Let us do a little math on 15.00 minimum wage

a reply to: scauma

You are absolutely 100% wrong. The bottom is always going to be the bottom and I explained why. Most workers making min wage now will LOOSE "money" (which include govt benefits) making $15/hr. You are just too blind to understand why.

a reply to: dragonridr

I'll bet you $1000 that you never claimed your mowing money as income. We are not talking about under the table money, that is a whole other benefit that welfare recipients benefit from. Working under the table gigs, not claiming the income and still making big money off of govt handouts.

a reply to: dragonridr

Also, you are basically arguing against yourself. You just admitted that when a job becomes too expensive, they just give the more experience person the assignments and eliminate the job beneath. When grocery baggers cost too much money, they just added that job to the cashiers. See how that works?

The same will happen if they force a company to pay a door greeter $15, say hello to AI robby robot who will also make sure you are not shoplifting.

a reply to: Puppylove

18 yo college kids and high school dropouts need work too.

a reply to: panoz77

And yet growing up, I've rarely seen a fast food place with zero adults working those hours. It's almost like most college classes are during those hours, or there's simply not enough college people or 18 year olds in the work force to literally cover every position in every shift in every fast food place the world over, especially when there's no colleges anywhere in sight.

a reply to: Puppylove

No one is claiming that adults are not working min wage jobs and that only kids are working these jobs. You are the one that claimed that each and every minimum wage job REQUIRES adult workers, that is patently false. The claim made was that min wage jobs are ENTRY LEVEL, LOW SKILLED jobs. Workers of all ages even into their 70's work these jobs. My grandmother worked at Sams Club as a demo lady for the food items into her 80's. These jobs are not career positions, they are not intended as jobs to support a family on, they were never intended to be a "living wage" job.

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#.

a reply to: panoz77

These jobs are intended to make money there is no intent beyond that. Stop pretending they have some specific societal role as entry level jobs. There is no such thing. Also, stop pretending there are enough jobs out there that every single person can move out of minimum wage jobs. There isn't plain and simple.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: panoz77

These jobs are intended to make money there is no intent beyond that. Stop pretending they have some specific societal role as entry level jobs. There is no such thing. Also, stop pretending there are enough jobs out there that every single person can move out of minimum wage jobs. There isn't plain and simple.

Again, you are out in left field.

Yes, they are intended to make money, a little extra money. It is the left who are making the claim that each and every job, no matter the skill required must be a "living wage" job. That the guy who collects the shopping carts in Alabama, should make as much as the 18 year old coal minor in his first year. The left is the one claiming that even workers performing the most unskilled jobs should be able to "raise a family" from collecting shopping carts.

To add, any motivated worker, even who starts out shoveling horse crap out of stalls can work their way up to a better position, it is all about hard work, dedication, being on time every time, doing that little bit extra. Any hard worker will be noticed and rewarded. That is the American way.

a reply to: panoz77

You do know, all jobs can be living wage jobs while allowing for others to make more than living wage, right? There's really no good reason for the lowest wage to be anything less than a living one.

Also, not everyone is created equal, some people can't do much more than shovel horse crap. Should that person's capabilities prevent them from making a LIVING wage? It's literally the best that they can do.

Also even if every person worked their hardest, every person got a degree, and literally everyone did their best, some despite all this hard work would be stuck in minimum wage jobs. Not only that, but now even those would suddenly require degrees and work experience due to the influx of overly skilled workers everywhere.

Once again, there are not infinite promotions, stop pretending there is.

a reply to: Puppylove

Life isn't fair, everyone doesn't get a participation trophy. Those "make more than minimum wage jobs" will always be scaled to the lowest paying job, and prices for goods and services will also reflect that increase. The bottom, will always be the bottom, whether it's $15/hr or $50/hr. If that is the bottom, the skilled jobs would have to increase as well. That's how the system works, inflation would skyrocket. You are stuck with "pie in the sky" thinking. You must first have a basic understanding of economics. Your emotion is clouding your rational thinking.

We have fallback programs for those who are unfortunate enough to not be able to work, it's called disability. I am 100% OK with disability to those who are not defrauding the program, the actual needy and disabled.

There are 1000's of rags to riches success stories, people who came to this country with a dollar in their pocket and are now living the American dream. Too many to mention. Hard work is rewarded. Good ideas are rewarded. Inventiveness is rewarded. Just watch shark tank, many examples just from that show alone.

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

This is just your opinion, and it exhibits just how out of touch some people are with reality.

The reality is, each and every combination of situation+person is different and unique. How can you not see that?

How much any one person's labor is worth for any given job is - or should be - determined by the free market - meaning, what the one offering the job is willing to pay, and what any potential person considering taking the job is willing to take as payment.

PERIOD.

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

No, it is called reality. I do understand that socialists/communists/fascists don't really do 'reality', but thankfully...

Reality... is.

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

Yes, they do, but their business is limited in what it is able to pay. Labor is a part of - in many cases, it is the largest part of - what is called the 'Cost of Goods'. The total 'Cost of Goods' determines the cost of the final product. If the Cost of Goods is too high, then the cost of the final product will be too high, and no one will buy it.

This is a very natural, even simple, process - when left to the free market. However, when petty-tyrant-wanna-be's start trying to micro-manage the process based on feelz and wantz, it gets super duper complicated, to the point it is impossible to manage at all. This is the reason why socialist/communist/fascists countries generally implode, and their entire populations are 'living' far far below what we here in the USA would call 'poverty level. We, in fact, don't know what real poverty looks like... although we are well on the way to finding out.

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.

The problem with this is that you want to:

a) Unilaterally declare that the meaning of 'fair and living wage' is a wage that anyone could not only live on themselves, but also provide for an entire family,

b) Unilaterally declare that all jobs are equal, and equally deserve a 'fair and living wage' as you define,

This is, quite simply, a delusional state of being. It is irrational. It is illogical. It is in outright defiance of the reality of the world in which we live.

originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: tanstaafl
I'd love to pick your brain after you start a business and understand things better. Please let me know if that happens.

Rotflmao! Yeah, if he ever actually got to the point of starting a business, he'd have to adjust his thinking and beliefs to the point he'd be agreeing with everything we're saying.

originally posted by: Puppylove
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.

So what? There are other jobs than those provided by 'fast food' - you do know that, right? I mean, like, at least 2 or 3 other kinds of jobs. Who knows, maybe even more, like... thousands?

Jobs that can be done on weekends, and evenings, and summer jobs during school breaks, etc etc ad nauseum?

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: panoz77
There's really no good reason for the lowest wage to be anything less than a living one.

Yes, there is. That reason is logic and reality. Logically, and in reality, a 5yr old earning .25/hr picking up rocks does not need to be a 'living wage' job.

There is a purpose for these low skilled low wage jobs - a way for those with no skills or just entering the job market to learn the value of work, their time/labor, and money, as a first step to increasing their skills in order to graduate to higher wage more skilled jobs.

When I was in India, they had 3 or 4 men manning the toll booths at a bridge we had to cross. It took 5 times longer to get through the toll due to the confusion caused by having too many people trying to do the job of one person - but hey, they had full employment.

People like you think that is a good thing.

Also, not everyone is created equal, some people can't do much more than shovel horse crap. Should that person's capabilities prevent them from making a LIVING wage? It's literally the best that they can do.

Yes, they should have to suffer the consequences of their limitations. It is called reality. It is also the entire original purpose of things like ... wait for it ... WELFARE.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: panoz77

When the prices of basic necessities rise to adjust to the pay raise the people living on social security will get shafted.

An excellent point. Such issues exist across the globe; in New Zealand, I never fail to notice how the supporters of min wage increases ignore the most vulnerable people in society. Wage hikes on low skilled jobs drive up groceries' price, and beneficiaries are the worst impacted. Notably, the people who are genuinely unable to work are slapped with higher costs.