I suspected it would be something along those lines. But you left one out! Don't forget: "I should be paid enough to live in the most expensive places in the country, just because I'm special"
If you dont have any skills, sign up for the military and make something of yourself. Then I will say you are deserved of a livable wage.
Not talking about "single" small business. In that case a significant wage hike would likely drive it out of business.
And you still attempt to dodge. Do you not think it is not obvious to all and sundry? You have multiple times in this thread equated 'minimum wage' to your vaunted 'living wage', and now you say the two aren't related. Perhaps you need a score card to keep up with your own dodges and side tracks? The idea that people are not returning to their 'low wage' jobs, when their skill set doesn't match anything else, because they haven't had personal growth (there's that word again!) and increased their value in the employment marketplace, can yearn all they want for a 'living wage' but they will still be at the bottom of the wage ladder, which means their purchasing power will still be exactly what it has always been - bottom of the ladder.
Not "minimum wage". I'm talking about those who work full time and don't make a living wage. Any business that can only profit from the difference between those two needs to shut down.
living wage | BUSINESS ENGLISH living wage noun [ S ] UK US money you earn from your job that is enough to pay for the things you need to live, such as food and a home: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/living-wage
You went from an extremely broad term to a definition just as broad! One could argue you are discussing with that definition everything from Indentured Servants to Elon Musk!
not gonna read this entire thread it is very easy to guess what the posts are containing trumpers say....biden is bad and the inflation is all his fault anti trumpers say ...the inflation began the first day biden began printing money for covid relief I say the tax cuts in 2018 for the wealthiest americans coupled with the massive covid subsidies are the reasons for inflation yes it will seem like the workers will win with higher wages being paid but along with higher wages will come a higher cost of living. the last 2 delivery meals I made were a $50 dollar 3 item order of asian food and just last night I paid $28 dollars for a delivered pizza both asian and italian food became popular largely because is was a economical alternative to home cooking 6 months ago I could fill my car for $50 bucks..now it is $75 as a young kid I remember gasoline wars and gas as low as 26 cents a gallon today it is $3.26 a gallon is this bidens fault? or trumps?? it it just the way things are...price goes up on needed items and has forever another thing that needs to be mentioned.. money trickles up, NOT down.. at the end of the day, the rich will get richer..because they will find a way to get the money from the masses when goverment subsidies are given to the working class those subsidies are then spent at wal mart, winn dixie, target,and resturants, ect; ect; so the big corporation get a double payday the government sends corporations billions and they also collect the subsidies from the working class that is the american way and has been since 1776
I don't give a crap if they're related or not. I'm simply not referring to minimum wage. I'm referring to living wage. If you hire a human being to work a full time job, you are profiting from his work, and that human being needs to earn enough to cover his most basic living expenses (i.e. living wage). Whether he's seeking "personal growth" or not, is up to them. Not to you, not to the employer. They can fire the employee, if they want. But while they have them working, they need to pay a fair living wage. And this, apparently, is starting to happen now. Which is the point of this thread. Look... clearly you jumped into this thread without reading the OP, or understanding what it's about. Now you know. If you have something to contribute, go for it. If not, and instead want to grasp at straws, you're on your own. But I'm not going to be wasting my time explaining it to you again and again...
Of course it's broad. Because what "living wage" is is not the topic of this thread. All that is needed here is that posters understand WHAT the expression broadly means. Which should have been obvious to anybody who read (and understood) the OP.
I read the OP. Your attempts now denying the relationship between MW and your claim of 'living wage' doesn't change a thing. Your lack of comprehension of the relationship between skillset and value in the employment marketplace highlights that you do not have active involvement in employment, or understanding of how and what value of production actual means. You can explain all you want, there is nothing you have said that is actually applicable to a real life employment situation other than what YOU feel is fair. Your opinion, but it's not based in reality. There is nothing that requires an employer to pay a 'living wage' (whatever that may actually be) for someone with either no skill set, or a common skill set. The responsibility to improve that skillset is on the individual. Apparently the belief that employers are responsible for the individual's ability to pay for their lives is one that has gone beyond any stretch of logic and common sense. Failure to understand who it is that earns minimum wage (oooo, I said it!) and what percentage of the actual workforce they are.
How can anybody believe that you read the OP when you CLEARLY didn't even read the post you are responding to. What part of "I don't give a crap if they are related or not" are you struggling to understand? I don't deny or affirm whether there is a relationship or not. I just don't care!!! Whether they are related or not makes absolutely no difference to what I wrote on the OP or to ANYTHING I have written since. So if you did read the OP (which I doubt), then you are just attempting to change the subject. And I'm not biting. Now... if you want to comment AFTER you actually read the OP. Or even if you actually read the post you quoted here, let me know.
If you 'don't care', then the point, whatever it may be, of your entire premise is what? A bait trap? A thread to hear yourself talk? Pride in spewing misinformation on the subject? Your opinion of what a 'living wage' sho0uld be is flawed, because no employer is required to pay a person more than their labor is worth. They are not required to pay a person what the person wants or needs to support their lifestyle. The fact that you try to claim that your entire thread has nothing to do with Minimum Wage or skillsets, or the growth there of clearly shows that you don't understand the relationship between them all. And considering what you are trying to promote, or that 'you don't care' pretty much paints a true picture that you don't understand the subject whatsoever.
They should not be required to pay more, and they should not pay them less. And, so far, The Great Resignation appears to be correcting that.
Not really. 'They should not' is opinion, which you are welcome to, but many posts have already proven that to be rather empty. We all would 'like' to see people make the money to support their lives, but it isn't being realistic. It requires effort on the person's behalf, and it seems some don't want to put in that effort. There are solutions, none of which are beneficial to the majority of the citizens in this country. Raise all wages, watch inflation speed up. Net zero. Continue to bring in H2B and J-1 workers to fill the gaps. Inflation doesn't rise as fast, but people don't get the wages they feel they deserve. Automation. Manufacturers get a boon, the fix and repair departments create more positions, but individuals not willing to increase their skillset or value in the employment markets lose out. Inflation doesn't rise as fast, low/no income group grows.
There is so many people who have a vastly larger mountain to climb to reach success and have done it, yet we have people that feel a person that his a habitual job turner because they can't work a work week deserves to earn a wage the same as a hard worker. BTW, I highly suggest getting yourself a pair of these bad boys! I've bought several pairs and they are GREAT! The million dollar sock entrepreneur with Down's syndrome https://www.bbc.com/news/business-42353259
And how do you (or me, or anyone) determine what another individual's cost of living is? Every single person has a different standard for these things. There is no way on earth anyone but THAT person can know how much money they require to live the life they have chosen to live.
And if his 'basic living expenses' include high rent and a fast food habit? What if he's a gambler, or addicted to buying new shoes every month? What if he insists on living alone, when he could drastically reduce his costs by sharing with family? What if he takes out a loan to buy a brand new car, instead of saving up the cash to buy a used car? Etc etc etc. NONE of that is the employer's business. They cannot possibly know how well their employees live on what is paid .. because each employee will manage their money differently, according to their own preferences. Those who spend too much and thus want more, will find a way to improve their value and seek higher paying work. Those who are content to live on what is paid, will not. If the latter group happen to complain about their 'poverty', it's akin to a toddler squawking about having eaten all their candy at once instead of saving some for later. It's irrelevant - and reacting to it with appeasement is as bad as appeasing the toddler by giving him more candy.
The problem is that "living wage" doesn't mean a thing. It's like asking 'how long is a piece of string?'. There is no answer.
There is a flip side to this, and that is the larger companies, and/or companies with some capital to spread around are already replacing workers. This is not going to stop and it doesn't matter whether the economy or politics.
You are living in a fantasy world. Obviously you have never been anywhere near the higher level people who manage a company. Businesses don't pay low wages because people don't do the job they were hired to do. They pay low wages because it's more profitable. No company in existence has a policy of decreasing the salary of employees to below a living wage when they can't do the job. They just fire them! And that's how it should be. But those who they don't fire because they DO the job they were hired to do, DESERVE a living wage. And The Great Resignation is allowing that to happen right now.
