Raising Minimum Wage issue a Win-Win for Democrats!

Wordslinger wrote:If the minimum wage bill had passed in the senate (it didn't), the democrats would have won considerable support from the millions of Americans stuck in part time jobs and taking food stamps to get by.

If it didn't pass -- because of republican efforts to kill the bill -- the democrats would pick-up even more votes from workers in low paying jobs who would want payback against the republicans who screwed them.

Congratulations republicans - you've undoubtedly pleased giant blood sucking corporations like Macdonald's and Walmart --

No doubt you figure big campaign contributions will let you win the coming elections anyway.

Your problem is, the father of three who's earning $8.20 an hour won't forget why you let him and his family suffer.

Thanks republicans for making it all so easy ...

Wordslinger wrote:If the minimum wage bill had passed in the senate (it didn't), the democrats would have won considerable support from the millions of Americans stuck in part time jobs and taking food stamps to get by.

If it didn't pass -- because of republican efforts to kill the bill -- the democrats would pick-up even more votes from workers in low paying jobs who would want payback against the republicans who screwed them.

Congratulations republicans - you've undoubtedly pleased giant blood sucking corporations like Macdonald's and Walmart --

No doubt you figure big campaign contributions will let you win the coming elections anyway.

Your problem is, the father of three who's earning $8.20 an hour won't forget why you let him and his family suffer.

Thanks republicans for making it all so easy ...

Markle wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:If the minimum wage bill had passed in the senate (it didn't), the democrats would have won considerable support from the millions of Americans stuck in part time jobs and taking food stamps to get by.

If it didn't pass -- because of republican efforts to kill the bill -- the democrats would pick-up even more votes from workers in low paying jobs who would want payback against the republicans who screwed them.

Congratulations republicans - you've undoubtedly pleased giant blood sucking corporations like Macdonald's and Walmart --

No doubt you figure big campaign contributions will let you win the coming elections anyway.

Your problem is, the father of three who's earning $8.20 an hour won't forget why you let him and his family suffer.

Thanks republicans for making it all so easy ...

AND a lose - lose for AMERICA.  But, it would be another step toward the Socialism/Communism you so pine for.

As you well know your statement about $8.20 an hour for a father of three is a blatant LIE.  Please tell us what the typical household income is where one of the workers earns minimum wage.  Or are you going be the coward and change the issue...again?

PkrBum wrote:Why not make it twenty an hour... or fifty... or one hundred?

Stop being greedy.

Hey... why don't we just tack an extra zero on the end of every priced thing? Tada... crisis solved by govt solution.

Floridatexan wrote:

Markle wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:If the minimum wage bill had passed in the senate (it didn't), the democrats would have won considerable support from the millions of Americans stuck in part time jobs and taking food stamps to get by.

If it didn't pass -- because of republican efforts to kill the bill -- the democrats would pick-up even more votes from workers in low paying jobs who would want payback against the republicans who screwed them.

Congratulations republicans - you've undoubtedly pleased giant blood sucking corporations like Macdonald's and Walmart --

No doubt you figure big campaign contributions will let you win the coming elections anyway.

Your problem is, the father of three who's earning $8.20 an hour won't forget why you let him and his family suffer.

Thanks republicans for making it all so easy ...

AND a lose - lose for AMERICA.  But, it would be another step toward the Socialism/Communism you so pine for.

As you well know your statement about $8.20 an hour for a father of three is a blatant LIE.  Please tell us what the typical household income is where one of the workers earns minimum wage.  Or are you going be the coward and change the issue...again?

Touchy subject for you, I see.  No...we can't pay people for what they contribute.  Power to the billionaires.  Screw the people.

2seaoat wrote:The minimum wage historically has been fought by traditional main street Republicans where the party once had its strongest support among small business owners who thought that wages were killing their bottom line.

Go to any town now and see the closed storefronts where middle class Republicans built small business, but those businesses have closed for lack of revenue and demand.  Large big box stores have filled the void, and those traditional Republicans are now looking at economic theories and realizing the strangling of the median income has a direct correlation with GDP and consumer demand.   The inability to keep the minimum wage close to real dollar minimum wage in 1968 has created structural demand issues which will take over a decade to correct.  A slow 20 year migration of the minimum wage to real 1968 baselines adjusted for inflation will slowly correct some of those structural problems, but not without complete trade policy overhaul, and setting priority on increasing the median income in America......it is not as simple as make the minimum wage $15 dollars and poverty is extinguished......yes there will be meaningful wealth equity, but there will be real threats of short term unemployment.  The key is slow and steady based on sound economic principles and not political rhetoric.

Markle wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:If the minimum wage bill had passed in the senate (it didn't), the democrats would have won considerable support from the millions of Americans stuck in part time jobs and taking food stamps to get by.

If it didn't pass -- because of republican efforts to kill the bill -- the democrats would pick-up even more votes from workers in low paying jobs who would want payback against the republicans who screwed them.

Congratulations republicans - you've undoubtedly pleased giant blood sucking corporations like Macdonald's and Walmart --

No doubt you figure big campaign contributions will let you win the coming elections anyway.

Your problem is, the father of three who's earning $8.20 an hour won't forget why you let him and his family suffer.

Thanks republicans for making it all so easy ...

AND a lose - lose for AMERICA.  But, it would be another step toward the Socialism/Communism you so pine for.

As you well know your statement about $8.20 an hour for a father of three is a blatant LIE.  Please tell us what the typical household income is where one of the workers earns minimum wage.  Or are you going be the coward and change the issue...again?

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:If the minimum wage bill had passed in the senate (it didn't), the democrats would have won considerable support from the millions of Americans stuck in part time jobs and taking food stamps to get by.

If it didn't pass -- because of republican efforts to kill the bill -- the democrats would pick-up even more votes from workers in low paying jobs who would want payback against the republicans who screwed them.

Congratulations republicans - you've undoubtedly pleased giant blood sucking corporations like Macdonald's and Walmart --

No doubt you figure big campaign contributions will let you win the coming elections anyway.

Your problem is, the father of three who's earning $8.20 an hour won't forget why you let him and his family suffer.

Thanks republicans for making it all so easy ...

AND a lose - lose for AMERICA.  But, it would be another step toward the Socialism/Communism you so pine for.

As you well know your statement about $8.20 an hour for a father of three is a blatant LIE.  Please tell us what the typical household income is where one of the workers earns minimum wage.  Or are you going be the coward and change the issue...again?

You're on.  But instead of the real minimum wage which is $7.25 an hour, paid mostly to part time workers so rich bastards can make maximum profits from their labor, let's use my fictional wage level of $8.20 an hour:

The average part time worker works about 34 hours a week -- 34 X 8.20 = $278.80 a week X 4 = $1115.20 per month X12 = that's $13382.40 gross per year.  And qualifies the worker and his family for food stamps.

Ouch! you cry .... poor baby ...

And as for it being a "lose lose" for America, you're dead wrong.  If your company is selling 24,000 units a month you need as many people as it takes to produce your product.  If the minimum wage goes up, you raise your prices to cover the new costs.  If you sell less units because of the higher price, then you cut your workforce, or do better advertising and sales management. Now consider what happens in the marketplace when all your workforce is earning a fair wage -- and spending most of their income -- everything goes up when demand goes up.

What you want more than anything, Herr Markle, is a slave work force and no price controls.  That's what you Nazis have always wanted.

Markle wrote:

2seaoat wrote:The minimum wage historically has been fought by traditional main street Republicans where the party once had its strongest support among small business owners who thought that wages were killing their bottom line.

Go to any town now and see the closed storefronts where middle class Republicans built small business, but those businesses have closed for lack of revenue and demand.  Large big box stores have filled the void, and those traditional Republicans are now looking at economic theories and realizing the strangling of the median income has a direct correlation with GDP and consumer demand.   The inability to keep the minimum wage close to real dollar minimum wage in 1968 has created structural demand issues which will take over a decade to correct.  A slow 20 year migration of the minimum wage to real 1968 baselines adjusted for inflation will slowly correct some of those structural problems, but not without complete trade policy overhaul, and setting priority on increasing the median income in America......it is not as simple as make the minimum wage $15 dollars and poverty is extinguished......yes there will be meaningful wealth equity, but there will be real threats of short term unemployment.  The key is slow and steady based on sound economic principles and not political rhetoric.

PLEASE, explain in detail to us the benefit of increasing the minimum wage.  Keep in mind that every wage level above that will increase by an equal percentage and the net result will be...ZERO.

Our favorite Socialist/Communist Wordslinger rambles on about paying someone for what they contribute.  Fine.

What does someone who cannot speak proper English, even as their first language, cannot do simple arithmetic, have NO skills, no work ethic and has never had a job worth to an employer?  

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:

2seaoat wrote:The minimum wage historically has been fought by traditional main street Republicans where the party once had its strongest support among small business owners who thought that wages were killing their bottom line.

Go to any town now and see the closed storefronts where middle class Republicans built small business, but those businesses have closed for lack of revenue and demand.  Large big box stores have filled the void, and those traditional Republicans are now looking at economic theories and realizing the strangling of the median income has a direct correlation with GDP and consumer demand.   The inability to keep the minimum wage close to real dollar minimum wage in 1968 has created structural demand issues which will take over a decade to correct.  A slow 20 year migration of the minimum wage to real 1968 baselines adjusted for inflation will slowly correct some of those structural problems, but not without complete trade policy overhaul, and setting priority on increasing the median income in America......it is not as simple as make the minimum wage $15 dollars and poverty is extinguished......yes there will be meaningful wealth equity, but there will be real threats of short term unemployment.  The key is slow and steady based on sound economic principles and not political rhetoric.

PLEASE, explain in detail to us the benefit of increasing the minimum wage.  Keep in mind that every wage level above that will increase by an equal percentage and the net result will be...ZERO.

Our favorite Socialist/Communist Wordslinger rambles on about paying someone for what they contribute.  Fine.

What does someone who cannot speak proper English, even as their first language, cannot do simple arithmetic, have NO skills, no work ethic and has never had a job worth to an employer?  

Obama is absolutely correct; you don't need to attack a racist -- just let them talk and they destroy themselves.

Herr Markle's measurements are of a non-educated foreign employee who hasn't a firm grasp of English.

In simple terms, this obviously means that Herr Markle thinks America's part time workers are all Hispanics.

And finally, who gives a flying fuck what a big employer thinks a worker is worth, if that figure is less than the worker can live on and feed his family?

Herr Markle, you've outdone yourself -- not only are you a Nazi capitalist tyrant, but you're also a bigot.

You must be so proud ....

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:

2seaoat wrote:The minimum wage historically has been fought by traditional main street Republicans where the party once had its strongest support among small business owners who thought that wages were killing their bottom line.

Go to any town now and see the closed storefronts where middle class Republicans built small business, but those businesses have closed for lack of revenue and demand.  Large big box stores have filled the void, and those traditional Republicans are now looking at economic theories and realizing the strangling of the median income has a direct correlation with GDP and consumer demand.   The inability to keep the minimum wage close to real dollar minimum wage in 1968 has created structural demand issues which will take over a decade to correct.  A slow 20 year migration of the minimum wage to real 1968 baselines adjusted for inflation will slowly correct some of those structural problems, but not without complete trade policy overhaul, and setting priority on increasing the median income in America......it is not as simple as make the minimum wage $15 dollars and poverty is extinguished......yes there will be meaningful wealth equity, but there will be real threats of short term unemployment.  The key is slow and steady based on sound economic principles and not political rhetoric.

PLEASE, explain in detail to us the benefit of increasing the minimum wage.  Keep in mind that every wage level above that will increase by an equal percentage and the net result will be...ZERO.

Our favorite Socialist/Communist Wordslinger rambles on about paying someone for what they contribute.  Fine.

What does someone who cannot speak proper English, even as their first language, cannot do simple arithmetic, have NO skills, no work ethic and has never had a job worth to an employer?  

Obama is absolutely correct; you don't need to attack a racist -- just let them talk and they destroy themselves.

Herr Markle's measurements are of a non-educated foreign employee who hasn't a firm grasp of English.

In simple terms, this obviously means that Herr Markle thinks America's part time workers are all Hispanics.

And finally, who gives a flying fuck what a big employer thinks a worker is worth, if that figure is less than the worker can live on and feed his family?

Herr Markle, you've outdone yourself -- not only are you a Nazi capitalist tyrant, but you're also a bigot.

You must be so proud ....

2seaoat wrote:PLEASE, explain in detail to us the benefit of increasing the minimum wage.  Keep in mind that every wage level above that will increase by an equal percentage and the net result will be...ZERO.

This statement is not sound.  Other wages may increase or decrease, however corporate and business profits will be lowered because the cost of doing business will be increased, and you will see increases in the costs of goods and services which will mean short term corporate profits taking a hit unless there are lay offs, or increased demand and therefore more revenue.  The hard part is realizing that income inequality has a negative impact on GDP but simply raising the minimum wages in too large of an increment not to be offset by increased demand and business is not sound economic policy.  Again, this is not a zero sum game.

Wordslinger wrote:Here's some reality :

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Median personal income for the population age 25 or older in 2005.[1]
Income in the United States

   Affluence in the United States
   Household income in the United States
   Income inequality in the United States
   (Male–female disparity • Racial disparity)
   Personal income in the United States
   Social class in the United States

Income by:

   State (localities by state • Income equality)
   County (highest | lowest)
   Metropolitan statistical area
   Place (highest | lowest)
   Urban areas
   ZIP Code Tabulation Area . . .




. . . Personal income is an individual’s total earnings from wages, investment interest, and other sources. In the United States the most widely cited personal income statistics are the Bureau of Economic Analysis’s personal income and the Census Bureau’s per capita money income. The two statistics spring from different traditions of measurement—personal income from national economic accounts and money income from household surveys. BEA's statistics relate personal income to measures of production, including GDP, and is considered an indicator of consumer spending. Census's statistics provide detail on income distribution and demographics and are used to produce the nation's official poverty statistics. Inflation-adjusted ("real") per-capita disposable personal income rose steadily in the U.S. from 1945 to 2008, but has since remained generally level.[2][3]

Income patterns are evident on the basis of age, sex, race and educational characteristics. In 2005 roughly half of all those with graduate degrees were among the nation's top 15% of income earners. Among different demographics (sex, marital status, race, gender) for those over the age of 18, median personal income ranged from $3,317 for an unemployed, married Asian American female[4] to $55,935 for a full-time, year-round employed Asian American male.[5] According to the US Census men tended to have higher income than women while Asians and Whites earned more than African Americans and Hispanics. The overall median personal income for all individuals over the age of 18 was $24,062[6] ($32,140 for those age 25 or above) in the year 2005.[7] The overall median income for all 155 million persons over the age of 15 who worked with earnings in 2005 was $28,567.[8]

As a reference point, the minimum wage rate in 2009 was $7.25 per hour or $15,080 for the 2080 hours in a typical work year. The minimum wage is a little more than the poverty level for a single person unit and about 50% of the poverty level for a family of four (see Poverty in the United States)