America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 8 years ago by jetblasted. 22 replies replies.
Go figure . . .
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
jespear Offline
#1 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 8:53 AM EST
Joined: 03-19-2004
Posts: 9,464



Seattle Employees Ask for Reduced Hours So That Jacked-Up Minimum Wage Won’t Cost Them Subsidized Housing

By jacking up minimum wage, Seattle has provided a valuable lesson in liberal economics. The plan has now backfired.

Nora Gibson, who is the executive director of Full Life Care, told KIRO 7 she saw a sudden reaction from workers when Seattle’s phased minimum-wage ordinance took effect in April, bringing minimum wage to $11 an hour.
She said anecdotally, some people feared they would lose their subsidized housing so they have asked that their work hours be reduced to remain eligible for all government subsidies.

It doesn’t stop at $11/hour. The law puts it up to $15 starting January 1, 2017, they will have to reduce their work hours even more to remain eligible for handouts. Good thing the minimum wage wasn’t raised even higher, most would not work at all, they prefer to be spoon fed and remain on the government plantation.

Remember free market capitalism? Under that system, the harder and smarter you worked, the higher your standard of living. But that was found to result in income inequality, so now we have a system where wealth is bestowed by bureaucrats, and working harder doesn’t always make sense.

(P.S. This was on Fox News. Food stamps, child care credits, medical care and a few other benefits are also affected. The potential loss of income exceeds the amount of the pay increase.)
sd72 Offline
#2 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 8:59 AM EST
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
Or work more, and pay your own way.
danmdevries Offline
#3 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 9:13 AM EST
Joined: 02-11-2014
Posts: 17,404
sd72 wrote:
Or work more, and pay your own way.


Why would you want to do that?
sd72 Offline
#4 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 9:47 AM EST
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
I'm starting to wonder myself bud.
tonygraz Offline
#5 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 9:53 AM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,266
Actually it shows that higher pay rates will bring people above the subsidy line, which should cause celebration on Fox where they are so worried about subsidizing poverty but never mention how much more money is poured into corporate subsidies. Actually it shows how Fox will complain about anything repubs are not for and sometimes even things that result in what they are for.
DrafterX Offline
#6 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 9:58 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
Mellow
teedubbya Offline
#7 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 10:00 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
while the "article" could be true there is absolutely no information in it. Anecdotally a person or two may have thought that?

This is a fluff piece designed to whoop up a certain group of folks. There is no there there.
gummy jones Offline
#8 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 10:13 AM EST
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
can you blame people for taking advantage of a crap system?
jespear Offline
#9 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 10:28 AM EST
Joined: 03-19-2004
Posts: 9,464
sd72 wrote:
Or work more, and pay your own way.


Did so for 40 years, often working two jobs.
I guess that's why the "freeloaders" pizz me off so much.

You need help . . . I support the system being there for you.
You want freebies . . . GFY !

For those that don't get what I'm saying . . . IDGAF !
danmdevries Offline
#10 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 10:30 AM EST
Joined: 02-11-2014
Posts: 17,404
^ yup.

Got no problem with helping those in need.

But gaming and abusing the system... those people can die in a fire.
cacman Offline
#11 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 10:46 AM EST
Joined: 07-03-2010
Posts: 12,216
teedubbya wrote:
while the "article" could be true there is absolutely no information in it. Anecdotally a person or two may have thought that?

This is a fluff piece designed to whoop up a certain group of folks. There is no there there.


Although you may consider it a "fluff" piece, this trend IS happening in a number of cities/States where they have raised the minimum wage. Of course in the guberment's infinite wisdon, their solution will be to raise the poverty level so that no one looses any of the free sh|t they are receiving, instead of putting more Americans to work. As the guberment puts it, we need the illegal immigrants to do the jobs Americans don't want to do.

Do you know how to say "Yes, I would like fries with that." in Spanish?
victor809 Offline
#12 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 11:26 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
teedubbya wrote:
while the "article" could be true there is absolutely no information in it. Anecdotally a person or two may have thought that?

This is a fluff piece designed to whoop up a certain group of folks. There is no there there.




I caught that too.

"anecdotally, some people"

Let me start by saying, I don't like the increased minimum wage, I think it's probably a bad idea which will have some very interesting consequences.

But this little bit of silliness masked as a news story isn't saying anything.

So anecdotally, someone said they were worried and asked about having their hours cut.

What actually happened statistically? I'm sure some percentage chose to stay in the system. But doesn't that mean that (as tony said above) another percentage is able to LEAVE the system? Anyone not "anecdotally" cutting their hours is now earning enough to not be on whatever system the others are "anecdotally" trying to stay in.

Sounds to me like the program is a raging success on getting people off whatever welfare system they're trying to stay in.
frankj1 Offline
#13 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 12:12 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
cacman wrote:
Although you may consider it a "fluff" piece, this trend IS happening in a number of cities/States where they have raised the minimum wage. Of course in the guberment's infinite wisdon, their solution will be to raise the poverty level so that no one looses any of the free sh|t they are receiving, instead of putting more Americans to work. As the guberment puts it, we need the illegal immigrants to do the jobs Americans don't want to do.

Do you know how to say "Yes, I would like fries with that." in Spanish?

actually, I blame those in the private sector for hiring the illegals who are willing to take less than even an unskilled American is willing to take.

Another big trend is hiring temps. It's cheaper to pay the (private) agency about $23/hour than to hire an unemployed American looking for full time work at $15/hr...
teedubbya Offline
#14 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 12:15 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I'm not saying it's not true. I'm just saying there is nothing in that particular piece that supports that it is true. If that's good enough for you godspeed.
TMCTLT Offline
#15 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 1:00 PM EST
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
frankj1 wrote:
actually, I blame those in the private sector for hiring the illegals who are willing to take less than even an unskilled American is willing to take.

Another big trend is hiring temps. It's cheaper to pay the (private) agency about $23/hour than to hire an unemployed American looking for full time work at $15/hr...



More than our Federal Government for allowing them to continue to pour in?
Again, I actually agree with you on this as it was a choice I have been faced many times and DECLINED the cheap labor because I can't support that kind of thinking to better my bottom line while knowing full well there ARE Americans out there looking for work.

And you are correct in your 2nd statement also but it's more than that... employers are now sidestepping the cost of healthcare that is being forced on them by the ACA. I have worked for a company called Tradesman Int. they're a Non union organization that contractors can call and get " temp. help " be it carpenter (comm. or res. ) a painter / electrician etc and they charge handsomely ($45) per man hr. for a carpenter and pay out maybe $19-$22 maybe $25 an hour. It's all about giving big business an opportunity to sidestep full time employees and paying them what they're worth.
danmdevries Offline
#16 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 2:00 PM EST
Joined: 02-11-2014
Posts: 17,404
The cost of an employee to an employer is way beyond payroll.

I considered a contractor position, with a staffing agency, who would be paying me nearly double my base salary. But no benefits. After digging in deep, my total package as an employee was worth more than the contract work.

Raised minimum wage, while this thread is talking voluntary employee reduction of hours to maintain a threshold, I'm sure is causing employers to reconsider their full-time staffing percentage to reduce total package costs.
jespear Offline
#17 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 4:10 PM EST
Joined: 03-19-2004
Posts: 9,464
Basically, guys I just wanted to vent a bit.
(Post #9 pretty much sums it up.)
Brewha Offline
#18 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 4:16 PM EST
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
jespear wrote:
Seattle Employees Ask for Reduced Hours So That Jacked-Up Minimum Wage Won’t Cost Them Subsidized Housing

By jacking up minimum wage, Seattle has provided a valuable lesson in liberal economics. The plan has now backfired.

Nora Gibson, who is the executive director of Full Life Care, told KIRO 7 she saw a sudden reaction from workers when Seattle’s phased minimum-wage ordinance took effect in April, bringing minimum wage to $11 an hour.
She said anecdotally, some people feared they would lose their subsidized housing so they have asked that their work hours be reduced to remain eligible for all government subsidies.

It doesn’t stop at $11/hour. The law puts it up to $15 starting January 1, 2017, they will have to reduce their work hours even more to remain eligible for handouts. Good thing the minimum wage wasn’t raised even higher, most would not work at all, they prefer to be spoon fed and remain on the government plantation.

Remember free market capitalism? Under that system, the harder and smarter you worked, the higher your standard of living. But that was found to result in income inequality, so now we have a system where wealth is bestowed by bureaucrats, and working harder doesn’t always make sense.

(P.S. This was on Fox News. Food stamps, child care credits, medical care and a few other benefits are also affected. The potential loss of income exceeds the amount of the pay increase.)

I don't know which is worse, Fox publishing this kind of half baked, divisive crap, or the audience swallowing it like Linda Lovelace.

I reckon that the "conclusion" we are to draw from this true crime peice is that minimum wage is bad because the poor are that way by lazy choice and don't deserve a living wage. It even seems to suggest that if wages were higher, people would not work at all. Ah, the "wisdom" of Fox......

Yeah, that's the fair and balanced truth; give 'em raise to $40k a year and they all quit...
frankj1 Offline
#19 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 5:31 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
jespear wrote:
Basically, guys I just wanted to vent a bit.
(Post #9 pretty much sums it up.)




understandable
frankj1 Offline
#20 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 5:39 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
TMCTLT wrote:
More than our Federal Government for allowing them to continue to pour in?
Again, I actually agree with you on this as it was a choice I have been faced many times and DECLINED the cheap labor because I can't support that kind of thinking to better my bottom line while knowing full well there ARE Americans out there looking for work.

And you are correct in your 2nd statement also but it's more than that... employers are now sidestepping the cost of healthcare that is being forced on them by the ACA. I have worked for a company called Tradesman Int. they're a Non union organization that contractors can call and get " temp. help " be it carpenter (comm. or res. ) a painter / electrician etc and they charge handsomely ($45) per man hr. for a carpenter and pay out maybe $19-$22 maybe $25 an hour. It's all about giving big business an opportunity to sidestep full time employees and paying them what they're worth.


It's nice to know we agree!

Not sure if Fed Gov or Biz wins the contest, as you asked. sort of the chicken/egg question. I mean, if the jobs weren't being offered, I'm feeling that far less illegals would want to stream in. There's a percent in every group looking for freebies for sure, but sooo many are taking these jobs!
ZRX1200 Offline
#21 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 5:56 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,617
Some see more of this than others, having first hand experience tends to drift people towards believing stories like this. So believe what you will, I see people gaming the system every day. I even have relatives and relatives of friends who see this up close.

People tend to take the path of least resistance, no different for those on the dole. By choice or not.
jetblasted Offline
#22 Posted: Mon, Sep 14 2015, 8:06 PM EST
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,595
teedubbya wrote:
This is a fluff piece designed to whoop up a certain group of folks.


Racis . . .
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top