ADVERTISEMENT

Raising Min Wage to $15

Yeah, but how much of that is first generation/second generation differences? Furthermore, if you grant amnesty and make them all citizens, then they will eventually realize that they are better off taking the government's money and services than working and getting less overall. And they will have to earn the minimum wage as citizens so they will now be undercut by the new illegals. So the cycle starts anew.

What makes it worse is that we're starting to give many of the benefits of citizenry to illegals. At some point, there will be zero incentive for them to actually become citizens. They'll get all of the benefits with none of the responsibilities.

I'm not saying make them all citizens or give benefits of citizenry. My take is more a leave it the hell alone. Like I said, this country essentially runs on illegal labor.
 
There was a time when anyone working full-time could support themselves. The good old days.
When was that time when anyone who worked one full time job could support themselves no matter what job?
 
Late 60's, early 70's.
In 1960, the nation's largest employers were auto makers GM and Ford, Steel producers, oil companies, and AT&T. These are companies that actually produced things and they did it with American labor. There was also a huge economy of suppliers for these companies. They provided well paying blue collar jobs and there was no expectation that a head of household would work a low wage job as their career.

Now, the top four largest companies are Walmart, Target, Sears, and Kroger. These are resellers that don't produce anything. They sell goods that are made elsewhere with other labor. They have relatively small support economies.

Raising the wages on these companies will do little else but cause inflation. Nothing will be solved because you're treating the symptom not the cause. Bring back a production economy to the U.S. and rebuild the blue collar workforce and you won't have to worry about the minimum wage.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ed4ucf
There was a time when anyone working full-time could support themselves. The good old days.

Yes, the good old days when Europe was still in a post war recovery, China was still a fully Communist 3rd world economy, India was nothing but slums, South America was stuck under the thumb of brutally repressive socialist dictators, and the Middle East was nothing but sand and local tribes.

In other words, the days when there was no globalized economy and America had it really lucky.

How do we get back there?*
 
In 1960, the nation's largest employers were auto makers GM and Ford, Steel producers, oil companies, and AT&T. These are companies that actually produced things and they did it with American labor. There was also a huge economy of suppliers for these companies. They provided well paying blue collar jobs and there was no expectation that a head of household would work a low wage job as their career.

Now, the top four largest companies are Walmart, Target, Sears, and Kroger. These are resellers that don't produce anything. They sell goods that are made elsewhere with other labor. They have relatively small support economies.

Raising the wages on these companies will do little else but cause inflation. Nothing will be solved because you're treating the symptom not the cause. Bring back a production economy to the U.S. and rebuild the blue collar workforce and you won't have to worry about the minimum wage.
I think you're right to some extent, however I don't think the production economy is coming back. I also don't think all increases in the minimum wage lead to inflation, that is really only seen if its raised too much. To me $15 an hour is definitely too much, $10 is probably too much. $15 an hour obviously makes it difficult for some businesses to be successful in good times, let alone a downturn.
 
In 1960, the nation's largest employers were auto makers GM and Ford, Steel producers, oil companies, and AT&T. These are companies that actually produced things and they did it with American labor. There was also a huge economy of suppliers for these companies. They provided well paying blue collar jobs and there was no expectation that a head of household would work a low wage job as their career.

Now, the top four largest companies are Walmart, Target, Sears, and Kroger. These are resellers that don't produce anything. They sell goods that are made elsewhere with other labor. They have relatively small support economies.

Raising the wages on these companies will do little else but cause inflation. Nothing will be solved because you're treating the symptom not the cause. Bring back a production economy to the U.S. and rebuild the blue collar workforce and you won't have to worry about the minimum wage.

I absolutely agree with this. The problem is a lack of good paying jobs (production jobs), and because of that they are trying to artificially create ones in the service/sales sector. That creates two problems. One, the service sector as a whole can more easily pass those costs on. If Target/Walmart/Sears all get hit the same, then Walmart can pass just as much as that cost on as Target does while maintaining their slight cost advantage. They don't have outside influences to contend with, and therefor can set the market. The second problem, is that you will just exacerbate the original problem in manufacturing. Unlike the service/sales sector, manufacturing has to compete against outside influences (china) and can't just pass on the cost. If you truly want to drive a stake through the heart of US manufacturing, than a $15 min wage will do that.
 
So I hire my Supervisors at $15.50/hr currently. If min wage jumped to $15/hr, would I then make their pay $30/hr?

That's my biggest issue with the raise; what about all those making between min wage-$15. Do you go up percentage wise? Or dollar bump up. Or do I tell my supervisors that they are now worth $.50 more then a burger flipper at McD's.

Don't want to make minimum wage, get a skill set/education that makes you worth a living wage. As far as I know, every kid in America has access to free education through High School. I don't care about your situation, if you actually strived to learn in school, and are willing to actually WORK you would walk out of HS earning more than min wage.

This welfare nation we are creating is pitiful. Want government assistance? The government gets a full inventory of your possessions, and if you try to install a 60" TV, they'll make you sell it. Drug test passed randomly every month to get your check. Oh and you want a check? Volunteer, get enrolled in a vocational or educational program, or get a job. Want free food? Here's some rice, beans, and veggies.

Police Blotter in Brunswick GA a couple years ago had a story about a woman who had her car broken into and her $400 purse with her $200 wallet, containing $800 in cash; oh and her food stamps. My net worth is quite a bit above the average, but my wife doesn't own a purse worth more then $50. (Trained her right)

Sorry, little drunk! /rant
 
.....
That's my biggest issue with the raise; what about all those making between min wage-$15. Do you go up percentage wise? Or dollar bump up. Or do I tell my supervisors that they are now worth $.50 more then a burger flipper at McD's.
....

Those supporting the $15/hour minimum wage aren't even considering this....or don't care. Problem is there are a lot of people making $10-15/hour and raising everyone to $15/hour is what is going to cause mass layoffs.

.
 
Those supporting the $15/hour minimum wage aren't even considering this....or don't care. Problem is there are a lot of people making $10-15/hour and raising everyone to $15/hour is what is going to cause mass layoffs.

.
I'm all for more money to regular people but this is my big problem with the min. wage hike as well. It isnt as much about the low skill getting more money as it is basically making them equal with many post-grad entry level type jobs. it just doesnt make any logical sense.

Ideally, the low skill $15/hr would actually be in affect and post-grads would be making a lot more and narrowing the wealth gap. But yea thats not realistic at this point to expect so i cant see much coming from it other than negative side effects.
 
What about the OT exemption for salaried employees that's starting to be looked at? Seen a few articles about this recently and companies like ADP are seeing a lot of concern from companies they do business with.
 
For those that are concerned about skill workers making less money due to pressure to increase the minimum wage think of some "skill" jobs that all of a sudden werent as paid well compared to less skill jobs. And when we talk about skill jobs what about salespeople...skill job or not?

So let's look at that. You are selling high end theater lighting that is price sensitive so the price of goods sold isn't going up.

So your average sale is $50k with the sales person making 15% and he does 10 deals a year giving him $75k a year.

Inflation kicks cost of living up 5% so effectively, he now he is still working just as hard, but he is 5% further down the pole or $3,750 in the dumper. Can your family absorb $300 loss in discretionary income per month? There goes your UCF season tickets and maybe you will catch a game this year by scalping. Also say good bye to a round of golf each month and a dinner out with the wife, but the good news is that the people serving up your sack of crap now will be happier. Oh wait, they won't because most of the people still working those kinds of jobs as adults are miserable f*cks who think the world owes them and is cheating them out of something.
 
So I hire my Supervisors at $15.50/hr currently. If min wage jumped to $15/hr, would I then make their pay $30/hr?

That's my biggest issue with the raise; what about all those making between min wage-$15. Do you go up percentage wise? Or dollar bump up. Or do I tell my supervisors that they are now worth $.50 more then a burger flipper at McD's.

Don't want to make minimum wage, get a skill set/education that makes you worth a living wage. As far as I know, every kid in America has access to free education through High School. I don't care about your situation, if you actually strived to learn in school, and are willing to actually WORK you would walk out of HS earning more than min wage.

This welfare nation we are creating is pitiful. Want government assistance? The government gets a full inventory of your possessions, and if you try to install a 60" TV, they'll make you sell it. Drug test passed randomly every month to get your check. Oh and you want a check? Volunteer, get enrolled in a vocational or educational program, or get a job. Want free food? Here's some rice, beans, and veggies.

Police Blotter in Brunswick GA a couple years ago had a story about a woman who had her car broken into and her $400 purse with her $200 wallet, containing $800 in cash; oh and her food stamps. My net worth is quite a bit above the average, but my wife doesn't own a purse worth more then $50. (Trained her right)

Sorry, little drunk! /rant

Every time someone tries to implement a law based on an incorrect sterotype of people that receive welfare, it ends up being a massive waste and failure. Only five people out of 87,000 welfare recipients tested for drug use in Arizona failed. The arguments that say "well then they just stopped using drugs!" or "they jut cleaned it out of their system before the test!" are desperate attempts to maintain an incorrect worldview to support long-held false beliefs about the poor in society.

There is no massive society of welfare leeches out there looking for a free ride. There are some abusers, but by and large those that remain on economic support have other challenges keeping them from getting out of their situation.
 
Every time someone tries to implement a law based on an incorrect sterotype of people that receive welfare, it ends up being a massive waste and failure. Only five people out of 87,000 welfare recipients tested for drug use in Arizona failed. The arguments that say "well then they just stopped using drugs!" or "they jut cleaned it out of their system before the test!" are desperate attempts to maintain an incorrect worldview to support long-held false beliefs about the poor in society.

There is no massive society of welfare leeches out there looking for a free ride. There are some abusers, but by and large those that remain on economic support have other challenges keeping them from getting out of their situation.
You must provide sources. Or are you are a socioeconomic expert too?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jetsaholic
Every time someone tries to implement a law based on an incorrect sterotype of people that receive welfare, it ends up being a massive waste and failure. Only five people out of 87,000 welfare recipients tested for drug use in Arizona failed. The arguments that say "well then they just stopped using drugs!" or "they jut cleaned it out of their system before the test!" are desperate attempts to maintain an incorrect worldview to support long-held false beliefs about the poor in society.

There is no massive society of welfare leeches out there looking for a free ride. There are some abusers, but by and large those that remain on economic support have other challenges keeping them from getting out of their situation.


[roll][roll][roll]
 
Every time someone tries to implement a law based on an incorrect sterotype of people that receive welfare, it ends up being a massive waste and failure. Only five people out of 87,000 welfare recipients tested for drug use in Arizona failed. The arguments that say "well then they just stopped using drugs!" or "they jut cleaned it out of their system before the test!" are desperate attempts to maintain an incorrect worldview to support long-held false beliefs about the poor in society.

There is no massive society of welfare leeches out there looking for a free ride. There are some abusers, but by and large those that remain on economic support have other challenges keeping them from getting out of their situation.

Well then, drug testing of welfare recipients shouldn't be a problem if none of them take drugs. You can take all those legitimate welfare recipients and they'd probably agree.
 
Drug testing would be a complete waste of money and time. The person with a pain pill prescription can wash them down with bud lights, but the person who smokes a joint is screwed. Who suffers? The kids.
 
Drug testing would be a complete waste of money and time. The person with a pain pill prescription can wash them down with bud lights, but the person who smokes a joint is screwed. Who suffers? The kids.
OMG, save the children. Forgetting about slippery slope and all, I'd rather them show that they are trying to be productive to society in order to get that check. If they're all drugged out but are cleaning the side of the roads, give em money. If they're sitting at home playing xbox, screw them. Or partying every night and popping out kids while being unable to hold a job due to the effects of alcohol and drugs on their life. Screw her too (damn welfare queen in my family who posts all of her exploits on facebook).
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT