Replies

I like to get this straight whenever someone uses the minimum wage canard anywhere.

1) People are paid the market rate for the production that their labor brings to the corporation. That is unless they receive minimum wage. A minimum wage earner, by definition is paid above their value due to the fact that if an employer could do so legally, he would pay that person less, and in most instances that same employee would accept the lower wage as a tacit acknowledgment that their particular labor is not that valuable to the company.

2) Two people working full time minimum wage jobs with two children at home, live ABOVE the Federal Poverty level. By a lot. It isn't the minimum wage that is the problem, It is after all a starting wage and should be limited to the least employable, as it mostly is. It is the lack of full time jobs in the Obama economy that is killing the workers of America at all economic levels.

BTW two full time Minimum wage workers in a household gross $30,160 per year. The Federal poverty level for a household of 4 is $23,850. 126% more than poverty levels.

3) The minimum wage is the greatest barrier to entry for workers ever devised. It is anti democratic, anti liberty and is on its’ face unconstitutional. A person has the right to contract their labor at any rate they would desire and for any reason they would have to set that rate. It is not unbelievable that a person would even work for free in order to gain experience or show that they are suitable for the job.

I like to get this straight whenever someone uses the minimum wage canard anywhere.

The only canard present here, is one that was buttressed by a leap of logic concerning a message about minimum wages.

Well, I appreciate you trying to get something straight alright. Here, let me help. Did I advocate raising the minimum wage across the board in a city, county, region, state, or nation? No.

Coming unglued because I touch on a specific industry in a specific instance and advocate for better pay, isn't rational. Beginning to see a little straighter?

1) People are paid the market rate for the production that their labor brings to the corporation. That is unless they receive minimum wage. A minimum wage earner, by definition is paid above their value due to the fact that if an employer could do so legally, he would pay that person less, and in most instances that same employee would accept the lower wage as a tacit acknowledgment that their particular labor is not that valuable to the company.

Okay, then you obviosly honestly believe that the job the housekeeper does is not that valuable to the company. How may rooms would a hotel rent per night, if they didn't have a housekeeping staff?

Is the housekeeping staff still not valuable to the company? For many people, the hosuekeeping staff is the staff guests come into contract with the most frequetly.

2) Two people working full time minimum wage jobs with two children at home, live ABOVE the Federal Poverty level. By a lot. It isn't the minimum wage that is the problem, It is after all a starting wage and should be limited to the least employable, as it mostly is. It is the lack of full time jobs in the Obama economy that is killing the workers of America at all economic levels.

I think this is where some Conservatives lose their way. The housekeeping staff is the largest staff in the hotel. It's the staff that comes into cotact with the guests the most. It is your liason to your customers, and yet you scrimp when it comes to paying them.

Let's take a worst case scenario. A housekeeeper spends about twnety minutes in my room. They may spend as little as fifteen, perhaps even ten. Let's go with twenty. If I'm paying $300 a night for my room, part of it is going to pay my housekeeper.

Let's say a housekeeper is paid $12.00 an hour instead of $8.00. That's $4 extra dollars an hour. The additional taken out of my room rentals fee would be $1.33 cents. In my original post, I addressed $300 dollar a night rooms. Are you telling me that an increase in housekeeping wages equal to 0.44% of my rental fee is going to destroy the hotel. Serioiusly?

If we're talking about a $100 dollar a night room, the perentage would be 1.36%. Here again, is that going to put the hotel out of business? No. If that still doesn't convince you, I as a patrion would be more than willing to pay $1.00 extra per night, if I knew it would go towards the Housekeeping staff making a decent living. That way the percentage increased to the hotel would be 0.11% and 0.33% resepctively.

BTW two full time Minimum wage workers in a household gross $30,160 per year. The Federal poverty level for a household of 4 is $23,850. 126% more than poverty levels.

You earlier talked about a man and woman with two children. Now you're defending a wage of $30,160 dollars collectively. I don't care what the government poverty figures are. That amount of money is not reasoned. It isn't good for the couple. It's isn't good for the community they live in. Tell me which you would prefer, couples making $30,160 dollars per year, or couples making $48,000 dollars per year living in your neighborhood?

3) The minimum wage is the greatest barrier to entry for workers ever devised. It is anti democratic, anti liberty and is on its’ face unconstitutional. A person has the right to contract their labor at any rate they would desire and for any reason they would have to set that rate. It is not unbelievable that a person would even work for free in order to gain experience or show that they are suitable for the job.

First of all, I'm not impressed by anything that is Democratic. We are a consitutional Republic.

I am not in favor of a formal minimum wage.

I am not in favor of unions.

I am also not in favor of employers squeezing every penny they can out of employees. There has to be some middle ground.

As for fast food restaurants, the wages are spread over the amount of goods sold per hour. If the cost of a happy meal goes up by $0.25 cents due to the increase in wages, charge me an extra $0.25 cents for the happy meal.

If you sell 250 burgers an hour, and you use ten employees to do it, then a $12.00 an hour wage vs an $8.00 an hour wage, means you would spend $40 more dollars over that hour.

That's an increase of $0.16 cents per burger. I'm not going to stop going to my favorite fast food place because they charged me $0.16 cents more per my burder.

Of course it wouldn't just be for the burger, but for the drink, the fries, and the burger.

I think the unions are gaming the public. People who work in the fast food industry are not going out on strike. Idle union members are paid to come in an represent a fraud. We all know it. None of us should approve.

None the less, I don't think it would hurt as much as some folks think, if wages were increased, the owners and the public paying a little more.

You see, employing Americans with a wage they can live on, does not have to be the negative that some folks claim it has to be.

If I'm going through a drive through picking up food for a family of five, I'm not going to give it a second thought that I might be charged $0.75 cents more total for five meals.

If that employee is earning more money, they will spend it in my community. The people they spend that money with will have more money to spend.

This isn't a zero sum loss here.

If I spend that $0.75 cents, some of those emplyees are going to be buying my goods too. I'll make that $0.75 cents back down the road.

I'm not in favor of employers getting taken to the woodshed. A stong business environment is important. If we could get the local, state, and federal tax people off businesses backs, they could pay their employees more, the government would bring in more, and our communities would be more.