It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Terrible Fear of Paying the Poor Too Much

page: 9
107
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 01:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
HIgher wages might also stimulate the economy.



This is a proven fact. The Economist cites studies by market analysts showing that this would be the case, as well as reducing turnover costs for businesses.

As one can see from this forum, the emotionalism behind wanting to deny the poor a minimum-wage increase is not one of good policy, but of unhealthy, stubborn world-views based in some very dark place (not Christianity).

It seems like many posting here would deny minimum wage increases even though it is beneficial to humanity, businesses and even the economy. I bet some would give up their first-born child as sacrifice to prevent a minimum-wage increase.

Some on here blame the poor for not getting ahead - well why not help them out a bit so that they can get ahead, climb out of poverty and stop being stereotyped?
edit on 29amTue, 29 Apr 2014 02:05:16 -0500kbamkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 01:57 AM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

"The correlation is that Wal-Mart took away opportunities. In fantasy land, it might be easy to start whatever business you want, but in real life, a Wal-Mart nearby makes it harder to do that."

Walmart did not take opportunities away, it provided a superior price/service. The other businesses (who fell off the map) could not match or beat their price/service. Competition at it's best. I guess the seahawks took opportunity from the bronco's this year, or did they simply play a better game?

Since computers made people/businesses more efficient, should we get rid of those? I mean, they took opportunity away from people.

"The average worker doesn't have much say in the structure of the jobs offered by the economy, unlike you seem to think. They have to make do with what is available. Even small businesses fail 8 out of 10 times in the first year alone."

The worker has a lot of say over the jobs in which they can qualify for in the economy. Through experience and education the worker has a large amount of influence over the jobs they're offered by the economy.

"If Wal-Mart has jobs available, and there are less jobs available other places, then people are going to have to work at Wal-Mart. Even Wal-Mart wants to keep its workers"

What? I thought walmarts goal was to kill their workers! At least that's what most would have me believe with the way they talk about walmart. To the point, as much as people restrict themselves to a location, they do have to choose from jobs available in that location. I can't very well expect to get a manufacturing job in a town of 2k people.

"Since we live in a first-world country and have the ability to create a nation with a high standard of living, it is only reasonable that we do. The only reason to purposefully take away other people's standard of living when they are doing their part for society is out of spite, destructiveness and bad policy."

America's poor have been the richest in the world (though I understand that that has changed this year, tax increases... tsk tsk).
edit on 29-4-2014 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:00 AM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

"It seems like many posting here would deny minimum wage increases even though it is beneficial to humanity, businesses and even the economy."

If this were true, that it is beneficial to raise wages through an arbitrary minimum wage, then why not raise it to $100/hr?



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

That one is easy to answer. The mathematics are against that. The French raised their minimum wage to a point where it did negatively affect their economy.

For the United States, the correct minimum wage choice for the strongest economy is just above $10.00 / hr.
edit on 29amTue, 29 Apr 2014 02:09:27 -0500kbamkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:12 AM
link   
There seems to be a lot of republican bashing in the articles you posted. I can honestly say it is a bipartisan problem. I am neither. Just saying. Democrats don't really want the minimum wage raised, either. They just say they do in public to get votes. Look at Obama, said change five thousand times during his campaign, then surrounded himself with Goldman Sachs. The only thing that changed was his bank balance.

I do agree that the minimum wage should be raised, but I also believe that if you make over 70% percent of you money from America, that you can't produce your goods overseas. This would be better for everyone in America, but the higher costs to buy products wouldn't really change anything. You would just spend the extra money you make on the higher priced goods. If you noticed, we have increasingly become dependent on foreign workers to produce basically everything while our economy is based upon almost nothing. It is a constant money vacuum going the wrong way, and should make anyone worried. If oil fails to be as necessary as it is now, see ya later bank account. Ever wonder why alternative energy never catches on? That's why. Our money would instantly be worthless and we don't produce anything of note. It would be everyone calling in their debts at the same time with nothing to pay them with. Oh the teeter totter of excitement we live on top of! Might see the walking dead for real in your lifetime. Going town to town with shotguns looking for the last twinkie.
edit on 29-4-2014 by pleasethink because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:13 AM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

"The French raised their minimum wage to a point where it did negatively affect their economy."

So there is evidence that a higher minimum wage can negatively affect an economy. Is there evidence that a lower minimum wage can hurt an economy?

"For the United States, the correct minimum wage choice for the strongest economy is just above $10.00 / hr."

Why $10? Why not $12? How could higher wages hurt?



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:20 AM
link   
a reply to: V22tech



You know who is acting entitled? People with IQs barely above coffee pots moping floors claiming they are worth $10 or $15 an hour.


Actually, in today's dollars those people are worth closer to $30. V22tech, you are looking at this issue from the wrong angle. You are sitting at your station in life and looking down. Afraid of what may rise up behind you. You are looking down in contempt at those you believe to be less than you. The point you are not grasping here is that the chasm has gotten so wide when looking up that it is farcical. No single worker is worth $79,000,000.

For that matter, no one American family is worth the total Walton family wealth of $89,500,000,000,000 while the median wealth of American families in 2010 was $77,300.

Walton Family Wealth

Your own arrogance in believing you have elevated your station in life is not in your best interest. If those "brain dead fry cooks" and "dumber than coffee pot floor moppers" are worth $30 per hour when working for a profitable corporation, then your value would also be increased proportionately.

Your idea that with Communism everyone is paid the same is a little off, also. Their ideology has never been fully realized...

"In the communist economy, production and consumption are fully socialized, and the processes for which are advanced into maximized automation, efficiency, and recycling. This results in the end of individual money calculation, hence relationships between individuals being based on free association and free access to all goods and services according to need."

Communism
edit on 29-4-2014 by BurbGirl378 because: (no reason given)


Yep, just walk right into the communist Walmart and take whatever you need, because your contribution to society entitles you to fulfillment.
edit on 29-4-2014 by BurbGirl378 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:24 AM
link   
a reply to: BurbGirl378

"You are looking down in contempt at those you believe to be less than you."

No, he/she is looking down in contempt at those he/she whose skill are worth less than his/hers, but wish to receive pay that is equal the his/hers without bettering their skill set.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:27 AM
link   
Countries where the citizens are capable of negotiating their own worth (IE, no government minimum wage):

Austria
Brunei
Denmark
Germany
Hong Kong
Iceland
Italy
Norway
Singapore
Sweden


en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 29-4-2014 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-4-2014 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite
You missed the point I made about looking up.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Certain incentive for competition is good for the economy. 100 dollar an hour minimum wage would pretty much lose it.

Although certain minimum wage is definitely necessery, a minimum wage above living wage. 21st century life should not be a fight for survival anymore.

Ideally, any person working 40+ hour week in any company in modern countries should earn enough to rent a small apartment, cover the basic utilities, eat well, be able to afford cheaper tech and clothes, cover basic transport costs and medical bills. When one wants more, he should work harder, if not, stay in the place they are.

At the end, every job is necessary for the society, whether a cleaning lady, cook, teacher or a fireman. Everything can not be taken in the monetary value provided. There are jobs far more important for the society than any CEO or advertising specialist, yet their salaries are way below.

There are many out there for whom the top stays at some low skilled job, not because they were not hard-working, but because they lack the talent. 1 in 7 person, for example, has an IQ less than 85, which means they are very likely to never achieve greatness anywhere. Their minds are just not able to grasp complex concepts.

Salary differences need to exist, although everybody should earn enough for the essentials.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Why, why, why, must you gloat.
Your self absorbed arrogance in regard to the decline
of the U.S, status in the world when compared to your perceived
elevated status is such a turn-off.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:39 AM
link   
a reply to: BurbGirl378

Yyou mean: "The point you are not grasping here is that the chasm has gotten so wide when looking up that it is farcical. No single worker is worth $79,000,000"?

While I find this exorbitant, let's crunch some numbers.

Oracle employs 120k people.
Per person the CEO made $658 over the course of a year. (79M/120k)
Divided by hours worked 2080 (this assumes they are all full time, which they are not, but just for ease of computations sake I am assuming this)

The CEO of oracle made a whopping 31.65 cents/hour off each employee.

Fire the CEO, give everyone a 31 cent raise!



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: BuzzyWigs


originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
$24/hour?? Holy Cow!!! If only.

AVERAGE? Yeah, right.
Sources, please.

Total private: www.bls.gov...


originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
I hold an advanced degree in Behavioral Health, and have never, ever made more than $12/hour....even when I got out of non-profit and went into the corruptorate world, I only got $12.36/hour.

Sorry, but I don't see your point.

No?

How is it that you were able to make above minimum wage?



These numbers including earnings of ALL employees, doesn't it mean that CEO's are included? It sure bounces the average wage, but without their wages i'm sure it'll be around what she said, about 12$ p/h.

Seems much more reasonable in today's economy as well.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:47 AM
link   


21st century life should not be a fight for survival anymore.
a reply to: Cabin

Finally, someone who gets it!
There is enough for eveyone,
Yet we lack due to unjustified hoarding by some.

Everyone is necessary, everyone has value to the system,
and everyone should be able to acquire a comfortable life.

If that comfortable life demands $30.00 per hour
then the Billionaires can afford to pay those wages.
When they do our economy will become
a cycle of produce and purchase again
rather than a greedy extraction
of wealth from the worker.

edit on 29-4-2014 by BurbGirl378 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: OrdoAdChao
a reply to: CZ75P01

Many of us have done what you are pointing out. This is not a disagreement to the idea of working hard and smart and then reaping the rewards, it's an disagreement towards the idea that this fact makes it completely acceptable to look down upon the humble janitor as a loser who deserves to struggle to make ends meet. In a country where a handful of people hold more wealth than 300+ million individuals, that humble janitor deserves not to struggle.


I'm glad that many of us have worked hard, but I think for every one person like us, there are five losers and I'll explain why, using myself as an example. I'm not special or smarter than anyone. I just do what I have to do to make it in America. Its easy to sit back and have the ceo's and the middle class pay for your existence.

I'm sorry to break the news to you OrdoAdChao, but the humble janitor is going to struggle because he is a janitor and the unskilled manual labor he does is only worth 5.15 an hour at most. If he's lucky some kind soul will pay him under the table so he doesn't lose out any more to uncle.

I've been there and do not consider those blue collar workers losers. Not literally a janitor, but I've worked for minimum wage digging holes at a construction site for a year immediately after graduating HS and washing dishes at Ledo pizza for my first four semesters of University. I've since found something marginally better, but still attend both school and work full time. It sucks. I dont go out. I barely get to drink and only if someone else is paying. I'm sure you get the idea. But, you know what? I dont want to be a loser so I work my ass off. I didnt have money for school, or rent or books or a car or groceries, so I had to work a year just so I could get off my feet and move.

Now you may be thinking "But Cz75P01, how did you pay for school if you only made minimum wage?" Well, the our "system" is designed for upward class mobility, and I'm a perfect FN example Ordo. You see, programs like affirmative action, Fafsa Loans, Pell grants, Sanford loans, welfare, food stamps and the like are designed to be stepping stones.

They are NOT perpetual lifestyle subsidies handed out by generous ol' uncle Sam to make sure humble Jose has a nice, comfy lifestyle. They are given to help you move up in life, as I am doing. I utilized the tools available ( which FYI were surprisingly simple to apply for) and applied for Pell grants and Fafsa/sanford loans. This, right here is the key to ending poor Mr. Janitors suffering. Money to go to college that you pay back after you find a job! Yay!

it is not the governments responsibility to make sure losers who dont utilize the tools they are given have a suffering-free life. If they are struggling to make ends meet, cancel the subscription to cable tv (I did) and maybe stop drinking alcohol (I did that too, well...never really started to begin with very heavily at least). Get the fcuk up, use the tools the government and taxpayers let you use, and quit being a loser. If you dont, dobt complain about the rich and how crappy your life is. Do something about it. This is America. The dream isn't dead, Americans just got lazy and entitled...losers.
edit on 29-4-2014 by CZ75P01 because: broke down into paragraphs

edit on 29-4-2014 by CZ75P01 because: fixed spellung error and changed me to Mr

edit on 29-4-2014 by CZ75P01 because: added a quotation and a line of introspection



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 02:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Cabin

"At the end, every job is necessary for the society, whether a cleaning lady, cook, teacher or a fireman. Everything can not be taken in the monetary value provided. There are jobs far more important for the society than any CEO or advertising specialist, yet their salaries are way below."

You missed my previous post about supply/demand of skills. that's why their salaries are way lower.

"Although certain minimum wage is definitely necessery, a minimum wage above living wage. 21st century life should not be a fight for survival anymore. "

What do you expect with a global economy where people are fighting for survival?


edit on 29-4-2014 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite




The CEO of oracle made a whopping 31.65 cents/hour off each employee.


Please explain why the CEO of oracle is entitled earn to 31.65 cents per hour
off each of those 120k employees? Does he own these employees,
or receive royalties from these employees?

You're incorrect in thinking that for some reason the CEO's compensation
has a direct correlation to the number of employees who work for the company,
for whom he does very little direct supervision. Their last project for the state
of Oregon crashed, and it was paid for with U.S. Tax Dollars.
edit on 29-4-2014 by BurbGirl378 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: ThichHeaded
And I forgot to add..
Think of all the people making say 14.40 an hr..(my wife for example) You think if min wage was 15 an hr she would get a compensated raise for that? I think not..

Also if they raise min wage do you think people will hire more? No.. As seen on the railroad when you have to many workers and not enough work, they get mad efficient and start making more train cars for trains and less workers..

ya think about that for a while.


So you're saying your wife making 60 cents more an hour, because she doesn't make what's considered a living wage now is a bad thing just because others making even less money would see just as much improvement?

Are you insane?

BTW, Australia has a minimum wage that's twice that of the US and on average they pay about 10% more for goods. 200% of the wage for 110% of the price.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:16 AM
link   
a reply to: BurbGirl378

Thats just one way to look at it, you can look at it from the perspective of product or the perspective of revenue. He does do a lot of work you know, it's not an easy task to manage a company the size of Oracle. I imagine that you think that ceos are worthless. If so, you're woefully uneducated on their function.



new topics

top topics



 
107
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join