Minimum wage. Should it be $15?

[Nismo]

 

Haaaa ! Must be a glitch in the system. I don't even need 5,000 posts to access the BS section !! LOL

 

 

 

Instead of the thread crapping, why don’t you help out Mustang Guy’s son with the survey in the first post?

 

https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/160146-minimum-wage-should-it-be-15/#entry1940862

 

 

Actually, as I think about this, why do you feel the need to post this type of condescending remark criticizing and devaluing those of us attempting to delve into this topic and thread crap?  History on this forum seems to show that posts of this nature only tends to serve to attract other thread crappers.  Why are you trying to derail this thread?  Are you trying to get it locked?

 

You must have some type of corollary experience since you seem to have gotten very defensive in your ATMOS threads in what you seem to have construed as thread crapping.  Did they ask you if you had some type of financial interest related to sales surrounding ATMOS? 

 

Also, please note that I have not posted in your ATMOS thread since I do not have anything constructive to add and note that I have not thread crapped in those threads.

 

If you do not want to participate in the discussion, there are plenty of other threads that could interest you; however, please move on from this one if you do not want to participate in an intelligent manner.

 

LOL. Didn't realize that if I (or anyone) offered their own personal perspective which may be different from the masses it would be considered thread crapping.  Not sure one could even notice thread crapping with the BS so deep in this thread. But thanks for informing me of how I can & how I cannot participate with a particular thread. But hey, the desire to control (my) speech must fall right in line with the desire to control wealth distribution, everyone gets a trophy just "because" & marginalize anyone who does not agree with your views. I like having my own views & the ability to express them... without crying victim status. Post in any Atmos discussion all you want, & if my experience happens to be different than yours I'll not hesitate to offer a counter viewpoint. Never realized that was considered defensive. But, yeah... I do laugh a bit, whenever someone lives in their own fantasy world & fabricates a wonderful story (absent any fact with no basis in reality) that I work for Atmos.Welcome to bizzaro world. 

[Jeff Matthews]

Okay, you 2 love birds.  Get a motel room.

[Paducah Home Theater]

Thanks for that link.  Honestly, it raises questions, but I don't care to go researching into them.

 

For example, they don't give much attention to downward mobility.  Rich dads, raising sons to become bums?  This, indeed, happens.  It could be an economical thing, exacerbated by cultural differences.  For example, in The Millionaire Next Door, the data showed that 1st generation immigrants from Russia tended to be the most likely ethnic group in the US to become millionaires.  The data also showed that this propensity dropped very quickly, and by the 3rd generation, there was no statistical difference.  In any event, since the data can reflect both upward and downward mobility, the conclusion that there is more upward mobility, without corresponding downward mobility, can be in error.  I mean, you can't seriously believe that the only way they are going is disproportionately up, up and up, can you?  I suppose if that was the case, they'd have long passed us up in GDP decades ago.

 

Does the study only include sons who remained in their native countries?  We know that the US takes in a large number of immigrants who do very well here.  I've heard comments (I know, anecdotal) from Brits and other Europeans who came here to make a living because, in their words, "It's a rip-off system over there.  There isn't any opportunity."  Maybe their perceptions of their home-lands was in error, but as we have admitted in other threads, perception is very, very important.  If I believe I have opportunity here, isn't that very important?  Isn't that what matters?   Ignorance can definitely be bliss, and who the heck are you to want to pop my bubble?  It just might be that perception of mobility is what drives mobility, and in that case, immigrants do better than burned-out natives who've been told to "ditch the stupid idea of having a work ethic in this country" (sarcasm).

 

I'm sure other questions could be asked, but you get the gist.

My family has a history similar to this post. My great grandfather was an accountant over in England but not exactly doing super well. Saved up enough money to get a boat ride over for his honeymoon. Apparently this was the land of opportunity because he never went back. To be an accountant over in England you had to be pretty smart, dealing with pounds and shillings at the minimum. Our system was super easy comparatively, plus there was no glass ceiling, you could be as successful as you wanted. He quickly climbed the ladder and became a top dog in the IRS,and they got very rich.

Your post also makes me wonder, what makes somebody hungry for success? Without that hunger, you can never be anybody. Successful parents can teach a work ethic to their kids but how do they teach them to be hungry for success like the immigrants would have? Just makes me think we are spoiled as a society.

I mean, one kid living in the ghetto could be nothing, but on the flip side, there's Dr. Ben Carson. One kid could be part of a dynasty and enjoy great success, yet one kid with similar family ties ends up being a nobody. I don't understand it.

Edited November 9, 2015 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[Fjd]

 

 

Haaaa ! Must be a glitch in the system. I don't even need 5,000 posts to access the BS section !! LOL

 

 

 

Instead of the thread crapping, why don’t you help out Mustang Guy’s son with the survey in the first post?

 

https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/160146-minimum-wage-should-it-be-15/#entry1940862

 

 

Actually, as I think about this, why do you feel the need to post this type of condescending remark criticizing and devaluing those of us attempting to delve into this topic and thread crap?  History on this forum seems to show that posts of this nature only tends to serve to attract other thread crappers.  Why are you trying to derail this thread?  Are you trying to get it locked?

 

You must have some type of corollary experience since you seem to have gotten very defensive in your ATMOS threads in what you seem to have construed as thread crapping.  Did they ask you if you had some type of financial interest related to sales surrounding ATMOS? 

 

Also, please note that I have not posted in your ATMOS thread since I do not have anything constructive to add and note that I have not thread crapped in those threads.

 

If you do not want to participate in the discussion, there are plenty of other threads that could interest you; however, please move on from this one if you do not want to participate in an intelligent manner.

 

LOL. Didn't realize that if I (or anyone) offered their own personal perspective which may be different from the masses it would be considered thread crapping.  Not sure one could even notice thread crapping with the BS so deep in this thread. But thanks for informing me of how I can & how I cannot participate with a particular thread. But hey, the desire to control (my) speech must fall right in line with the desire to control wealth distribution, everyone gets a trophy just "because" & marginalize anyone who does not agree with your views. I like having my own views & the ability to express them... without crying victim status. Post in any Atmos discussion all you want, & if my experience happens to be different than yours I'll not hesitate to offer a counter viewpoint. Never realized that was considered defensive. But, yeah... I do laugh a bit, whenever someone lives in their own fantasy world & fabricates a wonderful story (absent any fact with no basis in reality) that I work for Atmos.Welcome to bizzaro world. 

 

 

 

Excerpt from Klipsch terms of service.

 

Be Courteous!

Don't attack others. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Challenge others' points of view and opinions, but do so respectfully and thoughtfully ... without insult and personal attack.

 

https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules

 

 

I do not see where you provided personal perspective related to wages or any of the detail provided in this thread.  Please note that I only requested that you do not attack our character in this thread and not insult by implying that we are full of BS; and I never stated that you could not present your views on the wages or any other topic, regardless of whether your experience is driven by anecdotal experience or empirical data.  I do not believe that disagreement is a form of disrespect and welcome diversity and difference of opinion; however, I tend to disagree with discussion that can be construed as condescending language when in disagreement.

Edited November 9, 2015 by Fjd

[Jeff Matthews]

Just makes me think we are spoiled as a society.

 

Yep!  The wild frontier is long gone from the hearts and souls of the living dead. 

Edited November 9, 2015 by Jeff Matthews

[prerich]

 

Thanks for that link.  Honestly, it raises questions, but I don't care to go researching into them.

 

For example, they don't give much attention to downward mobility.  Rich dads, raising sons to become bums?  This, indeed, happens.  It could be an economical thing, exacerbated by cultural differences.  For example, in The Millionaire Next Door, the data showed that 1st generation immigrants from Russia tended to be the most likely ethnic group in the US to become millionaires.  The data also showed that this propensity dropped very quickly, and by the 3rd generation, there was no statistical difference.  In any event, since the data can reflect both upward and downward mobility, the conclusion that there is more upward mobility, without corresponding downward mobility, can be in error.  I mean, you can't seriously believe that the only way they are going is disproportionately up, up and up, can you?  I suppose if that was the case, they'd have long passed us up in GDP decades ago.

 

Does the study only include sons who remained in their native countries?  We know that the US takes in a large number of immigrants who do very well here.  I've heard comments (I know, anecdotal) from Brits and other Europeans who came here to make a living because, in their words, "It's a rip-off system over there.  There isn't any opportunity."  Maybe their perceptions of their home-lands was in error, but as we have admitted in other threads, perception is very, very important.  If I believe I have opportunity here, isn't that very important?  Isn't that what matters?   Ignorance can definitely be bliss, and who the heck are you to want to pop my bubble?  It just might be that perception of mobility is what drives mobility, and in that case, immigrants do better than burned-out natives who've been told to "ditch the stupid idea of having a work ethic in this country" (sarcasm).

 

I'm sure other questions could be asked, but you get the gist.

My family has a history similar to this post. My great grandfather was an accountant over in England but not exactly doing super well. Saved up enough money to get a boat ride over for his honeymoon. Apparently this was the land of opportunity because he never went back. To be an accountant over in England you had to be pretty smart, dealing with pounds and shillings at the minimum. Our system was super easy comparatively, plus there was no glass ceiling, you could be as successful as you wanted. He quickly climbed the ladder and became a top dog in the IRS,and they got very rich.

Your post also makes me wonder, what makes somebody hungry for success? Without that hunger, you can never be anybody. Successful parents can teach a work ethic to their kids but how do they teach them to be hungry for success like the immigrants would have? Just makes me think we are spoiled as a society.

I mean, one kid living in the ghetto could be nothing, but on the flip side, there's Dr. Ben Carson. One kid could be part of a dynasty and enjoy great success, yet one kid with similar family ties ends up being a nobody. I don't understand it.

 

Carson didn't come from the ghetto....no one during his fathers time was in the "ghetto" working at the Cadillac plant.  It was a unionized job that paid even more than Chrysler Hamtramck!!!! During the 70's My father was doing pretty well there (topped out at $77k yearly in 75).  An illness and the loss of his ability to work - thrust us into poverty and the deep south.  Dr. Carson's family did very well and were middle class to upper middle class.  

 

I see that there was a divorce - but the area that his mother lived in was still very affluent. They lived in the south-west side of Detroit.  Now if they were to say that they lived on Mack Ave, or Joy Rd, Brewsters, Tireman, or Dexter....they yes that would be poverty....but that's not the SW side either. 

 

Carson has his own view of what poverty is....and in may peoples minds - that may be poverty...until you go to the east side!!!! I wonder is that why they are questioning his background now. I'm originally from the "D" ol' school and I know it very well!!! Carson is about my sisters age.  

Edited November 9, 2015 by prerich

[prerich]

I'm really laughing now!!!! In the 70's....that area was more "bourgeoisie" than Rosedale Park (were my family lived)!!!!! He was right next to Dearborn!!!! I think his ideal of what poor is might be warped - like the difference between Donald Trump broke and MC Hammer broke!!! LOL   

[Paducah Home Theater]

Carson didn't come from the ghetto....no one during his fathers time was in the "ghetto" working at the Cadillac plant.  It was a unionized job that paid even more than Chrysler Hamtramck!!!! During the 70's My father was doing pretty well there (topped out at $77k yearly in 75).  An illness and the loss of his ability to work - thrust us into poverty and the deep south.  Dr. Carson's family did very well and were middle class to upper middle class.  

 

I see that there was a divorce - but the area that his mother lived in was still very affluent. They lived in the south-west side of Detroit.  Now if they were to say that they lived on Mack Ave, or Joy Rd, Brewsters, Tireman, or Dexter....they yes that would be poverty....but that's not the SW side either. 

 

Carson has his own view of what poverty is....and in may peoples minds - that may be poverty...until you go to the east side!!!! I wonder is that why they are questioning his background now. I'm originally from the "D" ol' school and I know it very well!!! Carson is about my sisters age.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/07/ben-carson-profile-republican-election

Carson's parents divorced when he was 8. At that point his sing mom worked 2 or 3 low paying jobs while on food stamps and other welfare programs. I doubt that making $77,000 in 1975 would have qualified them for such support.

Edited November 9, 2015 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[Jim Naseum]

 

Mr. Jeff,

I found this study of mobility, which is similar to what I referenced about the low mobility in the US.

quote

The relationship between father-son earnings is tighter in the United States than in most peer OECD countries, meaning U.S. mobility is among the lowest of major industrialized economies. The relatively low correlations between father-son earnings in Scandinavian countries provide a stark contradiction to the conventional wisdom. An elasticity of 0.47 found in the United States offers much less likelihood of moving up than an elasticity of 0.18 or less, as characterizes Finland, Norway, and Denmark.

Source:http://www.epi.org/publication/usa-lags-peer-countries-mobility/

Maybe what's most interesting is the gap between what people believe is the mobility and what it actually is. The large gap means that heavy propaganda is at work.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

 

Thanks for that link.  Honestly, it raises questions, but I don't care to go researching into them.

 

For example, they don't give much attention to downward mobility.  Rich dads, raising sons to become bums?  This, indeed, happens.  It could be an economical thing, exacerbated by cultural differences.  For example, in The Millionaire Next Door, the data showed that 1st generation immigrants from Russia tended to be the most likely ethnic group in the US to become millionaires.  The data also showed that this propensity dropped very quickly, and by the 3rd generation, there was no statistical difference.  In any event, since the data can reflect both upward and downward mobility, the conclusion that there is more upward mobility, without corresponding downward mobility, can be in error.  I mean, you can't seriously believe that the only way they are going is disproportionately up, up and up, can you?  I suppose if that was the case, they'd have long passed us up in GDP decades ago.

 

Does the study only include sons who remained in their native countries?  We know that the US takes in a large number of immigrants who do very well here.  I've heard comments (I know, anecdotal) from Brits and other Europeans who came here to make a living because, in their words, "It's a rip-off system over there.  There isn't any opportunity."  Maybe their perceptions of their home-lands was in error, but as we have admitted in other threads, perception is very, very important.  If I believe I have opportunity here, isn't that very important?  Isn't that what matters?   Ignorance can definitely be bliss, and who the heck are you to want to pop my bubble?  It just might be that perception of mobility is what drives mobility, and in that case, immigrants do better than burned-out natives who've been told to "ditch the stupid idea of having a work ethic in this country" (sarcasm).

 

I'm sure other questions could be asked, but you get the gist.

 

 

Agree. it begs many more questions, and I'd be the last person to declare it has a stand alone meaning. It's a piece of data, a part of a larger story that has economic, social, political, and psychological components. But, it's also not worthless. 

 

We have a complex system machinery of the economy) here with hundreds of levers to pull and push. The aspect of this I like to highlight is that these levers are pushed and pulled by motivated interest groups, not random. We didn't accidentally end up with this economy, we went into the machine room and turned all the knobs and levers to suit various interests. "Minimum wage" is nothing more than a knob in the control room. It has a certain set of effects on the rest of the machine. The motivation to turn that knob UP comes from one of many interest groups. Most of who are trying to turn it down. Congress in the analogy is the Control Room. Changes to the knobs and levers are done by Congressional Law and by Rulemaking which results from Law. So, we can see easily that those with the most influence in Congress will have the greatest ability or access to the knobs they want to turn. 

 

Tax rates, capital gains, interest rates at the Central Bank, unemployment benefits, Social Security indexing, Medicare payments, Medicaid grants, Minimum Wage, corporate tax rates, loopholes, grants to states, and of course general spending, are just a few of the knobs available to be turned by WHOMEVER HAS THE INFLUENCE. 

 

Since INFLUENCE is the key to how these controls are set, we can conclude a few things about all the settings. 1) They are not accidental or arbitrary. 2) They are not based on any Economic Law,  natural law, social norm, psychological defect. 3) There is no right or wrong setting, only consequences of any setting. 4) The weakest set of influences will get the least favorable settings.

 

With that in mind, when I review many opinions about the Minimum Wage knob, I see many fall into those four fallacies. Especially the idea that there is some "social failure, or moral shortcoming in the people" causing a cry to raise minimum wage. I wonder of it also hold that there is a similar social or moral shortcoming in say, bankers, who are forever trying to manipulate the knobs to favor their ilk? 

 

Isn't it just a tug of war by interest groups? If one group is seeking to turn it down for their benefit, doesn't the other group have the same righteous purpose to try an turn it up, without being regarded as "morally defective?" 

 

So where am I going here? A case for democracy. The more democratic a system is, the more equity there will be in the settings of all these knobs. As democracy goes down, so goes the ability to tug back and get settings that work for your interest group. To be more plain about my position, we are losing democracy to corruption. When 90,000,000 working people lose every battle to 10,000 plutocrats, you know it is a system design problem, or corruption of the system. If the democracy was rich and deep, the Minimum Wage would prospectively be $20/hr., all things being equal today. If it were non-existent, there would be a $0/hr. minimum wage. Again, how do 90,000,000 lose against the 10,000 in the society? 

[Paducah Home Theater]

I'm really laughing now!!!! In the 70's....that area was more "bourgeoisie" than Rosedale Park (were my family lived)!!!!! He was right next to Dearborn!!!! I think his ideal of what poor is might be warped - like the difference between Donald Trump broke and MC Hammer broke!!! LOL

Apparently not quite the ghetto, but, bourgeoisie? This was his house.  He wrote in his book that he literally attempted to kill a friend over what music he was listening to.  Sounds like they were living it up in a respectable suburb, no?  At least at one point they were in public housing as far as I could tell.  This was probably the best home he had after his parents divorced.  

 

Edited November 9, 2015 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[Jim Naseum]

Candidate and party politics are not allowed to be discussed. Can we leave that alone, please? Just asking.

[Paducah Home Theater]

Candidate and party politics are not allowed to be discussed. Can we leave that alone, please? Just asking.

 

This has nothing to do with politics, he's a highly successful brain surgeon who seems to have grown up pretty poor for at least half of his childhood.  We can talk about Ursula Burns if it makes anybody feel better.  

Edited November 9, 2015 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[oldtimer]

Jeff, and any others who may be interested, here is one list of top countries ranked by economic data, but also with survey information thrown into the mix.  We have been surpassed by others in GPD per capita.  Depending on which group does the measuring I have seen the US ranked as high as third and as low as in the teens which is a pretty wide disparity.  The system used for the list rankings hit on a lot of your points and are quite interesting.  The European countries which are ranked higher are not what most of us consider when we think of Europe for example. Without further adieu:

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/the-26-healthiest-happiest-richest-and-most-crime-free-countries-in-the-world/ss-CC5ZUf

[prerich]

 

Carson didn't come from the ghetto....no one during his fathers time was in the "ghetto" working at the Cadillac plant.  It was a unionized job that paid even more than Chrysler Hamtramck!!!! During the 70's My father was doing pretty well there (topped out at $77k yearly in 75).  An illness and the loss of his ability to work - thrust us into poverty and the deep south.  Dr. Carson's family did very well and were middle class to upper middle class.  

 

I see that there was a divorce - but the area that his mother lived in was still very affluent. They lived in the south-west side of Detroit.  Now if they were to say that they lived on Mack Ave, or Joy Rd, Brewsters, Tireman, or Dexter....they yes that would be poverty....but that's not the SW side either. 

 

Carson has his own view of what poverty is....and in may peoples minds - that may be poverty...until you go to the east side!!!! I wonder is that why they are questioning his background now. I'm originally from the "D" ol' school and I know it very well!!! Carson is about my sisters age.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/07/ben-carson-profile-republican-election

Carson's parents divorced when he was 8. At that point his sing mom worked 2 or 3 low paying jobs while on food stamps and other welfare programs. I doubt that making $77,000 in 1975 would have qualified them for such support.

 

You don't know Michigan do you.....

 

She was working 2 to 3 "low paying" jobs....Lets do the math here.  Michigan just recently became a right to work state, before then, almost all jobs were unionized. Everything had a union.  You do not maintain a home in Allen Park on welfare (unless you're getting over - we wondered how a kid I knew in elementary school's mother could afford a brand new custom red and white caddilac - sunroof, tire in the back, everything, and they were on free lunch and welfare).  Carson's not telling everything. - I don't know the whole truth, but the area - the time, and the money - doesn't add up. 

[Arrow#422]

Minimum wage. Should it be $15?

No, not because I believe we shouldn't be helping our neighbor, but rather because of the mechanics involved with implementation.

Heavy hands cannot legislated morality.  Fortunately, I've had the opportunity to work for business owners that were willing to share in their successes.

I've also worked in other climates where owners only saw wage growth as a detriment to their personal bottom line agenda.  Needless to say, those tenures were short lived.  $15?  Debatable forever with no clear winner.  Economies are only able to naturally support a finite number of people at a certain living standard without necessitating a shared financial burden in providing assistance measures (regardless of the method used) to the "have nots". With that being said, would overall economic welfare be better off with a total global population closer to 5B…..quite possibly so.

[fuzzydog]

So has anyone's mind been changed as a result of reading the various points in this thread?  I doubt it...

 

I believe that there is a correct answer to the OP's question, but people these days seem so entrenched in their own political perspective that they're unwilling to change their opinion when presented with compelling arguments. 

[Paducah Home Theater]

You don't know Michigan do you.....

 

She was working 2 to 3 "low paying" jobs....Lets do the math here.  Michigan just recently became a right to work state, before then, almost all jobs were unionized. Everything had a union.  You do not maintain a home in Allen Park on welfare (unless you're getting over - we wondered how a kid I knew in elementary school's mother could afford a brand new custom red and white caddilac - sunroof, tire in the back, everything, and they were on free lunch and welfare).  Carson's not telling everything. - I don't know the whole truth, but the area - the time, and the money - doesn't add up.

His description of her jobs is that she worked as "a domestic". That likely means she was a housekeeper, babysitter, things like that, random jobs inside other people's houses. I guess I didn't realize that Detroit was so progressive that a single black mother could get not just one but three good paying union jobs at the same time, in 1959, in this line of work.

Edited November 9, 2015 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[Jim Naseum]

Hi Mr. Arrow,

 

If not $15, what would you think is the right minimum wage?

[Jim Naseum]

Jeff, and any others who may be interested, here is one list of top countries ranked by economic data, but also with survey information thrown into the mix.  We have been surpassed by others in GPD per capita.  Depending on which group does the measuring I have seen the US ranked as high as third and as low as in the teens which is a pretty wide disparity.  The system used for the list rankings hit on a lot of your points and are quite interesting.  The European countries which are ranked higher are not what most of us consider when we think of Europe for example. Without further adieu:

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/the-26-healthiest-happiest-richest-and-most-crime-free-countries-in-the-world/ss-CC5ZUf

 

The surveys have been running along these tracks for maybe 20 years now. A few changes here and there. I think that's why the ideas causing these results are important to understand. They aren't just "European ideas", they include Asia as well. Ideas need no political or ethnic confirmation. If they are good, they are good. I think that entire "We Ain't Europe" argument derails a lot of good discussion about the ideas. 

 

Switzerland is putting a guaranteed minimum income referendum on the ballet in 2016. There is a lot of economists who think this is a good idea, which may solve a lot of problems. 

[Paducah Home Theater]

This debate goes far beyond just pay though. A big issue right now is the whole 32 hour work week thing. Employers don't have to pay benefits below this amount so quite a bit of effort goes into monitoring this, especially for ObamaCare. I know this because I wrote a timekeeping software system and I'm supposed to modify it for this very reason. The difference between 31.5 and 32.5 hours a week is huge. So, what happens is that people get cut off before they hit 32 hours and end up working two part time jobs and still don't have any benefits, so they still lean on the government.

My question is, why are we not hearing people protest about this? To me, those benefits are worth way more than a $7 an hour raise. That's less than 12 grand a year. My health insurance alone costs twice that. This practice seems way more questionable to me, especially in terms of getting off of government dependency, yet nobody talks about it.

If you really want people off of public assistance, the most effective thing to do would be to get rid of the 32 hour barrier, which would let the people who need it get more hours in as well as receive benefits.

Edited November 9, 2015 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters