Gallup Poll: 76% of Americans would vote to raise minimum wage to $9/hr

MelissaWV said:
What happens if I don't pay my workers at least minimum wage?
Click to expand...

You will be fined. If you refuse to pay, your company will be closed or you will be sued or arrested. If you resist any of these things, you will likely be shot with a firearm.
 
Keith and stuff said:
The minimum wage requirement is much more about force. If you don't pay it, you will be fined. If you don't pay the fine, you will be jailed or completely closed. If you resist the jail or closure, you will be tased or killed.
Click to expand...

Yep. Forget the economic arguments for a moment. People should think about what they value. People think they are somehow a beneficiary of minimum wage without realizing the process that devalues freedom.

Reminds me of that phrase (and I need to look up who said it): A government big enough to give you everything you want--is big enough to take everything you have.
 
NorthCarolinaLiberty said:
Yep. Forget the economic arguments for a moment. People should think about what they value. People think they are somehow a beneficiary of minimum wage without realizing the process that devalues freedom.

Reminds me of that phrase (and I need to look up who said it): A government big enough to give you everything you want--is big enough to take everything you have.
Click to expand...

I don't think that there are too many people here that don't recognize that most things are all Fd up.

Want the Fed Gov to stop taking our money and building drones and spying.

The min wage law is one of the better ones.

We're mixing up arguments.

Argument 1) - what's the ideal situation?

Argument 2) - what should be done, now, because we're so very very far from an ideal situation?

Argument 1) - most would agree - free market all the way.
Argument 2) - because the government takes our money and spends it on spies and drones, we don't have the money to spend it at the store. There is no free market, and therefore the magic invisible hand isn't there. Because it's all f'd up, we need laws to keep people from starving. Too many people use Argument 1, when we're in situation 2.
 
MelissaWV said:
Well I guess it's not force if I have so many choices! :D
Click to expand...

FORCED - You MUST do something.

I think you're thinking about PROHIBITED.
Where PROHIBITED - You CAN'T do something.

They both have to do with things, and doing them, so I can understand the confusion.

And if you like arguing, and you don't really care that much about the specific meanings of words, I can see how the 2 concepts are related.

But saying you CAN'T do something is not at all the same as saying you MUST do something.

With the Minimum Wage law, the Gov't isn't saying at all that you MUST do something.

With Obamacare, the Gov't is saying you MUST do something.

Since the Gov't saying that you MUST do something is much much worse than the Gov't saying you CAN'T do something, I think it's useful to understand the distinctions between the 2 terms.
 
Last edited:
parocks said:
FORCED - You MUST do something.

I think you're thinking about PROHIBITED.
Where PROHIBITED - You CAN'T do something.

They both have to do with things, and doing them, so I can understand the confusion.

And if you like arguing, and you don't really care that much about the specific meanings of words, I can see how the 2 concepts are related.

But saying you CAN'T do something is not at all the same as saying you MUST do something.

With the Minimum Wage law, the Gov't isn't saying at all that you MUST do something.

With Obamacare, the Gov't is saying you MUST do something.

Since the Gov't saying that you MUST do something is much much worse than the Gov't saying you CAN'T do something, I think it's useful to understand the distinctions between the 2 terms.
Click to expand...

When you can win the argument retreat to....semantics.
 
parocks said:
FORCED - You MUST do something.

I think you're thinking about PROHIBITED.
Where PROHIBITED - You CAN'T do something.

They both have to do with things, and doing them, so I can understand the confusion.

And if you like arguing, and you don't really care that much about the specific meanings of words, I can see how the 2 concepts are related.

But saying you CAN'T do something is not at all the same as saying you MUST do something.

With the Minimum Wage law, the Gov't isn't saying at all that you MUST do something.

With Obamacare, the Gov't is saying you MUST do something.

Since the Gov't saying that you MUST do something is much much worse than the Gov't saying you CAN'T do something, I think it's useful to understand the distinctions between the 2 terms.
Click to expand...
So saying, "You must pay your workers 9$ an hour," is not saying you must do something?
 
gwax23 said:
When you can win the argument retreat to....semantics.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to underline the key distinction between Obamacare, where people are actually forced to buy insurance,
and pretty much every law. Yes, we know that laws are restrictions on freedom. But Obamacare is a special
kind of law.

It's a real distinction. A notable distinction. We don't want to blur the edges between being forced to do something, and forced not to do something.
We really don't. Being forced to do something is much worse than being forced not to do something. It's important to keep that distinction clear.
 
bolil said:
So saying, "You must pay your workers 9$ an hour," is not saying you must do something?
Click to expand...

You don't have to have workers. You CAN'T pay workers less than $9. You could pay your workers, if you choose to have workers, $9 or $19. But you don't have to have workers. I don't have workers.
 
I think parocks has a point. McDonald's should agree with him and fire 5-10 people at every store. It should then get 5-10 interns that sleep 4 to a room at a house near the place. In addition to free housing and utilities, they should be given $400 a month in McD's bucks to spend at the rest. If they turn out to be good, they should be hired as contract workers with no benefits and the equivalent of pay equaling $9 an hour. At anytime, they would be subject to fire. Is that your ideal plan for fast food parocks? I think the current plan where workers get paid on average, the equivalent of what, $11 an hour in pay and benefits is better but maybe that's too much money? Or the fast food workers at Costco that average what, $20 an hour in pay and benefits?
 
Keith and stuff said:
I think parocks has a point. McDonald's should agree with him and fire 5-10 people at every store. It should then get 5-10 interns that sleep 4 to a room at a house near the place. In addition to free housing and utilities, they should be given $400 a month in McD's bucks to spend at the rest. If they turn out to be good, they should be hired as contract workers with no benefits and the equivalent of pay equaling $9 an hour. At anytime, they would be subject to fire. Is that your ideal plan for fast food parocks? I think the current plan where workers get paid on average, the equivalent of what, $11 an hour in pay and benefits is better but maybe that's too much money? Or the fast food workers at Costco that average what, $20 an hour in pay and benefits?
Click to expand...

KFC worker - $7.55 an hour. Anyway, my "plan" is just keep it the same as always since 1938. Mininum wage, with periodic raises for inflation. 9$ seems fine to me.
 
parocks said:
You don't have to have workers. You CAN'T pay workers less than $9. You could pay your workers, if you choose to have workers, $9 or $19. But you don't have to have workers. I don't have workers.
Click to expand...

You don't have to have insurance. You can pay the fine.
 
parocks said:
KFC worker - $7.55 an hour. Anyway, my "plan" is just keep it the same as always since 1938. Mininum wage, with periodic raises for inflation. 9$ seems fine to me.
Click to expand...
How about no minimum wage, and a by and large elimination of inflation through the abolishing of the Fed and an implementation of a 100% reserve bank and a commodity backed currency?

Even using the flawed CPI calculations, the minimum wage would have to be some $17.50 to be comparable to 1975. If you were to try to enforce that, you would demolish the economy. (not to mention tyrannize people)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jmdrake
Poll : Americans becoming less tolerant of same gender relations (Down to 64% from 71%)
Replies
8
Views
436
unknown
unknown
PAF
How Donald Trump and Kamala Harris want to change your taxes
Replies
1
Views
692
unknown
unknown
unknown
70% of Americans say no to tranny athletes.
Replies
5
Views
366
unknown
unknown
Anti Federalist
Joe Biden Tells Democrats to Treat Future White Minority ‘with Respect’
Replies
6
Views
626
unknown
unknown
Occam's Banana
It’s Good to Be Skeptical of Elections
Replies
4
Views
3K
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Back
Top