The Reality of Minimum Wages.

[Vivek]

I still find that your beliefs are entirely idealistic without any basis or reference to actual economics.

The belief that minimum wage shouldn't function as minimum wage (despite the very term stating otherwise) has nothing to do with economics and everything to do with the greed of the few and the ignorance of many. Judging by your posts I would guess you are the latter.

Contrary to what you're thinking, simply stating that your argument "sides with economics" doesn't make it so.

To state that the lowest in our society with the least going for them who take on the jobs the rest of us aren't willing to do and have the option of not doing should have their basic needs met is not idealism. It is simply common sense.

What irks me here is that your argument against raising min wage isn't that the people on it are able to sustain themselves fine already.

Instead your argument seems to be that they shouldn't.

And that is not what civilized society is about.

[Nostop it]

"Taxes pay for roads" isn't rhetoric. Taxes literally pay for roads.

The gasoline tax pays for roads. But if you say taxes pay for roads it's easier to pass new taxes.

[AeneasBK]

This thread started very amusingly but I've got to the end and I feel like I'm at the tail end of some horrid hallucinogenic experience. I should go back to bed

[Chrysia]

The gasoline tax pays for roads. But if you say taxes pay for roads it's easier to pass new taxes.

The gasoline tax is nowhere near sufficient to pay for the degree of infrastructure we need. Gasoline taxes are one of the many taxes that go towards building and maintaining roads.

[Vivek]

Cooking is a skill? In wow maybe.

I hope you are joking here.

[Grizzly Willy]

Cooking is a skill? In wow maybe.

Suppose we can go tell culinary schools and master chefs to pack it up and go home, since anyone can do their job and demand is going to crash?

[Vivek]

Cooking is a skill? In wow maybe.

I am sorry I seriously have to just stop here and ask you if you are really retarded enough to believe what I am reading here.

At this point you either have to be trolling or simply too stupid for this debate.


[Infracted]

[diddle]

The belief that minimum wage shouldn't function as minimum wage (despite the very term stating otherwise) has nothing to do with economics and everything to do with the greed of the few and the ignorance of many. Judging by your posts I would guess you are the latter.

Contrary to what you're thinking, simply stating that your argument "sides with economics" doesn't make it so.

To state that the lowest in our society with the least going for them who take on the jobs the rest of us aren't willing to do and have the option of not doing should have their basic needs met is not idealism. It is simply common sense.

What irks me here is that your argument against raising min wage isn't that the people on it are able to sustain themselves fine already.

Instead your argument seems to be that they shouldn't.

And that is not what civilized society is about.

Please give me the source that says that minimum wage is called so because it is supposed to give the minimum one needs to life off of. It simply means that it is the minimum wage that an employer can legally offer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage

Check out the first sentence.

[Vivek]

It simply means that it is the minimum wage that an employer can legally offer.

Thank you for stating the very obvious.

It already has been established and not really contested that companies offer min wages because they are made to by law.

Simply stating that fact on its own is really quite irrelevant.

Minimum wage exists because minimum wage law exists. And minimum wage law exists so that even the most unfortunate individuals in society aren't treated like animals and have the means to sustain and better themselves.

This is common sense and the fact that I have to sit here and explain this to anyone is part of the problem.

[Chrysia]

Please give me the source that says that minimum wage is called so because it is supposed to give the minimum one needs to life off of. It simply means that it is the minimum wage that an employer can legally offer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage

Check out the first sentence.

FDR, the architect of the minimum wage in this country, would disagree with your assessment.

The entire purpose was to force employers to pay workers a living wage for the time.

[Vivek]

FDR, the architect of the minimum wage in this country, would disagree with your assessment.

The entire purpose was to force employers to pay workers a living wage for the time.

For the record, I simply can't wait to see your reply to that one Diddle.

[diddle]

For the record, I simply can't wait to see your reply to that one Diddle.

FDR also thought Social Security was going to turn out well. Please tell me in the law where it specifies that a minimum wage must be a living wage, not just FDR's personal rhetoric.

I am also honored to be immortalized in your signature.

[Chrysia]

FDR also thought Social Security was going to turn out well.

It did. For nearly a century. The maximum taxable income simply hasn't been properly adjusted for inflation, so it's falling behind. With simple reforms (increasing the maximum taxable income), it would be completely viable for the next century or so.

[Vivek]

FDR also thought Social Security was going to turn out well.

Social security and your critique of it or the people behind it are irrelevant to this.

You have been constantly arguing that the purpose of minimum wage isn't self-sustainability despite the fact that the people who put it there have stated explicitly otherwise. As if merely reading the phrase 'minimum wage' was insufficient...rofl!

What do you say to that?

[Cthulhu 2020]

The gasoline tax pays for roads. But if you say taxes pay for roads it's easier to pass new taxes.

Taxes pay for some services that you obviously take for granted every day.

[diddle]

Social security and your critique of it or the people behind it are irrelevant to this.

You have been constantly arguing that the purpose of minimum wage isn't self-sustainability despite the fact that the people who put it there have stated explicitly otherwise.

What do you say to that?

If that was the absolute intention, it would have been written into law. Presidents say things and make many false promises.

[Vivek]

If that was the absolute intention, it would have been written into law.

They probably thought something like that would be self-explanatory. I suppose your country's past leaders expected too much of future Americans.

[Chrysia]

If that was the absolute intention, it would have been written into law. Presidents say things and make many false promises.

The problem with that is what do you chain it to? Inflation? Inflation is a complicated metric that doesn't always correlate with cost of living. Cost of living? Cost of living where?

The intent was to make the minimum wage a livable wage for the time, then revisit and adjust it as necessary.

[diddle]

It did. For nearly a century. The maximum taxable income simply hasn't been properly adjusted for inflation, so it's falling behind. With simple reforms (increasing the maximum taxable income), it would be completely viable for the next century or so.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=1258

A tangent from the OP, but a ludicrous amount of money goes to entitlements, as well military. The government spends much more on seniors than on our nation's youth.

The problem with that is what do you chain it to? Inflation? Inflation is a complicated metric that doesn't always correlate with cost of living. Cost of living? Cost of living where?

The intent was to make the minimum wage a livable wage for the time, then revisit and adjust it as necessary.

You guys keep simplifying the issue as if the reason it hasn't happened is because everyone is just less intelligent than yourselves, can you guys give me a fleshed-out plan to execute what you guys intend? It's easy to just generalize the solution as "tax reforms".

[Chrysia]

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=1258

A tangent from the OP, but a ludicrous amount of money goes to entitlements, as well military. The government spends much more on seniors than on our nation's youth.

Money those seniors paid into the system for their entire lives.

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=1258

A tangent from the OP, but a ludicrous amount of money goes to entitlements, as well military. The government spends much more on seniors than on our nation's youth.



You guys keep simplifying the issue as if the reason it hasn't happened is because everyone is just less intelligent than yourselves, can you guys give me a fleshed-out plan to execute what you guys intend? It's easy to just generalize the solution as "tax reforms".

I'm not a politician, nor an expert on the tax code or the intricacies of the legislative process.

However, the reason it hasn't happened is massive lobbying against it by moneyed interest, and Republican aversion to "entitlements."