28 May 15
Originally posted by normbenign"Walmart hires everything from boys to push carts back to the store, to CPAs, Lawyers, and Truck drivers. "
[b]oh for fuk's sake. do you honestly believe walmart is a multi-billion dollar corporation because it saves 5 dollars an hour for its domestic employees?
Could you possibly keep the foul language to yourself? You know absolutely nothing about Walmart's wage scales. Permit me to enlighten you. Walmart hires everything from boys to push carts back t ...[text shortened]... did that job, for Finast markets in Boston in my senior year of high school, for $1.10 and hour.[/b]
i am not concerned about lawyers. they don't make 7.25$/hour
"If they raised the wages of high school boys who push carts back into the store by $5 per hour, my guess is that they would eliminate the job, for example by not allowing the carts out into the parking lot at all."
so? the point is not give everyone a crappy job to barely survive.
high school boys will be laid of. the tragedy.
"I did that job, for Finast markets in Boston in my senior year of high school, for $1.10 and
hour."
why would i care? you worked minimum wage to get money for beer. not because you had no choice. the average age in the fast food industry today is 28.
the US still has about 5% unemployment rate. let's lower the minimum wage to 3$/h, that way we can have double the amount of cart pushers and everybody would have a job.
28 May 15
Originally posted by sh76"Anyway, I don't agree with the proposition that every job should be able to support a family of 4"
What's with you and these bizarre false dichotomies?
Anyway, I don't agree with the proposition that every job should be able to support a family of 4. Minimum wage jobs are not designed necessarily for the family's sole breadwinner. They're designed for young people, single people, second incomes, etc.
Just because a job doesn't produce enough to support ...[text shortened]... 't do it and therefore it's wrong to do. I don't by "X does it" as a reason that I should do it.
don't worry, a minimum wage job is in no danger of doing that.
"The argument that someone else does it and therefore it's correct"
that was not the argument made. the argument i made is that someone else does it without resulting in huge unemployment rates or the collapse of civilization like you people scream. it is correct to pay a minimum sum for a job to allow someone to live with dignity.
"They're designed for young people, single people, second incomes, etc."
yes, unqualified workers shouldn't have kids. of course. they shouldn't marry. they shouldn't grow old. common, repeat the fox mantra: only lazy people stay in minimum wage jobs.
28 May 15
Originally posted by Zahlanzi<sigh>
"Anyway, I don't agree with the proposition that every job should be able to support a family of 4"
don't worry, a minimum wage job is in no danger of doing that.
"The argument that someone else does it and therefore it's correct"
that was not the argument made. the argument i made is that someone else does it without resulting in huge unemployment ra ...[text shortened]... y shouldn't grow old. common, repeat the fox mantra: only lazy people stay in minimum wage jobs.
Excuse me while I go try pulling seaweed out of the ocean floor.
28 May 15
Originally posted by Wajomano.
Should there be a worldwide standard minimum wage, regardless of a persons, skills or ability?
you don't need 15$/hour in india .
a banker will make more than an average doctor who will make more than a nurse who will make more than a janitor. we can't change that and we shouldn't. there will always be jobs that are valued more than others. there will always be people with different skills
but that doesn't mean a janitor should make so little money that he has no hope of ever improving his skills and getting a better job or at the very least, make enough to support his child so he has a chance at being something other than a janitor.
the minimum wage is, to put it simply, society's way of telling you how much they value the effort you put in a job. in a free market economy where supply and demand decide who makes what, the minimum wage is the bare minimum one should make and it should reflect the prosperity of that society.
28 May 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziUnless your goal is to shift jobs to India perhaps you should change what you advocate.
no.
you don't need 15$/hour in india .
a banker will make more than an average doctor who will make more than a nurse who will make more than a janitor. we can't change that and we shouldn't. there will always be jobs that are valued more than others. there will always be people with different skills
but that doesn't mean a janitor should make so lit ...[text shortened]... m wage is the bare minimum one should make and it should reflect the prosperity of that society.
28 May 15
1 edit
Originally posted by quackquackkeeping jobs in states has nothing to do with moving them to india. the minimum of 7.25 is already way bigger than the minimum wage there.
Unless your goal is to shift jobs to India perhaps you should change what you advocate.
and maybe you should think of different ways to keep jobs in the states than paying workers 2 dollars
28 May 15
Originally posted by ZahlanziMaybe instead of telling me what I should think about, you should get a reality check. We already have a minimum wage and minimum wage jobs aren't meant to comfortably support families. We also have free public education and free libraries in this country. We have Medicaid and a whole host of other governmental programs which ensure that basic needs are met. I'm more than satisfied with the amount of resources our society spends on the least productive.
keeping jobs in states has nothing to do with moving them to india. the minimum of 7.25 is already way bigger than the minimum wage there.
and maybe you should think of different ways to keep jobs in the states than paying workers 2 dollars
28 May 15
1 edit
Originally posted by ZahlanziYou can't both have a higher minimum wage and prevent employers from cutting back.
keeping jobs in states has nothing to do with moving them to india. the minimum of 7.25 is already way bigger than the minimum wage there.
and maybe you should think of different ways to keep jobs in the states than paying workers 2 dollars
I'd even rather give low wage employees taxpayer cash as an incentive to work (which we already do - it's called the earned income tax credit - look it up) than to cause employers to cut back on human resources by making the minimum wage too high.
28 May 15
Originally posted by quackquack"We already have a minimum wage and minimum wage jobs aren't meant to comfortably support families."
Maybe instead of telling me what I should think about, you should get a reality check. We already have a minimum wage and minimum wage jobs aren't meant to comfortably support families. We also have free public education and free libraries in this country. We have Medicaid and a whole host of other governmental programs which ensure that basic needs are ...[text shortened]... I'm more than satisfied with the amount of resources our society spends on the least productive.
they shouldn't, but the level of your minimum wage cannot uncomfortably support a family
"We also have free public education"
only 12 years. not college. which is enough of an education to enter precisely the minimum wage jobs we talk about.
"We also have [...] free libraries in this country. "
which is of great help for the people being forced to work 2 or 3 minimum wage jobs just to get by.
" I'm more than satisfied with the amount of resources our society spends on the least productive"
nobody gives a fuk if you're satisfied. are they? but why should we ask them, we all know they are leechers, right?
28 May 15
Originally posted by sh76"You can't both have a higher minimum wage and prevent employers from cutting back."
You can't both have a higher minimum wage and prevent employers from cutting back.
I'd even rather give low wage employees taxpayer cash as an incentive to work (which we already do - it's called the earned income tax credit - look it up) than to cause employers to cut back on human resources by making the minimum wage too high.
sure you can. you give them (the small businesses) tax cuts to compensate. you prefer to give tax cuts to the giants however. very productive
"I'd even rather give low wage employees taxpayer cash as an incentive to work (which we already do - it's called the earned income tax credit - look it up)"
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit"
"For tax year 2013, the maximum EITC benefit for a single person or couple filing without qualifying children is $487. The maximum EITC with one qualifying child is $3,250, with two children it is $5,372, and with three or more qualifying children it is $6,044"
ooo, 6000 more dollars, they will be vacationing in Tahiti now.
sarcasm aside, yes it better than nothing.
problems:
not enough.
why should all the taxpayers support this incentive for walmart, mcdonalds, etc employees? why can't the employers support it, and if your business is bellow a certain net worth, it can be deducted from your taxes.
why this fear to tax the giants who can afford it?