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.
If your workers cannot afford to live while you employ them then your business is not viable. Taxpayers are basically subsidizing low wage workers with welfare programs. Privatized profits but socialized costs..
WalMart makes how much? WalMart employees costs taxpayers 6.2 BILLION (with a B) dollars in welfare. Why are we paying for WalMart's employees? WalMart can certainly afford to do so.
NOBODY working a full time job should have to rely on government aid to avoid starving to death. Companies that refuse to pay their employees enough money to survive need to be punished.
If your workers cannot afford to live while you employ them then your business is not viable. Taxpayers are basically subsidizing low wage workers with welfare programs. Privatized profits but socialized costs..
WalMart makes how much? WalMart employees costs taxpayers 6.2 BILLION (with a B) dollars in welfare. Why are we paying for WalMart's employees? WalMart can certainly afford to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmondaynight
NOBODY working a full time job should have to rely on government aid to avoid starving to death. Companies that refuse to pay their employees enough money to survive need to be punished.
The reason that Seattle chose $15 originally was because they noted that a full time job in the late 60's at minimum wage could pay for a studio apartment with one weeks pay; so with the market rate studio going for $600/month at the time the $15 wage law passed, that is why it was chosen
Wages should not be based upon what people will do with their money.
Some jobs (low to no skill), are not meant to support people paying rent or mortgages, plus food, ins, car pmt, etc. They were primarily considered entry level jobs that teens would take, or part time jobs for moms wanting spending money or retired seniors looking for something to do.
I worked several of those fast food jobs as a teen. The goal was always to get a career after graduating. Something that would pay enough to get an apartment with a roommate, until I was earning enough money to get my own place.
Now you have unskilled people that don't try to better themselves either thru education (college, vocational training, apprenticeships, military, or a job based on commissions, that expect a cashier or fast food job to pay enough to support themselves. Not going to happen. You need to invest in yourself and plan, if you want a career that supports you. Fast food and cashiering is not a career.
Actually, a wage should provide food and shelter, the two necessities of life. I wouldn't take any job that didn't pay me enough for either
No it shouldn't.
You said they key phrase... you wouldn't take it. Right - you have a choice. Some people - would take a job that did not provider enough for food and shelter - just to bring in extra money.
The employer has a choice as well. If he wants someone to work, how much would they be willing to accept in pay? Someone who sweeps hair in a barber shop should not get $15/hr. If the pay is too low, people won't work there.
It is not the employer's duty to provide a living for his employees.
If a job pays well enough for food and shelter - great. But it is not mandatory.
Actually, a wage should provide food and shelter, the two necessities of life. I wouldn't take any job that didn't pay me enough for either
No, a wage should be proportional to the work being done. You want to know what else is a necessity in life? A marketable skill. That's ALL on the individual.
Some jobs (low to no skill), are not meant to support people paying rent or mortgages, plus food, ins, car pmt, etc. They were primarily considered entry level jobs that teens would take, or part time jobs for moms wanting spending money or retired seniors looking for something to do.
I worked several of those fast food jobs as a teen. The goal was always to get a career after graduating. Something that would pay enough to get an apartment with a roommate, until I was earning enough money to get my own place.
Now you have unskilled people that don't try to better themselves either thru education (college, vocational training, apprenticeships, military, or a job based on commissions, that expect a cashier or fast food job to pay enough to support themselves. Not going to happen. You need to invest in yourself and plan, if you want a career that supports you. Fast food and cashiering is not a career.
There are many MILLIONS of skilled people "working down" with significant skills. Many are over 40 years old where few will hire. Over 50 years old quadruples the problem. Its a crappy job or no job. That 50 year old chooses the crappy job.
Note I am NOT for $15. Im for a modest stepped increase in the federal minimum wage to something along the lines of $9 to $10 an hour.
In January 2016, Seattle’s minimum wage jumped from $11 an hour to $13 for large employers, the second big increase in less than a year. New research released Monday by a team of economists at the University of Washington suggests the wage hike may have come at a significant cost: The increase led to steep declines in employment for low-wage workers, and a drop in hours for those who kept their jobs. Crucially, the negative impact of lost jobs and hours more than offset the benefits of higher wages — on average, low-wage workers earned $125 per month less because of the higher wage, a small but significant decline.
Did you get that? Not only did more people lose their jobs, but the "low" wage workers that kept their jobs lost $30 per week because of "higher" wages.
“The goal of this policy was to deliver higher incomes to people who were struggling to make ends meet in the city,” said Jacob Vigdor, a University of Washington economist who was one of the study’s authors. “You’ve got to watch out because at some point you run the risk of harming the people you set out to help.”
Maybe these busybodies should let the people help themselves and stay out of how people operate their business, because their little social experiment is jacking up the economy - both personal and country wide. These professors did not lose any income on this theory of minimum wages. The people who need the money are losing income.
Social idealists vs Corporate America is a no contest.
The latter is paying the wages and will not tolerate any virtue signalling nonsense from SJW's.
In fact, keep it up and corporations will flex their muscle to eliminate more low paying jobs.
Yet another example of misguided vanity driven leftists doing what they know best to destroy other peoples lives.
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.
