and you have to remember, if you worked 40 hours a week at minimum, you would still be below the poverty line and eligible for that safety net.. so either way, we are already paying for it.. either thru taxes or higher prices.. sometimes both
and you have to remember, if you worked 40 hours a week at minimum, you would still be below the poverty line and eligible for that safety net.. so either way, we are already paying for it.. either thru taxes or higher prices.. sometimes both
Just for Reference that $15 and hour rate comes from the MLK minimum wage position adjusted for inflation.
Then how about corporations that make $X dollar amount a year that has Y number of employees on assistance get "taxed" the same amount it costs the tax payers to subsidize their employees pay checks? This would directly target companies that actually manipulate time and under pay employees as part of their SOP, because at the end of the day, when the companies underpay and the tax payer has to subsidize is the same as welfare to the company.
I see huge detail issues but a concept question.
Flight Service wrote: Then how about corporations that make $X dollar amount a year that has Y number of employees on assistance get "taxed" the same amount it costs the tax payers to subsidize their employees pay checks? This would directly target companies that actually manipulate time and under pay employees as part of their SOP, because at the end of the day, when the companies underpay and the tax payer has to subsidize is the same as welfare to the company. I see huge detail issues but a concept question.
This is actually an EXCELLENT idea.
In reply to Flight Service:
Would support. Sounds like a better option than my proposals in "Corporate Tax Breaks Based on Average Employee Wage."
There really doesn't seem to be any dissinsentive to underpaying employees.
In reply to Flight Service:
Would support. Sounds like a better option than my proposals in "Corporate Tax Breaks Based on Average Employee Wage."
There really doesn't seem to be any disinsentive to underpaying employees.
SVreX wrote: ... evil conservatives...
Conservatives are people too, SV, even if you think such labels are appropriate.
Honestly though, the whole "I'm a conservative and I'm being persecuted for it" thing is pretty sad.
Flight Service wrote: Then how about corporations that make $X dollar amount a year that has Y number of employees on assistance get "taxed" the same amount it costs the tax payers to subsidize their employees pay checks? This would directly target companies that actually manipulate time and under pay employees as part of their SOP, because at the end of the day, when the companies underpay and the tax payer has to subsidize is the same as welfare to the company. I see huge detail issues but a concept question.
Very smart. Dunno if it's loophole-free but I like the concept.
In reply to pres589:
I guess you missed the incredibly thick sarcasm dripping from my post.
My apologies.
mad_machine wrote: that is like saying with the recent economic downturn over the past 10 years that prices should have gone down....
This whole thread ended right here. The system is rigged people. Can you be the 1%? Sure, I've touched it briefly for a month or so at a time. But to argue FOR the 1% is absurd.
The amount of wealth that the richest of the rich have is mind boggling. As a billionaire, you literally have more money than you can possibly spend in life. There comes a part where more is just "more", aka greed. Making everyond's life better creates a better society to live in.
I'm a pretty conservative individual, but even I recognize that. What is silly, is that for a country that is made up of states that are more like their own "little countries" than sections of one unified country, your states can't set reasonable minimum wages themselves. Strikes me as odd.
HiTempguy wrote: The amount of wealth that the richest of the rich have is mind boggling. As a billionaire, you literally have more money than you can possibly spend in life.
You, Sir, obviously under-estimate my abilities!
Bobzilla wrote: Why hasn't my wage? Why should someone not willing to push forward be allowed to get what millions of others don't?
You're part of the problem. No offense, but its called the race to the bottom; when MOST companies engage in cutthroat destruction of wages, its basically collusion against the wages of workers. This is where capitalism fails miserably.
If 50% of companies go "we're cutting your wage this year even though we earned more money", thats not "market forces". The system is rigged, which is why pure capitalism doesn't work. But people (like yourself) buy into it with such a zealot-like righteousness, that they can't take the blinders off to recognize it as such.
Fact: companies are earning more money than they ever have
Fact: wage discrepency IS A THING and is becoming worse
The arguments we are having right now probably mirror the same types of arguments before a revolution. The companies don't get to be rich and wealthy without US, THE 99%. It is not their sandbox, it is ours, and the only reason THEY have so much control is because of the absurd amounts of money WE have given them and in return how little money we have accepted from them.
SVreX wrote: In reply to pres589: I guess you missed the incredibly thick sarcasm dripping from my post. My apologies.
No prob. What's a thickly sarcastic statement doing in a discussion of the minimum wage?
HiTempguy wrote: The amount of wealth that the richest of the rich have is mind boggling. As a billionaire, you literally have more money than you can possibly spend in life. There comes a ppoint where more is just "more", aka greed. Making everyone's life better creates a better society to live in. I'm a pretty conservative individual, but even I recognize that.
100%
How do you get really rich people to spend their money without taxing the crap out of them? Why don't rich people get together to try and building starships or something?
PHeller wrote: How do you get really rich people to spend their money without taxing the crap out of them? Why don't rich people get together to try and building starships or something?
They tried to build the Freedom Ship to set up businesses in international waters...
See also: Seasteading, second to most recent GiTS movie, a certain underwater FPS game and a certain Neill Blomkamp movie...and maybe also a book with a 60-page rant...
100% How do you get really rich people to spend their money without taxing the crap out of them? Why don't rich people get together to try and building starships or something?
You convince them that investing in business is good for business.
HiTempguy wrote: The arguments we are having right now probably mirror the same types of arguments before a revolution.
Possibly. Although it wasn't in English so it probably sounded sexier.
In reply to noddaz:
They already know that, the game now is to invest as little as possible while still showing net profit. It's that game of measures that goes on today, where cost is taken out as much as possible while still moving product, before a brand crashes to the ground after everyone has lost faith in their products.
capitalism does not work without rules. Like it or not, the Federal Government needs to set down a level playing ground that all companies have to follow.
HiTempguy wrote: The companies don't get to be rich and wealthy without US, THE 99%. It is not their sandbox, it is ours, and the only reason THEY have so much control is because of the absurd amounts of money WE have given them and in return how little money we have accepted from them.
If it really is the proletariat's sandbox, then why do you feel you need legislation forcing a minimum wage?
Datsun1500 wrote: This thread has a lot of people saying big companies are greedy because they make so much money. Is demanding they give you more of what they earned not greedy?
It's akin to the "only white people are racist" mindset, IMHO.
Datsun1500 wrote: People used to aspire to work hard...
I'm sorry, but anyone saying that needs to remember to tell the neighbor kids to get off their lawn, otherwise the message just isn't believable enough.
In reply to Datsun1500:
We must be old souls from a different time.......a time before that Bob Costas "occupy" mentality. You aren't entitled to anything other than what you agree to work for, and if you aren't reasonable, you won't have a job. Be thankful for what you get, and always look at bettering yourself. Just remember that several of the "Evil large corporations" started from garages with almost no startup capitol.
Datsun1500 wrote:pres589 wrote:So, excuse number 1.....Datsun1500 wrote: People used to aspire to work hard...I'm sorry, but anyone saying that needs to remember to tell the neighbor kids to get off their lawn, otherwise the message just isn't believable enough.
that's the first thing I thought as well! lol
yamaha wrote: In reply to Datsun1500: We must be old souls from a different time.......a time before that Bob Costas "occupy" mentality. You aren't entitled to anything other than what you agree to work for, and if you aren't reasonable, you won't have a job. Be thankful for what you get, and always look at bettering yourself. Just remember that several of the "Evil large corporations" started from garages with almost no startup capitol.
That went out of style when we no longer kept score and everyone gets a trophy.
This topic is locked. No further posts are being accepted.
