• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What should the federal minimum wage rightfully be in 2019?

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
No they aren't. You have to pay your workers and you have to pay them enough so that they don't tell you to go pound sand and work for someone else.

No worker HAS to work for you, will they, nil they. That IS slavery. If they can leave, it's not. I think you need to go look up the definition of 'slavery.'

So, if I own a store and want to hire someone to sell yarn, I'd better offer enough to make someone want to work for me. If I don't, nobody will. If I don't offer enough, s/he will leave and work for someone else. If I'm the only employer in the area, I'd better take good care to offer good wages, because union strikes are not good things.

........I don't see 'slavery' anywhere in there. It's a bit odd that you do.
I find it odd that you don't appear to know the difference between welfare and being employed. If an employer is paying you, it's not taxpayer money.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
I find it odd that you don't appear to know the difference between welfare and being employed. If an employer is paying you, it's not taxpayer money.

I find it odd that you don't appear to know the difference between government mandates and free market employee/employer relationships.

Not that I'm chiming in here AGAINST a minimum wage. I'm actually for it, because I'm afraid that without one, certain employers will take advantage of very bad economic times and start doing some of the things the minimum wage and anti-monopoly laws were enacted to prevent.

I do get more than a bit nervous when people start talking about minimum wages as something high enough to support a family of four, with enough income to support a typical American middle class life style, from the house to the car to the vacations.

Minimum wage should be enough to help someone beginning to get experience in order to start climbing the salary ladder. Minimum wages for entry level jobs that require no more than a pair of hands and minimum training.

More than that, and you aren't leaving any room for growth---for employee OR employer.
 

tigrers2019

Member
I am one of those who also think that the MW is used as a cover by the elites (who push the Gov. buttons) to make the masses think that they are being taken care of.
The last thing the top 10% of the richest in this country want is for all incomes to be closer to each other.

What occurred at the end of WWII when we were the strongest country in the world, was the start of Financial Engineering. The elites could not stand it that the dollar that the common man could obtain so easily could put him and his family in closer proximity to them. According to Dollartimes Inflation Calculator a dollar in 1946 could purchase what it takes today $13.80

Through Financial Engineering by the time the elites had us nearly through the second financial drain (Viet Nam after Korea) they had the dollar valued down to $6.31 by 1971
It is falling into their trap to keep talking MW instead of Financial Engineering, and trust me to hell itself, the politicians will be instructed accordingly by their handlers if they are accused of this financial practice.
 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
All wages are government mandated. You have to pay your workers and you have to pay them well, unless you're alright with slavery.
Your emphasis on “all” is misplaced. The government mandates minimum wage, overtime, etc. Not “all” wages.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
I am one of those who also think that the MW is used as a cover by the elites (who push the Gov. buttons) to make the masses think that they are being taken care of.
The last thing the top 10% of the richest in this country want is for all incomes to be closer to each other.

What occurred at the end of WWII when we were the strongest country in the world, was the start of Financial Engineering. The elites could not stand it that the dollar that the common man could obtain so easily could put him and his family in closer proximity to them. According to Dollartimes Inflation Calculator a dollar in 1946 could purchase what it takes today $13.80

Through Financial Engineering by the time the elites had us nearly through the second financial drain (Viet Nam after Korea) they had the dollar valued down to $6.31 by 1971
It is falling into their trap to keep talking MW instead of Financial Engineering, and trust me to hell itself, the politicians will be instructed accordingly by their handlers if they are accused of this financial practice.
In 1946 white men were still very much the dominant majority of those employed. Not many women worked yet, the Civil Rights act hadn't happened yet, discrimination against Asians was rampant, and, overall, there weren't even as many white men working then either. And CEOs weren't making ludacris percentages above and beyond what their average employee makes. So, we have more people, with a small group taking even more of the pie than they were then, and they aren't sharing as much as they take as they used to, either.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Yeah, a lot of times they do. Whether there are no other options, no one else hiring you, whatever, sometimes people really do have no other choice but to work for where they work at.

They can choose not to work at where they work at.

Slavery...is when it is not possible to choose to work anywhere else, because trying to will get you shot or jailed.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Literally, that isn't always an option. Especially in rural parts, jobs arent plentiful, and they most certainly are not abudant like they are in California.

We are talking here about employment vs. slavery.
In 'Rural parts,' where jobs are not plentiful, people can still choose not to work for pay that doesn't do them any good. They can also choose to move.

Many have.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
We are talking here about employment vs. slavery.
In 'Rural parts,' where jobs are not plentiful, people can still choose not to work for pay that doesn't do them any good. They can also choose to move.

Many have.
You need money to move, and you need a job for basic needs. My own experience, in Indiana, I basically had two places I could work for using my degree, and no matter which one I worked for Id still be at poverty wages before taxes (and sunk well below after taxes). Both of them also had an understaffed case management problem with the ones they do have each taking on the caseload of at least two or three case managers. So options really didnt exist for me there (they didnt in general), and I was fortunate enough that I had some help and could move.
 
Top