Chef Jim Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 Well, I didn't make that claim. Also, rarely are there solutions that are of the variety of the be-all and end-all silver bullet ones. My view is based on three main points. 1) Cost of living is rising and wages should reflect that, if it is doable. In other words from the workers perspective. 2) Corporations are flushed with cash, and it is my belief that they easily could withstand this increase, without skipping a beat. 3) That there would be a net positive effect on the economy. Listen, you think that I like being on the side of an argument that defends mandates? I just normally don't agree with them in many instances because it usually from my perspective doesn't produce the intended results. This just happens to be one instance where I happen to believe that an increase to the level we are talking about, won't detrimentally harm corporations and would have a net positive effect on the economy. I've thought about this issue a good bit over the years, and I've simply come to a different conclusion than most of you here. So are you mandating a COLA for everyone or just those at minimum wage? Why should they be the only ones to have their wages keep up with COLA. Oh wait they usually do. Those people get promotions and raises too. If you're in a $7.25 an hour job and don't get a raise every year you either suck or need to look for another job.
Magox Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 (edited) Look at the data, it's clear that the majority of minimum wage holders are young and in temp jobs. Of course there are non-teens in many of those jobs. But how do you know they're simoly not supplementing other family income? What are their numbers? Minimum wage hikes haven't had a tangible effect on growth yet because businesses know they're sporadic and not tied to automatic cola increases. You are advocating set economic policy based on the sample outliers? If you do, then Yes, but if the cost of living is increasing, just because the majority of these recipients are "temp" workers and young shouldn't exclude them for having their standards of living rise. By the way, those "temp" jobs, what age do you think most of them are? Ok, lets flip this, show me where minimum wage hikes have stifled growth and broadly negatively impacted corporations? So are you mandating a COLA for everyone or just those at minimum wage? Why should they be the only ones to have their wages keep up with COLA. Oh wait they usually do. Those people get promotions and raises too. If you're in a $7.25 an hour job and don't get a raise every year you either suck or need to look for another job. Yep, I'm the great mandating dictator now. In regards to why should they see an increase over others? that's an absurd point to make. Think about that question for a second. We are talking MINIMUM here. Let the word Minimum sink in for a second, and then rethink your comment. YOU MADE THE CLAIM, YOURE THE ECONOMICS EXPERT, YOU BACK IT THE !@#$ UP. No. GG said it would stifle growth, I responded to that post and then you replied to my reply of GG's. Now show me how it has stifled growth. Edited March 21, 2013 by Magox
meazza Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 No. GG said it would stifle growth, I responded to that post and then you replied to my reply of GG's. Now show me how it has stifled growth. Careful, he might yell at you.
Chef Jim Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 Yes, but if the cost of living is increasing, just because the majority of these recipients are "temp" workers and young shouldn't exclude them for having their standards of living rise. By the way, those "temp" jobs, what age do you think most of them are? Ok, lets flip this, show me where minimum wage hikes have stifled growth and broadly negatively impacted corporations? Yep, I'm the great mandating dictator now. In regards to why should they see an increase over others? that's an absurd point to make. Think about that question for a second. We are talking MINIMUM here. Let the word Minimum sink in for a second, and then rethink your comment. Listen I spent 25 years in an industry that probably has the most minimum wage employees. We'd start them at minimum wage. Did they stay there? No, they got raises every year. They also improved their skills. Dishwashers learned to prep veggies and make salads......got a raise. The prep and salad person learned to work the line........they got a raise. The guys on the line learned to manage and became a sous chef........they got a raise. The cook didn't have the skills to manage they went to a bigger restaurant or a hotel that paid them more or they just got a raise. All they had to do was request one. Oh the horror, I have to ask for a raise. Let's change this from minimum wage to what it really is. Something most of us can relate to......base pay. Who sets base pay? Your employer not the government.
RkFast Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 GG said it would stifle growth, I responded to that post and then you replied to my reply of GG's. Now show me how it has stifled growth. I asked you to explain how it wouldn't. Who gives a turkey about GG?
Magox Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 Listen I spent 25 years in an industry that probably has the most minimum wage employees. We'd start them at minimum wage. Did they stay there? No, they got raises every year. They also improved their skills. Dishwashers learned to prep veggies and make salads......got a raise. The prep and salad person learned to work the line........they got a raise. The guys on the line learned to manage and became a sous chef........they got a raise. The cook didn't have the skills to manage they went to a bigger restaurant or a hotel that paid them more or they just got a raise. All they had to do was request one. Oh the horror, I have to ask for a raise. Let's change this from minimum wage to what it really is. Something most of us can relate to......base pay. Who sets base pay? Your employer not the government. Well good, I'm glad to hear that.
Chef Jim Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 Well good, I'm glad to hear that. Good answer. And now that I think about it most of the places I worked payed their entry level people above minimum wage. Why do you think that is?
meazza Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 Good answer. And now that I think about it most of the places I worked payed their entry level people above minimum wage. Why do you think that is? Because it's actually getting quite hard to fill those jobs.
Chef Jim Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 Because it's actually getting quite hard to fill those jobs. Yup and keep them filled. Imagine that. The market forces making a minimum wage not necessary. The only minimum wage job I had was at my dad's restaurant. He gave me a raise once and I told him he had to they just raised minimum wage. Pissed the old man off. Oh and I was probably 15 years old. You know, really who the minimum wage was designed for.
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 Magox: Two things, 1) Your use of the word "ideologue" as a perjorative is the pinnacle of irony. 2) Your fiat declarations that something is "pragmatic" does not make it so.
....lybob Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0774473.html historic minimum wage 1955 -2012, historic high 1968 equivalent to $10.42 today, historic low 2006 equivalent to $5.84 today http://www.westegg.com/inflation/
Magox Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 Good answer. And now that I think about it most of the places I worked payed their entry level people above minimum wage. Why do you think that is? Because the market dictates so? You're not gonna have me defend the reasoning behind mandates, and the notion that I'm some sort of mandater in chief is absurd. I for the most part believe in free markets, I just think that in some cases there do need to be regulations and mandates. My conclusions are usually derived from pragmatism, logic and numbers, and I do not automatically subscribe to all conservative economic orthodoxy. I discount opinions based purely on ideology, and I know that many here on this board and that follow politics are usually people who either toe the party line or the accepted view of the ideology they follow. Which means that they are held prisoners to their indoctrinated views. I'm not saying you are one of them, you may or may not, but I know many here do.
birdog1960 Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 On any given Sunday I can destroy anything with sugar around me at the blink of an eye. Cookies? Sure! Ice cream? Definitely. Part of the reason I gained some weight back is because I fell off the wagon. It's no secret that I have the tendency to balloon into a starting offensive lineman if I am not careful but that comes from my own willpower and the choices I make as an individual. or does it? might there be a biologic basis for your cravings and inability to remain "on the wagon"? why do mammals perceive hunger at all? what is the reason for it from an evolutionary perspective? is it vestigial and actually harmful in modern society? then again it could be you're just a glutton. things are rarely as simple as they initially seem. witness this discussion on the minimum wage.
GG Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 Yes, but if the cost of living is increasing, just because the majority of these recipients are "temp" workers and young shouldn't exclude them for having their standards of living rise. By the way, those "temp" jobs, what age do you think most of them are? Ok, lets flip this, show me where minimum wage hikes have stifled growth and broadly negatively impacted corporations? Yep, I'm the great mandating dictator now. In regards to why should they see an increase over others? that's an absurd point to make. Think about that question for a second. We are talking MINIMUM here. Let the word Minimum sink in for a second, and then rethink your comment. No. GG said it would stifle growth, I responded to that post and then you replied to my reply of GG's. Now show me how it has stifled growth. It didn't take long for you to embrace COLA and how you're trying to fix a societal issue by throwing more money at it. When was the last time a societal and demographic problem fixed with governmental mandates of more money? Minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be for people who are supporting a family. If someone is in that position, they're either unnwilling or unable to get a better job. Handing them $1 extra an hour will not fix the fundamental issue of why they're in that job in the first place.
Magox Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 (edited) Magox: Two things, 1) Your use of the word "ideologue" as a perjorative is the pinnacle of irony. 2) Your fiat declarations that something is "pragmatic" does not make it so. To your two points. 1) I do, and honestly I don't really care what you find to be ironic. 2) And your "fiat declaration" that it doesn't make it so, doesn't make it so. It didn't take long for you to embrace COLA and how you're trying to fix a societal issue by throwing more money at it. When was the last time a societal and demographic problem fixed with governmental mandates of more money? Minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be for people who are supporting a family. If someone is in that position, they're either unnwilling or unable to get a better job. Handing them $1 extra an hour will not fix the fundamental issue of why they're in that job in the first place. "Throwing more money at it" What?? First off, they are earning their wage. There is no handout, there are no taxes being placed on anyone that is being redistributed. So your characterization is faulty at best. The crux of it all is that you are against minimum wages, period. Right? Now that we have it, because it is law, when do you propose is the right time to increase those wages? I'm enjoying this. Of course you are, because you usually are where I am right now. Edited March 21, 2013 by Magox
meazza Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 or does it? might there be a biologic basis for your cravings and inability to remain "on the wagon"? why do mammals perceive hunger at all? what is the reason for it from an evolutionary perspective? is it vestigial and actually harmful in modern society? then again it could be you're just a glutton. things are rarely as simple as they initially seem. witness this discussion on the minimum wage. We all have our weaknesses. I have a hard time managing my habits which is why I just stay away ( I don't buy junk food at home, I just purchase small quantities when I feel the urge). If your liberal studies finds a way to make veggies taste like a nice nutella sandwich, then I fully support your studies
Magox Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 That fact that I can't help but agree with an idiot truther like yourself should be enough to make Magox stop and think all on its own. If you really think about it, based on this comment, maybe it isn't me who should rethink their position.
Recommended Posts