Minimum wage... pick a number.

[peeonme]

Propose something other than throwing money at the poor then I'll consider it.

When we had general assistance in this country people said that we were throwing money at the poor. We no longer have the welfare state that we once had, as Bill Clinton said 'The era of big government is over".
So when a decent wage is proposed for workers we sing the same song? Don't throw money at the poor.

The effect of raising the minimum wage would mean more jobs. People would buy clothes, go shopping, fix there homes.
It would put more money on main street instead of Wall street. But, they might waste the money that they earn, so let the rich pocket it.

 

[Rickrock]

In the past it wasn't too hard to find a better paying job and all you had to do was work hard every day. Today there seem to be fewer high paying jobs and the job market is constantly shifting. It is not just working hard daily, but also spending your free time trying to keep up with the changes. Although some of that is good, not everyone is capable of following the changes and keeping up. A lot of what peeonme said in post #27 resonates with me. Employers were looking for workers and there were fewer workers available. Now much of the industrial work is gone from outsourcing and automation and many of the jobs left require training which is time consuming and expensive and sometimes not available and in some cases unknown about by people looking for work. Raising the minimum wage is a partial solution and I don't know what the full solution is, but all workers in a company contribute to the company and all workers should be valued.

 

[zoltanspawn]

Thirty dollars/hour

I could probably get behind champagne socialism.

 

[Dominus]

When we had general assistance in this country people said that we were throwing money at the poor. We no longer have the welfare state that we once had, as Bill Clinton said 'The era of big government is over".
So when a decent wage is proposed for workers we sing the same song? Don't throw money at the poor.

The effect of raising the minimum wage would mean more jobs. People would buy clothes, go shopping, fix there homes.
It would put more money on main street instead of Wall street. But, they might waste the money that they earn, so let the rich pocket it.

No, I am not proposing we give money to the rich. I'm saying let people earn their way up instead of the state try to artificially uplift people.

The war on poverty back in the 70s, while done with good intentions, did nothing to uplift people out of poverty. All it did was create dependency. Instead of training people for useful skills, it just gave people incentives to stay poor.

We have been giving people public assistance for 50 years with little to no positive results. How long do you want us to keep doing the same thing?

Instead of giving people public assistance and raising the minimum wage, why not try a different approach for once?

Take my husband. He has 3 sisters and 3 brothers. All work minimum wage type jobs. And yet he works in a professional setting with a very good salary. How? I assimilated him into my family culture. If anything, he proves that something just isn't working with his family background. A simple change in attitude and expectations made all the difference. No public assistance could ever replace the mindset that I planted in him.

Stop thinking giving money to the poor will somehow make things better. It won't.

 

[Dominus]

Also, aren't you a Christian? Remember jesus' teaching about fish? Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him to fish and he will eat for life. Or something like that. Instead of giving people fish, why not teach them to fish and let them earn it?

 

[peeonme]

Also, aren't you a Christian? Remember jesus' teaching about fish? Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him to fish and he will eat for life. Or something like that. Instead of giving people fish, why not teach them to fish and let them earn it?

Jesus did not say that.

 

[peeonme]

No, I am not proposing we give money to the rich. I'm saying let people earn their way up instead of the state try to artificially uplift people.

The war on poverty back in the 70s, while done with good intentions, did nothing to uplift people out of poverty. All it did was create dependency. Instead of training people for useful skills, it just gave people incentives to stay poor.

We have been giving people public assistance for 50 years with little to no positive results. How long do you want us to keep doing the same thing?

Instead of giving people public assistance and raising the minimum wage, why not try a different approach for once?

Take my husband. He has 3 sisters and 3 brothers. All work minimum wage type jobs. And yet he works in a professional setting with a very good salary. How? I assimilated him into my family culture. If anything, he proves that something just isn't working with his family background. A simple change in attitude and expectations made all the difference. No public assistance could ever replace the mindset that I planted in him.

Stop thinking giving money to the poor will somehow make things better. It won't.

The war on poverty was in the 60's under the Johnson administration. If we leave the minimum wage where it is, people are eligible for food stamps and some other help, that comes out of taxes. If the minimum wage is raised it come out of the pocket of employers.
Again, paying a decent wage is not giving money to anyone.

 

[peeonme]

No, I am not proposing we give money to the rich. I'm saying let people earn their way up instead of the state try to artificially uplift people.

The war on poverty back in the 70s, while done with good intentions, did nothing to uplift people out of poverty. All it did was create dependency. Instead of training people for useful skills, it just gave people incentives to stay poor.

We have been giving people public assistance for 50 years with little to no positive results. How long do you want us to keep doing the same thing?

Instead of giving people public assistance and raising the minimum wage, why not try a different approach for once?

Take my husband. He has 3 sisters and 3 brothers. All work minimum wage type jobs. And yet he works in a professional setting with a very good salary. How? I assimilated him into my family culture. If anything, he proves that something just isn't working with his family background. A simple change in attitude and expectations made all the difference. No public assistance could ever replace the mindset that I planted in him.

Stop thinking giving money to the poor will somehow make things better. It won't.

I am glad that your husband has done well, you brag and take credit for his accomplishments and attribute his success to your 'family culture'. The fact is that you supported him while he went to school. Everyone doesn't have a sugar daddy as you called yourself in another thread.

By referring to your 'family culture' that is just another way to attribute the success that was accomplished in America to being of Asian decent. If just being of Asian decent and culture is the cure explain the poverty in Vietnam and other nations in that area.

 

[Dominus]

I am glad that your husband has done well, you brag and take credit for his accomplishments and attribute his success to your 'family culture'. The fact is that you supported him while he went to school. Everyone doesn't have a sugar daddy as you called yourself in another thread.

By referring to your 'family culture' that is just another way to attribute the success that was accomplished in America to being of Asian decent. If just being of Asian decent and culture is the cure explain the poverty in Vietnam and other nations in that area.

One, there are plenty of successful white people and there are also plenty of unsuccessful Asian people. In fact, there are more poorer than poor Asian people in this world than there are poorer than poor white people. When I said family culture, I was referring to different expectations and attitudes in life. Success has nothing to do with race. I could have been white or brown or black. Whatever color. As long as the right attitude and expectations are there, anyone can do better.

Two, you can call it bragging if you want. The fact of the matter is there are many programs out there that allow people to go to college without a sugar daddy. You honestly think my parents were able to pay cash for all of us to go through college with 2 minimum wage jobs and a house mortgage?

This is what is wrong with how you see things in life. Any mention of success as an example is "bragging". Fine if you see it that way. Or you can see it another way that anybody can become successful with a change in attitude and expectations. Hence exhibit A my husband.

I brought him up because you keep insisting people are incapable of improving themselves and the only way for their lives to get better is charity from the government.

And yes, artificially increasing zero skill wages is charity. You're practically saying people are so helpless and worthless that the government has to step in and give them yet another handout.

What I'm proposing is instead of keep giving them handouts we actually put that money toward job training programs, budgeting classes, etc. Require high schools to teach basic house hold finances. Fun fact, I went through k12 without a single class in finances. This is why most people don't even understand simple concepts like compounded interest.

Back when I was working for habitat for humanity, I once almost pulled my hair out trying to explain compounded interest to some people.

 

[peeonme]

^^
What you do not understand is the difference between demand side economics and supply side economics.

https://owlcation.com/social-sciences/The-Differences-Between-Supply-Side-and-Demand-Side-Economics

The greatest danger of supply side economic theory is long-term deficits which will weigh heavily on the future economy.

One danger of too much consumer demand is inflation.

This country ran on demand side economics quite well for many years, the greatest problem was inflation, which simply put means too many dollars chasing too few goods.
The middle class that had been created under the new deal gave workers discretionary spending power, not just survival pay. This meant a greater demand for goods and a need for workers to produce them. This in turn made workers more valuable which meant more pay and again more spending power and again the demand for more goods.

Life was good for most workers, the term working poor was not even heard of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics
Read about Keynesian economics.

now, inflation didn't bother most people, wages rose, prices rose etc. The folks that really hated it were the wealth, they couldn't find a way to invesy their vast wealth where the return would keep up with inflation, this meant that a million dollars would lose over 310,000
in real money between 1960 and 1970


Reaganomics or supply side economics was the republican answer to this, it meant increasing the supply of goods and the supply of workers and less money in the hands of workers lowering the price of goods and wages. This along with huge tax cuts to the wealthy
brought inflation under control but at a huge cost to the middle class.

From 1980 on we have seen increases in homelessness, a lowering of available health care to workers, fewer jobs, less pay and a general lowering of the standard of living for the middle class worker.

So, who has reaped the benefits of Reaganomics? The top 1-10% of the already wealthy. When I say that this economy of a working poor
was planed and intentional I mean just that. There has been a systematic dismantling of the new deal and a war on the middle class brought on them by those whom they vote for.

Anyone with a brain would see that outsourcing of jobs, an influx of workers accompanied by a decrease demand for goods due to less
discretionary spending power in the hands of the consumers would and has decimated the middle class.
Agian, it was intentional and done by both parties that have been bought by the wealthy.

 

[Dominus]

^^ I wrote out a long response. Then I realized at this point we are probably talking past each other.

So, all I gotta say is the recipe that's been passed down l from my parents works regardless of economic policy that's in place. And when applied to someone like my husband, it worked again. It just works. And the no-ambition-and-lets-get-pregnant-asap-out-of-wedlock recipe does not work no matter how politically incorrect pointing it out is.

I agree to disagree.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

I could probably get behind champagne socialism.

I wasn't even joking, if wages kept up with inflation min wag would be hovering around the thirty dollar mark, give or take

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

It is not that i don't care about the minimum wagers. I'm just not convinced raising the minimum wage will do any good for someone that got pregnant at 16, dropped out of school, etc. Let me repeat. Throwing money at those who have not the budgeting skills, the self discipline, and the will for self betterment will not solve anything.

Ahh and there we go with the anti-poor propoganda, and of course the villain is a female because she made that baby by herself. When classism and misogyny meet and have a baby.....

One of the laziest comments in any discussion about economics or wages is that people who can't afford their seventeen bajillion dollar per pill monthly prescription are just lazy and unwilling to work, of course this flies in the face of the poor who hold down two or three jobs but nobody wants to talk about them cuz then you'd have to acknowledge that the system is kinda fucked, a lot of people are falling through the cracks and you're indifferent to their suffering cuz you had to work a part-time job during college now you feel like you're the hardest working man in the history of labor.

*"you" in this post is a general "you" not YOU arist.

 

[peeonme]

I wasn't even joking, if wages kept up with inflation min wag would be hovering around the thirty dollar mark, give or take

If the economy hadn't been sabotaged by Reagan with supply side and later Clinton with globalization the only people working for minimum wage would be high school part time workers as it always had been.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

If the economy hadn't been sabotaged by Reagan with supply side and later Clinton with globalization the only people working for minimum wage would be high school part time workers as it always had been.

Hindsight is always twinny twinny, as it stands it's not high-school students working part time, low-wage jobs, it's college students with thousands of dollars in loans, professionals chasing supplemental income to keep the lights on, elderly people and the sick who can barely afford healthcare and [wait for it] people with families to support, sure we could criticize their life decisions [I know some people bust a nut every time the get a chance to demonize welfare queens] but what would that solve other than a temporary self-esteem boost?

 

[Rickrock]

Aristomaniac I just want to say that not all people are as strong, talented and intelligent as you are.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

Aristomaniac I just want to say that not all people are as strong, talented and intelligent as you are.

That was so sweet of you, it's all people wanna hear when they keep singing "everybody could be as successful as I am if only they....."

 

[Dominus]

Aristomaniac I just want to say that not all people are as strong, talented and intelligent as you are.

Good God.

It seems like all the arguments against my argument against more handouts is I'm a bad person. Why not address my point, that it doesn't matter how high we raise the minimum wage. 50 years of public assistance, public housing, food stamps, etc. have done little to help get people out of poverty. The way out of poverty is not more public assistance. And yes, increasing the minimum wage is public assistance.

Instead of throwing more money at the problem, we should take a different approach for goodness sake. Instead of scoffing at a recipe that works while embracing a recipe that hasn't worked even though it's been tried for 50 years... but whatever.

 

[peeonme]

Hindsight is always twinny twinny, as it stands it's not high-school students working part time, low-wage jobs, it's college students with thousands of dollars in loans, professionals chasing supplemental income to keep the lights on, elderly people and the sick who can barely afford healthcare and [wait for it] people with families to support, sure we could criticize their life decisions [I know some people bust a nut every time the get a chance to demonize welfare queens] but what would that solve other than a temporary self-esteem boost?

I said that globalization along with supply side would kill the middle class when it was proposed. I joined the democratic party and even was elected to an insignificant office as precinct delegate in the district where I lived. This gave me access to my congressman face to face,
it was soon obvious that the democratic party had left the working class. Of course the republicans had never been for the worker.
I say this because it's important to know what fucked things up if we are to fix them.

I agree that right now it's not high school kids working minimum wage jobs. Ironically people with degrees end up there. That is because the rungs in the ladder between entree level work and decent jobs have been removed. It's a leap to get to a higher rung, not just a step.
So, increasing the minimum wage would be the first step. Then going back to a growing upwardly mobile middle class of workers would be the next thing to do. Vocational training in the building trades would be a good place to start. That along with a level playing field that would end the huge trade deficits and bring jobs back and keep jobs here would be the next thing on the list.

 

[peeonme]

Good God.

It seems like all the arguments against my argument against more handouts is I'm a bad person. Why not address my point, that it doesn't matter how high we raise the minimum wage. 50 years of public assistance, public housing, food stamps, etc. have done little to help get people out of poverty. The way out of poverty is not more public assistance. And yes, increasing the minimum wage is public assistance.

Instead of throwing more money at the problem, we should take a different approach for goodness sake. Instead of scoffing at a recipe that works while embracing a recipe that hasn't worked even though it's been tried for 50 years... but whatever.

If increasing the minimum wage is 'public assistance', then why not do away with it all together? Are you for that?