# Higher Minimum Wage Workers Want Less Hours



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

And you'll never guess why.

http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/blog/post/15-minimum-wage-encouraging-part-time-work-force



> On the heels of Los Angeles becoming the latest city to pass a $15 minimum wage law and the state of New York moving closer to a mandate requiring a $15 wage for fast food workers, _Fox News_ reports that some workers earning the higher wage in Seattle are asking their employers for fewer hours in order to continue qualifying for such public subsidies as food, child care and rent.


Remember the whole 'living wage' argument? Apparently that was just another lie.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Our hopes have changed


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Awww, those hard workers found out they get less in benefits when they make more money.


----------



## cfuhrer (Jun 11, 2013)

Show of hands, who's surprised?

No, no. Don't be shy now.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

_"The KIRO story featured two workers who said they purposely work part-time in order to remain eligible for public subsidies."

_Two workers. A whole lot of presumption going on here for two workers. 

In places like Seattle and New York where the cost of living is so high, $15 an hour is probably the equivalent of $7.50 in other places. So if those cities took the bull by the horns and fixed their minimum wage where they think is appropriate, they didn't wait around for the feds to force something on them, I actually like that. Time will tell if they overdid it or not. But the fact that it happened as a local decision and not a federal mandate is good news if you ask me.


----------



## Michael W. Smith (Jun 2, 2002)

I heard on the news tonight that New York is moving closer to it. They figure New York City will be the first - probably in the next year.

Have they stopped to think WHERE the extra money will come from to pay them $15.00 / hour? Well, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I would have to figure the price of the food will be going up.

With the price of the food in the restaurant going up, that will equate to either fewer customers or just MORE money out of your wallet. Fewer customers could equate to job layoffs or the whole restaurant going out of business. And then where are those $15.00 / hour people going to get jobs?


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

I'm going out on a limb here. 

How about the employer say "No"?

Can't really blame the workers.

$15x30=$450, is still not a lot of weekly money, in New York city, or Seattle.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

The problem is there are sharp cut offs to certain things. So that there are times when making just a few more dollars result in having to move ,losing medical care , child care etc. faced with such choices reasonable people my chose to earn a few dollars less.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

plowjockey said:


> I'm going out on a limb here.
> 
> How about the employer say "No"?
> 
> ...


No, it's not. My daughter's best friend lives in Washington Heights and her rent is $950 a month for a tiny studio apartment. And she has a very good job.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

MO_cows said:


> _"The KIRO story featured two workers who said they purposely work part-time in order to remain eligible for public subsidies."
> 
> _Two workers. A whole lot of presumption going on here for two workers.
> 
> In places like Seattle and New York where the cost of living is so high, $15 an hour is probably the equivalent of $7.50 in other places. So if those cities took the bull by the horns and fixed their minimum wage where they think is appropriate, they didn't wait around for the feds to force something on them, I actually like that. Time will tell if they overdid it or not. But the fact that it happened as a local decision and not a federal mandate is good news if you ask me.


Here's one that's not based on two workers:

Because of the high mandated European wages and benefit structure, McDonalds will be increasing the use of their ordering kiosks in most of their European stores.

Cut hours? Better to cut out the whole job, when it becomes less expensive to automate.


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

Here is the problem: We have so catered to the useless parts of our society that they think they are entitled to everything that the hard working producers have. 

Do you think for a moment that we would not have riots if suddenly the welfare crowd were told that they would not be furnished 48 inch tv's, air conditioned housing, free food and medical care? 

The kid who drops out of school in the 9th grade becomes a street thug, the girl who gets pregnant and drops out of high school, the jerk who sits in class thumbing his phone behind a book---all those people will demand public assistance, and we give it to them while the kid who studied and made something of himself will have to pay their way. 

Naturally if one of them takes a job that pays enough to cause them to shoulder their own responsibilities they'll try to avoid it.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> The problem is there are sharp cut offs to certain things. So that there are times when making just a few more dollars result in having to move ,losing medical care , child care etc. faced with such choices reasonable people my chose to earn a few dollars less.


Bingo. It's a lot easier to enroll in those programs than to phase out. Uncle Sam forgot to include an exit plan!


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

AmericanStand said:


> The problem is there are sharp cut offs to certain things. So that there are times when making just a few more dollars result in having to move ,losing medical care , child care etc. faced with such choices reasonable people my chose to earn a few dollars less.


So true.

I know a poor retiree who makes next to nothing from SS. She passes on food stamps and section 8. Uses medicaid very reluctantly, only to cover the many Medicare gaps.

She want to work some but doing so, will put her _over the line._ 

So she stays at home.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Oxankle said:


> Here is the problem: We have so catered to the useless parts of our society that they think they are entitled to everything that the hard working producers have.
> 
> Do you think for a moment that we would not have riots if suddenly the welfare crowd were told that they would not be furnished 48 inch tv's, air conditioned housing, free food and medical care?
> 
> ...


So people who work in a fast food restaurant are automatically useless and don't work hard? Judge much?


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

MO_cows said:


> Bingo. It's a lot easier to enroll in those programs than to phase out. Uncle Sam forgot to include an exit plan!


Bingo ! They got to keep the voter base on a tight leash...


----------



## Fishindude (May 19, 2015)

I get the high cost of living and $1000 per month studio apartment rent in some cities.

What I don't get is why, perfectly capable, able bodied adults that can't afford it continue to live there? Cost of living in the rural midwest is dirt cheap by those standards, good jobs are available for anyone drug free, relatively intelligent and willing to work, and you can still buy a house for $40,000.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> I'm going out on a limb here.
> 
> How about the employer say "No"?
> 
> ...


True, but 15x60=900 per week which is a good amount for anyone.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> True, but 15x60=900 per week which is a good amount for anyone.


You forgot overtime


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

TripleD said:


> You forgot overtime


Yep, but then I never had a job that paid overtime. My production levels per hour never seemed to increase by working longer hours.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Fishindude said:


> I get the high cost of living and $1000 per month studio apartment rent in some cities.
> 
> What I don't get is why, perfectly capable, able bodied adults that can't afford it continue to live there? Cost of living in the rural midwest is dirt cheap by those standards, good jobs are available for anyone drug free, relatively intelligent and willing to work, and you can still buy a house for $40,000.


Where does the extra money to move come from? Moving is expensive in itself and then there is a place to live on the other end, and other expenses. 

It's easy to say just move but much much hard to do in real life.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

We need to get past the idea that companies are there to provide jobs. No, companies are there to make money for their owners and investors. They do this by providing a good or service that is in demand. Job production is a side effect of this economic truth. All people, who have a job, are selling their time to their employers. The amount they can get SHOULD depend on the demand for their skills, not some government mandate.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Where does the extra money to move come from? Moving is expensive in itself and then there is a place to live on the other end, and other expenses.
> 
> It's easy to say just move but much much hard to do in real life.


Moving can be expensive or not, depending upon method used. I have relocated several times in my life.... Some times it cost me a little, other times I made money in the process. I like to sell the junk, put everything I own in my pocket then replace when I get to my destination. One foot in front of the other works well.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> I'm going out on a limb here.
> 
> How about the employer say "No"?
> 
> ...


 That is all fine and dandy in places that have a high cost of living but NOT fair at all where the cost of living and renting is low, and the area is poor.
So this hike bs can not go company wide. It HAS to be tied to only areas that can handle such a increase. Ands besides fast foot joints were never and should remain never a Live Long Job. It is a STARTING job to LEARN how to work and get along in a working environment. It was never and should not ever be considered a "living wage" whatever that is~!!!! And if not MOVE. I did others can also.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Farmerga said:


> We need to get past the idea that companies are there to provide jobs. No, companies are there to make money for their owners and investors. They do this by providing a good or service that is in demand. Job production is a side effect of this economic truth. All people, who have a job, are selling their time to their employers. The amount they can get SHOULD depend on the demand for their skills, not some government mandate.


I just had to say from some one that's had less than 200 posts in 5 years :thumb:


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Farmerga said:


> We need to get past the idea that companies are there to provide jobs. No, companies are there to make money for their owners and investors. They do this by providing a good or service that is in demand. Job production is a side effect of this economic truth. All people, who have a job, are selling their time to their employers. The amount they can get SHOULD depend on the demand for their skills, not some government mandate.


 Y0ou bet no government agency should tell ANY company what the have to pay in wages. That is between the company and its workers ONLY. Period.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Irish Pixie said:


> Where does the extra money to move come from? Moving is expensive in itself and then there is a place to live on the other end, and other expenses.
> 
> It's easy to say just move but much much hard to do in real life.


My son's company is providing him with $8000 in moving expenses.

Advancement and generous benefits is one reason he tried very hard to go to work for this company.

People, particularly young people, tend not to look at the entire picture when seeking employment. Yes, sometimes you have to take a job, just to have a job, but the smart person is always trying to better themselves.


----------



## Fishindude (May 19, 2015)

Anybody that's barely scraping by and paying $1000 per month rent for a tiny apartment has the funds to relocate. Further .... they can't afford not to relocate to someplace where the skills they have and the money they pull in goes further.

Most Americans are spoiled from a pretty high standard of living and afraid to make any personal sacrifices. 

Hispanic families are packing up with only a few pieces of clothing and a few dollars in their pockets and leaving Mexico every day, coming up here to take $8 - $10 an hour jobs, and creating better lives for themselves and their families on a daily basis.

During the 40's, my grandpa and grandma left the kids at an uncles and traveled staying in a little camper so grandpa could make money working construction, building the new military bases being built all over the US. He sent money home and they only got back to see the kids every couple months.

Opportunities are out there. People need to quit complaining about their personal situation and do something about it.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Moving can be expensive or not, depending upon method used. I have relocated several times in my life.... Some times it cost me a little, other times I made money in the process. I like to sell the junk, put everything I own in my pocket then replace when I get to my destination. One foot in front of the other works well.


did you just carry your children on your back?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Michael W. Smith said:


> I heard on the news tonight that New York is moving closer to it. They figure New York City will be the first - probably in the next year.
> 
> Have they stopped to think WHERE the extra money will come from to pay them $15.00 / hour? Well, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I would have to figure the price of the food will be going up.
> 
> With the price of the food in the restaurant going up, that will equate to either fewer customers or just MORE money out of your wallet. Fewer customers could equate to job layoffs or the whole restaurant going out of business. And then where are those $15.00 / hour people going to get jobs?


No, you know that the Unicorns and Rainbows will magically provide jobs and everything will be wonderful.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Jolly said:


> My son's company is providing him with $8000 in moving expenses.
> 
> Advancement and generous benefits is one reason he tried very hard to go to work for this company.
> 
> People, particularly young people, tend not to look at the entire picture when seeking employment. Yes, sometimes you have to take a job, just to have a job, but the smart person is always trying to better themselves.


Aren't we talking about fast food workers in large expensive cities? How many of those are going to have their employer pay for a move?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

You do Whats best for YOU. You DON'T under ANY circumstances stay there and HOPE the government mandates a pay increase. You MOVE to better yourself Period~!


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Moving can be expensive or not, depending upon method used. I have relocated several times in my life.... Some times it cost me a little, other times I made money in the process. I like to sell the junk, put everything I own in my pocket then replace when I get to my destination. One foot in front of the other works well.





Fishindude said:


> Anybody that's barely scraping by and paying $1000 per month rent for a tiny apartment has the funds to relocate. Further .... they can't afford not to relocate to someplace where the skills they have and the money they pull in goes further.
> 
> Most Americans are spoiled from a pretty high standard of living and afraid to make any personal sacrifices.
> 
> ...


Real world, folks we're talking about the real world. Perhaps a single person could do that if they lived in a homeless shelter in the city and then in the mid west, assuming they got a job the minute they got to their destination. 

There's no way it can be done with kids without government assistance.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> Real world, folks we're talking about the real world. Perhaps a single person could do that if they lived in a homeless shelter in the city and then in the mid west, assuming they got a job the minute they got to their destination.
> 
> There's no way it can be done with kids without government assistance.


IP give me a break . My family moved 17 times in my first 17 years with three children. Never more than 150 miles , no Government help and no moving expenses were given what so ever !


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Farmerga said:


> We need to get past the idea that companies are there to provide jobs. No, companies are there to make money for their owners and investors. They do this by providing a good or service that is in demand. Job production is a side effect of this economic truth. All people, who have a job, are selling their time to their employers. The amount they can get SHOULD depend on the demand for their skills, not some government mandate.


In a perfect world, yes. But history has shown us that some people will make money for their owners and investors even if other people have to suffer greatly for it. The "company stores" that kept people in servitude, poor safety conditions, you name it. Not too long ago, a company was busted for taking advantage of the mentally disabled they hired and terribly exploited. The dark side of greed, not the healthy greed that drives people to achieve things. 

So the playing field is leveled somewhat by mandating a minimum wage. As long as that min wage stays in balance, everybody wins. If the feds raised the national min wage to $15 tomorrow, I'd be moaning along with everybody else! But it was individual cities who took action for their citizens. None of our business really, unless we live there. I'm not going to sit here and presume I know more about Seattle or New York than the people who live there. 

It's a new social experiment, let's see how it turns out. Usually cities and states are pretty close to the national min wage if they address it at all. Logically and intuitively, it seems like raising min wage would be bad for business, bad for jobs. Every time the feds raise it, there is howling. But guess what, the sky didn't fall yet. So obviously it just isn't that simple.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Fine and dandy. But THOSE raises have been SMALL in comparison to what is going on today with a HUGE raise of at lest 5 bucks in just a few Short Years. These businesses which are running on a small profit to start with can oborb a SMALL raise every few years but can not and will NOT stand for this huge price hike without putting huge increase in costs.~!
And those costs will stop many from stopping in, and many WILL get laid off.
NOW when do those same low wage earners do then? Be Happy In Your Work, be glad you GOT Work and if you have to get TWO part time jobs to make things meet. You DON'T rely on Government to mandate such a increase nor protest to get said pay hike it won't work at this point int time with small profit margins that are going on. here is a shot at reality as to what is going on. The reality is that many franchise systems are operating at a 0 - 2% margin while others *can *achieve 7%. The margins are a lot lower then those 20 30 years ago, as prices keep going up on beef etc.
I wonder how many know what the difference is between Corporate owned and Franchised owned? MD's is now changing many over to Franchised owned rather then corporate owned. Putting a huge burden and the franchisee. And trying to maintain a living profit margin to keep operating.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

I've moved halfway across the company twice, the last time borrowing money for a moving truck from my Father in law.
Every time it is brought up to move, you have the same whiners complaining that its hard. Yeah, so what? You do what you need to to provide for your families and stop holding your hand out to Uncle Sam.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

TripleD said:


> IP give me a break . My family moved 17 times in my first 17 years with three children. Never more than 150 miles , no Government help and no moving expenses were given what so ever !


How long ago, and how was the job market? Was it exactly like it is today?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mnn2501 said:


> I've moved halfway across the company twice, the last time borrowing money for a moving truck from my Father in law.
> Every time it is brought up to move, you have the same whiners complaining that its hard. Yeah, so what? You do what you need to to provide for your families and stop holding your hand out to Uncle Sam.


Hmm. Offering an opinion different than your is whining. Good to know.


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

I believe you'll find that in areas with a higher cost of living the wages are also higher, usually in ratio. When we moved from St Louis to Springfield my wife's company kept her salary the same, and it seemed like a 20% raise.

In Dallas I was paying at least $3/hr over minimum in order to pry people off their couches, while flooring companies in East Texas had no trouble getting help.

When it comes to low end jobs, the employer isn't just in competition with like businesses, but "benefits" too.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

The University of California just authorized the raising of employees salaries to $15 per hour minimum. And then the next week authorized a 3% cola for the upper administrators.
In truth, the only minimum wage jobs there are few starting part time jobs. Few start at minimum and no one stays there for long if they start there.
But it certainly is an excuse to raise the pay of the excessive numbers of already overpaid administration personnel. Because, of course, it's the poor unasked tax payer that is always on the hook for it. 
And soon all the University will be decrying the lack of public support for education. Despite a benefit and retirement package that would make most taxpayers weep for joy if they could get it, there is no enough.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> How long ago, and how was the job market? Was it exactly like it is today?


You tell me. I was born in 1964 . The moves were between 1964 and 1981. You might know better than me. I do know dad almost always worked 2 jobs and mom worked fulltime. We kids did the house work and yard work after I turned 10. We kids had the dinner meal on the table as well. Don't tell me it can't be done without the government !!!


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

LOL. What does Righty Kool-Aid news do when their last set of lies get gunned down? Move on to the next set of lies. Here are some links exposing the last round regarding Seattle's restaurants. Turns out not one of the restaurants closed due to the minimum wage increase, most were planning to shutdown before that piece of legislation. 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...ts-anatomy-of-a-lie-from-inside-the-bubble/2/
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...or-national-fiction-on-15-minimum-wage-issue/
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/07/23/fox-cites-misleading-anecdotes-about-workers-on/204557

I'll hang out here and wait for the real reporters to shoot the latest round of BS propaganda out of the sky. They like to take their time, you know, look into the actual facts...


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> did you just carry your children on your back?


Naw, they had legs of their own.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Real world, folks we're talking about the real world. Perhaps a single person could do that if they lived in a homeless shelter in the city and then in the mid west, assuming they got a job the minute they got to their destination.
> 
> There's no way it can be done with kids without government assistance.


Of course it can be done! I have done it myself several times without gov assistance. In 76 I loaded up the kids and what we could carry and moved from California to Indiana, spent that miserable winter there and moved the pack to Ky. Don't even try to tell me it can't be done :flame:


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Irish Pixie said:


> Hmm. Offering an opinion different than your is whining. Good to know.


Sorry, but it's whining about how hard it is and why people shouldn't have to move.

Reality hurts sometimes.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> Fine and dandy. But THOSE raises have been SMALL in comparison to what is going on today with a HUGE raise of at lest 5 bucks in just a few Short Years. These businesses which are running on a small profit to start with can oborb a SMALL raise every few years but can not and will NOT stand for this huge price hike without putting huge increase in costs.~!
> And those costs will stop many from stopping in, and many WILL get laid off.
> NOW when do those same low wage earners do then? Be Happy In Your Work, be glad you GOT Work and if you have to get TWO part time jobs to make things meet. You DON'T rely on Government to mandate such a increase nor protest to get said pay hike it won't work at this point int time with small profit margins that are going on. here is a shot at reality as to what is going on. The reality is that many franchise systems are operating at a 0 - 2% margin while others *can *achieve 7%. The margins are a lot lower then those 20 30 years ago, as prices keep going up on beef etc.
> I wonder how many know what the difference is between Corporate owned and Franchised owned? MD's is now changing many over to Franchised owned rather then corporate owned. Putting a huge burden and the franchisee. And trying to maintain a living profit margin to keep operating.


I beleieve I heard the other day the average profit margin is about 3%.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

wiscto said:


> LOL. What does Righty Kool-Aid news do when their last set of lies get gunned down? Move on to the next set of lies. Here are some links exposing the last round regarding Seattle's restaurants. Turns out not one of the restaurants closed due to the minimum wage increase, most were planning to shutdown before that piece of legislation.
> 
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...ts-anatomy-of-a-lie-from-inside-the-bubble/2/
> http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...or-national-fiction-on-15-minimum-wage-issue/
> ...


Seattle is currently in the middle of a boom. After Katrina, fast food workers were paid more than $15/hr, because there were not enough workers.

But just like New Orlean's post Katrina boom, Seattle's boom will not last.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Of course it can be done! I have done it myself several times without gov assistance. In 76 I loaded up the kids and what we could carry and moved from California to Indiana, spent that miserable winter there and moved the pack to Ky. Don't even try to tell me it can't be done :flame:


You are a reasonable person, was the economy the same in 76 as it is now? I remember making good money in 76 working horses and I was 14. 

I think it's very very hard to relocate NOW on minimum wage jobs if you have kids. How's that? Is very very hard acceptable? I shouldn't have said there was no way it could be now.


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

Mo Cows says: 
"So people who work in a fast food restaurant are automatically useless and don't work hard? Judge much?

No, Mo Cows; People who will not learn how to do anything that will pay a living wage, or who expect to be given more than they can earn, are pretty much useless.

Fast food jobs, except for the managers and owners, are not intended to be careers. These jobs are generally held by kids or people on the way up. If an adult cannot learn to do anything more than sling hamburgers FOR SOMEONE ELSE'S BUSINESS, then that person should live within the income he or she earns and not expect the taxpayer to pick up the pieces.

If George studied while in grade school and high school, kept his nose clean of drugs, served in the army, went to college afterward and rose from poverty to relative comfort, why in the hell does Fred, the dropout, the druggie, the stupid, expect to sling hamburgers and have the taxpayer pick up the difference between his wage and Georges?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Jolly said:


> I beleieve I heard the other day the average profit margin is about 3%.


meaning some make less, some make more, the average is 3%. Either way, its very easy to go broke.


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

"Where does the extra money to move come from? Moving is expensive in itself and then there is a place to live on the other end, and other expenses. 
It's easy to say just move but much much hard to do in real life."

People who sit and complain, or beg, will never get anywhere. I grew up during the tail end of the great depression. I saw men and women riding the rails, begging for food, families moving in wagons down country roads, some not knowing where they'd end but determined to make a life in those hard days. 

My own family starved off the farm when the dry summer winds blew corn nubbins off the wagon, and there was no other feed. The cows brought something like $5 each, and we moved to a tiny line cabin on a ranch, water from the nearby creek. 

Eventually Dad got enough together to haul us to a nearby town where he took up the mechanics trade and made a living for his family of 8 children. Nobody sniffed glue (we did not know of anything else, though I once heard Dad say he had to fire a "drug fiend"). We studied and in time we all got college degrees of one sort or another. Not once did we ask for or get welfare.

Consequently I have little respect for those who sit on their behinds and learn nothing that will earn the living they want us to pay for. I have MUCH respect for those who do the best they can and stand on their own, rich or poor. Perhaps more for the poor--I remember where I came from.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Oxankle said:


> "Where does the extra money to move come from? Moving is expensive in itself and then there is a place to live on the other end, and other expenses.
> It's easy to say just move but much much hard to do in real life."
> 
> People who sit and complain, or beg, will never get anywhere. I grew up during the tail end of the great depression. I saw men and women riding the rails, begging for food, families moving in wagons down country roads, some not knowing where they'd end but determined to make a life in those hard days.
> ...


:clap: :clap:

And those same actions were repeated by countless families around the country. People were always striving to do better and NOT be a burden to anyone else.

People who stay perpetually on welfare are a burden. Period.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Just a thought....I wonder if the country's massive drug problem has as much to do with public assistance as anything else?

It's hard to buy a "dime bag" of anything, when you can barely rub two quarters together in your pocket, because you can't get or hold a job...People used to be poor, and some drank their way into a hole, but I just don't remember in the past, so many poor people hooked on so much dope...


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> You are a reasonable person, was the economy the same in 76 as it is now? I remember making good money in 76 working horses and I was 14.
> 
> I think it's very very hard to relocate NOW on minimum wage jobs if you have kids. How's that? Is very very hard acceptable? I shouldn't have said there was no way it could be now.


My economy is much better now than it was back then, and yes it's not easy, few good things in life are. It takes drive ambition and guts to get out of the poverty cycle.... But it's well worth the work and sacrifice when you get there.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Fishindude said:


> I get the high cost of living and $1000 per month studio apartment rent in some cities.
> 
> What I don't get is why, perfectly capable, able bodied adults that can't afford it continue to live there? Cost of living in the rural midwest is dirt cheap by those standards, good jobs are available for anyone* drug free, relatively intelligent and willing to work*, and you can still buy a house for $40,000.


That's why


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

What ever happened to working your way up?


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

"And those same actions were repeated by countless families around the country."

Those people, and they were most of our country then--not as many layabouts as today--went on to fight WWII, liberate Europe, clean out the Pacific and build the great postwar economy. Unfortunately, some twenty-odd years later some of their spoiled children started the country downhill.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Cornhusker said:


> What ever happened to working your way up?


Marxists.


----------



## bruce2288 (Jul 10, 2009)

IP Maybe there are no jobs in NY, but in Nebraska, Kansas and the Dakotas,if a person will show up and is willing to WORK there an abundance of jobs. Sure moving can be difficult, maybe you should read grapes of wrath or some about early immigrants to this country. Hardships were endured, sacrifices made in hopes of a better life for their families. People understood if you wanted a better life, you had to get up off your butt and do something ab out it. Today it is easier to let taxpayers take care of them and whine so liberals will keep ladeling out the gravy


----------



## GREEN_ALIEN (Oct 17, 2004)

bruce2288 said:


> IP Maybe there are no jobs in NY, but in Nebraska, Kansas and the Dakotas,if a person will show up and is willing to WORK there an abundance of jobs. Sure moving can be difficult, maybe you should read grapes of wrath or some about early immigrants to this country. Hardships were endured, sacrifices made in hopes of a better life for their families. People understood if you wanted a better life, you had to get up off your butt and do something ab out it. Today it is easier to let taxpayers take care of them and whine so liberals will keep ladeling out the gravy


Too bad I can't 'like' this post more... or love it.

As a young man leaving HS in a map dot mining town in the middle of Nevada I was faced with several choices and no money. One was the restaurant industry, one was the casino industry and one was the Marine Corps. I figured they all started at the bottom, the pay was low but the Marine Corps had guns and a cool travel plan. The recruiter failed to mention the lead parting gifts... I used the Corps to improve me and my employment picture, I used my work after the Corps to do the college thing and the rest is history. It took hard work, dedication and the will to endeavor to persevere. That is lacking these days. Everyone wants something but only a handful will work hard and sacrifice for what the want.

The only things that are possible are the things we actually do...

Ted


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Jolly said:


> Seattle is currently in the middle of a boom. After Katrina, fast food workers were paid more than $15/hr, because there were not enough workers.
> 
> But just like New Orlean's post Katrina boom, Seattle's boom will not last.


Weird how a bastion of liberalism is experiencing yet another economic boom. :thumb:


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

wiscto said:


> Weird how a bastion of liberalism is experiencing yet another economic boom. :thumb:


Like Detroit?


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

JeffreyD said:


> Like Detroit?


Detroit was a one industry town. Seattle is defense, technology, tourism, fishing, international shipping.... But they're liberal, so they should look like Detroit, right?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

wiscto said:


> Detroit was a one industry town. Seattle is defense, technology, tourism, fishing, international shipping.... But they're liberal, so they should look like Detroit, right?


Nope, they're failing all on their own. Socialists never learn. Workers asking for LESS hours because the minimum wage deal doesnât work, they want to stay on the government teat. Never has lifted anyone out of poverty, just made everything more expensive and grew the government's bank account. Those on fixed income suffer.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

JeffreyD said:


> Nope, they're failing all on their own. Socialists never learn. Workers asking for LESS hours because the minimum wage deal doesn&#8217;t work, they want to stay on the government teat. Never has lifted anyone out of poverty, just made everything more expensive and grew the government's bank account. Those on fixed income suffer.


Seattle has been left of center for a long time... They're one of the strongest economic forces in the country. I'm starting to wonder if Americans know anything about our own history and the Industrial Revolution. The instability of the late 19th and early 20th century does not fall on the shoulders of "socialism." The Rockefellers and Carnegies of the world get to own that one all by themselves. Dangerous working conditions. Market instability. Zero regulation. The Roosevelts saved this country.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Fishindude said:


> I get the high cost of living and $1000 per month studio apartment rent in some cities.
> 
> What I don't get is why, perfectly capable, able bodied adults that can't afford it continue to live there? Cost of living in the rural midwest is dirt cheap by those standards, good jobs are available for anyone drug free, relatively intelligent and willing to work, and you can still buy a house for $40,000.



Because you still can't buy a $40,000 on minimum wage. 
More than that is the importance of family and place. When you make a take home of less than $10,000 as a full time employee at minimum wage. You need the family to help babysit and you can afford to go cruising around a new place looking fort new sources of needed goods and services.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

arabian knight said:


> Ands besides fast foot joints were never and should remain never a Live Long Job. It is a STARTING job to LEARN how to work and get along in a working environment. It was never and should not ever be considered a "living wage" whatever that is~!!!! And if not MOVE. I did others can also.



Says who ?
From many sources I keep hearing we are becoming a service based economy. If that's true declaring service jobs are to be second rate forever is the same as saying most working people should live a second rate life. 
Just cause you moved doesn't prove a thing.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

arabian knight said:


> Y0ou bet no government agency should tell ANY company what the have to pay in wages. That is between the company and its workers ONLY. Period.



Um no ! 
Why should it be ?


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

arabian knight said:


> You do Whats best for YOU. You DON'T under ANY circumstances stay there and HOPE the government mandates a pay increase. You MOVE to better yourself Period~!



You seem to be wrong. This is exactly what's happening.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

JeffreyD said:


> Like Detroit?


Ya lets just keep getting cars Made In America. 
Oh wait to be classified as Made In America that vehicle MUST have at least 75% of its parts come from North America.
Hmmmmm
Guess what vehicle is the MOST american made. Toyota Camry 
and THAT is not even made in Detroit.
Heck even the most widely sold PU in America just Dropped off the top 6 list as Made In America and that is the Ford F150`

Toyota Camry.
Toyota Sienna.
Chevrolet Traverse.
Honda Odyssey.
GMC Acadia.
Buick Enclave.
Chevrolet Corvette.

Ya keep puking up the same old old news from the liberal media side that says America is doing so well. Keep spitting it up maybe someday will get back to great, but not for a LONG TIME.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

arabian knight said:


> Ya lets just keep getting cars Made In America.
> Oh wait to be classified as Made In America that vehicle MUST have at least 75% of its parts come from North America.
> Hmmmmm
> Guess what vehicle is the MOST american made. Toyota Camry
> ...


I think he was actually on your side.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

wiscto said:


> *Seattle has been left of center for a long time... They're one of the strongest economic forces in the country. * I'm starting to wonder if Americans know anything about our own history and the Industrial Revolution. The instability of the late 19th and early 20th century does not fall on the shoulders of "socialism." The Rockefellers and Carnegies of the world get to own that one all by themselves. Dangerous working conditions. Market instability. Zero regulation. The Roosevelts saved this country.


Then why are there people depending on welfare in Seattle?

And BTW, WWII saved this country. Roosevelt's economic policies never did manage to pull the country out of depression, even after 10 years. Oh, they may have kept people from starving but the economy never rebounded like he'd hoped. And stubborn man that he was, he refused to change policy.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

AmericanStand said:


> Because you still can't buy a $40,000 on minimum wage.
> More than that is the importance of family and place. When you make a take home of less than $10,000 as a full time employee at minimum wage. You need the family to help babysit and you can afford to go cruising around a new place looking fort new sources of needed goods and services.


Once again; Minimum wage was never meant to a a living wage for an adult.
Its an ENTRY Level wage.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Speaking of Seattle & the cost of living *cough*, how much would one have to make in order to get off welfare? $20/hr? $30/hr?

We could live quite well down here on $30/hr. Heck, $20/hr is enough to have a nice 3-BR apt and a new car.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Irish Pixie said:


> Real world, folks we're talking about the real world. Perhaps a single person could do that if they lived in a homeless shelter in the city and then in the mid west, assuming they got a job the minute they got to their destination.
> 
> There's no way it can be done with kids without government assistance.


Yea, we need a Federal Dept. of Moving to fund moving expenses for the poor. Based on a conversation with my Border Collie, I predict the funding would only amount to 20 billion a year.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

wiscto said:


> Weird how a bastion of liberalism is experiencing yet another economic boom. :thumb:


Also helps that they are one of the closest ports to China.

Wonder what happens when we start importing stuff from somewhere else?


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

poppy said:


> Yea, we need a Federal Dept. of Moving to fund moving expenses for the poor. Based on a conversation with my Border Collie, I predict the funding would only amount to 20 billion a year.


You have a very smart dog...


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

wiscto said:


> The Roosevelts saved this country.


:hysterical:Youve got to be kidding!!!


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Jolly said:


> Also helps that they are one of the closest ports to China.
> 
> Wonder what happens when we start importing stuff from somewhere else?


Defense, technology, tourism, aerospace, fishing... Is this going to be one of those times when I suggest you do more research and you get mad at me? 



Yvonne's hubby said:


> :hysterical:Youve got to be kidding!!!


Says the revisionist historian.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

wiscto said:


> Defense, technology, tourism, aerospace, fishing... Is this going to be one of those times when I suggest you do more research and you get mad at me?
> 
> 
> 
> Says the revisionist historian.


I remember when Boeing was two shakes from going in the crapper, and there's a lot of guys that worked in defense that had to walk away when the plants were shuttered, all over California and the Midwest.

I never said Seattle is going to dry up and blow away, but never think a boom lasts forever.


----------



## sammyd (Mar 11, 2007)

> You need the family to help babysit and you can afford to go cruising around a new place looking fort new sources of needed goods and services.


What are you doing with kids when you are making min wage?
Min wage is for kids in high school or just out making a few bucks while attending tech or college.
Min wage jobs are not for folks looking to get married or to start a family.

All this talk about fast food types getting raises, what about all the other jobs making min wage like bus boys at regular restaurants, grocery baggers, broom pushers. What about folks getting 10 bucks now? are they getting a raise? What about folks making 24 bucks or so? They are worth 3x min wage now, will they still be worth 3x as much when min wage gets boosted?
How much more worthless are we looking to make our money? Think cost of living is high now, just wait....


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Jolly said:


> I remember when Boeing was two shakes from going in the crapper, and there's a lot of guys that worked in defense that had to walk away when the plants were shuttered, all over California and the Midwest.
> 
> I never said Seattle is going to dry up and blow away, but never think a boom lasts forever.


Yup, I live in another bastion of liberalism, Los Angeles. Boeing was here. Lockheed, Yahoo, gm, and many others. They were driven out by the liberal policies.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

sammyd said:


> What are you doing with kids when you are making min wage?
> Min wage is for kids in high school or just out making a few bucks while attending tech or college.
> *Min wage jobs are not for folks looking to get married or to start a family.*


You'd think that would be common sense. Apparently not. Apparently people want to remain ignorant and just get paid more for it. ound:

It goes to show how far gone our country is, when unskilled labor demands more pay for their lack of skills. :buds:


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Txsteader said:


> You'd think that would be common sense. Apparently not. Apparently people want to remain ignorant and just get paid more for it. ound:
> 
> It goes to show how far gone our country is, when unskilled labor demands more pay for their lack of skills. :buds:


And they demand more pay out of fairness. When was fairness ever an issue in the labor market? It used to be based on things like education, experience, work history, ability, and such. Most of the people working fast food jobs won't even stay with it more than a couple months and miss work regularly. They then drag up with no other job to go to. You occasionally see some really on the ball young person working fast food and you know he/she is going to find something better soon. The rest are useless dolts. You go through the drive up around here and order an unsweetened tea and 50% of the time they will give you a sweet tea or coke. They just don't care.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

wiscto said:


> Detroit was a one industry town. Seattle is defense, technology, tourism, fishing, international shipping.... But they're liberal, so they should look like Detroit, right?


Unions killed Detroit, not liberals
Liberals are mostly ineffective without their strong arm wings like unions and other thuggish organizations


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

mnn2501 said:


> Once again; Minimum wage was never meant to a a living wage for an adult.
> Its an ENTRY Level wage.


Exactly
And you can make the minimum $20 an hour and it will still be the bottom.
Minimum skills, minimum work ethic, minimum ambition will always be low paid.
If you want a better life and more money, make yourself worth more money to your employer.


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

Liberals got awfully quiet, didn't they?
ox


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

poppy said:


> And they demand more pay out of fairness.


They're earning a wage comparable to their skills and job tasks. Sounds pretty darn fair to me. 

I'd still like to know what hourly wage it would take to get them off welfare.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Oxankle said:


> Liberals got awfully quiet, didn't they?
> ox


Heh, indeed. I felt quite certain someone would challenge the story as a bunch lies.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Sorry for sleeping. Seattle has been "liberal" for as long as LA. California doesn't speak for everyone... And the liberals aren't the only reason why that state went completely off the rails. Explain Seattle's decades long success then. Go ahead. Show me how they're like LA. You don't know? Okay.

You all talk like unions are the only problem. You all talk like the auto industry didn't flop because of the economy. "Thuggish" organizations, LOL. Unions formed to fight abusive power. Unions had too much power. There's nothing new about the story of unions in the history of humanity, but you owe them everything in this country. Everything you know about working in the United States was shaped by their efforts. Everything you know about the "middle class" was shaped by their efforts. Unions have problems, that's a reality. But your rhetoric is dangerous to your own standard of living, because if you forget what unions were all about in the first place, you're doomed to repeat history.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

It might be in this thread, I don't know, but I did mention my son was moving because of a job promotion and a 20% raise.

When he went to work for the company he now works for, he could have done several things - he could have gone back to work as a teacher, he could have stayed with the Fortune 500 company he was working for or he could have taken a job with the company he is with now.

Even though the money was a little better at the Fortune 500 company, the benefits and the chance for education and promotion was better at the company he now works for...And with this raise, he's just hitting the lower rungs of the _really_ good money for a guy his age.

Work hard, be flexible and put some thought into who and where you go to work. Most anybody can be successful, at least in this country.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Oxankle said:


> Mo Cows says:
> "So people who work in a fast food restaurant are automatically useless and don't work hard? Judge much?
> 
> No, Mo Cows; People who will not learn how to do anything that will pay a living wage, or who expect to be given more than they can earn, are pretty much useless.
> ...


Post of the day award.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Oxankle said:


> "Where does the extra money to move come from? Moving is expensive in itself and then there is a place to live on the other end, and other expenses.
> It's easy to say just move but much much hard to do in real life."
> 
> People who sit and complain, or beg, will never get anywhere. I grew up during the tail end of the great depression. I saw men and women riding the rails, begging for food, families moving in wagons down country roads, some not knowing where they'd end but determined to make a life in those hard days.
> ...


Post of the day award.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

sammyd said:


> What are you doing with kids when you are making min wage?
> Min wage is for kids in high school or just out making a few bucks while attending tech or college.
> Min wage jobs are not for folks looking to get married or to start a family.
> 
> ...


Post of the day award.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

JeffreyD said:


> Nope, they're failing all on their own. Socialists never learn. Workers asking for LESS hours because the minimum wage deal doesn&#8217;t work, they want to stay on the government teat. Never has lifted anyone out of poverty, just made everything more expensive and grew the government's bank account. Those on fixed income suffer.



You might need to brush on your Detroit history a bit, IMO, especially when comparing to Seattle.

Practically every small town, to huge city, in America has suffered inner city/downtown decline - on some level, most severe, because the more affluent moved to the suburbs, leaving the less affluent there. ,Retailers and business, went right along with them, because that's where the money was only making things worse, for those stuck there.

The money left, so did the tax money.

What would 'socialism" have to do with this fact?


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

TripleD said:


> You forgot overtime


How do you get overtime, when your working _two_ 30 hr per weeks jobs?


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

plowjockey said:


> How do you get overtime, when your working _two_ 30 hr per weeks jobs?


Don't go trying to confuse me ...:surrender:


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> The money left, so did the tax money.
> 
> What would 'socialism" have to do with this fact?


WHAT?

You don't know?

Money LEFT BECAUSE OF Liberalism, THAT is what it has to do with things.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Of course it can be done! I have done it myself several times without gov assistance. In 76 I loaded up the kids and what we could carry and moved from California to Indiana, spent that miserable winter there and moved the pack to Ky. Don't even try to tell me it can't be done :flame:


Wasn't gasoline 40 cents a gallon and a hamburger 10 cents, back then? 

Seemed like it was a little earlier to be poor back then.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

plowjockey said:


> You might need to brush on your Detroit history a bit, IMO, especially when comparing to Seattle.
> 
> Practically every small town, to huge city, in America has suffered inner city/downtown decline - on some level, most severe, because the more affluent moved to the suburbs, leaving the less affluent there. ,Retailers and business, went right along with them, because that's where the money was only making things worse, for those stuck there.
> 
> ...


LOL. Ask yourself why those able moved to the suburbs in the first place and you'll have your answer. It was a direct result of liberal socialist policies that made city life unbearable for them. They had the option and they moved out of the city. They could have easily stayed and remodeled their big nice older homes or tore them down and built more modern ones in their place. But they didn't. The reason? City governments, largely dominated by leftist democrats, imposed ever more building restrictions and city laws that made it unfeasible to many people. Example: A small city near us, democrats in charge, has passed such strict rules on remodeling houses that you have to get government approval on the type and color of siding, type and color of door, and style of windows you plan to put on your remodeled house. Don't even ask about the roofing requirements. The result, people resent being told what their house has to look like and are moving out of the city limits. Now the democrats are lamenting the problem of houses sitting empty and falling into disrepair. They just can't understand why, even though several people have written letters to the editor explaining why they moved to the suburbs. Socialism always fails.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Its all relative. Back then the wages were what? 1.35 1.50? 1.65? SO don't go and play this oh the cost of living was lower, SO WERE THE WAGES. Period.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Money left.....

Or those that had dreams,held a goal for making that dream, developed a plan, worked the plan, dealt with the road blocks and continued on faces success or more often than not found improvement in their bank accounts ....left.

Money earned went with those that earned.


Those that were able to have a dream
And a goal
Future failed to plan things out
Or waited to have fun first.... party on dude
Grew bitter as others moved on
Failing to face a mirror they sought to blame it on....out regret and left pity on others

Money left faster as more of the lower income gave up and safely turn to government gifts... which required more taxes.. which became a greater reason for some on the fence to choose to get their carp together and get to work or give up and grow more reliant on hand outs for their needs and later to include their wants.

People seeing taxes sky rocketing.. left... 

See in Baltimore... they were on the receiving end of big bucks ..from Fed money..they had money.... they still live by a .....pity party mentalities.

They did not work for that money from the Fed's... so why expect them to value it


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

plowjockey said:


> *Wasn't gasoline 40 cents a gallon and a hamburger 10 cents, back then? *
> 
> Seemed like it was a little earlier to be poor back then.


Those prices were not based on an 8 dollar minimum wage either. It was no easier being poor then because it was hard to have 40 cents for a gallon of gas or 10 cents for a hamburger. I lived through those times. I remember me and my friends walking the highway picking up empty soda bottles to cash in to buy BB's. Otherwise, none of us had a nickle to buy them. I also remember people walking the railroad tracks picking up coal that fell off the trains to sell by the bucket because they needed the money. But, we all survived and no one starved to death. Now you can't get people to pick produce for 9 bucks an hour and have to import Mexicans.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

I have no answers as to what exactly the minimum wage should be, but I do know I made few bucks more than 15 an hour, office setting, and we joked in the office that we would go be employed elsewhere for 15 an hour without all the stress... 
Also, why do some assume that fast food workers are lazy, unmotivated, unreliable, etc. or that all minimum wage earners are fast food workers? 
I too used to be a bit judgemental with the go get another job ideals, but in my location the job market is not what it used to be. In fact, just getting that min wage job can result in 3 interviews, employer jerking your schedule around once you land that dream job, and just for the record, those workers pay into the system they attempt to use too. Just something to think about.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

I was talking this thread over with one of the neighbors. She wanted to tell me about her grandson and how well he was doing.

The boy knew he didn't want to go to college, so his senior year in high school he went half a day to school and half a day to vo-tech training. Took him almost a year past high school graduation, but he turned out a welder. Went to work for Union Tank at entry level welder wages.

Worked for three years, honed his craft, made a little rep for himself as a good hand who worked hard and wasn't scared of OT. Got a call from a friend of a friend, who was trying to find good welders for some oilfield work.

Now you've got a kid with a high school degree, some training and a good work ethic, making over $60K/yr.

Nothing beats a fail, but a try. And sometimes when you try, there's no telling how far you can go...


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Jolly... a boy... had a dream of his future
Developed a plan
Worked the plan
And is on his way...


Funny how that WORKs.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

doozie said:


> I have no answers as to what exactly the minimum wage should be, but I do know I made few bucks more than 15 an hour, office setting, and we joked in the office that we would go be employed elsewhere for 15 an hour without all the stress...
> *Also, why do some assume that fast food workers are lazy, unmotivated, unreliable, etc. or that all minimum wage earners are fast food workers? *
> I too used to be a bit judgemental with the go get another job ideals, but in my location the job market is not what it used to be. In fact, just getting that min wage job can result in 3 interviews, employer jerking your schedule around once you land that dream job, and just for the record, those workers pay into the system the attempt to use too. Just something to think about.


I'm not assuming anything. I've seen it for years with my own eyes. Ask any fast food operator how many people in his restaurant call in sick every week, mainly on weekends. Why do so many get sick on weekends? Yes, most people making the minimum wage are in the food business. How many times have you went through the drive through and not gotten what you ordered or had it all thrown in a bag so all your fries are dumped out? They aren't trained that way. They are either too stupid to follow directions or just don't care. Probably both.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

poppy said:


> I'm not assuming anything. I've seen it for years with my own eyes. Ask any fast food operator how many people in his restaurant call in sick every week, mainly on weekends. Why do so many get sick on weekends? Yes, most people making the minimum wage are in the food business. How many times have you went through the drive through and not gotten what you ordered or had it all thrown in a bag so all your fries are dumped out? They aren't trained that way. They are either too stupid to follow directions or just don't care. Probably both.


 Boy you got that right. And it is not just fast food lazy workers. they are now infiltrating into the main work force also.
So many especially small companies have a very hard time keeping workers. They show up late only do the BARE Minimum as they can possibly get away with.
And one thing about that you want to move up in wage and on the ladder you don't just do the very minimum of work, call in late never show up.
Or in one case my friend is looking for a route driver. He got soooooo frustrated with the two so far interviews he is sick and tired of what todays workers have turned into.
Interview ya thats a joke. he NEVER has showed up YET for a face to face interview. Excuse after excuse after excuse. And finally now his application is long Gone`
And I'll betcha why he isn't get any people to interview they DON'T want EARLY Morning Start time this job requires.~! How can you get up at 4am if that is about what time you have gotten HOME from the night of partying~!


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

Doozie; If you worked in an office, "office setting", did you do or learn anything that would have permitted you to move on, or up? Any skills that are needed other than being able to type and use a telephone?

Where are you? Why don't you call the unemployment office in , say, Fayetteville, AR or Tulsa, OK and ask if they have any jobs, and what they pay? Some of us are far from our kin--we went where we could work and feed our children.

Yes, employers do change schedules; the must have people when and where they need them--that is how they stay in business and pay wages. 

My 21 year old grand started out trying to sell time-shares on the phone. Not a living wage. Then she started carrying dishes at a restaurant, moved up to waitress, then a better job at a restaurant that served high-rollers. Then she got a chance to make reservations at an airline, which she can do from home while she attends college.

See the pattern? Almost all of us who eat regularly and have secure places to sleep have done something like this. Not many of us inherited wealth. 

Tragedies happen--A girl falls in love, marries young, children come along and she finds herself five years into a marriage with a husband who drinks, or is financially irresponsible, or who cheats. A man takes a job as a truck drive and is crippled in a wreck, or he finds he's married to a woman whose spending habits he cannot support. (And he's not man enough to say "STOP!!!!!") 

Those things happen, but most people can over come even tragedy if they will get out there and try.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Cornhusker said:


> Unions killed Detroit, not liberals
> Liberals are mostly ineffective without their strong arm wings like unions and other thuggish organizations


Both Seattle and San Francisco have a huge number of unions.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

arabian knight said:


> Boy you got that right. And it is not just fast food lazy workers. they are now infiltrating into the main work force also.
> So many especially small companies have a very hard time keeping workers. They show up late only do the BARE Minimum as they can possibly get away with.
> And one thing about that you want to move up in wage and on the ladder you don't just do the very minimum of work, call in late never show up.
> Or in one case my friend is looking for a route driver. He got soooooo frustrated with the two so far interviews he is sick and tired of what todays workers have turned into.
> ...


I know. I see them in stores all the time. People employed there to assist customers but are too busy texting friends or chatting with other employees to actually help anyone. I was going into Rural King a few weeks ago and the cashier told one of the guys they were out of shopping carts and he needed to bring some in off the lot ASAP. He went outside to get them I assumed. I went to the back and bought some paint and a brush. Maybe in there 10 minutes. As I went out the door I noticed they still didn't have any shopping carts in the store. Then I saw the lazy lout sitting in the shade under the roof smoking a cigarette. He couldn't care less.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

JeffreyD said:


> Yup, I live in another bastion of liberalism, Los Angeles. Boeing was here. Lockheed, Yahoo, gm, and many others. They were driven out by the liberal policies.


Which liberal policies?

just curious.

In nearly every city in America, business and people moved to the suburbs.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

arabian knight said:


> WHAT?
> 
> You don't know?
> 
> Money LEFT BECAUSE OF Liberalism, THAT is what it has to do with things.


Suburb cities don't have Democrat mayors and public unions?


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Successful people want to benefit from their efforts and successful people know what it takes be be successful.

Staying in areas that increasing take from successful people via taxes and other socialist means that gives to others who CHOOSE not to be successful yet demand equality of results not equality of work is not a place successful people want to live and support.

Rather they move away in search for folks with equal understanding of what works to achieve.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

The MAY not have but the smear companies that were contracted to make parts for the big three. were FORCED into paying union wages. And a small company like that could not absorb such a horrid thing as that and THEY PULLED OUT. MOVED OUT MONEY gone~!


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

arabian knight said:


> Its all relative. Back then the wages were what? 1.35 1.50? 1.65? SO don't go and play this oh the cost of living was lower, SO WERE THE WAGES. Period.


Really?

In 1976, gas was .57 gallon and in 2008 nearly $4.11. my online calculator says that is an increase of 621%.

Bread was 32 cents (76") $1.68 (08') 424% increase

Minimum wage in 1976 was $2.30/hr and $6.55 in 2008, which is an increase of 184% - *32 years later*.



How it that "relative"?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

plowjockey said:


> You might need to brush on your Detroit history a bit, IMO, especially when comparing to Seattle.
> 
> Practically every small town, to huge city, in America has suffered inner city/downtown decline - on some level, most severe, because the more affluent moved to the suburbs, leaving the less affluent there. ,Retailers and business, went right along with them, because that's where the money was only making things worse, for those stuck there.
> 
> ...


Liberal policies ran the city, exorbitant pay and unfunded pensions just to get elected. Billions of dollars lost to useless projects by "friends of the city, favoritism. They couldn't adapt to the changing times because of their entrenched policies. California has billions in unfunded liabilities for union worker pensions.

These are just a touch of the socialist policies that caused the epic failure in Detroit. 
What would be YOUR reason Detroit failed?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

plowjockey said:


> Which liberal policies?
> 
> just curious.
> 
> In nearly every city in America, business and people moved to the suburbs.


Taxes,fees,eronious laws and policies, gifts of public money to union shills and their contractors, the pure hatred for those who try to stand up to them. Their passonate hate for the Constitution. Kamila Harris, our AG, going to investigate the folks that made those planned parenthood videos instead of investigating planned parent hood for those atrocities they committed! And it's a conflict of interest for her to do that, but she gets a pass because......she's a liberal of color!

Just the tip of the iceburg. Our biggest problem is the Jerry Brown. He's senile and has become a dictator....think CARB and his buddy and passonate Constitution hater Mary Nichols. Ever know a government agency that writes AND enforces it's own laws? They do!!


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

Just read that a court has refused to let Chicago amend its retirement plant; city is so far behind on pension funds that it will go broke; something like 26% funded. The big city unions and the city officials are so in bed together that the cities promise what the taxpayers cannot deliver. Pension funds ( and the US disabilty fund) are going to run out of money.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

JeffreyD said:


> Liberal policies ran the city, exorbitant pay and unfunded pensions just to get elected. Billions of dollars lost to useless projects by "friends of the city, favoritism. They couldn't adapt to the changing times because of their entrenched policies. California has billions in unfunded liabilities for union worker pensions.
> 
> These are just a touch of the socialist policies that caused the epic failure in Detroit.
> What would be YOUR reason Detroit failed?


Some seem to think that this country is still like it was back in the 60's and 70's This country was in a boom time. Had plenty of jobs money to spend.
We are no longer in a boom time it is in a Bust time and it will take many years to come out out it. And one can not expect or demand the SAME BUYING power today as they had in the Easy boom times days.
SOME just have to cut back and stay the course to ride it out Simple as that~


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> Really?
> 
> In 1976, gas was .57 gallon and in 2008 nearly $4.11. my online calculator says that is an increase of 621%.
> 
> ...


It should be easy to see the relativity here.... for every wage increase prices go up.... but prices go up more than that wage increase. Yeah, lets get the min wage up even further! That way those folks wont be able to get to the store much less be able to buy anything if they get there.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Cornhusker said:


> Unions killed Detroit, not liberals
> 
> Liberals are mostly ineffective without their strong arm wings like unions and other thuggish organizations



Lol you sound like a management shill always blaming their mistakes on the union. 
Remember every problem management blames on the unions is actually a management mistake 
Everyone !


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

kasilofhome said:


> Jolly... a boy... had a dream of his future
> Developed a plan
> Worked the plan
> And is on his way...
> ...



Funny how you hear one story about how it turned out well for someone and you crow like anyone who doesn't do it isn't trying. 

Funny too that you don't seem to see how much of that was luck.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

plowjockey said:


> Both Seattle and San Francisco have a huge number of unions.


When they get greedy, and they always do, they'll kill the businesses that feed them


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

plowjockey said:


> Really?
> 
> In 1976, gas was .57 gallon and in 2008 nearly $4.11. my online calculator says that is an increase of 621%.
> 
> ...


It's just as relative as hamburger going from $1.99 to $4.99 a pound under Obama but his administration saying inflation doesn't exist, so SS recipients don't need a cost of living increase.

Speaking of wages, it's high time they raised the wages of retired folks. Being retired is our occupation and I can prove it. Scroll down any list of occupations on any form and you will find "retired" listed with all the others. Talk about underpaid!! We work at our occupation 24/7/365 for a low salary not even close to minimum wage. We are even forced to sleep on our job. Bump me up to $15.00 a hour, and of course overtime for everything over 8 hours. Heck, I'll even gladly pay income tax and SS tax on it. Think how much revenue that will generate for SS and the treasury!!! Also consider how much spending would increase to boost our economy! Since being retired is my occupation, I could deduct vacations and meals as business expenses, along with my house, clothes, utilities, etc. Seems totally fair to me.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Lol you sound like a management shill always blaming their mistakes on the union.
> Remember every problem management blames on the unions is actually a management mistake
> Everyone !


Yeppers, Management should have shot the union thugs right in the beginning. alas, they were in error and allowed unions to get a death grip.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

JeffreyD said:


> Liberal policies ran the city, exorbitant pay and unfunded pensions just to get elected. Billions of dollars lost to useless projects by "friends of the city, favoritism. They couldn't adapt to the changing times because of their entrenched policies. California has billions in unfunded liabilities for union worker pensions.
> 
> These are just a touch of the socialist policies that caused the epic failure in Detroit.
> *What would be YOUR reason Detroit failed?*


White people left, for the suburbs, because they were afraid of living with blacks and took their money with them. Plus there was better opportunity there.

That is fact.

Poor blacks, are not going to be able to fund a City government on an acceptable level.

An absolute fact.

Pension funding issues are a problems with nearly every pension program, regardless of who initiated it. suburb cities where the whites flocked to have similar pensions issues also.

It's always fun to "blame the Liberals", but in reality, when they started many pension programs, people died when they were 58, not as now, when it 78.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> White people left, for the suburbs, because they were afraid of living with blacks and took their money with them. Plus there was better opportunity there.
> 
> That is fact.
> 
> ...



Racist.... 

Better options for them period...


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> It should be easy to see the relativity here.... for every wage increase prices go up.... but prices go up more than that wage increase. Yeah, lets get the min wage up even further! That way those folks wont be able to get to the store much less be able to buy anything if they get there.


It does not seem easy, apparently.

Minimum wage is not about a high paying career.

Your point seems pretty moot, IMO. Ok so minimum wages have gone up, - over the decades, but of has the prices of everything else,to run a business, insurance, taxes, steel, rubber, concrete, including white collar and executive pay.

So, now we are blaming minimum wage workers for the high costs of business? Seriously?

No one (except those on the Right) said about paying them $30 hr. It just seem interesting that after all these "massive" minimum wage increases, Corporations and businesses are still managing to make a profit, some quite excellent.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

kasilofhome said:


> Racist....
> 
> Better options for them period...


I'm just trying being honest, but when it comes to race, who wants that? 

Got google?

M


> igration of middle-class white populations was observed during the 1950s and 1960s out of cities such as Detroit, Oakland, and Cleveland, although racial segregation of public schools had ended there long before the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in _Brown v. Board of Education_. In the 1970s, attempts to achieve effective desegregation by means of forced busing in some areas led to more families' moving out of former areas.[10][11] More generally, some historians suggest that white flight occurred in response to population pressures, both from the large migration of blacks from the rural South to northern cities in the Great Migration and the waves of new immigrants from southern and eastern Europe.[12


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_flight



> The Detroit Race Riot of 1943 broke out in Detroit in June of that year and lasted for three days before Federal troops regained control. The rioting between blacks and whites began on Belle Isle on June 20, 1943, and continued until June 22, killing 34, wounding 433, and destroying property valued at $2 million.[19]
> 
> 
> *The summer of 1967 saw five days of riots in Detroit.[20][21] Over the period of five days, forty-three people died, of whom 33 were black and 10 white. There were 467 injured: 182 civilians, 167 Detroit police officers, 83 Detroit firefighters, 17 National Guard troops, 16 State Police officers, and three U.S. Army soldiers.*
> *2,509 stores were looted or burned, 388 families were rendered homeless or displaced, and 412 buildings were burned or damaged enough to be demolished. Dollar losses from arson and looting ranged from $40 million to $80 million.[22]*


*Economic and social fallout of the 1967 riots*



*After the riots, thousands of small businesses closed permanently or relocated to safer neighborhoods, and the affected district lay in ruins for decades*




Per capita income in Detroit and surrounding region from the 2000 census. The dotted line represents the city boundary.


After the riots, thousands of small businesses closed permanently or relocated to safer neighborhoods, and the affected district lay in ruins for decades.[23]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Detroit#Economic_and_social_fallout_of_the_1967_riots


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

I am white.... was wealthy, went poor, dream, goal, plan, work...we will achieve ....won't be over night. Rather that count on others we, once a child now a man worked and focus on the prize.

Nothing special... same actions in the past has aided everyone who has applied that method..... give up then the results of failure on giving up, not skin color... ask her main Cain, Ben carson, Clarence Thomas... oh... no the are demonize for going white... Successful people come in all races.

Min wage= starting wage.. it is optional to live on it for live in a free society.
Trophy wages are earn thru effort.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> I'm just trying being honest, but when it comes to race, who wants that?
> 
> Got google?
> 
> ...





How many of the rioters 're and looters requested the day off from work.
Duh. There would never be successful people of all races if effort and work did not matter only race.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> It does not seem easy, apparently.
> 
> Minimum wage is not about a high paying career.
> 
> ...


Minimum wage is a "base" that other wages tend to follow. Everytime min wage goes up it increases those other jobs payscale as well. The major issue is that businesses must increase their prices in order to stay profitable. What really bites the worker is that those prices have to go much higher than just the increase in min wage.... all of those other expenses involved with getting that candybar on your grocers shelf go up too. Every workers pay goes up, from the farmer producing the sugar to the truck driver hauling it. What happens is everyones buying power drops whenever wages go up. The worker is cutting his own throat by demanding more money for the same work.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

poppy said:


> It's just as relative as hamburger going from $1.99 to $4.99 a pound under Obama but his administration saying inflation doesn't exist, so SS recipients don't need a cost of living increase.
> 
> Speaking of wages, it's high time they raised the wages of retired folks. Being retired is our occupation and I can prove it. Scroll down any list of occupations on any form and you will find "retired" listed with all the others. Talk about underpaid!! We work at our occupation 24/7/365 for a low salary not even close to minimum wage. We are even forced to sleep on our job. Bump me up to $15.00 a hour, and of course overtime for everything over 8 hours. Heck, I'll even gladly pay income tax and SS tax on it. Think how much revenue that will generate for SS and the treasury!!! Also consider how much spending would increase to boost our economy! Since being retired is my occupation, I could deduct vacations and meals as business expenses, along with my house, clothes, utilities, etc. Seems totally fair to me.



Sound's like Bernie is your man.



> âAt a time when more than half of the American people have less than $10,000 in savings and senior poverty is increasing, we should not be talking about cutting Social Security benefits. We should be talking about expanding benefits to make sure that every American can retire with dignity," Sanders said earlier this year.


http://qctimes.com/news/local/gover...cle_503f65ec-4281-5091-82b2-6dcf5f40a9e1.html


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> *Where does the extra money to move come from?* Moving is expensive in itself and then there is a place to live on the other end, and other expenses.
> 
> It's easy to say just move but much much hard to do in real life.


I have heard that some people work overtime or get a part time job to achieve their goal to have a better life.

Results vary by a number of factors. Motivation is one.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Minimum wage is a "base" that other wages tend to follow. Everytime min wage goes up it increases those other jobs payscale as well. The major issue is that businesses must increase their prices in order to stay profitable. What really bites the worker is that those prices have to go much higher than just the increase in min wage.... all of those other expenses involved with getting that candybar on your grocers shelf go up too. Every workers pay goes up, from the farmer producing the sugar to the truck driver hauling it. What happens is everyones buying power drops whenever wages go up. *The worker is cutting his own throat by demanding more money for the same work*.


That makes terrible business sense, to voluntarily raise wages, for _every other employee,_ because those at the bottom, got a little more. So the CEO, gets an extra $50k, just to be fair? 

No wonder they have to raise prices.

The worker is not demanding a minimum age increase. the government is.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> The worker is not demanding a minimum age increase. the government is.


Of course it is.... they are going deeper into debt every day. The only way they can maintain that pace is for inflation to eat up the value of todays dollars. (what little value is left)


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> It does not seem easy, apparently.
> 
> Minimum wage is not about a high paying career.
> 
> ...


Well, if $15/hr isn't enough to get off welfare, then what hourly wage would it take?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

At $15 an hour you aren't going to qualify for much of anything unless you have a lot of kids. 

I still am taken aback by how many people think they know better than Seattle what's best for their city. 

Everybody holds up Detroit as the crumbling example of liberal policies, yet not too long ago in a thread about poverty, the southern "right to work" states had the most children living in poverty. Hate to break it to you, it just isn't so black and white.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> I'm just trying being honest, but when it comes to race, who wants that?
> 
> Got google?
> 
> ...


So, whites moved out after the riots??

Imagine that. 

Can you blame them? What person in their right mind would stay in an unsafe neighborhood?


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Minimum wage is a "base" that other wages tend to follow. Everytime min wage goes up it increases those other jobs payscale as well. The major issue is that businesses must increase their prices in order to stay profitable. What really bites the worker is that those prices have to go much higher than just the increase in min wage.... all of those other expenses involved with getting that candybar on your grocers shelf go up too. Every workers pay goes up, from the farmer producing the sugar to the truck driver hauling it. What happens is everyones buying power drops whenever wages go up. The worker is cutting his own throat by demanding more money for the same work.


And it's mind-boggling that everyone can't see that.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

kasilofhome said:


> How many of the rioters 're and looters requested the day off from work.
> Duh. There would never be successful people of all races if effort and work did not matter only race.


Study American history.



> In the postwar period, the city had lost nearly 150,000 jobs to the suburbs. Factors were a combination of changes in technology, increased automation, consolidation of the auto industry, taxation policies, the need for different kinds of manufacturing space, and the construction of the highway system that eased transportation. Major companies like Packard, Hudson, and Studebaker, as well


Why didn't the blacks move to the suburbs, also?


duh. 



> Some of the patterns of racial and ethnic segregation (based in part on the differing religions of the Americans and Europeans), persisted after other social discrimination had eased by the mid-20th century. White mobs enforced the segregation of housing up through the 1960s: *upon learning that a new homebuyer was black, whites would congregate outside the home picketing, often breaking windows, committing arson, and attacking their new neighbors.*[35] In 1956, the mayor of Dearborn-part of Metro Detroit-boasted to the _Montgomery Advertiser_ that _"******* can't get in here...These people are so anti-colored, much more than you in Alabama."_[32]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Detroit_riot#Employment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Detroit_riot#cite_note-promised-32


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yeppers, Management should have shot the union thugs right in the beginning. alas, they were in error and allowed unions to get a death grip.


They did. Pinkerton officers opened fire on workers at a Carnegie steel plant back in the day. Didn't go over very well. Go figure.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Txsteader said:


> And it's mind-boggling that everyone can't see that.


a whole lotta folks cant see much further than their next payday... tis a shame.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> They did. Pinkerton officers opened fire on workers at a Carnegie steel plant back in the day. Didn't go over very well. Go figure.


I remember hearing something about that... did the workers all find new jobs elsewhere or did they go back to work in Carnegies mill?


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

plowjockey said:


> Sound's like Bernie is your man.
> 
> 
> 
> http://qctimes.com/news/local/gover...cle_503f65ec-4281-5091-82b2-6dcf5f40a9e1.html


Yea, he'd probably think it was a good idea. Like other socialists, he wouldn't stop to think where all the money to pay that extra SS money would come from. I'd think you would be happy to pay a lot more taxes to give poor retired people more income. If not, it is a sure sign you hate poor retired folks. But my proposal is no different than you wanting to give minimum wage earners a raise. The money for that raise has to come from some where. It isn't like the local McDonalds is showing a net profit of 5 million a year and can easily afford the raises. You and I and anyone else who buys things will have to pay for them and I ain't getting any raises to be able to do that.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> Study American history.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Deary....1967...enough time has occupied to have gotten a clue.... that it's time to work.

Money is earned by individuals... it is theirs not a community's money.. the individuals who earn get to spend it where they. The bold mindset..... that it is the duty for people... that people work to achieve something must share the wealth.... with folks that habitually take 49 years to move on are moving too slow or..... they don't plan on changing when what they are doing is meeting their goals.

Stop blaming successful folks for being successful..... honestly there is no limitation on the number of successes... someone eles success in no way impacts my success....


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Marxism & Communism have worked so well in other places, to eliminate poverty.
:umno:

And in Marxist and Communist countries, that statement would be enough to put me behind bars.

Um*hell*no!


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

kasilofhome said:


> Deary....1967...enough time has occupied to have gotten a clue.... that it's time to work.
> 
> Money is earned by individuals... it is theirs not a community's money.. the individuals who earn get to spend it where they. The bold mindset..... that it is the duty for people... that people work to achieve something must share the wealth.... with folks that habitually take 49 years to move on are moving too slow or..... they don't plan on changing when what they are doing is meeting their goals.
> 
> Stop blaming successful folks for being successful..... *honestly there is no limitation on the number of successes..*. someone eels success in no way impacts my success....


Really?

Earlier you named Herman Cain, Ben Carson and Clarence Thomas, three blacks whocame from very poor means (even though Thomas went to private schools) and were eventually very successful. Fair enough. That's three.

Without googling, name three more.

Recent similar threads, seemed to have the consensus that, we really don't want the poorer blacks, moving into the more affluent non-black neighborhoods, anyway.

They will bring too many problems with them.

Perhaps it's history repeating itself.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Why is it that poverty is limited to blacks.... why is it that min wage topics have to turn to how hardships, and unfairness And whitie..keeping the Blackman down...

Wealth, health, and poverty is not a race issue... behavior plays a big big roll...how that is overlooked the o focus on race is racist.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> Really?
> 
> Earlier you named Herman Cain, Ben Carson and Clarence Thomas, three blacks whocame from very poor means (even though Thomas went to private schools) and were eventually very successful. Fair enough. That's three.
> 
> ...


George W. Carver, Uncle Remus and Uncle Tom all came from humble beginnings and found fame and fortune. ok, those last two probably found more fame than fortune. 

in more recent news I think Oprah and Obama have done fairly well for themselves.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> Really?
> 
> Earlier you named Herman Cain, Ben Carson and Clarence Thomas, three blacks whocame from very poor means (even though Thomas went to private schools) and were eventually very successful. Fair enough. That's three.
> 
> Without googling, name three more.


What difference if Thomas went to private schools? According to Wikipedia, his father was a farm worker and his mother was a maid! His grandfather, who raised him from the age of 7, was uneducated but managed to build a successful business. 

Sounds to me like hard work and wise choices are what enabled Thomas to attend private school.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

kasilofhome said:


> Why is it that poverty is limited to blacks.... why is it that min wage topics have to turn to how hardships, and unfairness And whitie..keeping the Blackman down...
> 
> Wealth, health, and poverty is not a race issue... behavior plays a big big roll...how that is overlooked the o focus on race is racist.


You are right! I have watched many immigrant families come to this country with little more than the clothes on their backs, no working knowledge of the language and leaving very oppressive governments. They work hard build good lives and many go on to become business owners.. Why can they do it and people that have lived in this country all their lives not?


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

LOL, Plowjockey: Shall we throw out Bill Cosby?

Now: The reason that most whites do not want blacks living in their neighborhood is simple: No matter how good, how well educated, how law-abiding a black in this country is, that person will more than likely have a relative who is a drug dealer, a thief, a looter, robber or some other antisocial character. 

These antisocial characters will visit, case the neighborhood and return-----This is the fear, no matter how absurd it may seem. The fear may be absolutely unfounded with regard to some, or even most, black families that move into good neighborhoods, but that is the experience that people have. 

Have you ever seen what happens to a neighborhood when the government suddenly sticks some section 8 residents nearby? What happens when low-rent subsidized apartments are built? White, black, yellow, green or blue--if you stick a bunch of losers into a good neighborhood your housing value goes down. 

On the other hand, when everyone had to work for a living, no welfare, it was perfectly safe in the South to have a block of poor people's housing two blocks away from royalty row. The poor had jobs within walking distance. When I first went to Shreveport, La. to work just after college there were row houses within a block of my downtown office.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Oxankle said:


> Have you ever seen what happens to a neighborhood when the government suddenly sticks some section 8 residents nearby? What happens when low-rent subsidized apartments are built? White, black, yellow, green or blue--if you stick a bunch of losers into a good neighborhood your housing value goes down.


BINGO!

And why do housing values go down? One word: crime.

Not to hijack this thread but google AFFH and see what's about to happen in the suburbs. 

Hint: The 'A' stands for 'affirmatively' and we all know what that means.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

In my area (rural and on the poor side) it certainly isn't blacks that bring crime into the area, simply because there are very very few minorities here. It's the _white_ trash that is making meth, stealing, living in run down nasty, dirty trailers or shacks, and bringing down my property values. I pay much more in property and school taxes because of it too.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Txsteader said:


> What difference if Thomas went to private schools? According to Wikipedia, his father was a farm worker and his mother was a maid! His grandfather, who raised him from the age of 7, was uneducated but managed to build a successful business.
> 
> Sounds to me like hard work and wise choices are what enabled Thomas to attend private school.


Your thinking of Herman Cain  , but regardless, intact families, solid work ethics and a desire to succeed, has not really been staples, of the black community, literally, since they were freed salves, for various reasons.

The fact that they were really, _literally_ not wanted anywhere else, might be a big reason they are mostly still where they are.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Irish Pixie said:


> In my area (rural and on the poor side) it certainly isn't blacks that bring crime into the area, simply because there are very very few minorities here. It's the _white_ trash that is making meth, stealing, living in run down nasty, dirty trailers or shacks, and bringing down my property values. I pay much more in property and school taxes because of it too.


I don't doubt it a bit. That white trash being moved into a better neighborhood would lower property values just the same as black trash. No one's saying otherwise. Obama's the one focusing on moving poor blacks.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Oxankle said:


> LOL, Plowjockey:* Shall we throw out Bill Cosby?*
> 
> Now: The reason that most whites do not want blacks living in their neighborhood is simple: No matter how good, how well educated, how law-abiding a black in this country is, that person will more than likely have a relative who is a drug dealer, a thief, a looter, robber or some other antisocial character.
> 
> ...


Why would we? 

Cosby was _not_ raised in the poor black inner city, with no father and all of the usual dysfunction, that goes with that life.

It's not the same, IMO.

We expect people who have lived that life, for _generations, _to simply "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" and leave the ghetto, for a better life elsewhere, despite the fact they are not wanted elsewhere.

Americans want them to leave the ghetto, so they don't have to pay to feed them, but Americans don't them moving into their own neighborhoods.

Simple problems with simple solutions.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I remember hearing something about that... did the workers all find new jobs elsewhere or did they go back to work in Carnegies mill?


Seems like their next gig was pushing up daisies.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> Your thinking of Herman Cain  , but regardless, intact families, solid work ethics and a desire to succeed, has not really been staples, of the black community, literally, since they were freed salves, for various reasons.
> 
> The fact that they were really, _literally_ not wanted anywhere else, might be a big reason they are mostly still where they are.



I didn't google Herman Cain. What did I say that had to do w/ Cain?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Thomas


> He was the second of three children born to M.C. Thomas, a farm worker, and Leola Williams, a domestic worker.[5][6] They were descendants of American slaves, and the family spoke Gullah as a first language.[7]





> Living with his grandparents, Thomas enjoyed amenities such as indoor plumbing and regular meals for the first time in his life.[5] His grandfather Myers Anderson had little formal education, but had built a thriving fuel oil business that also sold ice. Thomas calls his grandfather "the greatest man I have ever known."[10] When Thomas was 10, Anderson started taking the family to help at a farm every day from sunrise to sunset.[10] His grandfather believed in hard work and self-reliance; he would counsel Thomas to "never let the sun catch you in bed." Thomas' grandfather also impressed upon his grandsons the importance of getting a good education.[5]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Thomas#cite_note-oyez.org-5https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Thomas#cite_note-Gullah-7


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> Americans want them to leave the ghetto, so they don't have to pay to feed them, but Americans don't them moving into their own neighborhoods.
> 
> Simple problems with simple solutions.


:hand:

I don't want white meth heads moving into my neighborhood any more than I want black gang bangers/crackheads moving into my neighborhood.

Perhaps folks should get a clue and realize the crime associated with inner-city blacks, especially, rather than their color, is why they're not welcomed.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> Really?
> 
> Earlier you named Herman Cain, Ben Carson and Clarence Thomas, three blacks whocame from very poor means (even though Thomas went to private schools) and were eventually very successful. Fair enough. That's three.
> 
> ...


And I listed zero Asians,zero native Americas, zero white...

Private school are in your mind means what....

Plow you really in to the blacks never gets a break.... 

Oh your are confusing.... not wanting to give hand OUT .... you are confusing the fact that forced decreed community are ing the works.

Really stupid communists idea to assign folks to housing locations to achieve a racial balance .....because...... that is a loss of freedom for all.


But you misinterpret that .... because race is the first thing you care about ...not the individuals.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Hey...how did the Irish once slaves... Move to and then from their own ghetto in places like hells kitchen in an employment market where irish were not to apply...

What government program .... was the solution... seems to have work....oh th e 're was no government programs... it was work and sacrifices.... 
That the historical way to success.

Everyone should try it.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> Your thinking of Herman Cain  , but regardless, intact families, solid work ethics and a desire to succeed, has not really been staples, of the black community, literally, since they were freed salves, for various reasons.
> 
> The fact that they were really, _literally_ not wanted anywhere else, might be a big reason they are mostly still where they are.


Why... seems like teaching poor people... (that's not racist) that
Having the American dream, setting personal goal...long and short term ones interior youth and helping them to understand how... to make plans to work to achieve them would and should be done.


Rather that how to file discrimination suits....waving big pay outs.


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

Plowjockey: Your statement is just plain wrong. 
"intact families, solid work ethics and a desire to succeed, has not really been staples, of the black community, literally, since they were freed salves, for various reasons.
ment " 

Up until the Lyndon Johnson "War on poverty" began blacks in this country had about the same marriage rates and illegitimacy rates as whites. Once the government started feeding loose women and made it possible for men to evade their family responsibilities the family went downhill. 

Today black and white illegitimacy rates, the dysfunctional family, are again approaching equality in blacks and whites. Shameful fact.

Sad to say, Pixie is right; poor white trash is the name given by blacks to the sort of people they call by the "N" name. 

When I was a boy we referred to respectable black people as "colored". The "n" word was reserved for the black "white trash". 

As I said in an earlier post, when losers are moved into your neighborhood, black, white, yellow, green or blue, your house is worth less.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yeppers, Management should have shot the union thugs right in the beginning. alas, they were in error and allowed unions to get a death grip.



Is that your approach to employment ? Offer a pittance then kill any who won't work for that. 
Gonna bring back slavery huh ?


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Those that seek special solutions based on race... are racist. 
Affirmative action really was a nail in the coffin of encouraging minorities that the were and are personally full able to achieve based solely on their personal abilities.

War on poverty ....was to put folks in a box .


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Is that your approach to employment ? Offer a pittance then kill any who won't work for that.
> Gonna bring back slavery huh ?


The government supports slavery, it's here, and not going away until welfare programs are cut way back. Fact of life, but some like it this way because they get "free" stuff!


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Johnson handed out free mental wheelchair that certain folks born with certain dna where not equal... that to make them equal to compete was so impossible that they had to be taken care of...

Took the spirit out of people... taught them to wallow in self pity charlatan s like rev. Al...started training them to riot loot for a cause.... wake up.. 

Martin Luther king had a better way...


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

kasilofhome said:


> Hey...how did the Irish once slaves... Move to and then from their own ghetto in places like hells kitchen in an employment market where irish were not to apply...
> 
> What government program .... was the solution... seems to have work....oh th e 're was no government programs... it was work and sacrifices....
> That the historical way to success.
> ...


FWIW, the Irish were not slaves. Many of them entered into indentured servitude, which is a far cry from chattel slavery.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Yes, the lack of education does not change facts... even uncomfortable facts.

Read and learn ..Read the historical docs which have not been doctored and cleansed to fit an agenda.

Irish slaves in America is part of our history.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=irish+slaves&FORM=HDRSC3#ov_em


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

Kasiofhome, you are full of bull....

here are the facts from an Irish historian, Liam Hogan.


* &#8216;Irish slaves&#8217;: the convenient myth *

Liam Hogan 14 January 2015 

The conflation of indentured servitude with chattel slavery in the &#8216;Irish slaves&#8217; narrative whitewashes history in the service of Irish nationalist and white supremacist causes. Its resurgence in the wake of Ferguson reflects many Americans&#8217; denial of the entrenched racism still prevalent in their society.

Supplied by the author from Twitter.
It was with a heavy heart and no small amount of anger that I decided it was necessary to write a public refutation of the insidious myth that the Irish were once chattel slaves in the British colonies. The subject of this myth is not an issue in academic circles, for there is unanimous agreement, based on overwhelming evidence, that the Irish were never subjected to perpetual, hereditary slavery in the colonies, based on notions of &#8216;race&#8217;. Unfortunately this is not the case in the public domain and the &#8216;Irish slaves&#8217; myth has been shared so frequently online that it has gone viral.

The tale of the Irish slaves is rooted in a false conflation of indentured servitude and chattel slavery. These are not the same. Indentured servitude was a form of bonded labour, whereby a migrant agreed to work for a set period of time (between two and seven years) and in return the cost of the voyage across the Atlantic was covered".

Anyone who has ever studied Am history knows of the indentured servant. Not all Irish by any means.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

2015 document trump docs from the infancy of America... Nope

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=irish+slaves&FORM=HDRSC2


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

Your stuff is plain baloney. No credible historian believes that, and as Hogan says the "myth" is put out by Irish nationalists. It is easy to get depictions of prisoners, some of whom may be Irish, and your drawings of slave ships are easy to come by. Again, no credible historian believes as you do.

Note; We are talking about the US of A? There is no disputing the fact that during Cromwell's time and earlier the Irish were treated harshly, but even then there was s line between slavery and indenture. I don't think a white slave ever existed in the US, or even on the N. American continent under English rule.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Is that your approach to employment ? Offer a pittance then kill any who won't work for that.
> Gonna bring back slavery huh ?


There is a difference twixt employees and union thugs.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

I wish someone would outlaw slavery in this country so we can quit fighting about it.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Cornhusker said:


> I wish someone would outlaw slavery in this country so we can quit fighting about it.


Sorry Cornhusker that won't happen. We have more slaves in this country today than ever. We just pay them to do nothing.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

TripleD said:


> Sorry Cornhusker that won't happen. We have more slaves in this country today than ever. We just pay them to do nothing.


Sounds like the opposite of slavery when you say it like that, but I agree, the system we have now is designed to keep people poor, dependent and uneducated.
Democrats tell poor minorities that they are not up to the task of making it on their own, they are not being treated fairly, so don't bother trying.
They tell minorities they aren't smart enough to keep up with the "rich white kids" in school, so they drop out.
I think if the left would stop telling people they aren't good enough and just got out of the way and let them strive and thrive, the poverty in this country would find a minimum and the country would be better off.
It's kind of like giving a kid everything he wants and never making him earn it. He doesn't respect anything he has, and will always be ungrateful and unhappy.
People want to accomplish and take pride in their accomplishments, it's a basic human need, and is one of the things that makes us human.
The government has taken away their self respect.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> There is a difference twixt employees and union thugs.



Could you explain the difference ?


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

JeffreyD said:


> The government supports slavery, it's here, and not going away until welfare programs are cut way back. Fact of life, but some like it this way because they get "free" stuff!



Do you mean the wealthy people that get subsidized employees because the government caters to the needs of the rich?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Do you mean the wealthy people that get subsidized employees because the government caters to the needs of the rich?


Nope!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Could you explain the difference ?


Sure, employees are people who have jobs, go to work and provide service to the employer. That service ranges anywhere from simple labor all the way up to making management decisions for the company. (think ceo) 

Union thugs do not work for the company. The are basically leaches that go around encouraging otherwise good employees to walk off the job, and shut down the companies operations using strong arm tactics under the guise of helping the employees better themselves. Instead of earning a living they extort their wealth from the employees via union dues, which is extorted from the companies by the employees via strikes and other non productive means.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

JeffreyD said:


> Nope!



Well then who do you mean ?


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yeppers, Management should have shot the union thugs right in the beginning. alas, they were in error and allowed unions to get a death grip.






Yvonne's hubby said:


> Sure, employees are people who have jobs, go to work and provide service to the employer. That service ranges anywhere from simple labor all the way up to making management decisions for the company. (think ceo)
> 
> 
> 
> Union thugs do not work for the company. The are basically leaches that go around encouraging otherwise good employees to walk off the job, and shut down the companies operations using strong arm tactics under the guise of helping the employees better themselves. Instead of earning a living they extort their wealth from the employees via union dues, which is extorted from the companies by the employees via strikes and other non productive means.



Them I can't see how your original post would work with your explanation of the use the word thug.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

union thugs ruined a once needed entity. But in todays world of companies unions are a useless money grabbing political entity no longer have their workers in mind only their deep pockets of the worst kind of slop.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

And while they may not be as involved as they once were, the mob is still closely connected to unions in certain parts of the country.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

arabian knight said:


> union thugs ruined a once needed entity. But in todays world of companies unions are a useless money grabbing political entity no longer have their workers in mind only their deep pockets of the worst kind of slop.



Any proof of your outrageous insults ?
Are you trying to insinuate that all companies always have the best interests of their employees or nation at heart ?


----------



## tiffnzacsmom (Jan 26, 2006)

Arabian knight if minimum wage goes up the government collects more taxes and has more money for those of you who collect disability for arthritis.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Any proof of your outrageous insults ?
> Are you trying to insinuate that all companies always have the best interests of their employees or nation at heart ?


http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

http://mercatus.org/publication/top-25-political-donations-1989-2014

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...litical-donations-behind-18-different-unions/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nding-by-unions-far-exceeds-direct-donations/

http://www.publicintegrity.org/2013/09/04/13274/unions-dramatically-increase-super-pac-donations

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/11/03/big-political-spending-by-unions-paid-with-dues/


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

tiffnzacsmom said:


> Arabian knight if minimum wage goes up the government collects more taxes and has more money for those of you who collect disability for arthritis.


Good deal and now starting next month the money that I get from SS is coming out of the general fund not the SSDI side of things. I love it when a plan comes together. And people just can't stay away from slamming people when doing what they were forced into getting. But just wait till a close friend or yourself is put in the same situation and the tide turns sour, for those sour pusses that can't leave something along.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Them I can't see how your original post would work with your explanation of the use the word thug.


I am not sure which part you arent getting? Carnegies employees had jobs and went to work every day providing the labor required to operate the equipment and produce steel. On payday they took their pay and bought whatever necessaries they needed to feed their families. All was working well for all parties. Then one day the union boys showed up and convinced the employees that Carnegie was not being "fair" (in spite of the fact that he lived up to his end of their bargain and paid them on time everytime their mutually agreed wage)

They (the union thugs) convinced these poor devils that they needed to organize a union in order to force Carnegie to treat them better, and for just a small part of their paychecks in Union dues, these thugs would back their play. Of course that led to a strike... and the employees not only would not work, they would not let anyone else work either. The pinkertons came in, and the rest is history. They shot the wrong guys! something like 8 employees dead... not a union thug among them. They were quite busy elsewhere convincing other decent people to join their unions and getting rich collecting their dues.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Any proof of your outrageous insults ?
> Are you trying to insinuate that all companies always have the best interests of their employees or nation at heart ?


I think what he is trying to imply is that the union thugs do not have the employees best interests at heart. To them its just an easy buck, taken from the employees dues. Pretty much the same as its always been with union thuggery.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Union officials job is to get into your pay check.... really think 
Safe .... covered already from your paycheck via taxes for every government regulations. Laws and government agencies cover discrimination....


Now, think so little of your own personal skills that you can't prove your worth to any employers....


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Sure, employees are people who have jobs, go to work and provide service to the employer. That service ranges anywhere from simple labor all the way up to making management decisions for the company. (think ceo)
> 
> Union thugs do not work for the company. The are basically leaches that go around encouraging otherwise good employees to walk off the job, and shut down the companies operations using strong arm tactics under the guise of helping the employees better themselves. Instead of earning a living they extort their wealth from the employees via union dues, which is extorted from the companies by the employees via strikes and other non productive means.


Post of the day award.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I am not sure which part you arent getting? Carnegies employees had jobs and went to work every day providing the labor required to operate the equipment and produce steel. On payday they took their pay and bought whatever necessaries they needed to feed their families. All was working well for all parties. Then one day the union boys showed up and convinced the employees that Carnegie was not being "fair" (in spite of the fact that he lived up to his end of their bargain and paid them on time everytime their mutually agreed wage)
> 
> They (the union thugs) convinced these poor devils that they needed to organize a union in order to force Carnegie to treat them better, and for just a small part of their paychecks in Union dues, these thugs would back their play. Of course that led to a strike... and the employees not only would not work, they would not let anyone else work either. The pinkertons came in, and the rest is history. They shot the wrong guys! something like 8 employees dead... not a union thug among them. They were quite busy elsewhere convincing other decent people to join their unions and getting rich collecting their dues.


Oh brother talk about re-writing history. The plant was trying to increase production and to accomplish this, they demanded the employees work longer hours and more days per week for the same pay. Also workers were getting hurt regularly. When the workers protested, Pinkerton officers were brought in and ended up opening fire on them.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

The latest I hear about the liberal version of the minimum wage was the raising of the idea of a "living" wage. The rough idea is that everyone, working or not, should have a guaranteed "living wage." This was on an NPR broadcast.
And there resides the problem with every liberal proposal. As long as any percentage of people are not thriving, despite every previous legislated benefit, more is required. And because some people specialize in screwing up, there is always that valuable percentage to leverage into more benefits and thus more employment for the administration of same.
If there could just be a definition of 'enough' that could be made to stick then liberals would not be so frightening.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

where I want to said:


> If there could just be a definition of 'enough' that could be made to stick then liberals would not be so frightening.


I think it was Rockefeller that was asked how much was enough... His reply: "just a little bit more."


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

where I want to said:


> The latest I hear about the liberal version of the minimum wage was the raising of the idea of a "living" wage. The rough idea is that everyone, working or not, should have a guaranteed "living wage." This was on an NPR broadcast.
> And there resides the problem with every liberal proposal. As long as any percentage of people are not thriving, despite every previous legislated benefit, more is required. And because some people specialize in screwing up, there is always that valuable percentage to leverage into more benefits and thus more employment for the administration of same.
> If there could just be a definition of 'enough' that could be made to stick then liberals would not be so frightening.


Exactly. What is considered a living wage here wouldn't be a living wage in NY. But proponents and government fail to recognize that. It will never be fair........unless government wants to start dictating wages and costs. :indif:

:nono:


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Txsteader said:


> Exactly. What is considered a living wage here wouldn't be a living wage in NY. But proponents and government fail to recognize that. It will never be fair........unless government wants to start dictating wages and costs. :indif:
> 
> :nono:


Or the regulations get ever more complicated, burdensome and expensive to administer with the effort to be fair, responsible with tax dollars and lawsuits. There is no such thing as a simple solution and every welfare expansion is an opportunity to create a juggernaut.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> The pinkertons came in, and the rest is history. They shot the wrong guys! something like 8 employees dead... not a union thug among them. They were quite busy elsewhere convincing other decent people to join their unions and getting rich collecting their dues.



Reread this part of whatever you wrote and I think if you are honest with yourself you will see the problem. 
What part of the constitution gives employers the right to kill employees ?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Txsteader said:


> Exactly. What is considered a living wage here wouldn't be a living wage in NY. But proponents and government fail to recognize that. It will never be fair........unless government wants to start dictating wages and costs. :indif:
> 
> :nono:


And the OP was about Seattle, not nationwide. So are you saying Seattle doesn't know their own cost of living, or was it just an opening for the usual general bash-fest of fast food workers, unions, entitlements and other "whipping post" favorites? 

I agree the minimum wage was not intended to be a "living wage" in the sense that you could support a family on it. But the worker still has to live, don't they? In certain areas where the cost of living is so high, nothing wrong with those localities establishing a minimum wage that is higher than the national one. I'm still gonna assume the Seattle city council knows more about Seattle than me.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Reread this part of whatever you wrote and I think if you are honest with yourself you will see the problem.
> What part of the constitution gives employers the right to kill employees ?


The tenth amendment would apply. The right to defend ones person and property etc is not denied the people anywhere in the constitution. That is one of those rights retained by the people.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> And the OP was about Seattle, not nationwide. So are you saying Seattle doesn't know their own cost of living, or *was it just an opening for the usual general bash-fest of fast food workers, unions, entitlements and other "whipping post" favorites*?


Was that really necessary?


> I agree the minimum wage was not intended to be a "living wage" in the sense that you could support a family on it. But the worker still has to live, don't they? In certain areas where the cost of living is so high, nothing wrong with those localities establishing a minimum wage that is higher than the national one. I'm still gonna assume the Seattle city council knows more about Seattle than me.


Apparently you are not aware that there is a push to have the FEDERAL minimum wage raised to $15/hr.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Txsteader said:


> Was that really necessary?
> Apparently you are not aware that there is a push to have the FEDERAL minimum wage raised to $15/hr.


If it does make it ,in this area it will kill everything going .:hammer:Any time Gov. get involved with free enterprise ,they create winners and losers . I have had help at the sawmill I would been better off to payed them to stayed at home .At $15.00 a hour I would fired them at the five dollar mark :thumb:


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

where I want to said:


> The latest I hear about the liberal version of the minimum wage was the raising of the idea of a "living" wage. The rough idea is that everyone, working or not, should have a guaranteed "living wage."  This was on an NPR broadcast.
> And there resides the problem with every liberal proposal. As long as any percentage of people are not thriving, despite every previous legislated benefit, more is required. And because some people specialize in screwing up, there is always that valuable percentage to leverage into more benefits and thus more employment for the administration of same.
> If there could just be a definition of 'enough' that could be made to stick then liberals would not be so frightening.


Post of the day award.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Txsteader said:


> Was that really necessary?
> Apparently you are not aware that there is a push to have the FEDERAL minimum wage raised to $15/hr.


No, it isn't at all necessary....but it happens just like clockwork every time a related topic comes up. Those themes that some just love to hate will get brought up. 

Yes there is a push to raise the federal min wage, but what the president said in a speech was $10. Well by the time they haggle it out in Congress they will compromise at less, IF they can even manage to get that done. So don't be skeered. 

You might recall that WalMart is raising their base pay, I think to $9 an hour in a year or so. That is a pretty good clue it's getting time to bump the federal level a bit. It hasn't gone up for 6 years. 

I would not be in favor of $15 as the national minimum wage, but I do think we need a minimum wage in place to avoid unfair exploitation of workers. And from time to time you have to raise it to allow for inflation. It doesn't have to be a big whoop dee doo deal, the world isn't ending and the sky isn't falling. 

And it will be very interesting to see how it shakes out in Seattle and other cities that have taken independent action.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> The tenth amendment would apply. The right to defend ones person and property etc is not denied the people anywhere in the constitution. That is one of those rights retained by the people.



Can't see how that would apply. 
I've read the constitution many times and never see a right to kill people because they won't work for you.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Sawmill Jim said:


> If it does make it ,in this area it will kill everything going .:hammer:Any time Gov. get involved with free enterprise ,they create winners and losers . I have had help at the sawmill I would been better off to payed them to stayed at home .At $15.00 a hour I would fired them at the five dollar mark :thumb:


Yep. Like I said before, folks could live quite well on $15/hr in this area......problem is, employers couldn't pay it w/o having to lay off workers.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

MO_cows said:


> No, it isn't at all necessary....but it happens just like clockwork every time a related topic comes up. Those themes that some just love to hate will get brought up.
> 
> Yes there is a push to raise the federal min wage, but what the president said in a speech was $10. Well by the time they haggle it out in Congress they will compromise at less, IF they can even manage to get that done. So don't be skeered.
> 
> ...


I got to ask how can a employer exploit a worker ? This isn't England in the 1700's .


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Txsteader said:


> Yep. Like I said before, folks could live quite well on $15/hr in this area......problem is, employers couldn't pay it w/o having to lay off workers.


Peter Schiff did a video on just that ,his theory was any marginal worker would be outright fired ,then replaced with ones that could do the work of two . Also his thoughts were they would go for the ones with better educations. Another thing he said those making above the minim the employer could give them a raise and more duties costing the Co less . Gov and business never mix .

I think what the deal is the Gov, big business and the bankers have took over the Gov . adding laws like this just gets rid of those not in the favor with them .:thumb:


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> No, it isn't at all necessary....but it happens just like clockwork every time a related topic comes up. Those themes that some just love to hate will get brought up.


But I didn't, so your dig was uncalled for.


> Yes there is a push to raise the federal min wage, but what the president said in a speech was $10. Well by the time they haggle it out in Congress they will compromise at less, IF they can even manage to get that done. So don't be skeered.
> 
> You might recall that WalMart is raising their base pay, I think to $9 an hour in a year or so. That is a pretty good clue it's getting time to bump the federal level a bit. It hasn't gone up for 6 years.
> 
> ...


Unless you're one of the ones that has to be sacrificed so that _others_ can have their 'living wage'.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Sawmill Jim said:


> I got to ask how can a employer exploit a worker ? This isn't England in the 1700's .


I don't seriously believe you need it spelled out for you, you're a smart enough guy. Just because people aren't chained to a work station any more doesn't mean they can't be exploited.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> I don't seriously believe you need it spelled out for you, you're a smart enough guy. Just because people aren't chained to a work station any more doesn't mean they can't be exploited.


Only if they choose to be, otherwise they can't be.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

MO_cows said:


> I don't seriously believe you need it spelled out for you, you're a smart enough guy. Just because people aren't chained to a work station any more doesn't mean they can't be exploited.


Nope to exploit me you would need to chain me up ,then I would gnaw my arm off and beat someone over the head with the bloody stump :sing:


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Txsteader said:


> But I didn't, so your dig was uncalled for.
> 
> 
> Unless you're one of the ones that has to be sacrificed so that _others_ can have their 'living wage'.


The dig was in general, not directed at you. Sorry if it twisted your long johns.

I straight up said I didn't think min wage was intended to be a living wage.

My job is on borrowed time already. I work for mom and pop and pop is retirement age and one of these days mom will insist he retires. I'll just enjoy it while it lasts and do my best to make lemons out of lemonade when the time comes. And unlike most of corporate America, mom and pop know that you usually get what you pay for and have never hired at min wage the whole history of the enterprise.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

I still like to know the definition of living wage :hammer: I would also like to know why some think it is owed to them . Most don't get the idea when wages go up so does everything .Most wages are based on worth of a employee gaining more than their cost to the employer .Thousands of jobs have went by the wayside due to these facts . Watch for a lot more automation ,that is one area where they don't have to depend on as many people not showing up for work .:thumb:


----------



## sammyd (Mar 11, 2007)

Oldest kid works nights at Walmart. They took half his shift premium away to pay for those minimum wages.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> No, it isn't at all necessary....but it happens just like clockwork every time a related topic comes up. Those themes that some just love to hate will get brought up.
> 
> Yes there is a push to raise the federal min wage, but what the president said in a speech was $10. Well by the time they haggle it out in Congress they will compromise at less, IF they can even manage to get that done. So don't be skeered.
> 
> ...


you are aware that raising labor costs is one of the main causes of inflation right? workers essentially lose buying power with every raise they get.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Can't see how that would apply.
> I've read the constitution many times and never see a right to kill people because they won't work for you.


Not working for you is one thing, but the employees at the steel mills didn't just refuse to work. They took over the mills by force, shut them down and refused to let anyone else work. Now do you see the difference? What would you do if you came home one day and found your home invaded by people who wouldn't let you in your house? Would you just say "ok, y'all can have my home, I'll just go live under a bridge." Or would you have them removed from your property.

When you went through your copy of the constitution did you run across anything denying people the right to defend themselves or their property? If not those rights were part of those basic rights reserved by them.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> you are aware that raising labor costs is one of the main causes of inflation right? workers essentially lose buying power with every raise they get.


There are other factors for inflation, those super high fuel prices for awhile were adding noticeably to the cost of EVERYTHING. Drought mostly, caused the national beef cow herd to drop to the lowest levels since the 50s or 60s, depending which ag journal you read. Beef will be expensive for a few more years until supply and demand level out again. Had nothing to do with labor costs, yet it affects every red meat eater in the nation. So if wages don't go up, everyone loses buying power. 

It's a balancing act. If the national min wage was raised to $15 tomorrow, yes it would be a disaster. But if it continues to creep up in gentle increments that don't exceed the level of inflation that is happening anyway, we maintain the balance.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> There are other factors for inflation, those super high fuel prices for awhile were adding noticeably to the cost of EVERYTHING. Drought mostly, caused the national beef cow herd to drop to the lowest levels since the 50s or 60s, depending which ag journal you read. Beef will be expensive for a few more years until supply and demand level out again. Had nothing to do with labor costs, yet it affects every red meat eater in the nation. So if wages don't go up, everyone loses buying power.
> 
> It's a balancing act. If the national min wage was raised to $15 tomorrow, yes it would be a disaster. But if it continues to creep up in gentle increments that don't exceed the level of inflation that is happening anyway, we maintain the balance.


I can't argue that wage increases are the only cause of inflation but it is one of the main causes.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I can't argue that wage increases are the only cause of inflation but it is one of the main causes.


With more and more products made by cheaper foreign labor in our marketplaces, prices still go up. So I'll just agree to disagree.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> With more and more products made by cheaper foreign labor in our marketplaces, prices still go up. So I'll just agree to disagree.


That's fine too.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

MO_cows said:


> There are other factors for inflation, those super high fuel prices for awhile were adding noticeably to the cost of EVERYTHING. Drought mostly, caused the national beef cow herd to drop to the lowest levels since the 50s or 60s, depending which ag journal you read. Beef will be expensive for a few more years until supply and demand level out again. Had nothing to do with labor costs, yet it affects every red meat eater in the nation. So if wages don't go up, everyone loses buying power.
> 
> It's a balancing act. If the national min wage was raised to $15 tomorrow, yes it would be a disaster. But if it continues to creep up in gentle increments that don't exceed the level of inflation that is happening anyway, we maintain the balance.


Turning up the heat of the water on the boiling frog slowly ,still kills the frog :thumb:
Increasing all costs slowly as min. wage goes up will leave retired old folks on SS holding the bag with a fixed income and higher taxes everywhere .Maybe the crash will come way before then ,our Gov has already spent the next ten thousand years of it's income yesterday :thumb:


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Not working for you is one thing, but the employees at the steel mills didn't just refuse to work. They took over the mills by force, shut them down and refused to let anyone else work. Now do you see the difference? What would you do if you came home one day and found your home invaded by people who wouldn't let you in your house? Would you just say "ok, y'all can have my home, I'll just go live under a bridge." Or would you have them removed from your property.
> 
> When you went through your copy of the constitution did you run across anything denying people the right to defend themselves or their property? If not those rights were part of those basic rights reserved by them.



Still no right to kill.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Still no right to kill.


Care to respond to my question? Or are you content to sleep under a bridge?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Sawmill Jim said:


> Turning up the heat of the water on the boiling frog slowly ,still kills the frog :thumb:
> Increasing all costs slowly as min. wage goes up will leave retired old folks on SS holding the bag with a fixed income and higher taxes everywhere .Maybe the crash will come way before then ,our Gov has already spent the next ten thousand years of it's income yesterday :thumb:


Our govt spends money like a childless lottery winner with 48 hours left to live! But that's a separate issue from this thread. 

SS has gone up in the last 6 years, while the min wage didn't. So I don't get the connection you are trying to make between min wage and the fixed income crowd.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

MO_cows said:


> Our govt spends money like a childless lottery winner with 48 hours left to live! But that's a separate issue from this thread.
> 
> SS has gone up in the last 6 years, while the min wage didn't. So I don't get the connection you are trying to make between min wage and the fixed income crowd.


No need to make a connection ,should be easy enough . But i'll line up some :thumb:

Lot of folks like me are old and broke down and are stuck with SS no hope of much improvement :facepalm: 

When I was younger one time there I needed money so bad I didn't have time to work for it . Buddy and I took a small travel trailer and went 1,214.2 miles from home to work in the oil field . Buddy made more than I did for various reasons but I was happy with my little old $40.00 a hour . Everyone back home was moaning about being broke but wouldn't push ,pull or drag their grits out there for a job . A lot 99% are stuck at min due to their own choosing .Most want big pay with little effort on their part .Case in point.

Another friend back in the winter said he wanted some part time work and was going to find himself about eight yards to mow .I told him I knew him better than that and knowing him he would wind up with half the county to mow with no free time . I spoke to him the other day and ask how his part time mowing was going and he said what part time mowing I got eighteen yards and a full time helper. :hammer:

There are lots of jobs pay way more then min but an't nobody going to break their door down and drag their grits off the sofa to give them to them .Or that is what the wife told one of her boys one time . If people would get it threw their thick head they an't owed a living ,they might make a living humble as it may be .:flame:


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Care to respond to my question? Or are you content to sleep under a bridge?



What question ? And how will not answering it force me to sleep under a bridge ? 

just as a point I have ssleptunder a bridge many times and have found it quite comfortable.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ceo-raised-minimum-wage-70-212850113.html

Thought this was an interesting aspect on artifically increasing wages. 
Remember that CEO who decided to raise starting wages for his incoming employees to $70,000 per year? Well there's been a slight hitch. Turns out that some of his current employees, who did not get a corresponding increase in their wages, did not like the idea that they could have successfully produced for the business yet their salary was similar to those new hires who had proven nothing and lacked the skills. A coupoe simply quit.

What an unsocially responsible reaction- to expect that producing more should mean earning more.......


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Not working for you is one thing, but the employees at the steel mills didn't just refuse to work. They took over the mills by force, shut them down and refused to let anyone else work. Now do you see the difference? *What would you do if you came home one day and found your home invaded by people who wouldn't let you in your house? Would you just say "ok, y'all can have my home, I'll just go live under a bridge." Or would you have them removed from your property?*
> 
> When you went through your copy of the constitution did you run across anything denying people the right to defend themselves or their property? If not those rights were part of those basic rights reserved by them.





AmericanStand said:


> What question ? And how will not answering it force me to sleep under a bridge ?
> 
> just as a point I have ssleptunder a bridge many times and have found it quite comfortable.


the question I asked to start with and you dodged. I bolded it for you this time.


----------



## logbuilder (Jan 31, 2006)

Another perspective from Seattle. Ivar's is a local restaurant chain that has been in Seattle since 1938 and was started by Ivar Haglund. He was quite the character. They are taking a leadership position in their industry by implementing the $15 wage 2 years ahead of when they would be required. Should be interesting to see how it works out in the long term. Their fish and chips are great.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/higher-wages-a-surprising-success-for-seattle-restaurant/

At Ivarâs Salmon House on Seattle's Lake Union, menu prices were raised 21 percent and routine tipping was eliminated after the restaurant decided to institute the cityâs $15-an-hour minimum wage two years ahead of schedule. Since the change, wages for some workers have increased as much as 60 percent and revenue has soared.

More at the above link.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> the question I asked to start with and you dodged. I bolded it for you this time.



I'd have the removed of course. 
By the law. 
Not killed. 
Can you see the difference ?

Another tiny difference can you see the difference between your house and a steel mill ?

Hint YOU probably don't own a steel mill.

See your question was answered you just couldn't see it because you didn't like it. 

So to be clear the original answer to your question was, "still no right to kill"


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> I'd have the removed of course.
> By the law.
> Not killed.
> Can you see the difference ?
> ...


Yes I see the difference, you would have the law evict them.... The ones who carry guns and seem to have no qualms about using them to get people to comply with their demands. IE you would farm the job out just exactly the way Carnegie did!

You are correct, I do not own a steel mill, but that is neither here nor there. Property is property and people do have the right to protect their property. Others have no right to occupy your property unless you the owner grants permission.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

logbuilder said:


> Another perspective
> 
> At Ivarâs Salmon House on Seattle's Lake Union, menu prices were raised 21 percent and routine tipping was eliminated after the restaurant decided to institute the cityâs $15-an-hour minimum wage two years ahead of schedule. Since the change, wages for some workers have increased as much as 60 percent and revenue has soared.


I like the elimination of tipping thing although the article indicated some people tipped anyway. Basically what the restaurant did was increase their prices by the amount a person was expected to tip so the cost to the patron could be touted as the same. 
But since restaurants are reported to have a 5% profit margin, yet the nontipped personnel also got the $15 per hour wage, it would seem that either the tipped personnel will get less as their normal tipping will now be distributed over more people or the restaurant's profit will take up the difference. 
It will be interesting to see the result although Seattle is an exceptionally rich city at the moment and a 21% menu increase may not deter diners there. That is an option not avaible to non-tipping restaurants like fast.food places.
But w ho knows the public may find a $10 Big Mac acceptable.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yes I see the difference, you would have the law evict them.... The ones who carry guns and seem to have no qualms about using them to get people to comply with their demands. IE you would farm the job out just exactly the way Carnegie did!
> 
> 
> 
> You are correct, I do not own a steel mill, but that is neither here nor there. Property is property and people do have the right to protect their property. Others have no right to occupy your property unless you the owner grants permission.


 
The pinkertons were just a bunch of hired thugs , the fact they killed gives them the thug justification. 
You can weasel around any way you want and not justify killing peaceable men. 
There was no self defense issue. 
And to help clarify a house/home is a small domicile of a few individuals , most steel mills I've seen are company owned business properties , meaning many people own them and don't live there.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

logbuilder said:


> Another perspective from Seattle. Ivar's is a local restaurant chain that has been in Seattle since 1938 and was started by Ivar Haglund. He was quite the character. They are taking a leadership position in their industry by implementing the $15 wage 2 years ahead of when they would be required. Should be interesting to see how it works out in the long term. Their fish and chips are great.
> 
> http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/higher-wages-a-surprising-success-for-seattle-restaurant/
> 
> ...


Yes now the wealth is spread out among all the waiters. Before this happened there were probably some that made 300 a night in wages and tips. Some did not. So now all make the same with no incentive to excel. 

Is that what you are trying to say?

I used to work for a large construction company. Every spring we would all get a bonus check that was equal. In December we would get a bonus that totaled all of our individual profits from the jobs we did individually. They ranged from 1000 to 20000 dollars in one check. How long do you think it took for those 1000 dollar bonus workers to decide to excel the next year and make the 20000?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> The pinkertons were just a bunch of hired thugs , the fact they killed gives them the thug justification.
> You can weasel around any way you want and not justify killing peaceable men.
> There was no self defense issue.
> And to help clarify a house/home is a small domicile of a few individuals , most steel mills I've seen are company owned business properties , meaning many people own them and don't live there.


Just a historical note here... Carnegie owned his steel mills outright, they were his property. Those "peaceable" men had taken over his property by force and were armed, had no intention to vacate the property peacefully.


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

where I want to said:


> It will be interesting to see the result although Seattle is an exceptionally rich city at the moment and a 21% menu increase may not deter diners there. That is an option not avaible to non-tipping restaurants like fast.food places.
> But w ho knows the public may find a $10 Big Mac acceptable.


 Where are you coming up with this '$10 Big Mac' thing? A Big Mac is $3.99, so even if they raised all menu prices 21%, the burger would cost $4.83


----------

