Would you republicans vote for a $12 minimum wage?

I meant to use the 1971 minimum, it was $1.60 for non farm workers and $1.30 for farm workers.

 

The GOP would not support a federal minimum wage hike.

 

In 1850, if I were alive then, no way in hell would I have been a democrat. Things change, in the early part of the century, KKK members were democrats. In the 60s, there were still more liberals in the GOP than conservatives, and in the DNC there were more blue dogs than liberals. We had a liberal president, LBJ, who reluctantly supported the Civil Rights Bill (he did it reluctantly because he knew that by supporting it, he would lose the south ) , which was largely a (liberals) Hubert Humphrey & Dirksen bill, but we know this to be true (the left / right ratios ) because more republicans voted for the civil rights bill than dems but it wouldn't have ever happened if it were not introduced by (liberal) Humphrey and Dirksen.

But these ratios of left / right in the parties of yesteryear do not hold true, today. Republicans today are so far to the right they are off the charts. If a right winger viewed the republican party's platform of 1956 today, they would accuse them of being communists.

And, here is another fact for you, in a letter to the NYTimes, which published it, Lincoln stated that if he could have saved the union without freeing the slaves, he would have done so, so freeing the slaves was NOT his motivation.

 

I find it odd that republicans support E - verify. The claim to be the party of 'small government', but support a policy that adds another layer of intrusion to the vast majority of people's lives who are citizens for an intrusive policy in search of a small minority who aren't.

Here are 10 reasons why it's a bad idea

https://www.aclu.org/issues/immigra...rights-and-detention/10-big-problems-e-verify

"Remain in mexico" is a bad idea because most people at the border are from central america, and they are fleeing persecution, and are not mexicans, and life on the mexican side of the border, the tent cities are far below American standards are unsafe and unsanitary, so it is a humanitarian issue.

https://justiceforimmigrants.org/wh...ntly-asked-questions-remain-in-mexico-policy/

So, another bad idea.

On H1 - B, I'll need to see the arguments pro and con, does the present policy cause American skilled workers a tough time finding employment? If it does, you might have a point. If the reverse is true, then you don't. I don't know, at this juncture. I'll need to see several studies done.

I do know that farms are struggling to get produce to market, and we need more workers there, not less, and Americans are not interested in picking cabbage and strawberries, etc.

I believe America needs more, not less, immigration, so no on that one.

 

Here's your choices in 1852.

Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_Pierce

vs

Whig
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winfield_Scott

 

wait, wutt?

Who is a Gorbachev lover?

Oh, and good old lying Tara, her story was so terrible, even Fox dropped her.

 

Eeeew

and

Eeeew!

 

Nope. There should be no federal minimum wage.

$12 is more than enough to cover the cost of living in some U.S. cities and not even 1/3rd enough in other U.S. cities to eke out of poverty existence.

Compare Huntsville, AL (one of the least expensive places to live) with San Francisco (one of the most expensive) and anyone with reasoning skills can see why there is no "one-size-fits-all" minimum wage, and why federal interference only mucks up things where economies are affordable.

In Huntsville, you can work a "median" job and earn the value of a "median" house in 3 years:




In San Fransisco, you can work a "median" job, but a "median" home is worth 10 years of salary:




There is zero reason for minimum wage in Huntsville to be the same as minimum wage in San Francisco. An increase will only harm Alabama's economy and do nothing to take pricing pressure off of California.

 

So in other words, you can't be compromised with. And in particular, you can't be compromised on issues that directly and indirectly put pressure to lower wage rates. To me, it doesn't make sense to do everything you can to crater wage rates in this country, than whine that the minimum wage is too low.

 

I dont understand minimum wages.

I have never been represented by collective bargaining, and I earned minimum wage for about 6months at the age of 16 before I started to get raises based on my value.

So, with this minimum wage, is there a minimum level of work? A minimum level of productivity? A minimum level of responsibilty and a good attitude.

Because, let's be honest here. Those people earning a minimum wage don't typically possess those traits that are valuable to the employer. If they did, they wouldn't be working minimum wage.

So for this $12 an hour, what is the employer getting? If it's the caliber of service we see form gast food, shelf stockers, etc now... then no they aren't worth $12 an hour.

But we all know the expectation is to bump them up to 12, 15, whatever, and don't expect any better service or better employees.

 

No but I ain't a pure republican. The cost of living is different everywhere so I would rather each state or locality determine a minimum wage. Otherwise, you are overburdening local businesses and destroying jobs.
The Federal government should focus on a UBI instead. I will never support any minimum wage on a federal level.

 

Click.

Ignore.

Not even worth a response.

When you are capable of posting without the flame bait, hyperbolic, extremist partisan hackers, let me know so I can remove you from ignore and attempt to have an intelligent discussion.

Until then, I have no time for children.

 

You want better service then treat people better.

 

Your expectation is that a wage must be liveable.

I disagree, but let's break that down.

Ok, at how many hours of labor per week at what productivity level. And WHERE is this livable wage based on? There are substantial differences in cost of living in various states and areas.

 

Maybe that wa true at some time somewhere in the past in certain towns. Wages, generally, are less about your ability or work ethic and more about the supply and demand of labor.
A good work ethic will determine if you get to keep your job or be part of that high turn around. It usually only adds a few cents to your pay, if anything.
We need a minimum pay so long as we have high unemployment and fail to enforce immigration. These things flood the labor market and reduce the pay levels being offered. Supply VS demand

 

Yeah, that's not how the real world works.

Nobody works like ****, and sits in a annual review and says "I want a raise, and I'll work harder if I get it".

It's time for people to put their big boy pants on.

 

We will get better service, but not in the way minimum wage workers want.

The Globalists are using a number of economic, social and health issues to "hurry up" the transition from humans to machines. The Great Reset will put hundreds of millions of people out of work globally.

Pushing up minimum wage as high as possible will only motivate the mega-corporations to invest in robots and AI, if they haven't already. Corporations aren't worried. The technology to replace low-skilled workers has already been developed and is being installed.

 

Absolutely not true.

Show me a go- getter with a hard work ethic and a good attitude and I guarantee they make more than their peers.

 

I can't see who you are responding to. Must be someone I put on "ignore" a while back. LOL

Very effective, the ignore button.

 

So, if I hire some guy to come build me a fence, my wage negotiations require that the fee cover living expenses for him and his family??

Here is how the real world works, and its applicable to employment.

If a guy can't support his family, he won't take the job. If nobody takes the job, I'm forced to pay the rate that makes it worth somebody's time. I.e. a living wage.

The problem here, and that of the minimum wage assumes that employees are victims. Like everything else in the lefts platform, government intervention is required to protect people's interests.

Some of you need to read the book "you incorporated".

 

In jobs that require skills, yes. It can make a difference in pay. That's because those markets are not flooded with labor. The company has to hire someone with a specific skill, so they can only hire from a small pool of people. This forces them to pay more if they want to get a employee and pay more, increase wages, to keep good employees.

Minimum wages are for jobs for people without any skills or abilities.

 

The easiest jobs are the easiest to be replaced.

The minimum wage is always "zero" for those who can't even compete at the low end.

Soon, it won't matter.

Robots. Because "Covid and social distancing". Yeah. Right. This is the Great Reset where corporate investors purchase the remaining resources of value in the world. Humans are not considered that "valuable" to those folks at the top.

 

Probably not. For a couple of reasons. FIRST, a NATIONAL wage ignores the vast differences across the our country $12/hr in Manhattan isn’t the same as $12/hr in Buffalo Chip Wyoming. Second, for all thw wailing and gnashing of teeth few workers (3-5%) actually earn the MW. Third repeated studies show minimum wage hikes are a mixed blessing at best; those that manage to hold on to the jobs, AND MAINING HOURS benefit but small businesses, which provide something like 2/3s of our jobs, run on tight margins and compensate for forced wage hikes by layoffs and reduced hours. Fourth MW hikes ripple through economy and force more hikes - which SOUNDS good but actually will likely push prices up accordingly.

There have been a large number of companies that have voluntarily raised wages and provided other benefits. IMHO, that’s the path we should take. Instead of top down government run economy we need to let the business people and entrepreneurs do their thing unimpeded as possible with government bureaucracy.

 

There has to be a minimum wage, a baseline, and I tend to agree that a $15 baseline is too high, but I think $11 is the right number, as Manchin as stated. I would favor different minimums in different states to vary according to cost of living in different regions. But, without a minimum, otherwise, corporations will exploit those is poor bargaining positions, like in China where 8 people sleep in bunk bed rooms for living quarters, and work 16 hours a day for $2 with one day off.

 

No, those are my positions. IN a bargaining situation, everything is up for negotiation.
So, it would be horsetrading, I want this, and I'll give you this in return, that sort of thing.

For example, on $15 an hour minimum I would go as low as $11, maybe $10, but no lower.

But, if that even with amendments, you wind up not voting for the bill anyway, then there is no point.