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.
Yes, I do think a higher minimum wage is better for the economy.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers increases spending in local businesses.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers results in additional sales tax revenue.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers means that they need less taxpayer assistance.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers results in higher contributions to SS and Medicare.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers means less homelessness.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers lessens use of food pantries and other charitable resources by the working poor.
The conservatives' "trickle down" economics mantra of giving tax breaks, subsidies, and increasing compensation to the wealthy has been totally discredited by the wage stagnation and soaring wealth inequality that's occurred over the last 40 years. Giving all the goodies to the wealthy and crumbs to everybody else has NOT floated any boats but those of the wealthy, and the benefits of an enlarged economic pie have all gone to the rich, not to the middle or lower classes.
Yes, I do think a higher minimum wage is better for the economy.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers increases spending in local businesses.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers results in additional sales tax revenue.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers means that they need less taxpayer assistance.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers results in higher contributions to SS and Medicare.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers means less homelessness.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers lessens use of food pantries and other charitable resources by the working poor.
The conservatives' "trickle down" economics mantra of giving tax breaks, subsidies, and increasing compensation to the wealthy has been totally discredited by the wage stagnation and soaring wealth inequality that's occurred over the last 40 years. Giving all the goodies to the wealthy and crumbs to everybody else has NOT floated any boats but those of the wealthy, and the benefits of an enlarged economic pie have all gone to the rich, not to the middle or lower classes.
"The conservatives' "trickle down" economics mantra of giving tax breaks, subsidies, and increasing compensation to the wealthy..."
Ignorance of the left as to what conservative think and do is abundant.
You might want to check out the last time the "conservatives" passed a tax cut and who ACTUALLY benefited the most before making a bigger fool of yourself
Whats good for the economy is to hire the best not the cheapest. Americans need a paradigm shift. The best is always cheaper in the long run even when it comes to labor. People who supervise low wage worker will tell you how much time they spend or waste training the revolving door of low wage employees.Think of all the investments technology and advancements in process that has to be developed because the cheapest labor is not always the most intelligent.
Anytime two employees (even at an increased hourly rate) can do the work of three employees, it is a net win for the business due to:
One less employee on a health insurance plan.
In most states, industrial insurance is calculated on the amount of hours an employee works - 24 hours, 32 hours, 40 hours, etc - so even at $15 an hour with one less employee it reduces industrial / workplace insurance.
One less exposure calculated for general liability insurance for the business.
And increased productivity of two employees at a higher wage vs. three at a lower wage. That's just subjective valuation of the job, by the worker and human psychology 101.
Yes, I do think a higher minimum wage is better for the economy.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers increases spending in local businesses.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers results in additional sales tax revenue.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers means that they need less taxpayer assistance.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers results in higher contributions to SS and Medicare.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers means less homelessness.
More $ in the hands of lower income workers lessens use of food pantries and other charitable resources by the working poor.
The conservatives' "trickle down" economics mantra of giving tax breaks, subsidies, and increasing compensation to the wealthy has been totally discredited by the wage stagnation and soaring wealth inequality that's occurred over the last 40 years. Giving all the goodies to the wealthy and crumbs to everybody else has NOT floated any boats but those of the wealthy, and the benefits of an enlarged economic pie have all gone to the rich, not to the middle or lower classes.
If minimum wage is increased, businesses pass on the extra cost to the consumers, which hurts the poor the most. Ultimately, all you are doing is increasing the cost of living.
If minimum wage is increased, businesses pass on the extra cost to the consumers, which hurts the poor the most. Ultimately, all you are doing is increasing the cost of living.
Never understood why Liberals have such a hard time grasping this simple, almost self explanatory concept.
Apparently they think that it can't be true because they don't want it to be.
Never understood why Liberals have such a hard time grasping this simple, almost self explanatory concept.
Apparently they think that it can't be true because they don't want it to be.
The problem I have with most Liberal positions on various issues is that they assume everything exists in a bubble. They're based in good intentions, "how can anyone be against <fill in the blank>", but oblivious to external factors that have negative side effects.
For example, lowering college admission standards for Blacks has done more damage than good. The problem being that lowering the bar to get in without adjusting the curriculum only serves to set some of these Black students up for failure in college. They smile as they see the more diverse campus they've created, without knowing they've set some of these people up for failure and debt they may be saddled with for years.
Another example being the Paycheck Fairness Act. It was basically poorly-written, feel-good legislation that was largely redundant of existing laws, and designed specifically as something for Republicans to vote against, giving Dems Example A in the rights' "War on Women." However, digging into this bill, it would make hiring women a much bigger liability for employers, as it gave female workers an arsenal of tools with which to bring costly discrimination lawsuits against their employers, which would actually discourage hiring managers from picking women over similarly qualified men. It makes female employees a liability, and thankfully it was voted down.
They're always surprised or in denial when their policies have these negative side effects.
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.
