Federal Workers Min. Wage raised to $10.10

Mr.Sloth

Mr.Sloth

Active member
Just happened, by executive order. Discuss.
BgTDnGoCEAENUf6.jpg


 
It's a really really bad idea and a lot of people are going to lose their jobs and that's all I have to say about that.
 
It's going to be really hard on small businesses.. Maybe not the large corporations but this is going to be huge for the small business owners
 
its about time. I can't say i'm an expert on how this will be implemented but I think its fair to have employers at least attempt to pay workers enough to live. The cost living in the united states is not possible for people earning minimum wage without government assistance such as food stamps, housing assistance, etc. (generally, like if you have a family or any dependents at all). Shifting the burden from your tax dollars to employers seems fair to me...
 
I would say it's just to increase tax revenue, but it's only for federal workers so that doesn't really work. It does the opposite and creates a larger deficit. I don't really see the positive of this from a government standing.

I really love when the executive branch does this kinda shit though. Take that democracy.
 
The executive order was for Federal workers. Not the national minimum wage. You didn't even have to read the article, just the thread title.

And what people fail to realize is that minimum wage isn't something you are supposed to be able to live off of. You aren't supposed to earn a living working as a cashier at McDonalds. Those jobs are for experience to then move up into a better position that pays more within the same company or a different one.
 
Also this needs a source. Haven't seen anything about it anywhere that I have looked. Maybe mobile is making it hard but a link would be much appreciated.
 
do you understand the concept of a minimum wage job? It is a job that requires zero skill. A 16 year old can do it. They aren't jobs that are meant to be lived off of.

That said, I just pray to god that Obama doesn't try to raise the national minimum wage. Can't imagine the effect on the economy that would have.
 
I didn't see the word federal jeez.. It's not like the government cares if we go more into debt by paying the workers more. It's just a way of one party buying more votes. If Obama gets a bunch of workers a higher wage, they'll obviously vote democrat because that's where their extra money came from. Even though the money that makes that wage increase possible comes out of our taxes..
 
The only guaranteed outcome is the price goes up or quality goes down, which both basically equate to a "loss of purchasing power" for the consumer.

This is a good example of why the US dollar has lost 99% of its purchasing power since the federal reserve was enacted in 1913.

Vijay-Blog1.png
 
no its not...it's a picture with no support. It's not even an example

The link in the bottom at the bottom of the picture doesn't work either

A reverse image search shows that graph coming from some assholes blog located in Orlando FL. He provides no support for his reasoning either

original.jpg
 
The data is correct. a broken link doesn't make facts untrue.

So why did they pick $10? Why not $11? Why not $12?

Tell me why minimum wage shouldn't be $1,000 an hour then if raising the minimum wage is so great?
 
Obama has only a fraction of executive orders under his belt as compared to previous presidents, both Democrat and Republican.
 
True. But the internet wasn't such a news source for those presidents like it is now. So people care more now because they read headlines about lots of stuff. So it bad. Hmmmkay.
 
DIRECTLY from the us bureau of labor statistics website:

Put in $1 in 2013 equals how many dollrs in 1913. Answer=.04

link

 
here is the actual result:

692142.png

you misread the results, what it actually means is that you could buy something in 2013 with $1, but in 1913 the same thing would have cost $0.04
 
I can't even begin to address all the economic bullshit that has been thrown around in this thread. Let's get a few things out of the way first:



1. This particular EO concerns federal workers, as stated numerous times throughout this thread and in the title itself. It's effect on the greater economy will be next to zero.

2. Obama isn't even close when it comes to number of EOs in his presidency. I'm sick of people getting their panties in a twist about this "dictator" snatching for power around every corner. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php



Still with me? Good, let's get to the meat of the actual issue at hand, which is raising the federal minimum wage. Economists agree almost unanimously that raising the minimum wage will have net benefits that far outweigh the costs (see question 2, http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economfic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_br0IEq5a9E77NMV). Organizations like The Heritage Foundation and Americans for Prosperity love bangin' Econ 101, "it's supply and demand! If the price goes up, supply must go down! Unemployment! Gahh!" Well, if they hadn't fallen asleep before their professor finished, they might understand that simple neo-classical models, such as supply and demand, really only work in a vacuum. They only work because perfect competition drives profit to zero, when in real life there are many barriers to entry and massive profits are maintained by well-established oligarchies in industries like oil and insurance. Opponents of minimum wage increases either live in theoretical fantasy lands or are perfectly happy keeping the wool over low earning employees' eyes to appease their corporate masters. As long as profits exist, there is room to increase the wage of America's lowest earners.

A couple additional points. For those of you arguing that minimum wage jobs are only meant to be stepping stones to better opportunities, wake the fuck up. Yeah, it would be lovely if that was the case, but there are thousands of workers that DO have to work those jobs and are unable to move up due to lack of access to education, lack of better jobs, overwhelming family burdens, etc. Hardly any of us, myself included, knows how difficult it is to break the cycle of poverty. Secondly, us taxpayers subsidize the shitty pay and benefits provided by companies like McDonald's and Walmart to the tune of billions of dollars (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-13/how-mcdonald-s-and-wal-mart-became-welfare-queens.html), while the Walton's have more wealth than a large portion of the US combined.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-28-2014/wage-against-the-machine

TL:DR - Profits exist, there is room to pay bottom earners more, stop corporate welfare.

inb4 you're a commie
 
For someone who rails against poor reading comprehension, you seem to have a lack of it yourself. The article you posted has a limited survey of economists with results that are far from "unanimous."
 
The number of Executive Orders is irrelevant, what matters is the content of those Executive Orders.

If you actually take the time to look at the Executive Orders of each president, the fact of the matter is that Obama does abuse the very power he used to criticize.

“There is no shortcut to politics, and there’s no shortcut to democracy.”

- Senator B. Obama

From what I could tell skimming through GW's Executive Orders, the majority were related to foreign policy and minor domestic issues. The majority of the criticism for his Executive Orders I believe were related to foreign policy.

Obama one the other hand uses executive orders to dictate economic policy, and his executive order have much further reach in their effects. For example, his undoing of the Welfare Reform Act passed under Clinton by abusing Executive Orders. Also, delaying certain aspects of Obamacare by Executive Order is another abuse, an attempt to mask the failure that is his signature domestic "achievement." This too has far reaching economic consequences.

This newest one related to federal workers, although very limited in its reach, is a precursor for his broader agenda goals. More than anything, it's an attempt to make somewhat good on his State of the Union threat, and is a threat to Congress that he'll try to force it through on his own if they do not act (bend to his will). Last I recall, George Bush never used Executive Orders as a threat (although you're free to prove me wrong).

Obama is an abysmal president, you're a dumbshit millennial and you got taken, face up to it already. I know voting for him may have felt good (hopefully not twice), but it should've worn off by now.

 
I will be the first to admit that Obama's presidency has been mired in poor decision-making and broken promises, of which both he and the legislative branch need to take responsibility for. That being said, I don't think that nothing will have been accomplished in his eight years. On the contrary, I think that many policies will be looked on favorably in hindsight, particularly the quick response to the 2008 financial crisis.

I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you about Executive Orders. I care more about economic policy than necessary political processes, especially when Congress' approval rating is sitting at 13%. Sure, I may have overstated the confidence of labor economists, but the fact that there isn't a resounding NO concerning a hike in the minimum wage is enough for me. Unless you hold a minimum wage job and are feeling insecure about your tenure, there's really no reason to oppose such policy. I may be a dumbshit Millennial, but I've got an awesome job that pays more money than I can possibly spend and I also happen to care a bit about those at the bottom of the socio-economic spectrum. There are plenty of other economic policies that I would love to see enacted to compliment a hike in the minimum wage, but this is a good place to start and I've got my fingers crossed that there's more to come.

Question: would you like to abolish the minimum wage altogether?
 
While executive orders aren't necessarily democratic in nature, they aren't always a bad thing; especially when the legislative branch is a stick in the mud. Teddy Roosevelt did a bunch of executive orders that weren't always popular with the public, but in the end they had positive effects because of good foresight. Note that many regard him as one of the best presidents in history. I'm not saying it's the same in this instance, but they aren't always negative as seems to be implied by many.
 
I really hope that some of the people posting in this thread are younger than the site average, because if not - holy fuck.
 
FUCK I literally just had to do a debate in my economics class about keeping the minimum wage down, some of the shit you guys are saying would have surprisingly helped
 
okay so this one really bothers me. In is State of The Union address he said that the people serving our troops shouldnt be living below the poverty line.

Well what about our troops Mr. President? I generally work a 48 hour work week (4 12 hour shifts) but theres been times ive worked for 12 days straight and my pay doesnt change. I still get my base pay, nothing less nothing more. I make about 6.75 an hour. Im an E3 by the way.
 
Don't worry, eventually automation will take over and there simply won't be enough jobs, then we will move to a basic, or guaranteed income.

Buttttt, before that happens make sure to work realllly hard for whoever exploits, er I mean hires, you.
 
Lol the republicans have cockblocked him nonstop just to do it, they would totally have done it again. Guaranteed. Barry isn't playin' around anymore- fuck the anal retentive politics, I'm just glad he's getting shit done.
 
Yea I can't wait to make minimum wage after I pass my series 7 and get into the financial industry. Fuck off.

And automation will take over those simple jobs because it will become cheaper to build and maintain computers rather than pay people $10+/hr to screw up orders.
 
Broman, I got $10.25 / hour as a student and my country hasn't gone third world (other than the natives) and that was while we were on par. Quit your bitching and let someone else make a living wage.
 
yeah bros, everyone should make a living wage regardless of the profit they create for a company. Bro when a company cant produce a competitively priced product because they pay their workers too much, the government should just subsidize the company and bail them out bro. And if the government runs out of money from subsidizing everything just sell all our future earnings to china bro.

Bros we should make the minimum wage $1,000 per hour. Why just pick an arbitrary number like $10.10. You can't eat steak everyday and drive a lamborghini on $10.10 an hour bro, everybody deserves to drive a lamborghini bro.
 
Flawless logic is flawless. The government already subsidizes big corporations in every industry, not only through advantageous tax laws but also through welfare paid to their employees. McDonald's and Walmart pay low wages and provide poor benefits to their employees, forcing many to rely on SNAP, Section 8, etc. Meanwhile, c-suite folks are making 400x the average employee income. I don't understand how people are ok with that.

Why is everyone so quick to argue that the poor could survive with less while not applying the same logic to those making millions? America's greed and indifference is reaching disgusting levels.
 
Why is it bad to work hard and make tons of money and expect to keep it? Why is it bad to be someone who worked their way from a factory assembly line job to becoming a Senior Partner at big a financial firm making six figures. Why should he have to give money to someone who wants to rely on EBT and government help. He didn't, and if he did he did it to get on his feet so that he could not rely on it.

That is the point of SNAP, Section 8, and EBT. To help you get back on your feet. Not rely on it.

You know how many states pay more in welfare than minimum wage? 35. 35 states pay you more to do nothing than to work. So what are you going to do? Nothing. And you're gonna enjoy doing nothing because someones still handing you enough money to live.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/09/02/on-labor-day-2013-welfare-pays-more-than-minimum-wage-work-in-35-states/

When did we start to see people who worked hard, dreamed big, and achieved their goals as a bad person?

And I am all for welfare. I think it is a great program to help people get back on their feet and become a productive member of society. But I am not for a program that is being abused by many.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top