 |
 |
Democratic Nominee in 2020
Poll
| No votes (0%) | |||
 | 4 votes (18.18%) | ||
| | 2 votes (9.09%) | ||
| | 1 vote (4.54%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 1 vote (4.54%) | ||
| | 1 vote (4.54%) | ||
| | 8 votes (36.36%) | ||
| | 2 votes (9.09%) | ||
| | 3 votes (13.63%) |
22 members have voted
| January 3rd, 2020 at 1:17:15 PM permalink | |
| AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18213 |
Yeah, no. First minimum wage in 1938 was .25 worth about $4.45 today. MW was NEVER supposed to be what today is called a “living wage.” The President is a fink. |
| January 3rd, 2020 at 1:28:51 PM permalink | |
| rxwine Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 189 Posts: 18764 |
But the idea the employer has decided what the lowest wage should be by what the worker is worth is still generally false. The debate is over what is acceptable. Nowhere is there a stipulation that it can’t be a living wage. You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really? |
| January 3rd, 2020 at 1:53:59 PM permalink | |
| Dalex64 Member since: Mar 8, 2014 Threads: 3 Posts: 3687 |
Really? Every time I look up the original purpose of the minimum wage I see something like "The purpose of the minimum wage was to stabilize the post-depression economy and protect the workers in the labor force. The minimum wage was designed to create a minimum standard of living to protect the health and well-being of employees." You'll need more than your opinion to convince me otherwise. "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
| January 3rd, 2020 at 3:22:22 PM permalink | |
| Shrek Member since: Aug 13, 2019 Threads: 6 Posts: 1635 | I don't think he knows either. 🤣🤣🤣 This is why it's fruitless arguing with libbies. You present them with facts (above), and they completely ignore the facts. It's like you never even said it. 🙄 |
| January 3rd, 2020 at 3:34:33 PM permalink | |
| Mission146 Administrator Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 23 Posts: 4147 |
No, point definitely taken. I was wrong to say that indexing the minimum wage to inflation at the time MW was enacted would solve the problem as the minimum wage would currently be lower, as a result. With that, I have modified my opinion to using inflation as some sort of automatic increase that would at least keep up with whatever it's decided that MW should roughly represent. If I had to pick a spot for it right now, I would probably say something like ten bucks an hour (with gradual increases over 3-4 years until it hits $10) for federal minimum wage and then havce it indexed to inflation thereafter. I could be wrong, but I really don't think the proponents of an immediate increase to $15 an hour really understand the microeconomics of certain semi-rural and small town type areas...but an instantaneous increase to $15/hour could be an unmitigated disaster for those businesses. The minimum wage could be $300/hour and it's not going to positively impact anything if there are no jobs because the businesses can't even break even at those wages. Or worse, we play the same game of Monopoly withy bigger numbers but start out with less relative spending power compared to the bank. All the properties go up for auction in that game of Monopoly, because nobody can afford to buy them outright. "War is the remedy that our enemies have chosen..let us give them all they want." William T. Sherman |
| January 3rd, 2020 at 3:35:05 PM permalink | |
| AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18213 |
More than my opinion? How about the numbers I gave? How about your own statement, a "minimum standard of living?" Not a "living wage." Sorry you cannot understand that now all jobs are supposed to be "living wage." Many are entry level, to get people a start or to fill in gaps they may be having in life. If you want a "living wage" go get skills to justify it. The President is a fink. |
| January 3rd, 2020 at 3:36:37 PM permalink | |
| AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18213 |
No matter what you do, the MW earner will always be on the bottom. The rest is just playing with numbers. $15 Min might work in high cost CA. It would be a disaster in WV. The President is a fink. |
| January 3rd, 2020 at 3:36:58 PM permalink | |
| Mission146 Administrator Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 23 Posts: 4147 |
My concern with your line of reasoning is that there are some people (not necessarily you) who would advance the same positions if the minimum wage were $0.72/hour. "War is the remedy that our enemies have chosen..let us give them all they want." William T. Sherman |
| January 3rd, 2020 at 3:41:52 PM permalink | |
| Mission146 Administrator Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 23 Posts: 4147 |
I would like to think that nobody argues that the MW earner both is, and should be, on the bottom. The main point of contention is exactly what should that bottom look like. Between Government-subsidized housing and maybe a few other odds and ends, I don't have any problem with the notion that MW should be such that a single person can afford utilities, food and a non-leaking roof over their heads. Assuming that the person doesn't have any debts, of course. "War is the remedy that our enemies have chosen..let us give them all they want." William T. Sherman |
| January 3rd, 2020 at 3:45:51 PM permalink | |
| AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18213 |
MW started at $0.25 per hour. Right now most places have to pay $10 per hour to attract decent workers. The market will find the right rate. Back in your and my part of the USA people were glad to get $3.35 when their mill job vanished. You cannot legislate people into a "living wage." Unmotivated people will stay at the bottom. The President is a fink. |