Page 40 of 64 FirstFirst ...
30
38
39
40
41
42
50
... LastLast
  1. #781
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    I view that as a problem with the welfare system rather than Walmart.

    Companies like Walmart will pay as little for "warm body" work as they can. So would you if you were running Walmart. And raising the minimum wage certainly does less than nothing in the long run.
    I view it as a problem with Walmart and the US in general that they even allow a company to mistreat their employees to such an extent. They shouldn't be allowed to pay sub-human level income. Instead they refuse to allow you full time work. Even if they work you 40 hours a week they still count you as part time and will fire you if you get so much as 5 minutes of overtime. Watched them force an employee to take a 3 hour lunch to avoid overtime and could still make sure he was there for the start and end of his shift.

    They need to raise minimum wage to livable levels and require a company to have a certain percentage of their employees be full time I would say about 80% for any building that hires more than 30 people. You shouldn't have over 500 people working in a building and less than 35% of them be full time and they are only full time due to the fact they have been there for 9+ years and got grandfathered in as such.

    I am also supporter of a healthcare system similar to Canada's. We could have ours be a carbon copy of theirs and it would be a net improvement across the board as we already spend 3 times more than they do as a percentage of our national income for vastly inferior service. At least according to the last studies I read about a year back. That would also solve the full time vs part time to an extent as that way, even the part timers are covered for healthcare.
    Last edited by Fugus; 2012-11-16 at 02:15 AM.

  2. #782
    Quote Originally Posted by Fugus View Post
    I view it as a problem with Walmart and the US in general that they even allow a company to mistreat their employees to such an extent. They shouldn't be allowed to pay sub-human level income. Instead they refuse to allow you full time work. Even if they work you 40 hours a week they still count you as part time and will fire you if you get so much as 5 minutes of overtime.
    There was a time when the minimum wage was considered just dandy. It's kept pace with inflation, and suddenly it's "sub-human". Time change, eh ?

    They need to raise minimum wage to livable levels and require a company to have a certain percentage of their employees be full time I would say about 80% for any building that hires more than 30 people. You shouldn't have over 500 people working in a building and less than 35% of them be full time and they are only full time due to the fact they have been there for 9+ years and got grandfathered in as such.
    We've had a 60 year policy of continually raising the minimum wage. What you want is more of the same. If you keep doing what you've been doing, you'll keep getting what you've been getting.

    As for carbon copying Canada's system... why on Earth people can't be happy we got the ACA is beyond me. You're not even willing to give it a fucking chance before you decide that it's not enough.

  3. #783
    Quote Originally Posted by Lefrog View Post
    Technology is indeed affecting our workforce, but without concrete numbers your guess is as a good as mine. Menial physical labor is indeed getting replaced, but at the same time, the job growth in the IT department has been exponential by far. 20 years ago you had those thousand workers in a factory, now you have them maintaining websites, updating databases, etc etc while you have 1 machine doing the factory job. Menial labor has simply shifted.
    Don't disagree but it goes beyond menial labor. Look at accounting departments or hell even pharmacists. 10-15 years ago you'd need 20 people just for finance. Now you may need 5 due to improvements in software. More and more of pharmacy is being automated to the point where you need 1 person to hand the prescription to the customer while the machine does the rest.

    I think it's great that some people are able to go back and get an education in a different field but my point is not everybody is going to be able to do that. There simply wont be enough jobs to meet the demand of new college grads and those that have been replaced.

  4. #784
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    There was a time when the minimum wage was considered just dandy. It's kept pace with inflation, and suddenly it's "sub-human". Time change, eh ?



    We've had a 60 year policy of continually raising the minimum wage. What you want is more of the same. If you keep doing what you've been doing, you'll keep getting what you've been getting.
    http://www.raisetheminimumwage.com/facts/

    according to that, minimum wage would be $10.55 an hour if it kept up with inflation, it is $7.25 an hour here. That is vastly different payscales which puts it squarely in "sub-human" levels with it being about 25% below what it should be.

    If the 60 year policy kept up with inflation and didn't allow companies to find loopholes to avoid providing what they should, the problems wouldn't be so severe.

  5. #785
    What if we don't want to be like Denmark?
    We're a democratic republic. You're free to try to win the national debate and we on the left are free to push for more liberal policies. If your side loses you're free to continue arguing for change back to the right or leave.
    I'd ask which ones since the UK, Germany, all of Scandinavia and France have top marginal tax brackets over 42% and mean effective rates well over America's 29%. In fact, the only one that's in the US' effective tax neighborhood is Switzerland.
    Top marginal rates. And yes most of them pay more in taxes than we do, but they're also getting more in social services. If you want an honest comparison you have to take into account not only what we're paying in taxes but what we're paying in health care and in many cases higher education to what they're paying in taxes.
    There was a time when the minimum wage was considered just dandy. It's kept pace with inflation, and suddenly it's "sub-human". Time change, eh ?
    Inflation is less important than purchasing power. Real value of the federal minimum wage has dropped significantly since the 70s.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

  6. #786
    The Lightbringer Naxere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    45.0061° N, 93.1567° W
    Posts
    3,066
    Papa John's I can tolerate, but not Denny's too!

  7. #787
    Quote Originally Posted by Fugus View Post
    http://www.raisetheminimumwage.com/facts/

    according to that, minimum wage would be $10.55 an hour if it kept up with inflation, it is $7.25 an hour here. That is vastly different payscales which puts it squarely in "sub-human" levels with it being about 25% below what it should be.

    If the 60 year policy kept up with inflation and didn't allow companies to find loopholes to avoid providing what they should, the problems wouldn't be so severe.
    I am so sick of people bringing that bogus website up.

    Let me enlighten you to some facts.

    Here's the Department of Labor's actual chart on minimum wage historical rates.

    Let's look at when the minimum wage was $.25 in 1938. If you plug that into the US Bureau of Labor Statistics' inflation calculator you'll see that the 1938 minimum wage of $.25 equates to about 4.10 today.

    In 1950, when the minimum wage was at the height of its purchasing power, it was $.75, or $7.20 in today's dollars.

    The minimum wage has, historically, fluctuated around a $6-$8 (in 2012 dollars) rate. The point that the "raise the minimum wage" people like to start their charts at is the late 60s and 70s when, for a brief time, the purchasing power of the minimum wage was artificially inflated to ridiculous purchasing power of $10-$11 in today's dollars.

    You'll find that it didn't last long either as inflation quickly normalized it back to its classical rate.

    I'm just so tired of explaining this uncomfortable fact to minimum wage advocates every time it comes up.

  8. #788
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    I am so sick of people bringing that bogus website up.

    Let me enlighten you to some facts.

    Here's the Department of Labor's actual chart on minimum wage historical rates.

    Let's look at when the minimum wage was $.25 in 1938. If you plug that into the US Bureau of Labor Statistics' inflation calculator you'll see that the 1938 minimum wage of $.25 equates to about 4.10 today.

    In 1950, when the minimum wage was at the height of its purchasing power, it was $.75, or $7.20 in today's dollars.

    The minimum wage has, historically, fluctuated around a $6-$8 (in 2012 dollars) rate. The point that the "raise the minimum wage" people like to start their charts at is the late 60s and 70s when, for a brief time, the purchasing power of the minimum wage was artificially inflated to ridiculous purchasing power of $10-$11 in today's dollars.

    You'll find that it didn't last long either as inflation quickly normalized it back to its classical rate.

    I'm just so tired of explaining this uncomfortable fact to minimum wage advocates every time it comes up.
    So you are saying that minimum wage was never meant to allow anyone to ever actually live in any fashion? If it doesn't even allow you to support yourself and give you even the most basic of needed things, then what the hell is the point?

    Sorry, if it doesn't allow one to support themselves and provide a minimum of the basics needed just to survive, it isn't enough. If it was that low this entire time, why the hell haven't we had a civil war yet as it is long overdue at that point?

  9. #789
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    We're a democratic republic. You're free to try to win the national debate and we on the left are free to push for more liberal policies. If your side loses you're free to continue arguing for change back to the right or leave.
    My problem isn't, necessarily, that the left want more social policies. My problem is that the left, classically, cares far less for the financial realities of the policies they want, choosing instead to lean on nebulous benefits we'll supposedly see down the road (which include "opportunity costs" of not providing X for the poor). The source of the money always seems to go back to the wealthy. I have no illusions I'll make more than $250,000/year. I'm not part of the 1%. I may not even be part of the top 20%. I'm still incredibly uncomfortable with thrusting a burden on someone just because they can afford it. I believe that what should be taken is only what is absolutely necessary and no more.

    Inflation is less important than purchasing power. Real value of the federal minimum wage has dropped significantly since the 70s.
    Inflation is directly related to purchasing power. Yes, real value of the federal minimum wage has dropped significantly since the 70s... but only AFTER it increased significantly from the 40s.

  10. #790
    boycott

    is one of our collective power.

    edit: we should make a list, I will work on that and I will post it everywhere. I know that corporations own almost everything, but i'm on a crusade.
    Last edited by Morogoth; 2012-11-16 at 02:38 AM.

  11. #791
    Titan Adam Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Sarif Industries, Detroit
    Posts
    13,551
    Quote Originally Posted by Erenax View Post
    Papa John's I can tolerate, but not Denny's too!
    This is getting stupid. Like really. Why punish employees for what Congress does?

    Fuck Denny's your food sucked anyways.

    If a video game developer removed tumors from players, they'd whine about nerfing their loss in weight and access to radiation powers. -Cracked.com

  12. #792
    My problem isn't, necessarily, that the left want more social policies. My problem is that the left, classically, cares far less for the financial realities of the policies they want, choosing instead to lean on nebulous benefits we'll supposedly see down the road (which include "opportunity costs" of not providing X for the poor).
    We're not really at the cost phase of implementation though. That's something you figure out when you're actually crafting a bill. Right now those who want single payer need to just focus on advertising the idea and getting people elected who will move towards it. That being said single payer systems are generally delivering care for less than our current one so I don't get cost as a valid objection at this time.
    Inflation is directly related to purchasing power. Yes, real value of the federal minimum wage has dropped significantly since the 70s... but only AFTER it increased significantly from the 40s.
    This doesn't really matter. Real value has dropped.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

  13. #793
    Quote Originally Posted by Fugus View Post
    So you are saying that minimum wage was never meant to allow anyone to ever actually live in any fashion? If it doesn't even allow you to support yourself and give you even the most basic of needed things, then what the hell is the point?
    Once upon a time the minimum wage did provide a living wage. Continual increases keep it over a living wage, but accelerate inflation. 100% of goods produced in the United States attribute their costs to labor or profit (Which is merely what corporate owners deem their labor worth). This means that the minimum wage starts off pretty awesome. In 5 years or less, though, minimum wage is right back to being a shitty, rock-bottom job that can't pay rent.

    Sorry, if it doesn't allow one to support themselves and provide a minimum of the basics needed just to survive, it isn't enough. If it was that low this entire time, why the hell haven't we had a civil war yet as it is long overdue at that point?
    Because there's nothing that can be done to fix it.

    The bottom is always going to be the bottom and no amount of price-fixing (Which is all the minimum wage is) will change that.

    Libertarian think tanks routinely find, in their studies, that Unions, rather than the poor, benefit more when the minimum wage increases.

  14. #794
    Quote Originally Posted by Morogoth View Post
    boycott

    is one of our collective power.

    edit: we should make a list, I will work on that and I will post it everywhere. I know that corporations own almost everything, but i'm on a crusade.
    I'd boycott Papa John's for this, if I wasn't already boycotting them for producing disgusting inedible pizza.

  15. #795
    Yeah, I'll pass on having a bunch of sick, underpaid people with no health insurance make my pizza for me. THANKS.

  16. #796
    Quote Originally Posted by stumpy View Post
    I'd boycott Papa John's for this, if I wasn't already boycotting them for producing disgusting inedible pizza.
    The sad thing is if we boycott the restaurant, the owner will still have his millions and a lot of poor people will lose their job...FML

    edit: we should march on his manor, 100k people marching and burning everything on their path! That would make a beautiful movie.

    p.s. hello NSA
    Last edited by Morogoth; 2012-11-16 at 02:48 AM.

  17. #797
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    Once upon a time the minimum wage did provide a living wage. Continual increases keep it over a living wage, but accelerate inflation. 100% of goods produced in the United States attribute their costs to labor or profit (Which is merely what corporate owners deem their labor worth). This means that the minimum wage starts off pretty awesome. In 5 years or less, though, minimum wage is right back to being a shitty, rock-bottom job that can't pay rent.



    Because there's nothing that can be done to fix it.

    The bottom is always going to be the bottom and no amount of price-fixing (Which is all the minimum wage is) will change that.

    Libertarian think tanks routinely find, in their studies, that Unions, rather than the poor, benefit more when the minimum wage increases.
    So basically what you are saying is the corporate owners are too greedy and trying to steal more than their fair share of the pie. So we have to increase our minimum wage while somehow muzzling the ones controlling the rate of inflation. That is a hard one to try and fix without forcing a lot of peoples hands.

    There is plenty to fix though. Yes the bottom is always the bottom, but how far the bottom is is the problem, they want the bottom set WAY too low for what it should be.

    You just said flat out what the problem is and then said there was no problem........ The corporate owners deem labor to be artificially lower than what it is really worth but since they hold most of the cards they have gotten away with it and THAT is what we need to fix.

    Edit: Off to my FML job that is neither mentally nor physically, nor sexually, nor financially gratifying in any way...... Honestly still have trouble justifying even going but according to others, if you are willing to throw a couple decades of your life away at a job proving yourself, a real job might one day hire you for a job that pays at the poverty line and if you are lucky, above it. Or at least you can depend on handouts while using it to pay for college and then get a real job (what I am stuck doing for now).
    Last edited by Fugus; 2012-11-16 at 02:49 AM.

  18. #798
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,210
    The argument I've always heard for a lower minimum wage is that employers would be spending less on creating their products in conjunction with demand going down, forcing them to lower their prices.

    Not sure if I necessarily agree with that, however.

  19. #799
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    We're not really at the cost phase of implementation though. That's something you figure out when you're actually crafting a bill. Right now those who want single payer need to just focus on advertising the idea and getting people elected who will move towards it. That being said single payer systems are generally delivering care for less than our current one so I don't get cost as a valid objection at this time.
    "Where the money comes from" must necessarily be one of the first things determined when drafting a policy.

    Switzerland seems to be a better happy medium for the left and right. It does away with the price-fixing regimes of other nations while spending almost 40% less per capita.

    This doesn't really matter. Real value has dropped.
    And what system would you implement? You can't say the minimum wage hasn't been consistently increased. To the contrary, it's increased by about 25-30% every decade practically like clockwork since its inception except from 1967 through 1976 when it was increased by almost 10% almost every year.

    You can't take an honest look at those figures and expect me to believe continual minimum wage increases are a policy that works when, after 60 years, that policy has failed to maintain a standard of living.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-16 at 02:54 AM ----------

    And then take a look at this chart.

    http://www.usinflationcalculator.com...flation-rates/

    Where it shows periods of significant inflation have accompanied minimum wage hikes rather routinely.

    Pay special attention to the late 70s and early 80s (About 5 years after the "golden age" of minimum wage).

  20. #800
    "Where the money comes from" must necessarily be one of the first things determined when drafting a policy.
    That's what I'm telling you. The debate isn't to the point of drafting a specific bill. Its still at "is single payer a type of system we want to pursue".
    Switzerland seems to be a better happy medium for the left and right. It does away with the price-fixing regimes of other nations while spending almost 40% less per capita.
    Among first world nations Switzerland is still 4th with us, belgium and France ahead of them. I don't know about belgium but France provides a huge amount of stuff and both of those nations are only about a percentage point of GDP above Switzerland.
    You can't say the minimum wage hasn't been consistently increased
    Absolute value is pointless. If we create the minimum wage to keep standard of living up the only thing that matters in this discussion is the purchasing power.
    You can't take an honest look at those figures and expect me to believe continual minimum wage increases are a policy that works when, after 60 years, that policy has failed to maintain a standard of living.
    There are more factors at play here, we both know this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •