• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

On the issue of raising the minimum wage

What is your opinion on the plans to increase the minimum wage?

  • Total voters
    20
  • Poll closed .
Nickyjo said:
My point was that many conservatives who oppose rights or benefits for workers in other contexts also argue that they are helping workers by opposing minimum wage increases...
Click to expand...
What other folks say that you don't like doesn't matter here. My point was that while you you seem to say that minwage hikes help low income folks (correct me if you don't mean that), I don't see it when I look at history.
Nickyjo said:
...the min wage has not kept up with the cost of living, and that argues for an increase.
Click to expand...
Agreed, the Fed min wage has stayed put for a decade while inflation continued. History also shows that most everyone's wages went up much faster than inflation the longer the min. wage was held steady. Now we understand you don't care for historical numbers but in case that changes---
realwages.png

:
 
expat_panama said:
What other folks say that you don't like doesn't matter here. My point was that while you you seem to say that minwage hikes help low income folks (correct me if you don't mean that), I don't see it when I look at history.Agreed, the Fed min wage has stayed put for a decade while inflation continued. History also shows that most everyone's wages went up much faster than inflation the longer the min. wage was held steady. Now we understand you don't care for historical numbers but in case that changes---
realwages.png

:
Click to expand...

I worked for minimum wage. Was poor. A higher minimum wage would have made me better off. Management tends not to want an increase. Labor does. Seems pretty simple to me.
 
Nickyjo said:
I worked for minimum wage. Was poor. A higher minimum wage would have made me better off.
Click to expand...

assuming you had a job at the higher wage. The higher the wage the fewer the jobs. Would a 0 wage have made you better off??

you don't like to be confused by facts do you. You hold onto your prejudices no matter what?
 
James972 said:
assuming you had a job at the higher wage. The higher the wage the fewer the jobs. Would a 0 wage have made you better off??

you don't like to be confused by facts do you. You hold onto your prejudices no matter what?
Click to expand...

So I guess I should have work for nothing to lock down my employment permanently. A 10 cent bump was gonna put the company out of business? Doubt it. Used to work for the farmworkers union back in 1972. “You’re ruining the industry,” claimed a grower when I told him a winery paid their harvesters $2.40 an hour. During the civil rights era, an employer in Colorado told his white workers to write to Washington, saying that if I “have to hire blacks I have to fire whites.” I imagine back in the day panic set in among employers when child labor was abolished, and a forty hour week? America as we know it is done for.

Same thing happened when proposals to outlaw the short handled hoe in agricuture was proposed. How will we thin lettuce? Lettuce and farmworkers’ backs survived.

Management always seems to panic whether it’s getting rid of slavery or child labor, making mines safer or raising the minimum wage. My workers will suffer! Oh, the humanity!
 
Nickyjo said:
I worked for minimum wage. Was poor. A higher minimum wage would have made me better off. Management tends not to want an increase. Labor does. Seems pretty simple to me.
Click to expand...
The words "would have" are bad words to use when it comes to money. Others are "should have" and "could have".

Years ago I worked for minimum wage too and was greatful for the chance to feed my family. I understood back then that if the minimum wage was raised I'd be out of a job --I knew that at the time that I just wasn't productive enough to earn more than min. wage for my employer. So what I did was to improve the value of my labor by working harder to learn calculus at the local junior college. It led to graduation and a 4-year college degree which doubled my labor value.

Sure, there are lots of good ways to increase earning power, but shoulda coulda woulda and voting for gov't aid don't work.
 
expat_panama said:
The words "would have" are bad words to use when it comes to money. Others are "should have" and "could have".

Years ago I worked for minimum wage too and was greatful for the chance to feed my family. I understood back then that if the minimum wage was raised I'd be out of a job --I knew that at the time that I just wasn't productive enough to earn more than min. wage for my employer. So what I did was to improve the value of my labor by working harder to learn calculus at the local junior college. It led to graduation and a 4-year college degree which doubled my labor value.

Sure, there are lots of good ways to increase earning power, but shoulda coulda woulda and voting for gov't aid don't work.
Click to expand...

You must have missed the New Deal and the work of unions over the past 100+ years since Haymarket. The sky didnt fall each time conservatives predicted it would when they opposed each reform that came along. You were indeed probably “worth more,” but if you want to believe that your boss would have closed shop if he had to pay more, go ahead. Bible notes that some are happy with the scraps that fall from the master’s table.

Yes, rising wages or union rules can lead some employers to seek out sweatshops overseas or run away to some place in the US where an inspector shows up every few years, but to use that as an excuse to accept exploitation is absurd.
 
simple human behavior: Get more for less
Wal- Mart motto: Get more for less
Increase in minimum wage: Get more for less
Congressional pay scale: Get more for less
Illegal Aliens: Get more for less

American middle class hard worker: get less for more

Unwanted baby as result of irresponsible DNA donators: death penalty without trial

We have some damn serious problems in this country, and I don't see it getting better anytime soon.

Our original freedom came from personal sacrifice and responsiblity and common goals among the citizenry. I'm surprised that the word responsibility hasn't been labeled 'hate speech' yet
 
The notion that raising the wage will lead to people losing their jobs to robots is ill-founded.

Automation will happen whether or not the wage is raised. If anyone is currently employed, that means they are in a position that can't be automated quite yet. That means they'll keep their job if the wage goes up, for now. Whenever their job can be automated, it will be, whatever the minimum wage is at that time.
 
AmNat said:
The notion that raising the wage will lead to people losing their jobs to robots is ill-founded.

Automation will happen whether or not the wage is raised. If anyone is currently employed, that means they are in a position that can't be automated quite yet. That means they'll keep their job if the wage goes up, for now. Whenever their job can be automated, it will be, whatever the minimum wage is at that time.
Click to expand...

This is yet another case of me seeing 'conservative' as a person's indentifying leaning, thinking that I already know what stance they will take, and then being completely wrong about that.

I'm a huge proponent of dramatically raising the minimum wage, and less of a proponent of increasing welfare, as I have been in the past. My views have shifted because the dialogue has completely changed, and among other things, I want low-wage jobs to be far more competive than having no job. I empathize with conservatives who lament the prospect of paying taxes to support those who refuse to work, I really do. I don't understand, however, people who claim to lament that, but also are against better pay and working conditions for the lowliest of workers.
 
DH Kirkwood said:
This is yet another case of me seeing 'conservative' as a person's indentifying leaning, thinking that I already know what stance they will take, and then being completely wrong about that.

I'm a huge proponent of dramatically raising the minimum wage, and less of a proponent of increasing welfare, as I have been in the past. My views have shifted because the dialogue has completely changed, and among other things, I want low-wage jobs to be far more competive than having no job. I empathize with conservatives who lament the prospect of paying taxes to support those who refuse to work, I really do. I don't understand, however, people who claim to lament that, but also are against better pay and working conditions for the lowliest of workers.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Welfare subsidizes low wages, both by removing the incentive to demand better wages, and (more perversely) imposing very high marginal tax rates on wages earned by welfare recipients. It's better to make work pay than to make idleness comfortable.

I'm a social conservative and a nationalist. The economy, in my view, has only one purpose, to support the family. Profit incentives for the wealthy are a necessary means to that end, but not a goal in themselves. Unfortunately, both parties have largely been bought and paid for at this point.
 
AmNat said:
Totally agree. Welfare subsidizes low wages, both by removing the incentive to demand better wages, and (more perversely) imposing very high marginal tax rates on wages earned by welfare recipients. It's better to make work pay than to make idleness comfortable.

I'm a social conservative and a nationalist. The economy, in my view, has only one purpose, to support the family. Profit incentives for the wealthy are a necessary means to that end, but not a goal in themselves. Unfortunately, both parties have largely been bought and paid for at this point.
Click to expand...

I'm a social liberal and a humanist, but where we seem to absolutely agree is where both our parties have been bought and sold. I'm not a moderate by any stretch of the term, but I would consider voting for a Republican that disagreed with everything save for campaign finance reform.
 
Nickyjo said:
You must have missed...
Click to expand...
What we seem to have here is I'm happy w/ my income because of me and what I did, so you're not being happy w/ ur income ends up being my fault too.

We can leave it at that.
 
DH Kirkwood said:
both our parties have been bought and sold.
Click to expand...

well, Democrats certainly sell welfare entitlement programs in return for votes, but Republicans have nothing to sell since they support freedom and capitalism. Do you understand?
 
AmNat said:
Unfortunately, both parties have largely been bought and paid for at this point.
Click to expand...

Republicans??? Why so afraid to present your best example? It's easy to parrot a line but much harder to back it up-isn't it?
 
James972 said:
Republicans??? Why so afraid to present your best example? It's easy to parrot a line but much harder to back it up-isn't it?
Click to expand...

Yes. The Republican Party has been entirely bought and paid for by the donor class. It does not represent the interests of its base.
 
AmNat said:
Yes. The Republican Party has been entirely bought and paid for by the donor class.
Click to expand...

for 3rd time, do you have any evidence of this whatsoever????????????????
 
DH Kirkwood said:
I'm a social liberal and a humanist, but where we seem to absolutely agree is where both our parties have been bought and sold. I'm not a moderate by any stretch of the term, but I would consider voting for a Republican that disagreed with everything save for campaign finance reform.
Click to expand...

It takes more than just campaign finance reform to repair America's broken democracy.

Since a long, long time in most modern democracies only the popular-vote is acceptable to elect anyone as head of the government. For more than two centuries we have allowed a cockamamie Electoral College warp the popular-vote by means of an ignominious rule: That the popular-vote winner of the presidential election in any given state obtains ALL THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES.

Nowhere in any developed country on earth is that manipulation of the popular-vote permitted. Exceptions to the rule from WikiPedia here:
Other countries with electoral college systems include Burundi, Estonia, Kazakhstan, Madagascar, Myanmar, Pakistan, Trinidad and Tobago and Vanuatu.
Click to expand...

And the US of A ...

PS: And, of course, on the state level there's Gerrymandering of voting districts to favor one or the other party in a basically two-party national system. With any luck, the Supremes will see their way to outlawing this mechanism. With any luck!
 
Lafayette said:
Nowhere in any developed country on earth is that manipulation of the popular-vote permitted. Exceptions to the rule from WikiPedia here:
Click to expand...

wiki Lists 13 exceptions but forgot China and Russia. And let's not forget Democrats want felons and 16 year olds to vote to make democracy even more of a joke.
 
Why do Minimum Wage-advocates always stick to low numbers? If they truly believe a higher MW means a higher living standard for all, then why not just set it at a million dollars? :mrgreen:
 
Dacke said:
Why do Minimum Wage-advocates always stick to low numbers? If they truly believe a higher MW means a higher living standard for all, then why not just set it at a million dollars? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

liberals don't know word one about economics. Many just want to print money and hand it out! they call it MMT. Liberals imagine their thinking is legitimate when really it based in total ignorance.
 
Lafayette said:
For more than two centuries we have allowed a cockamamie Electoral College warp the popular-vote
Click to expand...

it has nothing to do with "allowing". If we cut the small states out there is no USA. Case closed!! Nobody will consent to being ruled by libcommie pseudo elites in NY and California.
 
AmNat said:
Yes. The Republican Party has been entirely bought and paid for by the donor class..
Click to expand...

So you handlers told you and you are a good parrot, but despite being asked 10 times you have no evidence to support what you are parroting.
 
PLIGHT OF THE MINIMUM WAGE EARNER

Xelor said:
Implement it or don't. I won't oppose either outcome, but it shouldn't be necessary given the nature of our economy and our nation's comparative advantage in the global economy.
Click to expand...

Would you have said that if unemployment was at 10% and not close to 4%? I doubt it.

Times are good for the moment, so many think the MW at a livable-wage level is not necessary. So, how many are working at the MW-level?

What does the Bureau of Labor Statistics say about it? This:

Among those paid by the hour, 542,000 workers earned exactly the prevailing federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 1.3 million had wages below the federal minimum. Together, these 1.8 million workers with wages at or below the federal minimum made up 2.3 percent of all hourly paid workers.
Click to expand...

Some facts-of-living:
*The annual MW is is presently $7.25 x 40 hours x 52 weeks or $15,080.
*The average cost of living (from here) for four-person family, per month = $4,045 ($48540 per year)
*The cost of living average for the US is 3.2 times the MW (in the above context).

How would YOU like to be in the circumstance of the 2.3% of Americans (1.8 million workers) who earn the MW? Not me.

So, why should any advanced nation allow that to happen?

Because that's the way the cookie crumbles? Of course, the above is just a raw analysis of the situation. In fact, many low-income families do find affordable low-cost housing offered by cities/states.

But is that the way to live all your life because one is incarcerated within the MW of $7.25 an hour ... ?
 
Lafayette said:
How would YOU like to be in the circumstance of the 2.3% of Americans (1.8 million workers) who earn the MW? Not me.
So, why should any advanced nation allow that to happen?
Click to expand...

the nation does not allow it to happen, liberals do with idiotic liberal policies like inviting in 60 million illegals to bid down wages for real Americans.
 
Since Trump's tax law was passed we've seen companies granting numerous pay raises and bonuses. Over the weekend target announced a plan to gradually hike their minimum wage to $15/hr. over the next years. Walmart is doing something similar and boosting its employee education program. THIS is the way it should happen, not by government fiat,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom