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.

 

Seattle approves $15 minimum wage

page: 13
26
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: doobydoll

Here in the USA, such is carefully monitored. That means if a family or a person moves right into a rent controlled place and gets subtleties, it remains like that until it is shown that they make more than what is permissible by regulation and law.

This is going to have far reaching implications, affecting all levels and people. So now those same people now making 15 an hour will lose all of those benefits, including things like free lunch/breakfast for their children at the schools, as they will be making way too much money.

Sticker shock, that is what will hit first. Think about it, and I have experienced it once before. At one time I was in the military. The items were cheaper on base, no tax what so ever. So the item I was getting, cost about 2.75 on base. When I got out of the military and was out and about the same item I got at 2.75, now cost me 6 dollars. It was a sticker shock like no other. The same thing will apply to all of these people, things that they either got for free, or paid very little for will now hit them. And that is not including say the new health care law, that all of these people will be responsible to get on their own. And from what I am seeing, talk about sticker shock, add another 1000 a month just to get the bare min to be legal.
If that happens then they'll have to pay workers more again won't they? It's no good giving with one hand just to snatch it back with the other. Workers are getting pretty fed up with being vilified for being low paid and a repeat of the same because they need benefits to top up their pay. You hate them because they are demanding more money so they can live, but you don't hate the bosses for not paying them enough.


Have you ever owned or ran a business before? Do you know what all is require for such to take effect and work on, or what is considered profitable? Most of the time, a lot of the small businesses operate on a tight bottom line, and all profits are considered after all of the bills are paid. That means the electric, water, garbage, and the insurance, along with the fixtures. Then the products, and finally the labor. And of that there are the taxes. In most business’s labor is the biggest cost, and the most important. So any and all profit has to be considered after all of the bills are paid, and if business is slow, how much of a profit margin is there? May be not as much as what some would thing. Does it mean that the business is unsuccessful, no, it means that there is a tight bottom line.

Look, in the UK we have such as Asda, Tesco, etc, all paying minimum wage, and some even have people working for NO WAGES, and average-to- high prices in their stores. Then we also have such as Aldi who pay their workers excellent wages and extremely low prices, AND it makes a profit.

So don't talk to me about costs and how bad it is for business owners, oh boo-hoo. Maybe they should be directed to take a close look at Aldi's business model, they could pick up a few valuable pointers about how to run a business properly instead of being greedy bastards.
edit on 6-6-2014 by doobydoll because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: doobydoll




If bosses can't afford to pay workers enough to pay their own way in life, then that business is unprofitable and should be closed down, because allowing them to continue operating is costing us a fortune in payments to their workers.

Ok. Shut down the business. Those jobs are gone.
Now what?

Well, as far as I can see those people are no worse off. They claimed benefits when they were working, and they'll continue to claim now. In both instances they're broke, they only difference is they're not worked to death for no reward.

The bosses of those closed down companies will also be in the unemployed queue, let's see how well they can 'live the dream' on 'lavish' benefits. I can't wait.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 02:15 PM
link   
A cheap apartment in seattle will cost u $1,000. dollars and it's a dump. A complete rip off, i would rather live in a camping tent than pay that outrageous feeee. With this in mind, $15. dollars an hour= 600 a week minus-state,local,federal,health, for a total of 440. a week and this does not include minus your 401 K. Now lets minus our monthly car insurance of a low $70. now u have 370. Now lets minus the gas to go to work. Lets say a small 8 miles to work a day and back = 16 miles. times 5 days a week = 80 miles a week. divided by 32 miles per gallon = 2.5 gallons a wk at 4 per gallon seattle price. Cost 10 dollars a wk. now you have $360. Minus a phone bill, you need a phone for emergncy, to call work,to do buisness , other transactions a necesity. Well thats $85 dollars a month. divided by 4 =21.25 . now u have $339 a week. You need to eat every week and at a very low cost of $50. a week to live off of. Now u have 289. a week. That equals to $1156. MINUS RENT 1,000 which gives u $156 dollars a MONTH. to pay your electric BILL which runs usually 80 a month. 156-80=76. Now U HAVE a WOPPING $76 dollars in your pocket a month. to pay for nesessities like toilet paper, dish soap,cloths soap,hair soap,body soap to wash your nasty azzzz clean, so u can show up for WORK smelling like a rose for a lousy $15 dollars an hour. Better borrow some money from ur friend in the future to put cloths on your back. I'll see you at the GOOD WILL store , you BUM. Cain't even afford a tooth brush or toothpaste your breath stinks. Your cloths need a wash, you smell. Gee, for 15 an hour, hard worker, driving your rusty junkard car, you sure get alot of flack. I KNOW, SOCIETY MADE ME THIS WAY.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: doobydoll
The bosses of those closed down companies will also be in the unemployed queue, let's see how well they can 'live the dream' on 'lavish' benefits. I can't wait.

The average business owner, in the US, takes home $68,000 before taxes.

In addition to that, 15% of US small business owners currently have a second job.

They are already 'living the dream'.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: doobydoll

Look, in the UK we have such as Asda, Tesco, etc, all paying minimum wage, and some even have people working for NO WAGES, and average-to- high prices in their stores. Then we also have such as Aldi who pay their workers excellent wages and extremely low prices, AND it makes a profit.


It sounds to me like Aldi has the right idea!

Let's see, from this format business owners would stand to gain:

-employees who will stick around (because their wages are equitable), with the business saving the high cost of training new hires
-employees who will turn around and spend their wages with their employer
-employees who will tell their friends about how affordable the goods are, thus, free advertising for the business

A business owner's dream, one might think.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: doobydoll
The bosses of those closed down companies will also be in the unemployed queue, let's see how well they can 'live the dream' on 'lavish' benefits. I can't wait.

The average business owner, in the US, takes home $68,000 before taxes.

In addition to that, 15% of US small business owners currently have a second job.

They are already 'living the dream'.
Look it's simple, what fool runs a business that is so unprofitable that not only can he not pay his workers enough, but he also has to get another job to keep it afloat?

Why do you prefer that taxpayers continue to top-up the wages of what is an otherwise unprofitable, doomed business? If its workers were paid enough that business would go under in a New York minute, so why waste taxpayers money to keep it limping along? It's crazy.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Those who think 15 an hour is too much, should live on 14 dollars an hour with ONLY that income. No wife's income, no rent from others. No child support,2nd job or what have u. You would not be singing the same tune if it were U. A person ONE PERSON can NOT live off of 15 an hour unless he or she had help from others or other incomes Or paid rent less than 600 a month. In todays society , living alone this is not possible. Lets face it. you need to bathe,eat,transportation,have a place to live, cloth yourself,go to the doctor,fix your transportation so you can get to work, and save some money for emergencies. This is life, 15 DOLLARS an hour living in downtown SEATTLE is a JOKE if u are living alone on just one income. Same scenario living in San fran cisco, austin texas,Downtown New york, Hollywood CA, Florida, The bahamma's, Any downtown City area. If u say you live in california and work for 15 an hour and live that way, i will say that you must live with 5 or more people or you live on the street. Almost ALL of the money u make on 15 an hour will go for rent housing and transportation to and from work. I garentee it.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: doobydoll
Look it's simple, what fool runs a business that is so unprofitable that not only can he not pay his workers enough, but he also has to get another job to keep it afloat?

The kind of fools that currently employ 52% of the US workforce.


Why do you prefer that taxpayers continue to top-up the wages of what is an otherwise unprofitable, doomed business? If its workers were paid enough that business would go under in a New York minute, so why waste taxpayers money to keep it limping along? It's crazy.

Why do prefer living in an imaginary world where every business owner is rolling in money, and laughing at the plight of the poor US pleb?

99% of US business' are small business' with owners scrapping by...same as everybody else.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Just face the FACTS: Rent will ALWAYS go UP. Your bills every year, after year will ALWAYS GO UP. Your food costs will ALWAYS GO UP. Did u pay for food,gas,clothing,housing,rent,bills the same amount back in 1950's ? NO, so what makes u think things are going to change ?? The debt will ALWAYS GO UP. In order for buisness to thrive a sucker working for low pay must exist and the products they sell must make a high profit to pay for the companies bills and wages of all the employees. SO, if the materials go up, then so does the cost of the products of every buisness. Meaning YOU PAY MORE to get said products, or the buisnessman goes out of buisnesss. SO suck it up. You are ALWAYS going to be used so the whole of the company makes more to afford the life they want to live.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 03:53 PM
link   
One day, the brand new garbage can in the front of the driveway with the rusty bottom will fall out and all of it's contents will scatter to the ground to rot. Analagy of theory. Mother earth will come to collect, and it's Fleas will be shaken off. 15 dollars an hour, so. It could be 100 dollars an hour, buisness will still raise prices to sell those goods , so the prices of the materials will go up and YOU will pay the price to buy them if the price of the materials goes up. Look what happened to the prices of everything when all the gold miners came together in one place. The prices skyrocketed to keep up with what was going on there at the time. WHY. buisness wanted to make a profit and sell materials and things that was needed to be there and get gold. YOU WANT THE GOLD , then you pay the price for the materials. There has to be a SUCKER, for another to get rich. It's just simple math. So you are made to beg, borrow or steal to stay in the game.So what happens when more people are faced with this scenario? I will just say that when the moon is full, you know what happens. OH i know, the garbage can bottom falls out.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 04:08 PM
link   
UNLESS the laws change on how many people can live in one space, it will always be a rocky road when living and paying bills alone. If they started community living arrangements and rent prices drastically went down. The economy would start to boom drastically. But since this will never happen. well, good luck with the thought of a 15 dollar an hour future. You have a bumpy road ahead of you. If only renters could pay less, Not in this society. Bills will only go up and up and up and up till the inflation helium balloon bursts.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: doobydoll
Look it's simple, what fool runs a business that is so unprofitable that not only can he not pay his workers enough, but he also has to get another job to keep it afloat?

The kind of fools that currently employ 52% of the US workforce.
... of which most have to claim benefits because those fools won't or can't pay them a fair wage. (there, I finished that sentence off for you).





Why do you prefer that taxpayers continue to top-up the wages of what is an otherwise unprofitable, doomed business? If its workers were paid enough that business would go under in a New York minute, so why waste taxpayers money to keep it limping along? It's crazy.

Why do prefer living in an imaginary world where every business owner is rolling in money, and laughing at the plight of the poor US pleb?

99% of US business' are small business' with owners scrapping by...same as everybody else.

The business owners should not be 'scraping by' with money their workers should be paid with, the same money those owners wouldn't have in the first place if it weren't for their workers' blood sweat and tears.

If those businesses can only operate as long as somebody else (taxpayers) tops up their workers wages, then those owners should close down and find something to do that they might be successful at, but this time try to do it without relying on the taxpayer to help pay their wage responsibilities.
edit on 6-6-2014 by doobydoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Let it all carry on until the tax coffers are dry, all low pay workers claiming it to help survive, none of them paying taxes.

Higher paid workers are taking all the strain and paying all the taxes, yet these are the very people whom are complaining about the low-paid getting benefits. So it's proposed they get paid more to get them off benefits, and the higher paid moan about this too. Don't want them to have benefits and don't want them to have more pay either.

The cost of living is always rising, and as it does so year upon year, more and more of your hard earned tax money has to be paid to low paid workers to help them live - you would prefer this rather than force bosses to pay it instead? The price of their product consistently rises year after year, but they've never given their workers a penny more than MW in all those years. They leave that bit of the equation for YOU to fulfil, the taxpaying mugs that you are.

But it's gotta stop eventually, or the gov is going to have to top up the pay of minimum wage workers forever, just so broke bosses can stay in business.
edit on 6-6-2014 by doobydoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: doobydoll

You know you could take every one off of social security,welfare,higher minimum wage, and all of those other programs and you would still have the problems you have now. SO, this leads us to that it is NOT these people that U think are bringin down the system. GRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEDDD. Also to add that some of these programs don't help matters either, they only quicken the pace of the national debt. I say that if u pay into the programs that get taken out of your check every week, you should get that back in life. Everyone needs something to catch your fall when u need it. Not spend it and wish the next generation will pay more for the lavish spending they did the years before and NOW. It is just dumb. Thats like giving a blank check to a teen ager that has no worries to pay it back, not that they would care anyway's. YEEE HAH.


edit on 6-6-2014 by cloaked4u because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: doobydoll

That's the thing if they're so broke then they'd shut their #ing doors. Nobody who runs a business is going to keep running it if they are "struggling" it's a bullspit lie...if they were struggling and had to work another job to make ends meet, they'd shut down or sell...this kind of excuses is from someone who liked to blow smoke up our asses. Well I, for one call bulls hit. It's more "temporary middleclass / poor" believing one day they'll be one of the elites. But it's a pipe dream.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: ldyserenity
a reply to: doobydoll

That's the thing if they're so broke then they'd shut their #ing doors. Nobody who runs a business is going to keep running it if they are "struggling" it's a bullspit lie...if they were struggling and had to work another job to make ends meet, they'd shut down or sell...this kind of excuses is from someone who liked to blow smoke up our asses. Well I, for one call bulls hit. It's more "temporary middleclass / poor" believing one day they'll be one of the elites. But it's a pipe dream.

I totally agree with you.

They wouldn't part with any sweat to prop up a 'struggling' business. Seriously, what would be the point? And they think we believe it.

Yep, they're pissing down our backs and telling us it's raining.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: doobydoll
Especially when they could do such things easy work at WalDicks and McDicks and work less hours and get supplemental income from gubmint and free/partial housing assistance. Anybody smart would just do that.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 06:59 PM
link   
The reason why a lot of small business owners are seeming to struggle, is because they are busting their asses to get to the next level. At least in my experience.

That said, me, and every other construction crew owner I knew paid well above minimum wage, but we also expected to get a lot in return. We expected you to show up every day on time and sober. We expected you to learn what we taught you, and be able to apply it. We expected you to pull your own weight. Don't want to hear no "I can't work I am sick" BS, I pull my ass to work when I am feeling like crap, so will you. Barring something serious, you better be waiting outside when I come to pick you up. I was never easy to work for, and never claimed to be. I let the guys I hired know beforehand, I would probably be the toughest boss they would ever work for, but also fair.

I could never in good conscious hire someone and pay them peanuts. It isn't right. I suppose that is why I am not rich yet lol.
edit on Fri, 06 Jun 2014 18:59:27 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 07:10 PM
link   
a reply to: doobydoll

Workers are not being vilified for working; they are being vilified for expecting far too much. This is not justified or should be a guarantee, nor is it good for the economy. This is not the UK or Europe, the ideas and motivations are not necessary the same as those of Europe.

There are some very big differences, to include the tax basis, and labor laws. There is also more of a difference. And what you stated makes that very clear. While there are some things that may be better in the UK, such as free medical, in the US, it costs and is not cheap. Nor are the prescription drugs, or any number of items that is free in the UK. And vice versa, there are some things that are a lot better in the USA, such as the cost of gas.

Reality is, that this is going to be a bad idea, and disastrous. And it reeks of unions, which are political tools and shills. No one takes into account that the vast majority of jobs are not provided by big name stores, but by the mom and pop stores that give people their start in the job market, along with many of the simple entry jobs. I am sorry, but I really do not see how someone flipping a burger should be paid equal to if not more, than someone who went to college, or has been working a job for years, or a person who started at the bottom and worked up to being a manager.

Would you now take and remove the jobs from everyone, the right to work, to where it is no longer a simple matter of going out and filling in an application and making it far harder for them to get a job? Would you narrow the basis for such, where now those who have no experience have no chance of getting that job in the first place? After all if the owner or manager is going to have to pay a person 15 dollars an hour, then he is going to raise the expectation of the job, and the qualifications of such.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: TKDRL

Well in construction I get that...but you're comparing oranges to apples because construction jobs already paid well above min. wage. I don't know what construction job pays minimum wage except maybe for an apprentice job, but I don't even think that they have those anymore. My SO is a contractor. But he's been under others as a construction worker too. Right now he's hemorrhaging money out the yin yang cause he was bamboozled into doing work for family which is the major no no in any business.

Eta: construction is a "skilled labor" job actually. But Mcdicks is not (their so called materials are a lot cheaper, too), so construction should always be above the minimum wage. Even if minimum wage was $15/hr right now I know a mason who is paying $25/hr.
edit on 2014/6/6 by ldyserenity because: to add



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join