What's a living wage?
Options
Comments
-
Gern Blansten wrote:The Papa John's example above is a good one. This is exactly why unions formed in this country to begin with. You have the billionaire owner making money off the backs of the peons that are crucial to the function of the corporation making profit.
The argument that increasing the minimum wage means that the price of goods will increase is not a solid one. Competition among businesses dictates price. McDonald's and every other fast food giant could pay a much higher minimum wage without raising prices at all. They would just sacrifice some of their billions in profits toward the people that made them the billions.
This, totally. That's the crux of it. Billionaires who are just caught up in their numbers game- and that's all it is a some point, just numbers, because they can't possible use all that money and few of them are true philanthropists and some of the ones who claim to be are just making excuses for all that greed- so caught up in the numbers game that little else really matters. People will struggle, the earth will be polluted, the climate will change but I have my billions so... ffft."It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
shitty pizza that it is and douche I think he is, most of the Papa Johns are franchised are they not? Theres where he makes his money. from people seeking to sell his shitty pizza.brianlux wrote:
This, totally. That's the crux of it. Billionaires who are just caught up in their numbers game- and that's all it is a some point, just numbers, because they can't possible use all that money and few of them are true philanthropists and some of the ones who claim to be are just making excuses for all that greed- so caught up in the numbers game that little else really matters. People will struggle, the earth will be polluted, the climate will change but I have my billions so... ffft.
http://www.papajohns.com/franchise/freq ... ising.shtm_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
Prince Of Dorkness wrote:
Because they're providing a service to the billionaires who own those companies. And without them, those businesses will go under. Therefore, since Papa John himself isn't washing the pizza trays but he IS collecting all the money made by the company.. it's his responsibility to pay them enough to live on. Enough to eat and pay rent.
Without those people he gleefully spits on, there would BE no company. I think if you're running a business, it's your responsibility to pay your staff.
Because if he doesn't... WE DO.
And $15 per hour is not "so much." YOU try to live on $600 per week.
ThisI have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon0 -
Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
Well... I suppose if one felt completely confident that people would concern themselves with the welfare of their workers to the point they assured a decent wage, benefits, and working conditions... your post would be valid.
But the Industrial Revolution and the current and growing exploitation of workers in various third world countries lend evidence to a side of human nature that belies such a premise.
How many millions or billions is enough for one man? People born into such fortune might say "more", but for the single mother in Chicago, catching the bus to get to her chamber maid job while leaving her 8 year old daughter at home to tend to her and her younger brother's needs... might argue differently. If a hotel could pay their workers $3 an hour... they would do it. If every organization could jump on the backs of their front line workers at $3 an hour... they would do it. Picture the good ol USA then. You think you have problems now?
I am grateful that this site allows for the entire spectrum of humanity to intersect and discuss various current topics, but at the same time, I am shocked at the mentality some have formulated for some things. In this instance, I cannot believe that some would argue against protecting the average citizen against corporate greed.
I agree that corporations like Walmart, McDonalds, papa johns, etc should pay their employees more. What I do not agree with is them being forced to pay them more by the government. I understand why the minimum wage laws exist and that if it wasn't for corporate greed, they wouldnt be necessary. But to have the government tell somebody how they should spend thier own money is crazy.0 -
live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.0
-
Last-12-Exit wrote:I agree that corporations like Walmart, McDonalds, papa johns, etc should pay their employees more. What I do not agree with is them being forced to pay them more by the government. I understand why the minimum wage laws exist and that if it wasn't for corporate greed, they wouldnt be necessary. But to have the government tell somebody how they should spend thier own money is crazy.
I think you answered your own question. You understand why the minimum wage law exists and why without greed it wouldn't be necessary.
The government is the last hope of the people. That's the only way to force a company to pay a minimum wage. The law has to separate greed from the greedy.Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt20 -
no, government isn't the last hope for employees. Employees can unionize if they feel they are treated poorly and underpaid.Gern Blansten wrote:
I think you answered your own question. You understand why the minimum wage law exists and why without greed it wouldn't be necessary.
The government is the last hope of the people. That's the only way to force a company to pay a minimum wage. The law has to separate greed from the greedy.0 -
Last-12-Exit wrote:no, government isn't the last hope for employees. Employees can unionize if they feel they are treated poorly and underpaid.
That might work in some companies but would it work for a franchise in which the corporation is moving more and more costs on the the franchise owners? Here's an article that talks about this:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-0 ... tings.html
McDonald’s is “doing everything they can to shift costs to operators,” said Kathryn Slater-Carter, who in June joined other franchisees in Stockton, California, to brainstorm ways of getting the chain to lessen the cost burden. “Putting too much focus on Wall Street is not a good thing in the long run.
‘‘It is not as profitable a business as it used to be,’’ said Slater-Carter, who owns two McDonald’s stores and backs California legislation that would require good faith and fair dealing between parties in a franchise contract.
With this kind of thing going on, I doubt the franchise owners are going to be giving raises or allowing unions to be formed. The only one's winning are corporate big wigs."It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
Gern Blansten wrote:
I didn't change my "tune". Surely you realize that if one does not qualify for a higher paying job they won't get that job right? I used the brain surgeon example. There might be hundreds of brain surgeon jobs available but that doesn't mean that someone can go from being a line cook at McDonald's to operating on your brain.
If jobs paying more than minimum wage were prevalent then we wouldn't have an issue right? The issue is that more and more people are fighting for the minimum wage jobs and that is causing a massive income inequality gap.
I've got data on my side for that claim. You are going off of right wing emotion.
What you said was there were only minimum wage jobs available, and there simply isn't any place where that condition holds true. There are a lot of levels from Entry-level to CEO (or brain surgeon). People can get better jobs. It's the ones that throw up their hands and cry about it not being fair or don't think they have any options that are screwed.The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.0 -
....I would like to see an academic test given, during the hiring process.
score high = higher hourly wage
score low = lower hourly wage
then people may begin to take advantage of the free education.live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.0 -
...know1 wrote:I don't really believe in discussing a person's charitable giving.
It's true, I still have some possessions so I haven't followed the biblical example cited above. That being said, I'm confident that if my taxes were lowered, a higher percentage of it would go to help people who need it than currently does.
You DO live in the U.S... right? You REALLY believe that people would donate the same amount they are paying in taxes... or more... to charity... and not bank the bulk of it (or spend it on Black Friday)? Really?
We're talking about the same U.S., right? The one on planet Earth?Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!0 -
Cosmo wrote:...
You DO live in the U.S... right? You REALLY believe that people would donate the same amount they are paying in taxes... or more... to charity... and not bank the bulk of it (or spend it on Black Friday)? Really?
We're talking about the same U.S., right? The one on planet Earth?
I'm pretty sure the majority would not, but I was talking about myself. But then again, only a small percentage would have to and it would be better than the government helping people.The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.0 -
...know1 wrote:I'm pretty sure the majority would not, but I was talking about myself. But then again, only a small percentage would have to and it would be better than the government helping people.
So, I don't get it. A smaller number of people taking care of the same number of poor people? Wouldn't that mean they would get less than they are getting today? How does that figure?Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!0 -
What is a living wage for one person working 40 hours a week in the greatest country in the world?
500 sq ft - 46 sq m - flat
Basic utilities
2,000 calories of nutrition a day
Clothing
Health care
Transportation
Education
Savings
Entertainment0 -
I have written and re-written posts on this subject many times without being able to get my exact sentiments correct, hopefully the following makes some sense to folks
Obviously this is a conversation that is passionate for some people. There is a solid argument to be made for paying the working class more, there are also solid arguments to be made for not artificially controlling wages.
I believe that if you artificially control wages without artificially controlling prices you will find poverty created and magnified. People always seem to forget that payroll taxes are a pretty significant cost to businesses beyond the wage they pay their employees.
People also seem to forget that with inflation and cost of living differentials around the country there will never be a federal living wage that treats everyone the same. It would have to be a formula, good luck coming up with a fair one.
just saying 15 an hour doesn't mean that number is a smart one. I don't even care about the price of goods going up because of costs, it would be demand that would drive it. More money to be spent means more demand means higher prices, that doesn't necessarily mean more jobs or wage increases. While this MAY have an effect on hiring, I can tell you that it will absolutely have an effect on making those at the top even richer. If everyone at the bottom got 50% more in their paycheck, how much of that money do you think ends up back in the hands of those at the top? I would say almost all of it.
On that note, lets stop talking about evil corporate making their money off the backs of the people. Sometimes a person is important to the success of a company, for instance a manager with great skills in supply chain management or minimization of working capital is worth their weight in gold to a business because they literally can save millions, that job isn't easy...Sometimes a job is important to the success of a company but not necessarily the person that is in it. A pizza delivery driver is just that type of position. I am not saying they aren't important as human beings, but rather that just about anyone who can drive and read an address can deliver a pizza. So the Job is important, not necessarily the person who fills it. People are compensated accordingly in most regards.
There are plenty of people who work in corporate offices that work their asses off and contribute to the success of a company...
There is no real government solution. Unfortunately there is a only a human solution and that is to change people's mentality and start taking care of each other without the threat of force. But instead we get lip service libertarians and conservatives who have no feeling of responsibility to their neighbors, but rather just want to keep everything for themselves. As a libertarian who believes that we need to take care of each other, it infuriates me to see selfish people being chosen as my spokesperson through simply access to a microphone and a loud mouth. Until that changes and people start realizing that if they want the gov't to do less they need to do more, we will always have these discussions, and even worse, we will always have a ridiculous gap between the haves and the have nots...
Sometimes I feel like the hamburgler, "ramble ramble" I mean robble robble...that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan0 -
unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487mickeyrat wrote:a request and two questions , UNANSWERED, I guess I dont rank if I'm on topic. :roll:
Actually I have other activities that trump my time spent here. And now that I have a chance to reply I suggest you search my previous posts for the answers you seek because they are out there, and I know you have those skills.0 -
thank you. Very well articulated and easily understood. Makes absolute sense.mikepegg44 wrote:I have written and re-written posts on this subject many times without being able to get my exact sentiments correct, hopefully the following makes some sense to folks
Obviously this is a conversation that is passionate for some people. There is a solid argument to be made for paying the working class more, there are also solid arguments to be made for not artificially controlling wages.
I believe that if you artificially control wages without artificially controlling prices you will find poverty created and magnified. People always seem to forget that payroll taxes are a pretty significant cost to businesses beyond the wage they pay their employees.
People also seem to forget that with inflation and cost of living differentials around the country there will never be a federal living wage that treats everyone the same. It would have to be a formula, good luck coming up with a fair one.
just saying 15 an hour doesn't mean that number is a smart one. I don't even care about the price of goods going up because of costs, it would be demand that would drive it. More money to be spent means more demand means higher prices, that doesn't necessarily mean more jobs or wage increases. While this MAY have an effect on hiring, I can tell you that it will absolutely have an effect on making those at the top even richer. If everyone at the bottom got 50% more in their paycheck, how much of that money do you think ends up back in the hands of those at the top? I would say almost all of it.
On that note, lets stop talking about evil corporate making their money off the backs of the people. Sometimes a person is important to the success of a company, for instance a manager with great skills in supply chain management or minimization of working capital is worth their weight in gold to a business because they literally can save millions, that job isn't easy...Sometimes a job is important to the success of a company but not necessarily the person that is in it. A pizza delivery driver is just that type of position. I am not saying they aren't important as human beings, but rather that just about anyone who can drive and read an address can deliver a pizza. So the Job is important, not necessarily the person who fills it. People are compensated accordingly in most regards.
There are plenty of people who work in corporate offices that work their asses off and contribute to the success of a company...
There is no real government solution. Unfortunately there is a only a human solution and that is to change people's mentality and start taking care of each other without the threat of force. But instead we get lip service libertarians and conservatives who have no feeling of responsibility to their neighbors, but rather just want to keep everything for themselves. As a libertarian who believes that we need to take care of each other, it infuriates me to see selfish people being chosen as my spokesperson through simply access to a microphone and a loud mouth. Until that changes and people start realizing that if they want the gov't to do less they need to do more, we will always have these discussions, and even worse, we will always have a ridiculous gap between the haves and the have nots...
Sometimes I feel like the hamburgler, "ramble ramble" I mean robble robble..._____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
Although the discussion is about a living wage - it obviously is more complicated than simply artificially raising wages to an arbitrary number. Ultimately, it's really a philosophical discussion. A discussion about whether we want a society that continues to widen the gap between those who have and those who have not. I think we must acknowledge that society as we know it now favours the haves in many ways. It's much easier to get a better job with higher wages when you are not poor. If we acknowledge that - then we need to then acknowledge what systems are in place to allow for the poor to rise above that. We know simply hard work is not the answer.
The living wage as it relates to the US is almost a kin to health care. How do you institute a program that at its crux is philosophically socialist with a country that is populated by mostly non-socialists!? The answer is you cannot. The same thing as it relates to a living wage. Setting a living wage acknowledges facts about a society that it does not want to face. I've said it plenty before and while many people in the US get offended, it is the truth. Americans are not a "we" culture. There is nothing wrong with that - let's just simply call a spade a spade. For that reason, it is what it has become. A nation where it is possible to prosper to unfathomable riches but also one that has to balance that with a large segment of the population that will have none of that.
Living wages are designed for society's that believe in "we" and the collective. I'm sorry if libertarians think that their policies are going to make a more just and fairer society are mistaken. There is no example of these ideas working anywhere. All the countries that are most admired are essentially socialists in nature full of people that believe in "we" over "me". The US isn't made up of those people.0 -
unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487Prince Of Dorkness wrote:
Because they're providing a service to the billionaires who own those companies. And without them, those businesses will go under. Therefore, since Papa John himself isn't washing the pizza trays but he IS collecting all the money made by the company.. it's his responsibility to pay them enough to live on. Enough to eat and pay rent.
Without those people he gleefully spits on, there would BE no company. I think if you're running a business, it's your responsibility to pay your staff.
Because if he doesn't... WE DO.
And $15 per hour is not "so much." YOU try to live on $600 per week.
It's his responsibility to pay minimum wage, which he appears to be doing. Were these people not aware of their potential pay when they applied for the job?0 -
mikepegg44 wrote:There is no real government solution. Unfortunately there is a only a human solution and that is to change people's mentality and start taking care of each other without the threat of force. [...] Until that changes and people start realizing that if they want the gov't to do less they need to do more, we will always have these discussions, and even worse, we will always have a ridiculous gap between the haves and the have nots...
Of course this is the soultion, but is it pragmatic? Do people, on a widespread basis, have the capacity to take care of each other when it might compromise their very own way of life?
I think laws, rules, and regulations are there to work for the ideals you speak of. I think without them... and with some exceptions... we would see a carnivorous world.
Look at some of the more lawless places throughout our planet and think of how the human species operates there. I get frustrated by the government as well- it seems to have morphed into something never intended... but the alternative is scary in my opinion."My brain's a good brain!"0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 273 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.6K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help