- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 638
- Reaction score
- 122
- Points
- 43
That was the average for full time employees, not the minimum.
Hillary for President!
- Thread starter Spike
- Start date
That was the average for full time employees, not the minimum.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 638
- Reaction score
- 122
- Points
- 43
So consider that minimum wage has not kept up with inflation so $5.00 then was more than $7.25 is now.
There's no labor shortage. Look at how many people have stopped looking for work that aren't in the unemployment number. Look how many people are now working part time because of Odummacare. People need to take the jobs that are available and the company's will have to make them full time and deal with Odummacare. That will cause prices to go up and possibly cause another recession but that's for another thread. The only shortage there might be will be in select areas where the skills needed just aren't there but there will be plenty of people to take the jobs, if trained to do the job.
IDK all Im saying is that I managed. But within a year I was making 35K because I promoted into higher responsibility positions and ended up being a corporate office employee. The opportunities are there. What you do with them is up to you. If you arent capable of doing anything other than pulling merchandise out of a box and putting it on a shelf, why should you make $15/hr? Thats bullshit.
I took work at Walmart when I moved to Fort Collins, CO back in 97 I think. Coming from an O&G background, there wasnt any jobs there for me. So while I looked for admin/clerical work, I needed an immediate income. So I went to Walmart and applied. I had bills to pay. The electric company doesnt discriminate based on where your green comes from.
I took work at Walmart when I moved to Fort Collins, CO back in 97 I think. Coming from an O&G background, there wasnt any jobs there for me. So while I looked for admin/clerical work, I needed an immediate income. So I went to Walmart and applied. I had bills to pay. The electric company doesnt discriminate based on where your green comes from.
I know work in temp staffing. I manage entire contingent labor programs for different companies. We raised the bill rate to the client $2/hr to accommodate ACA so the temp agencies didnt go broke. So now that we are in an O&G dip, they have cut back and eliminated 1500 jobs (just one client) for cost savings.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2014
- Messages
- 2,921
- Reaction score
- 831
- Points
- 113
http://www.vox.com/2015/4/14/8411221/welfare-work-benefits
A lot of people getting assistance work. Clinton/Gingrich got rid of the old welfare system, its impossible for welfare to be a generational thing.
The reality is corporations paying below a subsistence wage are using the taxpayer to support their employees and low tax states are pushing
their tax burden on higher tax states because the government ends up supporting more of their citizens. In essence conservatism
creates a bigger need and reliance on the federal government. Those that squawk about big government are the creators of big government.
Ain't that a kick in the pants.
A lot of people getting assistance work. Clinton/Gingrich got rid of the old welfare system, its impossible for welfare to be a generational thing.
The reality is corporations paying below a subsistence wage are using the taxpayer to support their employees and low tax states are pushing
their tax burden on higher tax states because the government ends up supporting more of their citizens. In essence conservatism
creates a bigger need and reliance on the federal government. Those that squawk about big government are the creators of big government.
Ain't that a kick in the pants.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,104
- Reaction score
- 7,799
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,104
- Reaction score
- 7,799
- Points
- 113
I took a low paying retail job that I never intended to stay in as well. It was the fastest job I could get. I ended up staying there 10 years because my boss kept throwing more money and benefits at me so I wouldn't leave.
I'm not going to pretend most people will get rich working retail. It is certainly possible to work a few years and earn a living wage, even make a career of it, if you work hard and show up. So many people don't, and then they wonder why they're still making 10 bucks an hour at 40 years old.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,104
- Reaction score
- 7,799
- Points
- 113
Actually people who pay high states taxes deduct them from their federal taxes. The federal government is subsidizing high tax states with money it gets from low tax states.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/03/time-to-end-the-federal-subsidy-for-high-tax-states
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 638
- Reaction score
- 122
- Points
- 43
Right. Doesn't full time employee include the CEO?
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 4,805
- Reaction score
- 4,921
- Points
- 113
I am not a big fan of paying for people to survive, but those plans are not going anywhere anytime soon. So how about something like this?
TOTAL Govt benefits made equal to minimum wage for a 40 hour work week. So @ $7.25/ hr that would equal $290.00/wk. Now because we want people to live better on lower paying jobs, they can keep then on a sliding scale, until they TOTAL $14.50/hr. Those people who DO NOT want to work can receive NO MORE THAN $290.00/wk. Also turn fraud investigation over to private companies, and pay a 50% commission on convictions.
TOTAL Govt benefits made equal to minimum wage for a 40 hour work week. So @ $7.25/ hr that would equal $290.00/wk. Now because we want people to live better on lower paying jobs, they can keep then on a sliding scale, until they TOTAL $14.50/hr. Those people who DO NOT want to work can receive NO MORE THAN $290.00/wk. Also turn fraud investigation over to private companies, and pay a 50% commission on convictions.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,104
- Reaction score
- 7,799
- Points
- 113
I doubt his salary averages out to much over the number of employees they have.
No one is suggesting Walmart pays great. Let's face it, they hire the lowest of the low in terms of skills and qualifications. They aren't all that much different from most retail jobs though. I have a friend who just got divorced and started working at Macy's a couple of years ago making I think $8.50/hour.
having a vagina doesn't make her less evil.
(TFC) Washington, D.C — It was the worst kept secret in Washington; an expected inevitability where only time and place was in question. Hillary Clinton, former first lady, senator, and secretary of state will once again run for the presidency. Those who love her grant her sainthood, but the truth of the matter is, she would make a terribly inept president whose alliances will squarely rest with warmongers, dictators, and profiteers of war.
From Around the Web
Progressives and women all over America are jumping for joy that Hillary Clinton is running for president. What they are cheering on is a pro war, pro spying corporatist, who takes dirty money and does the dirty work for corporations who strive to profit off of misery.
In 2003, Clinton voted in favor of the Iraqi invasion that killed and maimed thousands of American troops, as well as contributing to the killing of a million innocent Middle Eastern civilians. She regretted the vote by writing in her memoir, “I thought I had acted in good faith and made the best decision I could with the information I had. And I wasn’t alone in getting it wrong. But I still got it wrong. Plain and simple.” She also claimed the vote became “painful,” as she kept corresponding with her supporters in New York who lost a family member in the war.
The vote contributed to one of the worst foreign policy disasters in American history, and is indicative of the mess Clinton loves to make. She did all of that while cashing checks for defence contractors. In her run for the presidency, Clinton got more money from defence contractors in one quarter than Mitt Romney, Barack Obama and Rudy Guiliani. To appease her donors, Clinton is on record for supporting possible war with Iran, and increasing the defence budget. Her record of supporting war, and making a huge mess out of countries is shown in how Libya was destroyed with Clinton’s help.
During the Libya civilian war, both the Department of Defense and the C.I.A balked against intervention, but that didn’t stop Clinton from pushing for intervention, citing her husband’s failure to stop the genocide in Rwanda. After the country was blown up, Clinton’s state department lacked the resources and preparedness to assist in the formation of a post-Gadhafi government.
Even more sickening; with Gadhafi gone America lost intelligence in the fight against Al-Qaeda. Even though he was an evil man, Gadhafi sent frequent intelligence reports to the C.I.A. Clinton’s actions in voting for Iraq, and making a mess out of Libya, is not the only reason her presidency would be a disaster. Her hypocrisy when talking about women’s issues is something that no woman who supports Clinton, should ignore.
Clinton’s campaign is expected to push for the female vote by decrying issues like the gender wage gap, but if she is a supporter of women’s issues then she should be more careful of who she accepts money from. While she led the State Department, The Clinton Foundation accepted donations from foreign governments that include Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. In Qatar marital rape is legal, and women are expected to be nothing more than housewives; in the UAE, a Norwegian woman who was raped was sentenced to sixteen months in jail for the crime of extramarital sex. The courts in the UAE believed a raped woman lied to them, and threw her in jail for having, in their view, an affair. It gets even worse for women in the tiny Arabic country, as men are legally allowed to beat their wives.
Feminists who will vote for Clinton because she is a woman, who is a supposed champion of women’s rights, will be voting for a woman who betrays women. NOW President Terry O’Neill either ignored those issues, or believes hypocrisy is a commendable character trait when she endorsed Clinton’s candidacy by writing, “Secretary Clinton’s candidacy is a powerful message to girls that they can aspire to the highest office,” which is great of course, but those aspirations are squashed in countries like Oman and the UAE where women are not thought of as humans. Taking money from countries that abuse women shows the world, when it comes to cash, your integrity, and the rights of others are negotiable.
Clinton is the worst person to depend on when it comes to changing the power structure in Washington. She is a friend of the big banks who destroyed America’s economy, driving families from their homes and out of the workforce. All voters have to do is search her name on Open Secrets to see her major donors are banks like Citi Group, Goldman Sachs, and JP Morgan & Chase. The Clinton Foundation has also taken money from Goldman Sachs, with Hillary scratching their back by giving two separate speeches at Goldman Sachs conferences. Her pro corporate leanings are shown in her acceptance of campaign dollars from law firms. One donor, Kirkland and Ellis represents massive corporations like Pfizer, Dow Chemical, Raytheon, and Fannie Mae.
Clinton is not the candidate to change the old guard. She claims she is a populist who cares about the middle class, and women, yet she cashes checks from big banks and countries with terrible human rights records. She won’t reign in banks, and will gleefully destroy governments with bombs and foreign policy failures. She has already told the American public who she will govern for with the appointment of Jerry Crawford to run her campaign in Iowa. Crawford, who has served on other campaigns, did legal work for Monsanto, a company that destroys the environment and contaminates the food supply.
If you are ready for Hillary, you can expect corporations to continue their control of Washington; after all, Hillary is in love with corporate money and will do anything to feed their pockets at the risk of the American public.
(TFC) Washington, D.C — It was the worst kept secret in Washington; an expected inevitability where only time and place was in question. Hillary Clinton, former first lady, senator, and secretary of state will once again run for the presidency. Those who love her grant her sainthood, but the truth of the matter is, she would make a terribly inept president whose alliances will squarely rest with warmongers, dictators, and profiteers of war.
From Around the Web
Progressives and women all over America are jumping for joy that Hillary Clinton is running for president. What they are cheering on is a pro war, pro spying corporatist, who takes dirty money and does the dirty work for corporations who strive to profit off of misery.
In 2003, Clinton voted in favor of the Iraqi invasion that killed and maimed thousands of American troops, as well as contributing to the killing of a million innocent Middle Eastern civilians. She regretted the vote by writing in her memoir, “I thought I had acted in good faith and made the best decision I could with the information I had. And I wasn’t alone in getting it wrong. But I still got it wrong. Plain and simple.” She also claimed the vote became “painful,” as she kept corresponding with her supporters in New York who lost a family member in the war.
The vote contributed to one of the worst foreign policy disasters in American history, and is indicative of the mess Clinton loves to make. She did all of that while cashing checks for defence contractors. In her run for the presidency, Clinton got more money from defence contractors in one quarter than Mitt Romney, Barack Obama and Rudy Guiliani. To appease her donors, Clinton is on record for supporting possible war with Iran, and increasing the defence budget. Her record of supporting war, and making a huge mess out of countries is shown in how Libya was destroyed with Clinton’s help.
During the Libya civilian war, both the Department of Defense and the C.I.A balked against intervention, but that didn’t stop Clinton from pushing for intervention, citing her husband’s failure to stop the genocide in Rwanda. After the country was blown up, Clinton’s state department lacked the resources and preparedness to assist in the formation of a post-Gadhafi government.
Even more sickening; with Gadhafi gone America lost intelligence in the fight against Al-Qaeda. Even though he was an evil man, Gadhafi sent frequent intelligence reports to the C.I.A. Clinton’s actions in voting for Iraq, and making a mess out of Libya, is not the only reason her presidency would be a disaster. Her hypocrisy when talking about women’s issues is something that no woman who supports Clinton, should ignore.
Clinton’s campaign is expected to push for the female vote by decrying issues like the gender wage gap, but if she is a supporter of women’s issues then she should be more careful of who she accepts money from. While she led the State Department, The Clinton Foundation accepted donations from foreign governments that include Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. In Qatar marital rape is legal, and women are expected to be nothing more than housewives; in the UAE, a Norwegian woman who was raped was sentenced to sixteen months in jail for the crime of extramarital sex. The courts in the UAE believed a raped woman lied to them, and threw her in jail for having, in their view, an affair. It gets even worse for women in the tiny Arabic country, as men are legally allowed to beat their wives.
Feminists who will vote for Clinton because she is a woman, who is a supposed champion of women’s rights, will be voting for a woman who betrays women. NOW President Terry O’Neill either ignored those issues, or believes hypocrisy is a commendable character trait when she endorsed Clinton’s candidacy by writing, “Secretary Clinton’s candidacy is a powerful message to girls that they can aspire to the highest office,” which is great of course, but those aspirations are squashed in countries like Oman and the UAE where women are not thought of as humans. Taking money from countries that abuse women shows the world, when it comes to cash, your integrity, and the rights of others are negotiable.
Clinton is the worst person to depend on when it comes to changing the power structure in Washington. She is a friend of the big banks who destroyed America’s economy, driving families from their homes and out of the workforce. All voters have to do is search her name on Open Secrets to see her major donors are banks like Citi Group, Goldman Sachs, and JP Morgan & Chase. The Clinton Foundation has also taken money from Goldman Sachs, with Hillary scratching their back by giving two separate speeches at Goldman Sachs conferences. Her pro corporate leanings are shown in her acceptance of campaign dollars from law firms. One donor, Kirkland and Ellis represents massive corporations like Pfizer, Dow Chemical, Raytheon, and Fannie Mae.
Clinton is not the candidate to change the old guard. She claims she is a populist who cares about the middle class, and women, yet she cashes checks from big banks and countries with terrible human rights records. She won’t reign in banks, and will gleefully destroy governments with bombs and foreign policy failures. She has already told the American public who she will govern for with the appointment of Jerry Crawford to run her campaign in Iowa. Crawford, who has served on other campaigns, did legal work for Monsanto, a company that destroys the environment and contaminates the food supply.
If you are ready for Hillary, you can expect corporations to continue their control of Washington; after all, Hillary is in love with corporate money and will do anything to feed their pockets at the risk of the American public.
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2014
- Messages
- 24,914
- Reaction score
- 11,537
- Points
- 113
The Beast Mobile has been spotted!
Hillary Clinton's van' is a beast! Presidential hopeful's armored Chevrolet van with tinted windows is finally spotted as she stops for coffee
if the van is rockin'....
Hillary Clinton's van' is a beast! Presidential hopeful's armored Chevrolet van with tinted windows is finally spotted as she stops for coffee
if the van is rockin'....
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,576
- Reaction score
- 29,904
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
This just in:
In her opening campaign event of the 2016 presidential race, Hillary Clinton on Tuesday laid out four primary "fights" she's focused on during her presidential run, including eliminating "unaccountable money" from America's political system, even if it requires a constitutional amendment.
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/hillary-clinton-tries-keep-low-profile-iowa-n341356
This also just in, well, actually, well-known but completely ignored because it shows Clinton is the worst kind of lying reprobate imaginable:
In an extraordinary report that has not yet been fully digested, the Wall Street Journal tells us that the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation has received millions from foreign governments including Qatar, a prominent backer of Hamas
It is bad enough when Clinton takes gobs of money in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, oil and chemical companies, and other titans of industry — although that, too, raises the potential for conflicts of interest. But a foreign government should never have any claim on the loyalty of a U.S. president, which is why foreign donations directly to a campaign are illegal. We cannot give her a pass simply because her entity is a “foundation,” not a PAC or campaign entity.
There is no conceivable way, I would suggest, that the foundation can keep the foreign monies if she wants to run for president. It is unseemly in the extreme and raises potential for liability down the road. But even if she were now to give all the money back, she has had use of the money in the meantime (the time value of money is something, after all). More important, her egregious judgment and untrammeled greed raise real questions about her priorities and ethics. Republicans should and will, I predict, pummel her with this. If the MSM is not entirely in her pocket, they will as well. Imagine if Jeb Bush’s education foundation took millions from Saudi Arabia. Surely there would be cries for him to withdraw from presidential pre-campaigning.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ons-foundation-raise-major-ethical-questions/
In her opening campaign event of the 2016 presidential race, Hillary Clinton on Tuesday laid out four primary "fights" she's focused on during her presidential run, including eliminating "unaccountable money" from America's political system, even if it requires a constitutional amendment.
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/hillary-clinton-tries-keep-low-profile-iowa-n341356
This also just in, well, actually, well-known but completely ignored because it shows Clinton is the worst kind of lying reprobate imaginable:
In an extraordinary report that has not yet been fully digested, the Wall Street Journal tells us that the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation has received millions from foreign governments including Qatar, a prominent backer of Hamas
It is bad enough when Clinton takes gobs of money in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, oil and chemical companies, and other titans of industry — although that, too, raises the potential for conflicts of interest. But a foreign government should never have any claim on the loyalty of a U.S. president, which is why foreign donations directly to a campaign are illegal. We cannot give her a pass simply because her entity is a “foundation,” not a PAC or campaign entity.
There is no conceivable way, I would suggest, that the foundation can keep the foreign monies if she wants to run for president. It is unseemly in the extreme and raises potential for liability down the road. But even if she were now to give all the money back, she has had use of the money in the meantime (the time value of money is something, after all). More important, her egregious judgment and untrammeled greed raise real questions about her priorities and ethics. Republicans should and will, I predict, pummel her with this. If the MSM is not entirely in her pocket, they will as well. Imagine if Jeb Bush’s education foundation took millions from Saudi Arabia. Surely there would be cries for him to withdraw from presidential pre-campaigning.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ons-foundation-raise-major-ethical-questions/
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,576
- Reaction score
- 29,904
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
"You know Bill is in the back!"
The Welfare system needs a major overhaul. I think welfare should be for people who are working, but having troubles paying the bills. People who do nothing but smoke, drink, and contribute 0 to society should get nothing.....It is totally ridiculous that these people not only get food stamps, cash assistance, but totally free medical care. If these people receive nothing, they have 2 choices. 1) live on the streets or 2) get a job like the rest of the world. For the ones that have kids make the parents get their acts together or remove the kids from their custody. Something needs to be done.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 638
- Reaction score
- 122
- Points
- 43
I think the gov should not have to subsidizing companies for paying poverty wages. Let the companies pay the living wage and let welfare be for those who can't work or who have gaps in employment.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,104
- Reaction score
- 7,799
- Points
- 113
Retail businesses operate on thin margins. Wages all go up, prices go up, sales drop, people lose their jobs. There's no money fairy to pay these people more. Don't bring up the phony issue of CEO pay...eliminate Walmart's CEO and you can probably give every employee an extra 2 bucks a year. That's just a meaningless liberal talking point. Workers wages aren't low because CEO pay is high.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 638
- Reaction score
- 122
- Points
- 43
what you are saying is their poverty is vital to your cheap prices. and it's wrong because, as walmart discovered, people paid at those levels can't even shop at walmart. Paying a living wage to everyone would be a boon to the economy.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 638
- Reaction score
- 122
- Points
- 43
I had a client who got minimum wage cleaning hotel rooms. She worked a full 40 hours on her feet or her knees the whole time. It's a vital job for everyone who wants a clean toilet when they check into a hotel. it's a cheap response to belittle people doing the job by suggesting that if they had any worth they would be promoted to a higher paying job. the reason it''s a cheap point is because we as a society need people to do those ****** jobs. Can't the people doing the ****** jobs most of us would turn our noses up at, get paid enough for rent, food, an occasional movie, etc...all without needing gov't assistance? Why would you rather pay them through your taxes in welfare than through a slightly higher room rate?
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,104
- Reaction score
- 7,799
- Points
- 113
No, their poverty is not vital. They are not doomed to work at Walmart at entry level wages forever. I don't why you can't seem to grasp this. Very few people work at low wages for long periods of time. Only 2.6% of Americans earn minimum wage or less. More than half of them also earn tips. Half are age 24 or younger. 64% only work part-time. They are students, they are people earning second incomes, they are retirees, they are housewives, they are young people just entering the workforce who will eventually gain experience and get better jobs.
A certain proportion of entry level jobs for entry level people at entry level wages are vital not just to cheap prices, but to the economy in general. It would collapse without them.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/08/who-makes-minimum-wage/
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,104
- Reaction score
- 7,799
- Points
- 113
Presumably her goal in life is not to keep doing this and never get a raise or a promotion. I certainly hope not. Like most people she will do this until she gets a better job, or gets promoted, or gets herself some education and moves up in her career choices. Some other entry level person who has no skills or experience will do this job when she is done with it. If they don't pay enough for anyone to want to do it, they'll have to pay more.
Similar threads
