Minimum wage should be $22 a hr??????

WestTn Huntin man

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2006
Messages
13,129
Location
Benton Co.
One reason so many folks are on welfare.It pays better than minimum wage jobs.
Would this open the door for More under the table jobs for illegals ??
 

fishboy1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2003
Messages
12,035
Location
Warren Co
Increasing the minimum wage is based on the LIE that it will benfit the worker. To buy in, you must ignore or deny some FACTS.

#1. Increasing the minimum wage will result in that increase being added to the price of goods and services. So, you might get a raise for putting ketchup on that burger, but now that burger will cost $11. Thus you have netted nothing.

#2. Don't forget Taxes!!!! Increasing the min wage will immediately put many of the "working poor" into tax paying brackets. Not to mention the MANDATORY SS/Mcare/Mcaid with holding they already pay.... Coupled with #1. above, you have just become poorer while the government exploits and extorts money from the "peasant" class. Oooops. they forget to mention this part.

#3. Psychological factor.....the "living wage" farce. Ok. so who WANTS to work at a minimum wage job their whole life? Who among the WORKING desires to stay at the bottom of the economic ladder as a career? That is one of the main justifications for increasing the minimum wage....to create a Peasant Class poor who are making a "living wage" meaning they can "get by" on their entry level job and skill set. When the poor realize that they aren't getting ahead, welfare will look like a great deal! A small % reduction in income, NO TAXES, NO work expenses or time demands. Cramming down even more borderline poor into government dependance and captive voters.

If you think about it....Liberal/progressives WANT a "slave" class of workers who toil for room and board. Isn't that what basic "living wage" promises? To be able to "get by" on a minimum wage job? So who will be the "masters" of those slaves?

The political elite! the "superior" intellects, in short.... the liberal collective.
Strip away the lies and marketing and what do you have? More elitist, racist, classist bigotry papered over with pretty words and false sentiment.
 

REM7

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
5,042
Location
GRUNDY COUNTY
Thats not the answer IMO. Will just cause higher inflation. Last time. Welfare needs to be for those who truly need it. Not able body/mind lazy people. Welfare sytem needs an overhaul big time.
 

BMan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2006
Messages
23,554
Location
Middle TN
If you go back to the beginning of the minimum wage (.25/hr in 1938), and index it to inflation, it should be...

$4.12 / hour.

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

And guess what: according to the BLS, in 2011 only 2.3% of workers in the United States make the minimum wage (5.2% if you include hospitality workers who theoretically make less than the minimum wage, yet receive the majority of their pay in tips - conveniently left out of the equation).

Those numbers reflect an almost 20% drop in those receiving the minimum from one year earlier, and roughly one third the rate of 1979.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011.htm
 

TN RDG RNR

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
8,157
Location
Rhea County
What good would it do if min wage was $22 an hour if the price of milk went to $10 a gallon?

They are idiots.

Take a look at wages in North Dakota I have read reports of McDonalds are paying as much as $20 an hour. The only thing that the Government needs to do is loosen regulations and and get the hell out of the way.
 

Hunter 257W

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Messages
10,549
Location
Franklin County
BMan said:
If you go back to the beginning of the minimum wage (.25/hr in 1938), and index it to inflation, it should be...

$4.12 / hour.

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

And guess what: according to the BLS, in 2011 only 2.3% of workers in the United States make the minimum wage (5.2% if you include hospitality workers who theoretically make less than the minimum wage, yet receive the majority of their pay in tips - conveniently left out of the equation).

Those numbers reflect an almost 20% drop in those receiving the minimum from one year earlier, and roughly one third the rate of 1979.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011.htm

I agree that if you are going to make adjustments to minimum wage over time to keep the buying power of the pay equal, then inflation is the only way to do that.

In conflict to that method of adjustment though, the article states: "If you took the minimum wage from 1960 and indexed it for workers� gains in productivity, it would be $22 an hour today...."

I'm not sure what they mean by "gains in productivity" but I fail to see how that should be considered. If a worker is producing more now compared to 1960 because of gains in technology(what I assume they are talking about), that has nothing to do with that min wage employee getting pay with equal buying power compared to 1960.

Obviously, as others stated, if min wage went up this much, inflation would just drive up the cost of everything we buy proportionally and nobody would gain anything. It's just a way for liberals to appear to be looking out for the poor so they can buy their votes then forget about them as soon as the polls close.
 

Pic IN the Casa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
20,954
Location
TN
I also think that rich people should have to give everybody else their share of sunshine and lollipops.
 

Wildcat

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Jun 10, 2000
Messages
66,676
Location
Western Ky.
Hunter 257W said:
BMan said:
If you go back to the beginning of the minimum wage (.25/hr in 1938), and index it to inflation, it should be...

$4.12 / hour.

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

And guess what: according to the BLS, in 2011 only 2.3% of workers in the United States make the minimum wage (5.2% if you include hospitality workers who theoretically make less than the minimum wage, yet receive the majority of their pay in tips - conveniently left out of the equation).

Those numbers reflect an almost 20% drop in those receiving the minimum from one year earlier, and roughly one third the rate of 1979.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011.htm

I agree that if you are going to make adjustments to minimum wage over time to keep the buying power of the pay equal, then inflation is the only way to do that.

In conflict to that method of adjustment though, the article states: "If you took the minimum wage from 1960 and indexed it for workers� gains in productivity, it would be $22 an hour today...."

I'm not sure what they mean by "gains in productivity" but I fail to see how that should be considered. If a worker is producing more now compared to 1960 because of gains in technology(what I assume they are talking about), that has nothing to do with that min wage employee getting pay with equal buying power compared to 1960.

Obviously, as others stated, if min wage went up this much, inflation would just drive up the cost of everything we buy proportionally and nobody would gain anything. It's just a way for liberals to appear to be looking out for the poor so they can buy their votes then forget about them as soon as the polls close.


"gains in productivity"

Is total BS used by the liberals to try to push their ways and make it SOUND real.

What they leave out is the MILLIONS of dollars the company put in new technologies that is used to make the "gains in productivity" The workers alone NEVER work harder and longer hours to make that happen by themselves plus the ones that did work longer and harder got PAID OVERTIME.
 

fishboy1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2003
Messages
12,035
Location
Warren Co
Don't forget, that MANY PUBLIC/Gubment and PRIVATE UNION contracts have an adjustment feature tied to the Minimum Wage (among other things).

So that UNION job paying $20-40/hr will get an AUTOMATIC increase proportionate to the increase in the minimum wage. This is AUTOMATIC and has nothing to do with job performance.

ANOTHER socialist/liberal payola for votes scheme paid for by the US citizen.
 

Pic IN the Casa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
20,954
Location
TN
fishboy1 said:
Don't forget, that MANY PUBLIC/Gubment and PRIVATE UNION contracts have an adjustment feature tied to the Minimum Wage (among other things).

So that UNION job paying $20-40/hr will get an AUTOMATIC increase proportionate to the increase in the minimum wage. This is AUTOMATIC and has nothing to do with job performance.

ANOTHER socialist/liberal payola for votes scheme paid for by the US citizen.

Yep.
 

eightpointer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2002
Messages
11,073
Location
Harrison TN
Wildcat said:
Hunter 257W said:
BMan said:
If you go back to the beginning of the minimum wage (.25/hr in 1938), and index it to inflation, it should be...

$4.12 / hour.

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

And guess what: according to the BLS, in 2011 only 2.3% of workers in the United States make the minimum wage (5.2% if you include hospitality workers who theoretically make less than the minimum wage, yet receive the majority of their pay in tips - conveniently left out of the equation).

Those numbers reflect an almost 20% drop in those receiving the minimum from one year earlier, and roughly one third the rate of 1979.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011.htm

I agree that if you are going to make adjustments to minimum wage over time to keep the buying power of the pay equal, then inflation is the only way to do that.

In conflict to that method of adjustment though, the article states: "If you took the minimum wage from 1960 and indexed it for workers� gains in productivity, it would be $22 an hour today...."

I'm not sure what they mean by "gains in productivity" but I fail to see how that should be considered. If a worker is producing more now compared to 1960 because of gains in technology(what I assume they are talking about), that has nothing to do with that min wage employee getting pay with equal buying power compared to 1960.

Obviously, as others stated, if min wage went up this much, inflation would just drive up the cost of everything we buy proportionally and nobody would gain anything. It's just a way for liberals to appear to be looking out for the poor so they can buy their votes then forget about them as soon as the polls close.


"gains in productivity"

Is total BS used by the liberals to try to push their ways and make it SOUND real.

What they leave out is the MILLIONS of dollars the company put in new technologies that is used to make the "gains in productivity" The workers alone NEVER work harder and longer hours to make that happen by themselves plus the ones that did work longer and harder got PAID OVERTIME.

$22 bucks an hour for min wage is very unrealistic..but most companies put less into new technologies that expand jobs and more into technologies that cut jobs. I've seen that first hand. Most all of us have. But 22 an hour..thats some serious start pay for sure..haa
 

Wildcat

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Jun 10, 2000
Messages
66,676
Location
Western Ky.
eightpointer said:
Wildcat said:
Hunter 257W said:
BMan said:
If you go back to the beginning of the minimum wage (.25/hr in 1938), and index it to inflation, it should be...

$4.12 / hour.

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

And guess what: according to the BLS, in 2011 only 2.3% of workers in the United States make the minimum wage (5.2% if you include hospitality workers who theoretically make less than the minimum wage, yet receive the majority of their pay in tips - conveniently left out of the equation).

Those numbers reflect an almost 20% drop in those receiving the minimum from one year earlier, and roughly one third the rate of 1979.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011.htm

I agree that if you are going to make adjustments to minimum wage over time to keep the buying power of the pay equal, then inflation is the only way to do that.

In conflict to that method of adjustment though, the article states: "If you took the minimum wage from 1960 and indexed it for workers� gains in productivity, it would be $22 an hour today...."

I'm not sure what they mean by "gains in productivity" but I fail to see how that should be considered. If a worker is producing more now compared to 1960 because of gains in technology(what I assume they are talking about), that has nothing to do with that min wage employee getting pay with equal buying power compared to 1960.

Obviously, as others stated, if min wage went up this much, inflation would just drive up the cost of everything we buy proportionally and nobody would gain anything. It's just a way for liberals to appear to be looking out for the poor so they can buy their votes then forget about them as soon as the polls close.


"gains in productivity"

Is total BS used by the liberals to try to push their ways and make it SOUND real.

What they leave out is the MILLIONS of dollars the company put in new technologies that is used to make the "gains in productivity" The workers alone NEVER work harder and longer hours to make that happen by themselves plus the ones that did work longer and harder got PAID OVERTIME.

$22 bucks an hour for min wage is very unrealistic..but most companies put less into new technologies that expand jobs and more into technologies that cut jobs. I've seen that first hand. Most all of us have. But 22 an hour..thats some serious start pay for sure..haa

Read the article. They were TRYING to say , "If you took the minimum wage from 1960 and indexed it for workers� gains in productivity, it would be $22 an hour today...."


They are using "since 1960" Now go back and look at how much all the new technologies cost SINCE 1960.

YES, the technologies DID cut jobs but would you rather pay $10.50 a gal for gas than $3.50??? Would you rather pay $1,000 for a CVA MZ than $250? Would you rather pay $4,000 for a new set of tires for your old truck?? How about $95,000 for a new Ford F-150???

Just how many times "since 1960" did YOU reach for the CHEAPER product over the higher priced one???? How may posts have YOU made on here complaining about any higher prices?????

Just what do you want?? You seem to want BOTH, HIGH paying job but CHEAP prices. Tell us how we can get both without paying for the other??????
 

fishboy1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2003
Messages
12,035
Location
Warren Co
Something else to consider that NOBODY talks about.

The Government WANTS INFLATION !
Why? Inflation eats up your standard of living. It makes things MORE expensive. It makes your savings and retirement accounts worth LESS, even though your balances go up. Inflation makes us POORER. It makes the Central Bankers and the Federal Government Richer.

So WHY does the gooberment want inflation?
Because it makes the economy LOOK like its expanding. Wages APPEAR to go up since you get raises. Thus the people are pacified and the politicians can avoid responsibility for bad monetary policy.

When we are working just as hard, or harder, getting raises, and having a MORE difficult time making ends meet, the politicians can hide behind inflation and say "don't blame me, wages went UP, GDP went UP, must be something YOU are doing."

Research DEFLATION. Read about it. Understand it. IT makes the CITIZENS RICHER. Purchasing power INCREASES faster than WAGES DECREASE. It makes government deficit spending TOUGHER and more expensive. That is why Helicopter Ben is pumping 85 BILLION per month into the banks. Have to keep inflation up or deflation will start seeping in and their house of cards will start to fold.
 

Wildcat

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Jun 10, 2000
Messages
66,676
Location
Western Ky.
eightpointer said:
Wildcat...relax Brother..I'm just talking man. Not jumpin your case. Just a conversation man. Relax.

I'm fine but I was making a point.

EVERYBODY will reach for the CHEAPER product 75% of the time.

Take those money saving machines out and replace them with more people what do you think would happen???

If we were still have to pay 10 people to do the job of 5 people things would be so high there would be a all out shooting war.
 

WestTn Huntin man

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2006
Messages
13,129
Location
Benton Co.
I don't know the answers. $22 an hour isn't it.I honestly don't see how a man can support himself let a lone his family on $8 hour. We need a lot more give and take to find some middle ground these days.The Big shots making millions/Billions need to be doing a little more giving and a whole lot less taking.
 
Top