I believe the Government should raise the Minimum Wage

[danpass]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

Yeah because of money in politics. Take the money out and we'll have real democracy back.

the Berlin wall

[anonymouslurker]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

Many of those career paths work for large corporations as it is. What's your point, everyone leave their job and start their own practice? Not everyone can do that.

I'm insinuating that you are a defender of the rich and that they own you.

First of all, you've missed my original point completely. All I said was that not every company in the world is a huge corporation that has a CEO making tens of millions of dollars per year. You stated that all the shopping centers are corporations, so I stated that there are other business that exist beyond retail. You said I couldn't name any sectors where they weren't all huge corporations, so I did. Are you still not getting the point that small businesses exist?

Second, how is stating a simple fact that not every company in the world has a CEO making millions, in any way defending the rich? It was a simple statement of fact. A fact that much as you misdirect around, remains a fact.

Third... how exactly is one owned by "the rich"? Are you promoting indentured servitude? Slavery?

[prostuff1]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

Yeah, that's why so many people move to podunk places like Texas, for cheap rent. What they don't realize is that the quality of the rest of their life also diminishes.

That seems a little contradictory to me. If rent is cheaper and they are spending less income on that one specific thing they should have more to spend on other things or doing other stuff... thereby having a better quality of life.

And calling Texas "podunk"... really...? Care to list the other places you consider to be "podunk"?

$800 a month in rent is not a whole lot less then I pay for a mortgage and property tax on my house each month.

[iMikeT]

Originally Posted by danpass

the Berlin wall

The hell does that have to do with anything?

If you're referring to anything about socialism, I suggest you do some fact checking and find out what real socialism was and realize that what we were taught about communism was actually fascism that called itself communism.

Originally Posted by anonymouslurker

First of all, you've missed my original point completely. All I said was that not every company in the world is a huge corporation that has a CEO making tens of millions of dollars per year. You stated that all the shopping centers are corporations, so I stated that there are other business that exist beyond retail. You said I couldn't name any sectors where they weren't all huge corporations, so I did. Are you still not getting the point that small businesses exist?

Second, how is stating a simple fact that not every company in the world has a CEO making millions, in any way defending the rich? It was a simple statement of fact. A fact that much as you misdirect around, remains a fact.

Third... how exactly is one owned by "the rich"? Are you promoting indentured servitude? Slavery?

First, I didn't miss your point at all. Small businesses exist but not in the extent that you think.

Second, you're right, not EVERY single company in the world is a large corporation. But I stand by the fact that large corporations have executives making unreal amounts of money off the backs of their workers.

Third, I'm not promoting anything. Working for the lowest wage legally possible is pretty much being owned by those who pay you. It's called being a wage slave.

[Moyank24]

Originally Posted by prostuff1

That seems a little contradictory to me. If rent is cheaper and they are spending less income on that one specific thing they should have more to spend on other things or doing other stuff... thereby having a better quality of life.

And calling Texas "podunk"... really...? Care to list the other places you consider to be "podunk"?

$800 a month in rent is not a whole lot less then I pay for a mortgage and property tax on my house each month.

If someone is paying $250 for rent, it probably is in Podunk Texas - because I can't imagine rent being that low in Houston, Austin, or Dallas.

And as far as quality of life - I think it's relative. I spent a week in Tyler once. As cheap as everything was - there was absolutely nothing to do there. So there is a tradeoff between living in a major metropolitan area and living in a rural area.

[jav6454]

Originally Posted by Moyank24

If someone is paying $250 for rent, it probably is in Podunk Texas - because I can't imagine rent being that low in Houston, Austin, or Dallas.

And as far as quality of life - I think it's relative. I spent a week in Tyler once. As cheap as everything was - there was absolutely nothing to do there. So there is a tradeoff between living in a major metropolitan area and living in a rural area.

I pay $550/month for rent for my nice one bedroom. Its in New Orleans metro area and we have everything here.

[Moyank24]

Originally Posted by jav6454

I pay $550/month for rent for my nice one bedroom. Its in New Orleans metro area and we have everything here.

Right - which is more in line what a city down here would be. But $250? I can only imagine what that would get you in New Orleans.

[miloblithe]

Originally Posted by Muscle Master

I'm curious is to why the government hasn't raised the minimum wage. $7.25 x 40 hours every two weeks for a year is $6,960!

$7.25*40*2*26=$15,080.

Now, to be fair, a minimum wage worker is unlikely to have paid holidays off, paid sick leave, etc. So actually getting in 2080 hours a year may be hard.

That doesn't change your basic assertion (even if your math is way off) that living on minimum wage is a difficult proposition, especially when supporting a family.

[anonymouslurker]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

First, I didn't miss your point at all. Small businesses exist but not in the extent that you think.

Second, you're right, not EVERY single company in the world is a large corporation. But I stand by the fact that large corporations have executives making unreal amounts of money off the backs of their workers.

Third, I'm not promoting anything. Working for the lowest wage legally possible is pretty much being owned by those who pay you. It's called being a wage slave.

Again, all I said was that not everyone works for a company that has mega-rich executives. That's all, nothing else.

Yes, there are some huge corporations where executives are paid crazy salaries. Don't like it? Don't support those companies.

So, you're saying I make minimum wage, and I'm a wage slave?

[prostuff1]

Originally Posted by Moyank24

If someone is paying $250 for rent, it probably is in Podunk Texas - because I can't imagine rent being that low in Houston, Austin, or Dallas.

That or someone might be living with room mates and then splitting the rent.

And as far as quality of life - I think it's relative. I spent a week in Tyler once. As cheap as everything was - there was absolutely nothing to do there. So there is a tradeoff between living in a major metropolitan area and living in a rural area.

Your idea of nothing to do is likely different than mine. I right now live in a subdivision type setting surrounded by single family homes. I grew up out in the country where the closest neighbor was 1/4 mile away and the nearest mall was about a 20 min drive. I loved living out in the country and would in a heart beat again. When the time comes I will sell my house in the city, find myself some land were no one is around, build a house, and give the city a big middle finger as I leave.

Working in the city I can deal with, living in the city is not my cup of tea but something I tolerate for now.

[jav6454]

Originally Posted by Moyank24

Right - which is more in line what a city down here would be. But $250? I can only imagine what that would get you in New Orleans.

A room inside house which location is a questionably safe area (lower Kenner/airport area, Project Area or Lower Ninth Ward).

[iMikeT]

Originally Posted by prostuff1

That seems a little contradictory to me. If rent is cheaper and they are spending less income on that one specific thing they should have more to spend on other things or doing other stuff... thereby having a better quality of life.

People who make a low wage and pay low rent is one thing. People who make a low wage and pay higher rent is another.

I mean two things by the quality of life comment. 1) Wages are generally low in these areas as is it. Moving there for the low rent doesn't help an individual out much. 2) Culturally. No real need to get into that though.

And calling Texas "podunk"... really...? Care to list the other places you consider to be "podunk"?

Yes. Most fly-over and red states really. Except for cities that I consider islands of sanity like Denver and Austin.

$800 a month in rent is not a whole lot less then I pay for a mortgage and property tax on my house each month.

It depends on where you live. There are parts of the area that I live in where rent for a 1 bedroom apartment is $2,200 per month without utilities.

[prostuff1]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

It depends on where you live. There are parts of the area that I live in where rent for a 1 bedroom apartment is $2,200 per month without utilities.

Yup, it is truely a location, location, location thing. I could not stand to pay that much in rent for an apartment though. Nothing could justify that expense in my mind each month.

[astrorider]

Originally Posted by Muscle Master

I'm curious is to why the government hasn't raised the minimum wage. $7.25 x 40 hours every two weeks for a year is $6,960!

For starters, $7.25*40hr/wk*52weeks/year=$15080/year. You will have to work hard for a while, keep your expenses low, etc., perhaps be willing to relocate, but training and education in a field in demand will open the doors to higher paying jobs.

[anonymouslurker]

Just FYI, in response to this comment:

Originally Posted by iMikeT

First, I didn't miss your point at all. Small businesses exist but not in the extent that you think.

With "Small Business" being defined as having less than 500 employees...
In 2010 there were 18,500 companies in the U.S. with more than 500 employees.
There were 27.9 million companies in the U.S. with less than 500 employees.

From the same Small Business Administration report, 49.2% of private sector employment, is at a small business.

PDF link

Sure seems to me like it exists to a pretty large extent.

[iMikeT]

Originally Posted by astrorider

For starters, $7.25*40hr/wk*52weeks/year=$15080/year. You will have to work hard for a while, keep your expenses low, etc., perhaps be willing to relocate, but training and education in a field in demand will open the doors to higher paying jobs.

Easy to say, far more difficult to do.

[miloblithe]

Originally Posted by astrorider

For starters, $7.25*40hr/wk*52weeks/year=$15080/year. You will have to work hard for a while, keep your expenses low, etc., perhaps be willing to relocate, but training and education in a field in demand will open the doors to higher paying jobs.

Who, in this scenario, will then do the minimum wage jobs?

[iMikeT]

Originally Posted by anonymouslurker

Just FYI, in response to this comment:



With "Small Business" being defined as having less than 500 employees...
In 2010 there were 18,500 companies in the U.S. with more than 500 employees.
There were 27.9 million companies in the U.S. with less than 500 employees.

From the same Small Business Administration report, 49.2% of private sector employment, is at a small business.

PDF link

Sure seems to me like it exists to a pretty large extent.

Any how many of these are subsidiaries and franchises of much larger corporations?

[anonymouslurker]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

Any how many of these are subsidiaries and franchises of much larger corporations?

If you'd bothered to read the report, it says that 2% are franchises.

[iMikeT]

Originally Posted by anonymouslurker

If you'd bothered to read the report, it says that 2% are franchises.

I don't have time to because the market is about to close and I have errands to run after that.

[anonymouslurker]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

I don't have time to because the market is about to close and I have errands to run after that.

Hope you're not going to patron any large corporate stores

[Muscle Master]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

Easy to say, far more difficult to do.

Exactly... I'm not saying it can't be done but at what cost

...

It seems I was way off, figured someone would correct me.. I came up with the equation based off someone getting paid every two weeks with 40 hours in totaled

[iMikeT]

Originally Posted by anonymouslurker

Hope you're not going to patron any large corporate stores

I don't intend to. I'm actually planning on closing a bank account at a large bank and open a new one up at a local credit union.

[astrorider]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

Easy to say, far more difficult to do.

Life's not always easy. In many cases, pay scales with the difficulty level to attain or perform the job. If you want to get paid more, those steps are available.

Originally Posted by miloblithe

Who, in this scenario, will then do the minimum wage jobs?

I'm not sure what you mean by "scenario", as though it's some far off idealistic place and not reality, but here's a breakdown of who currently works them:

•Over half (53 percent) are teenagers or young adults under the age of 23. More than half (54 percent) of these young workers live in families with incomes two or more times the official poverty level for their family size and 18 percent live in poor families. The average family income of these young workers is almost $50,500 per year. The average income for single young workers is $11,200. Over 63 percent are enrolled in either high school or college.

•The other half (47 percent) are workers ages 23 and up. More of these workers live in poor families (29 percent). Yet, even within this half of the minimum wage population, the average family income is over $38,100 per year. The average income for single workers is $19,300. Over 30 percent of these older workers did not graduate from high school and another 36 percent had only a high school diploma.

•Almost 43 percent of all minimum wage workers are children, 26 percent are married family heads or spouses, 11 percent are single family heads, and 17 percent are single people (another 3 percent are other relatives).

•Less than 21 percent of minimum wage workers are the sole breadwinners of their families and less than 5 percent are sole breadwinners that work full-time year-round. Less than 5 percent of minimum wage workers are poor single mothers over 18 years old.

•Over 57 percent of all minimum wage workers work part-time voluntarily. Only 25 percent work full-time year-round while over 28 percent work part-time part of the year.

•The average family income for all minimum wage workers is $45,200 and their wages account for 35 percent of their total family income. The average income of single-nonfamily minimum wage workers is $16,800.

Very Few Workers Remain at Entry-Level Wages for Long
Nearly two-thirds of minimum wage workers move above the minimum wage within one year, and the median raise for those workers is over 10 percent.2 For full-time minimum wage workers, the median first-year raise is almost 14 percent. Entry-level jobs are not lifelong dead-end jobs. These jobs allow Americans to establish a track record of work that creates opportunities for better paying jobs.

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...e-minimum-wage

[rdowns]

Totally throwing **** at the wall here but what about legislating a living wage and eliminating corporate taxes?