HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » What Bernie misses about ...

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 07:32 PM

 

What Bernie misses about $15 min wage

Good article. Again, it makes the contrast for me between Sanders and O'Malley with Clinton. She often seems like the only adult in the room on some of these issues.

"This 8 to 10 percent decline in employment occurred because Puerto Rico was significantly poorer than the rest of the United States; a minimum wage that made sense on the mainland was way too high for the island.

Something similar seems to be happening in the debate over a $15-per-hour minimum wage. A $15-per-hour minimum wage may make sense for the handful of wealthy cities that have adopted it in the past couple of years. But that doesn't mean it's a good idea for the rest of the country, where average productivity is a lot lower. And while Puerto Ricans who lost their jobs were able to look for work in the much larger mainland US economy, given the scarcity of housing in rich coastal cities it's not so obvious that unemployed workers in Kentucky or New Mexico would be able to move to Boston or Seattle in search of work."


http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/11/15/9737432/democratic-debate-bernie-sanders-minimum-wage

187 replies, 6289 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 187 replies Author Time Post
Reply What Bernie misses about $15 min wage (Original post)
MaggieD Nov 2015 OP
reformist2 Nov 2015 #1
Wellstone ruled Nov 2015 #3
JaneyVee Nov 2015 #7
reformist2 Nov 2015 #10
JaneyVee Nov 2015 #12
JDPriestly Nov 2015 #160
lovemydog Nov 2015 #164
JDPriestly Nov 2015 #185
lovemydog Nov 2015 #186
JDPriestly Nov 2015 #187
Recursion Nov 2015 #52
reformist2 Nov 2015 #83
upaloopa Nov 2015 #179
JackInGreen Nov 2015 #108
Matariki Nov 2015 #118
AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #144
MaggieD Nov 2015 #23
reformist2 Nov 2015 #35
MaggieD Nov 2015 #96
AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #145
MaggieD Nov 2015 #146
AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #149
Name removed Nov 2015 #174
Armstead Nov 2015 #2
TM99 Nov 2015 #5
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #19
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #55
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #61
MaggieD Nov 2015 #65
JaneyVee Nov 2015 #8
Armstead Nov 2015 #11
JaneyVee Nov 2015 #13
Armstead Nov 2015 #16
MaggieD Nov 2015 #67
Armstead Nov 2015 #88
neverforget Nov 2015 #95
MaggieD Nov 2015 #97
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #159
winter is coming Nov 2015 #14
MaggieD Nov 2015 #27
Armstead Nov 2015 #44
MaggieD Nov 2015 #60
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #64
MaggieD Nov 2015 #69
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #168
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #70
MaggieD Nov 2015 #109
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #110
MaggieD Nov 2015 #123
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #131
MaggieD Nov 2015 #135
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #136
MaggieD Nov 2015 #147
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #151
MaggieD Nov 2015 #152
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #154
MaggieD Nov 2015 #155
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #156
MaggieD Nov 2015 #157
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #158
AOR Nov 2015 #47
kristopher Nov 2015 #59
MaggieD Nov 2015 #63
AOR Nov 2015 #89
MaggieD Nov 2015 #98
Fumesucker Nov 2015 #107
MaggieD Nov 2015 #113
Fumesucker Nov 2015 #115
MaggieD Nov 2015 #124
Fumesucker Nov 2015 #132
MaggieD Nov 2015 #134
AOR Nov 2015 #138
MaggieD Nov 2015 #139
AOR Nov 2015 #141
MaggieD Nov 2015 #143
Oilwellian Nov 2015 #180
MaggieD Nov 2015 #183
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #137
Doctor_J Nov 2015 #66
Cha Nov 2015 #4
Armstead Nov 2015 #6
AOR Nov 2015 #17
Armstead Nov 2015 #22
MaggieD Nov 2015 #39
Cha Nov 2015 #45
Armstead Nov 2015 #100
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #58
Cha Nov 2015 #9
UglyGreed Nov 2015 #15
MaggieD Nov 2015 #41
MichMan Nov 2015 #111
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #18
Armstead Nov 2015 #21
Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #26
MaggieD Nov 2015 #36
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #46
UglyGreed Nov 2015 #20
RobertEarl Nov 2015 #24
UglyGreed Nov 2015 #33
RobertEarl Nov 2015 #53
UglyGreed Nov 2015 #62
Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #25
MaggieD Nov 2015 #29
Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #32
beam me up scottie Nov 2015 #40
MaggieD Nov 2015 #48
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #57
MaggieD Nov 2015 #72
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #85
MaggieD Nov 2015 #103
Capt. Obvious Nov 2015 #94
TheFarS1de Nov 2015 #30
UglyGreed Nov 2015 #43
UglyGreed Nov 2015 #50
MaggieD Nov 2015 #42
Armstead Nov 2015 #54
Cha Nov 2015 #28
Cha Nov 2015 #31
beam me up scottie Nov 2015 #37
MrMickeysMom Nov 2015 #79
beam me up scottie Nov 2015 #84
MrMickeysMom Nov 2015 #86
MaggieD Nov 2015 #104
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #51
PatrickforO Nov 2015 #34
Rosa Luxemburg Nov 2015 #38
beam me up scottie Nov 2015 #49
earthside Nov 2015 #56
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #68
beam me up scottie Nov 2015 #71
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #75
beam me up scottie Nov 2015 #76
MaggieD Nov 2015 #78
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #90
MaggieD Nov 2015 #106
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #169
Armstead Nov 2015 #93
MrMickeysMom Nov 2015 #81
MaggieD Nov 2015 #77
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #82
MaggieD Nov 2015 #128
Mnpaul Nov 2015 #148
MaggieD Nov 2015 #150
Mnpaul Nov 2015 #153
Doctor_J Nov 2015 #73
MaggieD Nov 2015 #74
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #80
MaggieD Nov 2015 #127
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #170
Nye Bevan Nov 2015 #99
Hiraeth Nov 2015 #87
MaggieD Nov 2015 #102
Weidman Nov 2015 #91
MaggieD Nov 2015 #105
Weidman Nov 2015 #116
MaggieD Nov 2015 #122
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #167
whatchamacallit Nov 2015 #92
MaggieD Nov 2015 #101
Armstead Nov 2015 #112
MaggieD Nov 2015 #119
Armstead Nov 2015 #125
MaggieD Nov 2015 #129
Armstead Nov 2015 #130
Fumesucker Nov 2015 #114
MaggieD Nov 2015 #126
Weidman Nov 2015 #117
MaggieD Nov 2015 #121
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #172
oasis Nov 2015 #120
Cha Nov 2015 #133
beam me up scottie Nov 2015 #162
Armstead Nov 2015 #175
nilesobek Nov 2015 #140
MaggieD Nov 2015 #142
Armstead Nov 2015 #177
MichMan Nov 2015 #163
JTShroyer Nov 2015 #161
Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #165
upaloopa Nov 2015 #181
Armstead Nov 2015 #182
Armstead Nov 2015 #178
Sunlei Nov 2015 #166
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #171
Sunlei Nov 2015 #173
Truprogressive85 Nov 2015 #176
EndElectoral Nov 2015 #184

Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 07:34 PM

1. Then we should provide a permanent basic income to those who can't get work.


Another novel idea that Hillary would probably be afraid to discuss, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:12 PM

3. Total agreement.

What do people not get. Average wage earners pay check turns from 5-7 times in value on Main Street. Econ 101 and Civics should be mandatory for every School Kid. Then this idea would finally be put to rest. Learned the Economic Turn of Pay Roll in our School system way back in1953. But,there again,that was a time of different values. And one had to learn how to run a Slide Rule and Math was long hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:24 PM

7. Why would you work if you could get permanent income for not working?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #7)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:29 PM

10. You wouldn't! That's the point. Give the average citizen real power to bargain with employers.

If you could get $300 a week, guaranteed, then employers would have to offer a pretty good deal to get you to sign on as a new employee, no?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #10)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:30 PM

12. No.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #12)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 03:57 AM

160. Work gives meaning in life. In our work, we achieve status, we meet goals, we deal with people.

If the minimum wage is only $10 or $12 in one area of the US and $15 in another, companies will be motivated to move to the states with the lower minimum wage in order to save money. But the taxes raised in the states with the lower minimum wages will not be high enough to cover the costs of the state and local governments there.

As it is, states like California that have higher wages pay more in federal taxes than they get back while states like Mississippi and Alabama that pay lower wages pay less than the federal government pays them for various programs.

A uniform minimum wage that is relatively high in what are now low-income states will allow the low-income states to hire and retain better teachers for their schools, have better state roads and better state services.

People have a very hard time living on less than $15 in most places. $15 is, as I understand it, and Elizabeth Warren has said this I believe, the wage that would be the minimum wage had the minimum wage risen with inflation.

So a higher minimum wage would not affect the desire of people to work. That is especially true if the $15 per hour wage is gradually adopted. I understand that is the plan in Los Angeles.

One of the problems in our country is the extreme disparity in wealth among people living and working in different parts of the country. If you live in Siligon Valley where houses, ordinary houses, may be worth many hundreds of thousands of dollars, you can accumulate wealth earning Silicon Valley wages and buying a house, assuming you can get a job that pays Silicon Valley wages. Over time, the house is a source of wealth for you since you can sell it and it is likely that your equity will have grown since you bought it as will the value of the house.

A person in rural Mississippi would not be able to earn in an entire lifetime the money that house in Silicon Valley will be worth when sold.

So the ultimate wealth of the person in a richer part of the country compared to that of a person in a poorer part of the country is just enormous even though the lifestyles may be similar.

You can buy a nice house in a poor state for less income. But at the end of your life, when it comes time to leave an estate to your children, the person from the poor state will leave a small estate while the person from the wealthy area with a home in the estate, will leave a large estate. This disparity in wealth and in inheritance increases with each generation. These facts are contributing to the disparity in wealth in our country.

There is no easy solution. Some disparity in wealth is inevitable and not a real problem, but the disparity of wealth between states is part of the reason that some states are so pessimistic and conservative while others are more liberal and optimistic. We should have a $15 national minimum wage. In states like California and New York, it is a livable wage, no more than that, and in states that are poor like Mississippi, it would raise the standard of living and make them better places to live.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #160)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 08:07 AM

164. Thank for that insightful rationale.

I know there are arguments pro and con on this, and I appreciate good arguments & explanations. I'm in favor of a $15 minimum wage. I've read the arguments against it and I just don't believe them. Nothing against those who post them. I feel that if we as citizens want something and apply ourselves to it we can get it. The naysaying on this kind of stuff rarely turns out to be true, in my humble opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lovemydog (Reply #164)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 06:43 PM

185. People in the South say that they cannot afford $15 per hour.

But, they are kicking themselves in their pocketbooks. If they paid $15 per hour, they could attract people to live there who were better educated and who wanted to give and get back from their region.

Here in California, rents are impossibly expensive, we don't have enough water, our weather is hot and dry and in that sense great, but we only have so much room.

People crowd into California for the good pay and good jobs. You have to draw people with good pay and opportunities like the opportunity to own a home or at least a nice condo, to have good schools for their children, welcoming religious and civic organizations -- nice, cordial communities.

A living wage, a wage of about $15 per hour as the minimum wage would make all that and healthy community growth more likely in the South. Southerners who want to improve their lives almost have to move to someplace that pays higher wages.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #185)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 06:52 PM

186. And if people are making that as a minimum,

it means a lot of money being circulated around the community, and a better tax base on which to provide other things like perhaps better schools and a basic minimum income. Of course most of the big business owners oppose it because they maybe won't be as rich. But that's short-sighted thinking. Even Henry Ford understood that you've got to pay workers enough so that they can afford to buy the cars that are being produced.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lovemydog (Reply #186)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 06:54 PM

187. Precisely!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #7)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:08 PM

52. Lots of people wouldn't, which is a good thing

We're not fighting a two ocean war or anything. There's not some stack of widgets going unmade that we desperately need made. We don't remotely need 60% of the adult population in the labor market; they're there because that's the only way to eat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #52)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:46 PM

83. There still is this puritanical belief that everyone needs to work. Old beliefs die hard.


As the robots and computers take over, it seems obvious that when we insist on finding ways to achieving full employment, that we're going down the wrong track.

We need a new way of thinking, one that recognizes the new reality that we can have wealth without everyone having to work 24/7. It's just going to require that we SHARE that wealth. And maybe even *gasp* a little REDISTRIBUTION of that wealth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #83)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:28 PM

179. Wealth is created such as in manufacturing

The finished product is made up of labor, material and overhead. Those inputs together cost less than the selling price of the product made. The difference is created wealth. If part of the economy creates wealth and all share in it, the we eventually run out of wealth to share.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #7)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:28 PM

108. We embrace the thrust of Reagans 'welfare queens' now?

I suppose if you want to hitch your wagon to that, be my guest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #7)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:39 PM

118. Because most people want more than just basic food and shelter.

Some people would choose not to work but I believe most would not. It would be a civilized option - basic security for everyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #7)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:22 AM

144. Standard right wing claptrap

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:38 PM

23. We have extended unemployment benefits

 

.... when unemployment is high. We also have SSI. We're covered on that already. All we need to do is increase SSI payments for those that need them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #23)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:52 PM

35. We're not really covered. Workers are stil vulernable, likely to take whatever they can get. We need


to give them bargaining power. This is what unions used to do, albeit in a haphazard, patchwork kind of way. Not all workers got to benefit from union support. This is why I suggest the idea of a right to a basic income - not as high as a minimum wage, but high enough to give would-be workers the courage to demand more of employers. They are not in any such position now, and it is an injustice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #35)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:08 PM

96. $12 per hour is just right

 

I think what you want is a rate that discourages people from either working at all, or in trying to do better than a minimum existence with minimum wage.

You could always move to Denmark. That's more realistic than getting our country to raise middle class taxes to 55% and doing a 25% sales tax.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #96)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:25 AM

145. We get ripped off by insurance companies and predatory college loans

 

Denmark gets a much better deal. They aren't getting ripped off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #145)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:41 AM

146. I hear there are flights to Denmark everyday

 

Did you know that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #146)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:46 AM

149. Well..

 

..You gave it your best shot!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #146)


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 07:47 PM

2. I love seeing Republican arguments made on DU

 

1)It's not $15 tomorrow. It's phased in over several years. And by then the cost of living will have also increased.


2)Businesses have fixed costs, taxes, rent, utilities, production expenses etc. Businesses (at least those without a moral compass) see labor as a more controllable cost, and they will likely squeeze that because they can. The idea of a minimum wage is to prevent that beyond a certain level. Making it at a level that someone working full time can actually afford the basics should be a no-brainier in terms of common decency.

3)There have been many different studies about the impact of the minimum wage on employment, and it's nebulous and variable enough that you almost have to choose which to believe. Once upon a time liberals tended to go with those that supported raising it as a source of economic growth, as well as being morally correct.

I guess that liberal thinking has become fallacious these days.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:15 PM

5. No shit.

 

This is OP is straight out of the GOP playbook.

Exactly! Sanders plan stretches out increases until 2019 or 2020 I believe.

But really I am not surprised from this poster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #5)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:11 PM

19. The author of the Vox piece is a former Cato Institute guy, that's the Koch Bros outfit....

 

So you know it's minty fresh!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #19)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:10 PM

55. For real?

 

Yech

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #55)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:14 PM

61. Oh yeah. Koch-o-Rama.

 

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #19)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:19 PM

65. So what do you think of Glenn Greewald's screeds about Hillary?

 

Those are okay, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:25 PM

8. No one is against raising it.

 

The question is how much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #8)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:29 PM

11. You're correct....Just remember...

 

$15 in a few years is not $15 today.

Minimum wage has always been in a catch-up with the COL. For 30 years, we slowed down and let the gap grow larger with wages overall, and the Minimum wage in particular.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #11)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:33 PM

13. The cost of living varies widely from place to place.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #13)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:48 PM

16. Not the basics...and many variables within areas

 

Gentrification and tourism, for example, is an unseen cost of living that skews living expenses and wages. Many places that one would assume are rural with low living costs are being transformed by little pockets of prosperity and gentrification.

I live in an area where wages are comparatively modest, but housing is ridiculously expensive because of people from the big city who like to come here to weekend getaways and have driven up housing prices.

Bottom line is that, while states can raise it, there has to be a livable national floor. If that turns out to be a bonus for some workers in some areas, that's merely an small excess of good.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #16)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:23 PM

67. Again, wrong

 

The median rent in Seattle is double what it is in Nashville. And San Fran is higher than Seattle. It is just completely incorrect to discount the massive differences in COL across the country.

It's always the extremism that turns me off so much. Just FYI. I think a lot of folks that chose HRC instead feel the same. The ideas are extreme and so is the defense of the extremist policies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #67)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:56 PM

88. I guess I don't know anything about my own hometown because I'm so Extreme

 

YOU are using extreme examples as the exceptions that prove the rule. Most places are a mix of localized factors -- not some statewide template. A crappy wage is a crappy wage. It's just crappier if it's in a place like Seattle, which had to do something to deal with its escalating living costs.

If we are going to get serious about restoring the working class, and giving the lower classes a shot at getting out of poverty then we have to get serious about it. The floor has to be rebuilt.

What you are advocating is a holding action. Keeping overall wage levels at their current point (considering COL rises) rather than allowing them to rise to a pre-Supply Side levels.

Extreme. My God. That's Demopublican nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #67)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:03 PM

95. 2015 California minimum wage $9/hr. Washington 9.47/hr. tennessee 7.25/hr

7.25<9<12<15 Such extremism to want a livable wage.....

http://www.raisetheminimumwage.com/pages/minimum-wage-state

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to neverforget (Reply #95)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:10 PM

97. A $12 federal wage is the right number

 

That would translate into $15 on the west coast and provide a living wage in the south.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #67)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 03:38 AM

159. Fascinating that you beleive a $15 minimum wage is "extremism."

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:34 PM

14. +1. Bonus points if it's mischaracterized as "adult thinking". n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:46 PM

27. Couple of things on those points.....

 

1. True. But he never mentions that on the stump. The problem is that $15 is too high for places like KY, TN, and AR, for example, where median rents are one third what they are on the west coast.

If you start it at $15 on the federal level you will overburden businesses in low COL states, and depress state increases in high COL states. Like everything from Bernie, he goes to the extreme. $12 is a reasonable proposal that will allow states in high COL states do what they have long done and increase the state min wage above the federal level

2. I don't think you've ever owned a business. Doubling wages is not sustainable for hundreds of thousands of small businesses. So again, $12 is more reasonable. We can always go to $15 later, but it seems prudent to pass $12 first. Of course neither will pass until we get majorities in the house and senate.

3. There have been no studies that include doubling the minimum wage.

As for your subject header - if you love seeing republican arguments on DU you must be in hog heaven. I see them made about Hillary every day here.

Also, name me a republican in favor of waging the min wage to $12. Shall I wait? No. So I guess I can conclude your objective is simply to insult me. Amirite?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #27)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:00 PM

44. My objective is to point out what I said -- And the author is a CATO Libertarian

 

If you think it is an insult to note the source of the article, then I'm sorry. But CATO Libertarians are very right wing, and don't really even like things like the minimum wage in the first place. So yes, it was a conservative article.

1)Sanders mentioned it on his website and in interviews. Not keeping it a secret.

Also, there are many variables in the cost of living, even within communities. And factors like gentrification are squeezing many people in formerly low-cost areas. For example, I live in a relatively rural area with moderate-to-low wages and where you might say living costs are low....... However, housing and some other basic costs are skewed by the presence of affluent city dwellers who pay top dollar for weekend homes and vacation rentals. Affordable where they live but not where I live. So wages here have to pick up to keep pace with real costs.

2) Business, including small ones, did fine in the past when the minimum wage was higher in terms of real money. But over the last 30 years, the idea that labor is the most expendable cost has taken over. A business should grow as it can afford to, including having a staff it can afford. And, as noted above, it is not a cost that is going to hit them overnight.

3) The minimum wage was not allowed to keep pace with living costs. At some point it has to catch up again. ASnd if you think $7 an hiour is a fair wage....well I'll just have to agree to disagree.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #44)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:14 PM

60. No, the author is NOT a CATO libertarian

 

He worked there as a staff writer early in his career. He is a senior editor at Vox, and he has a blog that makes it perfectly clear he is not a libertarian. Where do you guys come up with this stuff?

http://timothyblee.com/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #60)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:18 PM

64. Incorrect, he was first a staff writer at Cato, then later an adjunct scholar at Cato.

 

I challenge you to quote him making himself clear he is not a libertarian. Because he is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #64)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:26 PM

69. He worked for Ezra Klien and now with Yglesias

 

His blog roll includes many liberals. You're looking for a reason to discount the factual material in the article, and smearing him (even though you have no idea who he is) in order to do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #69)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 09:31 AM

168. Obviously I know who he is, you left his by line out of your OP, I named him and offered his CV to

 

DU. Pat Buchanan used to work for the Rachel Maddow Show, regular guest 'my Uncle Pat' she called him. Was that because Pat is also a liberal? No, it is because opinion outlets employ pundits of varied opinion. As you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #60)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:26 PM

70. Probably because He's a Cato Institute contributor?

 

http://www.cato-unbound.org/contributors/timothy-b-lee

He also wrote for Forbes until he got a job at WaPo. And I dunno what you're deciding "he's not a libertarian" on - I suspect you don't know what the fuck a libertarian is - but his blog is full of anti-reg, anti-tax, pro-business, pro-bitcoin decentralizing stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #70)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:29 PM

109. I seem to remember that was fine when it was Glenn Greenwald

 

But I suspect Wonkblog and Vox would be shocked to discover they hired a right wing nut. Oh wait, he's not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #109)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:30 PM

110. Glenn Greenwald wasn't trying to sell policy to shortchange workers

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #110)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:47 PM

123. So CATO is okay if the post comes from the Bernie peeps?

 

Please clarify. Thanks.

I found one that got 223 recs. CATO okay or not okay?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #123)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:03 AM

131. It's pretty simple

 

Greenwald was reporting on surveillance. Lee is advocating specific economic policy that shortchanges workers for their labor.

These are different subjects, with different impacts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #131)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:07 AM

135. So CATO is okay if you agree with it?

 

CATO bad if you disagree. Got it. LOL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #135)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:15 AM

136. You were just arguing that Lee was not affiliated with CATO

 

Now you're trying to red herring your way out of that. Greenwald is not relevant to this discussion. Nor, to my knowledge, has Greenwald been posted here advocating a policy that would short american workers of their living wages.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #136)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:44 AM

147. He's not, but I'm just trying to figure out your reasoning

 

Why did Bernie supporters give an OP praising CATO writer Glenn Greenwald 223 recs, but now all of the sudden think CATO means the author of this article is bad.

Please explain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #147)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:50 AM

151. I've explained thorough. I'm not sure what your difficulty is

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #151)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:54 AM

152. Your explanation makes no sense

 

... because you contradict yourself. Read it again and I'm sure you'll agree. You simply have to decide if the fact that someone wrote for CATO in the past disqualifies them or not. And I'm thinking not since 223 of you rec'ed a thread praising former CATO writer Glenn Greenwald.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #152)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:05 AM

154. Which thread was it, first of all? Let's see it, por favor

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #154)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:10 AM

155. It's linked here

 

Read this thread. You'll find it. Or just search DU. Bernie peeps seem to adore former CATO writer Glenn Greenwald.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #155)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:26 AM

156. I don't feel like scrolling through this whole thread to do your work for you.

 

You want to present a claim to me, and then back out. So far you're at least consistent in that sort of behavior.

The problem is that you are bringing a Cato contributor - and a Forbes contributor, and a WaPo contributor - here to espouse neoliberal economic ideology. This is what Cato revolves around, total deregulation, rule by "free Market magic." Whatever thread you're going on about with Glenn Greenwald pretty certainly revolves around warrant-less government surveillance.

Do you understand that there is a difference between bringing an advocate of neoliberal economics to DU to advocate neoliberal economics, and bringing a different advocate of neoliberal economics to DU to advocate an end to warrant-less government surveillance of its citizens?

That is, Lee's goofy-right economics and association with a goofy-right economic "think tank" are relevant to your use of him to advocate goofy-right economics. Greenwald's goofy-right economics do not have a bearing on his opposition to government surveillance.

Now, if I'm wrong and that thread you won't show me is 233 recs for right-wing economics, again by all means, show me. I will be duly puzzled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #156)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:31 AM

157. He's a senior editor at Vox - liberal blog

 

And in the meantime you're pretending that it matters to you if a guy used to write for CATO on privacy issues, EVEN THOUGH you guys love to post and rec stuff from former CATO writer Glenn Greenwald as long as it's anti Hillary.

Stop deflecting. It's pretty simple hypocrisy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #157)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 03:35 AM

158. Pardon me, but...

 

You brought an advocate of right-wing economics here to advocate for right-wing economics. His credentials are well-established in this arena - CATO, Forbes, WaPo, even his blog is all about deregulating markets, removing currency from government control, and letting the "free market' reign supreme. When called on this, your response is to start complaining about Glenn Greenwald getting recs for talking about freedom of the press. You can't address the issues brought up in your OP - and when you try you start saying shit like how capital is superior to labor.

That's the deflection. And it's yours.

Now what i think the problem is, is that you're just not very informed about what you're trying to talk about. You don't seem to have much awareness of economics, or the subjects and terms brought up by your own thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #27)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:01 PM

47. That some think business owners are entitled to cheap labor is quite laughable...

 

business owners are entitled to NOTHING as they couldn't exist without labor. On the other hand...labor is entitled to all it creates... and labor is prior to and independent of capital...and workers produce all wealth yet that wealth is not realized by all workers...and the majority of the working class is getting shafted by a capitalist system that promotes savage inequalities for the profits of a minority ruling class of capitalist parasites and business owners. Hope that helps.

The screeds you are presenting on this issue are reactionary drivel in defense of the ruling class and capital over labor. No matter how you couch the talking points to sound otherwise that is a fact. This garbage is straight up ruling class and right-wing garbage regardless of what labels the people spewing them are wearing. Period and end of story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AOR (Reply #47)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:13 PM

59. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AOR (Reply #47)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:16 PM

63. And labor couldn't exist without capital investment

 

So what is your point? What does that have to do with whether $12 or $15 is a more achievable and beneficial minimum wage that will not disrupt jobs and hiring?

What makes that discussion a "screed"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #63)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:57 PM

89. Labor existed long before "capital investment"...

 

or else you wouldn't exist. The idea that humans didn't survive on their labor alone - in communal social relations - before the introduction of commodity production is amusing. Pure stupidity and superficial nonsense without a shred of historical awareness on human civilization. I usually have this argument with right-wing libertarians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AOR (Reply #89)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:10 PM

98. Link?

 

I am not sure where you are getting that, but it is just not true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #98)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:28 PM

107. At some point far enough back in history there was no capital but there has always been labor

As long as humans have been around there has been labor, knapping flint for arrowheads, hand axes and spear heads is labor.

That's where capital comes from in the first place, accumulated fruits of labor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #107)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:31 PM

113. Again, wrong

 

Try again. No business was ever started without capital of some sort. And it's not difficult to figure that out. Workers don't work for free. Never have, never will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #113)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:35 PM

115. Where did the capital come from?

It didn't just magically appear from thin air...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #115)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:49 PM

124. It's starts from the business owner

 

Even a business built in the garage. It starts with the owner working for free, selling the goods, and then using that money to hire workers.

Every business starts with investor capital. Every single time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #124)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:04 AM

132. Alley Oop finds a nice piece of flint on the ground and knaps a Clovis point from it

The act of making the Clovis point is labor, once Alley has the Clovis point it then becomes capital which can be traded for salt for seasoning or a warm bearskin for his sleeping cave or a pretty piece of turquoise for his girlfriend Oola.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #132)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:07 AM

134. But no workers gets paid until Alley makes a bunch himself and sells them

 

.... so he can hire a worker to make more.

Got it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #98)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:53 AM

138. You're deeply embarrassing yourself...

 

you should stop while you're behind and cut your losses. Neither money as an object nor "capital" as the word is used under capitalist social relations is needed for a human being or a society to survive. Surely you're not suggesting that hunter-gatherer societies - in which both hunting and gathering are labor - didn't exist are you ? Hence, labor can exist independent of capital is a factual and true statement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AOR (Reply #138)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:57 AM

139. Again you're wrong

 

The point is there is no business without capital, and workers don't work for free. Now you can all go join communes and create job lists for each other, but that's not what we're talking about here.

We're talking about WAGES and there isn't any money for wages without capital investment. This is not a complicated subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #139)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:13 AM

141. LOL...you made the statement that labor can't exist without "capital investment"...

 

you've been proven to be emphatically wrong. Labor is indeed prior to and independent of capital. Human survival derives from human labor and has always been thus. Without human labor. No human survival. That the labor of humans is being converted to capital - for the profits of owners - over that of survival is an insidious crime against the human condition. As I told another using your memes...not only are you batting in the wrong ballpark... you're standing at home plate with a fly swatter thinking you hit a home run. Your posts are comedy gold.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AOR (Reply #141)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:14 AM

143. No, I responded to a statement that labor wages come first

 

They don't. Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #143)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:34 PM

180. Lincoln would disagree with your ridiculous assertion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Oilwellian (Reply #180)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:45 PM

183. Lincoln didn't say that

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #63)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:19 AM

137. Where do you learn your economics?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:23 PM

66. don't worry. she'll get another time out soon

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:13 PM

4. Yes, a lot times it goes way beyond feel good sound bytes.. and this isn't a goppoint of view.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #4)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:22 PM

6. Okay...Some people think it feels good to have a roof over their heads and 3 squares a day

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #4)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:54 PM

17. It's always a good thing to know who stands with capital over labor and business as usual...

 

notwithstanding the reality of feel good sound bytes being the only thing offered by capitalist reformers of course. Some present their reactionary thinking in crystal clarity despite claims of being for "justice and equality." Own it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #4)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:34 PM

22. Please note who the author of the piece was

 

CATO right wing libertarian, hates all guverment regulation and minimum wage in general.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #4)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:54 PM

39. Never seen a GOPer in favor of raising min wage to $12

 

Have you? LOL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #39)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:00 PM

45. Exaclty.. just more misinformation to prop up BS and attempt to tear down Hill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #45)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:14 PM

100. Some people care about more than the Battle of the Candidates

 

All this nonsense is ultimately about principles, not who is going to be the Prom King Or Prom Queen

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #4)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:12 PM

58. No, you're right - Neoliberalism is a bipartisan philosophy

 

It's still a shitty philosophy advocated by shitheads.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:26 PM

9. KICK! Thank you, Maggie!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 08:35 PM

15. If the minimum wage kept

pace it would be around 21 bucks an hour. But why should people be able to survive????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UglyGreed (Reply #15)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:56 PM

41. Lucky for you Dems support increasing it

 

But what is your plan to get it to $15?

$12 is what Dems support.

http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UglyGreed (Reply #15)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:30 PM

111. Yes

Since it can't be phased in immediately, I would propose $20/hr as the minimum wage goal. That may sound ridiculous to some, but fighting over $12 or $15 isn't enough to make up for the last 25 years with what the robber barons have done to the working class.

In order to keep parity with people making above minimum now, everyone else should have a similar % increase.

My major fear is that since I work for a non union auto supplier now paying $12-$15/hr, that going to a comparable % increased wage of around $25-30/hr could cause the big 3 automakers to buy parts from a Chinese or Mexico based supplier instead of the one in Michigan I work for. It can be hard work, so in order to get people to work here, they would have to pay more than a fast food place or gas station paying minimum.

I'm too old to find new employment at the age of 58. Hoping that all the profits from people being able to afford new cars would prevent that from occurring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:09 PM

18. What a stark admission of conservatism this is. The author of the Vox piece is a Cato Institute guy

 

Cato being the Koch Brother's libertarian think tank. Timothy B Lee.....wow. Good for you Mags!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #18)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:33 PM

21. Oh good catch.

 

It sounded fishy to me....Checking who the authors are is always helpful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #18)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:46 PM

26. And quoting Reihan Morshed Salam, the editor of the National Review.

 

The article is a stinking shit pile of rightwing nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #18)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:53 PM

36. So then why is the anti-Hillary Glenn Greenwald stuff okay?

 

I see Bernie folks post stuff all the time from him. This guy who worked as a staff writer there is no different, right?

Here is his bio: He's a senior editor at Vox.

http://timothyblee.com/about-me/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #36)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:01 PM

46. When I post some of his stuff you can come whine to me then, I don't so I'm pointing out that your

 

OP expresses a nasty right wing point of view directly out of the Koch Brothers crock pot. And you are serving it up hot.
Also, I'm the one who introduced the man's name and bio into this thread, you left those bits out of your OP.
Koch Brothers Express. Good for you Mags. Be super ultra proud!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:23 PM

20. GOP libertarian talking points!!!!

Are you a Koch brothers operative???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UglyGreed (Reply #20)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:39 PM

24. It's nuts, isn't it?

 

The only reason we see this crap is because there is a certain candidate and republicans who want poor people to stay poor.

I will be so glad when a certain candidate is forever retired so we don't have to see this crap anymore. I can't wait.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #24)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:51 PM

33. I was being sarcastic

and would never label someone by an article they post. Today I made a mistake of posting a hotair article not knowing it was a right wing site but I found the exact same info by Washington Post's Philip Bump and added to my thread. I post stuff about Hillary that I know is true and to tell you the truth it is hard to find anything from a liberal web site and I do make mistakes.

BTW I agree that some people are just happy with their lives and do not care about others that struggle. If you don't feel the pain it's easy to not give a crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UglyGreed (Reply #33)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:08 PM

53. I know you were

 

Look, don't ever apologize for doing the right thing and standing against the tide of awful bullshit we are being presented. The Truth is the Truth no matter from where it comes. You just keep at it and let the complainers whither away, as they will. Just not soon enough, eh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #53)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:15 PM

62. Thanks

I speak my mind and it does not make me too many friends at times. Sometimes I overreact or jump to conclusions but I'll never pretend to support something to fit in or because others want me to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UglyGreed (Reply #20)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:41 PM

25. FYI

 


On Mon Nov 16, 2015, 06:27 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

GOP libertarian talking points!!!!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=819166

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Incredibly rude and nasty personal attacks add nothing to the discussion except divisive flamebait.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Nov 16, 2015, 06:38 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: IMO personal and over the line.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Reihan Morshed Salam is a conservative American political commentator, columnist, and author. He is the executive editor of "National Review" and a columnist for Slate, as well as a contributing editor.
The article cited is regurgitating right wing talking points about 15, Right wing nonsense is unacceptable here and those posting it should be called out for doing so.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

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


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #25)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:48 PM

29. It's okay to call a lifetime Democrat a republican, or GOPer or whatever

 

.... if you're a Bernie supporter. Everyone knows that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #29)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:50 PM

32. when you post right wing talking points you takes your chances.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #32)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:54 PM

40. Ayup!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #32)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:01 PM

48. I saw a hotair post today by a Bernie supporter

 

Now if I had called that person a right winger I would have gotten a hide in a heartbeat, and you know it.

So far today I have been called the following by Bernie supporters:

- a liar
- a conspiracy theorist
- a Koch brother loving GOP libertarian
- a right winger

And that is just in a few hours. Seems everyone of the was alerted on and everyone left to stand. Now why do you suppose that's okay? Just curious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #48)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:12 PM

57. Well your OP touts a Koch brother loving GOP libertarian straight out of the Cato playpen, so

 

what do you expect people to think? You didn't just post the piece, you endorsed and praised it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #57)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:28 PM

72. Vox is a liberal site

 

And Wonkblog is a liberal blog. He's a senior editor at Vox, and prior to that worked for WaPo writing for the Wonkblog. You have no idea who the guy is, just admit it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #72)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:47 PM

85. I'm the person who pointed out his roots and resume, linked to his bio, and first named him in

 

this thread, so I know who he is. You left his name off the OP, which indicates that you also knew he is fresh from the Koch Bros estuary. Transparent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #85)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:18 PM

103. Again, wrong

 

He's fresh from Ezra Klein's Wonkblog, and Vox is a liberal site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #48)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:02 PM

94. It's a conspiracy to silence good Clinton supporters

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #25)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:49 PM

30. Pathetic

They can't even handle the truth .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #25)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:59 PM

43. They are out to get me

at least I won this round.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #25)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:05 PM

50. Go look at my other thread

the personal attacks and slander, I kept my cool for days and finally my cork blew yet I still wasn't as rude as some towards me. And now look at them just rubbing it in. Nice liberal values indeed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=817842

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UglyGreed (Reply #20)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:58 PM

42. So then we can discount ANYTHING Glenn Greenwald says....

 

When he's lying his ass off about Hillary - right? And you guys will cross your hearts and promise not to post that drivel any longer - right?

Let me know. I will bookmark your response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #42)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:09 PM

54. If Glenn Greenwald is writing rightwing economics articles go ahead and call it out

 

Face it, if you are posting an article critical of the minimum wage written by a "fellow" of the CATO Institute, then you got to expect a reaction.

If you support a libertarian viewpoint on economics, hey that's your right. But don't get all shocked and pissed off when people who are liberals/progressives don't agree with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:47 PM

28. But Alan Krueger, the co-author of that famous fast food employment study and a former adviser to

the Obama administration, isn't so sure. He supports Hillary Clinton's plan to raise the minimum wage to $12 per hour."

snip//

"This is particularly important because O'Malley and Sanders are proposing a national $15-per-hour minimum wage. Setting a $15 minimum wage in San Francisco or New York is a different proposition than doing the same thing in Arkansas or West Virginia."


Feel good shyte.. no big picture.

snips from your link, Maggie.. thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:49 PM

31. HaHa.. some anonymous poster on here asks if you're a "koch bro operative"!!!!!!1111111 and it

stands 5-2.

This is the kind of crap we have to deal with day in and day out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #31)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:53 PM

37. The op is a libertarian hit piece on a Democratic candidate.

And you're complaining about the DUers who wondered why it was posted here?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #37)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:38 PM

79. Unbelievable ...

The hits just keep coming, and they get more and more apoplectic each time..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #79)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:46 PM

84. This thread is full of win!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #84)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:51 PM

86. !!!

They made it SO!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #84)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:19 PM

104. Seems odd you're ignoring the facts in the article

 

Don't you think? You have good company though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #31)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:06 PM

51. That's because the editorial the OP cites is by a Koch trained Cato Institute flack.

 

It is what it is, if you are going to cite Koch Bros flacks and tout their points of view expect Democrats to point that out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:52 PM

34. You know, if we had a single payer healthcare system that was not tied to employment,

most employers would be able to raise minimum to $15.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 09:54 PM

38. Republicanspeak

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:01 PM

49. Earlier you claimed he wanted to "immediately jump" to $15/hr now you're posting libertarian screeds

MaggieD

10. This supports phasing in a $15 min wage

What does that have to do with Bernie's proposal to immediately jump to that?

Hillary's proposal to raise it to $12 and index it to COL makes perfect sense. Of course states with a higher COL will raise it above that as they always do.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251816581#post10


Well at least now it's obvious you have no idea what you're talking about, you're just looking for shit to throw at the wall.

Unfortunately you got some of it on yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:11 PM

56. It becomes clearer: why the 'H' arrow points to the right. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:25 PM

68. Hot Links to Cato Institute podcasts by the author for you Mags, since you are such a fan....

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #68)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:27 PM

71. LMAO!

He used to write for Forbes too, maybe we should get Maggie a subscription.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #71)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:33 PM

75. She touts right wing anti minimum wage attacks on a Democratic candidate then gets cheesed off

 

when a room full of Democrats don't lap it up like pablum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #75)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:36 PM

76. It's a conspiracy!

Everyone knows that she's only being targeted because she supports Hillary!

Big Alert™ is run by Bernie's minions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #75)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:37 PM

78. Tell me which republican supports a $12 min wage

 

Shall I wait?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #78)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:58 PM

90. Show me where in that editorial the author says HE supports a $12 minimum. He does not.

 

He does say Hillary supports $12 an hour, but that's not the same thing. Also, I never called him a Republican. Called him a libertarian and that's also not the same thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #90)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:27 PM

106. The article is not an editorial

 

It's called journalism, and it is fact based. Maybe you missed this part:

"Even left-leaning economists are worried about a $15 minimum wage

There's a lively debate among economists about whether higher minimum wages cause unemployment. Conservatives argue that forcing employers to pay more will force them to reduce the number of workers they hire. For two decades, liberals have been citing a famous study by David Card and Alan Krueger showing that a 1992 increase in New Jersey's minimum wage didn't cost jobs in the fast food industry — a result that ran contrary to conservative orthodoxy."

Not a right wing article.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #106)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 09:39 AM

169. It is punditry, an editorial with a strong point of view against living wages.

 

And as I said, you could not show the author 'making it very clear' he is not a libertarian nor could you show us where the author endorses $12 because he does neither thing in his editorial, his commentary, is opinion piece.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #78)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:01 PM

93. Is that the New Normal template? Slightly better than Republicans?

 

And by the way, it is hardly an EXTREME position.

"Sixty-three percent of Americans support a minimum wage increase to $15 by 2020, and 75 percent of Americans support raising the federal minimum wage to at least $12.50. "
https://ourfuture.org/20150724/republican-candidates-on-raising-the-minimum-wage

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #75)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:39 PM

81. Oh noes...

11!!!1!!!!1!! and at..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #68)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:36 PM

77. There are two podcasts - neither of them seem libertarian

 

Which one of the two do you think does?

Also, since when are Ezra Klein and Matthew Yglesias libertarians? Please do elaborate on your theory.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/05/ezra-klein-vox-washington-post_n_4903930.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #77)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:41 PM

82. Ezra and Matthew did not write this, Mags. Timothy Lee of Cato Institute wrote this.

 

And obviously you had no time to listen to the podcasts by Lee at Cato so you have no basis of opinion on that, really. Your post here, it is devoid of any actual point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #82)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:56 PM

128. Glenn Greenwald worked for CATO

 

A Bernie supporter posted an OP praising him. It got 223 recs from Bernie supporters.

So, is CATO okay if you're a Bernie supporter? Sincere question. Please let me know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #128)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:44 AM

148. No he didn't

I am not now, nor have I ever been, employed by the Cato Institute. Nor have I ever been affiliated with the Cato Institute in any way. The McCarthyite tone of the denials is appropriate given the McCarthyite nature of the lie.

In seven-plus years of political writing, I have written a grand total of twice for Cato: the first was a 2009 report on the success of drug decriminalization in Portugal, and the second was a 2010 online debate in which I argued against former Bush officials about the evils of the surveillance state.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/1/30/1182442/-Glenn-Greenwald-Responds-to-Widespread-Lies-About-Him-on-Cato-Iraq-War-and-more

There are a series of common lies frequently told about me which I'm addressing here. During the Bush years, when I was criticizing George Bush and the GOP in my daily writing and books, there was a set of lies about me personally that came from the hardest-core Bush followers that I finally addressed. The new set comes largely from the hardest-core Obama followers.

I've ignored these for awhile, mostly because they have never appeared in any consequential venue, but rather are circulated only by anonymous commenters or obscure, hackish blogs. That is still the case, but they've become sufficiently circulated that it's now worthwhile to address and debunk them. Anyone wishing to do so can judge the facts for themselves.


I guess we can add hard core Hillary supporters to the list of those spreading these lies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mnpaul (Reply #148)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:49 AM

150. So you admit he wrote for CATO - right?

 

So this guy wrote for CATO and that means everything he says is shit according to some Bernie peeps, yet if it's another former CATO writer smearing Hillary they give that 223 recs, and writing for CATO is no problem.

So which is it? Vox is a liberal blog. The guy is a senior editor for Vox. So the CATO argument is complete bullshit. Right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #150)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:03 AM

153. He wrote two articles

He was never employed by them. It is just another ridiculous claim you made in this thread. Ron Wyden did the same on similar issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:29 PM

73. why are opinions from far right wing propaganda organs allowed at du?

 

I understand why hillarians would read them and lap them up, but don't the tos frown upon this? If I were to post something from Alex Jones about how Hillary killed Vince foster, would that be OK?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #73)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:33 PM

74. Vox is not a right wing propaganda organ

 

But I did see a Bernie supporter post something from HotAir.com today. I've also seen a bunch of shit from Glenn Greenwald smearing Hillary.

So good question. Let me know if anyone explains why they do that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #74)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:38 PM

80. Vox is not the author of the article, Timothy Lee is and he's the libertarian from Cato....

 

That's who you resonate with, that's fine, embrace it and be proud!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #80)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:54 PM

127. Glenn Greenwald worked for CATO

 

And a Bernie supporters posted an OP praising him that got 223 recs from Bernie supporters.

So, is CATO bad or good?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #127)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 09:50 AM

170. Why do you think Greenwald is some free pass for you? I'm not Greenwald, nor do I cite him.

 

You also don't have your facts about Greenwald in order, Lee was a staff writer and later adjunct scholar at Cato. Geenwald's association with them is very different from that. Facts matter to me.

And frankly, your actions are your own, what others do is what others do. So why are you doing what you are doing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #73)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:14 PM

99. Either because people don't alert on them,

or because people alert on them but juries vote to leave. Presumably you alerted?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:53 PM

87. Are you fucking kidding me with this shit?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hiraeth (Reply #87)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:17 PM

102. Would you like to make an actual argument

 

... against the facts in the article?

Or are you just here to kick my thread?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 10:59 PM

91. MaggieD apparently didn't do her homework

 

on Timothy Lee, CATO asskisser.

Oh, and there's this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Weidman (Reply #91)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:24 PM

105. Vox is a liberal site

 

1. His previous work was with Ezra Klein at the Wonkblog.

2. Bernie says "top" economist support him? LOL! What makes them "top"?? 600 signed the $10.10 min wage proposal, so I guess 400 don't agree with Bernie's press release.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #105)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:35 PM

116. Author is more important than some site.

 

The author is already a known CATO fellow, and you fail very mightily right here. Stop. Just stop. Do yourself a favor and lurk. You mock us Bernie supporters about H.A. Goodman. Let us mock you with this cretin you tout.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Weidman (Reply #116)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:46 PM

122. So then why did a post praising Glenn Greenwald

 

Get 223 recs by Bernie supporters? He worked for CATO too.

Can you explain that? If ever having worked as a writer for CATO is toxic why 223 recs by Bernie supporters praising Glenn Greenwald?

Please explain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #122)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 09:27 AM

167. What's with this theory among Clinton supporters that their actions are mitigated by the actions

 

of others? 'But Mommy, Johnny did it too, he did it first all the kids are doing it!' All day yesterday her very ardent boosters posted bogus crap and when called on it they said 'But Johnny did it first Mommy'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:00 PM

92. Another virtual self-sharting with this OP

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:16 PM

101. Let me summarize this thread

 

... from the point of the Bernie supporters:

Bernie is right because Vox is no longer a liberal website. The writer is a right wing libertarian even though he works for Ezra Klein and Matthew Yglesias. Also, never mind his blog and blog roll. And if actual right wing libertarian Greenwald, or that wing nut dope over at HotAir say something nasty about Hillary the only question is how often should we post it.

Plus, economists don't know shit, and we don't need no data, dammit!

Also, Puerto Rico does not exist, so this data about their minimum wage impact is just not true.

Did I cover everything?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #101)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:30 PM

112. No you missed the forest for the trees

 

You also missed calling all Bernie Supporters extremists because they don't agree with an anti-minimum wage article written by a libertarian.

Whether Vox is liberal, conservative or a mixed journal of opinion doesn't matter. The specific article and author does.

You tell people they have no clue because they point out that the cost of living is affected by many factors.

You ignore the point that wages are falling behind and we have to do more than tread water to restore an economy that lifts all boats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #112)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:40 PM

119. I would venture to bet....

 

That not a single Bernie supporter responding to this thread has every read ANYTHING by this guy. Wonkblog is NOT a right wing blog. Vox is not a right wing blog. THIS is not an editorial. This article cites a left leaning economist. This article cites ACTUAL DATA from a huge minimum wage in a very low cost economy that is a US territory.

I am not missing anything. I am watching people doing everything but discussing the actual issue between a $12 min wage and a $15 dollar minimum wage. What this article is very gently saying is you cannot double the minimum wage all over the US and not expect some businesses to opt for automation over people. And that is true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #119)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:50 PM

125. Businesses are going to do that anyway

 

The minimum wage could be $3 an hour and if the chance to eliminate labor costs they will go for it. That's a bigger issue. We may be on the road to a society where we can make anything, but there will be no one available to buy it because they don't have jobs.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #125)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:57 PM

129. That has nothing to do with $12 versus $15

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #129)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:01 AM

130. You mentioned it.

 

That one is kind of a Pandora's box.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #101)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:33 PM

114. Have you ever been to Puerto Rico?

The cost of living there is no lower than on the mainland, quite a lot of things are more expensive in fact since everything has to be shipped to the island.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to MaggieD (Reply #101)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:38 PM

117. Timothy Lee's creds included work for CATO.

 

That is a Koch-funded right-wing fruitcake think tank.

You really want to continue to tout this author?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Weidman (Reply #117)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:44 PM

121. So what?

 

It's not an editorial. It is fact based and cites a left leaning economist.

Here is a link to a post by a Bernie supporter that got 223 recs. It's praising Glenn Greenwald. Also a guy that worked for CATO.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026180533

What changed? Do tell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #121)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 10:11 AM

172. It is an editorial. What makes you think it isn't? It's punditry, commentary.

 

If you can't tell the difference I have to say no wonder.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:41 PM

120. $12.00 makes plenty sense, but that's not a big enough hook

in the "pie in the sky" wholesale market.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #120)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 12:05 AM

133. Prescisely.. start out with $12.00 instead of slapping $15 Nationally on every state like they

would get that passed anyway.

But, bern has a plan.. Revolution! Stump Speech!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #133)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 06:30 AM

162. Bernie's plan phases in the $15 wage over a period of years.

Do any of you Hillary supporters actually do research before repeating right wing talking points on du?

Just yesterday the op claimed that Bernie wanted to "immediately jump" to $15/hour.

Some advice: stop reading CATO institute libertarian drivel and listen to liberal voices.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #133)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:05 PM

175. What part of $15 in several years don't you understand?

 

It would be phased in, not "slapped on" --- and by then $15 will probably be the equivalent of today's $12, or perhaps less. Four years ago I could buy a quart of milk for $1.50 today that same milk costs about $2.50.

I suspect that if Clinton had proposed $15, the idea would probably make a lot more sense to some people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:09 AM

140. 15$ an hour is a poverty wage.

If you have any family or responsibilities at all. That's only 28,000$ a year. A very low wage indeed for a guy with family like me. All I hear from the champagne capitalists are jingoistic phrases and catchwords like: "These jobs are for kids, they live with their parents." Or, "You are trying to ruin my business."

Most of these politicians haven't done an honest day's work in decades. We do need a revolution. The minimum wage should be 35$ an hour.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nilesobek (Reply #140)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:13 AM

142. A minimum wage job is not a career aspiration

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #142)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:13 PM

177. Not everyone is cut out to be a rising professional. And the idea is to raise overall wages

 

First of all, people may be stuck in those jobs for various reasons -- location, child-raising obligations, lack of ability, etc.

And with the wonderful trade policies we have adopted, many of the lower-mid level jobs or above no longer exist. Or they have been downgraded to contractor status or just stifled by employers.

And minimum wage is the "floor" that, when raised also tends to give a boost top other wages. I know you will mention the impact on businesses. But the point is that businesses have come to exploit labor, in part to accomodate unavoidable fixed costs, such as rent, utilities, etc. If we value labor, and the idea of a healthy working and middle class, we have to stop marginalizing workers.

And Sanders has proposed phasing in the increase, not suddenly imposing it out of the blue. In a few years $15 will be the equivalent of $12 today, or perhaps less. About four years ago I could buy a carton of milk for $1.50. Today it costs about $2.50. Do the math.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nilesobek (Reply #140)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 08:02 AM

163. Ripple effect would be devistating

Everyone making higher than the minimum wage now would also get a proportional increase.

I work for an auto parts supplier that currently pays $12-15 per hour. it can be hard work that requires some skill and knowledge. Factory work is not for everyone.

If the minimum wage was $35 as you recommend, they would probably have to pay $45-50 per hour. If you could get $35 working at the nearby Wal mart, no one would work here for the same wage. The problem is that our customers (Ford, GM, Chrysler, Toyota) would source these parts from China or Mexico instead, causing our plant in a small rural town to be closed.

I'm probably too old to start over in another career at 58 yrs old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 05:48 AM

161. Bernie's plans sound good to those under 30 that don't know political realities

Bernie also wants to repeal Obamacare. WTF?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JTShroyer (Reply #161)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 08:39 AM

165. Sanders would like to replace the ACA with medicare for everyone.

 

That's what the fuck that is about. End employer based health insurance. Everyone is covered from birth to death. A public not for profit universal health care insurance system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #165)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:36 PM

181. We would still have to pay into a fund that

pays for the medical care. And without employer contributions the whole cost is borne by us. Also Medicare does not cover the total cost so part would be paid by the patient.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #181)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:39 PM

182. It would be tied to income like SS and taxes

 

Not subject to arbitrary gouging by privater insurers. Big difference

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JTShroyer (Reply #161)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:18 PM

178. Political Reality? That dog don't hunt.

 

How about this political reality?

Surveys show that a large majority of the population favors a minimum wage of $15. I had one yesterday at about 63% but I lost the link.

And many states that vote Red otherwise have assed significant minimum wage hikes.

Sorry but in terms of political "reality" you're the one who is unrealistic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 09:15 AM

166. perhaps $250 resorts in Puerto Rico can raise prices a little more to cover a living wage

If $10 pina colada and $ 9.00 burger isn't enough "profit" to pay room cleaners a living wage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #166)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 09:55 AM

171. That's what this is about, businesses that extract excess profits from low wage labor

 

A business person who can't pay living wages is basically calling for indenture for the sake of their own affluence. 'I have the right to their bodies!!!!'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #171)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 10:17 AM

173. Our Gov. should stop giving Corps the slave wage workers (for profit prison workers & foreign visa

worker crews), Then many more job seekers could have those millions of 'jobs'.

Those are jobs that can't be exported because they exist on and for USA infrastructure.

For example forestry, park services, agriculture, wildfire fighters, domestic oil production, domestic gas production, food industry, shipping companies, hotel/resort industry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:12 PM

176. Here comes the centrist

So is this the new talking point

$15 is too much ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Original post)

Tue Nov 17, 2015, 01:52 PM

184. You want an indexed minimum wage?

So if Bernie had said an "average" minimum wage of 15 after indexing for cost of living you'd have been OK. And could we index Indians in Pine Ridge down to $4.00 an hour since poverty is so rampant there and cost of living is so much cheaper, and they'd be grateful for any work.

Would that be the adult thing to do?

There's something morally wrong to me that some might argue about equal pay for equal work, and then add an "except" if you live here, or you live there.

If a fast food worker in New York makes this much and a fast food worker in Pine Ridge makes this much, they do the same work, but get paid based upon the poverty in their region.

If the minimum wage had been indexed to inflation from 1968 to 2014 it would be 10.90. Bernie's argument is we want it to be more than that because that money is pumped directly back into the economy rather than saved, hence acting as an economic stimulus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread