Minium wage

Here's something to think about-------yrs ago I worked housing construction in Baton Rouge------my boss was self employed and paid me hour wages-----------then he approached me and said------"I'm gonna start paying you by the square footage of the house!" So I switched from hour wages to square footage/percentage--------and guess what??? Production went up----I stopped "dragging my feet" and started hustling---the faster I got finished with one job---I was on to the next!

See??? You get someone working for Burger King----pay them by the percentage----------"Today we sold 1000 hamburgers!" or "Today we grossed $2000.00!"--------"Now---here's your 'cut' on that percentage!"-----------sales go up---Johnny gets payed more---------sales go down---send Johnny outside and let him walk up and down the sidewalk with a sign that says----"Eat more hamburgers!!!"----------the more hamburgers sold---the more money he takes home at the end of the week!!!!

As far as Julia getting 3 mill for 10 minutes work--------why didn't I go to acting school???????????????????????????

 

That is an interesting point of view Blackbird ! I guess it can work in " production ". And even there, i guess there is a limit in security, and quality of work. I saw some tv show about those guys (don't know the english word) you call when your dashmachine is out of order. For the show, they removed a plug behind the machine and called 5 companies. 4 said " it's totally dead, you should buy a new one " and the diagnosis was done in 20 minutes, the last one took one hour and fixed it. They asked how the guys we paid. The 4 who came first were paid considering the number of interventions per day, they were doing 10 to 12. The last one was paid per hour, and was doing 4 to 6.

That to say i think there is a limit to that way of " interesting " people in being more productive, sometimes at the price of quality (and honesty).

And about Burger King, i truly think, as a " passive job " (they wait in the kitchen for orders, or at the cashmachine for customers to pay) tehy can'd do much more than just " wish " more customers come in the restaurant.

And about Julia, i guess many are doing the job, probably some work more than her, and will never earn enough for a good living standard. That's just the way it is : i guess in such jobs, you need a little luck, to meet the good person at the right time.

In any job, do those who work the hardest earn the most ? No. Are the most able always promoted ? No. Do those who make the hardest, dirtiest, most dangerous jobs earn more than the common glass tower white collar ? No.

We're just discussing, and there's nothing sure in this world but the Word of the Bible. Of course, someone who's studied, who's clever, and works hard, will probably have a better standard of living then the one who's left school at 16, who's not clever, and a little lazy (but if that last one's daddy rules a big company, he'll find something for his son ).

 

Frankly I didn't see the bitterness and resentment that you saw, but rather the message that they can do better.

I have known single young mothers in this situation. They recieved foodstamps, Sec 8 housing, free medical care for their children, assistance in buying a vehicle, tuition grants in order to learn a better paying skill. At least one of them took advantage of the help offered and went to school, and now makes a good income working in the medical field. Others didn't. It is not a lack of compassion to point out that single moms do have options if they're willing to put in the effort.

 

My contribution was in direct response to the OP which presented the statement of a so-called "expert" that offered only two alternatives to a single mother - either raise the minimum wage or go on welfare.

It is a false dichotomy.

There are many other alternatives and possiblities - not the least of which is furthering one's education and improving one's job skills to qualify for a better job.

And yes, people do make decisions for many reasons other than money - myself included.

But I fail to see why a nationwide imposition of a minimum wage or minimum wage increase is required in order to guarantee a wage level to someone who makes decisions based on things other than money - but still wants the money.

 

I work with probably the most disadvantaged group there is- the Deaf. But I will say that more of them get held back by themselves rather than by their deafness.

And the same goes for most other people.

 

>We're just discussing, and there's nothing sure in this world but the Word of the Bible.

Jesus said that the world would never run out of poor people thus the Republican Party must be the most "Christian" party. They want to fulfill Bible prophecy. Can't have Jesus being wrong.

 

You are wrong! The comment regarding the mother earning a minimum wage says nothing about raising it. You just assume it was about raising the minimum wage because the first comment by a different person misleads you to that conclusion. You really have no idea what all was being discussed anymore than I as the OP is very vague ... so you just assume a position. If you also heard the discussion, then you don't present it here on this board. You just assume a position which even you don't make clear, which is debatable based on the vague context of the OP..... and then you fight expecting me or others to understand your position.

What you have actually said in all your discussion and repeated in this quote (wherein FINALLY you include 'raising the minimum wage) is that you disagree with the alternatives she's given ..... that of getting a job or going on welfare.

She only has two alternatives regarding living or starving. She can work.... or she can live on welfare. She must do this before she can consider anything else. You say she can get an education and increase job skills: How does she do that if she doesn't either have an income nor help? Grants, scholarships, and loans wont pay all expenses for food, board, and education and child care (remember your conditions..... no minimum wage job and no welfare..... at least that's the way you've presented your discussion)...... and, if they could (a living on loans and grants)...... she'd be more shackeled by the repayment of college loans just as soon as she graduates no matter what kind of pay she's able to get in her first job.

No, before she can even set a goal for education and increasing job skills, she must first provide for her baby and herself. She is already handicapped by her circumstances being out of what should be the natural order of having a husband and father in the picture..... but without knowing if she is widowed or was raped, etc.......... you are playing God to judge her for her circumstances.
You cannot conclude this judgement from the OP nor the process of you debate.

Now the proper order for her to accomplish getting more job skills and an education is first chose how she and her baby are going to survive....... either to first accept the benefits of welfare and a program which might train her, if such is available........ or get a job and start developing her job skills and employment history and still see if she qualifies for programs which will help her.

Either way, we already have a minimum wage law.... even with no changes or raises.... and if she gets a job, it is the law that she is paid. If, as some have mentioned, the job isn't worth the minimum wage.... then don't hire anyone. If a job isn't needed..... why pay a person? If a job is needed..... either the employer will be paying someone to do it, maybe in addition to their other duties... and paying their time at whatever pay level they're at.... or the boss might do it himself....

Salty, you had no link so I have nothing but the logic which is presented in your 'hear say'.
The bold statement doesnot logically follow the italicized statement. Although the italicised statement creates an inference that the discussion you heard, and to which I am not privy to.......... might have been over raising the minimum wage, but you don't tell us that. You just begin by saying "the subject of the minimum wage came up." Whoopdedooo! Lots of angles can be discussed and if we had the context and who says what.... we all might be better informed to present an opinion.

However, You separated the second from the first and credit it to a different speaker...... such that this person who makes the statement could actually be supportive of having a minimum wage law with no increase. As you present it, it stands alone, even if it was part of the discussion that you heard. It was you who led off that the discussion was about the minimum wage. You didn't say the whole discussion was about raising it. I have no idea what was being discussed about the minimum wage other than your own report: And by your own report (and even you don't sound too clear).... one person makes a comment which has to do with raising it and another makes a point supportive of having a minimum wage.... but one cannot conclude by that last person's comment, as you have reported it, whether that person is even talking about raising or lowering or just maintaining a minimum wage.

Only you can know the context and the positions taken by both parties, if, in fact, you do know. For all I know, these persons could have been opposing each other in the discussion with both being for a minimum wage, with one defending it and another wanting raises. For that matter there could have been comments by other parties present suggesting 'why have a minimum wage law' which provoked the last statement. ..... but you can't present the report or its context. You have not well defined your discussion points.

The (bold) statement says to me is that a single mother must be able to sell her labor for a minimum wage or go on welfare which I wholly concur. It says nothing about increasing the minimum wage......... and since at least the 80's we've had a minimum wage law...... all one may gather from this statement is what it says.... By law they are not supposed to be hired below the minimum wage.

Mexdef, Spear, et al, I have no disagreement with any of your points.

 

Please see the word "or" in my sentence that you are referring to.

Actually the OP said, "Another expert said that if you don't give that single mother a minimum wage job, then she has to go onto welfare."

That is what I disagree with. And I said over and over that she should qualify herself for a better job.

You seem very confused about what has been said in this thread.

Why do you have no confidence in your hypothetical single mother?

Of course it is possible for single mothers to work and gain an education at the same time - it happens every day.

There are many alternatives.

Perhaps if your vision were wider you would be a happier person.

Yes, and when someone discusses an angle other than what you are focused on you become all upset.

Perhaps you would do well to retire from the discussion if it is so upsetting to you.

Is it maybe a control issue with you?

Are you upset because Salty started a fairly open discussion and chose to welcome general comments on the topic of the minimum wage rather than a narrow focused black/white-yes/no question?

Your emotional state over all of this is very surprising.

 

The control issue is really all over this thread..... in your posts.
You 'should' this and 'should' that all over other people like a controller (like the hypothetical single parent who has to figure what she'll do to survive).

You propose the impossible: You set up the situation that the parent not sell her labor for the minimum wage.... nor go on welfare...... yet you insist she should get education or training and job skills. She can't do the later if she and child are starving because she's followed your advice. Life is not a jar of instant 'this and that' like the movies you watch or the coffee you might drink. Some goals must first be met before others can be appropriately set. IOW, a person may have long term goals and short term goals, but the STG come first and are a priority before persuing LTG. As a businessman, you don't go straight to making profit and reinvesting before you meet some STG. Your STG have first to do with setting up your business, beginning and increasing production, paying off and controlling debt or eliminating it, clearing overhead expenses before your LTG come into play like making and reinvesting profit,

Futhermore........ you interpret something as fact and not in the OP....... You added something not in the OP. There are 2 statements in the OP, each made by different persons. Because of the 'hear say' you don't even know if they directly follow each other.....or are in the correct order...... or what might have been said in the discussion. You are assumming things not evident in the OP.
Either you admit that you assume or keep doing the same in all your thinking and keep your delusions. (You blantanly claimed in the rape on women in the military thread that it was to discredit the military and the s*xual assaut reports were likely bogus or false, and your misinterpret a % of a subset, and generalized it to the whole military female population.) In another thread you blantantly attack a politician and either never visited the link in the OP or refused to address it. For all your smarts and success, you're showing an intellectual laziness and your own dishonesty in discussions.

If you were teaching me a class in a Bible study...... your bet your boots....... I'd jump all over you for adding to or taking away. In a time where we are receiving so much mis-information in media it is becoming increasingly important that we hold ourselves and others accountable to be intellectually honest in discussions.

Have at it Targus.......From the OP....... just where does it mention the single mother expecting a raise in the minimum wage? Where is the quote?

 

What a monumentally ignorant post.

 

Now compare that statement to this:

Do you not see the difference in the statement in the OP, and your attack?

Or you really advocating against having a minimum wage?
----------------------------------------------------------
In your other arguments:

I suppose you expect a person to sell their labor for nothing or for less than minimum wage .......and support themself and a child and gain job skills..... without 'welfare'....... which you do not define...... (and most people, like me, consider is inclusive of food stamps and any public assistance whether it be for housing, child care, health care, etc.) Either they get a job or are fully supported by welfare. If they don't already have skills.....or if jobs are hard to get..... their only options for a while may be jobs at the minimum wage.... which even you agree is hardly a living wage. This must come first before they can improve their options.


You, Targus, are typically wired male......... a microwave oven. Present a problem and propose a solution which has many steps between to get there........ which you ignore.

 

What attack?

Please go back to the beginning of the thread and identify for me which of my posts was the first to offend you.

 

The first post which offended me was where you expected her to get skills or schooling without considering her means of survival.

---------------------------
Be that as it may:
We are wired differently in thinking and perspective. God put his glory in you as a man to accomplish what you have with the reflexive, instinctive, protective, and demands of competing and providing and making quick decisions, and seeing the distance, and jumping through the hoops between without musing and fuss over each step to your ultimate goal. And I am wrong to put you down for that...

And I am a woman.... and quite within the nature of my wiring.... I think differently, and more in terms of immediate concerns which, for me, are more necessary to resolve before I can think clearly about the next ones.
That doesn't mean either of us lack the ability to plan ahead.... it is just the natural way God has designed us differently in our perspective and focus.

Please forgive me.

 

That is something that you read into it as it was not the meaning that I meant to convey.

I live in the real world too and understand the necessity of meeting immediate needs for survival.

With our hypothetical single mother it is impossible to provide a step by step plan for improving her education/job skills - she is just hypothetical after all.

As I said earlier - there are as many solutions as their are people in that position

No problem - no offense taken.

And isn't it glorious that God say fit to create those differences between men and women so that we can work to together and compliment each other?

I too apologize for anything that may have given you offense.