The Minimum Wage: What's the Big Deal?

[IPleadInsanity]

How about abolishing the minimum wage as an option? Minimum wage is a mentality, increase it and you increase those with the mentality. The system only works when people want to better themselves.

 

[volprof]

I love it. This is the second time you've mentioned that if you don't support paying women to sit at home and be baby factories then you hate our society/country. Good stuff.

It's one of the following:

1. Complete ignorance as to how modern societies must replenish themselves without their economies imploding

2. Disdain for one's own society

3. Apathy

You pick whichever category it is you and some others here fall into, but, rest assured, it is one of these.

 

[marcusluvsvols]

At the risk of having to deflect rocks and whatever... When you stop and look at it, don't you think that feminists had a lot to do with it? Rather than just support women who wanted to work, they had to go whole hog and convince women they should be in the workforce. When you flood the workforce, wages will drop - simple supply and demand.

The changes might not show up immediately, and the extra income in many cases led to new job demands - child care, more easily prepared meals (or eating out), transportation, clothing, and so on. But the endgame is that now two household incomes don't do much more than one did before, and kids and family life are societal casualties.

Don't count me in for one who thinks feminists and progressives have done anything to improve our way of life, but they've certainly trapped us in something worse than where we were.

Rock solid post. Again. Fast becoming one of the best posters here.

My wife has 2 part time Jobs but is quick to tell pepole that her career is a homemaker. Takes great pride in it. Laughs at feminists. She is 33 and a dying breed...young women today can't cook, sew,or take care of a home. I tell my teenage son all the time that he is going to have a really hard time finding a real woman. I work 60 hours a week most weeks. I don't wash clothes. I don't cook. I don't go to the grocery store. Ever. I don't need to... I have a real woman. I wash dishes frequently, because I want to and I love my wife. I vacuum..because it's a power tool and I enjoy it. Some would call me a sexist pig...my wife thinks I am a real man. That's all that matters. Because of my hard work she is class mom at school. Goes on every field trip. Handles every class party. Takes my kids to and from school. If she worked full time, we would have more money. It's simply better for my kids and my home that she doesnt. So we don't drive braND new vehicles. We don't wear designer clothes, or take lavish vacations. Those things aren't important to us. My kids are. Unless my son needs help, my kids homework is done by the time I get home from work, because mom is there to make sure of it.
Some would say we live a backwards lifestyle, not keeping up with the times. I think a young man today that settles for a career woman who can't cook, clean, properly run a home is making a big mistake. Money isn't all that matters. FwIw both my kids are straight A students and neither has ever been in any trouble outside our home. I don't think that is a coincidence. I think it's an expected result of a conscious effort.

 

[tumscalcium]

It's one of the following:

1. Complete ignorance as to how modern societies must replenish themselves without their economies imploding

2. Disdain for one's own society

3. Apathy

You pick whichever category it is you and some others here fall into, but, rest assured, it is one of these.

Lol.

If you don't support tax payer funded or mandatory law for every single business to pay for maternity leave then you hate your country? You don't care about anyone?

This is great. Keep going.

 

[volprof]

Lol.

If you don't support tax payer funded or mandatory law for every single business to pay for maternity leave then you hate your country? You don't care about anyone?

This is great. Keep going.

I gave you three options. That was just one of them. Perhaps you fit into the other two, but it's definitely one of them.

So, I've given research and statistics about how paid maternity leave cuts pregnancy-related healthcare costs, doesn't hurt (and may in fact help profits by avoiding costly turnover) profits, and helps incentivize the middle-class to have children (you know, those people you keep saying need to be the only ones having children, but statistically don't).

I'm sure it's not a perfect policy, as rarely any are, but where are all of you guys' counter-evidence. I keep getting anecdotal evidence about "my wife cooks and does other stuff at the home like a real woman, so damn feminists!" and cracker barrel, feel good philosophy about individual responsibility, welfare moms, poor people, and other nonsense, but I haven't seen anything of any substance to counter my substance yet.

I thought conservatives were about saving money. I demonstrate a plan that can potentially save money, and I be damned if half of you don't give it the time of day.

 

[hog88]

I gave you three options. That was just one of them. Perhaps you fit into the other two, but it's definitely one of them.

So, I've given research and statistics about how paid maternity leave cuts pregnancy-related healthcare costs, doesn't hurt (and may in fact help profits by avoiding costly turnover) profits, and helps incentivize the middle-class to have children (you know, those people you keep saying need to be the only ones having children, but statistically don't).

I'm sure it's not a perfect policy, as rarely any are, but where are all of you guys' counter-evidence. I keep getting anecdotal evidence about "my wife cooks and does other stuff at the home like a real woman, so damn feminists!" and cracker barrel, feel good philosophy about individual responsibility, welfare moms, poor people, and other nonsense, but I haven't seen anything of any substance to counter my substance yet.

I thought conservatives were about saving money. I demonstrate a plan that can potentially save money, and I be damned if half of you don't give it the time of day.

While I agree with and support paid maternity leave I'm 100% against government mandated employee benefits.

I've witnessed the benefits of offering paid ML here at our company and of course we have been burned also. But so far the benefit has outweighed the negative.

 

[volprof]

While I agree with and support paid maternity leave I'm 100% against government mandated employee benefits.

I've witnessed the benefits of offering paid ML here at our company and of course we have been burned also. But so far the benefit has outweighed the negative.

Thank you for sharing your experience, and thank you for being on the front line of this issue when so many other employers and our government doesn't seem to have gotten the memo, for whatever reason. It is a nice counterbalance to the cracker barrel philosophy here.

I'm not arguing all govt. mandated things/benefits are good or healthy for employers are the economy. My stated policy these days, as a general rule, is that it is best when government stays out of private affairs, if all things are equal. This isn't one of them though. The research, along with your real world account, is pretty clear on this one: we save money with paid maternity leave.

This is actually a principle of what I would consider my own "conservatism." It's not about whether or not the government is involved or about "limited government," it's about what saves, what "conserves," money. I don't know why a matter like paid maternity leave is such a polarized issue in this nation, even bringing out the anti-feminists to rant about kitchens and cooking. Seems to me that saving money, even by government mandate - when it is not limiting anyone's actual freedom - is as "conservative" as it gets.

 

[tumscalcium]

I gave you three options. That was just one of them. Perhaps you fit into the other two, but it's definitely one of them.

So, I've given research and statistics about how paid maternity leave cuts pregnancy-related healthcare costs, doesn't hurt (and may in fact help profits by avoiding costly turnover) profits, and helps incentivize the middle-class to have children (you know, those people you keep saying need to be the only ones having children, but statistically don't).

I'm sure it's not a perfect policy, as rarely any are, but where are all of you guys' counter-evidence. I keep getting anecdotal evidence about "my wife cooks and does other stuff at the home like a real woman, so damn feminists!" and cracker barrel, feel good philosophy about individual responsibility, welfare moms, poor people, and other nonsense, but I haven't seen anything of any substance to counter my substance yet.

I thought conservatives were about saving money. I demonstrate a plan that can potentially save money, and I be damned if half of you don't give it the time of day.

Negative. Your three options don't mean anything. We've been over this many times, if companies want to do it then great, good for them.

Under no circumstances should it be mandated by law, especially for every single business. Under absolutely no mf'ing way should it be taxpayer funded. You clearly don't understand human nature. You clearly don't understand much. You need to get away from your setting.

 

[volprof]

Negative. Your three options don't mean anything. We've been over this many times, if companies want to do it then great, good for them.

Under no circumstances should it be mandated by law, especially for every single business. Under absolutely no mf'ing way should it be taxpayer funded. You clearly don't understand human nature. You clearly don't understand much. You need to get away from your setting.

Well, you can share that with the other 115 year olds over the barrels of butter and biscuits at the country store.

In the meanwhile, I'll be out dealing in facts and saving money.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

You reek of nihilism, apathy, and decadence.

A society that hates itself as much as you hate ours will never reproduce itself.

And you're probably under the delusion that you're a patriot, simply because our tax dollars once provided you a means of later earning money in the private sector as a pilot.

How dare you question the reasons I went into the military and what I got out of it. I'll have you know it was fully my intention to make the military a career, but after Gulf War 1, there were fewer and fewer options for officers in my situation. There was always the possibility that I could have been shot at and that I could have been sent into harm's way. I wasn't. You can go back and find one of my posts where I spoke of how I felt that I was not worthy to render the salute in UT pregame festivities precisely because I had not actually been in hostilities.


How ****ing dare you. If we were standing in the same room right now I would render you unconscious.

 

[FLVOL69]

How dare you question the reasons I went into the military and what I got out of it. I'll have you know it was fully my intention to make the military a career, but after Gulf War 1, there were fewer and fewer options for officers in my situation. There was always the possibility that I could have been shot at and that I could have been sent into harm's way. I wasn't. You can go back and find one of my posts where I spoke of how I felt that I was not worthy to render the salute in UT pregame festivities precisely because I had not actually been in hostilities.


How ****ing dare you. If we were standing in the same room right now I would render you unconscious.

Bravo sir, and once again thank you for your service!

 

[volprof]

How dare you question the reasons I went into the military and what I got out of it. I'll have you know it was fully my intention to make the military a career, but after Gulf War 1, there were fewer and fewer options for officers in my situation. There was always the possibility that I could have been shot at and that I could have been sent into harm's way. I wasn't. You can go back and find one of my posts where I spoke of how I felt that I was not worthy to render the salute in UT pregame festivities precisely because I had not actually been in hostilities.


How ****ing dare you. If we were standing in the same room right now I would render you unconscious.

And I too thank you for your service, but I get tired of your persistent nihilistic *****ing about everyone else who uses government funds.

If you didn't ***** so much about everyone else using government money, I wouldn't criticize you or your service history.

So, you served in the military. You think that makes you better than everyone else. It doesn't.

 

[hog88]

Thank you for sharing your experience, and thank you for being on the front line of this issue when so many other employers and our government doesn't seem to have gotten the memo, for whatever reason. It is a nice counterbalance to the cracker barrel philosophy here.

I'm not arguing all govt. mandated things/benefits are good or healthy for employers are the economy. My stated policy these days, as a general rule, is that it is best when government stays out of private affairs, if all things are equal. This isn't one of them though. The research, along with your real world account, is pretty clear on this one: we save money with paid maternity leave.

This is actually a principle of what I would consider my own "conservatism." It's not about whether or not the government is involved or about "limited government," it's about what saves, what "conserves," money. I don't know why a matter like paid maternity leave is such a polarized issue in this nation, even bringing out the anti-feminists to rant about kitchens and cooking. Seems to me that saving money, even by government mandate - when it is not limiting anyone's actual freedom - is as "conservative" as it gets.

The problem with mandated benefits is they take away the competitive advantage from companies who do offer a better benefit package. Once all benefits are equal then all that's left is wage competition.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

And I too thank you for your service, but I get tired of your persistent nihilistic *****ing about everyone else who uses government funds.

If you didn't ***** so much about everyone else using government money, I wouldn't criticize you or your service history.

So, you served in the military. You think that makes you better than everyone else. It doesn't.

Why did you drag it into the conversation?

 

[volprof]

Why did you drag it into the conversation?

You made a misogynistic post about how companies shouldn't hire women of reproductive age, a perspective, that not coincidentally is the fast track to a society that no longer can even reproduce itself, or certainly not a middle-class that can. It is self-defeating, a decadent perspective, full of apathy, that cares more about death cult values of classism and sexism than it does about society, and ignores the actual statistics on the issue to boot.

My bringing up your military service was admittedly gratuitous, but I did it largely to demonstrate your hypocrisy. You don't want to pay for anyone else, yet you are a beneficiary of our system, albeit providing a valuable service in the process.

 

[Sin City Vol]

Rock solid post. Again. Fast becoming one of the best posters here.

My wife has 2 part time Jobs but is quick to tell pepole that her career is a homemaker. Takes great pride in it. Laughs at feminists. She is 33 and a dying breed...young women today can't cook, sew,or take care of a home. I tell my teenage son all the time that he is going to have a really hard time finding a real woman. I work 60 hours a week most weeks. I don't wash clothes. I don't cook. I don't go to the grocery store. Ever. I don't need to... I have a real woman. I wash dishes frequently, because I want to and I love my wife. I vacuum..because it's a power tool and I enjoy it. Some would call me a sexist pig...my wife thinks I am a real man. That's all that matters. Because of my hard work she is class mom at school. Goes on every field trip. Handles every class party. Takes my kids to and from school. If she worked full time, we would have more money. It's simply better for my kids and my home that she doesnt. So we don't drive braND new vehicles. We don't wear designer clothes, or take lavish vacations. Those things aren't important to us. My kids are. Unless my son needs help, my kids homework is done by the time I get home from work, because mom is there to make sure of it.
Some would say we live a backwards lifestyle, not keeping up with the times. I think a young man today that settles for a career woman who can't cook, clean, properly run a home is making a big mistake. Money isn't all that matters. FwIw both my kids are straight A students and neither has ever been in any trouble outside our home. I don't think that is a coincidence. I think it's an expected result of a conscious effort.

Congrats on a great life, most people don't have that. I think how people go about their roles in marriage is just a preference. My wife and I have full time jobs and neither of us work over 40 hours a week. We share things at home and raised 3 boys who are all now in college. One of the greatest concerns we had early on was if she wanted to be a "homemaker" and how would she survive if something happened to me or vice versa. It made more sense for us both to get degrees and get in the work force. We both have Masters degrees, our kids are A-B students and have never been in trouble. We both know how to cook, clean etc and have budgeted so we will be retired in about 11 years (55 years old).

I think this boils down to what you value and what lifestyle you want to live. I commend you for working 60 hours a week but that's not for me

 

[theFallGuy]

UC Berkeley Touts $15 Wage Law, Then Fires Hundreds After It Passe | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

You made a misogynistic post about how companies shouldn't hire women of reproductive age, a perspective, that not coincidentally is the fast track to a society that no longer can even reproduce itself, or certainly not a middle-class that can. It is self-defeating, a decadent perspective, full of apathy, that cares more about death cult values of classism and sexism than it does about society, and ignores the actual statistics on the issue to boot.

My bringing up your military service was admittedly gratuitous, but I did it largely to demonstrate your hypocrisy. You don't want to pay for anyone else, yet you are a beneficiary of our system, albeit providing a valuable service in the process.

My argument was simply for the sake of argument on the issue. Your missive about a society not being able to reproduce itself is ridiculous at a minimum. I still fail to see any hypocrisy in my "argument", but I am not nearly as wired in to the liberal mantra as you so I guess I can defer to your 'wisdom' on that. And I have no idea what you mean by decadent and self defeating. If you are talking about the survival of the species, I will stop typing so that I can roll on the floor with laughter. Or maybe the liberal genius believes that people of a certain intelligence level should be encouraged to breed? Unstable ground with that one professor, but I would love for you to step in that direction.

What I was merely pointing out is that if employers are forced to provide maternity/paternity leave by the .gov, it could be in their interest to not hire people that fall within that group. As I said before, no-one is inexpendible. If there is a 25-35 year old woman out there that is so important to a company's prosperity/survival that they can not do without her, that is more than likely an exception rather than rule, and I would bet that she is probably more dedicated to that company than her ticking clock because she would be highly compensated. I guess you believe the "right" to have children trumps any rights of anybody else as well including those of her employer?

And I'd still knock you out for your other comments.

 

[marcusluvsvols]

Congrats on a great life, most people don't have that. I think how people go about their roles in marriage is just a preference. My wife and I have full time jobs and neither of us work over 40 hours a week. We share things at home and raised 3 boys who are all now in college. One of the greatest concerns we had early on was if she wanted to be a "homemaker" and how would she survive if something happened to me or vice versa. It made more sense for us both to get degrees and get in the work force. We both have Masters degrees, our kids are A-B students and have never been in trouble. We both know how to cook, clean etc and have budgeted so we will be retired in about 11 years (55 years old).

I think this boils down to what you value and what lifestyle you want to live. I commend you for working 60 hours a week but that's not for me

And I commend you for raising good productive members of society and seemingly doing things the right way. There is definitely more than 1 way to skin a cat. I think a lot of 2 career households today end up strangers to their latch key kids and let them be raised by the television, internet, and social media as they live self absorbed lives. Mom and dad that is.

There are also certainly homes where only dad works, the kids are home schooled, never socialize and end up out in the world as young adults with absolutely no social skills and are therefore overwhelmed and unable to deal with real life. There are extremes on both ends of the spectrum.

Also, I am not saying we do everything right. I coach my kids ball teams, try to spend as much time with them as I can...but in truth I don't see them nearly as much as I would like to. They understand why, but it doesn't change the facts. In order to have my wife available to them nearly at all times, I would be a stranger to them if not for a conscious effort to never let that happen. I see my kids a couple waking hours a day plus Sundays . That is it. Life is just expensive, and in order to give then the education and other things they need, I have to be mostly absent from their day to day lives. I discuss this with my son. Tell him to keep those grades perfect and he can get a good job as on engineer etc. Where his wife can stay home or work part time and he can still only work 40 hours a week. I can't do that. He can. So far I have been able to give my kids a better start in life than I had. With God's grace that will continue hopefully and they can do better as adults than I have done while not sacrificing the values that we share.
The bible says it's easier to pass a camel thru the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven. That's because the love of money is the root of evil. Pride. It's a fine line. I try to lead my son to understand that he can get a good paying job with a good degree, give to the church, live a God centered life with his family, and still retire early if he plays all of his cards right. It's up to him. Hope springs eternal.

 

[hog88]

Congrats on a great life, most people don't have that. I think how people go about their roles in marriage is just a preference. My wife and I have full time jobs and neither of us work over 40 hours a week. We share things at home and raised 3 boys who are all now in college. One of the greatest concerns we had early on was if she wanted to be a "homemaker" and how would she survive if something happened to me or vice versa. It made more sense for us both to get degrees and get in the work force. We both have Masters degrees, our kids are A-B students and have never been in trouble. We both know how to cook, clean etc and have budgeted so we will be retired in about 11 years (55 years old).

I think this boils down to what you value and what lifestyle you want to live. I commend you for working 60 hours a week but that's not for me

On the flip side of that, I've known people (sure you have to) that the wife is basically working to pay child care and other expenses to work. If she stayed at home with the kids their net would be higher.

 

[Sin City Vol]

And I commend you for raising good productive members of society and seemingly doing things the right way. There is definitely more than 1 way to skin a cat. I think a lot of 2 career households today end up strangers to their latch key kids and let them be raised by the television, internet, and social media as they live self absorbed lives. Mom and dad that is.

There are also certainly homes where only dad works, the kids are home schooled, never socialize and end up out in the world as young adults with absolutely no social skills and are therefore overwhelmed and unable to deal with real life. There are extremes on both ends of the spectrum.

Also, I am not saying we do everything right. I coach my kids ball teams, try to spend as much time with them as I can...but in truth I don't see them nearly as much as I would like to. They understand why, but it doesn't change the facts. In order to have my wife available to them nearly at all times, I would be a stranger to them if not for a conscious effort to never let that happen. I see my kids a couple waking hours a day plus Sundays . That is it. Life is just expensive, and in order to give then the education and other things they need, I have to be mostly absent from their day to day lives. I discuss this with my son. Tell him to keep those grades perfect and he can get a good job as on engineer etc. Where his wife can stay home or work part time and he can still only work 40 hours a week. I can't do that. He can. So far I have been able to give my kids a better start in life than I had. With God's grace that will continue hopefully and they can do better as adults than I have done while not sacrificing the values that we share.
The bible says it's easier to pass a camel thru the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven. That's because the love of money is the root of evil. Pride. It's a fine line. I try to lead my son to understand that he can get a good paying job with a good degree, give to the church, live a God centered life with his family, and still retire early if he plays all of his cards right. It's up to him. Hope springs eternal.

We're very lucky because we are able to spend a lot of time together and were able to do the same with our kids. We both feel very lucky and understand life takes sacrifices on everyone's part

 

[Sin City Vol]

On the flip side of that, I've known people (sure you have to) that the wife is basically working to pay child care and other expenses to work. If she stayed at home with the kids their net would be higher.

Oh I know plenty. Majority of the spouses I knew in the military never worked because of this. I've worked with people and their wife never worked for 20+ years and as soon as their spouse retired they divorced within 2 years. The spouse gets 50% of the retirement but has zero job experience and immediately struggles

 

[marcusluvsvols]

On the flip side of that, I've known people (sure you have to) that the wife is basically working to pay child care and other expenses to work. If she stayed at home with the kids their net would be higher.

We ran the numbers when my kids were babies and this was the case for us..but my wife doesn't have a degree. If a woman can't make 40k a year these days I think it's a wash financially. Good child care runs 200 a week per kid. After school only is almost as much as all day. So if you have 2 kids...that's 400 a week..which is about what you take home from a 15 dollar an hour job or 30k annually. I think there are maNY households where mom working just pays for child care simply because the mom has bought into the modern idea that homemaker isn't an honorable job...or she is simply a person whose sense of self worth comes from a job outside the home. In our case, it simply wasn't worth it.

 

[marcusluvsvols]

We're very lucky because we are able to spend a lot of time together and were able to do the same with our kids. We both feel very lucky and understand life takes sacrifices on everyone's part

For sure. And I appreciate you not taking offense at my first post..I wasn't judging anyone. Different things work for different people. We struggle to this very day...but just do the best we can. Things are so dang expensive it is crazy.

 

[Sin City Vol]

We ran the numbers when my kids were babies and this was the case for us..but my wife doesn't have a degree. If a woman can't make 40k a year these days I think it's a wash financially. Good child care runs 200 a week per kid. After school only is almost as much as all day. So if you have 2 kids...that's 400 a week..which is about what you take home from a 15 dollar an hour job or 30k annually. I think there are maNY households where mom working just pays for child care simply because the mom has bought into the modern idea that homemaker isn't an honorable job...or she is simply a person whose sense of self worth comes from a job outside the home. In our case, it simply wasn't worth it.

I don't think the majority women see being a homemaker isn't an honorable job, if you have kids young it's hard for either parent to get an education and raise a family. We decided to wait and have kids after her education was complete, mine took years to finish because I was in the military. I believe most women and men for that matter want to work because life is expensive and you wanna stay ahead, which is very difficult no matter how much you make.

its a lifestyle choice we all have to make, neither option is wrong