"The Pitchforks Are Coming… For Us Plutocrats"

[Indy_Guy_77]

And this isn't really a 'trade' type skill. That is for pulling cable so the people with knowledge can come in behind them and do the rest of the job. Unfortunately, you are correct, this is a lot of money in this area. The old frame of mind in Dubois county is paying people $10-13/hour slaving away in hot factories. These are the same wage levels being paid when I graduated high school over 20 years ago. These people, due to inflation, have taken an enormous paycut over the past couple of decades.

$15/hr in that area is akin to $20 where I live now (south side of Indy). And both are even better if you're allowed overtime. I WISH I could get a 40 hour work week... That'd be a lot of extra money. But, my employer has determined, in an effort to save a whole heck of a lot of money, that 37.5 hours a week is "full time". No over time unless you're in a few very specific job categories. If I work more than 7.5 hours in any given work day, I "flex" that time off by the end of the two week pay period. I can't even "bank" those extra hours to use at a much later date - without meeting specific circumstances and getting special permission.

But if your top guys really are earning $50/hr... You really can live like a king in that area. And still live QUITE well up here.

 

[jamil]

If you think China is a grand design, go there. Our love afair with green manufacturing policies has a lot to do with the fact we have visibility beyond a couple hundred yards. I grew up in a rural community with a strong manufacturing sector and remember the air quality growing up, it has dramatically improved. If this isn't something you care about, you can probably find like minded souls on the other side of the planet. Personally, I am quite fond of my children not growing up weezing or not being able to play outside due to industrial pollutants.

I never said $20/hour should be the benchmark. I said if your business model doesn't generate a satisfactory profit for you (the owners) while offering employment that doesn't contribute to the downfall of our economy, you have a flawed business model and/or product. Where the benchmark should be placed is still up for debate in my mind, but I am confident it wouldn't be in the $7/hour range leaving the taxpayers subsidizing these workers, and indirectly their employers. And that is EXACTLY what happens with Walmart every year. They produce $5 BILLION in profits, but are the largest contributor to social welfare in the united states. They could afford to pay their lower paid workers $10,000 a year more and still profit $3 Billion a year, but instead they have 'capitalist cheerleaders' such as yourself that allow them to contribute to the downfall of our economy. And the ultimate slap in the face for the workers of this nation are that the capitalist cheerleaders like yourself are the very first to criticize these people for being on the public tit. It's a remarkably ironic situation from my perspective.

Oh, I don't think China is a grand design at all. I'm only demonstrating the futility of this labor utopia you're wishing to force into being. That China is the manufacturing mecca is because they're willing to do it cheap and dirty and we aren't. Frankly, I'm quite fond of clean air. But you can't have everything. You can't manufacture everything here AND have affordable stuff AND have clean air AND pay everyone a minimum of $15/hour AND have American labor that is competitive with the rest of the world.

Yes. Walmart could pay their employees more. They SHOULD pay their employees more and they should treat them better. Companies that do that attract better, more loyal employees. I wish the Walton kids had more of their dad in them. But having the government enforce a minimum wage isn't going to create your utopia. And why can't you bring yourself to acknowledge that some industries can't exist under any viable business model paying a $15/hour minimum wage. So you're willing just not to have those industries?

Crikey. Some socialist douchebag writes a piece advocating a very arbitrary $15/hour minimum wage and every ****ing left wing moon beam socialist goes ape**** about THAT number, thinking that's THE number that will solve "income inequality".

 

[jamil]

He ain't your buddy, pal.

Oh jeez.


It's just political discussion on the internet. No need to concoct real enemies from your imagined ones.

 

[ATM]

No conflicts here, buddy.

He ain't your buddy, pal.

He ain't your pal, friend.

 

[Hawkeye]

...

A two way street works just fine without a third government lane erected between them.

...

YOur analogy is a bit off. The government has not erected a lane, but really a barrier or wall so that it is more difficult to move from teh lwer earner lane to the higher earner lane!

 

[chraland51]

Why do we even need to solve "income inequality?" Flipping burgers at Mickey D's was never intended to provide a wage that would support a family and it should not be required to do so. I did not go to school for 16 years and work my tail off getting an education so that I could have something that employers would be williing to pay for other than being able to stand in front of a grill for a shift. I know that type of work is tiresome and boring, but I could have done that in junior high school. We need leadership who will do the things necessary to allow the economy to grow on its own instead of printing money to artificially keep the economy from collapsing. Throwing paper at the problem may only last until the current guy in the White House leaves to sit back and laugh at all of the trouble that he has caused.

 

[jamil]

Why do we even need to solve "income inequality?" Flipping burgers at Mickey D's was never intended to provide a wage that would support a family and it should not be required to do so. I did not go to school for 16 years and work my tail off getting an education so that I could have something that employers would be williing to pay for other than being able to stand in front of a grill for a shift. I know that type of work is tiresome and boring, but I could have done that in junior high school. We need leadership who will do the things necessary to allow the economy to grow on its own instead of printing money to artificially keep the economy from collapsing. Throwing paper at the problem may only last until the current guy in the White House leaves to sit back and laugh at all of the trouble that he has caused.

To get more people who vote democratic to be pissed enough to go to the polls in large numbers. Same thing with the war on women.

 

[seedubs1]

I really liked this quote from the article:

" If workers have more money, businesses have more customers. Which makes middle-class consumers, not rich businesspeople like us, the true job creators. Which means a thriving middle class is the source of American prosperity, not a consequence of it. The middle class creates us rich people, not the other way around."

 

[Phil502]

Lets all get jobs picking up cigarette butts and demand a living wage so we don't need to strive to do better. Sounds fair.

 

[jamil]

I really liked this quote from the article:

" If workers have more money, businesses have more customers. Which makes middle-class consumers, not rich businesspeople like us, the true job creators. Which means a thriving middle class is the source of American prosperity, not a consequence of it. The middle class creates us rich people, not the other way around."

Eh, that's feelgood puff-n-stuff. A robust middle class makes for a lot of money to change hands. True. Middle-class consumers are not the true job creators. Could they create wealth without the entrepreneurs who take the risks to start businesses? A thriving middle class is both a source of American prosperity AND a consequence of it. People who find ways to get other people to buy their stuff make lots of money.

 

[seedubs1]

I agree. Everything is intertwined in the economy. I just thought he had a good logical thought process behind it.

But I don't 100% agree with entrepreneurs taking all of the risks. A lot of the big money out there is old money. A lot of the .01%ers are born into it. For sure, there are self made ones, but not all. And once you get to a certain point, you don't need to take risks anymore. Your money can essentially not help the economy in any way, you can take essentially no statistical risk, and your money can still compound massively.

Take Walmart for example. The Walton family took the risks initially to start Walmart. Now their family continues to inherit the main share of the company even after the founders have died. They took no risk, and drain our government and economy, while their money continues to compound hand over fist. All the while, they pay their cashier employees that rely on their wages as a living wage (I'm not talking about kids working there in highschool to buy some bubble gum) an avg. of $8.53. That employee makes so little that they have to then rely on food stamps and other government subsidies just to keep afloat. In turn, when you buy anything from Walmart, you're not just paying the low prices for their cheap goods, part of your taxes are going to the subsidies to pay their underpaid employees because they can't make ends meet. In the end, you get screwed, and the Waltons rake in tons of money. The Waltons should be paying their employees a living wage so as to not be a drain on our economy. A raised minimum wage could mean that the Waltons make $10 Billion instead of $25 Billion a year. The $15 Billion they don't get wouldn't have gone into the economy anyway. However, if it goes to the lower middle class working at Walmart, it surely will go into the economy. I mean, seriously...we're literally talking about a family making $10 Billion vs. $25 Billion. Is there even a real difference there??? Are the now owners really "better" than anyone else that works hard other than lucking into an inherited massively successful business? Just some things to think about.

Eh, that's feelgood puff-n-stuff. A robust middle class makes for a lot of money to change hands. True. Middle-class consumers are not the true job creators. Could they create wealth without the entrepreneurs who take the risks to start businesses? A thriving middle class is both a source of American prosperity AND a consequence of it. People who find ways to get other people to buy their stuff make lots of money.

 

[hornadylnl]

I agree. Everything is intertwined in the economy. I just thought he had a good logical thought process behind it.

But I don't 100% agree with entrepreneurs taking all of the risks. A lot of the big money out there is old money. A lot of the .01%ers are born into it. For sure, there are self made ones, but not all. And once you get to a certain point, you don't need to take risks anymore. Your money can essentially not help the economy in any way, you can take essentially no statistical risk, and your money can still compound massively.

Take Walmart for example. The Walton family took the risks initially to start Walmart. Now their family continues to inherit the main share of the company even after the founders have died. They took no risk, and drain our government and economy, while their money continues to compound hand over fist. All the while, they pay their cashier employees that rely on their wages as a living wage (I'm not talking about kids working there in highschool to buy some bubble gum) an avg. of $8.53. That employee makes so little that they have to then rely on food stamps and other government subsidies just to keep afloat. In turn, when you buy anything from Walmart, you're not just paying the low prices for their cheap goods, part of your taxes are going to the subsidies to pay their underpaid employees because they can't make ends meet. In the end, you get screwed, and the Waltons rake in tons of money. The Waltons should be paying their employees a living wage so as to not be a drain on our economy. A raised minimum wage could mean that the Waltons make $10 Billion instead of $25 Billion a year. The $15 Billion they don't get wouldn't have gone into the economy anyway. However, if it goes to the lower middle class working at Walmart, it surely will go into the economy. I mean, seriously...we're literally talking about a family making $10 Billion vs. $25 Billion. Is there even a real difference there??? Are the now owners really "better" than anyone else that works hard other than lucking into an inherited massively successful business? Just some things to think about.

My wife works at the local school. Who's going to foot her $5 an hour pay raise?

 

[seedubs1]

My wife works at the local school. Who's going to foot her $5 an hour pay raise?

Me. And I'll do it GLADLY. Teachers should make WAY MORE than they do. Educating is not a job that should be looked at as attracting low wage employees. People that teach should be highly regarded, smart, educated, and compensated accordingly. I think it's sickening that educators in the USA scrape by, and also that not all educators in the USA are not above an average IQ.

It's part of the reason the USA is going downhill in education compared to other countries. Other countries have good pay for educators, and they attract good quality teachers because of it. The teachers in the USA are little more than babysitters, and they are paid accordingly.

If the majority of the population is to get smarter, we need smart people educating the masses. In order to do that, you need to attract qualified educators with a decent wage.

 

[hornadylnl]

Me. And I'll do it GLADLY. Teachers should make WAY MORE than they do. Educating is not a job that should be looked at as attracting low wage employees. People that teach should be highly regarded, smart, educated, and compensated accordingly. I think it's sickening that educators in the USA scrape by, and also that not all educators in the USA are not above an average IQ.

It's part of the reason the USA is going downhill in education compared to other countries. Other countries have good pay for educators, and they attract good quality teachers because of it. The teachers in the USA are little more than babysitters, and they are paid accordingly.

If the majority of the population is to get smarter, we need smart people educating the masses. In order to do that, you need to attract qualified educators with a decent wage.

Know any teachers making $10 an hour? My wife works in the cafeteria.

 

[RockofStrength]

Me. And I'll do it GLADLY. Teachers should make WAY MORE than they do. Educating is not a job that should be looked at as attracting low wage employees. People that teach should be highly regarded, smart, educated, and compensated accordingly. I think it's sickening that educators in the USA scrape by, and also that not all educators in the USA are not highly above an average IQ.

It's part of the reason the USA is going downhill in education compared to other countries. Other countries have good pay for educators, and they attract good quality teachers because of it. The teachers in the USA are little more than babysitters, and they are paid accordingly.

If the majority of the population is to get smarter, we need smart people educating the masses. In order to do that, you need to attract qualified educators with a decent wage.

Or you could, you know, let people teach themselves and stop insisting that we need the grand educated elites to raise up the stupid dirt farmers.

 

[seedubs1]

Or you could, you know, let people teach themselves and stop insisting that we need the grand educated elites to raise up the stupid dirt farmers.

Yes, because a 5 year old can teach themself. And a 5 year old has the mental fortitude to decide that it's best if he or she gets a good education...

Being born into wealth shouldn't dictate your ability to receive a good education. Right now, it does.

If you're arguing that the poor minorities born in downtown Detroit have the same opportunities as some kid born in Carmel, IN.....Well, I think I've made my point. Everyone deserves a shot, and as it is now, the USA is losing ground to other countries in education.

If we don't change something, pretty soon, we'll all be dirt farmers in the USA. Other countries are beginning to outsmart us.

 

[ATOMonkey]

You can't make something from nothing, which is what raising wages attempts to do.

Just paying someone more money doesn't make society any wealthier.

The only way you make society wealthier is by turning useless stuff into useful stuff through labor.

Everything else is a shell game.

 

[seedubs1]

Correct.....to an extent. Right now the majority of the shells are going to a select few. The shells then sit in banks, the stock market, etc... they aren't doing any buying with the shells, and the economy is becoming stagnant.

You can't make something from nothing, which is what raising wages attempts to do.

Just paying someone more money doesn't make society any wealthier.

The only way you make society wealthier is by turning useless stuff into useful stuff through labor.

Everything else is a shell game.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Correct.....to an extent. Right now the majority of the shells are going to a select few. The shells then sit in banks, the stock market, etc... they aren't doing any buying with the shells, and the economy is becoming stagnant.

ummm.... what?

If you think money just sits in a bank then you are sadly mistaken. Money only "sits" in a bank and earns interest because the bank spent your say $10 on something that would make $15, then they give you a dime of the $5 that your money made. For instance, the bank may buy a piece of real estate for $100,000 and sell it to a developer or builder for $150,000.

Also, I'm not sure you know what a shell game is if you think the shells get handed out...

 

[RockofStrength]

Yes, because a 5 year old can teach themself. And a 5 year old has the mental fortitude to decide that it's best if he or she gets a good education...

Being born into wealth shouldn't dictate your ability to receive a good education. Right now, it does.

If you're arguing that the poor minorities born in downtown Detroit have the same opportunities as some kid born in Carmel, IN.....Well, I think I've made my point. Everyone deserves a shot, and as it is now, the USA is losing ground to other countries in education.

If we don't change something, pretty soon, we'll all be dirt farmers in the USA. Other countries are beginning to outsmart us.

Well typically a 5 year old has parents...

For the record, I was taught English by a man being paid precisely $0 who didn't graduate from high school or college. Managed to achieve College-level vocabulary and reading level by grade 6. I was taught Math by a woman also being paid $0 who works as a nurse and has a Bachelors, but no education degree, training, or certification. Managed to finish college level physics courses in high school despite that handicap. Also managed to scrape by in the top 20% of SAT scorers too, and was being invited to at least one Indiana college at age 16.

Again for the record, I am far, far from the smartest person I've met. I have met several friends at least who could run circles around me particularly in higher math. I just had willing teachers who instilled a drive to teach myself rather than passively being taught. The only thing separating people from a good education is the drive to seek it and the motivation to climb out of their own ignorance, not the lack of someone to lead them along.

I will admit however, that good schooling is largely reserved for the rich in their high-quality academies and whatnot. Thank heaven a good education can be had without good schooling.