STUDENT LOANS

mrussel1 said:

show previous quotes

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

One effect that I've seen is forcing married people that both have student loans to file separately.  Or if one has loans and the other doesn't.  

A joint return causes the minimum student loan payment to be higher which forces a couple to file separately in order to keep their payments low.  I advise against this as much as I can but they tend to look at it from a monthly cash flow perspective rather than the overall savings perspective.  Of course those people probably read Dave Ramsey so getting through is difficult.

So you advise people to pay down student loans as quickly as possible and so does Ramsey...You may have more in common than you think.
Still not going to hire you, though.

Federal student loans have subsidized interest rates.  It's likely not better to pay them down sooner than later.  Private student loans are not, so that may make sense.  That sounds like dubious advice and it's also too general for most people.  I'm not opining on how a married couple should do it, which makes my point even more.  Advice from a celebrity is terrible.  

Federal student loans are also riskier to have weighing over you.  You can have your house foreclosed on for defaulting on federal student loans, or wages garnished.  No student loan debt is the way to go.
I’m not sure getting financial advise from a rock band forum member is a non-terrible idea...

Well if you want real advice, I'd tell a person to transfer their public loan to SOFI, sell your house, rent an apartment, transfer your assets to your parents and then file bankruptcy.  Or you could not file and just charge off and then fight the case based on chain of title (while also protecting assets).  You have better than a 50% chance of winning considering the trust issues that are prevalent with most student loans.

But I would disagree that paying off your lowest interest rate debt first is a good idea.  It's not, it's a bad one.  Yes federal loans have auto-garns but that's only if you go delinquent.  So all of this is assuming you are paying on time.  If you think you're going down, then like I said, refinance it out of the federal space and follow my previous steps.  

You forgot to add “get a lawyer” because, most likely, you are going to have some explaining to do for transferring your assets to a family member before filing bankruptcy (within 2 years before).  Wouldn’t you agree, Gern?
Lawyers are not cheap...so there’s more debt for ya.

I'm sure the bankruptcy attorney would cover that.  And yeah that isn't a strategy that you execute over a week.  That's a long con

Yeah, by telling you to disclose any assets that you transferred in the past two years. 

The lawyer would be for the fraud lawsuit afterwards, lol

Not if it was beyond the two year period there Ramsey

Righteo, so you are going to plan for a bankruptcy and give away all of your assets two years before???
I mean, I like plans, but that is pretty over the top there “CPA”.  

Almost seems like it would be easier not to go into such debt and not to have to plan such an elaborate “con”.
Damn, maybe I should be a CPA, this shit is easy.

This was my con.  I was showing a way to escape debt.  Challenging the chain of title is the easier path, but less fool proof.  Most people don't understand how loans are underwritten with "rent a charter" banks, so the documents are actually deficient as evidence in a court of law.   I've seen them all in my day. 

Personally, I value ethical and honest behavior and try to avoid putting myself in a situation that I would need to con myself out of.

PJPOWER said:

show previous quotes

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

One effect that I've seen is forcing married people that both have student loans to file separately.  Or if one has loans and the other doesn't.  

A joint return causes the minimum student loan payment to be higher which forces a couple to file separately in order to keep their payments low.  I advise against this as much as I can but they tend to look at it from a monthly cash flow perspective rather than the overall savings perspective.  Of course those people probably read Dave Ramsey so getting through is difficult.

So you advise people to pay down student loans as quickly as possible and so does Ramsey...You may have more in common than you think.
Still not going to hire you, though.

Federal student loans have subsidized interest rates.  It's likely not better to pay them down sooner than later.  Private student loans are not, so that may make sense.  That sounds like dubious advice and it's also too general for most people.  I'm not opining on how a married couple should do it, which makes my point even more.  Advice from a celebrity is terrible.  

Federal student loans are also riskier to have weighing over you.  You can have your house foreclosed on for defaulting on federal student loans, or wages garnished.  No student loan debt is the way to go.
I’m not sure getting financial advise from a rock band forum member is a non-terrible idea...

Well if you want real advice, I'd tell a person to transfer their public loan to SOFI, sell your house, rent an apartment, transfer your assets to your parents and then file bankruptcy.  Or you could not file and just charge off and then fight the case based on chain of title (while also protecting assets).  You have better than a 50% chance of winning considering the trust issues that are prevalent with most student loans.

But I would disagree that paying off your lowest interest rate debt first is a good idea.  It's not, it's a bad one.  Yes federal loans have auto-garns but that's only if you go delinquent.  So all of this is assuming you are paying on time.  If you think you're going down, then like I said, refinance it out of the federal space and follow my previous steps.  

You forgot to add “get a lawyer” because, most likely, you are going to have some explaining to do for transferring your assets to a family member before filing bankruptcy (within 2 years before).  Wouldn’t you agree, Gern?
Lawyers are not cheap...so there’s more debt for ya.

I'm sure the bankruptcy attorney would cover that.  And yeah that isn't a strategy that you execute over a week.  That's a long con

Yeah, by telling you to disclose any assets that you transferred in the past two years. 

The lawyer would be for the fraud lawsuit afterwards, lol

Not if it was beyond the two year period there Ramsey

Righteo, so you are going to plan for a bankruptcy and give away all of your assets two years before???
I mean, I like plans, but that is pretty over the top there “CPA”.  

Almost seems like it would be easier not to go into such debt and not to have to plan such an elaborate “con”.
Damn, maybe I should be a CPA, this shit is easy.

Yes you should take the exam.  See how you do.

And keep in mind...the person that mrussel1 is referring to likely doesn't have many assets.  You are acting like they are giving away real estate and jewelry.  Probably not.

PJPOWER said:

show previous quotes

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

One effect that I've seen is forcing married people that both have student loans to file separately.  Or if one has loans and the other doesn't.  

A joint return causes the minimum student loan payment to be higher which forces a couple to file separately in order to keep their payments low.  I advise against this as much as I can but they tend to look at it from a monthly cash flow perspective rather than the overall savings perspective.  Of course those people probably read Dave Ramsey so getting through is difficult.

So you advise people to pay down student loans as quickly as possible and so does Ramsey...You may have more in common than you think.
Still not going to hire you, though.

Federal student loans have subsidized interest rates.  It's likely not better to pay them down sooner than later.  Private student loans are not, so that may make sense.  That sounds like dubious advice and it's also too general for most people.  I'm not opining on how a married couple should do it, which makes my point even more.  Advice from a celebrity is terrible.  

Federal student loans are also riskier to have weighing over you.  You can have your house foreclosed on for defaulting on federal student loans, or wages garnished.  No student loan debt is the way to go.
I’m not sure getting financial advise from a rock band forum member is a non-terrible idea...

Well if you want real advice, I'd tell a person to transfer their public loan to SOFI, sell your house, rent an apartment, transfer your assets to your parents and then file bankruptcy.  Or you could not file and just charge off and then fight the case based on chain of title (while also protecting assets).  You have better than a 50% chance of winning considering the trust issues that are prevalent with most student loans.

But I would disagree that paying off your lowest interest rate debt first is a good idea.  It's not, it's a bad one.  Yes federal loans have auto-garns but that's only if you go delinquent.  So all of this is assuming you are paying on time.  If you think you're going down, then like I said, refinance it out of the federal space and follow my previous steps.  

You forgot to add “get a lawyer” because, most likely, you are going to have some explaining to do for transferring your assets to a family member before filing bankruptcy (within 2 years before).  Wouldn’t you agree, Gern?
Lawyers are not cheap...so there’s more debt for ya.

I'm sure the bankruptcy attorney would cover that.  And yeah that isn't a strategy that you execute over a week.  That's a long con

Yeah, by telling you to disclose any assets that you transferred in the past two years. 

The lawyer would be for the fraud lawsuit afterwards, lol

Not if it was beyond the two year period there Ramsey

Righteo, so you are going to plan for a bankruptcy and give away all of your assets two years before???
I mean, I like plans, but that is pretty over the top there “CPA”.  

Almost seems like it would be easier not to go into such debt and not to have to plan such an elaborate “con”.
Damn, maybe I should be a CPA, this shit is easy.

Yes you should take the exam.  See how you do.

Meh, not worth it for me.  I hear it is a pain to keep a CPA license long term.  Don’t you have to re-certify every couple of years?  Not to mention, I don’t even like doing my own taxes, let alone others!

Just continuing education.  40 hours/year if public accounting and I think 20 hours/year if in private accounting.

Not all CPAs do taxes.  I actually have a few clients that are CPAs.  I also have a few IRS agents.

mrussel1 said:

show previous quotes

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

One effect that I've seen is forcing married people that both have student loans to file separately.  Or if one has loans and the other doesn't.  

A joint return causes the minimum student loan payment to be higher which forces a couple to file separately in order to keep their payments low.  I advise against this as much as I can but they tend to look at it from a monthly cash flow perspective rather than the overall savings perspective.  Of course those people probably read Dave Ramsey so getting through is difficult.

So you advise people to pay down student loans as quickly as possible and so does Ramsey...You may have more in common than you think.
Still not going to hire you, though.

Federal student loans have subsidized interest rates.  It's likely not better to pay them down sooner than later.  Private student loans are not, so that may make sense.  That sounds like dubious advice and it's also too general for most people.  I'm not opining on how a married couple should do it, which makes my point even more.  Advice from a celebrity is terrible.  

Federal student loans are also riskier to have weighing over you.  You can have your house foreclosed on for defaulting on federal student loans, or wages garnished.  No student loan debt is the way to go.
I’m not sure getting financial advise from a rock band forum member is a non-terrible idea...

Well if you want real advice, I'd tell a person to transfer their public loan to SOFI, sell your house, rent an apartment, transfer your assets to your parents and then file bankruptcy.  Or you could not file and just charge off and then fight the case based on chain of title (while also protecting assets).  You have better than a 50% chance of winning considering the trust issues that are prevalent with most student loans.

But I would disagree that paying off your lowest interest rate debt first is a good idea.  It's not, it's a bad one.  Yes federal loans have auto-garns but that's only if you go delinquent.  So all of this is assuming you are paying on time.  If you think you're going down, then like I said, refinance it out of the federal space and follow my previous steps.  

You forgot to add “get a lawyer” because, most likely, you are going to have some explaining to do for transferring your assets to a family member before filing bankruptcy (within 2 years before).  Wouldn’t you agree, Gern?
Lawyers are not cheap...so there’s more debt for ya.

I'm sure the bankruptcy attorney would cover that.  And yeah that isn't a strategy that you execute over a week.  That's a long con

Yeah, by telling you to disclose any assets that you transferred in the past two years. 

The lawyer would be for the fraud lawsuit afterwards, lol

Not if it was beyond the two year period there Ramsey

Righteo, so you are going to plan for a bankruptcy and give away all of your assets two years before???
I mean, I like plans, but that is pretty over the top there “CPA”.  

Almost seems like it would be easier not to go into such debt and not to have to plan such an elaborate “con”.
Damn, maybe I should be a CPA, this shit is easy.

Yes you should take the exam.  See how you do.

Meh, not worth it for me.  I hear it is a pain to keep a CPA license long term.  Don’t you have to re-certify every couple of years?  Not to mention, I don’t even like doing my own taxes, let alone others!

Just continuing education.  40 hours/year if public accounting and I think 20 hours/year if in private accounting.

Not all CPAs do taxes.  I actually have a few clients that are CPAs.  I also have a few IRS agents.

Yeah,  not really worth it.  I'm sure he'd ace it without trying.  

I'm sure Ramsey is a CPA.  I bet he passed all four parts the first time.

Gern Blansten said:

show previous quotes

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

One effect that I've seen is forcing married people that both have student loans to file separately.  Or if one has loans and the other doesn't.  

A joint return causes the minimum student loan payment to be higher which forces a couple to file separately in order to keep their payments low.  I advise against this as much as I can but they tend to look at it from a monthly cash flow perspective rather than the overall savings perspective.  Of course those people probably read Dave Ramsey so getting through is difficult.

So you advise people to pay down student loans as quickly as possible and so does Ramsey...You may have more in common than you think.
Still not going to hire you, though.

Federal student loans have subsidized interest rates.  It's likely not better to pay them down sooner than later.  Private student loans are not, so that may make sense.  That sounds like dubious advice and it's also too general for most people.  I'm not opining on how a married couple should do it, which makes my point even more.  Advice from a celebrity is terrible.  

Federal student loans are also riskier to have weighing over you.  You can have your house foreclosed on for defaulting on federal student loans, or wages garnished.  No student loan debt is the way to go.
I’m not sure getting financial advise from a rock band forum member is a non-terrible idea...

Well if you want real advice, I'd tell a person to transfer their public loan to SOFI, sell your house, rent an apartment, transfer your assets to your parents and then file bankruptcy.  Or you could not file and just charge off and then fight the case based on chain of title (while also protecting assets).  You have better than a 50% chance of winning considering the trust issues that are prevalent with most student loans.

But I would disagree that paying off your lowest interest rate debt first is a good idea.  It's not, it's a bad one.  Yes federal loans have auto-garns but that's only if you go delinquent.  So all of this is assuming you are paying on time.  If you think you're going down, then like I said, refinance it out of the federal space and follow my previous steps.  

You forgot to add “get a lawyer” because, most likely, you are going to have some explaining to do for transferring your assets to a family member before filing bankruptcy (within 2 years before).  Wouldn’t you agree, Gern?
Lawyers are not cheap...so there’s more debt for ya.

I'm sure the bankruptcy attorney would cover that.  And yeah that isn't a strategy that you execute over a week.  That's a long con

Yeah, by telling you to disclose any assets that you transferred in the past two years. 

The lawyer would be for the fraud lawsuit afterwards, lol

Not if it was beyond the two year period there Ramsey

Righteo, so you are going to plan for a bankruptcy and give away all of your assets two years before???
I mean, I like plans, but that is pretty over the top there “CPA”.  

Almost seems like it would be easier not to go into such debt and not to have to plan such an elaborate “con”.
Damn, maybe I should be a CPA, this shit is easy.

Yes you should take the exam.  See how you do.

Meh, not worth it for me.  I hear it is a pain to keep a CPA license long term.  Don’t you have to re-certify every couple of years?  Not to mention, I don’t even like doing my own taxes, let alone others!

Just continuing education.  40 hours/year if public accounting and I think 20 hours/year if in private accounting.

Not all CPAs do taxes.  I actually have a few clients that are CPAs.  I also have a few IRS agents.

Yeah,  not really worth it.  I'm sure he'd ace it without trying.  

I'm sure Ramsey is a CPA.  I bet he passed all four parts the first time.

I watched my wife go through the CE's a few weeks ago.  She's a helluva lot smarter than me and has been a CPA for 20 plus years.  It definitely takes some work to get certified each year.

Gern Blansten said:

show previous quotes

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

One effect that I've seen is forcing married people that both have student loans to file separately.  Or if one has loans and the other doesn't.  

A joint return causes the minimum student loan payment to be higher which forces a couple to file separately in order to keep their payments low.  I advise against this as much as I can but they tend to look at it from a monthly cash flow perspective rather than the overall savings perspective.  Of course those people probably read Dave Ramsey so getting through is difficult.

So you advise people to pay down student loans as quickly as possible and so does Ramsey...You may have more in common than you think.
Still not going to hire you, though.

Federal student loans have subsidized interest rates.  It's likely not better to pay them down sooner than later.  Private student loans are not, so that may make sense.  That sounds like dubious advice and it's also too general for most people.  I'm not opining on how a married couple should do it, which makes my point even more.  Advice from a celebrity is terrible.  

Federal student loans are also riskier to have weighing over you.  You can have your house foreclosed on for defaulting on federal student loans, or wages garnished.  No student loan debt is the way to go.
I’m not sure getting financial advise from a rock band forum member is a non-terrible idea...

Well if you want real advice, I'd tell a person to transfer their public loan to SOFI, sell your house, rent an apartment, transfer your assets to your parents and then file bankruptcy.  Or you could not file and just charge off and then fight the case based on chain of title (while also protecting assets).  You have better than a 50% chance of winning considering the trust issues that are prevalent with most student loans.

But I would disagree that paying off your lowest interest rate debt first is a good idea.  It's not, it's a bad one.  Yes federal loans have auto-garns but that's only if you go delinquent.  So all of this is assuming you are paying on time.  If you think you're going down, then like I said, refinance it out of the federal space and follow my previous steps.  

You forgot to add “get a lawyer” because, most likely, you are going to have some explaining to do for transferring your assets to a family member before filing bankruptcy (within 2 years before).  Wouldn’t you agree, Gern?
Lawyers are not cheap...so there’s more debt for ya.

I'm sure the bankruptcy attorney would cover that.  And yeah that isn't a strategy that you execute over a week.  That's a long con

Yeah, by telling you to disclose any assets that you transferred in the past two years. 

The lawyer would be for the fraud lawsuit afterwards, lol

Not if it was beyond the two year period there Ramsey

Righteo, so you are going to plan for a bankruptcy and give away all of your assets two years before???
I mean, I like plans, but that is pretty over the top there “CPA”.  

Almost seems like it would be easier not to go into such debt and not to have to plan such an elaborate “con”.
Damn, maybe I should be a CPA, this shit is easy.

Yes you should take the exam.  See how you do.

Meh, not worth it for me.  I hear it is a pain to keep a CPA license long term.  Don’t you have to re-certify every couple of years?  Not to mention, I don’t even like doing my own taxes, let alone others!

Just continuing education.  40 hours/year if public accounting and I think 20 hours/year if in private accounting.

Not all CPAs do taxes.  I actually have a few clients that are CPAs.  I also have a few IRS agents.

Yeah,  not really worth it.  I'm sure he'd ace it without trying.  

I'm sure Ramsey is a CPA.  I bet he passed all four parts the first time.

I watched my wife go through the CE's a few weeks ago.  She's a helluva lot smarter than me and has been a CPA for 20 plus years.  It definitely takes some work to get certified each year.

Was the exam computerized when she first took it?  

In 1991-1992 we used the paper exam books.  Five parts back then.  You could opt to have the exam books mailed to you a few months after the exam if you wanted.  No answers....just the books.  I still have mine.  I can't imagine taking that fucker again.

I'm looking right at her first certification.  It's on our office wall with the other degrees.  11/21/97

Was that old school or new?

Gern Blansten said:

Dave Ramsey filed for bankruptcy in 1988.  I hope he had an attorney.

That’s kind of the point to his whole story.  To not do the same stuff that he did that led to bankruptcy, but I digress.

HughFreakingDillon said:

show previous quotes

PJPOWER said:

Gern Blansten said:

Dave Ramsey filed for bankruptcy in 1988.  I hope he had an attorney.

That’s kind of the point to his whole story.  To not do the same stuff that he did that led to bankruptcy, but I digress.

i read up on his "baby steps" thing guide to finances. he seems to think that a one size fits all approach works for everybody. I would disagree. 

That's probably the main criticism against him.  He also seems to push that the market will earn 12% over time which is historically wrong.

And he's a tRumpster.

Gern Blansten said:

show previous quotes

PJPOWER said:

The Juggler said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Gern Blansten said:

https://twitter.com/existentialfish/status/1359895931064262656

Fucking idiot

honestly, i don't disagree with him. his last comment "it's like peeing on a forest fire" is spot on. 

the CERB program in canada gives $500 per week for 28 weeks. that's $2K per month for 7 months. $1400 gives people the money to pay their hydro bill for a home they've already lost. it's absurd. 

Yeah, he’s not wrong...

I enjoy his podcast

Yup, Ramsey is da man!

He's a fucking tRumpster idiot.  He said that forgiving student loans wouldn't stimulate the economy unless people were planning on paying off their loans anyway.  Moronic.  

He is clearly conservative but I do not necessarily believe he is a Trump supporter. 

static111 said:

show previous quotes

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

CBO releases analysis on $15 min wage by 2025.  It's a mixed bag.  Helps some but net job loss.  

Increasing the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2025, from the current $7.25 an hour level, as President Biden has called for, would cut employment by 1.4 million and reduce the number of Americans below the poverty line by 900,000, according to a study released by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office on Monday.

The cumulative federal budget deficit from 2021 to 2031 would increase by $54 billion if a $15 federal minimum was enacted because higher prices for goods and services would contribute to an increase in federal spending, the report found. Government spending on nutrition supplements would fall, but that would be offset by increased spending on Social Security benefits, unemployment benefits and health-care programs, the CBO said.

The report found enrollment in Medicaid, health care for low-income Americans, would fall because many workers would earn more, but program costs would increase to higher prices for medical services.

Economic output would be reduced slightly, primary because of decreased employment, CBO said.

I have yet to hear anyone beside myself suggest a more flexible wage schedule.   My plan would be to increase minimum wage to a living wage for full-time workers and base that wage on cost of living according to where one lives (cost of living varies a great deal in varying parts of the country).  I would also give exceptions to minimum wage for students or elderly wanting a part-time job to make a little extra money or have something to do.  Why should a small business owner pay minimum wages to a senior who wants a part time job to supplement his or her retirement or social security or just to have something to give him or herself a sense of purpose?  Or to a student who just wants some work experience and some money to buy records and lattes?  I mean, seriously, it's very hard to keep a small business running as it it without having to deal with increased payroll given to people working who do not need a living wage.

Why is this issue being looked at in black and white?  Why is there so little common sense being applied to this issue?  No wonder people get frustrated with government.

show previous quotes

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

CBO releases analysis on $15 min wage by 2025.  It's a mixed bag.  Helps some but net job loss.  

Increasing the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2025, from the current $7.25 an hour level, as President Biden has called for, would cut employment by 1.4 million and reduce the number of Americans below the poverty line by 900,000, according to a study released by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office on Monday.

The cumulative federal budget deficit from 2021 to 2031 would increase by $54 billion if a $15 federal minimum was enacted because higher prices for goods and services would contribute to an increase in federal spending, the report found. Government spending on nutrition supplements would fall, but that would be offset by increased spending on Social Security benefits, unemployment benefits and health-care programs, the CBO said.

The report found enrollment in Medicaid, health care for low-income Americans, would fall because many workers would earn more, but program costs would increase to higher prices for medical services.

Economic output would be reduced slightly, primary because of decreased employment, CBO said.

I have yet to hear anyone beside myself suggest a more flexible wage schedule.   My plan would be to increase minimum wage to a living wage for full-time workers and base that wage on cost of living according to where one lives (cost of living varies a great deal in varying parts of the country).  I would also give exceptions to minimum wage for students or elderly wanting a part-time job to make a little extra money or have something to do.  Why should a small business owner pay minimum wages to a senior who wants a part time job to supplement his or her retirement or social security or just to have something to give him or herself a sense of purpose?  Or to a student who just wants some work experience and some money to buy records and lattes?  I mean, seriously, it's very hard to keep a small business running as it it without having to deal with increased payroll given to people working who do not need a living wage.

Why is this issue being looked at in black and white?  Why is there so little common sense being applied to this issue?  No wonder people get frustrated with government.

I'm a fan of indexed Min Wage.  Maybe something like 4 or 5 tiers based on the cost of living in an area.  You can't really do it at the state level because rural to urban is so different.  But it's a hard thing to do, it's hard to build and hard to manage.  I know there is a counter from Manchin out there for $11.  That's better than we have today and maybe not as disruptive as a huge jump to $15.

I would be if it was more complex to include age or something else too. I'm not for a national "liveable wage" even if it is tiered. And nearly the entire argument against it is not everyone needs a liveable wage. But I never see that addressed. I have 8th graders asking me for work permits, do they need a salary or hourly wage that is enough to support a family? There is nothing wrong with paying a 14 year old with a 7th or 8th grade education, who is at their first job with little to no experience, half of what would be considered a liveable wage for an adult. To increase the minimum wage they should expand the student learner wage program that increase those exempt from a minimum wage. 

Dear god this would be abused so bad.  No one would have jobs but seniors and students of a certain age that “don’t need” a livable wage.  Not to mention how stupid it would be if two people are doing the same job, cashier, line cook etc and one guy is 32 and makes 15 but the other guy is 65 or 18 and only makes 10 or whatever someone else decides is enough.  Holy moly that’s why we created minimum wage laws and unions in the first place, to not abuse the labor force...

Haven't checked this thread in a few days, we've probably moved on. But there obviously would be abuse, that's why more regulations would be needed. Like only allowing a certain number of minors to be employed. A McDonald's shouldn't be run by a bunch of 14 year olds anyway. I don't see why it would be that difficult to stipulate that for every 10 employees, only 2 can be  exempt from minimum wage (such as under 18). That solves your problem. 

But paying people on age already happens to some extent. Most places pay more if you have more experience and more education. So a 25 year old working the same job as a 14 year old will almost always be making more, even if they both are cashiers. You have 2 teachers teaching the same class at the same school, one is 22 and making 45k and the other 55 and making 90k. Same job. Yes, theoretically the older teacher with more experience is going to be a better teacher, but wouldn't also the 32 year old over the 14 year old at pretty much any job too? I would just never agree that a 14 year old at their first job needs $16/hr.