Do you believe Americans who work full time should earn a living wage?

Do you believe Americans who work full time should earn a living wage?


  • Total voters
    56

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
It's really telling how critics are attempting to frame this discussion..

Most, if not all of them automatically assume minimum wage workers are lazy and uneducated

So lets look at the facts:

-5%-10% of American workers hold more than one job

-College graduates make today, on average, $1.60 (men)/$1.80 (women) more than they did in 1973




Compare that to average CEO's earnings:



$819,000 in 1965, $15,175,000 in 2013












@ NoDrama, @ god1, @ Oddball1st, @ spandy, @ Harrekin, where did the money come from that raised average CEO income from $819,000 in 1965 to $15,175,000 in 2013?
@spandy, why did you avoid answering this question I directed at you specifically?

Why don't you admit you believe it's OK for CEO's and top execs to steal the economic growth from the workers like
@OddBall1st did?
 

spandy

Well-Known Member
@spandy, why did you avoid answering this question I directed at you specifically?

Why don't you admit you believe it's OK for CEO's and top execs to steal the economic growth from the workers like
@OddBall1st did?
If there is a company owner and one employee, and that one employee agrees to 10 bucks an hour, how is it theft when he is paid his fucking 10 bucks for every damn hour he works?

What the owner makes is completely irrelevant. Don't like your 10 bucks, then figure out how to make more, rather than trying to just rob the pockets of those who do better at money than you.

It isn't policy that needs changed

14k posts in 5 years, give you 2 minutes per post because of your long winded nature (bullshit runs thick) plus all the time you spend researching why you can't make a fucking dime,and you still fail to realize its YOUR FUCKING FAULT you are not doing better because that is months of free time you've spent bitching and not doing a damn thing about it.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Again, like Oddball1st, you are perfectly OK with stealing from the middle class and giving it to the upper class, and you can't answer any of the substantive questions I've asked you.

Take a look at the results of the poll at the top of the page, who do you think is winning this argument?
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
I explained why raising the mnimum would not affect unemployment in my previous post and don't want to do it again here.

I don't know where you see anything that i wrote that talked about doubling expenses or anything like that. As far as it goes, small businesses don't compete with Walmart. If Walmart wants to they flatten them, they are done. Walmart does it with imported crap. I don't know why people shop there. As far a McD's or burger joints, I don't eat that stuff any more so I'm not up to date on their costs or cost structures. I managed a burger joint when I was a kid. Labor costs ran roughly 20% of gross expenses*. Wages at or slightly more than the current minimum didn't affect it much -- sales and management practices had a much larger effect. I don't know what current margins are but doubt they are higher than what I saw.

The thing is, the minimum wage is not a livable wage. I'd like to see a more serious effort to enable people to move into better paying jobs where there is already serious shortages. And you know what? I bet you'd make a great employee in one of the areas where there is a shortage of workers, like electrician. But you need training, which circles back to how I'd like to see more effort made in this area.

A belly ache of mine is how big business is always crying about how trained labor is not available, yet they lay people off at the drop of a hat. Why would a kid take years of training just so they can get batted about by poorly managed companies? If they want people to want their jobs, companies might try to make the jobs attractive.

Anyway, I don't think your gripe was about my look at the economics of the minimum wage, it has more to do with everything else going on. It sounds to me like you are dissatisfied with where you are at and that is as good a starting point as any for figuring it all out. Good luck.to you.

*edit: it was actually 20% of revenue.
So doubling (or more) the wage would be 40% (or more) of revenue. That's what your "living wage" is, double. That is well more than the amount of profit they make. This means that prices would have to increase accordingly, employees would have to be dismissed, quality of food would have to be lowered, or some combination of them all. You didn't explain why raising the mnimum would not affect unemployment, you just stated it wouldn't. Not the same.
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Again, like Oddball1st, you are perfectly OK with stealing from the middle class and giving it to the upper class, and you can't answer any of the substantive questions I've asked you.

Take a look at the results of the poll at the top of the page, who do you think is winning this argument?
How are they stealing? Your assumption that you're entitled to the business's profits is wrong. If the business falters and loses money, are you going to pay them? No?
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Great summary of the situation. You get it . Others are so stuck in the status quo that they can't see alternatives.
He has no idea of the profitability of his employers, yet assumes they "should" pay him more. He doesn't get it. Neither do you.
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Well I get paid 12 35 an hour but I bring Home 8 dollars an hour after taxes and insurance. And yes there is nothing that pays more than that that I can find. All the jobs that do pay more require you to have experience already to do the job. What I was saying is not true it just because I agreed to work for that price does not mean that's what I am worth. I choose to work for that price because that's what the norm is of what people get paid.
If you can only sell your car, home, or labor for X dollars, then all they are worth is X dollars.
 

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
You're making the claim not providing evidence

You made the claim that the root cause of increasing income inequality and low wages is because "Nixon took the USA to retail and out of industrial", now in order for that claim to hold any weight, you need to provide evidence of it, just like I did

Do you have any evidence that supports your claim or not?

Look at your fucking chart, it says it all.....Major changes, what happen to that chart,...do you want play by play ? What for ? your charts shows it`s end results,...

You would have a clue if we still were industrialized and not retail, but we been on the retail side since the 70`s so you have nothing else but retail to blame for the numbers and he who penned the act to blame for it.....over..
 

NewtoMJ

Well-Known Member
If your company has a hundred workers, and has to pay for Jullio`s, Paco`s, Yen Foo`s and Uba Uba from Nigeria`s health insurance in Arizona because he snuck into the country or deserves too, .. you`re out any bonus or raise.
Yo, this is the most racist post I've seen.
 

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
Paddy, before your charts starts, we were industrialized, we were fine, polluters but making it. Your chart starts around the time of the change and look what it does...retail is all about up pricing to make profits, not raw materials and overhead.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
He has no idea of the profitability of his employers, yet assumes they "should" pay him more. He doesn't get it. Neither do you.
Thanks. Now please don't bother reading my posts. I'm not worthy of you.
 
Last edited:

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
So doubling (or more) the wage would be 40% (or more) of revenue. That's what your "living wage" is, double. That is well more than the amount of profit they make. This means that prices would have to increase accordingly, employees would have to be dismissed, quality of food would have to be lowered, or some combination of them all. You didn't explain why raising the mnimum would not affect unemployment, you just stated it wouldn't. Not the same.
Look, sounding things out isn't the same as comprehension. You didn't understand my post. You can't refute what you don't understand... Well you can, but it isn't very enlightening.
 

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
None of those perpetuate a negative stereotype. Those terms don't belong with your other statement.

Stereotype, looking for minute indications, always ready to be there on the double,.....able to leap tall buildings, cast your verdict and see if I care.....look new, I wont need to be told when I`m being racist,....and you wont need to tell anyone either......
 
Top