Comment Loc: California

Japan has no WELFARE. Either work or starve. Toyota, Subaru and a third auto company are closing assembly plants in Australia. No manufacturing plants on that soil.

CDM Loc: Florida

How many people (headcount) in the current work force are directly affected by the minimum wage? I see all kinds of percentages but it is difficult to tell how many people are in the work force. Hence the question. Anyone know?

mpix Loc: NorCal

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

SchoonerPete

One figure I saw was 1% to 2%.

Viral

The truth of the matter is that people like money. And they'll like whomever is giving them money.

I liked Bush a slight bit more when I got a little bit more money in my paycheck. Though ever since that I've noticed road conditions continue to deteriorate, police/fire departments cut back on jobs, etc.

Will a minimum wage increase change anything? On a grand scale, no. Things will do a little shifting as they always do until we're back in the same situation. It's like taking cold medicine to treat the flu. You *may* treat the symptoms for a short while, but the disease is still raging.

The closest symptom to the actual disease is a lack of decent jobs. Competition for even mediocre salaries is fierce.

(edit: for coherency)

It feels like we are in an artificial recession. With the success of companies presently, there is no reason why the job market should be so bleak. With an overabundance of human capital you can, by basic economics, pay the lowest price possible for labor. You can then also force those already in your employ to work harder for fear of losing the job they do have, and ultimately instill the fear of not being able to provide. So people are working longer, for less pay because employers can get away with it (not all of them mind you). A union could rectify the problem, but then you run into the problem of trying not to getting fired for trying to unionize, and then affording the union dues if you do set one up (not to say that unions are not also prone to corruption).

Another interesting way to think about it, who is the beneficiary of welfare? Is it the person relying on the government to subsidize their life? Or is it a company relying on the government to subsidize their employees' wages?

Example: A company that accepts food stamps sells food to a worker they employ. The employee cannot afford to use their hard earned money, and instead pays for their groceries with food stamps. The company has now not only saved money by not paying the worker enough money to not rely on government aid, but has also collected money from the government for giving its products to the employee, making a profit and cutting the municipality/state out of any tax proceeds. Who wins in this scenario?

Comment Loc: California

U have raise some interesting ideas. Let me add something to your story. Calif. has the highest gas taxes in the nation. But the money is syphoned off for the general budget. This is but one example of out right lies to the public because Calif. has the most pot holes (I ant speaking to cannabis either) per mile than any other state. They told us that they needed more money for roads and we pass the bonds and they spent the money on welfare. Politicians win, we lose

Joseph7

No matter HOW many low skilled foreigners you get they are NOT supposed to be paid under the minimum wage.Why do they not pay OUR workers more?When a ceo makes 240 million a yr, well there just isnt enough money to pay the workers who made the company successful and their ceo rich to pay them a DECENT L;IVING STANDARD!Thats ok according to the gop because you should ALWAYS exploit your workers when you can and buy enough politicians to help you do it legally!This is good republican business sense!And democratic too because even though the democrats raise the minimum wage they do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about cost of living increases as a result!Whats the problem with paying a low skilled working a decent living standard?I do not see ANY of the fast food restaurants telling the public "unless you are working your way thru college or you are a h.s. student or retired working part time, you cannot have a job here!"Seeing these jobs are NEVER meant for careers(yet they offer management training go figure).There are people who are not college graduates who work wherever they can find a job, condemned to poverty if they get on welfare and condemned to live in poverty if they take one of these jobs.Whats the solution?Cut the ceos pay and raise the living standard of your workers and the money they make will GO BACK INTO THE ECONOMY CREATING MORE JOBS AND MORE PROFIT FOR COMPANIES DUH!Also do away with the federal extortion law which forces us to buy health care and let the employers opt out of supplying health care for workers,they in turn can give their employees HALF the money they spend on their health care policies and keep the other half benefiting both sides of employer/employee work force.The insurance companies can TRULY "compete" in the open market then.They will have to "supply" an affordable health care policy with a low deductible that people can afford that they "DEMAND".

Puds Loc: So Centrl MN

It isn't just in California. The Minnesota Department of Transportation has become obsessed with "roundabouts" to
replace conventional intersections. They are more expensive to
construct, take additional land from the tax roles, are more difficult for snow removal and visibility, and can create maneuverability issues for semi trucks. U.S Highway 14 between North Mankato and New Ulm, MN is statistically one
of the more deadly roadways in MN. Rather than prioritize
reconstruction to extend 4 lanes as has been completed from
Owattona to North Mankato, MN, MN DOT erected three foot
X 2.5 inch yellow plastic pipe every two feet, in the centerline
for 10 miles. The adhesive, yes adhesive, they used began to fail almost immediately. MN DOT removed the plastic tubes and
the next construction season bolted replacement tubes into the
same stretch of pavement. On several occasions I have ridden
my motorcycle along this stretch of roadway to reach more scenic stretches of additional roads, and my observations tell
me the problems of cell phones and texting, other driving distractions and speeding could be readily reduced by more strict enforcement. In addition, rather than address the actual safety issue through construction and enforcement, political entities have lobbied for more expensive intersections to aid
perceived, unproven economic development, or other projects
that bring highway dollars to mundane even unnecessary projects requested by municipalities throughout the state.
Projects that should be constructed using local funds. MN also
uses fuel tax revenue in the general fund and convinces the media of the necessity for aesthetic improvement priority over
safety. Rest assured, CA and MN are not the only states and political subdivisions with fools in high places misappropriating
funds for political reasons.

Puds Loc: So Centrl MN

When written posts target only one political party of two to make a point, everyone continues to lose. Take a good look at the lists of political donors and you will readily recognize the johns paying our elected whores are bi partisan. Anyone believing the gop or dfl are lily white is only promoting unsubstantiated bias. Further, the insurance companies were
involved during the construction of the ACA. Wolves teaming
up to herd the sheople.

Tyster

I think you are right that many CEOs pay needs to be adjusted. However, while I can't state that no CEO gets $240MM, I doubt you will find that virtually no CEO gets paid that amount. There are some in the larger companies that draw $20MM or more - which is (IMHO) too much. Personally, I am a CEO of a public company, but my pay is far less than that (not even 200K!). My long term, loyal employees are paid well and only a few of the very new people are at the low end of the scale - though at this time we are starting them about $1/hr over minimum wage.

As to health care... as an employer I wasn't keen on it, but Hawaii has a fairly good law... for any individual that works in excess of 19 hours per week, you are required to provide basic medical coverage. Everyone has a net so to speak.

I have to disagree with the accusation against Republicans pushing for business to pay its executives extremely well and stiff the low end employees. Republicans support an economy where businesses are encouraged to flourish. Business in general is to use available resources efficiently to provide a product or service. That product or service has to be available at a price the consumer is willing to pay. This necessitates keeping production costs in check.

As a laborer, you are essentially in business for yourself... you offer your services for a fee. If your fee is too high, you will have difficulty in finding buyers. The more skills you can offer a company, the better chances you will have of attaining a better wage. The number of people at the minimum wage level is a very small percent of the working population. It isn't intended to be a "living wage"... it is an entry level pay floor intended for the truly unskilled worker.

I would rather see a two-tiered system... a minimum wage slightly above where it is now - intended for teens and others who are not relying on the job for full support. And a Living Wage that is intended for adults who are supporting themselves. This living wage would need to be set at an amount above the poverty level.

vernon

the minimun wage has been a democrat vote getter for 70 yrs .i think the republicans should steal some of theeir thunder and bid up what the democrats propose for the minimum wage .if they are proposing 10.00 the republicans say 20.00

ninetogo

Brian _

Since childhood I have been hearing the following:

1. Jesus is coming
2. Flying cars are coming
3. Paying a living wage to people will destroy this great nation. (Southerners were vociferous about that last one).

I guess you are just going to have to stew in it........for losing the right to exploit. Some of your creepy neighbors have the audacity to believe that people who work in McDonald's and Wal-Mart shouldn't have to sleep in the park or dumpster dive for food.

If the government blocks businesses from exploiting cheap labor, maybe the government won't have to augment low wages with food stamps and subsidized housing. Allowing low wages to continue, just subsidizes the wealthy 1% at the expense of the working class.

I support President Obama in his attempt to bring the minimum wage up to date.
_________________________________________________

Brian;
I have been on this board for several months and now feel the urge to sum you up in a post; you are one KEYBOARD COWBOY. Every post that you write is condescending, like you are the professor with all of the intellect and we are holy unwashed pupils. You exhibit a deep seeded hatred for any opinion that is counter to your own. You have the Clower-Pivens Community Organizer syndrome, that being to destroy and ridicule any poster that dares to voice a conservative point of view. You, my friend, are a total waste of DNA and my time.




With all due respect, from your post above, I can not believe that you have ever been self employed, or owned a small business in which you had to make weekly or bi-weekly payroll. If so, you would better understand that employees become your extended family; you care about them as you watch their families grow up. You want to see your employees and their families become successful and have productive lives. Matter of fact, I take ownership and feel a sense of pride when my employees receive a merit raise or receive a profit sharing check at Christmas.

Small businesses contribute over 80%You need to understand that small businesses contribute around 80%
families, their and you care about them, and their families, and their w, elfare. Small businesses constitute nearly 80% of the economic worth of the US GDP. This idea of elevating the minimum wage is purely folly. The political class receive accolades for thinking about the little people, but they do not generate one red cent in goods and services that will pay for this increase. Many of the small businesses have price ceilings on their goods and services; when the small business owners pay the new minimum wage, the employers contribution (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, worker's comp) increases, so overall overhead increases. Add to that the non-compensated administrative overhead that continues to increase due to more government regulations. The end result is that margins are squeezed to the point that the cost increases are passed along to the customer. This spiral insures that fewer employees will be hired at any entry grade position and

mpix Loc: NorCal

To the supposed intellectual progressive, with no business experience. They think that all private business is a deep well of stashed cash. Remember The president said you didn't build that business. He must have meant without employees. But who started the business with his own cash. Not the employee or big government. Yet big government wants to tell us we have to pay more money to our employees. Thats fine. Then who ends up paying more for his services or products? The consumer. You and me. So that 5 dollar burger just became 10 dollars. Guess we don't go out and eat anymore. Oops no customers less employees. Brian likes to bring up Europe alot. And how great it is there. I lived there for 6 years, it's not as cracked up as he dreams it to be.lt has been suggested to him he might want to go live there. Let him decide if that is truly his utopia. But damn he is still lurking around here. :thumbup: :thumbup:

mpix Loc: NorCal

Did the progressives tell us that union wages are linked to the minimum wage? Any increase to minimum wage the union wage increases also. It's The presidents way of a pay back to unions. To the rest of the non union workers to bad.

Comment Loc: California

And it's linked to the welfare check too. Obumma takes money away from military disabled withy no arms and no legs and gives it to the 29 yr old able bodied surfer and his kind. U figure.