Wal-mart Defends Controversial Food Drive For Employees

[CrossCuT]

And I'm not saying it's ok.  I'm saying that with the population of low wage workers (not underpaid in my book) that kids are a concern with barely half of that population.  Single parenthood is only a concern with less than 1/3 of that population (25% moms, 7% dads).  My point is "its for the children" ala Ned Flander's wife from the Simpsons is much overdrawn.

 

When it comes to children I think that IS where its ok for social supports to step in, in particular subsidized housing, as I think that is one of the factors that are the greatest barrier to parents.  A single person can live in a studio apartment.

 

But you already said you think its ok that they are paid so poorly because it helps encourage them to work harder.

 

I have never met a poverty advocate before.

"Its good for them! It encourages them to do better"

 

 

Also, the ironic thing is that YOU and I are paying for them. When the employer doesnt pay them enough to live off, they go onto government aid which is taken right out of our tax dollars. So its funny how so many people HATE Obamacare for taking taxes to help people yet at the same time its ok that we pay these people like crap so that we end up footing their living expense bill anyway?

 

How about we just pay them enough in the first place; we shouldnt need the aid and subsidized housing. Just pay people a humane wage! Its immoral not to.

[CrossCuT]

The level of derp in this thread has risen to a level that is melting my brains. I have to step out.

 

:sos:

[blazeingstar]

But you already said you think its ok that they are paid so poorly because it helps encourage them to work harder.

 

I have never met a poverty advocate before.

"Its good for them! It encourages them to do better"

 

 

Also, the ironic thing is that YOU and I are paying for them. When the employer doesnt pay them enough to live off, they go onto government aid which is taken right out of our tax dollars. So its funny how so many people HATE Obamacare for taking taxes to help people yet at the same time its ok that we pay these people like croutons so that we end up footing their living expense bill anyway?

 

How about we just pay them enough in the first place; we shouldnt need the aid and subsidized housing. Just pay people a humane wage! Its immoral not to.

 

Yep.  Minum wage meets their minum needs.  They want to fill Maslow's higher needs they can work harder.

 

Actually, most don't meet the standards of the poverty level to get goverment needs unless they have kids.

 

Again, I don't see minum as inhumane.  If it was $3 rather than $7 I might think so.  In LA $7 per hour is probably not social justice, but in podunk Alabama, $7 is very good.  I am against server wages that are under $7, but where wages are at right now, I'm fine with.

[4588686]

The poorest person in America is better off than most of the rich in something like 80% of the world.  Poverty is subjective.

 

 

Well, I've lived briefly in a developing country and I would like that you are incorrect.  There are large swaths of America that resemble a developing country and there are swaths of America where the life expectancy is approximately that of a developing country

[NotreDame]

Also, the ironic thing is that YOU and I are paying for them. When the employer doesnt pay them enough to live off, they go onto government aid which is taken right out of our tax dollars. So its funny how so many people HATE Obamacare for taking taxes to help people yet at the same time its ok that we pay these people like croutons so that we end up footing their living expense bill anyway?
 

 

Although I don't necessarily agree with Blazing Star's line of argument and while I'm not really following your train of thought, I will point out that I don't see the irony here and you probably only do because you've misunderstood why others dislike Obamacare or other regulatory inventions like the minimum wage.

 

I consider myself more of an Austrian than a monetarist like Milton Friedman, but he's still one of the best evangelists for common sense in the free market and speaks in a way that everyone could understand.  

 

The minimum wage law is actually a pretty simple subject to tackle if you understand how to draw and analyze a supply and demand curve, but you don't need that to understand what Friedman is saying:

 

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/02/milton-friedman-responds-to-president-obamas-proposal-to-raise-the-minimum-wage-the-most-anti-black-law-in-the-land/

 

And for those that think that people have a right to a minimum income (which is really what they are saying when they talk about a living wage), you might be surprised that Friedman also supported this idea (forseeing the "IQ economy" or the "end of fordism" as Curiousing called it) via the negative income tax, which he introduced in the US:

 

http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/welfare-pensions/milton-friedman-on-the-negative-income-tax

 

Funny enough, Megan McArdle tackled just this subject recently in Bloomberg:

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-15/they-ll-pay-you-to-live-in-switzerland-.html

 

As for why, if you are going to implement some sort of minimum income, it should be done via direct payments (private or public) instead of via gov't regulation on business, there are many reasons, but they are really just fundamental arguments and I'm not sure if this is the place to list them.

 

Regarding the issues with centralizing health-care (or anything) under gov't control, Hayek's arguments against central planning are the most well-known:

 

https://www.google.com/#q=hayek+on+central+planning

 

And Reagan does a good job of summarizing why central planning of health care is so specifically dangerous:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0NWqvRidlk

 

Now I've tried to make an effort to provide some real resources on economics here and not be snarky or sarcastic.  No one has to agree with them, but I've provided links to arguments from some of the best known economists of the last 100 years.  If you choose to disagree with me, that's fine, but do me the courtesy - for at least this post - of disagreeing with what I actually say.  Please do not disagree with things I did not say (yes, many of you do this) and please do not disagree with things you feel I've inferred, but have not actually said (yes, this happens also.)  Good day.

[NotreDame]

Well, I've lived briefly in a developing country and I would like that you are incorrect.  There are large swaths of America that resemble a developing country and there are swaths of America where the life expectancy is approximately that of a developing country

 

Care to give examples?  I've lived a few places outside the states and my experience was very different.

[4588686]

 

 

And you are incorrect that "most" have children.  At best, it's 60%...just over half

 

http://www.dol.gov/dol/aboutdol/history/herman/reports/futurework/conference/lowwage/section3.htm

 That awkward moment when the guy claiming that paying above poverty will disincentivize people from educating themselves reveals that he doesn't understand how percentages work.  

 

FYI.  60% of 'x' is most of 'x'

[blazeingstar]

 That awkward moment when the guy claiming that paying above poverty will disincentivize people from educating themselves reveals that he doesn't understand how percentages work.  

 

FYI.  60% of 'x' is most of 'x'

 

Akward moment when the guy who is trying to prove the woman wrong dosn't read

 

Persons with children is 3/5.  last time I checked that's 60%. 

 

Single people with children is 25% women, 7% men, making for only 1/3 being single parents.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

I dont like this mentality. Some people have disabilities and arent able to work at the same capacity as you or I. I dont believe they should be punished or lumped into a category of lazy in that they simply dont work hard enough for their living, the simple fact is that they arent paid enough. Why is it even right that a job would pay someone so low? Its not! I believe its immoral and against the dignity of the person. 

 

Even if they couldnt afford to go to college and get a fancy-shmancy degree, they should still be able to work a job and afford a roof over their head and clothes on their back. 

 

Why cant the world be filled with people who help eachother instead of just say "Work harder or too bad for you!!!"

Wheres the loving, caring christian attitude?

 

 

Blazing star never said lazy. Should everyone have the same pay CrossCut ? You can make it on minimum wage, you just have your needs and only a few want's, not everyone want's want's some people are quiet happy with just having there needs met, i think that was blazing stars point.

Edited November 22, 2013 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

And cross cut i think there is a difference between poverty and poor when it comes to finances.

Edited November 22, 2013 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[CrossCuT]

 Should everyone have the same pay CrossCut ? 

 

Im not even going to answer this. It has been addressed so many times in the thread however I understand that giving people a "humane wage" automatically makes members in this thread think (for some reason...) that I mean EQUAL across the board. Thats not it at all.

 

Start reading what Im saying.

 

The Federal minimum wage is $7.25/hr and hasnt been changed for 6 years. It should be increased to help keep up with inflation. 

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Im not even going to answer this. It has been addressed so many times in the thread however I understand that giving people a "humane wage" automatically makes members in this thread think (for some reason...) that I mean EQUAL across the board. Thats not it at all.

 

Start reading what Im saying.

 

The Federal minimum wage is $7.25/hr and hasnt been changed for 6 years. It should be increased to help keep up with inflation. 

 

 

I couldn't be bothered reading every post at present, but i did read your response to the whole equal wages thing after i had already posted my response to your post from the first page after i decided to flick through a few other pages. And why do you pick just one bit i said to debate me on, what about the rest of what i posted, i had a thought that you where going to do that. :(

Edited November 22, 2013 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Im not even going to answer this. It has been addressed so many times in the thread however I understand that giving people a "humane wage" automatically makes members in this thread think (for some reason...) that I mean EQUAL across the board. Thats not it at all.

 

Start reading what Im saying.

 

The Federal minimum wage is $7.25/hr and hasnt been changed for 6 years. It should be increased to help keep up with inflation. 

 

 

The minimum wage in australia rarely keeps up with inflation either, but also is not on or below or even close to the poverty line for this nation, as i assume is the same for the u.s. minimum wage. Minimum wage just requires as i stated previously the desire to only have your needs met and very few want's.

Edited November 22, 2013 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Nihil Obstat]

Maybe central banks should stop their shenanigans with relation to the monetary supply. :|

[NotreDame]

Maybe central banks should stop their shenanigans with relation to the monetary supply. :|

yep.

 

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303763804579183680751473884