DrafterX
12 years ago
just the facts man... show me some numbers.... 😟
gryphonms
12 years ago
I'm not even going to bother debating with you, it is not productive.
DrafterX
12 years ago
ok..... I'll just assume you're wrong then... 😟
stogiefan
12 years ago

So you would rather keep minimum wage where it is at and also pay those people welfare? Because that is the reality of what is happening. I agree with the whole discussion of supply and demand. But at this point welfare benifts have made supply and demand for minimum wage irrelevant. Also many people now view minimum wage jobs as careers since we have lost our manufacturing base.

gryphonms wrote:



You are going to end up paying some form of welfare anyway for all the people that have been priced out of work. At least the ones working on welfare contribute something to the economy and can actually develop their work skills so they are not stuck earning minimum wage for the rest of their life. I agree that more people are forced into minimum wage jobs to start because of the loss of the manufacturing base. But solving one economic imbalance by creating another one is not a viable solution.
gryphonms
12 years ago
Agreed, the only realistic solution I see is to bring back our manufacturing base. That will not happen with our present government. So the theory is realistic, not it's reality.
victor809
12 years ago

Agreed, the only realistic solution I see is to bring back our manufacturing base. That will not happen with our present government. So the theory is realistic, not it's reality.

gryphonms wrote:



Even if our manufacturing base is back, that doesn't defend a minimum wage.

Regardless of how much high value work we have going on, there's always some work which doesn't have the same value being performed by individuals with less training, or less skill, or simply less capability. To force an employer to pay them a value above what they are contributing is essentially requiring the company provide the welfare as opposed to the government.

You're just shifting the cost from the gov't to the direct employer. It's NO different than specifically taxing the employer and putting the money in a welfare program.
ZRX1200
12 years ago
And still no incentive for lazy and or underqualified labor.


Screw the middle class.
gryphonms
12 years ago
Bringing back our manufacturing base would shift many people out or minimum wage. My point was not that minimum wage should corelate to production value, even though it should. My point was we seem to have 2 choices presently. I find it less onerous to inflate minimum wage than to subsidize minimum wage. Both options pay more than these jobs are worth from a supply and demand perspective. So I may not have stated my reasoning clearly enough. My viewpoint may come from a jaded perspective but I want to see less welfare, even if the end result is the same.

Ideally there would be welfare reform that caused welfare to be available to those truly in need and no one else. Historically people worked 2 jobs to make ends meet. Today the government pays the 2nd job portion.

Any successful person that I know works 60 hours a week. That is how we get ahead.
ZRX1200
12 years ago
Yes ignore how americans have been manipulated to devalue their labor.....60 hour weeks thats the ticket.
gryphonms
12 years ago
I ignored nothing, I stated my opinion. I am not talking about the middle class. I am talking about the poor and the wealthy. If you are poor you need to work more. You are not worth $15 an hour when you are flipping burgers nor should you receive welfare to do so. Many wealthy people are wealthy due to hard work. You usually do not make over 100K annually working a 40 hour week.
victor809
12 years ago

Yes ignore how americans have been manipulated to devalue their labor.....60 hour weeks thats the ticket.

ZRX1200 wrote:



In all honesty, successful people should be working that amount or more.

Successful people are driven, they want to complete a task regardless of the amount of effort it takes.

When I was a grad student I worked about 12 hours a day every day of the week.

Now that I'm a professional, I frequently stay up working until 3am, because I have documents I want to get finished before the next day.
ZRX1200
12 years ago
Wasn't discounting that as an avenue.

Was discounting that as THE defined means and as a measure of real wealth. You only live so many hours, and countless hours off the clock do not add wealth.
victor809
12 years ago

, and countless hours off the clock do not add wealth.

ZRX1200 wrote:



Indirectly they do.

Successfully completing projects in time (or early) increases one's value to an employer. It adds experience to your resume and makes higher level roles available.
jackconrad
12 years ago

Screw you! I ain't taking a pay cut! :-"

MACS wrote:


I meant ar
t least 25 bucks , Elitist! lol
ZRX1200
12 years ago
Victor I appreciate your desire for affirmation and doggonit you are good enough. But sometimes you miss your nose in front of your face. I'm not arguing you're wrong. I still love you though 💓
DrafterX
12 years ago
what happened to Victor's nose..?? 😕
MACS
12 years ago

I meant ar
t least 25 bucks , Elitist! lol

jackconrad wrote:



I know. Just being an asshat. 🌫
MACS
12 years ago

what happened to Victor's nose..?? 😕

DrafterX wrote:



It got flooded because he holds it so high. [frypan]
victor809
12 years ago

what happened to Victor's nose..?? 😕

DrafterX wrote:



I know Drafter... I mean, it's gone sideways a couple times, but I think it's still pretty. 😞
victor809
12 years ago

Victor I appreciate your desire for affirmation and doggonit you are good enough. But sometimes you miss your nose in front of your face. I'm not arguing you're wrong. I still love you though 💓

ZRX1200 wrote:



Just keep working you prole!
Users browsing this topic