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 06-03-2015, 11:47 PM
 
41,110 posts, read 25,730,963 times
Reputation: 13868

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
I have seen a lot of arguments about what a living wage is. think I have found one I like.

Roosevelt-

Notice...this means a living wage can support kids, allow you to go to school, even have something for recreation. Allows you to save for retirement, and even have some set aside for when you get sick.

Since Roosevelts age we have made vast improvements in productivity, and its all been going to the top for the last generation. He believed this was doable back then, today it should be even easier. We're doing it wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcopolo View Post
Kind of ironic to hold up Roosevelt as a model of anything. He raised costs for business, and there was less business. He raised prices on goods and services, and less were used. He increased the price of labor, and jobs plummeted. His policies clearly prolonged the Depression.

And specifically, 'living wage' regulation would further reduce the employability of low-skill workers, exacerbating the terrible unemployment rate in our inner cities and among the poor. It is a cruel hoax.
Yes it is funny he brings Roosevelt up. The only reason we pulled out of depression is not because of Roosevelt's policies but because of WWII. During the war, unemployment dropped to 2%, relief programs largely ended, and the industrial economy grew as millions of people moved to wartime factory jobs or entered military service.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2015, 12:29 AM
 
34,278 posts, read 19,368,360 times
Reputation: 17261
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
Would you like enough to pay for a Mercedes and a maid too?
LOL. If I wanted them I make enough now.

Kind of a odd response to me responding to another post though. What makes you think a living wage requires a maid or a mercedes? Maybe you should go back and read the first post again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2015, 12:34 AM
 
34,278 posts, read 19,368,360 times
Reputation: 17261
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
Yes it is funny he brings Roosevelt up. The only reason we pulled out of depression is not because of Roosevelt's policies but because of WWII. During the war, unemployment dropped to 2%, relief programs largely ended, and the industrial economy grew as millions of people moved to wartime factory jobs or entered military service.
Except for that whole part abut the depression ending in 1939. You know...before the war really got going.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2015, 12:37 AM
 
Location: Houston
26,979 posts, read 15,886,908 times
Reputation: 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
Yes it is funny he brings Roosevelt up. The only reason we pulled out of depression is not because of Roosevelt's policies but because of WWII. During the war, unemployment dropped to 2%, relief programs largely ended, and the industrial economy grew as millions of people moved to wartime factory jobs or entered military service.
Of course the Keynesian argument is WWII forced Roosevelt to spend enough to lift the economy out of the depression. That is partly true but it left us with a 100% GDP/Debt ratio which we were able to recover from due to the rest of the world needed our goods.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2015, 03:35 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
The cruel hoax is believing that we can pay poor people less and less, and that this will somehow increase opportunities for them and their children.
Not as cruel as the government believing it can continue paying the rich more and more and the rest will also do better.

Federal Reserve policy helping rich get richer: BlackRock pro Rick Rieder
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2015, 03:37 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller View Post
I would define a living wage as having enough to meet your necessities with money left over to accumulate capital. Less than that, and you're generally stuck in perpetual poverty (i.e., "wage slavery") with just enough consumption to tread water.
Why are you stuck not able to find a better job?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2015, 03:39 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
LOL. The basic free market stuff works perfectly when theres sufficient jobs to employ everyone. For example-when this country was formed 90%+ of our population was working on farms. There was demand and competition for employees, realistically no fit human being would be unemployed except by choice.

Welcome to 2015. a significant % of our population is unemployed, and not by choice. People who growing up had nothing but opportunity, can't comprehend the changing world, and apply their old beliefs to the current world.
That (along with my post and link above) is the problem. Odd that people don't want to take the time to address the actual problems.

Quote:
Suddenly Basic free market capitalism no longer is good for the the community. Because there is no competition at the bottom end of the skillset, and the "bottom end" is rising as automation comes into play more and more. While battered by offshoring, now the automation is going to smash it.

Basically.....I worry about what occurs next. I worry that the increasingly unemployed will look at this, and recognize that their choices are limited. And that rising from this they will vote in extremist choices. Or even worse become violent.
You are right to worry when people refuse to address the actual problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2015, 03:40 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Of course the Keynesian argument is WWII forced Roosevelt to spend enough to lift the economy out of the depression. That is partly true but it left us with a 100% GDP/Debt ratio which we were able to recover from due to the rest of the world needed our goods.
The depression ended because we destroyed a large segment of our competition.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2015, 04:29 AM
 
20,948 posts, read 19,049,136 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox Terrier View Post
What someone's living arrangements are or number of children should not matter.

We are talking about 'minimum wage', aka 'living wage'.

Maybe that person living with his parents would move out and become independent if he could get a job that paid enough for him to do that.

Someone with a mortgage is assumed to already be making more than minimum wage.

Same with paying rent and having two children.

MINIMUM. What someone can do from there is up to them.
You can no more determine a "minimum wage" for all than you can determine a "living wage" for all.

Of course peoples living arrangements matter. EVERYONE has a different need.....but only your value to your employer or customers matter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2015, 04:32 AM
 
20,948 posts, read 19,049,136 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
Since we dont even come close to meeting it for any of these, I'd argue we can do better

Go read the first post again. You're trying to over specificy it while ignoring that we don't even come close to meeting any of it really.

I love how you toss in a attack on unions in the middle too. Yeah thats reasonable.

Stop spewing nonsense, and think about what Roosevelt was communicating.
I didn't attack unions. I merely pointed out the fact that unions and living wages cannot coexist, since everyone's need is different.

Would you, as an employee do the exact same job as the person next to you for less money, simply because they have greater need?

That there is "common sense", not nonsense.
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. The time now is 12:51 AM.

© 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