Need Anti-Living Wage Talking Points

[chambley1]

I need anti-living wage talking points for our crusade against it here in the Peoples Republic of Arlington, Virginia. Thanks Freepers

[TomB]

I see you are getting a lot of useless responses

pot.

kettle.

black.

[Thinkin' Gal]

Maybe I did get through that thick skull, ..., nah, too much to hope for.

Gee thanks for the compliment! Wasn't me.

[balrog666]

Your advice needed. Or perhaps just a link to the last such thread. ;^)

[Age of Reason]

All we need do is stop importing millions of unskilled immigrants, and wages will rise of their own accord.

Then we can also all but end welfare, because there would be no more poor except for those too ill to work.

[kcar]

I'm thinking this line doesn't work too well in most parts of town...

[rolling_stone]

If the government wants to require a minimum wage for employees, then they should guarantee the employers a minimum profit. Makes about as much/little sense either way. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

[Aristophanes]

Some of you on this thread will be losing your high-paying jobs in the next few months as the economy continues to slide downhill. When you do, I hope that you enjoy your next job working for WalMart.

After a few months of working for minimum wage, you can come see me, a bankruptcy lawyer. Be sure to tell me all about what a crock you think a Living Wage is then.

Best wishes.

[Real Cynic No More]

The following has been posted here before, but I recently received it in an e-mail, so I'll post it again. It is an analogy that most anyone could understand:

Subject: Tax Cuts

Think about this! It is as good an explanation as it gets...

I was having lunch with one of my favorite clients last week and the conversation turned to the government's recent round of tax cuts.

"I'm opposed to those tax cuts," the retired college instructor declared, "because they benefit the rich. The rich get much more money back than ordinary taxpayers like you and me and that's not fair."

"But the rich pay more in the first place," I argued, "so it stands to reason that they'd get more money back."

I could tell that my friend was unimpressed by this meager argument. Even college instructors are a prisoner of the myth that the "rich" somehow get a free ride in America. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand.

Suppose that every day 10 men go to a restaurant for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If it was paid the way we pay our taxes, the first four men would pay nothing; the fifth would pay $1; the sixth would pay $3; the seventh $7; the eighth $12; the ninth $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

The 10 men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20. Now dinner for the 10 only costs $80."

The first four are unaffected. They still eat for free. Can you figure out how to divide up the $20 savings among the remaining six so that everyone gets his fair share? The men realize that $20 divided by 6 is $3.33, but if they subtract that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would end up being paid to eat their meal.

The restaurant owner suggested that it would be most fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same proportion as they had been paying in the first place, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so now in addition to the first four men paying nothing, the fifth man also pays nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh pays $5, the eighth pays $9, the ninth pays $12,leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52 instead of $59.

Outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out the $20," complained the sixth man, pointing to the tenth, "and he got $7!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got seven times more than me!" "That's true," shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $7 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor" The nine men surrounded the tenth man and beat him up.

The next night he didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They were $52 short!

And that, boys, girls and college instructors, is how America's tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table any more. There are lots of good restaurants in Switzerland and the Caribbean!

Abe Lincoln said; "you can't help the poor by tearing down the rich,"

[Chi-townChief]

My argument is always to agree with these "living wage" advocates and tell them that $10 per hour (or whatever they want) is peanuts - why don't they make a real stand and go for $50,000 annual minimum? Oddly enough, they never seem to answer that one.

[rolling_stone]

And if there were no low paying jobs because of a high living wage, then what? Is it better to work for a little than not work at all? I suggest you take a course in economics, supply and demand and then justify a living wage. It is bad enough the government gives earned income tax credits to those who earn little, but to expect employers to pay both a living wage and for the tax credits is a bit socialistic don't you think? By the way what is a living wage? Does a 16 year old need a living wage? Could a 16 year old get a job if the imposed wages were too high for the work output? If the minimum wage is raised to say $10 per hour how many jobs will be lost? Did you work your way through school at a low paying job? And if there was no job would you have completed school? How about the govt guaranteeing employers a "living profit" what is the difference?

[Aristophanes]

Vocational advice: master the following useful phrases -

"D'ya want fries with that?" and "Welcome to WalMart!"

Call me when the bank threatens to foreclose.

Cheers!

[Aristophanes]

Goes the other way, too though. What if the labor market were such that you could pay people to work for 1 cent per day. Would you do it? Would it be moral? Could you sleep at night?

How close to zero does it have to be before it becomes slavery?

[Denver Ditdat]

Just go to work for a bankruptcy lawyer. They're wonderfully benevolent, kindhearted, and generous. You'll get that fantastic living wage regardless of the services you perform for them, from paralegal tasks to scrubbing the toilet down the hall.

Should you ever live beyond your means and one day require their services, you'll find them perfectly affordable. After all, it wouldn't do to work for filthy lucre when the person employing you is at the ebb of his or her financial life.

An added bonus is that wonderful Muzak playing in the background while your paperwork is being filed:

I'd like to teach the world to sing, in perfect harmonyyyyy...

[Denver Ditdat]

What if the labor market were such that you could pay people to work for 1 cent per day. Would you do it? Would it be moral?

The government requires employers to pay employees a minimum of $5.15 an hour. Using the logic above, when do they then ever pay anyone more than that? Why not keep the payroll as skinny as possible?

[A_perfect_lady]

It's like asking a woman if she would have sex with me for $1 million dollars and then if she says "yes", ask how about $20.00? She then asks "Do you think I'm a prostitute"? I would say that we already determined that, but just need to negotiate the pay.

O.M.G.... you have no idea how many times I've told that joke to make the same point. I told it just today. Wow.

[Lee_Atwater]

It is evident that brain power isn't required to become a bankruptcy lawyer.

[Jeff Chandler]

Some people's work just isn't worth very much money. (How's that?)

[m1911]

LOL. Funny that someone who makes money from the misery of others is so caring, huh?

[rolling_stone]

Ah yes don't answer my questions, just make derogatory comments....then again maybe you were the one saying fries with that or welcome to Wal-Mart before you had a practice?

FYI about the only way I would have a bank threaten me with bankruptcy is if I had a business that was required to pay more in wages than it could afford. My personal debt I can control, should I have to resort to a low paying job(after loosing my business because of govt regulations of course), I could cut back my expenses, sell my house live in accomodations I can afford from my low salary. No job would more likely bancrupt me than a low paying job. It is one thing to have a cut in income another to have no income...

I cannnot control what the government tells me as an employer to pay in wages, nor cut the wages when the economic situation calls for cutbacks, only cut the number of employees. Again if the government mandates a minimum wage, why not a minimum profit to those who supply the jobs? Same principle, except those that take more risk investing time & money in a business providing jobs have no govt security to fall back on. If you are going to require a living wage for employees, surely employers deserve a living wage also? In case you don't know it, most businesses pay their owners out of profits, which may or may not equal the minimum wage....ah but a sole practicioner should know that..

[rolling_stone]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/785129/posts

Whoops what happened to those jobs?