Raise The Minimum Wage!

Allow me to clarify my question, then perhaps you will address it earnestly;

Is a dollar worth the same to one who has enough to pay his bills and some left over as to one who doesn't make enough to pay his bills and must choose whether to pay bills or buy food?
Click to expand...

The dollar buys the same amount of food for one as the other, doesn't it? When you buy groceries, do they ask you if you had enough to pay your bills this month, before they ring up your total? So the VALUE of the dollar is exactly the SAME!

What you are building your stereotype around, is the false belief that people who live within their means have as much as they desire. If someone makes much less than me, but they've maxed out the credit cards, that's not MY fault, is it? They can't pay their bills because they weren't responsible with credit, and I can pay mine because I have been responsible and not over-extended myself... why do you think I should be punished for that, or that money doesn't mean as much to me? If I educated myself, and got a degree, and now make $100k a year, and my high school buddy dropped out and works at Burger King, why is his money more important to him than my money is to me?

Surely you can see that $.50 has far more value to the minimum wage earner?
Click to expand...

No, I see where $.50 has the exact same value to all. Until I start going into stores who ask me how much I make, and charging me accordingly, I will continue to believe the value is the same. I do not understand or comprehend how you can rationalize otherwise, other than to make an erroneous assumption that because someone is able to live within their means, that money doesn't matter to them... I would say, if anything, just the OPPOSITE is true, money matters more to them than to someone who doesn't give a shit about earning more, saving more, making more.

Your sarcasm aside, if one is living within one's means, then by definition one has "enough"
If one's entire earning power cannot purchase life's needed goods, then one does not have enough.
Click to expand...

Again... what you are saying is, I don't deserve to keep my money that I earned, because I am responsible enough to save and live within my means, and that society needs to subsidize people who have no self-discipline, run up debts they can't repay, and can't pay their bills. And AGAIN... no sarcasm... when have you ever felt like you had "enough" money???

So it doesn't help many, since there are so few who receive it, yet it's impact is so vast that it hurts a great many?
Hmm, I don't see how it can be both ways. A very small raise to a very small group of people, yet it has vast effects?
Click to expand...

Because of the "ripple effect" I explained to you earlier. The cost of this has to be recovered from somewhere... money doesn't grow on trees. The result of raising the minimum wage, is increased prices on goods and services and fewer jobs. This is why we have been raising the MW for 40 years, and are no better off today than 40 years ago when we started. And we can keep doing this for 40, 80, 120 more years, and the same thing is always going to happen. The market absorbs the increase, prices rise, and life goes on... no one is really "helped" by it, you just create inflation that is unnecessary, in an attempt to do something you already know you can't do.

As to the rest of your comments in the above paragraph, who decided what lowest rung jobs are for?
Regardless of what you have decided that minimum wage jobs are for, the FACT is that they are jobs. Those that have them depend upon then, often work them longterm, and clearly do not qualify to earn more money in any way, be it due to age, physical or mental or social stature, or simply lack of any higher paying jobs. Those that can advance do, it is not they who we are concerned with.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean by "who decided" what lowest rung jobs are for. Who decided you have to put your feet on the ground to stand up? It's just the way things are. YES, they ARE jobs, and as you admitted before, they are rare because most companies pay above minimum wage. Even people who start at minimum wage, are given raises after so long, and I don't know of a situation where that's not the case. AND EVEN IF... you have some contingent of misfits who can't manage to ever get anything better than a minimum wage job, and can't manage to advance past that... they need more than a fifty-cent raise! Like maybe some level of instruction on how to be more motivated, or how to be less lazy, or something! Because something is terribly wrong, and a meager $.50 isn't going to help that.
 
christiefan915 said:
Welfare recipients do get cut off from cash payments after five years. Note that in the means testing for welfare, payments are called "assistance", not gifts, and are contingent on the recipient having some income or being in job training.

But regarding your fictional family that gets $3000/week, that works out to $156K a year which puts them in the top 5% of all wage earners. There's plenty of room to cut expenses even under your inflated numbers for every household item. Median income in the country is around $45K. There are way too many variables in your scenario to make me feel sorry for that top 5% earner while applauding the welfare recipient.
Click to expand...


Please then be specific and lay out what you think I inflated?
 
Rune said:
Prove it! Fucking prove it or shut the fuck up.

No one give a fuck what you think, why don't understand that?

For the last time, do you have any proof at all or not?
Click to expand...

DAMN Rune.
Your outburst almost leads me to believe that the reason you're for a raise to the minimum wage, is because you can't get a job that pays above it. :D
 
j-mac said:
Seems like the two are at paradox with each other...Wonder who is right?
Click to expand...
this is a singular perspective, anecdotal coupled with facts.
Bear in mind the US STILL has a useless counterproductive embargo in place for....(?). Cuba is also allowing small business start ups.

I'm not so much interested in who's right here -i am interested in opening up Cuba to US trade.

Did you know Cuba is pumping oil across the Florida Straights? <90 miles away. Why isn't the US involved? the Embargo.

Who suplies the rig? -a Spanish subsidary of China - not up to US standards; i think they are even teaming up with the Bahamas.
So we get the risk of a spill, and no oil. Duh.

I'm in Florida, I do not want what happened to the BP rig to happen so close to the Keys, we also have the "Mangrove Coast" mostly the SW tip, but it's low lands, with many, many channels -no real coast line like up north, it just fades into the Gulf.

There is no political, and especially no economic reasons to keep the Embargo -Fidel has outlived them all, a d is slowly allowing decentralization of the economy.

Havana buildings routinely collapse -we could be sending workers/ materials, and building hotels, and normalizing relationships -Cuba is not our enemy.

But we're still so freaking stupid, we dont.
 
annata said:
this is a singular perspective, anecdotal coupled with facts.
Bear in mind the US STILL has a useless counterproductive embargo in place for....(?). Cuba is also allowing small business start ups.

I'm not so much interested in who's right here -i am interested in opening up Cuba to US trade.

Did you know Cuba is pumping oil across the Florida Straights? <90 miles away. Why isn't the US involved? the Embargo.

Who suplies the rig? -a Spanish subsidary of China - not up to US standards; i think they are even teaming up with the Bahamas.
So we get the risk of a spill, and no oil. Duh.

I'm in Florida, I do not want what happened to the BP rig to happen so close to the Keys, we also have the "Mangrove Coast" mostly the SW tip, but it's low lands, with many, many channels -no real coast line like up north, it just fades into the Gulf.

There is no political, and especially no economic reasons to keep the Embargo -Fidel has outlived them all, a d is slowly allowing decentralization of the economy.

Havana buildings routinely collapse -we could be sending workers/ materials, and building hotels, and normalizing relationships -Cuba is not our enemy.

But we're still so freaking stupid, we dont.
Click to expand...


Well, I don't disagree with you that Cuban relations need to be slowly normalized with a greater possibility of the embargo being lifted under Raul if he continues to apply a loosening of the Castro grip on the people, and after Fidel dies is willing to move to a more democratic form of government.

The oil drilling says much more about the Obama policy on drilling than it does Cuba. And if we don't think that China will slant drill our oil then we are fooling ourselves.
 
j-mac said:
This is actually an interesting question Rune....Now I can hope that you are learning.

So let's take a look at it shall we?

Family (A) has a weekly gross income of $3,000. per week, and for the sake of even purposes has two children.

Now let's look at their bills.

1. tax liability - Combined between Federal, State, Property, Local they have an off the top liability of (being generous here) 45% that equals $1,350 per week off the top...That leaves a net spendable income to the household of $1,650.

So sorry, we are using net income to the home. So, still at $3000. Remember, the comparison is between two household, one with "enough", one not.

2. They have to save for their own retirement at the rate of say 20% combined retirement and savings for emergencies that is another $330. bringing their income to $1,320
Again, this would come from the gross. Still at $3000

3. Using your number they spend $300 per week on groceries, now we are down to $1,020.

$2700

4. Mortgage for their socio economic range is around $650. per week that brings us to $370 left.

My mortgage is paid off, as would be the household in my example.

$2700

5. Utilities including cable, internet, cell phones etc. let's be generous and say $150. per week, that leaves $220.

Whatever,

$2550

6. They own two cars, one outright, and one on payments of let's say $100 per week. That now leaves $120. per week left over.

Again, whatever,

$2450

7. Now you're not done. They have kids, sports, extra activities, and gas, tolls, and other expenses it is more than likely that in some weeks there isn't enough left overfor our couple to even have $20 left for themselves for lunch during the week.

Lets be generous and call it $450

$2000 left per week.


Now let's look at your couple on welfare.

1. Their housing is paid for

No, it isn't. Earning minimum wage does not come with free housing. Even if they have section 8 housing, they are still responsible for 1/3 the rent.

2. Their food is paid for

Again, no it isn't. Food stamps will cover approximately 1/4 of the food bill.

3. Their utilities are paid for

once again, no. There is some assistence available.

4. They get a stipend for spending

Hardly. Where do you live?
5. If they increase their family size their income from the State is increased.
If, and only if they are on welfare. Many people with minimum wage jobs do not qualify for welfare.



Now, do they live the exact same lifestyles as the couple that works to earn their lifestyle? No.

That's for sure Capt. Understatement.

Does the recipient class family deserve the funding they get? Some do yes. Some things are beyond their control..

Completely irrelevant.

Is it most likely that a strong majority of generational recipients could leave the rolls tomorrow if cut off? yes.
Click to expand...

Again, irrelevant. Can you at least try to stay on topic?
 
j-mac said:
hmmmm....The China news, posts a story of the WHO, praising the Communist health system, as a great achievement of the socialist revolution....So we have a communist propaganda outlet, touting a socialist orientated organizations findings, of a communist State....

Ah well, it must be the truth...:roll:
Click to expand...

Wrong dipshit. Unlike you, annata has a well deserved reputation for factual posts.
 
Rune said:
The comma would have been a clue, but I imagine they skip that sort of thing in Reading for Retards 101. By the way, did you pass it yet?
Click to expand...

Keep posting your unfinished homework assignments here and we'll keep grading them for you. :D
 
j-mac said:
Please then be specific and lay out what you think I inflated?
Click to expand...

1. tax liability - Combined between Federal, State, Property, Local they have an off the top liability of (being generous here) 45% that equals $1,350 per week off the top...That leaves a net spendable income to the household of $1,650.
Click to expand...

Top tax rate for this income level is 28%. State income tax varies according to dollars earned. In many states the tax is charged on earnings over a certain amount, not gross earnings. (http://taxes.about.com/od/statetaxes/a/highest-state-income-tax-rates.htm) Worst state for local and sales taxes rate is 9.4% (TN) State with highest property taxes 1.89% (NJ) Using worst case scenario, highest combined taxes would be about 39% which adds approximately $200 to the spendable income.*

2. They have to save for their own retirement at the rate of say 20% combined retirement and savings for emergencies that is another $330. bringing their income to $1,320.
Click to expand...

A married couple can deduct up to $10K a year on an IRA contribution.**

3. Using your number they spend $300 per week on groceries, now we are down to $1,020.
Click to expand...

I think that's a lot for 4 people but will let it stand because costs can vary depending on location.

4. Mortgage for their socio economic range is around $650. per week that brings us to $370 left.
Click to expand...

Nebulous. Just because a person can afford 2600/month doesn't mean he'll actually pay that amt. But, in the event this couple does, they can write off the interest, points and mortgage insurance premium on Schedule A. ***

5. Utilities including cable, internet, cell phones etc. let's be generous and say $150. per week, that leaves $220.
Click to expand...

It's more than generous. You can get a FIOS bundle for about $100/month. You can put your other utilities on a budget plan.

6. They own two cars, one outright, and one on payments of let's say $100 per week. That now leaves $120. per week left over.
Click to expand...

Possible Schedule A write-off for travel expenses if any cars used for business.

7. Now you're not done. They have kids, sports, extra activities, and gas, tolls, and other expenses it is more than likely that in some weeks there isn't enough left over for our couple to even have $20 left for themselves for lunch during the week.
Click to expand...

Not enough information to calculate.

*Taxes are based on AGI, not straight gross income. If the family uses the standard deduction it amounts to $11,600 for the couple, plus four other exemptions totalling $14800. These credits bring AGI down to $129,600.

**If the couple deducts 10K for the IRA contribution it brings down the AGI to $119,600.

***If the couple decides to itemize using Schedule A instead of the standard deduction, their AGI can be lowered via Medical & Dental Expenses, Taxes Paid, Charitable Deductions, etc.
 
Rune said:
So sorry, we are using net income to the home. So, still at $3000. Remember, the comparison is between two household, one with "enough", one not.
Click to expand...

We can stop with your game right there....This is the most dishonest line of posting I have seen in my over 10 years on message boards.
 
christiefan915 said:
Top tax rate for this income level is 28%. State income tax varies according to dollars earned. In many states the tax is charged on earnings over a certain amount, not gross earnings. (http://taxes.about.com/od/statetaxes/a/highest-state-income-tax-rates.htm) Worst state for local and sales taxes rate is 9.4% (TN) State with highest property taxes 1.89% (NJ) Using worst case scenario, highest combined taxes would be about 39% which adds approximately $200 to the spendable income.*



A married couple can deduct up to $10K a year on an IRA contribution.**



I think that's a lot for 4 people but will let it stand because costs can vary depending on location.



Nebulous. Just because a person can afford 2600/month doesn't mean he'll actually pay that amt. But, in the event this couple does, they can write off the interest, points and mortgage insurance premium on Schedule A. ***



It's more than generous. You can get a FIOS bundle for about $100/month. You can put your other utilities on a budget plan.



Possible Schedule A write-off for travel expenses if any cars used for business.



Not enough information to calculate.

*Taxes are based on AGI, not straight gross income. If the family uses the standard deduction it amounts to $11,600 for the couple, plus four other exemptions totalling $14800. These credits bring AGI down to $129,600.

**If the couple deducts 10K for the IRA contribution it brings down the AGI to $119,600.

***If the couple decides to itemize using Schedule A instead of the standard deduction, their AGI can be lowered via Medical & Dental Expenses, Taxes Paid, Charitable Deductions, etc.
Click to expand...

Rune has already proven that this was a dishonest exercise from the start, so your calculations which I am no longer going to take the time to go into are a futile endeavor.

Bottom line is whether you are talking about a couple making a household income of &150K or $250K like Rune just moved the bar to, makes no difference. They earned it. There is no obligation to force them to redistribute what they earned legally, and their shouldn't be regardless of what you think there should be.
 
Rune said:
Disapointed that your childish ploy to abscond with my example failed?
Click to expand...

Look, you are not interested in honest discussion, so just find someone else to play games with, I have no intention on playing into your hand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top