Can I get a “WTF lady?”
Another flaming example of election through prostitute-like means.
Like or Dislike: 0 0
Yes – equal opportunity poverty. This could work!
Does the insanity never stop?
It would be funny except for the fact that she’s actually been elected to high public office.
You want proof that an electorate is as dumb as a box of rocks? Look no further.
I’m not sure why this is crazy. In fact, I’m pretty sure it’s completely correct. It’s not saying people would get a living wage or anything, just that they would be employed – which they would be.
Below minimum wage = slavery.
Go one further. Minimum wage = slavery
But seriously, she seems like she’d be knocked down trying to cross a road, failing to look both ways, with her shoes untied, just a mental image I conjure
She is the shame of my state.
Another easy way is to erase the word “unemployed”.
Another great group of words that has no real meaning. Yeah “wiping out unemployment” is great. Busting your balls for two bucks an hour won’t feed your family or keep a roof over your head though.
You’re better up pining on a couch.
I checked the site. 9 of the 10 quotes fit the bill of absolute stupidity/craziness.
Although for the #1 quote “Not all cultures are equal”, that’s 100% correct. Although in the context of what Bachman was using it in, I’m sure it’s just as dingbat ignorant as the rest of them.
This one is hard for me. I’ve BEEN an employer and paid below minimum wage (under the table) because I needed someone to help me but was barely breaking even as it was. I paid an old friend of mine to do tech support on a software application I wrote. He was a felon and nobody would hire him. The $5.50 an hour I paid him put food on his table and, combined with his wife’s income from a regular FT job, paid the rent.
I know for a fact that if I hadn’t been there, he wouldn’t have a job because when we closed our doors and he was let go, he never found more work.
I’m a huge fan of a real living wage, and in a perfect world it would be amazing if everyone could get one, I just don’t know how to reconcile my personal experience with the sentiments above.
Not to drag the healthcare debate into this, but it also hits the same chord. If I were a small businessman with 49 employees, I would have to make the decision between stopping growth and hiring one more person, likely wiping out my profits. Opinions?
It was kind of you to help out your friend while you could, but it sounds like your he couldn’t find work because of his felon status, not because of minimum wage.
With things like the healthcare issue there’s always a point where someone will be at a disadvantage. If the limit were 75 employees then employers with 74 employees would be in the same predicament, and so on. I think 50 is a little low though. They should use some type of ratio of number of workers vs. net profit. Some businesses (pick any size) are struggling and would go under with the added expense of healthcare. Others of the same size are booming and could easily afford to insure their employees, but still don’t.
On the employees’ end, some businesses with just over 50 employees will likely let a few go to stay under the limit. Others will cap their workforce at 49, making everyone work a little harder, and keeping a few people on the street from having a job. There’s really no easy solution. It’s sad that this issue even has to exist.
Ignoring that he couldn’t find work, I was in a position where I either hired someone at less than minimum wage or went out of business. When I finally DID close up shop it was because I found a fantastic, high paying job where I WASN’T working 15 hours a day.
I guess I just feel as if I’ve worked my ass off to get where I am. I’ve worked under the table. Heck, I’ve worked for FREE to gain skills. I’ve worked myself literally sick so that I can be where I am. At all of those points in my life I was able to choose to work for next to nothing and make my own career decisions including working for free just for experience. It’s just strange that in the USA, I can work for FREE (internship) but am not legally allowed to work for $1.00 an hour. If I want the job and the employer wants to hire me at that price, why can’t we make that agreement?
I KNOW I’m about to be flamed (actually, saying this might stop some people commenting) about how unscrupulous employers would take advantage of people in these situations. The fact is that I can’t speak for unscrupulous employers. I can only speak to my personal experiences in this matter and the line isn’t so clear.
Someone could sure agree to be brutalized by their employer, worked long hours, paid little. In fact, they used to agree to this all the time, and it created a world in which people worked all day in menial positions and yet could still not feed their children, and of course this breaks down society and encourages alcoholism and crime as the sane way of life.
So unions and the government had to step in and force employers to allow their employees to be compensated in such a way that the lower levels would have enough security to be able to have a life. You must look at society from the top down, because personal anecdotes do not tell the story. Statistics show that societies where the lower classes have a better life are more likely to be stable and prosperous. You have to break the vicious cycle of despair and try and promote the cycle of prosperity, but that can not be done in a purely free market because the lower classes in reality have no power, as their labor is not valuable in an industrialized world where most work is done by machines(which is should be, because people doing meaningless tasks is not a good investment). Society as a whole is what matters, not individuals. Not everyone is going to be able to work themselves to death and come out on top, but we can invest in ourselves as a community by bridging the gaps between the classes. This may not seem fair to someone who suffered to get where he is, but this is not about him. We can’t punish people for not wanting to life a pointless life.
Aside from the vaguely hostile tone, I see your point. As I initially stated, I’m just unable to rectify my personal experiences both as an employee and an employer with this.
I understand that the nature of the world is greater than my personal experience, but I believe we all filter our opinions through what we, personally have seen. Certainly no right minded cynic is going to change his mind merely because there are “statistics.” I add the quotes slightly in derision just because I’m in a mood today.
I am always interested to hear about these things from a historical perspective, however. Whereas in the industrial revolution, if one did not accept whatever wages at whatever work level, they were setting themselves up to be unemployed, in the information age at least certain careers are set up more for mobility. Hearing a certain part of the population go on about how “everything’s changed!!!!” then assuming that what helped a segment of society 100 years ago will always work.
The optimist in me feels like we’ve reached a point where hard work is rewarded in that there are many entry level positions out there that do not make minimum wage as it is. The market has decided that they want better people working and offer more money than they are required to by law to get it. Surely there’s SOME merit to this idea?
Honestly, I’m on the verge of having my mind changed here, and your argument has a lot of value, I just want to get it worked out calmly if possible. I’m one of those whacky libertarians and I have no problem changing my mind about things.
I found this: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1912435,00.html
It really makes most of the pro / con arguments pretty clearly and I think I’m landing on your side of the fence now. Honestly the biggest issue is that as a past employer, I think of people like ME paying more money for the same work / less work and MOST people think of bloated thieving corporations being the ones skimping on the money. Once I acknowledge that most of the affected people are working for large corps, my thinking changes.
This reminds me of a debate I had with a friend when there was a vote to increase on minimum wage $5.85 to $6.35. He was against it because “how unemployable would someone have to be to only make minimum wage anyway?” I replied, “two people making minimum wage could barely pay the bills much less start a family.” His solution: “Then they shouldn’t start a family.”
I agree that someone who can’t afford it shouldn’t start a family. My point is that they never will be able to if people like my friend try to keep them broke.
Oh, and by the way, my friend and his wife have no kids and combined, make about $100,000 a year. Way to walk in the other guy’s shoes, huh?
What’s with that state? I mean the same state elected Al Franken, no? Is there some strange gerrymandering going on?
RSS feed. This site uses the Basic Maths theme for WordPress, designed by Khoi Vinh & Allan Cole.