FeedGo yell at Chef Kevin
January 15, 2007 in Citizen Journalism
The miserable pro-millionaire exploiter of the working class actually has the audacity to oppose an increase in the
Why? Just because minimum wage increases makes to hard for small businesses to stay in business, stifles initiative, raises prices for consumers and creates
Anyway, go yell at HIM for a change.
January 15th, 2007 at 8:19 pm
no…I kinda agree with him.
January 15th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
I agreed with his scenario too, but I will still go yell at him.
January 15th, 2007 at 9:38 pm
I agree as well. The minimum wage is there to level the playing field between companies that hire first-time workers (wage earners). It was never intended to be something that people would try to live off of. People are supposed to gain work experience and MOVE up to additional responsibilities either with the same company or to MOVE to another comapny, using that initial work experience as leverage.
The end result of continual increases will be two-fold.
1. Low end, first-timer jobs will become fewer and harder to obtain.
2. Inflation caused by the increases will make many goods and services cost more, thereby creating inflation that will hurt that same minimum wage person the most.
January 15th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
Let me help you out MDD…
3. Those folks who have moved beyond minimum wage don’t get a corresponding bump up. Thus, when coupled with the inflation, they are actually earning LESS.
January 15th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
The purpose of the minimum wage as established by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 is:
“The act’s objective was summarized as the “elimination of labor conditions detrimental to the maintenance of the minimum standards of living necessary for health, efficiency and well being of workers.”
In short a LIVING wage. It most certaintly was intended to be something one could live off of, albeit frugally.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:23 am
translation: To ensure the end of slave labor and the Employer sticking it completely to the employee.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:59 am
The government will always want you to believe the minimum wage is meant to be a living wage. That way you’ll always be a slave to government programs and their meager handouts. To escape the bottom rungs of the socio-economic ladder the minimum wage should be used to develop labor skills while continuing one’s education. Upon graduation one leaves that life behind and earns the wages for the career they chose to pursue. Any naysayers to this philosophy are more than welcome to drive their children through the south side of Peoria and tell them otherwise…
January 16th, 2007 at 8:01 am
Mahkno has right: “…something ONE could live off of…”
ONE not a family of 8.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:52 am
And seriously, how many adults out there really earn minimum wage? I would guess that over 75% of people who earn minimum wage are under 18 years old.
January 16th, 2007 at 9:00 am
Tony,
Some interesting stats on who earns the minimum wage can be found at:
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Labor/WM19.cfm
A few selected stats from the information about minimum wage earners:
53% are teenagers and young adults with 43% being age 23 or older;
For those over 23 - over 30% did not have a high school diplomna and around 36% had only a high school diplomna;
57% of minimum wage earners work part-time voluntarily;
More interesting facts in the article.
January 16th, 2007 at 9:20 am
Other research I did found that unemployment rises as the minimum wage goes up (amongst unskilled workers).
So it begs the question?
Who DOES the minumum wage benefit?
January 16th, 2007 at 9:25 am
Answer: Politicians.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:06 am
No chef… in looking at other information from that time, the minimum wage was to provide for a family of four, not an individual.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:11 am
and the wife was expected to keep the home, not work outside it like many do today.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:52 am
So any job out there has to pay enough to support a family of 4? Bull.
January 16th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
Well, Vonster, lets look back to 1938 and see what that really meant. It meant food on the table, a roof over your head, and clothes on your back. That was pretty much it. No cars, no TV, not likely a radio, certainly no cable or internet, no telephone as that was not widely available until after the war. To pander to your conservative sensibilities, if these ‘poor’ folk are spending their hard earned coin on these sorts of ‘luxuries’ and still are coming up short, its their own damn fault. We certainly have the right to be critical and questioning if some minimum wage person is sitting at home with a $3000 HDTV. It isn’t impossible to save money working near minimum but it won’t be easy.
Now that still begs the question as to how much is enough. There is going to be a wide range depending on where you live. The cost of living in Peoria is certainly less than any major city. What might pass as comfortable in Peoria might be scrapin by in Chicago.
January 16th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Mahkno, I might be able to buy the living wage stuff if this was 1938. But it’s not, and people don’t live without TV (cable), radio, land phone, cell phone, and a car(s). By today’s standards, the living wage needs to be about $10/hour (or even more).
January 16th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
With the current minimum wage level, everything was okay. Anyone could work at the burger joints full-time and be able to support themselves. 2 people, husband and wife. As for kids, its just not a decision rational people make when working for minimum wage, to have kids…is just a no-brainer, these people will continue to milk the government of funds. They are taught by example, and chances are…if you are an adult and you are making minimum wage, then..your parents did the same thing. This is what the rational person calls…Its your own damn fault, make better decisions. Don’t expect society and government to accomadate you for your bad decisions. Inflation is the only rational argument, and I understand this…but many would argue that employment is way up and the economy is booming. This is going to effect all businesses. The ones it hurts the most is the consumer, because the costs are taken out somewhere, and usually its customer service or quality standards.