Most of the world recognizes May 1 — May Day — as International Workers’ Day. Here in one of the few countries that doesn’t, it’s worth pausing to ask how U.S. workers are doing.
At an event last December, Fight for $15 organizer Terrence Wise recalled “going to bed at night, ignoring my own stomach’s rumbling, but having to hear my three little girls’ stomachs rumble. That’s something no parent should have to endure.”
In order to provide “real” political representation for the “poor” and “underprivileged” as well as the middle class in this country, We the People must reject the corporate owned parties of the Duopoly, and create a new party, dedicated to the advancement of the 99%.
The 1% have abused their power and have proven to be unworthy of governance.
Those whom greed has perverted their sense of “right and wrong” must be disqualified from public service through legislation designed to identify the lack of ethics and morals.
Since I presume you support the “Fight for 15” campaign, I must ask, how did they get to $15 as the right answer? Or should I ask, what should the minimum wage be, and why? In order to justify a specific minimum wage, there must be a reason why it should be that specific value, not a penny more or less. If you believe it should be $15, then I must ask why are you so cruel as to not push for $20 per hour or $50 per hour? What is the justification for only $15 per hour?
The point is that the $15/hour proposal is completely arbitrary. It has no empirical basis. It’s simply an ideological ploy. You can’t claim that the minimum wage has no effect on jobs and then have no empirical rationale for the specific minimum wage that you propose. That’s being logically inconsistent.
What’s the point of this? $15 is over $30K/year and is above the poverty level.
If that was his justification would you let it go? He’s not the enemy here.
Acknowledging that it costs some minimum amount to not live “under a bridge” in this country is not difficult. And that it costs still more to afford to feed and clothe children, should be understandable. So, why not $15? Australia did it from about 7.50 to 15. They don’t tip in restaurants, and still the workers there can afford to not live under bridges and have families.
If you can question the $15/hr, why not question why everyone plays the charade? Or was that your point?
The reason is because there is no empirical logic behind the arbitrary $15 number. And hence, there would be no logic behind $20, or $50, or $100. Clearly at a certain level, unemployment must rise because no company will employ someone at a loss. And at certain levels, companies will shift their means of production from labor to capital. So PonyBoy is the enemy, because his lack of logic has real costs. The minimum wage detrimentally affects the people it’s supposed to support by pricing them out of a job. For those who get a raise, it’s nice. For those who lose a job, or more importantly, those who were already looking for a job, they are detrimentally affected.
So when you imply that there is no cost to raising the minimum wage to $15, you need to prove to me that there is no cost. You need to prove that there’s a reason to choose $15 and not $20, or $50, or $100. Because if the minimum wage has no effect on jobs, then you would never stop at $15. You’d raise it indefinitely and, poof, poverty would be gone.
I read your response and it makes a couple of things come to mind initially. First, you neglected to answer me by replying directly to my message. Why is this, because you’d like to remain somewhat anonymous as you seek to increase the number of enemies, by calling them out here by name? Seems somewhat below board behavior, and I don’t know why. Perhaps it is because you reject any defense of or justification for starting at $15 an hour. You keep writing stuff like this:
Nobody implied that there would be no cost to raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. And it would come from those “pass through” businesses where the business owners are in Mitt Romney’s words: “Takers”. The true Takers are taking more than 1 person’s sompensation for their part in keeping their business afloat. Their workers are expected to keep the business afloat by showing up ready to work and performing their jobs at the skill level they were brought in at or higher. For this they get some compensation. Same goes for the leaders, but they seem to take way more money for their way easier jobs that anyone else can and does (when they get the sack) go!
It seems to me that I can make a pretty darn good empirically logical argument for a $15 an hour wage. We can break it down by acknowledging that the government(s!) will take at least the top 30% of that for FICA, Medicare and Federal & state Taxes. That leaves $20K per year. From this they must pay Rent (presumably no savings to afford a home). I don’t know where you hail from, but out here in Arizona for $600 a month you might find a place in a really crappy neighborhood, but only if you can find a roommate. That eats up $5000 at least, leaving only $15K. After that comes food. $100 a week at a grocery store is not living high on the hog, and only feeds yourself (not that well) and there went another $5000 before you buy beer to drink away your non-working hours in your ‘still a’ dead end job. Now you’re down to $10K left. From that you’ll need either Bus fare to & from work every day, or a car with insurance. That consumes another $400 minimum for bus fare, and that works only if you don’t work odd hours. If you do, then you need your own wheels and with gas and insurance, that’s easily $2500 more per year neglecting any maintenance. And cars don’t run that long when you neglect to maintain them. Now you’re down to $7500 at BEST, and this must pay for clothes, Phone, Utilities, Bank Fees, LIFE SAVINGS (for the only way to get ahead is to save something from each paycheck) and finally other miscellaneous things like health insurance (BAM Which eats up the remaining $7500 and we’re done. Buy hey, Repuglicans don’t want him to have insurance, so let’s keep going) potentially: KIDS!, cards, gifts, or a pack of gum.
After the major necessities, that really leaves one at $15 per hour with about $5000 a year. That is not a whole lot, and woefully inadequate if you have a kid or two. But hey, with the fake bullshit of compound interest, until that scam falls apart, some portion of that $5K gets socked away for retirement. And his savings will grow as a number on a piece of paper mailed to him year after year, until suddenly, before he retires, for reasons not his fault, the stock market goes to shit and the poor sucker gets a paper mailed to him that says he has $1756.12 or some ridiculously low number on which to live out the remainder of his life. We hope that doesn’t happen to him, but it’s happened about every 20 years to many people.
On the other hand, the current $7.50 an hour ran out before the insurance! And you claim that $15 is random and unjustifiable, …to you. Am I an enemy now? But you go farther still!
Prove to YOU there will be no cost? What says there doesn’t have to be a cost, and someone to pay it? One question is are you one of the Takers in this scenario? Are you a “Job Creator” business owner who’s taking more than his top people as take home pay for their work because: “I keep them busy” or “It’s my business” (these both must be said with whiney high pitched voices). If you are, then you’ve already added me to your list, but you felt compelled to ask for some simple math to prove there is no cost. The simple answer is that when folks have more money to spend, they save and spend more driving the wheels of the economic engine more than keeping everyone employed but poor.
The cost would initially have to come from those people who run businesses but who don’t pay their workers living wages, which for folks in the US not legally allowed to live under a bridge for free, is somewhere upwards of $15 an hour. When other folks start getting paid a living wage, they’ll start buying more, because they’ll have money to spend. If you rely on others in any part of your business to run your business, then don’t take more than a fair day’s wage for your 1 person’s contribution. For truly, if the guy at the top goes away, some other schmuck will step into his shoes. 1 person’s shoes. No CEO is worth millions a year in compensation, unless they pay the gals making their widgets, the same millions. Without whom: No Widgets
When PonyBoy says:
He’s being honest enough to suggest something where the math works. What I’m constantly amazed at is folks posting who don’t think of doing some simple math to see if they can defend their positions before they go asking to make enemies of random unknown people on the web.