Quoting Mir (Reply 12): Quoting JoePatroni707 (Reply 6): Makes a strong argument to eliminate or discontinue welfare. Or, better, to raise the minimum wage.

Or even better.Lower Welfare! STOP THE DEPENDENCE!You'll always will be poor.

Quoting ImperialEagle (Reply 15): I have a friend that works in one of the social welfare offices here in Roanoke. Every once and a while I will go down there and meet him for lunch. I am always amazed at the line-up of pregnant women waiting to get in. He says they just don't want to work, so they get pregnant and come get the freebie coupons. Multiply this by millions and you can see why the system is broken! Badly! They just keep on having babies and those of us who pay taxes keep on paying the tab. What fun!

   There it is ! That says it.

Some of you guys keep blaming the wealthy! UGH!!! But welfare breeds poorness and bad habits.Why then is there poorness still in the US? Welfare and freebees are not fixing the problem! It's growing the problem! Be self-reliant,independent and control your destiny


BTW-Welfare has been more costly then minimum wage.

[Edited 2013-08-31 16:13:07]

Quoting PSA53 (Reply 100): BTW-Welfare has been more costly then minimum wage.

Exactly! Think about the correlation of the two. I applaud your example. Pay more, less welfare, a living wage. Not rocket science, or is it?

[Edited 2013-08-31 18:30:31]

[Edited 2013-08-31 18:30:59]

Quoting PSA53 (Reply 100): Be self-reliant,independent and control your destiny

That would be great. If the poor people had access to getting their hands on money through work. When the poor work, they spend their money on things like rent, and transportation, and utilities, and food. Whereas the rich tend to prop up the economy by buying shoes and iPhones and clothes. But, yeah... I see your point: those pesky poor people trying to survive. They don't need any more help. /sarcasm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 102): That would be great. If the poor people had access to getting their hands on money through work. When the poor work, they spend their money on things like rent, and transportation, and utilities, and food. Whereas the rich tend to prop up the economy by buying shoes and iPhones and clothes. But, yeah... I see your point: those pesky poor people trying to survive. They don't need any more help. /sarcasm

I just drove through the poor section of Providence today. A fast food joint on every corner, the big chains. They sure know how to exploit the needy. They sure know how to gather that welfare money. It makes one wonder why they do not pay more to their help. I guess they do not want to lose customers. A built in customer base, of billions in revenue.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 102): spend their money on things like rent, and transportation, and utilities, and food.

Whoa,admit it! A lot of misuse of spending on those same, latest and greatest technology that poor people ALSO spend on!.So,that is not all accurate when some 47% are living better then I am.Sorry.I don't buy that sad story.

But then you feel that government should do nothing to motivate them to the work force by cutting down or cutting off social programs?

What is your suggestions to cut the number of poor? Because things have been in place for decades not improving things.

Quoting PSA53 (Reply 104): Whoa,admit it! A lot of misuse of spending on those same, latest and greatest technology that poor people ALSO spend on!.So,that is not all accurate when some 47% are living better then I am.Sorry.I don't buy that sad story.

Could you write that so we can understand it? I think you are trying to infer that people on welfare actually have the purchasing power to buy things like PS3 and iPhones and brand new Lexus'. That is very incorrect.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 103): They sure know how to gather that welfare money.

How? Last time I checked, only food from supermarkets could be purchased with food stamps. If you go to McDonalds with a food stamp card, the transaction will be declined. Same with WIC checks. The only possible way that would happen is with unemployment payments which are finite.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 103): It makes one wonder why they do not pay more to their help. I guess they do not want to lose customers. A built in customer base, of billions in revenue.

Now you are thinking globally. This is what the international corporations (people) want.

•Failure to report income or money received.
•Failure to report the return of the absent parent to the home.
•Failure to report a child out of the home.
•Failure to report property or assets.
•Internal employee fraud.
•Duplicate Aid.
•Forgery or stolen identity.
•Receiving Public Assistance Benefits to which they are not entitled.


These are the types of welfare fraud listed in R.I. Not all use fraud, but many do. There is plenty of cash available in the community to go to the fast food chains, because of crooked merchants. I still say, it is not by accident that there is a fast food chain on every corner in the poor sections. I still say they go where the money is. I still say it is by design. I still say they pay their help lousy minimum wages. I still say they would hate like hell to see people paid more, where they could afford to patronize a better class of restaurant.

[Edited 2013-08-31 20:15:22]

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 106): •Failure to report income or money received.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 106): •Failure to report property or assets

Which the state has a record of. Believe me, in California, Oregon, and Washington, they let the people know and they do something about it!

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 106): •Duplicate Aid. •Forgery or stolen identity. •Receiving Public Assistance Benefits to which they are not entitled.

Again, the state knows. Just like with voter IDs. It seems you have a solution in search of a problem.

But, also, I have to point out that the only things that can be used at fast food stores is cash or actual Visa/MC/AMEX/Discover cards and NOT food stamps. There is one pizza chain in the West authorized by those states to accept food stamp cards. But not for McDonalds, Jack In The Box, Burger King, etc.

As far as the others, that is on the honor system. Some people have no honor and those people need to be dealt with accordingly.

I think you and I are on the same page but speaking two different languages. I still think that people take minimum wage jobs at Wal-Mart and McDonalds and so forth because they have no choice. If those employers would actually pay well, there would be fewer people on food stamps. We all know this but no corporation wants to do anything about it. Cheap labor is the best thing for them.

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 78): Does that mean the minimum wage should be at least that at this point?

The ,minimum wage should be above the poverty line. Until employers pay that then we all see our tax dollars to go food stamps, welfare, etc. It's called corporate welfare.

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 78): Let's set the compensation rate at or just below the minimum wage level.

Look at the poverty line before looking at the minimum wage. And remember a lot of those folks working as a waiter or waitress are pulling in around $3 an hour - plus tips. Time for that to change as well.

Quoting JoePatroni707 (Reply 80): Fast food never has been or will it ever be a job to support one self, its a job for a teen in school, extra pocket money, etc.

And 40% to 50% are adults that are working those jobs because it is all that is available - and they are trying to raise a family.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 82): All because they feel the need to contribute and support themselves.

Or there are no other jobs around - Old W & Dick made sure of that. If they don't hustle fast enough or say one wrong word they are out the door because there are a lot of people waiting to take their place - and they obviously are not protected by any union. Or politician.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 82): Knowing the workers were not paid much, and how much we paid, I still say we got a deal. We were good with it. And we left a tip.

That top went to someone that will be lucky to make $20 K a year before taxes. How much of a tip did you leave? 20% minimum?

Quoting Mike89406 (Reply 83): What I meant is don't settle for minimum wage career wise if you can help it.

Far too many of those folks are adults that simply cannot get another, better paying job. Maybe they were doing OK, moderate income and paying bills. They W's Great Recession hit and they are at the bottom of the pyramid - often for the rest of their working lives.

You got a good job? Good. That means your taxes can help pay for their government benefits,

Quoting Mike89406 (Reply 83): There's always a way to improve you're life if you're able

Abel is the key word, Sometimes there are no other jobs. Sometimes the person is not the brightest - below average. We've all seen them, sometimes called "slow" in school. You know they have no chance at any real success, or breaking free of poverty.

Quoting Mike89406 (Reply 86): They get the what they want then the dollar value will drop. That 15/hr would have nearly the same buying power as what they were making. What would that accomplish?

Not rally. Bumping up the wages might mean another 10¢ or so added to the cost of your Big Mac. The hourly rate is only a fraction of the total company cost. In retailing the objective is to hold personnel costs to the 8% to 10% range.

Quoting Mike89406 (Reply 86): What would the supply and demand be for fast food? They could hire 3rd world workers or automate, unemployment would rise.

Not that much different in terms of demand as the price increases would be held in check with competition.

Someone like McDonalds hires 3 world workers and the DOJ will have a field day, as will local DA's. Might need to shut a few down to ensure the others understand.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 87): No, Inflation happens when the government spends more than it can afford, and prints money to cover the difference.

Well, Old W did spend a lot - especially on the credit cared. We saw massive inflation in health care & related insurance, but that was because the government didn't provide core care via a tax - which exploded cost shifting.

And when government spends money, how much does that generate in tax revenues? Look at the total jobs impacted with a road program. Start with engineers, accountants, lawyers, etc. (and everyone working at their firm) and that is before anything physical gets started on site. These folks pay taxes in various forms.

Now start assembling resources - from heavy equipment to steel, sand, gravel, cement, etc. More private companies making money and paying taxes.

Now start looking at all the people working on site, operating machinery, overseeing the operations, etc.

Lots of jobs who be paying various forms of taxes as well as spending in the community - which generates more jobs & tax revenues.

So we spend $20 million on a road. How much comes back long term on that investment in terms of tax revenues? And jobs. Those jobs are important as they reduce payment of government benefits related to unemployment.

Maybe a bright economist can give you an exact "estimate' of the money flowing back into federal, state, county & local treasuries.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 101): Exactly! Think about the correlation of the two. I applaud your example. Pay more, less welfare, a living wage. Not rocket science, or is it?

Why stop at the living wage? Why not make it a millionaire wage? Then we'd all be rich right?

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 108): The ,minimum wage should be above the poverty line. Until employers pay that then we all see our tax dollars to go food stamps, welfare, etc. It's called corporate welfare.

It isn't corporate welfare at all. Businesses have no obligation to pay any particular wage just like consumers have no obligation to pay a particular price for their products. I thought people hated cartels but here we are.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 109): Why stop at the living wage? Why not make it a millionaire wage? Then we'd all be rich right?

And if the gays get the right to marry, then people will be marrying their dog and then marrying their child.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 109): consumers have no obligation to pay a particular price for their products.

We kinda do. We could actually be paying less per gallon for gas than we are now. We don't have a choice. We could be paying less now for a hamburger but we can't. We don't have a choice.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 108): How much of a tip did you leave? 20% minimum?

About 30%. Plus, by city ordinance, they also get health care. Anyone who works restaurant jobs in SF gets health care thanks to a surcharge on the bill. Knowing he is getting his health care paid for, I still knew he was not getting enough.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 108): The ,minimum wage should be above the poverty line.

I'd say it should be at the poverty line, no more and no less. And as the poverty line moves, the minimum wage should move with it.

-Mir

Quoting Mir (Reply 111): I'd say it should be at the poverty line, no more and no less. And as the poverty line moves, the minimum wage should move with it.

Poverty line for a single person household is $11,490.

http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/13poverty.cfm

Assuming 50 work weeks at 40 hours per week, that works out to $5.75 per hour.

Are you advocating a drop in minimum wage?

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 108):

To summarize, I realize not everyone can succeed or make more than minimum wage. I said that one way or another from my first post and on... Some people are destined to be poor.

I am only talking about people that can possibly move on . I started with nothing and yes I had to take those 3.35 /hr jobs. I did a lot of physical labor and long hours. Eventually things turned around it took several years to jump up a little. For some it's easy and others hard. I know someone who dropped out of high school and just finally went back their GED in they're early 40's. Now they're going to college and working.

[Edited 2013-09-01 14:05:19]

Quoting seb146 (Reply 107): I think you and I are on the same page but speaking two different languages. I still think that people take minimum wage jobs at Wal-Mart and McDonalds and so forth because they have no choice. If those employers would actually pay well, there would be fewer people on food stamps. We all know this but no corporation wants to do anything about it. Cheap labor is the best thing for them.

Even though we speak different languages at times, we agree on the main points. The prevailing attitude most read on here. Cheap Labor, not me. Cheap wages, for them, not me.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 109): Why stop at the living wage? Why not make it a millionaire wage? Then we'd all be rich right?

Why? As far as I can tell, most people are just trying to pay bills and survive. I am one of them. We leave the greed to others.

http://digital.olivesoftware.com/Olive/ODE/ProJo/


Some may enjoy the Al Lewis article, "Let them Eat Burgers" in the Wall Street Journal. Scroll to Page C10 in the Providence Journal after going to link provided. I think he hits the nail on the head about the weeping of the food corporations and the reality of real life.

Just a few numbers for people about burger workers pay which is minimum wage mostly. McDonalds pleading poverty. along with others about raising wages. In 2012 CEO Don Thompson received a 237% bump in compensation to 13.8 million. The Ex CEO was given a 215% bump for 2012 to 27.7 million. 27 mil. equals about 520.000 per week, about 13.000 per hour, based on a 40 hour week. Of course we all know they work 80 hours a week, leaving them a paltry 6500 per hour. If my figures are incorrect, let me know. My mind does not accept those figures easily for a wage, or should I say compensation package.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 117): If my figures are incorrect, let me know. My mind does not accept those figures easily for a wage, or should I say compensation package.

While I agree that those salaries are excessive (well, not all of it is salary - most is in the form of stock options. Actual cash compensation is closer to $4 million as I recall), those people who say "the CEO should take a salary cut to increase the wages of those at the bottom" need a little remedial math.

Assuming the salary you mentioned was all cash, and it were 100% distributed to the 420,000 employees of McDonalds, that would come to an additional $0.016 per hour.

Quoting PSA53 (Reply 104): A lot of misuse of spending on those same, latest and greatest technology that poor people ALSO spend on!.So,that is not all accurate when some 47% are living better then I am.Sorry.I don't buy that sad story.

A lot of people earning a moderate income have problems with financial budgeting. One reason why I believe it should be part of the last 6 years of school to slowly develop an understanding to the financial reality of life after high school.

Quoting PSA53 (Reply 104): But then you feel that government should do nothing to motivate them to the work force by cutting down or cutting off social programs?

Maybe we can start with outsourcing jobs that should be run by the government. Start with a lot of contractors doing traditional jobs in the military, like cooks, and security of military bases in was zones. That opens up jobs, een if it does

Quoting PSA53 (Reply 104): What is your suggestions to cut the number of poor? Because things have been in place for decades not improving things.

Old W's Great Recession didn't help things, nor did going to war on the credit card. We also see the problem when looking at the ratio of the highest compensated in a company to the lowest. We have gone from a ratio of around 20:1 to close to 300:1.

That delivers a lot of wealth to the fortunate and a lot of shrinking of the middle class and an increase in poverty. And those at the top have the financial power to keep politicians as lap dogs so I really don't look for any significant increase at the bottom.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 106): Not all use fraud, but many do.

Sort of like Wall Street hot shots padding their expense accounts. Or politicians getting their "fact finding"trips. If you "follow the money" you'll be looking up, not down.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 109): It isn't corporate welfare at all.

Bull. All the government benefits for those in poverty allows companies to pay below the poverty line. You for a low minimum wage then you are indirectly supporting the taxes (or national debt) that will pay for those benefits.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 110): About 30%. Plus, by city ordinance, they also get health care. Anyone who works restaurant jobs in SF gets health care thanks to a surcharge on the bill. Knowing he is getting his health care paid for, I still knew he was not getting enough.

That is about what should be paid - especially for low level bills. A waitress takes care of you for a $10 - $15 bill they need about 30%. You waiter/waitress is exceptionally lucky on the health insurance side. A lot earn $3 an out with no insurance and are sent home early on a "slow night" - to save the company $3 to $6. Can you believe that people on minimum wages are sent home early when things are slow just to save a few bucks/

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 118): Assuming the salary you mentioned was all cash, and it were 100% distributed to the 420,000 employees of McDonalds, that would come to an additional $0.016 per hour.

Now multiply that my all the people making over $100K in the company and that low number changes.

You are also forgetting that paying a living wage might mean a 10¢ increase in your next Big Mac. Are you willing to handle that huge price increase?

BTW do you really believe that the guy making the $4 million is delivering the same quality of health insurance to all workers than he is getting?         

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 119): Now multiply that my all the people making over $100K in the company and that low number changes.

Ah, so anyone making over $100K now is filthy rich and needs to be pulled down.

It used to be millionaires and billionaires. Then it was $450K and over. Then it was $250K and over. Now we are down to $100K.

How about everyone makes the same miserable salary, except those who are card-carrying members of the elite party?

That's never been done before...  

And by the way, labor costs consume about a third of a typical fast-food restaurant’s revenue. Numerous studies show that when the minimum wage goes up, employers make do with fewer workers, and low-wage employees lose their jobs. They go on the unemployment/welfare/disability bandwagon, and become Democrats. Sounds like the real reason why Democrats love to push the minimum wage...

Whenever the government tries to tell private business that the price of a commodity (such as labor) is anything other than the amount a person is willing to sell it and another is willing to pay for it, you will have such consequences.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 120): They go on the unemployment/welfare/disability bandwagon, and become Democrats

HUGE red flag. HUGE call for BS here.

Washington state minimum wage is $9. Not much in Seattle but a fortune in Walla Walla. The places I shopped and ate all across Washington seemed to be doing just fine with part time and full time staff paid at minimum wage, thank you very much. Consider that Seattle is really the only "liberal" part of Washington. Where we spent most of our time is ultra conservative. And they still make at least $9 an hour. And don't complain.

I know a couple in California who adopted a 12 yo child.. She's now 16 and pregnant!

So the 'father' is 17 and failing high school (will not attend this year) and doesn't work. He says he's tried to find work but because he dresses like a gangster nobody wants to hire him.

His father is currently in jail and his mother lives off benefit. The family house is paid for by benefit and inside you'll find the grandmother who takes care of the family, the mother who does nothing, four kids (by different fathers).

The benefit family is excited by this new arrival and have already taken steps to increase benefits!

The adoption family is devastated.

So what does one do? Stop benefits and make things worse for this new child?

Quoting mad99 (Reply 122): So what does one do? Stop benefits and make things worse for this new child?

And there you go. I also know a few "benefit families" as you call them, and you are right - from what I've seen, it's mainly mothers who are actually teaching their teenage girls how to get in on the scam. It has become an industry.

Yes, when looked at individually, such benefits are not that big. But if you have a home with a mother (around 40), 4 or 5 of her daughters, each around 20-25 and each of them with several babies all living together, you have yourself quite a little business. It's quite common. And none of them would dream of getting married - the entire household would be impacted financially.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 123): It has become an industry.

Yep
So what do you do?

The one who will suffer is the new born through no fault of its own.

Some people are proposing no increase in benefit after 1 or 2 kids but what if the parents have more for whatever reason?

If the girl i mentioned above does not put the child up for adoption the parents might phone childcare workers and say that the newborn is at risk and they will have to remove the child.

So what to do?? Another generation of benefit claimers or a new opportunity with a different family

Quoting mad99 (Reply 124): Yep So what do you do? The one who will suffer is the new born through no fault of its own. Some people are proposing no increase in benefit after 1 or 2 kids but what if the parents have more for whatever reason?

How about mandatory sterilization after the first child receives benefits. I think that's fair. Don't have kids unless you can afford to have them.

That should also provide some incentive for the woman to find other solutions (like having the baby-daddy marry her).

Quoting casinterest (Reply 66): A lot of people on welfare already have jobs, or they are incapable of work. Most have families, and then what would you do with the kids?

I think most everyone is capable of separating garbage into categories, unclogging sewers, plowing a field etc. Make the kids work as well, or not eat, or go to jail.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 70): The good teachers of my youth might now go into law or some other profession.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 109): Businesses have no obligation to pay any particular wage just like consumers have no obligation to pay a particular price for their products. I thought people hated cartels but here we are.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 125): That should also provide some incentive for the woman to find other solutions (like having the baby-daddy marry her).

Agreed, I think real parents provide for their kids. If a kid is being fed by taxpayers, the paternity should go to the taxpayer as well (for honors, not additional obligations). Kid should say "my true father is the one who puts food on my table - the taxpayer."

Quoting mad99 (Reply 122): So the 'father' is 17 and failing high school (will not attend this year) and doesn't work. He says he's tried to find work but because he dresses like a gangster nobody wants to hire him.

That's no father. That's just a boy. Whether 17 or 47. A man or a father provides. That boy ought to be disciplined for what he did, but the girl should as well. Benefits should be zero. Let them earn their way. If not, take the baby.

The status quo policy is what is hurting these people. It causes poverty and violence.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 125): How about mandatory sterilization

Probably not going to happen

Here in spain you get benefit for two years max then nothing. Here they keep lowering the amount and duration one can get it.

I think maybe it should depend on hoe much one puts in, if someone contributes over 40 years he should be entitled to more then 2 years. Also, to get the 2 years one must work a minimum and i think its about 4 years.

According to the Big Mac Index a Big Mac is 4,56$ in the US, and 4,66$ in the eurozone. Those are averages, I can attest that in France it's usually 3,5€, 4,62$ at today's exchange rate. So with a 9,43€/h minimum wage you can buy more than 2,5 Big Macs if you're French (and working at making such Big Macs, for example) while in the US you can barely buy two. This is with more expensive meat since hormones are illegal.

Now 9,43€ is not what a worker gets in his pocket, since social security/health care contributions are taken from the paycheck, so they really get 7,38€, still more than 2 Big Macs, but for that you get a pension and almost free health care (and 5 weeks paid vacation), free schools and universities, etc.

I checked
Four months per year worked so after six years of work one is entitled to two years. I think you get close to 100% of your pay the first year and the second it drops considerately.

So here welfare can pay better than working for up to two years, after that time to get the finger out!

Quoting Aesma (Reply 128): According to the Big Mac Index a Big Mac is 4,56$ in the US, and 4,66$ in the eurozone. Those are averages, I can attest that in France it's usually 3,5€, 4,62$ at today's exchange rate. So with a 9,43€/h minimum wage you can buy more than 2,5 Big Macs if you're French (and working at making such Big Macs, for example) while in the US you can barely buy two. This is with more expensive meat since hormones are illegal. Now 9,43€ is not what a worker gets in his pocket, since social security/health care contributions are taken from the paycheck, so they really get 7,38€, still more than 2 Big Macs, but for that you get a pension and almost free health care (and 5 weeks paid vacation), free schools and universities, etc.

Great and France has 11.5% unemployment vs the US's 7.4%? Terrific. And of course comparing minimum wage values doesn't say anything about what people actually do get paid, what your analysis is actually saying is "this is how much more value French people have to provide for them to legally get a job".

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 115): Why? As far as I can tell, most people are just trying to pay bills and survive. I am one of them. We leave the greed to others.

I don't understand, wouldn't it be better if everyone was millionaires? Think about how good the standard of living would be for people who are currently suffering. I don't understand why if you support the minimum wage, you'd want to stop at a low level and not ensure everyone makes a 7 figure salary?

Quoting seb146 (Reply 110): We kinda do. We could actually be paying less per gallon for gas than we are now. We don't have a choice. We could be paying less now for a hamburger but we can't. We don't have a choice.

Sorry, how could you be paying less for gas the you are now?

If you think you are being ripped off i suggest you start your own oil company up. I rather suspect you won't be able to produce oil for cheaper than you can buy it today though.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 119): Bull. All the government benefits for those in poverty allows companies to pay below the poverty line. You for a low minimum wage then you are indirectly supporting the taxes (or national debt) that will pay for those benefits.

I'm for no minimum wage. The benefit bill will be lower if people are actually working and contributing to the economy, than being banned from working for the crime of being unskilled. Companies have no obligation to pay any wage provided it's voluntary. Would you like it if the government mandated a minimum pricing for the things you buy from these companies that was above what you currently pay?

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 130): The benefit bill will be lower if people are actually working and contributing to the economy, than being banned from working for the crime of being unskilled

People currently working for minimum wage ARE contributing to the economy. They are buying things. Even if the job is listed as "unskilled" they actually are contributing.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 130): how could you be paying less for gas the you are now?

Everyone always complains about how the price of gas skyrockets when there is a hurricane or something but creeps down or even goes up when nothing is happening. We actually could be paying 50 cents less per gallon than we are now, but the oil companies will have none of it.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 130): I don't understand, wouldn't it be better if everyone was millionaires? Think about how good the standard of living would be for people who are currently suffering. I don't understand why if you support the minimum wage, you'd want to stop at a low level and not ensure everyone makes a 7 figure salary?

Again, you are making the "slippery slope" argument.

And, for the record, everyone (yes, EVERYONE) wants to make 7+ figures. That same group of people want to work for it. Those of us down here at the bottom know the value of a dollar. However, we can not get enough of them together to invest in anything.

I think instead of your argument of starting everyone off at 7+ figure salary, how about the top 10% live off $25,000 a year for one year. Just to see how most of America lives. I bet things would change really quick!

Quoting mad99 (Reply 127): Here in spain you get benefit for two years max then nothing. Here they keep lowering the amount and duration one can get it.

In the States, unemployment benefits end after a period and food benefits are lowered the more income one has.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 131): I think instead of your argument of starting everyone off at 7+ figure salary, how about the top 10% live off $25,000 a year for one year. Just to see how most of America lives. I bet things would change really quick!

You elitist prig. The vast majority of those 10% have had jobs as I have when we were young. Starting at mowing and trimming lawns, sacking groceries, working on Louisiana oil rigs during the summer (I'm lining up my 16 year old nephew for that job next summer). Trust me, after you gotten yourself drenched in oil and salt water for 14 hours per day throwing pipe in 100 degree heat, you know EXACTLY what the value of that paycheck is.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 131): Everyone always complains about how the price of gas skyrockets when there is a hurricane or something but creeps down or even goes up when nothing is happening. We actually could be paying 50 cents less per gallon than we are now, but the oil companies will have none of it.

But who would start an oil company if they weren't allowed to generate profits? You wouldn't be able to get oil at all if that were the case.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 131): People currently working for minimum wage ARE contributing to the economy. They are buying things. Even if the job is listed as "unskilled" they actually are contributing.

Yes, it's the people who should be earning below minimum wage but are banned that are the ones that aren't contributing to the economy.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 131): Again, you are making the "slippery slope" argument.

No, i'm not. The reason the minimum wage doesn't work for 9 bucks is the same reason it doesn't work for a million. It's the exact same economic parameters just at a different scale.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 131): I think instead of your argument of starting everyone off at 7+ figure salary, how about the top 10% live off $25,000 a year for one year. Just to see how most of America lives. I bet things would change really quick!

Things sure would change quickly, the economy would grind to a halt because nobody could be bothered to do the demanding jobs that serve society.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 118): While I agree that those salaries are excessive (well, not all of it is salary - most is in the form of stock options. Actual cash compensation is closer to $4 million as I recall), those people who say "the CEO should take a salary cut to increase the wages of those at the bottom" need a little remedial math. Assuming the salary you mentioned was all cash, and it were 100% distributed to the 420,000 employees of McDonalds, that would come to an additional $0.016 per hour.Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos

What does one need with 500k every week? What is the function of that salary? Where is the morality of that salary, while people have nothing, no hope, no jobs, no pride. It is a greedy rip off of the company. A manipulation of the rules by the power structure in place in most corporations. A corrupt greedy bunch who do so because they can. 27 million is 27 million, no matter how one wants to count it. If it was not, why would they term it as compensation? The sad part is he is not anywhere near the top tier of compensation.


I wonder how many times he visits the troops in the field like they used to do way back? Imagine him exhorting the workers to work harder, asking how their families and children are doing? He would not dare. The seeds of revolution are being sown every year we get closer to the have and have not's, with out any middle to keep the anger tamped down. I worked for close to half a century without class hatred in my thinking. Not so anymore.
All of the Champions of this system we have now, might well think of their children and grandchildren and the legacy of hate we are fostering by this injustice. Who do the have not's come looking for when the injustice and greed get to be too much? Labor Day 2013 What a country.

[Edited 2013-09-02 13:48:57]

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 119): Sort of like Wall Street hot shots padding their expense accounts. Or politicians getting their "fact finding"trips. If you "follow the money" you'll be looking up, not down.

I would say, exactly the same.

Quoting mad99 (Reply 122): I know a couple in California who adopted a 12 yo child.. She's now 16 and pregnant! So the 'father' is 17 and failing high school (will not attend this year) and doesn't work. He says he's tried to find work but because he dresses like a gangster nobody wants to hire him. His father is currently in jail and his mother lives off benefit. The family house is paid for by benefit and inside you'll find the grandmother who takes care of the family, the mother who does nothing, four kids (by different fathers). The benefit family is excited by this new arrival and have already taken steps to increase benefits! The adoption family is devastated. So what does one do? Stop benefits and make things worse for this new child?

And it will continue to get worse, ignorance, poverty, low wages, classic examples of the torn fabric of our society now. Show me the fairness in our system that will help this system improve. Billions are made everyday from ignorance and poverty. An industry in itself. One might say, a product of Capitalism in its purest form. Feed them the liquor, the drugs and the butts and welfare. We have a Capitalists dream.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 126): If not, take the baby.

We do and have by the millions, do you see things getting better?

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 130): Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 115):Why? As far as I can tell, most people are just trying to pay bills and survive. I am one of them. We leave the greed to others. I don't understand, wouldn't it be better if everyone was millionaires? Think about how good the standard of living would be for people who are currently suffering. I don't understand why if you support the minimum wage, you'd want to stop at a low level and not ensure everyone makes a 7 figure salary?

I was, and I am sure millions more were taught that greed was not good. That exploitation was evil. To look in the mirror everyday and say, I like myself. I am 74 now, and I can say, that I never cheated anyone of a dime, and in return, though I have loaned many bucks to my family and friends. I have never lost a dime. Character is a term that comes to mind, sadly lacking now.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 132): Trust me, after you gotten yourself drenched in oil and salt water for 14 hours per day throwing pipe in 100 degree heat, you know EXACTLY what the value of that paycheck is.

Ok. I agree, you earned your pay by hard work. Value received for work given. Do you think anyone truly earns 520k per week? Can anyone really do that much work? What is it again 13k an hour. I am worth it. A con job way out of proportion to reality.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 132): The vast majority of those 10% have had jobs as I have when we were young.

I think you'd be surprised at how few of today's top 10% have had jobs like that. While it was true in the past, most of today's wealthy were wealthy from the get go.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 125): How about mandatory sterilization after the first child receives benefits.

I'm sure the religious right would love that!!

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 130): I'm for no minimum wage.

The U.S. tried that, it was a miserable failure. Most of the population lived in abject poverty, women/children were taken advantage of, people had absolutely no savings and the economy routinely plunged into recessions/depressions that wiped out what little most people had. Granted, a very tiny minority of people got super rich during this time, but for the average American it was an ugly life.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 139): Ok. I agree, you earned your pay by hard work. Value received for work given. Do you think anyone truly earns 520k per week? Can anyone really do that much work? What is it again 13k an hour. I am worth it. A con job way out of proportion to reality.

That is pretty extreme, and I would support a very high income tax rate (say, on $10 million per year upwards) to dissuade that sort of thing - including eliminating the stock option deduction. But some people are worth their weight in gold due to exceptional management, leadership and/or visionary skills, like Steve Jobs, Jack Welsh, Jeff Bezos and Anne Mulcahy, and if a company is willing to shell out $50 million per year to attract someone of that caliber to work for them, who are we to say it is immoral?

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 140): I think you'd be surprised at how few of today's top 10% have had jobs like that. While it was true in the past, most of today's wealthy were wealthy from the get go.

I think you'd be surprised. My grandparents (on both sides) grew up dirt poor but made good fortunes for themselves. My father took a job in the LA oilfields even though financially he did not have to - my grandfather told him "You aren't dickin' off the whole summer - you are going to work!", and I got exactly the same treatment, for 3 summers in a row. It was good for me, and my nephew, who has otherwise been very spoiled, is going to get the exact same education next year, in spite of his family being wealthy. I think you will find that many wealthy families understand the need to give their kids a wake-up call and understand how much work that IPad or car represents.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 141): and if a company is willing to shell out $50 million per year to attract someone of that caliber to work for them, who are we to say it is immoral?

You miss the point. Nobody would care, that is how the system has gone off the rails. there is no wash down. It goes up to a relative few, as we can see with the current conditions of a shrinking middleclass and a growing poverty class. When I and you and many others of a certain age started out, we all expected the higher ups as we used to say to live better. We knew we had a reasonable chance at the golden apple. It inspired us to do better. They made an attempt to pay for labor, even though not too willingly. (Union pressure) Now that they have killed off that pressure, (Jobs overseas) (States stealing each others jobs) We see the bloated compensation, pay. This is a rape of that system, worthy of the Robber Barons of old.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 141): I think you'd be surprised. My grandparents (on both sides) grew up dirt poor but made good fortunes for themselves. My father took a job in the LA oilfields even though financially he did not have to - my grandfather told him "You aren't dickin' off the whole summer - you are going to work!", and I got exactly the same treatment, for 3 summers in a row. It was good for me, and my nephew, who has otherwise been very spoiled, is going to get the exact same education next year, in spite of his family being wealthy. I think you will find that many wealthy families understand the need to give their kids a wake-up call and understand how much work that IPad or car represents.

I know, I have been there myself, abject poverty to middleclass. The wealthy have always known how to perpetuate wealth. I give them credit. You are talking the American Dream. Gone for more and more people, by intent, it has to be. Every now and again, the wealthy overplay their hand, and then we have class resentment. We are in that stage now.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 140): The U.S. tried that, it was a miserable failure. Most of the population lived in abject poverty, women/children were taken advantage of, people had absolutely no savings and the economy routinely plunged into recessions/depressions that wiped out what little most people had. Granted, a very tiny minority of people got super rich during this time, but for the average American it was an ugly life.

They had that in Great Britain also, and we see that many would advocate that today, if we are that dumb to let them. I suggest that people look up the smiling faces of poverty in old photos. Canada, US, Great Britain, Ireland, everywhere. You can see the grinding face of poverty allowed no smiling. We know what changed it, Revolution, unions. Economic freedom was not given freely here, or anywhere else.

[quote=WarRI1,reply=134]Where is the morality of that salary, while people have nothing, no hope, no jobs, no pride.




Does a pig feeding at the trough have moral code? NO, they do not, it is survival. So that kind of behavior excusable in the animal world. So is 520K a week for survival? I do not think so. Are humans supposed to have a moral code? I think they should have. I also said how moral is it when others have nothing, but welfare, minimum wage, poverty, ignorance? I know the wealthy give a bunch to charity, but I give what I can, and it is not to assuage my conscience for raking it off the top, which may help contribute to the socio economic problems we have.

[Edited 2013-09-02 15:48:01]

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 140): The U.S. tried that, it was a miserable failure. Most of the population lived in abject poverty, women/children were taken advantage of, people had absolutely no savings and the economy routinely plunged into recessions/depressions that wiped out what little most people had. Granted, a very tiny minority of people got super rich during this time, but for the average American it was an ugly life.

What you are describing is modern day america. Not quite sure how you can tie any of the above to the minimum wage though. The minimum wage causes poverty because it entails outlawing jobs that otherwise would exist - forcing people into unemployment.

You are drawing the usual flawed conclusion that the reason there was move poverty back then was because of the economic model and not because of the technological levels of the time.

Even the hardest leftie in the world should be against the minimum wage. I am happy to concede that there are left wing policies that will produce more equality, though at the expense of overall wealth. However, the minimum wage is purely destructive. A policy based on misguided ideology.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 112): Poverty line for a single person household is $11,490. http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/13poverty.cfm Assuming 50 work weeks at 40 hours per week, that works out to $5.75 per hour. Are you advocating a drop in minimum wage?

I should have specified the 3-person household poverty line. That works out to just about $9.75/hour, which you could round up to $10/hour if you wanted. Then tie it to inflation and leave it alone.

The nature of the economy now is such that people do have to support families on minimum wage - they should be able to do so, but only at the poverty line, and only with one child.

-Mir

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 133): The reason the minimum wage doesn't work for 9 bucks is the same reason it doesn't work for a million. It's the exact same economic parameters just at a different scale.

No. You are saying "let's start everyone off at a million dollars and see what happens" which is akin to a slippery slope argument. I say don't let trust fund babies get mommy and daddy's money for at least 5 years. Make them be in poverty or below for a while so they see what their legislation does to the majority of us.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 133): You wouldn't be able to get oil at all if that were the case.

The oil would still be able to be had, but the investors would be pissed your company is not making the same profit as Exxon.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 133): it's the people who should be earning below minimum wage but are banned that are the ones that aren't contributing to the economy.

So, if people want to contribute they need to get high paying jobs they are not qualified for? How can a person do that? Get an education they can not afford.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 132): You elitist prig. The vast majority of those 10% have had jobs as I have when we were young. Starting at mowing and trimming lawns, sacking groceries,

AAAAAANNNDDD... the name calling starts so your point is moot.

However, I will say: GWB. Trust Fund babies.

There are those who did work their behinds off. But, others who cried to mommy and daddy when life didn't give them what they wanted.

The bottom line is: no respect for name calling.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 132): working on Louisiana oil rigs during the summer (I'm lining up my 16 year old nephew for that job next summer).

It's nice to know Louisiana has no child labor laws.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 136): And it will continue to get worse, ignorance, poverty, low wages, classic examples of the torn fabric of our society now.

Sorry, i think you missed the point. These people do not want to work! The 'father' can't find a job and one of the reasons is he looks like a gang member. So how do you remove that problem? Don't dress like a gang member!!!

Responsibility, work ethic, right and wrong

Quoting mad99 (Reply 147): These people do not want to work!

They do. If they did not want to work, they would not fill out applications!!!

Quoting mad99 (Reply 147): The 'father' can't find a job and one of the reasons is he looks like a gang member. So how do you remove that problem? Don't dress like a gang member!!!

The smart ones figure it out. Believe me. I have seen people who dress "gangster" get hired because they dress "professional" for the interview and job. The not smart ones end up eating out of dumpsters and the kids become award of the state.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 146): No. You are saying "let's start everyone off at a million dollars and see what happens" which is akin to a slippery slope argument. I say don't let trust fund babies get mommy and daddy's money for at least 5 years. Make them be in poverty or below for a while so they see what their legislation does to the majority of us.

I'm not saying start everyone off at a million. If the minimum wage was a million pounds 99% of people would have no job. Or do you actually think if the minimum wage was set to a million dollars we'd all be millionaires?

Quoting seb146 (Reply 146): The oil would still be able to be had, but the investors would be pissed your company is not making the same profit as Exxon.

Nobody would pump any oil out because it would not be profitable to do so.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 146): So, if people want to contribute they need to get high paying jobs they are not qualified for? How can a person do that? Get an education they can not afford.

Honestly what the hell are you talking about?

The minimum wage is a ban on certain jobs. That means if you aren't skilled enough you are banned from working and contributing to the economy. That is my issue.