Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 sebster wrote:

The only question now is whether what's motivating these people is sociopathic indifference ("feth you, I've got mine") or just simple spite (because in many cases the reforms are better for the poor and better for society as a whole, and opposing them can only really be motivated out of a desire for the poor to remain as poor as possible).

its all well and good to have a different viewpoint,
but when your getting into cussing and literally saying people who hold a different viewpoint are literally sociopaths, or spiteful, or want people to stay poor, maybe take a step away.

its insulting when you tell a person, who has LIVED the md d's life to get ahead, and that what worked for me. If hard work, saving, which is the only way anyone, ever, gets ahead, wont work for "most people" then most people dont deserve to get ahead. Make room for the motivated.

Me relating my life experience, where I actually LIVED the topic on hand, is most certainly not the equivalent of me saying anything close to "feth you, ive got mine" or any of the other falsehoods you assert comprise the entirety of the camp that simply thinks individuals are responsible for themselves and that there are ALREADY things in place to help the less fortunate its not this wasteland of hopelessness and desperation you make it out to be.

maybe go volunteer more, I feel that my time spent at the mustard seed or the food bank will do more to help then any of this BS talk talk talk and spending of other peoples money or raising the min wage only to have workers hours cut....
sometimes things that sound good on the face, like raising min wage, or obamacare, just end up having peoples hours cut so they end up worse off.


time and time again, i see those with a negative, whiny attitude fail, and those who suck it up and have a positive attitude, succeed.

its so odd, that the people who constantly blame the system or the whatever it is they are blaming at the moment, tend to succeed less then those who simple try, fail, try again, until they succeed.

 Easy E wrote:
Agreed, but you have to realize when you are poor things like smoking are your only recreation. You don't drive around town listening to the radio, go on weekend trips, go to the pub much, it is like Sebs story about the TV. That is all you do to kill time (and possibly hunger) and then you are addicted.

Jeeze man, I don't know if the same logic applies to smoking. Because the logic is basically that the more you sit around the house (because you don't have money to go out), then the more value you get out of a tv, and so you might as well spend what money you have on a good tv.

But smoking is an insanely expensive way to kill two minutes, no matter what.

I think that's kind of the end moral - some spending decisions made by poor people actually make a lot of sense when you get a feel for what being poor is like. There's actually a really good series of articles on Cracked about that, believe it or not. But other decisions, like smoking, well they're just bad decisions, and exactly why the poor tend to make those decisions more often is something I don't think there's a particularly good answer for.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
I don't think the idea that menial jobs should entail low wages necessarily implies spite. Just thinking beyond my own views, it could imply the notion that merit -- yes, a complex and totally problematic term -- should be the key factor in determining whether someone earns (another problematic key word) a better or worse wage.

Sure, menial jobs needing to be paid low wages isn't just a spite thing. I mean, it's basically an accepted fact of every modern economy. And it isn't really a problem, either, that it gets based on some notion of merit, or what a person 'earns' - they are as you say problematic words, but they're ones with some real value behind them, at some level - before we even consider any notion of incentives, people would have a basic sense of unfairness if society deemed that a doctor is to be paid the same wage as a burger flipper.

So the problem isn't with the idea in general, but with how it's been argued in this thread, in the context of other threads. There have been a fair few minimum wage threads now, and a whole lot of transparently stupid arguments made, many of which could only be believed by someone if they were looking for anything to justify their initial instinct. And when the people making those arguments keep on making them, no matter how many times the flaws in the argument are pointed out, well then it looks a lot less like an argument formed through reason and consideration, and more like a bunch of rationalisations for something.

And then you add in the context that whenever a thread involving people on the margins is started, you know exactly which side these people are going to take... at which point I find it hard to see people taking a broad, rational look at each issue, and instead people with a basic instinct to gak on the people lower than them on the totem pole, grabbing at whatever rationalisation they can find to justify it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 easysauce wrote:
its all well and good to have a different viewpoint,
but when your getting into cussing and literally saying people who hold a different viewpoint are literally sociopaths, or spiteful, or want people to stay poor, maybe take a step away.

Nah. It's all well and good for people have different viewpoints, but there's a point we you have to take an honest look at the quality of debate put up by one side, and ask how people could honestly claim stuff that was so incredibly silly.

I feel that my time spent at the mustard seed or the food bank will do more to help then any of this BS talk talk talk and spending of other peoples money or raising the min wage only to have workers hours cut....

I don't agree, that doesn't relate to my personal experience (where the people I've known who moved from poverty to something at least a little more comfortable all did so not because of sporadic private charity initiatives, but because of the basic stability of a larger weekly pay), nor does it relate to anything I've read on solving poverty in the developed world.

But I will acknowledge that that is, on the face of it, a genuine argument, and not one I'd put in the 'so silly there must be some underlying motivation' category.

time and time again, i see those with a negative, whiny attitude fail, and those who suck it up and have a positive attitude, succeed.

You're confusing moral judgements with economics.

And actually, that's another problem I see, aside from the spite element - people failing to look at things in terms of processes and systems, and instead seeing only individual actions which are in turn seen only in moral terms. In this model, all that matters is that a person is expected to act in a 'moral' sense towards money - work hard, save lots. Anything outside of that is seen as excuse making. The idea that people across the board might do more of that if they are given more hourly pay just doesn't seem to matter at all.

its so odd, that the people who constantly blame the system or the whatever it is they are blaming at the moment, tend to succeed less then those who simple try, fail, try again, until they succeed.

And I think it's fascinating how often people assume that the people calling for a higher minimum wage must be unsuccessful people. The idea that a person could make such an argument out of concern for people other than themselves just seems to escape them entirely.

 sebster wrote:

 Rotary wrote:
Yeah it was never a hard number, i think you are missing the point. Out of the entire thread guys focus on a statement that shows the dollar menu going to two dollars.

You can't just throw a wild number out there, and then back away from it as soon as anyone points out how silly a number it was.

If you're not willing to defend your number (which is a sensible choice, given how silly a number it was), then you need to either start using a more sensible number. So I think you need to change your claim to 'Guess the dollar menu at mcdonalds will have to become the 1.02 dollar menu around that time'

And now, put in that context, doesn't your post start feeling a litte bit silly?

No i don't have to defend my number at all. You obviously missed the point by a mile.
I'm happy to see minimum wage stay where it is at. I don't think it needs to increase and i think entry level employees make that amount for a reason. You wanted to curse at me in your first reply to me so let me due the same to you as your behavior from the get go has been hostile and rude. I work for a firedepartment as a paramedic and i served this country. I have young fire fighters that start out for us making just over minimum wage. They worked their ass off to get here and spent the better part of their summer on a strike team. If they complete the next year they get a full time job with good pay and benefits. So tell me why the feth do i think a mcdonald worker should make the same as them? Really? The bottom line is these guys are away from their family working their asses off and you want me to support a bill that will put minimum wage closer to their pay, making daily living expenses go up for everyone. Ohh and if my math skills are so horrible, please don't code out in my county, I'd hate to miss calculate a dosage during transport since apparently they are very horrible.

Bottom line minimum wage can stay where it is at, we all had to start out somewhere. If I have increased costs I want it to go to scholarships and things that help those same employees move up in the world. Nope, I just don't see an argument for how flipping a burger should support a house payment and a family. It was never intended to be that kind of job. My post doesn't feel silly, lazy Americans who want to give hand outs to the world does.

 Rotary wrote:
I have young fire fighters that start out for us making just over minimum wage. They worked their ass off to get here and spent the better part of their summer on a strike team. If they complete the next year they get a full time job with good pay and benefits. So tell me why the feth do i think a mcdonald worker should make the same as them?

My question is, if these guys are working their asses off in potentially hazardous situations away from their families, why aren't they being paid more than, "just over minimum wage"?

Do you also not see an issue with someone being unable to support themselves on a job when good paying jobs are so hard to come by in our crappy economy?

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Rotary wrote:
I have young fire fighters that start out for us making just over minimum wage. They worked their ass off to get here and spent the better part of their summer on a strike team. If they complete the next year they get a full time job with good pay and benefits. So tell me why the feth do i think a mcdonald worker should make the same as them?

My question is, if these guys are working their asses off in potentially hazardous situations away from their families, why aren't they being paid more than, "just over minimum wage"?

Do you also not see an issue with someone being unable to support themselves on a job when good paying jobs are so hard to come by in our crappy economy?

It's a trial period, you have to show you are capable of doing the job and keeping yourself and the rest of crew safe. The pay is very low, but competition is high for positions. There are departments that pay some amazing amounts for paramedics but that comes with a high call volume. I've worked in systems where i spend an entire 24 hour shift with out making it back to the station due to the call volume.

I'd like to see people make a decent living at every level. I just don't know that the timing is good. With the economy still turning around and major health care changes going into effect i worry that the increase in wages will be too soon. I can say this because i also work on call for an ambulance, to cope with the health care increases all employees have had their hours changed to part time or on call. For the other employees who didnt already work fire this was a huge hit. Sometimes the things we put in place to help employees can hurt them if we are not careful.
I'm all for any increase to help people be upwardly mobile, i want my dollars to pay for someone who is trying to get ahead. Those are principals i can get behind.
I don't know that i have the "correct" answer, but it is still my opinion. I worked two jobs for years to get by in school, that didn't hurt me. What hurt was the huge amount of debt I had in the end from school bills.

 Slarg232 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

@Easy E - well of course if I make $1000 a week and someone else makes $500 a week that $35 a week smoking habit is going to hit the person making $500 "harder" in terms of a percentage of their income. But tha still doesn't mean they have to smoke. It's a completely voluntary act that is also completely non essential.

Agreed, but you have to realize when you are poor things like smoking are your only recreation. You don't drive around town listening to the radio, go on weekend trips, go to the pub much, it is like Sebs story about the TV. That is all you do to kill time (and possibly hunger) and then you are addicted.

And yet, for the same $35 a week, you could buy more food (Ramen Noodles is 20 packs for $5), getting you through a couple more days without hunger, you could buy a Library Card (If said library isn't just free) and be entertained for DAYS. You can go for jogs/workout on open gym nights. Go to the park and pick up litter/relax. Buy a TV and watch it (Seb's story says it's doable, and guess what? Not "Poor Taxed" like Alcohol/Cigs.

Search for a second job, even if all it is is picking trash up along the road.

There are plenty of things you can do without haing to smoke/drink while poor.

Yeah, no disagreement that it is a terrible decision and other decisions would be better. However, that doesn't change the fact that it is a regressive tax that impacts the poor who do smoke more than the middle class or higher who do smoke.

 Easy E wrote:

Yeah, no disagreement that it is a terrible decision and other decisions would be better. However, that doesn't change the fact that it is a regressive tax that impacts the poor who do smoke more than the middle class or higher who do smoke.

Couldn't the same be said for a tax levied on pretty much any product?

 Rotary wrote:

I'm happy to see minimum wage stay where it is at. I don't think it needs to increase and i think entry level employees make that amount for a reason.

What is that reason?

 Rotary wrote:


I work for a firedepartment as a paramedic and i served this country. I have young fire fighters that start out for us making just over minimum wage. They worked their ass off to get here and spent the better part of their summer on a strike team. If they complete the next year they get a full time job with good pay and benefits. So tell me why the feth do i think a mcdonald worker should make the same as them? Really? The bottom line is these guys are away from their family working their asses off and you want me to support a bill that will put minimum wage closer to their pay, making daily living expenses go up for everyone. Ohh and if my math skills are so horrible, please don't code out in my county, I'd hate to miss calculate a dosage during transport since apparently they are very horrible.

Perhaps that starting fire fighter should be making mor ethan minimum wage to start with then. Just a thought.

 Rotary wrote:


Bottom line minimum wage can stay where it is at, we all had to start out somewhere. If I have increased costs
I want it to go to scholarships and things that help those same employees move up in the world.

That is a good idea.

 Rotary wrote:

Nope, I just don't see an argument for how flipping a burger should support a house payment and a family. It was never intended to be that kind of job. My post doesn't feel silly, lazy Americans who want to give hand outs to the world does.

And here we see that "moral" argument that Sebs was talking about earlier in the thread.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cincydooley wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

Yeah, no disagreement that it is a terrible decision and other decisions would be better. However, that doesn't change the fact that it is a regressive tax that impacts the poor who do smoke more than the middle class or higher who do smoke.

Couldn't the same be said for a tax levied on pretty much any product?

Nope. Yachts have a special tax called a luxury tax, that is not considered Regressive as it impacts luxury goods paid for only by people of a higher income bracket.

Granted, I'm not on expert so this could technically be a "regressive tax"; but the impact is not on low income people. Of course, there is an argument to be made that such terms as "regressive" and "progressive" taxes are unhelpful in this discussion since they really only talk about how the scale of the tax rate changes when people have different tax rates. By that definition that cigarette tax is a "flat" tax since it is always x% of income; but the impact on remaining income is not "flat". However, now we are arguing RAW vs. RAI (a Dakka Dakka favorite!).

Again, I'm not really a tax expert, but I know that the cigarette tax impacts poor people's income more than the luxury tax impacts low income people.*





*= Also note, I am not espousing one tax as "better", "fairer" or more "Just" than another between taxes that impact low income people vs. hones that impact only high-income people.

Well lets not look at something as obviously high income as a yacht. How about food? Tennessee, for example, has a tax on food at a flat 5%. They have a higher tax on crap (candy, alcohol, tobacco, fast food...maybe soda?) that is at 7%, but the 5% applies to all food and food ingredients not identifed in the 7% bracket.

That 5% more adversely affects a low-income individual that doesn't receive social services, does it not?

 cincydooley wrote:
Well lets not look at something as obviously high income as a yacht. How about food? Tennessee, for example, has a tax on food at a flat 5%. They have a higher tax on crap (candy, alcohol, tobacco, fast food...maybe soda?) that is at 7%, but the 5% applies to all food and food ingredients not identifed in the 7% bracket.

That 5% more adversely affects a low-income individual that doesn't receive social services, does it not?

Yes, that 5% impacts poor people more, as does the 7%. Just like the cigarette tax.

So, is the follow-up point about how we need to cut taxes?

 Easy E wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
Well lets not look at something as obviously high income as a yacht. How about food? Tennessee, for example, has a tax on food at a flat 5%. They have a higher tax on crap (candy, alcohol, tobacco, fast food...maybe soda?) that is at 7%, but the 5% applies to all food and food ingredients not identifed in the 7% bracket.

That 5% more adversely affects a low-income individual that doesn't receive social services, does it not?

Yes, that 5% impacts poor people more, as does the 7%. Just like the cigarette tax.

So, is the follow-up point about how we need to cut taxes?

Well, were it up to me I'd find a way not to tax 'regular' food. Ohio doesn't, and the first time we went to Tennessee to buy groceries with my in-laws I was really surprised that they did. I was even more surprised to find they had different tax rates. With that being said, I think there should absolutely be the sin taxes on pop, alcohol, cigarettes, fast food, and anything thats a luxury item. I mean, I have a real problem that Red Bull is available for purchase with WIC in Ohio, but that's an entirely different story.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 surixurient wrote:
The shadow of many an elbow-patch-wearing college professor is being cast long and deep across this thread.

One thing I learned is to stop listen to collegee Proffs when it comes to politics. My feminism teacher was ranting about hr cuba trip saying about how great a place it was. Saying they had healthcare and food and how they where free.

You've just learned an awesome lesson. The next awesome lesson is to slowly nod your head up and down, like you're agreeing with them, when you're really off on Hive World Vermithrax, fighting off the evil human horde as you and ten score million Boyz go a' crumpin.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Pretty much. I tried to make her see the hypocrisy from what she was saying earlier about how we all have to write to freedom of speech and yet she was saying how cuba was free.

Remember, in college-disagreement equals C at best. Just nod and remember this when you hear whining in later years about more college funding. Then you'll know what to do.

 Rotary wrote:
No i don't have to defend my number at all.

That's true, given you aren't defending your number, and are in fact just quietly abandoning that argument entirely.

I'm happy to see minimum wage stay where it is at. I don't think it needs to increase and i think entry level employees make that amount for a reason. You wanted to curse at me in your first reply to me so let me due the same to you as your behavior from the get go has been hostile and rude. I work for a firedepartment as a paramedic and i served this country. I have young fire fighters that start out for us making just over minimum wage. They worked their ass off to get here and spent the better part of their summer on a strike team. If they complete the next year they get a full time job with good pay and benefits. So tell me why the feth do i think a mcdonald worker should make the same as them?

That's an argument to pay starting firefighters more, not an argument to pay some other person less.

Nope, I just don't see an argument for how flipping a burger should support a house payment and a family.

Work a full time job, you should earn enough to support yourself, and along with a partnet working full time support a family. It isn't so much an argument as a basic understanding of what an economy needs to have in order for society to be stable.

It was never intended to be that kind of job.

It is that kind of job. You don't write policy based on the economy you'd like to have, but on the economy you actually do have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Easy E wrote:
Granted, I'm not on expert so this could technically be a "regressive tax"; but the impact is not on low income people.

It is a regressive tax, basically anything that impacts the poor more than any other group is a regressive tax.

The greater issue is that you can't just pick out a regressive tax in isolation, and conclude it is regressive and must be removed. You have to look at it in the context of the overall system of taxes and transfer payments. So you might have a sales tax (which is regressive because the poor spend a greater portion of their income on goods and services), but that sales tax raises money which allows for larger transfer payments to the poor, for instance.

It isn't good for a tax to be regressive, but simply being regressive doesn't mean a tax is bad, if that regressive impact is offset elsewhere in the system, and the tax has other positive benefits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cincydooley wrote:
Well, were it up to me I'd find a way not to tax 'regular' food.

Or rather, don't look to create all these different categories with different tax rates. Having a 7% rate on crap food, and a 5% rate on other food, and different rates again for everything else is encouraging a bureaucratic and possibly legal nightmare, as people argue about exactly what kind of product something is (and this only gets worse as people invent new products that do whatever technical nonsense is needed to be classified in a category with a lower tax rate).

Just put one flat tax on everything, and use a portion of the money raised to offset any regressive impact.

 Rotary wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Rotary wrote:
Yeah it was never a hard number, i think you are missing the point. Out of the entire thread guys focus on a statement that shows the dollar menu going to two dollars.

You can't just throw a wild number out there, and then back away from it as soon as anyone points out how silly a number it was.

If you're not willing to defend your number (which is a sensible choice, given how silly a number it was), then you need to either start using a more sensible number. So I think you need to change your claim to 'Guess the dollar menu at mcdonalds will have to become the 1.02 dollar menu around that time'

And now, put in that context, doesn't your post start feeling a litte bit silly?

No i don't have to defend my number at all. You obviously missed the point by a mile.
I'm happy to see minimum wage stay where it is at. I don't think it needs to increase and i think entry level employees make that amount for a reason. You wanted to curse at me in your first reply to me so let me due the same to you as your behavior from the get go has been hostile and rude. I work for a firedepartment as a paramedic and i served this country. I have young fire fighters that start out for us making just over minimum wage. They worked their ass off to get here and spent the better part of their summer on a strike team. If they complete the next year they get a full time job with good pay and benefits. So tell me why the feth do i think a mcdonald worker should make the same as them? Really? The bottom line is these guys are away from their family working their asses off and you want me to support a bill that will put minimum wage closer to their pay, making daily living expenses go up for everyone. Ohh and if my math skills are so horrible, please don't code out in my county, I'd hate to miss calculate a dosage during transport since apparently they are very horrible.

Maybe you should pay them a bit more then minimum wage then huh?
Oh, just so you know, Not all Minimum wage jobs are "Flipping burgers" My job requires me at the end of the day to close the grill by myself. which means cleaning hoods, Fryers, Grills and other such things. Things that are all long and hard. I do more then "Flipping Patties" I run around the entire kitchen cooking for ungrateful people that look down at me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 surixurient wrote:
The shadow of many an elbow-patch-wearing college professor is being cast long and deep across this thread.

One thing I learned is to stop listen to collegee Proffs when it comes to politics. My feminism teacher was ranting about hr cuba trip saying about how great a place it was. Saying they had healthcare and food and how they where free.

You've just learned an awesome lesson. The next awesome lesson is to slowly nod your head up and down, like you're agreeing with them, when you're really off on Hive World Vermithrax, fighting off the evil human horde as you and ten score million Boyz go a' crumpin.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Pretty much. I tried to make her see the hypocrisy from what she was saying earlier about how we all have to write to freedom of speech and yet she was saying how cuba was free.

Remember, in college-disagreement equals C at best. Just nod and remember this when you hear whining in later years about more college funding. Then you'll know what to do.

Well one teacher I did listen to was my philosophy Teacher in critical thinking. His whole class is about getting past rhetoric and looking at facts. So he was able to look at both arguments and put coherant arguments forth.

http://rt.com/news/swiss-adult-minimum-wage-794/

 reds8n wrote:
http://rt.com/news/swiss-adult-minimum-wage-794/

Oh, those wacky, cowardly Swiss.

 Seaward wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
http://rt.com/news/swiss-adult-minimum-wage-794/

Oh, those wacky, cowardly Swiss.

I thought gun supporters worshipped the Swiss because everyone in the country owned a gun and therefore were an inherently superior nationality?


Note: Not actually serious.

I fail to see how working hard and saving up leads to higher income. You might be able to save to buy a house, or a car or something, but it won't affect your income.

Also many low-paid jobs (like mine) are manual. The notion of "working more" when I already have full-time back pain seems pretty insulting.

 Seaward wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
http://rt.com/news/swiss-adult-minimum-wage-794/

Oh, those wacky, cowardly Swiss.

Zap Brannigan wrote:"I hate these filthy neutrals Kif! With enemies you know where they stand but with neutrals? Who knows! It sickens me."

"What makes a man turn neutral ... Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?"

xruslanx wrote:
The notion of "working more" when I already have seems pretty insulting.

Exactly. It sounds like a moral judgement, and what it really means is too bad you weren't lucky like me.

The "hardest" working people I know make the least money.

Easy E wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
The notion of "working more" when I already have seems pretty insulting.

Exactly. It sounds like a moral judgement, and what it really means is too bad you weren't lucky like me.

The "hardest" working people I know make the least money.

The Calvinists will never use the word "luck".

 reds8n wrote:
http://rt.com/news/swiss-adult-minimum-wage-794/

Is actually a little different - it's going to be more like a monthly living allowance, as in you get it just for being alive. Government pays it, not the employer.

So much simpler if cost of living was so much lower....remember the one cent candy row in 7/11..