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)
 
Old 02-24-2015, 01:07 PM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
11,142 posts, read 10,711,121 times
Reputation: 9799

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Eagle View Post
You just avoided what I said there are not positions higher up for every one to move up to.
I specifically addressed what you said. There have never been enough jobs in the top tier for everyone. However, there are plenty of jobs that pay middle class wages for those that put in a bit of effort.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-24-2015, 01:10 PM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
11,142 posts, read 10,711,121 times
Reputation: 9799
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
If it is such a small percentage of the workforce, then why so much resistance from right wingers? One would think you guys would be for raising the minimum wage because it would distract people from the real issues that the right wingers want to hide.
You'd have to ask a right winger what their viewpoint is. I wouldn't know. As for me, I'd prefer to support programs which have a chance to actually help minimum wage earners rather than chasing the same pipe dream which has failed since the 1930s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2015, 01:12 PM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,385,439 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRom View Post
You'd have to ask a right winger what their viewpoint is. I wouldn't know. As for me, I'd prefer to support programs which have a chance to actually help minimum wage earners rather than chasing the same pipe dream which has failed since the 1930s.
That pipe dream worked rather well just after WWII.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2015, 01:14 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,822,024 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianEcon View Post
That pipe dream worked rather well just after WWII.
When we were the only industrial country not blown to pieces, I wonder if that had anything to do with it
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2015, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
11,142 posts, read 10,711,121 times
Reputation: 9799
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianEcon View Post
That pipe dream worked rather well just after WWII.
The real value of minimum wage was lower after WWII than it is now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2015, 01:58 PM
 
34,279 posts, read 19,371,187 times
Reputation: 17261
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
If it is such a small percentage of the workforce, then why so much resistance from right wingers? One would think you guys would be for raising the minimum wage because it would distract people from the real issues that the right wingers want to hide.
Because the reality is its not as small of a % as the right wing likes to claim. A small % make EXACTLY the minimum wage, a sizable % makes a tiny tiny bit more.

The right use the argument of it being a small % as no reason to do anything, while they fight it tooth and nail. The reality is its a significant % being helped by raising the minimum wage. Its a false argument on their side. Anyone using it is either trying to mislead, or ignorant of the reality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2015, 02:04 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,822,024 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
Because the reality is its not as small of a % as the right wing likes to claim. A small % make EXACTLY the minimum wage, a sizable % makes a tiny tiny bit more.

The right use the argument of it being a small % as no reason to do anything, while they fight it tooth and nail. The reality is its a significant % being helped by raising the minimum wage. Its a false argument on their side. Anyone using it is either trying to mislead, or ignorant of the reality.
All it does is increase the cost of goods leading to the same purchasing power as before, nothing changes, debt becomes more desirable, savings less desirable, and the current model continues on without change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2015, 02:13 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,180,801 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
All it does is increase the cost of goods leading to the same purchasing power as before, nothing changes, debt becomes more desirable, savings less desirable, and the current model continues on without change.
As does paying anyone above minimum wage, so why pay anyone more than minimum wage if all it is going to do is increase the cost of goods and reduce the purchasing power?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2015, 07:15 PM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,385,439 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRom View Post
The real value of minimum wage was lower after WWII than it is now.
https://www.stlouisfed.org/legacy_as...nimum-wage.png

https://www.stlouisfed.org/publicati...ages-intrusive

Really? The minimum wage as % of average hourly wage was much higher back in the 1950's Than it is now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2015, 07:23 PM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,385,439 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
When we were the only industrial country not blown to pieces, I wonder if that had anything to do with it
Possibly but there is a deeper thing to worry about.

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thre...1_image001.gif

GDP growth per capita per year. The best fit line before WWII was 1.8. After WWII it was 2.0. Time spent above the curve is balanced by time spent below the curve.
Do you want to spend 50 years at 1.2% growth per capita per year?

What I'm talking about is how to not have to do that.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:54 PM.

© 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