It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


"Food Stamps" and "Minimum Wage" do not belong in the same sentence.

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 03:42 PM
So... Lets get interesting... Lets go a step farther and break it down... What does minimum wadge get ya?

$7.50/hr X40hrs x 52 weeks = $15,600

That's a WHOLE YEAR.

Now what can we do with that... Lets break it down by month.

$15,600 / 12 = $1,300

Now... This is true if you make 40 hours a week.

That number isnt "that" bad.... untill.... You take away taxes!

lets say 21%. I use this for my taxes and it "used" to keep me marginaly safe. It's probably not a whole lot diffrent today, considering what you may pay in state taxes in addition. Minus nothing more than taxes, you're probably going to get $1,000 a month. This is BEFORE you get your insurance taken out.

So these are numbers I'm throwing out there. They may be diffrent for you.

$1,000 per month to spend: (Based on one person)

300 - Food
100 - Misc utilitries
50 - Sewage/Water (depends on where you live and if you have this fee at all)
150 - Electricity/Gas (this is a low estimate, often)

...and we havnt even rented the apartment yet!

Left Over - 400$

What if you need a Car?

100 - 200 - Car Insurance
250 - 350 - Car Note
50 - 100 - Gas
50 - 100 - Misc

That's another 500 - 700$ more.

So, if you make min wage, you better be living with mom or in a shelter.. You better not bother worrying about a car untill you make at least 10$ per hour. Which is only $1,700 per month... Before taxes...

So in reality, you better be making 11 or 12 instead of 10...

Most apartments will not even speak to you unless you:
- Have credit
- Have previously rented (or your parents better help with this)
- Make at least 4X more than the monthly cost of the rent of the apartment. (average 1br aprt 400) still short by 200$, but on the bright side, if you can get in, you will have found where to put the remaining 400$)

If you dont... Guess you just wont get ahead till you're in your 30s and havent knocked over a corner store yet.

...its getting worse every year. Inflation keeps going up like this, it wont matter how much you make per hour...

One thing I have found to be true... It "Seems" that the older you get, the more money you make. No matter what you're doing. No matter how many jobs I've had in 25 years, every one seemed to go a bit higher in wadge than the one before it. Then again... could be the reason I went to the next job in the first place!

edit on 9-12-2011 by theRhenn because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 03:42 PM

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
Oh, in case you don't understand the implications of that; $10 becoming equal to $7 means a 30% wage cut for everybody else.

No, it means those minimum wage people, who typically spend most of their income each month,
will circulate %25 more capital, which can be used to hire more people.

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 03:42 PM
It's simple.

Give every US citizen food stamps.
Eliminate the entire bureaucracy as a savings.

Of course since the government _is_ the bureaucracy
I don't think they will ever come around and see it that way.
Look for continued use of the divisive words deserve and entitlement.

It's not entitlement that is the problem. It's selective entitlement that's the problem.

David Grouchy

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 03:43 PM
You really should not be having kids if you have a minimum wage job. Of course you have the "right" to have kids and a minimum wage job but you can't blame the system for your bad choices then complain about free handouts from that evil government.

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 03:52 PM
reply to post by PrimalRed

you shouldn't be having kids, unless you can support them...and well, got to tell ya something here, that would probably eliminate a good portion of the population....maybe even you!!
it costs a heck of alot of money to have and raise kids, keep them housed adequately, fed, with medical care, school supplies, clothes, and all of it!!!

each state has a child healthcare program, go and check yours, see at what income you don't qualify for at least a little bit of help with it!!!
and well, bosses know the programs are there. my one boss told me to go apply for that when I asked about the cost for putting my kids onto my plan.... I would have ended up owing him money if I had added the kids to that plan!!!

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 04:15 PM
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein

When I was born, the minimum wage was $1.00 an hour. When I was growing up, it rose to $2.00 an hour. And during that time, a man could work at a full time job and make enough to support his family... maybe even save a little.

On May 1, 1974, it went to that $2.00 level after 6 years at $1.60. 8 months later, on January 1, 1975, it went to $2.10. On the same date in 1976, it was $2.30. Two years later it went to $2.65, then rose each year through 1982... $2.90, $3.10, $3.35. The same time period that wages were being forced upwards by legislation was when the last major recession hit. Suddenly a household needed two incomes to make ends meet. Gasoline went from $0.25 a gallon to $1.50 a gallon.

Now you want us to do the same thing. Heck, we have been. On September 1, 1997 it was $5.15 and stayed there until 2007. Then on June 24, 2007 it went to $5.85; June 24, 2008 it was $6.55; June 24, 2009 it was $7.25. We are now in the largest recession/depression since 1929. gasoline hit $4.00 a gallon. Households can't make ends meet even with two jobs.








Isn't there enough misery already? Are things not bad enough? Are you really that anxious to become destitute? Do you really hate people so much you want them to go hungry and cold?


We have enough troubles already...


posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 04:53 PM
Increases in minimum wage cause inflation and therefore are non productive as a stimulus to the economy. This redistribution effort has no effect on the standard of living of the lower classes because of its effect on inflation.

Companies forced to increase the bottom line will balance that increase with a proportional increase in sale price. Overall effect is a devaluation of the Dollar.

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 05:01 PM

Originally posted by Adamanteus
Increases in minimum wage cause inflation and therefore are non productive as a stimulus to the economy. This redistribution effort has no effect on the standard of living of the lower classes because of its effect on inflation.

Companies forced to increase the bottom line will balance that increase with a proportional increase in sale price. Overall effect is a devaluation of the Dollar.
Say it again, you and the redneck both. No matter how many times you tell people, they just don't get it.

posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 05:41 AM
reply to post by dawnstar

well, fine, I buy that and up ya one!! the taxpayers should have to be subsidizing the payroll of these companies either by feeding their employees, providing them with housing and medical care, ect!! if the owner of the business wants able bodied people working so he can make a profit, well, it's his job to pay them enough so that they can meet their needs...not the taxpayers!!!

s/f for the OP, too... Precisely put, and brilliantly addressed by all. The problem is the fat cats at the top, the "publicly held" companies where "shareholders" are the invisible puppeteers, whether they know it or not.
I say in addition to everything that has been suggested (i.e. raising minimum wage, LOWERING PRICES, reducing the income/wealth gap, and forcing BUSINESSES to pay for the employee's care and wellbeing, etc.) we should also make it that the CEOs get paid ONLY after profits are calculated, expenses are paid, balance sheets go back to ZERO, and then the profit gets divvied up between the bosses. Period.

No futures and shorts and insider trading and hedge funding. Just straightforward BUSINESS. You offer a service or commodity. You don't RIG the price. It must be affordable for people working at the average income for the state/nation, or even have it be not a set dollar amount, but a PERCENTAGE of the person's income.

For example: you need a lawnmower. You go to where-ever, and the price tag says "2%". That means it costs TWO PERCENT of your annual income, whether you earn minimum wage or $15,800,320. It's still TWO PERCENT. For the same quality. The same machine.

If taxes are based on income, SO SHOULD BE PRICES. Sliding scale cost. It's done in many social service agences and health care facilities. It works. Why is it not done on the commercial markets?

Do away with Wall Street. It's a gigantic gambling house, and is rigged.

edit on 10-12-2011 by wildtimes because: spelling/typos

posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 10:11 AM
reply to post by wildtimes

I can understand where you are coming from, but in the end it is still the old Communist Manifesto... from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs. That is the greatest economic system ever proposed or developed by mankind... on paper. The problem is it does not work in reality... at least on anything but a very small scale.

My family is communist. I work for our living, but if my wife needs something she gets it. Same with my son. If one of us needs a doctor (rare, rare event in reality, but this is an example), no one of us cares who made the money that pays for that. If my son needs a tool, he has complete reign over the shop to use any tool he needs. It doesn't matter whether it is mine or his. That is communism, and it works on a small scale much better than any other economic system.

But even within a family, it has its problems. My wife might decide she wants a new dress about the same time I decide I need a new drill. If there is only enough money for one, who gets their need fulfilled? Human greed creeps in; I made the money, so I should get the drill; she works hard around the house so I can make the money, so she should get the dress. Bang, we have an argument.

History has proven time and time again that this system works less and less well the larger the community practicing it grows, as more and more greed creeps in and perverts the system. In the 1960s, the hippie movement experimented with communal living, and in every single instance it worked until the group grew past a point and then disintegrated. The USSR and China tried it on a national level, reinforcing it with the authority of law, and in both cases it led to extreme poverty for the masses and corruption at the higher levels.

The problem is that humanity thrives on competition. That's not a bad word, competition. It simply means that you, me, and everyone else involved has a reason to improve themselves, a need to become better than they were before. With this competition comes new ideas, new developments, new technology. Because of competition, we can communicate across the globe from the comfort of our homes at an affordable cost. Our lifespan has increased to exceed 70 years on average. We can travel form one point to another in heated/air-conditioned comfort at high speeds. We have indoor plumbing, television, food choices from around the world, electronic machinery to help us remember, understand, and preserve food. All that has come about because at some time, someone in competition with others made a discovery or had an idea.

If we were to sell at a percentage of income, then there would be no competition. What would be the benefit in making twice the money if it came with the requirement that you had to spend twice the money for the same things? Have you never wanted something so badly you were willing to work extra hard to get it, willing to sacrifice for it, willing to go that extra mile to achieve it? I have. I drove a truck cross country for 8 years, sacrificing time with my family, the comfort of a real bed at night, home-cooked meals, looking toward a goal. I got that goal: my shop. And today it means so much more to me than it would have if all I had to do was ask for it to get it. Under your plan, there would have been nothing I could do to get it... no new job, no overtime, no sacrifice would have been enough.

Capitalism, properly restrained, works. It has worked for 200 years in this country, proven by the high standard of living we all enjoy. Yes, we still have poverty, but nothing, and I mean nothing compared to other countries around the world. I know of no one, including the homeless, who have to go for extended periods without food... even the homeless here have clothing, can find clean water, etc., etc., etc. Those are luxuries out of reach in some places.

Those who dissent against capitalism are typically, in my experience, those who have not succeeded under it. So for those who may be reading this thread, I offer this advice: try. Just try. Learn what works for you and what doesn't, and use that information. If you can sweet-talk a preacher into cussing, go into sales. If you can fix a car, become a mechanic, if you have a sharp mind, become a doctor or engineer. I you like to argue become a lawyer. But do something! Make a plan to get where you want to be in life and follow it.

There are plenty of people who will help you along the way. Most are capitalists. Capitalism has nothing to do with charity... it is an economic system, not a moral one. Morals can thrive among capitalistic societies as well (maybe better) than socialistic or communistic societies, because those either make charity impossible for the average person or try to force charity onto people.

If you don't want to do that, don't want to leave your video games and Ipods long enough to make a difference, then at least stay there and let those of us who do want to improve our lives have a chance to do so. Someone will be by to make sure you don't starve. And it will probably be a capitalist.


edit on 12/10/2011 by TheRedneck because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 10:39 AM
reply to post by DarthMuerte

To TheRedneck:

I was just about to post on this thread, but you, my friend, said exactly what I was going to say, so all I will say, is "ditto" and starred!

edit on 10-12-2011 by ProfEmeritus because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 10:40 AM
You know what I'd like to see?

I'd like to see EMPLOYERS care about the people that work for them again- really, honestly CARE.

I'd like to see a lot more love and concern for other people in the US and a whole lot less greed.

My dad owned a place of business for years. He never tried to be a big wheel- he tried to make an honest living that provided for him and all his employees. He would also say that you never really get more than 40 hours work out of anyone. He admired Eastman, from Kodak.

Why do people look up to the Robber Barons and not George Eastman?
Why is Edison taught in schools and Tesla- who wanted free energy for the world- hardly mentioned?

As far as the govt. raising minimum wage- they shouldn't HAVE to. People should have the common sense to pay people a decent living wage- especially if they are going to complain about food stamps.

To my way of thinking- the shame would be in having employees on food stamps- not in a working person having to rely on them.

posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 11:45 AM
reply to post by TheRedneck

Wow. Excellent points! I had not thought of all of them, and I appreciate your thoughtful response. Interesting the bit about family communism. ... vs large scale. From personal experience I know this to be the case absolutely.

You make good points regarding the size of community and competition. But you did not address the Wall Street part.

Suppose that a "sliding scale" of cost was in place for certain things, like food and basic necessities (which it is, actually -- but the quality available goes down with the "price"). I'm thinking more along the lines of having less "crap" quality stuff for those who can't afford "good" "better" or "best." Especially for food. It should be possible for everyone to eat fresh fruit, regardless of their annual income. ... not just those in the higher echelons. If they want luxury, they can go eat at the fancy caviar maitre'de restaurants. But cooking at home for basics (not delicacies) should be available for everyone.

I know you mentioned that no one in our country will starve to death or go without medical attention. I applaud those facts. I recognize fully that we DO have luxurious lifestyles compared to much of the world. Most of the world, in fact.

Nevertheless, there is a disparity of "comfort", and if CEOs were not made into billionaires, but rather they earned a REASONABLE top-notch salary (who REALLY needs that much money? It's excess and overkill, IMO) AND the employees under them were paid decent wages based on profits (employee-owned rather than NYSE owned), I believe things would be better.

Anyway, thanks again for the interesting thoughts and concepts. star to you and the Prof both -- excellent thread this.

edit on 10-12-2011 by wildtimes because: TO EMPHASIZE REASONABLE AND REALLY

posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 11:49 AM
reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree

I agree.

Perhaps if we didn't have so low of a minimum wage then we wouldn't need to have all these entitlement programs.

Have any conservative groups ever examined this? I bet not. That wouldn't benefit the corporations.

posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 11:56 AM
reply to post by hadriana

As someone who has sat on both sides of that desk, I'd like to see more employers care more about their employees too... but I would also like to see more employees care about their employers. It's a two-way street.

Here's what I see from employees:
  • That bell sounds for quitting time, and no matter what is happening, the employees begin a mad race for the door. I have seen places where I was worried what would happen if a forklift was in operation when it blew... I'd honestly expect the driver to jump off without bothering to stop it first.

  • Not my job... I work here, I am being paid to be here and help out, but I don't want to do that (usually simple) task because no one wrote it down in my job description.

  • Hey! What do you mean the company can't afford a bigger raise this year? I want more money, and I don't care if you go bankrupt giving it to me!

  • That boss just sits in his office all day, while I'm stuck out here on the line working my tail off making less money. What? Don't talk to me about his spending 5 years in college as a starving student to be able to do what he does, and don't talk to me about all that responsibility he has and the late evenings he works... I don't want to hear that! I just want him to get fired.

  • I'm only 30 minutes late. Someone else will cover for me while I'm watching TV at home. You're docking my time? You evil *&(*^$*)%*&(!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So the result is: time clocks, strict restrictions on actions, everything becomes litigated, there's no real reward for those who try to be good employees, and bosses feel persecuted and get antagonistic.

When I was an electrician, I had more problems with helpers than you can imagine. I didn't think I asked a lot: be ready to work, do what I say, be courteous to the customer, and don't show up drunk or high. I paid a little more than the going rate, because I thought my helpers deserved it. One guy quit and never bothered to tell me until I stopped by his house to pick him up. After driving alone to the job site wondering how the heck I was going to pull wire without someone on the other end, the carpenter on the house we were doing said he had a nephew who needed work; I hired him on the spot out of desperation. He worked good that Friday, and because he was down on his luck, I paid him for that days work instead of paying after the job completion as I normally did.

Monday morning I went by to pick him up to finish the job. His mother came to the door and told me she hadn't heard from him since I dropped him off Friday. A week later he called me to tell me he was ready to go to work. He didn't. I had already found someone who was actually a great employee.

Bosses have schedules they have to keep, and your job, regardless of the description, is to help them meet those schedules. If you are late, if you don't show up, if you goof off when there is a deadline, then you are not doing your job and you should be thankful they even let you hang around. And if this description does not fit you, then you should be thoroughly angry at those it does fit, because they are the reason you aren't getting better treatment.


posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:26 PM
reply to post by wildtimes

It is possible for everyone to eat well... well, at least it was before this current economic mess... but I digress...

Just above, I posted about the employee behavior I have seen in my life. Those who do not give in to the temptation to do the things I mentioned rarely are left behind. Perhaps they are in one company, but there are always other companies and if nothing else, always opportunities to work for yourself.

Everyone is ultimately responsible for their lot in life. Yes, life can be unfair, but that's where charity comes in. I am living below the poverty level right now, on food stamps, working three part-time jobs to make ends meet while I attend college full time to try and get a good job in an industry that hasn't dried up. but I still cannot walk by a collection for someone who has had a serious setback without dropping at least some coins into the tin.

Of course, I do turn people down too. I came across a collection at one of the rural four-way stops around here about a month ago. I rolled down the window and reached into my pocket before the guy even made it over. I asked "Who are you collecting for?", expecting the recipient to be someone who had lost their house in the tornadoes this past year or someone who had been stricken by illness.

"A couple at our church who just lost their jobs."

I was amazed... I looked him in the eye and said, "I have been unemployed for two years. I am working part-time grunt jobs to get me through college to get a job. I cannot help you."

I drove away.

Now maybe I didn't have all the information, and maybe I did the wrong thing. But it just stuck me that this group had an elitist attitude over me. They somehow thought they deserved for someone else to give them something so they didn't have to take responsibility. Medical situations are not something most people can control; natural disasters are out of their control; there are probably a million different reasons that someone could need help.

"I lost my job" is not one of those.

So you want people to always have fresh fruit? They can! Are there no orchards nearby? Most of them sell fresh fruit, fresher than what is in the supermarket, for reduced cost. Stroll by the produce section sometime and look for those "quick sale" stickers... I have gotten a half-dozen ripe apples, nice apples, for 25 cents. The stickers go on a few days before the expiration date, which is a few more days before most fruit actually spoils.

The point is, things are possible if you simply try.

Some time back I got an opportunity to tutor math at the college I attend. Imagine, a 50 year old guy doing a job that was designed for teenager students! 19 hours a week maximum at minimum wage! Most people would scoff at it. I took it and worked hard to help everyone I could. Now I am getting the reputation as the guy others (including teachers) go to when there is a problem. I have a couple of different departments fighting over me. And I just heard that the fact I took this job may make it possible for me to get a free ride at a nearby university to continue my education.

All because I took a job that most think is "beneath them". So I have to sweep the floor. Big deal. I'm off unemployment.

The bottom line is that if a person takes responsibility for their own situation, they can pull themselves out of it. In my 50 years, I have pulled myself up by my bootstraps many times. I may have to do it again. But never have I expected someone else to do for me what I should be able to do myself. Every dime of charity I have been given I have returned at least 20 fold in my life. Everything that I had to have I somehow got. It may have been unpleasant, but I did what had to be done. And someday, when I look up out of a real purty box at crying friends and relatives, I can rest easy knowing I left this world better than I found it.

That's what capitalism is really about. Self-responsibility. Self-sufficiency. The ability to help others. The satisfaction of knowing you did what you felt was right, and made your own way.

And that is worth it all. How many can truly say that?


posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 03:22 PM
reply to post by TheRedneck

All because I took a job that most think is "beneath them". So I have to sweep the floor. Big deal. I'm off unemployment.

The bottom line is that if a person takes responsibility for their own situation, they can pull themselves out of it. In my 50 years, I have pulled myself up by my bootstraps many times. I may have to do it again. But never have I expected someone else to do for me what I should be able to do myself. Every dime of charity I have been given I have returned at least 20 fold in my life. Everything that I had to have I somehow got. It may have been unpleasant, but I did what had to be done. And someday, when I look up out of a real purty box at crying friends and relatives, I can rest easy knowing I left this world better than I found it.

And I, too, friend have done that. I hold a Master's degree. The atmosphere and environment drove me out of the field. I went into the corporate world. It also sucked (in terms of not being ethical towards employees). When I protested the treatment of the front-liiners (having been there myself mutliple times) I was put on the "Document and Destroy" list by management.

For the last three years I have worked part-time, minimum wage jobs. I do not consider anything "beneath" me. I have ALWAYS been a front-liner, a grunt, if you will, a bottom rung type of woker, but I ALWAYS have done what I thought was right. When pan-handlers approach me, I say, "sorry, no". Because I have given SO MUCH of myself with so LITTLE in return...

You are right, about the fresh fruit. Yeah, it is available where I live, where backyard and "truck" farmers have fresh home-grown fruits/veggies to sell....
And I do buy them.

But sadly, many people in dire cirumstances are either not aware of those resources, or they are too stubborn and "proud" to shop there. I make a habit of buying "second hand" or "scratch and dent" items. I know people who "return" major purchases for "wrong color" or "weird scratch that no one can see" . WTH is up with that?

I have worked freelance: sewing, providing quality child-care; I do not "hire" yard or house-cleaning services, or home maintenance guys (I do what I can by myself, which is considerably quite a lot). I drive an '89 vehicle that is completely paid for. I don't buy clothes: if I need something, I go to thrift stores, or use hand-me-downs.

Am I regarded as "lesser than" by some of my social circle and family? Oh, yeah. You betcha. Do I feel bad about it?

So please, don't take me as a frivolous and ignorant spender. I work hard at living within my means. And I do all right. And my kids have adopted the system. For that, I am proud and grateful.

posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 03:41 PM
A 30% increase in wages will NOT result in a 30% increase in price. This is a false argument. Take hiring Americans vs illegals to pick fruits and vegetables. Cost is not 100% labor, if a $1 Avocado is .25 labor, the increase is .07. I think I'm willing to pay that. But companies have no conciseness, their mission is to make the most amount of money possible, if that means costing American jobs to increase profit just a tad, so be it. That's why another mechanism is required, ya know, just a little government oversight, instead they serve each other.

The other driving factor are the MILLIONS of illegal workers who are taking jobs and using resources. When things get tough, I'm sorry, but I favor my own country's people first. I don't see whats so unreasonable about closing or slowing immigration until our economy comes back. But no,thats asking too much, you get government continuing to reward companies for moving jobs out and hiring illegals at home and that is why we have what we do.

Manufacturing is gone. Job security is gone. Some unions got greedy and helped right along with the rest. More and more employees are now less than 40 hours just so they won't get benefits. Useful idiots continue to argue that all the things that brought this about are such great ideas. If we could have true capitalism vs the crony capitalism of today it would be different.

posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 02:47 AM
My wish has come true.....almost.

10$ Minimum wage set as "city minimum wage"

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 09:09 AM
reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree

An experiment. Let's see how SF does, and use that information to determine the proper course of action for the country. Agreed?


top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in