The Ecstatic said:

Enlil said:

That's arbitrary.  The vast majority of people in the world live on less than that, so setting the "living wage" at $12 is completely arbitrary and based on a standard of living that would be wealthy if viewed globally.

---

It's a standard that means your full time wages are liveable enough that your life not be subsidized by the government. And I'm not talking iPhones and big screens, I'm talking a paycheck that's enough to get food, clothes, housing, transportation, etc.

---

Exactly. 

Enlil said:

It's arbitrary because it assumes that one must eat more than ramen every day, live without 20 roommates, and wear clothes that weren't purchased at the Salvation Army.

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Enlil said:

I think this might be the first time I've ever agreed with DieCommie.

---

I agree that the whole world can't have a US minimum wage, but do you think we should intentionally lower our standard of living here in the US as a result?

---

zappaisgod said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Enlil said:

I think this might be the first time I've ever agreed with DieCommie.

---

I agree that the whole world can't have a US minimum wage, but do you think we should intentionally lower our standard of living here in the US as a result?

---

Why can't the whole world have as much success as the poorest American?

---

BoldAsLove said:

zappaisgod said:

I would like to humbly request that people stop using idiotic words and phrases like sustainable, affordable, reform and living wage.  I'm sure there are more than a few buzzwords with no meaning that I am missing.


If a higher minimum wage is so good and lets more people buy shit thus stimulating the fuck out of the economy why not make it $100 an hour?  At what point do you think the minimum wage tipping point is where it stops being stimulative for the general overall economy?  I think it is zero.  I think it has absolutely no positive effect on the overall economy.

---

I would like to humbly request that you actually discuss the topic at hand. No one here is advocating for raising the minimum wage to $100/hr. Once again, you are reducing the argument to an absurd point. You can read about the fallacy here if needed.

To give an example, if you argued that lowering taxes would be beneficial, I could argue that reducing taxes to 0 would not be beneficial because we wouldn't have a government. Clearly not a valid argument against lowering taxes. Similarly, I could argue that raising taxes is beneficial, and you can argue that raising taxes to 100% is clearly not beneficial. Again, definitely not a valid argument against raising taxes.

So as opposed to arguing against a ridiculous proposition that everyone here agrees is ridiculous, why not try arguing the actual subject matter?

---

Enlil said:

One can get food, clothes, and housing by working 40 hours at minimum wage today.  There are millions who do so for less than minimum in the U.S. 

It's arbitrary because it assumes that one must eat more than ramen every day, live without 20 roommates, and wear clothes that weren't purchased at the Salvation Army.

---

Goddamnit!!  Here in the US poor people have the right to an i-phone and a big-screen TV with cable and high speed internet so it isn't 'fair' to the people who have entry level skills if the minimum wage isn't high enough....

zappaisgod said:

BoldAsLove said:

zappaisgod said:

I would like to humbly request that people stop using idiotic words and phrases like sustainable, affordable, reform and living wage.  I'm sure there are more than a few buzzwords with no meaning that I am missing.


If a higher minimum wage is so good and lets more people buy shit thus stimulating the fuck out of the economy why not make it $100 an hour?  At what point do you think the minimum wage tipping point is where it stops being stimulative for the general overall economy?  I think it is zero.  I think it has absolutely no positive effect on the overall economy.

---

I would like to humbly request that you actually discuss the topic at hand. No one here is advocating for raising the minimum wage to $100/hr. Once again, you are reducing the argument to an absurd point. You can read about the fallacy here if needed.

To give an example, if you argued that lowering taxes would be beneficial, I could argue that reducing taxes to 0 would not be beneficial because we wouldn't have a government. Clearly not a valid argument against lowering taxes. Similarly, I could argue that raising taxes is beneficial, and you can argue that raising taxes to 100% is clearly not beneficial. Again, definitely not a valid argument against raising taxes.

So as opposed to arguing against a ridiculous proposition that everyone here agrees is ridiculous, why not try arguing the actual subject matter?

---

I have.  Repeatedly and over several years.  The ideal minimum wage is zero.  Stop fucking with the market.  It will cure itself.  It always does.

---

zappaisgod said:

And your complaint is?????????????????????????

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Fine, I'll agree a living wage is somewhat arbitrary.  Let the voters decide what's right (if only we lived in a democracy).

---

zappaisgod said:

Stop fucking with the market.  It will cure itself.  It always does.

---

Enlil said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Fine, I'll agree a living wage is somewhat arbitrary.  Let the voters decide what's right (if only we lived in a democracy).

---

Okay, so accepting that it's arbitrary and should be decided by the people, at what level?  Surely, you understand that a "living wage", as arbitrarily defined by you, isn't the same in California as it is in New Mexico.  Why should the minimum be the same in both?

While we're at it, a living wage in Manhattan isn't the same as one in Buffalo, so shouldn't the minimums be different by city?  If I live in Beverly Hills, a house, clothes, and food are gonna run me a lot of money...I think the minimum might have to be $40/hour there...Or are you gonna dictate where people have to live for this minimum wage to be a living wage? 

---

Of course it's different where cost of living is higher.  We agree. 

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

zappaisgod said:

Stop fucking with the market.  It will cure itself.  It always does.

---

On its own, the market doesn't create a middle class.

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Enlil said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Fine, I'll agree a living wage is somewhat arbitrary.  Let the voters decide what's right (if only we lived in a democracy).

---

Okay, so accepting that it's arbitrary and should be decided by the people, at what level?  Surely, you understand that a "living wage", as arbitrarily defined by you, isn't the same in California as it is in New Mexico.  Why should the minimum be the same in both?

While we're at it, a living wage in Manhattan isn't the same as one in Buffalo, so shouldn't the minimums be different by city?  If I live in Beverly Hills, a house, clothes, and food are gonna run me a lot of money...I think the minimum might have to be $40/hour there...Or are you gonna dictate where people have to live for this minimum wage to be a living wage? 

---

Of course it's different where cost of living is higher.  We agree. 

---

Enlil said:

And yet you didn't answer a single question I posed.

---

Enlil said:

Okay, so accepting that it's arbitrary and should be decided by the people, at what level?  Surely, you understand that a "living wage", as arbitrarily defined by you, isn't the same in California as it is in New Mexico.  Why should the minimum be the same in both?

---

Enlil said:

While we're at it, a living wage in Manhattan isn't the same as one in Buffalo, so shouldn't the minimums be different by city?

---

Enlil said:

If I live in Beverly Hills, a house, clothes, and food are gonna run me a lot of money...I think the minimum might have to be $40/hour there...Or are you gonna dictate where people have to live for this minimum wage to be a living wage?

---

Enlil said:

So basically what we have now...

People can live today on minimum wage, so what exactly is your complaint?

---