minimum wage

[lp85253]

$15 an hour isn't realistic but no real suprise they're pushing that. I'm for giving state's the right to choose on that one. It will only increase unemployment. NY and CA makes more sense because the living cost is so high, but a national law on this isn't realist in say N/SD. If they do a national law on this then well obviously it has to be somewhere in the middle. I'd rather cut taxes but understand I voted for Biden to get Trump out.

The states already have the right to set wages.. Info to the contrary is an effort to make gop obstructionism seem more palatable ...what's being left out of this discussion is: social security is lagging even farther behind...how is it possible that seniors that worked 30 yrs in the workforce can't even afford a modest 1 b.r. apt...???

 

[cpp]

No, we have Spectrum, but I don't use them for cable, only internet.

I have much better experiences with them than ATT- both can be OK for that, but ATT seems to try to avoid it at all costs. I called Spectrum tech support for a customer and it was a very pleasant experience. The main factor is about who answers the call and how interested are they in doing their job. I heard kids in the background and asked if she was working from home and she laughed, then said she was.

I cut the cable a few weeks ago, cost got out of control and so far life is good. Just a cable modem for internet to worry about now. AT&T is horrible around here,.

 

[Irvrobinson]

The states already have the right to set wages.. Info to the contrary is an effort to make gop obstructionism seem more palatable ...what's being left out of this discussion is: social security is lagging even farther behind...how is it possible that seniors that worked 30 yrs in the workforce can't even afford a modest 1 b.r. apt...???

Because Social Security wasn't conceived to provide sufficient income to be a replacement for earned income. And SS is actually better than any private pension I'm aware of, because it's indexed for inflation. If you wanted full retirement coverage for earned income the only way I know of to get it is work in a state where state jobs are covered by ridiculously generous pension plans, like PERS in Oregon. With PERS, for example, you can actually earn more in retirement than you did on the job. There are several states that were just as stupid as Oregon, since all of those state pension plans are grossly underfunded due to being ill-conceived. Whining about it now is a waste of energy.

 

[lp85253]

Because Social Security wasn't conceived to provide sufficient income to be a replacement for earned income. And SS is actually better than any private pension I'm aware of, because it's indexed for inflation. If you wanted full retirement coverage for earned income the only way I know of to get it is work in a state where state jobs are covered by ridiculously generous pension plans, like PERS in Oregon. With PERS, for example, you can actually earn more in retirement than you did on the job. There are several states that were just as stupid as Oregon, since all of those state pension plans are grossly underfunded due to be ill-conceived. Whining about it now is a waste of energy.

I've been on social security for 16 years , living on it exclusively, ya think i might have an idea how it might work..?? And it's strengths and weaknesses? The truth is in the modern economic structure in is woefully lacking... Trying to tell someone that worked blue collar jobs in a right to work state for 3 decades " how they got it wrong"and how to fix it ?? priceless in it's lack of recognition of the problem.. You sound like a gop politician trying to justify tax cuts and corporate greed.. Oh wait.. Those are the idiots that invented your political ideology for you..

 

[Irvrobinson]

I've been on social security for 16 years , living on it exclusively, ya think i might have an idea how it might work..?? And it's strengths and weaknesses? The truth is in the modern economic structure in is woefully lacking... Trying to tell someone that worked blue collar jobs in a right to work state for 3 decades " how they got it wrong"and how to fix it ?? priceless in it's lack of recognition of the problem.. You sound like a gop politician trying to justify tax cuts and corporate greed.. Oh wait.. Those are the idiots that invented your political ideology for you..

Social Security Disability? And, I suspect on Medicare and SNAP too? The only problem I recognize is your incessant whining on a forum that's about a luxury.

 

[lp85253]

Social Security Disability? And, I suspect on Medicare and SNAP too? The only problem I recognize is your incessant whining on a forum that's about a luxury.

Or not ... You sure seem to have a stick up your butt about me... Luxuriate on that skippy....this is the steam vent right...??? I get the feeling you are 100% convinced you earned everything you got... Sounds a lot like every trust fund douchebag i ever met...

 

[Irvrobinson]

Or not ... You sure seem to have a stick up your butt about me... Luxuriate on that skippy....this is the steam vent right...??? I get the feeling you are 100% convinced you earned everything you got... Sounds a lot like every trust fund douchebag i ever met...

Yeah, I see your point. You think everyone who has a better outcome than you only achieved it because of lucky breaks, knowing the right people, cheating, fortuitous birth, or whatever, anything but intensive learning, hard work, discipline, and good decisions, and you, on the other hand, have been cheated by society out of the generous benefits that are rightfully yours. Enough whining. Man up.

(If you'd like the stick back, send me your mailing address. I'll pay for the postage out of my trust fund.)

 

[lp85253]

Yeah, I see your point. You think everyone who has a better outcome than you only achieved it because of lucky breaks, knowing the right people, cheating, fortuitous birth, or whatever, anything but intensive learning, hard work, discipline, and good decisions, and you, on the other hand, have been cheated by society out of the generous benefits that are rightfully yours. Enough whining. Man up.

(If you'd like the stick back, send me your mailing address. I'll pay for the postage out of my trust fund.)

Well i see you still don't get my point....i find it absolutely baffling as to how you can excuse your racist (or in my case place -ist) rhetoric behind the thought that this is a luxury forum.. As if us less fortunate " others "somehow are not good enough to be here... Or maybe we should be aware of how fortunate we are to be allowed on your " luxury forum".. Dude you're a relic from a far worse time... Amazing how you guys always revert to the same sad tactics ...Edit: the fact is I'm on disability. Youre opinion that i ought to just " man up" has nothing to do that disability through social security qualifies me to be homeless , it doesn't pay enough to stay housed...how do you defend that?.. By personal attacks on me being a whiner... So do you get why i think you're a fukstik douchbag rich asswipe? Now i may be wrong .. But I'd bet on it...

 

[Irvrobinson]

Well i see you still don't get my point....i find it absolutely baffling as to how you can excuse your racist (or in my case place -ist) rhetoric behind the thought that this is a luxury forum.. As if us less fortunate " others "somehow are not good enough to be here... Or maybe we should be aware of how fortunate we are to be allowed on your " luxury forum".. Dude you're a relic from a far worse time... Amazing how you guys always revert to the same sad tactics ...Edit: the fact is I'm on disability. Youre opinion that i ought to just " man up" has nothing to do that disability through social security qualifies me to be homeless , it doesn't pay enough to stay housed...how do you defend that?.. By personal attacks on me being a whiner... So do you get why i think you're a fukstik douchbag rich asswipe? Now i may be wrong .. But I'd bet on it...

Dude (I despise that term, but whatever), you've told us repeatedly that you live below the poverty line, but you have questions about your HT system. Kate Smith's signature song comes to mind.

 

[lp85253]

Social Security Disability? And, I suspect on Medicare and SNAP too? The only problem I recognize is your incessant whining on a forum that's about a luxury.

Dude (I despise that term, but whatever), you've told us repeatedly that you live below the poverty line, but you have questions about your HT system. Kate Smith's signature song comes to mind.

what home theater questions? You're getting sloppy, skippy... Wake me up when you gather a coherent argument as to why ss disability recipients need to be at sub poverty level income to sooth your fragile political ego... It was such fun working 25 years for poverty wages then having to take a pay cut from that ...it's about the system inequality , not about me , genius... It's gotta be pretty obvious that i am doing better than many people in my situation...

 

[Darenwh]

I feel that the real problem here is one of corporate greed. Yes, a business should make money for its investors but it also has to care for the people that make it possible for the company to exist. Pay at companies should be directly tied to the pay of the level below it. For instance, a CEO should only be able to make double the average pay of the level below them.

If the lowest level workers make an average pay of $15 per hour then the next level, say level one managers could have an average pay of $30 and Max pay of $45. Second level managers would have an average wage of double the true average wage of the level below to a maximum average of $60 and Max pay of $90. Doing this all the way up to the CEO would result in a company tying executive maximum pay to the average pay they give their bottom level employees. Instant incentive to pay well at the bottom.

Further tying maximum total of yearly dividends paid out to the total payroll (say 100 or 1000 times payroll, (a totally random number but a fare multiplier could be found)) would predicate how pay is done within the company insuring that employees are paid a fare wage for the earnings brought in by the company.

I also believe we should tax the highest earners (the 1%) at near 100% above a certain dollar amount allowing a very generous tax break for money reinvested in new domestic companies. This would encourage the ultra rich to invest more in building new American business creating more jobs.

Tax cuts alone currently most often go to savings not reinvestment. An example, above 50 mill a year tax at 100%, if they earned 150 mill, if the person invests $80 mill of the $100 mill they would have been taxed at 100% they would be able to write aff the whole 100 Mill, pocketing 20 mill. Instant investment with great potential for increased job growth.

Last, foreign workers will always be needed. Laws should insure any foreign worker is paI’d above the average pay for the job they do and that the workers pay be based on the highest paying job the worker does no matter how little of that job they do.

Bring in a foreign worker to flip burgers 38 hours a week and program for two and you would need to pay a programmers wages for the entire 40 hours. Since the pay must be greater than the average programmer pay for your company, if you have more than half your programmers in the company as foreign workers your average pay would go up every year causing you to need to increase pay further each year For those workers. You would need to have half your workers be domestic workers, actually more than half, or your payroll would get out of hand. Ergo, an automatic control on total foreign workers.

There would be exceptions, such as migrant farm workers, but for technical jobs this could reduce abuses of worker visas to bring in foreign workers to supplant domestic workers At lower pay.

 

[lp85253]

I feel that the real problem here is one of corporate greed. Yes, a business should make money for its investors but it also has to care for the people that make it possible for the company to exist. Pay at companies should be directly tied to the pay of the level below it. For instance, a CEO should only be able to make double the average pay of the level below them.

If the lowest level workers make an average pay of $15 per hour then the next level, say level one managers could have an average pay of $30 and Max pay of $45. Second level managers would have an average wage of double the true average wage of the level below to a maximum average of $60 and Max pay of $90. Doing this all the way up to the CEO would result in a company tying executive maximum pay to the average pay they give their bottom level employees. Instant incentive to pay well at the bottom.

Further tying maximum total of yearly dividends paid out to the total payroll (say 100 or 1000 times payroll, (a totally random number but a fare multiplier could be found)) would predicate how pay is done within the company insuring that employees are paid a fare wage for the earnings brought in by the company.

I also believe we should tax the highest earners (the 1%) at near 100% above a certain dollar amount allowing a very generous tax break for money reinvested in new domestic companies. This would encourage the ultra rich to invest more in building new American business creating more jobs.

Tax cuts alone currently most often go to savings not reinvestment. An example, above 50 mill a year tax at 100%, if they earned 150 mill, if the person invests $80 mill of the $100 mill they would have been taxed at 100% they would be able to write aff the whole 100 Mill, pocketing 20 mill. Instant investment with great potential for increased job growth.

Last, foreign workers will always be needed. Laws should insure any foreign worker is paI’d above the average pay for the job they do and that the workers pay be based on the highest paying job the worker does no matter how little of that job they do.

Bring in a foreign worker to flip burgers 38 hours a week and program for two and you would need to pay a programmers wages for the entire 40 hours. Since the pay must be greater than the average programmer pay for your company, if you have more than half your programmers in the company as foreign workers your average pay would go up every year causing you to need to increase pay further each year For those workers. You would need to have half your workers be domestic workers, actually more than half, or your payroll would get out of hand. Ergo, an automatic control on total foreign workers.

There would be exceptions, such as migrant farm workers, but for technical jobs this could reduce abuses of worker visas to bring in foreign workers to supplant domestic workers At lower pay.

Gotta love some of those Democratic socialism points...

 

[Irvrobinson]

I feel that the real problem here is one of corporate greed. Yes, a business should make money for its investors but it also has to care for the people that make it possible for the company to exist. Pay at companies should be directly tied to the pay of the level below it. For instance, a CEO should only be able to make double the average pay of the level below them.

If the lowest level workers make an average pay of $15 per hour then the next level, say level one managers could have an average pay of $30 and Max pay of $45. Second level managers would have an average wage of double the true average wage of the level below to a maximum average of $60 and Max pay of $90. Doing this all the way up to the CEO would result in a company tying executive maximum pay to the average pay they give their bottom level employees. Instant incentive to pay well at the bottom.

Further tying maximum total of yearly dividends paid out to the total payroll (say 100 or 1000 times payroll, (a totally random number but a fare multiplier could be found)) would predicate how pay is done within the company insuring that employees are paid a fare wage for the earnings brought in by the company.

I also believe we should tax the highest earners (the 1%) at near 100% above a certain dollar amount allowing a very generous tax break for money reinvested in new domestic companies. This would encourage the ultra rich to invest more in building new American business creating more jobs.

Tax cuts alone currently most often go to savings not reinvestment. An example, above 50 mill a year tax at 100%, if they earned 150 mill, if the person invests $80 mill of the $100 mill they would have been taxed at 100% they would be able to write aff the whole 100 Mill, pocketing 20 mill. Instant investment with great potential for increased job growth.

Last, foreign workers will always be needed. Laws should insure any foreign worker is paI’d above the average pay for the job they do and that the workers pay be based on the highest paying job the worker does no matter how little of that job they do.

Bring in a foreign worker to flip burgers 38 hours a week and program for two and you would need to pay a programmers wages for the entire 40 hours. Since the pay must be greater than the average programmer pay for your company, if you have more than half your programmers in the company as foreign workers your average pay would go up every year causing you to need to increase pay further each year For those workers. You would need to have half your workers be domestic workers, actually more than half, or your payroll would get out of hand. Ergo, an automatic control on total foreign workers.

There would be exceptions, such as migrant farm workers, but for technical jobs this could reduce abuses of worker visas to bring in foreign workers to supplant domestic workers At lower pay.

This is the silliest post I've read since the last time lp85253 posted.

 

[lp85253]

This is the silliest post I've read since the last time lp85253 posted.

He should take that as a seal of approval from those that reside in the human race...

 

[Old Onkyo]

I feel that the real problem here is one of corporate greed. Yes, a business should make money for its investors but it also has to care for the people that make it possible for the company to exist. Pay at companies should be directly tied to the pay of the level below it. For instance, a CEO should only be able to make double the average pay of the level below them.

If the lowest level workers make an average pay of $15 per hour then the next level, say level one managers could have an average pay of $30 and Max pay of $45. Second level managers would have an average wage of double the true average wage of the level below to a maximum average of $60 and Max pay of $90. Doing this all the way up to the CEO would result in a company tying executive maximum pay to the average pay they give their bottom level employees. Instant incentive to pay well at the bottom.

Further tying maximum total of yearly dividends paid out to the total payroll (say 100 or 1000 times payroll, (a totally random number but a fare multiplier could be found)) would predicate how pay is done within the company insuring that employees are paid a fare wage for the earnings brought in by the company.

I also believe we should tax the highest earners (the 1%) at near 100% above a certain dollar amount allowing a very generous tax break for money reinvested in new domestic companies. This would encourage the ultra rich to invest more in building new American business creating more jobs.

Tax cuts alone currently most often go to savings not reinvestment. An example, above 50 mill a year tax at 100%, if they earned 150 mill, if the person invests $80 mill of the $100 mill they would have been taxed at 100% they would be able to write aff the whole 100 Mill, pocketing 20 mill. Instant investment with great potential for increased job growth.

Last, foreign workers will always be needed. Laws should insure any foreign worker is paI’d above the average pay for the job they do and that the workers pay be based on the highest paying job the worker does no matter how little of that job they do.

Bring in a foreign worker to flip burgers 38 hours a week and program for two and you would need to pay a programmers wages for the entire 40 hours. Since the pay must be greater than the average programmer pay for your company, if you have more than half your programmers in the company as foreign workers your average pay would go up every year causing you to need to increase pay further each year For those workers. You would need to have half your workers be domestic workers, actually more than half, or your payroll would get out of hand. Ergo, an automatic control on total foreign workers.

There would be exceptions, such as migrant farm workers, but for technical jobs this could reduce abuses of worker visas to bring in foreign workers to supplant domestic workers At lower pay.

Or you could be a CEO....

I was always amazed that guys in the locker room figured they could run the company better than the CEO. I often told them they should have gone to CEO school.

 

[highfigh]

I cut the cable a few weeks ago, cost got out of control and so far life is good. Just a cable modem for internet to worry about now. AT&T is horrible around here,.

I hated ATT. They wasted so much of my time during calls to tech support and CS and I'll never get it back but disconnecting the call on my own (they did that too often) wouldn't have ended with any kind of decent resolution. Inept is the best word for the way they handled my calls, for myself and my customers who were unfortunate enough to be their customers. We all left and went to Spectrum- while it hasn't always been painless, it has been an improvement.

 

[Sadie42]

$15 an hour is not a "living wage". People working those jobs are lucky to get 30 hours a week. Human beings working their asses off should make enough that they don't feel like spitting on my burger. $7.25 is ridiculous, and it's just surprises me that it's even a debate.

 

[highfigh]

$15 an hour is not a "living wage". People working those jobs are lucky to get 30 hours a week. Human beings working their asses off should make enough that they don't feel like spitting on my burger. $7.25 is ridiculous, and it's just surprises me that it's even a debate.

The wage is low, but the impact from jumping to more than double in one shot isn't reasonable- it should have risen incrementally over time but Congress, in their limited wisdom, didn't see fit to do that.

 

[highfigh]

I've been on social security for 16 years , living on it exclusively, ya think i might have an idea how it might work..?? And it's strengths and weaknesses? The truth is in the modern economic structure in is woefully lacking... Trying to tell someone that worked blue collar jobs in a right to work state for 3 decades " how they got it wrong"and how to fix it ?? priceless in it's lack of recognition of the problem.. You sound like a gop politician trying to justify tax cuts and corporate greed.. Oh wait.. Those are the idiots that invented your political ideology for you..

Are you totally unable to work? I remember you posting that you have CP, but don't remember if you commented on its severity.

 

[lp85253]

Are you totally unable to work? I remember you posting that you have CP, but don't remember if you commented on its severity.

I'm totally unable to work without pain..scoliosis.. My back literally is shaped like an s...my right leg is about 3 inches shorter than my left and i have no coordination in my right hand...The basis of my bitch is that it's socially acceptable that people like me have to make decisions based on homelessness vs working when work is obviously not a good idea...then i get a stiff prick like irv telling me how the world works according to the lucky...fuk it and him...