This Is Scott Walker's Idea Of A Living Wage

That is correct and explains why the power structure wants ten million illegal immigrants working in the United States. Supply and demand influence on minimum wage anyone?

 

Really? I need to prove that the amount of people on welfare increased exponentially? That's really sad.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/econo...ecord-levels-after-50-years-of-war-on-poverty

 

No, you need to prove cause and effect. You do understand statistics don't you?

 

Another reason you will never be elected and put in charge of anything, and will remain sitting online 24/7 posting anti-Conservative whine-threads.

 

Here is a list of cost of living adjusted public education spending per pupil by state.

http://www.datacenter.kidscount.org...gional-cost-di#detailed/2/2-52/false/867/any/

Draw your own conclusions.

 

When did settling wages become a valid function of government?

That didn't work out worth a hoot for the USSR.

 

You are entitled to whatever you can negotiate for, like any other good or service, labor is no different.

The minimum wage obstructs voluntary association. It should be completely abolished. It's no different than general entitlements, the only difference is the stolen funds go directly from the taxpayer's pocket (the business) into the recipient's.

There are dozens, hundreds of laws which benefit corporations. But benefit is not necessarily coercive. The monetary system being stacked in their favor? Coercive. The advantage gained by inheritance? Not coercive. Direct subsidies and government contracts? Coercive. Paying your employees $0.000000001/year? Not coercive.

Deal with it.

 

To a ward-heeling Libocrat political manipulator, the upside of even more millions of unskilled, poor illegal aliens is huge. The hyperlibs shovel out welfare to this permanent underclass, which rapidly includes the uneducated, lower-classes of American citizens. Pretty soon we've got half the population on one kind of welfare-suck or another, and then the illegals are made *legal, with a simple gesture of some dictator's "pen and phone". And there you have it -- the very class of "Proles" (proletariat) that George Orwell described in his magnificent, prophetic classic, "1984".

These "Proles" will make up a cheap labor pool that will last as long as "Big Brother" needs it to. And the Inner Party Members (to carry the "1984" example further) use great skill making sure that people are kept poor enough to make certain they will need government welfare programs -- including the "minimum wage" -- and the Socialist-Democrats who shovel it -- forever!

Until the Socialists take over completely, however, they need to leverage not only masses of poor, unskilled, unproductive cattle on welfare, they need to artificially increase their wages far above any relationship to worth in a free-market labor force. This way they can continue to drive inflationary forces (while officially ignoring it, as the government does right now), and this dilutes the earnings of those who have worked well and made decent livings for themselves on their own. Thus the erosion of the Middle Class continues, which just ends up swelling the population and dependency of the "Proles" as the government that controls them grows like cancer....

 

Right on target. It's incredibly sad, sickening, disgusting, and immoral.

All so a few elitists can retain power.

 

It does work though in most 1st world western countries.

 

What socialist BS? He asked what a livable wage was, and I attempted to explain it.

Pay isn't based on the extent of the work or the profits the work creates, which is basic 101 capitalism. It is based on supply and demand extremism, and employers would pay much less if it were legal to do so.

I'm against minimum wage increases by the way, they will not work unless the adjustments come from the top and work their way down. Raising prices and dumping the increases into the consumers lap will only increase the relative poverty level putting us right back where we started. Too many people depending on government to supplement wages that are not in any way comparable to the cost of living, so save me your sanctimonious supremacist BULL(*)(*)(*)(*)!

It's that retarded illogical supremacist BS and the cronyism capitalism you seem to support that is destroying the countries economy.

 

But, regardless, Gov. Walker is a bastard. He thinks people should have a choice as to whether or not they join a union. He thinks people should be able to work anywhere they want to work and the organization wants to hire them. He thinks people should be paid what their work is worth. He thinks people and the government should pay their bills. He thinks people should more control over how the money they earn is being spent.

Bastard.

 

No and I don't think $8.50, $9.50 or even $10-$12.00 is a living wage. Many of these jobs weren't meant to be a living wage job. They were meant to give school kids spending money. They were meant to supplement another salary in the family. If you pay a hamburger flipper $15.00 an hour as some Libs demand, what do you pay a garbage man, factory worker, bus driver and etc.? Next thing you know inflation goes sky high and your no better off than you were. People need to look at these jobs for what they are, not what you want them to be. If you want a living wage job, do what three out of my four grand kids finally had to do. Learn a trade that pays more.

 

The poor are so poor in this country that they are dying of obesity.

 

As only a socialist would.

From Socialism 101, not doubt. Only unions and other socialists would agree with you.

Another Socialist POV. First, supply and demand for both the products and the skills are a factor of wages and any employer would gladly pay less for that labor will suffer from it since they will lose out to their competitors who would pay the going market rate. Again, another socialist POV would think that "laws" are needed where market forces suffice.

No, your not a socialist, but you advocate the redistribution of wealth!

You got that part right, congrats!

Oh, and you were doing so well and then you made a huge left turn.

Maybe, when viewed from the socialist lens.

 

And as has been pointed out so many times...."Families" is where you guys continue to fail.

Minimum wage is not intended to support "families".

If you work for minimum wage you should not be making babies and having a "family".

You lefties keep crying that corps or the rich have some sort of owed obligation to the masses...well, that's a two-way street jack. Mr/mrs minimum wage also has an obligation to not become a mooch on society, and that obligation includes things like keeping your dick in your pants when you can't afford a baby.

 

but at least they're doing it with their iPhones in-hand.

 

There is nothing socialist about determining how much it costs to "live" under a particular cost of living. If wages are not comparable to the cost of living it isn't a livable wage. It's called math. Nothing more, nothing less.

Capitalism is based on having competitive environment from which to allow growth, stability, and prosperity across the board.

Capitalism is supposed to naturally keep prices low and wages high, through competition of a large variety of competing businesses, but that can't work if the government is running interference and manipulating the market for the benefit of a handful or monopolizing industries.

Any employer who claims his employees are worthless and undeserving of a livable wage is clearly admitting they would pay their employees far less if it was mandated by the government to do so. Unfortunately that is a bunch of baloney because the minimum wage isn't there to help the employees but to keep wages artificially low, employees dependent on government subsidies, which make them non competitive, and unmotivated due to a lack of incentive to try harder. Why do you think so many people are just giving up and taking the welfare route?

That requires a competitive environment to begin with. The best government corporate money can buy has all but eliminated the competition for a hand full of chosen few. Where businesses used to literally litter the main streets of this once great nation, a strip mall of government darling remain. You don't see local businesses thriving like it did when communities were small business friendly, and they depended on local entrepreneurs to keep them self sustaining when competition wasn't considered competing against the government to survive. Between over regulating, and overtaxing to offer and give out tax breaks/grants/and government corporate welfare (handouts) to the too large to fail crowd that feed the coffers at the congressional levels of government all in the name of eliminating competition to maximize profits, competition is killed by the government that is supposed to assure it exists for the good of the nation as a whole. Only in areas where employees are scarce will significant wages/salaries/bonuses/lucrative tax free expense accounts exist. In the mean time corporate entities establish wages and keep them stagnant as long as someone is willing to tote the water.

Reread it. I did not endorse or promote that in anyway, just discussing the cause and effect. Do you even know what socialism is? From the ignorance you are spewing it is doubtful.

More ignorant banter.

It is all right, some people are just too stupid to understand what I am saying, and picking fights with BS pulled out of their own ass.

If there is a point there you didn't make it. I didn't create welfare, the rich/elites and their sock puppet politicians who are benefiting the most from a noncompetitive/unmotivated populous did. Follow the money it will lead you to the wealth re-distributors of the past 40-50 years every time. Nobody gets wealthy off of welfare, your ignorance is showing again.

You really don't know what socialism is do you?

 

The entire construct of a "living wage" is pure socialism, nothing more, nothing less. Its pure babble to talk about how much it costs to live under a particular cost of living. Cost of living is nothing but an index to a standard of living.

This is somewhat true and has nothing to do with your statement: "Pay isn't based on the extent of the work or the profits the work creates, which is basic 101 capitalism." There is nothing in capitalism that guarantees prices will be low and wages would be high... that is a socialists interpretation. The market forces are what determine wages and prices, but I agree with what you said about government intervention. Government is suppose to ensure a level playing field and not determine winners and losers.

Utter poppycock. I suspect that you have never owned a business. If you had, you would know how ridiculous your argument is since no one who plans to stay in business thinks such garbage. I know of NO EMPLOYER who would claim such BS. They ALL recognize what asests their employees are.

Because it is there for the taking and some see it as a viable option to having to do what is needed to be done to improve themselves and their situation.

Sorry, but I only read the first sentences... I don't have time for specious socialist babble.

I have no problem with English comprehension, you on the other hand have a problem owning up to your socialism. I understand why, its a failed ideology, but some weaker minds find it attractive nonetheless.

Butt hurting?

Still Butt hurt... GOT IT!

Class envy, socialism 1A.

I called you out on it, didn't I?

 

This false debate that Liberals (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s are putting forward on "Living Wage" is ridiculous and a smoke screen for their massive economic failures.

These jobs are not supposed to be "Living Wage" jobs. They are supposed to be for the student, kid, part time supplement, etc.... What they are not wanting to debate is how they destroyed all the skilled jobs that did support more than a living wage and provided the ability for people to move up in the workforce. This garbage is an idiot argument, designed to fool fools, that will not advance our nation one iota.

Rubbish.

 

This is exactly right. Progressive policies have led to the destruction of good paying jobs in this country and whatever are left are going to foreigners that they insist we import. Now only low skilled low wage jobs are left as a result and the Left needs to cover all this up by blaming greed and demanding that their scraps that they left for everyone be enough to raise a family on. If they don't do this they will have to admit and ultimately reveal that they have been a complete failure.

 

Good grief. If you are a human you need basic necessities. Food, water, clothing, shelter, and sex. To have a job you need some form of communication, transportation, and whatever requirements placed on you by your employer and society itself. These things have a value that is determined by the cost of living in whatever community you reside in.

Without pretending the standard of living requires $150.00 sneakers, 2 1/2 big screen TV's, a $400.00 phone, 3-4 home computers, a lap top, $150 cable bill with internet, 3-4 automobiles, a microwave oven and air conditioning in the 4 bedroom home you own or whatever silly nonsense you have been programmed to believe everybody on welfare possesses, how much do you think you would need to 'live' on per month? Never mind, it is obvious you have never had to survive for a living, most likely had everything handed too you, and are completely void of the practical first hand knowledge/ experience necessary to understand the term 'working for a living'.

Where did I say anything was guaranteed? That is you reaching for an argument where one doesn't exist. Yes when there is several businesses competing for customers, the prices reach the lowest common denominator to entice a larger following of customers. From there it greatly depends on the service, attitude, and atmosphere of the business. People tend to go for the best deals and better service, AKA competition. Also YES, is higher wages. Most businesses that wish to excel get the best employees for the job whether that means better production, or compatibility to customers needs, the employees who do the best jobs will be paid better to, you guessed it (well not you you seem to be lost) because their work is more valuable in created higher profits. Their worth is based on how much their work effects the bottom line, profits. If you devalue your employees worth, find them valueless, and pay the lowest wage the law allows you too, you get (*)(*)(*)(*)ty workers with little to no incentive to do better for you or them.

Yes and the market ( a real one not an unnatural one manipulated by cronyism) is influenced by a competitive environment when actual capitalism is allowed to work.

Not all but most of the employers (mostly the government darlings who have control of entire industries) have frozen wages and are in complete agreement with those frozen wages and in compliance to keep them their for their own benefit. They start you at whatever the government requires (minimum wage), not a cent more, because the market is saturated with people who will take the job in a minute anytime an employee have some sense of value about the work they do.

Why do you think these places have such large employee turn arounds?

 

So, why do we hear so much support for a national minimum wage increase?

 

Labor costs are not a significant percentage of the cost of goods any more. This isn't medieval London any more. Raising the minimum wage of fast food workers would be barely noticeable, even on a $2.00 bill at McDonald's, maybe 18 cents at worst. Stop pulling hysterical hyperbole out your asses with that drivel about it tripling the costs of anything. All it proves is that those caliming that BS can't do arithmetic and have never owned a business and hired employees. We already know many of those who keep sniveling about 'high taxes' have never filled out their own tax returns and don't know squat about that issue either.

 

If raising the minimum wage is so essential, why didn't the city of Seattle institute a $15.00 and hour minimum wage immediately after taking the symbolic action of voting in the increase? Why are they waiting nearly a decade to impose this upon businesses?