Jake

Both theories are valid, rest assured that the solution will be identified by those that control the money. It will most likely benefit them.

My opinion on wages:
Educate Americans so their services are most effective. This way the most qualified and efficient labor is readily available. Thus making us more desirable as the work force.

Once we are indispensable, we can demand the wage that we are worth.

However, some jobs require people to have a skill set thus should not be minimum wage jobs, but are. This might be rectified by having more jobs available, so qualified people are not desperate for work. Unfortunately, large corporations do not want this to happen as it would cut into profits. Right now, they have over qualified workers at low wages.

Corporate control/laws/taxes were supposedly set up to protect us from "big" corporations but have accidentally stifled the small ones. If we go back to controlling/taxing heavy on the big ones, we might be able ease the pain on the smaller ones...startups. Thus potentially creating more jobs.

Just my 1.5 cents

rumitoid

Lol, you are a very predictable person, ginnyt; always the dark side. Nothing else about Henry Ford is pertinent to a "living wage," though very interesting. I said his motives and means were suspect. You, as a competent spreader of dirt, do well here. Making it seem like I support Hitler, anti-Semitism, and spying on workers. Nice job. Nothing to do with anything I was talking about or the topic but it works well for your hatred of me.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Am I the one who raised Henry Ford as an icon of the Democratic party and his wage setting methodologies? No, it was you. Many people are unaware of the "dark" side of his personality, his business associates, and his personal views of individuals. If you identify with him, that is not my problem because I did not mention anything about you in my approach to Mr Ford.

I do not know you, so I can not say what you are like on a personal level ergo to like you or dislike you as an individual I would not venture in either direction. However, as I have read many of your comments I can say that many of your views are contravene to my standards, ethics, and beliefs. This is no way of saying that you are lacking in values or ethics, it is simply that you and I are from different worlds and are essentially incompatible.

Do have a wonderful holiday!

rumitoid

Love it! Master at deception.
"Am I the one who raised Henry Ford as an icon of the Democratic party and his wage setting methodologies?" This had nothing to do with what i said and never suggested said. Re-read what i said.

Another marvelous twist; damn you are good: "If you identify with him, that is not my problem because I did not mention anything about you in my approach to Mr Ford." A mention of what a historical figure did, such as pointing out the holocaust, is not identifying with Hitler. Nice try, though.

"I do not know you, so I can not say what you are like on a personal level ergo to like you or dislike you as an individual I would not venture in either direction." You are unreal. You have insulted me and called me names wildly over one comment I made about your obvious hatred of Obama. The worst imaginable comments made against someone you did not know. People like you get to me; it is very disheartening to face what you put out.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Really, then quote it! Give me date time stamp and a direct quote.

rumitoid

There a good number here who remember when you went after me way over the top for challenging you about your expressed hatred of Obama. Then you formerly apologized for it. A misunderstanding ensued after that over my "LOL" response to your apology. Realizing that "lol" is not what my daughter and I exchange, "lots of love," I wrote an apology. But you have never let things go. You continually take nearly every opportunity presented to insult or degrade me. NP. That means no problem. I may be wrong. You may be a truly good and wonderful person; I see mostly vengeance and duplicity from you at almost every corner. You are very bright and otherwise seem of good character and have led an exemplary life; I guess it is just me. Chemistry or something.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Really, go back get the date time stamp and quote it along with all the follow ups you mention. I keep all of my posts so I can refer to them quickly. And, no I will not do the research for you. If you make a statement, be prepared to back it up with the quotes. I trust that you had the same foresight to save your comments by subject matter, writer and any follow up conversation by topic.

As for my character and my nature, because you and I are from different worlds, I sincerely doubt that you will be able to met me, have a face to face discussion therefore you will never be qualified to judge me; you can only judge the limited contact we share on this forum. I assure you that these quick comments do not make you competent as a judge.

rumitoid

Lol (lots of laughs, Laughing out loud) ginnyt, you way overestimate the importance of responding to you. I expect no honesty or decency from you; you have proved that point, at least to me. Not providing the things you ask is now a point (or more) in your favor: congrats. However, if you do have on record your scathing insults and name calling of me, at the ready as you claim, I will brace myself for a repeat. Do that, and I will comply with your wishes.

I have never, as you have of me, judged you, though I do admire that tactic of oft repeating the slur: it becomes accepted reality. I have never judged anyone here: find it if you can? I have named you for what you showed yourself to be. Again, I could be wrong.

You said when you saw my name in the comments of your thread, you were concerned. When I see yours, I feel the same. So, let's be adults and end this playground game, okay? Nothing but the facts, okay, ma'am?

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

If you are going to be the accuser, then you are required to prove what you have been saying. There comes a time when one must put up or go away and admit that they have unfairly treated another person. You are at that point. I am calling! No more raises, no more passes. Show your cards. As they say, I am all in. Deed to the farm is on the table. I call! Put it out there and let the community see your evidence! And, I am not laughing.

Loki Loc: Georgia

I still have to disagree; reason being as I stated, you are only putting more money, temporarily, into the hands of the lowest wage earners. How much of that goes to catch up things like utilities, car and insurance payments that are in arrears? This isn't much of a stimulus. Also bear in mind that far more people make a little more than minimum, than actually make the minimum. These people did not receive a raise. Their buying power, as soon as consumer prices rise, (which they will, within three or four months) will be diminished. You are temporarily boosting one group to the detriment of a far larger segment of the population. There are lots of people who make $8.50/hour, which is, realistically, about the same as minimum. There are more of them than minimum wagers, and they are the ones who will get screwed. Hell, in 2001, I paid my dishwashers more than that as starting pay. As GM/Executive Chef, would you care to hazard a guess who gets to wallop pots till after midnight if your dishwasher quits to work for someone who pays worth a damn? I would not hire at minimum wage, because if that is all you're worth, I don't want you on my staff. My sous chef/chef d'affair had, in retrospect, a better job than me. He made a very respectable wage, and did not have to listen to the owner's bullshit at the end of a 12 hour or longer day.

xlindsaydurham

Thank you for the kind words and Merry Christmas to you as well. And a Merry Christmas to everyone on the list.
Most of my plans don't work too well in fact most plans don't work at first anyway. Stratagems have to be tried and changed, tweaked, improved and discarded if they don't achieve the desired effect. The idea of putting more money in people's pockets through minimum wage hikes wasn't mine, economists came up with it and I read about it in the paper.

It makes sense if you think about it, low wage earners spend everything they make so you get a virtually instant boost to the economy. The rich just pocket their tax loopholes in accounts in the Cayman Islands and sip their fruit drinks on the beach. A little bit of income redistribution might not be such a bad thing, as I said it would also (indirectly) benefit the wealthy as well. Minimum wage earners would take their pay to the stores, buy more stuff and grow the economy. (Theoretically) Your point on inflation though is well taken, I hadn't thought of that.
Lindsay

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Lindsay,
Many people think that "rich" people have all kinds of loop holes that they shelter their money in off shore accounts. That we hoard our fortune and the little guy is always the looser. They also intertwine the notion of rich people and corporations. Well, I pay 38 percent in taxes on my income. I do not have loop holes to take advantage of due to being a widow, having no mortgage, business losses and such. I do have money put away in another country, but before you go gotta; I paid taxes on that money, nothing was or is being hid away.

You claim that income redistribution is not a bad thing. To me it is. My family worked for what they passed on to me, I have worked so I can pass on to my children. We did not rob anyone, we did not ask for handouts/handups even when times were rough. We worked. This is a unique concept in this day and age, but some of us old folks actually went 9 to 5 at a job, put our noses to the grind stones and earned a pay check. In my circle of friends, we make many contributions to include educational and scholarship awards, donations to hospitals, fund organizations that care for the needy, abused children, older Americans, and the list goes on. I personally have paid the tuition of not only my children but on last count 35 full ride scholarships within the last 10 years. I believe, and most of my friends also think that we have given much more of our wealth than the grand majority. Therefore, I must ask the question....how much more do you want to take from us? How much of my wealth do you want to distribute?

I am in no way trying to discourage you or challenge your opinion. But, it would be helpful if you would look at the other side of the situation.

Now then, big corporations is another story. They do have loopholes that the take full advantage. But, again without those corporations how many people would be unemployed? Would the ranks of the poor grow? Do you think it fair for the stock holders to be required to sell their stocks and give the money away?

You do have a point about low wage earners. They do spend every red cent that comes into their hands. Perhaps that is the problem. They spend their money and then look at the government or cast the green eyed monster at people who sacrificed to put 10 percent of their income into investments to make a better life. And you say by redistribution of my wealth that I will receive benefits. Hades, I do not even get thank you notes! And, I do not drink so when I go to the islands, I sip fruit juice and water.


Just food for thought.

LurkingTom Loc: North Dakota

HA HA HA HA huh?

snowbear37 Loc: MA.

It almost always comes down to "take more from the rich and give it to the poor", doesn't it? Our President has professed this concept over and over. Good work ethics are almost non-existent anymore and raising the minimum wage simply rewards those that have no work skills and punishes those that do. I don't understand why some people can't "get" the idea that it's the people that work hard and create businesses that are the ones providing the jobs. :thumbup:

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Snowbear,

Thank you. It is a problem, especially now that Obama has come out against anyone that has two cents to rub together. But, it is the socialist philosophy that no one has a right to their earnings, that everything belongs to everyone. And, it is my opinion that Obama is a socialist; which may be due to his Muslim upbringing and beliefs.

I must have been asleep when our nation changed from a land of opportunity, where anyone with ambition, a willingness to study hard and work hard can achieve. It seems that now it is those who do work hard is somehow obligated to support those that are unwilling to pursue their a dream other than being the number one scorer on X-Box games. And those who believe it amusing, and a release from their boredom to kill others.

I do appreciate the fact that at least you understand. Thank you again.