I don't know what the minimum wage is in Canada (or how it relates in regards to Canadian/American dollars), but if we are gonna use fast food as an example, I'll try. The minimum wage has gone basically NOWHERE in the US in the last two decades. It was $5.15 until 10 years ago, it is now.....$7.25. Relative to worker productivity, it has been a joke. If the minimum wage kept up with productivity, it would be near $22/hr. It isn't even in the same stratosphere. Moreover, even the amount of $7.25 has lost 10% of it's purchasing power since being implemented due to inflation.
Now then....let's look at fast food prices. When I entered high school (about 20 years ago), a Big Mac Extra Value Meal was $2.99. At present, it is AT LEAST $7.00. So, over the course of those twenty years, the minimum wage has basically moved jack shit (about 25%), and yet somehow food prices at restaurants which would typically be paying minimum wage have more than DOUBLED. Something tells me it isn't workers asking for a little more than peanuts that is the problem.
@CamDawg 1. @deltago didn't give any numbers 2. The increase can be quite big in areas where the workers are making much less than workers in big cities for example
@CamDawg 1. @deltago didn't give any numbers 2. The increase can be quite big in areas where the workers are making much less than workers in big cities for example
The problem with the minimum wage is that it's not a livable wage. If you're in favor of it as it currently stands, you're in favor of people being paid starvation wages and basically needing SNAP on top of their income to have enough food, and god forbid we talk about rent.
The benefit of raising the minimum wage is economic stimulus. The more money people have, the more money they can spend, and the more money they can spend, the stronger the economy is. This is pretty basic. Also, people will better be able to support themselves, pay expenses, and rely less on programs like SNAP in order to eat enough.
The problem with the minimum wage is that it's not a livable wage. If you're in favor of it as it currently stands, you're in favor of people being paid starvation wages and basically needing SNAP on top of their income to have enough food, and god forbid we talk about rent.
The benefit of raising the minimum wage is economic stimulus. The more money people have, the more money they can spend, and the more money they can spend, the stronger the economy is. This is pretty basic. Also, people will better be able to support themselves, pay expenses, and rely less on programs like SNAP in order to eat enough.
I already know what the counter-argument is going to be, which is that minimum wage jobs are ONLY meant for teenagers entering the work force. First off, there aren't enough teenagers to staff all the needed positions. And for another, ever been to a restaurant being run by 5 high school students?? I once saw a sour cream gun fight break out in the back of a Taco Bell while customers were waiting in line. It's not just that $7.25 isn't a livable wage. It isn't really even a survivable wage without the help of social programs, which people who are against raising the minimum wage ALSO oppose. So what the hell do they want?? $15 may be far too big a jump (which is why Hillary in the campaign was meeting Bernie halfway at $12), but it sure as shit needs to be AT LEAST $9, or at a BARE MINIMUM increase in regards to inflation.
Beyond that, let's be frank: alot of these jobs are filled by people who are less skilled, for whatever reason (be it intelligence, mental/physical disability, social skills etc etc etc). SOMEONE has to fill these jobs (or those of use saying it doesn't need to be raised will be the first people bitching when the drive-thru line is twice as long). Is it possible that we should maybe throw them a bit more than table scraps??
Bear in mind that the additional costs to businesses from higher wages will not ALL be passed onto customers. A company cannot raise prices without losing customers; they can't raise prices, even in response to increased wages for their employees, indefinitely. If they could increase prices without losing customers, they'd have already raised it to that level.
Yes, a higher minimum wage will translate into higher prices for businesses that pay their workers the minimum wage. But not all of money that goes to their employees will come from customers; part of it will come out of the company's profits.
I don't know what exactly the minimum wage should be, but it should increase with inflation. Wages need to keep pace with living standards.
So when minimum wage goes up the guys making $10 an hour is the problem not the CEO making $9200 an hour? McDonald's and Starbucks CEOs literally make that much. But golly gee an extra 20 cents an hour per worker is a huge unbearable burden.
The problem is companies paying CEOs and all their executives out of control wages.
So when minimum wage goes up the guys making $10 an hour is the problem not the CEO making $9200 an hour? McDonald's and Starbucks CEOs literally make that much. But golly gee an extra 20 cents an hour per worker is a huge unbearable burden.
The problem is companies paying CEOs and all their executives out of control wages.
If you have 10,000 employees that $0.20/hr raise becomes a $2000/hr raise which is over $4 million/year. Even if you have only 100 employees that's over $40k/yr. You really don't think that's going to be passed on to the customer? BTW the CEO's that make the kind of money you're talking about likely approach the 100,000 worker level. That $0.20/hr raise would cost that company almost $50 million/ yr. And that's only a 20 cent/hour raise. Nobody's even discussing a raise that low...
So when minimum wage goes up the guys making $10 an hour is the problem not the CEO making $9200 an hour? McDonald's and Starbucks CEOs literally make that much. But golly gee an extra 20 cents an hour per worker is a huge unbearable burden.
The problem is companies paying CEOs and all their executives out of control wages.
So when minimum wage goes up the guys making $10 an hour is the problem not the CEO making $9200 an hour? McDonald's and Starbucks CEOs literally make that much. But golly gee an extra 20 cents an hour per worker is a huge unbearable burden.
The problem is companies paying CEOs and all their executives out of control wages.
So when minimum wage goes up the guys making $10 an hour is the problem not the CEO making $9200 an hour? McDonald's and Starbucks CEOs literally make that much. But golly gee an extra 20 cents an hour per worker is a huge unbearable burden.
The problem is companies paying CEOs and all their executives out of control wages.
If you have 10,000 employees that $0.20/hr raise becomes a $2000/hr raise which is over $4 million/year. Even if you have only 100 employees that's over $40k/yr. You really don't think that's going to be passed on to the customer? BTW the CEO's that make the kind of money you're talking about likely approach the 100,000 worker level. That $0.20/hr raise would cost that company almost $50 million/ yr. And that's only a 20 cent/hour raise. Nobody's even discussing a raise that low...
I'm sure they will pass on the cost. I'd say they should be examining the system where they can afford to pay one group of jackasses tens of millions of dollars a year but then turn around and claim they can't afford to pay their workers a living wage.
Yeah, agreed 20c is not in line with what's being asked but supposing the amount of workers and raise requested did equal 50 million a year. That is a little over double what our 9200 per hour ceo is making. Half the time they fire these business criminals and they walk away with golden parachutes worth hundreds of millions of dollars. These big companies are regularly posting profits worth tens of billions of dollars.
Where's that money go? They are giving this cash to stock and interest holders. They can reward gamblers and speculation but gosh when it comes time to pay their workers Oh gosh no, minimum wage is too much right.
The system is rigged. No argument here. But when in the history of mankind has the system NOT been rigged? How do you 'unrig' it? I'm pretty sure I won't agree with your answer on that last one. I try to work within the system we have rather than rage against the machine (although they do have some great songs).
The genocide against the Rohingya in Myanmar continues. The military has been murdering innocent men and boys, raping the women and girls, and burning the survivors to death.
The genocide has already been well-documented. It is a proven fact. Yet the military continues to deny its existence. They have committed crimes against humanity and are lying about it every day.
The genocide against the Rohingya in Myanmar continues. The military has been murdering innocent men and boys, raping the women and girls, and burning the survivors to death.
The genocide has already been well-documented. It is a proven fact. Yet the military continues to deny its existence. They have committed crimes against humanity and are lying about it every day.
Sounds like we should start sanctions. That'll teach them!
A recent study has found that about 20% of college students believe it's justified for a student group to resort to violence to shut down speech they find offensive.
The genocide against the Rohingya in Myanmar continues. The military has been murdering innocent men and boys, raping the women and girls, and burning the survivors to death.
The genocide has already been well-documented. It is a proven fact. Yet the military continues to deny its existence. They have committed crimes against humanity and are lying about it every day.
Sounds like we should start sanctions. That'll teach them!
Or launch a military intervention. It'd sure save a lot more lives than it would end.
Listen, corporations keep prices as low as possible out of the goodness of their hearts. They all operate on razor-thin profit margins, and the only reason they would ever raise prices is if our big, mean bully of a government forces them to. "I'm sorry, dear starving customer," they'll say, "I would truly like to sell you this Filet-O-Fish for $1.99, but Barry Obummer and Shadow President Crooked Killary Clinton just won't allow me to. That'll be $2.29." And then a single glistening tear will roll down their bony, profit-starved cheeks.
alot of these jobs are filled by people who are less skilled
Yeah, and these unskilled and inexperienced workers (or potential workers) are the most likely to become or stay unemployed as a result of minimum wage laws that give employers a strong financial incentive to automate, offshore, or otherwise cut back on such jobs whereever possible.
And the thing is, few people normally stay in very low-paying jobs their whole lives. These jobs are often a stepping-stone, allowing people to build up skills and gain experience and prove they can be productive, which then qualifies them for better jobs. This makes a wage increase for some members of this group at the expense of a 100% wage decrease (unemployment) for other members of the same group, a very bad deal from a utilitarian perspective. For the ones who get a bit more money during the temporary "stepping-stone" phase of their life, it won't be a significant long-term benefit. But the ones who are cut off completely, suffer compounded harm in the long-term as they loose all the follow-up opportunities.
Is it possible that we should maybe throw them a bit more than table scraps??
Who is this "we"?
If you mean society as a whole, then why are you shifting the responsibility for it to employers (who are just a small portion of society)?
Make no mistake: Anything that someone is paid above and beyond the market value which their work provides, is essentially a charitable donation.
You can argue that society has a moral obligation to provide donations to its weaker members, but with what moral justification do you place the burden on employers to foot the bill for your charitable "generosity"?
A recent study has found that about 20% of college students believe it's justified for a student group to resort to violence to shut down speech they find offensive.
The genocide against the Rohingya in Myanmar continues. The military has been murdering innocent men and boys, raping the women and girls, and burning the survivors to death.
The genocide has already been well-documented. It is a proven fact. Yet the military continues to deny its existence. They have committed crimes against humanity and are lying about it every day.
Sounds like we should start sanctions. That'll teach them!
Or launch a military intervention. It'd sure save a lot more lives than it would end.
Mass murder is worth stopping.
I agree. I won't be the one doing the fighting though so I'm not sure I should be the one calling for it. Besides, I don't think the West has the stomach for 'boots on the ground' anymore and that's what this would require...
Minor point: The federal minimum wage makes exceptions for teenagers.
Also, a lot of us would strongly prefer a universal basic income (which would distribute the burden more evenly), but that isn't happening in the US any time soon. In the meantime, I think it's more moral to make employers foot the bill than it would be to leave the employees unsupported.
Apparently Strzok and Page, the FBI officials who made derogatory texts about Trump, also made similar comments about a whole host of political figures in their private correspondence, both Republicans and Democrats.
The system is rigged. No argument here. But when in the history of mankind has the system NOT been rigged? How do you 'unrig' it? I'm pretty sure I won't agree with your answer on that last one. I try to work within the system we have rather than rage against the machine (although they do have some great songs).
That's the rub. These rich businessmen are getting away with murder. Will they give up a tenth of their outrageous salary if it would cover say health insurance for their entire work force? No, they don't. Out of sight out of mind, and screw you, I'm getting mines is what they think. Maybe they even convince themselves that they totally are worth their salary that is 300% more than the average worker.
So when the costs on the employee side go up, perhaps instead of passing on the costs to the public they could just pay their executives ever so slightly less. Maybe these people won't be able to afford their fifth mansion and third plane. But no no, they've got theirs and you are on your own, little guys.
That's basically what the worst aspects of capitalism comes down to isn't it? People at the bottom trying to claw their way up and people on the top own the system and hold them down. They will conserve what's theirs, you can't have it.
alot of these jobs are filled by people who are less skilled
Yeah, and these unskilled and inexperienced workers (or potential workers) are the most likely to become or stay unemployed as a result of minimum wage laws that give employers a strong financial incentive to automate, offshore, or otherwise cut back on such jobs whereever possible.
And the thing is, few people normally stay in very low-paying jobs their whole lives. These jobs are often a stepping-stone, allowing people to build up skills and gain experience and prove they can be productive, which then qualifies them for better jobs. This makes a wage increase for some members of this group at the expense of a 100% wage decrease (unemployment) for other members of the same group, a very bad deal from a utilitarian perspective. For the ones who get a bit more money during the temporary "stepping-stone" phase of their life, it won't be a significant long-term benefit. But the ones who are cut off completely, suffer compounded harm in the long-term as they loose all the follow-up opportunities.
Is it possible that we should maybe throw them a bit more than table scraps??
Who is this "we"?
If you mean society as a whole, then why are you shifting the responsibility for it to employers (who are just a small portion of society)?
Make no mistake: Anything that someone is paid above and beyond the market value which their work provides, is essentially a charitable donation.
You can argue that society has a moral obligation to provide donations to its weaker members, but with what moral justification do you place the burden on employers to foot the bill for your charitable "generosity"?
There isn't a single job being advertised in this country right now whose market value is $7.25/hr. Hasn't been for over a decade. It's just that the current minimum wage law let's them PRETEND that it is. And blind faith in the market is as disastrous as blind faith in the government. Before government intervention, blind faith in the market had children dying in industrial jobs.
The disparity between what workers are actually doing in this country vs the wages they are being paid since the '70s is EXHAUSTIVELY laid out in this study from the Economic Policy Institute:
No argument here. But when in the history of mankind has the system NOT been rigged? How do you 'unrig' it? I'm pretty sure I won't agree with your answer on that last one. I try to work within the system we have rather than rage against the machine (although they do have some great songs).
That's the rub. These rich businessmen are getting away with murder. Will they give up a tenth of their outrageous salary if it would cover say health insurance for their entire work force? No, they don't. Out of sight out of mind, and screw you, I'm getting mines is what they think. Maybe they even convince themselves that they totally are worth their salary that is 300% more than the average worker.
So when the costs on the employee side go up, perhaps instead of passing on the costs to the public they could just pay their executives ever so slightly less. Maybe these people won't be able to afford their fifth mansion and third plane. But no no, they've got theirs and you are on your own, little guys.
That's basically what the worst aspects of capitalism comes down to isn't it? People at the bottom trying to claw their way up and people on the top own the system and hold them down. They will conserve what's theirs, you can't have it. -------------------------- Because things are so much better with communism? I'm pretty sure there are super-rich people in every government ever created by mankind. I work for a German company and our CEO makes € millions. The last time I checked, Germany was socialist. The difference with communism is that elitist intellectuals rile up the people, start a revolution, rob the rich, become rich themselves then exploit the people that put them in power. Sounds great to me.
No argument here. But when in the history of mankind has the system NOT been rigged? How do you 'unrig' it? I'm pretty sure I won't agree with your answer on that last one. I try to work within the system we have rather than rage against the machine (although they do have some great songs).
That's the rub. These rich businessmen are getting away with murder. Will they give up a tenth of their outrageous salary if it would cover say health insurance for their entire work force? No, they don't. Out of sight out of mind, and screw you, I'm getting mines is what they think. Maybe they even convince themselves that they totally are worth their salary that is 300% more than the average worker.
So when the costs on the employee side go up, perhaps instead of passing on the costs to the public they could just pay their executives ever so slightly less. Maybe these people won't be able to afford their fifth mansion and third plane. But no no, they've got theirs and you are on your own, little guys.
That's basically what the worst aspects of capitalism comes down to isn't it? People at the bottom trying to claw their way up and people on the top own the system and hold them down. They will conserve what's theirs, you can't have it. -------------------------- Because things are so much better with communism? I'm pretty sure there are super-rich people in every government ever created by mankind. I work for a German company and our CEO makes € millions. The last time I checked, Germany was socialist. The difference with communism is that elitist intellectuals rile up the people, start a revolution, rob the rich, become rich themselves then exploit the people that put them in power. Sounds great to me.
Meet the new boss, the same as the old boss...
I simply do not think advocating for a modest increase in the minimum wage is anything resembling communism, or even Scandinavian-style socialism (which seems to have worked brilliantly for decades, mind you). There is no threat of communism happening here. Certainly not YET. Continuing to allow the disparity gap between the richest and the poorest simply balloon and balloon and balloon decade after decade is eventually going to cause a very bad situation. In fact, those who want to AVOID a extremist left-turn would be well advised to start thinking about at least marginal steps to address it.
@jjstraka34 The quotes got all messed up in our repartee so I'm starting a new conversation.
I'm not really arguing against the minimum wage hike, I'm simply stating that it won't be the corporations paying for it. It'll be we the people (like usual). It's just another hidden tax on the middle class. Here in Michigan it's being raised in stages up to $10/hr. I think it's around $9 right now. The earth didn't stop rotating or anything so I think we'll survive. I do think MW jobs are not meant to be 'raising a family' type jobs, though. If you're flipping burgers to feed your kids may be you're not utilizing your abilities to their fullest. What is sad these days is how many elderly folks are working at fast food joints, grocery stores and retailers. I don't remember ever seeing that when I was a kid.
The communism comments I made are more in reference to your disdain for the rich. I've never thought I was owed anything from someone else simply because they had more than I did. It doesn't compute in my brain. That type of thinking leads to envy and unhappiness. I'm satisfied that even if I don't have everything I want in life, at least I earned what I do have. The rich are yet another minority that make easy targets for unhappy people. The right has immigrants and Muslims that they blame for everything and the left has corporations and rich people that they blame.
Back to minimum wage in a moment, but I need to ask,
Isn't this the reason why candidates get vetted by congress in the first place? If the president can't do is job properly, can't congress at least attempt to do their job properly and not just rubber stamp everyone paraded before them?
Your main problem is that ignorant and totally unqualified people shouldn't be President.
It's certainly not the first time though. Ulysses S. Grant comes to mind. Calvin Coolidge wasn't great president material either. Those two are just off the top of my head. I'm sure there are more examples. Somehow we've survived...
I do think MW jobs are not meant to be 'raising a family' type jobs, though. If you're flipping burgers to feed your kids may be you're not utilizing your abilities to their fullest. What is sad these days is how many elderly folks are working at fast food joints, grocery stores and retailers. I don't remember ever seeing that when I was a kid.
That's a big part of the problem. We can say that people shouldn't be trying to live off of minimum wage jobs, but the fact is, many people are. That's the reality we have to deal with.
I do think MW jobs are not meant to be 'raising a family' type jobs, though. If you're flipping burgers to feed your kids may be you're not utilizing your abilities to their fullest. What is sad these days is how many elderly folks are working at fast food joints, grocery stores and retailers. I don't remember ever seeing that when I was a kid.
That's a big part of the problem. We can say that people shouldn't be trying to live off of minimum wage jobs, but the fact is, many people are. That's the reality we have to deal with.
But raising the minimum wage overvalues those jobs. The carrot has always been get an education, learn new skills, or take up a trade and you won't have to do those menial jobs forever. I have to think some of the incentive to improve yourself will be lost if you raise it too much. People get comfortable where they are if they stay too long. I'd hate to think somebody might choose to make a career out of flipping burgers...
@Balrog99: The carrot is there, but clearly those people aren't taking the bait. We've been sitting on the current minimum wage for many years, and yet the scenario you're hoping for--people get out of minimum wage jobs and find work elsewhere--simply has not happened in all those years. When is it supposed to happen? Is it going to happen? And if the problem isn't going to solve itself, should the government do anything to solve the problem?
I would say yes. When a problem fails to solve itself for years on end, we can try to solve it or we can just keep waiting.
Comments
Now then....let's look at fast food prices. When I entered high school (about 20 years ago), a Big Mac Extra Value Meal was $2.99. At present, it is AT LEAST $7.00. So, over the course of those twenty years, the minimum wage has basically moved jack shit (about 25%), and yet somehow food prices at restaurants which would typically be paying minimum wage have more than DOUBLED. Something tells me it isn't workers asking for a little more than peanuts that is the problem.
1. @deltago didn't give any numbers
2. The increase can be quite big in areas where the workers are making much less than workers in big cities for example
The benefit of raising the minimum wage is economic stimulus. The more money people have, the more money they can spend, and the more money they can spend, the stronger the economy is. This is pretty basic. Also, people will better be able to support themselves, pay expenses, and rely less on programs like SNAP in order to eat enough.
Beyond that, let's be frank: alot of these jobs are filled by people who are less skilled, for whatever reason (be it intelligence, mental/physical disability, social skills etc etc etc). SOMEONE has to fill these jobs (or those of use saying it doesn't need to be raised will be the first people bitching when the drive-thru line is twice as long). Is it possible that we should maybe throw them a bit more than table scraps??
Yes, a higher minimum wage will translate into higher prices for businesses that pay their workers the minimum wage. But not all of money that goes to their employees will come from customers; part of it will come out of the company's profits.
I don't know what exactly the minimum wage should be, but it should increase with inflation. Wages need to keep pace with living standards.
The problem is companies paying CEOs and all their executives out of control wages.
(EDIT: deleted some duplicate quotes)
Yeah, agreed 20c is not in line with what's being asked but supposing the amount of workers and raise requested did equal 50 million a year. That is a little over double what our 9200 per hour ceo is making. Half the time they fire these business criminals and they walk away with golden parachutes worth hundreds of millions of dollars. These big companies are regularly posting profits worth tens of billions of dollars.
Where's that money go? They are giving this cash to stock and interest holders. They can reward gamblers and speculation but gosh when it comes time to pay their workers Oh gosh no, minimum wage is too much right.
The system is rigged.
No argument here. But when in the history of mankind has the system NOT been rigged? How do you 'unrig' it? I'm pretty sure I won't agree with your answer on that last one. I try to work within the system we have rather than rage against the machine (although they do have some great songs).
The genocide has already been well-documented. It is a proven fact. Yet the military continues to deny its existence. They have committed crimes against humanity and are lying about it every day.
Mass murder is worth stopping.
Increased unemployment for adults, as well.
Increased consumer prices too (as has apparently been discussed to death already ITT), though I think that's actually an overemphasized aspect. Yeah, and these unskilled and inexperienced workers (or potential workers) are the most likely to become or stay unemployed as a result of minimum wage laws that give employers a strong financial incentive to automate, offshore, or otherwise cut back on such jobs whereever possible.
And the thing is, few people normally stay in very low-paying jobs their whole lives. These jobs are often a stepping-stone, allowing people to build up skills and gain experience and prove they can be productive, which then qualifies them for better jobs.
This makes a wage increase for some members of this group at the expense of a 100% wage decrease (unemployment) for other members of the same group, a very bad deal from a utilitarian perspective. For the ones who get a bit more money during the temporary "stepping-stone" phase of their life, it won't be a significant long-term benefit. But the ones who are cut off completely, suffer compounded harm in the long-term as they loose all the follow-up opportunities. Who is this "we"?
If you mean society as a whole, then why are you shifting the responsibility for it to employers (who are just a small portion of society)?
Make no mistake: Anything that someone is paid above and beyond the market value which their work provides, is essentially a charitable donation.
You can argue that society has a moral obligation to provide donations to its weaker members, but with what moral justification do you place the burden on employers to foot the bill for your charitable "generosity"?
Also, a lot of us would strongly prefer a universal basic income (which would distribute the burden more evenly), but that isn't happening in the US any time soon. In the meantime, I think it's more moral to make employers foot the bill than it would be to leave the employees unsupported.
No argument here. But when in the history of mankind has the system NOT been rigged? How do you 'unrig' it? I'm pretty sure I won't agree with your answer on that last one. I try to work within the system we have rather than rage against the machine (although they do have some great songs).
That's the rub. These rich businessmen are getting away with murder. Will they give up a tenth of their outrageous salary if it would cover say health insurance for their entire work force? No, they don't. Out of sight out of mind, and screw you, I'm getting mines is what they think. Maybe they even convince themselves that they totally are worth their salary that is 300% more than the average worker.
So when the costs on the employee side go up, perhaps instead of passing on the costs to the public they could just pay their executives ever so slightly less. Maybe these people won't be able to afford their fifth mansion and third plane. But no no, they've got theirs and you are on your own, little guys.
That's basically what the worst aspects of capitalism comes down to isn't it? People at the bottom trying to claw their way up and people on the top own the system and hold them down. They will conserve what's theirs, you can't have it.
The disparity between what workers are actually doing in this country vs the wages they are being paid since the '70s is EXHAUSTIVELY laid out in this study from the Economic Policy Institute:
http://www.epi.org/publication/understanding-the-historic-divergence-between-productivity-and-a-typical-workers-pay-why-it-matters-and-why-its-real/
That's the rub. These rich businessmen are getting away with murder. Will they give up a tenth of their outrageous salary if it would cover say health insurance for their entire work force? No, they don't. Out of sight out of mind, and screw you, I'm getting mines is what they think. Maybe they even convince themselves that they totally are worth their salary that is 300% more than the average worker.
So when the costs on the employee side go up, perhaps instead of passing on the costs to the public they could just pay their executives ever so slightly less. Maybe these people won't be able to afford their fifth mansion and third plane. But no no, they've got theirs and you are on your own, little guys.
That's basically what the worst aspects of capitalism comes down to isn't it? People at the bottom trying to claw their way up and people on the top own the system and hold them down. They will conserve what's theirs, you can't have it.
--------------------------
Because things are so much better with communism? I'm pretty sure there are super-rich people in every government ever created by mankind. I work for a German company and our CEO makes € millions. The last time I checked, Germany was socialist. The difference with communism is that elitist intellectuals rile up the people, start a revolution, rob the rich, become rich themselves then exploit the people that put them in power. Sounds great to me.
Meet the new boss, the same as the old boss...
So when the costs on the employee side go up, perhaps instead of passing on the costs to the public they could just pay their executives ever so slightly less. Maybe these people won't be able to afford their fifth mansion and third plane. But no no, they've got theirs and you are on your own, little guys.
That's basically what the worst aspects of capitalism comes down to isn't it? People at the bottom trying to claw their way up and people on the top own the system and hold them down. They will conserve what's theirs, you can't have it.
--------------------------
Because things are so much better with communism? I'm pretty sure there are super-rich people in every government ever created by mankind. I work for a German company and our CEO makes € millions. The last time I checked, Germany was socialist. The difference with communism is that elitist intellectuals rile up the people, start a revolution, rob the rich, become rich themselves then exploit the people that put them in power. Sounds great to me.
Meet the new boss, the same as the old boss...
I simply do not think advocating for a modest increase in the minimum wage is anything resembling communism, or even Scandinavian-style socialism (which seems to have worked brilliantly for decades, mind you). There is no threat of communism happening here. Certainly not YET. Continuing to allow the disparity gap between the richest and the poorest simply balloon and balloon and balloon decade after decade is eventually going to cause a very bad situation. In fact, those who want to AVOID a extremist left-turn would be well advised to start thinking about at least marginal steps to address it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/12/15/that-painful-exchange-between-a-trump-judicial-pick-and-a-gop-senator-annotated/?utm_term=.1c23ce3fd6c3
I do not think it should have to be said that ignorant and totally unqualified people should not be federal judges.
The quotes got all messed up in our repartee so I'm starting a new conversation.
I'm not really arguing against the minimum wage hike, I'm simply stating that it won't be the corporations paying for it. It'll be we the people (like usual). It's just another hidden tax on the middle class. Here in Michigan it's being raised in stages up to $10/hr. I think it's around $9 right now. The earth didn't stop rotating or anything so I think we'll survive. I do think MW jobs are not meant to be 'raising a family' type jobs, though. If you're flipping burgers to feed your kids may be you're not utilizing your abilities to their fullest. What is sad these days is how many elderly folks are working at fast food joints, grocery stores and retailers. I don't remember ever seeing that when I was a kid.
The communism comments I made are more in reference to your disdain for the rich. I've never thought I was owed anything from someone else simply because they had more than I did. It doesn't compute in my brain. That type of thinking leads to envy and unhappiness. I'm satisfied that even if I don't have everything I want in life, at least I earned what I do have. The rich are yet another minority that make easy targets for unhappy people. The right has
immigrants and Muslims that they blame for everything and the left has corporations and rich people that they blame.
Isn't this the reason why candidates get vetted by congress in the first place? If the president can't do is job properly, can't congress at least attempt to do their job properly and not just rubber stamp everyone paraded before them?
Like, demand more from your politicians.
I would say yes. When a problem fails to solve itself for years on end, we can try to solve it or we can just keep waiting.