Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-29-2013, 11:01 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,268,389 times
Reputation: 27718

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by newonetoo View Post
Unionizing will never work, Walmart has already proved that, Walmart and others like them would rather shutter the doors than unionize. Hostess most recently is a good example, except Hostess management mismanaged and sucked the company dry, and even raided pension funds with impunity.
And all well within the law.
Who would have thought that we have laws on the books that allow that ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-29-2013, 11:03 AM
 
12,997 posts, read 13,604,698 times
Reputation: 11187
Quote:
Originally Posted by shiftymh View Post
Let's stop this bs charade that leftists want these unskilled workers to make enough money so they wont qualify for subsidies. They'd simply be right where they are now if they had to pay for their own things. Liberals want them to make $15 an hour and still qualify for subsidies.
Not true at all. As a middle class person who earns way more than minimum wage, I'm just looking out for my bottom line. I'd rather walmart workers make enough money to support themselves so that I don't have to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2013, 11:11 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,268,389 times
Reputation: 27718
You are not going to get these stores to change.

It's supply and demand.
In some places there is no supply and starting salaries are high to try to attract workers.
In other places there is surplus supply and thousands line up to apply for these jobs.

I highly doubt that Congress would raise the min wage and cancel some of these welfare programs.
Means testing now goes up to 400% of FPL which is now in middle class territory.
Many programs go above FPL with varying percentages ..120% here, 133% there 200% and 400% for Obamacare.
Because people cannot afford to live in the US on low paying service jobs which is taking over the employment landscape.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2013, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Maui County, HI
4,131 posts, read 7,420,978 times
Reputation: 3391
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
You are not going to get these stores to change.

It's supply and demand.
In some places there is no supply and starting salaries are high to try to attract workers.
In other places there is surplus supply and thousands line up to apply for these jobs.

I highly doubt that Congress would raise the min wage and cancel some of these welfare programs.
Means testing now goes up to 400% of FPL which is now in middle class territory.
Many programs go above FPL with varying percentages ..120% here, 133% there 200% and 400% for Obamacare.
Because people cannot afford to live in the US on low paying service jobs which is taking over the employment landscape.
The programs don't have to be cancelled. Higher wages make people ineligible or the welfare programs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2013, 11:28 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,268,389 times
Reputation: 27718
Quote:
Originally Posted by winkosmosis View Post
The programs don't have to be cancelled. Higher wages make people ineligible or the welfare programs.
$1 more gets you thrown out of these programs.
Making $1 more and you could lose $800 in SNAP alone.

Now the low wage worker can easily make $1 more each and every week..15-30 minutes of overtime.
But could he make $200 more each and every week now to make up for what he lost in SNAP benefits ?

While it's not the same I do sub teaching and there are retired teachers that stop subbing at a certain point because going over impacts their pension benefits more than the money they would earn. It's not dollar for dollar here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2013, 11:33 AM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,421,998 times
Reputation: 4241
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
$1 more gets you thrown out of these programs.
Making $1 more and you could lose $800 in SNAP alone.

Now the low wage worker can easily make $1 more each and every week..15-30 minutes of overtime.
But could he make $200 more each and every week now to make up for what he lost in SNAP benefits ?

While it's not the same I do sub teaching and there are retired teachers that stop subbing at a certain point because going over impacts their pension benefits more than the money they would earn. It's not dollar for dollar here.
That's the thing with all these cries for raising MW. Once raised, the people would starve quicker. They would lose their benefits and STILL not be able to feed a family. You can't feed, house and clothe a family on $15/hr. The Left wants to raise MW and still have these people get subsidies as another poster pointed out. It's really hard to fathom the thinking of a modern day Progressive, they support things that will make things worse for EVERYONE!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2013, 11:38 AM
 
7,359 posts, read 5,449,449 times
Reputation: 3141
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCobb View Post
No - why do you ask? I have to be a Marxist to want employers to pay for their own workers and not pass the expense off on the American taxpayer?
No you don't have to be, but it helps.

Employers don't own their workers. Their employees are not their children. It's not their responsibility to support them.

The employer isn't passing off expenses to the American taxpayer. Those expenses aren't theirs to begin with. The expenses involved in feeding, clothing, and housing an individual belong to that individual. Not to that individual's employer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2013, 11:42 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,268,389 times
Reputation: 27718
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
That's the thing with all these cries for raising MW. Once raised, the people would starve quicker. They would lose their benefits and STILL not be able to feed a family. You can't feed, house and clothe a family on $15/hr. The Left wants to raise MW and still have these people get subsidies as another poster pointed out. It's really hard to fathom the thinking of a modern day Progressive, they support things that will make things worse for EVERYONE!
Say a worker makes $9 per hour.
30 hour week (easier math) = $270
Raise to $15
30 hour week =$450 ($180 increase).

But in doing that they lose SNAP, free breakfast/lunch in schools, medicaid, and who knows what other programs.

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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2013, 11:48 AM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,421,998 times
Reputation: 4241
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Say a worker makes $9 per hour.
30 hour week (easier math) = $270
Raise to $15
30 hour week =$450 ($180 increase).

But in doing that they lose SNAP, free breakfast/lunch in schools, medicaid, and who knows what other programs.

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.
Exactly what needs to be done.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2013, 11:49 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,772 posts, read 104,356,591 times
Reputation: 49248
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Say a worker makes $9 per hour.
30 hour week (easier math) = $270
Raise to $15
30 hour week =$450 ($180 increase).

But in doing that they lose SNAP, free breakfast/lunch in schools, medicaid, and who knows what other programs.

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.
Plus add to this, the cost of everything would go up, even if just slightly, it would be enough to make life pretty tough for those getting the BIG raises.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top