Mark B: Where DO we draw the line? If $10.10 is a good number, why isn't
$15.15, or $20.20? Should there be a line drawn? I'm not trying to be
flippant. I think it is a viable question.riverofsun: Just curious
if you agree with President Obama in this quote from his address -
"Americans understand that some people will earn more money than others, and
we don't resent those who, by virtue of their efforts, achieve incredible
success. That's what America is all about."
@Mark B:Let's make minimum wage forty dollars an hour.Now wouldn't that solve our economic problems?Better yet! No
one has to go to work. Government can give everybody a checkbook, and mandate
banks to honor all the checks coming through.Obama's starting
to make sense.
worf"Words mean nothing."Which is why so many
people did the American thing and didn't listen to the same old lies in the
state of the union campaign speech.
Words mean nothing.
Minimum wage was never about being a living wage. It never will be. It's
entry level pay for unskilled work. As skills increase so can your wage. By
raising the minimum wage in '08 to what it is now another 10% of teens lost
the opportunity to work. Raising it more will cost more jobs.
In the long run, minimum wage laws hurt the most those it is intended to help -
untrained, poor and minority workers - locking individuals into low pay jobs and
delay advancement....If an employer has 100 workers, raising the wage rate by
30% will result in 5 to 10 people being laid-off or eliminate up to 25 more
people getting new jobs.... Then those who got the increase will see their
purchasing power decline as companies have to raise their product prices to
counter the higher labor cost......Minimum wage needs to be tied to the
inflation rate to at least retain purchasing power. Over the past decade, if you
apply that method, the current minimum wage is just slightly lower than that
Thank goodness that Congress has been slow to act on Obama's agenda. 70%
of the country feels we are headed in the wrong direction. Obama's agenda
is being revealed as the wrong agenda--very self serving.He gives
money to Solyndra and other green companies, that in turn donate heavily to
his/Democratic campaigns, and then go bankrupt.He only wants more
funding for preschools so he can unionize more teachers and receive more money
for Democrats. Studies show minimal benefits to his pre-K proposals.He wants immigration reform to get more voters for Democrats...not to benefit
Hispanics, not to benefit American business, and not to benefit the American
worker, or the unemployed.Obama is very self-serving, and taking us
in the wrong direction.
What is so hard to understand about this?:- Gov't mandates
increases in what an employer pays to its entry level employees- employers
pay their entry level employees more- employers have less money to buy
merchandise, upgrade their stores, etc- employers raise their prices- the public, including those very same entry level employees the forced wage
increase was supposed to help, now have to pay more for that BigMacIt isn't rocket science.
raising the minimum wage is fine but who are we really helping here? Minimum
wage jobs are supposed to be for teenagers or adults who are going to college.
As it turns out under Barack, minimum wage jobs flipping burgers etc... are fast
becoming a career especially for the low info, under educated, Obama voting
base. If liberals REALLY wanted to help they would work toward getting people
OUT of minimum wage jobs - away from government dependence and working toward
self reliance. As far as the state of the union speech with Barack
...this is like the Bill Murray movie "Ground Hog Day"....same ole tired
stuff year after year after year.... Spend more, borrow more, tax more, and hand
out more. This year we get to hear a lecture from the nutty professor regarding
income inequality and how paying burger flippers $15 an hour is the answer. Yawn
Mountanman asked, rhetorically perhaps, "Why else do you think the number of
food stamp recipients have doubled under Obama?"Umm, let me
think. Could the uptick in food stamp recipients have anything to do with the
3,000,000 jobs shed in the last 8 months of the previous administration? Just wondering.
Never forget the wealthy corporate crowd are no longer satisfied with an excess
of millions of dollars in their businesses, bank accounts, real estate, stocks
and bonds, etc..Now their bottom line is to have billions stashed away in
profits.These folks can't ever seem to have enough, and they
blatantly advertise this to show the world where their true happiness lies.
@ Mark B. People become prosperous by being highly productive; producing
something of higher value, products and services in high demand. The market
should determine value not the government because the government can only drive
up the cost of goods which only means poor people will be even more poor! If a
poor person goes to the grocery store to buy food, and the person stocking
shelves is earning higher than the market value wages, that extra cost is passed
on to the cost of the groceries which makes them less affordable for the poor
person and we just went in circles and accomplished nothing but drive up costs
for poor people. Why else do you think the number of food stamp recipients have
doubled under Obama?
By all means, let's look for new ways to pay people LESS. That way the only
trickling will be UP.
Some one should explain to Obama that every time minimum wages increase in
America, China rejoices because they know goods made in China will be even
cheaper compared to goods made in the US. Made in China is our future but darn
it, there goes your job!