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.

 

Let us do a little math on 15.00 minimum wage

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2021 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

This is a poor example carwashes throughout the country are automating, But guess what that automation opens up some high paying jobs. These things needs to be cleaned and repaired brushes changed weekly So the jobs dont go away they just change. Those guys make 30.00 an hour and an automated place needs a minimum 0f 3 to clean and repair. The advantage of automation isnt saving labor costs its time. They can wash more car faster meaning they make more money. If a car wash closes its because there location cant support the trafic needed. The days of paying two guys to sit and wash the ocasional vehicle are over. Times change just like convienance stores no longer having people pump gas jobs go away as technology makes things easier.



posted on Mar, 7 2021 @ 08:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: panoz77
So, let's assume that our worker with girlfriend and child (aka the breadwinner) currently makes $8.00 and hypothetically works 40 hours a week (even though most minimum wage jobs are not 40 hr per week "full time" jobs.

Decent analysis, but it totally ignores the most glaring question...

Low wage jobs are intended to be 'entry level'. Unskilled. And never... EVER... were or are intended to be jobs that someone can even provide 100% for themselves, let alone raise a family on. These are jobs intended for those just entering the workforce - ie, teenagers.

Abolish the minimum wage. Abolish stupid unilateral laws against children working for small wages. And no, I'm not advocating for child slave labor. But children should be allowed to work for peanuts if t hey want, with the permission of their parents. I used to pick up rocks for a neighbor for .25c/hr. That was a lot for a 10 yr old kid, and it taight me the value of my time, hard work, and a dollar.



posted on Mar, 7 2021 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

That's not how it would work. The cost to pay 8 more per hour would hit everyone at the increase in cost of goods in order to make up for the min wage unless over half of the employees were laid off, then they'd have nothing. Ironic you called the favor of the increase a "no-brainer".



posted on Mar, 7 2021 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

That's not true as each and every one has required adult workers since day one. Not a single one of these jobs exist in such a way they can be fully staffed by kids. Your claim is complete and total bull#.



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Yes, I already said this as well.


originally posted by: panoz77
In addition, the whole minimum wage being a "living wage" is a complete misnomer. The minimum wage jobs were never meant to be "careers" or to support a family. They are entry level low skilled positions that are almost never full time to begin with. They are part time jobs for low skilled workers. High school kids, high school dropouts, college kid making some book or beer money, and maybe a retired person looking to make a bit for their prescriptions.

These are not careers, LOL. How some people don't even understand this simple fact is beyond me.

edit on 8-3-2021 by panoz77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: panoz77
The liberals and democrats want to lift people out of poverty and give them a "living wage". So let's focus on the impacts to the individual working that minimum wage job. I'm not going to discuss the other impacts to the economy or businesses in general.

So, let's assume that our worker with girlfriend and child (aka the breadwinner) currently makes $8.00 and hypothetically works 40 hours a week (even though most minimum wage jobs are not 40 hr per week "full time" jobs.

$8.00 per week at 40 hrs/wk = $16,640 or $1,386.66 (Based on gross income)

Now, with an annual salary of $16,640 how much does our worker with girlfriend and child pay in Federal taxes? 10%
So that brings us to about $14,976. Minus local taxes, let us assume 1% local tax. Now we are at $14,810 and we are going to assume this worker with girlfriend and child is not investing in a 401K. We won't even bother deducting social security and medicare.
Monthly net income is about $1,234.

Does our worker with girlfriend and child qualify for SNAP? Yes they do!
eligibility.com...
www.masslegalhelp.org...

So I would get about $535 in monthly SNAP benefits.

So just adding SNAP benefits, our worker with girlfriend and child is actually making about $1,769 NET INCOME adding just SNAP alone.

Now let's add our Medicaid benefits. Yey, we qualify since we are under $29,207 (before taxes). Let's just say that equates to about $400 a month we save from having to pay for medical insurance through our employer for a family plan ($200 per pay is an extremely low estimate for a family insurance plan). What are we up to now in monthly wage?
$2,169!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So for the sake of argument, we will just stop here even though we probably qualify for several other assistance programs, like housing, utilities etc.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Now, let's see what our $15/hr worker with girlfriend and child will make, shall we?

$15/hr equates to $31,200 per year or $2,600 (gross monthly income)
Federal tax bracket = 15%
us.icalculator.info...


So our net income after Uncle Sam takes his part is $25,392 minus local taxes of 1% = $25,080 or $2,090 (net income).

To qualify for SNAP we would have to be below $2,184 (gross); $1,680 (net) OH NO!!!!! We loose our SNAP benefits!!!!
WHAT! We loose our Medicaid too!!!!! And all our other govt assistance?

So just doing some very generous back of the paper math, we can see that our $8.00 worker with child and girlfriend with Govt assistance actually make MORE that our $15.00 per hour "living wage" worker with child and girlfriend.

$8.00 with Govt assistance = $2,169 net monthly income (very lowball estimate)
$15.00 with not Uncle Sam helping = $2,090 net monthly income

But the democrats are helping you earn your "living wage", and they thank you for being a new taxpayer.





You forgot to factor in the price hike to cover the $15 min wage increase. So it's actually worse than you say.



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: jidnum

Actually, I didn't. I acknowledged there are other economic impacts, but wanted to focus on the individual impacts.

"So let's focus on the impacts to the individual working that minimum wage job. I'm not going to discuss the other impacts to the economy or businesses in general."



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: tanstaafl

That's not true as each and every one has required adult workers since day one. Not a single one of these jobs exist in such a way they can be fully staffed by kids. Your claim is complete and total bull#.

Your ignorance is really showing...

First, you say 'each and every one has required adult workers since day one', without explanation...

Each and every one... of what? Job? Sorry, as I said, I used to work for 0.25/hr when I was a kid, and was happy to earn that money.

There are countless different potential types of jobs out there that are considered low or no-skilled and do not deserve anywhere near a 'living wage' - defined apparently as enough money for someone to be able to not only live on themselves, but to even potentially raise a family on.

Sorry, but 'grocery bagger' is not a job that should ever be considered as having to pay a 'living wage' (as defined above)and any claim that it should is just absurd to the extreme.



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Cool beans, but must have been in a follow-up post?

Anyway, like I said, it was a decent analysis, so good job...


originally posted by: panoz77
a reply to: tanstaafl

Yes, I already said this as well.


originally posted by: panoz77
In addition, the whole minimum wage being a "living wage" is a complete misnomer. The minimum wage jobs were never meant to be "careers" or to support a family. They are entry level low skilled positions that are almost never full time to begin with. They are part time jobs for low skilled workers. High school kids, high school dropouts, college kid making some book or beer money, and maybe a retired person looking to make a bit for their prescriptions.

These are not careers, LOL. How some people don't even understand this simple fact is beyond me.



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Exactly.

How about store greeter, shelf stocking, warehouse worker, fruit picker, shopping cart collector, grass cutter, dish washer, shoveling horse stalls, working a register, the list goes on and on.



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 02:28 PM
link   
After covid , a 15$ minimum wage would really hurt restaurant and small businesses owners.



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: panoz77

You made a lot of assumptions but what we can assume is if someone is making minimum wage they probably aren’t married. Also, in no way shape or form is nearly doubling anyone’s income a net negative for them. Save it.



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: scauma
a reply to: panoz77

You made a lot of assumptions but what we can assume is if someone is making minimum wage they probably aren’t married. Also, in no way shape or form is nearly doubling anyone’s income a net negative for them. Save it.


I think having their job eliminated is a net negative....



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 03:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: scauma
a reply to: panoz77
You made a lot of assumptions but what we can assume is if someone is making minimum wage they probably aren’t married.

Totally and unequivocally irrelevant.


Also, in no way shape or form is nearly doubling anyone’s income a net negative for them.

It is if it causes them to lose their job because the business owner can't afford to pay them $15/hr for a job that is only worth $5/hr, then... is that a net negative for them? -shrug-


Save it.

Nah, I'll spend it on whatever I want, whenever I want...

Why?

Because I earned it.
edit on 8-3-2021 by tanstaafl because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 04:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: tanstaafl

That's not true as each and every one has required adult workers since day one. Not a single one of these jobs exist in such a way they can be fully staffed by kids. Your claim is complete and total bull#.

Your ignorance is really showing...

First, you say 'each and every one has required adult workers since day one', without explanation...

Each and every one... of what? Job? Sorry, as I said, I used to work for 0.25/hr when I was a kid, and was happy to earn that money.

There are countless different potential types of jobs out there that are considered low or no-skilled and do not deserve anywhere near a 'living wage' - defined apparently as enough money for someone to be able to not only live on themselves, but to even potentially raise a family on.

Sorry, but 'grocery bagger' is not a job that should ever be considered as having to pay a 'living wage' (as defined above)and any claim that it should is just absurd to the extreme.


Wow you really tell your age born in 1920s? First i used to cut lawns in my neighborhood growing up on the average i charged 20.00. Next the fact that you think baggers still exist tells me you dont get out much. Cashiers will sometimes work as baggers if the need arises but for some reason you think they shouldnt be paid?

No one cares that your labor was only worth .50 cents in the 1920s factory workers only made .40 cents an hour. So im guessing you were overpaid.



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr
Wow you really tell your age born in 1920s?

Wow, you really tell your age... what, are you twelve? thirteen?


First i used to cut lawns in my neighborhood growing up on the average i charged 20.00.

Sure, but I didn't cut grass at age 5. When I graduated to cutting grass, like you, I charged more...


Next the fact that you think baggers still exist tells me you dont get out much.

Pure baggers? Probably not... but how about door greeters?


Cashiers will sometimes work as baggers if the need arises but for some reason you think they shouldnt be paid?

They should be paid what they are worth - and what the business owner can afford. I've never said someone shouldn't be paid for doing work.


No one cares that your labor was only worth .50 cents in the 1920s factory workers only made .40 cents an hour. So im guessing you were overpaid.

Again, more deliberate ignorance. It is amazing that you are unable to tell the difference between a 5 yr old earning .25/hr for picking up rocks (that is called unskilled labor), and a factory worker (requires at least some skills)...



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl


It is if it causes them to lose their job because the business owner can't afford to pay them $15/hr for a job that is only worth $5/hr.


Everyone's labour is worth more than $5 dollars an hour... doesn't matter what their doing.

Also, this whole BS about mass job losses because of employers refusing to pay what employees are worth, is just hysterical nonsense.

End of the day... Employers need their employees to provide the service they're offering.

So basically they'd be left with 3 options...

1. Go broke, because they no longer have the employee's to provide said service.

2. Get off their lazy arses and do all that hard labour themselves.

3. Simply pay their employees a fair and livable wage.

i predict the majority would go with the fair a livable wage option in the end.



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 05:13 PM
link   

edit on 3/8/2021 by Puppylove because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: tanstaafl


It is if it causes them to lose their job because the business owner can't afford to pay them $15/hr for a job that is only worth $5/hr.


Everyone's labour is worth more than $5 dollars an hour... doesn't matter what their doing.

Also, this whole BS about mass job losses because of employers refusing to pay what employees are worth, is just hysterical nonsense.

End of the day... Employers need their employees to provide the service they're offering.

So basically they'd be left with 3 options...

1. Go broke, because they no longer have the employee's to provide said service.

2. Get off their lazy arses and do all that hard labour themselves.

3. Simply pay their employees a fair and livable wage.

i predict the majority would go with the fair a livable wage option in the end.


I'd love to pick your brain after you start a business and understand things better. Please let me know if that happens.



posted on Mar, 8 2021 @ 05:50 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Fast food is the most common example used by people with your beliefs. Fast food places have always been open during school hours and required adult staff.




top topics



 
15
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join