Why $15 an hour minimum wage SUCKS

[onlinebiker]

Um, you do realise the discussion is more about providing a baseline level of wages that workers can live on and not paying EVERYONE the exact same amount, right?

Not every job CAN provide enough to live on.

A paperweight should be paid as such 


Sure that sucks  if you are a paperweight.

It sucks even worse when you are a skilled worker - and now the paperweight is being paid the same as you.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Um, you do realise the discussion is more about providing a baseline level of wages that workers can live on and not paying EVERYONE the exact same amount, right?

Not every job CAN provide enough to live on.

A paperweight should be paid as such 


Sure that sucks  if you are a paperweight.

It sucks even worse when you are a skilled worker - and now the paperweight is being paid the same as you.

You can’t have it both ways. You implied earlier that shitty wages produce shitty workers and that people need incentives. I don’t disagree, but it seems the best way to change that is to pay people a living wage to start, then increase it as they become more skilled and productive.

When employers can get away with poverty-level pay, they will do so and do it for as long as possible. If a worker is paid $8/hour and understands that they will ALWAYS be paid $8/hour, where’s the incentive?

Boru

[onlinebiker]

K

Not every job CAN provide enough to live on.

A paperweight should be paid as such 


Sure that sucks  if you are a paperweight.

It sucks even worse when you are a skilled worker - and now the paperweight is being paid the same as you.

You can’t have it both ways. You implied earlier that shitty wages produce shitty workers and that people need incentives. I don’t disagree, but it seems the best way to change that is to pay people a living wage to start, then increase it as they become more skilled and productive.

When employers can get away with poverty-level pay, they will do so and do it for as long as possible. If a worker is paid $8/hour and understands that they will ALWAYS be paid $8/hour, where’s the incentive?

Boru

LMAO


Seriously? You don't see your fail?

You want to give the doorstop more money.- WITHOUT ANY EFFORT ON HIS PART - as an incentive?

To what? Vote for the politician giving away the money?

It's sure not an incentive to do better, more productive work.

Why work? Just be a doorstop.....

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

You can’t have it both ways. You implied earlier that shitty wages produce shitty workers and that people need incentives. I don’t disagree, but it seems the best way to change that is to pay people a living wage to start, then increase it as they become more skilled and productive.

When employers can get away with poverty-level pay, they will do so and do it for as long as possible. If a worker is paid $8/hour and understands that they will ALWAYS be paid $8/hour, where’s the incentive?

Boru

LMAO


Seriously? You don't see your fail?

You want to give the doorstop more money.- WITHOUT ANY EFFORT ON HIS PART - as an incentive?

To what? Vote for the politician giving away the money?

It's sure not an incentive to do better, more productive work.

Why work? Just be a doorstop.....

Why stay at $8/hour? Where’s the incentive to work harder? Low pay COSTS employers money. Higher pay saves a bundle in hiring and training costs. Keep someone at shitty pay and they’re more likely to leave.

Boru

[Rev. Rye]

So, how exactly are we defining paperweight? Are we assuming that if a worker’s not paid enough to live on, that can only be because they’re just doing nothing? Are you even familiar enough with the job market today to know that even people who’ve gotten an education (and practically bankrupted themselves in the process) struggle to find employment?

And on the whole “not every job can provide enough to live on” point: how do you think we should solve this problem? Or do you not think this is a problem worth solving? Before you ask what my answer is, I’ll give it to you: government subsidies for the businesses that can’t afford to pay their workers, provided by taxing those individuals rich enough to actually pony up (read: millionaires).

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

And if a job can’t pay enough to live on, the workers who hold those jobs still need to live, which means housing assistance, food assistance, medical care assistance...and OLB gets to pay for it out of his taxes.

Sweet.

Boru

[onlinebiker]

LMAO


Seriously? You don't see your fail?

You want to give the doorstop more money.- WITHOUT ANY EFFORT ON HIS PART - as an incentive?

To what? Vote for the politician giving away the money?

It's sure not an incentive to do better, more productive work.

Why work? Just be a doorstop.....

Why stay at $8/hour? Where’s the incentive to work harder? Low pay COSTS employers money. Higher pay saves a bundle in hiring and training costs. Keep someone at shitty pay and they’re more likely to leave.

Boru

Government interfering and forcing employers to double the wages of entry level jobs will do two things.

1. Freeze wages for all but the most critical employees (and any raises will be smaller than deserved).

2. Eliminate entry level jobs.


Good go.

Now your doorstop can apply for unemployment... If they are eligible....

[Rev. Rye]

And if a job can’t pay enough to live in, the workers who hold those jobs still need to live, and OLB gets to pay for it out of his taxes.

Sweet.

Boru

This is why I posted “Kill the Poor” earlier. With this general line of thinking, actually paying workers enough that they can survive is bad, them taking advantage of the welfare state to survive because work isn’t giving them enough to do so is also bad, frankly, if you actually give a shit about this problem and are so dead-set against these people getting help to survive, it’s really the inescapable conclusion of that mindset.

[Spongebob]

College degrees are more about generating profit from interest than getting people jobs, at this point.  That's the actual market, and we're the product.

This depends highly on the field.  Engineering, some sciences, mathematics, medicine and probably others I'm not familiar with all practically guarantee you a well paying job.  They don't guarantee riches, but six figures is not at all unusual.  Poly Sci, maybe not so much.

[onlinebiker]

And if a job can’t pay enough to live in, the workers who hold those jobs still need to live, and OLB gets to pay for it out of his taxes.

Sweet.

Boru

This is why I posted “Kill the Poor” earlier. With this general line of thinking, actually paying workers enough that they can survive is bad, them taking advantage of the welfare state to survive because work isn’t giving them enough to do so is also bad, frankly, if you actually give a shit about this problem and are so dead-set against these people getting help to survive, it’s really the inescapable conclusion of that mindset.

Your plan places the welfare of doorstops on employers.

They are in it for the money - as is the model. Business? You may have heard of it.

If you want to take care of doorstops - pay lots of taxes and have your juggernaut goverment feed and water them.....

Businesses are busy trying to make money. And pay their taxes.

---

College degrees are more about generating profit from interest than getting people jobs, at this point.  That's the actual market, and we're the product.

This depends highly on the field.  Engineering, some sciences, mathematics, medicine and probably others I'm not familiar with all practically guarantee you a well paying job.  They don't guarantee riches, but six figures is not at all unusual.  Poly Sci, maybe not so much.

Yup.

If you have a BS in English Studies or Phys Ed - safe bet - the Bentley double parked out front isn't yours....