Trump's Second and Third year in office

Quote: darkoz

But those are tip jobs.

Her salary from the restaurant is not $50k a year.

I doubt your airport bartender is paid $70k as salary. Without tips their income is quite lower i imagine

So wages need minimum if the only way to survive is with accompanying tips

Why? The system ain’t broken. What’s the difference if someone makes $10k salary + $60k tips versus $70k salary + $0 tips?

Quote: RS

Why? The system ain’t broken. What’s the difference if someone makes $10k salary + $60k tips versus $70k salary + $0 tips?

Because there are plenty of non-tip jobs NOT making $70k

U do understand that most of America does not have $70k plus wages only jobs

Quote: darkoz

Everywhere I go people talk about how difficult it is to pay their bills.

If that is the case, why object to stricter enforcement of our longstanding immigration laws?

Quote: SOOPOO

I live in Buffalo. Just had 6 of us go out to dinner. I'm a stingy tipper. Total bill was $480. My part was $160. Tip $25. So just my table for this waitress was probably $85. Let's say she had just 4 such tables for her entire shift. I think that breaks $100k per year but I'm a tad lazy right now.... My local pizza/italian place turns over tables every 60-90 minutes. Cut the bill to $160 and that's still $25 a table. Easily a dozen such bills for a waitress. That surpasses $50k without batting an eyelash, remembering they also get a small hourly wage as well.

Edit.... forgot I have a friend who serves drinks at an airport bar. She told us she makes $70k a year..... less than 40 hours a week....

thanks for contributing to my argument as to why we should be tipping less In restaurants.

Quote: darkoz

Because there are plenty of non-tip jobs NOT making $70k U do understand that most of America does not have $70k plus wages only jobs

Facts and figures? Or we are just going to get more of, "Everywhere I go"?

Quote: RS

Why should a business have to have enough enguiniety(sp?) to pay employees above some arbitrary minimum wage?

Because if they don't, they won't be a business for much longer. As much as we don't like government interference, minimum wage laws are among the smallest interference they have with businesses

Quote: RS

Let’s try another way of explaining how absolutely retarded minimum wage is. Instead, imagine Best Buy selling laptops for $400 each. I go to Best Buy and hey, I want to buy a laptop. I get a laptop, Best Buy makes money, all is well. Oh but wait, government steps in and says “you can’t sell laptops for $400! You can only sell them for $200 maximum!” I, the consumer might initially say, “hell yeah, laptops are cheaper, this is awesome!” Unfortunately, Best Buy can no longer afford to sell laptops because their margin is too low (or possibly negative) now. So they stop selling laptops.

So what, should Best Buy get enough ingenuity to be able to sell laptops for $200/ea? Omegalul

There actually are lots of price control laws throughout the country. I disagree with almost all of them, but they really don't effect me in any way other than an ideological disagreement. All of them (minimum wage included) take market forces into account.

Quote: SanchoPanza

Facts and figures? Or we are just going to get more of, "Everywhere I go"?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thestreet.com/amp/personal-finance/average-income-in-us-14852178

Average income in US is $46k+

Its a shame you need the link. I see all around me the poverty of working class individuals in this country.

But I supplied you the link anyway

(Irony: the same people complaining about laziness in the work market are too lazy to google facts and figures

Quote: billryan

Over on Fox, longtime trump friend Andrew Napolitano is accusing Trump of unleashing racial hatred. He'll probably lose his job over it.

It would far more helpful to have accurate comments.

***UPDATE: Napolitano is doubling down on his misleading, one-sided analysis. On Monday, he told Shepard Smith, “There’s ample evidence — this doesn’t require too much analysis — to indict the president.”
Napolitano also speculated that Trump may already be an “unindicted co-conspirator.” Again, Napolitano did not bother to point out just how absurd and desperate (as explained below) this all is. ***End Update

Appearing with Shepard Smith on Wednesday, Fox News’s Judge Andrew Napolitano continued his winning streak of being the worst and most dishonest legal analyst on television not named Jeffrey Toobin. Keep in mind that this is the same Napolitano who told us back in January the Mueller report would prove the Trump campaign “had a connection to Russian intelligence.”

This is the same Napolitano who told us he expected Donald Trump Jr. to be indicted. This is the same Napolitano who told us Trump committed a felony and will be indicted over what is, at worst, a campaign finance violation that might result in a fine.” breitbart

Apreciating that the source might not be your cup of tea, here is a more friendly one:

“And then there is Judge Andrew Napolitano, the Libertarian Party voter and legal commentator, who seems to be disappearing from Fox News altogether as he’s grown more and more critical of the Trump administration and its treatment of the Mueller report.
Fox News hasn’t dispatched with Napolitano altogether, of course—one presumes he has some kind of contract with the network—and Napolitano still makes more regular appearances on Fox Business." vanityfair

Quote: darkoz

Because there are plenty of non-tip jobs NOT making $70k

U do understand that most of America does not have $70k plus wages only jobs

What's your point? Some jobs are better than others? What a revelation!

It doesn't need to be any more complicated than this:

Person A: "I'd like to work for you. What would you pay me?"
Person B: "I can pay $10/hour. Is that good for you?"
Person A: "Sounds good to me. When can I start?"

Here's another example:

Person A: "I'd like to work for you. What would you pay me?"
Person B: "I'll pay you $2/hour, but since this is a restaurant, you're almost certainly going to get tips [unless you're terrible]. Is that good?"
Person A: "Sounds good to me. When can I start?"

Quote: darkoz

Because there are plenty of non-tip jobs NOT making $70k

U do understand that most of America does not have $70k plus wages only jobs

They have the opportunity, but I wouldn't expect someone who rolled over for a number of years to understand that.

Quote: TomG

Because if they don't, they won't be a business for much longer. As much as we don't like government interference, minimum wage laws are among the smallest interference they have with businesses

Can you describe how it wouldn't be a business for much longer from an economic/business stance? A business profiting $120k/year decides to hire employees and pays them $40k/year. But, somehow, because they don't have enough ingenuity to pay $80k/year, the business is going to fail????

Quote: TomG

There actually are lots of price control laws throughout the country. I disagree with almost all of them, but they really don't effect me in any way other than an ideological disagreement. All of them (minimum wage included) take market forces into account.

So you disagree with price control on selling products. But you're fine with price control when it comes to selling your time?

Quote: RS

Why should a business have to have enough enguiniety(sp?) to pay employees above some arbitrary minimum wage? If both parties agree & consent, who the hell is the government to interfere?

Because low income people are more vulnerable to be manipulated by unscrupulous and not as flexible as you might imagine. That's how people were manipulated in the past in boarding house situations where wages were just enough to cover the place to sleep. Endless cycle. If you have even a small family you often can't afford to make rash decisions quit your job. Maybe as a single man, young and good health you can tell your employer to toss it and walk at will.

Quote: rxwine

Because low income people are more vulnerable to be manipulated by unscrupulous and not as flexible as you might imagine. That's how people were manipulated in the past in boarding house situations where wages were just enough to cover the place to sleep. Endless cycle. If you have even a small family you often can't afford to make rash decisions quit your job. Maybe as a single man, young and good health you can tell your employer to toss it and walk at will.

So the problem is manipulation by employers, right? Okay, then make laws that address employers who unfairly manipulate their employees. If these laws already exist (I have a feeling they do), then minimum wage isn't necessary. If they don't exist, then add them and get rid of minimum wage.

Quote: RS

So the problem is manipulation by employers, right? Okay, then make laws that address employers who unfairly manipulate their employees. If these laws already exist (I have a feeling they do), then minimum wage isn't necessary. If they don't exist, then add them and get rid of minimum wage.

Um, yeah, lol.

The laws are called minimum wage

Quote: darkoz

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thestreet.com/amp/personal-finance/average-income-in-us-14852178 Average income in US is $46k+
Its a shame you need the link. I see all around me the poverty of working class individuals in this country.But I supplied you the link anyway (Irony: the same people complaining about laziness in the work market are too lazy to google facts and figures

Talk about "lazy." The $46,000 figure is limited to the diminishing category of "wage and salary workers."

"The median household income in 2017 was $61,372, which is a 1.8% increase from 2016. It’s also the first annual increase since 2007, after which the Great Recession of 2008 left millions of Americans without work." investopedia

Quote: rxwine

Because low income people are more vulnerable to be manipulated by unscrupulous and not as flexible as you might imagine. That's how people were manipulated in the past in boarding house situations where wages were just enough to cover the place to sleep. Endless cycle. If you have even a small family you often can't afford to make rash decisions quit your job.

Sounds like old-fashion socialism.

Not only do some people beat down on the welfare people, they can't even stand seeing people work at low wage jobs without more of a beat down.

It's why the right gets the party of mean designation.

Quote: rxwine

Not only do some people beat down on the welfare people, they can't even stand seeing people work at low wage jobs without more of a beat down.
It's why the right gets the party of mean designation.

In reality, it is a lot more descriptive of the leftist open-immigration movement. Lower wages are clearly a valid consequence for the apparently automatic Democratic votes of the vast swarms of illegal immigrants.

Quote: SOOPOO

Face..... MAILMEN?

Most spend several years (close to ten) with a p/t position that only guarantees 2-4 working days a month. It's a big struggle getting any sort of security unless you happen upon a place so bad no one wants to stay. That's how I got in in just 2 years, and also why im so pleasant and cheerful these days.

But if you do get in, the combat vet has lines of coke right on his desk, which is nice after your 57th consecutive 14hr day of nonstop manual labor that you can only complete by both running to every stop and skipping every one of your mandatory breaks.

My money problems have indeed vanished, as 150hr paychecks are wont to do. Now I just need to figure out how to obtain the rest of the surgeries, how to repair the broken relationships, and how to shrink myself of the PTSD this has all caused.

For many people, I'm one of "the lucky ones". I'm Boz's "hard work and a dream". I'm a "success story".

Are you happy for me?

Quote: RS

Can you describe how it wouldn't be a business for much longer from an economic/business stance? A business profiting $120k/year decides to hire employees and pays them $40k/year. But, somehow, because they don't have enough ingenuity to pay $80k/year, the business is going to fail????

A business that can only afford three minimum wage workers, but instead hires six will most likely fail. Permission for the business to pay their workers $3.75 per hour isn't going to change that.

Quote: RS

So you disagree with price control on selling products. But you're fine with price control when it comes to selling your time?

I disagree with the ideologically of price controls, including minimum wage. From virtually any other perspective it really doesn't effect me at all. And anyone who says they would be better off if a business was allowed to pay less than $7.25 is just being silly.

My perspective is always that people should be able to do whatever they want, so long as it doesn't effect what I want to do. Working cooperatively to create a community is included in that. Which is why I also support states rights. Which should be the heart of minimum wage. Everything is a trade-off. There really can't be any true purity.

Quote: Face

Most spend several years (close to ten) with a p/t position that only guarantees 2-4 working days a month. It's a big struggle getting any sort of security unless you happen upon a place so bad no one wants to stay. That's how I got in in just 2 years, and also why im so pleasant and cheerful these days.

But if you do get in, the combat vet has lines of coke right on his desk, which is nice after your 57th consecutive 14hr day of nonstop manual labor that you can only complete by both running to every stop and skipping every one of your mandatory breaks.

My money problems have indeed vanished, as 150hr paychecks are wont to do. Now I just need to figure out how to obtain the rest of the surgeries, how to repair the broken relationships, and how to shrink myself of the PTSD this has all caused.

For many people, I'm one of "the lucky ones". I'm Boz's "hard work and a dream". I'm a "success story".

Are you happy for me?

I don't know if I'm happy or not. Whine a little more and maybe my mood will change some more.😀

Quote: darkoz

Um, yeah, lol.

The laws are called minimum wage

I’m saying make laws that go after actual manipulation and not this bogus minimum wage thing. Unless you somehow think that an employee willing to work for less than some arbitrary amount is manipulation...?

Maybe you should try a smaller PO. It's like a shed.

Quote:

Shannon Mitchell works in this tiny place as its clerk, and she says that she has the coolest job in the world. She has a phone, a computer, an air conditioner, a fluorescent tube for light, and a pair of tiny sliding screen doors to keep out the giant horseflies. Everything that she needs is obviously within reach. The job is quiet, as you might expect, although she does get occasional visits from people from all over the world who stop by to get something postmarked. Shannon has a stack of Ochopee Post Office post cards on the counter, pre-stamped both domestic and international, for when the tour buses pull up.

If nature calls, there's a Subway about three miles west, and Skunk Ape Research Headquarters is a mile east.
The person who delivers mail from this post office has a daily route that stretches across three counties, 132 miles long.

Quote: MaxPen

I don't know if I'm happy or not. Whine a little more and maybe my mood will change some more.😀

Not intending to whine, rather giving a view into the lower class y'all seem to despise so much, and pointing out that "help wanted" signs hardly tell a full story.

Quote: TomG

A business that can only afford three minimum wage workers, but instead hires six will most likely fail. Permission for the business to pay their workers $3.75 per hour isn't going to change that.



I disagree with the ideologically of price controls, including minimum wage. From virtually any other perspective it really doesn't effect me at all. And anyone who says they would be better off if a business was allowed to pay less than $7.25 is just being silly.

My perspective is always that people should be able to do whatever they want, so long as it doesn't effect what I want to do. Working cooperatively to create a community is included in that. Which is why I also support states rights. Which should be the heart of minimum wage. Everything is a trade-off. There really can't be any true purity.

You didn’t answer my question. I’ll rephrase it: If a business can function fine by paying 2 employees $10/hr, what makes you think they’ll fail because they don’t have the ingenuity to pay them $20/hr? It should be obvious that a business that is thriving isn’t going to fail (based on what they pay their employees). Common sense.


I’m not arguing about the price of minimum wage, I’m saying the concept is simply terrible. Unless the minimum wage is $0.00, then it’s too high. Wages should be whatever the prospective employee and employer agree upon.



Wait wtf? You disagree with price controls and minimum wage, yet you’re seemingly arguing in favor of having a minimum wage?

Quote: RS

You didn’t answer my question. I’ll rephrase it: If a business can function fine by paying 2 employees $10/hr, what makes you think they’ll fail because they don’t have the ingenuity to pay them $20/hr? It should be obvious that a business that is thriving isn’t going to fail (based on what they pay their employees). Common sense.


I’m not arguing about the price of minimum wage, I’m saying the concept is simply terrible. Unless the minimum wage is $0.00, then it’s too high. Wages should be whatever the prospective employee and employer agree upon.



Wait wtf? You disagree with price controls and minimum wage, yet you’re seemingly arguing in favor of having a minimum wage?

So u must be for de-unionization.

No way unions allow employers to just make agreements for lowest possible wages with employees

For that matter why should any employer offer health insurance or pensions?

We should probably eliminate need for unemployment insurance deductions as well as all the rest

The last couple pages are exploding the myth of the rightwing's respect for the working man (or woman).

Quote: rxwine

The last couple pages are exploding the myth of the rightwing's respect for the working man (or woman).

I've been aware of the GOPs lack of empathy for as long as I can remember. It is the sole trait that caused me to hold a "destroy at all costs" policy towards it. Specifically the anti gay stuff of the Bush years.

I stood then because I knew then.

Too bad y'all are ridiculous about guns. I like health care and legal drugs, too =p

Quote: SanchoPanza

Talk about "lazy." The $46,000 figure is limited to the diminishing category of "wage and salary workers."

"The median household income in 2017 was $61,372, which is a 1.8% increase from 2016. It’s also the first annual increase since 2007, after which the Great Recession of 2008 left millions of Americans without work." investopedia

Median household income would include 2, 3, 4 jobs under the same roof. If there are kids in the household, they will need childcare if there's more than 1 full-time job among 2 people. Childcare is going to cost more per hour than minimum wage jobs currently pay.

More importantly, median income would include revenue from all sources, which would count the income from.assets and investments of the very rich.

What that figure would really prove, with the historically high gap.between the top 1% or 5% or 10% (pick your income breakdown) and the rest of us, is that there is more wealth AVAILABLE, since the median went up, but it proves nothing when arguing that the middle class or poor are making enough money to get by. They aren't. It's not available to them. Their wages are flat and have paid for increasingly less for 40 years now.

Quote: RS

Wait wtf? You disagree with price controls and minimum wage, yet you’re seemingly arguing in favor of having a minimum wage?

My position is that eliminating minimum wage laws will have virtually no impact -- market value for vast majority of labor is already over minimum wage. Most businesses that try to claim the government is hurting them with these laws are much more likely to be hurting themselves by relying on a business model that can't afford $7.25 per hour.

Trump retweeting video from fed up Baltimore residents showing the trash in their city warms my heart.

Can’t say I thought I would see anything like this but taking the narrative back is a good first step.

What Dems have done by taking AA voters for granted is an American embarrassment. Hopefully more start seeing that Dems are not the only party out there and people like Cummings don’t care about them.

Quote: TomG

My position is that eliminating minimum wage laws will have virtually no impact -- market value for vast majority of labor is already over minimum wage. Most businesses that try to claim the government is hurting them with these laws are much more likely to be hurting themselves by relying on a business model that can't afford $7.25 per hour.

I think that’s really the idea behind minimum wage is to set an absolute floor. You set the floor and then businesses go above the floor by some amount in order to attract employees.

If you set the floor at zero, then it really doesn’t require an employer to pay all that much to go above the floor. More than that, it makes collusion easier within a labor market in which labor supply greatly exceeds labor demand. While that may not currently be the case nationally, though arguably it still is, it is certainly the case in some microeconomies. (Unemployment rates)

Even with all of that, if you index the minimum wage to inflation, and I believe I’ve discussed this before, the actual spending power vis-a-vis minimum wage is substantially lower than at other times. Moreover, there are many jobs that may pay more than minimum wage, but less than what minimum wage represented in the past after indexing for inflation.

Despite these facts, I’m basically fine with where minimum wage is right now for reasons that I’ve already detailed. In brief, a significant increase to minimum wage will find itself represented in a significant increase to prices such that the wage increases will likely be MORE than covered. In other words, many companies will financially benefit while the standard of living for many, who see bigger numbers on their paychecks, actually gets worse. That’s not to mention the reduction in spending power that will be suffered when minimum wage goes up, prices go up, but their wages STAY THE SAME because they were already making more than the new minimum wage.

Also, assuming roughly equal increases to prices, those individuals currently making more than the current minimum wage, but less than the new one, will likely see a lower percentage increase to their wages relative to the increase in prices.

In other words, it makes the absolute poorest maybe ever so slightly less poor. Maybe. They probably also have it worse. Those who do not see wage increases also relative to the price increases will have it worse, so that probably pretty much represents a big percentage of the middle class. The extremely rich will continue to be extremely rich. Anyway, it does set a floor, so to speak, but many people will just end up either on or much closer to that floor.

I think there are a number of other, and better, potential solutions to level the proverbial playing field...but conservatives wouldn’t like those, either.

Quote: darkoz

So u must be for de-unionization.

No way unions allow employers to just make agreements for lowest possible wages with employees

For that matter why should any employer offer health insurance or pensions?

We should probably eliminate need for unemployment insurance deductions as well as all the rest

I don’t care much for unions. Don’t know much about them, TBH. As far as I can tell, they’re bad.

An employer can offer health insurance, pensions, a work car, or whatever else the hell they may offer. Why do you care what a business and prospective employee agree upon?

Quote: TomG

My position is that eliminating minimum wage laws will have virtually no impact -- market value for vast majority of labor is already over minimum wage. Most businesses that try to claim the government is hurting them with these laws are much more likely to be hurting themselves by relying on a business model that can't afford $7.25 per hour.

You have more faith in the market than I do. For instance, you need laws to prevent employers from removing their older higher paid workers and replacing them with younger lesser paid workers even when there is no particular work problem with the older worker. If it's not against the law it will be done to someone to make an extra buck.

Quote: rxwine

The last couple pages are exploding the myth of the rightwing's respect for the working man (or woman).

Virtue signaling at its finest. Nicely done!

Quote: TomG

My position is that eliminating minimum wage laws will have virtually no impact -- market value for vast majority of labor is already over minimum wage. Most businesses that try to claim the government is hurting them with these laws are much more likely to be hurting themselves by relying on a business model that can't afford $7.25 per hour.

So if we get rid of minimum wage, then there’d be virtually no impact. Okay, that sounds reasonable.

Now let’s say we raise the minimum wage. Do you really think McDonalds is going to keep & pay their employees $20/hr? Or are they going to have one guy running the store with 10 robots doing everything else?


Changing things doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It’s not like all of a sudden everyone’s going to be making $20+/hr and we have peace & happiness. When prices go up, there’s going to be a response. The business may fail because they can’t meet some dumb law. Maybe they’ll lay off employees (meaning more people are out of a job, those that do have a job are going to be expected to work harder, and service would likely go down). That company that should be expanding may not be able to do so anymore because they simply can’t afford it with $15-20+/hr wages.

Quote: beachbumbabs

Quote: SanchoPanza

Talk about "lazy." The $46,000 figure is limited to the diminishing category of "wage and salary workers."

"The median household income in 2017 was $61,372, which is a 1.8% increase from 2016. It’s also the first annual increase since 2007, after which the Great Recession of 2008 left millions of Americans without work." investopedia

Median household income would include 2, 3, 4 jobs under the same roof. If there are kids in the household, they will need childcare if there's more than 1 full-time job among 2 people. Childcare is going to cost more per hour than minimum wage jobs currently pay.

More importantly, median income would include revenue from all sources, which would count the income from.assets and investments of the very rich.

What that figure would really prove, with the historically high gap.between the top 1% or 5% or 10% (pick your income breakdown) and the rest of us, is that there is more wealth AVAILABLE, since the median went up, but it proves nothing when arguing that the middle class or poor are making enough money to get by. They aren't. It's not available to them. Their wages are flat and have paid for increasingly less for 40 years now.

Yep, USA was getting destroyed thru bad policy decisions. The current guy in office is trying to do something about it. Probably to late. Especially with all the resistance from the left and their entitlement mentality.

Quote: Boz

Trump retweeting video from fed up Baltimore residents showing the trash in their city warms my heart.

Can’t say I thought I would see anything like this but taking the narrative back is a good first step.

What Dems have done by taking AA voters for granted is an American embarrassment. Hopefully more start seeing that Dems are not the only party out there and people like Cummings don’t care about them.

Orkin's Top 50 Rattiest Cities

Baltimore came in number 9.

Hmmm, what do the top ten rattiest cities have in common?



They all have mayors who are democrats

Quote: RS

Virtue signaling at its finest. Nicely done!

Noting that someone is virtue signaling is also a form of virtue signaling.

However, now I am virtue signaling your notification of virtue signaling.

Quote: Boz

Trump retweeting video from fed up Baltimore residents showing the trash in their city warms my heart. Can’t say I thought I would see anything like this but taking the narrative back is a good first step. What Dems have done by taking AA voters for granted is an American embarrassment. Hopefully more start seeing that Dems are not the only party out there and people like Cummings don’t care about them.

Are the Baltimore rats carrying bubonic like the Los Angeles rats?

Quote: RS

Now let’s say we raise the minimum wage. Do you really think McDonalds is going to keep & pay their employees $20/hr? Or are they going to have one guy running the store with 10 robots doing everything else?

Bernie Sanders cuts staff hours to pay for $15 min, wage. Eco 101

This is what happened after NYC raised the minimum wage to $15: AEI

"...the survey also reported that “76.50% of respondents report reducing employee hours and 36.30% eliminated jobs in 2018 in response to mandated wage increases.” ...December 2018 restaurant jobs were down by almost 3,000 (and by 1.64%) from the previous December,"

"...while 47% said they’ll eliminate jobs in 2019."

Quote: Fleaswatter

They all have mayors who are democrats

Like these?: 100 most dangerous places to live in the U.S.


"What you look at is what would a third world country look like." - Bernie Sanders in Baltimore

My youngest son one summer was required (by his mom and me) to get a job. Was tighter job market than now. Got one at Walmart stocking shelves. Went to work everyday, my recollection is he was making $8 an hour, he quickly LEARNED that working a manual labor minimum wage type job sucked. VALUABLE lesson. Went to college. Got some sort of computer degree. $50k+ immediately upon graduation. Maybe if minimum wage is higher that will strike MOTIVATION to get education or skills to make more.

There are kids wanting to do ‘volunteer’ work. Or ‘unpaid internships’. Many are no longer available because of minimum wage law interpretation.
Let the market determine minimum wage. Democrat philosophy is businesses are bad and are in existence to hurt people. Republicans believe businesses are what create jobs that help people.
Face——. I am happy for you if YOU are happy for you! I would like to think that you have evaluated the pros and cons of your job, and have decided the pros outweigh the cons. I won’t go into details, but I’m sure many might be jealous of my salary, but few my actual job! How many have worked 24 hours straight? (I of course take bathroom breaks when needed!). Point is I made the determination that the salary outweighed the negatives.

Quote: SOOPOO

How many have worked 24 hours straight?

24h+ many times.

Quote: SOOPOO

My youngest son one summer was required (by his mom and me) to get a job. Was tighter job market than now. Got one at Walmart stocking shelves. Went to work everyday, my recollection is he was making $8 an hour, he quickly LEARNED that working a manual labor minimum wage type job sucked. VALUABLE lesson. Went to college. Got some sort of computer degree. $50k+ immediately upon graduation. Maybe if minimum wage is higher that will strike MOTIVATION to get education or skills to make more.

There are kids wanting to do ‘volunteer’ work. Or ‘unpaid internships’. Many are no longer available because of minimum wage law interpretation.
Let the market determine minimum wage. Democrat philosophy is businesses are bad and are in existence to hurt people. Republicans believe businesses are what create jobs that help people.
Face——. I am happy for you if YOU are happy for you! I would like to think that you have evaluated the pros and cons of your job, and have decided the pros outweigh the cons. I won’t go into details, but I’m sure many might be jealous of my salary, but few my actual job! How many have worked 24 hours straight? (I of course take bathroom breaks when needed!). Point is I made the determination that the salary outweighed the negatives.

I've worked 24+ hours straight several times for what I am sure is a lot less than you made doing it. Of course, I'm not a doctor.

Yeah, working minimum wage level manual labor jobs sucks. I think the idea behind providing something that at least approaches a wage that ensures the minimum required for basic survival is that not everyone will have the intellectual capacity to get a college degree and a job making substantially more than that. Even if we assume that everyone has such capacity, then the job markets for those types of jobs would be flooded with labor supply greatly exceeding labor demand thereby causing those jobs to pay substantially less. Perhaps even something closely resembling minimum wage...which is why there is a minimum wage.

I think it's pretty tough to state the Democratic or Republican viewpoints so simply. I think that all but the most extreme on both sides understand that the relationship between employer and employee is a symbiotic one, so minimum wage is just a way to ensure a certain minimum balance. Minimum Wage (and certain other labor laws) did not always exist and I should assume did not come into being because employers were treating employees fairly 100% of the time.

I don't see how what would happen if we were to get rid of MW laws entirely is not painfully obvious. It's usually called, "Slavery," for anyone curious. Alternatively, there were situations more in line with, "Indentured servitude," one can research the ways that certain industrial mills operated a century ago for examples of that. It also still happens today with certain, "Under the table," work. I've seen it myself in the hotel industry, of course.

My argument against min wage as a small.business owner is.

I currently pay my 4 employees between 13-19 an hour for jobs that are "skilled" positions. If they raise min wage to 15 then I am going to have to pay my people 21-27 an hour. Why would a skilled position work for min wage. 1 employee in my industry can only process so many claims in 1 day so I am in the position like some places where I can eliminate a position to keep costs the same. I am also not pulling in 150k a year where as a well paid person I could take less money to make up the difference. My only way to stay a float would be to raise my prices. Instead of charging clients 5% I would have to raise prices to 7 or 8%. My clients are not in the position to raise their rates as the insurance companies are the ones to set their payments so they will be looking at ways to

Right now I am already competing against companies in India with low rates. I am would certainly start losing clients to offshore companies. I get emails every week from offshore companies about hiring them to do my work. I guess I could lay off 3 people and out source myself.

Quote: Mission146

I don't see how what would happen if we were to get rid of MW laws entirely is not painfully obvious. It's usually called, "Slavery," for anyone curious. Alternatively, there were situations more in line with, "Indentured servitude," one can research the ways that certain industrial mills operated a century ago for examples of that. It also still happens today with certain, "Under the table," work. I've seen it myself in the hotel industry, of course.

Some people already work 2 jobs with minimum wage to get ahead or stay ahead. Can't imagine where it gets even more difficult with less than minimum wage. How many jobs can you work? How many hours can you work?

I agree with almost all of your points, Mission, except I do NOT believe a single minimum wage 40 hour per week job must be enough to support a family, or even an individual for that matter. I think I've averaged 50-55 hours a week for the last 35 years. I keep reading here about a bunch of 'side jobs' many members here do.

I think you have to re-think your slavery comment.....

Quote: GWAE

I guess I could lay off 3 people and out source myself.

The point is, the few people that
are left making $30K a year
minimum wage flipping burgers,
the point is that they have enough
money for their illegal drugs and
other hobbies.

Quote: GWAE

My argument against min wage as a small.business owner is.

I currently pay my 4 employees between 13-19 an hour for jobs that are "skilled" positions. If they raise min wage to 15 then I am going to have to pay my people 21-27 an hour. Why would a skilled position work for min wage. 1 employee in my industry can only process so many claims in 1 day so I am in the position like some places where I can eliminate a position to keep costs the same. I am also not pulling in 150k a year where as a well paid person I could take less money to make up the difference. My only way to stay a float would be to raise my prices. Instead of charging clients 5% I would have to raise prices to 7 or 8%. My clients are not in the position to raise their rates as the insurance companies are the ones to set their payments so they will be looking at ways to

I'm obviously in favor of there being some sort of minimum wage, but I completely agree with your argument vis-a-vis a drastic and immediate increase to minimum wage. It's going to be difficult for anyone to increase the wages of such workers (as a percentage) commensurate with the percentage increase to the minimum wage. While that happens, base goods (the labor providing which often goes to minimum wage level employees---think grocery stores) would have to increase in order to keep profits consistent for the employer.

My concern for your employees would be that the increase to prices, as a percentage, would increase by a greater amount than the increase to their current wages. If that were to happen, they would end up being worse off despite the fact that they technically make more money. Even then, now you have to start think tax brackets and things of that nature which effectively serve to reduce the percentage increase in what they are earning.

Quote:

Right now I am already competing against companies in India with low rates. I am would certainly start losing clients to offshore companies. I get emails every week from offshore companies about hiring them to do my work. I guess I could lay off 3 people and out source myself.

That's precisely what would happen here in the event of a complete absence of minimum wage. Jobs would simply go to the lowest bidder who is competent to do the job. Not completely starving is better than completely starving. With that, you would see a very fast sprint to the bottom as far as employee earnings are concerned.

Quote: SOOPOO

I agree with almost all of your points, Mission, except I do NOT believe a single minimum wage 40 hour per week job must be enough to support a family, or even an individual for that matter. I think I've averaged 50-55 hours a week for the last 35 years. I keep reading here about a bunch of 'side jobs' many members here do.

I think you have to re-think your slavery comment.....

I absolutely agree with you that a single minimum wage job should not absolutely be enough to support a family. Even then, there are other social safety nets in place that at least act as an aid. I'm thinking in terms of public housing, food stamps, medicare, welfare, etc.

If the question is, "Should someone be able to afford to be a homeowner (or private renter) and cover all bills to be able to support a family on minimum wage alone?" My answer to that question would be, "No."

I do think an individual should make enough with minimum wage in order to support himself/herself, but there might be some who disagree with that perspective. I also think that the person in question should be provided with some sort of health coverage, but I know that there are those who disagree with that.

In any event, I think we are actually pretty close to agreement as relates the matter of the current MW.

Slavery

Maybe, "Slavery," was excessive, but certainly indentured servitude. It doesn't even necessarily have to be under the table work. Here's an example of the employment practices at one hotel I worked for certain housekeepers:

1.) They made minimum wage.
2.) They lived in rooms at the hotel at a cost of $25/night.

Okay, so with a 40 hour workweek (it was less) and at $7.25/hour (at the time) they made a total of $290/week before you get into your medicare and social security deductions. Meanwhile, they were paying $175/week for the room, assuming single occupancy.

You'll have to take my word for this, but it does NOT cost anywhere near $175/week for someone to occupy a hotel room that is not being serviced by housekeeping. The owner of the hotel was making an absolute killing on this arrangement, and in rare circumstances, not even losing opportunity costs because people would occasionally be asked to go stay elsewhere in the hotel (they wouldn't be charged for the room for that night, obviously) in the event there was going to be a sellout.

In the meantime, the person would be left with well under $100/week for food and any other necessities after you account for the certain unavoidable payroll deductions.

The only way out of that situation would be to find another job. Also, public housing would cost less per month (even with utilities), but if you moved out, you were probably going to get your hours cut in favor of another live-in and would not really be able to afford your public housing costs. When I say, "Hours cut," I mean you would be working one day per week.

So, there was obviously no way to save money to get out of the situation. Public housing was not an option. The only way out would be to find a different job. Of course, you would have to stay at the hotel long enough to save enough money to be able to rent a place somewhere else. In this scenario, you would be shown gratitude for your time at the hotel by having your room rate increased to the rack rate...unless he really liked you (or it was an extremely slow season) in which case you could remain at the $25/night for as long as you wanted. Why? Because the owner is still making money at the $25/night rate, or he wouldn't be doing it in the first place.

I haven't inquired for awhile and don't really talk to anyone at the hotels anymore, but last I heard, the live in rate was up to $30 or $35 now. Were the MW to go up, I suspect there would be a further increase to the live in rate.

So, if that's not indentured servitude, then I don't know what indentured servitude is. Furthermore, that entire arrangement is all completely legal (particularly in a right-to-work state), under the current system. Without the current system to guarantee at least that much, what do you think he would offer people? The room for eight hours a day (every day) plus a daily $5 food stipend? Probably. Still better than starvation and homelessness, I guess. I'd like to think for 56 labor hours per week one should be permitted to do better than just slightly above starving, though.