Anonymous wrote:And I make a big deal about him being white and a veteran, because I think a lot of people who oppose the minimum wage do so because they think it's all POC and younger people. Not true.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?
If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.
And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.
Buddy, you ever been hungry?
I have and I’ve worked the minimum wage jobs when I was. I worked construction jobs that were hard when I was. I did without stuff when I was.
I didn’t bitch that it wasn’t fair and expect someone else to do something about it, it was on me to do it.
And you're fortunate enough to have had the skills and the wherewithal to do so. Not everyone does, and those people still need to eat.
There are many well paying jobs that require 0 skills, but they’re usually harder work, so people just complain instead.
What jobs are those that pay well despite requiring zero skills?
Garbage. Mail. Janitor. Lawn maintenance. Car washer. Bus driver. Taxi cab/Uber driver. Cashier. Maid. Doorman. Bellhop. Delivery person. Warehouse fulfilment. Stock/clerk. I could go on. Yes, there are some basic skills required, but nothing the overwhelming majority of adults could not pick up in a very short period of time.
Okay, say everyone went to these so-called good paying skillless jobs. Whose going to do the minimum wage work? And do those people not deserve to be able to sustain themselves?
The same people that do them now, as the above jobs are out there currently. Anyone making minimum wage Today could get a better job Tomorrow, but they won’t because the work is harder. Some people don’t want to reward them for their decisions, why is that a bad thing?
If you want to be able to sustain yourself but don’t want to put the work in, that’s not my problem.
NOT EVERYONE IS CAPABLE OF DOING MORE. What is it about that that you struggle to understand? For some people, getting and keeping a minimum wage job is a significant achievement. For some it's the best they can do. For some, they are unmotivated to do or learn more. ALL of those people still deserve to eat and have shelter. It's not a frickin reward you sick f#ck.
You can have shelter and food on minimum wage. If you’re unmotivated to do more, why do you deserve a wage that covers more than food and shelter? People here think minimum wage needs to cover food, shelter, car, phone, internet, health care, etc.
Why do you keep moving the goalposts?
Not without government assistance. 40 hours a week for 52 weeks a year at minimum wage = $15,000.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?
If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.
And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.
Buddy, you ever been hungry?
I have and I’ve worked the minimum wage jobs when I was. I worked construction jobs that were hard when I was. I did without stuff when I was.
I didn’t bitch that it wasn’t fair and expect someone else to do something about it, it was on me to do it.
And you're fortunate enough to have had the skills and the wherewithal to do so. Not everyone does, and those people still need to eat.
There are many well paying jobs that require 0 skills, but they’re usually harder work, so people just complain instead.
What jobs are those that pay well despite requiring zero skills?
Garbage. Mail. Janitor. Lawn maintenance. Car washer. Bus driver. Taxi cab/Uber driver. Cashier. Maid. Doorman. Bellhop. Delivery person. Warehouse fulfilment. Stock/clerk. I could go on. Yes, there are some basic skills required, but nothing the overwhelming majority of adults could not pick up in a very short period of time.
Okay, say everyone went to these so-called good paying skillless jobs. Whose going to do the minimum wage work? And do those people not deserve to be able to sustain themselves?
The same people that do them now, as the above jobs are out there currently. Anyone making minimum wage Today could get a better job Tomorrow, but they won’t because the work is harder. Some people don’t want to reward them for their decisions, why is that a bad thing?
If you want to be able to sustain yourself but don’t want to put the work in, that’s not my problem.
NOT EVERYONE IS CAPABLE OF DOING MORE. What is it about that that you struggle to understand? For some people, getting and keeping a minimum wage job is a significant achievement. For some it's the best they can do. For some, they are unmotivated to do or learn more. ALL of those people still deserve to eat and have shelter. It's not a frickin reward you sick f#ck.
You can have shelter and food on minimum wage. If you’re unmotivated to do more, why do you deserve a wage that covers more than food and shelter? People here think minimum wage needs to cover food, shelter, car, phone, internet, health care, etc.
Why do you keep moving the goalposts?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So idiotic to have a national minimum wage given the vast differences in cost of living across fifty states. A smart country would create a dynamic minimum wage tied to cost of living. It might be 20 in NY and 8 in West Virginia. The data is available and easy to crunch......we’re just too stupid a country to try and innovate anymore.
Plenty of people have suggested this. It's more that Congress isn't motivated or rewarded for innovating. We'll just keep fighting the same culture wars and arguing over the same failed policies so long as they can use it to maintain power.
^This. I feel like 99% of the issues on DCUM threads boil down to this.
Want to add this: Almost no bills or policies are data or analysis-driven. It is shameful.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?
If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.
And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.
Buddy, you ever been hungry?
I have and I’ve worked the minimum wage jobs when I was. I worked construction jobs that were hard when I was. I did without stuff when I was.
I didn’t bitch that it wasn’t fair and expect someone else to do something about it, it was on me to do it.
And you're fortunate enough to have had the skills and the wherewithal to do so. Not everyone does, and those people still need to eat.
There are many well paying jobs that require 0 skills, but they’re usually harder work, so people just complain instead.
What jobs are those that pay well despite requiring zero skills?
Garbage. Mail. Janitor. Lawn maintenance. Car washer. Bus driver. Taxi cab/Uber driver. Cashier. Maid. Doorman. Bellhop. Delivery person. Warehouse fulfilment. Stock/clerk. I could go on. Yes, there are some basic skills required, but nothing the overwhelming majority of adults could not pick up in a very short period of time.
Okay, say everyone went to these so-called good paying skillless jobs. Whose going to do the minimum wage work? And do those people not deserve to be able to sustain themselves?
The same people that do them now, as the above jobs are out there currently. Anyone making minimum wage Today could get a better job Tomorrow, but they won’t because the work is harder. Some people don’t want to reward them for their decisions, why is that a bad thing?
If you want to be able to sustain yourself but don’t want to put the work in, that’s not my problem.
NOT EVERYONE IS CAPABLE OF DOING MORE. What is it about that that you struggle to understand? For some people, getting and keeping a minimum wage job is a significant achievement. For some it's the best they can do. For some, they are unmotivated to do or learn more. ALL of those people still deserve to eat and have shelter. It's not a frickin reward you sick f#ck.
You can have shelter and food on minimum wage. If you’re unmotivated to do more, why do you deserve a wage that covers more than food and shelter? People here think minimum wage needs to cover food, shelter, car, phone, internet, health care, etc.
Why do you keep moving the goalposts?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?
If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.
And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.
Buddy, you ever been hungry?
I have and I’ve worked the minimum wage jobs when I was. I worked construction jobs that were hard when I was. I did without stuff when I was.
I didn’t bitch that it wasn’t fair and expect someone else to do something about it, it was on me to do it.
And you're fortunate enough to have had the skills and the wherewithal to do so. Not everyone does, and those people still need to eat.
There are many well paying jobs that require 0 skills, but they’re usually harder work, so people just complain instead.
What jobs are those that pay well despite requiring zero skills?
Garbage. Mail. Janitor. Lawn maintenance. Car washer. Bus driver. Taxi cab/Uber driver. Cashier. Maid. Doorman. Bellhop. Delivery person. Warehouse fulfilment. Stock/clerk. I could go on. Yes, there are some basic skills required, but nothing the overwhelming majority of adults could not pick up in a very short period of time.
Okay, say everyone went to these so-called good paying skillless jobs. Whose going to do the minimum wage work? And do those people not deserve to be able to sustain themselves?
The same people that do them now, as the above jobs are out there currently. Anyone making minimum wage Today could get a better job Tomorrow, but they won’t because the work is harder. Some people don’t want to reward them for their decisions, why is that a bad thing?
If you want to be able to sustain yourself but don’t want to put the work in, that’s not my problem.
NOT EVERYONE IS CAPABLE OF DOING MORE. What is it about that that you struggle to understand? For some people, getting and keeping a minimum wage job is a significant achievement. For some it's the best they can do. For some, they are unmotivated to do or learn more. ALL of those people still deserve to eat and have shelter. It's not a frickin reward you sick f#ck.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?
If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.
And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.
Buddy, you ever been hungry?
I have and I’ve worked the minimum wage jobs when I was. I worked construction jobs that were hard when I was. I did without stuff when I was.
I didn’t bitch that it wasn’t fair and expect someone else to do something about it, it was on me to do it.
And you're fortunate enough to have had the skills and the wherewithal to do so. Not everyone does, and those people still need to eat.
There are many well paying jobs that require 0 skills, but they’re usually harder work, so people just complain instead.
What jobs are those that pay well despite requiring zero skills?
Garbage. Mail. Janitor. Lawn maintenance. Car washer. Bus driver. Taxi cab/Uber driver. Cashier. Maid. Doorman. Bellhop. Delivery person. Warehouse fulfilment. Stock/clerk. I could go on. Yes, there are some basic skills required, but nothing the overwhelming majority of adults could not pick up in a very short period of time.
Okay, say everyone went to these so-called good paying skillless jobs. Whose going to do the minimum wage work? And do those people not deserve to be able to sustain themselves?
The same people that do them now, as the above jobs are out there currently. Anyone making minimum wage Today could get a better job Tomorrow, but they won’t because the work is harder. Some people don’t want to reward them for their decisions, why is that a bad thing?
If you want to be able to sustain yourself but don’t want to put the work in, that’s not my problem.
NOT EVERYONE IS CAPABLE OF DOING MORE. What is it about that that you struggle to understand? For some people, getting and keeping a minimum wage job is a significant achievement. For some it's the best they can do. For some, they are unmotivated to do or learn more. ALL of those people still deserve to eat and have shelter. It's not a frickin reward you sick f#ck.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So idiotic to have a national minimum wage given the vast differences in cost of living across fifty states. A smart country would create a dynamic minimum wage tied to cost of living. It might be 20 in NY and 8 in West Virginia. The data is available and easy to crunch......we’re just too stupid a country to try and innovate anymore.
Plenty of people have suggested this. It's more that Congress isn't motivated or rewarded for innovating. We'll just keep fighting the same culture wars and arguing over the same failed policies so long as they can use it to maintain power.
^This. I feel like 99% of the issues on DCUM threads boil down to this.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you ask someone to work for you for full time hours, but don't pay them enough to reasonably sustain themselves, you've essentially got yourself an indentured servant. Are we really okay with that as a country? Having an underclass of indentured servants that we allow the merchant class to abuse and treat however they want?
If you offer someone a job and tell them upfront the wage you are willing to pay, and the person says YES to your offer, then you’ve got yourself an employee who has entered into an at-will agreement to work for you at the wage you both agreed upon.
And in most cases, the wage is very clearly indicated in the job posting. The “indentured servant” need not apply to that job of the wage is not suitable to them.
Buddy, you ever been hungry?
I have and I’ve worked the minimum wage jobs when I was. I worked construction jobs that were hard when I was. I did without stuff when I was.
I didn’t bitch that it wasn’t fair and expect someone else to do something about it, it was on me to do it.
And you're fortunate enough to have had the skills and the wherewithal to do so. Not everyone does, and those people still need to eat.
There are many well paying jobs that require 0 skills, but they’re usually harder work, so people just complain instead.
What jobs are those that pay well despite requiring zero skills?
Garbage. Mail. Janitor. Lawn maintenance. Car washer. Bus driver. Taxi cab/Uber driver. Cashier. Maid. Doorman. Bellhop. Delivery person. Warehouse fulfilment. Stock/clerk. I could go on. Yes, there are some basic skills required, but nothing the overwhelming majority of adults could not pick up in a very short period of time.
Okay, say everyone went to these so-called good paying skillless jobs. Whose going to do the minimum wage work? And do those people not deserve to be able to sustain themselves?
The same people that do them now, as the above jobs are out there currently. Anyone making minimum wage Today could get a better job Tomorrow, but they won’t because the work is harder. Some people don’t want to reward them for their decisions, why is that a bad thing?
If you want to be able to sustain yourself but don’t want to put the work in, that’s not my problem.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So idiotic to have a national minimum wage given the vast differences in cost of living across fifty states. A smart country would create a dynamic minimum wage tied to cost of living. It might be 20 in NY and 8 in West Virginia. The data is available and easy to crunch......we’re just too stupid a country to try and innovate anymore.
Plenty of people have suggested this. It's more that Congress isn't motivated or rewarded for innovating. We'll just keep fighting the same culture wars and arguing over the same failed policies so long as they can use it to maintain power.
Anonymous wrote:So idiotic to have a national minimum wage given the vast differences in cost of living across fifty states. A smart country would create a dynamic minimum wage tied to cost of living. It might be 20 in NY and 8 in West Virginia. The data is available and easy to crunch......we’re just too stupid a country to try and innovate anymore.