Eadora Posted December 29, 2004 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 8 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 226 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/03/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/24/1945 Share Posted December 29, 2004 (edited) [Work In Progress; I quote: Edited December 29, 2004 by Eadora Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work in Progress Posted December 29, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 123 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,111 Content Per Day: 0.39 Reputation: 35 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/29/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted December 29, 2004 No, I won't give you specific locations, as I don't give out that kind of information about myself on a public internet message board. Like I said, it's public housing, nice apartments (but trashed by those who live there), and I'm in the MidEast. (America) You relate to me that you endure poverty. Why do you think you are not worthy of a wage for a 40 hr week that will provide for your bare subsisentce level necessities? A wage that will provide a minimum standard of living. No, I endured poverty, I don't now. My husband worked two part time, minimum wage jobs, and I worked one and that is exactly what they provided - the "bare subsistence level necessities". You hit the nail on the head - we were worthy of just that, that's why we worked hard to make ourselves more worthy to earn more money. That's how it works. Please explain to me why a business owner should pay my husband $15.00 an hour to pump gas? Or pay me $15.00 an hour to check out groceries? No special skill or education needed, but we should make the same as someone with skill and education? Where does that leave the incentive to work and better oneself? It doesn't. And how much would that gas and those groceries be after that wage was paid? How about full medical benefits, while we're at it - again - where is the incentive to better oneself then? And how much will that gas now cost?? I think your demands are impractical and unrealistic and unreasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irishcowboy Posted December 29, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 127 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 3,248 Content Per Day: 0.88 Reputation: 13 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/23/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted December 29, 2004 this is begining to sound a bit like an event that happened a few years ago. a business man had opened up a business and built it up, starting with only himself, and grew where he was hiring more and more people. He paid a fair wage, and had decent benefits. A labor union was trying to get its feet planted in that company, and had even gotten a couple meetings set up to try and make this a union company. the owner knew of these meetings, but as law has it, he can not release anyone that is involved in union activities. the Owner showed up at one of the meetings, and the union represenitive made the comment directed at the owner, that he could do nothing about these labor union meetings. the owner replyed, you are right, to some extent. if you do not mind, i would like to say a few words, and then i will get out of your hair. the owner stepped up to the podium, and told everyone there that it was their right to start a union shop. but, he had built this business from the ground up, and it belonged to him, and that if he chooses to give a raise, he will give a raise, if he chooses to hire some one he will hire some one, if he needs to fire some one, then he will do so, not relying on some organization to make his decissions for him about his business. the Union Rep, spoke up and said that he could not threaten him like that, and that if there was a union involved, then they would make the choices. the owner then said, fine, if that is what you want, then tomorrow morning, the shop is closed. and there is no need for anyone to bother showing up, for he is retiring, and there will be no more work. several of the workers called for a vote, and the vote was against the union, and for the owner. *********************** now.... if I go out in the morning, and hire 6 people for 50 dollars for the day, and then go out at noon and hire 6 more, and again at 1 and 3 and again at 4 pm, and then when the day is over, I pay each and every person 50 dollars, who is to say I am not paying them fairly. if the government comes in and tells me that i have to pay a certain amount, then i may not be able to hire as many people, or maybe will have to let some one go.... do you want to be the one that i have to let go cause i am trying to keep prices down and still try to make a living???? i have the lowest service calls in the three state area for plumbing, heating and air. if i have to raise wages ( my guys are paid as good as the others at other companies ) then i will have to let some one go, or raise my prices. that is all there is to it, or maybe i can just shut down today, send every one home, and then next week open up again under a differant name, with even lower service call prices and work by my self again and earn more for me and none for you. you want higher minimums???? we have one guy in the area, that has bankrupt several times for several million, and yet is still working...... well, thieving.... has not paid a sing penny towards any of the bankrupts.... digs a debt, hides everything, then declares bankrupt... none of the whole saleers will warrentee anything he buyus from them. yet he installs items every day and passes off that he has full factory warrentee, when he has none..... i have done follow on work after him, and some was suppose to be warrentee work, hard to tell a customer that they got ripped, and they will have to pay full price on the repair or change out when the air conditioner is only 3 months old...... if we could dump some of the people like this in business, then maybe the rest of us can keep our prices a bit lower...... or maybe if people would not tear something up and try to get it warrenteed saying that it was that way when the units was installed ( hole in the coil, kinked linesets, chewed up wires ( dogs ).... and so forth.... maybe if the water pipes was not busted in a heat of rage, then the landlord/owners of the houses could do more for less rent..... if the trash at the apartments was picked up, and the beer bottles thrown away insteadf of being tossed out the front door onto the sidewalk and busted, maybe the managers would be more willing to help get the light fixture fixed.... maybe if we would vacuume our house more often the roaches would not be so thick... some people do try to take care of stuff.... others just want want want want..... no return.... force me to pay more and i will shut down too.... mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yod Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 I advocate that the lowest wage earners in our society be ALLOWED to earn enough to survive on. NOTHING MORE. no one is stopping them from from EARNING anything...but artificially manipulating the market is like putting a bandaid on a sharkbite. C'mon Eudora...think! This is deeper than the surface level treatment you've given it. There is cause-and-effect for such a wide ranging move. The key word here is "incentive". If everyone's only incentive were to get by on a poverty subsistance level, then a minimum wage would be appropriate....like they do in communist countries already. Have you ever visited a communist country? I was in Romania right after the Iron Curtain fell. The Italians and the Turks moved right in with free-market ideas like bread stores and pizza parlors and made lots of money. The Romanians continued in communistic thinking and fell behind. I wanted to call home one night at about 8 PM. I dialed the operator in a city of 250,000 people and waited for over 5 minutes.....got no answer! My hosts told me that perhaps the operator went home. My question was, "Does anyone ever get fired around here?" They had no idea what I was asking...because it didn't happen. People were "given" everything they had so they didn't understand the principle of earning it. That made them unproductive in a free-market economy. I think we should lower the minimum wage or get rid of it. Too many people are accepting what is being "given" instead of trying to EARN something better. It's the whole Pavlov's dog scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eadora Posted December 29, 2004 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 8 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 226 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/03/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/24/1945 Share Posted December 29, 2004 Yoh! Friends Work in Progress & Mr. & Mrs. Mike. Thank You for your personal anecdotes regarding your personal experiences with hard times, unethical business practice, and abuse by those in poverty. I will not gain say you. But nowhere do I advocate an across the board $15.00 min wage. I quote: Yod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work in Progress Posted December 29, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 123 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,111 Content Per Day: 0.39 Reputation: 35 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/29/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted December 29, 2004 Eadora, I'm still waiting to hear where these "poverty stricken" people are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yod Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 I am sorry to have to repeat this but: It is the present system now in place that is artificially manipulating the market. I am sorry to have to repeat this but: That is not true. You have no proof whatsoever to support your claims. Many people here have already shown hard facts which point to the contrary of your opinions. Are you ready to concede the point yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted December 30, 2004 Share Posted December 30, 2004 Eadora, I would propose that regional consideration might be advisable here. Perhaps State legislatures working together might be best placed to deal with this problem. Using a carefully constructed formual as to what is a subsistence wage in any given region. There would have to be consultation and mediation from State to State regarding their regional disparities. In cases of dispute there would be need of some form of arbitration, mediated I would suggest by the Federal Government. Neither of these would require large bureaucracies, and could be handled to a most large degree by State Legislature. The present system of subsidies, food stamps, rent vouchers, etc, all require a large bureaucracy to be maintained. Now as far as you second concern that economic hardship and turmoil would result. The proposal here is that any recognized needed adjustment must be phased in over a sufficient time period that would allow Business both Big and Small to adjust to the change. If a $2:00 dollar increase would create havoc in the economy start with $.25 cents or what ever. Eadorah, you are still just not getting it... Regional minimum wage? Unrealistic. If the minimum wage in some states is higher than others, where do you think business owners are more likely to start new businesses? States with lower minimums will get the bulk of new businesses and more franchises of existing businesses. In fact, business owners may close down and move existing locations to lower cost states. If I were a business owner, I would do whatever it took to maintain solvency. If I have to contend with a higher min. wage, I will lower the number of hours of my full-time employees from 40 to 25-30 hours. They would make the same amount of money with the higher minimum wage as they were with the lower wage. I am not required by law to give anyone 40 hours a week. Even if it is a phased program, business will compensate ahead of time so that the phased increases will have little to no impact on the profit margin. Here is another consideration. If you want to be fair to senior employees that make over minimum, you will have to raise THEIR wages in the same increments that minimum is increased. So you not only have the cost of increased minimums, but the increase of wages of higher payed employees. If that is not an option, you are looking at layoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apothanein kerdos Posted December 30, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 331 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 8,713 Content Per Day: 1.20 Reputation: 21 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted December 30, 2004 I got tired of getting paid minimum wage...so I've made an effort to go back to college. It's all paid for in loans....but I'm doing it because I want to make something of myself. If a person strives only to make the minimum...then they need to expect to only get the minimum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work in Progress Posted December 30, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 123 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,111 Content Per Day: 0.39 Reputation: 35 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/29/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted December 30, 2004 this is begining to sound a bit like an event that happened a few years ago. a business man had opened up a business and built it up, starting with only himself, and grew where he was hiring more and more people. He paid a fair wage, and had decent benefits. A labor union was trying to get its feet planted in that company, and had even gotten a couple meetings set up to try and make this a union company. the owner knew of these meetings, but as law has it, he can not release anyone that is involved in union activities. the Owner showed up at one of the meetings, and the union represenitive made the comment directed at the owner, that he could do nothing about these labor union meetings. the owner replyed, you are right, to some extent. if you do not mind, i would like to say a few words, and then i will get out of your hair. the owner stepped up to the podium, and told everyone there that it was their right to start a union shop. but, he had built this business from the ground up, and it belonged to him, and that if he chooses to give a raise, he will give a raise, if he chooses to hire some one he will hire some one, if he needs to fire some one, then he will do so, not relying on some organization to make his decissions for him about his business. the Union Rep, spoke up and said that he could not threaten him like that, and that if there was a union involved, then they would make the choices. the owner then said, fine, if that is what you want, then tomorrow morning, the shop is closed. and there is no need for anyone to bother showing up, for he is retiring, and there will be no more work. several of the workers called for a vote, and the vote was against the union, and for the owner. *********************** Irish, I know your experience only too well. Something very similar happened to us. My husband worked for a man who built his company from nothing, into a very successful company. This was in NYC. Sure enough, a union plant got hired and started putting the union bug into employees ears. The business owner fought that union (which was mob connected) and it cost him thousands. But, soon enough, another union plant was there, and that one was successful. And, all of a sudden, the raises that my husband got every six months were gone - replaced with a low, standard raise every year. The benefits my husband got from the boss were gone - replaced with benefits of the union which weren't as good. And to add insult to injury, we now had to pay Union dues out of every paycheck. The Union strong-armed their way in and it ruined the place - we got less than when there was no Union. Don't start me on Unions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts