House and Senate Democrats introduce legeslation to increase federal min. wage to $15/hr by 2025

Published

Hope this legislation gets passed. as $15.00/hr =  $ 31,200/ year  barely enough  to cover rent. heath insurance, food, clothing for a family --- as my one son has learned.

 

 

Specializes in Hospice, Geri, Psych and SA,.
18 minutes ago, Beerman said:

Yes, but should a business owner be required to pay someone $30 an hour for a job that requires little skill or education, and if he/she cant afford that then go out of business?

Depending on the size and financial means of the company, absolutely.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
4 minutes ago, TheMoonisMyLantern said:

Depending on the size and financial means of the company, absolutely.

So, really what you are saying is that people should be paid according to what their need is, not their ability.  Do I have that right?

A single mother of two working the cash register at McDonalds, or Jim's Burger Shack, should get paid more the teenage doing the same job?

 

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Hospice, Geri, Psych and SA,.
1 minute ago, Beerman said:

So, really what you are saying is that people should be paid according to what their need is, not their ability.  Do I have that right?

 

Not necessarily, but I think a responsible company should take into account what kind of wage is required to survive in the market they're at and if they think so lowly of their employees that they are unwilling to do that, then the government should force their hand.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
2 hours ago, Beerman said:

Yes, but should a business owner be required to pay someone $30 an hour for a job that requires little skill or education, and if he/she cant afford that then go out of business?

Wages like commodities, are market driven. No matter what the mandatory requirements are, unless there's a need, value becomes transactional. Eg how many college educated history;arts majors are even employed or earning what their investments were?

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
10 hours ago, Beerman said:

I'm not sure where you got that.  I've only argued that the govt shouldn't mandate what a business pays.  Most businesses, at least successful ones, know that treating employees well is good for their business.  The fact that raising the minimum wage to $15 would only benefit 10% of the working population speaks to that.

I got that from your comments about paying the employees according to their value to the employer and your questions about careers in low wage jobs.  It leaves the impression that you feel that people should be paid according to employer evaluation and if it's difficult for the business that it's not a fair wage. 

The government has a roll in assuring that workers are treated and compensated fairly for their work. 

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
11 hours ago, Beerman said:

Perfect.  According to the MIT calculator, a single parent with one kid needs $25-35 an hour to make a "liveable wage"  depending on location. 

Let's say its $30 where you are.  One of your college students decides to quit school and make a career at your restaurant.  He/she ends up with a kid.  At what point do you give them that big raise to a "liveable wage" to do the same job they did for $17?

And, I am aware your tipped employees make great hourly,  but only 5 hours a day.   If they make $150 a day, and work 5 days a week,  that's $39k a year.   Sounds good to me for that job, but not a "liveable wage" for someone with children. That translates to $19 an hour for a 40 hour work week.

 

How interesting. 

I provided that MIT calculator on the first page of this thread after your early questions and skepticism about how a living wage could be calculated. 

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
1 hour ago, toomuchbaloney said:

I got that from your comments about paying the employees according to their value to the employer and your questions about careers in low wage jobs.  It leaves the impression that you feel that people should be paid according to employer evaluation and if it's difficult for the business that it's not a fair wage. 

I'm not sure from that how you got that I believe employees should be paid a wage "as low as humanely possible".

Up Vote Up Vote ×
1 hour ago, toomuchbaloney said:

How interesting. 

I provided that MIT calculator on the first page of this thread after your early questions and skepticism about how a living wage could be calculated. 

When a poster has a consistent history of demeaning and condescending comments towards me, I often skip past their posts.  

 

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
16 minutes ago, Beerman said:

When a poster has a consistent history of demeaning and condescending comments towards me, I often skip past their posts.  

 

Sure.

Except you didn't skip it...you responded and negatively characterized my intentions. In other words, you projected onto me what you were, in fact, doing in this thread.  And then you asked the same question again. 

Why shouldn't we skip past your insincere posts which ignore information while criticizing the intentions of those interacting with you? Are you commenting in good faith or just to argue?

 

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
29 minutes ago, Beerman said:

I'm not sure from that how you got that I believe employees should be paid a wage "as low as humanely possible".

That's not what I said and that's not what the quote you selected says.  That is your interpretation of what you read.  I described a business model and said it seems like you are promoting it. You took offense.  I wonder if that colors your ability to accept information that is shared with you...the initial emotional reaction to the words...

Quote

"It is true that one capitalist business model is to pay your employees as little as is humanely and legally possible while extracting the maximum amount of value and profit (for the company) from their labor. That seems to be the model that you are promoting."

 

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
33 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

That's not what I said and that's not what the quote you selected says.  That is your interpretation of what you read.  I described a business model and said it seems like you are promoting it. You took offense.  I wonder if that colors your ability to accept information that is shared with you...the initial emotional reaction to the words...

 

I guess I did misinterpret.  When you said I was promoting a certain business model, I wrongly assumed you thought I believed what you thought I was promoting. 

Sorry to illicit such a emotional reaction to my words with that misinterpretation.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
42 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Sure.

Except you didn't skip it...you responded and negatively characterized my intentions. In other words, you projected onto me what you were, in fact, doing in this thread.  And then you asked the same question again. 

Why shouldn't we skip past your insincere posts which ignore information while criticizing the intentions of those interacting with you? Are you commenting in good faith or just to argue?

 

I don't recall seeing that post.  Maybe you could include the reply I made to it?

I wish I had paid more attention to that MIT calculator.   It actually helps me make my main point.

If you feel my arguments are insincere,  I invite you to ignore them.  As I said, that's what I often do.  So, no hard feeling from me if that's what you choose to do.

Once again, my apologies for illiciting such a emotional reaction with my words.  It seems those emotions are coloring your ability to interpret my posts.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion