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.
Of large cities, Atlanta is the 12th most expensive city for a single person, just behind Chicago and Seattle, so no its not a low cost of living city.
The article is about a woman in East Point, Georgia -- a part of Atlanta I know well. That is just about the absolute best place to make $7.25 an hour in the US. The cost of living is extremely low. A three bedroom house sold for around $50,000 in 2010. I'm not sure what the current costs are, but they can't be much higher. The rents are ridiculously low there too. Plus, it has a metro stop so unlike 95 percent of America, you could almost get away without owning a car in that area. Plus, it's close to jobs .. it's not out in some rural area like most places with such a low cost of living. If you can't survive on $7.25 in that neighborhood, you can't survive anywhere.
Time it face facts -- 7.25 is a slave wage. It's time to double it -- and as another poster points out, no $15 is not a lot of money. That's just the bare minimum that one human should pay another human for an hour of his or her time.
Amazing......because I'm teaching my son, that he does not need to excel in life, he should live on min wage for the rest of his life.....
Even at $15, it's for beginners....does the left not understand this?
If you're satisfied with $15 an hour, chuck, if $31,200 annual (assuming full time employment) is enough to get you every little thing your heart desires, then .. um, let's just say your ambitions are a tad lower than the norm.
Of course the minimum wage shouldn't be so high that it de-incentives initiative and ambition. $15 isn't. Most people would still have plenty of reason to get of bed in the morning and hustle to make more than the minimum.
Of course it wasn't. Because you were being paid for the job, not what you brought to the job. If a medical practice had an opening for a receptionist, and a surgeon applied for the job, would you expect them to be paid a lot more money because of their experience? No. Because the position pays a certain wage, and the potential employee is free to take that position for that wage, or not. It's obvious the position doesn't need a lot of skill. Why should they pay for something they don't need?
The position required receptionist duties as well as office "support" and, of course, "additional duties as required". They wanted someone with experience and knowledge of estate software, plus
experience in court filing proecedures, etc., which I had. He wanted a legal assistant AND receptionist, lowballed into a receptionist salary. Part time (with additional hours as needed). Obviously, to avoid paying benefits. This particular attorney had the reputation as being a very cheap *******.
As far as receptionists, that job DOES require skill, I might add. Juggling phone lines, scheduling appointments, maintaining a proper up front office demeanor, "gate keeping" (aka screening calls), taking accurate messages, etc. They deserve to be paid accordingly.
The position required receptionist duties as well as office "support" and, of course, "additional duties as required". They wanted someone with experience and knowledge of estate software, plus
experience in court filing proecedures, etc., which I had. He wanted a legal assistant AND receptionist, lowballed into a receptionist salary. Part time (with additional hours as needed). Obviously, to avoid paying benefits. This particular attorney had the reputation as being a very cheap *******.
As far as receptionists, that job DOES require skill, I might add. Juggling phone lines, scheduling appointments, maintaining a proper up front office demeanor, "gate keeping" (aka screening calls), taking accurate messages, etc. They deserve to be paid accordingly.
Definitely agree about the receptionists deserving decent pay. Anyone who works in a office knows doing business with another office that has a good receptionist is a lot more pleasurable and easy than doing one with a receptionist who is a mess.
Something like 25% of working Americans make $10 an hour or less. Yes, the minimum wage needs to go up. It is a simple fact that in a capitalist society, you need an effective mandatory wage floor. The minimum wage serves that purpose.
Something like 25% of working Americans make $10 an hour or less. Yes, the minimum wage needs to go up. It is a simple fact that in a capitalist society, you need an effective mandatory wage floor. The minimum wage serves that purpose.
It's closer to the opposite......because we are not a capitalist society is the reason we need one. Even then it's just the government throwing crumbs to the little people and for some reason they are satisfied with it.
Everyone that is employed to do a job is worth 3 five dollar bills an hour for their time. If that person is not worth that little, then the employer should like about replacing them with someone who is.
If so, anybody, who can't produce more than $15/hour worth of value, are now unemployed, meaning virtually all minimum wage workers.
Something like 25% of working Americans make $10 an hour or less. Yes, the minimum wage needs to go up. It is a simple fact that in a capitalist society, you need an effective mandatory wage floor. The minimum wage serves that purpose.
In a capitalist society, if the wage needs to go up, it will go up.
In our society, there's no NEED for the minimum wage to go up; there's only WANT.
Definitely agree about the receptionists deserving decent pay. Anyone who works in a office knows doing business with another office that has a good receptionist is a lot more pleasurable and easy than doing one with a receptionist who is a mess.
Whether a person deserves a decent pay is dependent on whether or not he or she can produce decent value and the presence of or lack of competition.
The whole idea of someone must be paid at certain amount is nothing but fascist and communist.
Cost-of-living is lower across the board in Republican states, thus the need to raise the minimum wage in those states isn't the urgent matter that its become in more urban blue states. Average rent 1-bedroom rent in NYC and San Francisco is over $3000 per month, compared to under $600/month in Tulsa, Topeka, Indianapolis and Tucson.
Which is why if you want to pass high minimum wage laws, they should be done locally rather than statewide. Introducing a one-size-fits-all solution is going to cause as many problems as it fixes. Adjusted for cost-of-living, a $7.25 hourly wage in Oklahoma City is equivalent to a $12.00 hourly wage in Boston where the current minimum wage is just $10/hr., so the workers in OKC are coming out ahead even at a lower hourly wage.
Which is why the fed should stay out of it.
The typical fed, "one size fits all" is ridiculous in most cases.
A state sets its own rates and cities can do the same.
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.
