of that consider the beauracracy that would have to be in place. Consider what employers are going to have to go through. Now on top interviewing you to make sure you're actual qualified to work for them, they are going to have to do a detailed profile on you and your current living conditions so that they can turn around and provide the information to said beauracracy so they can tell the business how much they need to pay you? Does THAT sound fair to you? That government tell businesses what they must pay not based on the qualifications of the individual but upon what a living wage for those people would be?

I personally do not think it is fair that the business makes its profit OFF OF THE LABOR of its employees, while I have to pay for this businesses employees to survive. I believe the business can afford to pay their employees a bit more, and as someone else said, if they can not afford a 50 cent minimum wage hike per hour for their employee then they probably should not be in business....

Why do you put that burden on yourself? Why do you blame the business for not providing the minimum to a person as a oppossed to say blaming the person themselves for you haveing to foot part of a bill for them?

Maybe you are in business and you prefer that the gvt, me, has to pay for your employees to survive instead of you paying them more, but i do not see this as something that is fair zoomie.

And i am not suggesting these full time workers not get help from the gvt in order to survive, I am suggesting to you, that if these minimum wage workers were paid a little more, then we the tax payer, would have to pay LESS.

And I am suggesting to you the same would be true if the individual held themselves to a standard that didn't require you to pay for them.

We are a wealthy country, there is no reason that we can not come close to paying people that work and produce for these businesses, something closer to a living wage.

This goes back to a philosphical debate and what makes society stronger and thus the individuals stronger. Yes it sounds so compassionate and nice to say all our businesses provide their employees at least a living wage (w/ no expectations on the employee, btw). But what favor are you really doing society. Is it wise to teach people that really no effort is required to survive. As I asked before, do you really think it wise this be an across the board mandate? What about high school kids on their first job? Do you really want them figuring out any job at all is an alternative to finishing school?

I do think this should be done within each state though...the determination of a living wage for essentials can be so different from state to state due to their cost of living differences.

It would have to be done person by person in all reality.

I disagree on two basic fronts. The logistics behind it which those for this idea cleary haven't considered. And the idealogical which I again beg someone to answer: why is it someone elses responsibility, more so than your own, to provide a living wage for yourself?

 

[Care4all]

I know you're saying that just to help your argument, but your friend and your son aren't the people we are talking about. I have no problem with helping people that can't have themselves or are handicapped in some way.



Same question for you that I asked RodISHI:

Why is it someone elses responsibility, more so than your own, to provide for yourself?

Bern, are you advocating NO minimum wage? Where employers can pay $1 dollar an hour if they so choose?

and if these employees only make $40 bucks a week, then WE, THE TAX PAYER has to pay for them to survive instead of the EMPLOYER that is making a profit OFF OF what their worker produces?

My goal is to see people getting paid a fair wage for what they produce and us, THE TAXPAYER not having to subsidize these low paying employees because their employer refuses to do such.

Care

 

[Bern80]

Bern, are you advocating NO minimum wage? Where employers can pay $1 dollar an hour if they so choose?

and if these employees only make $40 bucks a week, then WE, THE TAX PAYER has to pay for them to survive instead of the EMPLOYER that is making a profit OFF OF what their worker produces?

My goal is to see people getting paid a fair wage for what they produce and us, THE TAXPAYER not having to subsidize these low paying employees because their employer refuses to do such.

Care

For the most part people are paid a fair wage, far and beyond minimum wage. Your argument rests on the presumption that if a minimum wage didn't exist all of sudden most businesses would start getting paying below that. There isn't any evidence to support that. The vast majority of jobs already pay much more than minimum wage. The pay of those jobs are based on the market. $1 an hour? Do you really think people would work for that? Or enough that such a wage could be sustained? THIS is where the market would come in and the bargaining power of the individual. Minimum wage may not cover much, but $40 a week doesn't cover ANYTHING. So there would be no point in most anyone taking such a job. As such any business that offered that wage is going to have increase the rate until they get enough takers.

I don't have a problem with a minimum wage. My guess is we could do without it, by I'm abivalent. What I'm not so ambivalent about is that the minimum wage be considered a living wage. There is nothing in the law regarding it and no reason to assume that's it's purpose. There is a place in society for minimum wage, but it isn't to provide a standard of living. It's great for young people getting their first experience in the working people and many use at as a form of supplemental income.

P.S. you didn't answer the question.

 

[RodISHI]

I am SO sorry to read that, Rod. Truly you and your family have my sincerest sympathies.

Is there anything we can do?

Thank you for the thoughtfulness it is appreciated. Not a lot anyone can do about this particular house situation. Due to certain issues surrounding the whole matter I am unable to discuss anything concerning how and why the local bank now owns this particular place. They call it "non disclosure". I can say with a smile that the bank does throughally deserve the place though.

We will be leaving behind the local residents that their great great grand-daddy settled. Evidently they were in this house a long time prior to when we got here. It is a family of racoons that has live in an attached pantry that was formerly a porch I believe. I had heard they lived there before but had neve seen one before the other night. I am know feeding them a few left overs now that I know they are there at the back of the house. Heck everyone needs a warm place in the winter. Even those furry little racoons.


Pray for warmer weather in January is all I can think of editec. At least we do have a place to move back too that we can gather fire wood to burn and heat the place. Many people out there do not have that same option. Here in Des Moines today they are tearing down wood huts along the river where a lot of homeless people live.

We have until January 15 so it is a process of a little bit here and there.

 

[RodISHI]

For the most part people are paid a fair wage, far and beyond minimum wage. Your argument rests on the presumption that if a minimum wage didn't exist all of sudden most businesses would start getting paying below that. There isn't any evidence to support that. The vast majority of jobs already pay much more than minimum wage. The pay of those jobs are based on the market. $1 an hour? Do you really think people would work for that? Or enough that such a wage could be sustained? THIS is where the market would come in and the bargaining power of the individual. Minimum wage may not cover much, but $40 a week doesn't cover ANYTHING. So there would be no point in most anyone taking such a job. As such any business that offered that wage is going to have increase the rate until they get enough takers.

You are wrong again Bern. There are millions of displaced workers out there that you and skullboy are merely calling lazy or people with no incentative and desire to improve their lives. Many of these people have been taking jobs of any kind to try to make their house payments and survive while looking for other employment. I know asshole because my husband and I are two of those people. As much as you claim I would be taking away from you your families business you already helped take away mine by your ignorance.

What you are saying is nothing nore than lies. If I had never cared to better myself because life was just handed to me I would have gave up long ago fighting the system that most every higher educated ecomomics major/teacher proclaims is for the betterment of society as a whole to just let businesses market determine and decide what they will pay their employees. It does not work. There are too many greedy prideful pricks out there in this world that are only wanting to line their own pockets. That is why you are seeing this whole crash today.

You have a whole society that has been led to believe that credit and buying power on credit is a good thing. You have a small group of people that has used a lot of good inspirational speakers to push this buy now pay later theory. That payday is here.

 

[editec]

Why is it someone elses responsibility, more so than your own, to provide for yourself?

Nobody is saying that it's SOMEBODY elses responsibility.

What we ARE saying is that we live in a civil society which depends on ENOUGH people doing reasonable well if we want to keep it that way.

What are you saying?

That it's every man for himself and that we live in the jungle?

I don't think that was your point, now, was it?

If you'd take the time to get off your high horse, and recognize that your good fortune and everyone elses fortunes are inextricably bound together, you might find the moral character to stop trying to put words into other people's mouths to make them look like idiots, you know.

 

[RodISHI]

Nobody is saying that it's SOMEBODY elses responsibility.

What we ARE saying is that we live in a civil society which depends on ENOUGH people doing reasonable well if we want to keep it that way.

What are you saying?

That it's every man for himself and that we live in the jungle?

I don't think that was your point, now, was it?

If you'd take the time to get off your high horse, and recognize that your good fortune and everyone elses fortunes are inextricably bound together, you might find the moral character to stop trying to put words into other people's mouths to make them look like idiots, you know.

Bern does not want to here this. He'd rather switch and bait posts and call me RobISHI.....

 

[Gem]

editec wrote:

Nobody is saying that it's SOMEBODY elses responsibility.

What we ARE saying is that we live in a civil society which depends on ENOUGH people doing reasonable well if we want to keep it that way.

What are you saying?

That it's every man for himself and that we live in the jungle?

I don't think that was your point, now, was it?

If you'd take the time to get off your high horse, and recognize that your good fortune and everyone elses fortunes are inextricably bound together, you might find the moral character to stop trying to put words into other people's mouths to make them look like idiots, you know.

Interestingly, I think that this is the closest the two points have come in this conversation.

I think both sides believe that we live in a civil society and that our lives are bound together in numerous ways. I think that both sides want people to receive fair wages for their work. I think that both sides respect people who do a hard day's work and do not want to see workers exploited.

What I hear your side saying, Editec, is that employers should be required to pay wages such that all of their employees should be able to pay a monthly rent/mortgage payment, pay their bills, pay for healthcare, pay for childcare, etc. And this is where the sides differ...

Because the opposing view is NOT that we want workers to be starving and working for $1...but rather that some jobs do not merit a salary that would provide a mortgage/rent payment, utilities and bills payment, healthcare payment, etc. each month. And that mandating employers to pay such a wage for ALL of their employees would have negative consequences that could outweigh the supposed benefits of everyone making this "living wage."

Why is it...that simply because I don't think McDonald's should be required to pay the 9th grader who takes my order should be able to afford an apartment, bills, and a healthcare plan on his salary...that I automatically hate the American worker and want McDonald's to be able to pay him $1 an hour? I feel that this sort of rhetoric is mean-spirited nonsense...no one here has stated that they want people to do poorly...they have only questioned whether all full-time jobs should receive the kinds of salaries that you seem to be advocating.

 

[Bern80]

You are wrong again Bern. There are millions of displaced workers out there that you and skullboy are merely calling lazy or people with no incentative and desire to improve their lives. Many of these people have been taking jobs of any kind to try to make their house payments and survive while looking for other employment. I know asshole because my husband and I are two of those people. As much as you claim I would be taking away from you your families business you already helped take away mine by your ignorance.

What you are saying is nothing nore than lies. If I had never cared to better myself because life was just handed to me I would have gave up long ago fighting the system that most every higher educated ecomomics major/teacher proclaims is for the betterment of society as a whole to just let businesses market determine and decide what they will pay their employees. It does not work. There are too many greedy prideful pricks out there in this world that are only wanting to line their own pockets. That is why you are seeing this whole crash today.

I don't really know how either one of us can prove our perspective. Again you're entire argument rests on the assumption that the majority of people that own and operate businesses are horrible to their employees. That if given the opprtunity they would all conspire together to offer a wage that would not meet people's needs. If that was simply the way it was, if we took for a given that that was the majority mindset for business owners and there was no doing anything about it, I would be inclined to agree that an intervening force needs to step in to help people meet basic needs as in such a system there would simply be no way for most people to do that on their own.

The other perspective is mine. That reality simply doesn't constitute the above. Nothing I have experienced in the working world so far suggests that is the case. Is that to say their are no greedy owners out there or greedy to the extent that they are unfair to their employees, of course not. I'm certainly not calling you a liar, there are just plain awful people out there. Is that the norm? No evidence I have seen suggests that it is.

Now, I did you the service of answering every single one of your questions in full in the post you requested, it would be nice if you would do the same.

You have a whole society that has been led to believe that credit and buying power on credit is a good thing. You have a small group of people that has used a lot of good inspirational speakers to push this buy now pay later theory. That payday is here.

And why does no accountability fall on the individual to figure out the basic concept that maybe buying things with money you don't have and won't have in the future is not the best idea in the world. Before now I didn't think such people like you, people who think individuals are responsible for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING where their financial lot and providing for themselves is concerned, actually existed. There's one thing I stand corrected on.

 

[RodISHI]

editec wrote:


Interestingly, I think that this is the closest the two points have come in this conversation.

I think both sides believe that we live in a civil society and that our lives are bound together in numerous ways. I think that both sides want people to receive fair wages for their work. I think that both sides respect people who do a hard day's work and do not want to see workers exploited.

What I hear your side saying, Editec, is that employers should be required to pay wages such that all of their employees should be able to pay a monthly rent/mortgage payment, pay their bills, pay for healthcare, pay for childcare, etc. And this is where the sides differ...

Because the opposing view is NOT that we want workers to be starving and working for $1...but rather that some jobs do not merit a salary that would provide a mortgage/rent payment, utilities and bills payment, healthcare payment, etc. each month. And that mandating employers to pay such a wage for ALL of their employees would have negative consequences that could outweigh the supposed benefits of everyone making this "living wage."

Why is it...that simply because I don't think McDonald's should be required to pay the 9th grader who takes my order should be able to afford an apartment, bills, and a healthcare plan on his salary...that I automatically hate the American worker and want McDonald's to be able to pay him $1 an hour? I feel that this sort of rhetoric is mean-spirited nonsense...no one here has stated that they want people to do poorly...they have only questioned whether all full-time jobs should receive the kinds of salaries that you seem to be advocating.

McDonald's pay's $8.00 an hour, Sears pays a mechanic $5.00 and hour Sears adds 50 cent commision for changing four tires. Not sure if you realize it or not but that mechanic could possibly cost you your life if he does not know WTF he is doing. Sears is owned and operated by an investment group.
McDonalds are owned both by privates and by a one man operated corporation (by the way he is a prick it took me over a year to collect my money for work i provided for his corporation out him. Thank God the state of MO has some good collection laws for companies who refuse to pay labor wages. for small contractors such as I.)

That Sears mechanic can also cost a customer that brings their car in thousands of dollars if they do not perform the work properly on their car. Heck just by screwing up one of the valve stems that are mandated now on all new cars it is about a three hundred dollar booboo. The Sears $8.00 an hour manager has promises of granduer he is looking at so he'll tell the mechanic, "we'll just tell the customer it was already broke".

If the guy changing your oil grabs the wrong oil fill hose your car may run for awhile and you won't ever know what actually happened when the engine blows. It is usually the poor that have their cars serviced there though so since you work in the country club crowd it probably will not be your car. You'll probably go to a dealer who pays his mechanics 8.00 to 10.00 dollars an hour or a flat commission rate. That mechanic can screw up just the same way too. The difference is the dealer charges you more for the job to screw up your car.

 

[RodISHI]

Now, I did you the service of answering every single one of your questions in full in the post you requested, it would be nice if you would do the same.

You call me rob and you switch mine and care's statements around and you tell me what a nice service you did for me? Now you think I should oblige you and take my time for you?

"Nice" is not really on my agenda today Bern. So for the day you'll have to accept that or if you like go back into the attempt to insult if you really think you can.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You are wrong again Bern. There are millions of displaced workers out there that you and skullboy are merely calling lazy or people with no incentative and desire to improve their lives.

Back up the short bus there Dipshiti. Show me where I called anyone lazy.
What I said was everyone is responsible for bettering their own circumstances. They either will or they won't and in a small percentage of cases people actually are incapable of bettering their circumstances.

But those who won't because they choose not to are not my responsibility. And those that fall on hard times and give up are not my responsibility either.

Many of these people have been taking jobs of any kind to try to make their house payments and survive while looking for other employment. I know asshole because my husband and I are two of those people. As much as you claim I would be taking away from you your families business you already helped take away mine by your ignorance.

Hey, I know what its like to work 2 and 3 jobs at a time to pay the bills. I did it and I didn't complain that I wasn't being paid enough or that I shouldn't have to work more than one job because wages were too low.

What you are saying is nothing nore than lies. If I had never cared to better myself because life was just handed to me I would have gave up long ago fighting the system that most every higher educated ecomomics major/teacher proclaims is for the betterment of society as a whole to just let businesses market determine and decide what they will pay their employees. It does not work. There are too many greedy prideful pricks out there in this world that are only wanting to line their own pockets. That is why you are seeing this whole crash today.

You have a whole society that has been led to believe that credit and buying power on credit is a good thing. You have a small group of people that has used a lot of good inspirational speakers to push this buy now pay later theory. That payday is here.

Here is where we part ways philosophically. A libertarian will say that you and you alone are responsible if you spend more than you make. You will say it's greedy business owners who don't pay you enough.

If a business in a competitive market mistreats its employees, guess what, a business that treats those employees better will naturally attract more employees and the best of those will be hired. That business which attracts the best employees will provide better products and services thereby attracting more customers and will then realize more profit.

It makes no economic sense to mistreat your employees or pay them wages so low that they will not stay with you.

You will find that businesses will pay what they have to pay to retain the best people. So your responsibility is to be one of the best people to hire

 

[RodISHI]

Your not on my agenda either for the day skullboy.

 

[Bern80]

Nobody is saying that it's SOMEBODY elses responsibility.

What we ARE saying is that we live in a civil society which depends on ENOUGH people doing reasonable well if we want to keep it that way.

But the reality of proposing a living wage would do just that, would it not? It would be mandated by government that all businesses provide people enough to live on. Thus the burden is no longer on you to provide your basic needs. That responsibility is now on the employer.

Regardless of what believe or don't believe about who shares what extent of the burden, that is the end result of such a proposition.

What are you saying?

That it's every man for himself and that we live in the jungle?

I don't think that was your point, now, was it?

If you'd take the time to get off your high horse, and recognize that your good fortune and everyone elses fortunes are inextricably bound together, you might find the moral character to stop trying to put words into other people's mouths to make them look like idiots, you know.

What I am saying quite broadly is that it is not in the best interest of societies, especially the government of societies to provide incentives to people to not challenge themselves. I don't think there can be much denying that mandating a wage that insures really no effort on your part will be needed is the way to accomplish that.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Your not on my agenda either for the day skullboy.

Then log off and stay off.

You can't post an outright lie about what I have said and expect me to ignore it.

So get your facts straight or piss off.

 

[Bern80]

You call me rob and you switch mine and care's statements around and you tell me what a nice service you did for me? Now you think I should oblige you and take my time for you?

"Nice" is not really on my agenda today Bern. So for the day you'll have to accept that or if you like go back into the attempt to insult if you really think you can.

The post I quoted is not yours? It has your name on it above, or the account you've been using anyway.

As to you or your husband, that could be cleared by something telling us how you would like to be referred.

Excuses over yet?

 

[Bern80]

Your not on my agenda either for the day skullboy.

Apparently posting nothing that even contributes to the conversation other than be snide IS on your priority list.