Minimum Wage and McBudgets

[GGT]

Jesus Rand, it's irritating the way you twist my words to fit your agenda. You're the one who lives in SSSocialist Europe, your minimum wage workers have NHS and Universal Care independent of income. Not true in the US. Our min wage workers have to work 2 or 3 part-time jobs, and work more than 40 hours/week -- with few or no benefits, especially for healthcare -- for paychecks at 70's COL.

The reality is, all developed nations are struggling with growth and employment. New economy, transitional era, more people than jobs, job attrition with few/no replacements....and millions falling from middle income to low income. Not every secretary, travel agent, accountant, insurance underwriter, production line worker (etc.) who was replaced by a computer app or robotics is university material. Not everyone can become a physician, astrophysicist, or nuclear engineer, but that's no reason to pay peanuts for laborers, either.

[GGT]

I'm kind of annoyed at the fact we are arguing the impact of minimum wage when we should be arguing the fact private property owners should be able to make business decisions the way they want. What right does the government have to stifle the freedom of business? Another pathetic example of tyranny of the majority banding against a minority.

Do you mean like those "good ole days" when we had slaves working for the plantation owner? Or do you mean segregated lunch counters and motels, or children working in mines and factories?

Even if its better for society to have a minimum wage (its not) societal "good" shouldn't trump liberty.

What Illusions said. And technically, the state owns the land. Ownership of "private property" is more like a lease agreement between the state and the people.

[Being]

The United States was founded on the opposite principal, that is why. It wasn't founded to achieve maximum freedom for everyone, but to create "a more perfect union" with liberty as one of the tools in achieving this aim. Regardless, you yourself do not follow your own premise. We jail thieves because the liberty to steal from people is trumped by societal good.

+1

[Lewkowski]

Do you mean like those "good ole days" when we had slaves working for the plantation owner? Or do you mean segregated lunch counters and motels, or children working in mines and factories?

I'm curious where you think slavery is OK for someone who believes in freedom. Probably just knee jerk liberal race card nonsense.

[Lewkowski]

The United States was founded on the opposite principal, that is why. It wasn't founded to achieve maximum freedom for everyone, but to create "a more perfect union" with liberty as one of the tools in achieving this aim. Regardless, you yourself do not follow your own premise. We jail thieves because the liberty to steal from people is trumped by societal good.

LOL - That's why the founders took the time to talk about liberty, freedom and then form a constitution that was designed to LIMIT government. And the limits of freedom are fairly obvious. Your freedom to swing your fist ends at my nose. Barring direct harm (and no setting a wage in a company YOU OWN is not direct harm) you should be free to run your shop the way you want.

What is more important the needs of the collective or the freedom of the individual?

[Loki]

The United States was founded on the opposite principal, that is why. It wasn't founded to achieve maximum freedom for everyone, but to create "a more perfect union" with liberty as one of the tools in achieving this aim. Regardless, you yourself do not follow your own premise. We jail thieves because the liberty to steal from people is trumped by societal good.

We jail thieves because they violate property rights, and ensuring those rights is one of the main objectives of government.

[Nessus]

We jail thieves because they violate property rights, and ensuring those rights is one of the main objectives of government.

And given that your jailing procedures disproportionately involve the lesser races, one of the main objectives of local government is working towards racial purity and maintaining the ability of the few to exploit the imprisoned labour of those beneath them. I love the smell of progress in the morning!

[RandBlade]

Jesus Rand, it's irritating the way you twist my words to fit your agenda. You're the one who lives in SSSocialist Europe, your minimum wage workers have NHS and Universal Care independent of income. Not true in the US. Our min wage workers have to work 2 or 3 part-time jobs, and work more than 40 hours/week -- with few or no benefits, especially for healthcare -- for paychecks at 70's COL.

The reality is, all developed nations are struggling with growth and employment. New economy, transitional era, more people than jobs, job attrition with few/no replacements....and millions falling from middle income to low income. Not every secretary, travel agent, accountant, insurance underwriter, production line worker (etc.) who was replaced by a computer app or robotics is university material. Not everyone can become a physician, astrophysicist, or nuclear engineer, but that's no reason to pay peanuts for laborers, either.

Do you realise the UK government spends less on the NHS than the US government spends on healthcare?

You were the one claiming it plays a significant role. So I guess this reply means you have changed your mind?

No, if you're acknowledging it plays a role then we just need to query how significant a role. I think jumping the minimum by 50-100% in one go could play a significant role yes.

And technically, the state owns the land. Ownership of "private property" is more like a lease agreement between the state and the people.

WTF?

[Lewkowski]

And given that your jailing procedures disproportionately involve the lesser races, one of the main objectives of local government is working towards racial purity and maintaining the ability of the few to exploit the imprisoned labour of those beneath them. I love the smell of progress in the morning!

What is liberals obsession with race? The only part in America that is racist is the Democratic party.

[Enoch the Red]

What is liberals obsession with race? The only part in America that is racist is the Democratic party.

That's a pretty ballsy statement.

[RandBlade]

It's a pretty stupid statement.

[Veldan Rath]

How about it's the party that leverages race the better of the two?

[Lewkowski]

That's a pretty ballsy statement.

Well I suppose I should clarify. The only *major* party in America that is racist is the Democratic party. Racist being a term to describe those who discriminate on the basis of race. If you don't think the Democratic party has this within their party platform I suggest you read up on it.

[Being]

No, if you're acknowledging it plays a role then we just need to query how significant a role. I think jumping the minimum by 50-100% in one go could play a significant role yes.

Minimum wage plays no significant role in the number of jobs. Minimum wage has not even kept up with inflation for decades yet the jobs are gone. You really should look into why your country pays people to not participate in the labor force. USA hasn't reached that extreme yet but we are butt hair close to doing the same thing.

[Being]

What is liberals obsession with race? The only part in America that is racist is the Democratic party.

Quoted for posterity. Also like to point out that the party line is against inequality whether it be race, gender, sexual orientation...

[RandBlade]

Minimum wage plays no significant role in the number of jobs.

Source?

Minimum wage has not even kept up with inflation for decades yet the jobs are gone.

There is always churn in jobs yet new ones get created just as old ones disappear. Unless you do something stupid to f**k up your economy. Like you want to it seems.

You really should look into why your country pays people to not participate in the labor force. USA hasn't reached that extreme yet but we are butt hair close to doing the same thing.

My country has more socialism than yours but less than the continents that's why.

Quoted for posterity. Also like to point out that the party line is against inequality whether it be race, gender, sexual orientation...

So the party line is against discriminating based on race in all circumstances? So it'd be against discriminating between college applicants based on skin colour.

[Lewkowski]

Quoted for posterity. Also like to point out that the party line is against inequality whether it be race, gender, sexual orientation...

Do the words affirmative action ring a bell?

[Flixy]

So the party line is against discriminating based on race in all circumstances? So it'd be against discriminating between college applicants based on skin colour.

Still, the only?

[Lewkowski]

Still, the only?

I clarified it to major party - yes I'm aware there are some idiots in parties that don't even get 1% of the vote.

[Ominous Gamer]

Well I suppose I should clarify. The only *major* party in America that is racist is the Democratic party. Racist being a term to describe those who discriminate on the basis of race. If you don't think the Democratic party has this within their party platform I suggest you read up on it.

neither the democratic platform at democrats.org or the republican platform at gop.com mention affirmative action a single time.

and when this forum brought up the list of ridiculous claims and positions in the GOP platform wasn't the response something along the lines of the platform being nothing of significance or concern?

[Loki]

http://chronicle.com/blogs/innovatio...on-brief/34003

Really, OG? This has been a pet issue of the DNC for a while (less so now given how unpopular it's become: http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2...tion_11128.xml).

[Ominous Gamer]

I'm not saying that there isn't support, but its not published where and how he claims it is. This is like saying the gop states in their platform that they are against appropriate healthcare, when the best he has is the 40+ times they have failed to repeal obamacare.

[Enoch the Red]

I clarified it to major party - yes I'm aware there are some idiots in parties that don't even get 1% of the vote.

More important would be what the people that comprise the party believe, no?

[Loki]

Except that the DNC consistently supports AA in court cases...

[GGT]

I'm curious where you think slavery is OK for someone who believes in freedom. Probably just knee jerk liberal race card nonsense.

Right, like the early Founders who wrote laws prohibiting women and non-white men from owing property, but were legal property themselves? Yeah, individual freedom and liberty was championed by white, male land owners who didn't want the government telling them how to run their business....or limit their use of slaves or indentured servants.

Newsflash: the Civil War is over and the Union won. The beauty of the Constitution is its adaptability throughout time, as a living document open to interpretation. Including terms like Man, The People, freedom, liberty, ownership, private, public, harm, Public Good, equality, and justice.

Do you realise the UK government spends less on the NHS than the US government spends on healthcare?

Of course. That's why you shouldn't stand on your UK soap box, and rile against US minimum wage increases from a theoretical angle. Especially since the UK model has higher corporate and sales taxes that fund your NHS and universal healthcare. That's a direct subsidy for UK low-wage workers not applicable for US low-wage workers....and it's an indirect subsidy/benefit for UK employers and business not available to US counterparts.

No, if you're acknowledging it plays a role then we just need to query how significant a role. I think jumping the minimum by 50-100% in one go could play a significant role yes.

That's why I said $15/hour is probably too high as a "one-go", but it should definitely be higher than $7.25. Somewhere between $9 and $10 would bring minimum wage back to 1970 COL equivalents. But only with subsidies for healthcare, since those costs have escalated through the roof the last few decades.

[Being]

Source?

Really?

[RandBlade]

Really?

Of course.

[Flixy]

I clarified it to major party - yes I'm aware there are some idiots in parties that don't even get 1% of the vote.

I would say either party has plenty of idiots who even get elected To be fair, a quick google for racist quotes by republicans shows that plenty of racists in that party got elected, too. I think you are being naive, or at least very selective, if you think it's only one party and not both.

[Being]

Of course.

Maybe you should Bing it instead of trusting Google. Everyone trusts Microsoft.
See, you can even copy and paste.

Where did american jobs go?

[Lewkowski]

I would say either party has plenty of idiots who even get elected To be fair, a quick google for racist quotes by republicans shows that plenty of racists in that party got elected, too. I think you are being naive, or at least very selective, if you think it's only one party and not both.

Idiots in all parties however a majority of Democrats support Affirmative Action. Can you find a majority of Republicans who support a similar racist position?