What is this "living wage" garbage? What moron thought this up?

[Ferocious]

Living wage sounds reasonable.

What people forget is that some people are forced to work for very low wages because there are other people willing to do so.....not because employers can not afford otherwise.

It's just a way to help the lower class combat business greed.

This is why the Republicans are so eager to have completely open immigration....a source of eager low-wage lovers.

But there also problems if living wages are imposed indiscriminately.

 

[crzyc]

Following the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Statistical Policy Directive 14, the U.S. Census Bureau uses a set of money income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is poor. If a family's total income is less than that family's threshold, then that family, and every individual in it, is considered poor. The poverty thresholds do not vary geographically, but they are updated annually for inflation using the Consumer Price Index (CPI-U). The official poverty definition counts money income before taxes and does not include capital gains and noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps). Poverty is not defined for people in military barracks, institutional group quarters, or for unrelated individuals under age 15 (such as foster children). They are excluded from the poverty universe--that is, they are considered neither as "poor" nor as "nonpoor."

from census.gov

 

[crzyc]

<< This is why the Republicans are so eager to have completely open immigration....a source of eager low-wage lovers.

But there also problems if living wages are imposed indiscriminately. >>



I believe that free trade and the free flow of goods, including people would greatly benifit the world. Seems most of the time people are more concerned with domestic poverty.

 

[jahawkin]

FYI - poverty info
poverty thresholds
Poverty rates
How many of you could live on $8,600 a year???

 

[herdmaster]

Doboji; I can afford a $10 hamburger too but I would not buy one.
Not to say I don't suffer from this at times myself but there seems to be some foolish thrill or something about being able to buy outrageously expensive items. If enough people are foolish enough often enough then these businesses prosper. As a general rule I shop for bargins in everything and do not support those businesses.

Multi Million dollar game players for example, give me a break????

 

[Amused]

<< FYI - poverty info
poverty thresholds
Poverty rates
How many of you could live on $8,600 a year??? >>



If I had to, I would. But I wouldn't. There are many things an able bodied person can do to get out of that... like get a second job and/or get an education or job training so they can find a better job.

 

[BoberFett]

<< What people forget is that some people are forced to work for very low wages because there are other people willing to do so >>

It's called competition. It's been around since the dawn of time and will continue until the end. Might as well get used to it.

 

[gunf1ghter]

YP, you are making some mis-guided arguments. I do believe that some progress has to be made in certain areas of worker-rights, such as better healthcare assistance for low-income workers. That, however is another thread.

I myself was born into a very poor family. I started working part time jobs at the age of 14 (there was one place that would employ me even though I wasn't supposed to start working till age 15). This isn't including paper route type jobs that I had from about age 10.

I got decent grades in school and got a scholarship to help pay for the cost of college (I was the first in my family ever to have gone to school). After one year of getting excellent grades in college I had to leave because the school was too expensive. I then went to a 2nd school where I also had a hard time paying tuition. I started working menial jobs for 30-40 hrs a week and found that this did not mix too well with getting a degree in Engineering.

Today, 7 years later I am a network systems engineer. I taught myself computers and worked as many jobs as I could to continue building my skills. I am now on with an excellent employer that pays for my education so I am finishing up a degree in CS. I am living proof that our system does work. I busted my ass working some real crappy jobs but I kept working at it and now I have gotten somewhere. Unfortunately there are many people that don't have any ambition but still think that the government (aka, taxpayers) owe them a middle-income lifestyle. That's not reality. If you are working low paying jobs, you should be working multiple jobs. You should be looking for opportunities to get a job with some more long term value. It's not as impossible as some make it out to be. True, some have real bad luck and live their lives in poverty even after trying all their lives, but I really believe that many who try hard and work hard succeed (as evidenced by how many poor immigrants can make a good life in this country in 1 or 2 generations).

 

[Darkluck]

I don't know if people have even thought of or mentioned this as I am not going to go through and read all the posts here. The legistlature's job is to make laws....whether or not the laws make sense, are constituional, or are feasable, is left to the judicial system to decide. That is why we get all these wierd laws passed in this country because the senate and house of every state has to be proactive, thus they can say around election time &quot;we passed some very beneficial laws&quot; when some of them are a bunch of regulations on things that don't need to be regulated. The bottom line is that the legistlature in this country has a lot of power and they wield it like a toy. Don't be surprised when they force the populace to do something else...thats my 2c.

 

[shifrbv]

I think there's so much optimism in this thread because no one has yet had their standard of living affected by our so-called &quot;free markets&quot;. People believe that there will always be a time when people can pull themselves up no matter what and that if you can't, you must be a slacker or not educated enough. The concept of too many people for too few high-paying jobs doesn't seem to register with anyone here.

For capitalism to work, you need one of two things. For existing industries, they need to be streamlined as much as possible to keep the profit margin. Or you need to come up with new industries or new ideas to fuel the growth. We've seen the streamlining, first in the agricultural sector, next in the manufacturing sector. Then we saw the introduction of a new industry which saved us, information technology. But I predict, that will be the next to go the way of previous industries. What will be left for people? I don't see any big industries on the horizon to fill the void.

Marx predicted that this type of system couldn't last. He couldn't envision that people would forever invent new technologies, that the appetite for new things would forever insatiate people or that so many people could afford them, or that they would be content to be driven down into poverty from their old industries. He figured the tension would become so great, something would have to give. So far, it's been giving. It's given with the labor unions, the new deals, the workers rights laws. But what will it be for the future?

Somebody mentioned that they were uncomfortable relying on system that required some level of unemployment to function. Isn't anybody uncomfortable knowing that we have a system that drives people down to the last penny in an age when population is increasing at an unprecedented rate and competition is at an all-time high? What kind of quality of life does that give people? I think it's clear from our lowered standards of living nowadays what kind of life it gives.

I believe sooner or later, it's going to catch up to all of us.

 

[tm37]

<< I think there's so much optimism in this thread because no one has yet had their standard of living affected by our so-called &quot;free markets&quot;. People believe that there will always be a time when people can pull themselves up no matter what and that if you can't, you must be a slacker or not educated enough. The concept of too many people for too few high-paying jobs doesn't seem to register with anyone here.

For capitalism to work, you need one of two things. For existing industries, they need to be streamlined as much as possible to keep the profit margin. Or you need to come up with new industries or new ideas to fuel the growth. We've seen the streamlining, first in the agricultural sector, next in the manufacturing sector. Then we saw the introduction of a new industry which saved us, information technology. But I predict, that will be the next to go the way of previous industries. What will be left for people? I don't see any big industries on the horizon to fill the void.

Marx predicted that this type of system couldn't last. He couldn't envision that people would forever invent new technologies, that the appetite for new things would forever insatiate people or that so many people could afford them, or that they would be content to be driven down into poverty from their old industries. He figured the tension would become so great, something would have to give. So far, it's been giving. It's given with the labor unions, the new deals, the workers rights laws. But what will it be for the future?

Somebody mentioned that they were uncomfortable relying on system that required some level of unemployment to function. Isn't anybody uncomfortable knowing that we have a system that drives people down to the last penny in an age when population is increasing at an unprecedented rate and competition is at an all-time high? What kind of quality of life does that give people? I think it's clear from our lowered standards of living nowadays what kind of life it gives.

I believe sooner or later, it's going to catch up to all of us. >>




Ok You make some very valid points. On it's face socialism is a much better system, Everyone works hard, everyone gets the benifits. WOW lets do it. THere is ONE MAJOR PROBLEM ....



Ready?




Here it is!






The human condition. Some people will work hard enough to get by. No harder they follow the path of least resistance. Do it the easy way. Now production falls. There is very little motivation to do a good job. Why bother my check and lifestyle depend on it. No system is perfect however, I would op for the one that benifits those that make GOOD CHOICES over one that makes them for you. If you want to dig ditches and live in an area with a high population of ditch digger without many ditches to be dug you should mone to a more ditch freindly community where there are less digger and more ditches! By saying everyone has the RIGHT to a livible wage you assume EVERYONE WORKS THE SAME RATE OR HAS THE SAME TALENTS.


I cannot shoot a 60 on the golf course there for I am not playing on the PGA tour. I do not have a great sense of humor so I do not host a lightnight talk show. I cannot hit a baseball 500 ft so I don't play for the padres. I don't have the creative abilty to write or produce quality Televison so NBC hasen't knock on my door. I can however repair electronic equiptment. There for I moved TO MN where there are not many people with my talents and have been able to make a livible wage. Nothing was givin to me. I received a FREE education that is avialible to every AMERICAN CITIZEN. I joined the navy. Got my education got out and now make a fairly god wage. Did I recieve some breaks? Of course I did. Did I take risks? Yes I did. Did I sacrafice? More than you know. At some point people are responsible for the CHOICES, be it what you do where you live or how hard you work. I won't lie and said I had to study really hard to get through my training but I will say That oppurtunities are there for those that choose to take chances and make sacrifices.


Do I think A-Rod is worth $25 mil a year. Yes I do. But only because Tom Hicks was willing to pay it. You are worth as much as you can get no more no less. raising the MIN WAGE negates what I have done and what people who have work much harder than I did to achieve their goals and dreams. You want to flip buyrgers and live in southern california that is a bad choice many burger flippers without a lot of burgers that need to be flipped. Add in the high cost of living. However if You move you can accually make a LIVABLE WAGE in St. Cloud MN because they don't have enough flippers so they are burning burgers, therefor they pay a premium price for your services. It is all about supply and demand. You have the supply, you need to find the demand.

 

[67gt500]

Isn't anybody uncomfortable knowing that we have a system that drives people down to the last penny in an age when population is increasing at an unprecedented rate and competition is at an all-time high? What kind of quality of life does that give people? I think it's clear from our lowered standards of living nowadays what kind of life it gives.

Highest standard of living in the US ever. Highest gdp per cap ever.

If you want to compare present day US life to that of communist russia or red china you will lose the debate.

Nobody is starving in the United States. And anyone who is starving or suffers from starvation does it by choice.

The propoganda on this board is neverending. You can't provide a single example of where a marxist society prevailed and maintained stability because they don't exist. Your only examples would be third world countries buried in poverty and disaster.

 

[67gt500]

But I predict, that will be the next to go the way of previous industries. What will be left for people? I don't see any big industries on the horizon to fill the void.

Your prediction is baseless. There is no foundation to base such a prediction on.

I can list dozens of successful capitalistic systems which prevail and continue to prevail today. Can you list one communistic nation with similar standards? I can save you the trouble and say NO.

 

[Feanor]

<< [
Oh BS, YP. Are you claiming that EVERYONE has the ability to play the guitar? That EVERYONE has the ability to be a national sport star? That EVERYONE has the ability to understand complex math problems? That everyone has the ability to be an award winning actor? That everyone has the ability to invent the lightbulb? (I HOPE you get the idea by now)

Employees are a commodity, YP. The more talent the job requires, the more rare the qualified person is. Rarity means that person can demand more for the job, simply because without a person with this extraordinary talent, the project could not get done.

This has nothing to do with Hitler, Eugenics, or any of that crap. Some people are just more able to do certain things than other people. The rarity of that talent dictates how much they're worth.

If one person can climb out of poverty, so can any other able bodied person. It's hard work, yes, but it CAN be done.
>>



Let's see, by one of your arguments, certain people are better geared for a specific activity than others (running a company, playing a guitar, acting, etc.)

But _somehow_ climbing out of poverty is the one activity that everyone can do. What about the people that aren't able to do that well? Or do we just say fsck them, they'll die soon enough anyways. You're not making a very convincing argument.

 

[Feanor]

<< If everyone earned the same wage at any job, what would be the incentive to take on a more difficult job? I'm in college, workin' my arse off to earn a master's in Electrical Engineering. Why would I spend 6 years making practically nothing, putting in enormous hours working (studying) just to make the same amount I could make right now as a burger-flipper or ditch-digger, or any other low skill job? Would I spend 6 years in college for the respect of having the EE title? No. While money isn't the only incentive to take on more difficult work, it is the best. Without that incentive few people would make the effort to innovate, to learn, to excel. If everyone is told they can live by making french fries, a lot of them will accept that, because they don't have the motivation in themselves to try for more, and there is no longer an external impetus for them to. That would be a sad state of affairs, if only because of all the wasted potential. >>



What's the incentive? Because it's something you enjoy. If you're putting yourself through years of schooling and more years of work in a field that you don't enjoy working in solely for the money, then I'm sorry to say you have a wakeup coming. It may not come until your 75 years old, sitting in a retirement home saying, &quot;holy $hit. I wasted my life&quot;, but it will come. Hopefully, it will come sooner, rather than later.

Money is _not_ the best incentive by any means. I'd rather work 40 hours a week doing something I truly enjoy, and making enough to live and provide for my family, then work 40 hours a week doing something I hate but able to call myself &quot;rich&quot;.

 

[Amused]

<<

<< [
Oh BS, YP. Are you claiming that EVERYONE has the ability to play the guitar? That EVERYONE has the ability to be a national sport star? That EVERYONE has the ability to understand complex math problems? That everyone has the ability to be an award winning actor? That everyone has the ability to invent the lightbulb? (I HOPE you get the idea by now)

Employees are a commodity, YP. The more talent the job requires, the more rare the qualified person is. Rarity means that person can demand more for the job, simply because without a person with this extraordinary talent, the project could not get done.

This has nothing to do with Hitler, Eugenics, or any of that crap. Some people are just more able to do certain things than other people. The rarity of that talent dictates how much they're worth.

If one person can climb out of poverty, so can any other able bodied person. It's hard work, yes, but it CAN be done.
>>



Let's see, by one of your arguments, certain people are better geared for a specific activity than others (running a company, playing a guitar, acting, etc.)

But _somehow_ climbing out of poverty is the one activity that everyone can do. What about the people that aren't able to do that well? Or do we just say fsck them, they'll die soon enough anyways. You're not making a very convincing argument. >>



There are enough jobs and trades out there, that ANY able bodied person can find something that will lift them to at least lower middle class. For example, basic manufacturing jobs pay on average 15-20 an hour and require no inherent talent, just easily learned skills.

Climbing out of poverty takes incentive, a little ambition, and hard work. These are not talents. Attitude is not a talent.

Personally, I'm shocked someone even tried such a weak argument...

 

[tm37]

<< Money is _not_ the best incentive by any means. I'd rather work 40 hours a week doing something I truly enjoy, and making enough to live and provide for my family, then work 40 hours a week doing something I hate but able to call myself &quot;rich&quot;. >>



We all would but, If you have to do something you don't enjot to pay your bills you should. You should not expect to have a easy mindless job that requires no skill or effort to pay top dollar. Some times money is the best incentive. If you were to ask people I am sure most would say they would be much more productive if there was a financial gain to be had. The majority of people Work to live unlike the few who live to work.