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.
Take away the food stamps and Welfare and you might see workers unionizing so they can get a living wage.
I don't know about this. When there are substantially more people than jobs, the dynamics do not favor unions. There are reasons why organized labor in the U.S. has been declining since the peak in the 50's.
Fast forward, corporations are more likely to build new plants in Right to Work states.
Who in their right mind supports low wages? Low wage workers are a burden on the tax payer. Shouldn't everyone who works full time have the means to support himself? Not supporting this concept is akin to supporting slavery. What kind of jerk do you have to be to want full time workers to make starvation wages?
I don't know anyone who wants workers to make starvation wages. Who are these people?
What seems to be missing here is that we are NOT subsidizing these low wage workers. We are subsidizing multi-billion dollar corporations. By allowing them to keep their employee costs very low, we allow them to make unnaturally high profits, which are returned to their share-holders and to management as big bonuses. So we are basically subsidizing their share-holders.
So that's why my 401k is growing so nicely? Thank you very much!
Because people cannot afford to live in the US on low paying service jobs which is taking over the employment landscape.
The food services and retail sectors have been the largest U.S. employers since the late 80's.Walmart is the single largest private sector global employer, followed by McDonalds.
The EITC was enacted in 1975 which coincided with the start of wage stagnation. As I understand it, the original purpose was to offset increasing payroll taxes and more importantly, provide incentive to work. Today, it is one of the largest anti-poverty tools, despite that most income measures, including the poverty rate, do not take it into consideration. Go figure, eh.
There is no way they can afford to make up the cost of what they have lost because what they lost costs more than the bump in pay.
It's a lose/lose before you even get to the gate people.
You have to restructure our welfare programs to be transitional, not all or none.
Let it be $1 for $1. You earn $180 more a week then you get $180 less in SNAP.
You now are transitioning people to live off their own pay regardless if you upped the min wage or not.
People have more incentive to get better paying jobs then they don't have the fear of losing all their benefits.
It's the all or nothing approach that hurts the most.
Forgive me if I'm being repetitious. CNN did a story this morning on how 1/3 of bank tellers are getting govt. assistance. (Can't find it anywhere on the web, darn!) It's not just Walmart.
I don't know anyone who wants workers to make starvation wages. Who are these people?
You should have referred that poster to the threads showing the big stock market gains as a big accomplishment of Obamas.
What people don't understand is that the post-WW2 era in the USA was one of the greatest times in human history to basically be a worker with a highschool education that was able to "show up".
Wages were insanely high, employment was easy.....and times have changed with globalization.
And NOW people not getting how much things have changed still want to be able to wander out of HS or heck....just drop out...and go work 40 hours a week at burger king and make enough to live decently.
Yeah, screw education....screw bettering yourself....we are owed a "living wage" of 30k a year or so just for showing up to a job that an average 14 year old can do with about 1 weeks training.
Oh well, nothing will come of it because let's face it...they are generally lazy and won't do anything about it. As long as society gives opportunity to the motivated it's safe....the slugs will whine but not much else.
Forgive me if I'm being repetitious. CNN did a story this morning on how 1/3 of bank tellers are getting govt. assistance. (Can't find it anywhere on the web, darn!) It's not just Walmart.
That's because most banks hire younger people right out of highschool etc. I have relatives that have worked in banks as both tellers and management and that's just whom they hire for those low paying positions.
They can be popular jobs for young single moms too given that they have very similar holiday schedules as schools.
That's because most banks hire younger people right out of highschool etc. I have relatives that have worked in banks as both tellers and management and that's just whom they hire for those low paying positions.
They can be popular jobs for young single moms too given that they have very similar holiday schedules as schools.
The point is, it's not just Walmart. I think young single moms would want to be able to support their families.
The point is, it's not just Walmart. I think young single moms would want to be able to support their families.
Correct. Walmart is no different than dozens of other retail chains (other than they are much larger).
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.
