• 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!

Dear poor Republicans / Red States/ Trump supporters

democrats = anti American citizen/pro illegal alien...............................We all know that taxes are deducted according to the amount of pay you get. Raise minimum wage and democrat crooks get more money to buy more votes from illegal aliens. To hell with American citizens.
 
JustHanging said:
But there's a reason some places are more expensive...and it's usually got a lot to do with supply and demand, ie the more expensive places to live are the nicer places to live. I'm sure some crap town next to toxic waste dump is really cheap to live in, and looks great when adusted rates are looked at, but who wants to live there?
Click to expand...

This comment does nothing to refute the legitimacy of adjusting the minimum wages to the widely variable cost of living, because the same wage in two different places provides for two very different standards of living. It's possible to have a worse standard of living in a high-cost place with a higher minimum wage than you would in a low-cost place with a lower statutory minimum wage. High-COL places need significantly higher minimum wages in order for them to even just be equivalent to lower minimum wages in lower-cost places.

And just because a city has a high cost of living doesn't mean it's necessarily a "nice place to live." I'd recommend clicking the link and trying to understand the concept of a real minimum wage.

California's $11-something an hour minimum wage is great for people who live in Fresno or Bakersfield, because the cost of living in those California cities is low. But make that same wage in the Bay Area or San Diego, you'll be homeless.

Now look at the Pennsylvania/Ohio area. If you live in Toledo (which I don't particularly recommend, but people do it), the $8-something minimum wage would actually provide quite a bit of your necessities, because the cost of living there is low. Take that same wage to Philadelphia, what will you be able to afford on that same $8-something minimum wage? Not much. Anything close to the "nice areas" that make it an expensive place to live? Nope. You'll be pushed out to the worst parts of the city and struggle a lot more to afford your necessities than if you lived in a lower-cost area not that far away.
 
Neomalthusian said:
This comment does nothing to refute the legitimacy of adjusting the minimum wages to the widely variable cost of living, because the same wage in two different places provides for two very different standards of living. It's possible to have a worse standard of living in a high-cost place with a higher minimum wage than you would in a low-cost place with a lower statutory minimum wage. High-COL places need significantly higher minimum wages in order for them to even just be equivalent to lower minimum wages in lower-cost places.
Click to expand...

IMO minimum wages should be even across the board.

And just because a city has a high cost of living doesn't mean it's necessarily a "nice place to live."
Click to expand...

Sure, it can be isolated, so supplies are more expensive, but in general I believe the nicer places to live cost more to live in, just based on supply and demand. Do you have any data to show there is no correlation?

I'd recommend clicking the link and trying to understand the concept of a real minimum wage.
Click to expand...

I understand the concept you're working with. I just believe that minimum wages should be equal across the board.

California's $11-something an hour minimum wage is great for people who live in Fresno or Bakersfield, because the cost of living in those California cities is low. But make that same wage in the Bay Area or San Diego, you'll be homeless.
Click to expand...

Then those cities will have to pay more than $11.00 an hour to their employees, if they want to have employees.

Now look at the Pennsylvania/Ohio area. If you live in Toledo (which I don't particularly recommend, but people do it), the $8-something minimum wage would actually provide quite a bit of your necessities, because the cost of living there is low. Take that same wage to Philadelphia, what will you be able to afford on that same $8-something minimum wage? Not much. Anything close to the "nice areas" that make it an expensive place to live? Nope. You'll be pushed out to the worst parts of the city and struggle a lot more to afford your necessities than if you lived in a lower-cost area not that far away.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get the math. And here you're confirming what I said earlier, that generally nicer places cost more to live in.
 
plutonium said:
Maybe i am missing something... Trump talks about your welfare like he is going to help you have a better life. one very simple question. why is the minimum wage in Calif 12.00 hr going to 15.00 and New York 11.75 hr "democratic states by the way". and almost all of your red states are still 7.25 an hour.. dont you maybe,,, just maybe think that your republican party does not really care about you poor republicans. Keeping Mexicans and Muslims out is not going to put food on the table. The most simplist thing to do is Raise the federal minimum wage and dammit the dems would have voted yes on that!!! Wow.... i rest my case folks
Click to expand...

I'ts pointless, these people have watched Fox news propagandize them to blame all their problems on minorities, illegals, and democrats that no amount of facts, logic or reasoning it going to matter. I mean, the Republicans and Trump are not even hiding the corruption and giving everything to the rich while going after the rest of the countries benefits and income. and yet still so many believe Trump. it's what happens when your only link to the world and reality is Fox news, which just peddles complete fiction
 
plutonium said:
Maybe i am missing something... Trump talks about your welfare like he is going to help you have a better life. one very simple question. why is the minimum wage in Calif 12.00 hr going to 15.00 and New York 11.75 hr "democratic states by the way". and almost all of your red states are still 7.25 an hour.. dont you maybe,,, just maybe think that your republican party does not really care about you poor republicans. Keeping Mexicans and Muslims out is not going to put food on the table. The most simplist thing to do is Raise the federal minimum wage and dammit the dems would have voted yes on that!!! Wow.... i rest my case folks
Click to expand...

Compare housing costs and taxes between NYC and Texas and get back to us with it.
 
Neomalthusian said:
This comment does nothing to refute the legitimacy of adjusting the minimum wages to the widely variable cost of living, because the same wage in two different places provides for two very different standards of living. It's possible to have a worse standard of living in a high-cost place with a higher minimum wage than you would in a low-cost place with a lower statutory minimum wage. High-COL places need significantly higher minimum wages in order for them to even just be equivalent to lower minimum wages in lower-cost places.

And just because a city has a high cost of living doesn't mean it's necessarily a "nice place to live." I'd recommend clicking the link and trying to understand the concept of a real minimum wage.

California's $11-something an hour minimum wage is great for people who live in Fresno or Bakersfield, because the cost of living in those California cities is low. But make that same wage in the Bay Area or San Diego, you'll be homeless.

Now look at the Pennsylvania/Ohio area. If you live in Toledo (which I don't particularly recommend, but people do it), the $8-something minimum wage would actually provide quite a bit of your necessities, because the cost of living there is low. Take that same wage to Philadelphia, what will you be able to afford on that same $8-something minimum wage? Not much. Anything close to the "nice areas" that make it an expensive place to live? Nope. You'll be pushed out to the worst parts of the city and struggle a lot more to afford your necessities than if you lived in a lower-cost area not that far away.
Click to expand...

OK, but using that same "logic" would you then advocate for varying one's Social Security (SS) retirement benefit amount based on where they chose to live? BTW, many get far less than $30K/year in SS retirement and yet are expected to 'get by'.
 
JustHanging said:
IMO minimum wages should be even across the board. Sure, it can be isolated, so supplies are more expensive, but in general I believe the nicer places to live cost more to live in, just based on supply and demand. Do you have any data to show there is no correlation?

I understand the concept you're working with. I just believe that minimum wages should be equal across the board.
Click to expand...

This makes minimum wage earners in high-cost areas significantly worse off than minimum wage earners in low-cost areas. Seems a bit arbitrary.

Then those cities will have to pay more than $11.00 an hour to their employees, if they want to have employees.
Click to expand...

This comment does two strange things. 1) It departs from the comment you just made about believing minimum wages should be the same everywhere. 2) It seems to suggest the market (cost of living) creates a de facto market-based minimum wage, begging the question why we need a statutory one.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
OK, but using that same "logic" would you then advocate for varying one's Social Security (SS) retirement benefit amount based on where they chose to live?
Click to expand...

No. Without delving into Social Security, my point on expressing the minimum wage relative to cost of living is not because I think that's what needs to be done by law, it's just because it doesn't make a lot of sense to cry about minimum wages in certain places without taking into account (at all) how far those wages go in those places relative to others.
 
Neomalthusian said:
No. Without delving into Social Security, my point on expressing the minimum wage relative to cost of living is not because I think that's what needs to be done by law, it's just because it doesn't make a lot of sense to cry about minimum wages in certain places without taking into account (at all) how far those wages go in those places relative to others.
Click to expand...

That makes little sense at all. Why should an entry level worker (in zip code X) be paid more than a retiree who has worked and paid FICA taxes for 40+ years? BTW, if it's not "done by law" then it is not really a MW.
 
JustHanging said:
IMO minimum wages should be even across the board.



Sure, it can be isolated, so supplies are more expensive, but in general I believe the nicer places to live cost more to live in, just based on supply and demand. Do you have any data to show there is no correlation?



I understand the concept you're working with. I just believe that minimum wages should be equal across the board.



Then those cities will have to pay more than $11.00 an hour to their employees, if they want to have employees.



Yeah, I get the math. And here you're confirming what I said earlier, that generally nicer places cost more to live in.
Click to expand...

That (bolded above) assertion fails to consider that which is added (or made unnecessary) by "safety net" benefits. One must be honest and admit that all workers being paid $X/hour are not necessarily living on that wage alone under our "safety net" system.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That makes little sense at all.
Click to expand...

What doesn't make sense about it? It doesn't make sense to criticize a place because of its minimum wage while intentionally being ignorant or avoidant of the "real" (i.e. COL-adjusted) minimum wage. Because in some cases the places with higher minimum wages actually result in lower quality of life for the people that earn that wage, compared to elsewhere, because the variable being ignored is how far those wages go to afford the necessities.

Why should an entry level worker (in zip code X) be paid more than a retiree who has worked and paid FICA taxes for 40+ years?
Click to expand...

I'm making no value judgments as to what an entry level worker "should" be paid vs. what a retiree "should" be paid.
 
Neomalthusian said:
What doesn't make sense about it? It doesn't make sense to criticize a place because of its minimum wage while intentionally being ignorant or avoidant of the "real" (i.e. COL-adjusted) minimum wage. Because in some cases the places with higher minimum wages actually result in lower quality of life for the people that earn that wage, compared to elsewhere, because the variable being ignored is how far those wages go to afford the necessities.



I'm making no value judgments as to what an entry level worker "should" be paid vs. what a retiree "should" be paid.
Click to expand...

You are making a value judgement that equal pay for equal work is 'unfair' but don't think that applies to retirement benefits. If mandated COLAs are 'good' for workers then it stands to reason that they are 'good' for retirees as well.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
You are making a value judgement that equal pay for equal work is 'unfair' but don't think that applies to retirement benefits.
Click to expand...

I don't see how anything related to this topic applies to retirement benefits.

If mandated COLAs are 'good' for workers then it stands to reason that they are 'good' for retirees as well.
Click to expand...

I guess, but that seems tangential to this. The point is the "worst offenders" in terms of minimum wage are a very different list of places if you look at it relative to cost-of-living (how far those dollars go) versus if you completely ignore cost-of-living.

So if a person is going to chastise the "worst offenders" while ignoring the cost-of-living variable, they should explain why they're ignoring it.
 
Neomalthusian said:
I don't see how anything related to this topic applies to retirement benefits.



I guess, but that seems tangential to this. The point is the "worst offenders" in terms of minimum wage are a very different list of places if you look at it relative to cost-of-living (how far those dollars go) versus if you completely ignore cost-of-living.

So if a person is going to chastise the "worst offenders" while ignoring the cost-of-living variable, they should explain why they're ignoring it.
Click to expand...

Both MW and SS retirement benefit levels are established by federal law. IMHO, both should be periodically adjusted for cost of living (basic inflation) or, over time, they will both become essentially worthless.
 
Cardinal said:
As I said, no matter which metric you use, you'll always see the same general clustering.

For states that use the most Federal assistance:

8af93870aad5ba8b463237b4f46a33da.png


Lowest graduation rates:

states.png

Red States Least Educated in the U.S. | Time

Highest teen pregnancy:

imrs.php


Well-being index:

0311-SUBeconomix-well-being-map.gif


Chlamydia rates:

aHR0cDovL3d3dy5saXZlc2NpZW5jZS5jb20vaW1hZ2VzL2kvMDAwLzA3MC83OTcvb3JpZ2luYWwvY2hsYW1pZGlhLW1hcC1sYXJnZS5qcGc=
Click to expand...

So your rebuttal is to combat cost of living to wages is to post stats completely irrelevant, and even ignore some of your own two posts where many of those blue states are just as bad,last I checked nv was a blue state and fl was a purple state, also your hiv list shows half the north east heavy on hiv which is usually a democrat stronghold and not the south. Infact the only chart you posted that singles out the south on anything is the clap, but heck if you are using std's as a measurement of economy vs costs be my guest, you are awarded no pointed and god have mercy on your soul.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom