Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Im a little late to this party but.....there are 3 basic needs of a human being, a shelter is one of them. (Food and Water being the other) These are BASIC NEEDS to exist. You just claimed that people making minimum wage dont even deserve one of the only three things required to exist on this planet. Doesnt that sound a little odd to you?
Fun fact, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics there are 3.6 million workers in the US at or below minimum wage. Your claim is that 3.6 million people dont deserve their own shelter....in what claims to be the greatest nation on Earth. Well done sir, well done.
No, they don't deserve their own shelter. Because they don't earn enough for the LUXURY of their own shelter. So they should do what generations before them have done when they don't earn enough for their own shelter - SHARE.
BTW - the greatest nation on earth does NOT take from the producers, who DO earn enough for their own shelter, and give to those that refuse to take the steps to do the same.
People can go on until they're blue in the face saying things like: "no one over the age of 21 should be in a mw job;" "mw jobs are only for people with few to no skills," etc.
The facts are, however, that:
A) there are lots of people over the age of 21 in minimum wage jobs. I'm not saying this a good thing or a desirable thing, or that everyone in a country like the US shouldn't do their utmost to avoid having to be stuck in mw jobs. But thinking those things doesn't change reality. There are many socioeconomic reasons why some people get stuck in the MW rut, including low literacy and english-language skills.
Besides, in the few times per year that I take my kids to a fast-food establishment, I want to know that the place is not being run by a bunch of immature, hormone-raging kids under the age of 21. Proper handling and preparation of food is a serious business, and is should be treated as such. Improper food handling can result in many people becoming seriously ill. Most kids under the age of 21 are not going to take that possibility seriously.
Therefore, I want to see at least a couple of full-grown adults around to ensure proper food prep and handling, the demand for high standards of personal hygiene and operational cleanliness, quality customer service, responsible management, etc.
B) People working in mw jobs do have skills, but it's a sad fact that these skills are overlooked or - in a mw environment - are undervalued. Whether it be at a fast-food place, a Walmart or Target store, or a retail business, the skills required to operate a business, deal effectively with public all day long, etc, are NOT worthless skills.
I'm a professional with a master's degree, and my husband is a highly-paid professional currently working on his third master's degree, so I think it's safe to say that we believe strongly in the value of education. But we both have always felt this kind of attitude toward mw workers to be snobbish, dismissive and counter-intuitive. And when one considers that this attitude ("mw wage jobs are only for stupid, unskilled schlepps that no one care about") are often held by people who aren't particularly well-educated themselves, it's quite amusing.
Long story short, there are people in mw jobs who have valuable skills and roles, and they should be paid accordingly.
Thank you for the words about the skills required in retail/fast food. I think it irritates me to see people say that people like me are working retail because it's "low skill" and I don't deserve to be paid more for what I do. After working with the public, in customer service, for over 50 years nobody can tell me that I don't have the requisite "skills" to do my job. People skills, making judgments with customer problems and knowing when to keep my mouth shut! lol As a cashier I deal with many many people all day long and it's amazing how many people skills I use, all day long. There's so much more to a customer service job and those employees are stuck between the customer and management. Having to worry about pleasing BOTH factions can be a strain. I, personally, don't worry about pleasing management because I know I do my job well and they have no complaints with me.
I also have to add that I didn't start this job at MW and nobody hired there does. It's about $1 above, which isn't much either, but we do get regular raises. I had three in the first two years and my fifth coming up. It isn't much at a time...50 cents...but it adds up. Many of my co workers have been with the company a long time and make up to at least $20 hour. Not bad...
dont get me started on this.
not my problem you are making this amount. you should of went to school
Um, catlover? That should read "you should havegone to school" (a variation of past tense of the verb "go").
Just love it.
There are a number of posters on this thread who illustrate beautifully how those who hold disdain for low income people, call them names, and toss off their problems (NOT MY PROBLEM) very often are not particularly well educated or - I'm guessing - professionally successful themselves.
Funny, that.
Last edited by newdixiegirl; 02-25-2014 at 04:33 PM..
To the best of my knowledge low income childless adults can get EITC as well. I mean, would you rather have a baby out of wedlock so you could get extra "help" via the EITC? I think not.
Yes, they can. I can only remember getting it once, after a year of barely making any money, and it added about $700 to my return. I believe I was 55 that year. You can't get it anymore after age 62 no matter how small your income. At this point I'd be disqualified anyway. I'm not poverty level anymore.
So you're telling me that employers will hire people at a high minimum wage even if that employee won't create more value than they are paid? I've got to say, that seems far-fetched. Maybe such an employer needs new management.
I didn't say that.
I was responding to this:
Quote:
what a higher minimum means is that workers keep a greater share of the fruits of their labor.
If someone is hired at minimum wage, by definition, that is the value of their labor. If that wage is then increased by government decree, those minimum wage workers will either be fired, or they will be keeping the fruits of someone else's labor, as their labor is not worth the increase.
Nope. It means that they will keep a greater share of the fruits of someone else's labor.
Really?
Did you miss that whole hullaballoo about how much taxpayers subsidize minimum wage jobs with things like food stamps and welfare?
If workers at the bottom make more money, there will be less subsidization required. They'll actually be taking less of the fruits of someone else's labor.
Whose labor are you even talking about anyway? Ronald McDonald?
Last edited by winkosmosis; 02-25-2014 at 04:31 PM..
If someone is hired at minimum wage, by definition, that is the value of their labor. If that wage is then increased by government decree, those minimum wage workers will either be fired, or they will be keeping the fruits of someone else's labor, as their labor is not worth the increase.
So you think that the minimum wage should be abolished?
Simply put, minimum wage does not represent wage earners "keeping the fruits of someone else's labor." That is an inapt comparison, and it is misleading.
Its not as cost effective as you might think.... Technology has a lot of maintenance cost not just the initial cost to build the infrastructure.
Besides. Its already there.... Most libraries provide internet access.
Also... a lot of establishments with free wifi.
I work in technology. I don't subscribe to the notion that internet access is a necessity.
There are very few absolute necessities. Roads, parks, libraries, and a whole lot of other public-funded things aren't necessities. Everyone having internet access would do wonders for education, productivity, poverty, and a whole lot of other things. though.
If you disagree about public-funded internet that's fine, but tax dollars don't fund only things that are basic necessities. The great majority of things funded by tax dollars aren't basic necessities.
Thats easier said than done. For example in metro Atlanta, many jobs went along with the white flight and moved too and are in areas where majority whites live and the MARTA train line stops right were that line begins to form. And apartments for 1 bedrooms close to those jobs on the Northside can be $700 for old apartments and typically $850 up to $1300 for a 1 bedroom and if you try to get a roommate, these apartments will make it $1500-1600 for 2 people to live there, so you still have to pay $7-800 to live near work in a safe area.
So if someone didnt have a car, this could be their commute considering our rail goes N/S/E/W and connect downtown:
15-20 min Bus ride to a train
20-40 min Train ride
15-40 min Bus ride to work
So the typical commute without a car would be 1 Hour up to 2 hrs each way when considering the wait time for the bus/trains as well. So there goes 4 hours of your day for commute if you dont have a car or have enough money to live by your job.
So you look for a cheaper place near work. I've done it many times myself, even in such areas as greater Washington DC I have $500/month rent by living with a roommate and walk to work. Stop complaining and act, you can cut your costs to a very low level.
Lots of people in this thread seem to think that deprivation is a good thing. In the case of cell phone service and internet access, they are missing the benefits of the "network effect," wherein each person's access to the service provides utility to everyone else who uses the service. I believe that some states use "lifeline" for cell phone service.
I'm also not sure why an individual who earns minimum wage should simply be expected to live in extreme austerity. Minimum wage jobs are often the sort of local, service jobs that cannot be outsourced but require little experience or education. Increasing the minimum wage will therefore not likely have a large impact on the number of these jobs offered by employers. What then is the harm in increasing the minimum wage to allow one a more comfortable living for full time work?
Government taxes, it does not confiscate. It also provides benefits. Do you think that Social Security and Medicare should be eliminated? I think you would be alone in that bucket.
Worker's compensation is a benefit to those who need it due to on-the-job injuries. Do you think that injured workers should receive no compensation?
Your discussion of hiring a housekeeper is simply incorrect. If you hire a full-time housekeeper, then you are most certainly an employer. Most people, however, hire a contractor to provide housekeeping services regularly (every week or two or four). That service is provided for a fee and does not require any paperwork on the part of the person hiring the housekeeper.
I take it you have experienced getting sued by a housekeeper. If you qualified as that person's employer under state law, then you should have been complying with the requirements of acting as an employer. If it was a close question, then you should have been more careful. If it wasn't close, then the lawsuit should have been disposed of quickly (and your renter's/homeowner's insurance probably should have hired an attorney as the person was injured on your property).
Do you think it is a good thing for people who work full time to only earn enough money to afford necessities? At the federal minimum wage, before any taxes, an individual earns $15,080 annually working 40 hours a week without any time off. After state and federal taxes, that is not going to stretch terribly far in most places. At San Francisco's minimum wage, the highest in the nation, an individual working 40 hours a week without any time off earns $21,299.20 annually before any taxes. That would not stretch very far most places, much less in coastal California.
I don't think only having bare necessities is good in the long term, but for a year or two having only necessities (while you are, of course, doing what you can to better yourself) is better than being unemployed because your employer can't afford you!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
