[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by TXSTYLE

THIS.

I honestly have to question the "integrity and character" of ANY person who does not wish to see his fellow man or woman live as comfortable a life as possible through work and effort.

These dudes are happy they are subsidizing Wal Mart's profits by allowing people to collect benefits from tax payers, just because pay hasn't kept with inflation.

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

What? No.

You think these businesses are keeping people employed by the goodness of their hearts?

I have to wonder why so many people are just willfully ignorant. I don't want a 15/hr minimum wage, nor do I think the pressure it would put on small businesses would be fair - but the minimum wage NEEDS to go up. There is no reason someone who is WORKING for a living should be living in poverty.

Willfully ignorant? Hardly.

At $7.25/hr it may not be worth it to invest in automation (or hiring a team of consultants to figure out how to make the workflow more efficient so you can accomplish just as much with less people without automation), you almost double it to $15/hr? Then suddenly it may be worth looking into, but it depends on a lot of factors, it's a gradual increase through 2020 but that's still just 5 years away. If you honestly think that an almost 100% increase in wages for low skill labor in the next 5 years in LA won't cause some businesses to invest in ways to figure out how to do more with less, then you're kidding yourself.

And there's plenty of reasons someone who is working for a living should be living in poverty, sorry. A few reasons off the top of my head, not working enough, living beyond their means, having kids without the necessary cash flow to adequately support them, drug problems, list can go on.

I think it's woefully ignorant to think that even at $15/hr ($31,200/year gross), that single working moms will magically be lifted from poverty. They'll still be poor. The math on that is pretty easy to ascertain.

Nice try though with the feel good story about working and thinking that simply raising the minimum wage will magically solve the problem.

[TXSTYLE]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

These dudes are happy they are subsidizing Wal Mart's profits by allowing people to collect benefits from tax payers, just because pay hasn't kept with inflation.

So it would seem...

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by TXSTYLE

So it would seem...

Not at all, but the idea that raising minimum wage would solve it is foolish. It helps a little, but it isn't the panacea people who don't know any better make it out to be.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by fecurtis

Willfully ignorant? Hardly.

At $7.25/hr it may not be worth it to invest in automation (or hiring a team of consultants to figure out how to make the workflow more efficient so you can accomplish just as much with less people without automation), you almost double it to $15/hr? Then suddenly it may be worth looking into, but it depends on a lot of factors, it's a gradual increase through 2020 but that's still just 5 years away.

And there's plenty of reasons someone who is working for a living should be living in poverty, sorry. A few reasons off the top of my head, not working enough, living beyond their means, having kids without the necessary cash flow to adequately support them, drug problems, list can go on.

Yes, it's willful ignorance on your part because you are speaking purely on speculation with next to zero real world examples.

What, the rest of the developed working world knows something we don't - economics doesn't work in America the same way it does in Canada?

Honestly, if it's not worth it at $7:50, plus the cost to train (because there is a HIGH turnover in those positions) it's not going to be worth it for $10:10/hr or $12/hr. If those jobs disappear and are automated, it was inevitable, but that doesn't mean the wage floor shouldn't be raised to keep people out of "working poverty"

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by fecurtis

Not at all, but the idea that raising minimum wage would solve it is foolish. It helps a little, but it isn't the panacea people who don't know any better make it out to be.

You're right it's not, but I think the minimum wage being raised to 10/hr PLUS an EIC would a a VERY good start.

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

Yes, it's willful ignorance on your part because you are speaking purely on speculation with next to zero real world examples.

What, the rest of the developed working world knows something we don't - economics doesn't work in America the same way it does in Canada?

Honestly, if it's not worth it at $7:50, plus the cost to train (because there is a HIGH turnover in those positions) it's not going to be worth it for $10:10/hr or $12/hr. If those jobs disappear and are automated, it was inevitable, but that doesn't mean the wage floor shouldn't be raised to keep people out of "working poverty"

Lol did I say it shouldn't be raised? Nice false dichotomy. I'm just saying it's not gonna help much (although $15/hr in 5 years seems a bit ambitious).

Expanding the EIC program is the most economically efficient way to target the problem, yet no one talks about it.

EDIT: I see you just did, and in that I agree with you 100%. I don't know why no one really talks about it, I can't see how it'd have much opposition. The right can't really fuss about it since its an EARNED income tax credit meaning you have to be working to qualify. Plus it scales based on the number of kids you have, can't really base wages on how many kids you have since that'd be illegal.

[NEFARIOUS]

I'd hate to be a new recruit in the military, knowing I can face death when a burger flipper starts at more than E-1.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by NEFARIOUS

I'd hate to be a new recruit in the military, knowing I can face death when a burger flipper starts at more than E-1.

Both are "Jobs" but one comes with SIGNIFICANTLY more benefits than the other.

[Templar]

Originally Posted by NEFARIOUS

I'd hate to be a new recruit in the military, knowing I can face death when a burger flipper starts at more than E-1.

Derp.

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

Both are "Jobs" but one comes with SIGNIFICANTLY more benefits than the other.

Exactly. You don't see a burger flipper getting fully funded medical benefits or fully funded housing.

[WreckerX5d]

Originally Posted by Templar

Exactly. You don't see a burger flipper getting fully funded medical benefits or fully funded housing.

Also in their eyes, free food.



All I see happening is the minimum wage will increase, prices will go up to offset that, and then screw everyone who works for $16-25/hr. I highly doubt the employer's will increase those wages.

[MrPrena]

So...where can I sign up for that 15/hr part time job?

[ethanjoon]

Raising minimum wage doesn't solve anything. Simple economics proves this with simplest of tools: supply and demand curves.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by Arktis_Conviction

Raising minimum wage doesn't solve anything. Simple economics proves this with simplest of tools: supply and demand curves.

Be sure to link all those peer reviewed studies that proved that.

[ethanjoon]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

Be sure to link all those peer reviewed studies that proved that.

Peer reviewed studies.
Do you disagree? I'd love to hear your thoughts. I'm familiar with your reputation of being a troll, so be sure to leave that nonsense behind your own screen.

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by Arktis_Conviction

Peer reviewed studies.
Do you disagree? I'd love to hear your thoughts. I'm familiar with your reputation of being a troll, so be sure to leave that nonsense behind your own screen.

It's not that simple,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-minimum-wage/

I will agree that it's not the panacea many think it is (I think I already said that in this thread) but raising it modestly won't really have any widespread negative affects.

[MightyMouseTech]

They will just hire more student part time workers. Done.

Although, the minimum wage here in Ontario,Canada is currently $11.00/hr, so $15.00/hr in 2020 may not be far off our normal practices.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by fecurtis

It's not that simple,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-minimum-wage/

I will agree that it's not the panacea many think it is (I think I already said that in this thread) but raising it modestly won't really have any widespread negative affects.

Shhh, he thinks he's entitled to his own facts.

[nagisak31]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

Shhh, he thinks he's entitled to his own facts.

Trying to find where you posted a single fact or link to anything with some substance...

Oh wait...

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by nagisak31

Trying to find where you posted a single fact or link to anything with some substance...

Oh wait...

Let's say I didn't (and it may be possible, I'm involved in a lot of these conversations) Do you really think I'm stupid enough to make unsubstantiated claims while berating members who do the same?

The correct answer is no.

Honestly, I think facts are lost on your type - people like you who spout off from the hip without an inkling or care of what the truth is - if you did, this wouldn't need to be a conversation.

but because you asked so nicely
http://www.raisetheminimumwage.com/pages/job-loss

http://www.cepr.net/documents/public...ge-2013-02.pdf

Summary: Reviews the past two decades of research on the impact of minimum wage increases on employment: this study concludes that the weight of the evidence points to little or no effect of minimum wage increases on job growth. The study also finds that a review of the minimum wage literature commonly cited by minimum wage opponents is flawed because it is subjective, relies in large part on studies of wage increases in foreign countries, and fails to consider the most sophisticated and recent minimum wage studies.

http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/166-08.pdf

Summary: Examines every minimum wage increase in the United States over the past two decades—including increases that took place during protracted periods of high unemployment—and finds that raising the wage floor boosted incomes without reducing employment or slowing job creation. The research demonstrates how a body of previous research—one frequently relied on by business lobbyists who oppose minimum wage increases—inaccurately attributes declines in employment to increases in the minimum wage by failing to sufficiently account for critical economic factors.

http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/157-07.pdf

Summary: Provides the most sophisticated study to date of the effects of increases in the minimum wage on job growth in the United States. Taking advantage of the fact that a record number of states raised their minimum wages during the 1990s and 2000s – creating scores of differing minimum wage rates across the country – the study compares employment levels among every pair of neighboring U.S. counties that had differing minimum wage levels at any time between 1990 and 2006 and finds that higher minimum wages did not reduce employment.

[nagisak31]

I'm shocked it took you so long to Google all that. You're just a twat who spouts nonsense too until someone calls you on it, but now that you've posted SOMETHING at least you're not hypocrite too I guess.

It's funny because I didn't say one way or another what I think on the subject, I just called you on your bullshit and you got all defensive and went on a Google crusade.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by nagisak31

I'm shocked it took you so long to Google all that. You're just a twat who spouts nonsense too until someone calls you on it, but now that you've posted SOMETHING at least you're not hypocrite too I guess.

It's funny because I didn't say one way or another what I think on the subject, I just called you on your bullshit and you got all defensive and went on a Google crusade.

Google crusade? Some insult, took me all of 5 minutes to have a greater understanding of the facts than the majority of the people in this thread, that doesn't bode well for them -Honestly. it's so easy to Google, why didn't everyone (including yourself) save me the time and trouble and do it yourself?

I guess you missed post #24 in this thread where only person provided support to their argument and it was rejected as "fraudulent" because apparently reality has a liberal bias and facts don't apply to them.