Let's pay 16 year olds $31.2k to sweep floors!!!!

[eniwetok]

Raising the minimum wage to $15 over the next 4-5-6 years in high flying urban areas may make perfect sense. But does $15 make sense as a NATIONAL minimum wage... to be applied to ALL areas of the nation... be they high flying urban areas or depressed backwaters?

Is the owner of Joe's Garage in East Coalcake WV or the owner of the KKK General Store in Jeb Stuartville MS really going to pay some 16 year old $31.2k a year to sweep floors, pick up trash, and clean toilets when those owners may just be getting by on $25k?


15
40 ×
52 ×
--------------------------
$31,200 =

Add to that the employer will have to pay another $1200+ in extra FICA over the current MW.

Of course it's scandalous that Washington has allowed the MW to depreciate from it's highest value... which would be $10.95 today. Someone's been making off with that value that should have been going to workers. But it's oh so easy for some here to say OF COURSE those businesses should pay $15... when it's someone else's money! Anything less is predatory employment! OF COURSE there won't be any disruptions to the economy. If anyone disagrees THEY ARE RIGHT WINGERS: IGNORE!!!

I love Bernie... but I think some of the justifications and accusations I've been hearing on this board for a $15 national MW are just nutty. It's one thing to use it as an opening gambit in negotiations. It's another to believe it MUST be the ultimate goal.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

1. Because of GOP obstruction and our unwillingness to fix our trade situation, the person sweeping

those floors wont be a 16 yr old, it will be either a 40 year old single mom or a 70 year old retiree who cant afford to retire.

[eniwetok]

24. The MW doesn't discriminate

The MW doesn't discriminate. To say the MW must be higher for that "40 year old single mom or a 70 year old retiree who cant afford to retire" who live in high flying cities means it WILL also apply to that 16 year old kid who lives at home in some rural backwater. A so-called "living wage" for some is living high off the hog for others. While the federal MW should be reasonable and adjusted to inflation... it's really up to states or cities to go above it.

[Hestia]

306. Even in rural areas, $15 isn't living high on the hog. Food is usually higher, no mass transit syste

living off your parents or friends for rides if you don't have your own car (bikes aren't safe on our backwater highways in most places, too hilly and no shoulders to move to if a car comes) but you still have to pay them for gas.

Most economists agree, MW would be cycled back into the economy, boosting small businesses bottom lines. MW earners do not hoard cash like the 1% and off-shore it.

[saturnsring]

2. joe can wash the floor clean the toilet pick up trash all by himself

and many are older people

[lame54]

206. 40 hrs a week? - why isn't that 16 year old in school

[saturnsring]

227. even better

[revbones]

3. So when that janitor is a single mom working nights as a second job to feed her kids what then? nt

[eniwetok]

12. OK... raise it to $25

A national MW is the FLOOR which the unskilled worker must be paid. It can't be expected to cover the situation EVERY worker is in.

But it's that's the "logic" you're going to use... then why not just decree the MW be $25. Oh, because there are TWO parties involved... the employee and the employer. Are you prepared to hold a gun to every employer's head that they MUST pay the living wage for that mom with kids... even if they're hiring that 16 year old who lives at home?

[nadinbrzezinski]

69. Are you related to the President of the San Diego Chamber?

Hmm that argument is awfully familiar

[LanternWaste]

75. By extrapolating your argument, why not lower it to 25¢?

By extrapolating your argument, why not lower it to 25¢?

[eniwetok]

131. makes no sense

Businesses get freebies from government as discussed here http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027733743

As beneficiaries of social benefits they also have to serve the needs of society... to pay a reasonable MW, to provide safe working conditions, pay OT over 40 hours... etc. The question is what's a reasonable MW for unskilled labor in ALL parts of the nation?

It's pretty difficult to make the argument that of $15 is a "living wage" for a high flying city... then it must be also applied to even depressed small towns. Which is why I've argued for a return of the highest the MW has ever been... which today would be about $11. It's clear from BEA and BLS numbers that the economy was able to absorb this without problems. But since 1968 the economy has become increasingly addicted to a depreciating MW... and some is making off with that value that should be going to workers.

[TexasProgresive]

144. Here's the problem, The single mom

or man for that matter working as a janitor will lose his/her job to the 16 year old who can be paid less. That's the problem of having a scale of minimum wage. Whether there ought to be a national minimum wage is open for debate. It is certainly more expensive to eke out a living in Manhattan or San Francisco then in some other places in the U.S.. As to your kid making minimum wage sweeping and cleaning, that's probably a cheaper alternative to living on the street turning tricks, and stealing for dope and food.

[cigsandcoffee]

4. The KKK General store may have bigger problems. n/t

[Adrahil]

132. Ha! I thought the same thing!

I thought "KKK General store? WTF!?"

[madinmaryland]

195. Well, I should have known that KKKarl Rove has a General Corruption Store.

Just wish he had gotten frog marched years ago. I'm still waiting for Fitzmas and those 24 business hours to happen.

[bkkyosemite]

5. You sound like a republican! I was making as a secretary in 1988 $15 an hour damnit

Our wages have gone drastically downward over the last 30 years. Yes sweeping floors for $15 if you want to pay rent and eat is just fine!

[restorefreedom]

134. a secular amen to that! nt

[corbettkroehler]

180. Ditto!

[dana_b]

267. yep! An adult who needs to pay the bills and maybe has a kid or two

but who happens to work in the service industry should not be near starvation wages just because they don't have a bachelors degree or higher and isn't working in a white collar job.

[ProfessorGAC]

6. Didn't We Do This Already?

What, you couldn't convince people the first time, so you just had to beat the same drum again?

Your basic premise is flawed and has been pointed out numerous times.

First, not all MW workers are 16.

Secondly, a high percentage of MW workers don't work 40 hours a week.

Other than that, you've nailed it.

[mac56]

7. Weren't you banging the drum about this yesterday?

Tenacious, ain't you?

[JimDandy]

109. Yep...this appears to be his raison d'etre for being on DU.

A future Bernie Butter?

[Major Nikon]

196. Very telling that

Must be getting close to the election.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

274. And pimping Nader, defending the SCOTUS and....

....an election fraud denier in another thread. This dude is a real winner

[X_Digger]

223. Among other 'bait' topics. n/t

[HughBeaumont]

8. Hooo boy.

Not that any of our needs matter anyway, what with the Ryan House, McConnell Senate and State Legislatures under Repub control (THANKS, Debbie Disasterman Schultz!).

[bemildred]

9. We pay asshole bankers billions, why not pay kids well too? nt

[Nye Bevan]

96. Yes, that's normally a very successful argument when asking your boss for a raise (nt)

[bemildred]

98. We are not asking. nt

[eniwetok]

165. gee.... because not every business is a bank? n/t

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

10. Sounds good to me.

If the floors aren't worth being swept, don't sweep them. If they are, then pay a living wage to do the work.

Look, in most businesses, the cost of labour is something like 25-33% of overall cost. That means if you sell a $5 meal and your cost of goods sold is $2.50, something like a buck sixty is labour. You double the pay, and cost of goods sold goes up another .80. You make your $5 meal $6 and you're already ahead. And you're likely to sell a lot more $6 meals when everyone is making $31k a year, rather than 15k a year.

Edit: I started switching around numbers while writing, and screwed up by bumping some numbers up by two but not others. That 80 cents should be 1.60, so you'd have to bump your $5 meal up to $6.60 to stay at the same level of profitability. But I still hold that you'll sell a lot more $6.60 meals when everyone is making $31k a year than you do $5 meals when most folks are making $15k.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

44. Yep. Even fascist ant-Semite Henry Ford knew paying his workers enough to afford his cars was...

...good for business.

An economy based on consumer consumption can't survive when consumers can't consume.

[whatthehey]

89. Actually that was just spin. He raised wages to stop 370% turnover at a terrible job

[eniwetok]

111. good question

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/03/04/the-story-of-henry-fords-5-a-day-wages-its-not-what-you-think/

But this article is by a known right winger...

[whatthehey]

128. I can quibble with the emphasis but not the facts

The bits they are missing or gloss over is that it was a horrible job with terrible conditions. We hold up auto jobs as desirable today and while they are still tedious and demanding they are far better than Ford's first efforts at Taylorism. On the job workers were forbidden to so much as talk to their workmates, let alone use bathrooms or sit. Nothing that could distract from unbroken attention and productive motion was allowed. This was long before UAW piece rate maximums. Off the job a company detective force (really, not hyperbole!) monitored their social and personal behavior far more intrusively than the Forbes article mentions. Ford had particular issues with profanity, drunkenness and weight gain.

So yes the idea that he raised wages to make his cars affordable is bogus. What's not however is that he did give his employees, or at least those with either the servility or patience to put up with his crap, more disposible income which did indeed allow them to buy more of whatever they wanted, including cars if they chose. Ford really did essentially propel Detroit to, temporary, economic success, but in reality he did it despite his own weird and misguided intent.

[eniwetok]

138. Ford's raise = $592 a week today

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=25.00&year1=1914&year2=2016 or $14.80 and hour... not bad! But then it was tedious work with a high turnover. There was no overhead like employers share of FICA, or health insurance, or UI taxes Workers Comp insurance. And Ford did it for reasons that made sense to his business.

So what made sense to Ford be applied to ALL businesses of the time where there was no high turnover and where $14.80 was excessive give how inefficient they were compared to his assembly line?

[scscholar]

115. Good point about the $5 to $6 raise

Despite inflation, we make more. Make more.

[TexasProgresive]

11. If the 16 year old is working 2080 hours a year

That person needs a living wage. They certainly don't have time for school and a social life.

[Adrahil]

135. I certainly agree.... but...

Is the living wage over $30K everywhere?

Not here it isn't. Here it is possible to rent a decent apartment for about $600/mo. Cost of living is cheap. The MEDIAN wage here is $13/hr. I favor rasining the minimum wage to a living wage everywhere. But the living wage isn't the same everywhere.

[krawhitham]

250. Lets do the math

$15 bucks per hour
40 hours a week
52 weeks a year

31,200 gross

Check deductions
$222.60 FED Tax LINK
$47.17 Ohio state tax LINK
$169 SS LINK
$37.7 Medicare LINK

$476.47 per month

Required Monthly bills
$600 Apartment
$95 Average monthly electric bill LINK
$258 health insurance Ohio LINK
$310 Ford's 2nd cheapest car costs 17,255. A car loan breaks down to 310 per month
$75 car insurance LINK
$78.25 Gas LINK
$210 Food (assumes 7 bucks a day on food)

$1626.25 per month

Since it is called a living wage I'll assume you are allowed to spend money on fun stuff
I'll assume the person is a cordcutter
$46.92 Home Internet LINK
$10 Netflix
$73 Cell phone LINK

$129.92 per month


All that totals $2,232.64 per month or $26,791.68 a year

That leaves you will $84.75 a week left to deal with random stuff that always come up
New Cloths
Cleaning Cloths (your in an apartment so I assume you do not have your own washer and dryer)
Household items
Car Maintenance
OTC Drugs
Dates
Christmas presents


Not much if any wiggle room, and that is at today's costs. All these laws passing supporting 15 bucks an hour are slowly rolled out, California does not hit $15 a hour for 6 more years. $15 is living wage NOW, in 6 years it will take even more

[pipoman]

269. The whole and entire point is that there are vastly different costs of living across the US

And a one size fits all "living wage" is impossible. A "living wage in San Francisco is completely different than a living wage in Cheyenne Wyoming.

[krawhitham]

293. No, not as much as you think

Everything listed is pretty much costs the same everywhere or it is already on the low end of the spectrum, only thing listed that can change much is the apartment cost and I used the number giving by the sub OP, who said cost of living was low in their area

SS, medicare, FED tax are set nation wide
Ohio has one of the lowest income tax rates in the country
Ohio has one of the lower Health insurance costs
Ford charges the same for a car in Ohio VS California, only thing that fluctuates is TAX and I figured that at ZERO
Gas was figured at $1.91 a gallon who has it cheaper?
Ohio is on the low end for average electric costs
7 bucks a day for food is very low. 3 meals off a dollar menu would cost more
Netflix is the same everywhere
Cell phone companies are nation wide
Find Broadband home internet for less that 47 bucks a month, that is a low number in California it is almost $100

car insurance might fluctuate but how much lower that 75 per month can a 16 year old expect?

[pipoman]

295. No, cost of living isn't the same everywhere.

Average home losting price

California. $654k
Kansas $166k

http://m.trulia.com/home_prices/

Average electricity cost

California $15.23 Kwh
Kansas. $10.04

http://www.neo.ne.gov/statshtml/204.htm

gasoline prices

California. $2.78
Kansas. $1.87

http://fuelgaugereport.aaa.com/todays-gas-prices/

cost of living

California #47 of 50 col index 134.4
Kansas #8 of 50 COL index. 90.9

https://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/cost_of_living/

No, vastly different. Average salaries for the same job are very different too.

Minimum wage in most of California is already over $10 simply because of economics...

[Adrahil]

278. Here's the issue I havee with that.

The main issue with what I have is that you are posting average costs. First, my whole point is that that things do cost the same everywhere, so averages aren't so useful. Where I live, we have about 77% of the national average cost of living. By you analysis, i would guess not even $15/hr would cut it in high cost areas.

Also, why would someone making minimum wage have average expenses? I'm not interested in poor shaming or anything like that, but for example I did not buy a new car when money was tight.

However, I do appreciate your analysis, and it does require some thought recalibration. It may be that by shofting the burden frrom taxpayers to employers for ensuring their basic employee neeeds are met, that there needs to be some shift in my thinking. But i maintain a flat rate doesn't make any sense. We're not a flat country.

[krawhitham]

294. Ohio is a low cost area

Most numbers were for Ohio

Look up a post or two where I explain that

[Adrahil]

304. But Ohio isn't homogeneous.

Neither is Indiana (where I live).

We really have to focus on localities, not whole states.

And let's say the baseline wage SHOULD be $15/hr. If you really do need $15/hr to get by in rural Ohio, then how in the world would that be adequate for someone living in NYC or Seattle?

[winstars]

13. Great idea eniwetok, kids need money!!!

Gas for their cars and drugs cost real $$$...

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

32. Or maybe they can start saving for college, given how horribly costs have risen.

Or start saving up for a mortgage downpayment or the money they'll need if they ever want to have kids.

[azmom]

112. The costs of textbooks are fucking obscene too.

My daughter who is in college works for spending money and books. Last semester, I had to help out because she didn't make enough. It's insane.

They need every penny they can get.

[DustyJoe]

123. A-men

My 18yr old grandaughter studied hard, got her ged at 16, was in community college taking pre-nursing pre-requisites at 17. Now 18, after obtaining 30 credit hours towards applying for a nursing school slot being only short 8 credit hours of requisites, had to go to work full time just to live leaving NO time or money for school. Luckily one of her first courses at the college was to get her Certified Nurses Aide certificate so she works at a retirement/rerhab center making $10.50 an hour tending to alzheimers, dementia, stroke residents and the aged and infirm, changing diapers, bathing, feeding etc. those unable to tend for themselves and care for them so they don't fall or get sores.

I think she would love $15 an hour.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

280. I was shocked that my most recent textbook costs

last time I picked up a degree, I think were actually higher than my semester tuition when I picked up my first degree.

[eniwetok]

120. how is that the gas station owner's problem?

While we clearly need a reasonable national MW... and pay should be connected to the value produced... how is anything beyond that the responsibility of a business owner?

Sorry, you're making a magic wand argument that all business owners are responsible for the hopes and dreams of all their workers.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

281. No, I was just pointing out that there's no reason to discriminate among workers based on age.

That 16 year olds have legitimate reasons to desire the exact same wages as 18 year olds or older for performing the exact same jobs, and there is no real reason they SHOULD be paid any less than anyone else that performs the job.

The argument that children's labour should be rewarded less simply because they're minors has always been specious, and merely a trick to provide cheap labour.

[trumad]

141. BAM!

Oh but some here think that all 16 year olds use it for drugs. DU has gone to shit lately.

[Kip Humphrey]

14. In 2012 when fast food workers determined a living wage, they settled on $15 as a national need.

I hate to tell you, but I trust their evaluation of their needs way more than your tripe which is based on CoL and inflation calculations which have been revised 3 times since 1968 with all 3 readjustments to the calculus reducing the results. Using original formulas, the 1968 MW should be 20.65/hr.. Keep your elitist dream world; I stand with the workers' judgment of $15/hr in 2012 dollars.

[eniwetok]

28. The Fight For 15 movement STARTED IN NYC

And $15 may make perfect sense for NEW YORK CITY... http://fightfor15.org/november10/about-us/

But does it make sense as a NATIONAL MW?

$15 in the big city may be a living wage. But it's living high on the hog if one can get it in depressed areas of the nation.

[Kip Humphrey]

34. $15 living high on the hog? You must have some real issues with poor people. Might I suggest you

consider the republicon party? They are loaded with folks who think just like you when it come to poor people. But I guess that being "All In for Hillary" is pretty much similar, eh?

[eniwetok]

48. CHALLANGE: How many GOPers back a $11 or $15 MW?

Put up or shut up. If you're going to call me a GOP sympathizer... then back it up. How many GOPers have supported going back to the HIGHEST the MW has ever been.. which today would be $11. And where have I EVER said that $15 may not be appropriate for big cities? How many GOPers have?

[Kip Humphrey]

64. Willfull ignorance is a poor defense. Were you a student of Bernie's plan to surmount the current

politics, I would discuss this and much more with you. But as it is, given your disposition, it would be a waste of time. Research Paul Wellstone if you want to begin to understand.

[eniwetok]

85. Gee... what disposition?

YOU failed to back up your accusation... and now are trying to make that failure sound respectable?

The simple fact is that not every one on the left... such as it is in the US, must agree on EVERY issue. Stop trying to impose such ideological GroupThink on everyone. This is NOT the GOP.

And I am a Bernie supporter but that doesn't mean I MUST agree with him on every issue. For instance he's never called for true democratic reforms to our antidemocratic federal system... even if it's the cause of most of the things he complains about.

[nadinbrzezinski]

81. In 1968 dollars that is more like 20

Did I mention that was national and the highest point?

[Igel]

88. There are a lot of partially correct assumptions in this thread.

Like every thread on the topic. It's not a discussion, it's a screaming match between whose partially correct assumptions must be 100% true all the time.

When right up front pretty much none of them are. But we only see the virtue and justice of our own thinking.

So my neighborhood has an average household income of around $50-60k/year.

Nearly every household has two breadwinners. The assumption seems to be that every man or woman is an island and that minimum wage has to be living wage. Not just for one person, but for a single parent with at least two kids. This assumption is flawed because we ignore how it plays out for two-income households, for kids who head no household, and for singles with no kids (or one kid or 5 kids). We can't have nuance, we can't have differences because then the monolithic argument and virtue that we inherently have can't be defended.

But two-income families means at minimum wage they'd be earning around $60k/year. That's not penury. For my state, that puts them in the high end of the 3rd quintile. They'd be well above the median household income.

Now, two things have to happen: Either incomes are adjusted upwards to preserve the distinction that these families have, making more than minimum wage for their superior skills, or their skills are downgraded to minimum-wage worthy.

We pretend that the latter won't happen--and it may not. Sudden high-school drop-out and somebody with an AA degree make the same money for similar effort. This has consequences. Or wages have to go up, and that has consequences for small employers.

A lot of minimum-wage increases are for large employers only, which means, in fact, that the minimum wage does discriminate.

[Chan790]

67. The same two issues...

as the last 5 times we've had this conversation.

1.) The national MW has to be standard and national, not regionalized or tiered or else it encourages labor-flight to the cheapest markets. It's fine if states or cities want to pass higher ones, but the national minimum wage has to be universal.

2.) Yes, a $15/hr. is pretty much the minimum cost of living everywhere if you define cost of living as the cost for one person working the national median weekly work-schedule (Currently 28 hours/week) to be able to afford to share a 2BR apartment, pay their bills and buy groceries with 25% of their income left for savings or disposable income.

[shraby]

86. Maybe, just maybe the depressed areas of the nation wouldn't be depressed if people made

enough money to actually put food on their families and be able to buy stuff they need and buy a few "wants".

[phylny]

215. LOL.

Even where *I* live, in Redneckistan, Virginia, that's not high on the hog. In rural places, we pay more for crappy Internet (satellite, which is hella expensive), we have to drive longer distances to get places, there is NO public transportation, and we generally get crappy gas mileage because our roadways aren't flat, but hilly/mountainous. Groceries are more expensive, too, because of the cost of transportation. If you can afford an airplane ticket that, too, is more expensive because there aren't direct flights.

I don't know why you want to continue giving working people a poor wage which forces them to get WIC, SNAP, and their kids Medicaid when they can make more money and need less government assistance.

[Jim Beard]

256. I see people moving south all the time to save money

and cheap real estate.

[MillennialDem]

261. Sure, if you want a decreased quality of living.

[dana_b]

268. it's BARELY a living wage in NY or SF

for one person. I am a single mom with a kid. According to this chart: http://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/06075
I should make $29.37/hr as a living wage for SF. and no, her dad is out of the picture.

Still think that $15/hr is too high?

[FSogol]

15. Your numbers are bogus. The bogus one is the $25k number.

That might be the profit of the business, but that # wouldn't include what those people pay themselves. All of the other costs can be deducted as business expenses lowering the tax burden and lowering the amount of profit on paper. The actual profit isn't $25k (which you pulled out of your ass), it is much higher. If an owner can't afford to pay workers a fair rate, they should close up shop or sell the business to people who can run it properly.

I'm totally sick of hearing fucking right wing pukes complain that business owners shouldn't have to pay fair wages. I think you took a wrong turn somewhere.

* ?

[eniwetok]

52. If an owner can't afford to pay workers a fair rate....

"If an owner can't afford to pay workers a fair rate, they should close up shop or sell the business to people who can run it properly."

Absolutely... but who says that's a $15 NATIONAL MW that must apply to EVERY business... be it in a big city or some dumpy rural village?

[FSogol]

70. Show me one business anywhere that went under because the minimum wage raised.

I have no problem with a minimum standard for the US. We don't need rural backwaters exempt from our laws.

[eniwetok]

181. you do realize that the higher MW now is $10... right?

The highest STATE minimum now is $10 in both MA and CA... and I live in MA. So how am I supposed to know what's going to happen at $15? I don't live in any big city where the MW is going to $15 but I suspect those cities will do fine.

I think the burden of proof is on you to prove that there will be NO economic disruptions if the NATIONAL MW goes to $15 when half the states are at $8 or below and 19 are still at $7.25. All I know is that when the national MW was briefly at $11... 1968, the economy managed fine... so that's been my starting point because I know it's an argument that can't be countered by the right. Not even Obama has suggested a MW that high. But I just don't buy the magic wand argument that we can just decree $15 everywhere because that started as an high flying URBAN MW.

[FSogol]

218. Another red herring. What is, The $15 will be phased in. I'll take GOP talking points for $500!

[HOPNOSH]

257. Gee my high school freshman has a better grasp on economics than the OP

I wonder why?

[Chan790]

80. Basic economics and math.

$15/hr. is the minimum viable cost of living nationally (That means anywhere in any of the 50 states) for an individual working the median weekly work-schedule (currently 28-hours/week) where cost of living is defined as able to support oneself in modest means...a shared 2BR apartment, groceries, taxes and bills with ~25% left over for savings or disposable income.

$15/hr. is the ssumed CoL in dumpy rural village...one would be living low on the hog indeed if one tried to live in even the poorest block of any of the 5 boroughs of NYC or the poorest ward (Ward 8) of Washington DC on $15/hr.

That's why it has to be $15/hr. everywhere...and if you don't think that's reasonable...then yes, you belong in the GOP as does anybody who believes that Americans should not be entitled to be able to support themselves in even a modest lifestyle on the work available to them.

[Person 2713]

107. "city or some dumpy rural village?"

[treestar]

199. I see your point

the wage could be different based on the location, as different areas have different wages to begin with. In fact the government recognizes certain area needs say more doctors or investment and make rules based on that. Also the bankruptcy laws contain standard of livings for different states, based on different averages. So that could be do-able.

[agnostic102]

253. That is such bs!!

i worked hard all my young adult life.. different language different culture and saved enough money (after dropping out of collage) saved 40 thousand dollars took a big risk and started a business. Worked hard at that business 7 days a week for a year straight. NOT one single day off.. the business grew enough where i could hire employees who i pay 11 dollars an hour plus whatever small tips our store gets. which is a lot better then most minimum wage jobs.

and your telling me that i should close my business down, lose my home, go on welfare, make my family my wife homeless because if i cant afford to pay a 18 year old high school kid 15 dollars an hour to run a register that i should close my business? FUCK THAT.. and FUCK anyone who thinks that.. it wasnt that 18 year old kid who risked hes life savings. i risked everything i own and worked like a dog to get to where im and you want to take that away from me because i dont meet your utopian standards of how this world should be?

I love how all these people who make bullshit arguments for taking my hard earned money.AT FIRST USE well look at the CEO OF MCDONALDS and hes 100 million dollars.. they prop him up as an example then come and DIG IN MY POCKET for the money. leave the fucking middle class alone. We get hit from every direction. You want bill gates or other billionares money to pay for 15 dollar an hour national average? THEN GET IT FROM HIM and leave me the fuck a lone. Im not rich, i dont have a boat or fancy cars. RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH who can afford it. not the middle class! and not small business owners. i swear the nerve of some people.

[HOPNOSH]

259. You dropped out of collage?

How artsy. If you cant afford to pay your workers a living wage, you NEED TO SHUT DOWN YOUR BUSINESS. Stop blaming. Try harder next post this one is weak.

[agnostic102]

313. Yes i dropped out

because i was putting all my expense's on credit cards and i had to provide for my self so i dropped out and started working. and dont tell me shut down my business THATS HOW i feed my self and my family and pay 11 dollars an hour which is ABOVE the minimum wage. you want to shut down my lively hood? COME TRY IT.

[AgadorSparticus]

307. I couldn't agree more. There is a HUGE difference between a small business owner & a LG corp.

Some small business owners are barely making it. But the notion of a huge MW hike without reference to the cost of living index and inflation rates seems to be asking for trouble.

These CEO's are making the million dollar incomes and bonuses for corporate tax purposes. I can see this $15 MW hurting the small business owner. Especially in an area where cost of living is low and wages are low.

[Glassunion]

310. What business are you in? nt

[Scootaloo]

16. Another anti-minimum wage piece that hinges on screeching about teenagers

Maybe come up with a coherent argument instead of appeals to emotion.

[eniwetok]

29. you made no argument

let alone a coherent one.

[Scootaloo]

38. That's because I'm making an observation

And then dispensing advice on the basis of that observation.

[HughBeaumont]

17. They need to make an "I Love Bernie Butt".

It'd be the same as "I'm Not Racist Butt". Or "I'm a Democrat Butt". Or "I think Republicans Are Evil Butt".

[Scootaloo]

26. You love Bernie Butt?

it doesn't look like he has much of one, but okay, I guess

[muriel_volestrangler]

41. You're spot on, there

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22i+love+bernie+but%22&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com

[HughBeaumont]

59. Nice one!

So many pessimists, so few good arguments.

[Visionary]

18. Somewhat agree

First off I'd like to say that the current min wage is shamefully low. It should at least be raised to keep pace with inflation. However, $15 everywhere and for all jobs is too high. Raise it to $11 per hour or something reasonable and see how it goes.

[Scootaloo]

27. Do you work these jobs?

[HOPNOSH]

262. If it should be raised to inflationary terms $15 is a joke

$15 is painfully low. But to you $11 is reasonable? Visionary, I think not.

[My Good Babushka]

19. I agree with you but I stopped at the headline. nt.

[tkmorris]

20. You never seem to advocate FOR anything

You just like to advocate AGAINST what others on DU propose.

For me, that's an obvious tell. Liberals tend to talk about what we should be doing, what we CAN be doing but aren't. So OK, you are against a $15 minimum wage. Tell me, what are you FOR exactly? If you were king, what do you accomplish by decree in your first week? What's your dream list?

[FSogol]

23. Yeah, that's kind of a Republican trait, isn't it?

[eniwetok]

40. first of all, not ALL DUers agree... but here's some of my wish list

As far as the MW goes... going back to the highest the MW ever was... the 1968 MW, today worth $11 and adjusting it to inflation.

Ending free trade with nations that don't impose on their industries the same overhead we do...

Nationalizing Big Pharma and letting NIH fund and coordinate all drug research

Offering new legal protections for unionization.

Breaking up big banks and restructuring Wall Street so it invests in productive activities instead of being a parasite on the economy.

Massive investments in renewable energy

Restructuring the US federal system to finally make it democratic.. ie abolishing state suffrage, and introducing proportional representation to Congress.

Free college... at least first two years. I'd rather see loans paid off as a percentage of increased income, instead of repayment of loans.

Raising top tax rate to 50% and eliminating capital gains tax break except for investments in risky areas we all need... medical research etc.

Putting for profit corporations on a chokechain when it comes to personhood.

Limit campaign finance spending. Elections are not the market where results can be bought.

Shall I go on?

[tkmorris]

102. Not a terrible list

A couple of things here though:

First, your MW proposal has that couple making $25k per year in your OP paying some kid $440 per week to sweep floors. That aint gonna happen any more than it would if the MW was $15 per hour, so the argument in your OP is clearly disingenuous.

Secondly, if you advocated more for the items in this list instead of against what others propose you'd probably be viewed with more respect, or at least with less suspicion. You don't come across as someone who is for anything liberal or Democratic. All most of us hear from you is "Hey, Liberals have suggested this idea. I am against it because it's stupid". I'd ease up on that line if I were you, in favor of pushing some of the other ideas you claim to be in favor of.

Just a suggestion.

[JimDandy]

116. + 1 The jury is no longer out...

I was #6. We're Dems, so freedom of speech is up there, hence the results below, but he's walking a very fine line per the comments...

On Wed Apr 6, 2016, 09:16 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Let's pay 16 year olds $31.2k to sweep floors!!!!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027741768

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Right-wing talking points. As Democrats, we can have a lively debate about working people and the minimum wage. But our support should be with working people, not with Big Business.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Apr 6, 2016, 09:24 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I disagree. It is not presented realistically since teenagers do not work 40 hours a week and anyone who does work that much, deserves a living wage. But, not worthy of a hide, it is worthy of polite dispute.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nothing abusive about the comment. I favor $15 minimum wage, but the subject is worth a polite discussion and will strengthen Democrats' ability to counter this kind of argument.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not hideable. That said, this new poster mostly spews anti-Democratic/democratic screeds. Disscusionist is a more appropriate venue for him/her. I am a former business owner-a $15/hr living wage is an absolute necessity.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Leave it just to expose right wingers and third way democrats on DU.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[eniwetok]

140. thanks for that.

But I do find it troubling that some in this jury seem to actually believe that ANYONE who disagrees with one candidates view on the MW is somehow a right winger or corporate Dem when I know I'm far to the left of most perhaps all liberal Dems on most positions. And I certain disagree with you that I mostly spew "anti-Democratic/democratic screeds". That was completely unfair and uncalled for.

I'm just arguing what I believe is a common sense position that the $15 which is supposed to be a living wage in a high flying city can be applied to even unskilled kids in economically, depressed areas... and done with NO economic ramifications.

[eniwetok]

125. OP was for illustation purposes...

The example of the 16 year old kid was only to make a point that if there were a NATIONAL $15 MW... it would apply to that unskilled kid. Though it just as easily applied to 18 year old flipping burgers.

As for the list... I've already posted on some topics... and have a long 10 year history at the Thom Hartmann forum under a few names. And you'd be surprised on how much resistance I've gotten from so-called liberals. But then I tend to be further left... and not into magic wand solutions. And I don't tend to blow with the wind as party narratives change... such as how libs Dems now embrace tax cuts, deficits and debt under Obama when they were against them in 2001 with Bush...

Oh, and I never said there was a couple owning the gas station or store.

I do webpage design and regularly visit clients... usually small business owners. I know how tough it is for these businesses when the big factories leave town for Mexico, or the Sun Belt. It drags down the entire community from the tax base to those who end up with lower paying service jobs. Had a long conversation with a client a month back. He runs a small business in the next town and feels trapped by the "changing demographics" that are bringing down property values. He thinks the city wants way too much in property taxes for the business he gets. He says he can't get any "know-nothing" kids to work in the shop for less than $12 an hour and he can't afford it. His shop was across the from a huge factory that went to Mexico so he's lost business. He's too young to retire and he knows he won't get shit if he sells his business. Sanders doesn't appeal to him because of the illegal immigration issue and the minimum wage. His view is Trump is an complete idiot but he speaks to his frustrations.

I was largely thinking of people like him when I write about the MW going to $15 nationally.

[Taitertots]

21. The "small" company that can hire someone to spend 40 a week on sweeping

PAY YOUR JANITOR A LIVING WAGE!!!

We always hear these stupid excuses about how the poor ownership class has to actually pay their workers the minimum wage. If it isn't important enough to you to pay someone $15 an hour than it isn't important enough for you to hire someone to do it.

[surrealAmerican]

22. Are those really full time, year round jobs?

It would have to be a pretty sizeable operation to need someone for 40 hours a week to sweep.

[Doctor_J]

201. Of course not, but the truth would have spoiled the headline

[Demit]

25. That doesn't sound like a full-time, 40-hrs-a-week job to me.

It sounds like what a cleaner does in maybe two hours a night. And yes, it's worth $15 an hour.

Or maybe the garage owner can make his own kid or other member of his family do it, or he can do it himself, if his business is only making enough for him to "get by."

[octoberlib]

30. What is wrong with you? This is your second OP on this topic. Need more drama?

[SwankyXomb]

47. Maybe he's trolling for pizza

then he can run back to his friends at whatever RWNJ site he came from, and wave his ban as proof that we're all just haters here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

72. Conservadem, that be my guess

Ladies and gents, this is what party realignment looks like

[Chan790]

82. Ze posts about it as a single-issue poster like it was hir job or something.

or do I mean

[peace13]

31. Let's get real.

Nowhere in this country can one work full time for minimum wage and afford to rent an apartment. We expect people to work two and three jobs to survive. If they need assistance they are mocked and ridiculed.

Remove the tax credits from the corporations or force them to pay a living wage. Educate the young people and create jobs that will sustain them. These are things that create healthy communities. It's not rocket science.

[Chan790]

84. +1! n/t

[whatthehey]

33. Yes. Let's. Because that 16 year old will spend that money

Might be on burgers at the local diner so that business owner gets more revenue to pay her fry cooks $15 so they spend that money maybe at the car stereo shop so that business owner makes more revenue to pay his parts runner $15 an hour so he then spends his wage at...yep the good ol' KKK general to increase their revenue to cover that sweeper's raise.

It's all about marginal propensity to consume. Poorer folks are generally at about 100%. They have so many unmet needs and wants that any money in their pocket goes straight back into the economy. Give me an extra $7 an hour and I'll gladly take it but it goes into retirement funds, which have a pretty minimal economic multiplier until quite a ways down the road. That's because I'm pretty comfortable and have few unmet needs. I don't have a desperate need for a washing machine I can't afford or repairs to an old rustbucket to keep it going. But min. wage people do, so that extra money goes to the mechanic or the appliance store who are paying those higher wages themeselves, hence the multiplier effect. Money in the hands of the poor drives consumption. Consumption drives the vast majority of the economy. If you want a better economy, give money to the poor. This isn't even pure dewy-eyed altruism, much as I genuinely wish to improve the lot of the working poor. It's people like me who own shares in the companies that will get those dollars in revenue. I'll benefit from that extra consumption too even if my wage stays the same. Even if I didn't have investments I'll benefit from the massive increases in FICA taxes they will pay when I retire, and from the extra sales tax revenue my city collects to fund improvements.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

282. exactly.

Money going to rich people does nothing but make them richer. Money going to poor people boosts the economy, because it is spent almost immediately.

[Orrex]

35. Funny thing about arguments against raising the minimum wage

Every single one of them boils down to "I'm more important than someone else."

Further, every argument against raising the minimum wage is in fact an argument against raising one's own wages.


What a twisted, masochistic society.

[HughBeaumont]

54. On that note . . . .

. . . . what does that make the "Lower or eliminate the minimum wage" argument?

I vote "Reprehensible", which is fitting for someone that thinks the wealthy will be disincentivized if we give them less while the poor will be disincentivized if we give them more.

What I don't get about these businesses is this: Did they seriously think and plan around the $7.25 insult being around forever and ever?

[Orrex]

77. Reprehensible indeed

fitting for someone that thinks the wealthy will be disincentivized if we give them less while the poor will be disincentivized if we give them more.

I've argued that same point once or twice myself--I simply don't understand why it's so difficult for some people to grasp.

Hell, why pay a minimum wage at all? Why not charge employees for the privilege of working?

[HuckleB]

57. +1,000,000 ... 000

[Nye Bevan]

36. Can I try to address this question seriously, in contrast to the snarky "you're a Republican"

responses?

So the question is what happens when a business is paying someone $9 per hour to do something like sweep a floor, the employee is happy to be paid that amount for performing that job, and then the minimum wage is raised to $15 per hour which would obviously be excellent for the employee but not possible or realistic for the business to pay.

The answer is automation. There will be an absolute boom in things like self-checkouts in supermarkets and automated ordering kiosks in fast-food restaurants. These devices are not cost-free, of course; retailers always have to weigh the cost of installation and maintenance against the cost of hiring an employee to do the same thing. Say the cost of having 5 self-checkout machines amounts to $11 per hour of operation, amortizing the initial cost over the machines' life and factoring in maintenance and repairs. Right now many retailers would take a pass because they can hire employees to do the checking-out for cheaper. But if you would have to pay those employees $15 per hour the self-checkouts become an absolute no-brainer.

And what about sweeping the floor? Instead of a kid with a broom, who would suddenly cost you $15 per hour, you pay a floor-sweeping contractor to do the job for you. He has state-of-the-art machinery and is able to do the job quickly, and for many other clients as well as you. Investing in the machinery suddenly makes a lot of sense when you are not competing with a kid with a broom at $9 per hour.

[salinsky]

49. And, this is where discussion of universal basic income comes in ... nt

[OneGrassRoot]

137. An interesting article about it...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-santens/humanity-needs-universal-_b_9599198.html

[HughBeaumont]

62. Er . . . .

Hmmmmmm.

[nadinbrzezinski]

79. You realize most of those mythical kids with brooms

Are heads of households, in many cases single wage earners? By the way, many of them at nine bucks are working two, at times a third part time job

What is wrong with people indeed.

[Nye Bevan]

83. How does that change any of my analysis in any way? (nt)

[nadinbrzezinski]

87. First assumption that MW workers are teens

Also suggesting a tiered wage scale. Mind you, my local Chamber president made that exact argument not too long ago before Council.

[Major Nikon]

222. It never was that great of an analysis to begin with

It's not fundamentally different than all the other "I'm going to take my ball and go home" arguments that whiny CEOs are making.

For one thing, lots of businesses already tried self-checkout stands with the MW already at dismal levels and many of them have already been ripped out due to all sorts of problems, not to mention they drive customers away who hate them. Automation will continue to replace workers no matter what the MW is, and the reality is that the workers who are in the most peril of this happening are higher up on the pay scale.

Improvements in automation increase overall productivity which means the economy can support higher wages. So your entire argument is actually completely backwards.

[Nye Bevan]

224. You think the guy who owns a fast-food restaurant cares about the economy's overall productivity?

As opposed to the absolutely compelling savings of replacing workers via automation when their cost to him almost doubles?

Where I live, self-checkouts are not only not being ripped out, they are expanding. Now you can pick up a scanner to scan and bag your groceries as you pick them out, and it takes less than a minute to pay for your entire order at the self-checkout. Works great.

[Major Nikon]

231. It doesn't really matter if he cares about it or not

If he produces the same amount of shitty food at lower cost because of less employees, he can afford to pay his remaining employees more money. So even if you can't understand how this works at the macro level, it should be easy enough to understand at the micro level.

When productivity increases, someone is going to reap the benefits of those gains. This can either be in the form of lower costs to consumers, greater dividends to investors, higher executive pay, and/or higher pay to employees. It's not too hard to figure out which of those things are better for the overall economy despite the bizarro world rhetoric coming from right wing loons trotting out the latest version of the horse and sparrow theory.

[Nye Bevan]

233. He will indeed be paying the remaining employees more money.

Because minimum-wage cashier jobs will be replaced by fewer, but more highly skilled and better paid, jobs for those programming and maintaining the automated technology. The losers will be the former minimum-wage employees while the winners will be those with the skills in the automated systems. But I do agree with you that there may be a positive net gain to the economy, which may not be much consolation to the losers.

[Major Nikon]

236. Nobody is going to replace workers with automation unless they are saving money

So yes, some of those productivity gains will go to higher skilled workers and some won't.

Productivity has been increasing rapidly for the last 70 years and almost certainly will continue to do so regardless of what the MW is. The gain in the economy you refer to creates more jobs which happens both at the top and bottom skill levels. We don't need to console the "losers" in any way other than insuring their pay is higher, which means less people being subsidized by the government.

[Nye Bevan]

238. The "losers" are the ones who don't have jobs anymore,

because their jobs have been automated away.

[Major Nikon]

240. Which is going to happen regardless of what the MW is

[Nye Bevan]

241. The point is, the economics of automation become vastly more compelling

when there is a big increase in the minimum wage.

[Major Nikon]

246. It's a pretty piss poor point then

Less than 5% of the population works for the minimum wage. If the economics become vastly more compelling the further up the pay scale you go, then folks making the most per hour should have the most to fear.

Trying to fight increases in productivity by holding wages down at the lowest levels is an idiotic strategy. Even if you decreased the minimum wage, increases in automation technology would phase whatever jobs it can regardless. Mexico fought robots in factories for decades and it simply had the effect of stifling their economy.

If increases in productivity don't translate to higher wages at the lowest level, all you are doing is making the rich richer and the poor poorer, which is the central design and purpose of promoting the horse and sparrow theory.

[Nye Bevan]

248. I thought it was obvious that cashiers earning $10 per hour

are more likely to be replaced by machines when they are required by law to be paid $15 per hour.

I guess it's not as obvious as I thought it was.

[Major Nikon]

249. So it would be even more obvious for those making $30 per hour

...and it would be an additional order of magnitude more obvious for those making $60 per hour.

Assuming it was that simple, which it isn't.

[eniwetok]

159. missing the point that $15 would ALSO APPLY TO THOSE TEENS

And yes, $9 is also too low. My position is that we should go back to the highest the MW has ever been... and that was in 1968... $7300 a year more than current MW. Today it be worth about $11 and states and cities can go higher if they want. Somehow, in the eyes of many here, that makes me a secret right winger.

[nadinbrzezinski]

160. And you are goign against the spirit and letter of the 1938 law that established minimum wage

sorry charlie, have better luck making those argument with somebody who has no clue about this.

[yuiyoshida]

37. You are really

obsessed with this, ne?

[hunter]

39. Fuck any job that can't pay a living wage.

Presumably making money to buy food and shelter is why we have jobs, right?

If not, then what the hell are we doing?

Oh yeah, we're turning millionaires into billionaires...

That's bullshit.

What we really need is a minimum national income insuring that nobody becomes homeless, hungry, or lacking in appropriate medical care.

We also need some bad-ass unions, the kind that insure a sixteen year old kid who is maybe not cut out for high school gets a well paid apprenticeship and training to do something more than sweep floors.

One sort of employer I've really learned to loathe is the skinflint "small "business" person or the giant corporation that refuses to pay employees a living wage.

Sometimes it seems The U.S.A. is a land of grifters and their marks, of mean small people and their victims.

Our "work ethics" are destroying both our humanity and the natural environment that we depend upon for our survival. Down this path we we will soon all be drinking poisonous water, breathing poisonous air, eating poisonous food, and beating one another senseless with rocks and clubs.

[salinsky]

50. ....

[justiceischeap]

42. Why doesn't a 16 yr old deserve the same minimum wage as an "adult?"

When I was 16, I was in high school and working a full-time second shift job in a factory.

So, according to you I wouldn't have deserved the same amount of pay for the same work I was doing as the adults. Or even less deserving if I was in charge of keeping the workplace clean for employees and customers alike because somehow janitors are less worthy of a living wage than a manager (who may very well had started off as a teen janitor).

[Nye Bevan]

58. You make a good point that more seniority should not necessarily result in higher pay.

If a newly-hired teenager is more productive than a 45-year old who has been with the company for 20 years, I agree that the teenager should be paid more.

[justiceischeap]

60. It's not even about merit pay

but whether there should be a sliding scale of some point for "kids" when it comes to minimum wage. As though teens aren't deserving of a higher minimum wage for some reason.

[Nye Bevan]

66. I certainly agree that a bright teen may well be more valuable than a time-served 45-year old,

in which case the teen should be paid more.

[justiceischeap]

156. As a 45 yr old that faces possible age discrimination in my field

and wage discrimination because of my gender, I don't see how a bright teen may be more qualified to earn more than me based on her age but a bright teen is definitely worth equal pay to begin with.

[CrispyQ]

43. If that 16 year old wants to go to college,

they will need tens of thousands of dollars unless they want to graduate heavily in debt. Why shouldn't they get $15 per hour for their work? Do you think it's easier just cuz they're 16?

But seriously, I think every American should have a guaranteed annual income. It's a concept who's time has come, what with the outsourcing & automation of good paying jobs. The supposed richest country on the planet does not take care of it's own citizens. Tell me again, what makes us rich?

What we should provide every American:
3 hots & a cot
free health care
free child/elder care
free education, K-college
a comprehensive public transportation system
a digital package, including a device that connects to the internet

But we can't do this. Other countries can, but not the US.

Go see Michael Moore's new movie Who to Invade Next? It's wonderful. Maybe his best.

[tenderfoot]

45. I admire the lengths you conservatives go to insure the poor stay poor.

It's hard work for sure.

[eniwetok]

61. ROTF

Gee... how many conservatives are for raising the MW back the HIGHEST it's ever been which today would be $11? That's higher than what Obama proposed. How many conservatives have said that if a state or city want to go higher... fine?

[coyote]

46. If college costs $40,000/year

they better start saving early. So sweeping floors at 31,000/year seems reasonable

[Vinca]

51. What's a 16 year old doing working a 40 hour work week?

If that is the situation, I expect it's to help support the family not to stock up on video games.

[Doctor_J]

203. And 50 weeks a year

Really dumb op

[HuckleB]

53. If a 16-year-old is working 40 hours a week, he/she may be supporting the family.

I grew up with a friend who worked 40 plus hours a week, working graveyard shift. He did twice the work of most adults, and most of his money went to keeping his family in their house with food in the fridge.

At 16, I framed houses, dug ditches, hauled block, and did finishing work, and I did more work than the vast majority of adults on the job.

This OP is a ridiculous red herring.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

55. lol

you want some help

you seem very confused

[KamaAina]

56. 16-year-olds seldom if ever work full time

even in East Coalcake, WV.

[KamaAina]

63. Think about why you view East Coalcake, WV as a source of parody.

It's because everyone there makes minimum wage or close to it. If the MW is raised, Joe will find that his customers suddenly have money in their pockets, some of which they will likely spend on long-deferred maintenance to their cars.

edit: If the Coalcake Mine is still open, and is unionized (many are not these days ), the miners already make at least $15 an hour.

[nadinbrzezinski]

65. Since most custodial work is done

By women who work their asses off to feed their families. Kudos for not going for the other RW trope

[stone space]

68. If you want that 16 year old to work over 2000 hours a year, then pay him or her a full time wage.

Either that or let the kids go to school.

But you can't have it both ways.

Why do folks here expect 16 year olds to work 40 hours a week for 52 weeks a year without being paid for the full 2080 hours?

[Oneironaut]

71. How many 16-year-olds work 40 hours per week?

They're all part time. Most are usually around 15-20 hours weekly.

[LanternWaste]

73. What then is the precise minimal wage you believe should be paid

What then is the precise minimal wage you believe should be paid (that wage being low enough to prevent the scenario you describe above), and on what objective standard is that measured?

[Nye Bevan]

76. This seems reasonable:

Cities and counties are also taking action. Since 2013, about 40 cities and localities have risen to the challenge — including Lexington, KY; Santa Fe County, NM; and Oakland, CA — and the drumbeat continues, with more states and localities considering ballot initiatives and legislation. At the same time, businesses large and small are raising wages on their own, recognizing the value of higher wages to boost morale and productivity.

At the federal level, the Obama Administration has expressed support for the Raise the Wage Act proposed by Senator Murray and Representative Scott, which would increase the minimum wage to $12 by 2020. The President has also taken action to raise wages for workers on all new federal contracts to $10.10 or higher. Raising the minimum wage nationwide will increase earnings for millions of workers, and support the local economies where they live, work and spend their earnings.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/raise-the-wage

[B Calm]

74. So now you want to discriminate workers based on age?

[Nye Bevan]

78. You raise a reasonable point.

Nothing wrong with paying a talented young person more than a less talented older person.

[eniwetok]

94. Was that supposed to make sense?

What are you talking about? A MW is a MW for everyone... and the only age exception is the youth training wage. I didn't call for any discrimination... only making the point that the idea of a living wage in the big city can't be applied to EVERY area of the nation. That being said... that NATIONAL MW must go up, just not to $15. Obama proposed $10.10. I think it should go back to the highest it's ever been... which today would be $11. Not even Hillary want to go to $15.

[B Calm]

97. In your opening post you said 16 yr olds.

[Bradical79]

114. You made age an issue

You're talking about a full time employee. Does it matter if it's a 16 year old or 26 year old? You're using age as a distracting element of your strawman argument.

[Uponthegears]

90. If you need

a full-time custodian (yep, that's your hypothetical) and your business is only grossing enough to pay you $25K, chances are the free market is sending you a message.

EVERY FULL-TIME JOB should pay a living wage.

[The Midway Rebel]

91. You don't really love Bernie.

Stop lying.

[Egnever]

92. 31k is not much money

Not sure why that would be a problem.

What slave wage do you think is appropriate?

Could you live on 31k?

[Starry Messenger]

93. Well, you didn't pay any attention in your last sea-lion op.

[notadmblnd]

95. Do you know how back breaking sweeping, mopping and vacuuming is?

Maybe you should try it sometime? And I'm not talking about just your bathroom or kitchen floor either. Spend a good 4 hour block of time doing it and come back and tell me how you feel.

I pay the ladies I work with at least $20.00 an hour. Sometimes more depending on how big the job is.

[mercuryblues]

99. having raised kids

I know a lot of teens. I have to say the ONLY teenager I met that worked 40 hours a week, barely graduated high school as he missed so much time. He was forced to earn a living for his family. His father disappeared when he was young and his mother a schizophrenic, who sometimes self medicated with drugs and alcohol. IOW unemployable.

Which was a real freaking shame because he is as smart as a whip and certainly deserved better. As soon as he graduated HS, he joined the Army and sent a check home every month to his sister, until she graduated from HS. He stayed with me for quite a while when he came back from Iraq, with PTSD.

So yeah. If he had a chance to earn a fucking livable wage at such a young age, his life would have turned out better. At 27 he is finally pulling himself together.

The differences...Instead of earning 8.00 and hour, he would have earned 15. He could have worked part time as opposed to full time to help his family. He could have graduated HS with a higher GPA instead of barely graduating. That would have put him in a position to qualify for scholarships to college, instead of joining the military for the GI Bill. Knowing he could have working and scholarships he would have gone to college. Avoiding the PTSD, would have enabled him to fully function, instead of diving for cover when he heard a loud noise, no night terrors, no outbursts of anger. Which would have enabled him to be a parent to his baby daughter from day one. Like I said, he finally has his life on a good track and is married to the mother of his daughter and has a newborn son. Instead of taking 4+ years to get there.

Other than that, I would say screwing over today's youth is a great idea! Why give those pesky teenagers a way to advance their livelihoods and a way up? Only rich kids deserve that advantage.

Some folks are born made to wave the flag
Ooh, they're red, white and blue
And when the band plays "Hail to the chief"
Ooh, they point the cannon at you, Lord
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no senator's son, son
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, no

Yeah!
Some folks are born silver spoon in hand
Lord, don't they help themselves, oh
But when the taxman comes to the door
Lord, the house looks like a rummage sale, yes

It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no millionaire's son, no
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, no

Some folks inherit star spangled eyes
Ooh, they send you down to war, Lord
And when you ask them, "How much should we give?"
Ooh, they only answer More! more! more! yoh

It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no military son, son
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, one

It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, no no no
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate son, no no no

[Person 2713]

100. U have been here 5 days & add new anti labor posts every time I check this site

Welcome not

[eniwetok]

119. if you can't make a point without gross distortions...

If you can't make a point without gross distortions...then you really haven't made a point... have you?

I'm not anti-labor... I'm just pro-commonsense... that a $15 MW in big cities can't be applied nationally. Otherwise I've always supported raising the MW back to at least the HIGHEST it's ever been... I'm an anti-free trade hardliner, a labor market protectionist, and someone who wants new protections for unionization. But feel free to call me whatever TF you want as a substitute for making a substantive rebuttal to my arguments.

[gratuitous]

121. So, the businessman who can't stay in business without paying a living wage

We should all subsidize his business model (through SNAP benefits, rental assistance, and EITC) so that he can underpay his employees? Why not pay workers more for their work so they can choose for themselves how to spend their money?

[PCPrincess]

191. Thank You!!

I get so tired of the assumption that somehow the needs of a 'business' trump the needs of individuals. Our priorities are out of freaking whack.

[laundry_queen]

255. +1 nt

[sanatanadharma]

101. NO! If floors need sweeping, hire the out-of-work parents of the country

NO!
If floors need sweeping, hire the out-of-work parents of the country

Keep kids in WELL-funded public schools
If families need their 16 year-old kids working for food on the table, pay them the legal wage
Stop wage thievery

At $16 per hour, perhaps the three (mom, dad, kid) can get off the streets- DAMN IT

[Iggo]

103. Yes, let's.

[Agnosticsherbet]

104. I don't like Sanders at all, but I think a$15.00 an hour minimum wage tied to inflaton

is critical.

Set the level of the floor from the beginning, and keep it from sinking out from under the poor.

[dchill]

105. Sounds good. It's not Chelsea-makes-a-speech wages...

but it's a start.

[Bradical79]

106. Yes

You're talking about a full time employee here. Not sure how age is relevant. Some small business owner doesn't have to pay a full time janitor. They can probably manage that work by themselves, and they probably do.

[ZombieHorde]

108. If the 16 year old is working 40 hours per week, 52 weeks per year,

then they're not in school and they're probably supporting themselves. You're talking about a very rare, and in my opinion, tragic situation.

[steve2470]

122. It is very rare. In my state, a 16 year old would have to be legally emancipated to do that....

and that requires a court order. Needless to say, judges are very reluctant to make 16 year olds adults.

[ViseGrip]

110. Rent, house pymts, car pymts, car ins. health ins, is just as high for them too!

Do we build free housing to house floor sweepers and other service workers because the wage is not enough to live (sleep eat and get to work) on? Or, just have those workers on the streets. Or staying at home with parents? College is not for everyone, and there are still no jobs for them! This is a jobs problem. Period. A problem for everyone, as this is what has killed off the middle class.

But Hillary people only look deep enough to see floor sweepers will make 31K a year? That's still less than a mom and child on assistance when it's all added up.

[ViseGrip]

113. PS. This is like reading a republican blog! Wage issues for 30 years

but ignore it and focus on someone working hard, who might make a living wage, and splain away why they shouldn't. Awful!

[rug]

117. I take it you're a McDonald's franchisee.

Or is it Wendy's?

[Kalidurga]

118. LOL ROFL

[haele]

124. Sure, if it's a full time requirement for me to do business.

Costco pay their lowest paid hourly workers (part time) $13.50 an hour + benefits in high cost of living locations now, and will be increasing everyone by around $2.00 nation wide soon. I suspect that's the janitorial/stocking staff in the stores.
In and Out Burgers start their workers out at $1.50 above minimum wage, and within a year, most of the non-management workers make around $13.00 - $16 an hour, depending on the hours and shifts they work and their seniority. They also promote from within.

Fun Fact - in airports and other "high risk" locations (including government facilities such as military bases), McDonalds and Starbucks both pay a premium on top of the normal wage; before the latest hike in the minimum wage, a neighbor's HS graduate started at $14.00 an hour training wage at the West Terminal McDonalds in Lindberg Field. The McDonalds at 32nd street pays their workers $2.00 an hour more than in town, because of the cost to maintain enough of a secure standard of living to maintain the security clearance to come on base.
They want employees that make a living wage that can concentrate on their job and be safe on the job, not an accident waiting to happen because the employee is dog tired and inconsistent due to the fact they're working three jobs and can only afford to be living in a sub-optimal housing situation.

If you can't afford to contract a living wage with any employee, you can't afford to employ. Doesn't matter if it's an adult supporting him or herself, a family member living under your roof, a housewife working for pin money, or a teenager who purportedly is living at home, they're employees.

Otherwise, you're basically stealing someone else's labor. Everyone has a right to request enough to provide for the basics to live on - and to build up enough cushion to save for unexpected or future planned expenses in exchange for their labor.
Might as well go back to the days of the Company Store, and throw in a little of that "Daddy knows Best" TV mythology, when only the strong Dad had a real job and the income that ran the house and provided for the important needs (like a vehicle, medical expenses, retirement, and college for kids), while everyone else was just a dependent that would spend any of their wages on frivolous trinkets and playthings.

On edit - Y'know, in my house and at my place of employment, I manage my "work" time so I can sweep and clean as part of the work that I'm doing, and don't have to depend on hired help to clean up after me. If I'm doing the neighbor's kid or a young family member "a solid" and letting him or her help out with the garden or if I need help completing some serious"two person" house cleaning or a minor repair, they get paid at least a $20 for every hour I need help, or $100 for the day (typically 5- 6 hours). Preparation, clean up and tool management, inventory and storage, are part of every task, skilled or not.

If I have to pay a professional handyman $15 - $25 an hour to come out for casual help, or a day labor company $150 a day to send someone out for 8 hours (plus breaks) unskilled labor, then ethically, I should be paying the neighbor's kid the equivalent in either cash or something that is a cost to me to provide in barter (housing, skills training, use of a workshop or vehicle for the employee's personal use that would otherwise need to be rented, a working vehicle or expensive tool, etc...) - just as if I would be should I have taken the time and effort to find and pay someone to come out and do the work.

Haele

[magical thyme]

126. Do you think teens should be paid less than adults for the same job?

And every low end job I've looked at has their regular workers do the sweeping and toilet scrubbing.

Only medium and large corporations hire cleaning agencies. And I knew the founder and CEO of a cleaning agency in Mass. He retired relatively young, to spend his life traveling, along with his wife and breeding/training operation of imported Lusitano horses between his large horse farm in Massachusetts, and his small farm in Florida. The young, untrained horses he imported sold in the $30,000+ range. Prices obviously increased with the horses' training. Iow probably had $1M in horses alone, never mind the mult-million dollar facilities.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

127. If you have 2000 hours worth of floor sweeping, you need to pay a living wage to get it done.

[ky_dem]

133. Agreed - that's exactly why the OP's point is so ridiculous

What Mom & Pop shop has 2000 hours a year of floor sweeping/other cleaning tasks?

[Warpy]

129. 16 year old kids have their hours limited in most states

Besides, have you sat down with your Sunday paper and tried to figure out a budget for that kind of pay? Don't forget to deduct all the taxes and insurance premiums like OASDI.

If a job is worth doing, it should pay enough to support the worker doing it. Period.

ETA: Oh, and besides:

[Politicalboi]

130. It's bullshit to have to wait 7 years for $15.00

They should make companies like Wal Mart and McDonald's pay $15.00 RIGHT NOW! If your company makes Billions a years, you should have to pay 15.00 now. Then let others build up to the $15.00.

[Warpy]

158. Yeah, by then inflation will likely have chopped its purchasing power down so far

that most people will just stay even with today.

There wouldn't be a need for a such a big jump had business and Congress not conspired to resist indexing the minimum wage. They let it fall too far and now they are faced with a revolution at the bottom versus anger at the top.

[Rex]

136. Still concern trolling?

Boring, you guys should try something new.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

139. why is a 16 year sweeping floors 40 hours a week?

[trumad]

142. Because it fits the narrative this Op writer needs.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

147. if a kid has dropped out of HS to sweep, he probably really needs a living wage though

so i dont really know if this narrative really works for this OP

[Marrah_G]

143. Nice condescending attitude towards janitors

I can't tell you what I truly feel about your post as it would probably be hidden. As for teenagers? I have lived on my own since I was 16/17 years old.

[raging moderate]

150. Right you are, Marrah G!

Jobs that actually accomplish something physically have been woefully undervalued in recent times! If these jobs are SO EASY, people, then why on Earth don't you all JUST DO THEM yourselves? Because you are CHICKEN to do them yourselves, that's why not! I have done these jobs, and I have sometimes done the work myself while also holding down a demanding higher-paid professional job. And let me tell you, there is a lot more to these jobs than some people realize.

[Marrah_G]

154. I want to see one of these assholes pick produce for a day

Or flip burgers or sweep floors or collect trash or any of the number of shitty low wage jobs that they are so fucking above.

[eniwetok]

164. and I won't say what I think of yours

My point is simply... and feel free to bastardize and misrepresent it all you want... that ANY national MW applies to EVEN THAT UNSKILLED KID SWEEPING FLOORS.

So what's the logic here... that what started out to be a living wage for people in high flying big cities must then be applied to EVERYONE... even that unskilled teen, even if they don't live in rural backwater... I know, you're now going to accuse me of badmouthing backwaters.

[Marrah_G]

166. I am accusing you of doing exactly what you are doing

And everyone here knows it. Enjoy your stay.

[raging moderate]

254. Yes, because I have been one of them! Dear God, help me, it hurt so bad!

Do you understand, it hurt so bad to go cold and sick and hungry while working hard! And some of them paid so low that they can't even find a place to sleep! Even now, I still have flashbacks sometimes!

[raging moderate]

145. How else can they afford college/trade school? and a house down payment? and babies in their 20s?

In the first place, most teens will be working only part-time, because they will be in school. In the second place, yes, most of them really do need the money nowadays, with the CRUSHING financial load that has recently been placed on the three items in my reply title. I remember the early 60s, when my sister got married, and her husband could earn enough money to afford an engagement ring, college courses, a down payment on a house, and several babies, while they were still in their twenties. She held a job briefly, but most of that came out of HIS paycheck as a beginning worker. Working wives were lauded for carrying a double load, and their efforts really added to family stature. Several years later, when I was in my twenties, all that was evaporating like snow in May. Employers began cutting wages to erase the working wife advantage until almost all wives HAD to work full-time (as soon as the poor baby was SIX WEEKS OLD) just to keep the family in food, shelter, and diapers. I remember how my husband was jeered at for letting me take a year off for each baby (actually, though, he didn't; I had to take a job well before that just to make payments on the 80-foot single mobile home in a mobile home park). And that was even before the tuition costs and housing costs ballooned under the Bush/Cheney regime. We had big student loans, but not as bad as they typically are now.

[eniwetok]

162. How is this the employer's problem?

Seriously...

Any national MW should be reasonable... and I've advocated going back to the 1968 MW, the highest it ever was. That's $7300 more than today. Any state or city can go higher.

But why should an employer be forced to pay more than what someone might be producing? Business gets a number of freebies from government to facilitate business and therefore owes something back to society... including paying a reasonable MW. But businesses aren't social welfare programs.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

283. Easy.

The employer is limiting their own sales. When people are better paid, they spend more, buying more product from employers.

Would you rather have 20% profit margins on sales of a million a year, or 10% on sales of 3 million a year?

And minimum wage folks are EXACTLY the people who turn around and spend basically everything they make, boosting the economy for everyone.

[raging moderate]

288. Because, if something bad happens to you, you expect these people to care about you.

If the employee operates on the same selfish attitude as a Neocon employer, then, if he sees the employer fall from, oh lets' say a heart attack, why should the employee lift finger one to help him? Why should the employee not just make a rational decision: "Oh, this employer will clearly not be able to provide the same service to me as he did before, so I will just leave and find another job?" Or, if you are hit by a car as you cross the street, why should any bystander lift finger one to help you? Why should he not just continue on his way to maximize HIS profits in life? If you want to benefit from the Social Contract between human beings, you have to be willing to honor it yourself. Whatever goes around, comes around.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

146. I honestly can't believe this is even an argument

on the Democratic Underground.

[Nye Bevan]

157. Why, when President Obama has never advocated $15? (nt)

[eniwetok]

163. I'm advocating for more than OBAMA

Obama has advocated for $10.10. Last I heard he was a Dem...

I've advocated the national MW should go back the highest it's ever been which would be about $11... $7300 a year more than today.... and states/cities can go higher.

So that makes me a right winger?

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

193. Who called you a "right winger"?

The Democratic Party platform includes a $15 minimum wage.

[GummyBearz]

148. 16 year olds don't work 40 hours per week

News flash: High school students don't work full time. And no one is saying that businesses are required to pay them to sweep floors 8 hours a day. Its more probable they sweep floors and clean up for 2 or 3 hours. So you are off by a factor of ~4. $8,000-9,000 per year seems about right for a high school worker. If a store owner doesn't agree he can always sweep his own floors

[HuckleB]

149. Low-wage Workers Are Older Than You Think

88 Percent of Workers Who Would Benefit From a Higher Minimum Wage Are Older Than 20, One Third Are Over 40
http://www.epi.org/publication/wage-workers-older-88-percent-workers-benefit/

[tabasco]

151. The kids who work at Denny's etc. who clean the diarrhea from the toilets

and mop the floors earn every fucking penny of $15/hour.

[teenagebambam]

152. That's more than I make

teaching at two different colleges, the equivalent of time and three quarters, with a three hour daily commute. The teenager might have to fight me for the job.

[nadinbrzezinski]

161. When you get a base wage to go up

others will be pushed up.

For the record, what is happening with adjuncts is a travesty

[Marrah_G]

167. Wages will rise with the minimum wage.

They have been stagnant for far too long. Your example of your job and pay show how stagnant they have become. You should be making much more then that.

[Bonx]

178. Gonna be a problem in Mississippi

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_ms.htm (you can sort by median wage)

Massive wealth redistribution via additional federal taxes from the wealthier states would work though.

[My Good Babushka]

153. It's clear that a lot of people here

are still waiting for trickle down economics to work.
I stand with the Fight for $15.
I stand with the right to unionize.

[brewens]

155. I liked starting at 15, expecting to get ten or a little more. My idea

for years was to have minimum be a buck an hour higher for part-time workers. I thought that would discourage some of the bullshit.

[Victor_c3]

168. That's the argument I get into with my father (a restraint owner)

It's a small restaraunt. He is the only cook and my mother is one if 3 waitresses. In the summer they have 2-3 teenage kids on from 4:00-10:00 and in the winter it's one from 4:00-8:00 or so. I grew up in that restaraunt and worked in it for years while growing up.

My parents only hire teenage high school kids to wash dishes and bus tables and the newest waitress working there has been there at least 10 years. The waitresses and busboys all get the full state minimum wage (not the food service wage) plus tips for the waitresses. He argues that the kids he hires just aren't worth $15 an hour - and I have to agree with him on that.

I don't think small business paying minimum wage is the problem. I think it goes more with larger corporations and their hordes of minimum wage workers.

A Walmart or anothe corporate store moves into town (dated example) and kills off all of those mom and pop shops that lined our mainstreets. Those shops were mostly owned and operated by the same people and they may have hired a couple of minimum wage people, but the store also provided a respectable middle class income for those owner operators. Instead Walmart comes in, drives the mom and pop shops out and replaces all of those solid income jobs with a horde of minimum wage jobs and maybe creates a small handful of middle class jobs in their place. 10 stores in a small mainstreet provided 10 families with middle class incomes and a handful of minimum wage jobs. Those stores are wiped out as are those middle class families.

Also, stock investors demand a high rate of growth on their investments so these companies have to keep expanding as fast as they can to keep their stock price from stagnating. However, a mom and pop store usually won't expand much in its lifetime. As long as it provides a solid income for the owner/operators they're content with the size of the business as is.

I believe there should be a graduated income based on the size of the business. Small mom and pops should pay a slightly lower minimum wage than a mid-sized business versus a huge corporation.

[Kingofalldems]

169. Looks like this thread is a continuation of your other anti-$15 thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027730765

[Major Nikon]

198. Yeah, and the right wing talking points just keep getting repeated

As if everyone hasn't heard them over and over.

Pretend it's all about "16 year olds"

Why not "$25"?

"$15 would cause enormous disruptions"

[Jbradshaw120]

170. So you don't believe in equal pay

For equal work? Or a fair days wages for a fair days work? If someone works 40 hrs a week they deserve and have earned the right to a living wage period.

[eniwetok]

175. Can't have it both ways

So should the burger flippers in NYC get the same as the burger flipper in my town? Or are you saying those who live in small towns with cheap standards of living should pay NYC prices for everything to cover that higher wage?

Can't have it both ways.

And same with the living wage. What's a living wage in NYC is way higher than where I live... or in small rural towns in depressed areas.

So whose "living wage" prevails? To apply to low one to the high cost area is unfair to them. To apply the high cost area to a low cost area is gravy for the worker and unfair to the employer... unless the employee is super productive or competition drives wages higher.

There are OTHER forces that can drive up wages besides mandating a one-size formula for the entire nation. We can go back to the highest MW we ever had which today would be $11 and index it to inflation... and we can end free trade, and give more legal protections to unions for a start. Those last two would draw wages up instead of just trying to mandate them to be $4 higher than the MW ever was.

[Jbradshaw120]

200. I agree that a liVing wage

Can differ between locals, but 15 dollars is a fair minimum wage. Maybe NYC and LA and other similar placed need higher, but 15/hr is a fair minimum wage nationally. But I don't believe a living wage shold be based on the idea of age. I went to work at 15 and needed a living wage. That would not be fair.

[phylny]

219. Since companies haven't shown the ability to be fair or to

care about employees, there needs to be a national minimum wage. That's because most corporations are run by greedy people.

So, let's say there's a national minimum wage of $15/hour.

Those that live in places that are more expensive will simply need to pay their employees more.

[Major Nikon]

171. You're going to get a broken back carrying that much water for the Heritage Foundation

[eniwetok]

174. Put up or shut up...

I really tire of your empty accusations.

Show me where Heritage EVER supported an increase in the MW back to the HIGHEST it's ever been... which today would be about $11... and that states and cities could go higher if they wanted. That $11 would be a $7300 raise above the current $7.25.

And I await your condemnation of Obama as a Heritage spawn for only advocating for $10.10.

[Major Nikon]

187. I'm sure carrying water for Heritage is tiring work

I've already asked you twice for your evidence that a $15 national minimum wage would hurt the economy and you certainly have yet to put up or shut up. So if you want to keep pretending you are arguing FOR something, go right ahead, but you aren't fooling anyone, nor is trying to pretend Obama is arguing AGAINST something he most certainly is not.

[eniwetok]

205. so YOU can't prove your false accusation...

YOU are the one who keeps saying I'm mouthing Heritage arguments. PROVE IT or retract. Show me where Heritage, or Cato, or AEI, or ANY right wing think tank or GOPer has EVER supported a $11 national MW... or retract.

[Major Nikon]

216. So let's see if I have this straight, because this is getting funny as hell

You start not one, but TWO OPs spewing nonsense AGAINST raising the MW to $15, and then when asked to provide something remotely approaching some kind of reason, you immediately switch to pretending your actual assertion is arguing FOR raising the MW to $11 while completely ignoring the actual reason why you started both those OPs in the first place.

Now I must "PROVE" something I never asserted to begin with or I must retract asking to you prove the nonsense you have now twice asserted without proof.



Nice try, but I don't take my marching orders from you and I'll be happy to keep pointing out how your pretzel logic just isn't getting any better. If you don't like it, tough shit, although deleting your OP is always an option.

[killbotfactory]

172. What are they gonna do? Spend the money on goods and services?

Improving the economy?

Maybe pay for college with a part time job?

Wait... Yes, that's exactly what they'd do.

The horror...

[Solly Mack]

173. I'm looking forward to tomorrow's repetitive thread but I have a doctor's appointment

on Friday, so if you could postpone your Friday repetition until Saturday, that would be better for me. I suppose I could just refer back to all previous repeats.

[eniwetok]

176. if people actually read entire threads...

Sorry about a second thread on the same topic. But it's clear that people here don't read entire threads to see if a point has been made 10 times before and responded to... so I have to respond over and over again often to silly points.

I thought picking out a key point would get out of that trap... but it's the same bullshit.

[Solly Mack]

182. People are reading them. They don't agree with you and instead of accepting that, you rather

believe in a false narrative of your own making - that people aren't reading your words.

You need to accept that a lot of people on DU will never agree with you. You also need to accept that many people will mock you for certain opinions.

It happens. Not all opinions will be popular, and constantly repeating them (regardless of how you frame your position) won't change that.

Now, you can take me for an asshole, and I freely admit to being one of DU's assholes, or you can take my words as they are intended.

You have an opinion and, obviously, it's not an opinion a lot of people agree with. Let it go.

[arcane1]

177. "I love Bernie... but I love republican talking points even more"

GTFO with that ignorant shit.

[corbettkroehler]

179. Think Living Wage, Not Minimum Wage

It's the right thing to do across the nation because, with very few exceptions, all workers are considered adults, as they should be. As is the case in many of our allies' societies, all adults deserve to earn a wage adequate to provide the basic necessities in exchange for a full-time schedule. For example, in Denmark, the starting wage at McDonald's is above $20 per hour.

[eniwetok]

184. Here are the OECD MWs above US

We're talking about a NATIONAL MW... not what one employer allegedly pays

From https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=MIN2AVE

USD 2014 constant prices in 2014 dollars... hourly MW


United States 7.2
Canada 8.2
United Kingdom 8.2
Ireland 8.7
New Zealand 9.1
Netherlands 9.6
Belgium 10
Australia 10.9
France 10.9
Luxembourg 11.2

[katsy]

183. Raising the minimum has never resulted in

less jobs or business.

This mentality reeks of trickle down economics. Want the economy to purrrr? Put money into workers pockets where that money rightly belongs.

Can't afford to pay your workers livable wages? Do it yourself or shutter your fucking doors. You don't belong in business. If you can't generate a profit that covers labor shut your fucking doors. You're probably not customer oriented enough to succeed as an entrepreneur.

I was self employed, retail. As a start-up, I paid my employees $12 hour when the state minimum wage was $8+/-. It was retail, cash register and stocking. That's what I determined fair. It was my fucking business and I took no salary because I knew I would grow my business and my rewards would grow much faster that cost of living.

So please. Spare us the chicken little crap. It's a lie based on trickle down.

[eniwetok]

186. Spare us all your meaningless reassurances.

Raising the minimum has never resulted in less jobs or business.

And as I've argued in other forums this is true when we went to the highest MW we've ever had. I cited BEA numbers on inflation and BLS numbers on those employed. But that highest today would be $11 for the national MW. So you claim that OF COURSE there'll be no problem at $15 is just an empty claim... especially since corporations have free trade as an escape hatch which didn't exist in 1968, there were unions then drawing wages upward, and employers now have more options in automation.

The highest state MW today is in MA and CA... @ $10.

$15 may be fine for prosperous urban areas. $15 nationally, even for a kid sweeping a floor... is uncharted territory.

So please. Spare us all your meaningless reassurances.

[katsy]

192. Nothing is going to keep corporations

from seeking cheap labor overseas. That's a done deal even AT THIS level MW.

Money has to flow into labor's pockets for Main Street economic growth.

I stand by what I said because historically raising the minimum wage has NEVER shuttered feasible businesses. And your denial of that is not supported by facts.

That's like these charlatan economists touting trickle down when there is nowhere on this planet this kind of fraud has EVER worked.

Don't fret chicken little. The sun will rise tomorrow.

[eniwetok]

209. are you incapable of reading comprehension?

I wrote

And as I've argued in other forums this is true when we went to the highest MW we've ever had. I cited BEA numbers on inflation and BLS numbers on those employed. But that highest today would be $11 for the national MW. So you claim that OF COURSE there'll be no problem at $15 is just an empty claim... especially since corporations have free trade as an escape hatch which didn't exist in 1968, there were unions then drawing wages upward, and employers now have more options in automation.

The highest state MW today is in MA and CA... @ $10.

$15 may be fine for prosperous urban areas. $15 nationally, even for a kid sweeping a floor... is uncharted territory.


and you turned that into

I stand by what I said because historically raising the minimum wage has NEVER shuttered feasible businesses. And your denial of that is not supported by facts.

Leaving aside that it's laughable to claim there will be no problems at $15 when the highest state now is only @ $10... still a $1 below what the MW equivalent was in 1968... WHERE DID I DENY ANYTHING? I clearly stated that there were NO apparent problems with either inflation or unemployment in 1968.

Never mind. It's clear you can't discuss this issue rationally. So why not just call me a right winger and be done with it.

[eniwetok]

210. OK... THIS ISSUE IS OVER

At least for me. I tire of reposting and reposting the same answers to the same lame points. And rather than lose my temper with some of the people here and this becoming a flame thread... I'm calling it quits on this topic. Feel free to continue to beat me up. I'm no longer going to respond.

[Rex]

211. You made this a flame thread, please don't pretend you had any other intentions.

Nobody is buying what you are selling, get a clue by now?

[Downtown Hound]

194. And if it does cost a few jobs?

What do you think costs more jobs, a few businesses going under because they can't pay a $15/hr minimum wage, or a population to poor to buy anything extra because all of their meager earnings went to simply having a roof over their head (if they're one of the lucky ones)?

High wages means greater purchasing power, which means...stronger economy. The problem for the super rich is that the wealth would be more spread out, and not so concentrated in the hands of the few. Hence why they have almost always opposed minimum wages increases. I remember people like you making the same argument in the 90's when they raised the minimum wage to a meager $5.00 per hour. Guess what? The economy kept plugging along just fine. In fact it did quite well in the 90's as I recall.

[Glassunion]

185. If that 16 year old needs full time employment, it's for a damn good reason.

They should be in school at that age. However, this is life and shit happens.

I've been working every day of my life since I was 14. Dad died, I need to go to work. Between 14 and 15 I worked part time by pulling 4 hour shifts after school, and two 8 hour shifts on the weekends. At 16, I went to work full time and school part time because I was supporting members of my family. But what you're implying is that all 16 year old kids have a job for shits and giggles money and they'd be "high flying" as you put it.

Trust me, if a 16 year old only has a job for shits and giggles, they are not going to school for 7 or 8 hours a day, to then head off to work for another 8. They are probably part time.

Now to your other point... If a kid is sweeping a garage or a country store, how many hours would it take for them to get the job done? Now, if the kid needs 8 hours to sweep a garage, or country store, it'd be a warehouse sized building. But we are not talking a warehouse sized building... we are talking a country store or a garage...

A human can sweep about 1000sq ft in 10 to 15 minutes.

This garage would take about 20 to 30 minutes to sweep.


This mom and pop country store would take 1 hour to 1 hour 15 min to sweep the store and upstairs apartments.


What are they doing with the remaining 7+ hours? Well... they could bust out a mop, stock shelves, take calls, clean the windows, take out the trash, clean the bathrooms, ring up customers.... Shit. I think I just described a full-time employee who should be paid a living wage. Sorry.

I hate to say it, but if they are only pulling in $25K a year for themselves, they should not be hiring people on a full time basis. They don't need full time help, because they don't have the customer base to necessitate the need for more help. But, if they just need someone to sweep the floors once a day, hire a kid looking for a shits and giggles job to come in, and spend an hour or so helping you clean up. That kid will have to get by on $75 a week.

[Downtown Hound]

188. That was one of the best responses I've read during my 12 years on DU

Well done!

[Glassunion]

292. It hit close to home...

Thank you.

[steve2470]

190. excellent post! nt

[eniwetok]

207. OK... should a 18 year old burger flipper make $31.2k?

God, the nitpicking here to avoid the purpose of my original example that a $15 national MW would apply to even that kid.

OK... should a full time 18 year old burger flipper make $31.2k in some poor town?

I await the next diversion from the issue at hand.

[Downtown Hound]

226. Why not?

Do you have some moral aversion to people who work hard making a decent living? Is that against your religion or something?

[My Good Babushka]

279. Burger flipper

even the way you pose questions is derogatory. You mean a cook. You post about people as if they are some kind of corporate property unit that comes out of a box and are meant to be used up and disposed of. Like they aren't citizens of your country.
Do you know why they live in poor towns? Why they have high health care costs, drug addiction, untreated sickness, poor, sporadic housing, homelessness, bad diets, high crime rates, crumbling schools and infrastructure from eroding tax bases? It's because when you pay people less than they need to live on, it unwinds an endless skein of misery and high-cost problems on everybody. And you want to volunteer all of us to take on these socio-economic problems so businesses, who have no allegiance to you and give you nothing, wouldn't cross a street to piss on you if you were on fire, have a steady supply of cheap labor? That's not very patriotic.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

284. Nobody's nitpicking, your choice of a 16 year old made it sound like you were defending the

lack of paying a living wage based on the tired old argument that some jobs are not 'real' but just 'kid jobs'.

If the work needs done, the job is real. All jobs deserve to pay a living wage, so yes, that 18 year old should be making $15/hr, and yes, the business owner can afford to raise item sale prices to pay that wage IF everyone else likewise has to raise prices. If all of his competition is also raising prices, he's not going to lose business to anyone else. And if all your minimum wage folks are making twice as much, they're not going to suddenly stop going to places that cost 10 or 15% more than they did when they made half as much.

[Glassunion]

296. I'm not nitpicking shit. Go back to Post#185, and superimpose 18 on top of every instance of 16.

The exact same premise of my post works regardless of age, or occupation.

If you are 16 and have a full time job, it's for a damn good reason.
If you are 18 and have a full time job, it's for a damn good reason.
If you are 28 and have a full time job, it's for a damn good reason.
If you are 38 and have a full time job, it's for a damn good reason.
etc...

So, to answer your question... "Should a full time 18 year old burger flipper make $31.2k in some poor town?" - Yes. They are working because they need to support themselves or their family. If the business cannot afford to hire a full time employee at a living wage, then their business model is a failure and they should not be in that business in the first place. If they are only taking in $24K a year for themselves, they are in the wrong line of work, because they cannot manage that business for shit. They plan poorly, budget poorly, or the very premise of their enterprise is not sustainable.

The newest of my employees, is a young man I hired at probationary rate of $17.30 an hour for a position he had the most basic of skills in. Skill set: Can you turn on a laptop and can you spell "PC"? Great! Your hired. We had to train him in almost every single aspect of the job. 2 years later he is making $22 an hour. He is still learning, but he will jump at every opportunity that we give him.

Why did I hire someone for an unskilled job, at $36K a year? Why did I raise his pay 27% over his initial rate over the next two years? Sure, he's a fantastic employee. But that's not the whole reason. I want to retain employees, and the primary reason I want to retain employees is quite selfish. It saves me money. Fact: paying someone over market saves me money in the long run. Turn over is expensive, especially in an unskilled position. There are hiring costs, payroll costs, training costs, etc... I don't have any of these costs with an experienced employee.

So, it makes good business sense, even with obscenely tight margins, to pay my employees more than the guy up the street. I perform better than the guy up the street, because my employees are happy. Happy employees are great for business, because they are the face of the company.

How many small companies can say that they have not had to replace an employee in over two years? How many companies can say that they have not had to terminate an employee in over 9 years? Not many at all.

If your business is built on the premise that you can pay your full time employees so poorly that they qualify for government assistance, you are a failure. Your business is a failure, and you are in the wrong line of work.

[LakeVermilion]

276. In addition, custodial work goes beyond sweeping and emptying.

Career custodians have to be aware of cleaning chemicals and their application. Regulations control the disposal of chemicals and refuse. If a 16 year old has a position with this responsibility, he or she should be paid for it.

[Downtown Hound]

189. $15 an hour won't even rent you an apartment where I live

So personally, I feel $15 is too low. And if you want to see the effects of what happens when you have a community of people that can't afford to rent a place to live even when they work full time, you are cordially invited to my neighborhood and I will gladly show you around the many, many homeless encampments around here.

[Travis_0004]

208. But it will where I live

So does the minimum wage need to be the same everywhere?

[hatrack]

197. So, residents of certain areas of the country should be paid less than others for the same work?

Of course, they already are, given market-driven variations already in place.

But mandating a federal MW that means that Mississippi residents earn less residents of Illinois? Really?

Along those lines, is it your intention to increase the rate of regional rural depopulation?

And btw, it already is "somebody else's money" - ours. Take a moment to recall Wal-Mart's new employee packet, with information on how to apply for Food Stamps and WIC and other federal assistance programs.

[eniwetok]

202. it already happens... and it ain't my fault

19 states have a MW of $7.25... the highest are CA and MA @ $10.

So you actually believe those 19 states are just going to jump their wages 240%? That's magic wand thinking.

There are more ways to bump up wages without trying to apply a high flying urban MW to poor states or depressed areas. Back in 1968 when the MW was $11 in today's money we had strong unions, and a protectionist economy which supported higher wages. Today the right has restructured the economy to become addicted to a depreciating MW. They sabotaged our industrial base, US corporations have the free trade escape hatch, employers have more options to automation, and the union movement is on the decline.

[OkSustainAg]

204. Stop Paying CEOs

to play golf and not do the work to earn their wages.

[hobbit709]

212. What do you consider a fair wage for YOUR work?

From your attitude I'd say you're worth about $0.50/hr.

[lostnfound]

213. No man is an island...higher wages can help family members too.

Maybe the kid has a single mom and little brothers and sisters.
It wouldn't be a horrible thing, compare to the current situation. And I think there are few jobs that are actually just sweeping floors nonstop. And there's a lot of unemployed 20-somethings who need jobs, too.

[The_Casual_Observer]

214. $15 an hour was a lot of money 30 years ago, not any more.

Wake up Rip Van Winkle.

[Hotler]

217. I find it amazing that folks that have under 300 post here on DU

sound off against democratic values. Paid trolls? Maybe? Maybe not? But there sure have been a lot of them on different threads. All leaning to the right or showing some form of sympathy for the corporations and/or the 1%. Any of these posters sound off against corporate welfare, Wall St. fraud or the fucking wars????? Have fun and enjoy your stay.

[Nye Bevan]

225. People who support President Obama's position on the minimum wage are now "trolls"? (nt)

[Major Nikon]

232. Has Obama argued AGAINST raising the MW to $15?

[Nye Bevan]

235. He supports $12 by 2020:

Cities and counties are also taking action. Since 2013, about 40 cities and localities have risen to the challenge — including Lexington, KY; Santa Fe County, NM; and Oakland, CA — and the drumbeat continues, with more states and localities considering ballot initiatives and legislation. At the same time, businesses large and small are raising wages on their own, recognizing the value of higher wages to boost morale and productivity.

At the federal level, the Obama Administration has expressed support for the Raise the Wage Act proposed by Senator Murray and Representative Scott, which would increase the minimum wage to $12 by 2020. The President has also taken action to raise wages for workers on all new federal contracts to $10.10 or higher. Raising the minimum wage nationwide will increase earnings for millions of workers, and support the local economies where they live, work and spend their earnings.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/raise-the-wage

[Major Nikon]

237. I didn't ask you what he supported. I asked you what he was against.

You didn't answer the question.

[Nye Bevan]

239. Ah, so he might secretly be in favor of $15,

but has just never mentioned this to anyone, ever.

You could be right!

[Major Nikon]

242. Or he might be secretly against it

So because he hasn't said so we MUST assume that you and Obama are in lock step with arguing AGAINST a $15 minimum wage.

Do you really think people are stupid enough not to see through that nonsense?

This OP and the one before it are arguing AGAINST a national $15 minimum wage, which Obama has NOT argued against. So pretending this argument is exactly like Obama's is unadulterated bullshit that just isn't going to stick to the wall no matter how many times you or the author of the OP try to throw it.

[Nye Bevan]

245. Well.... arguing for $12 would be construed by many as arguing against $15.

Perhaps if the OP had been couched in terms of supporting $12 rather than opposing $15 you would have been less hostile.

[Major Nikon]

247. I don't think that many find basic logic that difficult

YMMV.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

220. Very few 16 year olds work 40 hours a week and you damn well know it.

The late teens that do are probably busting their asses working and trying to pay their way through college. The rest are trying to make a living, many of them with independents to support.

This is the kind of OP I would expect to see on another site.

This looks like a very lame attempt at a straw man argument while ignoring the plight of others trying to get by onot low wages.

[X_Digger]

221. This is what, the third or fourth thread you've started with a 'bait' premise? Paging MIRT. n/t

[nichomachus]

230. This person has been here a week

Makes you wonder what their agenda is.

[quaker bill]

228. absolutely

Your argument against an increase in the MW is macroeconomic nonsense. You broadly assume that all other things are fixed and that the only thing that increases is the wages of a hypothetical 16 year old in BFE.

In short, everyone under the new minimum gets a raise and to prevent wage scale compression, those currently well above the minimum not only get the raise to $15 but more as businesses do not want the new hires making the same as experienced staff. Further people earning above $15 but still near $15 get raises too, because you do not want the less experienced making more than the more senior staff.

What this in fact does is change the income distribution of the entire workforce. There is suddenly much more disposable income in the hands of people who will in fact spend it, this circles back and makes the business more profitable and the wages more affordable.

This experiment has been run (under Bill Clinton) and while all the doom and gloom scenarios were predicted. (to include the one you mention) the observed result was as I describe it. Economists have since gone back to the history books on previous increases, and find the same result every time. Employment increases, the economy grows, and income is redistributed to the working poor.

Raising the minimum is the right idea and about 10 or 15 years overdue.

[nichomachus]

229. Let's pay everybody $11 an hour

So many people think that's a living wage.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

234. Let's look at WV

Yes - it makes sense, because (at that pay) the worker is off of virtually all public assistance. WV pays out a lot of public assistance, so reducing those government outlays makes sense. Then we look at what Henry Ford told us all over 100 years ago -- better paid workers spend that money (buy stuff) and raise the incomes of grocers, hardware store owners, auto dealers -- the list goes on. It makes sense.

[True Earthling]

243. If we can pay CEO's $100 million a year...

we can pay $31K for sweeping floors.

[Albertoo]

252. Two wrongs don't make a right

[Populist_Prole]

271. But the second "wrong" is more right

The former just pockets the money and solidifies their gains...and influence on the process.

The latter actually drives the economy via demand.

"Trickle down" is bullshit.

[Albertoo]

318. It's a bit more complicated, isn't it?

People strive because of the carrot at th eend of the stick. Without the prospect of being maybe one day at the apex of the pyramid, millions of managers worldwide would strive less.
The salary at the top is the lottery prize for which millions "buy their tickets" through their work and effort day in, day out.

Now, I'd readily agree the size of the prize (CEO average compensation) has grown too fat, and high bracket taxes too low, but it's a matter of degree, not principle.

[gollygee]

244. If a 16-year-old is working full time

Then it isn't a kid working after school for fun money, it's someone who has to help support their family or something along those lines.

[bhikkhu]

251. 16 year olds aren't permitted to work 40 hours a week

...first problem with the argument.

[TexasBushwhacker]

258. They could if the dropped out of school

and for that reason, I believe the minimum wage should be set lower for anyone under 20. As a former teacher, I don't want to see a higher minimum wage making some kids drop out of high school. Hell, there are families that expect kids to drop out and start working to help support the family when they are 16, some times younger.

[MillennialDem]

260. Honestly the best way to handle this is a universal basic income.

[AgadorSparticus]

263. The problem I see with raising the MW to $15 just means that the price of things will increase

It will negate the effects of a proposed livable wage.

[Recursion]

266. Some, sure, but not 107%

A Federal minimum wage of $15 would be a 107% increase in the Federal minimum wage, but:

1. Labor costs are only a portion of business expenses, and
2. Even within labor costs, only a portion of workers earn less than $15

So prices would go up somewhat, but not by as much as wages for the working poor would go up.

So we probably wouldn't see the working poor's standards of living literally double, but they'd go up significantly.

And, yes, people making more than $15 would see prices go up somewhat without necessarily seeing their wages go up (though there would be some push-up, or at least there always has been) which means, yes: the middle class will be paying for some of this. Which is fine.

[AgadorSparticus]

272. How do you determine that prices will go up but that it will only affect the middle class?

When prices in general go up, it will affect everyone. Not just the middle class.

[Recursion]

275. Because, again, labor is only a portion of business costs

Doubling labor costs does not double business costs. Not even close.

[AgadorSparticus]

277. That's not true. It depends on the industry. Some industries have a much higher labor cost.

Specifically, the restaurant or food industry tend to have much higher labor costs that can be upwards of 40-60%. If we double that, it would not leave room for profits.

I think the question is rather, how did we get the notion of $15 minimum wage? Was that adjusted to inflation? And cost of living index?

[Recursion]

285. And in none of them is labor higher than 40% or so

Seriously you can't actually mean this. This is Small Business 101.

[Glassunion]

298. What the hell restaurant or food industry has labor costs of 40 to 60%??

The average fast food restaurant has wages and payroll taxes at 26%. The average restaurant would be even lower if they have tipped employees.

Where did you get the 40-60% number from?

[AgadorSparticus]

299. I looked at a bunch of sites. I think it was the department of labor. I am trying to find it.

Here is one article giving the food industry labor cost close to 40%.

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/common-food-labor-cost-percentages-14700.html

Here is the article that referenced the department of labor statistics from 2013:

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/average-percentage-labor-retail-businesses-71526.html

[Glassunion]

308. I had not accounted for kitchen staff in the average retaurant. My bad.

However, close to 40, does not equal 40-60%.

That said, even if you do raise the MW to $15, you are not going to negate the effects of a living wage.

Let's use the highest percentage from one of your links (30 to 35%)... We will go with the high water mark of 35%.

Now there are many questions to answer.
How many employees in these places are making less than $15 an hour.
What percentage of the total number of employees is that?
How many are full-time or part-time?
What percentage of your labor includes static or sliding scale costs? (disability insurance, worker's comp, etc..)

So in your average restaurant, your wages are not going to double. You'd need to find exact financials on a particular business to determine the exact retail increases needed to cover the cost of raising the minimum wage. But, in the end only a percentage of the 35% of operating costs will be effected.

[AgadorSparticus]

311. The 40-60% is in the other article I listed. They got those # from dept. of labor.

One of the articles I came across said that the real cost in labor expense was in paying for overtime.

[Glassunion]

312. I read both articles and neither one stated labor costs at 40 to 60%

[AgadorSparticus]

314. Here, I copied and pasted from that article.

U.S. Labor Costs
Employers paid employees an average of $31.09 per hour worked in March 2013, according to the U.S. .Bureau of Labor Statistics. Of that average hourly rate, wages and salaries encompassed 69.1 percent and employee benefits accounted for 30.9 percent. Those are general statistics, which are not broken down by industry or occupation.

[Glassunion]

315. That is not the percentage of labor costs for the business.

That is simply the breakdown of what labor costs are. Not what percentage it is of a business' operating expense. If you look, both numbers equal 100%. It's simply stating that of the overall wage expense that a business pays out, 30% are in benefits and 70% are in wages.

It's the same as saying, for every $100 in a business that has 35% labor costs, they would pay $24.50 in wages, and $10.50 in benefits, leaving $65 for other operating expenses and profit.

[Populist_Prole]

270. But then, wouldn't that apply to ANYbody's increase in pay?

It may seem at first like a dog chasing its tail, but then I think a certain rarified sector of the population seems quite adament that incresed pay for them incentivises them. The typical supply-side horsehit states that economic activity is driven by them, not the working class' demand....But then, why do the plutocrats freak out every ( and any ) time the working class gains any income and then cry to the feds they have to cool down the activity, lest interest rates rise? Isn't that empirical evidence that it is indeed the 99 percent's spending power that drives the economy?

They can't have it both ways.

[AgadorSparticus]

273. I don't think they give a rats ass about driving the economy. That's just

Lip service to get government welfare and compensate with the interest rates for their business doings. Businesses calculate all their liabilities and adjust accordingly with how much they charge in order to keep their quarterly benchmarks.

[Cobalt Violet]

287. the price of things has been increasing anyway.

[AgadorSparticus]

302. Inflation is always occuring. The question is at what rate?

All I am saying is that when you double the minimum wage without reference to inflation or cost of living index, we won't get the results we hope to get--and that is a livable income. Why? Because companies will just pass that on to their customers.

[tenderfoot]

300. Can you kindly cite historical evidence of price hikes as result of pay raises?

I've yet to see ONE STUDY that proves that.

Just another RIGHT WING MEME.

[AgadorSparticus]

301. As I posted upstream, the article I found cited the department of labor & statistics. Nt

[tenderfoot]

303. and????

I don't see anything PROVING prices hikes.

[AgadorSparticus]

305. I wasn't trying to prove the price hikes. I proved where I got my numbers.

You can go do the rest.

[Skittles]

264. the hallmark of a repuke

spend money on senseless wars, private prisons, don't give a fuck about MAXIMUM wage but OMG, pay people enough money to live on and their panties are in an EXTREME wad

[Recursion]

265. If a 16 year old has to work 40 hours a week, yeah, he or she should make that much

Not sure why you'd be against that.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

289. +1

Yes, a full-time worker is a full-time worker.

But, if minimum wage is, say, 50 cents per year of age, I can live with that. Then that 16-year-old would make $8 per hour. Hmmm. (My minimum wage would be well over $30/hr ).

Edit to add: Yes, of course my formula is pure sarcasm!

[Recursion]

290. It's weird that this is even a question, you know?

Also as I look at 40 I'm a huge fan of indexing wages to age. Let's get a blue-ribbon on that...

[Warren DeMontague]

320. WHAT IS THE POINT OF HIRING CHILDREN, IF WE CANT PAY THEM LESS?

[rjsquirrel]

286. Sounds fair to me

31k for 40 hours a week of sweeping floors. Why is that a problem? Are there forms of labor you believe deserve no better than poverty level wages (which 31k still is if you have people you support)? Is the same labor by a teenager less valuable than that of an adult? Should children be exploited as cheap labor in America? Is "pushing a broom" (which also typically means cleaning in other ways with harsh chemicals) not real work in your book? Compared to what, sitting in a cubicle playing candy crush when the boss ain't looking for what, $70k?

I'm a Hillary supporter but I think a $15 minimum wage is still far too low.

[Octafish]

291. Do you do anything worth $15 an hour?

Most janitors I know are worth that much.

[HOPNOSH]

316. Look at the handle eniwetok= Any We Took

Interesting. You get the gist.

[Zorra]

297. Corporate internet trolls need to have their wages cut! Call Congress right fucking now! nt

[Buzz cook]

309. When you keep the minimum wage artificially low for so many years

raising it to fit the needs of the work force is going to seem like a big bite.

That is why both Clinton and Sanders have said they would phase in the raises over time and not all at once.

Once they do start raising the minimum wage the benefits will become apparent. Business should start preparing now to take advantage of the economic boom.

The increase in economic activity will be strongest in those places where the relative raise will be greatest.

[Warren DeMontague]

317. Hey, nice hat!

[uppityperson]

319. If a 16 yr old works 40 hrs a wk, 52 wks a year, yes, they should be paid that.

Few 16 yrs olds will do so because they are in school. If they are not and instead able to work that much, then of course they should be paid.